Miles Davis question

[AllenLowe]

by typical triadic improvising, I mean that the line tends to relate most specifically to the three degrees of the chord (in a c chord this would be the notes C, E and G) - the movement of line in relation to the chord tends to expand and contract in prime reference to the three basic notes of the chord and it's extended intervals - of course this is an oversimplification, but a player like Miles was starting to look at the chord as a scale rather than a triad - and was also superimposing related scales - which of course all beboppers were doing. It's just that with Miles (and with Dodo) the scale, (as opposed to the triad) was the prime tonal destination -

[Dan Gould]

I'll bet I have more Lee Morgan recordings than you do.

You can't. I have everything.

Really? You got all extant videotape and private recordings?

[md655321]

Look at Reggae, EVERYONE knows Bob Marley. But barely anyone knows anyone else in reggae. Does that make Bob overrated? Absolutely not, because he is the greatest.

How do you know he's the greatest ? He's the most well-known, but how do you know he's the greatest ?

Obviously greatest is not meant as absolute, but a general understanding of the quality of one's music. Is Bob THE greatest, imo yes. But regardless he is certainly one of the greatest.

Similar to Miles. You can argue he isnt the greatest jazzman of all time. But there is absolutely no denying that his name belongs in any discussion. based on the quality of music, his innovations, and the consistency of his contributions to the art. The same can not be said about Woody Shaw or even Lee Morgan. (although this is a different discussion when discussing just trumpet playing.)

What you seem to be omplying is that Herbie, Miles, BB King etc are overrated because the public knows them and there musicians equal to and better than them in their respective genres. I think they are well known because they are the (aleast arguably) very best at what they do, and I think the majority of people would agree.

[Stereojack]

I think one needs to put things in perspective. Neil Diamond is overrated. Rod Stewart is overrated. Celine Dion is overrated. Jennifer Lopez is overrated. The public knows these people, even though their talents are marginal. Miles may be one of the few jazz musicians whose name is known to the general public, but why begrudge him his fame? He backed it up with world class music. Would you rather that the pubic associate jazz with the likes of Kenny G, Michael Buble, et al? I think it's a good thing that Miles was able to achieve fame and success at least partly through the cult of his personality. I saw Miles many times and the music was never less than thrilling & exceptional. The fact that he has been dead for nearly fifteen years but still commands respectable sales is nothing to be critical about. We'd all like to live in a world where every deserving musician becomes rich and famous, but we don't live in that world. The public's ignorance is not Miles' fault. He was one of the lucky ones, and we should be thankful for that, instead of carping because there may be other artists we like better.

[7/4]

I think one needs to put things in perspective. Neil Diamond is overrated. Rod Stewart is overrated. Celine Dion is overrated. Jennifer Lopez is overrated. The public knows these people, even though their talents are marginal. Miles may be one of the few jazz musicians whose name is known to the general public, but why begrudge him his fame? He backed it up with world class music. Would you rather that the pubic associate jazz with the likes of Kenny G, Michael Buble, et al? I think it's a good thing that Miles was able to achieve fame and success at least partly through the cult of his personality. I saw Miles many times and the music was never less than thrilling & exceptional. The fact that he has been dead for nearly fifteen years but still commands respectable sales is nothing to be critical about. We'd all like to live in a world where every deserving musician becomes rich and famous, but we don't live in that world. The public's ignorance is not Miles' fault. He was one of the lucky ones, and we should be thankful for that, instead of carping because there may be other artists we like better.

Good call.

[johnagrandy]

think it's a good thing that Miles was able to achieve fame and success at least partly through the cult of his personality.

That's not the problem. The problem is overmarketing , overexposure , excessive concentration of critical power under too few pens , and agglomeration of too much of the potential listening public onto too few artists and musics.

Check out Pandora.com .... they're trying to solve this.

[johnagrandy]

But there is absolutely no denying that his name belongs in any discussion. based on the quality of music, his innovations, and the consistency of his contributions to the art. The same can not be said about Woody Shaw or even Lee Morgan.

That is where you are completely wrong. It may take generations, but eventually Woody Shaw will be seen as a greater innovator than Miiles. Woody invented his own musical world that contained derivatives of the most impossible sources for a trumpet (Dolphy, Tyner, various members of the European classical avant-garde, among many others). His playing has far more fire, depth, intellectualism, and communication of highly complex self-conflicting emotions than Miles' did. And per lifespan year, Wood invented just as many stylistic periods as Miles ... but he was vastly underrecorded and underappreciated.

That's one very specific reason why Miles is overrated: because Woody Shaw exists.

Edited January 29, 2006 by johnagrandy

[Guy Berger]

But there is absolutely no denying that his name belongs in any discussion. based on the quality of music, his innovations, and the consistency of his contributions to the art. The same can not be said about Woody Shaw or even Lee Morgan.

That is where you are completely wrong. It may take generations, but eventually Woody Shaw will be seen as a greater innovator than Miiles.

No way.

Guy

[md655321]

It may take generations, but eventually Woody Shaw will be seen as a greater innovator than Miiles. Woody invented his own musical world that contained derivatives of the most impossible sources for a trumpet (Dolphy, Tyner, various members of the European classical avant-garde, among many others). His playing has far more fire, depth, intellectualism, and communication of highly complex self-conflicting emotions than Miles' did. And per lifespan year, Wood invented just as many stylistic periods as Miles ... but he was vastly underrecorded and underappreciated.

That's one very specific reason why Miles is overrated: because Woody Shaw exists.

I will agree that there is SOME argument about Woody Shaw's contribution to trumpet, but the bolded part is where you are just flat out off your rocker. I would be impressed, and even AMAZED, if you can get a single person on this board to agree with that.

[JSngry]

It may take generations, but eventually Woody Shaw will be seen as a greater innovator than Miiles. Woody invented his own musical world that contained derivatives of the most impossible sources for a trumpet (Dolphy, Tyner, various members of the European classical avant-garde, among many others).

Dude, if you're waiting for a time when "most people" evaluate music, any and all music, primarily on an informed technical awareness of its mechanical components, I suggest, as a friend, that you get a time machine and set it to, like, NEVER!

[JSngry]

His playing has far more fire, depth, intellectualism, and communication of highly complex self-conflicting emotions than Miles' did.

So, these must be empirical quantities then. I'd like to see the data that proves this.

Anxiously awaiting the bar graphs and pie charts...

Edited January 29, 2006 by JSngry

[JSngry]

It may take generations, but eventually Woody Shaw will be seen as a greater innovator than Miiles. Woody invented his own musical world that contained derivatives of the most impossible sources for a trumpet (Dolphy, Tyner, various members of the European classical avant-garde, among many others). His playing has far more fire, depth, intellectualism, and communication of highly complex self-conflicting emotions than Miles' did. And per lifespan year, Wood invented just as many stylistic periods as Miles ... but he was vastly underrecorded and underappreciated.

That's one very specific reason why Miles is overrated: because Woody Shaw exists.

I will agree that there is SOME argument about Woody Shaw's contribution to trumpet, but the bolded part is where you are just flat out off your rocker. I would be impressed, and even AMAZED, if you can get a single person on this board to agree with that.

Me too. It's one thing to take note of a player's personal evolution, another thing altogether to equate it with "changing the face of the music" as a whole.

[JSngry]

That's one very specific reason why Miles is overrated: because Woody Shaw exists.

Can't wait for Woody's next gig!

Seriously, this attitude that there's only room for one "king" is at the very root of the dynamic that creates the problems that causes you so much consternation (some of which I can totally empathize with, some of which seems a bit, uh, nuts. No offense...).

Who's "the greatest jazz trumpeter of all time"? That's a "White Folks" kind of question, if you know what I mean, and I think you do, which is why your insistence on pursuing the issue of Woody's unquestioned greatness in these same terms seem all the more insane and self-defeating/destructive to me.

[Jim R]

Miles only did genius level work in the late 60s and early 70s.

Nonsense, IMO.

[Free For All]

What I can foresee happening here is an eventual pissing contest between Miles and Woody fans, to no good end.

Comparing these two is, to me, an "apples and oranges" scenario: both are deserving of a great amount of respect, neither deserves any derision. I love them both for different reasons.

Why do we have to always "choose"? There's PLENTY of love for ALL THE CATS in our big music world!!!

[johnagrandy]

His playing has far more fire, depth, intellectualism, and communication of highly complex self-conflicting emotions than Miles' did.

So, these must be empirical quantities then. I'd like to see the data that proves this.

Anxiously awaiting the bar graphs and pie charts...

Complete misinterpretation of my thoughts.

In my opinion, Woody invented his own musical language (to use Steve Turre's phrase) for the purpose of expressing the continual intense energy of the diametrical self-conflict and accompanying melancholy that characterizes life as it exists for those who continually question "Why?".

The mechanics he invented are fascinating and very relevant to the end result , but the techniques are ultimately only a minor attraction of Woody's music. I don't even understand what he was doing harmonically and rhythmically other than what a few trumpet pros have explained to me.

Confidence is borne of success , but confidence is also borne of distillation through a different prism. And Wood's prism was as rare as they come.

That he successfully connected the people to his simulataneous recognition of the necessity of and his distate for form and civilization , his simultaneous joy and melancholy at engaging in significant human relationships , his simultaneous belief in a better world along with the knowledge that this lofty goal is mortally fantastical and ultimately self-degenerative, his inner conflict that our instinctual desire to reach outside ourselves and our environment is highly dangerous to the carefully constructed foundation that sustains us ...

.... that he accomplished the sublime communication of these deep inner realms during his all too short career places him in a master spiritual plane.

In this regard, I place him above even Miles.

Edited January 29, 2006 by johnagrandy

[johnagrandy]

Woody Shaw-- now that is wacked out thinking, boldy ridiculous but BOLD, B-O-L-D even.

WOODY SHAW ONE OF THE TOWERING ARTISTS OF THE 20TH C. ABSOLUTELY-- behind only Duke & maybe Charley Pride & Richard Pryor, Magic Sam too (actually Magic Sam <----> Woody isn't TOO bad comparison)

Why do you choose to allude to complex forms of this sort of debate and then trivialize the subject ?

Anyway there are some seriously well-listened cats on these boards.

Genius isn't obvious ...otherwise it wouldn't be genius would it ?

Woody Shaw is the primary musical genius of the 20th century ... and that ain't a white thing. It's a black thing.

Edited January 29, 2006 by johnagrandy

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I think what people mean by Miles Davis being over-rated by the general population of popular music buyers is that they merely believe what they are told, that he is the greatest jazz musician. They have not heard enough of Miles' music, nor enough of other jazz musicians' music, to be able to make an informed judgement. Their view is, in essence, an act of faith.

That does not apply to people like Celine Dion, whose music I am not conscious of ever having heard, so I'm unbiased as to her talent. There is little doubt that the average pop buyer HAS heard a large sample of her music and also of the music of her competitors and is therefore able to come to an informed judgement about her relative merit as a pop singer. So that, if indeed Celine Dion is generally ranked as the greatest in that niche of the market, it is not an act of faith and she isn't over-rated. Equally, if I, who have heard hardly any pop music for the last 40 years, were to accept that status for her, that would be an act of faith and I'd be over-rating her.

MG

[AllenLowe]

I think the problem here is that we're confusing Woody Shaw with Clarence Shaw - or really Artie Shaw, and than Woody Allen, who plays a mean clarinet if you're a little drunk and not paying a lot of attention - so the equation is:

Woody Shaw - Woody + Clarence + Walter Allen - Walter - Clarence - Shaw = Woody Allen

problem solved

[johnagrandy]

It's one thing to take note of a player's personal evolution, another thing altogether to equate it with "changing the face of the music" as a whole.

Changing the face of music as a whole requires that music as a whole wants to change as a whole at that time

Is that true innovation ?

For the most part ( until the late 60s (maybe), and the early 70s (for sure) ), Miles didn't invent any trends. Miles fomented macro trends that were already pollinating throughout jazz. He put some of the best collections of the best pieces in place to create elite level music representing those trends and then presented it better than almost anyone else.

Powell ... Sun Ra ... Dolphy ... Ornette ... Woody ... Art Ensemble ... Braxton ... these cats actually invented new music.

Miles is vastly overrated by almost everyone. Everyone is too scared to say so 'cause then they'll get dissed as being unhip to the hippest man in the history. Time to turn that switch off.

Edited January 29, 2006 by johnagrandy

[JSngry]

In my opinion, Woody invented his own musical language (to use Steve Turre's phrase) for the purpose of expressing the continual intense energy of the diametrical self-conflict and accompanying melancholy that characterizes life as it exists for those who continually question "Why?".

The mechanics he invented are fascinating and very relevant to the end result , but the techniques are ultimately only a minor attraction of Woody's music. I don't even understand what he was doing harmonically and rhythmically other than what a few trumpet pros have explained to me.

Confidence is borne of success , but confidence is also borne of distillation through a different prism. And Wood's prism was as rare as they come.

That he successfully connected the people to his simulataneous recognition of the necessity of and his distate for form and civilization , his simultaneous joy and melancholy at engaging in significant human relationships , his simultaneous belief in a better world along with the knowledge that this lofty goal is mortally fantastical and ultimately self-degenerative, his inner conflict that our instinctual desire to reach outside ourselves and our environment is highly dangerous to the carefully constructed foundation that sustains us ...

.... that he accomplished the sublime communication of these deep inner realms during his all too short career places him in a master spiritual plane.

In this regard, I place him above even Miles.

Well, the first part of that is something with which I have no quibble, and the last senetnce goes to personal relevancy of same, so there's no quibble there either. But really - what you say about uniqeness of vision and the "expressing the continual intense energy of the diametrical self-conflict and accompanying melancholy that characterizes life as it exists for those who continually question "Why?"" pertains to pretty much damn near every genius of jazz. That's kinda the essence of the entire thing right there, dig? So, really, unless for some perverse reason you have to have one genius to place above all others, then it's more than good enough to say that Woody Shaw achieved the highest pinnacle of jazz awareness, and that he's in some pretty elite company for having done so, company which includes, yes, Miles. And Bird. And Pres. And Trane. And Newk. And Duke. And so on.

Genius isn't obvious ...otherwise it wouldn't be genius would it ?

Actually, genius is obvious. At least it is for those who have the chops (either intrinsic or developed) to recognize it. Most people don't have these chops because they have been trained, sometimes bluntly, sometimes subtly, to fearfully defer to power of any sort (and the genius of jazz lies in its power of self-definition, which is as big of a threat to the established order as anything imaginable), not to view it as something that they themselves are worthy of partaking in as a functioning ingredient in their own life.

It's precisely this dynamic that leads "the powers that be" to keep a eye out for "genius manifestations" and adjust the prism (to use your word) with which these manifestations are viewed to their advantage.

Think about it - you bitch because Miles is so well-known, but how is he well known to the masees? Do they have even half a clue as to the depth of his genius and/or the true content of his music? Do they really have an understanding of the stories being told in his music(s?)

HELL NO!

They view Miles as the "ultimate" in "cool" or "hip" or whatever, without even having half a clue as to what those terms imply, much less what they really mean (if they do in fact mean anything, which I suggest depends on who's doing the defining). Miles' very real real power has been reduced to a convinient decoy (sound familiar?), something that people are encouraged to partake of at face value, the equivalent of a restaurant that's been relentlessly labeled "the best". It very well may be the best (or close to it) of its type, but how many people eat at such a place and really taste the food?

It's to the restaurant industry's advantage to have such restaurants, because by having such pre-established benchmarks in place, the tendency of so many people to believe the hype w/o any personal/critical discernment means that they pre-buy the experience/reputation rather than the food itself. And that means that they really don't taste how good the food really is. And that means that they don't leave out of there wondering why every other restaurant's food isn't that good, or at least close to it. And that means that things just roll right on along undisturbed & unchanged. Mediocrity (and profit margins) ultimately goes unchallenged, even though excellence is exhalted. Pretty neat trick, eh?

Now, you may want to posit Miles as an equivalent of the above-mentioned "benchmark" restaurant that doesn't exemplify excellence, that exists purely on hype. That would, of course, be your perogative, and from your personal POV, that might indeed be how you see it. But most people who do have the abilty to accurately discern what's what in this music would tell you that you're off-base (although there are a few who would applaud your insight!). Some of us see him as somebody who kept the excellence and took the money, figuring that "the system" was going to be what it was going to be anyway, that somebody was going to get the money anyway, so why the hell shouldn't it be him? Yeah, he was a willing participant in the creation of his own hype, but he never (inarguably pre-retirement, arguably - but not by me - post-retirement) cheapend the value of his product in the process.

Whatever...

Woody Shaw is the primary musical genius of the 20th century ... and that ain't a white thing. It's a black thing.

In the end, what's relevant to you, as a thinking person and not a simple reflexive receptor (or reflexive rejector!) of hype is what you'll place the most value on. But it would behoove you to pay attention to what ends you ultimately put the power that comes with that value (and make no mistake - value is power). Use it to expand awareness, true awareness, deep (so deep you can't get under it) awareness, of yourself and those around you, enabling in both you and them the abiltiy to Travel The Spaceways From The Ancient To The Future, and yeah, that's a black thing.

Use it to smash one empiricism only to replace it with another, and that's just the same thing only different, which is a white thing.

A very white thing.

[JSngry]

Miles is vastly overrated by almost everyone. Everyone is too scared to say so 'cause then they'll get dissed as being unhip to the hippest man in the history. Time to turn that switch off.

Fine. Turn that switch off. I'm all for it.

But you'll still be left with a lifetime of damn fine, strong music.

And if that's not worthy of respect and love, what is?

Perhaps the problem isn't that the serving's too big. Perhaps the problem is that your plate is too small to hold all the food that's available. Or maybe you just need more than one plate.

It's a buffet, dude. All you care to eat. Adjust accordingly.

[Larry Kart]

Jim Sangrey wrote: "...and the genius of jazz lies in its power of self-definition...."

I like that way of thinking and putting it a lot. Sounds simple perhaps, but not so in practice.

[JSngry]

For the most part ( until the late 60s (maybe), and the early 70s (for sure) ), Miles didn't invent any trends. Miles fomented macro trends that were already pollinating throughout jazz. He put some of the best collections of the best pieces in place to create elite level music representing those trends and then presented it better than almost anyone else.

Powell ... Sun Ra ... Dolphy ... Ornette ... Woody ... Art Ensemble ... Braxton ... these cats actually invented new music.

Well now, it's not a true "trend" unless people follow it, is it. And the reasons they follow it are as important as the fact that they do. Those reasons are many, and they are varied.

These "macro trrends" could have, and did, manifest themselves in any number of ways. The root impulse of Horace Silver could have (and did) come out of the "overall mix" as Red Garland or as Les McCann. In which direction did Miles steer the music?

I think you underestimate the skill/art/whatever of exerting power in the cause of providing meaningful direction.

Creation (or invention) is only the first step...

[JSngry]

Jim Sangrey wrote: "...and the genius of jazz lies in its power of self-definition...."

I like that way of thinking and putting it a lot. Sounds simple perhaps, but not so in practice.

Thanks, but everything I had always suspected was merely enforced/confirmed/empowered by the exposure to the thoughts of Anthony Braxton.