ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/zorn-list/archive/v03.n757

Internet Message Format | 2002-02-06 | 21KB

From: [e-mail] (Zorn List Digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Zorn List Digest V3 #757
Reply-To: zorn-list
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


Zorn List Digest      Thursday, February 7 2002      Volume 03 : Number 757



In this issue:
-
       Old & New
       Now vs.Then
       Kubrik, piano
       Re: Jazz Death
       RE: Kubrik, piano
       Re: Kubrik, piano
       Re: Kubrik, piano
       frisell's sound part 17
       Messages out of order?
       RE: Jazz Death?
       Re: Now vs.Then
       Re: Messages out of order?
       Sick of Miles
       Re: Zorn List Digest V3 #755
       cripes, i can't believe i'm posting bout bjork

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1904 02:40:58 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Old & New

Il s'agit d'un message multivolet au format MIME.
- --------------B8AF82B89EAB6CEB0EAEB994
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



- --------------B8AF82B89EAB6CEB0EAEB994
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from mel-rti6.wanadoo.fr (192.168.156.20) by ms14.wanadoo.fr; 7 Feb 2002 11:22:40 +0100
Received: from lists.xmission.com (198.60.22.7) by mel-rti6.wanadoo.fr (6.0.039)
        id 3C62537F00003360; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 11:22:39 +0100
Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
    id 16YlXT-0002wv-00
    for [e-mail]; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 03:12:23 -0700
Received: from [193.252.19.25] (helo=mel-rto6.wanadoo.fr)
    by lists.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
    id 16YlXQ-0002wq-00
    for [e-mail]; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 03:12:21 -0700
Received: from mel-rta6.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.222) by mel-rto6.wanadoo.fr; 7 Feb 2002 11:12:18 +0100
Received: from wanadoo.fr (193.250.33.113) by mel-rta6.wanadoo.fr; 7 Feb 2002 11:12:12 +0100
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1904 02:16:36 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Now vs.Then
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000

IMHO, The problem lies in great part in the simple statistical fact that
most of the viable potential artistic terrain was preempted, roughly
between 1950 and 1980, by the post-war generation(s), in keeping with
the new tools and freedoms offered to them by technology and society.

There are plenty, perhaps many more incredibly creative musicians right
now then there were in those times, but they were preceded in the
pathways of creation  now looking more like jammed highways of creation.

It's easier now in some ways because everything's readily available
(improvisation schools, video methods, recordings, internet, etc.) but
much harder in another way because the territory's been covered and one
can only be at best "the new so and so" or a respectable upholder of a
now venerable tradition (bop, free, r 'n b, punk, etc.)

This axiom is as true for rock as for jazz: nobody now can possibly have
the impact and novelty the Beatles, Dylan, Hendrix, James Brown, etc.
had in the 60's. All there seems to be is rehashing, with once in a
while an ephemerous"new so and so"(Prince, Beck, Oasis, etc.).

Ditto for contemporary classical: Cage, Feldman, Scelci, Ligeti,
Xenakis, Reich, Glass have each produced schoolfuls of bright
students/imitators condemned to live in the shadow of "the great
original".

Painting and film don't seem different in that respect: Talented
regurgitations of Duchamp, Pollock, Stella, Lichtenstein, or Welles,
Godard, Fellini seem to be the best we can hope for.

Zorn's great insight is that from his generation's historical position
there was no alternative but to be derivative, so let's dance with it!
Let that be the new paradigm of originality: there ain't none, and what
about it? (Strawinsky in his own way blew away the myth of originality
for his contemporaries as well). And may the influences be as diverse,
obscure or unexpected as possible (Stalling, Japan, Gainsbourg, Torah,
etc.) but always explicit: so that it be clear that we are not of the
old "original" mold, and even less a good little "wannabe".

What can come after that? No, I'm not a pessimist, nor a conveniantly
incurable nostalgic of some golden age. Great stuff will inevitably come
up, such is life, but probably not from the place we expect it to, such
is life.

DY.






- -


- --------------B8AF82B89EAB6CEB0EAEB994--


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 12:01:16 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Now vs.Then

Il s'agit d'un message multivolet au format MIME.
- --------------1A37CC25C37F2BDA223DB31B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Very appropriately, my computer's date being out to lunch, i'm sending
this thing again with hopefully the correct one...
sorry for the repetition.
DY.

- --------------1A37CC25C37F2BDA223DB31B
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1904 02:16:36 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [fr] (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Now vs.Then
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

IMHO, The problem lies in great part in the simple statistical fact that
most of the viable potential artistic terrain was preempted, roughly
between 1950 and 1980, by the post-war generation(s), in keeping with
the new tools and freedoms offered to them by technology and society.

There are plenty, perhaps many more incredibly creative musicians right
now then there were in those times, but they were preceded in the
pathways of creation  now looking more like jammed highways of creation.

It's easier now in some ways because everything's readily available
(improvisation schools, video methods, recordings, internet, etc.) but
much harder in another way because the territory's been covered and one
can only be at best "the new so and so" or a respectable upholder of a
now venerable tradition (bop, free, r 'n b, punk, etc.)

This axiom is as true for rock as for jazz: nobody now can possibly have
the impact and novelty the Beatles, Dylan, Hendrix, James Brown, etc.
had in the 60's. All there seems to be is rehashing, with once in a
while an ephemerous"new so and so"(Prince, Beck, Oasis, etc.).

Ditto for contemporary classical: Cage, Feldman, Scelci, Ligeti,
Xenakis, Reich, Glass have each produced schoolfuls of bright
students/imitators condemned to live in the shadow of "the great
original".

Painting and film don't seem different in that respect: Talented
regurgitations of Duchamp, Pollock, Stella, Lichtenstein, or Welles,
Godard, Fellini seem to be the best we can hope for.

Zorn's great insight is that from his generation's historical position
there was no alternative but to be derivative, so let's dance with it!
Let that be the new paradigm of originality: there ain't none, and what
about it? (Strawinsky in his own way blew away the myth of originality
for his contemporaries as well). And may the influences be as diverse,
obscure or unexpected as possible (Stalling, Japan, Gainsbourg, Torah,
etc.) but always explicit: so that it be clear that we are not of the
old "original" mold, and even less a good little "wannabe".

What can come after that? No, I'm not a pessimist, nor a conveniantly
incurable nostalgic of some golden age. Great stuff will inevitably come
up, such is life, but probably not from the place we expect it to, such
is life.

DY.






- --------------1A37CC25C37F2BDA223DB31B--


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 12:20:41 +0000 (WET)
From: Ricardo Reis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Kubrik, piano

    Hi! could someone shade some info on that fantastic and marvellous
irritating piano piece on Kubrik's last film, "eyes wide shut"?

            greets,
                 Ricardo Reis

                "Non Serviam"


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 14:32:07 +0200
From: "Vincent Kargatis / Anne Larson" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Jazz Death

> From: "Brian Olewnick" <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Jazz Death?
>
> Skip asked:
> > Also, I see some really incredible young players/thinkers who are
> > building their own vocabulary in the music. Jim Black leaps to mind.
>
> I like Black very much as a drummer. I don't (yet) hear him as a major
> force.

I also wouldn't yet label Black a "major force" (despite his astounding
drumming).  I do, however, hold up the ALASNOAXIS album as one argument
against using the term "historical" to describe the jazz genre.  I think
it's a great album, and think its strengths derive from successful synthesis
rather than innovation - but in any case, it sounds to me totally
contemporary (as in ahistorical - it doesn't sound like something that could
have come from a previous period in jazz), and "jazz" seems to me without a
doubt to be the best descriptive label for it.
- --
Vincent Kargatis
np: Dave Holland - NOT FOR NOTHIN' (ECM)


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 14:01:42 +0100 (CET)
From: Yves Dewulf <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Kubrik, piano

>
>       Hi! could someone shade some info on that fantastic and marvellous
> irritating piano piece on Kubrik's last film, "eyes wide shut"?
>
It's part of "musica ricercata" by Gyorgy Ligeti. Worth checking out!


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 14:06:29 +0100
From: duncan youngerman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Kubrik, piano

Ricardo Reis a =E9crit :

>         Hi! could someone shade some info on that fantastic and marvellous
> irritating piano piece on Kubrik's last film, "eyes wide shut"?
>
>                         greets,
>                                  Ricardo Reis
>
>                                 "Non Serviam"
>

It's n=B0 2, from Gy=F6rgy Ligeti's "Musical ricercata" (1951-53)=2E
N=B0 1 just uses one pich =2E N=B02 uses 2, n=B0 3, 3 etc=2E all to 12=2E
A more than recommendable recording is "Ligeti, Works for piano: Etudes,
Musica Ricercata" by (top notch interpreter) Pierre-Laurent Aimard, on Sony
Classical=2E

DY=2E


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 14:50:01 +0100
From: Ari <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Kubrik, piano

> Ricardo Reis a =E9crit :
>=20
>> Hi! could someone shade some info on that fantastic and marvellous
>> irritating piano piece on Kubrik's last film, "eyes wide shut"?
>>=20
>> greets,
>> Ricardo Reis
>>=20
>> "Non Serviam"
>>=20
>=20
> It's n=B0 2, from Gy=F6rgy Ligeti's "Musical ricercata" (1951-53).
> N=B0 1 just uses one pich . N=B02 uses 2, n=B0 3, 3 etc. all to 12.
> A more than recommendable recording is "Ligeti, Works for piano: Etudes,
> Musica Ricercata" by (top notch interpreter) Pierre-Laurent Aimard, on So=
ny
> Classical.

Ligeti made also an adaptation for barrel organ!


- -

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 01:10:55 +1100
From: "Julian" <[e-mail]>
Subject: frisell's sound part 17

Hey, this has probably been asked a million times before but I've just
totally forgotten... what does Mr. Frisell use to get that 'backwards
guitar' tone? And while we're at it, what delay unit does he use?

Thanks,
Julian.


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 06:21:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Andy Marks <[e-mail]>
Subject: Messages out of order?

Is it just me or do others receive zorn-list
messages out of order? Like with that last
Kubrick message, I received the response and
then a couple minutes later the original message.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 09:16:33 -0500
From: "Sean Westergaard" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Jazz Death?

Chris Selwig dared to ask:

>    OK, I'm going to get in trouble for this, but I'm going to stick my
> digital foot in my virtual mouth and ask:  is jazz a dead language at this
> point, or can we really look forward to major formal innovations in the
> future?


"Jazz isn't dead, it just smells funny"  - Frank Zappa (early 70's i thnk)



- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 06:32:33 -0800
From: Tosh <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Now vs.Then

I think Duncan's commentary is right on the mark.  Also I want to add
age may have something to do with too.  I am in my 40's and lived
pretty much through the 'culture' of the 60's, 70's and so forth.
And remembered thinking 'wow this is so new and different.'

The artists who affected me that way when I first heard it are The
Beatles, Hendrix, Velvets, Miles Davis (my dad played 'Brew' really
loud and I thought it was the weirdest record ever), Roxy Music,
Bowie and Bo Diddley among others.  Art and cineama - Warhol,
Duchamp, Godard, Ozu,etc.   And there are sure are more examples -
but I don't have those feelings for new artists.  It doesn't mean I
don't like current artists (I do), but I for sure don't have that
'wow never seen this before, this is amazing' type of feeling anymore.
- --
Tosh Berman
TamTam Books
http://www.tamtambooks.com

- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 15:33:20 +0100
From: Ari <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Messages out of order?

> From: Andy Marks <[e-mail]>
> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 06:21:01 -0800 (PST)
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Messages out of order?
>
> Is it just me or do others receive zorn-list
> messages out of order? Like with that last
> Kubrick message, I received the response and
> then a couple minutes later the original message.

I receive messages that were posted in 1904. There must be some kind of a
delay on this list. Don't know if it's at random ;-)


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 16:06:47 +0100 (CET)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Efr=E9n=20del=20Valle?= <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sick of Miles

Hi,

Skip, some days ago you sent a welcome message to a
newcomer which I found enlighteningly ironic and
perfectly justifiable. In it, you questioned the
open-mindedness of this list in some particular cases.

However, your reply to my thoughts on Miles vs. Zorn
doesn't seem to me coherent in relation to the
contents in that message of yours.

Considering me a "silly", "damn kid" just due to the
fact that I dislike DAvis shouldn't be correct at
first sight. There are many ways to say things without
the need to fall into boring pollitical correctness
and keeping, at the same time, politeness.

I hate some attitudes by people who MUST adore a
specific artist because he/she is considered an icon.
I have never done it and will never do it- although I
put my "integrity" at risk.

I hope this doesn't start a stupid exchange like those
a couple of weeks ago.

Best,

EfrΘn del Valle


_______________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger
Comunicaci≤n instantßnea gratis con tu gente.
http://messenger.yahoo.es

- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 15:30:05 +0000
From: "Kurt Gottschalk" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Zorn List Digest V3 #755

The esteemed "Brian Olewnick" ranted like a loony:

I do think that there has been extremely little of great value produced in
the last few years that any reasonable listener would term "jazz" and that
what _has_ been achieved has been by musicians 40 years old or older...But I
don't see _any_ jazz musicians in their 20's doing beautiful, innovative
work. To be sure, we're up to our knees in fine jazz _musicians_, but not,
imho, great jazz creators. I've said it before, I'll say it again: where's
the current equivalent, in jazz, of Braxton in 1968 (at 23, when he recorded
'For Alto'), Roscoe Mitchell in 1966, Mingus in 1959, Taylor in 1955, etc.?

brian -- i wish i was gonna out'n'out fight you on this, but i guess i'm
not. still, i think there is some hope.

but first, a standard set by four (braxton, mingus, mitchell, taylor)
all-time geniuses is a little high. one could easily construct such an
argument to say "surely painting is no longer a viable art form."

nevertheless, yeah, we ain't in a heyday. but there are names i'm excited
about, moreso than in most of the 90s.

when i moved to nyc in 1993, i was pretty much always the youngest person in
audience at the old knit (27 at the time) and guaranteed younger than anyone
on stage. that's no longer the case, which in no way could be merely a
product of my getting older (september, november). there are a lot of
players in town doing very good music, at least some of whom will be adding
something considerable to the canon. names?
- -ori kaplan, especially his percussion ensemble. the record on kfw is nice,
and they can be a fairly chilling band live. and it features...
- -andrew bemkey. one of the great traditions of pianists is post-monk. (and
not monk-redux -- misha m being obvious, abrams at times, others). bemkey is
a remarkable musician, can play the fuck out of monk, can approach some
mingus/ra as a composer. why he doesn't get more attention i know not. that
downbeat TDWR bullshit? that should be andrew's middle name.
- -tom abbs is a phenom on bass. he does some nice composing, and as an
organizer/scenemaker, he's fairly important (jump arts).
- -susie ibarra. i'm not sold on the 'new music' approach of the last couple
years, but only cause i gots a fire in my soul that she's fanning less these
days. but nothing but respect. she's huge.
- -assif tsahar. great player, yeah, but the zoanthropic orchestra (new cd on
the way) stuff really shows the mine he's working.
- -charles waters. gold sparkle band(s) are great hard jazz. his funky stuff
is ok. but as a jazz chamber composer, he's quite interesting. saw him last
week (sax and flute/piano/acc guitar/trumpet and bass clarinet), and other
like ensembles in the past.
- -andrew barker is the shit.

that's just what leaps to mind.

given alla dat:

>It might be a simple matter of there being no stones left to overturn.

true enough. the thing about jazz is it sounds jazzy. i agree that amm ain't
jazz, and there's stuff more to my liking being done in that vein (please
don't ask me what vein that is) than the sons'n'daughters'o'satchmo. still,
joyous music abounds, olewnick.

cheers.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com


- -

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 15:32:13 +0000
From: "Kurt Gottschalk" <[e-mail]>
Subject: cripes, i can't believe i'm posting bout bjork

ok, respect enough for her i guess. songs i've heard sound pretty good, but
never felt quite drawn to explore.

but yesterday i read here that she is the most beautiful human on earth (or
some such). that fish-eyed dwarf? i was, well, surprised.

but that was before last night. she's radiant.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx


- -

------------------------------

End of Zorn List Digest V3 #757
*******************************


 To unsubscribe from zorn-list-digest, send an email to
       "[e-mail]"
 with
       "unsubscribe zorn-list-digest"
 in the body of the message.

 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.

 A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
 subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "zorn-list-digest"
 in the commands above with "zorn-list".

 Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in
 pub/lists/zorn-list/archive.  These are organized by date.

 Problems? Email the list owner at [e-mail]