JSngry

See, even more MOR-meets-real-music! Was he in on Ornette's RCA side too?

Doesn't look that much like Jaco to me. Kind of like him, but not really. No "llama lips", as we used to say back when he first hit the scene...

Ok, I'm listening to some of those mid-late-1960s Harold Vick RCA sides,and yeah, otoh the aim of the "context" is pretty much at the MOR stations that had room for some light jazz on their playlist (and didn't there used to be a fair # of stations like this across the land?), but what Vick is actually playing is anything but MOR, there's some pretty non-MOR stuff coming out of his horn. So the producer has to be hearing all this and letting it slide, right? And the producer is Brad McCuen who truns up on most (all?) of those indelible Ellingotn sides from the same period, as well, as some Gary Burton RCA sides, as well as the Lockjaw sides, the JJ sides (right?), and who knows what else. So this is a guy who seemed to be hip enough to get stuff out there that played the game both ways, aiming towards the market & still letting the players get their own thing in there too. God knows that's no where near as commonplace (and, I'd have to guess, as easy) as we'd like to think, no? So who was this cat? Is he still alive? Was he just lucky, I mean, was nobody at RCA saying "Hey Brad, tell that Harold Vick guy to stop using all those false fingerings. That shit sounds weird.", or was he really a good judge about balancing all the various elements of market and expression into a single package? Where/When else did he do producers' work besides his stint @ RCA? I mean, the cat really balanced his Ellington output as well, getting the Far East Suite & And His Mother Called Him Bill albums out while at the same time doing a few more "popular" oriented efforts. Balance all the way around, and none of it really sucked. This 1967 Harold Vick thing Watch What Happens has some "cheese" MOR with a female vocal group in the back (but Vick still plays!) as well as a Joe Bonner tune, "Ode To Trane", all on the same album. Herbie Hancock's all over this side too, playing his Herbieosity. Plenty of people make "commercial" records, but very few do it this way! So please, those who know, tell me about this Brad McCuen guy.

I mean, doesn't this say it all? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPoFI7m-cjI

From waht I understand, Jarrett's "special treatment" began as a child, with his mom, who was very protective & fought all his fights for him and stuff like that.

No. I'm not, (I mean, again, there's a lot of Jarrett's work taht I am quite fond of) and thanks for realizing that. Also, my response to Jarrett's various levels of melodicism (sublime vd. trifling, etc.) is first and foremost a visceral one, I assure you. The "intellectual" part comes when trying to describe why I either love it or hate it.

Just got htis one in last week, my first purchase from Newbury, won't be my last. I dig this music quite a bit actually. "Weird" it might be, at least relative to his earlier stuff, but it's also honest, and I'm not so sure but that ultimately it might not be more honest than Pepper's earlier work. Art Pepper was a fucked up dude who never really was relaxed or anything like that. His earlier work tries to cover that up, his later work doesn't. Now sure, I've heard some later Pepper that is godawful horrible, it's so disjointed and forced, but thee Vanguard sessions don't strike me that way at all. Again, though, different strokes and all that. What you get out of it is going to be greatly tied to what you're looking for, or think you should get. Fair enough, that is.

On the other hand, "Mary Had A Little Lamb" is at once highly memorable, highly melodic, and highly singable. And, not coincidentally, highly popular. still, after all these years. "Melodies" are like the assholes of music, some are dirty, some are clean, some stink in a good way, some make you want to puke from several miles away, but in the end (HAHA) everybody has 'em in some form, so it's not anything to be particularly...proud about, not in and of itself. But more to the point, it's not Keith's "melodicism" that's in question, it's more the quality of that melodicism. I've heard him be absolutely sublime, and I've heard him be absolutely trifling. Now, if anybody hears it all as one or the other, cool, different strokes and all that, but I ain't drinkin' that much of the pro or con Kool-Aid!

Hey, if it bothered you and you didn't get it, that would be something to be worried about! Funny thing about Jarrett though, for all his railings against electricity in music, I think that his least "self-conscious" playing was his electric work with Miles. That stuff just...came out in a way that appears to be uninterrupted and unfiltered. "Unworried about" might be the best way to put it. And not just for that work, but for all of his best work. Unworried about. The time to worry is when you practice. When you play, it's time to play, not worry. If you're constantly worrying about your playing while you're doing it, something ain't right yet.

Hey, don't get me wrong, I do dig Jarrett, have many of his recordings, and do consider him an "important" musician. It's just that his work is not without what I would consider "baggage", and that baggage can sometimes really, really rub me the wrong way. But when it's not there, hey, I can go there right along with him, and quite gladly.

I'd not disagree with any of that, Lon. Where we might have a difference of opinion is the frequency with which it happens "naturally" as opposed to "forced". Notice I did not say "contrived", because I do not believe that Jarrett is in any way cheap about or with his music. But I do think that he has a history of letting process and outcome become one and the same thing, and that's something that kinda bothers me personally.

It's been a few years, but I remember both as pretty much of a piece, just personal tapings by Ind of Warne in various playing moments in & around that time and place. Warne was in such a zone at that time that, hey, I'll take it no matter what!

CLARE FISCHER NOT SURE ALIVE CLARK TERRY NOT SURE ALIVE CURTIS FULLER NOT SURE ALIVE DONALD BYRD NOT SURE ALIVE HAROLD LAND NOT SURE DEAD

I wouldn't question Coltrane's much greater importance for a moment - but I think that position is based on musical and historical grounds. My point exactly! There's a "level" in Coltrane's work that is not present in Jarrett's. Which is not to say that Jarrett does not attain very high levels, just that Coltrane was, well, you know, "one of those people" who just do more than that, musically and historically. The "spiritual" angle might have been what drove it, but it got there and stayed there quite on it's own. With Jarrett, the whole "mystical" angle seems to not just drive the creation of the music, but also to define it when it succeeds as well as when it fails. That's really not fair, becuase one thing that Jarrett can do exceptionally well is phrase a melody with sublimity like very few others. And of course, yeah, there's skill, craft, work in that. But the differnce between him and Trane in that regardis that Trane stipualted to the work in advance. His work/practice ethic was legendary even in his lifetime. Jarrett certainly works quite hard at his craft, but he seems to want to deny that part of it and instead focus on the "magic". Well, good for him, but anybody who knows how music gats made knows that magic is only a part of the equation, often not even the most important part. But to "sell" that as reality seems tome to be more about "neediness" of ego than anything else. There is an audience, obviously, and good for them, but me, I want to hear a cat play, not... be a drama queen, not unless that's a byproduct of the playing. When it becomes the essence of the playing, as it sometimes does with Jarrett, that's when I leave.

When Coltrane did that from at least 'A Love Supreme' onwards he was praised to the skies...or even the heavens! In fact he spawned a whole industry of god-bothering* music and critical word-spinning of which Jarrett seems to be a part. I find I can switch off from all the 'plumbing the depths of one's soul' stuff in Coltrane; just as easy to do it in Jarrett. Best not to read the liner notes or any associated publicity, though. *acknowledgement to Cook and Morton for that term used in relation to 'Live in Japan', I think. Ok, I'll stipulate up fron that ultimately this is all subjective, but there are two bug, huge, even irreconcilable differences between Trane & Jarrett. First, with Trane the whole "God" thing was always framed in terms of what was being sought, "The Quest", if you will, With Jarrett (when he goes there, which again, is far from always). it always seems to be framed in terms of what has been found. The focus is not on The Quest, but The Questor. And yeah, ok, things can get out of hand either way, but whereas Trane seemed to have a genuine humility about him in the face of The Quest, Jarrett would appear to be quite the opposite. Which again, yeah, ok, so what, but I get the feeling that if Trane were cleaning up his house and found a beer can, he'd just throw it away, whereas Jarrett would probably get all wound up about it thirteen different ways, write a song about it, and let the whole world know he had been affected by finding this beer can, and what a tragedy it is that we can't understand how special he is for having been so touched. Second, you can take away all the extra-musical trapping of almost any Trane performance and you'd still be left with some deeply powerful music that pushes all sorts of boundaries. The titles of Interstellar Space might be all "cosmic", but the music on there is also about a lifetime spent confronting the saxophone and challenging it's limitations, as well as creating new forms of organizational structure. So if you're the type of person for whom "Mars" has little significance nesides being the name of a candy bar, you can still get your head blown off by the music therin. Whereas with Jarrett, when he goes off into that moaning zone and the accompanying music is that vague Paul-Bley-Sodomizes-Bill-Evans-While-Ornette-Gives-Instructions-And Merv-Griffin-Shouts-Approval nebulosity that he gets into at his worst (and again, by no means does he always go there, far from it, but he does go there often enough to have developed a "reputation" that is not without merit), then you either buy into the notion that This Is An Artist In the Throes Of Creative Rapture or else you just say, Jeez, Keith, uh...get over it, will ya'? Not a whole lot to be had in between. Again, this is all subjective, but it is perhaps revealing that scores of musicians of innumerable "spiritual" bents have picked Trane's bones dry in the service of musics of equally innumerable "spiritual" bents. OTOH, if you find a player who overtly cops to a strong Jarrett influence, almost always you're going to find some "extra-musical" agenda going on too, at least in my experience, and a lot of it is going to be about that person's ego, which will almost inevitably be a little more fragile than one would like, if you know what I mean. The whole "wounded child" thing will come into play at some point (and again, look at Charles Llyd and imagine him and Keith on a plane ride over hell exchanging personal grievances and try not to imagine everybody in listening range wishing like hell that they had a .45....) Jarrett is in no way the Defining Cultural Icon that Trane is, and I have absolutely no qualms about saying that that is as it should be for the type of culture in which I enjoy living. But I also have no qualms about saying that both men are/were great musicians who have made their share of truly great music. The dividing line for me, though, is that even Trane's most "esoteric" music has an adult "psychology" to it. But Keith's music comes loaded with a lot of psychological baggage that most adults have dealt with (or at least learned to control) a long time ago. What that means to me is that when he succeeds in transcending it, hey, it's something I do want to hear. But when he doesn't, hey, get me outta there. In a hurry. Totally subjective, sure. But as such, that's my feelings about all that.

I continue to be floored by the total musicianship of every element of the performance in that clip. I mean, really, you can do things differently, but ain't no way you can do them better.

Or are best asked and answered by one's own self alone.

Those are both two documents of Warne at his incredible late-50s best. Buy 'em both now and treasure them forever.

Mostly the late-70s solo stuff, where he's not getting there but trying desperately to convince everybody, probably including himself, that he is. There was a VHS of The Last Solo Concert (is that what it was called?) that I still haven't been able toget all the way through. It's painful. I would feel sorry for him, I mean, it's a noble pursuit, and failure therein can also be noble, but not when it's essentially a musical softcore porn movie. A bad musical softcore porn movie at that. That, and those moments on otherwise engrossing performances - and the Standards Trio has devolved into too much of this over time, imo - where he slips back into the Charles Lloyd (and geez, what a terror those two must've been together...) trap of playing like he wants to convince everybody, probably including himself, that He Is Seeing The Wonder Of The World For The First Time, And DAMN, Don't It Make Him Tremble Like A Baby In Awestruck Wonder - Oh What A Rare Sensitive Human Being It Is Who Can Channel Such Innocent Uncorrupted Beauty Into Our Lives! I mean, c'mon man, fuck that bullshit. But along with that, you do get moments, and often enough more than just moments, of very high-level creativity and, yes, beauty. So whatcha' gonna do 'bout that then?

All I'm going to say is that there are Jarrett performances that make me want to hurt somebody - usually him - ASAP, and some that totally take me to an even more totally good place. Anybody who can be that all over the place can be neither deified nor condemned as simply as would be the wont of most people who like an "either/or" world (which is, I've come to believe, most people in general). Hey, the cat can play. And, the cat can be a major irritant. Sometimes even at the same time. Such is life. Deal with it.

One of the most pleasant musical surprises I've had was in winter of 1982, in Birmingham, Alabama. I was in town for three weeks w/a touring "hotel show band" (remember those?) & discovered that Cleveland Eaton had returned home to Birmngham & opened a club. A local unit was the house band, but one weekend, the "special guest artist" was none other than Hank Crawford. Well, ok. I only knew Hank Crawford then as a soulful funk-jazz player and a balladeer of uncommon directness. I wanted to catch a set or two "just because". So when the last set of the hotel gig ended on Saturday, some of us hauled over to Cleve's Place (as it was imaginatively called...) and lo and be-hold, there was Hank Crawford doing nothing but playing BEBOP all night long, and playing it quite well! If I would've known my history as well then as I do now (no, I didn't know that it was him who played the bari solo on "Hard Times". I just assumed that that was Leroy Cooper...), this would not have been a surprise, but I didn't, and it was. I got to "talk shop" w/Hank on a break, and asked him about his setup. Given the bright, edgy tone he had, I just assumed that he was playing some wide-open mouthpiece with a fairly stiff reed. Quite to contrary, he played a very moderately-open rubber Meyer (iirc) and used medium-strenght reeeds. I asked him how he got that sound out of that setup, and he smiled and said something like "it's all in the air, how you blow it through the horn". Well, this is someth9ing I already knew, but not to the degree that his playing proved that night. A better lesson about the impact that directed, focused airflow and the role that throat/diaphragm coordination played in getting a certain sound, more than a simple "hardware" fix could have, could not have been had, at any price. Same thing for a lesson about how what you hear on a record might not always be a true reflection of a player's full capacities and capabilities, and definitely the lesson about how a player who strikes a "populist" chord can do so by distilling their essence every bit as much as by diluting it. Fathead I got immediately. Fathead was home. Fathead was the Mother Tongue. Hank Crawford it took me that night in Birmingham to get. But I got it, and shortly thereafter began the long run of Milestone albums that began to veer more towards the Hank Crawford that I had heard in person. I was blessed to hear Hank Crawford that night, and we as a musical culture were blessed by Hank Crawford in all of his guises. He really was the same in all of them, it was just the lighting and camera angles, the externals, that would change. The interior was a beautiful core of eternal solidity. RIP, and thank you, more than you know.

It plays on iTunes. And Quick Time. It's an Apple format to the best of my knowledge.

Hsnk Mobley Aaron

Wow. You MFrss are even nuttirer than me. I lorve it Dude, that was for real - an inadvertent episode of what the kids call "Ambien tripping". You take an Ambien & then stay awake. I have a script, so it's legit, but whereas they usually go to work gradually, this one just went BAM & had me higher than a mofo long before I actually fell asleep.