JSngry

You gotta respect the guy's ethics in not betraying the "secrets" of his clients even as you wish he had been a little less ethical every time you hear some of the results of him doing so. What I want to know now is who created the "Muse sound", the one that's got so much reverb it's almost traumatic? Some of the late 60s BNs have it too, but not as much as the Muses. Is this the "Bob Porter sound"?

Great stuff! Lon, I did not know that "Joe Gentle" was Yusef Lateef! Learn something every day, eh? Those who dig THE SOURCE are STRONGLY encouraged to pick up LOST AND FOUND on Rhino. It's got 5 cuts from Scott's second, still unreleased in toto Atlantic session, and they are uniformly superb, at least every bit as good as THE SOURCE. The disc is filled out with five tunes from THE SOURCE, so ther is some duplication, but so what? It's more than worth it.

I felt that Bley's book was really "in his voice", that he wrote with the same spirit and in the same manner which he plays. Sly, oblique, etc. Maybe not good "history", but good "art", if that makes any sense. The Rollins book was, as Mike said, pretty worthless except for the direct quotes, which I often found QUITE valuable. His Trane bio was even worse. How does this guy get a gig anyway? Rhetorical question...

Perhaps you've heard Dolphy's version? Or Ira Sullivan's?

Yeah, I for one take these Blindfold Tests "seriously", on a strictly personal level. I LIKE running ideas through my head until something clicks, and then trying to extrapolate from that. But I like crossword puzzles and the like too, and this is just another way to put those tendencies into play. The listening group we had here w/Jie Millazo, Shawn Dudley, and Andrew Griffith regularly featured blindfold tests, and it was fun to both squirm and to cause squirming. Kind of a game, but also a good intellectual exercise too, bringing all one's non-playing musical resources to the fore and keeping them sharp. Not everybody takes music THAT seriously though, and for that, they should be thankful! Bottom line for me - everybody's going to have their own way of approaching this, and if I know exactly what something is, I don't want to spoil it for those who like to do a bit of sleuthing. I'd be a little bummed if somebody spilled the beans too soon on something I felt that I almost had figured out, so that's where I'm coming from. There's fun to be had any way you play!

Allright Dan, this is my last clue about the track I'm 100% certain of. This guy is the leader of it, but it's not on this album. Now, that you got 2/3 of the "translation clue" do the other third (subhint - no translation required!) put the whole thing in quotes, and do a Google or AMG search for the album title. I'm only being so coy because two of the soloists involed are literally "household names". When you get it, you might feel like ttaking a train ride, because you'll be feeling kinda' blue.

Hint - The Big Jazz -translate it to French, lterally, in this exact same order. That will give you the album name. Listen to the tenor player again, and know that he was employed by the trumpet player at the time. Then use the rest of the clues in an acrostic-type manner. One more hint - when you realize who at least two of the featured players are, you're gonna trip that you didn't get them. But don't feel bad. Happens all the time with blindfold tests. The tenor player SHOULD be obvious, but then again, I'm calling Wardell Gray (hope so...) Frank Foster, so who am I to say THAT?

Yeah, I realized that this morning. I kept hearing that tone in my head and I KNEW it wasn't Foster. Please, accept my sincerest apologies.

Jim Sangrey, you are a total dumbass, and you're coming up for review before the Board of Examiners of the Tenor Geeks Association. That's no more Frank Foster than you're Sonny Rollins. It's Wardell Gray.

Damn fine stuff overall, and I really appreciated the QUALITY compositions compiled here. Plenty of meat just in the tunes! I'm going to want some of these albums in full, for sure. Very little in the way of obvious in terms of players, too. Many instances of "familar, but not readily so", and those make for the best (and most frustrrating) Blindfold Tests. I'll leave out the one cut I already knew, take a few stabs, and probably miss miserably.... 1 = Eddie Lang? Sounds like a polished player w/excellent facilty AND a good feel. Lang is the only name who comes to mind, which exposes my lack of knowledge about this kind of stuff. 2 - JJ, most likely. Sounds like his playing and writing. My guess is the Columbia session w/Bobby Jasper, Flanagan, & Elvin. I hear residual Columbia studio sound. I had no problem reconciling any of these players with what I heard, but Elvin took some serious convincing. But the drummers time had that rolling, stumbling over itself while still being perfectly in the pocket quality that virtually defines Elvin, even though nothing he actually plays does, so operating on the premise that a leopard can change his spots but not his DNA, I'll make this my final answer, Regis. 3 - Either the remastering or the original recording plays tricks here, because the tone on the opening head SURE sounds like Dexter. But it's not. "Perdido" changes, with a hipass melody, especially the bridge's melody/chord relations. Rockin' drum fills, almost New Orlean-y. The tenorist does indeed have a Rollins-esque quality to his lines, but there's a certain tonal quality in spots that I associate with Frank Foster of this era. That would be my best guess, but there's more than a few things along the way that aren't really Foster-esque, so I doubt that my best is good enough. That little vibrato on the ends of notes sounds familiar, but not enough to ring a bell... 4 - Ok, this one I knew. The Big Jazz. Kilometers between Locomotives in the Timbers. What are you doing, jitterbugging the rest of your life? It's 3/4 over, you know. 5 - Sounds like Tubby Hayes to me - Griffiny energy combined w/Mobleyey tone, chops out the wazzoo, and an aversion to breathing (usually annoying as hell, but quite invgorating when done right, and this cat does it right). I think I might have this, if it's on the Columbia CD, but it's been almost 10 years since I listened to that, and I can't find it on my shelves right now, so maybe not. The tune sounds kinda like "He's My Guy", but not consisently so. 6 - Jaki Byard? Early Abdullah Ibrahim, maybe (not)? Beautiful tune, and the drummer does a nice job of shadowing the triplets in the melody. Lovely performance, great tune. Is this another "trick" Elvin gig? It doesn't SOUND like Elvin, but it FEELS like him... 7 - First few notes sound like Sonny Fortune, but it's not. I'll guess Leo Wright, Robin Kenyatta, or Pony Poindexter, in that order. I could maybe bit on Bunky Green if I was drunk enough, but....no. LOVE the cat's tone, which is roughly Spaulding-esque, but not even remotely close enough to tempt me into guessing him. Great piece, great players, I want this. Sounds like an Atlantic recording, for whatever that's worth... 8 - Stuff Smith is one, I think, the one I like better. Is that Jo Jones on drums?Almost sounds like OP on piano... No surprises, just goodness, and I can be down with that most every time. 9 - I could go for Pat Martino, maybe, maybe not. I'm digging the organist more, though. Nice tune, the way it goes through various sections, and he/she reminds me of Eddy Louiss in doing so. Pretty interesting for me. 10 - Akioshi/Tabackin? Sounds like a Califronia band and recording, the alto has enough residual Koniz-isms to qualify as Gary Foster, and why else would the tenor just play the melody and not solo? Besides, it sounds like Lew, and it sounds like Toshiko's writing. Not familiar with this particular item, though, inless I heard it back int the 70s and have it on file subconsciously. This is a VERY nice piece - the voicings totally knock me out, especially in the saxes during the solo backgrounds. If this is indeed Foster, I'm usually left limp with disintrest by his playing, but this one really caught my ear. Great chart, great playing, and who's the trumpet soloist? Did i say how great this one was? 11 - Joe. Van Gelder. Is this from Cindy Blackman's Muse debut? If so, what the hell happened to Wallace Roney over the years? If not, then what hell happened to Wallace Roney over the years anyway? 12 - Grunting vibist means Dave Pike in my book. But this is marimba, I thnk, not vibes, and this doesn't sound like Dave Pike. I dunno.. something funny about the free sections. Plenty of logic to them, but maybe TOO much, if you get my drift... 13 - Don't care for this. Too "ECM-ish", in the stereotypical way, for my inclinations. Good players all, but the soprano player's tone REALLY bugs me, and not just the vibrato. Seems TOO "sincere"... But everybody's playing, so if I don't get into it, it's not their fault. 14 - Little Rootie Tootie. This piece reminds me of a drummer I used to play Monk pieces with in duet many years ago. We did it 2-3 times a week for about 2 years. He's be wanting to do all these DIFFERENT things to them from jumpstreet, and I told him to let's just learn the shit straight and then fuck with it, so we'd know what it is we're fucking with. These guys should do that - get a little deeper into the striaght tune, becsue I feel that they lose the essence of the piece more ofhten than they get it. I don't care how out you wanna go, but if you're going to play a Monk tune, go out in relation to that tune. And this isn't really out, this trio, it's just, uh, unnecessary. Seems to get all Monk's playfulness and none of his gravity. Gotta have both. GOT to have both. But that's just me. Since I folded, do I get a home edition of the game to go with my lovely parting gifts? Seriuosly, great selections (even the ones I presonally didn't care for). Let's play again.

Could disagree more about J.R.'s tone, but that's entirely a personal matter. And I LOVE Ernie Henry, and have from note one, but again, that's entirely a personal matter. You do vinyl, right Tony? If you ever come across Barron's 80s work on Muse, check it out. It's everything his earlier work was, only moreso. Fascinating stuff. Also, Bill Barron did a CD on the Joken label (something Kenny was a partner in, or some such) in 1989 called HIGHER GROUND where he plays a bunch of standards. That's some hip shit! Now - I gotta go to work and listen to this Blindfold Test that some doctor made up. Wonder what the hell is gonna be on THAT?

Yeah, I have it in a stack of things I've given a cursory listen to and am awaiting the time to give a proper in-depth checking out. First impression was that I dug it. It's got kind of a "dark" vibe to it, not in a bad way, but more like the "this is another day in the life of the wandering minstrels, who knows what they've seen in their travels, well, here they are this time, let's listen in and hear what stories they have to tell us this time" kind of dark. I dug it quite a bit, even if as an album per se it seemed to slightly lack cohesion. That comes with the territory. And JON EARDLEY! Hadn't heard from him since the 50s! Definitely one that will be revisited for further explorations.

Oh yeah, the dynamics too. The cat plays with what strikes me as an unusual amount of interphrasal (and if that's not a word, it is now!) dynamics. I can see why cats like Monterose, Tina Brooks, Bill Barron, Ernie Henry, etc. get to be "cult" favorites. What they do is on the one hand totally unique, and on the other so within such a narrow range in the overall scheme that it's understandable why some would "walk on by" their work, or at best take a look, say "that's interesting", and keep going. You know, the tune that really intrigued me was #4 ("Red Devil", I think). It's got a weird sturcture - 14, not 16, bars, but it's accomplished without any awkwardness in the resolution of the changes. The lack of the expected extra 2 bars creates this cool, organic, "looping" effect where you're back at the beginning sooner than you expect but you look around and everything SEEMS normal, so you keep it to yourself and act like nothing's wrong, even though you KNOW there is. A perfect vehicle for a NY cat trying to straighten out in Iowa, I'd think....

Oooooh.... Don't blame the musicians unless you know it's their fault. My experience has been that A)Most soundmen are from Planet Bizzarro and B)even if the band is responsible for their own sound and takes the time and effort to get a good mix, the club mangement will complain it to death. If it were up to me, I'd play as all-accousticly as possible, but THAT gets you the evil eye in a lot of joints. It's a dirty world, I tell ya'...

Hey, it's nice to know what people DON'T like. Remember how Trane said he wished he could hear his music from the perspective of someone hearing it for the very first time? It's not necessary to bend everything to "please" people, but having an idea of why the people who don't like your work don't like it gives you a little perspective. Sometimes you ponder and grow, and sometimes you strengthen in your resolve. Either way, it's a good thing. Well, ok "nice" is not necessarily the right word , but you get my point, I hope.

Why look over there on the right - it's little Johnny Coltrane! Damn, you think about what a spectrum of music Trane covered in actual professional experience and it boggles the mind almost as much - sometimes as much or more - than Bird. Jesus, this stuff is DEEP!

Got one of him in that wrinkled white suit,looking all puffy? Those are the ones that I hate to look at, but do, because otherwise it would be too easy to be infatuated with the genius without realizing what the man went through. Like somebody said, "As serious as your life!"

I thank you all for correcting my misidentifying the particulars of this album. 'Twas a long time ago... Sounds like an album I might like to borrow to see how it grabs me. I like Young, but not necessarily enough to buy any of his stuff. The descriptions of this album from people whose taste I respect have piqued my curiosity. And I've got to hear TONIGHT'S THE NIGHT. Don't think I ever have...

The subject at hand renders it superfulous.

Charlie Parker was really good!

The thing that totally grabs me on this album is Monterose's phrasing and his playing of ideas rather than licks. His phrasing is "over" the beat ather than "inside" it, and he begins and ends his lines only when the idea has been completed, which sometimes coincides with the bar lines, and sometimes doesn't. There's a true melodicism at work here that I find quite striking. Also, the absolute confidence with which he plays makes quite an impact on me. It's not easy to be so sustainedly melodic AND thoughtful without hitting a bump every now and then, or at least allowing yourself a pocket or two of slack to collect your thoughts. Monterose never does this here, and I find that quite impressive. Check out how his phrases begin quite boldly, and then, rather than that boldness setting up a bravura running of licks, the idea introduced is sustained all the way through, and as boldly as the beginning. Not too many players get into that zone, especially over the length of an entire album! The inflections are happening too. Rather than serving as effects, they are organically integrated into the ideas. You can take a line that is inflected for effect and play it straight, and it will still retain it's essence, but the way Monterose does it, it's as if those inflections are part and parcel of the line itself, as if they were "written" into the "composition" of the lines. Again, this is a rare level of improvisation. Of course, Monterose is coming heavily out of the Rollins bag, and everything I've described is things that Sonny was doing back then. But I'm struck by how even though the concept, the abstract approach to the music, is similar to Rollins', the actual playing is totally non-Rollins like in specifics. Monterose here is not necessarily playing "original" in the sense of creating a new approach, but he IS playing strikingly PERSONAL - what he plays, the specifics, are unlike anybody else, even though the impetus behind those specifics can be traced to other players. It's that personal quality that really catches my attention. Originality per se is not always what compels me. In some instances, the reaching of a totally personal voice within an established "bag" is just as ear-opening. Bill Perkins' work when he was in that mid-50s "float" zone of his is one example, and Monterose's playing here is another. It's not necessarily an an immediately obvious thing, but over time, the little details come to light, and the realization of how much DETAIL is in a player's work, and just how focused they had to be to get all that detail, that specificity, is a reward unto itself. Sometimes you hear cats blowing, and it's really good, but you can tell that it's more of a "big picture" approach to the music than it is anything else, which is certainly rewarding in and of itself. But sometimes you hear a guy who's really "inside" the music, whose every move is deliberate, and whose every nuance is of the moment. That kind of stuff just fascinate me to no end. It's the difference, to me, between reading a prepared speech out loud with great feeling and creating a fully formed and nuanced speech extemporaneously. Making the improvised sound totally composed. Both can result in powerful results, but the former is a helluva lot more easily accomplished than is the latter! I guess what I'm saying is that my fascination with this album springs from not just the music, but the "state" of its creator. To be so "clear" (I think that's a Scientology term, and I sincerely apologize for that, but the term seems to fit) as Monterose is here is something that so many of us, and not just musicians, strive for but so rarely reach, if indeed we EVER do. If it doesn't last, well, such is life. It's the rarity of its occurance that makes it such a delight to experience when the opportunity presents itself, even if it's a the company of a thoroughly "local" sounding accompanying group. And, as well, it's a TOTALLY subjective thing whether or not one senses it! But I think that with careful, repeated lisrening, and a consideration of all the specifics that the music reveals, it makes itself apparent in this album. If that sounds like a lot of work to put into listening to a simple jazz record, well, it is. But not as much work (and not necessarily "labor") as J.R. was putting into playing it!

Keep an eye out for a used copy while you're saving. It happens.

I don't know. I'm into my 3rd day on this stuff, and it jsut keeps getting cooler and cooler. It's a trip hearing fairly fully formed P-Funk type lyrics and melodies in the context of what was then hardcore mainstream R&B instrumentation and production. At first I say, "This stuff shoulda all been MONSTER hits", but then I listen some more and say, "naaaahhhh....". Both thoughts are correct! Anybody who buys it, or who is already familiar with this material, please post your impressions. I'm interested.

I never understood where the old man got that one from. He himself was half Irish and half a variety of German called "Pennsylvania Dutch", and since I STILL don't know what the hell "Pennsylvania Dutch" are, I canonly conclude that he was proving his point by demonstrating it.

I think there's a general lack of humilty in America today, and one manifewstation of it is that a lot of people don't feel anything "special" about hearing a quality performance, musical or otherwise. They want something that, at some level, they can feel superior to. Call it the Springerization of America. Rather than being moved or inspired by a well-honed, highly developed talent, they seem to feel threatened by it, and they'd prefer something non-threatening. That's perfectly normal, and nothing new, but it seems that it takes VERY little to threaten people these days when it comed to entertainment