3 ms·
First.. I'm a huge fan of this stuff, and Kind of Blue is one of my favorite records. That said, I think that the author is making a mistake by taking Stephen
by bhousel 14y ago
First.. I'm a huge fan of this stuff, and Kind of Blue is one of my favorite records.
That said, I think that the author is making a mistake by taking Stephen Thomas Erlewine's review too seriously. When you read things like "an album that towers above its peers, a record generally considered as the definitive jazz album, a universally acknowledged standard of excellence..." take it for what it is -- fawning praise written 50 years later by a fanboy.
Read a bit further... "this music never flaunts its genius," a line that stuck with the blogger. In fact, anybody who knows a bit about Miles Davis is probably laughing now about how backwards this is. Miles was Mr. Flaunty Genius.
"Kind of Blue is more than easy listening. It's the pinnacle of modal jazz"... I think at this point, modal jazz was just getting started, not reaching it's pinnacle.
"...this is an exceptional band... one of the greatest in history, playing at the peak of its power. "... Um, no! None of these musicians were at the peak of their power at all. They all went on to do more.
Unfortunately now the blogger is trapped in this line of thinking, and he writes... "I think what draws me to this album is the enormous restraint that each of these brilliant musicians show... They were all extraordinary musicians at the top of their games, and yet they came together and produced a piece of work that doesn’t feel strained or over the top. There is a sense of comfort – of rightness – to every note on the album."... In fact, there are other critics that have said that Cannonball Adderley was really a wrong choice for Kind of Blue - his playing stands out as being too bluesy and he didn't really "get" the modal jazz like the other musicians.
Anyway, I guess my point is to be wary of empty praise. The author was clearly moved by the music, and the Erlewine review reinforced those feelings, but he is missing out on a lot of interesting lines of criticism that might bring him new insights. Jazz, like other abstract arts, is especially interesting because of how malleable it can be, with each listener bringing their own perspectives and opinions into how they perceive the work. The best ones (and Kind of Blue is among them) will grab your attention, play off your memories and emotions, and inspire you.
- sk5t 14y agoI couldn't agree more... a lot of the appeal of Kind of Blue isn't its musicians' virtuosity, but rather that the pieces are very well-executed, accessible and interesting to both casual listeners and "serious" jazz fans, and the recording is now very, very familiar.
- noname123 14y agoCan you explain how improvisation is different in modal jazz vs. improvisation over chord changes? I understand that instead of targeting the tones found in chord progressions, Miles Davis etc. focused on playing the tones in D Dorian mode for "So What?" which has notes that could be actually dissonant to whatever chord-tones/walking bass being played. But how does one actually construct a modal solo and does one not think about at all the chord-progression being played at all or is chord consonance still very important?
- davydka 14y agoChord consonance is still important in modal jazz. For the most part, the players have more freedom to stretch out on longer harmonic movement, rather than hopping around quickly like in bebop. If you look closely at transcriptions of the solos in kind of blue, some of the players do hint at chord progressions towards the beginning, middle, and end of their solos, which might be the dissonance you mentioned. At least, this is what I remember from back in music school. :)
- zedshaw 14y agoWell, three things about modern Jazz to understand: 1. Dissonance isn't bad or good, it's just more or less tension. 2. You can alter chords with substitutions, effectively creating a "chord abstraction theory". 3. If you can get abstract about chords, and that lets you play similar chords where other chords are, then you can do the same thing with scales. They then just play fewer chords. If you only have 3, or even 1 chord, then you can simply stay in one key and solo all day long. You can then go outside the key to add tension with dissonant notes by picking a new "abstraction". This reduction in the number of chords in the song then lets you play with abstractions on the chords being used. You can start doing substitutions with chords that are similar to give the song a feeling of progression where there really is none. If I remember correctly, Freddie Hubbard's "Mr. Clean" is just a F-7 chord for the whole song, but check out what they do with it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5CNYsmAJwI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5CNYsmAJwI BTW, I hate that song.
- noname123 14y ago
- initself 14y agoI really dislike your point of view. - Kind of Blue *is* a definitive jazz album. - Miles was *not* flaunting during that particular time period of writing and recording. He changed his mode of expression and self numerous times throughout his life. - The musicians *were* at their peak *while they were together for this recording*. - Cannonball Adderley's playing is often times the best of the bunch. I don't think you can have "empty praise" when you are expressing your subjective opinion about music and you like something.