|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
12-02-2005, 05:12 PM | #52 (permalink) |
Chrome Plated Megaphone
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 163
|
theres this latin soul album by poncho sanchez which is one of my favurites
its got a killer latino version of watermelon man on it
__________________
"Artists are artists, because they have an extra sensitivity - a skin less perhaps than other people; and the great ones have an uncomfortable habit of being right about many things, long before their time" - Benjamin Britten, 1951 |
12-06-2005, 02:53 PM | #54 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 202
|
Charlie Parker was previously mentioned on page 4.
Bebop isn't for everyone. Some people prefer more melodious jazz. Parker's technical ability was dazzling, but I'll take the melodic playing of Bud Freeman any day. |
12-07-2005, 06:38 AM | #55 (permalink) |
Groupie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4
|
Dont aggree
yeah i dont agree with you that Charlie Parker is not melodius. Have you heard the yardbird suite. Charlie Parker bases all of his written compositions on popular melodies by the way......they are inverted and the complexity of the music structure astounds me. I love to play all of his music. It has so much life and energy.
|
12-07-2005, 06:46 PM | #56 (permalink) | |
Music Addict
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 202
|
Quote:
I never said Parker was not melodious. But it's a hard fact that Bebop is not one of the more melodious forms of jazz. I stated that guys like Bud Freeman were MORE melodious, which anybody with a respectable knowledge of jazz is well aware of. As I essentially stated previously, Parker was a technical genius, but there are a significant number of jazz saxaphonists who could create music that was clearly more melodic than Parker's. His greatness is undoubted, but I don't stand in blind awe of him, like so many others. |
|
12-08-2005, 03:55 AM | #57 (permalink) |
Groupie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4
|
Im sorry perhaps i came accross too strongly on my view. Its just, you see that i play jazz, and any time i play his music it gives me so much energy and i understand the feeling he must of had when he performed his music. However i am also an avid listener of Bud Freeman and i respect his musical ability. I play sax and clarinet. I play quite a bit of Benny Goodman, but you know i think he was so overrated at the time that now his music almost seems mediocre compared to other musicians. I like that era of jazz also from the 30's and also bebop in the 50's. Do you play any jazz yourself???????
|
12-08-2005, 04:15 AM | #58 (permalink) |
Groupie
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4
|
Actually you know what you sound like an old fart old bean who has bought a whole load of records and thinks he is a genius on Jazz masters. If you dont know, Charlie Parker was arguably the best Jazz saxophonist of all time. This is a hard fact. Here is some more published information you may want to inform yourself with. From my knowledge Buddy Freeman was the very first veteran of Tenor sax players. But Parker revolutionised Jazz and reinvented a trademark sound which is not matched by any other jazz musician. I beg to ask the question again DO YOU PLAY JAZZ YOURSELF.
'In terms of influence and impact his contribution was so great that Charles Mingus was to comment that if Bird were alive today he would think he was living in a hall of mirrors. Bird's talent is compared almost without argument to such legendary musicians as Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington, and his reputation and legend as one of the best saxophonists is such that some critics say he was unsurpassable.' Honestly old people think they know everything but you know they dont. I havent been in the world that long....but i know my music in terms of emotional quality and Intellligent musicianship and Charlie Parker is far more effective than Bud Freeman ever was.....and i dont care which you like better. So dont go writting on forums if you dont really know what your talking about, unless you have lived and breathed the music through your soul. |
12-08-2005, 09:58 PM | #60 (permalink) | |
SHAKE!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: On the A train.
Posts: 205
|
Quote:
Dude, you're basically going back and forth this entire post between saying you care about Music Man's opinion and that you don't. Here's the deal: Music Man isn't saying Charlie Parker wasn't an influential musician. He isn't saying Bird didn't have talent, nor is he saying that Bird didn't cause a fundamental change in the way jazz is/was played. He is saying that bebop is not music based on melody, which is true (although it's more melodic than a lot of other forms of jazz). He is saying that he doesn't stand in awe of Charlie Parker, which, although I stand in awe of him myself, being a saxophone player (yes, I DO play music), is completely fine. No one even mentioned Benny frickin' Goodman, I don't know why you brought him up (although I agree that he's overrated). The fact is, although it gives you a different viewpoint, playing music does not give you higher authority over what's good and what's bad. Someone I know, who knows more about music than anyone else I know, doesn't play music. And you can rave all you want about "feeling music in your soul", but that doesn't give you any higher power either. Boo hoo, someone has a different opinion than me. And old people? What the hell are you talking about? It's not like more than one out of a hundred YOUNG people even know who the hell Charlie Parker is. PS I don't know why you're talking about bebop in the 50's, it was there, yes, but by then it had diverged into hard bop, cool jazz, etc., the golden age was in the mid/late forties. And here you are saying people don't know what they're talking about. |
|
|