JSngry

Unions are like Laws - there's no pressing need for them if everybody does the right thing. Having said that, though, I still believe in the idea of and the need for unions in some form. Labor will always need representation, just to keep the playing field level. What I am fervently against is outmoded & unfeasible union tactics & demands that make the playing field less than level. I would hope that sanity prevails and that unions evolve their way into a fruitful & useful 21st Century, but that is their call to make. I see signs that this is occurring (new UAW contracts are beginning at 50% of the previous rate, companies are no longer being saddled with unmanageable legacy health care costs, etc.). I do feel 100% certain that if they should meet their demise, companies such as Toyota, who implement practices that engender loyalty and performance will remain in the minority. It's easy to criticize unions - too easy, in fact. Horror stories of abuse and corruption abound. But if you want real horror stories of abuse and corruption, look at the environment for labor pre-union. Don't be fooled into thinking that "things can never get that bad again", because they can. Not all at once, mind you, but over time, definitely. If we've learned nothing else from the recent financial meltdown, let's learn this - business/business power left unchecked & unbalanced can not be trusted to do the right thing over the long haul. This is a basic law of human nature. Surely Toyota has some sort of "employees association" or something to create/maintain/sustain constructive dialog between management & labor?

Having heard interviews with him and having seen him live a few times I tend to think that Don Byron's idea of Don Byron is more than the music. Then perhaps the house that would be Don Byron should consider making the music into a walkway rather than a moat?

That's the risk inherent in a "suite". I'm with you on the Monterrey thing, too much of a good thing. But at least it is a good thing. FWIW, I don't think that Wilson was ever that strong a "composer" per se. It's his arranging that carries the day. His own material, in terms of melodies, etc. is actually nothing particularly "heavy", and is actually somewhat limited in terms of breadth and scope. His arrangements of those materials, though, make up for all of that.

After years of trying to make it otherwise, I find that my enthusiasm tends to be for the idea of Don Byron's music more than the reality of it.

And oh yeah, chuck Gentry had an illustrious career in the studios, playing on many of the Sinatra Capitol sides. He was also in the Glenn Miller AAF band. Ollie Mitchell was another LA studio heavyweight, played on a all sorts of things, including Kenton's Neophonic album.

FWIW, the Woody Herman album of this series is a little gem, one to get if you see it. It's got Don Lamphere, a.o.

Too damn young...RIP.

Perhaps Mr. Garrett would be better served by going on a multi-year tour of Spain which was sponsored by a cellphone manufacturer than by performing and recording in the American arena.

What really bugs me about the audience sing-along thing is that it's just not that groovy. Hey - I've played joints where that kinda thing goes on 3-4 times per set, and when the vibe is right, it's cool. But the way that these guys do it, it's just not very groovy, so it comes off as really....not groovy. CARDINAL SIN!!!

Wow, look what I found: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LpuWYhC_Hw...feature=related

Great suggestion! Result: "This video has been removed due to terms of use violation." Thanks a lot for the dead link. Hey, life's a bitch and then you die. Get used to it. Either that or look to see if it's been reposted...

I mean, I've dug Kenny Garrett from the git-go, and a lot of people I usually align with have not been there with me. So it's not like I dis the guy just because I think he's a Rickyteer or anything. He definitely has a voice in a music where that's the name of the game and in an environ where people been changing the rules of the game to make that not matter any more. And it's been a strong, distinctive voice. But DAMN dude, at this point, either bring it with you or else just stay home. Either that or play ballads all the time, all smooth and shit, but with substance. That could work in a lot of ways. Anything besides bullshit.

The songs on Nexus are mostly good-to-very good, with one or two "heavyweights" in the mix. The production is quite sparse/minimal this time time around due to budget constraints, but if you didn't know that, your impression might well be that it was an artistic choice, that's how well done it is. And once or twice (in particular, "Sometimes"), it would be hard to imagine the song done any other way. Either way, her drum programming continues to amaze it it's flexible, liquid feel. this is how it should be done! All in all, a very good album. Not one I'd put in my "starter pile" necessarily, but one in the "get after you get these" pile. OTOH, her & husband Alex Sipiagin put together a "duet" (lots of overdubbing, but just the two of them) version of "As" for a Japan-only Stevie Wonder tribute album that is as good as anything that either one of them has ever done. Monday pretty much re-everythings the tune & makes it better than Stevie's version, imo. It becomes some more of that "omnimusic" of hers that I've spoken about in the past, everything good from disparate sources rolled into one organic whole. This one would be on the "starter pile" save for it being one cut on a pricey, difficult to find import Various Artists CD of widely varying quality. But if you can find it (and afford it), this is it, and Monday's worth the cost of admission all by herself, imo:

Indeed it is. It shows a profound lack of understanding about both & would have me hitting the figurative "off switch" immediately. Now, Bacharach (up until 1967-68 or so) & Weill, that, I think, you could go at least a little somewhere with, with or without the stupidass "beat" thing....

Yeah, well, the trick's on him because me, I can just listen to it once, throw it out, and that's that. Him, hey, he's got to walk by the trash heap and wonder why his new record is all over it. I mean, "Happy People", yeah, I'm all for that, much more than "Unhappy People" ya' know? But damn dude, give me something to be happy about, don't make me think that I'm supposed to be happy just because. Because I can do that on my own if/when I feel like it, I don't need you to suggest or otherwise attempt to create that reality for me. I don't need Kenny Garrett to be Happy Jim Sangrey, dig? But what Kenny Garrett can do is quite the bullshit and tell the truth. Then there would be a More Happy Jim Sangrey/Happy People, and then everybody's game would be elevated. I don't mind dancing and clapping my hands to the truth. In fact, that's the only way I will dance and clap my hands, thank you very much. If I'm going to succumb to bullshit, it's going to be on my terms, nobody else's, because that's the only way I know for sure what I'm getting. Kenny Garrett would probably tell me to kiss his ass. Fair enough. He's entitled, and then some. In return, I say with equal sincerity and entitlement that somebody needs to slap some sense into this motherfucker and get his ass back on the real side full time instead of just as a fluffer. Where the hell is Miles when you need him?

Definitely not his arrangements (or compositions). Those belong to Cecil Taylor & Johnny Carisi in their entirety. I've heard Gil's involvement described as "sponsorship", that he lent his name to the album as a showcase to the other men. I believe he showed up to the Carisi session to lend "moral support", not sure about the Taylor. As to the whats and whys of how come there was this as Gil's 2nd Impulse album instead of one featuring his band/music, there's got to be more to it than just altruism, I'd think, but I don't know any specifics.

Ok, this thing starts off HOT, as Garrett gets into some overtone/harmonics stuff that is similar to Trane on Transition in timbre/shape, but not in actual vocabulary. Fascinating, gripping in its uniqueness, and quite intense. But then, little by little, the whole thing devolves, ending up in a final audience-participation "c'mon c'mon c'mon WHAT, c'mon c'mon c'mon WHAT, etc." type thing that in no way other than personal choice precludes playing that is in the vein of that opening cut. Garrett & Co. make that choice however, and I challenge them to justify it, either here, there, or in the snow, white, yellow, or otherwise. I saw Kenny Garrett on BET what seems like 50 years ago playing people/groove music and deeply intense saxophone all on the same tune. I used to think that there was some label pressure for him not to do so on his records, but this is a new label for him. Either he has Abusive Spouse Syndrome when it comes to choosing labels, or else...something. But that first cut, hey - if you can find it as a standalone download (hopefully legal), then go for it. Because that's the shit right there.

Yeah man, topical - five names mentioned, and four of them dead and one of them almost sixty. :g

Maybe a little more overt Stevie Wonder influence would have helped...

When I say "hit it", i want you to give be a Big Strong Payola, erase it, come out of it with a Dick Clark Smile, and then back to the Madison. HIT IT!

So why does he have those satirical-looking song titles? MG Because he's "clever". Ya' know, when he first hit the scene he was cool for a few minutes. It was droll and wry, and yes, "clever". I mean, how do you not get a kick out of an album called "A White Sport Coat & A Pink Crustacean"? At least, that is, until the same type joke gets told over and over and over without any variance whatsoever and self-parody and self-caricature are warmly embraced and cashed in upon...

So, Rob, what's this blog of yours?

Helluva drummer by any standard. RIP, big thanks, and much uninterrupted love.

And I have a special weakness for his child with Toshiko Akiyoshi... Best wishes (and good health!) to a great player.