Earl Wild on Keith Jarrett

[Larry Kart]

Plug "Jarrett" into the “look inside” function to read Wild’s acid takedown of Keith:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Walk-Wild-Side-Memoir-pianist/dp/0578074699/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1450397516&sr=1-1&keywords=Earl+wild

 

BTW, Wild's memoir runs over 800 pages! From what I've read so far, he speaks his mind freely to say the least.

[Guy Berger]

Seems clueless about jazz, right?

[Larry Kart]

48 minutes ago, Guy Berger said:

Seems clueless about jazz, right?

What makes you think so? His dislike of Jarrett's music-making? Wild is fond of jazz; on p. 39 he says, "I have tremendous respect for the various jazz pianists I've had the pleasure of hearing in my life. I especially enjoyed watching, and listening to Art Tatum perform...." 

[medjuck]

5 hours ago, Larry Kart said:

Plug "Jarrett" into the “look inside” function to read Wild’s acid takedown of Keith:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Walk-Wild-Side-Memoir-pianist/dp/0578074699/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1450397516&sr=1-1&keywords=Earl+wild

 

BTW, Wild's memoir runs over 800 pages! From what I've read so far, he speaks his mind freely to say the least.

Why would you do that just to read a put down? 

[JSngry]

Too easy on Wild's part.

My truth is that Jarrett sucks, except when he doesn't, and vice-versa.

I get that he's been a too-fragile self-loving precocious moaning prick far more often than is healthy for anybody, and I really don't play him that much over the last few decades (and the whole Solo concerts era never even began to resonate with me) but still...this "acid putdown" really sounds a facile generalization that I would take seriously only in the sense that not really seriously.

What Earl Wild records do I need to hear that will go with me for the rest of my life like Bop-Be (Jarrett as Dewey's sideman, oh well, recognize and then play) looks like it's going to do? I ain't got all century, ya' know,so it better hit hard and land right. I ain't got time for a lifetime of more equivocated bullshit, ok?

 

If I had a chance to hire a piano player today for a gig tomorrow, and they played like that, I would not. I don't really want to hear all that, today or tomorrow. But that's not how it worked out. I once did, and did, and it makes sense to me in a good way, although if Dewey were to come back to life, take my tomorrow gig, and hire Keith for the draw, , then I would be very happy about that.

[jlhoots]

The book seems to be $200, so I guess i'll skip it. Rather listen to the Jarrett albums I like.

[fasstrack]

From what I read, though, he seems to have as big an ego as Keith....

[Larry Kart]

42 minutes ago, fasstrack said:

From what I read, though, he seems to have as big an ego as Keith....

Without a doubt. But Wild was, in the minds of more than a few and in the right repertoire, one of the major classical pianists of the 20th Century. 

[HutchFan]

31 minutes ago, fasstrack said:

From what I read, though, he seems to have as big an ego as Keith....

Yep.  Also, does anyone besides me think it's odd that Wild considered challenging Jarrett to an "improvisation contest"?  The fact that Wild wants to cut him makes me laugh. Obviously, Wild's approach to music (and improvisation?) has more in common with someone like OP than a musician like Jarrett.

BTW: I'm with Jim regarding Jarrett's music. From my point of view, it's very much hit or miss. There are big swathes of his discography that leave me cold. But when he hits it... YOWEE!!! He can take you on a rocket-ship to the moon. 

 

[fasstrack]

5 minutes ago, Larry Kart said:

 . Some Wild at his best below:

Nothing 'below'. Please post again.

[Larry Kart]

1 minute ago, fasstrack said:

Nothing 'below'. Please post again.

Sorry -- see previous post with album covers.

[HutchFan]

10 minutes ago, Larry Kart said:

Without a doubt. But Wild was, in the minds of more than a few and in the right repertoire, one of the major classical pianists of the 20th Century. 

Wild's Rachmaninov concertos with Jascha Horenstein ROCK.  

But Wild was very much an extrovert, "virtuoso" pianist -- with all of the attendant pluses and minuses that come with that sort of approach.

I know that there are lot of Oscar Peterson detractors around here. (I'm not one of them.) Wild's playing has always struck me as a sort classical analogue to OP. (And, since I'm not an OP "hater," I don't mean that in a disparaging way!  )

Edited December 18, 2015 by HutchFan

[Larry Kart]

3 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Yep.  Also, does anyone besides me think it's odd that Wild considered challenging Jarrett to an "improvisation contest"?  The fact that Wild wants to cut him makes me laugh. Obviously, Wild's approach to music (and improvisation?) has more in common with someone like OP than a musician like Jarrett.

BTW: I'm with Jim regarding Jarrett's music. From my point of view, it's very much hit or miss. There are big swathes of his discography that leave me cold. But when he hits it... YOWEE!!! He can take you on a rocket-ship to the moon. 

 

Throughout his long career, and later on too, Wild was regarded as quite an improviser, albeit not in any mode that might appeal to most of the likes of us, more in a kind of Liszt bag where he would come up with an extended improv based on notes suggested by an audience member.

[HutchFan]

1 minute ago, Larry Kart said:

Throughout his long career, and later on too, Wild was regarded as quite an improviser, albeit not in any mode that might appeal to most of the likes of us, more in a kind of Liszt bag where he would come up with an extended improv based on notes suggested by an audience member.

Sure thing, Larry. I realize that Wild improvised. I just thought it was humorous that Wild wanted to "take down" Jarrett, put him in his place.  

You mention Liszt. Along with Rachmaninov, Liszt is right up Wild's alley. BIG tunes. BIG sound. "Virtuoso" music.  

 

[Larry Kart]

BTW, Wild was an Oscar Peterson admirer, refers to him as "great."

Two more Wild gems. His “Rhapsody in Blue” etc. with Fiedler are widely (and IMO rightly) regarded as the best recordings of these works. The Gershwin transcriptions are quite something. FWIW I have the earlier RCA LP recording of the transcriptions, not this remake:

 

  http://www.amazon.com/Rhapsody-Blue-American-Paris-Earl/dp/B0002XNLTW/ref=sr_1_3?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1450455600&sr=1-3&keywords=earl+wild+gershwin

 

http://www.amazon.com/Earl-Wild-Plays-Transcriptions-Gershwin/dp/B000003GD0/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1450455645&sr=1-1&keywords=earl+wild+gershwin

[MomsMobley]

***

 

Edited December 20, 2015 by MomsMobley

[Dan Gould]

On 12/18/2015 at 0:27 AM, medjuck said:

Why would you do that just to read a put down? 

Hey I'm always up for a Jarrett put-wdwn. 

The irony that the opening sentence of the very next paragraph refers to the "great jazz pianist Oscar Peterson" ... ooo wee!

That couldn't be coincidence could it?  "Jarrett sucks, people, and by the way Oscar Peterson is great!" In a different context that has to get some sort of trolling award, doesn't it?

[Larry Kart]

Just being honest about what Wild said.

10 hours ago, MomsMobley said:

***

 

And your point is? Apples and oranges, no?

[Scott Dolan]

Am I missing something? What's wrong with Oscar Peterson? 

[Guy Berger]

13 hours ago, Dan Gould said:

That couldn't be coincidence could it?  "Jarrett sucks, people, and by the way Oscar Peterson is great!" In a different context that has to get some sort of trolling award, doesn't it?

Dan, you're right - it's solid trollwork.  But if Wild really wanted to go for the gold, he would have used this opportunity to trash Bud Powell or Thelonious Monk while praising Peterson.

P.S. Once a Jarrett fan (sincerely, I think) told me that Jarrett's versions of Monk tunes improved on the originals!  Trolling opportunity wasted.

[MomsMobley]

12 hours ago, Larry Kart said:

Just being honest about what Wild said.

And your point is? Apples and oranges, no?

ANY Medtner / Wild  

& / or

ANY Hampton Hawes (electric piano included)

>>>>

ALL fucking Jarrett (Dewey included)

Hamp came to mind because Jarrett's fucking insipid ersatz 'gospel' influences (as if) and his insipid fucking standards trio: DeJohnette gets a pass, barely; Gary Peacock does not. 

Mitigating Factor: Jarrett's classical records are soporific at best but a U of Texas music school student invited me to her house and though not a record collector, opened her thighs with Jarrett's DSCH Op. 87 P&F accompanying. 

In this context alone is Jarrett tolerable.

 

[Larry Kart]

OK -- I think I understand. In any case, I like both Medtner (though his music is very performance dependent and can turn to mud in the wrong hands) and Hawes.

Some of the best Medtner on record I know is this:

http://www.amazon.com/Medtner-Violin-Sonatas-Nocturnes-Canzonas/dp/B00005YDZJ/ref=sr_1_7?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1450675514&sr=1-7&keywords=medtner+violin+sonatas

Do you know it?

[jlhoots]

9 hours ago, Larry Kart said:

OK -- I think I understand.

Seems like the usual non-sequiturs & bad taste in language to me.

Edited December 21, 2015 by jlhoots

[JSngry]

15 hours ago, MomsMobley said:

Mitigating Factor: Jarrett's classical records are soporific at best but a U of Texas music school student invited me to her house and though not a record collector, opened her thighs with Jarrett's DSCH Op. 87 P&F accompanying. 

In this context alone is Jarrett tolerable.

 

No, see, that's where you fucked up. I get that you're a Sensitive Motherfucker (as are we all, either aspirational or realized), but what is being missed here is that that's a two word phrase - Sensitive and Motherfucker.

Let's meditate on that -

The Sensitive part goes ahead and respects the woman's needs and desires and puts her pleasure above his own, confident in the knowledge that his consideration will be returned in kind.

BUT -

The Motherfucker part finds a way to stop that shit from playing ASAP. The ideal way is to knock the needle off the record or otherwise stop it at the source with a choreographed ass-hit against the appropriate part of the sound system, your ass or hers, it matters not, whatever is more Sensitively Correct at the time, but there are other ways, and the fully evolved SM is never at a loss. You can be all sorry and shit, but don't stop being Sensitive - and don't stop being a Motherfucker. Do it at a moment when cessation of activity by your partner is not going to be a need which she has.That way, everybody goes away completely satisfied.

I'll allow for your youth allowing you to perform under such dire circumstances, but hopefully the passage of time has made you aware that if you got it up anyway, while this was playing, either Jarrett overrides your common sense, or else you were just a Sensitive Motherfucker in training at the time. I do applaud the vulnerability you show by admitting today that Keith Jarrrett played on without interruption and did not, as the vernacular has it, "fuck with your nature".

No doubt, the male subset of Organissimo Community is of a more mature bent, and has totally mastered the Art Of The Sensitive Motherfucker, if not completely, then largely. However, we older SMs have an obligation to our younger successors who might be lurking here to pass along our accumulated lessons and wisdoms whenever possible.

Also, keep in mind that ladies (be they girl or be they woman) can - and certainly should be - Sensitive Motherfuckers at least as competently as their male counterparts. The Evolution Imperative all but demands it!

This is a universal message for all people, that of The Ways Of The Sensitive Motherfucker. Heed well!

[fasstrack]

Personally, I find this public lambasting of fellow artists to be low-class and unnecessary. Honest musical criticism is one thing, in the proper forum. The rest is an ego-fest and it doesn't do a goddamn thing but make the purveyors look like the insecure babies they are. That includes Miles, Wynton, the late Brookmeyer, Jarrett himself (trashed Marsalis w/o provocation).

I'm sick to death of it. Art is supposed to make the world a better place IMO.