The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tags: , , , ,

Keith Jarrett a umbria jazz 07 Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 23rd August 2007
  #61
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
Jarret lacks bebop and blues chops, which for me, puts him in an interesting no mans land. I can't explain it without getting too technical. He's too diatonic and it gets old for me quick. Not enough lower/upper neighbor stuff outlining the voices of chords.
I wasn't going to chime into this thread, but this statement can't go unchallenged.

Jarret has tremendous facility, of all kinds, blues, be-bop, gospel, 20th century, romanticism - etc. al.

His genius at playing "jazz", is he doesn't restrict himself to "outlining chords" and "upper/lower neighbors" or any other of the hundred or so tiresome routines the typical lesser "jazz" musician engages in.

Rather, Keith draws from a deep well, a VERY deep well indeed - when I listen to Keith, I feel as I do behind the wheel of a car with vast reserves of power - you just know there's more there, lots more. When I saw him open at Town Hall in 1988, he started Autumn Leaves as a solo improvised two- part counterpoint loosely based on the familiar changes. It was as if Bach, schooled another two hundred years in jazz, had entered the room.

As for the poster who regrets Jarret's not having written a "standard", that's true, but he was never able to master the written composition, whether long form or short (it's always nice to know even a genius can have failings), but some of his long form improvisations are masterful compositions in their own right (koln concerts is a good example).

That he's an ass is unquestionable (I got into a bit of a row with him at a Q and A in the late 80's), but that's who he is - we wouldn't have all the great music if he was a "nice" person - I'd rather have his catalogue, I never have to break bread with him.

Ed
Old 23rd August 2007
  #62
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post

That he's an ass is unquestionable (I got into a bit of a row with him at a Q and A in the late 80's), but that's who he is - we wouldn't have all the great music if he was a "nice" person - I'd rather have his catalogue, I never have to break bread with him.

Ed
I hear ya. You're probably right about not having the music if he weren't such a turd. From where I sit, what is lacking in him isn't necessarily a pedestrian ability to 'be nice' to people ... but instead, the inability to exhibit even the tiniest shred of that revered quality known as 'class'.

It's hard to square the beauty of such a sophisticated & nuanced composer, with the neanderthal like brutality of such a clueless approach to social intercourse. Perhaps therein lies the attraction - in much the same way that most people can't not look at the gruesome jumble of twisted steel in a terrible automobile accident, even though they dread what they might see.

Truly a dichotomy ... or a brilliant marketing ploy.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #63
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
I was coming home from a gig thinking that I have to revise or define my terms.

Of course Jarrett plays jazz. He's one of my favorites. I do go hot and cold with him personally, but I love his playing. What he's done with the romatic side -- his lyrical qualities are wonderful.

But when I said he doesn't really play jazz is. TO ME the phrasing of post be bop jazz was defined by the playing of Charlie Parker. That's me. TO ME that's 100%. On the other side of the spectrum could be say, Cecil Taylor or Boots Randolph. I actually like Cecil Taylor, but his playing isn't what traditionally called jazz. I don't mean to stay Jarrett doesn't play jazz.

But you know, certain jazz cats, there's a RIGHT WAY. Doesn't mean that other ways are WRONG. I can't explain this well. It doesn't mean you can't phrase 60% of the way and it's not JAZZ, it's just less CORRECT.

Ornette and Dolphy for instance. They play(ed) differently, certainly not 100% correct, but they were brilliant. Monk too. Trane and Cannonballl were 100%.

Jarrett has this diatonic thing he sometimes does. It's not quite right. It's nice and not wrong, but it's outside the realm of how somethings are considered the way to phrase a line, specifically a bop derived line, when he's playing bop derived pieces.

My son is giving me grief right now, so I have to stop. Take me apart because this is sounding totally ********. But I know what I mean even is I could easily disagree with the way I am saying it!

Later . ..
Old 23rd August 2007
  #64
Lives for gear
 
doorknocker's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
That he's an ass is unquestionable (I got into a bit of a row with him at a Q and A in the late 80's), but that's who he is - we wouldn't have all the great music if he was a "nice" person - I'd rather have his catalogue, I never have to break bread with him.
This is a bigger cliché than the 'by-rote' jazz techniques you criticized: The artist as suffering genius, cut off from the world, unable to communicate in the plain language of the common man.... A very late-19th century concept and I suppose that KJ sees himself in that tradition.

I think you never can seperate the man from the music, in fact I think this is a most fascinating thing, even with 'lesser' musicians. If you put in a certain amount of work and dedication in your music , then your personality will come through (unless you're a dedicated copycat). Both good and bad will show, and ANY person has both. KJ has dedicated his work to certain aspects like solo playing, free playing without any preconceptions, etc and I see the paralell to hsi personality there. I'm not judging it.

The point about KJ's lack of writing skills is interesting. True, not everybody is a great writer but the modern jazz players that I personally really dig are the ones that come up with great tunes once in a while. Pat Metheny is a good example, he has done all kinds of 'atmospheric' stuff and obviously spent a million hours working on his improv skils but he also did write 'Travels', 'James', 'Phase Dance' and a lot of other tunes that are pretty much modern standards and also work when done by others.
The same is true for John Mc Laughlin or Herbie Hancock.

Or you have somebody like Miles who wrote stuff but even more so surrounded himself with great writers like Wayne Shorter or Joe Zawinul and thus provided a breeding ground for the creation of great tunes.

I'm not familiar with everything that KJ did but if I try to think of a tune that I associate with him, then it's some rhythmic, riff-based stuff from 'Belonging'. Still great but these are hardy memorable melodies.

I think it's part of the problem of 'modern jazz' and also part of the reason why the general public isn't that interested. The musicians always blame the 'public' for being stupid but even John Coltrane knew that you need a great tune to base your explorations on, see 'My favorite things' (It actually was a hit!) or his own great tunes like 'Naima' or 'Impressions'.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #65
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
It was as if Bach, schooled another two hundred years in jazz, had entered the room.
Bringing Bach into a discussion of abrasive personality reminds me of the tale of Bach trying to attack a student with a knife, and calling him a nanny goat. I don't know how accurate the story is, but it made it into Schweitzers
biography on Bach, so it's good enough for me.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #66
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Yes Bach, apparently did have an abrasive personality. As did Mozart and Beethoven. So? I judge a musician by his MUSIC, you know? They do make funny stories though.

I always thought of JK as being a wonderful composer. No he didn't write any jazz standards, but for me he wrote some great music. Almost everything on Belonging is fantastic. "Spiral Dance" and "'Long As You Know You're Living Yours," which now shares credits with Steely Dan because they lifted something if it for "Gaucho." But "The Wind Up" is considered the masterpiece of that album -- and it's a bitch to play. It's the irrecgular and orginial melodic placement. No, none of them are whistle songs.
"Personal Mountains" is a remarkable tour de force, even though they don't play it very well. Journey Home, Le Mistral, New Dance, My Song, Prisim, Lucky Southern . . . He was one of my favorite writers.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #67
Lives for gear
 
doorknocker's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
Y But "The Wind Up" is considered the masterpiece of that album -- and it's a bitch to play. It's the irrecgular and orginial melodic placement. No, none of them are whistle songs.
Please don't take this the wrong way but you often mention that a tune 'is hard to play', seemingly making a point for its greatness. Now I totally dig virtuosity in the right place but to me it has nothing to do whether a tune is good or not. You couldn't find a simpler tune/theme than say Miles' 'Jean Pierre' yet to me that is a masterpiece. I'll take that over most 'complicated' works we hear from the jazzers these days.

Is it a coincidence that 'Kind of Blue' was such a big success? Like most people I agree that it's one of the best jazz records ever made but it also appeals to everybody because it has clear structures, 'simple' themes and lots of space. I really think that music in general has to work on a 'gut level'. I don't mean that it is has to be watered-down but rather that the best music grabs you immedeadtely and then slowly unfolds its complexity upon repeated liistening. Whether it's Bach, Miles or The Beatles.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #68
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
I judge a musician by his MUSIC, you know? They do make funny stories though.
Definitely. I can happily hate the person but love the music. Bach is a huge influence on me, stubborn temperament or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
I always thought of JK as being a wonderful composer. No he didn't write any jazz standards, but for me he wrote some great music.
I like plenty of music that would never work as a standard. I've also played enough standards gigs to hate quite a few standards .
Old 23rd August 2007
  #69
Lives for gear
 
soultrane's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorknocker View Post
I think you never can seperate the man from the music, in fact I think this is a most fascinating thing, even with 'lesser' musicians.
this is true.

i once had a world famous teacher who showed me how the way i phrase on my instrument was the way i spoke in sentences, i.e., dropping off the end of my sentences... and doing it on the end of my musical phrases.

as he put it, we are not two people;

now, when i think of keith jarrett, the word that comes to mind is self-indulgence.

now, he may be a self-indulgent genius, if you care to use that word (personally i wouldn't).

funny i had an experience with this recently when i bought a car with a cd changer... i had a bill evans trio recording in their and a jarret "standards" trio in there.

the thing you notice first off, is bill evans swings alot harder than jarrett... yes, i said it, and bill is not known as one of the great swingers out there.

second, bill evans throws off alot of interesting and different ideas in the space of a tune... there is alot of variety, a lot of ideas explored quickly and then another one is introduced.

with jarrett... there is alot of the same mood / technique / vibe expressed over and over again ad infinitum.

now, i'm not saying jarrett is not a very good pianist.

i'm simply saying there is no need for all this hero worship because the guy obviously takes himself so seriously.

i mean, jarrett makes alot of fun of andre previn... well, andre previn is a heavyweight musician too, only without the "look at me i am a tortured artist you are lucky to be breathing my oxygen" vibe of a jarrett.

some of that cat's music is light light lightweight... in fact, some of those "improvisations" are just a few ounces heavier than george winston, and no one takes HIM seriously. george winston with groaning and grimacing.

bah hah... i'm just playing a little... i know winston couldn't play the bach "48." (some say jarrett can't either, though!)

anyway, here's a little fun for you, in a passage about "posing" on stage;

"Later, Keith Jarrett used to do that same **** when he was in my band. His wife would come along, and he would play some **** that he thought was hip, and him and his old lady would look at each other like it was the greatest thing in the world. But to me it wasn't nothing but real cute **** Keith was playing, and I had to tell him that it wasn't knocking me out. So he stopped doing it."

--- miles davis
Old 23rd August 2007
  #70
Lives for gear
 
soultrane's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaczac View Post
Bringing Bach into a discussion of abrasive personality reminds me of the tale of Bach trying to attack a student with a knife, and calling him a nanny goat. I don't know how accurate the story is, but it made it into Schweitzers
biography on Bach, so it's good enough for me.

well, its a bit different.

bach had 20 kids, lived on a lower middle class salary, and had to write a cantata a week.

jarrett flies the world in private jets, gets $50k plus a gig, and has audiences dying to lather themselves in his b.s....

in bach's case, i can understand the occasional flying off the handle at a nanny goat bassoon player; u know how frustrating those "zippelfagotists" with bad attitude can be.

and give j.s. his credit... it was a sword, not a knife.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #71
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Hey, I agree with you! I don't think Jean Pierre is a masterpiece, but I also don't think that a piece has to be hard to play to be good. I think many, maybe even most truly sublime music is simple. But sometimes it's very complex. I think many masterpieces are gut wrenching. But not always.

For me, I cannot generalize about what makes a piece of music great. There are so many types of music that feed different parts of my satisfaction meter. I was merely pointing out that The Wind Up is also a bitch to play.

Giant Steps is not a great piece of music, though it may be one of the most played. It's a device for working out "Trane Changes." It's a challenge to play. But compositionally it's ot a great piece of music. IMHO.

I don't think a song has to be whistle-able to be a great piece of music either. Or even humable. Otherwise the Monkees would be considered geniuses.

I do enjoy innovation, original ideas, in structure and form. That's me. But I also enjoy pure essences and simplicity. And the structure and form does not need to be complex.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #72
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soultrane View Post
i once had a world famous teacher who showed me how the way i phrase on my instrument was the way i spoke in sentences, i.e., dropping off the end of my sentences... and doing it on the end of my musical phrases.

as he put it, we are not two people;

Good quote, and I agree, but sometimes personalities that I don't like can translate well musically. I think Keith Carlock (drummer) is a great example. He just looks so intense all the time, which gets a bit much for me personally , but that intensity translates so well with his fantastic pushy feel. (Sorry Keith, you're probably a great guy, and definitely a monster player ). Check out the "Damn That Groove" video for a good example. (if you can bear the audio quality).

The Keith Carlock Website .::. Video
Old 23rd August 2007
  #73
Lives for gear
 
soultrane's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
Otherwise the Monkees would be considered geniuses.

they're not?

what was that monkees tune cassandra wilson covered? last train to clarksville or something like that?

hot tune.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #74
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soultrane View Post
well, its a bit different.

bach had 20 kids, lived on a lower middle class salary, and had to write a cantata a week.

jarrett flies the world in private jets, gets $50k plus a gig, and has audiences dying to lather themselves in his b.s....

in bach's case, i can understand the occasional flying off the handle at a nanny goat bassoon player; u know how frustrating those "zippelfagotists" with bad attitude can be.

and give j.s. his credit... it was a sword, not a knife.
Haha, so very true, and I stand corrected on the sword. Your post gets funnier every read.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #75
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by soultrane View Post
ti'm simply saying there is no need for all this hero worship because the guy obviously takes himself so seriously.
Yes. I thoroughly agree.

Quote:

anyway, here's a little fun for you, in a passage about "posing" on stage;

"Later, Keith Jarrett used to do that same **** when he was in my band. His wife would come along, and he would play some **** that he thought was hip, and him and his old lady would look at each other like it was the greatest thing in the world. But to me it wasn't nothing but real cute **** Keith was playing, and I had to tell him that it wasn't knocking me out. So he stopped doing it."

--- miles davis
Ha ha!
Old 23rd August 2007
  #76
Super Moderator
 
Remoteness's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by soultrane View Post
they're not?

what was that monkees tune cassandra wilson covered? last train to clarksville or something like that?

hot tune.
They had a ton of great tunes...

You got to thank their songwriters for that!
Old 23rd August 2007
  #77
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remoteness View Post
They had a ton of great tunes...

You got to thank their songwriters for that!
I was going to say that but it weakened the argument. But geniuses? Nah. Cool songwriters, but geniuses?
Old 23rd August 2007
  #78
Gear Addict
 

Genius is such an interesting idea. My take on the matter is that we're all capable of genius (besides which it's subjective). Also, even the musicians I respect the most aren't consistent. As a result I only use genius to describe a moment, not a person.

Going back to the old school for one more example, Mozart was clearly one hell of a talent, but I personally find his music pretty dull. (ok except the adagio from the 23rd piano concerto, but that's just because he quotes Bach's Siciliano for flute).
Old 23rd August 2007
  #79
Lives for gear
 
doorknocker's Avatar
I suffered thru a few semesters of classical guitar at a conservatory a long time ago......one very interesting thing though was the 'music history' courses a borderline-deranged 'mad professor' type was teaching: It's often forgotten that at Bach's time 'serious' music was a branch of Mathematics. Bach didn't see himself as an 'artist' but rather as a Mathematican and most importantly a server to God.

The whole idea of the 'art for art's sake' artist really is a Romantic/late 19-century idea. That's also when the whole concept of the 'genius artist' was created. Mozart might have pointed the way but he was still part of the 'system' and so were Haydn + Beethoven for most of their 'careers'.

What I'm trying to say is that we often take the 'msuic as personal expression' thing for granted these days and it's interesting to see that it really hasn't been that way always.

But Bach still wrote great msuic that is transcendent, he didn't need to insult his audience or live as a hermit for doing so.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #80
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soultrane View Post
this is true.

i once had a world famous teacher who showed me how the way i phrase on my instrument was the way i spoke in sentences, i.e., dropping off the end of my sentences... and doing it on the end of my musical phrases.

as he put it, we are not two people;

now, when i think of keith jarrett, the word that comes to mind is self-indulgence.

now, he may be a self-indulgent genius, if you care to use that word (personally i wouldn't).

funny i had an experience with this recently when i bought a car with a cd changer... i had a bill evans trio recording in their and a jarret "standards" trio in there.

the thing you notice first off, is bill evans swings alot harder than jarrett... yes, i said it, and bill is not known as one of the great swingers out there.

second, bill evans throws off alot of interesting and different ideas in the space of a tune... there is alot of variety, a lot of ideas explored quickly and then another one is introduced.

with jarrett... there is alot of the same mood / technique / vibe expressed over and over again ad infinitum.

now, i'm not saying jarrett is not a very good pianist.

i'm simply saying there is no need for all this hero worship because the guy obviously takes himself so seriously.

i mean, jarrett makes alot of fun of andre previn... well, andre previn is a heavyweight musician too, only without the "look at me i am a tortured artist you are lucky to be breathing my oxygen" vibe of a jarrett.

some of that cat's music is light light lightweight... in fact, some of those "improvisations" are just a few ounces heavier than george winston, and no one takes HIM seriously. george winston with groaning and grimacing.

bah hah... i'm just playing a little... i know winston couldn't play the bach "48." (some say jarrett can't either, though!)

anyway, here's a little fun for you, in a passage about "posing" on stage;

"Later, Keith Jarrett used to do that same **** when he was in my band. His wife would come along, and he would play some **** that he thought was hip, and him and his old lady would look at each other like it was the greatest thing in the world. But to me it wasn't nothing but real cute **** Keith was playing, and I had to tell him that it wasn't knocking me out. So he stopped doing it."

--- miles davis
You don't like the man, but enough already, we got your point.

Bill Evans was a master, no question about it, he has his place in history, there would be no Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea, Zawinal, Jarret etc, without the earlier contributions of Evans.

But you're comparing apples to oranges - Jarret and the others mentioned above are from a different generation than Evans - weaned on the Beatles and folk music as much as jazz and their playing shows it - in spades.

By your own admission, you don't really know the man's work yet you continue to bash him, let it go, man.

Ed
Old 23rd August 2007
  #81
Lives for gear
 
True North's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zaczac View Post
Good quote, and I agree, but sometimes personalities that I don't like can translate well musically. I think Keith Carlock (drummer) is a great example. He just looks so intense all the time, which gets a bit much for me personally , but that intensity translates so well with his fantastic pushy feel. (Sorry Keith, you're probably a great guy, and definitely a monster player ). Check out the "Damn That Groove" video for a good example. (if you can bear the audio quality).

The Keith Carlock Website .::. Video
Sorry to hijack BUT I love Keith Carlocks playing so much - I am usually up on new drummers but this guy completely slipped my radar until about 5 months ago and now he is one of my faves!!
Old 23rd August 2007
  #82
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doorknocker View Post
This is a bigger cliché than the 'by-rote' jazz techniques you criticized: The artist as suffering genius, cut off from the world, unable to communicate in the plain language of the common man.... A very late-19th century concept and I suppose that KJ sees himself in that tradition.
I'm not condoning it, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying it's who he is - in this case, you really do get the good with the bad.

Ed
Old 23rd August 2007
  #83
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
I agree JK doesn't really swing hard. Re Bill Evans swinging or not, you got to remember him playing with Miles at Newport '58 with Coltrane and Cannonball. He's swinging hard there!

The way JK articulates blues as in Billies Bounce from Still Live is just awkward to me. This is wierd because he does gospel piano type stuff.

But that's not what Jarrett's great at. What I love about his playing is that he's been able to retain the innocence, what he calls "state of grace". Just the sheer magic of playing music. Sometimes he's too pretty and precious, but I take the good and throw out the bad.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #84
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
But when I said he doesn't really play jazz is. TO ME the phrasing of post be bop jazz was defined by the playing of Charlie Parker. That's me. TO ME that's 100%. On the other side of the spectrum could be say, Cecil Taylor or Boots Randolph. I actually like Cecil Taylor, but his playing isn't what traditionally called jazz. I don't mean to stay Jarrett doesn't play jazz.

But you know, certain jazz cats, there's a RIGHT WAY. Doesn't mean that other ways are WRONG. I can't explain this well. It doesn't mean you can't phrase 60% of the way and it's not JAZZ, it's just less CORRECT.

.
I don't know what "less correct" means, but I'd say jazz had moved on from the Parker years of the 40's and into another generation or two by the 70's when Jarret, Hancock, Corea, Zawinul, Metheny, Goodrick, Gary Burton etc took the mantle.

As mentioned in another post, these guys had a much deeper well of music to pull from than Parker's generation - folk music, rock and roll, the Beatles had all appeared in the intervening years and it had a huge influence.

Look at Miles, even he got it, moving into modal explorations (with Kinda Blue) which would later influence rock and blues acts like the Allman Brothers ( a whole 'nuther thread topic).

Be bop was a generational style, it appeared in the 40's and lasted a few years, it was a very VERY important development as it defined playing over changes (something I give credit to Parker for developing to a high art) - jazz, like all music should, was a living breathing thing, it evolved from that point through the 50's, 60's and into the 70's where it......

..........unfortunately, has long since stopped evolving.....

Ed
Old 23rd August 2007
  #85
Gear Addict
 
jerdude's Avatar
 

i love KJ.

but this is hilarious!!

Quote:
i also know alot of jazz pianists, like oscar, who said "well, if you play the same chord sequence for 30 minutes straight, you should come up with something good."
Old 23rd August 2007
  #86
Lives for gear
 
ersheff's Avatar
 

I'm more distracted by his moans, squeals, and piano humpings than I am by anyone's camera flashes.
If you ask me, being a great performer should include being able to perform without making noises that are as loud or louder than the music you're making.
Some is certainly acceptable, but c'mon. This **** Jarrett does is ridiculous.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #87
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
I don't know what "less correct" means, but I'd say jazz had moved on from the Parker years of the 40's and into another generation or two by the 70's when Jarret, Hancock, Corea, Zawinul, Metheny, Goodrick, Gary Burton etc took the mantle.

As mentioned in another post, these guys had a much deeper well of music to pull from than Parker's generation - folk music, rock and roll, the Beatles had all appeared in the intervening years and it had a huge influence.

Look at Miles, even he got it, moving into modal explorations (with Kinda Blue) which would later influence rock and blues acts like the Allman Brothers ( a whole 'nuther thread topic).

Be bop was a generational style, it appeared in the 40's and lasted a few years, it was a very VERY important development as it defined playing over changes (something I give credit to Parker for developing to a high art) - jazz, like all music should, was a living breathing thing, it evolved from that point through the 50's, 60's and into the 70's where it......

..........unfortunately, has long since stopped evolving.....

Ed
I think I didn't articulate myself well. First I belong to the younger set of musicians. I'm not, myself, a bebopper. As for whether they have a deeper well I don't know.

The language changed, without question, after Bird. I said POST bebop. The Language - from Louis, to Hawk to Prez and Parker evolved certain stylings that carry through to today. Bird didn't invent bop. Arguably Bud Powell came before. Dizzy and Kenny Clarke helped in the formation of the articulation and phrasing., But Bird gave it it's style, form and phrasing. This is regardless whether you play a note of bebop yourself. Chick Corea, Goodrick, Burton, Brecker, Coltrane, Liebman, McCoy, Herbie Hancock, Metheny, Scofield, Lovano all heed these lessons.

I'm not saying one has to. But like it or not, and I don't, but jazz is a pretty chauvninistic music. There is a correct way of doing things. Ornette defnitely doesn't do it the correct way. Nor does Eric Dolphy. Nor does Jarrett, although he comes closer. It's in the detail that Jarrett doesn't display.

I personally think Jarrett suffers from his ego, in the primary sense that he doesn't play with other people. I love the social aspect of jazz. Corea still plays with other people. It's mainly, but not only, his own music. I think Jarrett suffers from too much incestuousness with himself. The last record he recorded with someone else was Kenny Wheelers "Gnu High" and that was so infested with Jarret you can't tell where Wheelers own influence comes in. JK would never "lower himself" to play with others. But this is where I think learning still happens. He actually played electric piano on Freddie Hubbards "Sky Dive". He was doing studio work for CTI to make money. If he were forced to play other peoples music he'd still be growing.

But that's me. Not him. I think he long ago decided the most valuable music universe was his and his art was about mining that universe. I don't disagree. I think self possessed artistry is important. It's the 'what I am is everyone' concept and 'the more I contact the truth within myself the more I allow others to contact the truth within themselves.' type thing. It just gets old for me after awhile because it all tends to implode upon itself, -- for me.
Old 23rd August 2007
  #88
Gear Addict
 
Dale's Avatar
 

Talking

Last Train to Clarksville

Words and Music by
Tommy Boyce and Bobby Hart
Old 23rd August 2007
  #89
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
The last record he recorded with someone else was Kenny Wheelers "Gnu High" and that was so infested with Jarret you can't tell where Wheelers own influence comes in.
Gnu High (one of my favorite records of all time, I can't imagine another pianist on that date) was recorded in 1975 - since that time KJ has done several records with other players ?????? - perhaps what you meant was as a sideman and not a leader?

I agree, Jarret is the "star" and is definitely not a sideman, but so what? I'd argue, forcefully, that like Lennon/McCartney, Jarret was a full partner in Gnu High, Wheeler never really did as fine an album ever again - he still wrote great material (the follow-up with Towner and Abercrombie was good), but nothing ever came close to Gnu High.

And that's thanks to the monumental contributions of Keith Jarret - just ask Wheeler himself, he'll tell you much the same.

Ed
Old 23rd August 2007
  #90
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
-- of course. Sorry. I was referring to JK playing in other peoples bands and playing their music.

Gnu High. Yes, that's a great record. But that's the point. It's as much Jarretts, even though Wheeler wrote the music. And no, no nothing KW did since comes close. And Jarrett HATED that record. That's the record when he vowed to never again play someone elses music as a sideman. It was apparently very miserable for him.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
duckyboard / So much gear, so little time
0
jje / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
18
demonfuzz / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
4
Jules / So much gear, so little time
7
indie / Gear free zone - shoot the breeze
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump