JSngry

So I've heard. Doesn't she sing and/or do drum programming on a cut or two as well? I'll be getting this one soon, just because.

HEY!!! In-fucking-DEED.

Well, otoh, there's probably a lot of "common knowledge" music that people who don't know shit about Bobby Bland or Bobby Hutcherson do know about that you/we/whoever either don't know about, don't care about, and/or some/both of each. So whose fault is that, if anybody's? The "problem" with playing "historical" music is that you're usually playing it to an audience that either doesn't knwo the history, knows it only in part, and/or looks at it like since it's history, hey, it's already been clearly defined, this is how things "should" be, that's that, and please get it outta the way if it ain't. About those first two, I think it's a bit much to expect an average music fan to pass some sort of entrance exam in order to be allowed to listen to music for pleasure & about the last, all I can say is that although I don't agree with it, I can't really find too much fault in it either, not if I look at it from that angle. Which is why I don't, but... The best way to defy "expectations" is to simply defy them from the git-go, just don't go there. Playing repertoire & "styles" of the past is almoist asking to be compared in some form, in degrees ranging from thoughtful to thoughtless, to the predecessors, and what can you say about that? But almost always, the end result is the same - you come up short, either musically, philosophically, or "image"wise. Some/lots of that is pure bullshit, yet some questions don't go away so easily, nor should they, because they're good questions. I mean, let's face it - the "jazz culture" that produced about 80% of a century's worth of a specific musical/cultural ethos just doesn't exist any more. Surviviors remain and provide us with a window into how things wre, but it ain't the same, it just ain't. I don't think that "preserving the music" & "preserving the message" are necessarily the same thing, and I think that at least some level of audience stereotyping is based in a gut-level recognition that it ain't, even if in most cases, there's no brain action to go along with that gut. But that's also a big part of the problem right there - people know that the "real deal" once existed at a very real level, and they think they know what it was, more or less, and they know what they think they want to see/hear. Same with a lot of musicians too, in their own way. But it's all a game of fitting into a mold that's already been created by neither the musicians or the players of the present. Again, it's about claiming an identity rather than creating one. Why so many want to do this is beyond me, but it's all the rage these days, so I guess I'm a bit out of step with what's happening now, baby. Oh well. In a lot of ways, Bird's advice to learn the blues, then learn rhythm changes, then forget all that shit and just PLAY is more relevant today than ever, especially if you think of "blues" and "rhythm changes" as metaphors rather than specifics (HEY!). Good luck.

http://www.answers.com/topic/benny-goodman-in-moscow

Either that or the possibility that nobody wants to be a middle-aged neurotic living with an older version of themself... Maybe the stereotype of "Old World" cultures being more generationally-interdependent is based on Old World cultures not turning out as many fucked up head cases from generation to generation. Hey, I just said "generationally-interdependent". Q.E.D.

Oh. Sorry, no such problems here w/this Firefox, but sorry anyways. Here's a link: http://bp2.blogger.com/_ff5MJzk-sRY/Rg3BgP...odmanMoscow.jpg The legendary/infamous USSR tour captured for posterity, including one or two "band comments". Damn good latter-day Goodman, and a snapshot of NYC's early 60s studio mafia posing as mad gypsies and road dogs, which at one point, a lot of them no doubt had been.

Jazz as a "musical language" used to convey certain musical ideals is something that anybody can get to as a player. Jazz as a "musical language" used to convey stories of specific life experiences & the worldviews that arise from those experiences is something that a player has to know first-hand in order to speak effectively and with integrity. It is not in any way race-specific, but given the enormous influence that race still has on how life is lived in this country (in spite of it becoming a significantly more difuse influence than it onece had), the odds are still good that the number of people playing the music who are able to really "get inside" it at this level "from the outside" are less than one might think/hope/whatever. Or not, if you know what I mean... Has the music reached the point where the first concept of "musical language" has pretty much obliterated the value that once was placed on the second? I think it has, and although I personally prefer the second version, hey, it's not my world. What else has happened, though, is that a lot (too many?) people across the board have appraoched the music far more in love with the idea than the reality of jazz as cultural "storytelling" (and to make it clear, this concept is in no way racially exclusive) while actually pursuing the music as a "musical style". It's sort of like learning how to speak phonetically, and becoming proficient in the "sound" of the words before (if at all) grasping their deeper/more nuanced/whatever meaning. But does that really matter? What if you reach a point, as I think jazz has, where audiences "expectations" are based almost entirely on handed down stories and images rather than those gleaned first hand? What about musicians who feel "entitled" to a legacy either because of the race they were born into or because of the notion that "jazz is colorblind"? Is it even worth having this discussion when audiences' & musicians' expectations are both based on a historical view that they largely know next to nothing about at anything more than a received level (and btw - from whom have they received it?)? Anybody can make "good music". Anybody. Not everybody can "tell a story in the language" and have it sound & feel real because it is real. Everybody can listen with their eyes and not think past what they've been programmed into thinking of as "truth". Not everybody can deal with anything beyond that. And that applies at least as much to musicians as it does audiences. Probably more. Color doesn't matter, but only once you've realized exactly why it doesn't. And that is something far deeper, complex, and fundamental than a bunch of starry-eyed idealistic statements about how we're all the same inside, or some lame bullshit like that, the kind of hand-holding WeAreTheWorld feel good crap that essentially bypasses reality in search of "truth". Sorry, it don't work that way too much past "the event". Frankly, I think that there's more lameness in the jazz/blues arena today than ever, and it's lameness that is indeed colorblind. Gee, Javon Jackson or Eric Alexander, which boring competent paragon of totally irrelevant (to me) proficiency is the more "authentic"? Wow, that one's pretty much a toss up.... Plenty of jive white posers, plenty of jive black posers. Musicians and fans. Not nearly enough of anybody doing anything other than claiming identities rather than creating them. P.S. - BTW & FWIW, I hear the reality of a multi-racial collection of influences turning into a non/uni-racial musical/social reality going on far more readily, naturally, and successfully in the "dance underground" than I do in any other music being made today.

is this the IPB with either Mel Powell or Wardell Gray? if so EDC concurs! Say what?

Ahem... http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=34383

But....but...but....mixing politics and religion is a bad and dangerous thing to do!

Anybody who's "obseesed with staying young" and falls for this bullshit deserves whatever they get. The best way to stay young, I think, is to go ahead and get older than you used to be w/o getting bummed or scared about it while still keeping your mind open to evolution. This rot runs counter to every one of those principles.

As have many aspects of life in general.

Well yeah. I mean, a big thrust of the "avant-garde" of the 50s, 60s, & 70s was "non-linearity" of one degree or another, the opening up of form, no longer needing "song forms" and such, and hey - who's really writing "good songs" today? Who needs to be? The esthetic of the old avant has begun its way into the mainstream (seldom in an "enlightened" manner, but that's not my point, other than that maybe rather than still fighting over 1980, some of our more "advanced musical minds" might want to consider what time it really is and proceed accordingly...). The whole 20th Centruy saw the discovery of "other dimensions" to time, space, and, yes, sound. Almost all "song-based" music is still very dependent on a relatively solid 3-dimensional based perception of reality to resonate to maximum capacity (even the deepest "song" stuff resonates by suggesting other dimensions not actually delivering them), and fewer and fewer people have that these days. We're still in a very primitive, new time as far as actually delivering thes other "dimensions", but that's evolution for you, eh? All I'm saying, I guess, is that pursuit of expanding the repertory of "songs" ain't gonna make jazz more "relevant" in the 21st century. It will merely move the period to which its backdated up a decade or two.

Alright, here's all the #1 records of 1954, the year before Elvis hit. See any jazz? "Oh My Papa" Eddie Fisher "Secret Love" Doris Day "Make Love To Me" Jo Stafford "Secret Love" Doris Day Make Love To Me" Jo Stafford "Wanted" Perry Como "Little Things Mean A Lot" Kitty Kallen "Sh-Boom" Crew-Cuts "Hey There" Rosemary Clooney "This Ole House" Rosemary Clooney "I Need You Now" Eddie Fisher "Mr. Sandman" The Chordettes Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_in_music Other than the bleached covers of R&B songs, this is all music and artists that would soon be swept of the charts in a year or two. And again - where's the jazz, even tangentally? Now, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_100_No._1..._1963_%28USA%29 the #1 hits of 1963, the year before The Beatles hit: January 5 "Telstar" The Tornados January 12 "Go Away Little Girl" Steve Lawrence January 19 "Go Away Little Girl" Steve Lawrence January 26 "Walk Right In" The Rooftop Singers February 2 "Walk Right In" The Rooftop Singers February 9 "Hey Paula" Paul & Paula February 16 "Hey Paula" Paul & Paula February 23 "Hey Paula" Paul & Paula March 2 "Walk Like a Man" The Four Seasons March 9 "Walk Like a Man" The Four Seasons March 15 "Walk Like a Man" The Four Seasons March 23 "Our Day Will Come" Ruby & the Romantics March 30 "He's So Fine" The Chiffons April 6 "He's So Fine" The Chiffons April 13 "He's So Fine" The Chiffons April 20 "He's So Fine" The Chiffons April 27 "I Will Follow Him" Little Peggy March May 4 "I Will Follow Him" Little Peggy March May 11 "I Will Follow Him" Little Peggy March May 18 "If You Wanna Be Happy" Jimmy Soul May 25 "If You Wanna Be Happy" Jimmy Soul June 1 "It's My Party" Lesley Gore June 8 "It's My Party " Lesley Gore June 15 "Sukiyaki" Kyu Sakamoto June 22 "Sukiyaki" Kyu Sakamoto June 29 "Sukiyaki" Kyu Sakamoto July 6 "Easier Said Than Done" The Essex July 13 "Easier Said Than Done" The Essex July 20 "Surf City" Jan and Dean July 27 "Surf City" Jan and Dean August 3 "So Much in Love" The Tymes August 10 "Fingertips Pt. 2" Little Stevie Wonder August 17 "Fingertips Pt. 2" Little Stevie Wonder August 24 "Fingertips Pt. 2" Little Stevie Wonder August 31 "My Boyfriend's Back" The Angels September 7 "My Boyfriend's Back" The Angels September 14 "My Boyfriend's Back" The Angels September 21 "Blue Velvet" Bobby Vinton September 28 "Blue Velvet" Bobby Vinton October 5 "Blue Velvet" Bobby Vinton October 12 "Sugar Shack" Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs October 19 "Sugar Shack" Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs October 26 "Sugar Shack" Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs November 2 "Sugar Shack" Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs November 9 "Sugar Shack" Jimmy Gilmer and the Fireballs November 16 "Deep Purple" Nino Tempo and April Stevens November 23 "I'm Leaving It Up to You" Dale & Grace November 30 "I'm Leaving It Up to You" Dale & Grace December 7 "Dominique" The Singing Nun December 14 "Dominique" The Singing Nun December 21 "Dominique" The Singing Nun December 28 "Dominique" The Singing Nun Cpmapring 1954 to 1963, the shift to more "youthful" oriented material is obvious. And the advent of the Beatles pretty much killed off the market for this type rock. so as much as I love Abbey Lincoln (which is a whole lot), I ain't buying that The Beatles killed jazz, or that Rock killed jazz, or that anything killed jazz other than jazz itself - as a whole - died a natural death but has left us with some beautiful spirits floating around waiting to come back in some other form relevant to the now to start the shit up all over again in a new way.

It wasn't just jazz that got coldcocked by rock. The whole "Adult Pop" thing started the 60s going strong, was severly limping by the decade's end, and was pretty much dead a few years thereafter. You know who was the first (and for a while, only) "rock" act on Columbia, then the biggest of labels, until Clive Davis revamped the roster in 1967? Paul Revere & the Raiders. The rest of Columbia was adult pop, country pop, jazz, classical, and show tunes, all of which took a hit of one degree or another during the 60s. And Dylan, who was originally signed on as a "folk" act (another popular genre that the "rock" of the 60s pretty much decimated. And otehr than Elvis, what "rock" did RCA have before Jefferson Airplane? They too had a lot of adult pop, country pop, jazz, classical, and show tunes as the foundation of their catalogue going into the 60s. A lot of jazz musicians of the day were bitter about the Beatles. But so were a lot of other musicians in other idioms that had larger general audiences than did jazz. Jazz has had periods, some of them long, of being a financially viable "alternative music" that was always close to the mainstream. But it has never been the mainstream itself. According to Wikipedia, here's the top records of 1939, one of the peak years of the Swing Era: # "And the Angels Sing" by Martha Tilton with Benny Goodman & his orchestra # "At The Woodchopper's Ball" by Woody Herman # "Beer Barrel Polka" by Will Glahe # "Begin the Beguine" by Chick Henderson with Joe Loss and his Band ( recorded July 5. # "Deep Purple" by Larry Clinton # "God Bless America by Kate Smith # "If I Didn't Care by The Ink Spots # "Jeepers Creepers" by Al Donohue # "The Man With the Mandolin" by Glenn Miller # "Moonlight Serenade" by Glenn Miller # "Moon Love" by Glenn Miller # "Our Love" by Tommy Dorsey # "Over the Rainbow" by Glenn Miller, also Judy Garland # "Scatter-Brain" by Frankie Masters # "South of the Border" by Shep Fields # "Stairway to the Stars" by Glenn Miller # "Strange Fruit" by Billie Holiday # "Summertime" by Sidney Bechet # "Sunrise Serenade" by Glenn Miller # "Tea For Two" by Art Tatum # "Thanks For The Memory" by Bob Hope & Shirley Ross # "Wishing (Will Make It So)" by Glenn Miller From 1937: * "That Old Feeling" by Shep Fields * "Once In Awhile" by Tommy Dorsey * "It Looks Like Rain in Cherry Blossom Lane" by Guy Lombardo * "September In the Rain" by Guy Lombardo * "The Dipsy Doodle" by Tommy Dorsey * "Sweet Leilani" by Bing Crosby * "The Moon Got In My Eyes" by Bing Crosby * "Boo Hoo" by Guy Lombardo * "Goodnight, My Love" by Benny Goodman * "On A Little Bamboo Bridge" by Louis Armstrong written by Abner Silver and Al Sherman * "Whispers In the Dark" by Bob Crosby * "Peace in the Valley" by Mahalia Jackson, gospel music hit written by Thomas A. Dorsey From 1941, the last pre-WWII year in America: * "Amapola" by Jimmy Dorsey * "Blue Champagne" by Jimmy Dorsey * "Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy" - Andrews Sisters * "Chattanooga Choo Choo" by Glenn Miller * "Daddy" by Sammy Kaye * "Dolores" by Bing Crosby, also Tommy Dorsey * "Elmer's Tume" by Glenn Miller * "God Bless The Child" by Billie Holiday * "Green Eyes" by Jimmy Dorsey * "High On A Windy Hill" by Jimmy Dorsey * "The Hut Sut Song" by Mel Tormé * "I Don't Want to Set the World On Fire" by Horace Heidt * "I Hear a Rhapsody" by Charlie Barnet, also Jimmy Dorsey * "I'll Be with You in Apple Blossom Time" - Andrews Sisters * "Intermezzo" by Earl Hines * "Lament To Love" by Harry James * "Let Me Off Uptown" by Gene Krupa * "Maria Elena" by Jimmy Dorsey * "Music Makers" by Harry James * "My Sister and I" by Jimmy Dorsey * "Oh! Look At Me Now" by Tommy Dorsey * "Perfidia" by Xavier Cugat * "Piano Concerto in B Flat" by Freddy Martin * "Racing With The Moon" by Vaughn Monroe * "Song of the Volga Boatmen" by Glenn Miller * "Take The 'A' Train" by Duke Ellington * "There I Go" by Vaughn Monroe * "There'll Be Some Changes Made" by Benny Goodman * "This Love Of Mine" by Tommy Dorsey * "Tonight We Love" by Nelson Eddy * "White Cliffs Of Dover" by Glenn Miller * "Yes Indeed! by Tommy Dorsey * "You and I" by Glenn Miller * "You Made Me Love You" by Harry James Sure, you see some jazz, and quite a bit that's tangentally "jazzy", a helluva lot more than you do today. But jazz is not any ways dominant on these charts, and this was a time when jazz is now often referred to as having been "America's Popular Music". It just ain't so.

Sorry, but jazz, "real jazz" has never been the dominant form of American Popular Music, not even during the Swing Era. It has, however, been a helluva lot closer to the "mainstream" than it is now (and at times has been a vital influence) due to various degrees of musical & societal evolution by everybody concerned. But jazz, "real jazz" has never been the main Top 40/Hit Parade/Whatever music. The discussion about jazz and rock is funny. Rock is dead too, even though, like jazz, it's hanging on (the difference in scale is obvous, but still...). So the discussion of one dead music resisting a newer dead music is pretty...silly at this point of the game, I think. Arguing the 20th Century ain't exactly "moving ahead", if you get my drift...

All this and all we have is this one photograph? Hmmm....

Wild hogs can be some bad news.

Bach was big in certain jazz circles because he was running changes, if you want to hear it like that. Too easy, too simple that is, but so was the connection made by a lot of people who felt that they didn't need to know better. As for Baroque & Pop, I was a (fairly aware) kid in the mid-late 60s when that was big, & it seemed/seems that A) it was an offshoot of the British Ivasion - never mind that Bach, etc. weren't English, the image of England as some sort of Enclave of Edwardian Elegance seemed to be the thing. B) There was very much an air of "innocent & pure beauty" about the culture, as should be expected from so many young people gaining so much cultural muscle at the same time. The stereotypical "Baroque sound" seemed to exemplify that perfectly. C) You just can't fuck around with Bach and lose. the shit's solid all the way through, with a core that's damn near indestructable no matter what/how you use it to other ends. Gotta love that. So you got a culture that's under the sway of a culture perceived as more "sophisticated" than itself intoxicated with the innocent idealism of empowered youth discovering some music that can't be deconstructed to the point of triviality and/or meaninglessness. A "hip" element of slightly older age group has already given Baroque some cachet. Next thing you know you got "A Lover's Concerto", then"Walk Away Renee", and then BOOM it's the Spring & the Summer Of Love, where granny glasses & harpsichords go together like ham & eggs. Summer turned to Autumn (and Winter) pretty quickly. But Bach remains one bad motherfucker.

She's like Jane Monheit with the jazz removed... (yeah, I'm as surprised as anybody... )

I'm listening, and it's good, but no match for SF2. No match whatsoever. Trust me.

Anybody stop to considerthe possibility that the rapid 16th thing might be as much a "Philly thing" as it is anything? Benny Golson was into that stuff too, and as long as we're looking up back issues of Cadence, try & find the one where Golson says soemthing to the effect that for the longest, his perception of Trane was that of another Philly cat, working on the same stuff that all/most/a lot of them were, just harder. In other words, it wasn't until later in Trane's evolution that Golson heard him doing anything fundamentally different than what they (and others) had both been working to varying degrees on in Philly. See, jazz used to work like that. It wouldn't be jsut one guy coming up with something that changed the world all by himself, there used to be communities of players with a pool of common ideas, common local slants on broader ideas, and then individual slants on those local slants. Now, we haven't even covered Jimmy Oliver, Jimmy Heath, the Granoff School of Music & Dennis Sandole, ya'know, all the specifically local elements that were part of the overall musical fabric of the community. Even if not everybody had direct exposure to every element, in a community where players hang. shed, study, live, and play together as a matter of fact daily existence, shit gets out into broader circulation without too much effort. Trane hit it harder and more in=depth than anybody else (that's been documented anyway), but that was just Trane being Trane. There was no halfass anything with him, it seems. FWIW, I've heard pieces of later Smith that show a helluval lot of Trane influence, I think. Fast lines with the chord superimposition thing going on. He pulls it off effortlessly. But this is all 80s stuff I'm thinking of (and at one point there was a cheapo live tape in the area - on a cheapo cassette badly recorded on a cheapo portable - from a Dallas club date ca. 1981 where he played like this at length, all night in fact. But the tape wasn't mine & couldn't get a copy of it. Now, who knows where it is?), so the assumption would be that Smith was influenced by Trane, which is probably true. But hell, they kneweach other in Philly, the gigged together for a short while, and no doubt it was all "in the air" there. So to make too much of a deal about who influenced who is to overlook the more overriding, more important point - that maybe, just maybe, that whole style in all its forms & degrees, was a product of a thriving musical community of which Trane & JOS were both actively invoived in.

That would be this, found here, right? No relation to SF2 whatsoever , but I plan on shceking it out. Thatnks for the lead?