Jimi Hendrix Both Sides of the Sky - new album coming March 9, 2018

Nah, I think Miles was just winging it. He didn't have any compositions, just rhythms and grooves. All the musicians just piffled around, creating a sort of ambient mud. Very easy to do meandering abstract when one is an accomplished musician. Jimi had compositions, direction, form and jaw dropping technique and creativity. He definitely was better.

 

Heh, Jim, we'll have to agree to disagree about the value of the music, although I feel you're listening for something that isn't there and is not supposed to be there.
70s Miles is indeed based on rhythms and grooves/bass lines (and not melodic compositions) overlaid with improvisations, that's the whole point, and that's why people babble on about it being the birth of electronic dance music. Miles wasn't trying to play rock music or emulate Jimi (with the exception of Jack Johnson); it's more of a crazy brew of James Brown, Sly Stone and Stockhausen (via Paul Buckmaster) and jazz sensibilities. Oh yeah, the use of wah wah definitely came from Jimi.

 

That clip is from "Eric Clapton and His Rolling Hotel", a film shot in 1978 and never released. Clapton was at the (likely) height of his alcoholism at this point and his incoherency is likely the reason the project was shelved. If you ever listen to/watch the concert shot for this film where Muddy Waters joined him on stage, you'll be depressed. Eric is obviously drunk and as a result, his playing is rough to say the least.

 

No.

 

Right, got this on dvd........
I don't know what gives you the idea he wasn't clean though, I mean, in this clip he seems totally sober to me!

 

I wasn't sure if you were kidding or not. Not to derail the thread further, but my "idea" came from Clapton's on biography where he talks about what bad shape he was in at the time. I'm sure there were good days and bad days though.

 

Of course I'm joking, he's smashed there!

 

Jimi was a songwriter. His jazzy jams were going nowhere. Have a listen to his Larry Young noodlings , boring...

 

I love that Larry Young jam . The jams on Hear My Music and Burning Desire also. Look at "Easy Blues" on People Hell & Angels too. Look at "Pali Gap" and "Tax Free", "Midnight",...
Wonderful stuff.

 

I know Jimi and Miles knew each other but are there any accounts of them actually jamming? the lets go jam in the studio with so and so off the cuff bore some pretty fruitless results as well.. it's Jimi so of course there's an inspired moment or two somewhere in a 20 min drudge but I can even recall Jack Bruce talking about a jam he had with Jimi describing it as dross.

 

This is the first Hendrix release I've passed on.

I'd rather they'd not padded the IN THE WEST reissue and had given us the entire San Diego '69 in lieu of this

 

I like "Young/Hendrix" as well. Its likely the closest thing we've got to knowing what a fusion album by/with Jimi would sound like at it has two genuine jazz players on it. Does it display Hendrix as a superlative jazz fusion player - to be honest - no. But I think its quite good for what it is - an impromptu exploratory jam that paired Jimi with two well known/respected jazz players which was never meant for public consumption - really we're lucky to have heard it.

Plus I really love Larry Young's 'Purple Haze' quote in the middle of the track!

Jimi probably could have gone the jazz fusion route if he had truly wanted to, but I doubt he would have wanted to as the style was outside his wheelhouse. Of course if he had the passion to do so, enough passion to put in the incredible amount of time and effort to develop it, he could have done it - but again, I doubt it was really ever his goal to be a jazz player.

As far as 'Tax Free' that was in no way a "jam" track, since it was a composition that Jimi was covering, and while 'Pali Gap' definitely began as just a jam, by the time Hendrix put on all his overdubs, it became IMO a fully realized (and wonderful) composition.

 

I hope I don't sound like a pompous ass by saying this, but musicians not being able to read music is barbaric. In this case, "barbarism," is defined as something that cuts against the grain of civilized norms. That is to say, for centuries, even the worst and/or novice musicians could read and write music. It is only within the last 100 years or so that most pop and rock acts have eschewed the art of musical notation. There are still tons of musicians/composers/songwriters out there who take it upon themselves to learn the craft. In fact, it's the language of music. To cut this important aspect out of one's toolbox is akin to moving to a country that doesn't speak English, yet refusing to learn the tongue of their adopted land.

Of course, playing devil's advocate here, it can be argued that pop and rock music is a fairly rudimentary form of music when compared to "classical" where music notation was born.

Now, let me ease off here, because even my favorite artist of all-time, Prince, could not read nor write music. Like you said, the Beatles, no, Hendrix, no; nor does anybody need to be able to read or write musical notion to be extremely creative. Poor Stevie Wonder. Even if he wanted to read and write music, he would have to jump some extreme hurdles to do so.

So, do all of these pop artists need to read and write music? Well, no...but that doesn't negate the fact that it kicks against the grain of hundred of years of artistic endeavors. Indeed, it's just lazy. Lazy, but it has become the accepted norm for pop and rock acts. Then again, I would contend that the pop and rock world is fairly myopic in the grand scheme of things.

Okay, done.

Man, I wish I was stoned. Maybe tomorrow.

 

Every track/album you just named is far better than anything miles davis did.

 

Pompous ass? Of course not. I respect what you’re saying as should anyone. Most of these musicians are rock musicians, like Hendrix, and if that’s the lowest form of the art then you’re right. But music is not a science or an art IMO. It’s an expression of human emotion that started well before any musical notation was developed. The fact that some people tap into that without the constraints of musical dogma should be celebrated and not criticized. It’s mind expanding or lazy depending on your point of view. I don’t like classical at all. I’ll take Hendrix any day.

 

1 - and its no coincidence that for the last 100 years we've had the ability to record sound. Musical notation was almost 100% necessary prior to recorded sound (almost, but not quite 100% since before recorded sound a song could still be composed by a non notation reader/writer to be performed only by himself or taught by him directly to another)

2 - but what if the language of their adopted land is musicians like himself who pass tapes around to communicate their ideas, or communicate by saying "these are the chords" or "this song is a I V IV progression in the key of G". Isn't that the common language of music that most musicians speak nowadays?

So unless they are moving to "classical music land" or perhaps "jazz music land" where notation IS the language, then the language of music ISN'T notation. It certainly isn't the language in the lands of pop, rock, country, blues, folk, hip-hop, rap...etc...etc...etc... If you start talking notation language to them, they'll at best (if you're lucky) just look at you like you have a third head or at worst they'll think you're a pretentious jerk who's talking down to them.

What's the point....unless one WANTS to be seen that way, I guess...

 

Not because it’s the proper way to do anything, but because it opens a more direct path into the hearts, minds and souls of geniuses than you may be able to get using your ears alone. If your own thing is more interesting, no problem. But if you’re thirsty to learn from masters from bach to Fats waller, it’s a great way to do it.

 

It's a good point about recorded music, which is something I considered, as composers like Claude Debbusy, for instance, took part in early sound recording, and even off-topic a little, Scott Joplin had piano rolls made of his music. Let's not forget, though, that there is still a market in the pop world (when I say "pop" I'm including most of the sub-genre's you mentioned) for sheet music transcriptions. In fact, aside from this small window of western culture, music notation is still mandatory in schools across the Asian lands. This is all the way from India to Cambodia. The irony is that the common practice of putting notes to paper started in western culture, yet it is other countries that are still carrying the torch.

In my experience, as a sessions musicians, who was active for at least 15 or so years, when mentioning notation among other musicians and/or performers, nobody looked at me like I had a third head, nor, to the best of my knowledge, was I viewed as a jerk. I don't know why. Even in my metal days, in the early to mid-'90s, a band mate of mine might tell somebody, "Oh yeah," pointing to me, "He can read music." Usually that was followed by, "Oh man, that's ****ing cool, dude!"

Even so, now it has me thinking about how many young musicians today know how to read music versus those who can't? I don't know about when you went to high school, but when I went, for every longhair with a guitar or a drum kit, there were two, maybe three kids in the school band who read music...or, at the very least drum charts. Sometimes they were the same kids.

All of that to say, it is especially lazy (yes LAZY) for a professional musician, like Paul McCartney, who has more than dabbled in classical music, to not have picked up the skill. I mean, it's not that difficult at all.

More to the point, though, if Hendrix wanted to do all of the cool stuff that we imagine him doing, he would have had greater success with being able to read music. Please don't think that the love of classical music gives me tunnel vision, because how would a world be if every film didn't have a score to carry the pacing, the mood, the tension, the ebb and flow that goes beyond the script and cinematography?

I'm not being combative. I'm not even being lofty. Reading music is just a matter of course. It's not a difficult skill to attain, but it also gives a deeper appreciation, a new slant, on what we're doing with tunes. Musicians can be amazing without reading a single note. That's not the point. It's do you want to visit the Grand Canyon, or do you want to look at a photocopy of the thing?

...and really, had Hendrix lived, and spent a year (or less) learning to read and write music, all of us fans would be like, "Yeah, and Jimi can read music, too!," as a sense of pride toward our hero. We certainly wouldn't look at him as if he had three heads.

 

True - sort of... Do you really think the majority of guitar players are reading the proper musical notation rather than the accompanying chord chart/notations and or guitar tabulature? I highly doubt it!

But that's different than if you were talking (over their heads) to them as if THEY know how to read music too - which would be the equivalent of you just randomly starting to speak french to them. That's FAR different than someone just thinking it's "cool" that you happen to know how to speak french, no?

You mean kids like me?

I'll half agree with this - sort of but ONLY as far as his dabbling in classical music is concerned. If you left out the classical part, and just meant his pop/rock stuff you'd be dead wrong! But even with classical, for him with his wealth and access to transcribers and top tier arrangers, its hardly a necessity, just more of a convenience, but really all he needs to do (unless the music in his head is beyond his own ability to play it) is record himself playing it on piano and then send the tape to a transcriber to notate. He'd still need an arranger after that to score the piece for whatever size ensemble will perform/record it, and I'm sure he'd be hands on during that process deciding which instrument(s) he wants to have voicing each part. Sure if he could do all that himself it would be a shorter distance between his ideas and reality (and also avoid the risk of the arranger putting too much of himself into the piece - unless of course Paul welcomes/encourages that - having someone who lives and breathes classical music to sort of "guide him"/"keep him on the straight and narrow", as well as legitimize his work a bit among classical music snobs:

"Pffft - so a mere "pop singer" has written a symphony, has he? Oh wait - he worked with <such and such a well known arranger> (perhaps an arranger who is also well known/respected composer in his own right). Well NOW I'm interested!"

How and why?

What does this have to do with rock/pop/country/folk/etc etc etc musicians ability to read music? Unless they're the ones scoring those movies.

But again...like I said above - if he were to start speaking french to us, just assuming we all knew how to speak french (for no reason)....

As far as the Grand Canyon - that's a weird analogy. I'd say a better one is you seem to be arguing that to be a better/proper checker player one must learn to play chess!

 

Boy did this thread take a bizarre turn for the worse.

 

It's in the nature of things:

 

can we start again please?

 

Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge

 

I was going to read this thread but instead I’m going to scrub the bathroom. Sounds more fun.

 

Well, you got about 100 or so good pages in here...

Veering sort of back on track, went to go play the CD on my MacBook and...the CD player is burned out. And of course this was not an album that Amazon had the Autorip feature for, so it doesn't even fall into my Amazon Prime Music collection. So at some point I have to go out and pick up a $20-$30 USB DVD burner just so I can get this onto the computer. I've already noted three songs I have to do edits for (Power of Soul to get the first "yeah yeahs" back, Send My Love To Linda and Things I Used To Do).