George Russell

[Shrdlu]

oh yeah, i wasn't calling you out Shrdlu

I know you weren't. No problemo, hermana!

[Chuck Nessa]

I mean, he's up there with the likes of Manny Albam and the rest.

I hope this was meant as a joke.

[Late]

The George Russell albums on Soul Note are very much worthy of repeated spins. It kind of bugs me that they're sometimes referred to as too "academic." At least I've read that before ...

Just pick 'em up and play the music. The music will tell you if you like them or not.

Can anyone PM me with possible leads to the KC album? I've listened to it on Ghost's show many times, and really like it.

[JSngry]

(y Tejas on vacation?)

Nah. Between drifting further off into the House, LTB having foot surgery that's requiring her to be non-weight-bearing for a 6-8 week minimum, and just getting tired of having the same conversations about the same old stuff year after year, there's not alot for me to add here.

However...

NYNY was my first exposure to Russell. Found the LP in the Treasure City cutout bin. It was under a buck (wasn't my first kill, so I didn't have to drink the blood, but I did anyway), and ironically was also found/purchased alongside Manny Albam's West Side Story side (also in mono & also on Decca). The Albam got dumped eventually, but the George remains, later to be autographed by Jon Hendricks (is this not his highest acheivement? I think so, and he hinted that he did too). Great side.

As for "later" Russell, well hey. Some is not so good, some of it is very good. But none of it is "bad". I'd rather hear somebody like him seeking and not always finding than I would watching him continue to pull the same rabbit out of the same hat pretending that both are "new" when the rabbit's fur is turning grey & molty and the hat's crinkled beyond repair. Kudos to any man who refuses to surrender but instead fights with honor and integrety and wisdom, even if the defeats seem to come more readily than do the triumphs. In the later stages of anybody's game, 1 triumph against complacency and/or redundancy > 100 defeats. The object of the game is not to win cheaply, but to win well, dig? And at some point, it gets harder instead of easier to keep on moving. "Oh well" about that.

But I/we have had this conversation before, and I got some fresh House mixes to explore, so.

And yeah, a hearty welcome back Shrdlu! Something tells me that your absence has not been uninteresting for you. At some point, you maybe will want to fill us in on what's been going on?

[Shrdlu]

I mean, he's up there with the likes of Manny Albam and the rest.

I hope this was meant as a joke.

No, not at all! What I meant was, that Russell can do a "conventional" big band sound (e.g. on NYNY) and I wonder why he didn't record more in that vein. I realize that the "different" things that he did are what makes him stand out, of course.

But I'm a big Manny Albam fan. And I have the likes of Bobby Brookmeyer to back me up on that one. (Got that "West Side Story" LP, btw. Nice.) NYNY has a lot of the same guys that Albam used.

[ghost of miles]

just getting tired of having the same conversations about the same old stuff year after year, there's not alot for me to add here.

But... but... we're just getting started!

[Morganized]

just getting tired of having the same conversations about the same old stuff year after year, there's not alot for me to add here.

But... but... we're just getting started!

Woa! Nothing to add? What the hell!!

You guys know more about jazz than I'll ever know. Some of us here look forward to the comments that you guys contribute. In fact there are a bunch of guys on the board that are extremely knowledgeable.That said, I always look with interest to the comments made by Jim, David and Chuck. Don't always agree, but I do read them with interest.

Now that we have finished the love fest (ha)

Anyway, I hope that was just a temporary sentiment. I think you guys have a lot to add and David says,...we're just getting started.

[Shrdlu]

Now ya made us all sad, JS!

I try to come up with new stuff.

But if ya want to get into McMaster vs TOCJ again, I'm outta here, ha, ha!

Did the RVG of "The Gigolo" ever come out ...

[ghost of miles]

I think you guys have a lot to add and David says,...we're just getting started.

Well, I was being a bit facetious. Jim joined the BNBB in when, 2002? I mean, there are a fair amount of posters here who go back five, six years (and some, like jazzbo, who know other posters from boards that preceded the BNBB). After awhile (and this is endemic, I think, to almost all online communities) you do see a fair amount of rehashing. I wish we discussed improv and new jazz a little more on the board, but hey, I'd better start with the man in the mirror, eh? (I have the same default to the 1945-1990 era and points before/beyond as many others in these parts.) Larry, Jim, Clem, and a # of other folks offer up much of interest here, & I feel as if I can only aspire to that consistent level of ongoing discourse. I do, however, solemnly vow to avoid the following discussions from here on out:

Is Wynton good/bad for jazz?

Was Sinatra a jazz singer?

RVG audio: bright new dawn or a final descent into darkness?

...and, of course...

Is Paul dead? (Obviously!)

[ep1str0phy]

Mercifully, I don't think I've ever seen a Sinatra debate. But all the other stuff--isn't it a general board thing as well? Jazzcorner's debates about Wynton, from what I can tell, are substantially more violent than ours.

[JSngry]

Sorry, didn't meant to be a downer.

Hey, this (jazz) is music that can change your soul, change your mind, change everything about your life. I oughta know. It's done that for me, and I will forever be grateful to it for doing so. It's in me, and it ain't never leaving. It's just that...how long can it be there by itself before the thing itself becomes a stationary object of admiration and not a moving vehicle of transport?

Sometimes you need a fresh perspective on the elements of music, what they are, how they can work together to communicate with the mind, body, and spirit, and how what some people think of as one or some might well reach others as being the other or some others. Certainly the best "older" jazz was all about communication through highly specific conveyances of spirit through tone, rhythm, and texture (notice I'm leaving out harmony, because harmony all by itself really conveys nothing without tone, rhythm, and texture), less so (for me) the overwhelming majority of "current" jazz.

The best house (or more precisely, the best house mixes) I've been hearing displays an incredibly acute awareness of the power inherent in rhytmic manipulation, building tension and release through using conscious repitition & quite specific variations within to get into the subconscious. I'm hearing a "message" there that strikes me as profoundly more relevant to life today than listening to some cats playing tunes & running changes, or doing some abstract "conceptual" thing that you have to think about in order to be able to "feel". That's backasswards to me - first you should feel it, then you should think about it. Of course, there's always exceptions to that, but in my experience, that's the sequence of events that pays off best over the long haul. Feel, then think.

I've said this countless times, but I'll say it again - life today is fundamentally different than it was even 15-20 years ago, and it ain't going back to the way it was any time soon. Time is compressed, "space" & "quiet" as we once knew it has all but been destroyed, and "place" has come to mean not just where you are physically, but also where you are with the assistance of the digital/cyber device of your choice. What I'm liking about house is that it doesn't try to deny any of this. It's built upon it in fact. But the stuff I'm hearing and responding to uses that acknowledgement and turns it on its heels by creating a world of seemingly infinite possibilities of tone, rhythm, and texture (and therefore, emotional/spiritual "space") on top of it all, just as jazz used to "rise above" the horrors and mundanities of its time by confronting them head on and beating them at their own game by finding the weak spots in the logic and plowing through them on the way to the glory of the other side.

Do the people/minds/spirits of house music have what it takes to do for their music to do what jazz did? Well, that will depend on who those people/minds/spirits are, won't it? Over the long haul, I remain skeptical, but what has been done by some people ought to leave hints as to the possibilities for anybody so inclined who's coming along. And since the best of this stuff is still "underground" (although in a pretty large, global underground), untouched for the most part by "mass media" concerns, hey, one never knows, do one? I will say this though - any young, creative musical spirit ought to be paying attention to this stuff, because there's more truth/reality going on there than damn near anywhere else in music today. And just as much bullshit. But what else is ne about that?

Can I burn out on it? Sure, I would think so, given the root functionality of it, and my non-organic relation to same. But one can burn out on the specifics and still learn broader lessons to carry on/out long after the debris is cleared away. If you can't do that with anything, hey, what's life for, then?

Now, what does any of this have to do with George Russell? Well, nothing, but then again, everything. Time, place, space, tone, rhythm, texture, harmony as a means of spirit rather than a tool of functionality, and above all, refusing to become trapped by pre-ordained notions of what all those things "are" that have been handed down by forces ranging in spirit from cluelessly maladroit to venally malevolent and rising above it all by beating the bastards at thier own game, hey, you tell me.

[ghost of miles]

Great post, as always, Jim. Music or art of any kind absolutely has to respond to the time and world in which it's made, and you're right--things are changing out there (& here) fast. Conversely, with the vast expansion of media, it's now possible to immerse yourself in the past in a way that most before us would have been hard-pressed to imagine. I hear you, I really do, on how and why you're responding to house music the way you are, and I think you're right to follow your instincts (your brain and your butt). I'd like to hear more jazz that incorporates what you're talking about; and even if Monday Michiru so far has not made a Bird-like impact on me, I can see what she's pointing to. I think there's a lot of fear in the jazz world; so much of the "greatest generation," both musicians and audience, are dying off, and we've already recycled so much of that era. Maybe I'm overly optimistic/idealistic, but I think that for each generation that comes along, there's a need to produce vital music that's of its time and speaks to the present way of life. And I think the jazz world, grudgingly or not, will respond... will have to respond. As a great man once said, "Necessity is a mother."

[JSngry]

Thanks, David. Now to get the thread back on topic...

Shrdlu, you're a player, so I gotta think you know why Russell didn't do the more "mainstream" arranging gigs. Listen to the standards on NYNY, do you hear anything remotely "mainstream" about the handling of them therein? Melodies are morphed and harmonies extended to the breaking point. Sure, it sounds normal enough in terms of instrumentation, but dude, ain't no way that stuff would get into the mainstream of its day. No way!

Edited March 9, 2007 by JSngry

[Chuck Nessa]

Thanks, David. Now to get the thread back on topic...

Shrdlu, you're a player, so I gotta think you know why Russell didn't do the more "mainstream" arranging gigs. Listen to the standards on NYNY, do you hear anything remotely "mainstream" about the handling of them therein? Melodies are morphed and harmonies extended to the breaking point. Sure, it sounds normal enough in terms of instrumentation, but dude, ain't no way that stuff would get into the mainstream of its day. No way!

This is why I bristled at the Manny Albam mention. He was a fine "craftsman" and Russell was an "artist". We can talk about Russell going "off the tracks" but Albam never got that far.

FWIW, I have worked with Russell and might have a bit (and I do mean "bit") of understanding.

[JSngry]

I spent a day with him at a clinic back in 1981, and I left with the impression that a "bit" is all that anybody's ever going to get.

But that's enough to get you started...

[Shrdlu]

O.K., no more refs to Manny Albam. I was just thinking aloud, really. An album like "Space Age" is very experimental, and nothing like "mainstream" arranging, but the NY album has portions that are very similar to more standard big band stuff. Russell could have done some more of that, if he had wanted to. Some guys like to get into a variety of styles. I do. I'm mainly into what you might call late hardbop, but sometimes I like to get into a Pres or Zoot groove, or do some swing era riffs, and so on.

[JSngry]

...the NY album has portions that are very similar to more standard big band stuff. Russell could have done some more of that, if he had wanted to.

Well yeah, if he had wanted to. One of the memories I have of that clinic is Russell recounting how he had been offered the arranging job for Art Mooney's record of "I'm Looking Over A Four Leaf Clover" (I've heard rumors that he actually took it, that that was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back as far as him pursuing a career as a "commercial arranger", but rumors is all they are). The look of disgust on his face and the tone of repulsion in his voice were almost freighteningly intense. So I don't think he had any eyes whatsoever for anything other than what he did.

[Larry Kart]

Based on what I heard of Manny Albam way back when (mostly big band stuff -- "Drum Suite," yech!) I would agree, but having encountered in recent weeks for the first time a bunch of stuff that Albam wrote for the Hal McKusick Quartet (Hal, Barry Galbraith, Milt Hinton, and Osie Johnson), I think he had a subtler and more individual mind than I used to think. No George Russell of course, just a craftsman as Chuck says, but at best he had his own imprint.

[JSngry]

The best stuff I've heard swings like a mofo. Swings.

When I last left house, mid/late-80s, it was something I heard unwillingly on breaks in clubs, and it was pretty mechanical/techno/boring/irritating. I hated it.

Things have changed, at least in some quarters (there's so many sub-genres, and I do not give a rat's ass about learning what's called what). There's effortless swing, joy, grace, and above all, soul. Deep soul (screw all these "divas" that get all the press. You wanna hear REAL soul singing, there's some stuff in the House that'll blow all that stuff away, and make you wonder where this has been all your Smiling At Freeway Of Love Because It Was Simply An Update Of The Good Old Stuff Wasted Life). I'll take it for as long as it's good to me.

One thing, though, that's definitely sticking is the notion of "set structure". I've long been enamored of playing (in both "free" & "inside" contexts) seamless, continous sets that create an arc, tell a story (big cliche, but a useful one nevertheless), and treat seques between songs as integral musical entities in their own right. But getting players to think like that takes some doing. The bass player needs a sip of scotch. The drummer needs to adjust his hi-hat. Somebody gets sweaty and needs to remove the offending wetness from their forehead. On and on and on. Cats think it's normal, and maybe in one zone it is, but dammit, there's a zone to be reached where none of that shit matters, where you're in the music and the music is in you and it just flows and flows and flows and if/when you stop, you come back to where you started from w/o ever really leaving.

I've seen the AEC play sets like that. I've seen Tower of Power play a set like that. I've got a bootleg or two of Sonny Rollins playing a set like that. I've seen all kinds of bands play a set like that, sometimes as an act of professional necessity, and sometimes as an act of true communion with the musical spirit. And this house stuff, these DJs (who may not be "musicians" but who certainly seem to have a better grasp of what's at stake than many/most who "are") goes there willingly and gladly from the git-go. GIGO still applies, obviously, but you get a cat who's savvy on all counts and you can get there. You can do it live with "real" players, but it takes a willingness to want to get there, and too many cats just aren't interested. Sign of the times...

The bass player needing to stop the groove for a sip of scotch between songs and things like that are definers of a musical zone that I'm no longer interested in inhabiting. If you come to a natural point of rest, hey, take it. But stopping as a matter of ingrained custom and/or "self"-consciousness, hey - you ain't transcending a damn thing in that zone, you're just digging yourself deeper in. Fine for those who want it, but I'm not one of 'em.

Edited March 9, 2007 by JSngry

[JSngry]

Another thing about the best house - it rewards (yes, rewards) close listening (yes, listening). The best cats are highly specific about detail and minutae of all things sonic, and subtleties abound deep within the mixes.

Surprised, no - shocked the hell out of me, but there it is.

Now, let's get back to George Russell.

[Guest donald petersen]

jim, get a groovebox really cheap and screw around.

i recommend a roland D2.

no one wants them so you can get one cheap but it has the guts of a MC-505.

i bet you would have fun.

[Shrdlu]

...the NY album has portions that are very similar to more standard big band stuff. Russell could have done some more of that, if he had wanted to.

I don't think he had any eyes whatsoever for anything other than what he did.

Well, I'm glad that he [George] did what he did.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

After some remarks since my last post, I'm going to go back a little on what I said. I still like Albam a lot, without apology, and I think he was one of the top arrangers. His stuff goes down smooth. One of his strong points was to leave lots of space for solos. All the top players dug him, and wouldn't have worked with him if they didn't care for his charts. In the notes for the Lonehill 2 CD set, Bobby Brookmeyer speaks with great affection about him and his work.

But let's get back to George.

I still haven't heard many of his recordings, e.g. the Riversides. Let's have some comments about his late 50s and 60s records.

[bertrand]

'I think I have told this story before. When "At the Five Spot" was issued I spoke with Ben Young (producer) and he said the choice was between it and "In Kansas City". He said "FS" won over "KC" 'cause they thought that name would sell more cds. He said it was a shame 'cause "KC" had lots of extra material to add. He gave no indication if the extras were alternates or new tunes.'

Thank you for this rare insight into the complex decision making process regarding reissues at the major labels.

To paraphrase John Cleese in a Python sketch about the BBC: 'I'd like to work for Verve on their jazz reissue program, but, unfortunately, I have a degree'.

Bertrand.

[Shrdlu]

What you smoking, Clementine? Far out! Gets me off the hook for my Albam gaffes, ha!

FWIW, I'm clean, too!

There was this film with Glenda Jackson living in an apartment building with a hooker friend, and Glenda was cooking some Italian stuff and ran out of an ingredient. She ran upstairs and banged on her friend's door and said "Do you have any oregano?" You can finish the dialog ...

[Late]

Not related to the music, but Russell's The Outer View had three covers. Anyone know which was the original? I always assumed it was the OJC cover, but it might be the one with Russell in front of F.L. Wright's famous building ...

Anyone here like Trip to Prilaguri? Now there's a Soul Note side that no one seems to mention.