free jazz album i got, is this a good one?

[clifford_thornton]

Guess I'm not part of that "cognoscenti" either. I think he's good. Not everything he does is good, but there is no way I'd count him out.

[JETman]

As I mentioned, many of the musicians (several of whom were known and well-respected) thought very little of Mr. Murray's playing.

Btw, J&R used to be (ans still may be) the place to be in NYC for buying jazz. Many of "those in the know" bought their stuff there.

Edited May 17, 2010 by JETman

[kh1958]

Who cares? He's good as far as I'm concerned, based on seeing him live live a half dozen times and having a fair number of his recordings.

[clifford_thornton]

Right.

Also, be careful to take hook, line, and sinker what other musicians think. Competition for bread crumbs is pretty massive in this music.

[A Lark Ascending]

Rumour has it that David Murray is about to reissue his entire catalogue in one huge boxed set with free used reed included with every numbered set.

No complaining, now.

(I like David Murray - lots of variety in what he does. But if I thought I was part of a 'cognoscenti' I'd resign immediately).

Edited May 17, 2010 by Bev Stapleton

[sidewinder]

Looking forward to the performance at Bath in a couple of weeks time. It will be the first time I think that I've seen him (maybe I have but if so I forgot it !)

[A Lark Ascending]

He did a really interesting clarinet duo concert with Louis Sclavis at Bath a few years back.

The one I saw that blew my socks off was with a quartet including Hamid Drake at Cheltenham. One of the finest live gigs I've been to (matched the night before by a blistering John Surman quartet concert).

[clifford_thornton]

I like chewy's variant just fine, haha.

[Guest Bill Barton]

I like chewy's variant just fine, haha.

Me too... And I agree that this is among the better early Murray albums. The Low Class Conspiracy stuff from around the same time with - gasp! - Stanley Crouch on drums is pretty sad in comparison, for instance.

[relyles]

According to this discography, he released 84 albums as a leader or co-leader from 1976-2000. That equates to a new album every 15.5 weeks, not every two weeks.

http://go54321.tripod.com/dm/davidmurray.html

Still a ridiculous clip! At any rate, he was (and still is) considered a poseur by the jazz cognescenti I used to hang with at J&R. Many of these were musicians, btw.

This comment reminded me of this prior discussion:

David Murray Thread

[clifford_thornton]

The Low Class Conspiracy isn't great but some of it gets the job done; I like the Circle LPs just fine. Also, it's a great name for a band, even today.

[JETman]

Right.

Also, be careful to take hook, line, and sinker what other musicians think. Competition for bread crumbs is pretty massive in this music.

As Pink Floyd once said: "I don't need no education"!

Yeah, ok, that's why musicians say Murray sucks --- because they want more money for themselves.

Ever hear of David S. Ware? Plays rings around Mr. Murray, and doesn't need nearly as many albums to prove it.

[clifford_thornton]

I think you are missing the point.

[JSngry]

I'd like to know who it was that was doing the dissing...although, gee, it's hard for me to conceive of a bunch of NYC jazz musicians being anything but unbiased and objective about a "competitor".

I'm on record in that other thread as saying that Murray had some problems, to me, obvious problems, earlier on, but to focus on them at the expense of overlooking his just as obvious gifts is just as bad as going at it the other way around.

Here's the deal - everybody wants HEROES & GIANTS because that's what used to be. Well, today...not so much, so a lot of people seem to have lost any sense of balance when it comes to "critical evaluation" (as in individual sensibilities, not "the critics", although that shoe fits quite often as well...). So when a guy puts out as much as Murray has, the gut reaction is either HE'S GREAT! or HE SUCKS! Nothing in between, which is a shame, really because that's a great deal of his work lies, and all things considered, that ain't a bad place to be.

Besides, technically, he's a significantly better player now than he was in the 70s & 80s. It's obvious that the guy's been doing the work. Just good old-fashioned...labor. Not a particularly "pretty" picture, but that's how skills get got.

[Pete C]

Ever hear of David S. Ware? Plays rings around Mr. Murray, and doesn't need nearly as many albums to prove it.

I didn't realize they were involved in a cutting contest.

[clifford_thornton]

The closest thing that I can think of is they each appear (on separate tracks) of William Hooker's Is Eternal Life LP. They are both excellent on it, and are both hit-or-miss throughout their 30+ year career. Whatever.

[Guy Berger]

This comment reminded me of this prior discussion:

David Murray Thread

That was a very interesting thread, actually, despite generating some heated discussion.

I've probably only heard about ten recordings with Murray (as either a sideman or leader), but have liked his playing on pretty much all of them. I don't really get the passionate hostility he seems to generate in some listeners, but we all have different ears.

Guy

[Chuck Nessa]

It makes a difference if you were there when this stuff was happening. Regular contact with some of the participants adds more color.

Lots of folks would pay $7000 for an Edsel today.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Chuck Nessa

[AllenLowe]

on youtube there's some clips of a Murray Octet from Europe, maybe the 1980s - it's got Hemphill on it, and a great pianist names Curtis Clark who, strangely enough, now lives in Portland, Maine.

it was a shock to me to hear how amateurish the arrangements sounded.

My feeling about David, whose playing I liked at first, is that he has a certain way of doing things which he tends to repeat. Gets a little tiresome. Like him.

[JohnS]

We are still waiting for Chewy's opinion!!!!

[David Ayers]

We are still waiting for Chewy's opinion!!!!

I told you, chewy's gonna re-record the album on a kazoo without hearing it and based on our comments in this thread.

[marcello]

According to this discography, he released 84 albums as a leader or co-leader from 1976-2000. That equates to a new album every 15.5 weeks, not every two weeks.

http://go54321.tripod.com/dm/davidmurray.html

Still a ridiculous clip! At any rate, he was (and still is) considered a poseur by the jazz cognescenti I used to hang with at J&R. Many of these were musicians, btw.

All I can say is...Yep!

[Pete C]

it was a shock to me to hear how amateurish the arrangements sounded.

What does an amateurish arrangement sound like? What does a professionalish arrangement sound like?

[JETman]

I'd like to know who it was that was doing the dissing...although, gee, it's hard for me to conceive of a bunch of NYC jazz musicians being anything but unbiased and objective about a "competitor".

I'm on record in that other thread as saying that Murray had some problems, to me, obvious problems, earlier on, but to focus on them at the expense of overlooking his just as obvious gifts is just as bad as going at it the other way around.

Here's the deal - everybody wants HEROES & GIANTS because that's what used to be. Well, today...not so much, so a lot of people seem to have lost any sense of balance when it comes to "critical evaluation" (as in individual sensibilities, not "the critics", although that shoe fits quite often as well...). So when a guy puts out as much as Murray has, the gut reaction is either HE'S GREAT! or HE SUCKS! Nothing in between, which is a shame, really because that's a great deal of his work lies, and all things considered, that ain't a bad place to be.

Besides, technically, he's a significantly better player now than he was in the 70s & 80s. It's obvious that the guy's been doing the work. Just good old-fashioned...labor. Not a particularly "pretty" picture, but that's how skills get got.

I will not name names! One in particular, though, is a living legend.

[JETman]

I think you are missing the point.

What is the point as you see it?

Bear in mind that comments made on the 'net are consistently misinterpreted.