Chris Potter: UNDERGROUND

[ghost of miles]

We got this in not too long ago at the station--only track I've had a chance to hear so far has been his take on Radiohead's "Morning Bell," which generally works IMO. Going to try to give the rest of it a listen tonight--anybody else hear it yet?

[JSngry]

Yes. I like it more than I usually like Chris Potter, who's nother one of those players about whom there's nothing really "wrong", but with whom I just don't connect. There's more than a few moments here where a connection is established, even if it's not an overpowering one.

[BFrank]

Been listening to it recently myself. Sounds very interesting. Don't know how well it will hold up for me. These are the kinds of albums that I'm usually attracted to right away, but then get tired of after repeated listenings.

He's going to be in town next week, and I'm thinking pretty seriously of checking out the show at Yoshi's.

[Nate Dorward]

Yeah I saw this band live doing this material--first time I'd heard Potter & actually got something out of it (I'd seen the quartet with Hays a few years earlier & been bored). I think the slightly mechanical, button-pushing feeling I get from Potter's playing works better with the grinding Tim Berneish grooves of the bassless quartet with Taborn.

[JSngry]

I was at times reminded of those old Stone Alliance albums, which ain't a bad thing.

I just like the fact that there's electricity and non-"swing" rhythms involved. The absence of the former and the presence of the latter are highly overvalued by younger players, I think. Play your world, not your father's and grandfather's.

Potter still sounds a little too "close to the vest" for me personally, but I do hear less of it here than before. I'm encouraged by that.

[DukeCity]

Haven't heard the Underground CD yet, but they're coming to town next Thursday and I'll most likely go hear them. We have a cool performance space here, seats 150-200, no smoking, no booze, no talking, nice sound system. Always a treat to hear music there, and I'm hoping to hear some good tunes next week.

[montg]

I was at times reminded of those old Stone Alliance albums, which ain't a bad thing.

I just like the fact that there's electricity and non-"swing" rhythms involved. The absence of the former and the presence of the latter are highly overvalued by younger players, I think. Play your world, not your father's and grandfather's.

Potter still sounds a little too "close to the vest" for me personally, but I do hear less of it here than before. I'm encouraged by that.

I heard some cuts from this at the website of the record label a few weeks ago. For me, the absence of non-swing rhythms was a definite drawback. Whatever was going on rhythmically struck me as more tiring and boring than interesting.

I would hope swing rhythms would still be a part of my world--the contemporary world. They may have been invented by our grandfathers, but that doesn't mean we can't use them, right? As long as it's done with love and sincerity.

[Free For All]

I was at times reminded of those old Stone Alliance albums, which ain't a bad thing.

Yeah! Stone Alliance!

Graciela, baby!

[Joe G]

I like that cover. Never heard of the group, though.

[Free For All]

Steve Grossman, Don Alias and Gene Perla. Check out: stonealliance.com

EDIT: The personnel has changed from time to time (different sax and sometimes a keyboard added- Kenny Kirkland played with them for a while) but my favorite group was the one with Grossman.

Edited February 23, 2006 by Free For All

[jazzypaul]

I just like the fact that there's electricity and non-"swing" rhythms involved. The absence of the former and the presence of the latter are highly overvalued by younger players, I think. Play your world, not your father's and grandfather's.

Interesting thoughts there, Jim. First I'll respond to this, and then I'll gush about the new Potter record.

electricity is cool when it's used well in context. I have yet to hear many situations where I thought that a synthesizer sounded good in context. I'm not really fond of guitar basses, but I think that actually has to do with how they're played. Because I don't mind hearing upright electric basses. But when guys play the pork chop, it rarely feels right, to my ears anyway.

In the right context, however, it sounds hip. Hip when its a varitone, or whatever Seamus Blake uses, hip when its a Rhodes or a Wurlitzer, hip when its a guitar run through a myriad of effects a la Bill Frisell. I like the electricity when it's used tastefully, and sometimes, it actually is.

As for the swing rhythms, Jim, I have to disagree. And I disagree for the same reason that I make all of my students learn jazz on the drumset first, and then teach them everything else: EVERYTHING, to some degree, is based on those swing rhythms. What is blues? Swing without the quarter notes to break up the dotted eigth/sixteenth note. What is funk? double time swing on the hi-hat or ride with a half time backbeat. What is rock? Swing syncopation switched to the bass drum and snare over a straight eigth feel. Let's face it, the best music of American stock (so exclude classical music and eastern music for a moment here) all swings at some level. And so to keep it in the repetoire and use it in different and hopefully interesting ways is VERY important.

Now where I truly agree with you on the idea of "play your world, not your father's or grandfather's" is in song choice. Yes, we younger players (at 30, I think I can still call myself that, right?) should know the standards because it's the common language. But, if Miles can play Human Nature, Time After Time, You Make Me Feel Like a Natural Woman and other pop tunes throughout his time in the jazz world, younger jazz players SHOULD be playing Radiohead, Bjork, R.E.M., Coldplay and My Bloody Valentine tunes. With my band, that becomes Metallica, The Rolling Stones, Leslie Gore, Slayer and Led Zeppelin. And it bothers me a ton that people think its so cool that we do those tunes. No, really, it's not. It's just that we're expanding our repetoire to include tunes that we really love and have something to say on, as opposed to "There is no Greater Love."

As for the Potter record, I dig the record, but I went absolutely apeshit over seeing that band live. The way this band has helped these tunes to grow on tour is light years beyond what's on the CD. I think his choice of tunes is great. I think his writing is pretty cool. I think that band's interplay on those tunes is fantastic. And as a drummer, Nate Smith blows me away every time I hear him. I recommend Underground quite enthusiastically.

[JSngry]

Won't disagree with any of that Paul!

Look, all I'm saying is that after years of hearing young(er) players making album after album of ching-chinga-ching-chinga-ching and variations thereof, as if it's not just their moral imperative to do so but also their only option, it's refreshing to hear something else delivered seriously and unapologetically. It's a big world, and there's a lot of different ways to swing. If you've had exposure to those different ways as part of your life, you're crazy (or musically xenophobic) not to use them in your music, I think.

Of course "traditional" swing is the root of it all, and you'd be just as crazy to intentionally deny yourself the pleasure of using it, too. That's the roots. But otoh, what good are the roots if they don't grow into a full-bodied plant? And really - how is any different fo a young(er) guy (& really Potter's not "young" any more by any definiton) to stay focused on 1966 in 2006 than it would have been for a young(er) guy to focus on 1926 in 1966? 40 years is 40 years, and 2006 is as different to 1966 as 1966 was to 1926. Yet there's also certain constants that were present in 1926 that are still present in 2006. It's not so much that people have changed as it is that the world they live in has (and lord knows there's more than enough fodder for a navel-gazing thread contemplating how much of whiich is which. Not today, thanks). When you get more concerned with trying to keep "things" the same than with enjoying the evolution and trying to direct it in a positive direction (whatever you perceive that to be), or with being so concerned with remaining "pure" that you can't let yourself get sullied by the world in which, like it or not, for better or worse, you do live, then you got a problem. This I do believe. And I do hear Potter enjoyng himself on ths album in a way that I haven't heard before. Right on to that.

Explore your world, that's all I'm saying, and report back on what you find, whatever it is. No need to "discard" anything in the process either. The basics are not going to "evaporate" or anything like that. They can't - they're too deeply ingrained in the collective psyche. But they can, and do, morph and evolve. Those morphings and evolutions can and should be exciting turf for a jazz musician, not something to fear and recoil from. Change is inevitable, but accepting it isn't. The world can pass you by, dig?

Keep it open, not closed. That's all I'm saying.

Edited February 23, 2006 by JSngry

[ghost of miles]

One of the reasons why I like the version of "Morning Bell" on UNDERGROUND so much is that it sounds like a contemporary torch song. That may sound weird, but it has a modern late-night feeling to it... somewhat brooding and foreboding. Not to say past torch songs weren't brooding and foreboding, even sinister at times (one of my favorite jazz recordings is the alternate take of "No More" on Billie Holiday's Complete Decca set), but I relate much more to the song and the Potter band's interpretation of it than I do to some Middle-Age Lion's take on "Embraceable You." Don't get me wrong--I love the Great American Songbook (aka GAS), and I still enjoy modern interpretations of it. And I've heard a number of tossed-off, gimmicky covers of modern pop-rock songs that operate with a superficial logic--"it's new, therefore we are supercool for playing it." It's just that we need to have more CDs like UNDERGROUND, or something akin to them, getting attention and radio play.

[Guest akanalog]

i am listening to stone alliance's "heads up" right now.

alias and perla are a fun and loose rhythm section.

[cannonball-addict]

At first I was all excited because it was a new Chris Potter record and I idolize his technique (especially in the upper register). I don't think JSngry will disagree on this point - the guy's chops are beyond remarkable. I also LOVE his rich full-bodied sound. His setup is fairly simple though. PM me if you want to know it. I have it in an email somewhere.

But after I while I started feeling that the beginnings of the songs were somewhat weak. The buildup on each track is key to this album but on a lot of tracks (esp. Nudnik, Big Top, and Underground) I felt like the minimalism was too little to hold my interest or the interest of others when trying to use this record to turn rock heads onto this cat.

Once you get beyond the beginnings, when the band starts to brew and Taborn is pounding out the lows as Potter is shrieking with the highs, Nate Smith shifting meters all the while, this group kills.

My favorite cuts are probably "Next Best Western," which according to Potter was written while the band was on a previous tour and they were staying at the Best Western right by the Jazz Showcase, "Celestial Nomad," "The Wheel," and their sublime version of "Yesterday." He said when I interviewed him about this group that they always stay in that same hotel when in Chicago and he actually wrote out the head on Sibelius one night while actually in his hotel room there. They played it the next night.

I actually interviewed him about this album just last weekend and recorded it for my show this week. I will be airing it at 3 PM EST this Saturday during my show on WRCT (streaming online at http://stream.wrct.org:8000/wrct-hi.mp3.m3u). Listen in for some insights and to hear my voice/selection of music.

Matt

[ghost of miles]

I actually interviewed him about this album just last weekend and recorded it for my show this week. I will be airing it at 3 PM EST this Saturday during my show on WRCT (streaming online at http://stream.wrct.org:8000/wrct-hi.mp3.m3u). Listen in for some insights and to hear my voice/selection of music.

Matt

Sounds cool, Matt... I'll try to listen in!

[JSngry]

I don't think JSngry will disagree on this point - the guy's chops are beyond remarkable.

Not the exact phrase I would use, but no argument otherwise. If the guy has any problems on/with his instrument, I sure don't hear them.

[DukeCity]

I don't think JSngry will disagree on this point - the guy's chops are beyond remarkable.

Not the exact phrase I would use, but no argument otherwise. If the guy has any problems on/with his instrument, I sure don't hear them.

Jim, what I think you're trying to say is... (kidding)

I posted elsewhere that I saw Potter and the band last night (having not heard the new record), and I dug is a lot. I can relate to what Jim said about Potter playing it "close to the vest", but I don't get as much of that when I see him live. It was fun watching/hearing those guy be so very focused on what was happening at the moment. But even with the rather complicated heads and forms and time signatures, they had a looseness that let the music really breathe. And that breath made the whole thing open up.

[johnagrandy]

Does anyone agree that it seems like Potter's playing was (is) more exciting when he's with Holland ? I've seen him w/ Holland 3-4 times (twice with the big band), and with his own group twice ...

Maybe my expectations were too high , but when I saw his own group , although definitely exciting playing , there seemed to be missing a sense of "resolution" ... like "we've successfully resolved our anxieties with our music" ... both the band and the audience are now de-stressed ...

Edited March 3, 2006 by johnagrandy

[cannonball-addict]

Does anyone agree that it seems like Potter's playing was (is) more exciting when he's with Holland ? I've seen him w/ Holland 3-4 times (twice with the big band), and with his own group twice ...

Maybe my expectations were too high , but when I saw his own group , although definitely exciting playing , there seemed to be missing a sense of "resolution" ... like "we've successfully resolved our anxieties with our music" ... both the band and the audience are now de-stressed ...

I definately can relate to what you're saying john. I think that Dave's group has had a lot more time to work out its kinks. Chris' group is more of an experiment - does it work yet? Yes and no. There are plusses and minuses and the no bass thing is part of that unresolvedness.

I think that the thing that really gets me about Chris' playing in Dave Holland's quintet and the big band is that his playing off of Robin's trombone is the key ingredient. When they stretch out on 20 minute grooves, shit gets really funky and crazy and they really work well off of each other. I think Dave's compositions really work well with Chris' playing style and I think part of the equation is also Steve Nelson, who I think gets the least credit in that band even though he is charged with the role of pianist. He is the only one comping. I would love to see Chris and Steve play duo shit. That would be hot.

Matt

[cannonball-addict]

PLAYING THE INTERVIEW RIGHT NOW - WILL END AT 3:45 EST

Edited March 4, 2006 by cannonball-addict

[cannonball-addict]

Actually the interview will end around 4 EST with the tracks from the album. Playing Nudnik right now

Edited March 4, 2006 by cannonball-addict

[Big Wheel]

Bumping this one up. This album features prominently in my Pandora playlist, but Pandora only plays Next Best Western, The Wheel, and Yesterday. I enjoy them all very much (I love Taborn's contribution to this record), but from the reviews here it sounds like I don't really need the full album, as the Pandora tracks are the highlights.

Edited July 21, 2006 by Big Wheel

[Aftab]

I dig the vibe of this CD - very nice. I like his playing with Dave Douglas, too.

And with both players - the presence of the Rhodes makes it complete for me.