Apologies for current slow updates

hey there people!
I've been working a lot, and working on my music a lot lately, so I've not been having too much time to do any reviews or random rants about Jazz. So if you're wondering why it's going to be slow, this is why. Though sometime this week there may be a gig review, as Acid Mothers Temple are playing in London tonight and so naturally, I will be there. Also the inevitable deafness that such a gig will induce will result in reviews becoming hard!
So yeah, that's something to look forward to.

Peace and love!

That's Jazz!

Miles Davis, one of the biggest inspirations in my life!

So, yesterday, I was browsing through the music stand at my local Tuesday market, I had already picked up four LPs and just as I was about to pay, I noticed one more box to flick through. The owner (who looked like a combination of Seasick Steve and Worzel Gummage) of the stand said to me in an almost dismissive tone 'That's Jazz!', as if a mid-twenty-something guy wouldn't know what Jazz is. The way he said it was like, it's a forbidden secret, something alchemical, and supernatural. Something you have to know about to like...

Which is pretty absurd, I got into Jazz without knowing anything about it. I didn't know who the stars are, I couldn't tell (or even know of) the difference between Bebop and Cool. Obviously though, as time went on, and my interest in Jazz grew, I've become reasonably knowledgeable about it. I can't list exactly who played in Charlie Parker's band in 1945 for sure, but that isn't that relevant to enjoying the music.

However, what is true is that there is a sense of alchemy to Jazz, in how it draws such base elements together, and creates gold from air. Jazz is dangerous, especially as it became more about personal interpretation, experience and improvisation, 'the moment', it became a right dark world. By the fifties, drugs and Prostitutes were used as payment more than cash, many legends had already set their life on a final crash course, and many would die young. However from this darkness comes the ultimate expression, the way out, the now institutionalised view of the Jazz performer, being at one on the stage, the music is the escape and the raison d'être. Billy Holiday dealt with much trouble in her life, yet propelled the art of singing into such alien territory, the voice as sheer emotion. Charlie Parker, Miles Davis, Eric Dolphy, Chet Baker and so many more were either briefly or long-lasting drug addicts, yet took music beyond what could be expected. Miles Davis himself was a one-man revolution!

Sun Ra took Jazz to the reaches of space,
and he never came back down.

While Jazz did become infiltrated by the commercial sector, and even men like Miles Davis would produce sub-par albums for the cash (these would flitter around during the fifties, but by the sixties and seventies, he was the living embodiment of artistic integrity), many leading figures would still create such earth-shattering works of spirituality. Ornette Coleman's Free Jazz was a quest for a new music, looking back into the history of 'black music' whilst surging forwards with such energy that those who didn't follow through were often left drifting in the cold dark space of irrelevance. Through it, he managed to perfectly secure the sound of the times, the anarchy and chaos of America's racial situation, and the search for a new 'Black Identity'. John Coltrane took his art to further heights, the saxophone becoming almost a direct connection to the spiritual world, the world of pure feeling and emotion, free of earthly baggage. An idea which was surpassed only by Sun Ra, the all loving angel from the planet Saturn, one of the original Moog players, and a conduit to true cosmic energy. His band, the 'Arkestra' were themselves used as a great big instrument by Sun Ra, whose out of this world Jazz would eventually influence the emergence of psychedelic rock.

There is a wide dismissal of Jazz particularly amongst the white middle class (who may perhaps have a Wynton Marsalis or Kenny G CD because it makes them feel oh so cultured because they like 'jazz' with a lowercase j), many comedians will make jokes about Jazz and it's experimental nature, as if it's an embarassing footnote in the history of music. Ultimately though, this comes from the reactionary attitudes of the white elite during the height of the American civil rights movement. The more violent and oppressive the elite got, the more expressive and experimental Jazz got, the darker, edgier and  painful the situation, the harsher, more aggresive, experimental Jazz got, to express these feelings. Unfortunately, the cultural baggage was put down and has stayed there. You just know that whenever somebody uses the phrase 'experimental jazz', they haven't listened to any of it.

Billie Holiday, singing with a voice
straight from the heart

Ultimately, my love of Jazz is prettymuch infinite, and I feel like it's one of the 21st century's greatest mistakes that Jazz is being left as this mouldy old music from the past, to be viewed like Bach and Vivaldi. Jazz is true music from the soul, it's influence is around everywhere, and it's feelings of individuality and expression are far more relevent now in our world of corporate and commercial mundanity. In a world where people think that tweeting about their breakfast is the height of individual expression, we need Jazz more than ever. It's powerful stuff, it's beautiful and ugly, dangerous yet loving, free yet oppressive, personal yet impossibly cosmic. Young people should not be discouraged from listening to Jazz, it should be encouraged, and hopefully it can earn it's place as the most pure form of expression around.

The deal with genres/classification

What's the deal with it all? I know that it's useful to find a way to separate different things. Miles Davis is jazz, Queen are rock, Kraftwerk are electronica... But what about Davis' funky fusion, Queen's pop ballads or Kraftwerk's earlier avant garde jazz? And what about those artists who defy genres, like Frank Zappa or Captain Beefheart?
If sorting through genres, should we seperate an artist up into lumps, or keep them at what they're more recognised for? So Steve Hillage would sit firmly as Psychedelic rock, even though he's a key figure in spacerock and electronica. See what I mean?

In recent years, since music stores have been in serious decline due to lazy Itunes users, so much music has been lumped together. Afrobeat, Jazz, Classical, french songwriter, New Age etc are often all lumped into the catagory of 'World Music'. The catch all term of 'Rock & Pop' covers everything from Duran Duran to Robert Wyatt, Frank Zappa to The Spice Girls. Yet 'Metal' and 'Urban' music get their own sections, despite there being very little difference between them and many of the 'Rock & Pop' scene. Where does funk end and hip hop begin? How is Jay Z more 'urban' than Sly And The Family Stone?

Essentially such ways of catagorising are just useless, while some such as Zheul and Canterbury Scene are quite their own isolated scenes, what about Gong? the spacerock band which has featured members from both genres and merged them into it's own entity? And of course, Hawkwind, who have featured and inspired most genres around. Can we really classify in this way anymore?

 My top CD shelf is all Frank Zappa, but then afterwards it goes astray, with shelves featuring a variety of genres, except metal, but even that includes many non-metal content. Where does metal end and prog begins?



So currently, I have them in rough groups. Zheul, Spacerock, Japanese Psyche and Krautrock all being close to each other (with their associated bands, so P.M's Gong is with Gong as opposed to with the fusion stuff). This isn't an ideal situation, but makes the most sense to me so far, and it's quite easy to know where everything is, which is useful when you own several hundred albums. Though I still think there could be a better way, it's just, finding it...


Another suggestion is organising stuff A-Z, but that means that Acid Mothers Gong, Daevid Allen, Mother Gong and Pierre Morelan's Gong would be seperate from Gong. Space Ritual would be kept seperate from Hawkwind despite being virtually the same band. It seems simpler yet also more confusing.



Essentially, everything is linked. Most rock comes from blues origins, Jazz comes from combining European brass bands with blues. Electronica comes from both the psychedelic and avant garde scenes, but it's further than that, electronica also owes itself to jazz, spacerock, orchestrial... everything owes itself to everything that comes before it, and any atempts to try and create strict genres is ultimately detrimental to music, and creates a narrow minded audience. Many people ONLY listen to punk, many people ONLY listen to metal, many people ONLY listen to hip hop etc etc. For example, Guys like Wynton Marsalis are creating a strict sense of jazz, referring only to a specific time and type of jazz, and ignoring anything that falls outside of those narrow parameters, so the inspiring work of Miles Davis' fusion, or Sun Ra's extra terrestrial experimentation, are not, in their eyes, jazz. Just think about it, and then see how dumb genres are.

Not a review, but I just wanted to rant for a bit. :)

Brooom!

Record Collecting Pointers

Whilst the bulk of my collection are CDs, the past year, I have become a quite dedicated record collector. Not collector in the 'OOH LOOK PRETTY VALUABLE' sense, but in the 'SOUNDS GROOVY' sense. So, if I get a picture disk, I'm listening to it. Monetary value is nothing compared to the experience of listening to music. Anyways, I have brought a sizable amount of records, and so think it'd be cool to post some pointers on here.

• Markets and Charity shops. These places are the goldmines, I've managed to pick up a load of decent LPs from these places. Captain Beefheart, Tangerine Dream, Human League, Yes, Mike Oldfield... it goes on and on. I managed to get Stravinski's Rites Of Spring for 50p. Well worth it. You can often find better deals in these places than in proper record shops due to the staff often not knowing how much something is worth.
• Check the vinyl! While I've never had to change my mind (generally it's all been excellent quality, as it lasts longer than tape and CD), I know to always pull the record out of it's sleeve and give it a glance, Small scratches can add a nice vintage popping sound to it, which can work well on your Rick Wakeman LPs, but bigger ones can totally ruin it. I've got a Zappa album which on one side skips like whole ten second sections in the songs. Luckily I have those tracks on CD, and only got the record due to being a Zappa completionist (it's a sampler), but still...
• Last minute eBay auctions. are the source of most of my records. You can often find something decent for 99p if you're able to keep an eye on it's last minutes. This is what I often do in my lunchbreaks at work. You can't argue with a 99p Sly and the family stone LP! Don't even focus on searching for specific stuff. Just search for 'Vinyl LP' and see what stuff is ending soon.
• Buy from sellers you TRUST! there are hundreds of record stores on eBay, start with just buying around, and then when you find some that you know have excellent quality, cheap delivery and so on, try and stick with them as your first port of call when browsing. The problem with ordering online is that sometimes the goods may not be as described (my 7" of Wuthering Heights has a giant crack down it), but generally, stores will have a reputation to uphold and will honestly grade the quality of their stock. Shakedown Records is a good seller to use on eBay.
  
• Don't pass up a bargain. If something seems abnormally cheap, don't wait around, BUY IT! Buy it before somebody else does. I've managed to get a vinyl copy of Zappa's 200 Motels for £12. That's around less than half of what the CD sells for! You just have to keep your eye on the ball, and remember, music collectors are opportunistic savages. We would sell our own parents for a shot at a mint sealed copy of Trout Mask Replica.

• Be weird. So many weird and exciting and experimental stuff has been released. This is your chance to pick up an absurd novelty record or get that BBC Sound Effects album you've heard about. Honestly, just go for whatever you can, whatever you think will be interesting. Explore. I brought a job lot of 80 singles, most of which I don't like, but some I love. It was fun to just go through, listening to each one and sorting them out and just immersing myself in the music. Explore the boundries of your musical taste and be weird.
  
  
  

Music is the best

Through Facebook conversations, or chats in the *gasp* real world, I've noticed that some people are... more than a little suspicious of my claims of over 400 albums on CD, So I've kindly provided a photograph. Here's a little breakdown

Top shelf is all Frank Zappa, about 2/3 of his total output. I'm slowly getting there. Of note is the 4-disk version of MOFO, an audio-documentary describing how Freak Out! was made. A Must have for any Zappaologist.

Second shelf contrains Beefheart, Waits and assorted psyche/prog. Item of note is a misspressing of Wyatt, Atzmon,Stephen's album, were instead it has a triphop album inside.
Third shelf is mostly zhuel, spacerock and japanoise also with some psyche. Worth mentioning are the Daevid Allen Bannanamoon Obscura series of albums, I have a couple of them, each limited to around 2500 each.
Then we have a misc shelf. Everything from Krautrock to David Bowie to Nick Drake to Steve Vai.
Fith is Joe Satriani and then Jazz/fusion. The Miles Davis session boxsets are more than worth their weight in gold. Get them now!
Sixth is my TEENAGE METAL SHELF including like most of Iron Maiden and Judas Priest's albums.
Seventh is misc rock/whatever. Funk, Ska, Psyche, electropop, Orson Welles' reading of War Of The World.
So, that's a lot of reviews worth of music!!
Also I am building up quite a nice record collection, so maybe photo of that in the future??

P.S. Yeah, this was a 'look at me showing off how much I have' kinda post, but y'know. Fuck it.

Hey there, this is a music blog, music is good.

I don't really know how to do an introduction, so here's some GENERIC QUESTION AND ANSWERS!!! 

Who are you? why should we care? I'm just some guy, and no, you shouldn't care. My musical interests stretch far and wide, from Jazz to Electronica, Space Rock to avant-garde orchestrial compositions etc etc. I do make music myself, and maybe at some point, I'll put some of that on here for you. Who knows??? But essentially I'm a depressive art graduate, and the only thing that keeps me going is my love of music, so I hope I can use this to promote decent and interesting music, and point the proverbial gun in the proverbial face of the proverbial Paolo Nuttini.

 There are plenty of music blogs already floating around on the internet, do we really need another one? No, but then you don't need the internet anyways. Hopefully what'll make this a bit different is that I will be trying to avoid the 'white guy in a grey overcoat' style of most blogs, which only tend to talk about 70's rock and such. I mean, THERE WILL be lots of talk on 70's rock, but there'll be plenty of talk on lots of other different types of music.

 Will there be download links? Nope, the music I will be reviewing will be stuff I have purchased as a physical copy. I feel that music becomming mere digital information has in a way cheapened the whole experience, and reduced the value of music to a commodity or background music. I mean, if you're just starting out and want to get your music out there, it's good, and likewise if you're just trawling round to check bands out, then again downloading is good but ultimately I think we should always see the CD, Tape or Record as the real deal. Listening to MP3's is often like looking at a painting through frosted glasses.

 (And yes, keen hippies will notice that the groovy mandala in the corner of my page is indeed an 'Octave Doctor' from the planet Gong!)