Jazz for aficionados
Right on Rok! I'm with you all the way; go with the flow, do what you feel, may the spirit guide you, and the force be with you. About my learning experiences; I've been to a university or two, at least I walked across the campuses (never got a pedigree) but I never learned as much in such a short time as I have from you guys quite recently. We'll go just like we've been going "quite recently", do what you feel, and I'll improvise. Enjoy the music. |
****You are a smart guy, examine the facts, and do the math. And don't forget the left-wing elites in the arts, have an agenda.**** Well, this comment can be interpreted one of two ways; either as faint praise or as insulting. Don't misunderstand, I don't take offense and I am also confident that you mean well. But, the comment is too rich with stuff that goes to the crux of the matter to ignore. I'll explain: It could be interpreted as insulting because you assume that I have not done the math. Moreover, you suggest that I would let whatever agenda the "left-wing elites" might have for presenting the argument override MY ability to analyze the issue, primarily by way of what my ears tell me, and arrive at MY own conclusions; conclusions shared by the overwhelming majority of those who know what they are talking about. And btw, the "left-wing elite" argument is, with all due respect, a pretty lame and sophomoric one. What you fail to recognize is that the argument about the African influence on jazz was well-accepted analysis way before our society developed any interest in crediting people of color for anything. But enough of that. I have no issue with your disagreement on a personal level and my motivation is simply to try and help you see the facts; and, more importantly help you develop a way of looking at these issues that is relevant to the act of listening to music. I say relevant because listening and enjoying is one thing, but analyzing the music or it's history is another and I am afraid that your version of "the math" is way off base. Again, you are willing to concede the probability of the African connection in Cuba, not because you can HEAR the influence, but because your "math" makes sense. As I said before, don't worry about the math and let your ears tell you the truth. Remember the "cables" debate? You're simply not hearing it. A challenge: Did you read the link to the article about Gunther Schuller's explanation of the African connection in jazz? Now, rather than simply dismiss the plausibility of his premise, explain why what he poses is NOT plausible; why what he poses is incorrect. But not because "the math" doesn't add up in your view; rather, explain why the musical analysis that he presents is incorrect. I would be very curious. Re "Bolero": They were probably "ignored" for a couple of reasons. Probably because there are too many submissions at any one time to cover them all, and only a couple of contributors to this thread have more than a passing interest in that music. Now, MY honest reasons for not commenting on them (no intention to ignore): First, how many times will we comment on Bolero? Its been done several times before and as great a piece as it is (in its way) it's not exactly the most interesting piece of music in the rep; by a long shot. More importantly, your definition of "magical" is not the same as mine. Perhaps the visual element of the dance makes it magical for you, but for me those two performances of Bolero are not particularly good and I see no point in criticizing your submission when there are so many others to comment on. Bolero is an interesting piece because it's repetitiveness and "simplicity" lays bare the soloists and the ensemble, making playing that is less than first rate very obvious. If those performances were magical from the standpont of the orchestra's performance, what would one call another performance that has better flow, better ensemble playing, more expressive and (at the same time) more rhythmically accurate solos, and better sense of drama? MORE magical? Here's to encouraging you to dig a little deeper. Cheers. BTW, did you try the clave rhythm exercise? Or should I complain that it was completely ignored :-) |
Bolero: It was all said in jest. No one said Bolero was the most interesting piece of music. No one said these performances were the best ever. Is that the only piece of music you listen to, the most interesting? If you didn't like them, fine. I cannot imagine anyone not enjoying them. Esp the one at the Proms. The audience went wild, the conductor was really into it. The dancers were, wow! But, to each his own. The "complaining" comment was just messin' with you guys. But, if your response was all you have to say about the performances, you may have lost sight of the reason music exists. And a better performance would be, " Mo' better magical!" Cheers |
When Ravel's Bolero opened in Paris, it almost caused a riot. I guess folks took their music more seriously back then. One woman shouted "this music was written by a madman". Ravel who was present, said to his friend, "she's right!!, There is no music in this music". So much, for the people who should know. If it weren't for Bolero the guy would probably be unknown today. Similar situation with "1812". They are so arrogant. But, we unwashed masses, always set things right. Maybe this is Mo' Better Magical. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsSALaDJuN4 Cheers |
