25 jazz records: A selection

[EKE BBB]

...

I have worked on a list like this with a small group and know how difficult it is.

...

←

Thanks, Chuck. After some "destructive" comments, we NEEDED that!

[EKE BBB]

And thanks to Chuck, Cayetano, Flurin and Guy for taking the time to compare the list with their collections.

All I can say is that I have a very big hole in my collection re jazz after 1965. God knows I´ve tried, but the more I buy 70-80-90-00´s jazz, the more I like.... Ellington & Tatum.

(yes, I have a problem, I know: being only 34, I am an old-timer...)

[Peter Johnson]

Well, as long as we're "hanging it out there," I'll show mine:

1917-1942: I got nothin'. Yes, you read that right. Pathetic. Mea culpa.

1943-1959: Missing the Tristano, got everything else.

1960-1979: Got it all.

1980-2000: Missing the M's, got everyting else.

I already knew this, but I've got to get conversant in pre-1957 jazz.

Thanks for the list--it will indeed be a good start.

P.S. If anyone wants to help guide me down the path of 1917-1942, I promise to be a "willing student"!

Edited October 10, 2005 by Peter Johnson

[AllenLowe]

sorry if I'm coming across as overly negative, though that was my original reaction - thanks for mentioning my book, which was an attempt to deal with the problem of trying to compartmentalize jazz history so strictly - I did take an approach which I think deals with the difficulty of summarizing so much so quickly (and once again, I apologize, as I cannot read the text that comes with your list) - I do have a set of 36 CDs which is coming out this December, and which deals with much of the material in my book - I actually think an anthology is a better way to deal with historical progression, especially an anthology that zigs and zags in the same way music does, stylistically speaking. And, of course, the big problem is post-1960 and especially post-1980, as the definition of jazz broadens in such a manner as to make easy summary nearly hopeless (one reason it is doubtful I will ever attempt writing a history of that period).

But most importantly, the fatal flaw of your list is that you are using ALBUMS to sum up historical periods during which the album concept did not exist - so to compare, say, the Hot 5 to Kind of Blue in such a way is historically disingenuous. Better, as I said, to annotate individual performances (aanother advantage is that by doing this you spare people having to sit through Herbie Hancock's era of bad jazz/funk) -

Edited October 10, 2005 by AllenLowe

[EKE BBB]

You´re totally right, Allen. There´s no getting away from your point on Albums vs 78 rpm recordings of that era.

But take into account that our list is supposed to be a "recommended CD shopping cart for newcomers". We could have recommended some good jazz compilations (such as your upcoming 36 CD package will be), but which would our work have been in that case?

As Michael Fitzgerald stated, from a track-by-track compilation, the newbie can start his collection, getting more discs from leaders, sidemen, composers, labels... in his/her own way.

We try to go one step further: we give them 25 + 40 "supposedly good discs" of jazz as a starting point.

Regards,

Agustín

PS: reading my last two lines... they may sound a bit pedantic.

As I said before, ours was a very modest project, far from being a "Jazz Bible for Spaniards"

[Clunky]

1917-42 Four missing Bix, Bessie, Goodman, Ellington Okehs

1943-59 Have them all

1960-79 5 missing Taylor, Roach, Mingus, Holland, Ayler ( waiting for the definitive set !!)

1980- 2000 Only have one the Murray,

[king ubu]

... Ayler ( waiting for the definitive set !!)

←

wouldn't do that... read more here:

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21883

[Clunky]

... Ayler ( waiting for the definitive set !!)

←

wouldn't do that... read more here:

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21883

←

hmm.....hadn't spotted that, I'll pass on this set .

thanks Flurin

[Jorge LG]

Well...here I am, guilty for my part, the last one, of that guide or list or...who knows ? We were just trying to make ir easier to a ( most of the times ) young newcomer to this music, as many of the readers of the spanish webpage we did it for, to go to a record shop and find some records to start a Jazz collection.

The problem here is that I feel like many of you are making a hard judgement of it as if it was something litterally like its name...it's true that maybe our most important mistake was the title of the...thing, I mean, we could maybe just tried to find something that doesn't need the explanations in the texts ( in spanish...I know it's difficult to read them, and I really apreciate your efforts to do it ) to let you know what we were trying to make with as much love for this music, respect for it and attention to the jazz fans of our country, those Fer tried to describe so well. That is maybe our bigger fault, but I must say also that in spanish, wich is much more wordy than english, it doesn't sound so...contundent.

Imagine that our first condition was the accesibility, so, the discussion about compilations or not, was quickly surpassed, but of course we had some talking about it.

The most severe criticisms to it I read around are about the after-sixties...so, that's my business...OK, I would try to explain the reasons for my choosings. I know there were, and are, some great players from other times still making great music, I mean...why to left Andrew Hill, wich is, by the way, one of my one thousands idols ( this month ) and so influential on some of the most interesting music during this years, Osby's for example ? Because his music was even more important in the sixties, it was a paradigm of the end of the decade, so if being in this guide, it had to be there, not later...it's not a problem of the many musicians you want to put into, but how many you must left out when you choose so few ! How can any of us left out a record like Joe Henderson's one on Strayhorn's music, one of the best records of its time if I have to choose some to take to an island ? Because we are trying, and we know the limitations of something like a guide of "essential" records, to describe with them the time they were made, and for that...well, I see you don't love him and his music very much, but isn't Marsalis "Black Codes" a much more paradigmatic record, and a very influential for the musicians and listeners coming out at that time ? Or why I choose a Five Elements record instead one of excellent Greg Osby's records ? Because the "first swordsman" of this current, the M-Base, one of the most important ( I see it like that, but maybe I'm wrong ) currents in modern Jazz, and not at all, I disagree totally with that, any "remake of fusions" or neo...Jazz Rock ? is Steve Coleman, so if anyone likes this music after getting the "Def Trance" one will get more records, or look in the AMG guide, find quickly references about Mr. Osby, and get into his amazing music.

Jazz Rock..! I hadn't heard those two words together, wich never fit any well, talking about this music, for years.

Jarrett ? Of course, I would loved to have here also some records of his great seventies american quartet, but we didn't have space, and anyway, the impact to the world of music of his Standards Trio, and those two records were the origins of that impact, was ( and is ) inmense, so...is it wrong to say that those were some of the six more representative records of the eighties/nineties ? I don't think so, but maybe, again, I'm wrong.

Are Marsalis or Murray small people compared to the old masters ? Well...I don't think those great masters of the past, if they were born in Marsalis and Murray years, were very happy with those comparisons. These new musicians are people of their time, great musicians of their years, and when we talk about their music we think about the time when it was made : I was eighteen years old when I heard for the very first time "Ming", and the impact of all those musicians coming from the Loft generation was incredible for people of my age, and when I heard "Black Codes" I was twenty two, and Wynton was twenty three or four, and the impact of it was incredible, and when I talked with many of my friends, musicians, all of them in their twenties, that record was seen like the very big example of what a young guy like us could make, and it determined, for better or worse, many of the music coming after.

And it still sounds great to me. But maybe...once again, something's wrong in my ears.

[Fer Urbina]

sorry if I'm coming across as overly negative, though that was my original reaction - thanks for mentioning my book, which was an attempt to deal with the problem of trying to compartmentalize jazz history so strictly - I did take an approach which I think deals with the difficulty of summarizing so much so quickly (and once again, I apologize, as I cannot read the text that comes with your list) - I  do have a set of 36 CDs which is coming out this December, and  which deals with much of the material in my book

No apologies needed, Allen. As for the texts in Spanish, I don't claim for them to be perfect, but, for instance, the intro deals with many of the points mentioned in this forum. But if you really feel apologetical, a nice discount on the 36-CD set will do

This was bloody difficult and possibly because it's not a good idea, as Mike F said about the "jazz for imbeciles" format (I don't trust overtly digested guides to arts, history or whatever), but as I said, bibliography about jazz in Spanish is patheticly weak (unlike our robust reputation for dodgy reissues).

I still have to confirm it, but within days after the publication of our Frankenstein monster, two or three public libraries showed interest in starting jazz CD sections. That's the situation we're dealing with.

As for Headhunters... apart from matters of taste etc, I was wondering whether it could be a cultural thing too. This will sound like anathema, but I know very few Spanish people who like Miles Davis's "Sketches of Spain"

F

PS OFF TOPIC If anyone's interested, my new avatar is a bloody good read

[marcoliv]

when i met Agustin in Madrid 10 days ago he told me enthousiastically about this particular project and all the hard work to make it real.

so far i've never reached to convince anyone that jazz is good so any kind of effort to do it will always have my full respect.

knowing the concept and target audience of the list i believe that a newbie would have a decent way to start on the vast world of jazz based on it.

comparing the list with my collection i noticed that...

1917-1942 - i only have the boxset of Billie Holiday

43-59 - i have 9

60-79 - i have 8

80-2000 - i only have both Jarrett albums and they don't do that much for me

the list only confirms that i'm not in love with jazz pre-40s, even if i do respect a lot that period and the major artists for the period 80-2000 mentioned are not my cup of tea and i don't have any prejudice for the jazz produced in the last quarter of century.

build a list like that for a Brazilian audience woulda been much harder so i can only encourage Agustin and his friends to keep up with their good work

Marcus Oliveira

[Jazzmoose]

Nice list. As is to be expected on a historical list like this, the more recent the period, the more I disagree. Fortunately I took Agustin's caution about clicking on the overviews seriously, or I'd have started the post with "where's Fletcher Henderson??? ). By the time of the last period covered, I disagree quite a bit, but still can see reasons for the picks, so I guess it's okay. The first period is such a good listing that I feel embarrassed about not having it all. I"d better get off the can and pick up some Jelly Roll and more Hawk. To say nothing of Bessie Smith and Bechet!

Let's see how many I have since we're all comparing...

1917-1942: 5

1943-1959: 11

1960-1979: 13

1980-2000: 0

Hmmm...keep in mind that I probably have one of the smaller jazz collections here, and have only been listening to 'newer jazz' since I picked up those two Quartet Out discs and fried my brain...

Anyway, I think for it's stated purpose, it's a great list (except for the modern era, but maybe that's just me). I have no doubt that anyone who stuck with it and listened to the entire batch would be hooked for life! My only question is, which one do you start with to make sure they come back for the second?

Edited October 27, 2005 by Jazzmoose

[EKE BBB]

Thanks for your input, Marcus and Mark (funny coincidence, btw!)