-
Man I just cant stop listening to this lass. Any of you guys listen to her?
-
06-28-2013 05:17 PM
-
Yes, I listen to Mary HalvorSon.
-
I wonder if they can play on chord changes too.
-
Man, I just don't like her playing at all. Sorry to say, but I'm just being honest. To me a lot of what music is about is beauty, and I don't hear it in her style.
-
Check the discography of the players. They are all highly skilled musicians.I wonder if they can play on chord changes too.
Yes they can play changes.
-
There was nice trumpet solo at about 1:25 that got totally transformed, deconstructed and re-cast by the collective noise-making beginning at 2:00. Cool group interaction.
Then, from what about the 3:42 mark, the music got quite King Crimson-esque, lines snaking in and out the collective percolation. I thought that was interesting.
Overall, it wasn't too bad--I expected worse, to be honest.
Naturally, no one can simultaneously champion this and, at the same time, decry why most people hate/ignore/have no time for jazz.
-
There were two comments in the comment section that struck me.
Perhaps a more intelligent way of discussing her music: "People that don't like this ought to be able to call it tripe/horrible/doggerel. I didn't like Halvorson my first time around, so I empathize with that. I think it perhaps sounds contrived on first listen? i.e. "they're just trying to sound weird." But now I love it, I appreciate how notes/melodies are manipulated into (sometimes) very harsh patterns that exploit rhythm in ways many other troupes don't. It's as if a free jazz concert has been quantized, then the result of that has been inverted."
File under Unfortunate Imbecile: "please consider that maybe you don't like this music because you don't understand it, and that the people who made it have much more refined aesthetics and better-oiled imaginations than you do... it's not your fault, you just don't actually like music that much..."
-
"Each work of art ought to imply the standard whereby it is to be judged." In this case the players have a very strong standard that they have set, and live up to it very well. To me there is more composition here than in a lot of jazz but the players also have a highly skilled adherence to the style of that composition in their improvisation. They know the rules and adhere to them quite well. And it's a heck of a lot more tonal than, say, Schoenberg, Webern, Boulez, or similar modern composers. It didn't take a lot of time to understand and "dig" what they are doing. I especially like what the drummer is doing.
Last edited by robertm2000; 06-29-2013 at 05:46 AM.
-
Seems to me the larger the group she's with the more interesting I find her music.
-
I like her music. Listening to jazz for 45 years, my tastes have always expanded, and I like any improvised jazz-like music in which I hear commitment, honesty, exploration, and good group interaction. Her groups have all that in droves. It doenst have to be bebop/4-4swing based, although I love that too. I find her improvising very interesting. It may not have the muscle that some of the greats on our instruments have (although I think she has some pretty serious chops), but I find what she says compelling.
But I know and respect many intelligent and knowledgable jazz musicians who can't stand listening to any jazz that doesnt owe 90% of its influence to parker/powell/monk/dizzy.
-
I liked this clip as well as some others. It kept my interest......mainly because I was curious to find out what was going to be played next. But there is a lot of traditional stuff that is attractive in the same way. It's not really a stylistic thing.
I'm sure there is all kinds of deficits that I could find in this clip, but it's Sunday and I'd rather just enjoy it for what it is, rather than what it isn't.Last edited by srlank; 06-30-2013 at 05:19 PM.
-
Im not quite sure why I like her playing so much.
I find her tone a bit thin and uninspired and the stuff she does with the pitch shifter should sound gimmicky and boring. However she does play in a way that peaks my interest and that makes these aspects which could be viewed as fall backs seem like just an added level of character.
-
she is uncompromisingly original. she has said that straight ahead jazz was too constraining of her creativity.
her composing is pretty great in my opinion.
-
I've listened to this and several other YT clips of her. I have not listened to a whole album or attended a live performance, but I feel comfortable in saying that where you can't stop listening to her, I've been successful in crossing her off my listening list. To be honest, I think its fair to say that given the nature of her music, I in fact gave her much more time and thought than a more traditional player might get from me these days. I rather liked the head in the above clip, but as a whole, it's just not what I'm looking for. I hope she continues doing what she loves, and I hope her audience grows but it's not for me. Fair enough?
Originally Posted by bopandroll
-
And it changes from day to day. Today it's all about Clifford Brown. If somebody turned on the OP clip, I might have to harm my self or others.
Last edited by srlank; 07-01-2013 at 03:57 PM.
-
Originally Posted by hodge12
I like her music too and think of her more as a composer in vein of Avante Garde Classical. Mary, Modern Classical, Free Jazz, et. al. are an acquired taste and not for everyone.
-
I dig Mary and I like to see someone exploring, expressing ideas. I like a lot of free jazz. I seem though, to gravitate more towards players who, at least part of time, play with a great sense of time. By that I mean, they have a kind of control where their lines have that push / pull thing going on... I don't necessarily want to pigeonhole it as "swinging", just....they have that "thing"...
It sees that with some free jazz artists, every tune they play has to have that jerky, stiff thing going on with the time, like it's de rigueur....
But even with Ornette, who played very free, where melody reigned without the constraints of harmony, his time was happenin'!
-
I know words used to categorize jazz styles are never precise, but I wouldn't call anything of her's I've heard "free". Many sections are completely (and intricately) composed, the improvisation has harmonic underpinnings or other structure, just not coming directly from bebop. Unlike, say ornette or Ayler, or her teacher Joe Morris. Originally Posted by Spirit59
-
Obviously, the video is a performance of a composed piece (through-composed?), Difficult to say how much freedom the soloists are given (or how much freedom they're taking) without seeing a chart... Mary's solo at around 16:00 - 17:00, sounds like it might be pretty free. Why wouldn't it be? I can't imagine why, in this context, such restrictions would be put on the soloists.... Originally Posted by pkirk
Anyway, my point was more in regards to time / time-feel in this sort of... what shall we call it? "Avant-classical-jazz"?
-
why would we call it classical? i'm missing that interpretation.
-
because of the heavy 20th century classical influence, which is arguably more present than the jazz influence... Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Think about this:
If we were to substitute the instrumentation here with a string section, some might not invoke the "J" term at all...
-
That is an interesting commentary on the mindset of the jazz community. In a genre like rock, one can champion the most avant-garde noise bands and still leave plenty of room for Nickelback fans. Surely one can appreciate Halverson and still leave room for Kenny G, no? Originally Posted by NSJ
The reality is that the average person will never be exposed to Halverson's music which makes it hard to peg her as a scapegoat. The average person will be exposed to much more mainstream jazz via infomercials, the dentist's office, shopping malls during the holidays and non-threatening renditions of the same 20 standards quietly providing the back drop to the main event...the all-you-can-eat brunch buffet.
The typical scenario for exposure to jazz sets one up to view it as background ambiance rather than the main attraction. Not to mention the fact that instrumental music in general is a tough sell these days.Last edited by Jazzpunk; 07-03-2013 at 02:44 PM.
-
How about correcting the thread title? Thanks. BTW, check out "Dragon's Head" by MH. One of my fave JG recordings from the last couple of years. Originally Posted by bopandroll
-
Perhaps. You bring up some good points. I guess I don't view what she plays as jazz, but it always gets linked to jazz. It is what it is, an avant guard form of instrumental music. Sometimes interesting, sometimes not. But it gets always linked to jazz, an experimental improvisational form of music where, again, per the esteemed Mr. Gillespie: "where African rhythms meet European harmony". Originally Posted by Jazzpunk
I'm not sure her music fits Dizzie's criteria at all.
Maybe I'm taking it from the view of the club owner who, as someone else pointed out here, once said, "you're what? Jazz? Oh, no, I ain't booking that weird shit ever again".
Personally, I don't think the average person gets exposed to hardly ANY jazz these days.
-
It's a shame too because I think people are more open minded than they are usually given credit for. Originally Posted by NSJ
Case in point, John Pisano's guitar night recently moved venues. The new location is more casual with a wider variety in clientele (ie people who are not there specifically to see him or to listen to jazz).
The first night I went, Gilad Hekselman was sitting in. Now he's no Halverson but he's certainly no Charlie Christian either. It was great to see the non-jazzers at the bar drinking, socializing and having a great time. They weren't fixated on the music per say but nobody fled in terror just because there happened to be some serious jazz goin' down!
Reply With Quote
Has anyone tried the JHS Clover preamp pedal?
Yesterday, 05:41 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos