Jazz for aficionados

I asked this guy "qdrone" what stuff to avoid buying by Grant Green because he said it was inferior. This is what he posted 01-23-2011 at 1:29PM;



Qdrone, could you name the stuff to avoid, I would like to buy it.
qdrone
799 posts
01-23-2011 1:29pm
Anything that says never released or only released in Japan. Or in box sets where you have newly discovered tracks (Mosiac has one or two sets with Green) I actualy posted for everyone to understand the times these recordings were made,heroin was problem among many musicians,I'm sorry that your so full of yourself that you thought i was just responding to you.

Maybe "Qdrone" changed his moniker, or left, I haven't seen him in a long time; but that was stuff to avoid.


llMusic Review by Stephen Thomas Erlewine [-]
Mosaic released a four-disc box set titled The Complete Blue Note With Sonny Clark in 1991, rounding up everything that the guitarist and pianist recorded together between 1961 and 1962. Blue Note's 1997 version of the set, The Complete Quartets With Sonny Clark, trims Mosaic's collection by two discs, offering only the quartet sessions (the Ike Quebec sessions, Born to Be Blue and Blue and Sentimental, are available on individual discs). In some ways, this actually results in a more unified set, since it puts Green and Clark directly in the spotlight, with no saxophone to complete for solos, but it doesn't really matter if the music is presented as this double-disc set, the four-disc box, or the individual albums -- this is superb music, showcasing the guitarist and pianist at their very best. All of the sessions are straight-ahead bop but the music has a gentle, relaxed vibe that makes it warm, intimate, and accessible. Grant and Clark's mastery is subtle -- the music is so enjoyable, you may not notice the deftness of their improvisation and technique -- but that invests the music with the grace, style, and emotion that distinguishes The Complete Quartets. Small group hard bop rarely comes any better than this.
Collapse ↑
User Reviews


Rok, and Frogman, we seem to have some contradiction here; could you guys help me out, I don't know what to do.


Somewhere I saw the Mosaic sets were the ones to own, but Qdrone said these were the ones to avoid, because "junky" Grant Green had made inferior music that could not be released, and he got that from very reliable sources. Now we find all that music "walked" to Japan; is that right Rok? That was the music that you said was not released, and what's the problem everybody has music that wasn't released.


My way of saying, that if GAME CHANGERS, like Prince, The Beatles and probably every artist that has ever recorded, including Elvis, Chuck Berry and Miles, can have unreleased material, what is the big deal about a run of the mill R&G guitar player from St Louis having the same?

Now I am really confused; someone said avoid the inferior junky music, meaning the Mosaic boxed sets, someone else says "So what", I'm still saying the same thing I said on 01-23-2011, and I'm still trying to track that music down so I can buy it.



Enjoy the music.

Is this Jazz for aficionados, or The Grant Green fan club??

Just asking.

Cheers

You two "Snarky Puppies" are not fooling anybody; you use to speak for Learsfool, now you're speaking for Rok, and neither one of you completely responded to Alex's post, and now you don't respond to mine, when all I'm trying to do is get the lies in regard to Grant Green's music straight so that I can buy the right CD's.

When I show you a review of the disputed music, you say I'm running a Grant Green fan club, when all I want is just a little friendly advice.



Enjoy the music.

Ok, O-10, lets play; if you insist.  Remember, as I said before, "don't expect silence when there is disrespect directed at a dissenting opinion".  Now, I realize that you need this bizarre interaction for reasons that only your shrink can figure out (although I have some pretty good ideas); so, let's just say I'm trying to help you out.  Let's go slowly and step by step for the sake of clarity:

I have tremendous respect for Alex and his contributions here, so....

****neither one of you completely responded to Alex's post****

- How exactly did I not respond to Alex's post?  What part of his post did I not address?  With specifics please.

****and now you don't respond to mine, ****

Seriously?  Your posts can be so convoluted and confused that it's practically impossible to respond to them.  However, as I see it, I responded in a perfectly clear way to what I believe is the heart of the matter re this ridiculous Grant Green business.  I will try it one last time.  My thoughts about Green; in a nutshell:

Really good guitar player who was, I would say, a significant influence on players like Wes Montgomery and George Benson; players who would go on to be the highest profile guitar players in the emerging funk/soul-jazz movement.  For a variety of reasons, his recordings toward the end of his career where not, in my opinion, on the same level as his classics.  Overall, as has been pointed out, not a "game changer" in the overall scheme of the music.

- So, how is any of that "a lie"?  A strange claim for someone who so often hides behind the "subjectivity" smoke screen.

- If by "lie" you refer to the issue of which records were released, when, which made it to Japan, etc. I am frankly not interested in those details.  As usual you sadly miss an opportunity to learn something about the music that is much more important:  what is it that defines a truly great musician?  what does it mean to have had an influence on the music?  what is influence?  what is it that shapes careers in music?  what is it the sustains careers in music?  how does the world of the music business work?  Oh, yeah....and, God forbid....what is it that some listeners don't like about Green’s later records and why?  

- Why the leaning on positive "reviews" by some unknown writer somewhere in the e-universe?  Who cares?  If you will give so much weight to these, why do you dismiss the ones critical of Green's late recordings? As has been said before, be confident with your opinions, respect those of others; and,  if you really want to do something productive, try and understand why some may disagree with you.

Lastly, I would like to bring up an issue that I have refrained from bringing up for quite some time out of.....yes, you heard it here, O-10.....respect for you as the OP.  However, you have done such a good job of eroding any semblence of adherence to the notion of respect that....what the hell!  It also goes to some comments I made recently that, in retrospect, I probably should not have made; but, like the guy hitting his head on the wall, well....sometimes the absurdity of it all is simply too much to take.  

I refer to the incongruesness and a kind of contradiction in the use of the word "aficionado" in conjunction with "jazz".  I have always found it to be a rather curious choice of words for the subject at hand.  From my vantage point, the main fuel for these ridiculous arguments is your insistence on personalizing matters; not only with your "hits below the belt" (disrespect), but also with your emphasis on "personal" accounts about musicians.  These "personal" accounts are often peppered with words and phrases intended to evoke a certain feeling of closeness to and supposed experience and familiarity with the musicians and their culture; phrases like "phaking the phunk", "dis here", "jam", "boss", "gitin down", and many more like them.  But, here's the curious thing:  jazz musicians don't talk like that.  What is this about?  I will concede that perhaps these are simply O-10'isms and nothing more; but, curious nonetheless.  Please enlighten me.

I realize  that I have thrown a lot your way.  A lot of things to address, but you wanted to play.  I am confident that if you take it step by step you can do it.  I know you can.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yx9xO98kcBU