Double Bass The Truth About John Coltrane

[Clyde Stats]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion and your own way of listening to and evaluating music, but here’s another perspective on these issues:

It is almost an article of faith that jazz musicians need to develop their own style and sound, and to hopefully move the music forward in some way. Louis, Bird, Duke, Miles, etc., and certainly Coltrane all did this. Coleman Hawkins and Ben Webster had already pioneered the rich, heavy, tenor sax tone; Lester Young owned the light, airy, alternative to this. Coltrane’s tone can be seen as between these two; a bit lighter than Hawkins/Webster, but with an edge to it that Prez didn’t have. After hearing only a few notes, Coltrane’s sound is unmistakable. As regarding Coltrane’s “repetitiveness,” it can be viewed as trying to extract every ounce of meaning/emotion from each idea before moving on, similar to a “spiritual” quest or journey that many have noted that Coltrane dedicated his life to. Another way to look at it is as an alternative to the entrenched bebop solo style of rapidly changing ideas with little or no repetition. Then there’s also his “across the bar” phrasing and use of extended range and techniques on the saxophone, not to mention his ballad playing which is almost the antithesis of all this! And yes, it does take close listening to appreciate all this; nothing wrong with that!

 

[JazznFunk]

Some people either get 'Trane or they don't. I find his tone uniquely HIM - which is the ultimate compliment. Trane was an endless explorer, and transcended jazz quite honestly - but his approach was JAZZ in the purest and most honest sense. One of the greatest gifts we were given was 'Trane being recorded pretty often from his early days on through his late-life experiments. It's an incredible body of work for a relatively short life. We're all guilty of taking too many choruses at times, exploring ideas, working on our stuff. Glad we don't have anyone crucifying US for that... except maybe ourselves as we post-mortem our performances.

I put 'Trane on a lot even just to listen to 'casually.' I don't find that I have to drop what I'm doing to listen to or understand him... but I often do because I always hear something different and compelling each time.

What's my favorite Coltrane record? Meditations. What's the one I play the most often as a 'casual' bit of listening? Blue Trane. And let's not forget that some of 'Trane's most lyrical playing was on 'Kind Of Blue.'

 

[bass player 53]

That was a clickbait title, what I’m going to say here is my opinion only, but at least informed by 55 years of life that included a substantial amount of jazz education.

Coltrane as a technician is invaluable. His understanding of the math was on a strange level and any of us can learn from what he played and wrote, intellectually. But - looking back in retrospect at his recordings and his choices as a performer:

His tone was shrill.

He took way too many choruses most of the time. His solos often began with beautiful ideas and devolved into patterns and exercises. “Impressions” is one example. Past a certain point, he sounds to me like he’s recording himself practicing.

His music is hard to listen to unless you are listening critically and with all of your attention.

I think at the time it was stylish for jazz musicians to record themselves playing 12 minute versions of songs that had 5 minutes of ideas. So some of it might have been that.

I’m not sure why I’m posting this because it could establish me as a pariah, but it’s a chat forum and I guess I’m wondering whether anyone at all agrees, and why.

I will give my opinion as an informed listener and admirer. There are several excellent books written about Coltrane, his life, his music (analysis), and historical context.
I believe, similar to a lot of jazz artists, you hear the growth and maturity of this great artist through the succession of his recordings. Beginning with bebop (perhaps earlier) post bop, modal, and beyond, you hear Coltrane developing his sound, composition, and expression as a jazz artist. His leadership of the quartet with McCoy Tyner was unmatched for the musical style it created regarding the use of quartal harmony, still a main component of much jazz today.
His contributions to the original jazz literature are important, historic, and highly regarded. Indeed, his music has touched many lives, including my own, in a very profound way.

Edit: I will add that, contrary to a few views, you don’t need to listen to his music in historical context, any more so than any of the great orchestral composers. Coltrane also developed a recognizable sound, a characteristic sound that was different from his contemporaries at each stage of his development as an artist. Speaking of which, he played with the very best and most influential of his contemporaries in the various historical successions of their groups.

 

[logdrum]

I am a horn player and Coltrane is my number one inspiration. I also happen to hang 2 times with his friend Pharaoh Sanders and he had some stories to tell -- and he after all is just a nice human being but musically he is advanced, always spiritually motivated, My late mother turned me on to him as a child when I did not understand much but the Village Vanguard Sessions was something she played over and over

Not sure what your agenda is to diss a long dead saxophonist who will be 100 years old next month. There are few harmonic and melodic concepts that he did pioneer in jazz - Coltrane Changes they call it and the Giant Steps Progression. The Love Supreme was an album that reached across non jazz audience. Not an easy feat to do way back then

That tone is focused -- that's what happens when you use a very hard read and blow hard. Nothing wrong with it. It's just another tone in the gamut of sax tones. Listen to his ballad work and he can play sweet. During that period, he was not the only one that had difficult music to listen to, For many it was about making statements of what they felt was important to them and many times there was social context to it. After all, jazz was still largely an African American art form back then which they willingly shared. Historically those were dark times as well. Even melodic guys like Desmonf as pretty as his music sound also played difficult music

In just over 20 years he has done more than most musicians have been trying to do for 50 or more years -- maybe even combined.. Yes towards the end, he stopped pandering to the label and jazz critics and explored what he felt need to be explored. I doubt you have listened to all his work., Even myself, I cannot even say that. For example how many times did the band play Love Supreme -including the recording date - without googling it. My mom was trying to understand his later work, but she died before she could. Later in life and understanding the spiritual path and his view of the universe he was on, did it make sense to me. Those albums to me are my favorite periods

Sun Ship -- has one of Jimmy Garrison's - Solo bass intro and outro on the last track Ascent,. One of my favorites as well and something that Jazz bass players should listen to.

Anyway -- you do have a right to an opinion.

 

[Bander]

I played/ play sax, listened to a lot of sax in the day. I think his tone and intonation werent the best - and i think that was his choice, to not focus on that, in favor of ideas that go beyond just "sax". So, I think most consider his contribution, to be musical - not saxical. I just invented that word

 

[brianrost]

Well, if you want a smooth saxophone tone, stick to Johnny Hodges (who hired Trane as a sideman!), Lee Konitz or Paul Desmond.

A lot of the music that came in the wake of Coltrane's last years, sometimes called "fire music" or "free jazz" as played by Archie Shepp, Pharoah Sanders, Albert Ayler, Sun Ra and others in the 60s can get really abrasive. It's an acquired taste, no doubt about it. I first got into that stuff because of Frank Zappa name dropping in his liner notes.

I found a lot of recordings in the cutout bins. I was already listening to fusion (especially Mahavishnu, Herbie Hancock's "Mwandishi" band and early Weather Report), prog (the weirder the better like Crimson, Gentle Giant, Universe Zero, Soft Machine) and deep into Zappa and Beefheart, so it was easy for me to get into it. My exposure to jazz was mostly backwards, I started with the craziest stuff first then headed into the past to bebop, Ellington and Louis Armstrong.

It wasn't like it was love at first listen, I often started with playing it as background music while I was reading or doing my homework. After a while I'd get used to it and then my ears were ready to actually hear what was under the surface. I'm sure ingesting substances helped me along

In a radio series hosted by Wynton Marsalis about jazz (long before the Ken Burns TV series), he discussed free jazz in one episode. He pointed out that we can except the wildness of Trane starting with "Ascension" in 1965 because we know he could play what was acceptable...bebop. That wasn't always obvious of other players in that vein, notably Albert Ayler.

 

[L-u-A-R]

I'm not a jazz person, don't have opinions in any direction myself.

He took way too many choruses most of the time. His solos often began with beautiful ideas and devolved into patterns and exercises. “Impressions” is one example. Past a certain point, he sounds to me like he’s recording himself practicing.

But what you said here of reminds me of my old piano teacher's view on jazz (classical musician)
Here's the gist:

Jazz is all heart, no head.

Listening to "Impressions", I think I get it? There's a sense of the music being played by feel, intense musical instinct.
It contrasts strongly with classical where every note, bar and phrase is already decided, so instead we carefully consider how to play, not what to play.

 

[Altitude]

Not sure what your agenda is to diss a long dead saxophonist who will be 100 years old next month.

No agenda. Talkbass is a discussion forum, not an echo chamber where everyone shares the same view on a given topic. I’m simply having this conversation, and I’m confident that I stated my position with enough rationale and basis to avoid it seeming like a troll post.

 

[DJ Bebop]

This is true that TB is a discussion forum.

Yet for me, I have never understood the need to use the time and energy to tell other people what I don't like. Especially when my opinion was not asked for.
But that's just me

Still, you do you

 

[Steven Ayres]

Everyone gets to like what they like, but for me, the experience of music is intuitive and emotional. If I have to study it to get it, it feels arid and artificial, too much head and not enough hips. I'm no longer impressed with speed or gales of notes. I've played enough bebop and such in clubs to understand which musical aspects most of the audience actually responds to, and it isn't the conceptual framework or an interesting conversation between musicians — or worse, the too-common overlong soliloquy. I've played upscale big-city jazz venues where the audiences are largely jazz nerds and high-art critics, and never felt colder in a room. The idea that jazz musicians are each striving to create a unique and personal sound is I expect true for a few, but for me this business is not about self-expression, it's about connecting with people, communicating intuitively and emotionally, and having fun. Bebop doesn't give me that, and Coltrane doesn't give me any more of it than Simandl exercises do: technically useful perhaps, but no fun.

 

[bassicmike]

I remember reading a book about John Coltrane, of which the title and author have been lost to memory. I do remember it was more an essay on the author's journey with Coltrane, rather than a bio or a review.

Anyway...early on the author describes going to hear Coltrane at a club with his girlfriend. The author was entranced, the girlfriend not so much. This phrase has stayed with me - she came out of the club feeling she had been 'raped by music'.

It brings to mind Miles' apocryphal quote regarding Coltrane's penchant to solo at length. "Try taking the horn out of your mouth".

The view of Coltrane perhaps playing too much is legitimate. From non-musicians to serious musicians.

The later period, long soloing John Coltrane is not something I seek out. It doesn't give me pleasure, rather it wears me out.

But as mentioned above, Plays the Blues, Blue Train, Love Supreme, the recordings with Johnny Hartman and Duke Ellington...all terrific listens.

What does all this mean, I dunno. But it's an interesting read.

 

[Altitude]

This is true that TB is a discussion forum.

Yet for me, I have never understood the need to use the time and energy to tell other people what I don't like. Especially when my opinion was not asked for.
But that's just me

Still, you do you

If you go back to my OP, you won’t see where I said I don’t like Coltrane. Which is because I didn’t say that.

I am saying that in my view, while the pedagogy of Coltrane’s music is as strong as it ever was, it takes a certain kind of person to engage with it. Others don’t or can’t, and I’m presenting the reasons why.

The definitive recording of Impressions (Village Vanguard, November 3, 1961) is 15 minutes and two seconds long including some silence at the beginning. Trane ends the head at :40 and resumes it at 14:12. Everything in between is him blowing. Nothing else. He plays a lot of things repetitively - not in the sense that he’s building something onto a motif he played before, just the same idea over and over again. Then he might move to a new idea for a minute or two, then return to the previous one.

I think, as others have said as well, that Trane did this on purpose. He was either performing a “meditation” or was trying to squeeze every ounce of expression from an idea by experimenting with the slightest possible variations. Which is cool but is also why I say that it can sound like Trane recorded himself practicing.

You gotta be pretty hardcore to listen to a 14 minute long sax solo over an AABA format where the player only modulates the idea a bit across the thing. Is it good? Sure, especially as far as it goes as an example of how far an idea can be taken.

Disclaimer that I’ve focused on Impressions as the example in this thread and the dynamic I’m commenting on might be extreme on that particular recording.

 

[DJ Bebop]

If you go back to my OP, you won’t see where I said I don’t like Coltrane. Which is because I didn’t say that.

I am saying that in my view, while the pedagogy of Coltrane’s music is as strong as it ever was, it takes a certain kind of person to engage with it.

The definitive recording of Impressions (Village Vanguard, November 3, 1961) is 15 minutes and two seconds long including some silence at the beginning. Trane ends the head at :40 and resumes it at 14:12. Everything in between is him blowing. Nothing else. He plays a lot of things repetitively - not in the sense that he’s building something onto a motif he played before, just the same idea over and over again. Then he might move to a new idea for a minute or two, then return to the previous one.

I think, as others have said as well, that Trane did this on purpose. He was either performing a “meditation” or was trying to squeeze every ounce of expression from an idea by experimenting with the slightest possible variations. Which is cool but is also why I say that it can sound like Trane recorded himself practicing.

You gotta be pretty hardcore to listen to a 14 minute long sax solo over an AABA format where the player only modulates the idea a bit across the thing. Is it good? Sure, especially as far as it goes as an example of how far an idea can be taken.

Disclaimer that I’ve focused on Impressions as the example in this thread and the dynamic I’m commenting on might be extreme on that particular recording.

Oh I don't know:

“His tone was shrill.

He took way too many choruses most of the time. His solos often began with beautiful ideas and devolved into patterns and exercises. “Impressions” is one example. Past a certain point, he sounds to me like he’s recording himself practicing.”

To me, it sounds like you don't care for his playing, which I would consider a dislike. But I could be wrong

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

I had a music teacher who was around in that era and could easily hang with those musicians at the time (he knew every jazz standard and could play them all in any key on piano or vibes without hesitation). He said something similar to your observation having seen Coltrane live and having walked out because it was like he was practicing exercises during his performance!

 

[Altitude]

Oh I don't know:

“His tone was shrill.

He took way too many choruses most of the time. His solos often began with beautiful ideas and devolved into patterns and exercises. “Impressions” is one example. Past a certain point, he sounds to me like he’s recording himself practicing.”

To me, it sounds like you don't care for his playing, which I would consider a dislike. But I could be wrong

Do you disagree with the information I provided later in support of my thesis? Specifically, does a 14 minute sax solo bookmarked by a few seconds of head on either side seem like a thing that would have broad appeal?

 

[Swamp_Ronin]

I think the original post was meant to explore and discuss Coltrane with a bit of criticism to foster discussion. I don't think he's trying to knock him over. Coltrane (or any genius) can be revered and questioned simultaneously, especially if handled carefully. I don't see any problems with that.

Some great posts in the replies

 

[RGerhart]

That was a clickbait title, what I’m going to say here is my opinion only, but at least informed by 55 years of life that included a substantial amount of jazz education.

Coltrane as a technician is invaluable. His understanding of the math was on a strange level and any of us can learn from what he played and wrote, intellectually. But - looking back in retrospect at his recordings and his choices as a performer:

His tone was shrill.

He took way too many choruses most of the time. His solos often began with beautiful ideas and devolved into patterns and exercises. “Impressions” is one example. Past a certain point, he sounds to me like he’s recording himself practicing.

His music is hard to listen to unless you are listening critically and with all of your attention.

I think at the time it was stylish for jazz musicians to record themselves playing 12 minute versions of songs that had 5 minutes of ideas. So some of it might have been that.

I’m not sure why I’m posting this because it could establish me as a pariah, but it’s a chat forum and I guess I’m wondering whether anyone at all agrees, and why.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

I'm glad I'm not the only one with these opinions.

 

[garrett2]

Do you disagree with the information I provided later in support of my thesis? Specifically, does a 14 minute sax solo bookmarked by a few seconds of head on either side seem like a thing that would have broad appeal? Or no?

Why would it matter if it has broad appeal? It's immersive searching music. You become part of it when you really listen with it. Like listening to Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan. Or Sonic Youth. Or Ayler. It's music that transforms you as you listen.

 

[rolfplamperton]

I love Coltrane, but yeah, his tone is kind of shrill. When I’m transcribing sax guys, I avoid Coltrane because there’s all sorts of weird squeaks and overtones. Can’t get into his later stuff and a lot of his live stuff just goes on and on and on. But Crescent and Coltrane’s Sound are two of my favorite jazz album.

 

[Pings Bass]

Not a novel take.

I had a reed teacher decades ago who was focused on tone production and improvisation as spontaneous invention. He decried Coltrane for being a "biter," someone who supported the reed with his jaw instead of a good soft tissue embouchure, and as a memorized pattern player instead of spontaneous creator. I think he had a couple valid points.

BUT

With Coltrane, jazz really did take giant steps.

The mistake made by jazz education is to treat those steps as a destination, his recordings objects to be analyzed, deconstructed and recreated and infinitum. Being able to mimic Coltrane's sheets of sound shouldn't be the object of a sax player's education, but the practice rooms at jazz schools echo with the sounds of mid-20th century sax solos.

My old teacher did the same kind of deconstruction, but with Bird and Cannonball. I think he was correct that their improvisation was less pattern-based, but of course there are characteristic idioms that get repeated in any music style.

Personally I see Coltrane as an important figure in modern jazz, coming out of bebop and hard bop with new takes both compositionally and improvisationally. He was not a tone monster, but the rawness of his tone was an inextricable from the urgency of his pull on the music. He's not my favorite tenor sax player or composer of modern jazz, but he earned his place in the canon, maybe even as the ultimate destination on the modern jazz journey.

My personal preference will always be for the soulful and sweet hard bop of Cannonball, and the compositions of Monk, Mingus and Ellington, but that doesn't detract from all that came before and after.