1. Home
  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
 

I've often heard there are only two kinds of music "good and bad". Just who determines which is which? "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", seems to be a more appropriate statement to me.

Our minds are computers that contain a record of everything we have experienced in our entire life. How those computers respond to music depends on that composite record. If the music does nothing to elicit a pleasurable response, it's thumbs down on the music; consequently, our take on the music is determined by us, and not the music.

It's early in the day; that plays a part on how I respond to music. Unless the music is spectacular, it will get a negative response. When you add all these factors together, one can easily see that it's the individual and not the music that determines the rating.

Frogman, I hope that explains why I'm "neutral" to the music you've presented.


Enjoy the music.
rok2id's avatar
rok2id
4,494 posts
 
O-10:

***** Our minds are computers that contain a record of everything we have experienced in our entire life. How those computers respond to music depends on that composite record. If the music does nothing to elicit a pleasurable response, it's thumbs down on the music; consequently, our take on the music is determined by us, and not the music.*****
 
Great Post.  Another way of saying, "The Great Unwashed decides".

Getting the mechanics, or nuts and bolts correct, does not necessarily result in good music.

Cheers
frogman
4,637 posts
 
Sometimes neutral is all that the art aspires to be.  

****our take on the music is determined by us, and not the music.****

Exactly right.  And exactly the point that I've been making for over three years.  "Our take" on the music is usually a reflection of ourselves.  But our own individual take on the music is not the final arbiter of the music's ultimate value; after all we are clearly not clones of each other.  Perfect example: I can't for the life of me understand how the Jesse Cook clip can be felt to be anywhere near as "spectacular" (to use your definition) as any of the recent piano trio recordings.  I wish I could say I was "neutral" to it. To my sensibilities it is bland, derivative and (almost) totally pointless music.  Obviously, not to all.  But, that's just me and goes to your point.  
rok2id's avatar
rok2id
4,494 posts
 
***** Sometimes neutral is all that the art aspires to be.******

Then, what would be the point of 'neutral' art?  Wrong again!!

Cheers
frogman
4,637 posts
 
No, Rok, I am not wrong "again".  Art is many things and sometimes it is greater than some individuals' ability and capacity to understand it.  Even the "Great Unwashed" can't escape the inevitable result of not washing.
More to discover