DrJ

Rooster, IMHO you should begin with the RCA recordings of the Akiyoshi-Tabackin big band. I believe you participated in the first blindfold test here, correct? If so, I had put a track on that disc from that era - the title track of the album LONG YELLOW ROAD. If you liked that, you will like most of this music I think. If you're into vinyl, then if the area you live is anything like mine, you shouldn't have much trouble finding a goodly number of these albums used - KOGUN, LONG YELLOW ROAD, ROAD TIME, and TALES OF A COURTESAN for example. If not, then you have to go to looking for Japanese CDs since basically all of this stuff remains unissued in the U.S. (there was a single CD compilation on RCA/Novus a while back, but you'll want to delve more deeply). I think a fair criticism of some of this music is that it can occasionally sound kind of "LA Studio," partly due to the presence of people like Gary Foster. But you also get to hear Tabackin in his prime on multiple reed instruments, Bobby Shew and Don Rader (both of whose trumpet playing I dig), and some absolutely wonderous compositions and arrangements. I love this music, and have long been calling for a Mosaic box...I still haven't heard all the music and I have a feeling there'd be some unissued stuff, at least alternate takes. Maybe with the apparent passing of her long-lived orchestra, Mosaic will feel more compelled to memorialize this amazing accomplishment. For some more obscure Toshiko, outside of the big band: AT TOP OF THE GATE (Intakt - Japan) is going to be hard to find, but if features her in a quintet with Kenny Dorham, Tabackin, Ron Carter, and Mickey Roker from 1968. A fine, swinging but subtly unconventional gig. There's also a VERY fine all-star date on Metrojazz from 1958 called UNITED NATIONS. From AMG: This very obscure record is not the first date as a leader by Toshiko Akiyoshi, but it is a gem worth acquiring. The pianist is joined by an all-star group that includes either cornetist Nat Adderley or trumpeter Doc Severinson, clarinetist/alto saxophonist Rolf Kuhn, flutist/tenor saxophonist/baritone saxophonist Bobby Jaspar, guitarist Rene Thomas, bassist John Drew, and drummer Bert Dahlander. There's a feeling of camaraderie as a mixture of head arrangements ("Broadway") and written charts ("Strike Up the Band") of standards, as well as original material by the participants (Jaspar's tasty "Sukiyaki" and the leader's "United Notions"), unfold before the listener. The record begins on a slightly campy note as each musician, following the leader's example, introduces himself in his native language. Long out of print, this bop date will have jazz fans scouring cyberspace and auction lists in search of it. — Ken Dryden I personally LOVE the "campy" intro - really nice idea. I only have this on a CD-R copy thanks to the kindness of a fellow board member, but would be willing to share. It's really a nice record.

I have both of Scott's entries in the JAZZ IN PARIS series - particularly enjoy the one with Clarke. This sounds like a winner, will pick it up.

Some updates - I finally had a chance to really listen to the first track, and to hear things on a better stereo system (with the little one, most of my listening these days is in the car, and my car has a good system while my wife's is pretty horrible...it was hers in which I heard the CD initially). I take back what I said about the recording quality...it's quite excellent actually, so apologies to Mr. Nessa, fine work here as usual. And the first track, which demands that it be heard on a decent sound system, is now as a result starting to yield some of its secrets. It's actually rather conventional in one sense: Braxton uses a wordless bit of sung melody to link sections of the piece, it recurs at several key points. Again, Smith is simply HUGE here (as well as intelligent), when he plays it sounds like a mighty elephant trumpeting...damn! On a better system, for some reason Jenkins no longer sounds quite as out of tune...it's intermittent, and still doesn't sound right to me, but maybe he WAS actually going microtonal intentionally, I might have to yield on that point. Braxton's soprano playing toward the start of this track was a revelation, I haven't heard him on that horn much...tone is light years apart from his (equally compelling) sound on alto. Pet moment in this 20+ minute tune so far: at about 11 minutes, out of left field, there's a harmonica bit that will make you laugh out loud - it comes in sounding like a cowboy playing, way out of context, but then gradually the part transforms into long held dissonant chords with fascinating overtones, sounding more and more like a pipe organ away in the distance, getting things back to the prevailing mood of the piece which is more "serious." This is sounding to me like a truly great recording...I wonder why I haven't heard more about it? Especially compared to FOR ALTO which is admittedly great and daring but in some other ways far more conventional.

A friend of mine gave me the single CD compilation of stuff from this box. Although I'm still fully exploring it, my overall assessment is "nice but far from essential." If you're a Pepper fanatic, you'll want it. Otherwise, I'm not sure. For me what lets it down in many spots are the rather staid rhythm sections...later period Pepper cried out for a more dynamic, energetic approach (Cables/Williams/Higgins or Elvin Jones).

Produced by Mr. Nessa, released on Delmark. Leo Smith (my first exposure to his playing) on trumpet, Richard Muhal Abrahms on piano, Leroy Jenkins violin, and Braxton. I've had FOR ALTO now for some time and have enjoyed it immensely. I am also really digging this one. I can't say I fully understand all of it yet, especially the first track, but it's fascinating stuff and the 2nd track is really pretty ear friendly for someone coming in from a more or less mainstream or mildly "out" post-bop perspective. Initial impressions: Leo Smith has a HUGE tone on trumpet, so far this has been my main pleasure in hearing the CD - I want to hear a WHOLE bunch more. Jenkins I'm not too keen on yet - he plays significantly out of tune, and in places and ways where it doesn't sound intentional, but again this is just first impressions. Braxton is a dynamo, as is Abrahms. Placed in the context of the year of recording (1968) it's a remarkably adventurous recording, who else was making music like this at that time (Art Ensemble was as adventurous in its own way but the sound is quite far from that music to me). Decent sound quality (maybe it's the CD transfer, but it's not the type of sound quality that was achieved on some other Nessa recordings of the time, like the Art Ensemble stuff). This is one to wear for a while. Ear expanding.

The sound quality IS poor, and everything else you say is also true I'm sure, Chuck, but it's 30+ years down the road now and the label did yield a few classics, stuff that surpasses so much that came before, at the time, or since. If there were other options, how come nobody else recorded these guys as leaders?

Big Al, that's a pretty cool tune, that Bangles song. Even better from the same album was their cover of Alex Chilton's "September Gurls." An appropriate song for the subject of discussion, since Chilton and Big Star in many ways INVENTED jangly pop, after all. Ghost - had missed your Go Betweens reference above until just now. Another great band. TALLULAH, heaven.

Yes, it's interesting - for quite a period of time (really up through AUTOMATIC FOR THE PEOPLE) I felt REM had reached its creative peak in the later years, and AUTOMATIC is still a real landmark album for me. But with more distance, I think the first three albums hold up best, particularly the remarkable FABLES OF THE RECONSTRUCTION album, where they reached a kind of a darkish jangly pop Zenith.

Wow, how did I miss this thread the first surge? Big fan of the jangly pop. Some of the as far unmentioned but very worthy groups I remember fondly: Salem 66 - band out of Boston, I think. Their LP A RIPPING SPIN (Homestead Records) was just that, what an incredible album. What about Lloyd Cole and the Commotions? Hey RATTLESNAKES was fab, with the title track ("She looks like Eva Marie Saint/In 'On the Waterfront'") and "Perfect Skin" ("She's got cheekbones like geometry and eyes like sin/And she's sexually enlightened by Cosmopolitan"). So was the unfairly maligned MAINSTREAM ("My Bag" captured the late 80's club esthetic better than just about any tune you want to dance to I can think of..."Spin, spin, whiskey and gin, I suffer for my art/Hey baby I got wild mushrooms growing in my yard/Fix me a quart of petrol and clams on the half shell/Feels like prohibition baby give me the hard sell/More, more, more, give me more more more/I'm your yes man, yes m'am, I'm your yes man..."). What a fantastic songwriter. Can't say I've kept up with his solo career as much, but DON'T GET WEIRD ON ME, BABY from quite a while back now was quite interesting. And not necessarily a purely "jangly pop" band by any means, but let's not forget the great Throwing Muses (their self-titled 1986 LP on 4AD was a landmark).

Great live performer, glad you brought this up Johnny E. One of MY personal favorite pop shows was when he did the limited-run acoustic tour in support of KING OF AMERICA - the show I saw was at the San Jose Civic Center. The playing and singing was top notch - the man really doesn't need anything more than his acoustic guitar and voice. He slipped in a lot of nice little things, like a medley of "New Amsterdam" with "You've Got to Hide Your Love Away," the latter an obvious source of inspiration for the former. He also incorporated that game show song wheel that he used more famously on the BLOOD AND CHOCOLATE tour. Fondest memory of that: one of the people randomly called up from the audience to spin the wheel was named, as it turned out, Allison! Elvis had her spin, but when it didn't come up on the song of the same name, he good-naturedly turned the wheel himself until that title came up and played a killer rendition. A magical show.

I was just gonna mention Brackeen's RHYTHM X, SEK beat me to it. All the Tollivers CAPRA BLACK Anyone have/heard Cecil McBee's entry (I think there's only one)? I've been intrigued, but not enough to take the plunge yet.

Oh COME ON, you guys...enough with these childish, comedic ejaculations!

That's a huge find, that Rogers box! Congrats, what a price! I dream about this very moment every time I go to a used store, but so far, to no avail! I've managed to piece a "poor man's" Rogers Mosaic together by finding two of the actual Mosaic discs sold piecemeal and coupling those with CD-R's of the other two and a photocopied version of the booklet. And it only took me 10 years or so to scratch that all up. Someday, though, SOME-dayyy....

Likewise Agreed And agreed! Glad you feel this way, too. I think we pretty much get where we were each coming from now, we both over-read into what was being said, and I'm really glad to move on. I value your opinions a whole lot, and there's way too much other stuff we both feel similarly about to focus on this one difference!

Because they still have stuff that's never been on CD before: The Booker Ervin Jazzhound mentions McCoy Tyner - COSMOS Randy Weston - LITTLE NILES (contains 4 tracks from DESTRY RIDES AGAIN, a session Randy ensured was left off the Mosaic Select) There's probably some others I'm forgetting.

Time to take that rather poetic sounding linkage and crash Soulstation's "Haiku Hut" thread.

Ah, in relooking at my CD liners, I was getting confused about the vintage of "Rated X" - thanks for setting it straight, I had looked inadvertently at the vintage for "Honky Tonk" (which I'm digging too, a LOT, maybe even more than "Rated X").

Well, I thought about going to this Postmodernism Generator site, but then just couldn't muster the energy...what's the point anyway, nothing really matters any more, and what if it did? It's easier to just drop in an enigmatic reference to it (you know, one that's so vague it's impossible to determine whether it's sarcastic or sincere) when I manage to land my first reality TV show role...

I'm still exploring the years in question, which is exciting - I am such a huge Davis fan and want to really savor this stuff, so I am listening to a little bit more each year, over time. Love FILLES, and IN A SILENT WAY. BITCHES BREW so far strikes me as one of his more overrated entries...not that I dislike it actively but honestly after those other two I've just mentioned, it somehow never seems to fully come together, the others seemed so much more fully realized. I have to give it a lot more attention though before making any kind of fixed assessment. LIVE-EVIL is fearsome, just a staggeringly powerful and great recording. I cannot wait for the full story with the upcoming vault material issue. My most recent foray into Electric Miles is GET UP WITH IT, which I just picked up last weekend. I have to say I am enjoying it immensely, and would rate it very highly indeed so far. "He Loved Him Madly," as someone else has pointed out above, is fascinating and quite unique....loving "Rated X" so far too, probably because it dates from the LIVE-EVIL era (I think...the discographical details can get a bit confusing around this time). Still so much more to explore...will be picking up the JACK JOHNSON box soon, and then there's the other live albums that have been reissued, and AGHARTA and PANGEA, and ON THE CORNER...all brave new worlds.

Peter A, I believe that at least some of that music was released on the Woody Shaw reissue on 32 Jazz called LAST OF THE LINE.

Jim, all I can say is you're taking all of this way differently than I meant it. I'm asking you, given the good faith and credibility I hope we have for each other after posting here and at the BN BB for so long, to just take what I said and what I'm saying now at face value, as I did your good natured sparring to draw me into the discussion in the first place. First, regarding the "grounding in reality" quote, what I MEANT was that you are talking, I feel, about a lot of possibles/theoreticals, but when it comes down to it, all the evidence I see to the contrary is that people - even very dedicated students of the instrument such as yourself - have a heck of a hard time identifying guitarists. I was saying, in essence, talk all you want about what MIGHT or COULD be done in terms of sonic possibilities, but we have here in front of us this blindfold test forum that demonstrates my point, with even you (who, I was trying to say but obviously failed miserably, has a very attuned and discerning ear in this area) misidentifying someone who I think one can make a case has one of the more identifiable guitar sounds (and to be honest I don't agree that it changed much in the later period, his phrasing and other things did but it still generally sounds like Grant Green). I would also point out that I could easily have chosen to be insulted by some of the things in your initial response to me. For example, I could have gotten offended at the fact that my initial comment about guitarists, which seems to have started all this, was taken way out of context. All I had said was that for ME, to MY ears, many don't have a very distinctive tone and so that spells disaster for ME PERSONALLY in trying to identify them blindfolded. You then generalized that to start a discussion about guitarists and their place in jazz and your perception that they are often stereotyped and in essence disrespected, and did your best to get me into that discussion with some of your own rather frank assertions and subsequent line-by-line dissection of my reply (which also entailed some pretty strong comments and challenges, or at least what look like confrontational phrases in the cold hard light of a BB - things like "Oh come on Tony," "pretty bold assertion," and others). But I just figured, I know Jim, I KNOW he's not trying to insult me, so it must just be that he feels passionately about all this and some of those things probably came across stronger than he intended/realized. It's true that I certainly didn't feel inclined to pull any punches when stating my own equally strongly-held opinions. I was the one, after all, who was drawn into a debate I really never intended to get into and I certainly felt I'd been placed a little on the defensive myself about my opinions. So again, please accept my statements at face value and also accept my CLEAR and UNEQUIVOCAL statement that nothing I have said was intended to be insulting or personal here. We simply disagree on many of the original points of discussion, in a big way, nothing more to it from my standpoint.

He sounds like he hews pretty closely to the "classic" Jim Hall sound of the early to mid 60's, not like the modern day Hall. Again, I'm not trying to say it's conscious or even that Hall influenced him (it could be the other way around), the main point is that they are close enough to have confused a lot of folks including me, and I think I have a much better ear for distinctions among guitarists than many (probably not you). Well, I think the "people just don't listen to/give any street cred to jazz guitarists" complaint is a cop-out, one I have heard from other guitarists and fans as well. The flaw in the argument is that the converse is equally (and I personally think WAY more) plausible: one reason people DON'T listen to guitarists is that there are only a few that anyone but a total guitar nut can pick out AND even fewer who are able to communicate at the level that saxophonists and trumpeters are able to. Again, this is coming from someone who loves guitar and has played for over a quarter century. Look, a whole bunch of people INCLUDING YOU, someone who obviously knows their guitarists and can hear some differences, misidentified Grant Green on track 8 in Dan's blindfold test - one of the singular voices on the instrument. I'm proud to say I picked him out and thought it was pretty obvious (as I recall, we even debated this issue somewhat after), but I'm sure that was mostly lucky and I used the context to help point him out. So to be frank, I'm not even remotely convinced you could consistently pick out the differences in less overtly distinctive players blindfolded, particularly if it involved recordings you'd never heard them on (even typical recordings for the player in question). I don't mean that as an insult, but just as a way of bringing some grounding in reality to the discussion! I don't really think there are, Jim. There are certainly a lot of horn players who fall prey to orthodoxy, but the percentages (at least back in the glory days of jazz) are WAY lower to my ears than for guitarists. Well heck, you haven't even heard DAYS GONE BY and you've speculated in a prior post that Bickert plays "more experimentally" on it than usual. I don't hear that at all, compared with Greenwich he's far more conventional, but the point is you can't fault me for speculating about a recording I've actually HEARD if you're gonna turn around and do THAT! Now THAT is a bold assertion, my friend. You're basically guaranteeing that if I just listened enough to Breakstone I'd be able to pick him out from the crowd blindfolded. I'm not sure I'm that good, even given my extensive love for and interest in jazz guitar, but I'm flattered! The main point though is that you simply can't know this to be a fact. You MAY be right, but no way to be sure (I do plan to spend a lot more time with Breakstone, first via this Monk album and then branching out if it all grabs me as much as the track you sampled!). I've listened to Eddie Harris, live and on recordings, for years and still totally whiffed on the cut included on your disc...so repeated, prolonged exposure is in no way a guarantee that one will be able to identify someone blindfolded. So I continue to strongly assert: except for a very few talented listeners (mostly but not all musicians, particularly when listening to people who play the same axe they do), mere mortals are only able to pick out the most distinctive players on ANY axe, and even for those players it generally has to be a very characteristic recording or people get wrong-footed. If this was not so, nobody would even be interested much in blindfold tests because they would be a crashing bore - the thrill is in the learning/growing by listening and guessing. These blindfold discussions have driven all this home so clearly...Jim Sangrey by and large has the highest percentage of IDs on all instruments but particularly sax, and surprise! He's a musician, someone who really lives and breathes the music. We all get to learn from Jim, which is great, but I don't think it would be nearly as much fun if everyone got "A's" on their blindfold tests! My whole point continues to be simply that the case for identifying guitarists is just a matter of degrees WORSE than for players of other instruments, for both the fundamental mechanical reasons and, secondarily, the "legitimacy" bug that I outlined above. Haven't you ever wondered WHY the role of guitar in jazz has by and large been secondary/marginalized? Do you honestly believe it's mostly or all stereotype? I just don't think so. Why is it you think so many jazz musicians gravitate toward the sax, trumpet, and trombone? I submit it's that the ability to create an individual voice, particularly a "vocalized" sound, is simply greater for these players given the tools they have to work with (in an "all acoustic" attitude/environment) than for guitarists. Some of this again is guitarists digging their own creative graves...for just one example, Herb Ellis recently caught some flak in a discussion I participated in because he has a "twang" and bends notes. Why is bending so little used by jazz players, given its expressive potential? Just one more shovel full of dirt on the creative coffin.

I'm sure most of his was out in the US a couple years back for BN's 60th anniversary - but perhaps not all of it. It's ALL wonderful. This is the type of material I'd love to see Van Gelder try and tackle for the RVG series.

Agree, Brad, "Willow" is a ballad performance for the ages. The whole collection is a classic in my view, with the originally issued album far superior for me. You have to be in the mood to let it unfold at its own pace and just let it wash over you. When you are, the magic of Gene Harris and Mr. T in their prime should take hold. As I've said before, my only problem with this one is that the Conn reissue sounds excessively harsh and sibilant, which was not present on prior CD reissues (although the clarity/presence has been improved).

First about the Bickert - my intention was not to say his playing is always like Hall's, but here, darn it, he sounds a heck of a lot like him. That doesn't mean he was influenced by him, and who knows, he may have come up with the sound before Hall, but he sounds a lot like him. I don't find that to be the case at all on DAYS GONE BY. My hunch is that on the blindfold cut, given the setting, he either consciously or unconsciously adopted some of the mannerisms of the Hall/Evans collaboration. Now to the bigger issue: there may be an above average POTENTIAL for unique soundprints for jazz guitarists, but the fact remains for my ears that most guitarists then promptly eliminate most of that potential by espousing a limpid tone and attack that eliminates most of the sonic possibilities (for example, the tone control is usually set to roll off much or most of the highs, almost as a matter of course). Compounding the problem, many of these guitarists also use pretty "orthodox" bop guitar phrasing. I am willing to admit that some of the issue may be with recording quality - it's hard to capture the nuances of sound. But it's more than that. For my money, there is a major problem with guitarists feeling as though they have to have a "legit" sound, which so many interpret to mean "uncolored." People like John Scofield get ripped regularly on this board and elsewhere for using as much coloration as they do. While I'm not always sold by Scofield's playing lately, I have to give the man credit - you hear him once and you know him immediately in the future. And it goes beyond that, he also has an extremely distinctive attack and phrasing - they can cross over into cliche/almost self-parody at times, which is the other side of the double-edged sword, but I admire his ability to create a signature sound anyone can identify immensely. There are also inherent limitations in the range of tones that a guitarist can recreate when using a "pure" sound. Wind instruments are generally a whole lot more expressive, particularly the saxophone...partly due to the embouchure issue (one not only can vary blowing but mouth shape, tongue use, etc - the guitarist can really only vary finger pressure on the fretboard and pick attack, the latter often being negated by having a tone setting that makes all but the most drastic differences in attack disappear), partly due to being able to toy with various and drastically-different sounding mouthpieces and reeds. The fact that sax players can toy with these things and still remain "legit" because "it's all acoustic, all natural" is not to be overlooked. It's still considered "jazz" by all concerned - listeners and players - with these guys. With guitarists, there's of course string gauge and tension but you honestly don't hear dramatic differences on all but the most stellar recordings and hi fi systems as much as the player him/herself FEELS the differences. Then there's hollow versus solid body, but most jazz players seem to eschew anything but hollow (or maybe semi-solid)...someone like Mike Stern is a notable exception. Pickups, again, impart subtle changes in sound but it's really subtle and I think more felt by the player than all but the most attuned listener. Beyond that you are left with various amp choices (although again with the settings most players use, it's almost like there might as well just be one amp) and then effects and colorations which, as I've mentioned, most jazz guitarists and sadly most jazz guitar afficionados seem to frown upon...and once the player has crossed into "the effects zone," a goodly portion of the jazz snobs say "well, it's nice, but it's really not jazz any more, is it?" I am convinced one reason Jim Hall gets flack these days is because of his use of such tools which is a shame - his trio show I saw at the Vanguard in NYC a couple years back was one of the most compelling live performances of jazz I've ever seen. It's worth mentioning at this point that I've played guitar myself for the past 26 years and have been an avid listener to guitarists of all stripes since well before I began playing (I got my first stereo at age 8 and have had a pretty diverse record collection ever since, which for years was dominated by guitar-centered music). While I can often appreciate subtle differences between jazz guitar players, I stand firm by my comment that there are only a relative handful of truly distinctive sounds out there for jazz guitarists that can be identified with a blindfold type setting (especially those with a more or less traditional approach and tone) when compared against saxophonists and trumpeters (not all of those folks are distinctive either, but there is a much greater relative number of unique voices to me). While the quality of ideas and playing is otherwise superior for jazz guitarists, overall I find rock and blues guitar players are much more likely to cultivate recognizable tones than jazz players, again probably relating to that "gotta be legit" bugaboo that I mentioned earlier. So in summary, I think we just fundamentally (and hopefully amiably) disagree on many issues here, Jim. As one example, for my money Hall is not only one of the singularly unique voices on the guitar in the "legit sound" school - his playing has also become far more adventurous over the years. If anything, he's an even greater musician now than he was in the past (which is really saying something because I find his work with Desmond, with Bill Evans, and with Rollins was flat out astonishing). Again, my intent is not to say there is "NO difference" between most guitarists, but rather to say that the differences are far more subtle than they are between reed players in jazz and that it is beyond many people's interest to invest the energy to look for such differences - it's a point of diminishing returns for me, and I think musicians ought to strive to put a much more identifiable stamp on their music than such musical birdwatching requires. One last point - I also agree that the options for piano sounds are somewhat limited, and I think that also shows up in the tests - most people have trouble picking out pianists unless they have a very unique sound and approach (Coltrane-period and beyond Tyner, for example). The proof is in the pudding - most people here did very poorly in identifying the guitarists in your blindfold disc and did relatively better with the horn players. Same thing with my disc - people confused Abercrombie with Metheny (an "easy" distinction for me and you as guitarists, but really hard for most others) and I think you were the only one who got Rene Thomas.