Jazz for aficionados


Jazz for aficionados

I'm going to review records in my collection, and you'll be able to decide if they're worthy of your collection. These records are what I consider "must haves" for any jazz aficionado, and would be found in their collections. I wont review any record that's not on CD, nor will I review any record if the CD is markedly inferior. Fortunately, I only found 1 case where the CD was markedly inferior to the record.

Our first album is "Moanin" by Art Blakey and The Jazz Messengers. We have Lee Morgan , trumpet; Benney Golson, tenor sax; Bobby Timmons, piano; Jymie merrit, bass; Art Blakey, drums.

The title tune "Moanin" is by Bobby Timmons, it conveys the emotion of the title like no other tune I've ever heard, even better than any words could ever convey. This music pictures a person whose down to his last nickel, and all he can do is "moan".

"Along Came Betty" is a tune by Benny Golson, it reminds me of a Betty I once knew. She was gorgeous with a jazzy personality, and she moved smooth and easy, just like this tune. Somebody find me a time machine! Maybe you knew a Betty.

While the rest of the music is just fine, those are my favorite tunes. Why don't you share your, "must have" jazz albums with us.

Enjoy the music.
orpheus10

Rok, while I agree with your comments until you get to "Haden"; everything must change, or evolve, and jazz is no different, but when it changed, you remained the same. I changed, but in a different way, I liked Scotch then, and now I like orange jello.

The problem we have, is one word, and that word is "jazz"; what if we agreed to call your music "Jazz", and Haden's music "Music Music" would that satisfy this debate.

I like a lot of Charlie Hadens music, and when I listen, I do not have this raging debate as to whether or not it's jazz. While you like "jazz jazz", you also like a lot of music that's clearly "not jazz", so as we can see you like more than just "jazz", but you feel someone else has laid claim to the name of your favorite music, when in reality it's simply that music during one period of time in it's evolution. But you must realize that nobody wanted to changed your name as you went through an aging evolution; nobody wanted to change your name from "young Rok" to old Rok, or "Dwain" (God I hate that name). Imagine having to go through the rest of your life with that name because as you evolved, you couldn't keep your old name, and you had to be called "Dwain".

Is a rose by any other name still a rose? I don't think I can get any "stupider" with this point, that doesn't have a point, but maybe everyone can get my drift; call it jazz or not jazz after the change, I still like some of Charlie Hadens music.










My only point, was that bassist and drummers were good leaders. 

Roach always had a great band up until he died. He was not known to me as a sideman.

Blakey by your own words was a leader.

Mingus was a virtuoso bassist, who LED some of the greatest bands ever.

Haden led some great bands and put out a great body of work. You do yourself a great disservice to just ignore him, but as usual, that is your choice.










***** You do yourself a great disservice to just ignore him, but as usual, that is your choice.*****

I don't ignore him (Haden).   I have him with Hank Jones on the CD "Steal Away" and also I have the CD "Dream Keepers".   The guy is heavy into "Free Jazz".   Which is another way of saying, that Jazz music is whatever the composer / player says it is.   I just disagree.  Can't do that in any other genre, why should Jazz be singled out for that nonsense.

Cheers
I agree completely, Acman3; and great clips, btw.  There is a danger in, in any way, suggesting that the importance of players (like Roach) who were "not known as leaders" took a back seat, in the real scheme of things, to the guys in the front line who oftentimes get the limelight.  The players themselves don't see it that way.  In the cauldron of creative musical activity that is the Jazz scene there are many players who shaped its direction and added fuel to the fire underneath it that sometimes are relegated to the status of "sidemen".  Drummers and bass players are the usual targets of this thinking.  Roach is one of the most important jazz musicians who ever lived and as you point out a great leader in his own right.  The magic that is possible and happens when a rhythm section is composed of players with a similar musical vision allows the full expression of the "leader"'s vision.  The projects where the drummer is expected to do no more than go "ca-chink, ca-chink" are usually not very good no matter who the leader is.  I can't imagine what Miles' 60's quintet would have produced without Tony Williams in the rhythm section; or Trane's quartet without Elvin Jones.  

The other danger is in potentially shortchanging the contribution of someone like Mingus as a player because of the excellence of the writing.  Sure, his writing and arranging was great, and that is what stands out out for many; but, digging a little deeper, I wonder what his recordings would sound like without the amazing propulsive feeling and dry sound in his bass playing bringing a distinctive feeling to the music overall and the playing of the sidemen?

Another player that doesn't get his due as a player because his writing and arranging were so great was Oliver Nelson.  His "Blues And The Abstract Truth" is a masterpiece in Jazz writing and arranging as well as playing.  He was a fantastic saxophone player and his playing, as well as being very soulful, always demonstrated the discipline and logic that are so essential to the art of composition and arranging.  Few players played with as much control of thematic development in an improvised solo.  One of my very favorite records with probably my favorite rendition of "What's New"; even Dexter Gordon's takes a back seat to the one on "Meet Oliver Nelson".  Beautiful record:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLddfRe84PI3iMpV4np6EO-x10y5-vMXQC&v=OCjbjGXrkyI