Search & Destroy: John Coltrane

A Love Supreme is quite boring and — if presented (as it routinely is) as JC's ultraclassic — it just inoculates foax against eg Live in Seattle or Interstellar Space or Ascension. Because they think "It's good [ie ALS] but I don't like it: I'll go no further."

However there's a live take of ALS, which — haven't heard it for years — I recall thinking greatly better

Search: The Impulse Classic Quartet Box Set, The Village Vanguard Box, the Johnny Hartman record, Giant Steps.

Also, stuff he did with Dolphy is amazing. Try and get live material from '63 w/ Dolphy, like the first Village Vanguard sessions (I may have the year wrong.) The Quintet Live in Paris is great, and has Dolphy playing bass clarinet on "Blue Train," bumping it up a few notches.

If you like lyrical Coltrane try "Transition." It has my favorite composition of his, "Welcome." Which I want played at my wedding. Actually, the rest of that album is so-so, but that track is so amazing.

My favorite "out there" stuff is probably Live In Seattle, could be what you're looking for if you want the more intense sound.

Destroy: Well, how about the opening chant of "Om."

As for the classic quartet and later stuff... --I highly recommend 'Live at Birdland' as a first pick, it was mine and from the beginning of Afro-Blue it pretty much floored me in terms of intensity. Besides, Alabama is the most beautiful song he ever did.

--I'm also pretty surprised at any backlash against A Love Supreme...for me, it's just an incredibly deep, emotional album that pretty much defines everything good about jazz. Plus, the Crescent album recorded the same year is my other favorite classic quartet album, it's so laid back and solid.

--As for the later stuff, all the stuff with Alice and Pharoah Sanders is pretty intense and free and busy...I 'got' Meditations after awhile, but can only listen to that stuff every now and then. Interstellar Space is a pretty singular record too (duet album with Rashid Ali on drums)...I had NO idea what was going on there for a long time. It's still pretty impressive in that sense, but it's easier to hear the colors and patterns they are going for.

Is 'Live in Seattle' out on cd? I just can't find a copy.

i think i probably find _is_ especially accessible because of its similarities to indian classical music. i put it on at work once and an indian immigrant co-worker loved it right away.

(ps josh: i'll write you back soon. i've just been really busy and not had enough time when i get to terminals.)

'Meditations' - Don't be fooled by the title. I'm telling you. This album here...will grab you by the balls and it will start to feel good.

'Ascension' - ...will grab you by the balls (that's for sure). It won't exactly feel good, however (unlike the nearly transcendent 'Meditations').

More or less, you can try most any of the later year Coltrane for the nifty free-jazz experience (aka: post-Love Supreme - the ones you have are pre-Love Supreme).

But, I know what you mean by "What's the fuss about this free-jazz I've read so much about?" and...with that :

I'd also try some Cecil Taylor. Now, HE is what I truly call avant-garde (wild/wacky/free-jazz). Cecil might just flat-out "blow your mind" (if that's what you're looking for in jazz form). Try Cecil circa 1966 ('Unit Structure') throughout/on up to around 1979 ('3 Phasis') and most inbetween (some of which is solo piano/some of which with band - the two mentioned as bookends are with band - so, be careful with that, taste according...personally, I kind of enjoy schizophrenic solo piano playing, but...it does have a more limited range than with band accompaniment).

Search: A Love Supreme (definitely his best, I would say), Crescent, and Meditations, just to name three off the top of my head. Meditations might take a bit to get accustomed to that one. The one with Johnny Hartman doing vocals is a nice, laid-back one.

Destroy: The later Village Vanguard album (with his final band) was a bit too out there for me.

We like it because it's great. I wonder if this doesn't suggest that there is something else other than jazz's complexity which turns some of us off to most of it? "Giant Steps" (the title track) tends to make me laugh. I like it's exuberance. He sounds like he's really enjoying himself playing it, but there's room for us to share the amusement. I'm still not sure I understand what "playing the changes" really means.

When you solo in straight-ahead jazz, the notes you play will generally reflect the harmonic structure of the song -- i.e. the chords. In tonal songs that are harmonically simple, the palette of "key notes" you have to choose from remains largely the same from chord to chord, so that at any given moment there are particular pitches that you can use as touchstones or "common tones", feeling pretty sure they won't dissonate. (For instance, if you're playing a very basic B-flat blues, the notes B-flat, C, E-flat, F, and G are all "safe" in that they're present in the scales that underlie all of the chords in a B-flat blues -- B-flat 7, E-flat 7, and F7. However, a solo made up of only those notes will likely be terrible, not least because it excludes "chord-defining" pitches and can't convey any sense of harmonic motion.)

The thing that makes the title track of Giant Steps so unusual is that the chords are changing very rapidly, and each chord is fairly remote from the previous one, so those touchstones are quite few. On top of that, the song is so fast that any given common tone is fleeting -- if you play a particular pitch for longer than a measure or so, the odds are that it will clash with a chord that's changing underneath you. So basically, the experience of improvising over "Giant Steps" can feel a little like trying to play catch in one of those gyroscopic whirlythings in which they train astronauts -- your frame of reference is constantly changing, and you have to think ahead at high speed in order to make sure that each of your choices will connect with where you're going to be in two seconds.

Given all that, the fact that Coltrane was able to play melodic and memorable solos in such a context is really remarkable, let alone the fact that he played them with total mastery. He didn't just plow his way through the chords, he weaved them into the fabric of his improvisation in such a way that, while they were integral to his solo and completely implicit in it (i.e. you can reconstruct the chord changes from his unaccompanied solo), he wasn't at all governed by them: he wasn't just running down the changes, he was using them as one would use a blues or "I Got Rhythm" changes or any other ground. In other words, he made the seemingly unnatural sound natural, even effortless, and in doing so he normalized a new part of human musical experience. It would've been incredibly easy to make "Giant Steps" sound like a gimmick, but Coltrane's sheer mastery made it seem instead like an open door, full of possibilities for new harmonic approaches that both he and others -- and anyone willing to listen and work hard -- could explore.

I really like the concert performance, especially Jimmy Garrion's solos in the third movement. Coltrane also plays a lot more noisily compared to the studio version, which I tend to enjoy. The sextet takes were a dissapointment. Shepp seems to be interrupting most of the time.

and then coltrane is playing his scales like crazy, garrison just fades. its a slow fade, I'm trying to listen to him but even the tape hiss is making more noise at the end and when coltrane does his bit is the turn of pharoah sanders/rashied ali/alice coltrane trio. I don't whether Alice knows what to do really...you keep hearing those piano notes but it gets harder to pay any attention to her and she sounds as if she was taken aback, only ali can keep up with sanders, they are just so 'in tune' with each other. Pharoah sanders' solo is just a thing of beauty...he starts off playing these 'sorrowful' notes but gradually he becomes keeps squealing and blowing so hard that he actually transforms the alto to some sort synth but there's no 'common logic' (its some other sort of logic) to what he's playing (unlike a lot of 'warp' type stuff)...anyway, sanders/Ali make this track.

Coltrane comes back and he and sanders throw little sax lines at the each to round off with Ali to round it all off.

If a live album's purpose is to make you wish you were there then this fulfills that purpose.

but historically - and vital for understanding "a love supreme" properly - you need to hear his '57 recordings with monk.

I'm still mad at the uncut reviewer who wrote a review of the last concert. it was basically: 'Free jazz is not my bag so don't bother'.

excuse my unpolished previous post on this.

what do other people think of 'infinity'? i've been thinking about starting a thread about it, but i guess this'll do. for me the strings = classic, but i can see how the cd piss a lot of people off.

I was looking for the live in japan 4CD box (it is a 4CD box yes?) but I couldn't find it at tower. must stop by HMV sometime.

That Ahsley Khan bk abt ALS is worth getting just for the pic of Ayler playing at JC's funeral - never seen that shot B4.

H*V doesn't have the 'Live in Japan' box, Julio - it must be out of print. In general, the collapse of the revived Impulse label has kind of left late period Coltrane reissues in limbo - now wld be a gd time to snap 'em up (or wait until the next set of superduper deluxe whatsits)

grebt review of the book there andrew!

thanks for that andrew. so Impulse went down then that's a shame. The coltrane rack at tower was looking a bit 'empty' (though they are closing now but still).

I'm gonna try and get what's there i think.

i have a question concerning the mixing quality of the album though. the cd i have has both saxes on the right channel and the drums on the left. the stereo sound is totally unbalanced as the saxes are so much louder than the rest. i always put the balance knob to the maximum level for the left channel. otherwise my right ear would get harmed when i put up the volume so that i can hear something from the left speaker. is that normal?

people used to put lots of effort into thinking and talking about actual records here, didn't they. well.

http://www.kompaktkiste.de/cd/_artist/coltrane/254646.jpg

Coltrane bassist r.i.p.

Art Davis, 73; known for mastery of the bass, also was a psychologist

By Jocelyn Y. Stewart, LA Times Staff Writer
August 4, 2007

Art Davis, the renowned double bassist who played with John Coltrane and other jazz greats, was blacklisted in the 1970s for speaking up about racism in the music industry, and then later in life earned a doctorate in clinical psychology and balanced performance dates with appointments to see patients, has died. He was 73.

Davis, a player whom jazz critic Nat Hentoff once described as "an astonishing player" and "beyond category," died of a heart attack Sunday at his home in Long Beach, said his son Kimaili Davis.

"He was adventurous with his approach to playing music," said pianist Nate Morgan, who played with the elder Davis intermittently over the last 10 years. "It takes a certain amount of integrity to step outside the box and say, 'I like it here and I'm going to hang here for a while.' "

Known for his stunning and complete mastery of the instrument, Davis was able to genre-hop comfortably. He played classical music with the New York Philharmonic, was a member of the NBC, Westinghouse and CBS orchestras, and played for Broadway shows.

The most intense and enriching experience of Davis' career was his collaboration with John Coltrane. Described by Hentoff as Coltrane's favorite bassist, Davis performed on the saxophonist's albums including "Ascension," Volumes 1 and 2 of "The Africa/Brass Sessions" and "Ole Coltrane." The two musicians met one night in the late 1950s at Small's Paradise, a jazz club in Harlem, where Davis was playing with drummer Max Roach. Coltrane invited Davis to play with him the following morning at one of his legendary grueling practice sessions.

A few years later, when Coltrane was building his quartet, he invited Davis to join. By then he had become averse to touring and so declined, although he periodically played with the group.

Davis viewed his instrument as "the backbone of the band," one that should "inspire the group by proposing harmonic information with a certain sound quality and rhythmic impulses," Davis said in an excerpt from So What magazine posted on his website. "You let the bass do the talking. A bassist cannot be satisfied with playing straight." By following his own advice, Davis' career flourished. He played with a long and varied list of artists: Thelonious Monk, Duke Ellington, Rahsaan Roland Kirk, Louis Armstrong, Judy Garland, John Denver, the trio Peter, Paul and Mary and Bob Dylan.

Pianist Ahmad Jamal once dubbed Davis the "forgotten genius" because the outspoken bassist had been blacklisted for many years. Davis' decision to take a stand against racism was born of his experiences in music.

Davis began studying piano at age 5 in Harrisburg, Pa., where he was born Dec. 5, 1933. By sixth grade Davis studied the tuba in school simply because it was the only instrument available, he said.

By 1951 he decided to make music his career but chose the double bass, believing it would allow more opportunities to make a living. At age 17 he studied with the principal double bassist at the Philadelphia Orchestra. But when he auditioned for his hometown's symphony, the audition committee was so unduly harsh and demanding that the conductor Edwin MacArthur questioned their objectivity.

"The answer was, 'Well, he's ['colored']' — and there was silence," Davis recalled in a 2002 article in Double Bassist magazine. "Finally MacArthur burst out, 'If you don't want him, then you don't want me.' So they quickly got together and accepted me." After high school, Davis studied classical music on scholarship at the Manhattan School of Music and the Juilliard School of Music. At night he played jazz in New York clubs.

"It all sounded good to me — and I felt I could do a number of different fields," he told Double Bassist. "I was of one the first to switch back and forth from jazz to classical."

But the switch was not always an easy one. Davis encountered situations where race was more important than performance. In the 1970s, his fortunes waned after he filed an unsuccessful discrimination lawsuit against the New York Philharmonic. Like other black musicians who challenged job hiring practices, he lost work and important industry connections.

"As a person, he had enormous integrity," Hentoff said in an interview this week. "He wouldn't bend to accommodate bias or the ignorance of some of the people in the music business."

With less work coming his way, Davis returned to school and in 1981 earned a doctorate in clinical psychology from New York University. Davis was for many years a practicing psychologist while also working as a musician.

"I went up against the big power people and lost 10 years of my life. I feel vindicated [through his court case], and I wouldn't be a Dr. Art Davis if it hadn't happened," he told Double Bassist.

As a result of his lawsuit and protest, Davis played a key role in the increased use of the so-called blind audition, in which musicians are heard but not seen by those evaluating them, Hentoff said.

The accomplished musician also pioneered a fingering technique for the bass and wrote "The Arthur Davis System for Double Bass."

Davis also wore the hat of university professor; for two years he taught at UC Irvine. Most recently Davis was a part-time music instructor at Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa. He could be regularly heard on Sundays at the Ritz-Carlton in Laguna Niguel. Among musicians, Davis was highly respected for his work and his role in the Coltrane legacy.

"And he always had a great attitude, no matter what kind of music we were playing or how difficult the circumstances were," said Jan Jordan, the pianist who played with Davis at the Ritz.

"He always reached out to people in the audience."

:(

rip

RIP, a remarkable man.

Phil's explanation of "playing the changes" on this thread is so clear and to the point -- it sheds a lot of light in three short paragraphs.

As close to a God to me as anything I hold dear. Sincerely. God schmod.

RIP indeed...

http://s3.amazonaws.com/findagrave/photos/2001/222/coltranejohn2.jpg

Looks like the AP and NY Times just found out about Art Davis.

for the "far out free jazz" type stuff, just look for anything from 1964 to 1967 (the year he died)

my favorites are a love supreme, one down one up (recently released live recording with a long insane title track solo), interstellar space, stellar regions (this one was unreleased until the 90s or something, it's awesome), and live in japan (4 cd set with intense long ass songs).

hate when ppl say blue train is 'boring'

yeah the solo on blue train is awesome

more like BLUE LAME

j/k

Heh

it's funny that to some of us, probably most of us, Coltrane is like this paragon of sophistication, jazz personified, etc. etc. and then you realize some of his contemporaries basically regarded him like he was Iron Butterfly or something

"Try taking the fucking horn out of your mouth"

It is interesting as a listener to come across totally opposite views by some contemporaries in jazz.

I love watching jazz educator Barry Harris videos and there is one where he is talking around a piano about voicing and one of the students mentions Bill Evans. Harris pretty much shoots that Evans is not that good and is overrated go listen to Hank Jones.

There is definitely some bile and venom in how things works out that comes from some classic jazz artists when a sore spot is touched. Read enough and you will come across some anger in some stories and interviews- I know I have read of some from and about George Coleman, Joe Henderson, Jimmy Smith, Jimmy Knepper off top of my head that made me think wow.

Barry Harris is kind of a bore imo

ikr get something like "sheets of sound" named after your playing style and then maybe i'll take your critique seriously.

Barry Harris is a technician. his major contribution, outside of the music (which isn't peanuts either by the way), really has to do with jazz pedagogy for players. so yeah if you're not a jazz musician it makes sense that you might find it boring

Barry Harris was awesome — even though I might disagree with him, I wouldn't mind hearing why he thought Bill Evans is overrated.

sheets of sound is a memorable phrase but it's a terrible description of coltrane's actual playing style, time to sit down the late ira gitler

the renata adler of honkin and squeakin

totally agree on "sheets of sound." That never seemed fitting to me at all.

Barry Harris is a technician. his major contribution, outside of the music (which isn't peanuts either by the way), really has to do with jazz pedagogy for players. so yeah if you're not a jazz musician it makes sense that you might find it boring

― budo jeru, Wednesday, April 10, 2024 2:02 PM (twenty minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I started college as a jazz major and took a clinic with him. I don't just mean his music is boring, I find his entire persona and approach to be boring.

*found - I forgot he passed a few years ago

Hank Jones is good of course. I'd be interested to hear an argument for why he's better than Bill Evans. But I'm pretty skeptical!

i mean for starters i think you could make an argument that there's more to learn from Hank Jones. i don't think that makes him "better" though. but yeah if you find his music boring and his approach unhelpful than to each his own

young players often get stuck in traps and sometimes it's unhelpful when a cult forms around a certain player, or people get it in their head that certain kinds of players are "conventional" or "boring", and therefore aren't worth paying attention to or learning from. i think that's what that's about, i mean he's not a music critic or something

I love weird jazz opinions and hating. More on a micro level though, it's not good to write off whole styles and eras.

I thought "sheets of sound" was only coned for one specific phase in Coltrane's development, like even maybe one of the Prestige sessions.

coined

it is but (a) ppl never remember this and apply it everywhere and (b) it's a bad description for that phase also

Better than Johnny Lotsanotes

I saw Barry Harris back in... 2005? 2006? I don't remember who the bassist and drummer were with him, but he sounded really good.

Barry Harris is for people who think Tommy Flanagan is some kind of radical avant-gardist. Like, wow, your harmonies are so sophisticated. Your chord substitutions are so cleverly conceived. You are truly the platonic ideal of jazz piano. But somehow, I never want to listen to you!

dunno what to tell you if you can't get with this album

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxLqEmaBJ4zz4-agdQ2kDZG43UvkVEq5F

I mean, the first track is exactly why I don't listen to Barry Harris. He takes one of the most famous bebop melodies there is, and plays it like Bach. He's exactly the kind of guy who'll say "jazz is America's classical music" with a straight face, and want you to nod soberly when he says it. He's not an innovator. He's a traditionalist, someone who makes sure the fences stay up.

Harris pretty much shoots that Evans is not that good and is overrated go listen to Hank Jones.

this would be funny if harris told the student to go listen to ryo fukui

Can I flagpost the whole thread for the Barry Harris hate?

What’s the hive mind opinion of Don Friedman?

see Can I flagpost the whole thread for the Barry Harris hate?

He's not an innovator. He's a traditionalist

god help us if every musician has to be an "innovator"

Sorry, he just really rubs me the wrong way, and I really did not like him in person! His music is fine. The idea of "learning to play bebop correctly" makes me want to die and is part of the reason I dropped out of the music program I was in, which was built on that concept. And I say this as someone who can actually play bebop "correctly."

Like no I am not interested in becoming an AI bebop generator, what the fuck is the point of that?

god help us if every musician has to be an "innovator"

Well, that's not what I said. But if you're determined not to be an innovator, maybe jazz isn't for you. Maybe you should just play piano in a blues or a country band.

Meanwhile, here's Miles talking about why he didn't require the players in his band to "know jazz history"
https://www.tiktok.com/@ettletodd/video/7349651562203024683?_t=8lFPsTGTris&_r=1

Also, even among *just bebop* players, I find Harris pretty unadventurous, fwiw.

every celebrated "jazz" "innovator" ever has been a traditionalist and the coltrane quartet was basically a fancy blues and country band anyway

yeah I thought bebop was about wrong notes where's the wrong notes

he's fine you know just not the kind of music I'd listen to

dubiousness about the phrase aside, my point stands: harris, by all acounts, was a consummate professional and highly respectable musician. he never did anything cool enough to merit a fucking catchphrase though.

no, not everyone needs to be an innovator to be an expert. but i would think the experts (who know what they're doing) would defer to the innovators.

Jazz is a big tent with ample room inside for lots of different cats of varying stripes.

Dissing Tommy Flanagan, Hank Jones and Barry Harris in one go is basically running down the entire Detroit school of piano– unless you are intentionally making an exception for Roland Hanna– along with the deep well that they were part of and contributed to that also brought us Motown etc.

TBC, I love Tommy Flannagan. I saw his trio live at least three times.

Now remembering some tangentially relevant funny things I heard Tootie Heath say at Smalls that I’m afraid I can’t type here

Meant to add something to that other post to the effect of “study, study or bonk, bonk on the head with Henry’s Swing Club!”

TBC, I love Tommy Flannagan. I saw his trio live at least three times.

It's pretty much understood these days that Coltrane practiced so assiduously only in the hope of someday bursting in on a urinating David Crosby

Loool!

Just remembered that bit of business in THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS