[Coltrane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thelonious Monk /img/forum/go_quote.gif jazz and rock will keep you busy a lot longer. classical music has a filter that makes the bad stuff hard to find: the bad stuff isn't performed or rereleased. unfortunately the same doesn't apply to popular music, hence me only listening to a couple of jazz musicians and a handful of rock musicians.

Um, what? The only filter one needs is their own ears. But how does related to how many good jazz or rock musicians there are? If you are listening to only a couple or a handful you are missing out on a veritable ocean of GREAT music.

 

[DavidMahler]

coltrane is one of the few artists I've kept with me after sorta leaving my jazz phase. From about the age of 15 to 21 all I listened to was jazz. Charlie Parker, Keith Jarrett and John Coltrane are the cats I still refer to often in my listening. Sometimes Lennie Tristano and Bud Powell as well

 

[MeanWillieGreen]

I came into Coltrane later - I was a trombonist as a youth, so I listened to Bill Watrus, Chicago, and a lot of fusion. I got into Herbie Hancock through fusion, and was encouraged to go backwards and check out his earlier work, which led to McCoy Tyner - which led to me discovering Coltrane at about 16. I went back further and checked out Dizzy, Louie, Kid Ory, but really settled on post bop, with Miles, Coltrane, and Bill Evans, being my base. Coltrane is my king. For me, Ballads is my favorite.

 

[Palantiri7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sno1man /img/forum/go_quote.gif I know how you feel. A long time ago I decided that i was a true music fan and therefore I needed to broaden my horizons. I went and bought several of "the" artists/albums to have accross many genres including country and of course jazz. With the exception of "a love supreme" which struck a chord immediately i didn't really feel them at first. I could apperciate them at a technical and superficial level but they didn't get in to my soul like they do now. Ultimately it took some time and exposure to some of their more accessible music to sort of ease in to it. Sun ship and On The Corner are great pieces of music, but i wouldn't start someone that knows nothing about jazz there.

It's nice to hear this. I'm starting to listen to jazz but unfortunately, besides some light-jazz, I just don't understand it! I don't get it! I must be dumb pond scum, or something, but I'll keep at it: I think I'll be missing out on something very important in life if I don't try.

 

[tru blu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palantiri7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's nice to hear this. I'm starting to listen to jazz but unfortunately, besides some light-jazz, I just don't understand it! I don't get it! I must be dumb pond scum, or something, but I'll keep at it: I think I'll be missing out on something very important in life if I don't try.

Just curious…I'm not sure what albums you're listening to, but when you say, "I just don't understand it," does that mean you can't hear how the sounds fit together? Does it mean that jazz's rhythms do not inspire you? It makes me wonder what music moves you now, and "why", because when I put on a Miles Davis album I'm not exactly looking for the same mood or whatever that I am when I put on something by, say, Joy Division or the Who. There's always this perception that jazz needs to be "understood", but I tend to think that enjoyment is about being moved by something without necessarily dissecting it.

 

[Spyro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tru blu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just curious…I'm not sure what albums you're listening to, but when you say, "I just don't understand it," does that mean you can't hear how the sounds fit together? ...... but I tend to think that enjoyment is about being moved by something without necessarily dissecting it.

Don't want to speak for him but I'm sure that's exactly it. It takes a certain amount of effort and attention and active listening to understand many jazz pieces. That's not a snobbish statement, that's just the way it is, there is usually too much going on especially for a non-musician. I have played cd's that have sounded like a mess initially but after more and more listens familiarilzing myself with it, it all fits together like a glove. It's an awesome discovery.

Maybe "dissecting" is too critical a word but you surely have to familiarize yourself to the theme and structure of a piece to have a chance at appreciating it.

 

[Spyro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif coltrane is one of the few artists I've kept with me after sorta leaving my jazz phase. From about the age of 15 to 21 all I listened to was jazz. Charlie Parker, Keith Jarrett and John Coltrane are the cats I still refer to often in my listening. Sometimes Lennie Tristano and Bud Powell as well

That's common with any type of music when you leave a genre. If you don't keep up with it you only listen to your old favorites.

Damn, there's too many classic rock stations.......

 

[SR-71Panorama]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palantiri7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's nice to hear this. I'm starting to listen to jazz but unfortunately, besides some light-jazz, I just don't understand it! I don't get it! I must be dumb pond scum, or something, but I'll keep at it: I think I'll be missing out on something very important in life if I don't try.

In my experience, you dont chose jazz, jazz chooses you. Sounds corny, I know, but I grew up playing alto sax all through school, and yet I only began to take a serious interest in jazz after graduating college. It just sort of made sense one day. One of the weirdest things to ever happen to me, the way it just sort of ambushed me, and demanded my full attention.
For me, I find that its usually harder to passively listen to jazz, in comparison to rock/pop/etc. It requires your full attention.
And especially with the exotic stuff, you have to be in a certain mindset, or prone to getting into that mindset very easily. If you are not 'up for it', jazz just doesnt work.

That said, my favorite artists are not the typical names dropped when talking about jazz. Miles Davis doesnt move me quite the same way as, say, Count Basie, Ray Brown, Coleman Hawkins, Art Farmer, Zoot Sims... Alot of people think Kind Of Blue says all there is to say in the world of jazz. Its a great recording, and I love it, but that is tunnel vision, imho.

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama /img/forum/go_quote.gif In my experience, you dont chose jazz, jazz chooses you. Sounds corny, I know, but I grew up playing alto sax all through school, and yet I only began to take a serious interest in jazz after graduating college. It just sort of made sense one day. One of the weirdest things to ever happen to me, the way it just sort of ambushed me, and demanded my full attention. For me, I find that its usually harder to passively listen to jazz, in comparison to rock/pop/etc. It requires your full attention. And especially with the exotic stuff, you have to be in a certain mindset, or prone to getting into that mindset very easily. If you are not 'up for it', jazz just doesnt work. That said, my favorite artists are not the typical names dropped when talking about jazz. Miles Davis doesnt move me quite the same way as, say, Count Basie, Ray Brown, Coleman Hawkins, Art Farmer, Zoot Sims... Alot of people think Kind Of Blue says all there is to say in the world of jazz. Its a great recording, and I love it, but that is tunnel vision, imho.

Awesome post and I couldn't agree more.

Count Basie, Ray Brown, Zoot Sims, Chet Baker, Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong, Michele Camillo, Bebo Valdes, Charles Mingus...I could go on and on. There is so much to jazz that I have yet to get bored of it. Every time I think I have heard it all, a new album pops up that I have not heard before and it starts over again. Just when I think I am out, jazz pulls me back in.

It's a great genre and the reason I love it so much is that it's so hard to passively listen to it. I need to pay attention.

THEN - there is the audiophile aspect of jazz. You haven't heard jazz until you have heard a well mastered album like the vinyl of "This One's For Blanton" or a perfect remastering of "Boss Tenor". The music and the great audiophile sound on some of these records will blow you away.

 

[Currawong]

I've come into jazz rather sideways, starting with a friends recommendation of dZihan & Kamien, DJs who splatter Jazz amongst their work. Also, and a random find, The Necks, whos albums consist of 60-minute single tunes of what I can best describe as "ambient jazz".

From there I've got a couple of Chesky sampling/testing CDs which have some lovely tracks on them, which, importantly, are very high quality. I more recently tried Coltraine, only just getting A Love Supreme. The Classic Quartet, which shows his styles throughout his career, has some great stuff, like Alabama (takes 4 & 5), Lonnie's Lament, Your Lady, Dear Lord and others. Recently, however, a friend gave me John McLaughlin's Extrapolation, a fusion jazz album, which has completely blown me away.

I can understand Jazz not clicking with people quickly, it can be very random-sounding. Also, the way some of the older recordings were done puts the instuments very much to one or another side, which can be fatiguing to listen to. That's why some HP amps have a switch that crosses over the left and right channels slightly.

 

[Palantiri7]

Thank you everybody for trying to figure out what my problem may be, as I don't quite know what it is myself. I think I will try Currawong's suggestion to get to jazz from a 'sideways' route - like Ray Brown for instance. What I've been listening to? Well, mainly John Coltrane, and Miles Davis "Kind of Blue". And, yes, maybe I've been trying too hard to hear how everything fits together. It's like a bunch of musicians coming together to play with no score, no preconceived ideas, and they see what happens as they play. On hearing it, I sometimes find it sounds like an anarchy of notes, but there's something that holds it all together, something that I miss. >sigh<

 

[tru blu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palantiri7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif What I've been listening to? Well, mainly John Coltrane, and Miles Davis "Kind of Blue". And, yes, maybe I've been trying too hard to hear how everything fits together. It's like a bunch of musicians coming together to play with no score, no preconceived ideas, and they see what happens as they play. On hearing it, I sometimes find it sounds like an anarchy of notes, but there's something that holds it all together, something that I miss.

Are you sure we're talking about Kind Of Blue? The "So What," "Blue in Green" and "Flamenco Sketches" Kind Of Blue? I don't think I've ever heard the term anarchy in such close proximity to that record.

 

[chadbang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caribou679 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I recently had the chance to see a video of Coltrane on TV in the 60's playing My Favorite Things. I was VERY impressed by the lenght of his fingers!! This is no joke, he had very long fingers!! Made me realised that this guy, with fingers like that, was determined to play and performed like he did. It was a plus he had and used! Hope you have a chance to see him play on some video.

Trying taking a look at Jimi Hendrix's fingers sometime.

 

[chadbang]

Some jazz works, some jazz doesn't. I went to a jazz club in NYC and heard a jazz saxophonist with a friend. We called his style BLAT! Because that's all he seemed to know how to play. BLAT! There's avant garde that works and avant garde that doesn't. Then there are times when great musician's just suck. I got a copy of T. Monk at Carnegie Hall. I bow to the god Monk, but he just sucked that night. I'm sure some of the huge audience -- who might not have been totally familar with his work -- walked out saying, how the **** did he get into Carnegie Hall? Coltrane? I don't really like "A Love Supreme." So either its not one of his best, or he's far too meandering or ... BLAT! ... for me.


I also don't like "Kind of Blue. It's okay, but I hardly ever feel the urge to go back to it. " I think I described Miles Davis as doing too much "noodling around" on the record to a friend, to his great amusement. On the other hand, I used to like Charlie Parker, lately he sounds run of the mill to me, not experimental enough. Monk. Yeah. Monk.

 

[steviebee]

^ Everyone has off-nights. When I saw Cecil Taylor at the Roundhouse years ago, what he played that night was boring & uninteresting. Having raved about his music, I'd taken along a friend -not impressed. But still, some of the most electrifying music on record.

And x453 or whatever on Coltrane. Transcendent is exactly the word.