chiron

I'm kind of at a loss because the Miles' records you mentioned are Kind of Blue and Sketches of Spain. Moe originally recommended Blue to the OP as a possible choice for like if you're just gonna buy one jazz record. Despite my further suggestion to check out the Smithsonian collection, I also have to agree that Kind of Blue is really kind of the perfect place to start. These kind of statements seem to get me in trouble around here but I'm gonna go ahead and say this: If you're not digging Kind of Blue, it's not the record, it's you. I don't wanna seem like I'm dissing you or disregarding your taste or anything like that but I'm telling you go ahead and go back to Kind of Blue and just open your heart to it and let yourself love it. And Sketches of Spain...man, I've mentioned before but that's my favorite Miles Davis record. I mean, damn, Sketches and Blue? You're in the right place man. I also want to second Moe's recommendation for 'Jack Johnson'. While by no means 'straightforward' jazz, the smashing power chords and wicked grooves and jams ought to have an immediate appeal to someone who rocks out on the stuff you do. Dude, if you can swallow horsepills like Sunn0))) you can take Sketches of Spain. I don't know what to say besides just let yourself love it. I mean, I believe you already love it, you're just not in touch with that love. Y'all don't get mad. I don't want to sound condescending like I'm saying I know what's in chiron's head more than he does. It's that I believe there's something universal about these records. Second to Jack Johnson the Miles Davis fusion record that I think is right for you is Live Evil.

Now, I wanna make a side note about the record Head Hunters and this is just my personal take ok? The jams on that record are terrific but the main themes, like those keyboard basslines don't really come off as that inspired to me. As far as basing a jam song around a rocking theme like that, I think bands like Yes and The Doors actually pull it off better. I know some of you probably think that's the dumbest shit you ever heard but still the musicianship and the grooves by both those bands really do blow me away. I saw Herbie Hancock doing a memorial show for the 60th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing in Hiroshima, by the way. A lot of people were there. It was in connection with a popular modern branch of Buddhism he follows. I was really impressed and surprised with how abstract the music he played was. It was very cool.

As for chiron getting to the roots and building a foundation to appreciate jazz on...Hey, that's a great idea. You know where to start. Let me also toss in the blues name Bessie Smith to the obvious jazz names.

Peace.

Please tell me that I am not who you're calling Moe. If so, my lawyers will be sending a cease and desist.




A great many Jazz fans not only don't care for Kind of Blue; they don't care for Miles.

A jazz fan who doesn't like Miles is like a rock fan who doesn't like the Stones. I'm sorry for rehashing this debate but I can't even take that shit seriously.

Well you might want to sit down for this, but there are fans who also don't like Coltrane (any period), Bird, DA Monk (hell there is even an infamous DA Monk is spotty post on this board, based on F****D Up Info given to the Good Rev.), Jelly Roll, Sun Ra, Louis Armstrong just to name a few.


There are those that won't listen to anything post Dixieland. Some who will only listen to Hard Bop (Blue Note is their Church and they usually worship at the RVG altar., Bop, Fusion, etc....

I loathe the Stones.

P.S. I love Herbie's older stuff, on his own and with Miles, but it's been around 25 to 30 years since he's done anything that really intersted me.

Ok, I'm going to intervene here. I disagree with OldSmell's thing about jazz fans being unable to like Miles, rock fans being able to like the Stones, just like Equinox and Satchmo, I don't understand his reasoning. However, we've had this discussion before, and no one was convinced. We're going to get the same results here, so I believe it's fair to say to continue such a debate would be pointless. Can we just stop that discussion right here, where everyone's stated there opinions and no further input will be doing any good?

I hope it's only a nomination, because I have no lecture prepared. Then again, would I rather win and be unprepared, or only have a chance at winning but be prepared? Hmm.


EDIT: By the way, my first real jazz album (as in, the first one I really liked, and for reasons other than Buddy Rich being himself) was Kind of Blue, but my second was A Love Supreme (John Coltrane, if the thread starter doesn't know). I guess some might veer away from reccomending it because it's leaning into the avant-garde (more than a lean I guess, but whatever), but I think it's really accessible anyway. Untrained as my ears were, I didn't even get what was avant-garde about it for some time. It's beautiful music, and I know kids who listen to mostly emo and indie and who've never heard another jazz album in their life, but liked this one. Plenty of fantastic (and accessible, of course) albums have been mentioned here, but here's another one that's among the true greats and can get someone started on jazz.