So, What Are You Listening To NOW?

[ghost of miles]

[HutchFan]

Enjoying this "chamber jazz":

Roditi, Ignatzek, Rassinfosse - Beyond Question (Nagel Heyer, 2009)

 

[HutchFan]

 

7 hours ago, soulpope said:

❤️ ❤️ ❤️

 

[Peter Friedman]

[HutchFan]

Prompted by the Mingus Complete 70s Atlantic set announcement:

[mjazzg]

1 hour ago, HutchFan said:

Prompted by the Mingus Complete 70s Atlantic set announcement:

👍

and I'm listening to 'Let My Children Hear Music' prompted by the same thread despite it not being in that timeframe

Edited April 19, 2023 by mjazzg

[HutchFan]

 

 

24 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

and I'm listening to 'Let My Children Hear Music' . . .

Such a magnificent album!  Among his very best.   

 

[mjazzg]

9 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Such a magnificent album!  Among his very best.   

 

Definitely. 'Mingus Moves' next up

[Peter Friedman]

I saw this group live a few times at the Bamboo Club in Detroit in the 1960's.

It was the George Bohanon (Trombone) - Ronnie Fields (tenor Sax)  Quintet with Kenny Cox, piano,

Will Austin, bass, and Bert Myrick, Drums

[Д.Д.]

Mosahiko Togashi with Steve Lacy and Kent Carter. Good stuff, although it would have been great if it was just a Togashi-Carter duo. Lacy's participation makes it more "ordinary". Great sound.      

On 4/18/2023 at 12:45 AM, T.D. said:

Yes, I have quite a few recordings w. Miller as sideman.

There's this 3-CD collection featuring him as leader,

which is scarce as hen's teeth. Michael (on behalf of Scott aka freejazz) sold one on this forum, but I snoozed and lost out. 😢

It's five albums of which four (with the exception of "Down South") are available from Ogun on bandcamp: https://ogun3.bandcamp.com/music . The music is OK, not spectacular.    

[AllenLowe]

On 4/18/2023 at 10:40 AM, jlhoots said:

I still don't get what this has to do with Trump or MAGA both of which I hate.

My point  with the Trump comparison is that when it comes to politics, we are critical of people who make judgements with insufficient evidence or information. To me there are particular kinds of music, historically based, that require a certain level of knowledge in order to understand how they sound and why they sound that way. I’m sorry if I offended people who liked Moran’s recent things, but the James Reese Europe stuff in particular is so musically misguided that it just needs to be said. Just as I wouldn’t try to judge a classical performance, these old black forms require a more comprehensive understanding of how music was made in those days and why it was made the way it was made 

And this is  not some kind of abstract intellectual point of view, because the original music is still there, still available, and not to listen to it is like preferring Pat Boone to little Richard. The difference is that dramatic.

Edited April 19, 2023 by AllenLowe

[BillF]

5 hours ago, ghost of miles said:

👍

Now playing:

Edited April 19, 2023 by BillF

[JSngry]

This is a really good record. 

[jlhoots]

26 minutes ago, AllenLowe said:

My point  with the Trump comparison is that when it comes to politics, we are critical of people who make judgements with insufficient evidence or information. To me there are particular kinds of music, historically based, that require a certain level of knowledge in order to understand how they sound and why they sound that way. I’m sorry if I offended people who liked Moran’s recent things, but the James Reese Europe stuff in particular is so musically misguided that it just needs to be said. Just as I wouldn’t try to judge a classical performance, these old black forms require a more comprehensive understanding of how music was made in those days and why it was made the way it was made 

And this is  not some kind of abstract intellectual point of view, because the original music is still there, still available, and not to listen to it is like preferring Pat Boone to little Richard. The difference is that dramatic.

I certainly prefer Little Richard to Pat Boone.

I wonder what Jason would have to say about your assessment. I'd love to hear that debate.

[Dub Modal]

On a Braxton kick. May take a while. Is there a book that compiles all or a lot of his compositional artwork? Fascinating stuff...

[gmonahan]

[HutchFan]

[Rabshakeh]

12 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Love this one.

[HutchFan]

2 hours ago, AllenLowe said:

My point  with the Trump comparison is that when it comes to politics, we are critical of people who make judgements with insufficient evidence or information. To me there are particular kinds of music, historically based, that require a certain level of knowledge in order to understand how they sound and why they sound that way. I’m sorry if I offended people who liked Moran’s recent things, but the James Reese Europe stuff in particular is so musically misguided that it just needs to be said. Just as I wouldn’t try to judge a classical performance, these old black forms require a more comprehensive understanding of how music was made in those days and why it was made the way it was made 

And this is  not some kind of abstract intellectual point of view, because the original music is still there, still available, and not to listen to it is like preferring Pat Boone to little Richard. The difference is that dramatic.

There's is nothing that says Moran (or anyone else) has to perform the music in the same manner that it was performed in the past. You might argue that a performance is unidiomatic -- but that's very different than saying it's wrong (relative to whose standard? The past's? Maybe that standard doesn't interest Moran) or ignorant (because he may have deliberately made choices that fly in the face of historical convention).

I love Charles Ives' music. A Frenchman recorded his Second Sonata, a quintessentially American work. But the pianist's interpretation made Ives sound like Debussy or Ravel. Was it idiomatic? No. Was it wrong? No.

Also, I would argue (as I have in the past) that comparing politics and art is a misleading and unhelpful analogy. Political outcomes can be measured; there are rules and laws related to government. Heaven knows politics is not objective -- but there are objective measures that can occur as the result of legislation and policy decisions. Art, on the other hand, does not work like that. What's the FIRST THING people say when they encounter art that subverts their expectations?  They say, "That's not art!"  And that's because the meaning, function, and definition of art is elusive.  

Finally, comparing someone's musical choices to MAGA or Trump is needlessly inflammatory & polarizing. So -- even when you have very interesting ideas to bring to the conversation -- you come across as a know-it-all who owns the the one-and-only "valid perspective."  Any other point of view is just "ignorance."  That is off-putting and disrespectful.  That's why people react negatively.  It's not (only) what you said; it's how you said it.

Respectfully.

 

Edited April 19, 2023 by HutchFan

[AllenLowe]

4 hours ago, HutchFan said:

There's is nothing that says Moran (or anyone else) has to perform the music in the same manner that it was performed in the past. You might argue that a performance is unidiomatic -- but that's very different than saying it's wrong (relative to whose standard? The past's? Maybe that standard doesn't interest Moran) or ignorant (because he may have deliberately made choices that fly in the face of historical convention).

I love Charles Ives' music. A Frenchman recorded his Second Sonata, a quintessentially American work. But the pianist's interpretation made Ives sound like Debussy or Ravel. Was it idiomatic? No. Was it wrong? No.

Also, I would argue (as I have in the past) that comparing politics and art is a misleading and unhelpful analogy. Political outcomes can be measured; there are rules and laws related to government. Heaven knows politics is not objective -- but there are objective measures that can occur as the result of legislation and policy decisions. Art, on the other hand, does not work like that. What's the FIRST THING people say when they encounter art that subverts their expectations?  They say, "That's not art!"  And that's because the meaning, function, and definition of art is elusive.  

Finally, comparing someone's musical choices to MAGA or Trump is needlessly inflammatory & polarizing. So -- even when you have very interesting ideas to bring to the conversation -- you come across as a know-it-all who owns the the one-and-only "valid perspective."  Any other point of view is just "ignorance."  That is off-putting and disrespectful.  That's why people react negatively.  It's not (only) what you said; it's how you said it.

Respectfully.

 

I am sorry but I feel that this completely misses the point. Of course Jason can play it any way he wants, but that doesn't free him from any judgement that someone may make that he is misunderstanding the music and the idiom. Yes, if he gave an alternative that made sense, that would be a good thing, but he has turned a very free and liberated music into one that is walled in by muddle-class inhibition and a snowflake-like over-sensitivity to racial style and context. I am NOT arguing that it is un-idiomatic; I am arguing that it is dull and denatured and has lost the feeling and essence of the original - which he was trying to preserve in what I think is a very misguided way. You disagree, fine, but you cannot deflect criticism by saying that the artist has the right to do the material his or her own way. No one is arguing for censorship. And I wasn't comparing the musical choices to MAGA - I was simply saying we have this double standard. We hold people's political decisions to certain principled standards based on information and historical perspective, and that is what I am doing musically here. If anyone is put off by my way of arguing - and I have attacked no one here personally - then they can counter my argument.  I give my opinion and then I outline my reasons for having that opinion. If you are put off by that, well....you just don't, in my opinion, have a real sense of the necessity of intellectual give-and-take. It's not personal; I think that when someone pretends to be delving into history by merely reproducing a very middle class and "respectable"  interpretation of something that was, actually, quite respectable and even middle class - but the middle class of 1913 and not the middle class of 2023 - then there is a problem and I feel like someone needs to speak for these musicians who cannot speak for themselves. Yes, that's my opinion. I am not advocating that anyone be forced to accept it (btw I am about to teach a 16 part course on this for Lincoln Center, and it's free, so anyone who wants to get a better understanding of my perspective is welcome to attend by Zoom).

6 hours ago, jlhoots said:

I certainly prefer Little Richard to Pat Boone.

I wonder what Jason would have to say about your assessment. I'd love to hear that debate.

he will never go public with this kind of discussion, which I would love to have. The reason is that he doesn't have to. I am a mere fly spec on the ass of the universe for people like him, who, at that level, do not need to engage with anyine to justify their own positions. All they have to do is give a monologue.

Edited April 20, 2023 by AllenLowe

[JSngry]

25 minutes ago, AllenLowe said:

... people like him, who, at that level, do not need to engage with anyine to justify their own positions. All they have to do is give a monologue.

Do you know for a fact that Moran is functioning in a vacuum and only having an interior monologue to reach his conclusions, not engaging with other sources/resources, or does it just seem that way to you! 

[AllenLowe]

30 minutes ago, JSngry said:

Do you know for a fact that Moran is functioning in a vacuum and only having an interior monologue to reach his conclusions, not engaging with other sources/resources, or does it just seem that way to you! 

I have sent him emails - not contentious ones, but about other subjects - that he doesn't respond to, which is ok and expected, though I do consider myself to be a peer. But my larger assumption is based on dealing - and trying to deal -  with people at that level of fame. I think it breeds a certain sense of un-touchability, a desire not to have to deal with unpleasant disagreements, and an ability to avoid those disagreements just because you can. And honestly, I don't have the energy to make any more futile efforts; it's next to impossible to get in touch with famous people and I am too old and have enough pride (not a lot but enough) to not want to face predictable rejection.

[Rabshakeh]

2 hours ago, AllenLowe said:

Yes, if he gave an alternative that made sense, that would be a good thing, but he has turned a very free and liberated music into one that is walled in by muddle-class inhibition and a snowflake-like over-sensitivity to racial style and context. I am NOT arguing that it is un-idiomatic; I am arguing that it is dull and denatured and has lost the feeling and essence of the original - which he was trying to preserve in what I think is a very misguided way.

What did you think of the later tracks, starting with "Memphis Blues" and going on?

I had a very similar, very negative, reaction to yours in relation to the first half of the record - particularly the opening monologue and then the rather awkwardly educational (to my ears) large group tracks which felt to me to be stiff and like they were missing a point. 

But then I really enjoyed the second half, where Moran's piano is more prominent and the treatment of the mid sized group tunes is looser and more daring. A lot of the stiff studio quality of the first half seemed to drop away.

It did not quite redeem the first half of the record for me, but it did change my overall view of the project. I think that if it had not had that opening monologue and perhaps had fewer of the larger group tracks I would have regarded it much more highly. As it is, I thought it was an interesting experiment that I would return to, but perhaps not all of it.

Edited April 20, 2023 by Rabshakeh

[BillF]

[EKE BBB]