the "I don't get it" thread

frunobulax

frunobulax

Gak Pernah Cukup!
I'll go first.

What is the real deal with this record?

Miles+Davis+Bitches+Brew+406572.jpg


I was at Boston Ballet last night with Mrs F and the last piece was set to Bitches Brew.

I don't get it...I was not thrilled to see what the music would be, but I approached it with an open mind. Knowing I would be in a seat and could not leave, I'd have a chance to listen to it all the way through and revisit it.

Didn't work. To me, it's still unlistenable. Nothing to latch on to. A lot of noise and atonal bleating set to a random rhythm that only sporadically approached a groove.

What am I missing?
 
frunobulax said:
What am I missing?
Click to expand...

You're missing "In A Silent Way" and "Jack Johnson". While "Bitches Brew" was released between them, the others are more accessible as "electric free jazz". It's kinda like listening to Captain Beefheart's "Trout Mask Replica" without hearing anything he did with Zappa or "Safe as Milk" first. Without context, and a desire to get weirder, it's a grating experience.
 
Nothing. It's art and there is no universal good/bad, great/awful, amazing/shit. The enjoyment is totally subjective. There's a ton of music that I know is being extremely well played by some outrageously talented or skilled/proficient musicians, even musicians whose other work I might actually love, that I can't listen to because I don't enjoy it.

It was just one of the many phases of Miles' career. He moved past it, but for some of his fans it's his greatest work. It's completely cool if you don't like it. The larger scope of jazz though, is that something you like or is jazz just not part of what you dig musically? If you don't like jazz and experimental music, this was never going to be for you...unless or until one day you do like it.

I've grown in and out of a lot of music and have enjoyed different stuff to different levels all throughout my life, except for the Beatles...always loved the Beatles, the Police, the Allmans, Coltrane (at least once I heard him), Bob Marley, Neil Young, etc.
 
I don't think it's a good starting point for most listeners, either for Miles Davis or for jazz in general. Of course, there are some people who have immediate connections with crazy shit, but they are atypical.

It's a landmark record. It was brand new, nothing like it, incredibly influential, was kind of like the Big Bang for jazz-rock fusion (which mostly became really lame after about 3 years), etc.

While it might sound like a bunch of long jam sessions, it really was the opposite. Very carefully put together.

But there are better entry points. Once again, for most.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
You're missing "In A Silent Way" and "Jack Johnson". While "Bitches Brew" was released between them, the others are more accessible as "electric free jazz". It's kinda like listening to Captain Beefheart's "Trout Mask Replica" without hearing anything he did with Zappa or "Safe as Milk" first. Without context, and a desire to get weirder, it's a grating experience.
Click to expand...

Trout Mask is a pop record in comparison.

I generally have a problem with 'free jazz', be it electric or otherwise.
 
Dogsinotpalc said:
Nothing. It's art and there is no universal good/bad, great/awful, amazing/shit. The enjoyment is totally subjective. There's a ton of music that I know is being extremely well played by some outrageously talented or skilled/proficient musicians, even musicians whose other work I might actually love, that I can't listen to because I don't enjoy it.

It was just one of the many phases of Miles' career. He moved past it, but for some of his fans it's his greatest work. It's completely cool if you don't like it. The larger scope of jazz though, is that something you like or is jazz just not part of what you dig musically? If you don't like jazz and experimental music, this was never going to be for you, unless or until one day you do like it. I've grown in and out of a lot of music and have enjoyed different stuff to different levels all throughout my life, except for the Beatles...always loved the Beatles, the Police, the Allmans, Coltrane (at least once I heard him), Bob Marley, Neil Young, etc.
Click to expand...

Good points...and sometimes an artist just has a bunch of ideas that need to be exorcised in order to move on.
That they get released might not even be their decision.
 
frunobulax said:
Trout Mask is a pop record in comparison.

I generally have a problem with 'free jazz', be it electric or otherwise.
Click to expand...

Well, its trying to be a pop record. Regardless, both fail miserably as accessible pieces of art. They're niche records that get significantly more press than they deserve because of how "out there" they are. In the meantime, Eric Dolphy's "Out There" only got a memorial barbeque.
 
Dogsinotpalc said:
Nothing. It's art and there is no universal good/bad, great/awful, amazing/shit. The enjoyment is totally subjective. There's a ton of music that I know is being extremely well played by some outrageously talented or skilled/proficient musicians, even musicians whose other work I might actually love, that I can't listen to because I don't enjoy it.

It was just one of the many phases of Miles' career. He moved past it, but for some of his fans it's his greatest work. It's completely cool if you don't like it. The larger scope of jazz though, is that something you like or is jazz just not part of what you dig musically? If you don't like jazz and experimental music, this was never going to be for you...unless or until one day you do like it.

I've grown in and out of a lot of music and have enjoyed different stuff to different levels all throughout my life, except for the Beatles...always loved the Beatles, the Police, the Allmans, Coltrane (at least once I heard him), Bob Marley, Neil Young, etc.
Click to expand...

for my own Miles preference, it would be the modal period - the records just before the free jazz records.

I have fairly eclectic tastes in music and art, but BB eludes me completely. as does Coltrane's later output.
 
Van%20Halen%20Productions%20Inc.jpg
+
van-hagar.jpg


A rock band so beloved, but I can only stand about four songs. I'd rather listen to a modular synthesizer than Eddie's schtick and DLR is one of the shittiest singers around, but he gets a pass because he's a "good showman."
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
Well, its trying to be a pop record. Regardless, both fail miserably as accessible pieces of art. They're niche records that get significantly more press than they deserve because of how "out there" they are. In the meantime, Eric Dolphy's "Out There" only got a memorial barbeque.
Click to expand...

I couldn't take Trout Mask upon first listening, but it has become a ...can't really say favorite, but... a part of my music collection. it is definitely not accessible. it's music I would put on when I wanted people to go home.
 
frunobulax said:
for my own Miles preference, it would be the modal period - the records just before the free jazz records.

I have fairly eclectic tastes in music and art, but BB eludes me completely. as does Coltrane's later output.
Click to expand...

Again, he didn't do free jazz.

But the period before his jazz-rock records -his quintet with Wayne Shorter, Tony Williams, Ron Carter, and Herbie Hancock - wasn't modal. It's my favourite as well, though. Especially the live releases from that era.
 
Flamencology said:
Again, he didn't do free jazz.

But the period before his jazz-rock records -his quintet with Wayne Shorter, Tony Williams, Ron Carter, and Herbie Hancock - wasn't modal. It's my favourite as well, though. Especially the live releases from that era.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression (false?) that these were the records on which he was exploring modality in writing and soloing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top