your opinion counts!
midtown neon
of the 1950's and the advent of Wayne Shorter, three important trumpet
players made their ways through jazz history, Lee Morgan, Kenny
Dorham and Freddie Hubbard.
[Lee Morgan's wife shot him while he was blowin' on the bandstand, jus'
for foolin' around. he-heh. she really loved that boy!]
in 25 words or less, no, let's make that more. in 50 words or less, but
not less than 25, give your opinions asto which one of these fine jazz
artists you thought was the best, and here's the hard part --- why?.
tell me why.
prizes will be awarded; as follows.
the winner will be given five free clues to the neonic-gender guessing
contest. the runner-up will be given ten.
notice, the free trip to Las Vegas will not be awarded this year. but,
have fun!
neon, m.
tejas
>
> after the untimely death of Clifford Brown, and between the Miles Davis
> of the 1950's and the advent of Wayne Shorter, three important trumpet
> players made their ways through jazz history, Lee Morgan, Kenny
> Dorham and Freddie Hubbard.
>
> [Lee Morgan's wife shot him while he was blowin' on the bandstand, jus'
> for foolin' around. he-heh. she really loved that boy!]
Yawn. Go see THE SPADE COOLEY story starring Montgomery Clift on the
bandstand.
--
TBSa...@richmond.infi.net (also te...@infi.net)
'Do the boogie woogie in the South American way'
Hank Snow THE RHUMBA BOOGIE
Paul Ilechko
neon) wrote:
>after the untimely death of Clifford Brown, and between the Miles Davis
>of the 1950's and the advent of Wayne Shorter, three important trumpet
>players made their ways=A0through jazz history, Lee Morgan, Kenny
>Dorham and Freddie Hubbard.
>
>[Lee Morgan's wife shot him while he was blowin' on the bandstand, jus'
>for foolin' around. he-heh. she really loved that boy!]
>
>in 25 words or less, no, let's make that more. in 50 words or less, but
>not less than 25, give your opinions asto which one of these fine jazz
>artists you thought was the best, and here's the hard part --- why?.
>tell me why.
Hmmm, they were all great, but personally I have a soft spot for Mr.
Hubbard for the work he did on that all-time classic, Maiden Voyage,
with Herbie Hancock. Of course, both of them went to the dogs not too
long afterwards.
Thinking back some more, Mr Hubbard is also to be praised for his
appearances on "Blues and the Abstract Truth" and "Out to Lunch". He
was a great sideman, even if his work as a leader never reached the
same hights.
But, but ... what about Booker Little ?
disclaimer: this comment is not intended to be an entry in Neon's
silly contest.
midtown neon
"But, but ... what about Booker Little?
Right on! question, Paul.
Fats Navarro, Clifford Brown, Booker Little. All great, all showing
promise, all dead before 25. Too soon.
Booker Little known mainly for his working partnership with the great
Eric Dolphy, died at 23 in the car crash which also took Richie Powell,
Bud Powell's kid brother.
Little and Dolphy were players of the 'other' mainstream jazz, as
differentiated from, say, the perspective of Art Blakey.
I loved them all; then, now, forever.
What about Booker Little? talk about tranparency in jazz! My most
subjective answer ... he'd play (at The Five Spot) I'd listen, I'd cry
.. through the exultance.
neon, m.
Paul Ilechko
neon) wrote:
>Little and Dolphy were players of the 'other' mainstream jazz, as
>differentiated from, say, the perspective of Art Blakey.
>
>I loved them all; then, now, forever.
>
>What about Booker Little? talk about tranparency in jazz! My most
>subjective answer ... he'd play (at The Five Spot) I'd listen, I'd cry
>.. through the exultance.
so, amazingly we do have something in common. My favourite period in
Jazz - The Blue Note years. Plus Coltrane from Giant Steps to A Love
Supreme, and Miles up to the early fusion, Jack Johnson, or around
then.
midtown neon
thought to his plea casts a spell over me and I say to myself get a hold
of yourself don't you see that this never can be.
The Blue Note period. Which one? J.P. Johnson? Ike Quebec?
Bud-Miles-Monk?
Coltrane from Giant Steps to A Love Supreme? Not from My Favorite
Things?
Ah, Paul. I bet that you thought that you knew me or knew who I was or
who I was like or what I was like when you were writng all those
terrible things about me, right? Right!
And ... now you find out that I'm an American jazz expert and an expert
on American jazz. ... Kinda changes things, doesn't it?
That's why I despise categories and categorizations.. Too much
dependency on associatives. No clear assessments.
Categorizations, inevitably, lead to prejudices ... to a priori
made-to-order judgementalisms ... and based on what? and ... to what
points?
People ... people who know people ...
People think that they know what they're looking at ... and sometimes,
like ... remember the ultra-myopic James Thurber and his OSU-days story
of his trials with the microscope and trying to make a drawing of a
specimen on the slide and his teacher looking at the squiggly pencil
marks saying you fool you've drawn your own eye? it's like that.
myopia to the max.
"Out to Lunch!" was an Eric Dolphy recording, BN-4163, made in 1964,
eight years after Booker Little passed.
Freddie Hubbard was on that date, to be sure. It was made shortly
before his own "Breaking Point" -- BN-4172.
neon, m.
Paul Ilechko
neon) wrote:
>The Blue Note period. Which one? J.P. Johnson? Ike Quebec?
>Bud-Miles-Monk?
Oh, roughly 57 to 64, a period I think of personally as the Golden Age
of Jazz - from Hard Bop to Modal to early Free and Fusion, a period
that saw the best work of Miles and Coltrane and Dolphy and Mingus,
Andrew Hill, Dexter Gordon, Wayne Shorter, Jackie McLean, Booker Ervin
and Little ....
>Ah, Paul. I bet that you thought that you knew me or knew who I was or
>who I was like or what I was like when you were writng all those
>terrible things about me, right? Right!
I seem to recall it being more vice versa, actually.
>"Out to Lunch!" was an Eric Dolphy recording, BN-4163, made in 1964,
>eight years after Booker Little passed.
Booker Little died in 61.
midtown neon
been golden.
1925-27 was a golden age for Earl Hines and Louis Armstrong.
The pre-WWII years were a golden age for Artie Shaw, Benny Goodman and
other but slightly less spectacular big swing bands and their leaders.
The mid-1950's were golden for the Ella Fitzgerald American songbook
recordings.
My Golden Age for Miles Davis was the small group recording dates of
1953-54.
Bill Evans' Golden age was from his first recordings through his last.
Billie Holiday had several Golden Ages: Early; Midde; Late.
Whatever you like, it is.
History, also, makes jokes on us,. There's Scott Hamilton, whose Golden
Age died before he was born. Had he lived earlier or they later, all
patent impossibilities, Scott Hamlton ideally would have had Benny
Carter, Coleman Hawkins, Ben Webster, Lester Young and others to have
played against. He could have been a contender. As it is, this
masterful musician will always entertain -- and will have no place in
the history books. His music is here, his Golden Age, which can never
belong to one man alone, isn't.
Booker Little died on October 5, 1961. If I wrote otherwise, it was a
mental typo.
Happens.
neon, m.
Paul Ilechko
neon) wrote:
>The Golden Age of Jazz of course is any age whch one remembers as having
>been golden.
I couldn't agree more, but my personal favourite Jazz period was the
one I mentioned. I do like Jazz from many other periods, but I prefer
the late fifties/early sixties. Much as I like many varieties of
classical music, but nothing so much as early modern chamber music,
such as Bartok, Ravel and Janacek's string quartets (Beethoven fits
here too, being about a century ahead of his time ...). And mid to
late sixties to early seventies rock music, from Dylan to Van Morrison
to Neil Young. But there is so much music, from any time, that is
worthwhile.
Paul.
midtown neon
of my own, you may find that options will open even further for you as
times go by.
Some things we like now, we'll like forever. Some we like now, we later
will not. Some we don't like now, we'll later enjoy, appreciate, or
find value in.
Things change; we do, too.
And, in time the new may explain the old.
But the point of all this is, and I don't mean just for Paul or just for
neon ... but for anyone ... if you love music, you're lucky that you
have music to love.
neon, m.
mt
as early modern chamber music, such as Bartok, Ravel and Janacek's
string quartets (Beethoven fits here too, being about a century ahead of
his time ...)>>
My estimation of Paul Ilechko has just grown about tenfold -- this new
growth makes up for about 1% of the points he lost for not understanding
Cervantes. Keep it up, Paul. Oh, I almost forgot. Quevedo, that's what's
in. And Maugham. And Priestley. And Mailer, most definitely Mailer. And
Hemingway (well, he's always been in, except for snobbish squares who
follow fads).
G'nite
mt
fido
<sm...@umich.edu> wrote:
> mt <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> : <<Much as I like many varieties of classical music, but nothing so much
> : as early modern chamber music, such as Bartok, Ravel and Janacek's
> : string quartets (Beethoven fits here too, being about a century ahead of
> : his time ...)>>
>
> Is that a widely-used conception of when "early modern" happened? Not
> being bitchy, just wondering about the gaps between academic and other
> usage.
>
> smw
My idea of Early Modern - although I'd never use the phrase - is the
Musical Offering. Curiously it was written for the pianoforte but I have
yet to see a recording - or at least a reasonably good one - on that
instrument. Freddie the Grate had the pianos and more or less ordered
Bach to write an impossible piece for the instrument.
--
fido
mt
<<Is that a widely-used conception of when "early modern" happened? Not
being bitchy, just wondering about the gaps between academic and other
usage.>>
First, you are quoting Paul, not me. Second, I took Paul's "early
modern" to simply mean "early 20th century". I don't think he was making
a heavy musicological statement.
As to actual usage, "early modern" is not used much (if at all) in
classical music. All three composers (Janacek, in the incandescent
epiphany of his old age, with girl) are considered "modern" without
qualification. Curiously, this "modern" musical age has lasted an entire
century already. It's a big, undifferentiated bag.
Regards,
mt
Paul Ilechko
>Silke:
>
><<Is that a widely-used conception of when "early modern" happened? Not
>being bitchy, just wondering about the gaps between academic and other
>usage.>>
>
>First, you are quoting Paul, not me. Second, I took Paul's "early
>modern" to simply mean "early 20th century". I don't think he was making
>a heavy musicological statement.
I wasn't. I tend to think of "modern" in the way it is used in the
visual arts, which at least to me seems to be the exploration of form
as the primary mode of expression. That would leave out much of the
programmatic music of the late 19th century, and I guess I would have
to say that "modern" in that sense begins more or less with
Schoenberg. Janacek and Ravel wrote much program (programme ?) music,
but their chamber music has that harsh, somewhat atonal edge that I
tend to think of as associated with modernism, hence my callling it
"early modern". Purely my own personal idiosyncrasy. I'm not a student
of music, just a listener.
Paul