Allan Songer Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 You don't like acoustic jazz. Cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 I agree with Allan. That's it Greg. I find those recordings to blow away anything Steely Dan ever produced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg928gts Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 Yeah, that must be it Gary, you guys are listening for something different than I am. I didn't mention the things I DID like about the recording. I noticed a very live sound to the cymbals and snare drum, and musically it's a very interesting recording. The location of some of the instruments in the soundstage was wonderful, I thought I could actually reach out in front of me and touch the instrument sometimes. Other times, during solo's that are way too forward in the mix, the sound comes mostly from one speaker. Allan, I think it's the acoustic SOUND that I'm not thrilled with, not acoustic jazz music. If I was sitting in a club, and the saxophone is blaring loud enough right in front of me so that the rest of the band is drowned out, I'd be just as disappointed. I'd probably move closer to the sound man if there was one. At least that way if I didn't like the mix, I could diplomatically let him know what was wrong. When I listen to music, I'm listening to my equipment. That's just me. I am one of those guys who buys music to listen to my equipment, not one who buys equipment to listen to music. Odd as that may seem, it's what I find enjoyable. Therefore, the music must be of such quality engineering, recording, and producing, that the result is a moving experience for me, sonically, not musically. Maybe I'll change someday, but for now, nothing moves me more than to enjoy the sound of the perfect solid thump and snap of a kick drum, the perfect whack of the snare, sizzling cymbals, a bass guitar that has been engineered to "fit in" to the mix and is distinguishable from the low frequencies being pushed forward by the kick drum, musical instruments playing in their own space in a wide soundstage, wonderfully smooth vocals that are slightly forward in the mix, and solo instrumentalists who are not disproportionally overmixed and drowning out the rest of the rythym section as they are playing. I think this is a lot to ask. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted January 21, 2004 Author Share Posted January 21, 2004 On 1/21/2004 greg928s4 said: "But as far as the mix goes, it doesn't matter which version of the cd you're talking about." ---------------------------------------------------------- Now, a dumb question. Would the mix on the CD versions be the same as the mix on the LPs? Would there be a different mix between Allan's mono and stereo recordings? Greg, I listened to Wahoo again and tried to imagine what you described regarding the loudness of the horns. I'm comfortable with the levels throughout. If anything, Mickey Rocker, the drummer, seems to be a bit "out in front". Check out Amanda, where he is very active. I happen to really dig it and think he pulls it all together but some may think he's a little too active. The comments and the information you've provided are appreciated. It helps in the music appreciation learning process. I'm not sure I fully understood what mixing was all about. Though I don't have either of the newer Steely Dan CDs you mentioned, I do have "Can't Buy a Thrill" and I took a listen a few minutes ago. The sound on that CD is wonderful but it dosn't sound as "live" as Wahoo or much of the other jazz I've been listening to lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg928gts Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 The mix should be the same regardless of the format. The only way the mix could change, is if someone remixed from the original track tapes. It is possible to use tone control to bring out certain frequencies and thus appear to change the mix. For instance, if someone remastered and boosted the bass frequencies, then the bass and kick drum would come out in the mix. Come to think of it, I almost always shy away from buying live recordings. Again, I just don't like the quality of the sound usually. I know the mix of my own live recordings were always way off. This is explained by the fact that a lot of the sound that is coming off the stage amps does not make it through the mixing console. Mixing live sound is very different from a studio situation. Most often final mixdowns in the studio are done by the engineer and producer while the bands sleeps. Live sound requires that the engineer adjust constantly for the changes in sound that the band produces off the stage, how full the room is, when the room empties , temperature, humidity, the woofer that just blew, etc... live sound is a much more volatile situation. Expecting a good sounding recording live is probably asking too much. I love live sound production, I miss it, but sitting in my living room evaluating sound, I'll take a nice studio recording any day. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tillmbil Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 Wow Greg, talk about Deja Vue. I just turned fortyone and I am trying to find my music again. While I am oftentimes in the mood for classic rock and just blast away. I am usually listening to something more subdued. I have, within the last six months, bought almost every Steely Dan CD and duplicated it in LP's. I am trying to get into the Jazz music, but haven't arrived yet. I have bought some of Allan's suggestions and like them, but not all. I have bought some BB King, and love it, but after about 4 songs they all seem to blend. My favorite is "Riding With the King" with Eric Clapton and BB King. Since joining this Forum, purchasing three complete tube systems, and various recordings I am truly buying music for my equipment only. I sometimes find it hard to remember any of the lyrics if they exist. I am mostly listening for the rythum, "hook", and the instruments trying to reproduce and hear that perfect sound. I also agree that horns played on horn speakers can sometimes be startling. Many times, when listening to these recordings that have been reccomended, typing on the computer. I have been shocked by the sudden high notes hit by the sax players. Makes me jump out of my seat. That is why I have taken a liking to Kenny G. His music is always well recorded, has a good mix and is soothing to listen to. JMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted January 21, 2004 Author Share Posted January 21, 2004 Bill, Although I have purchased recommendations from several forum members, I expect that most of my new stuff has been referred by Allan. Just curious, which of Allan's recommendations do you not enjoy and which do you enjoy most. It would be quite rare to like everything that one individual recommends and I'm sure Allan understands and appriciates that. I just checked and it seems that I have about fifty new selections, both LPs and CDs that either Allan has mentioned on the forum or are spin-offs from those he did. Of those, there is but one that I don't particular care for and only one that I doubt I will ever spin again. Also, have you heard "Wahoo" and if so, what is your opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 Kenny G? I agree with Pat Metheny on this one: Kenny G is not a musician I really had much of an opinion about at all until recently. There was not much about the way he played that interested me one way or the other either live or on records. I first heard him a number of years ago playing as a sideman with Jeff Lorber when they opened a concert for my band. My impression was that he was someone who had spent a fair amount of time listening to the more pop oriented sax players of that time, like Grover Washington or David Sanborn, but was not really an advanced player, even in that style. He had major rhythmic problems and his harmonic and melodic vocabulary was extremely limited, mostly to pentatonic based and blues-lick derived patterns, and he basically exhibited only a rudimentary understanding of how to function as a professional soloist in an ensemble - Lorber was basically playing him off the bandstand in terms of actual music. But he did show a knack for connecting to the basest impulses of the large crowd by deploying his two or three most effective licks (holding long notes and playing fast runs - never mind that there were lots of harmonic clams in them) at the key moments to elicit a powerful crowd reaction (over and over again). The other main thing I noticed was that he also, as he does to this day, played horribly out of tune - consistently sharp. Of course, I am aware of what he has played since, the success it has had, and the controversy that has surrounded him among musicians and serious listeners. This controversy seems to be largely fueled by the fact that he sells an enormous amount of records while not being anywhere near a really great player in relation to the standards that have been set on his instrument over the past sixty or seventy years. And honestly, there is no small amount of envy involved from musicians who see one of their fellow players doing so well financially, especially when so many of them who are far superior as improvisors and musicians in general have trouble just making a living. There must be hundreds, if not thousands of sax players around the world who are simply better improvising musicians than Kenny G on his chosen instruments. It would really surprise me if even he disagreed with that statement. Having said that, it has gotten me to thinking lately why so many jazz musicians (myself included, given the right "bait" of a question, as I will explain later) and audiences have gone so far as to say that what he is playing is not even jazz at all. Stepping back for a minute, if we examine the way he plays, especially if one can remove the actual improvising from the often mundane background environment that it is delivered in, we see that his saxophone style is in fact clearly in the tradition of the kind of playing that most reasonably objective listeners WOULD normally quantify as being jazz. It's just that as jazz or even as music in a general sense, with these standards in mind, it is simply not up to the level of playing that we historically associate with professional improvising musicians. So, lately I have been advocating that we go ahead and just include it under the word jazz - since pretty much of the rest of the world OUTSIDE of the jazz community does anyway - and let the chips fall where they may. And after all, why he should be judged by any other standard, why he should be exempt from that that all other serious musicians on his instrument are judged by if they attempt to use their abilities in an improvisational context playing with a rhythm section as he does? He SHOULD be compared to John Coltrane or Wayne Shorter, for instance, on his abilities (or lack thereof) to play the soprano saxophone and his success (or lack thereof) at finding a way to deploy that instrument in an ensemble in order to accurately gauge his abilities and put them in the context of his instrument's legacy and potential. As a composer of even eighth note based music, he SHOULD be compared to Herbie Hancock, Horace Silver or even Grover Washington. Suffice it to say, on all above counts, at this point in his development, he wouldn't fare well. But, like I said at the top, this relatively benign view was all "until recently". Not long ago, Kenny G put out a recording where he overdubbed himself on top of a 30+ year old Louis Armstrong record, the track "What a Wonderful World". With this single move, Kenny G became one of the few people on earth I can say that I really can't use at all - as a man, for his incredible arrogance to even consider such a thing, and as a musician, for presuming to share the stage with the single most important figure in our music. This type of musical necrophilia - the technique of overdubbing on the preexisting tracks of already dead performers - was weird when Natalie Cole did it with her dad on "Unforgettable" a few years ago, but it was her dad. When Tony Bennett did it with Billie Holiday it was bizarre, but we are talking about two of the greatest singers of the 20th century who were on roughly the same level of artistic accomplishment. When Larry Coryell presumed to overdub himself on top of a Wes Montgomery track, I lost a lot of the respect that I ever had for him - and I have to seriously question the fact that I did have respect for someone who could turn out to have such unbelievably bad taste and be that disrespectful to one of my personal heroes. But when Kenny G decided that it was appropriate for him to defile the music of the man who is probably the greatest jazz musician that has ever lived by spewing his lame-***, jive, pseudo bluesy, out-of-tune, noodling, wimped out, ****ed up playing all over one of the great Louis's tracks (even one of his lesser ones), he did something that I would not have imagined possible. He, in one move, through his unbelievably pretentious and calloused musical decision to embark on this most cynical of musical paths, **** all over the graves of all the musicians past and present who have risked their lives by going out there on the road for years and years developing their own music inspired by the standards of grace that Louis Armstrong brought to every single note he played over an amazing lifetime as a musician. By disrespecting Louis, his legacy and by default, everyone who has ever tried to do something positive with improvised music and what it can be, Kenny G has created a new low point in modern culture - something that we all should be totally embarrassed about - and afraid of. We ignore this, "let it slide", at our own peril. His callous disregard for the larger issues of what this crass gesture implies is exacerbated by the fact that the only reason he possibly have for doing something this inherently wrong (on both human and musical terms) was for the record sales and the money it would bring. Since that record came out - in protest, as insignificant as it may be, I encourage everyone to boycott Kenny G recordings, concerts and anything he is associated with. If asked about Kenny G, I will diss him and his music with the same passion that is in evidence in this little essay. Normally, I feel that musicians all have a hard enough time, regardless of their level, just trying to play good and don't really benefit from public criticism, particularly from their fellow players. but, this is different. There ARE some things that are sacred - and amongst any musician that has ever attempted to address jazz at even the most basic of levels, Louis Armstrong and his music is hallowed ground. To ignore this trespass is to agree that NOTHING any musician has attempted to do with their life in music has any intrinsic value - and I refuse to do that. (I am also amazed that there HASN'T already been an outcry against this among music critics - where ARE they on this?????!?!?!?!, magazines, etc.). Everything I said here is exactly the same as what I would say to Gorelick if I ever saw him in person. and if I ever DO see him anywhere, at any function - he WILL get a piece of my mind and (maybe a guitar wrapped around his head.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted January 21, 2004 Author Share Posted January 21, 2004 Enthusiastic! Revealing! Provocative! I never cared much for the guy before I knew all that. My wife bought me a Christmas CD of his and I think I only played it once. Not for me. Sometime in the 60's, I saw Louis Armstrong in Lambertville, NJ. He was quite wonderful. Shaking his hand and obtaining an autographed photo has always been special to me. I'm also offended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 No need to twist my arm. You couldn't pay me to listen to that crap he calls music. I always thought he sucked but I had no idea he overdubbed Louis! What a friggin ego. He and Michael Bolton should do a duet lp if they haven't already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkrop Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 Allan, Kenny G is to jazz as is Eric Clapton is to blues, somewhat technicly proficient but ultimitly lacking in the "soul" of the music! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 I think you just insulted Eric Clapton, but I get what you mean! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 I am still reeling at the fact that is about the longest post I have seen you record, and it was all about Kenny G! Lordy. In my opinion, Kenny G actually manages to play an instrument with the amazing talent of making it sound totally canned and without a semblance of soul, experience, or evidence that anything in his life could be translated as DEPTH via a musical instrument. I know that's a bit harsh but he ranks with me as one of the most vapid musicians around. His music has so little depth and essence, it's almost like listening to the aural equivalent of a Thomas Kinkade painting. kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 I think you just insulted Thomas Kincade, but I get what you mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tillmbil Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 I think I accidently found someones sore spot. Maybe I like Kenny G. because I use it as background music when doing something else, I am not sure. I will have to compare it to some other CD's and pay more attention. I did not mean to rile anyone. Your viewa were expresseed very well Allan. Boomac - from memory I cannot be sure if Stan Getz "Girl from Ipanema" was Allans suggestion, but I have yet been able to listen to the whole CD. However, Joe Hendersons "One Page" I have listened at least three times all the way through. I have an unopened Louis Armstrong "The Definitive" I will open tomorrow night and listen to. I am trying to find a copy of "Wahoo", it is not one of my collection yet. I find it interesting how many of you have been around music in the form of bands, mixing, etc. You will have to excuse the unknowing general public like me who have different likes. Who hear different instruments playing but have no idea what they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg928gts Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 The wife left the house for a couple of hours and I got a chance to listen to Wahoo again on my 299A Cornwall system. It sounded better on that system. The tone controls help and I'm sitting much closer to the speakers. The speakers are closer to one another than my Khorns, which are 22' apart. I think this is significant, because the horn solo's are really coming mostly from one speaker. The tenor sax and trumpet from the left speaker and the alto sax from the right speaker. The piano is eerily sitting in the center, slightly left, and the drums are slightly right, especially the cymbals. The bass seems to be slightly to the left also. Did they have a hard time with stereo recordings back then? I notice this on Brubeck's stuff too, instruments coming directly from one speaker instead of being a little more balanced. Anyway, I still think that the tenor sax and trumpet are up too loud during their solo's. To me, it's just uncomfortable to endure the blare. I wouldn't say twice as loud as I said before, but I would reduce by 25% if I were mixing it. And I would certainly work on the tonal quality. But again, given the age of the recording, it's understandable. I do appreciate the live quality of this recording, and the second time around I was really enjoying some of the grooves. It makes a difference when the bass and kickdrum are out front a little more (tone controls). I still think the piano is flat and plunky sounding, but it's just like most old recordings that I've listened to. I guess you get used to it. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone in any of my previous posts. My negative comments are not intended to be directed at anyone, I'm just a little frustrated right now with my lack of listening selections. Too d*mn picky that's all. Bill, I too am not there yet when it comes to jazz. I think I'll grow into it over time. I'm in a real tough place right now musically. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 William, Stan Getz's "Getz/Gilberto" was MY suggestion and I am really surprised you can listen to Kenny G but cant make it through this jazz standard. In fact, I find Getz/Gilberto one of the most accessable jazz albums ever and one of the ones I recommend for people that dont even like jazz. What is it you find bad about Getz/Gilberto? I cant imagine not making it through this classic as it's EXTREMELY listenable and easy for a jazz newbie. kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Kelly, do you like Chase? I'm sure you've heard it/him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 The diatribe against Kenny G was written by Pat Metheny on a message board a few years ago. I DID NOT WRITE IT and I thought I was pretty clear that this is Metheny's opinion. I agree with him! http://www.allaboutjazz.com/articles/arti0900_03.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Bill, If you like Joe Henderson's, "Page One", you should really enjoy Duke Pearson's, Wahoo. The Getz/Gilberto LP is not one that I can just sit still and listen to but I do enjoy it and its one to own for sure. If you havent already, type "jazz" into the search function at the top of the page and check out the jazz threads. SSH started one that contains a wealth of information. See Kellys several threads. Each provides comments, recommendations and examples. You will soon develop a good feel for what you really like and it's fun and games from there. Greg, I doubt you offended anybody. Hey, your comments and opinions are valuable and this is an open discussion. Duke Pearson is one of Allans favorites. He was a great musician, arranger and producer. I happen to agree with him and it was easy for me to jump on the bandwagon. Dukes Tender Feelins, Wahoo, Profile and Sweet Honey Bee are all in my collection. Wonderful music indeed! About Wahoo and the position of the instruments: I agree with you. Thats the way the sound comes through on my system exactly. The only question I have relates to the position of the saxophones. I thought Joe Henderson was coming from the right with the drums and that Spalding and Byrd were on the left. This shows some ignorance on my part and I guess I could be mistaken. Kelly, Glad youre on here. Actually, the recording that I referred to, as never wanting to hear again, was one of your recommendations. (I think Allan mentioned it as well) You did, however, provide a warning. Kelly said, Ornette Coleman is NOT easy. This does not go down with the cool ease of something like early Miles Davis. Im referring to Colemans, The Shape of Jazz to Come. You guys know I struggled with Sun Ra so I guess there is no surprise here. No criticism intended, its just not for me at this time. If somebody is interested, let me know and Ill send it out for a listen. After some of you other guys pick up Wahoo, lets continue the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.