Brotzmann 6tet/4tet : Nipples.
Chuck Nessa
>
> It seems pointless reviewing this - there's so little early Brotz available,
> this a must-have disk.
Yes it is pointless, unless you state the label and catalog number so
interested parties might find it.
CN
Andrew McKinnon
Niebergall, Han Bennink.
2nd track : Brotz., Van Hove, Niebergall, Bennink.
It seems pointless reviewing this - there's so little early Brotz available,
this a must-have disk.
Perhaps a few of the highlights for me:
Brotzmann is out of control - nothing I've heard from Ayler even approaches
this in ferocity. Evan Parker provides excellent support and, unlike on
Machine Gun, you can actually keep track of who's who.
The bass playing of Niebergall is a treat, especially the intro to track 2 -
whatever happened to him?
And Fred Van Hove makes more of an impression here than he does on Machine
Gun - IMO.
DB fans may be a little disappointed - Bailey doesn't get much of a chance
to make an impact.
As far as the allocation of solo-space goes, Nipples is remarkably
traditional. It's quite strange that such revolutionary music still can't
break away from the standard front-line / rhythm section hierarchy.
But, as I said, a must-have release.
File it somewhere between the intricacy of Karyobin and the fury of Machine
Gun.
rgds,
AJMcK.
Marc Neville
http://www.atavistic.com/news.html
Marc Neville
Studio City, CA
marcn...@worldnet.att.net
"Chuck Nessa" <cne...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:399C7669...@earthlink.net...
> Andrew McKinnon wrote:
> >
> > It seems pointless reviewing this - there's so little early Brotz
available,
> > this a must-have disk.
>
Amos Omondi
Chuck Nessa <cne...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Andrew McKinnon wrote:
> >
> > It seems pointless reviewing this - there's so little early Brotz
available,
> > this a must-have disk.
>
> interested parties might find it.
> CN
Even more pointless is the inclusion of Brotzmann (or Brotz,
to his friends) in a jazz newsgroup.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Benjamin Webster
: My bad.
: It's on the Atavistic label - in their new Unheard Music Series - Cat #
: UMS/ALP205.
If you like Brotzmann (or even if it's a bit too wild for you) check out
the other 3 titles that were reissued at the same time...
Fred Anderson Quartet: The Milwaukee Tapes Vol.1
Mount Everest Trio: Waves from Albert Ayler
Joe McPhee: Nation Time
I was impressed with all of these reiussues. The Joe McPhee is a funky
one. Mount Everest is varied (free improv, beautiful ballads). And
if you like Fred, then shit, go out and get this one!
Ben
JC Martin
news:8nivio$9h0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <399C7669...@earthlink.net>,
> Chuck Nessa <cne...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Andrew McKinnon wrote:
> > >
> available,
> > > this a must-have disk.
> >
> > interested parties might find it.
> > CN
>
> Even more pointless is the inclusion of Brotzmann (or Brotz,
> to his friends) in a jazz newsgroup.
Why is that? It fits in well if you ask me.
In fact I'm going out today to buy this recording.
-JC
JC Martin
news:sJdn5.1779$Vb.4...@ozemail.com.au...
>
> Benjamin Webster <bweb...@bluestem.prairienet.org> wrote in message
> news:gUcn5.879$T9.74@firefly...
> > If you like Brotzmann (or even if it's a bit too wild for you) check out
> > the other 3 titles that were reissued at the same time...
> > Fred Anderson Quartet: The Milwaukee Tapes Vol.1
> > Mount Everest Trio: Waves from Albert Ayler
> > Joe McPhee: Nation Time
> >
> > I was impressed with all of these reiussues. The Joe McPhee is a
> > funky one. Mount Everest is varied (free improv, beautiful ballads).
> > And if you like Fred, then shit, go out and get this one!
> >
> place an order. I'll grab the Fred Anderson 4tet for starters. I'm not so
> sure about the funky side of Joe McPhee - what would you compare it to?
>
> Vandermark's Joe Harriot disk is on my wish-list - but what about his Sun
> Ra/Funkadelic CD - has anyone heard this one?
Yep. I got this one a few weeks back and have only gotten to listen it
twice. My first impression is that the Funkadelic cuts could have used a
guitarist or some other voice, because IMO the vamps/grooves become a bit
repetitious after a while. Still, they are a lot of fun when you're in the
right mood and Vandermark does what he does rather well. The trio format on
these cuts put forth a Jimi Hendrix vibe....very raw.
The Sun Ra cuts, performed acoustically (unlike the electric bass used on
the Funkadelic cuts), were very enjoyable. But I will have to spend more
time with these cuts for the subtleties to sink in.
Rating: B-
If your a Vandermark fan, this one is worth adding to your collection...but
I did expect a little more out of it.
-JC
JC Martin
bonus disc titled "Free Jazz Classics" consisting of covers by Ornette
Coleman, Braxton, Cecil Taylor, Joe McPhee, Sun Ra, Eric Dolphy and the Art
Ensemble of Chicago. It was recorded live at the Empty Bottle in Chicago in
the Spring of 2000. Awesome! The first disc plays great as well. Make
sure when you buy this that the bonus disc in included. I got 2 CD's for
$15 at Rhino in Westwood. Well...well worth it.
-JC
JC Martin <subs...@NOSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:wJen5.74$vb3....@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Kurt Nordwell
>
> Andrew McKinnon <alep...@camtech.net.au> wrote in message
> news:sJdn5.1779$Vb.4...@ozemail.com.au...
> >
> > Ra/Funkadelic CD - has anyone heard this one?
>
> Yep. I got this one a few weeks back and have only gotten to listen it
> twice. My first impression is that the Funkadelic cuts could have used a
> guitarist or some other voice, because IMO the vamps/grooves become a bit
> repetitious after a while. Still, they are a lot of fun when you're in the
> right mood and Vandermark does what he does rather well. The trio format on
> these cuts put forth a Jimi Hendrix vibe....very raw.
>
> The Sun Ra cuts, performed acoustically (unlike the electric bass used on
> the Funkadelic cuts), were very enjoyable. But I will have to spend more
> time with these cuts for the subtleties to sink in.
>
> Rating: B-
>
> If your a Vandermark fan, this one is worth adding to your collection...but
> I did expect a little more out of it.
>
I agree 100%. The Sun Ra material is very good, but the Funkadelic seems more
of a novelty.
Kurt
JC Martin
news:399D9E53...@nortelnetworks.com...
Yeah, I was taking in the Sun Ra cuts more this afternoon. The dynamics
employed certainly make these cuts more of a draw.
-JC
Andrew McKinnon
Chuck Nessa <cne...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:399C7669...@earthlink.net...
> Andrew McKinnon wrote:
> >
> > available, this a must-have disk.
>
> interested parties might find it.
> CN
My bad.
It's on the Atavistic label - in their new Unheard Music Series - Cat #
UMS/ALP205.
I got my copy from Verge www.vergemusic.com but I've also seen at listed at
www.jazzloft.com and Cadence would probably have it as well.
rgds,
AJMcK.
Andrew McKinnon
Benjamin Webster <bweb...@bluestem.prairienet.org> wrote in message
news:gUcn5.879$T9.74@firefly...
> If you like Brotzmann (or even if it's a bit too wild for you) check out
> the other 3 titles that were reissued at the same time...
> Fred Anderson Quartet: The Milwaukee Tapes Vol.1
> Mount Everest Trio: Waves from Albert Ayler
> Joe McPhee: Nation Time
>
> I was impressed with all of these reiussues. The Joe McPhee is a
> funky one. Mount Everest is varied (free improv, beautiful ballads).
> And if you like Fred, then shit, go out and get this one!
>
Well, I want to get one of their UMS raven t-shirts - so I think I will
place an order. I'll grab the Fred Anderson 4tet for starters. I'm not so
sure about the funky side of Joe McPhee - what would you compare it to?
Vandermark's Joe Harriot disk is on my wish-list - but what about his Sun
Ra/Funkadelic CD - has anyone heard this one?
rgds,
AJMcK.
Amos Omondi
Benjamin Webster <bweb...@bluestem.prairienet.org> wrote:
> I was impressed with all of these reiussues. The Joe McPhee is a
funky
> one. Mount Everest is varied (free improv, beautiful ballads). And
> if you like Fred, then shit, go out and get this one!
The orderings in the directive above is incorrect. It should be
" ... go out, buy this record, and then shit?", as befits a Brotzmann
record.
Monk5by5
JAZZ shows I have ever seen
the music swung, danced, grooved and levitated
Amos-you know nothing of what you speak
Amos Omondi
monk...@aol.com (Monk5by5) wrote:
> the Brotzmann Tentet show @ Tonic this summer was simply one of the
greatest
> JAZZ shows I have ever seen
You need to get out more often.
Fabio Rojas
>> JAZZ shows I have ever seen
>
>You need to get out more often.
Amos, you forgot a few other good put downs:
- You're so lame.
- Takes one to know one.
- Your rubber, I'm glue. Whatever bounces off me sticks to you.
- Speak to the hand!
- Well, I never!!
- Once again, our public schools have failed if people dig Brotzmann .
- Let a thousand Wynton's bloom.
- This is yet another result of twelve years of Republican neglect.
I urge everybody else in this news group to contribute their
own put downs so that Amos will never be without a clever phrase.
-fabio, Foundation for Really Witty Dialogue
blanny
Amos Omondi <asa...@ntu.edu.sg> wrote in article
<8nnd05$4pu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> In article <20000819161052...@ng-cm1.aol.com>,
> monk...@aol.com (Monk5by5) wrote:
> > the Brotzmann Tentet show @ Tonic this summer was simply one of the
> greatest
> > JAZZ shows I have ever seen
>
> You need to get out more often.
Amos, to use an analogy, you only live in a world of "Dick and Jane" where
Brotzmann, et al, are "Dr. Seuss" to you. Most people, of course, love
Dr. Seuss and can still appreciate Dick & Jane too, but I bet most people
are glad to have moved beyond D&J - you've been left behind (by a
half-century it would seem).
Nils
>
> Amos Omondi <asa...@ntu.edu.sg> wrote in article
> <8nnd05$4pu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> > monk...@aol.com (Monk5by5) wrote:
> > > the Brotzmann Tentet show @ Tonic this summer was simply one of the
> > greatest
> > > JAZZ shows I have ever seen
> >
> > You need to get out more often.
>
> Brotzmann, et al, are "Dr. Seuss" to you. Most people, of course, love
> Dr. Seuss and can still appreciate Dick & Jane too, but I bet most people
> are glad to have moved beyond D&J - you've been left behind (by a
> half-century it would seem).
as i noted in the thread about that pathetic article in the phoenix
new times, this kind of thinking is based on ignorance and
intolerance. but mostly it's a troll. (have you ever noticed how
ignorant and intolerant trolls can be?)
Amos Omondi
"blanny" <a@b.c> wrote:
>
>
> Amos Omondi <asa...@ntu.edu.sg> wrote in article
> <8nnd05$4pu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> > monk...@aol.com (Monk5by5) wrote:
> > > the Brotzmann Tentet show @ Tonic this summer was simply one of
the
> > greatest
> > > JAZZ shows I have ever seen
> >
> > You need to get out more often.
>
where
> Brotzmann, et al, are "Dr. Seuss" to you. Most people, of course,
love
> Dr. Seuss and can still appreciate Dick & Jane too, but I bet most
people
> are glad to have moved beyond D&J - you've been left behind (by a
> half-century it would seem).
If loving jazz means I have been left behind, then so be it.
I can't help it that Brotzmann makes mindless noises and calls
it jazz. If that makes me ignorant, I have no problem with
that. But beating me over the head is unlikely to change
Brotzmann's music; a better approach might be for jazz lovers
to mount a concerted campaign to get him to either start
playing jazz or stop calling what he does jazz.
Amos Omondi
Nils <jaco...@frodo.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
>this kind of thinking is based on ignorance and
> intolerance.
That's what Amerika is all about, friend.
JC Martin
news:8nq100$spc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
I don't think he bothers getting into it.
All I know is that I'm a fan of jazz. I like it all...Duke, Louis
Armstrong, Sidney Bechet, Jack Teagarden, Coleman Hawkins, Lester Young,
Bird, Dexter, Lennie Tristano, Cecil Taylor, Miles Davis, Wayne Shorter,
John Coltrane, Ornette, Sam Rivers....and yes even the likes of Dave
Douglas, Zorn, Derek Baily, Peter Brotzmann, Ken Vandermark, etc, etc. It's
all jazz to my ears, because IMO jazz is a progressive music.
-JC
Bruce LeClaire
Amos Omondi wrote:
>
> Even more pointless is the inclusion of Brotzmann (or Brotz,
> to his friends) in a jazz newsgroup.
>
Reminded me of a riddle somebody once told me...
Q. What if Amos pitched a troll and nobody swung?
A. Well, if nobody was swinging then it couldn't be jazz now could it!
(Right Amos?)
--Bruce
BTW- where do you find application forms for the grants the Foundation
is (or will be) awarding?
Amos Omondi
bw...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>
> Amos Omondi wrote:
> >
> > Even more pointless is the inclusion of Brotzmann (or Brotz,
> > to his friends) in a jazz newsgroup.
> >
>
> Reminded me of a riddle somebody once told me...
>
> Q. What if Amos pitched a troll and nobody swung?
>
> A. Well, if nobody was swinging then it couldn't be jazz now could it!
> (Right Amos?)
If I'd said the same thing thing about Kenny G, eveyone would be
rushing to agree with me and bash the fellow. But even though,
Brotzmann is just the opposite extreme of Mr. G, i.e. as far
removed from jazz, he seems to get quite a different response.
I wish you'd respect my opinion as such, instead of calling it
"trolling", especially when I'm right.
Dan Given
>
> If I'd said the same thing thing about Kenny G, eveyone would be
> rushing to agree with me and bash the fellow. But even though,
> Brotzmann is just the opposite extreme of Mr. G, i.e. as far
> removed from jazz, he seems to get quite a different response.
> I wish you'd respect my opinion as such, instead of calling it
> "trolling", especially when I'm right.
A question for you Amos: What is your opinion of Brotzmann based on?
What recordings have you heard? And do you think that the ones you have
heard give you a sufficient understanding of his music to be able to say
that he doesn't play jazz?
It is quite obvious that you haven't heard Nipples, because it is jazz.
So are the Die Like a Dog albums, Songlines, Sacred Scrape,... I could
go on and on. Sure, some of his work doesn't fall strictly into the
jazz category -- though on all of it he retains as much connection to
his roots as Don Pullen did. Even on Machine Gun, one of the most
dissonant jazz albums ever, there is some really great bebop playing.
You are welcome to your opinions; the problem is that when they aren't
based on knowledge, people won't take you seriously.
Dan
Dan Given
>
> In article <39A46519...@ualberta.ca>,
> dlg...@altavista.com wrote:
>
> > jazz category -- though on all of it he retains as much connection to
> > his roots as Don Pullen did. Even on Machine Gun, one of the most
> > dissonant jazz albums ever, there is some really great bebop playing.
>
> what we are concerned with are the roots of jazz -- not just any old
> roots. There is absolutely nothing even jazzlike on Machine Gun.
> If that's the basis of claims that Brotzmann plays jazz, then people
> around here need new ears. It's a shame, an outrageous scandal to
> have these bizarre things squeezed into the jazz tent. It makes
> me want to cry. Really.
Amos, you failed to address my question. What Brotzmann albums have you
heard? Does the abouve comment about Machine Gun imply that you have
heard it? If so, you didn't listen very closely, if you can find nothing
even 'jazzlike' on it. But also what about other albums? Are you
familiar with more than 50 minutes of the man's career, and basing your
judgement on that? If you are going to make claims about what is and is
not jazz, they must be based on an informed opinion, not hearsay, not
what you may have read about someone, and not on one single album.
And when I said that Brotzmann maintains a strong connection to his
roots, as Pullen did, I was talking about his roots as a jazz player,
and the roots of jazz (which is what you so valued in Pullen's playing).
What did you think I was talking about -- his family background?. Your
reply was, simply, very idiotic and shows that you really don't have any
idea what you are talking about in this thread. Recently I've been
trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but why don't you just stay
out of threads that you have absolutely no knowledge of the topic?
So, will you please answer my question? What knowledge do you have of
Peter Brotzmann's music? For that matter, since you constantly argue
against Cecil Taylor, can you please inform us what this opinion is
based on. How many Taylor albums have you heard? What ones? When did
you hear them? If you want to be taken seriously, we need to know that
you aren't just some idiot pretends to know about the evils of evolution
of the music.
Dan
Amos Omondi
> jazz category -- though on all of it he retains as much connection to
> his roots as Don Pullen did. Even on Machine Gun, one of the most
> dissonant jazz albums ever, there is some really great bebop playing.
It is nice to know that he maintains connections to his roots. But
what we are concerned with are the roots of jazz -- not just any old
roots. There is absolutely nothing even jazzlike on Machine Gun.
If that's the basis of claims that Brotzmann plays jazz, then people
around here need new ears. It's a shame, an outrageous scandal to
have these bizarre things squeezed into the jazz tent. It makes
me want to cry. Really.
John Schutrick
>In article <39A402DC...@mindspring.com>,
> bw...@mindspring.com wrote:
>> Q. What if Amos pitched a troll and nobody swung?
>>
>> A. Well, if nobody was swinging then it couldn't be jazz now could it!
>> (Right Amos?)
>
>If I'd said the same thing thing about Kenny G, eveyone would be
>rushing to agree with me and bash the fellow. But even though,
>Brotzmann is just the opposite extreme of Mr. G, i.e. as far
>removed from jazz, he seems to get quite a different response.
>I wish you'd respect my opinion as such, instead of calling it
>"trolling", especially when I'm right.
Amos,
I've been following the interaction between you and other members of
this newsgroup for a few months now, and I've finally worked out the
source of the controversy.
You don't seem to understand that on RMB the definition of "troll" is:
Someone who expresses opinions that I disagree with in an interesting
way.
Hope this helps.
Shoe
On the changer: Miles Davis -- Bitches Brew
Amos Omondi
dlg...@altavista.com wrote:
> What did you think I was talking about -- his family background?.
Actually, yes. Certainly, there are no jazz roots here.
> idea what you are talking about in this thread. Recently I've been
> trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but why don't you just
stay
> out of threads that you have absolutely no knowledge of the topic?
And which threads would those be? If the present one is included,
then I can't answer your many questions.
> So, will you please answer my question? What knowledge do you have of
> Peter Brotzmann's music? For that matter, since you constantly argue
> against Cecil Taylor, can you please inform us what this opinion is
> based on. How many Taylor albums have you heard? What ones? When did
> you hear them? If you want to be taken seriously, we need to know that
> you aren't just some idiot pretends to know about the evils of
evolution
> of the music.
Albums listened to:
Somewhere between zero and a whole lot; choose a number that pleases
you. Taylor used to play jazz. He hasn't done that in decades but
is still polluting the jazz scene. That concerns me. Whether you
choose to take me seriously or not is up to you; my mission does not
depend on it. Same thing for whether you think I'm an idiot or not.
Our mission is to serious to depend on fickle usenet readers.
Why are we arguing about this, anyway? I have no problem with
Brotzmann, Taylor, etc. doing their thing and even getting paid for it.
But they should do it on their own time -- when on jazz time they
should behave properly. Look, Brotzmann doesn't know Note One of real
jazz. Couldn't swing if you strung him up on a vine and gave him a
good shove. But I'm a reasonable fellow, and I realise that he too has
to make a living. But why associate it with jazz? See, that's the
part that gets me.
We won't agree on this; so how about we just call it quits there?
You enjoy Brotzmann over there; but if he comes here we cane him for
his mischief. Everybody wins.
brew ziggins
+> So, will you please answer my question? What knowledge do you have of
+> Peter Brotzmann's music? For that matter, since you constantly argue
+> against Cecil Taylor, can you please inform us what this opinion is
+> based on. How many Taylor albums have you heard? What ones? When did
+> you hear them? If you want to be taken seriously, we need to know that
+> you aren't just some idiot pretends to know about the evils of
+> evolution of the music.
+
+Albums listened to:
+Somewhere between zero and a whole lot; choose a number that pleases
+you. Taylor used to play jazz. He hasn't done that in decades but
+is still polluting the jazz scene. That concerns me. Whether you
+choose to take me seriously or not is up to you; my mission does not
+depend on it. Same thing for whether you think I'm an idiot or not.
+Our mission is too serious to depend on fickle usenet readers.
+
+Why are we arguing about this, anyway? I have no problem with
+Brotzmann, Taylor, etc. doing their thing and even getting paid for it.
+But they should do it on their own time -- when on jazz time they
+should behave properly. Look, Brotzmann doesn't know Note One of real
+jazz. Couldn't swing if you strung him up on a vine and gave him a
+good shove. But I'm a reasonable fellow, and I realise that he too has
+to make a living. But why associate it with jazz? See, that's the
+part that gets me.
+
+We won't agree on this; so how about we just call it quits there?
+You enjoy Brotzmann over there; but if he comes here we cane him for
+his mischief. Everybody wins.
ROTFL! Great post!
--
bruce higgins ~ lbh2 at cornell dot edu ~ http://tigermtn.dev.cornell.edu
Read about the wisdom lost, a knock, a knock, a knock
A secret knock one hammer's locked the other wisdom lost
cla...@my-deja.com
> it jazz.
I saw Die Like a Dog last spring and was a little underwheled. It was
good to see Brotzmann (My exposure to him is limited to Last Exit and
the trio CD Songlines on FMP with Hopkins and Ali - a great recording
BTW).
He wasn't playing 'mindless noises'. He stuck mostly to the clarinet,
which didn't work for me - his tone on that instrument isn't all that
pleasent for me to listen to. The little tenor he played worked for me
fine, though. He still comes across as a creative, thinking player,
eventhough, as I said, I don't care for his clarinet's sound
(tarogato?). On the tenor he has a very distinctive and forceful voice.
Hamid Drake's playing I enjoyed the most of all the group. Roy Campbell,
like I mentioned in a thread I tried to start, seemed to be reaching for
something but always, to my ears at least, fell short. I think I would
like to have heard Kondo on trumpet instead.
And Amos. Getting hung up on labels is one sign of a lack of
intellectual depth. Catagorization is helpful, whatever you might be
talking about, but boundries in the real word are more often fuzzy than
distinct.
JC Martin
Peter started his career in dixieland swing bands. Roots? Seems like it to
me.
-JC
Bruce LeClaire
cla...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> And Amos. Getting hung up on labels is one sign of a lack of
> intellectual depth. Catagorization is helpful, whatever you might be
> talking about, but boundries in the real word are more often fuzzy than
> distinct.
>
I have to say that I myself wonder if Amos isn't engaged in what is
simply semantical warfare. Which is perhaps an improvement over
syntactical warfare.
What I find ironic is that the very musicians that Amos tends to enjoy
the most often rejected the very categorization and labeling of their
music as "jazz". Some didn't like the association of their music with
the unsavory origins of this word ("jazz"). Others simply didn't like
being put into a box or bin (Mingus comes to mind, of course, with his
preference for labeling his music as "folk" music).
A very revealing picture of the diversity of opinions the practitioners
of this music had about the label "jazz" can be found in Art Taylor's
excellent book "Notes and Tones". I wonder if Amos has read this book?
I would recommend it to almost anyone interested in "jazz".
Book Review: http://www.allaboutjazz.com/reviews/b0398_03.htm
Online buys:
http://www.netstoreusa.com/mubooks/030/030680526X.shtml
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/030680526X/hallbook/102-0784391-6330534
Taylor bio & info:
http://www.nypl.org/research/sc/scl/MULTIMED/JAZZHIST/atcat.htm
Now, I heard an interesting interview Ken Vandermark gave over the radio
not too long ago when he was in town. I remember him saying that he
didn't want to even label his own music as jazz because of
misconceptions the unwary [my word not his] public might have upon
hearing his music live. I found the following interesting interview of
him online:
See: http://www.jazzweekly.com/interviews/vandermark.htm
Let me lift a relevant sentence or two from this excellent interview...
FJ: The media has a tendency to categorize and pigeonhole both the music
and the artist, so in your own words, how would you describe your music?
KEN VANDERMARK: Well, it would depend a lot on what project. One of the
things that I'm most interested in is diversity. [...] If you said
"jazz" to someone and they think of Blue Note in the mid-50s or
whatever, some of the stuff that we do doesn't incorporate those things.
[...] So I think sometimes music, jazz listeners have a problem with
what we do because it's not so simply, "That swings," or "That sounds
like a saxophone solo out of jazz thing." [...]
So it sounds to me like Amos isn't alone in seeing the problem. ;-)
--Bruce
Bruce LeClaire
Amos Omondi wrote:
> bw...@mindspring.com wrote:
> >
> > Amos Omondi wrote:
> > > Even more pointless is the inclusion of Brotzmann (or Brotz,
> > > to his friends) in a jazz newsgroup.
> >
> > Reminded me of a riddle somebody once told me...
> >
> >
> > A. Well, if nobody was swinging then it couldn't be jazz now could it!
> > (Right Amos?)
>
> If I'd said the same thing thing about Kenny G, eveyone would be
> rushing to agree with me and bash the fellow. But even though,
> Brotzmann is just the opposite extreme of Mr. G, i.e. as far
> removed from jazz, he seems to get quite a different response.
> I wish you'd respect my opinion as such, instead of calling it
> "trolling", especially when I'm right.
But Amos, I do respect your opinion!
Actually though, I must confess, I made up that riddle. Seeing that we
are full-swing into the baseball season, I wanted to toss out that
riddle, and see if I could run the bases with it. I was hoping to score
a laugh or two, or perhaps steal a smile, but seeing as you balked at my
pitch, it looks like I struck out. At least I went down swinging!
--Bruce
JC Martin
isn't alone in >seeing the problem. ;-)
I think the idea of improvising music, performed with great integrity is
much more important than the idea having a term called "jazz". It seems
that nomenclature is more important to Amos than the music itself. Still,
much of the avant garde is certainly part of the thread we call "jazz".
Whether one likes or dislikes the jazz/improvising artist has very little
relevance to that thread.
-JC
Nils
>
> Now, I heard an interesting interview Ken Vandermark gave over the radio
> not too long ago when he was in town. I remember him saying that he
> didn't want to even label his own music as jazz because of
> misconceptions the unwary [my word not his] public might have upon
> hearing his music live.
And while we're at it with the quotes, I will humbly quote my own
interview with Jim West, the guy who runs Justin Time:
>>>
When it comes to difficult feat of marketing the music on Justin Time,
which is almost all jazz, West has an interesting approach. If “jazz”
is a dirty word, “then don’t call it jazz,” West explains. “Just call
it good music... put it on, don’t give it a title, because it has a
stereotype to it--like, you know, a smoky bar in some place. Don’t do
that, just play it. And when people hear it, they’ll say, ‘Hey,
that’s great! What is that?’... It’s wonderful and great to listen to,
so just don’t tell them it’s jazz.”
<<<
For the curious, the rest of the interview can be found at:
http://www.allaboutjazz.com/articles/arti0700_04.htm
Tom W. Ferguson
> I think the idea of improvising music, performed with great integrity is
> much more important than the idea having a term called "jazz".
Mingus called jazz folk music? Louis Armstrong said ALL music is folk music.
Fact is, some of what is classified as "jazz" has not much relationship to
other music called "jazz" except that they are both called "jazz." Ninety
percent of "jazz," according to inventory at my nearest department store, is
Kenny G. I guess it all comes down to who is doing the categorizing, eh?
Ellington shunned the term because he wanted his popular music taken
seriously. In recent decades musicians have shunned the term because they
want their serious music to be popular.
Personally, I've been living with the term so long it bothers me to see
people bothered by it. On the other hand, maybe it's a sign that the lineage
in many cases IS getting pretty disconnected.
Dan Given
I once asked Eugene Chadbourne (who is a pretty good jazz player once in
a while -- check out his great cover of Glad to Be Unhappy on one of his
many recent releases, can't remember which one) about how he classifies
music, considering that he typically jumps across a handful of genres
within each tune. His response was that there are two kinds of music:
music he likes, and music he doesn't like. This may be the best
classification I've heard yet. It is a take-off on Ellington's good and
bad, but much more subjective.
Dan Given
>
> of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a
> >troll"
>
> As with most political issues, the practical definition is not
> particulary close to the official definition.
>
> But Amos is a troll only in terms of the practical one. He simply
> holds unpopular views and expresses them well. That's what makes him a
> troll in RMB.
>
> Although he is at least as passionate, he tends to be far less
> vitriolic than his critics, and far more amusing. A brief review of
> this ng will yield dozens of postings with Amos saying things like
> "Let's not argue..." and "Don't dump on me; just let me do my
> thing..." and "I don't have a problem with these people selling CDs,
> just don't call it jazz...". Meanwhile, his opponents are calling him
> "choad", "fag", and "motherfucker". By any reasonable definition,
> who's the troll?
>
My problem with Amos isn't that his views are unpopular, it is that they
are not informed opinions. I specifically asked him what recordings he
has heard of certain artists that he constantly speaks out against, and
he won't answer. This, to me, implies that he has heard nothing, and
that his opinions, therefore, cannot actually be opinions. Sure, he may
be 'passionate', but he is passionate about some made up opinion with
absolutely no basis in reality.
His opinions are merely mindless drivel from someone who has now
admitted that he has no intellectual depth (in another thread). What
really scares me about this is that he is an academic -- and I really
have to worry about the students of anyone who a) has no intellectual
depth, and b) is so closed minded that he won't admit that there is any
validity in anything he disagrees with. God help anyone in one of his
classes who might question him!
Amos Omondi
cla...@my-deja.com wrote:
> And Amos. Getting hung up on labels is one sign of a lack of
> intellectual depth. Catagorization is helpful, whatever you might be
> talking about, but boundries in the real word are more often fuzzy
than
> distinct.
And now you are going to quote Ellington on good music and bad
music, right? Look, there is some music that people, including
most here on r.m.b, call jazz -- e.g. when bashing Kenny G --
and there is some music that they do not call jazz. RMB exists
to discuss mainly that sort of music. The word "jazz" is used
in many contexts to indicate that kind of music. Case closed.
What's more, people who insist that labels like jazz mean little
still manage to get upset when Brotzmann and Taylor are denounced
for polluting jazz. Lack of intellectual depth is when you decide
that a term has meaning only when applied to things you like. In
any case, I have never claimed to have intellectual depth; so we
need not concern ourselves with that one.
John Schutrick
>> on RMB the definition of "troll" is:
>> Someone who expresses opinions that I disagree with in an
>> interesting way.
"Andrew McKinnon" <alep...@camtech.net.au> replied:
>*BZZZZZZT* Wrong!!!
>
>From the Official rec.music.bluenote Bestiary[1]:
>
>Troll
>A creature who regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal
>attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose
>than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion.
>Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no real interest in
>learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait.
>They exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized
>as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a
>troll"
As with most political issues, the practical definition is not
particulary close to the official definition.
But Amos is a troll only in terms of the practical one. He simply
holds unpopular views and expresses them well. That's what makes him a
troll in RMB.
Although he is at least as passionate, he tends to be far less
vitriolic than his critics, and far more amusing. A brief review of
this ng will yield dozens of postings with Amos saying things like
"Let's not argue..." and "Don't dump on me; just let me do my
thing..." and "I don't have a problem with these people selling CDs,
just don't call it jazz...". Meanwhile, his opponents are calling him
"choad", "fag", and "motherfucker". By any reasonable definition,
who's the troll?
Shoe
On the changer: Wes Montgomery -- Groove Brothers
JC Martin
news:39a5c9c3....@nntp.ix.netcom.com...
That's a misrepresentation of the facts actually.
-JC
Dennis J. Kosterman
wrote:
> ... I have no problem with
>Brotzmann, Taylor, etc. doing their thing and even getting paid for it.
>But they should do it on their own time -- when on jazz time they
>should behave properly.
... "their own time" and "jazz time"??? How exactly do you define
"jazz time"? I've never heard either Taylor or Brotzmann get up on
stage and wave their arms and say "I'm playing jazz now". They just
play their music -- you can call it whatever you want. I choose to
call it jazz.
Dennis J. Kosterman
den...@tds.net
Amos Omondi
dlg...@altavista.com wrote:
>
> His opinions are merely mindless drivel from someone who has now
> admitted that he has no intellectual depth (in another thread).
Danny Boy, this is obviously a subtle one, so you might want to
get some help with it: there is a whale of a diference between
"I did not claim to have intellectual depth" and "I do not have
intellectual depth". Look, try and see it from my point of view:
some twit on r.m.b. states that I do not have any intellectual
depth. So? Why should I get excited over that?
>What
> really scares me about this is that he is an academic --
You scare too easily, Danny Boy.
Many years ago I read a book called Mosquito Coast. I can't
remember the author's name, but I think a movie came out of
it. The book starts with the main character saying that he
is dropping out of Harvard so that he can get an education.
Andrew McKinnon
> >"trolling", especially when I'm right.
>
>
> this newsgroup for a few months now, and I've finally worked out the
> source of the controversy.
>
> Someone who expresses opinions that I disagree with in an
> interesting way.
*BZZZZZZT* Wrong!!!
From the Official rec.music.bluenote Bestiary[1]:
Troll
A creature who regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal
attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose
than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion.
Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no real interest in
learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait.
They exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized
as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a
troll"
....
HTH
regards,
AJMcK.
And, Amos, ITSFWI.
[1] Or, to give due credit, see The New Hacker's Dictionary
http://www.gnulinux.com/mirrored/nhd/jargon_toc.html
Amos Omondi
"Tom W. Ferguson" <t...@pathwaynet.com> wrote:
t than the idea having a term called "jazz".
>
> Mingus called jazz folk music? Louis Armstrong said ALL music is folk
music.
I often see people quote Mingus, Ellington, etc. on the matter
of the word "jazz". Unfortunately, this tend to be taken out of
context -- not that I'm saying you have done that. Take Mingus,
for example. During a court hearing to be sentenced for knocking
out Knepper's teeth, he objected to the term on the gounds that
"To me the word 'jazz' means nigger, discrimination, second-hand
citizenship, the whole back-of-the bus-bit". If people actually
looked into the contexts, they would not be rushing to quote these
people.
> Ellington shunned the term because he wanted his popular music taken
> seriously. In recent decades musicians have shunned the term because
they
> want their serious music to be popular.
>
> Personally, I've been living with the term so long it bothers me to
see
> people bothered by it. On the other hand, maybe it's a sign that the
lineage
> in many cases IS getting pretty disconnected.
The funny thing is that my detractors have managed to shoot themselves
in the foot: by getting so worked-up about my claim that Brotzmann,
Taylor, etc. don't play jazz they have proved that they are guilty of
the sin I am accused of -- being hang-up on a label.
Amos Omondi
Only on r.m.b would you find this. A guy says, "You are an idiot. You
have no intellectual depth. Now, please answer these questions" and
then complain about his questions not being answered!
Amos Omondi
I tell you, John, I would never need to troll. If all I posted was
.
there would be people here arguing about that: I can always rely on the
likes of old faithfuls like JC and Nils. If you look carefully, you
will notice that the ones who shout "troll! ignore him! killfile him!"
are the ones who are always the first to jump into the fray. They love
arguing about my robust pro-jazz stance to such an extent I sometimes
feel like a hooker: everyone says, "bad, bad, bad" but can't resist
going over there to get some. I call it the Swaggart Syndrome.
Amos Omondi
bw...@mindspring.com wrote:
> Actually though, I must confess, I made up that riddle. Seeing that we
> are full-swing into the baseball season, I wanted to toss out that
> riddle, and see if I could run the bases with it. I was hoping to
score
> a laugh or two, or perhaps steal a smile, but seeing as you balked at
my
> pitch, it looks like I struck out. At least I went down swinging!
Ah, I get you now, Bruce. You just caught me at a bad moment: as you
can imagine, a nice guy like me doesn't being called names -- such
as "troll". And it's good to know that you respect my opinion, because
when it comes to jazz, I can assure you (from personal knowledge) that
there are few opinions that are as worth respecting as my pro-jazz ones
are.
sab...@mindspring.com
=-=================
troll v.,n.
1. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on
Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or
flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for
newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style
of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a
bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of
newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than
they already do, while subtly conveying to the more
savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you
don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. 2. An individual who
chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments,
flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in
email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a
discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no
real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want
to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named
after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they
are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh,
ignore him, he's just a troll."
or:
troll (trol) noun
A supernatural creature of Scandinavian folklore, variously portrayed
as a friendly or mischievous dwarf or as a giant, that lives in caves,
in the hills, or under bridges.
(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language )
and:
troll (trol) verb
trolled, trolling, trolls verb, transitive
1. a. To fish for by trailing a baited line from behind a slowly
moving boat. b. To fish in by trailing a baited line: troll the lake
for bass. c. To trail (a baited line) in fishing.
2. Slang. To patrol (an area) in search for someone or something:
"[Criminals] troll bus stations for young runaways" (Pete Axthelm).
(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language)
==============
So...is Amos a troll?
Is he just trying to stir controversy (the operating word is "just"
here)?
No. He's got a point, and he believes in it.
Is he an ugly little critter that lives under bridges?
Never met him, but his posts are often very funny. Nasty bridge
rolls are not known for theire sense of humor.
Is he trailing a line behind him, waiting for free jazz fish to
bite?
Most definitely.
S.
Nils
> As with most political issues, the practical definition is not
> particulary close to the official definition.
>
> But Amos is a troll only in terms of the practical one. He simply
> holds unpopular views and expresses them well. That's what makes him a
> troll in RMB.
expresses them well? excuse me? a short statement of denunciation
is about all we ever get. his recs come completely un-qualified.
get it together, shoe. no one needs to call anyone names, but if
it helps people stop responding to this nonsense, i'm all for it.
i actually prefer to deal with people who disagree with me--that's
the only way to learn and grow. but this situation is all hassle,
no benefit.
Amos Omondi
Nils <jaco...@frodo.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
> expresses them well? excuse me? a short statement of denunciation
> is about all we ever get. his recs come completely un-qualified.
> get it together, shoe. no one needs to call anyone names, but if
> it helps people stop responding to this nonsense, i'm all for it.
> i actually prefer to deal with people who disagree with me--that's
> the only way to learn and grow. but this situation is all hassle,
> no benefit.
But people seem to love this "hassle". They'll shout, "troll!",
announce kill-files, bitch in every way known to man, but they
won't keep away. No benefit, but they have to have it, eh? Delete
an article, skip an article? Why, when there is so much fun to be
had? The recs come un-qualified, but who would miss reading one?
I think we need to improve on the "help" these people are getting
because it sure isn't doing them much good. Maybe those who
want to help people should first help themselves?
Bruce LeClaire
I also like the ambiguity/wordplay when used as a verb. Trolling can
have the new meaning of acting like a troll (i.e. the combative,
cantankerous, mythical creature). But it can also be referring to the
already accepting meaning used in the context of fishing. As in,
He casts his post into the sea,
hoping to catch a response from me,
but if I should perchance reply,
I know this thread will never die.
--Bruce
PS- Sabutin's post is also dead nuts on, although
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary.htm also lists these definitions of
troll-(v):
Main Entry: troll
Pronunciation: 'trOl Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English Date: 15th century
transitive senses
1 : to cause to move round and round : ROLL
2 a : to sing the parts of (as a round or catch) in succession
b : to sing loudly
c : to celebrate in song
3 a : to fish for by trolling
b : to fish by trolling in <troll lakes>
c : to pull through the water in trolling <troll a lure>
intransitive senses
1 : to move around : RAMBLE
2 : to fish by trailing a lure or baited hook from a moving boat
3 : to sing or play in a jovial manner
4 : to speak rapidly
It's interesting to me, because I didn't know meanings 1 & 2, yet I
normally assume the dictionary orders the list of meanings by frequency
of usage.
My dictionary (which I'm rather fond of) lists the singing meaning as
"to sing lustily or in a full, rolling voice; chant merrily". Perhaps
this is the sense that Amos is trolling?
JC Martin
news:8o60d3$mbn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
*LOL*
Exposing our weaknesses, are ya Amos? What an interesting way to spend your
time.
Maybe some here feel there's something beneath the *trollish* image you
portray. I certainly do. It just takes so much damn work to get you to
actually discuss the music.
-JC
JC Martin
detractors have managed to shoot themselves
> in the foot: by getting so worked-up about my claim that Brotzmann,
> Taylor, etc. don't play jazz they have proved that they are guilty of
> the sin I am accused of -- being hang-up on a >label.
I can honestly say that I don't get worked up when you claim Brotzmann and
Taylor don't play jazz music. Really.
-JC
Bruce LeClaire
"Tom W. Ferguson" wrote:
>
> > I think the idea of improvising music, performed with great integrity is
>
> Mingus called jazz folk music?
Actually, he called some of his jazz "ethnic folk-dance music". I
temporarily forgot the entire phrase, but here's a quote from
http://www.furious.com/perfect/mingus.html containing the reference:
"The seemingly effortless stylistic shifts also make the Black Saint
remarkable. Although the album was initially written as a ballet, Mingus
emerged with a song cycle that went well beyond the boundaries of any
strict definitions. He referred to the sound as "ethnic folk-dance
music" (he asked Impulse! to include the name of the new genre under the
company's logo on the record), and indeed, the sound of the Black Saint
is so all-encompassing that it almost demands a new genre to contain it.
[...]"
BTW- this is the album that Mingus' psychologist wrote the liner notes
for.
--Bruce
uli_...@my-deja.com
As a matter of courtesy, I would like you to know that I do not read
the recs.
John Schutrick
>> Although he [Amos] is at least as passionate, he tends to be far less
>> vitriolic than his critics, and far more amusing. A brief review of
>> this ng will yield dozens of postings with Amos saying things like
>> "Let's not argue..." and "Don't dump on me; just let me do my
>> thing..." and "I don't have a problem with these people selling CDs,
>> just don't call it jazz...". Meanwhile, his opponents are calling him
>> "choad", "fag", and "motherfucker". By any reasonable definition,
>> who's the troll?
Then "JC Martin" <subs...@NOSPAMearthlink.net> replied:
>That's a misrepresentation of the facts actually.
Friend, if you care to argue facts, you should post some. I calls 'em
like I sees 'em, and could easily have provided many examples. As
always, I am willing to have my mind changed if you are able to
demonstrate the error of my ways. Care to try?
Shoe
On the changer: Art Farmer -- Blame It On My Youth
Andrew McKinnon
John Schutrick wrote:
>
> As with most political issues, the practical definition is not
> particulary close to the official definition.
>
> But Amos is a troll only in terms of the practical one. He simply
> holds unpopular views and expresses them well. That's what makes
> him a troll in RMB.
*BZZZZZT* Wrong again.
> Although he is at least as passionate, he tends to be far less
> vitriolic than his critics, and far more amusing. A brief review of
> this ng will yield dozens of postings with Amos saying things like
> "Let's not argue..." and "Don't dump on me; just let me do my
> thing..." and "I don't have a problem with these people selling CDs,
> just don't call it jazz...".
Classic troll behaviour - attack, back-pedal, attack, back-pedal .... - it's
been going on for years. Find any of Amos' "Let's not argue" posts, follow
the thread backwards a couple of steps, and there'll be Amos starting the
argument.
> Meanwhile, his opponents are calling him "choad", "fag", and
> "motherfucker".
*BZZZZZT* Strike Three.
Do a Deja search on (Amos AND (choad OR fag OR motherfucker)).
You'll find a few posts by Rob Schuh, and that's all.
> By any reasonable definition, who's the troll?
Well, so far, Amos and Rob Schuh. [I'm still giving you the benefit of the
doubt.]
Regards,
AJMcK.
Amos Omondi
"Andrew McKinnon" <alep...@camtech.net.au> wrote:
I simply give my opinions. If people want to argue about them, they
are free to; but I don't "start" the argument? And it's amazing to
have people like you get involved in such discussiona after the
repeatedly announced kill-file!
HEY, TROLL! WE SCHMUCKS WANT MORE!
uli_...@my-deja.com
Amos Omondi <asa...@ntu.edu.sg> wrote:
>
>
> Only on r.m.b would you find this. A guy says, "You are an idiot. You
> have no intellectual depth. Now, please answer these questions" and
> then complain about his questions not being answered!
>
> Before you buy.
Amos, where do you live? i experience the same situations in all walks
every day.
John Schutrick
Lotsa snipping...
>Classic troll behaviour - attack, back-pedal, attack, back-pedal .... - it's
>been going on for years. Find any of Amos' "Let's not argue" posts, follow
>the thread backwards a couple of steps, and there'll be Amos starting the
>argument.
I wrote:
>> Meanwhile, his opponents are calling him "choad", "fag", and
>> "motherfucker".
>
>*BZZZZZT* Strike Three.
>
>Do a Deja search on (Amos AND (choad OR fag OR motherfucker)).
>You'll find a few posts by Rob Schuh, and that's all.
>
>> By any reasonable definition, who's the troll?
>
>Well, so far, Amos and Rob Schuh. [I'm still giving you the benefit of the
>doubt.]
My friend, I come in peace. I have no intention of getting into a
bickering thing with you or anyone else.
My experience has been that Amos says something about jazz (which is,
afterall, the purpose of RMB), after which two or three or 10 or a
dozen guys reply with with a whole lotta vitriol about -- not his
statements, not his opinions -- but about Amos himself as a
functioning, intelligent, possibly heterosexual, competent, and
amusing human being. Despite appearances, this ng is NOT called RMAO,
so these attacks are at least off topic, if not themselves troll-like.
Amos himself seldom goes the ad hominem route. Occasionally, when he
is severely goaded, he will get a little pissy, perhaps suggesting
that his interlocutor will have to pay close attention to understand
what Amos is about to lay down. But I've never seen him call anyone a
a name of any sort. And you won't have to search any further than this
thread to find others calling him uninformed, mindless, of no
intellectual depth, closed-minded, and without validity.
I make these points not to defend Amos' views, nor even to defend Amos
himself. RMB is not served well by people defending Amos, nor by
people attacking him. Let's comment on, recommend, describe, make
lists of, defend, or attack *jazz* -- performances, recordings,
recording companies, and techniques. That what this ng is for, and I
think that's what Amos does. In our mutual interest, let's use RMB to
talk about jazz, not Amos.
Shoe
On the changer: The Rumproller -- Lee Morgan