--- maybe i was a little too hyperbolic. first of all, it isn't that i don't like Wayne Shorter. it's just that i have never thought that he was the equal of John Coltrane. as to his writing contributions to the Miles Davis library, no doubt that he had his impact, but he's no Cannonball Adderley, in my book, for writing tunes that are going to be in the jazz time capsule.
But if those two names are the measuring stick between being worthy of praise or being shrugged off, then you have to pish-posh 98% of all horn players in the history of jazz, no?? I mean, I'm not gonna say every rock band sucks because I've already heard the White Album...
If you polled jazz musicians, I think they would strongly disagree with this. Footprints, Water Babies, Teru, El Gaucho, Nefertiti, Speak No Evil, Adams Apple, Ana Maria, Infant Eyes... I mean just look at any fakebook-there's always a bunch of Shorter tunes. I would guess there are a lot players today who cut their teeth with Shorter's songbook. (I went down to my music room in my basement to look at my fakebook before clicking submit, and Wayne dominates the book.) This essay is obviously biased-as I am-in the pro-Wayne camp. But it hits on a lot of points why Wayne is one of the giants. http://www.orbismusic.com/wayne shorter/shorterpaper.html
--- fair enough, but we were talking about excellence: i have an idea of excellence and you have a differing one. we have overlaps. i prefer ben webster to sonny rollins. i would rather listen to lou donaldson than sonny stitt ( it has nada to do with their first names! ). my choice between chet baker and art farmer is baker. i can't say that my personal choices are better craftsman or that anyone else should have the same or similar preferences, but i do know that i'm not way out in left field, like someone who would say The Beatles are overrated. ( we've been thru that one, eh? ) i'm not strictly speaking a musician, though in the 70s i was a pretty competent blues harp player ( my shining hour? ). because my response to music is more emotional than cerebral ( sorry! ) i tend to prefer Blue Note to Colombia. ( someone mentioned "solea" earlier, and the notable exception would be "sketches of spain". first time i heard "solea" and "saeta", i could hardly contain myself. ) anyway, i'm just a music buff, which makes me subject to all sorts of excess, i imagine.
Comparing Coltrane to Shorter is apples and oranges. Sure, on some of Shorter's first few albums he used Trane's rhythm section but they were two different beasts when it came to composition and soloing. Coltrane had his sheets of sound, his spiritual thing, his moving crap around in minor thirds. Shorter wasn't trying to be Coltrane's "equal", he was just being himself. And thank God for that. He ranks up there with Ellington in my list of top jazz composers.
The problem with Shorter is that for the last 20 years his solos have becoming stale and boring. Start low and build up to a high note for the most part. But definitely a great composer. Not one for the originator of this thread, but a unique Miles album is that one he did with a drunk Charlie Parker in the early '50's. Bird's solo is about one measure behind the changes. The complete Bird savoy sessions are a nice way to see the young Davis develop. yikes - is this album on CD? "If you can tell me where Miles Davis went to school, I won't kill you"
--- Collateral. Now I forget. Berklee or Julliard? I stand corrected on the Wayne Shorter front. I forgot the matchless opuses from his Weather Report days. Of course they play a tune or two on "smooth jazz" stations from time to time, but that's not his fault, is it?
As a former tenor sax man (I used to be pretty good, actually), I prefer Shorter's style to Trane's. YMMV.
--- this is an interesting bit. since Shorter had the opportunity to learn from Trane ( and vice versa, but Trane died before he had a chance to learn as much from Shorter ) it's a bit difficult to judge whether your preference is based more on simple personal aesthetic grounds or a fair objective standard. granted, all musicians are derivative to a degree, but i think Trane would be viewed as more groundbreaking, especially in his modal approach, which while not original with him ( since the concept wasn't his invention ) he was the first exponent -- in my narrow awareness -- to gain a lot of recognition playing in that 'style'. what i would want to know, in addition, ML2, is who you like on other instruments, especially horns, so that i can get a perspective of your general musical aesthetic.
Davis di two albums with Horace Silver that aren't too bad. Davis himself said he felt that Silver made him a better player. Blue Haze and Walkin', 1954 on Prestige.
I'm just not a really big fan of the free jazz Trane did a lot of, especially later in his career. I'm more a fan of "traditional" jazz sax, I guess. I prefer Stan Getz, Sonny Rollins, Charlie Parker, Gerry Mulligan, Coleman Hawkins, Dexter Gordon, Sonny Stitt, Maceo Parker, Joshua Redman, Brandon Marsalis, Lockjaw Davis to Coltrane. Other horns Trumpet - Maynard Ferguson, Dizzy, Bix Beiderbecke, early pre "free jazz" Miles, Wynton Marsalis, Roy Eldridge, Fats Navarro, Art Farmer Trombone - Jack Teagarden, Tommy Dorsey, Glenn Miller I'm a big fan of big band and bebop. Oh, and I absolutely despise Kenny G.
:O WTF have you been drinking Mike? Parker and Rollins - yes. But Sonny Stitt?? Stitt is a bird wannabe. Gordon was very influenced by Coltrane ("Go") as were most of the others. Where's Illinois Jacquet on that list? Fun Mulligan fact. A friend of mine went to Yale and Mulligan gave jazz workshops there. He always wore long sleeve shirts to hide his tracks.
Oh, and I definitely recommend these Davis CD Birth of the Cool Round About Midnight Porgy And Bess Milestones and the aforementioned Cookin', Relaxin', Steamin' and Workin'.
Hey, to each his own. I like the Mulligan fun fact. I think he was one of the greatest jazz saxophonists of them all. Not only did I leave off Jacquet, I also somehow forgot to mention Paul Desmond!
Friday and Saturday Nights at the Blackhawk are NOT the most important or influential Miles albums, nor do they feature one of his important bands. What they do have is four and half hours of great, easy-to-dig jazz with top-notch backing and some of the best soloing Miles ever did. His musical conceptions elsewhere were much more adventurous and forward-looking, but this features some of his best playing. I'm a big fan of his electric period as well as his acoustic work. Check out Tribute to Jack Johnson if you want a taste of how good jazz-rock fusion could have been. It sets a standard almost nobody else could match. All of the above mentioned recommendations are stellar. You should absolutely start expanding your collection with the Prestige quintet discs.
I had a chance to watch this yesterday Even if you are not a fan of this period, it's worth checking out. The interviews alone, are fantastic. I have to hand it to Murray Lerner-he's been able to take this one concert and milk for a lifetime.