2. music
  3. 1361722327

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
orpheus10 OP
5,988 posts
 

Dave, you always seem to say the magic words for me "Soul Brothers", Ray Charles and Milt Jackson; 2 LP's without a loose cut on either of them. I'll just use your paragraph:


After completing listening to the Hudson album, I retreated to "Soul Brothers" and once again marveled at its understated beauty, soul and mind-soothing magic, and sound quality. That seems to be where I live.

If that's where you live, you'll just have to scoot over and make room for me; time is so irrelevant to that music, it's just as good today as when it was made.

frogman
4,637 posts
 
I think the important thing is whether music is "difficult", "dissonant" or even "ugly" and music that is "bullsh?t" (as defined by absence of skill or sincerity). No apologies necessary if any music doesn’t touch anyone of us.

There is room for "ugly" in art. Early jazz was deemed ugly by the society crowd. Swing players deemed bebop ugly. Cotrane’s "sheets of sound" were deemed ugly and on and on. Will I be listening to "Hudson" much or even buy it? Probably not, but that’s not the point. It puts the work of these artists and the state of modern music in better context/perspective for me; and it is certainly not bs. As much as I like the Connors recording it is lighter and without nearly as much grit as "Hudson" which falls more to the Rock side of the "fusion" idea in attitude. I like ghosthouse’s spice analogy. I love going to my local Indian restaurant and marvel at the way that Indian diners at other tables wolf down dishes that to me taste strange and unbearably spicy. Do they taste "bad"?

Great record, "Soul Brothers", btw.  Couldn't Iive on soul food only, 'though.
orpheus10 OP
5,988 posts
 

To be honest folks, when I was into this kind of music (fusion), there were guys smoking skinny cigarettes with a peculiar aroma to my left and right, plus across the room even, and a lot of it wafted in my direction. After breathing such fumes, I could visualize the 7th Galaxy and beyond when I listened to this music.

I saw many purple sunsets on the planet Orion. As I reminisce, this music from the "Hudson" is sounding better with each note; just set a new course for "Geidi Prime". That first cut, the one I'm listening to now, just got upgraded.
dlcockrum's avatar
dlcockrum
2,105 posts
 
C'mon in o. A prime listening spot in my acoustically-treated utopia awaits you. Skinny cigarettes are optional.

Dave
frogman
4,637 posts
 
Sorry for the poorly worded first sentence.  It should have read:

++ I think the important thing is the distinction between music that is "difficult", "dissonant" or even "ugly" and music that is simply "bullsh?t" ++


More to discover