A Lark Ascending

I think that's actually a very effective way to process music sometimes. We're told that we need to sit still and pay close attention to music; but I've found the peripheral approach has drawn me to really enjoy all sorts of music. Doesn't prevent you later giving it an undivided listen; and of course, if you are studying music or want to really understand it, then that full attention is vital. But for the average listener looking for something enjoyable and engaging, I'd say it can be very effective.

In the late 70s I had two Shostakovich albums - Symp 5 and 10 and despite playing many times found them grey and uninvolving. In the early CD years (c.1985) when there were few CDs available (hard to imagine in these days of megalopoboxsets), desperate to spend my pennies on something, I bought a Shosty 11. Again, nothing much happened for a while. Then one dark winter afternoon it turned technicolor on me. Went back to 5 and 10 and they too came to life. I've subsequently found that a way into unfamiliar music. If the first disc doesn't work, try one or two more. Often the wider perspective can bring the original recording into focus.

Bitches Brew too. Bought a copy in 1976 and didn't get it - the lack of a varied chordal base locked me out. I put it down to jazz rock and steered clear of electric Miles. It was only buying a copy of In A Silent Way in the early 90s that I finally got it. Can't understand why I didn't like it now -thrilling experience.

If you missed the Vocalion reissues, BGO are now following up:

We used to have really intellectual award ceremonies then. Like Miss World.

Oh, Bruckner's ländler's are a thing unto themselves. I always want to stomp in the mud to them. Mahler 6 is another favourite of mine. Wonderfully lyrical 'trio' section. Not sure it really fits that formula...but that's the nature of Mahler. And when I first started listening to Mahler 9 back in the 70s I always visualised the scherzo there as this demented Viennese waltz with the dancers having heads of farm animals!

The Cinderella movement of so many symphonies and extended classical pieces. The first movement generally carries the intellectual rigour; the second the emotional depth; last movements are more mixed - sometimes targeted at profundity, other times where the composer runs out of ideas. But the 'dance' movement is generally portrayed as the 'light' moment. Which ones grab you? Thinking about this listening to Dvorak 9 where the scherzo has always been the movement that grabbed me most. Another favourite is Walton's 1st Symphony - 'with malice' it says, and boy does it live up to the billing.

Coming in a couple of weeks: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mirrors-Kenny-Wheeler-Norma-Winstone/dp/B00B00MV74

Starts this Tuesday for those in range: http://www.bbc.co.uk...rammes/b01qnp5f Be interesting to hear how far they do go into the second half of the 20th. There seems to be a reasonably well accepted narrative (or set of narratives) of the first half of the 20thC. But outside of academia (maybe inside too?), the narrative of the second half (and beyond) seems to be still in flux.

This album has been like an old friend. I bought it in the first week after it's release and have loved it ever since. I have bought it four times in all in it's various formats and I think I may go and play it again now. The only sad thing is that the various CD reissues have never been able to completely de-muddy it. One hope is that the Porcupine Tree chap, Steven Wilson, has said he'd like to have a crack at it. Given his success with other music of the era there's a chance he might just pull it off. Let's hope he gets the go ahead. An album that really does deserve the label 'classic'.

Not sure if each of the four sides of this qualify: a) Generally thought of and marketed as rock though there's plenty of jazz within. b) Each piece plays continuously but is made up of clear episodes (which got constantly detached and reassembled in performance elsewhere). But as pieces of improvised music you could completely lose yourself in for 20 minutes at a time, they've worked for me since late-72.

Indeed. The guitar is a high point. Someone I'd like to hear more of.

Anyone ever heard 'Jam Sandwich' by Lyn Dobson? After hearing the new Reel compilation, became curious. I like his contribution to 'Third'.

Well, at least we'd leave the reader in no doubt as to who 'we' are.

Simply Not Cricket is mainly lists. Useful but not a thing to sit and read. Some nice covers

If you can find a way to relate them to structural conditions in late capitalism I'm sure he'll include them in the next edition. Read to within 30 pages of the end last night and had to throw it aside. The political chapters at the end are absolutely dreadful - basically rehearsing a lot of second hand socio-babble and desperately trying to latch on aspects of British jazz. Some terrible editing too. He reviews the early John Surman albums in one chapter; and then does more or less the same thing again in a later chapter. Notwithstanding the interesting sections about the music itself, I have to say this is the worst book I've read in years in any genre (and I read 'The Da Vinci Code'!)

Me too! The first version of 'Naima' I heard was a sidelong live recording by an Elton Dean Quartet with Keith Tippett, Chris Laurence and Louis Moholo. Lovely - don't think that one has got to CD yet.

The chapter on John Stevens, Derek Bailey and the AAM is a good read. A story I've read across magazine articles, sleeve notes etc (and in Wickes) but all in one place here.

I don't find the book particularly controversial. I've yet to read anything that you'd not have heard bandied around a university student union bar in the 70s. If anything surprises it is the very old fashioned nature of the political analysis. In its favour when he is writing about the music he draws you in - he's got me listening to things again and making lists of things I'd like to hear. His strengths are as a music journalist, used to writing reviews and magazine length articles. He's made the mistake of thinking that because it's a book he has to imitate the scholarly works he's read. I just don't think he's up to that. To me the book reads like a vast collection of cuttings, some from his own interviews, most from other secondary sources, stiched together with rather vague set of theories, couched (in the 'science parts') in a language he has learned from academic tomes ( if he tells me what 'we must' do one more time I might just scream.) Agree, it's good to have a book about the era; and that the Wickes book suffered badly from the editing. But I'd draw the comparison with 'Dazzling Stranger', Colin Harper's book on Bert Jansch set very much in the context of the same period. To my mind, a far more confident book. The CD is marvellous.

Continues to be an uncomfortable read. I've just read two chapters on drugs and race. In both cases there's an unfortunate hectoring tone with regard to the issues discussed. I'd imagine this book will be mainly read by people already familiar with at least some of the music and musicians and well used to the social issues that frame the chapters. But we are addressed as if this is all quite unfamiliar and need instructing. The odd thing is that within those chapters you get discussions of the music and musicians that are interesting and that could stand quite freely without being part of a race or drugs umbrella. He's going over familiar ground with Joe Harriott but his discussion of Mike Taylor, Mike Osborne and John Mayer is much more engaging. If you want to test whether the book is for you you might try the opening 2 pages of the chapter on drugs - 'One Scotch, One Bourbon, One Beer.'

Details of the cd are here: http://www.reelrecordings.org/trad_dads_dirty_boppers_and_free_fusioneers.php 120 pages in now - when he's describing the music and musicians he's intreresting. Chronology is all over the place, but lots of interesting anecdotes. Will get me relistening to some of this music.

Oh, he wrestles with the class differences of the jazz men but is desperate to box them into nice categories. The chapter I'm currently on tries to generalise on differences between those educated pre-Butler, those who went to grammar school and those who went to university. Joe Harriott's early 60's group causes him some difficulties. Like Marxist history generally, his analysis suffers from trying to project his own assumptions onto something much more fluid and interesting. I think he knows this but seems unwilling to jettison his ideological baggage. I don't like to be hypercritical of someone's hard work but this one really is clunky. Keeps reminding me of some of the sixth form essays I have to mark. Just listening to the CD - now that is interesting.

Well, now I know that when listening to Lyttleton or Westbrook, who are 'petite bourgeois', I need to consider their 'contradictory class position.' Funny that that never entered my head when enjoying Bad Penny Blues or Metropolis.

The problem is not that it's academic - it's not hard to read. It just seems a bit faux-academic. He seems confused as to whether he's writing a general account based on his enthusiasms or whether he's writing a scholarly analysis. I don't think he's equipped for the latter; and the approach he adopts is a bit old-Fashioned. 70s/80s cultural studies. He's no Alyn Shipton or Ted Gioia.

When he's telling the 'story' of developments he's fine. He loosens up and writes naturally. But it's as if every few paragraphs he remembers he's writing a history 'in it's social context'. Everything stiffens. I suspect I'm spoiled by having read people like Sandbrook in this period. The latter is far less knowledgeable about popular music than I'd imagine Heining is, yet pulls off his chapters on that aspect of the era with far more verve; and then follows it with an equally enthralling chapter on the crisis in the Treasury. Heining's historical and social context (lots of figures and percentages) read very second hand. But I'll persevere - its an era that interests me (especially towards the end) and I'm sure that when he's just telling the tale there will be lots to learn. I'm already curious about the Tracey/Bilk album and the version of Hair.