Thinking of Charlie Parker, every day

rmmj

unread,

Nov 23, 2009, 1:07:46 PM11/23/09

to

The New Yorker: http://tr.im/BirdParker

Erwin Dieterich

unread,

Nov 23, 2009, 6:08:34 PM11/23/09

to

Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention! You made my day.

Am Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:07:46 +0000 schrieb rmmj:

> The New Yorker: http://tr.im/BirdParker

al

unread,

Nov 25, 2009, 10:36:43 AM11/25/09

to

way cool, thanks!

"rmmj" <rema...@reece.net.au> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1B3506FT4014...@reece.net.au...

ansermetniac

unread,

Nov 25, 2009, 12:30:50 PM11/25/09

to

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:36:43 +0100, "al" <Bre...@ikt.rwth-aachen.de>
wrote:

"I also don't believe that Charlie Parker was as great a Musician as
history has seemed to have dictated. I feel he knew a bunch of great
licks in several keys and repeated them excessively!"

David Gibson*
Editor Saxophone Journal

Ever wonder why the Sax Journal is such a piece of crap?

Now you know why

Sax Journal-SOTW on glossy paper

Abbedd

*In a letter to Mel Martin which I have a copy of so don't accuse me
of libel

Orlando Enrique Fiol

unread,

Nov 25, 2009, 1:20:09 PM11/25/09

to

ansermetniac <anserm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"I also don't believe that Charlie Parker was as great a Musician as
>history has seemed to have dictated. I feel he knew a bunch of great
>licks in several keys and repeated them excessively!"
>David Gibson*
>Editor Saxophone Journal

Interesting. Any encyclopedic study of most improvisers and even composers
reveals a stable of choice licks or moves that get recycled in different
contexts.

Orlando

Charlie X

unread,

Dec 4, 2009, 8:34:36 AM12/4/09

to

That was a great read...and we can hear the show over the net!
thanks!!

charliex.com

barc...@hotmail.com

unread,

Dec 6, 2009, 1:59:19 AM12/6/09

to

On Nov 25, 1:20 pm, Orlando Enrique Fiol <of...@verizon.net> wrote:

Thanks for the article. I had been unaware of the Mosaic label but the
stuff looks interesting. As for repeated licks, someone here a couple
years back linked a youtube video of a Coltrane ballad. Some here
mentioned how beautiful it was. While the playing was compelling, what
I mostly heard was the riffs so many stole for 40+ years, and one
keeps hearing today. I was unable to finish listening to the track...

lesterama

unread,

Dec 6, 2009, 12:59:47 PM12/6/09

to mail...@m2n.mixmin.net

In article <b24ba719-8b7d-46ac...@z7g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
barch...@hotmail.com wrote:

>As for repeated licks, someone here a couple
> years back linked a youtube video of a Coltrane ballad. Some here
> mentioned how beautiful it was. While the playing was compelling, what
> I mostly heard was the riffs so many stole for 40+ years, and one
> keeps hearing today. I was unable to finish listening to the track...

Any idea what it was? I think of Coltrane's ballad style as
not easily imitatable. But this whole thing about recycled
licks seems to be a non-issue. If you play a Rollins solo
for example from a transcription, and play it as written,
it sounds like an exercise. It's the way the lick is played
that makes it what it is in the solo, so unless somebody
is imitating not only the pitches but the phrasing and
attack, it's not really recycling. When I think of recycled
licks I think of Parker's earliest solos with McShann, where
he plays some of Lester Young's licks nearly verbatim, although
the tempo is different. But close enough to recognize immediately.
Parker's well of ideas can be heard on the Savoy sessions. For
every well-known solo, there is also an alternate take that is
just as good. I made a tape of just the good alternate takes
that amazed some people who were familiar with the master takes.

LA