tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8326339.post7813264202704697977..comments2023-10-21T07:14:37.880-07:00Comments on Jazz: The Music of Unemployment: Return of the son of Industrial Jazz GroupAndrew Durkinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11471871547839907538noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8326339.post-7677012855902100982007-04-11T23:07:00.000-07:002007-04-11T23:07:00.000-07:00Thanks, Dan! Really digging your blog.Thanks, Dan! Really digging your blog.Andrew Durkinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11471871547839907538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8326339.post-89410810023232259912007-04-11T20:46:00.000-07:002007-04-11T20:46:00.000-07:00Just found my way over here...great discussion. Lo...Just found my way over here...great discussion. Love the Lotus Blossom and Mood Indigo examples. I actually compared many versions of Mood Indigo at some point and that Okeh recording really is magical. I think I'd have something more to add right now if I wasn't so damn tired (as evidenced by my multiple attempts to get the word verification below right)...maybe I'll pick up on the thread over at Soundslope. <BR/><BR/>All best,<BR/><BR/>DanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8326339.post-83453857409133702192007-04-05T13:37:00.000-07:002007-04-05T13:37:00.000-07:00Thanks for the good discussion, Nate. I will defin...Thanks for the good discussion, Nate. I will definitely check out those recommendations. More straightforward versions of overdubbed jazz have been around for some time, of course -- Bill Evans's <I>Conversations With Myself</I> discs are perhaps the best-known examples (and Sidney Bechet was experimenting with the one man band concept as far back as 1941). And in the eighties Zappa developed a technique called "xenochrony," in which he would take (for instance) a recorded guitar solo from one tune and lay it over the backing tracks for another, just to see what happened (often what happened was the creation of an uncanny sense of in-the-moment interplay when in fact there had never been such a thing). <BR/><BR/>I personally don't accept the notion that studio creations are "artificial" -- asynchronous, maybe. But I think the jazzer's resistance to studio fiddling has a lot to do with the notion of virtuosity, and the sense that a jazz musician might spend his or her entire life honing a specific sound and technical facility, and learning how to consistently demonstrate that artistry in a live situation. Given all the work involved to get to that level, why would anyone want their playing under- or mis-represented in a given recording?<BR/><BR/>That's one way of looking at it. Still, if virtuosity (or technical excellence) is one of the features of jazz, another is (or has been and should be again) "collaboration." At least this is what in part draws me to the genre: the sense that even when we're ostensibly using some more authoritarian, top-down model of art (i.e., the composer - conductor - musician hierarchy that has informed western music for however long), when it's jazz what we're really getting is more of an interactive, organic, collectively-authored sort of thing. I don't see why that collaboration should stop with (say) the horn players, just because they're operating pneumatic machines as opposed to the electronic ones wielded by a good engineer.Andrew Durkinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11471871547839907538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8326339.post-77822165022738642982007-04-03T15:10:00.000-07:002007-04-03T15:10:00.000-07:00P.S. I guess I should have referred to HTD in the ...P.S. I guess I should have referred to <I>HTD</I> in the plural where it fit grammatically (e.g., "the <I>HTD</I> discs," etc).Andrew Durkinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11471871547839907538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8326339.post-69085211838943542082007-04-03T15:05:00.000-07:002007-04-03T15:05:00.000-07:00Thanks to you both for the comments. Didn't mean t...Thanks to you both for the comments. Didn't mean to put anyone on the defensive, and please know that all of your points are well-taken. <BR/><BR/>Nate: I want to be clear that I didn't single out your review (which I thought was very well-written) specifically because I was on a crusade “set the record straight” about the <I>HTD</I> disc… though I do like that one and (as it happens) remain unbothered by its sound quality issues. The fact that KT posted the review was merely fortuitous, because it gave me an excuse to make broader statements on jazz and technology. <BR/><BR/>I know I’m an apostate, but for the record (ba-da-boom), here’s my current take on recording (in case it wasn’t already clear from the post): <BR/><BR/>I try not to overemphasize the question of whether recording technique and production values accurately represent what the players played (I’m not sure if truly “accurate representation” is even possible, if you consider how sound moves around in space). Similarly, I try to avoid the question of whether recording technique and production values fit the genre of music at hand. Instead, I listen for evidence that the artist is aware of the studio’s capacity as a creative tool (or is at least interested in disrupting prevailing notions of how recordings should sound). <BR/><BR/>"High quality" recording -- if we can agree on what that means -- is all well and good, and, as you say, may serve some kinds of music better than others. It’s nice to have it there as an option. But within the jazz world it seems to me that things have become fetishized to the point where nowadays the majority of recordings have a pristine sameness to their sound -- same EQ, same mic placement, same reverb, and so on. It occurs to me that the studio's potential as a sound-making machine has largely been overlooked (there are, as always, a few exceptions). So I have to ask: why should the rock guys get all the fun?<BR/><BR/>Of course, I’m not trying to suggest that it’s no longer possible to make a great jazz record the old-fashioned way. That would be ridiculous. On the other hand it’s a shame that there isn’t more openness to the idea of making something as technically creative as, say, <I>Uncle Meat</I> or <I>Pet Sounds</I>. As if jazz isn’t already overburdened with pieties.<BR/><BR/>Again, not much of this is directly relevant to your review, except that whenever someone mentions “sound quality” these days I tend to use it as an opportunity to launch into my various theories on this particular failing of post-modern jazz. So thanks for that.Andrew Durkinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11471871547839907538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8326339.post-23963571509277319522007-04-03T09:18:00.000-07:002007-04-03T09:18:00.000-07:00Wow - sorry this little thing has become such a bi...Wow - sorry this little thing has become such a big thing... that's probably my fault for bringing it up. But it's topical, I guess.<BR/><BR/>I also don't know if the comparisons to Miles Davis and Charlie Parker are warranted, but (as I said on my original post) we felt that in this case the music was such a successful statement of our live work that we chose to document the concert, despite whatever concerns there were about the quality of the stereo recording (which, as far as stereo recordings go, is pretty good by me, and I'm usually very critical on such things myself).<BR/><BR/>So let me just interject that Nate is one of the more understanding and enthusiastic writers who've ever tackled our music, and above all else, we appreciate the tremendous support he's demonstrated in the other 95% of that review.<BR/><BR/>I'm off to the hospital...Kris Tinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01605676500619480309noreply@blogger.com