JSngry

I think he had a stick up his butt a lot of the times, and that his musical analyses are sometimes accurate-as-far-as-they-go-but-they-don't-go-very-far, but having said that, I think he's an important figure in the history of jazz writing, and that "The Jazz Tradition" is a mighty fine book, especially for newbies. But don't take anything he writes as the final say. That would be like accepting a map of your state as a map of the world, no matter how detailed and accurate the map of your state might be.

Dude - get an ice cream truck for the gig. Built-in attention getter. Just change the music.

Is Appel's assumption that joy, ebulience, and ingratiation are automatically minstrel qualities? That it's a;ways a "persona"? Does he rule out the possibility that such qualities may well "come naturally" to some people, irregardless of the public forum in which they were delivered? I mean, it's good to be cynical (and smart, too), but not to the point where you can't accept that happiness and goodness happen just like shit happens (sometimes at the same time!) What an imbalanced view of the range of life's possibilities! Cross me off the list of people who refuse to accept the possibility that joy can be as natural as pain, and/or that the two are mutually exclusive realities. Immediately, if not sooner!

If somebody can make a totally clean distinction between "racial differences" & "class differences" as it pertains to America in general and jazz in particular, they're a better person than me, and I salute them.

What he did was learn that you could get the same notes from different slide positions by playing overtones of the fundamental, mostly an embouchure/air flow/throat position thing (if I recall my brass class instruction correctly). This certainly led the way to future generations who exploited this knowledge to achieve even greater fluency on the instrument. JJ Johnson, for one instance, would not have been able to do what he did w/o this knowledge. So, if you don't dig Bill Watrous, blame Jack Teagarden!

Pops Poopadeux

I appreciate that sentiment, and felt it myself for quite a while. But tell you what - the more I listen to Milt Jackson, the more I realize what a truly "advanced" musician he was, especially "in his time" of the late 40s/ealy 60s. Maybe it's the nature of his sound, or the instrument itself, or a combination of both, but it's real easy to overlook the very real rhythmic intricacies and harmonic bedevilment that Bags was up to in those years (and remained up to for the duration of his career, truthfully). If any of his solos on this sesion had been played on, say, an alto, people would have gone, and still be going, apeshit, such is their meatiness, intricacy, and clarity. I've been late in fully appreciating Milt Jackson, but when I started listening to his work as music and not as "vibes playing", my eyes were opened, and opened very widely. Milt Jackson was a BAAAAAAAAAD muthafukkah, and not at all "easy". His sound and delivery might have been, but hsi ideas were anything but!

I never thought about that but I see Jim's point although I don't agree with it. The varitone just ruins the sound. One lp of Sonny's that I really love is at the DJ Lounge. That recording is just not going to grab me the way it does if he had used the varitone. This is all subjective, of course, but I can't say for myself that his tone is "ruined". I would say that it's changed, though. Now, that might seem obvious, but it's not just a matter of being changed in quality, it becomes a matter of being changed in intent. Think about the changes that were going on during the time that Stitt used the varitone, mainly the movement to "say it loud, I'm Black and I'm proud". I don't think this should be overlooked or dismissed, because most of Stitt's work in these days was in venues where the clientele was being directly affected by these changes and this new philosophy. Men and women both were feeling liberation and more than a bit of "militancy" (not in the "hateful" way, but more in the "I'm going to be who and what I am as fully and blatantly as I can and I don't care who does or doesn't like it" way). The varitone gave Stitt's horns an edge that allowed it to cut through Patterson's organ, which then allowed Patterson to play as loudly and proudly as he wanted to, which then gave James full reign to do the same, and the whole thing kinda looped around on itself. This was not the dynamic of bebop at work, this was something else entirely, and I personally think it speaks perfectly to and of the time and place from which it sprang. Check out the Label M side of this trio at The Left Bank in Baltimore from 1971. That shit is LIVE in every sense of the word, and LOUD too. You can hear the crowd a little bit, and it's quite apparent that they were as live and loud (and proud) as the band was. It ain't nothin' but a BIG party going on. I don't think that that trio would have had that effect on that crowd, and countless others like them, if Stitt had not used the Varitone. It was part of the "electricity" of the moment, and in more ways than one. Now, that's not to say that every time he used it, it worked like that, because Stitt was as variable in being engaged in the music as he was consistent in his technical command of being able to deliver it, which is to say extremely so. But I do think that the Varitone served a more directly cogent purpose for him than beinge "merely" a gimmick or a fad. I can certainly understand why some people don't dig it no matter what, but I would like for that personal dislike to display an acknowledgement of the real benefits that it provided as well. Since those benenfits pertained almost exclusively to the social aspects of the music (and make no mistake - Stitt spent the vast percentage of his career playing social music), I don't expect a lot of today's fans to automatically be aware of, understand, or appreciate them. After all, it's now a much different time, place, and vibe. But the comments of certain critics, people who should know better (if not necessarily differently) play right back into the longstanding tradition of dismissing organ music and the entire milieu from which it sprang and flourished for reasons that might best be described as culturally condescending and at worst as flat-out, if probably unknowingly, racist. My only point is that it's entirely possible to not like what one is listening to and at the same time be aware of and understand/appreciate what it is that one is not liking. It's not necessarily necessary, but I do think it's desirable. That's all. In Stitt's case, one can not like the Varitone, for sure, but I think it neat to understand more of what what the Varitone really was for him and his mucic of the time.

Don't forget to send those cards!

Remind me to ask Santa for a Chicago phone book. Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to get some cards ready for tomorrow's mail!

Emus

You know what would be cool? If every George Freeman fan sent him a $20 bill in a Christmas card. Just because we love him. No moral issue or anything, just for kicks. I think it would be fuckin' GREAT! I'd do it for Von too. Sorry, but Bruz gets a pass. Haven't heard enough of him yet. But just imagine - you're George Freeman, you're going along living your life, and all of a sudden, you start getting all these Christmas cards w/$20 bills in them from people you've never met. Cooler than shit, I say.

If Stitt had used the Varitone on TUNE UP or albums of that ilk, it might have ruined the music, because that's music w/a different intent, on many levels. But Stitt on Varitone w/an organ group is perfect, I think, because it fit in with the overall vibe of the people they were making that music for at the time they were making it. Context matters.

Does this have anything to do with those volcanic eruptions?

Oh yeah...

Got a gig for me? I'm neither Jew nor Arab!

Brave Brubeck. At least that's what Astro says.

That sucks that you have to buy at least 2 CDs to get the entire session. I've got it all on on 12" LP, Prestige 7650, from the late 60s/early 70s (liner notes are dated March 1969). Still called MILES DAVIS AND THE MODERN JAZZ GIANTS, but the complete session is on one LP & a different cover is used. Absolutely no good reason why this issue shouldn't have been made available as a single CD. Not much mention of it on the Losin site, not even a cover scan. That seems wierd too.

OTOH, if you dig Pepper enough to buy this set, and if you can afford it, why not get a set w/a good box? But if it's not that big a deal, or if funds are tight, yeah - keep it as is and just dig the music.

What's funny is that I think that Monk's comps behind Miles are perfect. Maybe not what he watned to hear, but it sure works for me.

Just finished reading the 1981 Lee Konitz piece. Five paragraphs of perfection and absolute truth. The opening paragraph alone would be worth the price of the book. And the lines about "styles" perfectly sum up a lot of the everythings I love and hate about various jazzes. This is the type of writing that grows in insight, depth, and meaning the more you know about the music. Most music writing does just the opposite. Buy this book if you're into jazz for keeps. It'll be good for the duration.

Well, post it here! Or SOMETHING. I'd love to hear/read that.

If you picking just one, I'd go with TEARS. Easily.

Bummer.

Same guy. He was on Murphy Brown too.