Jazz for aficionados

It is our custom to acknowledge the passing of all jazz artists and their contribution to the art. Cecil Taylor contributed greatly to "Avant Garde" jazz. Anyone who considers Avant Garde special, might post links that will enlighten us who might be a shade in the dark.

Thank you Jafant for informing us, and Acman for that link that sheds light on Mr. Cecil Taylor.

Disputes are best settled in a way that they no longer linger. In the case of Mose Allison, his obituary says he was a jazz and blues pianist, since we never argue with anyone's obituary, that's settled once and for all, "He was a jazz and Blues pianist".

There must be a way to settle disputes of this nature in a non-arbitrary fashion; if "Wikipedia" says it is so, there it is, case closed for this thread.

Music is emotional, and so are we; consequently we must have a non-emotional manner of settling disputes of this nature in this thread, that closes the case. If someone doesn't like the verdict, I suggest they take it up with "Wikipedia".

There is nothing I hate more than being misunderstood; when people from Boston talked, they assumed they were speaking English, but some of us who also spoke English, failed to understand them.

When you have a crowd of people, from every state in the "United States", such as the first gathering for basic training in one of our branches of service, that's when you will discover, we may all speak "English" but we still don't all understand the English that is spoken from each individual state.

That's what I meant when I spoke of our "origination"; it also has an effect on how we speak musically.

I would like to thank pjw81563 for introducing someone most of us were unaware of, "Ladie Kim". I know this is my first time hearing Ladie Kim or, Kim Zombik, because there is another Lady Kim known for "Twerking". I don't want you to get them confused.

Right now, her CD's are outside of my economic range, consequently I won't be getting acquainted with Lady Kim anytime soon.


Enjoy the music.

O-10, I appreciate your comments. There is nothing wrong with disagreement nor even with dispute when it is handled with a modicum of respect for others and for others’ point of view.

**** I am not denigrating anyone or anything. Just stating my point of view, along with a few facts. ****

Rok, those relatively new to this thread may not be aware that this latest dispute is nothing new. As I have suggested many times previously there is a way to express one’s point of view without referring to others’ points of view as “bogus”, “noise”, etc. Why that is not obvious nor a priority when having a “discussion” is a mystery to me, but imo that is what causes problems; and this has been demonstrated time and time again. Clearly, your “facts” may not be someone else’s. Perhaps this example will cause you to reconsider your “facts” (and “sabbatical”?) and consider the possibility that there may be something else at play here:

**** Having done so, I think I will take a sabbatical along with the OP. As someone said recently, my kind of music is no longer discussed here. ****

I went back one month over this thread’s posts (to 3/7) and took a look at all the posts. I stopped at 4/6 with the first Mose Allison post. I stopped there because that seems to have been the catalyst for the recent dispute, but mostly because I couldn’t take the counting any more 🤪. I divided the posts during this period into three categories. Each submission of a music clip was counted as 1 whether it was accompanied by commentary or not. A commentary without a clip was also counted as 1. I didn’t need this exercise to know what the results would be, but since “facts” seem to matter most let’s present some facts. The three categories were:

1. Music clips that were presented without any claim of being jazz of any kind (Doo wop, Classical, Soul), and/or commentary unrelated to music.

2. Music clips of, or commentary supportive of “new jazz” (loosely speaking, post-Bitches Brew, to use your criterion).

3. Music clips of, or commentary supportive of “old jazz” (loosely speaking, pre-Bitches Brew, to use your criterion). And btw, the majority of these were submitted by those also supportive of “new jazz”.

I hope I will be forgiven for being off by 10 or so in each category; expediency demanded a bit of a rush job. I believe the results are representative of the entire history of this thread. The results:

1. 95

2. 65

3. 250 !!!!!!

Begs the question: Exactly what is the problem? I hope you reconsider.