[Milestones]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ross Miles also advanced the art of jazz - with "cool" jazz, modal jazz, fusion and other innovations - I believe more than Coltrane did, who was essentially musically conservative, if passionate. Coltrane was like Mozart, a genius working within existing forms, compared to Miles' Beethoven, perhaps less musically gifted (though still a genius), but who completely changed the face of music. Ross

While I agree with you that Miles arguably had Trane beat in terms of the quantitative amount of innovation he contributed (in terms of the number of different styles that Miles contributed to the jazz canon) - I'm afraid I can't agree with you that Coltrane was essentially a musical conservative.

Coltrane's entire career was marked by a restless searching for new ways of expressing the transcendently beautiful sounds he heard in his mind. The guy never rested on his laurels or became fixed in one approach to the tenor saxophone or his music - and he was always looking for new techniques for expressing what he was trying to say musically. Not only did he have a huge, indelible impact on the way the tenor saxophone was and is played that lasts to this day (as well as almost singlehandedly reviving the use of the soprano sax - no disrespect to Steve Lacy) - but he also was on the cutting edge of both the use of modal and free jazz. While he didn't create either modal or free approaches to improvisation, he employed both at a time when they were still considered very cutting edge and avant-garde.

Go back and listen to the 1961 Live Village Vanguard box set recorded by Impulse records. Do you really think that can accurately be characterized as "conservative". It was so out there for the time that a prominent Down Beat critic famously called Trane's music from the 61 Vanguard performances "anti-jazz". What about "A Love Supreme", "Ascension", "Interstellar Space"? - conservative?

For all these reasons, I think it is grossly inaccurate to characterize Trane as "essentially musically conservative".

I think I know what you are trying to get at - which is: Miles had a fundamental part in innovating a number of radical different ways of approaching jazz (cool, hard bop, modal, free bop, fusion, etc.) whereras Trane operated within frameworks established by others (hardbop, postbop, modal, free/avant-garde). I think it is possible to say this, however, without labelling Trane as "essentially musically conservative" - again, a grossly inaccurate statement even given the point you are trying to make.

 

[Nattapong]

Quote:

Originally posted by LTUCCI1924 HI: Well it looks like I messed up again. I am trying to stay out of trouble here at the forum but I am realizing that these post on my first impressions of this new music is not going well. ......

I think your liking or disliking is not the point. However, if you intended to expand your horizon you have to keep your mind open. Some are harder than others and it is up to your background. If you associate jazz with easy listening instrumental pop .. you may want to start with Kenny G ... (no to say that he plays jazz though) then start to check out Grover Washington Jr. .. if all goes well try some Spyro Gyra, Najee .. and some Bossa Nova (Stan Getz or Charlie Byrd) ..

In any case really negative comment about something that you don't understand.. doesn't help anything. It is one thing that you didn't get it but another that the music has something wrong. But .. keep posting though..

 

[BDA_ABAT]

Who cares? Does it really matter if Lou "gets" Miles? If he wants to post stuff that he doesn't like or get, that's his business. I'm sure Miles and Ludwig could care less what Lou's opinion is...

(That said, I'm a bit surprised by the "need for aspirin" statement... "Kind of Blue" is pretty mellow Miles... Lou, definately stay clear of "Bitches Brew"!)

Keep posting Lou! And definately keep exploring. There really IS more to life than Pink Floyd.

And, that's REALLY the point... to keep on looking for stuff that tickles you. Well, that and being able to enjoy those sound on whatever setup you have.

Maybe you could try some newer progressive bands before jumping into way other diverse music (a bunch of prog fans have posted good things about Symphony X and Procupine Tree).

Keep loooking!
Bruce

 

[source direct]

Quote:

You know, sometimes I think there is a need to disparage stupid opinions. I have no problem with someone not liking Beethoven or Miles Davis - plenty of people don't like jazz or classical - but that's not the issue. If that's all LTUCCI said, I would not have bothered responding. If someone is genuinely interested in learning about classical or jazz, a post along the lines of "hey, I'm new to this jazz/classical thing, and I'm having a bit of trouble understanding Beethoven/Miles Davis, could someone please help me out" would be more appropriate than describing Beethoven as "pointless ravings" or Miles Davis as headache-inducing and "Up front in your face attacking my ears". Those aren't the comments of someone who is open-minded or willing to put in the effort to appreciate this music. Because, like all great art, it does require effort. Unlike "easy listening" (whatever the hell that is) or pop music, great art doesn't come to you served on a platter and requiring no effort. So I stand by my comment: either be prepared to put in the effort, or stick to your Kenny G records. Ross PS If I ever say something stupid - which I do frequently - feel free to tell me so, as long as you can tell me why.

This is by far the most uni-faceted, elitist statement I've read in a while.

The problem with this forum is that noone has the balls to call someone on ******** (will they let me get away with that here ?).

Look, I like Miles just fine. However, if someone has to ask why they don't dig it, and have to ask for help liking it, then it is pretty clear that something is wrong. Not everyone likes jazz. Not everyone likes Miles. Not everyone likes Coltrane.

It doesn't matter if the person is "new to jazz" or not.
What the hell does that mean anyway?
If someone is new to jazz, it doesn't mean that they are new to trying to like jazz, and furthermore, simply trying to like music is lame in the first place.

How is it possible that giving your opinion on some music, could be worse than being a poser and try to find a way to like it?

Willing to put in the effort to appreciate music? What the **** are you talking about?
Music should be appreciated as quickly as it was made. If you know a damn thing about jazz, then you know that jazz is made pretty fast and on the spot.

If he likes Kenny G, then he should definately stick to him, atleast he won't be the poser.

If someone isn't willing to accept a criticism of some music, then maybe they are the ones who are not "open-minded or willing to put in the effort" to understand someone elses opinion.

 

[Braver]

Quote:

Originally posted by source direct Willing to put in the effort to appreciate music? What the **** are you talking about? Music should be appreciated as quickly as it was made.

you make some nice points, but is just absolutely not true. some music you need to figure out before it really touches you. and that doesn't depend on quickly it was made. hell, it could be the other way around too: if something is worked out clearly and logically, it could grab you faster than it was made, but improv style jam-written music usually takes more time to get the hang of.

you just can't listen to one CD, one single time, of a genre you're absolutely unfamiliar with, and say anything about it that makes sense.

I don't see much in "appreciating their talent", but you don't say like/no like after one listen, specially not jazz albums like Trane/Miles.

if you only go by first impressions, you'll never get any further than easy pop. but music can go much deeper than that, if given time.

 

[LTUCCI1924]

.

 

[source direct]

Quote:

quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by source direct Willing to put in the effort to appreciate music? What the **** are you talking about? Music should be appreciated as quickly as it was made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- you make some nice points, but is just absolutely not true. some music you need to figure out before it really touches you. and that doesn't depend on quickly it was made. hell, it could be the other way around too: if something is worked out clearly and logically, it could grab you faster than it was made, but improv style jam-written music usually takes more time to get the hang of. you just can't listen to one CD, one single time, of a genre you're absolutely unfamiliar with, and say anything about it that makes sense. I don't see much in "appreciating their talent", but you don't say like/no like after one listen, specially not jazz albums like Trane/Miles. if you only go by first impressions, you'll never get any further than easy pop. but music can go much deeper than that, if given time.

I won't argue this as I feel it boils down to a difference in opinion, and it's my fault for mentioning it knowing that it is too closely dependent on opinion.


Quote:

source direct Sorry if I afended you with my post. I have found out that the music level was twice as loud as it should have been causeing my reaction to miles. I have since lowered the volume to halfe the volume and have no further problem with miles or beethoven music. I think that because of the infearer headphones that I used to use that I had the volume up trying to get what never could be gotten out of cheep headphones. Now that I have great headphones I am learning that the cans donot need the high volume that I used to use. I now am useing volume at 2-3 clicks and it is loud enought for plasent lestening. As far as stupid post go I sugest that you dont read my post for they might all be stupid for I am a stupid guy. Thank you for your understanding.

I was responding to Ross' post. You don't like Miles, you don't like Beethoven; more power to you.

 

[Ross]

source direct, I have absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make.

As I said, I have no problem if LTUCCI or anyone else doesn't like Miles Davis or Beethoven.

If you think that the Beethoven late string quartets or Miles Davis' Bitches Brew are immediately and completely understandable and enjoyable, then you must be a listener of unprecedented musical talent, more so than anyone else I know.

Your suggestion that "music should be appreciated as quickly as it was made" is so ridiculous that I can't believe even you think this (how many years did it take Wagner to compose the Ring Cycle?); but I give you points for originality.

Again, what exactly was your point?

Ross

 

[source direct]

Quote:

Your suggestion that "music should be appreciated as quickly as it was made" is so ridiculous that I can't believe even you think this (how many years did it take Wagner to compose the Ring Cycle?); but I give you points for originality.

I think this statement still stands when speaking of jazz, due primarily to the amount of soloing/improvisation that it incorporates.

This is also not to say that music doesn't get better with time.

Second Sax solo in "So What?" on Kind of Blue. I feel that this solo inparticular is exemplary of being able to be appreciated by the listener the first time through. Especially how the group re-introduces the chorus at the end of the solo.

Another is a Love Supreme.

Even if someone is listening to stuff like this for the first time, they may very well not like Bitches Brew, but who listened to Bitches Brew and Interstellar Space as their first jazz recordings? Most people I know went out and bought Kind of Blue and Giant Steps.

But, alas, all of this is in my opinion, say what you want, I'm not going to argue with you about it.


Quote:

Again, what exactly was your point?

My point is this:

If he doesn't like it (the music, the tone, etc. ), and he decides to speak his voice on it, then who do you think you are to say that:

Quote:

I think there is a need to disparage stupid opinions.

So basically, I have wasted my time repeating what I originally said, when i first posted in this thread. I don't really see why my point was difficult to understand...

 

[Ross]

Your point was difficult to understand because it was not written clearly.

As I said (and repeat yet again), I have no objection to anyone liking or not liking this music or anything else, and saying that they do not like it. You quoted my post, but did not bother to read it or this would have been clear. I respect people's sincere opinions, but not their rationalisations for those opinions when they are wrong.

The reference to "stupid opinions" was a general one, and did not refer solely to LTUCCI's post. But, yes, I think it was a stupid opinion - for someone to listen to indisputably great music once only, form hasty and ill-considered views, and then post as if there was something wrong with the music, is in my view stupid. Just because someone holds a view, however sincere, does not make it clever. Most people, including me, hold stupid views, and I hope that we have not become so politically correct that it becomes impossible to point this out.

Ross

 

[zowie]

*yawns*

 

[coolvij]

I remember when we used to talk about how much fun listening to our preferred music used to be......