Sonny Rollins blindfold test

[Milestones]

Just that several posters said, "So what is Sonny going to learn from so-and-so?"

So, sell a few magazines. My god, how many copies can Downbeat be expected to sell per month? I'm glad to see it' still afloat. And if it offers any exposure to Sonny, that's a good thing.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Milestones

[JSngry]

OK, these last few posts I have read seem to be coming awfully close to saying that once you are a jazz great you are simply a god-like entity who is entitled to ignore those who follow and try to add to the jazz continuum.

Dude - that's a basic human right, ok?

Two words - Bob Wilber.

Two more words - Sonny Rollins.

Three Little Words:

[Larry Kart]

Bob Wilber?

[JSngry]

OK, didn't Duke record with such young punks as Coltrane, Mingus, Max Roach, and Clark Terry?

But - you never saw a Duke Ellington Blindfold Test (at least not that I know of).

When left to his own devices, Duke Ellington was not Alan Douglas or Bob Theile. Duke Ellington had neither time nor need to be Alan Douglas or Bob Thiele, being Duke Ellington was a full-time gig in itself, right?

And, Clark Terry joined the band in 1951..hardly a young punk even then!

But all of that aside - if you want to compare the jazz reality of Ellington's "later" years to those of Sonny's "later" years, let's line everybody up in a cemetery and see how much overlap there is. And then let's look at who's working where, how often, for how much, and with what kind of bands.

Apples and oranges.

Bob Wilber?

Yeah, somebody who willingly sealed themselves off, so to speak, from anything past a certain evolutionary point in order to do whatever it was they had to do.

Granted, Wilber's starting point came from all kinds of "outside" his own chronology, but it wasn't meant to go that far to make THAT point. It was just to say that everybody has the right to call it quits on where there "there" is, that that's not any kind of a "fault" in and of itself.

[Milestones]

You can argue all you want, though I have to say I don't know what you are arguing about.

Well, 1951 is not "early" when you figure Duke had been in business for at least a quarter-century by then--and he was over 50 and CT was about 30.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Milestones

[MomsMobley]

Was about to add, having listened to three hours of Clark Terry on WKCR this afternoon, CT hasn't been a 'punk' since 1940... tho' he's pretty nice here as a middle-aged duffer--

not to forget--

[Larry Kart]

OK, I guess -- but Bob Wilber was never that much of a Bob Wilber IMO.

[Milestones]

Wow, a 45 of "Brownskin Girl."

[JSngry]

also this, which is remarkable on # of levels not least Leonard Cohen, who had to be thrilled, keeping it intensely cool--

Dude - I saw that show in real time, VCR-ed it, and have damn near worn the tape out on that one clip.

The show itself, first view, had a weird arc, there was all this anticipation for me, because Sonny was never one to do a lot of TV, but when he did,like on that Dizzy Tribute show, or the first DB Awards show on Soundstage, it was of memorable proportions.

This one, the first cut was as a guest with the house band and as co-frontliner with Dave Sanborn (to whom much props, jsut because). The clip's on YT somewhre I think, but no matter. Sonny was definitely in "teaser" mode, tantalizing moments followed by, oh, yeah, right, this is tv bits, nback and forth like that. So...frustration.

And the...what they don't show you on that clip is that immediately prior to the live performance, they did like they did on Night Music and came back from a commerical break with a "vintage" clip, this of sonny playing "God Bless The Child" with Jim Hall from whatever show that was on...that's the relevance of Sonny's brief GBTC quote in the live performance.

Anyway, the effect was electrifying, like, WHOA! then and now, from tux and shit to THIS...and then he started playing...oh my god, has anybody ever filled a horn up with as much air as Sonny Rollins? I don't think so...people might have played with wider (hello, Gene Ammons) and/or louder sounds (hello Albert Ayler), but that's not what I mean...maybe you have to be a tenorist to really feel it, or maybe not, but GOODGOD , that's a F**KING LOT of air going through that horn to get that sound.

So I'm thinking that this is going to be an extended sonny Solo segment, but no, what;''s this, Leornard Cohen? LEONARD COHEN? With SONNY ROLLINS? AT THE SAME TIME? WTF? How is this not going to be weird...and then Sweet Pea Atkinson is back there doing his thing, and ok, we are hitting a groove here, but...Sonny?

And then, then Sonny just steps up and delivers. No teasers here, he's in there, pop going the weasel, yes, but unfiltered harmonic moves and willful effortless rhythmaning and yes, SO MUCH AIR IN THAT HORN.

Ok, I'm getting goosebumpy and could have been content there, but then the little cadenza at the end, EVEN MORE AIR (how much air is there, anyway?) and that last slide down to the in-the-leg low (tenor) A, in the leg becuase that's the only way to get it out of the instrument, and again, effortlessly and perfectly and SO MUCH AIR, you shouldn't be able to hit that note with that much air and nail it that perfectly, and then, the last note...jesus christ, what have I just heard, I mean, really, what have I just heard here, from start to finish? and then Sonny looks at Leonard and gives him that little grinny head nod that says, ok mortals, we've had a good time together, haven't we, you know a lot, but there's always more, trust me, there's always more, but yes, that was fun, wasn't it! More fun than playing with the Stones, for sure!

And then...nowhere near as intense as this, but there's the George Braith side where Sonny plays keys, just the keys of the saxophone. Pops the keys to play his solo. No air, just key-popping. Every note clearly defined too, which is not exactly a virtuoso move, more like a foundational one, like yeah, I know this instrument so well that I can play it without blowing it (Pharoah does this too, btw, although he incorporates it into the "show", Sonny, Ithink was just out in Braith's club and decided for whatever reason to do this...I wonder if he knew tape was running?). Not exactly "essential" but just goes to show you, Sonny knows the instrument about as well as anybody who has ever played it. Anybody.

But that Night Music clip...geez, I get goose-bumpy all over again just typing about it.

OK, I guess -- but Bob Wilber was never that much of a Bob Wilber IMO.

Exactly. Point just being that the act of "withdrawal" is not in and of itself anything other than just that, there's no intrinsic, predictable purely musical implication in or effect of so doing.

Wow, a 45 of "Brownskin Girl."

Yeah, that's a new one on me too. Where was THAT jukebox, eh?

[Gheorghe]

I don´t know what´s wrong in it, if he doesn´t recognize players from a younger generations, players who probably somehow more or less where influenced by HIM!

Musicians seldom buy and collect records the way jazz lovers do it.

and it would have been easier to recognize players from his generation like Trane or Hank Mobley, or some of his mentors like Hawk, Lester, maybe Don Byas.

[erwbol]

But don't they have opportunities to meet other younger players of their instrument? Don't musicians play their horns in each other's company?

[soulpope]

based on the reactions/feedback here this blindfold test at least helps to broaden down beat s marketing zone ;-)

[clifford_thornton]

Nothing wrong with them, but what would they have to offer Sonny Rollins other than the ability to name-drop with confidence?

At some point, an artist stops growing outward and grows inward. If they don't do that, then they've yet to find their voice, so...game not over, but lost. At least, that game. That's not to say that they shut themselves off from everybody and everything else, but as it pertains to their own pursuits directly with their instrument,..Michael Brecker made his first record in when, 1970? Think about how music saxophone Sonny Rollins had already played by 1970, not "styles" but saxophone. the instrument itself. what it can do, what it can't do, what you think it can't do but oh, looks like it can, By 1970, Rollins had heard, and lived with, a.o.Hawk, Prez, Byas, Bird, Trane, Ornette, and Ayler - real giants from within his own continuum that carved out space for themselves as foundational beings. What is Michael Brecker going to bring to Sonny Rollins' table about things you can do on a saxophone that are relevant to further becoming Sonny Rollins?

Not a knock on Brecker, or Lovano, or any of these people. They're all great musicians and fine jazz players. But I'll give you all their collected works if that's what it takes to keep one copy of, say, Sonny Meets Hawk or Alfie, never mind the Golden 1950s stuff that everybody's so damn stuck on as being the "apex" of Rollins or some such foolishness. Those are documents of a - another - foundational being. The other people are nice add-ons, but like all add-ons, they can be disappeared at no great loss to eternity. Not so the foundations, and there are reasons for that, not the least of which is that the foundations aren't always bothered with the need to keep up with P.R. niceties like being able to name-drop with confidence.

Would you expect Louis Armstrong to have picked out Donald Byrd in a Blindfold test? If so, why? Did Louis Armstrong "need" to hear Donald Byrd, or for that matter, Clifford Brown? Does Sonny Rollins "need" to hear James Carter? Hell, Sonny heard Lockjaw, what is James Carter going to tell Sonny Rollins that Sonny Rollins needs to hear?

Sonny made an album with Branford guesting on a few cuts. It sounded like a current Sonny playing with a 30 years younger Sonny - imitating himself. Nice for consumers, but relevant to Sonny himself, how, exactly?

These are artists, all of them, not consumers. It's one thing to know them as peers (or at least co-questers), quite another to get into knowing their work to the point of fanboy record-collecting them. Especially when you wonder what's wrong with an 80 year old man who has played as much music as Sonny Rollins has for not being able to recognize Joe Lovano in a Blindfold Test. I mean, really, that matters, at all?

What is it that makes people want to bring everybody down to their level? If Sonny Rollins aced a Blindfold Test of nothing but people who began playing post 1970, what, would that make him "better"? Or would that just make consumers feel safer about the good/great Medium-Sized Life that passes for "greatness" these days? Oh wow, Don't Ask, not so bad after all, instead of wow, Don't Ask,at once great AND not good at all, gee I have to think about this now...uh...this is hard...I think I'll play a Josh Redman record instead, that's easier, it's Always Very Good...Ahhhh...that's better now!

World gone wrong, Very Tall People are not Giants, simple as that, and killing all the Giants doesn't change anything.

This.

[paul secor]

OK, didn't Duke record with such young punks as Coltrane, Mingus, Max Roach, and Clark Terry?

Are you equating Coltrane, Mingus, Max Roach, and Clark Terry with Lovano, Brecker, Branford Marsalis, and James Carter?

They all play instruments but, for me, that's the extent of it.

[Leeway]

QUOTE: "At some point, an artist stops growing outward and grows inward."

That is way too neat and clean, and I doubt anyway if it is even possible.

The "Problem" with Sonny is that for the last several decades he had not been a factor in the development of jazz/improvisation. Choosing to play with musical props rather than formidable contemporaries has not allowed Sonny to grow inward or outward. Sonny has been treated like a Mayan temple: anyone who dared climb the steps was thrown down into the sacrificial pit. Easier than learning to deal with them.

In my own cheesy psychologizing, Coltrane created a crisis of confidence in Rollins that was never resolved, bridge or no bridge. Rollins and his advisers (family and hired) figured the best way to deal with it, is to have Sonny play with sock puppets or really good pals who would not pose any difficulties, while he soloed like crazy, solipsistically, one-dimensionally, objectless.

I see time and again on the Org Board a sort of Panglossian quietism that says whatever is, is right. Here it's whatever Sonny does, is right I don't believe that for a second. Maybe right for him, but not right for this music or this art. If it is, then we might as well throw everything out except for the divine works of Sonny Rollins, and worship.

I fo one would have liked to have seen him play with David S. Ware, or....why not? Evan Parker, or Steve Lacy, or Cecil, or Ornette. Screw Branford. There were a lot of giants that walked the land when Sonny was active (and there still are), but he just acted like a tall person.

[jazztrain]

Still not sure how Bob Wilber surfaced in this thread. I get your point to some extent. Bob Wilber at various times has, to some extent, channeled Bechet on Soprano, Goodman on clarinet, Hodges on alto, and Hawkins on tenor. However, his pairing with Kenny Davern in Soprano Summit and the later Summit Reunion was pretty distinctive and original in its own way, and his recordings with The Six certainly went way beyond his "roots" or "starting point."

OK, didn't Duke record with such young punks as Coltrane, Mingus, Max Roach, and Clark Terry?

But - you never saw a Duke Ellington Blindfold Test (at least not that I know of).

When left to his own devices, Duke Ellington was not Alan Douglas or Bob Theile. Duke Ellington had neither time nor need to be Alan Douglas or Bob Thiele, being Duke Ellington was a full-time gig in itself, right?

And, Clark Terry joined the band in 1951..hardly a young punk even then!

But all of that aside - if you want to compare the jazz reality of Ellington's "later" years to those of Sonny's "later" years, let's line everybody up in a cemetery and see how much overlap there is. And then let's look at who's working where, how often, for how much, and with what kind of bands.

Apples and oranges.

Bob Wilber?

Yeah, somebody who willingly sealed themselves off, so to speak, from anything past a certain evolutionary point in order to do whatever it was they had to do.

Granted, Wilber's starting point came from all kinds of "outside" his own chronology, but it wasn't meant to go that far to make THAT point. It was just to say that everybody has the right to call it quits on where there "there" is, that that's not any kind of a "fault" in and of itself.

[JSngry]

I see time and again on the Org Board a sort of Panglossian quietism that says whatever is, is right. Here it's whatever Sonny does, is right I don't believe that for a second. Maybe right for him, but not right for this music or this art. If it is, then we might as well throw everything out except for the divine works of Sonny Rollins, and worship.

Don't know if I give credence to the model that what's good for an individual as a person is ultimately less important than what is important for the industry in which they labor.

[Leeway]

I see time and again on the Org Board a sort of Panglossian quietism that says whatever is, is right. Here it's whatever Sonny does, is right I don't believe that for a second. Maybe right for him, but not right for this music or this art. If it is, then we might as well throw everything out except for the divine works of Sonny Rollins, and worship.

Don't know if I give credence to the model that what's good for an individual as a person is ultimately less important than what is important for the industry in which they labor.

I tend to see it as an art form.

[Milestones]

One of my points (it really it has been discussed ad infinitum over decades now) is that Sonny largely isolated himself and could have been more in tune with succeeding generations and used more of these players on his own records. Again, the model here is Miles Davis, and many fans felt he went too much with the younger guys and was too much into the latest trends. I personally find his post-1970 work hit-and-miss, but I'm glad he did what he did.

But for Sonny it is not really so cut-and-dried. As I've mentioned, he sometimes recorded with very decent younger guys like Stephen Scott and Roy Hargrove. He did have the meeting with Ornette, found on Road Shows Vol. 2.

Bottom line, Sonny is who he is, and god love him for his comments on the blindfold test, which show him engaged and respectful.

[JSngry]

I see time and again on the Org Board a sort of Panglossian quietism that says whatever is, is right. Here it's whatever Sonny does, is right I don't believe that for a second. Maybe right for him, but not right for this music or this art. If it is, then we might as well throw everything out except for the divine works of Sonny Rollins, and worship.

Don't know if I give credence to the model that what's good for an individual as a person is ultimately less important than what is important for the industry in which they labor.

I tend to see it as an art form.

Well. ok. but an "art form" that entertains the wants of its consumers as well as its creators is a business, and a business that is about getting product to market eventually becomes an industry.

So, if Sonny Rollins has failed to provide you with what you want/need, he has failed his industry, even though he might have served his own personal wants and needs just fine.

I don't expect anybody to listen trough all the 40+ years of brilliances and thudbooms of misses and "worship". But hostility on the grounds that the man had a faulty personal agenda/business plan, that if he HAD done XYZ then everything would have been allright, that's supremely industrial in it evaluation. Sonny "failed" because he didn't have the right parts installed, something like that, like the only thing that effects a player is who's on the stand that night or in the studio that afternoon, just show up and execute. Get that model SR back into R&D and don't come out until all the glitches and bugs have been removed.

Sorry, just not feeling that. If the guy wanted to play with David S. Ware, he would have. As it is, didn't they practice together for a while? That's where you'd really learn, one on one practice sessions. The whole "record/concert=reality" thing, that's basically industry glimmer to get in you eyes when the smoke clears. Now, sure, ther are plenty of peole who WANT to fo it like that, but not everybody does. One size does not fit all.

[Milestones]

Sonny is who Sonny is, and that should be the end of the discussion.

But I have to add that most fans have to rely on the recorded work to get our impressions. At least nowadays we can tap into a lot of concert footage, which will of course be of varying quality. And seeing a concert on YouTube is not the same as being there.

I was fortunate to catch Sonny in person once, and I have to say it was as great a concert as I have ever attended.

[Leeway]

I see time and again on the Org Board a sort of Panglossian quietism that says whatever is, is right. Here it's whatever Sonny does, is right I don't believe that for a second. Maybe right for him, but not right for this music or this art. If it is, then we might as well throw everything out except for the divine works of Sonny Rollins, and worship.

Don't know if I give credence to the model that what's good for an individual as a person is ultimately less important than what is important for the industry in which they labor.

I tend to see it as an art form.

Well. ok. but an "art form" that entertains the wants of its consumers as well as its creators is a business, and a business that is about getting product to market eventually becomes an industry.

So, if Sonny Rollins has failed to provide you with what you want/need, he has failed his industry, even though he might have served his own personal wants and needs just fine.

I don't expect anybody to listen trough all the 40+ years of brilliances and thudbooms of misses and "worship". But hostility on the grounds that the man had a faulty personal agenda/business plan, that if he HAD done XYZ then everything would have been allright, that's supremely industrial in it evaluation. Sonny "failed" because he didn't have the right parts installed, something like that, like the only thing that effects a player is who's on the stand that night or in the studio that afternoon, just show up and execute. Get that model SR back into R&D and don't come out until all the glitches and bugs have been removed.

Sorry, just not feeling that. If the guy wanted to play with David S. Ware, he would have. As it is, didn't they practice together for a while? That's where you'd really learn, one on one practice sessions. The whole "record/concert=reality" thing, that's basically industry glimmer to get in you eyes when the smoke clears. Now, sure, ther are plenty of peole who WANT to fo it like that, but not everybody does. One size does not fit all.

It's art first, commerce second. I think Sonny failed his art after 1970 or so. Commerce has succeeded brilliantly in marketing him. Money has been made, so no complaints there. I give Sonny the respect of looking at him as an artist, a person, not a myth or a god. Serving one's own personal needs and wants doesn't necessarily translate into serving the art. It's just solipsism. Sonny's greatness came as much from other musicians as from himself; in other words, he fed off them, and they fed off him. When he began playing with sock puppets, there was nothing to feed off, except himself, and that's the sound of on hand clapping.

Sonny is who Sonny is, and that should be the end of the discussion.

But I have to add that most fans have to rely on the recorded work to get our impressions. At least nowadays we can tap into a lot of concert footage, which will of course be of varying quality. And seeing a concert on YouTube is not the same as being there.

I was fortunate to catch Sonny in person once, and I have to say it was as great a concert as I have ever attended.

End of discussion? really, I thought JSangrey was the moderator. Have you been deputized?

I too have seen Sonny, with a microphone on his sax, and a sock puppet band behind him. Yes, he can still blow (with help), but it was an exhibition, not a performance.

[Milestones]

It's just a suggestion to end the discussion. I did start the thread, but it clearly can go as long as it wants.

It seems pretty demeaning to call Sonny's band-mates nothing but sock puppets.

[soulpope]

I see time and again on the Org Board a sort of Panglossian quietism that says whatever is, is right. Here it's whatever Sonny does, is right I don't believe that for a second. Maybe right for him, but not right for this music or this art. If it is, then we might as well throw everything out except for the divine works of Sonny Rollins, and worship.

Don't know if I give credence to the model that what's good for an individual as a person is ultimately less important than what is important for the industry in which they labor.

I tend to see it as an art form.

Well. ok. but an "art form" that entertains the wants of its consumers as well as its creators is a business, and a business that is about getting product to market eventually becomes an industry.

So, if Sonny Rollins has failed to provide you with what you want/need, he has failed his industry, even though he might have served his own personal wants and needs just fine.

I don't expect anybody to listen trough all the 40+ years of brilliances and thudbooms of misses and "worship". But hostility on the grounds that the man had a faulty personal agenda/business plan, that if he HAD done XYZ then everything would have been allright, that's supremely industrial in it evaluation. Sonny "failed" because he didn't have the right parts installed, something like that, like the only thing that effects a player is who's on the stand that night or in the studio that afternoon, just show up and execute. Get that model SR back into R&D and don't come out until all the glitches and bugs have been removed.

Sorry, just not feeling that. If the guy wanted to play with David S. Ware, he would have. As it is, didn't they practice together for a while? That's where you'd really learn, one on one practice sessions. The whole "record/concert=reality" thing, that's basically industry glimmer to get in you eyes when the smoke clears. Now, sure, ther are plenty of peole who WANT to fo it like that, but not everybody does. One size does not fit all.

It's art first, commerce second. I think Sonny failed his art after 1970 or so. Commerce has succeeded brilliantly in marketing him. Money has been made, so no complaints there. I give Sonny the respect of looking at him as an artist, a person, not a myth or a god. Serving one's own personal needs and wants doesn't necessarily translate into serving the art. It's just solipsism. Sonny's greatness came as much from other musicians as from himself; in other words, he fed off them, and they fed off him. When he began playing with sock puppets, there was nothing to feed off, except himself, and that's the sound of on hand clapping.

love rollins but following his impulse albums he faded away from me (or me from him ?)....the musicians he "used" thereafter may have been a reason......always admired his capability to "reinvent" himself, which IMO was exhausted or lost from the 70s onwards.....

[Gheorghe]

But don't they have opportunities to meet other younger players of their instrument? Don't musicians play their horns in each other's company?

I think it´s more hard for younger players to meet the older cats . During the time when Sonny was young, there sure were joints to jam. Maybe now there are "clinics" and stuff like that, but I doubt it is the same it was, when Sonny came on the scene.