Tom Storer

They're well worth it!

Do The Math reports that Richard Cook, co-author of the "Penguin Guide to Jazz Recordings" and author of "It's About Time: Miles Davis On and Off Record" and "Blue Note Records: The Biography," has died of cancer at age 50.

So they're recording--great. I can't wait to hear this group, especially to hear how Miller functions in Holland's sonic world. Leave it to Holland: when he moves back to the more traditional rhythm section, i.e. with piano instead of vibes, he hires one of the best, most interesting and also most under-utilized mainstream piano masters. Here's hoping this association will also serve as a boost to Miller's inexplicably sidelined career (inexplicably to me, anyway).

Can't wait to hear this band. I'm hoping they'll tour Europe this fall.

OK, I still have four more tracks to comment, but the first 32 have been ready for a while, so I might as well put them up now and get around to the remainder when I can! These are my frank impressions, written without researching or anything... I won't make too much of a fool of myself with wrong guesses since in most cases I can't even make a guess! 1. Can't think of the title. An Andrew-Hill-like rhythmic approach in the piano. Good bowing by the bass. I'd say a European group, no idea who. 2. The text has got to be by Edward Gorey, no? Enjoyable performance, although what's jazz about it is hard to guess. Off the top of my head I'd guess some connection with the Canterbury school of Anglo-jazz, or perhaps a Michael Mantler connection, but again I don't really have a clue. 3. A familiar tune, as usual I can't think of the title. Rather quickly dispatched with! More from Europe, I think. 4. Lovely. The sax and bass sound very familiar, but I suspect it's because they're cultivated young players who have learned their lessons well. I can't think of who exactly would fit the bill here. 5. For the first few seconds I thought of Cecil, but no. Then I wondered if it wasn't from Jarrett's latest solo onanism. Don't think so. Whoever it is is a fine pianist, but this kind of cold athleticism does absolutely nothing for me. 6. Ah, that's more like it! Love the sound of the vibes, and the horn solos are lots of fun. 7. A little too cute for me. The oompah-oompah rhythm gets old fast. More Europeans? I could see this coming out of Holland or Austria. 8. Good players, but it meanders a bit. I think it might appeal more in the context of the album it's set in. 9. Love the alto sax, who evokes Konitz at the beginning, and the interplay with the bass. They sound like they're really into it. The percussionist sometimes intrudes a bit too obviously with cymbal sounds. A shame this is so short--I'll be interested to learn who this is. 10. This sounds very dated to my ears. The bass walks and the drums play a swing-ish rhythm as fast as they are able while the tenor just blows and blows, but there's no actual tune or changes I can discern to give it shape, and the improvised content is kind of thin, IMHO. As I grow older I have less interest in this kind of thing. 11. Enjoyable--the most traditional tune yet. The trio works together very well. No clue who it could be. 12. I like this a lot better than number 10. Much the same scenario, but this time they're using their wits. It's not the same guys, is it? 13. Pleasant, although again the connection to "jazz" is somewhat tenuous. Sounds like a Dutch thing to me. 14. Same comments as above. Beautiful trumpet. 15. Fun, and performed with brio. Maybe I have Holland on the mind, but this also sounds Dutch to me. 16. Nice, but a little décousu as the French would say, in other words, too loose (Lautrec, har har). I recognize Jeanne Lee on vocals, always a pleasure, and a clue that the bass clarinet may be Gunter Hampel. Good players, and the Carribean thing is an easy way to have some fun, but it sounds perfunctory. And I could do without the flute(s). 17 & 18. I know, because you said so in the email giving the Rapidshare links, that these are by the same pianist. Quite a good pianist he is, too. Must be European--something about the rhythmic attitude, which is rather po-faced. (OK, unforgiveable stereotype, I know--but lots of European pianists play solo jazz as if they were giving a recital in a tuxedo.) No. 18 revealed itself to be a Monk tune in the final stretch--you know, one of those Monk tunes. Pick one. ;-) 19. Very, very nice. "What Is This Thing Called Love." No clue who it is, since every time I stick my head out of the trench there's another dozen brilliant young virtuoso saxophonists out there. I do guess that it's a player considerably younger than the era this Rollinsian performance harks back to, and that they're Americans. The tenor player is Lovano-like in his strong technique and his knowledge of the tradition (but it's not Lovano). Fantastic bassist, too--that pretty chord at the end of his solo (3:19)! The drummer is intriguing--he has a impressionistic thing that reminds me of European drummers, but an American style of interaction (don't ask me for specifics, I'm just talking off the top of my head). 20. God, what a bore! I shuffled in my seat, coughed and looked at my watch. 21 & 22. More Euro-piano. Admirably done, but see comments to 17 & 18. 23. Good, aggressive saxophonist. Not really my cup of tea, though--somewhere between no. 10 and no. 12. He's got a lot of facility and a nice sound, but his solo is little more than a workout to show off his chops. I would have preferred to have just heard the theme. 24. "What Is This Thing Called Love," played (with sphincter tightly clenched) at a knuckle-busting pace for no good reason that I can think of. This kind of thing makes me long to hear Red Garland. 25 & 26. Two tenor players. Interesting textures, I guess. This would probably be better listened to in the context of whatever album it's from. 27. I don't know if this is Andrew Hill, but if not the pianist seems to be emulating Hill's sound and phrasing. In general I like this sort of thing, but this particular piece seems to spend all its time preparing to go somewhere or do something--but in the end they remain where they started. A bit frustrating. 28. I realize, listening to this BFT, that I'm not a great fan of solo piano (well, OK, I already knew that). The whole point of this seems to be to display the pianist's facility and knowledge of both the classical and improvised domains. But so what? 29. This might have been fun to witness live, but it's kind of thin gruel, IMHO. They improvise a little and do some impolite thumping, apparently to disrupt the expectations of polite delivery that classical-sounding music brings with it, and I guess this is supposed to show that they're either fun-loving imps, creatively transgressive, or serious intellectuals. Or all three. Or something. I just find it pretty obvious. 30. Aaaaah. Nice to kick back and listen to some JAZZ for once! 31. Very pleasant. Sounds like a two-part classical etude played by jazz saxophonists. 32. Kind of grim for my tastes, but well-done.

Worth to whom and for what are the questions. He doesn't make a million dollars for playing his trumpet, or even as a bandleader. Those things are included in his activities for JALC, but he makes the big bucks for his value as program director and institutional spokesman (for that is what he really is--a spokesman for JALC, not for "jazz"). It's his PR value that he's really paid for, and the people paying him are looking at the fame, prestige, and asses-in-seats ratio of the program he "artistically" directs. To them, clearly he is worth his salary. Jazz fans have to decide on his worth on another basis than salary.

Yeah, but what is "this"? Wynton's output? JALC's programming? The caricature of jazz that is presented by the media? It's not because those things "ain't jazz" that there is no jazz to be found by those who care.

Although I haven't read them, I'd say it's just about certain that they are. That said, Marcel is my hero.

Yeah, but so what? He has other virtues. I'd rather listen to Jon Hendricks off-key than Kurt Elling in tune. But I tend to forgive off-key-ness more easily than most people.

Here's the original Proust questionnaire (found here): * Your most marked characteristic? A craving to be loved, or, to be more precise, to be caressed and spoiled rather than to be admired * The quality you most like in a man? Feminine charm * The quality you most like in a woman? A man's virtues, and frankness in friendship * What do you most value in your friends? Tenderness - provided they possess a physical charm which makes their tenderness worth having * What is your principle defect? Lack of understanding; weakness of will * What is your favorite occupation? Loving * What is your dream of happiness? Not, I fear, a very elevated one. I really haven't the courage to say what it is, and if I did I should probably destroy it by the mere fact of putting it into words. * What to your mind would be the greatest of misfortunes? Never to have known my mother or my grandmother * What would you like to be? Myself - as those whom I admire would like me to be * In what country would you like to live? One where certain things that I want would be realized - and where feelings of tenderness would always be reciprocated. [Proust's underlining] * What is your favorite color? Beauty lies not in colors but in their harmony * What is your favorite flower? Hers - but apart from that, all * What is your favorite bird? The swallow * Who are your favorite prose writers? At the moment, Anatole France and Pierre Loti * Who are your favorite poets? Baudelaire and Alfred de Vigny * Who is your favorite hero of fiction? Hamlet * Who are your favorite heroines of fiction? Phedre (crossed out) Berenice * Who are your favorite composers? Beethoven, Wagner, Schumann * Who are your favorite painters? Leonardo da Vinci, Rembrandt * Who are your heroes in real life? Monsieur Darlu, Monsieur Boutroux (professors) * Who are your favorite heroines of history? Cleopatra * What are your favorite names? I only have one at a time * What is it you most dislike? My own worst qualities * What historical figures do you most despise? I am not sufficiently educated to say * What event in military history do you most admire? My own enlistment as a volunteer! * What reform do you most admire? (no response) * What natural gift would you most like to possess? Will power and irresistible charm * How would you like to die? A better man than I am, and much beloved * What is your present state of mind? Annoyance at having to think about myself in order to answer these questions * To what faults do you feel most indulgent? Those that I understand * What is your motto? I prefer not to say, for fear it might bring me bad luck. Proust answered these questions when he was 20. Later in life a newspaper asked him this hypothetical question: An American scientist announces that the world will end, or at least that such a huge part of the continent will be destroyed, and in such a sudden way, that death will be the certain fate of hundreds of millions of people. If this prediction were confirmed, what do you think would be its effects on people between the time when they acquired the aforementioned certainty and the moment of cataclysm? Finally, as far as you're concerned, what would you do in this last hour? He answered: I think that life would suddenly seem wonderful to us if we were threatened to die as you say. Just think of how many projects, travels, love affairs, studies, it — our life — hides from us, made invisible by our laziness which, certain of a future, delays them incessantly. But let all this threaten to become impossible forever, how beautiful it would become again! Ah, if only the cataclysm doesn’t happen this time, we won’t miss visiting the new galleries of the Louvre, throwing ourselves at the feet of Miss X, making a trip to India. The cataclysm doesn’t happen, we don’t do any of it, because we find ourselves back in the heart of normal life, where negligence deadens desire. And yet we shouldn’t have needed the cataclysm to love life today. It would have been enough to think that we are human, and that death may come this evening.

As I recall, David Eubanks was also a cousin of Kevin, Robin and Duane. Drowned while swimming off shore someplace in the late 80's, I think, cutting short a promising career.

I got "The Struggle Continues" when it came out, and during my post-vinyl years I've at times been close to buying a turntable just to be able to listen to it again. A real classic. Dewey, Charles Eubanks on piano (cousin of Robin and Kevin--a real talent, wonder what happened to him), Mark Helias and Ed Blackwell. (In fact I saw the band in concert at the Village Gate, but with John Betsch instead of Blackwell. I don't have anything against Betsch, but I would have loved Blackwell to be there instead!) I'll be picking up both of these.

Pretty impressive, all right. I didn't know they talked about "tenor" drums. Is that a drum corps thing?

Impossible to misunderstand Houston Person and Etta Jones! Thanks for the tip, el Magnifico. This is going to the top of my list.

I knew "pwned" meant "owned," but I never knew why all of a sudden "owned" was being used all over the net to mean "you have been crushed into the dirt and completely dominated, you pathetic, laughable worm." I started noticing this on message boards over the past year or two--when someone scores a coup in a debate/pissing contest, someone else posts "OWNED!" or "PWNED!", sometimes adding the dreaded "lol." And now I know--it originates in video games. One more mystery solved.

[looks up from foxhole] [scurries out of no-man's land]

I never got the impression that Monk was "battling personal demons." That's such a contemporary cliché. To me that would be a description, for example, of a drug addict who really, really wanted to clean up his act but couldn't due to his all-too-human weaknesses, scars from childhood tragedy, etc. Cue the violins. It always seemed to me that Monk was solidly himself--never heard any reports of him wanting or trying to change his ways.

It's always imprudent to step into the no-man's-land of someone else's debate, but here goes. Seems to me Allen isn't saying "Max shouldn't have experimented with this or that"--what he's saying is that he believes Max's efforts to those ends weren't entirely successful. Same with his comments about Pepper/Morgan and "misunderstood modality"--I don't think he's saying they shouldn't have gone in that direction. Rather, he, like you, hears "the reality" of what they played but hears it differently, and judges it somewhat harshly. Further, he speculates that the results might have been better if the musicians had been more given to conscious critical thought about their own music. It seems to me that what you're saying is that if a musician follows his or her muse into uncharted (for them) territory, that approach is so laudable and honest in its intentions that someone who feels the direction proved fruitless isn't allowed to criticize and analyze the move because that would be tantamount to "telling everybody what's good for them and who's a good boy." But you could say that about any negative criticism of the arts.

I've never seen the American version, but I have trouble imagine it equalling the original, which in my humble opinion is brilliant.

I guess spag is spaghetti, but what's bog?

I've never liked the idea of very specific dietary restrictions. It would drive me crazy to have to monitor each mouthful, never ever eat this and always eat so much of that, etc. Instead, I simply make an effort to avoid carbs, fat, and processed food as much as possible (which rules out my secret vice, pernicious snacking--I have to be stern with myself to stay away from peanuts and chips and stuff; I don't have a sweet tooth but I have a salt-and-grease tooth). I drink lots of water, get regular exercise, and make sure I eat plenty of fresh produce. What I also find to be important is to exercise restraint concerning portion size and second helpings. When I gaze down at my less-than-flat stomach, my mantra is "Put less in it." Also, I try to keep alcohol consumption down. That stuff is fattening. And no soda or sugary drinks. Of course, I am a poor sinner and do at times gorge myself on delicious, high-calorie meals washed down with too much red wine. But usually I don't. (Grammar police note: the thread title should be "Help My Wife and Me Eat Better and Lose Weight.")

Philly Joe Jones once said, "If you love jazz, you have to love the drums." I love the drums, but the thought of Ginger Baker, Tony Williams and Max Roach drowning each other out against a backdrop of aimless percussionists rattling and tapping does sound like a nightmare. (The second part of that Philly Joe quote was "and if you love the drums, you have to love Buddy Rich.")

Gary Giddins once reported that Crouch had generously shared his Bird research with him at one point, and he praised both the research and the generosity. I really have trouble reading Crouch, but I'll get this in the hopes of learning more about Charlie Parker. Crouch we already know about.

For which I have a ticket! Come on, Joe, we're rootin' for you!

Proust. I'm about halfway through. I've started it many times and always got side-tracked somewhere in the first two to four volumes, so this year my mission is to read it from start to finish. Quite a feast. No indigestion yet, though.