JSngry Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 Mongo Santamaria Columbia albums - Ok, yeah, the songlists speak for themselves, but you figure w/Hubert Laws and/or Sonny Fortune on board that there would be some element of "rising above" to be had. Nope, guess not. Glen Campbell late-60s Capitol albums - Some masterpieces by Jimmy Webb and...nothing else. Who let that happen? Quote
Stefan Wood Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 Mongo Santamaria Columbia albums - Ok, yeah, the songlists speak for themselves, but you figure w/Hubert Laws and/or Sonny Fortune on board that there would be some element of "rising above" to be had. Nope, guess not. Glen Campbell late-60s Capitol albums - Some masterpieces by Jimmy Webb and...nothing else. Who let that happen? The Santamaria Columbia albums are what they are -- party albums. The real stuff was on Riverside. However, I enjoy the Columbia lps very much. Quote
JSngry Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Posted July 2, 2009 Yeah, I get that. I was just expecting a little...less formal party. Sounds like tuxedos to me. I'll give'em this though - that's one tight band. Everybody role-plays to perfection, and I give fullest pro props for doing that. That's a skill all unto itself. Quote
jazzbo Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 In my recent discoveries I've been not too surprised to find that I prefer Beethoven's solo piano, piano and cello and string quartet works to concertoes and symphonies. Quote
Dan Gould Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 I had absolutely no prior knowledge about Gene Harris' 70s work for Blue Note when I found a used copy of the album where he's pictured with a bunch of children on the cover. I was so excited to bring that sucker home - "NEW" GENE HARRIS! - and so disappointed from the moment the needle hit the grooves and that farting bass and godawful dreck started playing. Quote
Peter Johnson Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 (edited) farting bass Edited July 2, 2009 by Peter Johnson Quote
fasstrack Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 (edited) Mongo Santamaria Columbia albums - Ok, yeah, the songlists speak for themselves, but you figure w/Hubert Laws and/or Sonny Fortune on board that there would be some element of "rising above" to be had. Nope, guess not. My old friend the late Sam Furnace was in that band, too, on reeds. Probably it was better live. I saw them live and enjoyed it. I think I checked out a rehearsal too. Sam invited me. A lot of times you don't realize the pressure cats are under from labels (back when they even had labels) to stay current, cater to this or that, 'or else.' What're you gonna do? Change professions? I really don't blame guys trying to survive, crossover, whatever. This shit is just too hard and anything you get is a miricle in itself. Edited July 2, 2009 by fasstrack Quote
Alexander Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 I had absolutely no prior knowledge about Gene Harris' 70s work for Blue Note when I found a used copy of the album where he's pictured with a bunch of children on the cover. I was so excited to bring that sucker home - "NEW" GENE HARRIS! - and so disappointed from the moment the needle hit the grooves and that farting bass and godawful dreck started playing. So you're saying you don't like funk. Quote
Dan Gould Posted July 3, 2009 Report Posted July 3, 2009 I had absolutely no prior knowledge about Gene Harris' 70s work for Blue Note when I found a used copy of the album where he's pictured with a bunch of children on the cover. I was so excited to bring that sucker home - "NEW" GENE HARRIS! - and so disappointed from the moment the needle hit the grooves and that farting bass and godawful dreck started playing. So you're saying you don't like funk. No, what I'm saying is that its extra disappointing when artists you've enjoyed record a gigantic steaming pile of turd. Quote
BruceH Posted July 3, 2009 Report Posted July 3, 2009 No, what I'm saying is that its extra disappointing when artists you've enjoyed record a gigantic steaming pile of turd. I know; I really hate that. And most of them do, sooner or later. Quote
kenny weir Posted July 3, 2009 Report Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) *Ain't nothing like pho ... no matter how many different variations I try. Today, after a lunchtime kung fu class, me and Bennie hit a cheapo Chinese joint and had steamed Shanghai dumplings (superb, with a scorching hot blast of stock/soup sealed inside ready to burst forth and ... wherever) and the house beef soup noodles. They were good - beef slices, house-made white noodles, a couple of pieces of sliced radish, green onions, coriander (er, sorry, cilantro) and OK stock. But as I say, not a patch, IMHO, on the stock base, rare (lean) beef, flat rice noodles of the regal Viet version. Today's stuff wasn't as tasty, healthy (bean sprouts, mint) or cheap. *My long-running but haphazard efforts to replicate the buzz the Grateful Dead provide me is a fizzer. Always has been, always will be. Airplane, Quicksilver? Forget it. Actually, the closest are Trane at the Village Vanguard and assorted Sun Ra. *Again, I have never found straight out country rock that is as strikingly beautiful and original as the first Pure Prairie League albums. Although it's been fun trying. Edited July 3, 2009 by kenny weir Quote
JSngry Posted July 3, 2009 Author Report Posted July 3, 2009 What really bummed me was the Glen Campbell shit. I mean - it's LA, late-60s, you got some great singles, you got a great talent in Campbell, it's Capitol records and a time where album consciousness in very much in vogue, and you're gonna waste it on one or two transcendent singles and fill up the rest of the album with lower grade country-pop pap? I mean, ok, yeah, it "worked" as product. But Glen Campbell's talent as singer and guitarist could have been exploited in far more musically substantial albums. Oh well, that's Show Biz. Quote
kenny weir Posted July 3, 2009 Report Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) What really bummed me was the Glen Campbell shit. I mean - it's LA, late-60s, you got some great singles, you got a great talent in Campbell, it's Capitol records and a time where album consciousness in very much in vogue, and you're gonna waste it on one or two transcendent singles and fill up the rest of the album with lower grade country-pop pap? I mean, ok, yeah, it "worked" as product. But Glen Campbell's talent as singer and guitarist could have been exploited in far more musically substantial albums. Oh well, that's Show Biz. I haven't heard this Campbell stuff, but I'm surprised it fizzles. I love the Hag stuff he's on - on Capitol, of course. And given my recent pursuit of great classic pop (as opposed to rock), I would've been happy to bend an ear to these albums anytime. But then again, given some of the stuff that is pushing my buttons at the moment, my mileage may vary from yours considerably. I have a fairly high tolerance for pap of all kinds. Edited July 3, 2009 by kenny weir Quote
A Lark Ascending Posted July 3, 2009 Report Posted July 3, 2009 There is so much music out there that disappointments don't figure too highly with me as they are always greatly outweighed by the excitement of hearing new things I can engage with. But I do have one huge disappointment that has been with me since the late-70s. New classical music from the mid-20th C onwards. I'm musically illiterate (in the sense that I've had no training in 'flyshit') but have always been open minded and keen to hear what's next in my preferred musical genres (I'm completely closed-minded in rock music!). Two things have disappointed me in 'new' classical music of this time (I'm excluding the likes of Britten, Messiaen etc whose music was already formed by mid-century): a) The complete impenetrability of so much 'new' music. Though I can often find surface details to latch on to - nice textures, sonorities etc - I rarely get swept along by the music, frequently find my mind drifting. Now I imagine defenders of the music would say that is the point - leaving behind the Romantic emotionalism that got us all into trouble in the first place. But without the training to read scores and unpick the architecture I'm usually lost as to how this music is supposed to be engaging me. When you then throw in the elitist Adornoisms and Babbitry that surround this music, with its dismissal of music that tries to engage the public, I'm left with something very unattractive. b) The wishy-washy nature of the reaction to Darmstadtry - all the Baltic monks and sweet-toothed new populism. There are contemporary composers I've come to enjoy - a few Scandinavians, some of the minimalists, MacMillan etc. But even there there is nothing to sweep me along like Mahler or Sibelius or Stravinsky or Bartok or Britten. Deficiencies in my ability to process music, no doubt. But a genuine disappointment - I don't like the idea of sitting contentedly with my past masters. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.