givemenoughrope wrote:
I'm sorry, this is the dumbest thing Ive read on this board...and I've read/posted some pretty dumb things there.
Seems like someone who knows so much technically about the recording process would at least have the first clue about some of the most important music of the last hundred years. Strange.
Yes I know. It's baffling that in a single post Steve talks about an OC's music being "clearly an important legacy" and in the next paragraph saying the music is "bullshit". These sorts of comments say more about the listener than the music. I can easily understand people not liking it but to right it off in such an ignorant fashion is absurd.
I listened to Sound Grammar and the first Golden Circle disk yesterday. I'd be hard pressed to find such life affirming and joyous music anywhere.
I see more narrow minded snobbery from the Coleman haters on this board than any jazz fans I know.
I sent a friend of mine The Shape of Jazz to Come who'd never heard any Coleman before. He liked it a lot but it took a few listens his kids immediately responded to it in a positive way. It was Ornette's boundless melodic invention and the celebratory nature of much of the music they were responding to.
Until at least 1973, the music of Ornette Coleman was structured from the top down, melody first and foremost. His bands huddled around the blast furnace of his melodic genius and got inspired to create the rest. Each member of the group was required to take a lot of initiative. Therefore, trying to talk about Ornette Coleman's music without considering the musicians playing with him is folly. We would not have Ornette without Don Cherry, Charlie Haden, and Billy Higgins. Ed Blackwell and Dewey Redman are the two other most significant collaborators, but David Izenzon, Charles Moffett, Bobby Bradford, Jimmy Garrison, Scott LaFaro and Denardo Coleman also played with Ornette in a sympathetic way.
http://thebadplus.typepad.com/dothemath ... tte_c.html