Jimmy Garrison bootleg

[damonsmith]

Originally Posted by contrabart

That's a rather insulting comment, isn't it?

Furthermore, I can't believe no one here has heard what really happens. Jimmy Garrison misses (skips) the second A part of the chorus where it goes wrong. At the end of the next chorus Warren Chiasson "forces" him back into the form. Just focus on the bass line and it's easy to hear.

It is honest. If you can't hear outside of a song form and won't fill out your profile, there isn't much to go on...
Nobody says he sticks to the form, we have all listened. We are learning the difference between listening and hearing in this thread...

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by damonsmith

It is honest. If you can't hear outside of a song form and won't fill out your profile, there isn't much to go on...
Nobody says he sticks to the form, we have all listened. We are learning the difference between listening and hearing in this thread...

What's honest about calling someone a fascist when he clearly isn't? This Marsalis bashing is so lame. You don't have to like them or their music, but if you can't hear their musicality because of your dislike of them I feel sorry you. You're missing out on a lot of great music.

Nobody says he sticks to the form?
"I don't hear "lost", it's not like he's in a different place in the tune or the timestream (beat ahead or behind). (Ed Fuqua)
"+1
He's not lost. " (Gerry Grable)

I've seen things like "abstract lines", "he supports the music that is happening at the moment". Don't get me wrong, I am a huge admirer of Jimmy Garrison and his playing. But he just f***d up this time. Like someone mentioned, it happens to everyone. This recording does not in any way diminish my respect for one of the all time greats and one of my favorite bass players.

[damonsmith]

Originally Posted by contrabart

Nobody says he sticks to the form?
"I don't hear "lost", it's not like he's in a different place in the tune or the timestream (beat ahead or behind). (Ed Fuqua)
"+1
He's not lost. " (Gerry Grable)

Not sticking to the form or the the formal chord changes doesn't automatically equal lost.
It is an inside/outside approach to standards popular at that time, in that scene.
Have either of you really never heard a Paul Bley album?

Also, I don't feel Wynton's fascism interferes with his greatness, quite the opposite in fact. However, he has spent a career pushing the conservative thinking/hearing you and I Own A Bass are subscribing to.

[thepontif]

Originally Posted by contrabart

Jimmy Garrison misses (skips) the second A part of the chorus where it goes wrong. At the end of the next chorus Warren Chiasson "forces" him back into the form. Just focus on the bass line and it's easy to hear.

Agreed 100%. It is very obvious. He pedals a G over what would be the C chord at the end of the first A...like he forgot the D was a 2 there and it became a 5 to G, and then goes straight to the bridge. Things get REALLY screwy after the last A, because of the extra 4 bars at the end of the form. And then Warren starts clearly pounding stuff out to get his attention and bring him back on track later.

And furthermore, who gives a $hit? Anyone can screw up a form for whatever reason. The bartender might have been hitting on his woman, or he was tired, or he hates that tune, or whatever. I don't know any musician on any level who hasn't screwed up a form on a tune they know well...except maybe Geoffrey Keezer

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by damonsmith

Not sticking to the form or the the formal chord changes doesn't automatically equal lost.
It is an inside/outside approach to standards popular at that time, in that scene.
Have either of you really never heard a Paul Bley album?

Also, I don't feel Wynton's fascism interferes with his greatness, quite the opposite in fact. However, he has spent a career pushing the conservative thinking/hearing you and I Own A Bass are subscribing to.

Use your ears. He gets lost. Does that matter? No.

Again, calling Wynton Marsalis a fascist is such a stupid thing to say. Disrespectful too. Having strong ideas about something you're passionate about, tell me how that equates with fascism?

[thepontif]

Originally Posted by contrabart

Use your ears. He gets lost. Does that matter? No.

Again, calling Wynton Marsalis a fascist is such a stupid thing to say. Disrespectful too. Having strong ideas about something you're passionate about, tell me how that equates with fascism?

Maybe "sometimes bordering on unreasonable in the narrowness of his view of what good jazz or music is" is a better way to put it.

I think you can be passionate about what you believe in without dismissing everything else.

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by thepontif

I think you can be passionate about what you believe in without dismissing everything else.

Maybe. I'm passionate about my profession, and about my music. That means I have strong ideas of the qualities music has to have for me to be considered "good" music. If it lacks those qualities I dismiss it. It's not good, for me. For me, a lot of music that I hear that a lot of people like, sucks. And I say that out loud. But I don't tell people they shouldn't like what they like. (I might ask them why

[Marc Piane]

Originally Posted by contrabart

For me, a lot of music that I hear that a lot of people like, sucks.

I find this an interesting statement that seems to contradict itself in sentiment.

[thepontif]

Originally Posted by contrabart

Maybe. I'm passionate about my profession, and about my music. That means I have strong ideas of the qualities music has to have for me to be considered "good" music. If it lacks those qualities I dismiss it. It's not good, for me. For me, a lot of music that I hear that a lot of people like, sucks. And I say that out loud. But I don't tell people they shouldn't like what they like. (I might ask them why

When I say dismiss it, I mean dismiss it as generally invalid...not dismiss it from the body of music you listen to. You're not obligated to like music other than what you like, but dissing people for playing music you don't like is not cool. I think people should like what they like, and leave people who like more music than you alone. It's their business and it's not a moral issue.

[Marc Piane]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCIqFAdI6eI

[thepontif]

I think we should focus on form tunnels. He wasn't speaking in tongues, he was playing a different part of the tune than the rest of the band. Knowing what I know about the language of jazz, I'm fairly certain it was unintended...and TOTALLY inconsequential in the greater scheme of things.

[damonsmith]

This last few posts (not Piane's) really show the lack of understanding and history so many straight ahead players have of the avant garde.
You don't have to like it, but ignorance is never sexy. If Ed Fuqua says he's lost i'd defer to him.

1. This is a VERY minor form of inside/outside playing, vibes keeps the form, bass brings in some outside material.
There are hundreds of albums where this is explored - Jimmy played on many of them.

2. Crouch and Wynton ascended to their positions in very brutal, cut throat way. They ruined a lot of careers and pushed a very conservative version of what "jazz" is.
Totally relevant to the discussion at hand.
It seems harmless now, but it wasn't in the beginning.

A basic understanding of the history of free jazz won't hurt you.

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by damonsmith

This last few posts (not Piane's) really show the lack of understanding and history so many straight ahead players have of the avant garde.
You don't have to like it, but ignorance is never sexy. If Ed Fuqua says he's lost i'd defer to him.

1. This is a VERY minor form of inside/outside playing, vibes keeps the form, bass brings in some outside material.
There are hundreds of albums where this is explored - Jimmy played on many of them.

...


A basic understanding of the history of free jazz won't hurt you.

Whatever made you think I don't have an understanding of the history of free jazz. I've been a working jazz musician for 20+ years, and have played (a.o.) the "very minor form of inside/outside" way you're talking about.

Once again, use your ears, Jimmy is wrong, simply forgets the second A part. If you can't hear that, ask someone with better ears than you have.

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by thepontif

When I say dismiss it, I mean dismiss it as generally invalid...not dismiss it from the body of music you listen to. You're not obligated to like music other than what you like, but dissing people for playing music you don't like is not cool. I think people should like what they like, and leave people who like more music than you alone. It's their business and it's not a moral issue.

There is music I consider generally invalid. Whenever I hear electronic dance beats I turn away in disgust. I don't tell people not to like it but knowing I have a more thorough understanding and knowledge of music than they have I consider my opinion more valid.
I agree that both Wynton and Branford have said things when they were young that were too opinionated and in a manner that was questionable. But didn't we al go through a phase like that? I've read an interview with Branford in which he admits being "too cocky for his age" during interviews in his younger years.

But I agree with you that it's about taste, everyone's entitled to theirs, and it certainly isn't a moral issue.

[thepontif]

Originally Posted by damonsmith

This last few posts (not Piane's) really show the lack of understanding and history so many straight ahead players have of the avant garde.
You don't have to like it, but ignorance is never sexy. If Ed Fuqua says he's lost i'd defer to him.

1. This is a VERY minor form of inside/outside playing, vibes keeps the form, bass brings in some outside material.
There are hundreds of albums where this is explored - Jimmy played on many of them.

2. Crouch and Wynton ascended to their positions in very brutal, cut throat way. They ruined a lot of careers and pushed a very conservative version of what "jazz" is.
Totally relevant to the discussion at hand.
It seems harmless now, but it wasn't in the beginning.

A basic understanding of the history of free jazz won't hurt you.

Sure. Ok.

[damonsmith]

Originally Posted by contrabart

Once again, use your ears, Jimmy is wrong, simply forgets the second A part. If you can't hear that, ask someone with better ears than you have.

I think some of us are listening for notes and some of us are listening for intention.
Nobody is saying it doesn't go outside the form.

[Jason Sypher]

Finally got a chance to listen. He's lost, and more than once. Warren is doing his best to guide him back but Garrison seems quite oblivious. Who hasn't been there. What's the big deal?

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by damonsmith

I think some of us are listening for notes and some of us are listening for intention.
Nobody is saying it doesn't go outside the form.

As I wrote before:
"I don't hear "lost", it's not like he's in a different place in the tune or the timestream (beat ahead or behind). (Ed Fuqua)
"+1
He's not lost. " (Gerry Grable)

Listening for intention(which is always best) doesn't mean you're not supposed to recognize mistakes being made. As long as the "mistakes" don't interfere with the intention they don't really matter, agreed. But in this thread the question of "what happened here" came up. I listened and found out. That's all.

[damonsmith]

Originally Posted by contrabart

As I wrote before:
"I don't hear "lost", it's not like he's in a different place in the tune or the timestream (beat ahead or behind). (Ed Fuqua)
"+1
He's not lost. " (Gerry Grable)

Listening for intention(which is always best) doesn't mean you're not supposed to recognize mistakes being made. As long as the "mistakes" don't interfere with the intention they don't really matter, agreed. But in this thread the question of "what happened here" came up. I listened and found out. That's all.

And as I wrote before, being outside of the form doesn't always equal lost or that he doesn't know where he is in the form.
I think if it were more straight ahead musicians it would be more clear, but like I have already said, what he does here is less "out" than what Coltrane did with "My Favorite Things".

None of us really know - my argument is based on how people in that scene were playing then, to my ears it sounds less extreme than Ornette, but right in line with what Paul Bley and others were doing at that time.

He could have been lost, or he could have been trying to push things out and Warren wouldn't go with him so he came back.
He could have just heard that line, played it and came back it.

It is great to be able to keep forms solidly, but not being able to hear music past the song form being "the law" is what is disturbing in the thread.

I hear him stop supporting the harmony, but I also hear a beautiful, strong line that, to me, is more important than "All the Things you Are".

[Jason Sypher]

Well, that's what I meant, he's in a different place in the form. If I heard any other sign that he was going with the soloist or even leading the soloist into a new place, form or no form, I would agree that he is not lost. In this usage "lost" is to mean, he "is no longer playing with the other melodic/harmonic instruments. He could be suggesting a different route, if so it was not a strong enough suggestion to make the other players go with him.

Damon, always fighting the good fight for free music. I dig. But if the band is playing a tune, and there is an established understanding of the style the band is going to play the tune and the soloist is playing over those changes, then the bass player should play those changes no matter how strong a line he might have under his fingers. Up to that point in the tune there was absolutely no indication that they were going to take it out. Do you think?