Review of a review of "Four MF's Playin' Tunes"

[Lazaro Vega]

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/column/163040-is-innovation-required/

[JSngry]

here we go again...

[bneuman]

I think innovation is certainly required for jazz.

If we don't innovate in our jazz, then the Japanese will beat us, like they have in everything else.

We need to reshape our educational system to make sure our jazz can compete with the Japanese. All of our nation's children, not just a few Vijay Iyers and Robert Glaspers, need to learn how to adapt the jazz idiom to accommodate "hip-hop beats" and "odd-time signatures". Incorporating these innovations will make jazz "innovative" and "relevant" in the same way that bebop was innovative and relevant in the 1940s.

I did not know Charlie Parker personally, but I know if he were here today, he would play Anthropology in 7 with a drum 'n' bass beat behind it, and then play a Michael Jackson tune. I know this because Charlie Parker was an innovator, innovation is what's good about music, and awkwardly adapting a 70 year-old idiom constitutes innovation.

The only thing preventing modern jazz from attaining Radiohead-like popularity is the stodgy, institutionalized unwillingness to burn the Gershwin/Porter/etc repertoire to the ground and replace it with more relevant, innovative artists, like Michael Jackson.

However, I should note, these innovations and relevancies must be incorporated in an "individual" way. Jazz is an American music. America is all about individuals and individualism. Individuals are the ones who innovate relevancies. So, when you innovate relevant jazz, you have to do it in a way that is individual to you, an individual, personally. That is what John Coltrane, an individual, did.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Ben Neuman

[JSngry]

I'd settle for people just having their own distinctively individual tones and time feels, And an equally distinctively personal sens of what timbres and textures to frame that with.

Not innovation, just some basic personality. Character. A unique identity. Innovate the person, not the "style".

Get that in place, then we can talk.

Or even better, not talk. Just listen.

[David Ayers]

Listening to it now. Pleasant, light, swinging music - or 'jazz', as it is widely known. Played by Branford Marsalis and three blurry guys behind him who are as essential to the quartet as he is.

[Lazaro Vega]

7e5f2738db56a2c36d922cbc9c188828

[Dan Gould]

I think innovation is certainly required for jazz.

If we don't innovate in our jazz, then the Japanese will beat us, like they have in everything else.

We need to reshape our educational system to make sure our jazz can compete with the Japanese. All of our nation's children, not just a few Vijay Iyers and Robert Glaspers, need to learn how to adapt the jazz idiom to accommodate "hip-hop beats" and "odd-time signatures". Incorporating these innovations will make jazz "innovative" and "relevant" in the same way that bebop was innovative and relevant in the 1940s.

I did not know Charlie Parker personally, but I know if he were here today, he would play Anthropology in 7 with a drum 'n' bass beat behind it, and then play a Michael Jackson tune. I know this because Charlie Parker was an innovator, innovation is what's good about music, and awkwardly adapting a 70 year-old idiom constitutes innovation.

The only thing preventing modern jazz from attaining Radiohead-like popularity is the stodgy, institutionalized unwillingness to burn the Gershwin/Porter/etc repertoire to the ground and replace it with more relevant, innovative artists, like Michael Jackson.

However, I should note, these innovations and relevancies must be incorporated in an "individual" way. Jazz is an American music. America is all about individuals and individualism. Individuals are the ones who innovate relevancies. So, when you innovate relevant jazz, you have to do it in a way that is individual to you, an individual, personally. That is what John Coltrane, an individual, did.

Assuming this is satire, :tup

[AllenLowe]

I don't know if this is true, but I was told that Robert Glasper said, recently, that what jazz needs is more shootings.

[Justin V]

For me, the article raises another important question: Shouldn't a review of a review at least get the title of the album right? It's Four MFs Playin' Tunes, not Four MFers Playin' Tunes.

[Big Wheel]

I did not know Charlie Parker personally, but I know if he were here today, he would play Anthropology in 7 with a drum 'n' bass beat behind it

You laugh, but I think Donna Lee would sound super hip played at about 350 bpm over this kind of groove. I tried to do it with a combo last year but the guitar player was more interested in being an exact copy of Django Reinhardt and nobody could play the head that fast anyway.

[jeffcrom]

I'd settle for people just having their own distinctively individual tones and time feels, And an equally distinctively personal sens of what timbres and textures to frame that with.

Not innovation, just some basic personality. Character. A unique identity. Innovate the person, not the "style".

Get that in place, then we can talk.

Or even better, not talk. Just listen.

Amen, Brother Sangrey!

Before I'm interested in a person's music, he has to sound like himself. (Or she/herself.) That's more important than if they're playing chord changes or not.

The above is not a review of Mr. Marsalis' album, which I haven't heard.

Edited September 28, 2012 by jeffcrom

[JSngry]

I did not know Charlie Parker personally, but I know if he were here today, he would play Anthropology in 7 with a drum 'n' bass beat behind it

You laugh, but I think Donna Lee would sound super hip played at about 350 bpm over this kind of groove. I tried to do it with a combo last year but the guitar player was more interested in being an exact copy of Django Reinhardt and nobody could play the head that fast anyway.

Something sorta kinda like that:

Now that's not particularly good, but it's because it's not being done particularly well, not because of what is being done in and of itself.

(and those w/long memories might remember the Decoding Society doing something vaguely similar with this same tune...)

[Lazaro Vega]

There's this one:

Ronnie Cuber on bari.

[JSngry]

That's too slow!

[Michael Weiss]

I think innovation is certainly required for jazz.

If we don't innovate in our jazz, then the Japanese will beat us, like they have in everything else.

We need to reshape our educational system to make sure our jazz can compete with the Japanese. All of our nation's children, not just a few Vijay Iyers and Robert Glaspers, need to learn how to adapt the jazz idiom to accommodate "hip-hop beats" and "odd-time signatures". Incorporating these innovations will make jazz "innovative" and "relevant" in the same way that bebop was innovative and relevant in the 1940s.

I did not know Charlie Parker personally, but I know if he were here today, he would play Anthropology in 7 with a drum 'n' bass beat behind it, and then play a Michael Jackson tune. I know this because Charlie Parker was an innovator, innovation is what's good about music, and awkwardly adapting a 70 year-old idiom constitutes innovation.

The only thing preventing modern jazz from attaining Radiohead-like popularity is the stodgy, institutionalized unwillingness to burn the Gershwin/Porter/etc repertoire to the ground and replace it with more relevant, innovative artists, like Michael Jackson.

However, I should note, these innovations and relevancies must be incorporated in an "individual" way. Jazz is an American music. America is all about individuals and individualism. Individuals are the ones who innovate relevancies. So, when you innovate relevant jazz, you have to do it in a way that is individual to you, an individual, personally. That is what John Coltrane, an individual, did.

Assuming this is satire, :tup

I sure hope so!

[fasstrack]

I think innovation is certainly required for jazz.

If we don't innovate in our jazz, then the Japanese will beat us, like they have in everything else.

We need to reshape our educational system to make sure our jazz can compete with the Japanese. All of our nation's children, not just a few Vijay Iyers and Robert Glaspers, need to learn how to adapt the jazz idiom to accommodate "hip-hop beats" and "odd-time signatures". Incorporating these innovations will make jazz "innovative" and "relevant" in the same way that bebop was innovative and relevant in the 1940s.

I did not know Charlie Parker personally, but I know if he were here today, he would play Anthropology in 7 with a drum 'n' bass beat behind it, and then play a Michael Jackson tune.

Very good. AND you had me going for a minute! Once past the effective sarcasm I recognized a superior mind at work. I could tell b/c your opinions and mine are identical (;

[fasstrack]

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/column/163040-is-innovation-required/

Laz, I can't get the link w/my primitave cell phone, invented by Alexander Graham Cracker himself. And there's rule 1286.43, banning direct posting of copywritten material lest the transgressor be put in stocks or made to listen to recordings of Keith Jarrett berating an audience member he caught moving during an innovative performance. I would like to read it, though. Could you email it to me? OK, time to put the cell phone to bed next to my toga, sandals, abacus, and sundial. Socrates is speaking tonight and I don't want to miss it. Word has it that he's to try out a new potion left by admirers by the lectern. I think it's called hem-something or other (;

[Teasing the Korean]

I think if Charlie Parker were here today he would have Jheri curls to show how hip he is.

Also, today's players need to wear leisure suits like Bill Evans did in the 70s to keep keep jazz alive and moving in new directions.

[JSngry]

It was polyester what killed Bill Evans, not cocaine.

Granted, they were neck and neck, so either one could have one the race, depending on where the finish line was.

But since it was where it was, polyester takes the trophy.

[Teasing the Korean]

It was polyester what killed Bill Evans, not cocaine.

Granted, they were neck and neck, so either one could have one the race, depending on where the finish line was.

But since it was where it was, polyester takes the trophy.

It was truly a combination. Because polyester does not breathe, it is harder to sweat out the toxins, so truly, the polyester exacerbated the effects of the drugs.

Now, many of the players who are keeping jazz relevant by incorporating the sounds of today (e.g. Michael Jackson, Christopher Cross, Billy Ocean, etc.) do not do drugs, so the polyester/toxin issue will be less important.

Also, they are developing new space-age polymers that combine the classic look of vintage polyester with the breathability of cotton. When they use these fibers to create 21st-century leisure suits, even drug addicts will be able to wear them without fear.

[JSngry]

Perfect world!

[Noj]

I think the only thing that matters is making good songs with beautiful, memorable melodies and rhythms and moments. The medium or category or genre is beside the point. Make enjoyable noises.

Innovations, schminovation. Make music to the best of your ability based on what you know and where you want to take it. Let the fuckers who need everything to move forward sort it out.

[A Lark Ascending]

I saw the BM Quartet a few years back and really enjoyed them.

I wish they'd put out flyers to tell me I was supposed to dislike them for not being innovative enough.

Thank god we have critics to lead us to the true path.

[David]

I don't have much by BF, but I enjoy Contemporary Jazz(?) and Requiem, particularly Kenny Kirkland's playing.

Perhaps I'm the only one here, but I enjoy Bring on the Night as well.

[clifford_thornton]

I'd settle for people just having their own distinctively individual tones and time feels, And an equally distinctively personal sens of what timbres and textures to frame that with.

Not innovation, just some basic personality. Character. A unique identity. Innovate the person, not the "style".

Get that in place, then we can talk.

Or even better, not talk. Just listen.

Amen, Brother Sangrey!

Before I'm interested in a person's music, he has to sound like himself. (Or she/herself.) That's more important than if they're playing chord changes or not.

The above is not a review of Mr. Marsalis' album, which I haven't heard.

Right-o.