Music Forum review

[Kenny]

Yep, the balls, honesty and insights delievered by Sam and Jamie, and plenty of other posts, make this a thread to savour.

pg said:

What is needed is a language devoid of hobbyist glee which imbues the music with the respect it deserves.

pg: As a keen perpetrator of what could fairly be called "hobbyist glee", I seriously suggest you strenuously avoid anything I write and/or broadcast.

Reader: No, no, no - I'm not suggesting there is a total split between performers and audiences. I'm more bemused by assumptions (and not necessarily by yourself) that the media's primary role is to support the arts.

I have seen priceless expressions on some faces when I have truthfully explained that my first loyalties, esepcially as an employee, are to the readers and my editor. PBS works a little differently - there, support for the local music scene is instrinsic to the station's reason to exist. But still, the listeners are the bottom line.

I am talking of people so wrapped up in their own world they consider themselves the centre of the universe, and are shocked to discover not everyone is solely dedicated to making them household names or putting bums on seats.

Mostly, I'd say, the folkses I am referring to are from outside the jaz community.

I do, however, remembers a few pars in the old Jazzchord in which a jazz peacock of the time expressed shock and horror, after meeting some jazz journos, that there were actually other pressures and responsibilties in their world.

[musicain]

We the musicians are the centre of this universe that you speak of. Without us there is no audience, radio station, nothing to review in fact thier is no role for you.

[Kenny]

musicain said:

We the musicians are the centre of this universe that you speak of. Without us there is no audience, radio station, nothing to review in fact thier is no role for you.

Well now, we could all go round and round with this. What is a musician/artist without an audience?

But really, you're missing my point, which I'm happy to admit is being overcooked.

I was referring mainly of the day-to-day working life of journalists.

Intriguing.

If, as you claim, you are the centre of my universe, what should be my relationship to my boss at the SHS, or the jazz co-ordinator/station manager at PBS, or my son (for that matter)?

It is probably more confusing than I am letting on.

As a passionate fan, in theory, I find very little to quibble with in your post. I am in utter awe of the people who make the music and their talent and artistry. It brings me joy untold.

But my interaction with the music and its makers involves numerous compromises - in practice.

And on another level, to say "We the musicians are the centre of this universe that you speak of" is tosh. That would be God, of which the music is a manifestation.

I would be surpised if any of the players I've had on my show in the past year or so considered themselves, collectively or individually, as being the centre of the jazz universe.

[robburke]

Scott I disagree, I also say bring on the critism but it has to be balanced. - Not just critism after critism and neglect what is positive in the performance. As a reader of the review we want to know about the CD - not just a straight up music lesson for the players. - this can be done in the comfort of their teaching studios.

[isaacs]

robburke said:

Scott I disagree, I also say bring on the critism but it has to be balanced. - Not just critism after critism

Rob I have a criticism of your spelling of criticism. Three times the same, so clearly not a typo

But in the interests of the balance you mention, it's otherwise an excellent post

[Listener]

I buy alot of cds and listen to alot of music. Reveiws have only very rarely made me think about buying a cd. Often they are just too vague for me, with mention of feel, vibe but not much about the actual music (which I think is sometimes a bit insulting to the reader, we're might actually understand and want more) I really enjoy it when there is a balance and when it is an honest review. As a punter, I like to better understand the technical stuff and it explains why I like what is happening and I LEARN! I've read a couple of reviews by Mark Isaacs where he balanced critique and encouragement with musical detail really well, I think one was a Michelle Nicolle album. As stated earlier, different publications need different things -point taken.

Conversely, we know that many people don't make up there own minds and believe that if it's in print it must be true or right. But I'm not sure if that's true with jazz listeners.

There was nothing in Tim's review that would put me off buying "Grace", I found it really interesting and brave. Frankly, I'm surprised at the amount of attention it has gathered. I love Sam's stuff and "Red Fish Blue" is one of my favourite recordings. So even though I was interested in what Tim had to say, I don't care because I love Sam's style, his groove, his influences and his emotional approach. And to me players like Sam are why I love music so much.

My point is, people don't change their opinions because of one review.

[HENDRIX]

Sam Keevers is a true artist who is developing something.... Whereas Tim Stevens is an interpreter of music

Sam is a creator.
This very fact is difficult for because both of these artists have swayed both ways in their careers..however the proof is in the pudding . Look at the output of both and see who has gone to the depths to bring their music into reality and who has just written words and essays about it.

The only defense for the interpretor is in technicalities and the defense for the artist is in soul.
Both are imperitive but Muddy Waters will move you more deeply than Yo Yo Ma


the pin is now out of this cultural hand grenade.

[Jamie Oehlers]

I hear what you're saying Tinky, but shouldn't a review be more based on letting the public know about the record, rather than an assessment of what you played on D7 (thats d, f#, a and c going up..... ;D)? If I was reading a review about your CD I wouldn't want to hear about quintuplets or triadic theory or any of that shit, because it doesn't describe any of the energy or beauty of the music. And even though I know there are elements of all of that in your playing, I'm not thinking about that when I listen to it - that would be missing the point right? It's almost like saying you can learn Charlie Parker out of the omnibook - loads of people can play those notes, but nobody else sounds like Bird.. ..I'm all for musicians discussing their art (you know that), but I just don't think that a review is the place for being overly technical. I guess I do like to hang onto the "noble savage" illusion that music is more heartfelt than mindful - but thats the great thing about us upright monkeys - we all do and think differently.

The funny thing for me here is that I don't really take reviews to heart, if I did I would probably have stopped playing by now. I actually wrote to one reviewer who would never even acknowledge the fact that I was playing on gigs he reviewed, and asked him to at least say how shit I was - just don't ignore me. I know what I'm going for and when I don't make it. When I want to gain more knowledge or advice, I seek out players I respect and admire and get their opinions.

[spelling police]

Since spelling errors have been pointed out (petty, yet somewhat important), the last time I checked, I believe it was "always" with one "L" (sorry Tinkler)
;D

[Im Shocked]

I think it may of interest to note that Tim's review, whilst very eloquently put, does not particularly address musical issues with respect to either Sam or Jamie's performances, rather it appears to address Tim's own playing and aesthetic values. The points of contention in this review seem to me to be reflective of technical issues, both pianistically and compositionally, which Tim finds important to himself as a pianist.
Surely it can be assumed that Sam Keevers, with his wealth of experience and musicality is capable of making an aesthetic decision regarding his use of pedal when playing his chosen instrument. I would suggest that any problem Tim has with this is more reflective of his own preferences and that a statement like “The piano is greatly over-pedalled, too” is both arrogant in its meaning and insensitive to the artistic intent of Keevers.
Likewise, one should indeed give Sam credit with regards to his choice with voice leading and parallelism with these tunes and any others he may have previously written. The assumption that these aspects of Sam’s compositions are weak and NOT educated choices is once again both arrogant and insensitive.
This is not to say that critical reviews should not exist, quite the contrary. Tim is to be applauded for attempting to write such a review in a country generally bereft of anything but glowing CD reviews. My problem with this review is that is written as though Tim’s opinions (and it is important to remember that they are opinions) are facts.
Aspects of the performances that probably should be expressed as informed, educated opinion, are addressed as fact, which is inappropriate.

In conclusion, this review demonstrates, at the risk of sounding a bit NRMA about it, problems with a blown head gasket and some conspicuously weak motor tuning, issues which are not unknown elsewhere in Stevens’ reviews.

[Julio]

I'm Shocked. I like your descriptive powers. I'd prefer to read a review of one of my album's that compares it to HOLDEN rather than HANDEL any day. How much more relevant to me and other listener/readers living in our modern day Aussie context!!!!! And interesting, creative, amusing, clever (clever like Seinfeld not Frasier), real (like the guy who shears the sheep, not the one talking about the dressing needing a touch more mint).
Anyway, I think Grace is a great addition to my collection. Milton is a beautifully written composition and Beautiful Freak is just that! How about commenting on that tune.
I think Sams writing and playing is always honest and real and from the heart. So is Tims writing I guess. I can't comment on his playing, haven't seen him do a gig for years.
Wow, its great to hear what you all really think.
Mark, maybe you should check out the CD and see what you think. I'm pretty sure you could go to www.jazzhead.com and listen to the track for nothing. You've sure got a lot to say about an album you've never listened to!!
Just kidding mate. I know this discussion is no longer about the music in question but is now a discussion about the discussion thats inspired by the review of the MUSIC!
WOW! What a thread!!!
Its been fun. Thanks everyone xzzzz ;D

[ramirez]

Hi everyone. I simply could not resist the opportunity to (hopefully in a bit of a houmorous way) plug tonight's gig featuring the man of the hour himself. Ok, here it goes: Transit Bar, 8.00pm Oehlers, Keevers and that Latino bass player. Come and make up your own minds, ha ha...

[jules]

Man, I'd love to but I sure am sick of those guys after hanging out here the last few days!!!
Besides.... Transport has too many parallel lines for my liking. Makes me feel square.

[Reader]

C'mon HENDRIX, I think your cultural grenade went off in your own face: if there's one thing we can all agree on it is that both Keevers and Stevens are both superb musicians. Tim is certainly a creator, check out Nine Open Questions or any other of his numerous excellent albums. In fact Tim's great contribution to music is his music. In his written utterances he is provocative, which is great, but always seems so parsimonious... even in his praise.

[musician]

Kenny, when you say

"We the musicians are the centre of this universe that you speak of" is tosh. That would be God, of which the music is a manifestation. "

I’m afraid this doesn’t apply to me as I am an atheist.