Kurt Elling
Ralph Jungheim
On Sat, 28 Jun 1997 23:04:32 -0400, "Dr. Jazz" <drj...@drjazz.com>
wrote:
>Will someone PLEASE tell me what is so great about Kirt Elling? I have
>heard him live, and think he is BORING!
Can't agree with you on this one, Bob. If there's one thing Kurt
Elling ain't it's boring.
Ralph
Dr. Don Koldon
In article <33b78ca9...@news.beachnet.com>, bam...@beachnet.com
(Ralph Jungheim) wrote:
Okay, not boring. How 'bout pretentious and/or jive?
--
DK
SwingDoug
I'll buy that. Kurt is not boring to me, but that don't
mean I like it. He is caught up in this hipster vibe,
and seems to have zero regard for the great tradition
of jazz vocalists before him. I think he's very original,
but he doesn't come close to moving me.
Dr. Jazz
What about off key? Uninteresting? Straining? Bad?
Lee M. Cohen
> >
> >Can't agree with you on this one, Bob. If there's one thing Kurt
> >Elling ain't it's boring.
>
> Okay, not boring. How 'bout pretentious and/or jive?
>
-
no in between. When I first heard the CLOSE YOUR EYES recording, I was
embarassed, because a friend gave it to me who happens to be Kurt's
manager. I did not want to say what I really thought, but when Kurt did
an LA tour, and I had the chance to hear him live over a two-week stand,
and then at other venues around the country, I appreciated his guts and
ideas as a vocalist and musician. I still have trouble with his
"pretense" and "staged" effects with lyrics and poetry, and he does not
have a natural voice like Ella or Torme, but he reaches for sound the
way Dolphy reached for sound, somewhere between melody and angst, and
then gives release with humor and imagination. It took sometime, but I
hear it now... doesn't this sound familiar... BEBOP.
Oh, BTW, Dr. Jazz, ol' buddy, yu right man... he ain't Freddy Cole! :-)
Cheers!
Lee
Dr. Don Koldon
In article <33B8D4...@Jazznet.com>, LMC...@jazznet.com wrote:
>I still have trouble with his
>"pretense" and "staged" effects with lyrics and poetry, and he does not
>have a natural voice like Ella or Torme, but he reaches for sound the
>way Dolphy reached for sound, somewhere between melody and angst,
Well, unlike Mr. Beatster Wannabe, Dolphy usually GOT the sound. Ever
hear Elling try to negotiate his way through some fairly complex changes?
I have on a couple occasions, and if he was an instrumentalist playing the
same notes, he'd have been laughed off the bandstand. Comparing Elling to
Dolphy is stretching it, to say the least.
--
DK
jimb...@mcs.com
Dr. Jazz wrote:
>
> Will someone PLEASE tell me what is so great about Kirt Elling? I have
> heard him live, and think he is BORING!
I can't agree either, Doc. Living in Chicago, I've had the opportunity
to hear Kurt a half dozen time live, in a variety of settings, and over
a period of about three or four years. The first time, he sounded like
a copy of one of my favorite singers, Mark Murphy. His first
recordiing, on Blue Note, is one of the best first recordings by a new
artist I've heard in a lot of years, and goes well beyond the Murphy
influence. The second recording is also quite nice, and goes on from
where the first left off. A couple of months ago, I heard him do some
Sinatra charts with the Jazz Members Big Band. Both Kurt and the band
sounded really good -- the sax section was laying down this gorgeous
bed, right in the pocket, and Kurt was settling into it nicely.
BTW, Kurt's second album, which I've only heard tracks from on the
radio, has the great Eddie Johnson playing some wonderful tenor on at
least one track. Eddie, hardly known outside Chicago, is absolutely
marvelous accompanying a singer -- my wife and I almost missed our train
listening to him at Ravinia a few nights back.
Is Kurt a mature jazz singer? Of course not. Is he one of the most
interesting on the scene? Absolutely. The most promising of the new
ones? Well, he's definitely in the running! Will I trade in my Carmen
and Mark records? Never!
Jim Brown
Chicago
2 jazz pagans
jimb...@mcs.com wrote:
>
> [snip] The first time, [Elling] sounded like
> a copy of one of my favorite singers, Mark Murphy.
BTW, Mark now has a web site at www.markmurphy.com. As you'll see, it's
very much of a family affair. Check it out.
- JRB
Jack Woker
> BTW, Kurt's second album, which I've only heard tracks from on the
> radio, has the great Eddie Johnson playing some wonderful tenor on at
> least one track. Eddie, hardly known outside Chicago, is absolutely
> marvelous accompanying a singer -- my wife and I almost missed our train
> listening to him at Ravinia a few nights back.
What a treat to see Eddie Johnson's name mentioned! I've enjoyed his
Nessa album "Indian Summer" (thanks, Chuck) ever since it came out in
the early 80's. Glad to hear that he's still with us and active!
jack
jimb...@mcs.com
> BTW, Mark now has a web site at www.markmurphy.com. As you'll see, it's
> very much of a family affair. Check it out.
Just visited it, yes, it's very nicely done. The itenerary is
particularly useful. BTW, the Chicago Jazz Fest is usually broadcast
live on NPR, so keep an ear out for it!
Jim
LGEvilEye
<HTML>Dr. Jazz wrote:
>
> Will someone PLEASE tell me what is so great about Kirt Elling? I have
> heard him live, and think he is BORING!<<
HUH?
Are you sure you saw Kurt Elling? The same guy that blew me away last
month in NYC? Not only is the guy a dynamic stylist but one of the most
exciting performers I've ever seen. Constantly inventive, always taking
the unexpected turn. Even Will Friedwald, that stiff (the guy that hates
Bob Dorough and Mose Allison), digs him.
LG
Michael Colby
I'll jump in here too just to put in my reaction to Kurt Elling. I think
he's great. I feel very fortunate to have seen him live last summer at
Stanford in a recital hall. No waitresses, people yakking at other
tables or other distractions, it was all the music.
And what music! I was transported. The guy really seems to put 100% into
his music making, no phoning it in. And he can sing! Long, long tones,
which makes me think of Sinatra. This guy knows how to breathe. And what
he does with his voice, changing the color, the timbre: I know it's a
cliche, but I'd say he uses his voice like an instrument.
I like his lyric writing, too. The guy is literate and inventive. One of
the best lyricists to come along since Jon Hendricks.
And he's still in his twenties!
Michael Colby
mdc...@ucdavis.edu
Lee M. Cohen
Yes, I have... when he appeared live on stage improvising with both
Arthur Blythe and Chico Freeman, who I'd say are in a lineage with
Dolphy. Quite the contrary, Kurt was not laughed of the stage, but given
a standing ovation. I have it on tape. It was at the 1996 EDDIE MOORE
JAZZ FESTIVAL at Yoshi's in Oakland, CA.
Dr. Don Koldon
In article <33C563...@Jazznet.com>, LMC...@jazznet.com wrote:
>Yes, I have... when he appeared live on stage improvising with both
>Arthur Blythe and Chico Freeman, who I'd say are in a lineage with
>Dolphy.
Blythe and Freeman might be "in a lineage" with Dolphy, but hardly "in the
same league." Way closer than Elling, but so what? Your statement about
Blythe & Freeman says nothing about Elling. Hey, it's summer, i.e.
festival time ... check the rosters & reviews and you'll find better
musicans than both Blythe & Freeman sharing a stage with "musicians" far
worse than Elling.
>Quite the contrary, Kurt was not laughed of the stage, but given
>a standing ovation. I have it on tape. It was at the 1996 EDDIE MOORE
>JAZZ FESTIVAL at Yoshi's in Oakland, CA.
1) I specifically stated that -- at a number of live Elling performances
where I've seen him attempting (and generally failing) to negotiate more
harmonically sophisticated material -- if Elling were not a vocalist, but
was "blowing" the same lines as an instrumentalist he would be laughed off
the stage. I stand by that statement - the only clarification I'd add is
that "laughed off the stage" should have read "laughed off the stage by
the other musicians."
Scatting vocalists can "get away" with more than an instrumentalist can,
especially with an audience. Elling is not alone in this respect. (None
of this should be interpreted as a slight against jazz vocalists ... my
beef is that in terms of musicanship, Elling is no Ella or Sarah Vaughan,
to name just two.) IMO, he has a long way to go in terms of developing
in-depth musicianship, and would be wise to spend more time shedding his
musical abilities instead of falling back on his pretentious reincarnated
hipster routine.
2) As to the standing ovation ... again, so what? I bet some terribly
lame stuff will get standing ovations at the Hollywood Bowl (and many
other festivals from coast-to-coast) this summer ... does that make it
good? Yes, it's nice that the crowd enjoyed him, but it doesn't address
the "if he played those same lines as an instrumentalist" issue I raised.
3) I'm open to the possibility that, as Chicago is his home base, Elling
might take more chances and/or act more jive & obnoxious here on his home
turf than he does when out on the road promoting his Blue Note albums.
Maybe he behaves (and therefore, sings) a little better on the road.
--
DK
Lee M. Cohen
>
> 2) As to the standing ovation ... again, so what? I bet some terribly
> lame stuff will get standing ovations at the Hollywood Bowl (and many
> other festivals from coast-to-coast) this summer ... does that make it
> good? Yes, it's nice that the crowd enjoyed him, but it doesn't address
> the "if he played those same lines as an instrumentalist" issue I raised.
>
-
The Eddie Moore Festival is far from the Playboy Festival. This year its
Myra Medford-Joseph Jarman-Leroy Jenkins, Odean Pope, Julian Priester
and Sam Rivers. In the past it has been much of the AACM crowd,
musicians like James Newton, Steve Lacy, Mal Waldron, and Jazz In
Flignt, the organization that puts on Eddie Moore, does a yearly tribute
to Eric Dolphy. Audiences who come to hear those artists don't give
ovations lightly. In fact, the most boisterous of all the ovations for
Kurt Elling came from the founder of the Eddie Moore Jazz Festival, Ken
Schubert, who was among the first to bring the Art Ensemble and other
AACM folks out to the San Francisco Bay Area. You can bash Kurt, but
don't judge the audience for Eddie Moore without knowing more about it.
And again, that audience was impressed with his musicianship.
Dr. Don Koldon
What gives Lee? First Pritchett and now you ... isn't anyone willing to
link a running dialogue back to the statements that set off the debate?
In article <33C874...@Jazznet.com>, LMC...@jazznet.com wrote:
>The Eddie Moore Festival is far from the Playboy Festival. This year its
>Myra Medford-Joseph Jarman-Leroy Jenkins, Odean Pope, Julian Priester
>and Sam Rivers. In the past it has been much of the AACM crowd,
>musicians like James Newton, Steve Lacy, Mal Waldron, and Jazz In
>Flignt, the organization that puts on Eddie Moore, does a yearly tribute
>to Eric Dolphy. Audiences who come to hear those artists don't give
>ovations lightly.
I lived in the Bay Area for a year and am familiar with the Eddie Moore
festival, and with Jazz in Flight. A good festival, and a good
organization, and yes the Moore festival's crowd may be hipper than an LA
crowd, but you're painting them as particularly enlightened sages is
strained. Your "hipper festival than thou" defensiveness has nothing to
do with the issue you and I were debating, which was your comparing Elling
to Eric Dolphy. Maybe you'll feel better if I remind you I've seen Elling
in person a number of times in the very city that gave birth to the AACM,
which you keep mentioning. So what? Where are you going with these AACM
references? Bizarre.
>In fact, the most boisterous of all the ovations for
>Kurt Elling came from the founder of the Eddie Moore Jazz Festival, Ken
>Schubert, who was among the first to bring the Art Ensemble and other
>AACM folks out to the San Francisco Bay Area. You can bash Kurt, but
>don't judge the audience for Eddie Moore without knowing more about it.
>And again, that audience was impressed with his musicianship.
Here's my "judging" your festival audience:
>> 2) As to the standing ovation ... again, so what? I bet some terribly
>> lame stuff will get standing ovations at the Hollywood Bowl (and many
>> other festivals from coast-to-coast) this summer ... does that make it
>> good? Yes, it's nice that the crowd enjoyed him, but it doesn't address
>> the "if he played those same lines as an instrumentalist" issue I raised.
See the line "at the Hollywood Bowl (and many other festivals from
coast-to-coast)"? Do you get it? And, you ignored my linking it back to
the strange (and unsupportable) analogy you made some time ago, which is
what the debate was about until you drifted off into "we even have AACM
people, we're as hip as anyone else and maybe more so" paranoia and
defensiveness.
Remember what this is about:
>Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 07:46:29 -0600
>From: kol...@mindspring.com (Dr. Don Koldon)
>Subject: Re: Kurt Elling
>Newsgroups: rec.music.bluenote
>
>In article <33B8D4...@Jazznet.com>, LMC...@jazznet.com wrote:
>
>>I still have trouble with his
>>"pretense" and "staged" effects with lyrics and poetry, and he does not
>>have a natural voice like Ella or Torme, but he reaches for sound the
>>way Dolphy reached for sound, somewhere between melody and angst,
>
>Well, unlike Mr. Beatster Wannabe, Dolphy usually GOT the sound. Ever
>hear Elling try to negotiate his way through some fairly complex changes?
>I have on a couple occasions, and if he was an instrumentalist playing the
>same notes, he'd have been laughed off the bandstand. Comparing Elling to
>Dolphy is stretching it, to say the least.
So, let's get back to the point, okay Lee? I was saying (and still am)
that your comparing a virtuoso musician and historic figure like Eric
Dolphy to a still-emerging, controversial (even in his home base) jazz
vocalist with only two albums under his belt is ridiculous.
I love the Bay Area ... I bet you had a fine festival. But I don't care
if Elling got a standing ovation while standing on a stack of Roscoe
Mitchell albums, comparing Kurt Elling to Eric Dolphy is a Grand
Canyon-sized stretch. Gee, wait for his third album, if not another
decade.
--
DK
Ashley Capps
Gee, Dr. Don, I'm beginning to think that Kurt Elling stole your
girlfriend or something. You sure seem to be down on the fellow and anyone
who admits to enjoying his singing. I'll admit to having never seen the
guy in concert, and while I have enjoyed his records, and they seem to be
growing on me, they won't be making my desert island list in the
foreseeable future. Nevertheless, I find a few of your comments a bit
harsh and annoying:
First, saying that Kurt "reaches for sound the way Dolphy reached for
sound" is not the same thing as saying that Kurt is on the same artistic
plane as Eric Dolphy.
Second, criticizing a singer for not being on the same technical level
as a Sarah Vaughn or an Ella Fitzgerald is unfair. There are many
wonderful saxophonists who weren't and aren't on the same technical level
as John Coltrane or Sonny Rollins or Charlie Parker, but they are still
capable of creating compelling music. In fact, a lot of great art has been
created within the confines of some technical limitations. What I hear in
Elling is about expression, not vocal virtuosity.
Thirdly, I've heard a number of fine musicians who aren't necessarily
aces at negotiating their way through some fairly complex changes. They
may give it their best when the situation demands it, but generally their
work is focused elsewhere. There are other criteria for musicianship
beyond the ability to play complicated changes at a hundred miles per
hour.
Fourthly, the "Mr. Beatster Wannabe" comment forces me to ask, Are you
really Doug Wamble?
Ashley
Dr. Don Koldon
In article <acapps-1307...@knox521.static.usit.net>,
aca...@usit.net (Ashley Capps) wrote:
>Gee, Dr. Don, I'm beginning to think that Kurt Elling stole your
>girlfriend or something. You sure seem to be down on the fellow and anyone
>who admits to enjoying his singing.
Offended by his pretentious jive, yes and "down on him." I don't care if
anyone likes him, but comparing him to great artists was a red flag.
>I'll admit to having never seen the
>guy in concert, and while I have enjoyed his records, and they seem to be
>growing on me, they won't be making my desert island list in the
>foreseeable future. Nevertheless, I find a few of your comments a bit
>harsh and annoying:
Okay.
> First, saying that Kurt "reaches for sound the way Dolphy reached for
>sound" is not the same thing as saying that Kurt is on the same artistic
>plane as Eric Dolphy.
Maybe, maybe not. A fair difference of opinion. But you can read it
another way - as I pointed out in my first response, he reaches for it,
but hardly gets it IMO. I don't think a lead trumpeter who cracks/misses
a fair amount of high notes is comparable to one who consistently nails
those notes, just because he's reaching. One's cutting the part, the
other isn't.
> Second, criticizing a singer for not being on the same technical level
>as a Sarah Vaughn or an Ella Fitzgerald is unfair. There are many
>wonderful saxophonists who weren't and aren't on the same technical level
>as John Coltrane or Sonny Rollins or Charlie Parker, but they are still
>capable of creating compelling music. In fact, a lot of great art has been
>created within the confines of some technical limitations. What I hear in
>Elling is about expression, not vocal virtuosity.
Right, but again, linking him to Dolphy invites that comparison. I agree
with you that those of less than towering skills can make good music. If
you ever get a chance to see Mose Allison live (FORGET almost all of his
records for the sake of this point), you will see someone of limited vocal
abilities doing some very interesting things ... in addition to embodying
extensive life experience, or "hard-earned hipness" if you will (and,
he'll play way more piano than you'd ever would've guessed.)
Every time I've seen him, Elling has struck me as a faker, a poseur. This
is hardly a radical opinion ... it's a common criticism of him. You (and
a lot of others) may feel otherwise.
> Thirdly, I've heard a number of fine musicians who aren't necessarily
>aces at negotiating their way through some fairly complex changes. They
>may give it their best when the situation demands it, but generally their
>work is focused elsewhere. There are other criteria for musicianship
>beyond the ability to play complicated changes at a hundred miles per
>hour.
Yes, but the inability to do so has always earned an instant
"scarlet-letter" from most players. Vocalists can sometimes get away with
this much more easily than instrumentalists. If he can't cut it, he
should go shed until he can ... that's the basic "rules of the game."
> Fourthly, the "Mr. Beatster Wannabe" comment forces me to ask, Are you
>really Doug Wamble?
Doug and I have frequently fought like cats & dogs in public, and
sometimes agreed (usually on matters similar to this Elling issue). In
the case of Elling, I believe it was Doug who (some time ago) first posted
his having seen Elling fumble through some more harmonically complex
material, and I followed up by saying I'd seen that happen a number of
times. Maybe that's why you made the connection.
Regardless, as one who's suffered through hours of Elling's pretentious
jive, "Mr. Beatster Wannabe" certainly matches my reaction to him. Being
in this area, we've been getting Elling-this and Elling-that hype for
years now. Some love him, others don't. A recent feature article on him
in the Sunday paper's magazine illustrated both sides. It praised him for
some things, but also discussed how he strikes many as pretentious, etc.
--
DK
jimb...@mcs.com
I'm not sure what expectations should be for a singer who has just
released his second record and has only been around 3-4 years. I hear
new, interesting stuff in Kurt, and that's damned rare nowadays. Should
we be comparing him to singers with 30-40 years of seasoning? Sure,
Lady Day's records at that stage of here career were masterpieces, but
how many other singers (or jazz artists) have repeated that feat? I
think we might be able to count them without taking our shoes off.
One of the great comedians of the vaudeville era, in lamenting the
demise of the circuit and of small clubs (which, for comedians have
returned), said that "everyone needs a place to be bad." What he meant,
and he explained it in case anyone missed his point, is that every
performer needs a place to hone his craft, to learn stage presence, to
learn to communicate with an audience, and all of the things that go
with it. Chicago is that place for Kurt, as it has been for a lot of
folks who have attained stature in one field or another.
I, for one, don't expect folks to burst upon the stage perfectly
formed. What I do expect is the artist I'm going to hear to give me
their best at that moment. So far, I've always gotten that from Kurt.
When I've been there, he has always worked with strong musicians who
would push him.
Jim
LGEvilEye
I can't believe the harsh appraisals that Elling is getting here. What'd
he do, run over your dog or something? Or are we dealing with vocal
analysis by straight arrow formalists of the Friedwald school? What do
you think of Murphy, Allison, Dorough and Gaillard (among other 'hip', non
trad singers)?? I'm sure Torme digs Elling (as Ella would were she still
with us) - the posessor of not only a great 'instrument' but a great
creative mind as well. If you can't handle the 'obnoxious' (your word not
mine) side of Elling you might as well spend your time listening to Kenny
Rankin (urgh...).
LG
Lee M. Cohen
Dr. Don Koldon wrote:
>
> What gives Lee? First Pritchett and now you ... isn't anyone willing to
> link a running dialogue back to the statements that set off the debate?
>
Don, I was responding to your characterization of Eddie Moore as
"Playboy like", not Kurt Elling. And it is not strained to say that the
Eddie Moore crowd is more jazz orientated than Playboy, especially when
you take a look at the history of Eddie Moore and its connection to
Creative Music.
Dr. Don Koldon wrote:
> do with the issue you and I were debating, which was your comparing Elling
> to Eric Dolphy. Maybe you'll feel better if I remind you I've seen Elling
> in person a number of times in the very city that gave birth to the AACM,
> which you keep mentioning. So what? Where are you going with these AACM
> references? Bizarre.
--
I refered to AACM and Eddie Moore particularly because you live in
Chicago, and connected it to Eddie Moore so you might better understand
the make-up of the audience that heard Kurt. How is that bizarre?
Dr. Don Koldon wrote:
> So, let's get back to the point, okay Lee? I was saying (and still am)
> that your comparing a virtuoso musician and historic figure like Eric
> Dolphy to a still-emerging, controversial (even in his home base) jazz
> vocalist with only two albums under his belt is ridiculous.
--
As for comparing Kurt to Dolphy, perhaps that's a misunderstanding. I
would never put Kurt on the same level as an innovator like Dolphy, (and
didn't!). I attempted to describe in words what I feel Kurt is searching
for musically. In that context, a comparison to Dolphy is not
unreasonable. We might disagree whether he achieves what he's after
though. You quoted me, but did you read it?
"...he reaches for sound the way Dolphy reached for sound..."
That's not ridiculous. There's a 16 year-old kid out of Billy Higgins'
World Stage that many people, including Vi Redd, are comparing to a
young Dolphy. It's a way to be descriptive, not for placing Kurt in the
same historical context as Dolphy... PLEASE!
I think another good comparison is that a lot of folks when first
hearing Dolphy's tone did not like it at all. Miles in particular.
Kurt's tone illicits the same ambivalent reactions. Another valid
comparison.
Cheers!
Lee
Dr. Don Koldon
In article <33C9CF...@Jazznet.com>, LMC...@jazznet.com wrote:
>Don, I was responding to your characterization of Eddie Moore as
>"Playboy like", not Kurt Elling. And it is not strained to say that the
>Eddie Moore crowd is more jazz orientated than Playboy, especially when
>you take a look at the history of Eddie Moore and its connection to
>Creative Music.
I certainly agree that the Moore festival is a higher grade of event than
Playboy - I was saying I didn't care where Elling got a standing ovation.
Perhaps the"festival" issue/points cancel each other out.
> Dr. Don Koldon wrote:
>> do with the issue you and I were debating, which was your comparing Elling
>> to Eric Dolphy. Maybe you'll feel better if I remind you I've seen Elling
>> in person a number of times in the very city that gave birth to the AACM,
>> which you keep mentioning. So what? Where are you going with these AACM
>> references? Bizarre.
>I refered to AACM and Eddie Moore particularly because you live in
>Chicago, and connected it to Eddie Moore so you might better understand
>the make-up of the audience that heard Kurt. How is that bizarre?
I thought it odd to see the AACM mentioned so much in that it a)
continued on the "this was a good audience" angle which was irrelevant to
my criticisms of Elling (at least from my p.o.v.), and, b) sure seemed
bizarre to hear the AACM mentioned in the same breath as Elling. You
might remember a thread from 3 or 4 months ago which discussed the
political, musical and financial struggles of the AACM, especially in its
early years. Having played with a few other AACM'ers in the late 60's &
early 70's, I tried to imagine what their reaction might have been if a
time machine could have transported them forward to the Green Mill (or
better yet, taken Elling back to late 60's Hyde Park) - I'd have LOVED to
have seen the looks on their faces the first time Elling did his "Beat
poetry" routine (sorry to all his fans, but this bit always strikes me as
posturing). Given those memories and associations, yep, I found it
bizarre.
>As for comparing Kurt to Dolphy, perhaps that's a misunderstanding.
Yes - after your clarifications, I see that you meant something other than
what I took it to be.
--
DK
SwingDoug
Yes, Ashley, it is I, The Hated Doug Wamble.
And I _still_ think Elling is jive. As far as scatting goes,
he is very limited. As I've said, he is original. But he doesn't
have any blues up in his music, and he comes off like a
total hipster-doofus. That's my opinion, and that's why I
do not dig his thing.
Ralph Jungheim
The fact is that Kurt is a work in progress and may never be
universally beloved. So why does Doctor Don keep going back for more?
Masochism, maybe?
Ralph
Ashley Capps
In article
<koldon-1407...@ip247.schiller-park2.il.pub-ip.psi.net>,
kol...@mindspring.com (Dr. Don Koldon) wrote:
He'd be getting a less "flak" from some quarters if he
> was just a singer working on his craft - his "channeling the Beat
> Generation" pretentions turn off a lot of people, and I'm certainly one of
> them.
Just for further clarification, Don, do dislike the Beat Generation
hipster raps in general or is it that you think Elling does an especially
poor job?
Ashley
Ashley Capps
In article <19970714163...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
swin...@aol.com (SwingDoug) wrote:
Hey Doug - I was needling Dr. Don about his description of Elling as a
"hipster wannabe" which echoed somewhere in the canyons of mind as a
Wamble-ism.
You aren't hated here - I'm personally glad to have you back so soon. Are
you in New York?
Ashley
Dr. Don Koldon
In article <33cb5a4b...@news.beachnet.com>, bam...@beachnet.com
(Ralph Jungheim) wrote:
>The fact is that Kurt is a work in progress and may never be
>universally beloved. So why does Doctor Don keep going back for more?
>Masochism, maybe?
Right idea but wrong end of the exchange, Ralph. As it is I who keeps
kicking Elling, I guess that makes me a sadist. If Kurt kept coming back,
HE would be the masochist.
Since you're getting technical, the specific diagnosis for these
circumstances is "sadism, situational, induced by toxic exposure to the
alleged spirit of Lord Buckley and/or Jack Kerouac, as 'channeled' through
a 'work in progress.' "
--
DK
Dr. Don Koldon
In article <acapps-1407...@knox521.static.usit.net>,
aca...@usit.net (Ashley Capps) wrote:
Much more the latter - not just that he does a poor job, but is so
affected/pretentious/jive (take your choice). For some reason, it
brings up images of Donnie Osmond doing a tribute to Howlin' Wolf. (hmmm
... that might be interesting, come to think of it.)
--
DK
Dr. Don Koldon
>I'm not sure what expectations should be for a singer who has just
>released his second record and has only been around 3-4 years.
I agree, but from a different angle - that's why reading "he reaches for
sound the way Dolphy reached for sound" got such a response from me! :-)
>One of the great comedians of the vaudeville era, in lamenting the
>demise of the circuit and of small clubs (which, for comedians have
>returned), said that "everyone needs a place to be bad." What he meant,
>and he explained it in case anyone missed his point, is that every
>performer needs a place to hone his craft, to learn stage presence, to
>learn to communicate with an audience, and all of the things that go
>with it. Chicago is that place for Kurt, as it has been for a lot of
>folks who have attained stature in one field or another.
Again, we have some overlap in our ideas here: I think Elling was signed
and hyped prematurely, and indeed, should have been left in "a place to be
bad" for a little more seasoning. Exactly.
Having dealt with Bruce Lundvall when he was running Elektra/Musician, I
can just imagine what went through his mind when he got Elling's tape and
picture - probably the same thing as when George Butler first saw Wynton
Marsalis - "music not fully formed yet, but given the image and the timing
... man, I can SELL this." (I've had considerable contact with Butler -
and combined with Lundvall's being a former Columbia "jazz exec" - I'll
bet large amounts of green on this "educated guess." Not that either will
cop to it in public, but you know how that goes.)
I'll grant Elling - or any other "artist in incubation" their time in "a
place to be bad." He'd be getting a less "flak" from some quarters if he
was just a singer working on his craft - his "channeling the Beat
Generation" pretentions turn off a lot of people, and I'm certainly one of
them.
>When I've been there, he has always worked with strong musicians who
>would push him.
Agree fully on this point. His regular backing trio is very good.
--
DK
Chuck Nessa
Ashley Capps wrote:
>
> In article
> <koldon-1407...@ip247.schiller-park2.il.pub-ip.psi.net>,
> kol...@mindspring.com (Dr. Don Koldon) wrote:
> > was just a singer working on his craft - his "channeling the Beat
> > Generation" pretentions turn off a lot of people, and I'm certainly one of
> > them.
>
> hipster raps in general or is it that you think Elling does an especially
> poor job?
>
Butting into Doktor Don's territory, let me say it is 40 years too
late....Just like Wynton.
Chuck Nessa
Ashley Capps
tomb...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
>On 14 Jul 1997 06:40:48 GMT, lgev...@aol.com (LGEvilEye) wrote:
>
>>I can't believe the harsh appraisals that Elling is getting here. What'd
>>he do, run over your dog or something? Or are we dealing with vocal
>>analysis by straight arrow formalists of the Friedwald school?
That's a pretty weak shot at Friedwald. I've never seen him associated with
anything that didn't represent a respectable level of quality, which seems
to me something to be proud of. He doesn't sell his name out just for the
bucks, from what I've seen, which seems to me to be to his benefit.
(Or maybe he does, and I just don't buy that stuff. I don't know.)
I'm not sure what you mean by "formalist" in this context. Perhaps you're
referring to the way Friedwald organizes his his book by grouping similar
artists together? I guess anyone could argue with his categorization, but
he's hardly a formalist. It's just shorthand for him, an organizational
schema, not any kind of strict constructionist axiomatic philosophy.
I think he does a damn good job of walking that line, and I'm someone
who has very little use for musical categorization schemas.
What do
>>you think of Murphy, Allison, Dorough and Gaillard (among other 'hip', non
>>trad singers)??
Oh, okay, you were the cat who took a shot at Friedwald in another post
for his not liking Allison and Dorough, right? I think in his book Friedwald
listed Allison and Dorough in a hierarchy of quality, taking some critical
shots at them in the process. But he also had some grudgingly complimentary
things to say about Dorough.
I think those two guys are pretty mediocre and unoriginal myself. I've never
heard anything by Dorough that I liked, although the first album of his I
ever heard was so bad that I've pretty much avoided him since. Maybe he's
done something worthwhile that I haven't heard. I like Allison, but he
doesn't interest me enough to hold my attention for more than a couple
tunes. Actually, I usually have trouble paying attention all the way through
one of his tracks. I like a couple of his songs, though.
I'm not sure why you group them with Murphy and Gaillard (a bit of formalism
on your part, perhaps?). Murphy and Gaillard not only have a lot more
technique than Allison and Dorough, but they're also far more
original. It's a higher level of artistry altogether.
I'm sure Torme digs Elling (as Ella would were she still
>>with us) - the posessor of not only a great 'instrument' but a great
>>creative mind as well.
I think "great" is way overstating the case. He's got chops, and he
has the taste to borrow from Mark Murphy. That's all to his credit,
and he may someday approach greatness, but I haven't heard it yet.
If you can't handle the 'obnoxious' (your word not
>>mine) side of Elling you might as well spend your time listening to Kenny
>>Rankin (urgh...).
Interesting comparison. Elling's improvisational style does bear some
resemblance to Rankin, and I hadn't considered that until you brought
it up. Although I think he's mainly following Mark Murphy very closely.
I don't see any need to bash Elling. He's a very young guy and he has
a shot at developing into something interesting. Allison and
Dorough will never get any better than they are now.
Gary Milliken
>Hey Doug -
>You aren't hated here - I'm personally glad to have you back so soon. Are
>you in New York?
>
>Ashley
Hmm... another alter ego?
LGEvilEye
>>If you can't handle the 'obnoxious' (your word not
>>mine) side of Elling you might as well spend your time listening to
Kenny
>>Rankin (urgh...).
Interesting comparison. Elling's improvisational style does bear some
resemblance to Rankin, and I hadn't considered that until you brought
it up. Although I think he's mainly following Mark Murphy very closely.<<
Did I not make myself clear? I find Rankin bland and uncomfortably slick -
two criticisms I would never dream of levelling at Elling.
My grouping of Murphy, Gaillard, Allison and Dorough is more in their
relation to Elling as non-traditionalists than to each other (though there
are similarities).
Per Friedwald: Ironically he apparently digs Elling. However I have a hard
time with his cruel, dismissive comments about Dorough and Allison (two of
my personal faves). Go back and read what he has to say about both.
Dorough is, to be sure, an aquired taste but IMHO well worth the work. He
is not only a superior performer but an excellent songwriter as well (also
IMHO).
LG
Lcfpsf
I may have missed the beginning of this discussion (debate?), but have
read quite a few postings about Elling. The surprise to me is that I
haven't seen any mention of Mark Murphy. While listening to Elling
recently on Cd
I immediately thought of him as a Mark Murphy wanabe. The Murphy recording
of "Bop For Kerouac" seems to be the model for Elling. I much prefer
Murphy but consider Elling to be ok, but not more than that.
Peter Friedman
Chuck Nessa
Go back to dejanews....lots o' talk of Murphy/Elling.
Chuck
ame...@gustavus.edu
I'm going to be seeing Kurt Elling live this Evening in Minneapolis.
Is anyone else going to be seeing him in Minnesota while he is here?
I have seen him live in the past. My take is that his is unique,
experimental, & loves what he is doing. His level of musical
sophistication seems very good for his age & the fact that he has only
recorded twice.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet