JSngry

Oh my God, yes! Almost ALL the Prestige sides released during the Don Schlitten years had liner notes that qualified for the Hall of Fame in my opinion. Morgenstern was a frequent contributor, especially on the "historical" sides, and to this day I rue the day I loaned my Prestige issue of Dizzy's Salle Pleyel big band concert to an unworthy accquaintance. Never did get the album back, but phrases from those liner notes still resonate in my mind as "true' observations on the music. To me, that's effective writing. VERY much looking forward to Mr. Morgenstern's book, as well as Mr. Kart's. I loves me some good jazz books!

I'll tell Juanita to get me the diner!

H. Allen Stein, the man who could say less and mean it more than anybody this side of Prof. Irwin Corey!

You are, and so am I. That's just how it goes...

But it's my only line!

Yeah, I found those too, but they're not suicidal, they're normal, as frightening as that seems...

That's what I was wondering, but I can find no mention of it anywhere.

Well, if my daughter was anywhere near old enough to vote, I'd say your concern was justified...

Once again my life has been touched by greatness!!!

Injuries - the great leveller, and wholly unpredictable.

No. I don't want my dreams to be shattered. Just to be totally clear, this thread is TOTALLY tongue-in-cheek. Last thing I'd want would be for somebody to misunderstand and get on the phone to Cuscuna inquiring about the "Porno Mosaic"...

there's music included too?!?

No. I don't want my dreams to be shattered.

For myself, "technique" only becomes an issue when it interferes with the impact of a player's emotional content. To this end, I'll posit that although Lee Morgan and Miles both played the same instrument and as such shared a common base of basic technical concerns, they ultimately had DIFFERENT "techniques", because the stories that they told were told from such different perspectives that they required ultimately different instrument methodologies. So, what worked or didn't, technically, for one is different for the other. It's a matter of intent above all for me - is the player doing what they intended, or are they being held back by technical limitations? That's how I "judge" technique. Case in point (and I know I'll get flack for this from some people) - Jameel Moondoc. I LOVE what he's trying to say, and I LOVE his spirit, but dammit, I can't get past his "sloppy" fingering. What I hear first and foremost is a guy with great ideas and great feelings that just don't come out of the horn exactly as he intended them. Now, I'll take sloppy feeling over precise emptiness any day of the week, but it frustrates me to hear such obvious substance not given the full execution that it so obviously deserves. It just bugs me, and detracts from my enjoyment of his work. There's a difference between "controlled sloppiness" and "sloppy sloppiness", odd as that might sound. Now, John, I suspect that that is how Miles affects you, so although I disagree totally, I know where you're coming from in principle. I just hear a "precision" in Miles that I don't hear in Moondoc. But that is subjective, I suppose, so what's a mother to do?

and ANOTHER thing... The whole "Miles=Vulnerability" equation is often overstated in my opinion. Sure, it's a psrt of his overall persona, but this whole "walking on eggshells" business tends to obscure the fact that Miles had one of the SHARPEST senses of time ever, and had an internal rhythm that couls only be upset by his own doings. This was a motherfucker who could lay out for a cuppla bars and pop one note in EXACTLY the right spot to kick the intensity level up a notch or two. Not for nuthin' did he always play with drummers who had no compunctions against playing harder than the law allowed - he played that hard himself, even if he broke it up into distinct segments rather than letting it all come out in a continuous flow like most others of his generation. (btw - this is not an "original insight". Gil Evans said much the same thing a long time ago.) Such confidence and assuredness is not usually the province of the emotionally delicate, or frail, or otherwise "vulnerable". The whole "tough on the outside/tender on the inside" thing is a part of the Miles Mystique. and is true as far as it goes, but I don't buy into it, because it doesn't go NEAR far enough. "Tender on the outside/tough on the inside" works every bit as well, and I defy anybody to find an instance where it can clearly be said that one is the obvious choice over the other, or that the two levels of the "interpretation" are the only two levels there are. I think when you get into "interpreting" the emotional content of Miles' music, you're doomed to a resolution in ambiguity, because by all accounts, this was one "complicated" individual who not only had a bunch of opposite tendencies at play internally, but was also one who made no attempt to resolve them either: Bisexual (rumored) vs. Pussyhound, Nice Guy vs. Total Asshole, Sensitive Lover vs. Wife Beater, Man Of The Street vs. Bourgeois Negro, you name it, if there's a conflict to be had, Miles probably not only had it, but played to it but publically and privately. I think it's this confluence of opposites (I can't really call them "conflicts", because I see no signs of them being anything other than welcomed by Miles) that makes the easy labelling such as "vulnerable" etc. fallacious and over simplistic. It might also explain why Miles is somebody that continues to "fascinate" many of those who are less than thrilled with his music - there is such an energy being created just by him being who he was that it's damn near impossible to ignore from a human standpoint. But that's the Miles Mystique, something that I acknowledge, but don't really fall for myself, not totally anyway. Ackowledging it, recognizing it, and attempting to define it are quite different than being drawn to the music because of it, and like I said, I find enough of substance and profundity in the music alone to discuss it on it's own terms, minus all the psychoanalysis/psychobabble. But where's the fun there?

Well, to show you how different people hear different things in different ways, vulnerabilty is the LAST thing I hear in Monk. Go figure! And yeah, the earlier Prestige (and BN) sides DO show Miles often having chops issues (the date w/Rollins & Bird is particularly "painful" at times in this regard). But those are from his "frantic" years of out-of-control drug addiction and frequent periods of inactivity. So there's a "reason" why the chops are off there. But a solo like "Basin Street Blues" on SEVEN STEPS TO HEAVEN has all the "controversial" qualities in spades, and to me it is one of the most audacious solos Miles ever recorded - a tune that virtually defines "hoary" is redefined, reimagined, reharmonized, re-EVERYTHINGed, and presented with a total control and discipline that bespeaks a master saying exactly what he wants to say exactly how he wants to say it. Again, whether or not one "likes" it is purely a matter of personal taste, but geez Louise, how anybody can say that there's no control there is beyond me! (and I know that's not what you're saying John) You couldn't make "mistakes" like that in a million years!

Ok... Miles' technique gets a lot of bad raps, and I think it's largely because of his tone. It's not a conventionally "brassy" trumpet tone, nor is it a traditonally "fat" one. It is what it is, and he spent so long with it, honing, refining it, and shading it, that my conclusion is that it's the tone he wanted and the tone he heard. There's certainly no indication that he wanted a different type of tone. If anything, his tone is the one thing that remained constant over the years. Although he showed a willingness to tweak it over the years as the need arose, its core qualities remained from beginning to end. Now as far as finger-dexterity and range goes, there's plenty of examples of Miles playing fluently in all ranges, as well as him popping out some high notes quite readily, throughout his career, so if one wants to say that the cat had "poor technique" or some such, one had best be prepared to say in exactly what regard. Because the fluency of, say, his appearance w/Dameron & Moody in Paris ca. 1949 and his various live bootlegs of the late 60s will refute most any notions that he couldn't play high and/or fast. You might have a case if you want to argue consistency of these aspects of his technique, but that's another argument altogether. I think what it all comes down to is intent, and where Miles differed from many a trumpeter, jazz or otherwise, is that he was first and foremost a sensualist on the instrument. His concern was often with PURE sound, PURE mood, PURE effect through manipulation of his instrument. So yeah, a lot of those cracks, waverings, etc. WERE intentional. But not all. The measure I use for what's intentional and what's a flub is more often than not timing - does the "event" occur in such a place and is it executed in such a way that is unfolds in a manner that sounds controlled, like the guy is creating an arc of "event" all the way through, from beginning to end. And far more often than not, the answer for me is "yes", and unambiguously so. Miles' true flubs tend to disrupt his flow, his timing. And timing is another thing that Miles was VERY much about - pinpoint accuacy of the placing of EVERYTHING, space included. His timing is amongst the most amazing in all jazz, because for me, the ante is upped considerably when you start leaving things OUT. When you lay out, you have to come back in, and doing so at exactly the right moment with exactly the thing you intend is a helluva lot harder (for me, anyway) than riding the groove and playing onward and upward, although both are certainly valid approaches in themselves. Now none of this is to say that Miles had chops of steel, or that he never flubbed notes, or that he was the greatest technician on his instrument in he history of the world, because those things are obviously not true. But I've heard the "Miles couldn't ever really play that good" line (from disparate sources) for decades now, and franky, I think it's a load of hooey. Although, like ANY brass player, when Miles didn't stay on his axe regularly, his chops showed it in no uncertain terms, I think in Miles we have an artist who nevertheless had the basics (and beyond) at their disposal whenever they wanted them (almost always, anyway - see the "layoff" aspect), but seldom did they actually have that specific want. Their aims were to utilize other elements of sound and technique to make a different kind of music within thier idiom on their specific instrument. Now, none of this is going to make you LIKE Miles, I know. If you're asking for somebody to give you a reason why you "should", I'm not your guy. Explain to ME why I should love Bill Evans, ok? Either there's a connection or there isn't, and all the logic in the world can't create one where none exists. I've got no problem with somebody saying, "I just don't get it". Well, ok, a lot of times I DO have a problem, but I am maturing that way, ok? The problem I have is when somebody confuses the subjective "I don't like it" with the objective "this cat can not play his/her instrument". And what I hear you saying is that for your taste, Miles does not play his instrument well enough for your tastes to convey his message successfully. Even though I would disagree 100 (or more) per-cent with that, I can't say you're "wrong" (although I damn sure WANT to ) because who am I to tell you what you should or should not feel? I can plead the case that Miles was an innovator and an artist of rare sensitivity and perception from now until the cows come back home to Capistrano and swallow ttheir cud in Sorrento, but if YOU don't "get it", what's the point? Like I said - convince me of why I should love Bill Evans, and then I'll work on you about Miles. But until then, let's leave well enough alone.

lost for words Jim? That would be a novelty! Do I get a prize? No, not lost, and no prize. Just need time to collect myself and remember that you are a friend.

Well...

Doesn't matter to me one way or another.

Stupid, Stupid, STUPID!!!!