Jazz for aficionados

Rok, don't waste your time writing a good long post; it doesn't matter what we come up with, they're going to shoot it down.

My last two posts were of good, current jazz CD's that I had purchased and reviewed; they simply overlooked them and kept on harping about us not posting current music.

This is a coalition of the negatives; I call it "Attack of The Negatrons".

Spend your valuable time listening to the good new music we have acquired this year, and now that we have so many of their photographs in Nica's book, we can enjoy their music even more. Have a "Happy New Year" and don't forget "Enjoy the music".

@orpheus10 

"attack of the Negatrons" --   BRILLIANT!!!   I wish I had said that!

The root of the problem?
The phrase "Irreconcilable Differences" comes to mind.  I had already decided to throw in the towel.  I too, am tired of the negative.   This thread is getting to be a little too 'audiophile' in character for me.

I was sitting here, trying to 'see the light', as I listened to some of their clips on the computer speakers, then I noticed one of the CD players in my rig was playing, so I turned the volume up, and there was Billie singing "Fine and Mellow" (Sound of Jazz).    I just laughed out loud, for real.  I asked myself, can this 'new' music even be of the same genre?  No way!!

WTF was I thinking?   To each his own.   Am I living in the past?   Of course I am.   All Southerners are.   Down here,  past is not only prologue, it's  present.

Cheers

It boggles the mind how it’s possible for some people to create a reality so detached from what is. Here is what is:

The negativity has consistently come from Rock; and you, O-10. The rub has been (and I can’t believe I have to say this again) the negativity about new jazz and new music in general on the part of Rok. This has been evident from the start of this thread. There has not been a single negative comment on the part of one of the regular posters who like modern jazz about classic jazz in general; nor comment about the superiority of modern jazz and only comments about making room for both. It has consistently been the insistence that classic jazz is "superior", modern jazz is often played by "noise makers" "equating numbers to soul" (whatever the hell that means), "good new music is so rare", "if you want to listen to jazz or classical be prepared to listen to music by dead people", and on and on that has caused the rub. O-10, you do have very ecclectic tastes in music and I respect that, but you have been complicit in the negativity because whenever there is disagreement or conflict you and Rok run to each other for support and form your two man click no matter what conflict there may have been between the two of you originally. Sorry, but some things need to be said. Now, it is true that I have been negative about certain specific examples of music (very few really) that you have posted. I have been very specific about my reasons and they have always had to do with the execution of the music and never blanket criticism of the genre. Of course, you guys don’t seem interested in understanding more about this issue.  Rok and you are, of course, free to be highly critical of others' posts; but, that's OK.  Right? All this leads me to a comment about your most recent music postings; and those postings are so fitting for my previous comments:

Ok, O-10 seem upset that those clips were ignored. Speaking for myself, the reason is simple, I didn’t want to open yet another can of worms. But if you insist: I will admit that "Smooth Jazz" is not my favorite genre, but I have room for it generally and some of it can be a heck of a lot of fun. But, I find those two examples to not be very good examples of the genre. As much grief as smooth jazz gets from some, the fact is that some smooth jazz artists are terrific musicians and in most ways stick to the spirit of jazz in having a strong sense of spontaneity, improvisation and instrumental ability; not those guys, sorry. I find those two examples to be extremely formulaic and the music sounds as if they stick strictly to a written out or pre-determined template. I would bet you that if you heard them play those tunes live they would sound EXACTLY the same as they do on those clips; not the case with some other musicians in the genre.

Here’s to more mature interaction going forward 🍷

Sorry for the delay.  I was stunned into immobility.

New Jazz  vs  Classic Jazz:

When Thomas Edison invented his cylinder player, he didn't realize it, but one of the consequences was that,  Musical Artist would forever have to compete with,  and be compared to,  all players that have lived and been recorded.  They all became immortal.

Now, you do the math,  fill in the blanks, think about it, apply your logic,  and this is what this 'discussion' is all about.

You can't cut the line of merit, just because you are recording now, and it's New.   So think of any player, on any instrument, and then place these New guys in their proper / deserved place.

For instance:   And this is just for the sake of discussion:

If on Trumpet, Pops is 1, and Miles is 2, and Hubbard is 3, and Morgan is 4, Buddy Bolden is 5, and so on, .....you know the candidates....  Now,  where would you place Randy Brecker?  Who would he be in  front of?  What about Tom (perfect bebop solo) Harrell?

If you would answer this, then we have a place to start a discussion.

Cheers

I am sincerely disappointed that after all this time I feel reduced to having to ask the question "what the hell is wrong with you?". You want to continue to insist on using some sort of hierarchy of merit dictated by you and your own agenda (and there is clearly a personal agenda at work here), that’s fine go ahead. But, listen closely now...NOT EVERYONE THINKS ABOUT MUSIC AND ITS RELATIVE MERITS THAT WAY. The problem is not whether you, Wynton or anyone else think that this or that player is "better", it is your blanket denigration of any music made after your own personal music time-comfort zone.  

Do do you even know why Armstrong was as great as he was, can you even articulate it? And do you have any idea how ridiculous he, in spite of his greatness DURING HIS TIME, would sound playing the type of music that Hubbard played? Even more ridiculous playing the music that someone like Brecker plays? THATS THE POINT. The music changes and moves forward, it will because it has to; something that you are apparently incapable of. To not understand this is to not understand one of the most important elements of music and any art.  I had hoped that you were a more insightful music lover than you are showing yourself to be.  That is why I bothered.