Geoff's Guide to Undervalued Jazz Albums

[connoisseur series500]

Interesting writing, Geoff. And I'm sure you've discovered by now that the back-and-forth snarling here has less to do with you than you first thought...

Exactly Moose!

[JSngry]

Nichols was happy enough to be the equal member of a trio, rather than the specific leader. It is this closeness to a tight knit trio that Nchols had that makes the Blue Note recordings so valuable. The contributions of the drummers are significant, and are a key factor in the success of Nichols music.

Some constructive criticism, Geoff, if I may...

A more accurate way to say this might be that Nichols wrote music that called for the drummer and bassist to contribute equal weight to the structure and direction of the music rather than to function in a purely supporting role, not that "Nichols was happy enough to be the equal member of a trio, rather than the specific leader".

Herbie wrote all the music and put it together, both on paper and in the studio, and that includes the "concept" of the drummer and bassist being more up-front as integral parts of the compositions themselves. He was very much the leader, the leader of trios that featured a more equal distribution of roles than the traditional "solo plus support" piano trio. Which is, I think(?) what you're meaning to say, but not what you actually DO say. You make it sound like Nichols' trios were co-op affairs, that everybody set their own roles, and nothing could be further from the truth. It was HIS music, HIS concepts, and these were defintiely HIS groups.

Not busting your chops, dig what you have to say, but I know you want to improve as a writer, so I'm here to be a prick whenever I think it'll help, ok?

Edited January 23, 2004 by JSngry

[connoisseur series500]

On the contrary, Jim, you've made some excellent suggestions. Nicely said.

[JSngry]

Hey, the kid's 19 and he's writing about Herbie Nichols. Nothing I want more than to see him succeed. BIG TIME. So if I see an opportunity to keep him off the path of musically unaware and/or statements that reflect an incomplete understanding of the music at hand, DAMN STRAIGHT I'm gonna be a prick about it. To not do so would be unconscionable!

(he says with a wink and a smile...)

[Geoff]

Thank you for all your constructive criticism. It will help me improve in the long term, and indeed it is very welcome. I do not claim to know everything and what people have said in this thread have allowed me to learn new techniques/ideas to apply to reviewing.

And to JSngry, I agree with your comments. I guess I just wanted to indentify the important part the drummer and bassist played in the recordings, however it was ultimately Nichols music and his concepts.

Edited January 23, 2004 by Geoff

[Geoff]

here is another one, comments and criticism appreciated

I thought I'd do a review of both his blue note albums, because you really need to hear both.

Grachan Moncur III - Evolution

and

Grachan Moncur III - Some Other Stuff

Grachan Moncur III was perhaps destined to be under-valued due to the instrument that he played, the trombone. The trombone has long be considered to be a clumsy instrument unsuitable for the fast paced setting of be-bop and hard-bop jazz. However J.J. Johnson was perhaps the first to prove this theory wrong. J.J's recordings on Blue Note in the 50s proved that the trombone could be very effective as a bop instrument and since than all jazz trombonist has been compared to him. However I a comparison between J.J. Johnson and Grachan Moncur III would not be accurate. Indeed Grachan Moncur III belonged to a group of new trombone players that had developed a unique and original approach to the trombone that deviated from that of J.J. Johnsons. T

hese trombonists included Roswell Rudd, to a lesser extent Curtis Fuller and European trombonist Paul Rutherford and nearly a decade later George Lewis. Roswell Rudd often played loud blurred noters that emulated trombonist from the dixieland area. Indeed Roswell Rudd seemed to skip be-bop altogether, developing his style of 'free-jazz' trombone directly from dixieland. Curtis Fuller probably was the new trombonist most like Johnson, but while Johnson was known for his trumpet like runs of the trombone, Curtis was a little slower and picky about the notes he played. Paul Rutherford was possibly the most radical trombonist of them all, forming the 'Spontaneous Music Ensemble' in the mid-60s which often made the music of american free jazz sound almost mainstream. Now that I've covered some of Grachan's contemporaries I think it is about time to talk about Grachan own trombone playing.

Grachan III playing is somewhat similar to that of Miles Davis. Like Miles he didn't need to play fast be-bop runs, instead preferring less notes than more. Just listen to the beginning of 'Gnostic' on 'Some Other Stuff'. Moncur begins with very slow played notes, with a cool tone which great a deeply reflective atmosphere. With the counterpoint of Herbie Hancock's piano it creates an almost puzzle like tone to the music. On 'Evolution' the title track of the album of the same name, Moncur suspends time, by using Bobby Hutcherson's Vibes, the bowed bass of Bob Cranshaw and the repeated phrases of Jackie Mclean and Lee Morgan to great a constant improvisational background to improvise on top of. Evolution is perhaps one of the best compositions of both albums. Each soloist plays on top of the same backgroud, the background is always constant, and could even be compared to a orchestral/string quartet of Morton Feldman. Monk's influence on both Moncur's playing and compositions is clear. Indeed on 'Evolution' there is somewhat of a tribute to Monk with Grachan's 'Monk in Wonderland'. In particular the vibe playing by Hutcherson shows hints of Monk's work on the almost related instrument the 'celeste'. Another piece where the influence as Monk as a composer is evident is 'Thandiwa'. Like Monk's Bemsha Swing (on Brilliant Corners), at the beginning two instruments (one brass one reed) play together in unison. In Bemsha Swing it is the unison playing of Sonny Rollins on Tenor Saxophone and Clark Terry on Trumpet, on 'Thandiwa' it is the unison of Moncur on Trombone and Wayne Shorter on Tenor Saxophone. In addition to the unison playing on 'Thandiwa', Moncur plays in alternative turns with Wayne Shorter at the end of Nomadic. It as if two players come one, creating just one solo. A pretty unique compositional technique that makes Moncur's music very exciting and interesting to listen to. Moncur's choice of sideman was also astounding.

On Evolution he pushes Lee Morgan into playing some of the most avant-garde and unique solos of his career, Jackie Mclean's unique raw almost acidic tone prevails throughout the album and indeed it is quite possible to suggest that Moncur pushed Mclean to the edge of hard-bop and into a more freer form with his compositions and playing on Mcleans' 60s albums. Unlike Some Other Suff the piano that oftens restricts many jazz musicians is not present, instead replaced by Bobby Hutcherson on Vibes. The Vibes in modern jazz has always been seen to give more flexibility as evident on the pianoless 'Out To Lunch' by Eric Dolphy, and this comment is true for 'Evolution'. Tony Williams is plays a big part in 'Evolution', however he plays an even BIGGER part in 'Some Other Stuff'.

'Some Other Stuff' saw a significant shift in the band line-up. Only Tony Williams surviving from the original 'Evolution' line-up. The band was filled with newer faces, younger musicians, 2 of which were just about to become member's of Miles Davis' classsic 60s Quintet. Wayne Shorter who finally joined Miles Davis's Quintet in September (only a few months after the recording of Some Other Stuff which was recorded in July) and the returning drummer Tony Williams. Filling out the band was double bass player Cecil Mcbee a relative new-comer to the jazz world at the time. I am convinced that 'Some Other Time' features some of the best playing of both Herbie Hancock and Wayne Shorter. Hancock experiments with using just one hand on a couple tracks. Listen to the right hand explorations on 'Gnostic'. Shorter plays with much zest, and extremely inventive throughout the album. Shorter clearly positive and almost telepathic rapport with Moncur III is evident throughout the album. Cecil Mcbee contributes a good backdrop for the other musicians, and provides several interesting moments including his high pitched 'call and response' duet with Hancock on 'The Twins'. Finally I would like to finish my review of both these fantastic albums with a little section on Tony Williams. At the time Evolution was recorded Williams was only 18, and was already amazingly developed having played with Jackie Mclean since he had barely turned 17. Williams was a true boy prodigy and his playing at this very early age is about as good as any other jazz musician in history if not better! The real highlight of the whole two albums is the tune 'Nomadic' on Some Other Stuff, which basically is a 7 minute drum solo by Tony Williams with a little bit of alternating solos in the middle and the end. 'Nomadic' just shows how talented Tony Williams is, and is still one of the best examples of his drumming recorded. I beautiful way to end Moncur III last Blue Note album, and a great way to finish this review. Tony Williams died of a heart attack after routine gall bladder surgery in 1997, a major part of jazz drumming died too. RIP Tony.

[vibes]

Geoff, overall, I like what you've written. I think it takes a lot of guts to share your thoughts with this crowd, especially considering that you're relatively new to the board.

One small piece of advice - proofreading is very important. I believe there's one instance where you refer to "Some Other Stuff" as "Some Other Time." Watch the punctuation, especially the commas. Also, be sure to be consistent with capitalization. For example, if you're going to capitalize the name of an instrument in one place, it's probably best to be consistent and capitalize all instrument names in your article (although, I can't recall seeing this done in any publication I've read).

Again, overall, I like what you've written. Keep the reviews coming!

[couw]

Thanks for sharing Geoff, watch your syntax and your spelling!

I wouldn't say that Moncur *pushed* McLean into freer territories. McLean was already there, had arrived on his own strength with his Let Freedom Ring album, and was as much pushing himself as anyone else when he came back to freedom with One Step Beyond. "Stimulated" would be a better word I think. Similarly, I don't think Lee Morgan needed any pushing. The guy was a master of the trumpet and all over the map; this was recorded one month before the Sidewinder, just after Morgan had returned from an absence. Morgan seemed very much open for the new stuff being played at the time. This was before the success of the Sidewinder pigeonholed him.

[Dr. Rat]

(Geoff)Perhaps Nichols was more subtle than Monk in many ways, his experiments are less obvious and he never quite took the same amount of the limelight as Monk when performing in a trio. Nichols was happy enough to be the equal member of a trio, rather than the specific leader. It is this closeness to a tight knit trio that Nchols had that makes the Blue Note recordings so valuable. The contributions of the drummers are significant, and are a key factor in the success of Nichols music. Art Blakey manages to maintain a high level of creativity and interaction with Nichols and bassist Al McKibbon.

(JSngy)A more accurate way to say this might be that Nichols wrote music that called for the drummer and bassist to contribute equal weight to the structure and direction of the music rather than to function in a purely supporting role, not that "Nichols was happy enough to be the equal member of a trio, rather than the specific leader".

Somewhere or other I've written a bit on this collection, too and I noted something akin to what Geoff observes about the way Nichols works in the trio format.

My opinion was that Nichols and his compositions genrally sound better with the, um, more sensitive(?) Max Roach on board than with Blakey. With Blakey, Nichols seems to leave a lot of the transitional passages to the drummer and I don't think Blakey really was up to contributing at this level in Nichols's work, at least not on this date.

I'd have to go back and listen closely again to give a better sense of what I mean.

But what do other people think in terms of presenting Nichols's vision?

Also: if you can't afford this set at the moment, Nichols's Bethlehem session "Love, Gloom, Cash, Love" is probably available at a decent price, and is also a good intro to Nichols.

On technical stuff in reveiws: I'm a non-musician, but since I'm some kind of nut I've done things like get a rudimentary reading knowledge of music (since lost through disuse) in order to better understand Gunther Schuller. But I'd say whatever you write ought to be able to stand without the technical stuff (this is certainly true of Schuller's work). On the other hand, attention to detail and a vocabulary to talk about it are essential to good music writing.

There is an old review of Schuller's Early Jazz in the Hudson Review by William Youngren which talks about these issues pretty intelligently, I think. I don't think this is available on the internet, but a decent academic library should have a copy.

--eric

[JSngry]

Another piece where the influence as Monk as a composer is evident is 'Thandiwa'. Like Monk's Bemsha Swing (on Brilliant Corners), at the beginning two instruments (one brass one reed) play together in unison. In Bemsha Swing it is the unison playing of Sonny Rollins on Tenor Saxophone and Clark Terry on Trumpet, on 'Thandiwa' it is the unison of Moncur on Trombone and Wayne Shorter on Tenor Saxophone. In addition to the unison playing on 'Thandiwa', ...

Agreed about the Monkian influence, but listen closer to the head on "Thandiwa"- Moncurs breaks the melody line up into his horn playing individual notes and both horns playing in unison (and at the end of the melody, in harmony). The result is the tension of a "push-pull" variety, not just between the horns and the rhythm section, but between the horns themselves, all of which which is neatly resolved by that end phrase, which is a nice basic "swinging" riff. This creation and resolution of tension by using "unusual" patterns in juxtaposition with basic jazz riffology is indeed QUITE Monkian (so many of his tunes, even the "difficult" ones, contain language that is drawn from the deepest recesses of the jazz language), but Moncur takes it a step further by distributing the tension between actual instruments themselves, whereas Monk kept it within the melodies themselves, although on things like "Coming On The Hudson" and "Evidence", he certainly implied it. This is "evolution" (pun intended) of the truest sort - not destroying or breaking away entirely from one's predecessors, but rather using their essence and building upon it to create "some other stuff" (pun again intended, obviously).

Moncur also uses the "breaking up" of the melody line in "Nomadic", but here he never brings the seperates together, avoiding a comfortable, "homey" resolution of the tension, which is certainly in keeping with the title. The brief passage of sustained notes about halfway through offer a temporary resolution of sorts, but not really - they create an environment of momentary "pause", but it's a pause that can in no way be considered final. It's more like a brief rest stop that is fraught with the imperaty (not a word, but it is now!) of moving on, which again is wholly in keeping with the title.

That's what I like so much about Moncur's work - the "programmatic" aspect of so much of it. Each piece occupies a very "specific" space in terms of the vibe it creates, and requires equally "specific" interpretation in the playing of it. No "blowing changes" type material out of this guy (well, hardly ever...)! It's a type of music that could easily be "pseudo" in the wrong hands, but with players like this, it's not an issue, and Moncur himself seems to come by this manner of composing and playing in a wholly organic fashion. Such music is not to the liking of every listener, of course, but for those of us who DO like it, it's a provocative and imaginative addition to the possibilities of jazz, and the rarity of such an approach speaks to both its uniqueness and its difficulty, I believe. No matter how one might feel about the "results" of Moncur's music, though, I think that one would have to acknowledge both of those qualities. After that, it's a matter of individual taste.

[JSngry]

On technical stuff in reveiws: I'm a non-musician, but since I'm some kind of nut I've done things like get a rudimentary reading knowledge of music (since lost through disuse) in order to better understand Gunther Schuller. But I'd say whatever you write ought to be able to stand without the technical stuff (this is certainly true of Schuller's work). On the other hand, attention to detail and a vocabulary to talk about it are essential to good music writing.

As a musician, one of my pet peeves is writers who get the "technical" stuff either only partially right, or just flat out wrong. I'd say either know that what you're saying is wholly accurate, even if that means consulting with a musician (or anybody who can accurately critique the technical accuracy of the comments) or else just leave it alone and stick to "impressions", which are every bit as valid, if presented as such.

Or even better, do both. Nothing sours the reading of a review more for me than getting somebody's impressions, and then they turn around and say something that leads me to believe that they didn't really hear what it is that they're talking about. Opinions are entirely subjective, of course, but the actual music being played isn't. Notes is notes, unisons is unisons, chords is chords, etc, etc, etc. More than once I've read a review where major and minor keys are misidentified, and that's just the tip of the iceberg!

And Geoff - my distaste for such technical imprecision applies to professional writers, not aspiring ones, who of course are going to make mistakes as part of the learning process (which really NEVER ends). Although, if you're going to someday be a professional writer, I'd much rather you hear about it now than later, ok?

Edited January 23, 2004 by JSngry

[Nate Dorward]

Paul Rutherford was possibly the most radical trombonist of them all, forming the 'Spontaneous Music Ensemble' in the mid-60s which often made the music of american free jazz sound almost mainstream. Now that I've covered some of Grachan's contemporaries I think it is about time to talk about Grachan own trombone playing.

This is a tad inaccurate. Rutherford was the co-founder of the SME with John Stevens & Trevor Watts, & the SME is more or less identified with Stevens as the leader because it became a decades-long institution under his leadership, with many different shifts of personnel. This sentence strikes me as oddly as it would sound, e.g., to say that Horace Silver was the founder of the Jazz Messengers--not quite wrong, but missing a key name.....

I was going to captiously point out that it's a bad mistake to point to the use of unisons on heads as in any way an innovation of Moncur's or Monk's--you'll hear that on just about any bebop side you care to name. But I see Jim Sangrey has posted a much more useful comment specific to this track (I don't know the track, as I haven't got Some Other Stuff). Thanks Jim.

I've always liked Evolution a lot--there's also another closely related album you should hear if you've not already, McLean's One Step Beyond, the same band with no Morgan & with Eddie Khan on bass: I'm not so taken with it but it's still interesting. The original Blue Note reissue was badly botched (a crucial track index misplaced, into the middle of a track!), but I imagine it's on the recent Mosaic Select? -- That said, Moncur's never done much for me as a player--it's the composing & the great bands that make those discs. Like Herbie Nichols Moncur seems always to have had very specific images & scenarios in mind for his compositions--witness titles like "Ghost Town" or "Frankenstein", which are pretty accurate descriptions of the moods evoked.

I entirely agree with Jim about the painfulness of reviewers who insist on using musical terminology to make a show of knowing-what-I'm-doing, but doing so entirely inaccurately or in an obfuscatory manner. God help us, I've probably committed a few sins over the years (the most aggravating being a review where I misidentified Rhodri Davies as playing "Celtic harp"--which actually a small handheld thing, not confusable for a second with the full-size concert harp he uses), but have found time & time again that my having spent a few years trying to make a serious go of playing jazz piano has given at least the rudiments I need to write reviews. I can't imagine writing them without that basic background, really.

& yes: get rid of the darn typos. Very few journals except for the biggies like The Wire & Downbeat are at all carefully copyedited, so if you send in something full of mistakes & typos, expect most of them to make it into print. Plus the editors are usually happy to add a few more (most memorable instance: I gave the location of recording for a disc I reviewed once as "Lisbon". This was helpfully elaborated to "Lisbon, Spain" in the published version.)

[Geoff]

Paul Rutherford was possibly the most radical trombonist of them all, forming the 'Spontaneous Music Ensemble' in the mid-60s which often made the music of american free jazz sound almost mainstream. Now that I've covered some of Grachan's contemporaries I think it is about time to talk about Grachan own trombone playing.

This is a tad inaccurate. Rutherford was the co-founder of the SME with John Stevens & Trevor Watts, & the SME is more or less identified with Stevens as the leader because it became a decades-long institution under his leadership, with many different shifts of personnel. This sentence strikes me as oddly as it would sound, e.g., to say that Horace Silver was the founder of the Jazz Messengers--not quite wrong, but missing a key name.....

I was going to captiously point out that it's a bad mistake to point to the use of unisons on heads as in any way an innovation of Moncur's or Monk's--you'll hear that on just about any bebop side you care to name. But I see Jim Sangrey has posted a much more useful comment specific to this track (I don't know the track, as I haven't got Some Other Stuff). Thanks Jim.

I've always liked Evolution a lot--there's also another closely related album you should hear if you've not already, McLean's One Step Beyond, the same band with no Morgan & with Eddie Khan on bass: I'm not so taken with it but it's still interesting. The original Blue Note reissue was badly botched (a crucial track index misplaced, into the middle of a track!), but I imagine it's on the recent Mosaic Select? -- That said, Moncur's never done much for me as a player--it's the composing & the great bands that make those discs. Like Herbie Nichols Moncur seems always to have had very specific images & scenarios in mind for his compositions--witness titles like "Ghost Town" or "Frankenstein", which are pretty accurate descriptions of the moods evoked.

I entirely agree with Jim about the painfulness of reviewers who insist on using musical terminology to make a show of knowing-what-I'm-doing, but doing so entirely inaccurately or in an obfuscatory manner. God help us, I've probably committed a few sins over the years (the most aggravating being a review where I misidentified Rhodri Davies as playing "Celtic harp"--which actually a small handheld thing, not confusable for a second with the full-size concert harp he uses), but have found time & time again that my having spent a few years trying to make a serious go of playing jazz piano has given at least the rudiments I need to write reviews. I can't imagine writing them without that basic background, really.

& yes: get rid of the darn typos. Very few journals except for the biggies like The Wire & Downbeat are at all carefully copyedited, so if you send in something full of mistakes & typos, expect most of them to make it into print. Plus the editors are usually happy to add a few more (most memorable instance: I gave the location of recording for a disc I reviewed once as "Lisbon". This was helpfully elaborated to "Lisbon, Spain" in the published version.)

I was meaning to say 'founding member', rather than founder.

[Jerry]

Hey Geoff, great thread. By sticking your neck out a bit with extended analysis of some great discs you are stimulating a lot of good discussion. Keep it up. And your idea of having a 'Geoff Korner' is totally cool by me. Don't be deterred by people insisting you follow some pre-existing board format or whatever. This is free jazz and you're allowed to play with the format and the style.

Here's a thought: how about trying some different prose approaches? Write newspaper style where you start in the middle with some intriguing detail and then catch up with the background. Try doing loose, stream-of-consciousness writing without worrying about correct punctuation or even grammar. Play music with your words, mimic how a musician's style might be if he were speaking instead of blowing...

[Guest Chaney]

I will hang my head and shame and admit that I have no Herbie Nichols in my collection.

Damnit, man!! Get some!

Now might be an opportune time as TOWER RECORDS is having its 25% off all jazz titles sale AND free shipping (on orders of $20+).

As broke as i am, I just ordered the set for $36.74.

I believe that I got the last 'in stock' set, but what the heck: for this price, let 'em backorder it and be patient.

[king ubu]

Tony, in my humble opinion the Nichols is worth much more than 36 bucks! Please keep us posted when you have listened!

And if you like it, start hunting Nichols' last album, on Bethlehem, "Love, Gloom, Cash, Love", with Dannie Richmond and George Duvivier. If you're lucky you can still find the 2000 (or was it 1999?) reissue done by Avenue Jazz/Rhino.

ubu

[Nate Dorward]

Incidentally, if you're very keen on Nichols it's worth tracking down the handful of sides for Savoy with Danny Barker (I have them as the A side of a disc with the Monk/Gryce session on the B side)--two inconsequential vocal tracks, but "Who's Blues" & "Swonderful" are first-rate Nichols, & you get two takes of one of them. -- I haven't heard anything else from the Nichols apocrypha, though I gather there are a few recorded glimpses of him as a sideman in dixieland bands.

[Geoff]

I will hang my head and shame and admit that I have no Herbie Nichols in my collection.

Damnit, man!! Get some!

Now might be an opportune time as TOWER RECORDS is having its 25% off all jazz titles sale AND free shipping (on orders of $20+).

As broke as i am, I just ordered the set for $36.74.

I believe that I got the last 'in stock' set, but what the heck: for this price, let 'em backorder it and be patient.

hey Chaney,

I could have got you the Herbie Nichols box set new for around $39.95 AUS, which is only like $22 US.

This is what I paid

[Clunky]

And if you like it, start hunting Nichols' last album, on Bethlehem, "Love, Gloom, Cash, Love", with Dannie Richmond and George Duvivier. If you're lucky you can still find the 2000 (or was it 1999?) reissue done by Avenue Jazz/Rhino.

Are the more recent issues of this great album in improved sound . My Affinity Cd from the late 80s sounds ok but a little rough.

[Guest Chaney]

hey Chaney,

I could have got you the Herbie Nichols box set new for around $39.95 AUS, which is only like $22 US.

This is what I paid

So much for good deals, I guess.

And don't even get me started about grey then selling the set for $25 over in the selling form.

[king ubu]

hey Chaney,

I could have got you the Herbie Nichols box set new for around $39.95 AUS, which is only like $22 US.

This is what I paid

So much for good deals, I guess.

And don't even get me started about grey then selling the set for $25 over in the selling form.

Chaney, those things happen to all of us - like, you an LP, maybe an original pressing, 25 bucks or some, and next month you see it as a nicely remastered CD for less than half the prize... that's the jazz addict's fate, it seems.

ubu

[Geoff]

Ganelin Trio - Poco A Poco

This album was the first album released on cd by the British record label Leo Records. It also is one of the earliest recordings from the group that has been released in the West. The recording belongs to something of a triology of development. As suggested by Steve Kulak in the liner notes (he also happens to be the guy I bought the cd from) 'Poco A Poco', was the first of three amazingly important recordings. Each showing a clear development in terms of composition and sound from the other. The three albums are 'Poco A Poco' (recorded in 1978), 'Catalogue' (recorded in 1979) and finally 'Ancora Da Capo' (recorded in 1980). I have decided to concentrate on Poco A Poco not because it is the best of these three recordings, but rather because it is the earliest of the three recordings.

The Ganelin Trio is comprised of Vyacheslav Ganelin (pianist/leader), Vladimir Chekasin (multi-instrumentalist, mostly reed and wind instruments) and Vladimir Tarasov (drums and percussion). Yet this isn’t any ordinary trio, often the members play multiple instruments at once. In fact when Leo Feigin (owner of Leo Records and the Ganelin strongest supporter) played a recording of the trio to Steve Lake of ECM records, Lake thought there were at least 5 members in the band.

The music on Poco A Poco as quoted by Steve Kulack presents ‘an insanely accelerated history of jazz’. Not only does the band explore the many faucets of jazz, they are also display influences and themes from western classical music, folk and other genres of music. This idea is backed up by Chekasin own comments with an interview, whe he stated that the Ganelin Trio ‘borrow some elemtns not only from jazz but from chamber music, folk music and other genres’.

The Ganelin Trio’s music, is not completely improvised, in fact all of the music is composed prior to a concert/recording. Much of the music played on Poco A Poco can also be heard on ‘Encores’. The performances aren’t carbon copies but they retain a similar structure. Poco 5 becomes ‘Who Is Afraid of Anthony Braxton’ and Poco 4 becomes ‘It's Too Good to Be Jazz’. Vladimir Chekasin was questioned on how the Ganelin Trio worked on composition, and answered ‘A piece may emerge spontaneously during a rehearsal, and then we work on the details. Or a piece may emarge “mechanically”: we take a structure and then work out the textural elements, colouring, charcacteristic features – this is traditional composing technique.’ Chekasin went on to say that he considers the music of the trio to be chamber music, where “aleatory” is strictly under control. The music as suggested by critic Efim Barban is ‘an organic unity of composition and improvisation’

The music on Poco A Poco (Little By Little), largely varies, from the ‘free jazz’ sounding Poco 1, to the contemplative, prepared piano of Poco 4, to the lyrical Poco 9, to the ‘cackling pirate lunacy’ (as described by Kulak) of Poco 10. To the near Ayler like playing of Chekasin on Poco 11.

Efrim Barban writes that ‘The art of the Ganelin Trio is deeply provocative…althought is stirs the conciousness it does not give the answer. It questions. It is the music of an agnostic civilization.’.

Blah, this is really bad review, some I’m just going to post it, hoping that someone else here can talk about the Ganelin Trio as well.

[kenny weir]

Geoff, check your private messages!

[Geoff]

Geoff, check your private messages!

checked

[J.A.W.]

Hi Geoff,

I just noticed this thread. You seem to be a busy young man.