[Dixielandjazz] Fwd: Listening & Warning was John Coltrane, Giant Steps, & AJB

[Marek Boym]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marek Boym <marekboym at gmail.com>
Date: 26-May-2007 00:42
Subject: Re: Listening & Warning was John Coltrane, Giant Steps, & AJB
To: Steve Barbone <barbonestreet at earthlink.net>


As usual, we disagree.
You'd be surprised how much my friend knew of OKOM, which she loved,
followed and collected (sure, her collection is much larger now).  She
just grew up after Hubbard was discussed and played on every "jazz"
programme.

As regards Allen, the dispute was among OKOM lovers.  Some like a
certain performer, others don't, but all have a common frame of
reference.  I wonder how many on this list consider Coltrane within
their frame of reference (as can be iferred from the exchange of
letters, all on this list).  Thus, the comparison between OKOMer Allen
and "modernist" Coltrane is irrelevant (not that it is relevant, but I
have liked most Allen I've heard, which isn't too much - just the Bunk
Project and the film of his European tour).
And warning actually DOES "logically relate to the anecdote, even if
some people are too conceited to see it.  You seem to believe that
what you like or think is above all others, but would not afford us
mere mortals the same.

And I have heard early Coltrane as well.  My comment "even if, in some
 cases, it is tolerable (but not more)" referred to that period.  Of
course, he had a r&b period as well, and played with Earl Bostic.
And, while I do not doubt his technique, technique is important, but
is a tool, not the essence!

Cheers

On 26/05/07, Steve Barbone <barbonestreet at earthlink.net> wrote:
> on 5/25/07 4:20 PM, Marek Boym at marekboym at gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I've had the misfortune (great, I should add) of listening to it.
>
> OK, I can understand and relate to that.
>
> > Why subject others to the same?  While listening with one's own years is
> > highly laudable, why not warn people they might suffer?
>
> Why? Because you can't speak for their tastes. Remember on the DJML we had
> some discourse about Woody Allen and a strong warning for listees not to go
> hear him because he sucked.
>
> Now, interestingly enough there are several letters to the editor in the
> current edition of American Rag. (One of two monthly trade publications
> about OKOM). These letters extol Woody's performances in California, and
> that of his band.
>
> Suppose these people had heard and heeded the warning not to go? They would
> have missed some OKOM that THEY loved.
>
> What I'm saying is simple. Speak for yourself, but not for others because
> you don't know how they will react to the music you hate.
>
> > Many years ago, a very close friend of mine attended the North Sea
> > Jazz Festival, and went to hear a group named "Satchmo's Legacy,"
> > certainly an enticing name.  She left with disgust.  When she told me
> > about it, I asked: "What did you expect from a band under the
> > leadership of Freddie Hubbard," and the reply was: "how could I know
> > Freddie Hubbard?"  She was simply too young - in her twenties at the
> > time.  So warning people has some value.
>
> That conclusion does not logically relate to the anecdote. And no doubt,
> people who went there heard Hubbard's take on Satch and came away enthused.
> Hubbard like every other jazz trumpet  player in the world owes Satch a huge
> debt. And Hubbard  is certainly aware of that debt. It could have just as
> easily been that your friend didn't like Satch either. After all, at twenty,
> how could she know Louis Armstrong?
>
> > From my experience, Coltrane's "music" is not worthy of listening.
> > Personally, I try to avoid any exposure thereto, even if, in some
> > cases, it is tolerable (but not more).
>
> You are entitled to your opinion. From my experience all music is worthy of
> listening. Unless one listen to it all, one can't possible know whether to
> like or dislike it. Coltrane has recorded prolifically. He has put out some
> very beautiful ballads, and some great blues that I would think you might
> like, but unless you listen to them all, you'll never know.
>
> I remember early Coltrane which was very melodic. Heck, as a teenage
> clarinet player, one of the first tunes he learned was "Margie" based upon
> the Jimmy Lunceford arrangement.
>
> "Late" Coltrane is admittedly not for everybody Here's what Jazz Saxophonist
> Dave Liebman had to say about the far out stuff Coltrane was playing toward
> the end of his life:
>
> "People still don't get the late Coltrane. This is why I play Meditations
> every five years on his anniversaries, because I think that's a major piece
> of music, and the late Coltrane, when everyone was playing continuously
> together- I mean almost Dixieland in a way, only different kinds of notes
> and style, that's a very difficult period for the audience for sure, let
> alone musicians, to understand because it was chaotic, there was a lot of
> cacophony, yet there was an incredible amount of beauty. It's unbelievable
> what he does! And his saxophone playing, I mean what he was doing
> technically, is even beyond what he was doing in the middle sixties, so it's
> some different kind of music, and not for the faint-hearted, and I don't
> believe it's meant for even the good average listener."
>
> True? Perhaps, but there are also listeners who appreciate Trane's music.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve Barbone
>
>
>