Category Archives: Performance

Tord Gustavsen Quartet at Chicago’s Constellation

Leave a reply

“Meditative” and “liturgical.” Those were pianist Tord Gustavsen‘s whispered descriptions of his impending set at Constellation on Saturday night. He and his quartet – Gustavsen, saxophonist Tore Brunborg, bassist Mats Eilertsen, drummer Jarle Vespestad – brought their intimate Nordic jazz to the small but attentive capacity crowd. The performance was part of a five city promotional tour of the US in support of the recently released Extended Circle, an album I highly recommend.

The band’s ~75-minute set featured material from the quartet’s two albums Extended Circle and The Well along with earlier Gustavsen selections from Restored, Returned and Being There. Gustavsen and his band have a very stark approach on record, and I was curious how that would translate to a live setting. I’m pleased to report that it did so perfectly. The small venue and low lighting complemented the band’s restraint. It took until the set’s final number (before the encore), “Eg Veit I Himmerik Ei Borg,” for them to reach a semblance of forte, and in doing so provided a welcome release – and relief! – after the long, simmering slow burn. The set was a series of peaks and valleys, with each peak slightly higher than the last until the zenith during “Eg Veit…” I very much appreciated the group’s restraint – not once did it feel forced. Subtle intensity, Gustavsen’s specialty, is often more difficult to achieve than via the usual “high-fast-loud” means, and the band successfully executed it.

Such subtlety was achieved not through dynamics and dissonance alone but also via texture. Brunborg began and ended the evening on soprano (“The Child Within” and “Vicar Street,” respectively), but otherwise played tenor saxophone throughout. However, the tenor/piano/bass/drums instrumentation was exploited to its full potential. Gustavsen tastefully played outside and inside of the piano with great ease, completely avoiding any sense of gimmickry. Eilertsen beautifully played pizzicato and arco, and seeing a jazz bassist use a bow well was a breath of fresh air. Perhaps the MVP in this arena was drummer Jarle Vespestad. His control of his instrument, be it with drumsticks, mallets, brushes, or his hands, was second to none, particularly his cymbal work. I saw it as him approaching his drumset from a percussionist’s perspective instead of a drummer’s. And floating above it all was Tore Brunborg’s golden tone. Wow – I’ve listened to him on a lot of different recordings and none of them prepared me for just how deeply resonant his tenor sound would be in person. The icing on this sonic cake was their touring sound engineer. The amplification was used not to necessarily increased the volume but rather to enhance the live mix and balance, and every sound was crisp and clear.

Each musician basked in the spotlight some throughout the evening, including a couple of unaccompanied piano solos and a bass cadenza. Overall, however, Gustavsen’s music is more conducive to featuring the ensemble as a whole rather than an individual member, as improvised and composed passages seamlessly blend together. The set featured a nice mix of tunes, including “The Child Within,” “Suite,” “The Embrace,” “Glow,” “Eg Veit…,” “Vicar Street,” and others. Similar to the emphasizing of the ensemble as a whole, the individual tunes were less important than the flow of the overall set, which culminated in “Eg Veit…” and then unwound with the encore “Vicar Street.”

I attended this performance with my partner in crime Matt Borghi. Our shared love of ECM aside, this concert was rather special for me personally, as I never thought I’d see Tore Brunborg perform in the US. (And it’s not yet worked out for me to him in Europe.) He’s received some attention on this blog, notably for his work with Manu Katché (in whose band I first heard him), but also a quick reference regarding saxophonists who’ve influenced me. He should get his own full post at some point, as I enjoy his work – both as leader and sideman – but suffice it to say that I’m quite a fan. Furthermore, visiting with the band after the show was a real treat, and it was great to learn that they’re wonderful people as well as top-flight musicians.

If you have the opportunity to see this group, you must certainly take it. 2014 tour details here.

For a taste, here’s the quartet performing “Vicar Street” in 2009:

Borghi & Teager on this week’s ‘Hearts of Space’

Leave a reply

As a heads-up, Matt Borghi & Michael Teager are featured on this week’s episode of Hearts of Space. The episode, titled “SAXOPHONIC,” looks at the saxophone’s use in ambient music. It’s a tremendous honor for Matt and myself to have been featured on the holy trinity of ambient music programs – Star’s End, Echoes, and now Hearts of Space – these last few months. More info here.

[NOTE: This post replaces a previous iteration of the same, which has since been deleted.]

Oh Say, Renée

Leave a reply

I don’t use this blog to troll others, although it’s been attempted once, twice, or thrice in the past. In general, I find the whole trolling culture to be a waste. It goes nowhere, even though it may be incredibly popular. Having said that, since I have the time, it’s worth pointing out an odd article/blog over at The Washington Post by the classical music critic Anne Midgette about Renée Fleming‘s performance of The Star Spangled Banner at the Super Bowl. (And, believe me, I’ll be the first to concede that my scheming away in my dark, untrodden corner of the internet won’t even register on the Post‘s or Midgette’s radar.) I’m not out to fisk, but a couple items have annoyingly stuck with me over the last couple days.

Full disclosure: I enjoyed the performance (as much as I can enjoy over-the-top versions of the national anthem, anyway). And, having turned the TV off afterwards, it was the most I’ve seen of a Super Bowl in I don’t know how long.

First, a major point of agreement with Ms. Midgette. Like many other classical music-oriented folk, I developed an almost partisan attitude about the performance. Admittedly, there was a small part of me that was genuinely pleased/excited when it was announced that Renée Fleming would be singing the national anthem at the Super Bowl, the first opera singer to do so. The timing couldn’t have been better considering the latest circular firing squad about the death of classical music, etc. And I must confess that I, along with many of my musical colleagues, was excited to have a trained, virtuosic singer bask in the glory for a change. I by no means think training is everything – much of this blog complains about such things – but let the academy have the spotlight now and again. Besides, without getting on too high a horse, lip-synching (and finger-synching) is all too common, and enjoying some live music is a welcome change of pace.

I’ve read the Post piece three times, and I still don’t know how Anne really felt about Ms. Fleming’s performance. (But at least she wrote something, which is more than I can say for most. For all the hubbub leading up to the performance, afterwards you’d almost think it didn’t happen.) I think the source of my frustration lies in the opening paragraph. Anne rightly points out the classical community’s insecurity about its place in society. But then, instead of writing confidently about the opera star, Ms. Midgette hedges and takes an almost hipster turn, praising Queen Latifah’s “sounding easy” and looking “drop-dead perfect” in her casual attire. This is followed by Anne’s sniping Renée’s formalwear. I read that as the classical music critic herself feeling somewhat out of place and trying to “play nice” in the popular realm by writing about a sporting event. (“Oh, hey, I’m one of y’all! Did you see that diva?! Ick!”)

Not to speak ill of royalty, but I thought Queen Latifah sounded easy because she probably wasn’t trying too hard. I know my wife (a music teacher) and I cringed on the couch during America the Beautiful and shared quite the chuckle afterwards. Add in the ghosting musicians behind her and it was quite the musical circus. If Renée had a “faux-pop” sound, then Latifah’s was faux-good. It’s true that Ms. Fleming was a touch flat in parts, but big whoop. Not only did she sound lovely – though, that arrangement left much to be desired – but, again, she came to the table and delivered. And of course Queen Latifah was relaxed. She performs in such environments on a regular basis, whereas Renée – clearly the superior vocalist – was in an alien environment, from the amplification to the massive crowds to the televised spectacle.

Having written this, I suppose my real contention is with the author’s apparent hedging. There’s no need to kowtow to the popular music establishment. You’re the classical music critic – I don’t think anyone’s expecting you to opine about the wonders of 90s pop stars. Such insecurity does as much to perpetuate the myth of classical music’s death as some tripe in Slate. After all, if those in the classical community seem relatively embarrassed about belonging to it, why would others find it worthwhile?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7etXoNrwP8c

My Ambient Canon I

Leave a reply

Throughout the last few months, Matt and I have discussed – in interviews and conversations – our individual and collective influences vis-à-vis ambient music, particularly Convocation. This topic kicked off in a big way while in Philadelphia, being surrounded there by a strong, deeply knowledgeable ambient music community. Much of the time, we explained that our artistic models were different than what others had inferred. One trope was the fact that, individually, our original, primary influences are not ambient per se. Ambient traits abound, however there’s a lack of ambient artists atop each of our own personal canons.

Many of this blog’s Constant Readers know of Matt Borghi‘s long, deep immersion in the ambient scene. (If you’re not a regular visitor here but are reading this post, then you probably knew that anyway.) Before I met Matt I was peripherally aware of ambient music as a specific genre with countless sub-niches. Yeah, I bought Ambient Music 1: Music for Airports long ago, and I knew about Eno generally, but not much else of his ilk outside of various electronic artists and experimental rock. And, given my classical background, I was literate in related ambient-friendly styles: Minimalism (e.g., my passion for Einstein on the Beach), neo-Minimalists such as Michael Nyman and Arvo Pärt, electronic/computer music (electronique & concrete), various world musics, and the list goes on. But when I met Matt in 2008 I quickly learned of ambient music’s depth and breadth. Without explicitly setting out to do so, he has provided me an ambient apprenticeship which, arguably, continues today. He introduced me to not only his own extensive discography (partial list here) but also to Harold Budd, Steve Roach, and others. And of course we’ve been playing ambient music all the while, leading up to and including the aforementioned Convocation and our recently-released Awaken the Electric Air.

What makes this worth writing about, of course, is that I’m a saxophonist. Saxophone is far from a fixture in ambient music, and therefore we get a lot of interesting comparisons in reviews, interviews, and conversations. The most common reference is ECM titan Jan Garbarek. I wrote a “New Listen” about him here, and that marked my first listening to him as a leader. Aside from his work with Keith Jarrett or the Hilliard Ensemble, I can’t say I’m much more familiar with his solo work now than I was after writing that post, for whatever reason. (And I really dig his work with Jarrett…) Anyway, Jan is nowhere near my mind when playing with Matt. If I’m thinking of any ECM saxophonist, it’s probably either Charles Lloyd (MTH-V here) or Tore Brunborg (praise here). (Or, if I make enough of a leap, Dave Liebman, as he did record two Lookout Farm albums with ECM in the 70s.) Others compare my playing to that of Theo Travis, one of the few “ambient saxophonists.” He and I are part of a VERY small community, and I hadn’t heard of him until Mike Hunter suggested him to me while setting up for our Star’s End performance. I’ve since become acquainted with Travis & (Robert) Fripp’s Thread. Personally, I don’t think my playing sounds anything like Jan or Theo. And I’m by no means saying I sound better – definitely not the case. We’re just different. (Come on…Garbarek is a virtuoso, and I wouldn’t dare be so presumptuous or delusional as to think that I’m in the same league. Please.)

Of course, I understand the desire to throw out Garbarek and Travis references. One just doesn’t see saxophone in ambient music, so visually there’s very little to associate our music with when seeing us performing in an ambient context. Acoustic instruments are a rarity in this style, and the saxophone is almost anathema. Also, the Jan comparison is curious because, at least to my knowledge, he’s not at all an ambient musician. But he’s a saxophonist and the best-selling artist (along with Keith Jarrett) on ECM, a label with ambient-friendly tendencies. If playing six degrees of separation, I suppose that one would have a case.

As mentioned, neither ambient saxophone nor ambient artists are on my mind when playing in this style. In order to have an idea of what is informing my ambient work, it’s best to start at the beginning. To do that, I’ve done a fair amount of working through musical traits and nuances I glommed onto that could be described as being “ambient.” Much of this digging started in conversation with Matt during our 10-hour trek back from the Echoes studio to our homes in East Lansing, and I’ve since given much thought to the matter. Given that, I’d like to devote an occasional series of posts to this topic over the next several weeks or months, time permitting. If nothing else, it’ll help me to provide myself with some additional ammunition in future interviews. 🙂

As a primer of sorts, here are links to two recently-aired interviews in which Matt and I both touch on this subject. The first is our Echoes interview, which was chosen as the weekly podcast for January 9. The second is of a recent interview on WKAR FM’s Current State, broadcast from MSU in East Lansing.

Echoes interview: podcast link in iTunes — official page & description
Current State interview: stream here

Further posts on canon here and saxophone style here.

Reconciliation at the NEA Jazz Masters 2014 Ceremony

Leave a reply

The ceremony honoring 2014’s NEA Jazz Masters Fellowship recipients was held Monday evening at Lincoln Center and was streamed live. I generally don’t make a habit of watching or listening to the actual ceremony, but I was home and had the time. And while I don’t want to go into a lengthy exposé, I do have a few thoughts on the event.

(The NEA Jazz Masters Fellowship is the US’s highest federal honor for jazz musicians. That’s great, though it’s curious that such prestige for “America’s classical music” amounts to a $25,000 grant for cultural titans in our homegrown art. Anyway…)

It’s of course interesting to see who receives such awards, and I had an increased personal interest in the class of 2011 which included Dave Liebman. (2011 also curiously included the entire Marsalis family. Cute. It prompted this response from Phil Woods.) This year’s class also piqued my interest beyond general curiosity. The recipients are:
Jamey Aebersold – Renowned jazz pedagogue (I bet a number of you reading this have used his play-along sets as I have)
Anthony Braxton – Saxophonist, composer
Richard Davis – Bassist, educator
Keith Jarret – Pianist

He hasn’t received as much attention on this blog as some other figures/topics, but Keith Jarrett looms large in my life. (As I alluded to in a recent interview.) He’s one of my favorite musicians, and I’m fortunate to be alive at the same time as he. I can’t claim to have all of this albums, but I can at least say that I have a strong majority of his ECM output, and he’s a significant part of my collection. As far as “traditional” jazz is concerned, he’s often a bit of an outsider, despite his stature as being one of the most listened to pianists in the world. So his being recognized as a “Master” was of strong personal interest. That, and I was curious to see him give a speech – something that almost never happens – and wanted to see how he handled the performance portion of the evening. (Aside form classical works, he plays extended solo concerts or with his trio. That’s it.)

Jarrett was warm and sincere, all things considered. Humorous, even. (His speech was rough around the edges, but people don’t flock to his concerts – myself included – because of his charm and pleasant demeanor.) And it was nice to see Manfred there with him. For his “performance,” fellow ECM artists Jason Moran and Bill Frisell performed his “Memories of Tomorrow,” which he seemed to genuinely enjoy.

For me, the highlight of the night was Anthony Braxton‘s portion. It was quite compelling and one of the reasons I tuned in to begin with. If Jarrett is somewhat removed from the historical neo-Bop “heads” of the jazz elite, then Braxton is from another universe entirely, something Braxton acknowledged in his speech. Among other things, he, along with Roscoe Mitchell and Evan Parker, pioneered the solo saxophone aesthetic in improvised music. He’s since become renown as a composer, writer, and educator, as well as a strong technician of the instrument. While I’ve not really written about Braxton on this blog, I have discussed his Association for the Advancement of Creative Musicians (AACM) colleague Roscoe Mitchell. When I tuned in, I wanted to see both what he would say/do and what the reaction of his peers and audience would be.

I’ll admit, Braxton rambled and his speech was all over the place (and long), but he spoke a great truth: that musicians must reconcile their aesthetic differences and celebrate creativity and progression. He was heartfelt, joyous, and soft-spoken. Also, he acknowledged that his being considered a Jazz Master is a solid leap in that direction of reconciliation. Three key quotes, the first coming from his opening:

“For the last 50 years, my worked has been viewed as not jazz, not black, not contemporary classical music. My work doesn’t swing. After a while I got used to that. I got used to those perspectives and accepted it. In the end, I just wanted to do my music. And suddenly, with the beautiful passage of time, there would be a change.”

“Before Charlie Parker played his music, it didn’t exist.”

“We need to have a reconcilement in our music… We need to reconcile the polarities.”

He cited influences including Dave Brubeck, Cecil Taylor, Arnold Schönberg, Iannis Xenakis, John Philip Sousa, and the MSU and UofM marching bands. He also discussed music and aesthetics in the prism of cultural nationalism, politics, and theory. Yes, he droned on and on, but it was obvious that he was just as surprised to be receiving the award as others were to watch him receive it. Although the other three recipients were humbled and gracious, they’re still easily considered jazz musicians and they know it. Braxton, on the other hand, has spent his life and career in the wilderness doing his own thing and creating his own art. And the fact that he was acknowledged alongside Jamey Aebersold for anything is news in and of itself.

Braxton didn’t himself perform, but rather an excerpt of one of his operas, Trillium J, was performed by some of his associates and students. Yes, a contemporary/avant-garde opera excerpt was performed at the NEA Jazz Masters ceremony. And not only that, but it was performed well.

Unsurprisingly, Braxton’s speech and performance received a supportive but unenergetic applause. At least it got that, I suppose.

I could drone on and on about my thoughts on various other details, but a few things stick out:
• It’s curious that the two most technically advanced musicians of the recipients – Jarrett and Braxton – were the two recipients who did not perform live. Aebersold, a giant of jazz education who hasn’t made a career out of performing, did. (Which was nice to see, by the way, since it’s a rarity.) And Richard Davis started playing an interesting solo bass piece that quickly devolved into an arco trainwreck. (The bow, like the Ring of Power, is tempting and does more harm than good.)
• Despite the above point, the performances of Braxton’s and Jarrett’s music were the strongest of the recipients, and arguably the strongest of the night if judging purely on technical merits (and not subjective matters of taste).
• Wynton Marsalis and Soledad O’Brien needn’t co-host again.
• The forced collaborations for performances had an awkward, Grammy-like quality to it. Furthermore, why did some of the collaborations by jazz musicians seem so uncomfortable?
• The neo-Bop army was a little too smug when they gave a rousing applause to Richard Davis’s insistence that one can’t play “free” without the requisite fundamentals. (I agree wholeheartedly, but the audience reaction seemed like more of a slam against Braxton, who preceded Davis, than a support of instrumental technique.) This happened a couple other times.
• Many of the next-day write-ups have downplayed if not outright ignored Jamey Aebersold’s presence at the ceremony. Not only is he 25% of the program, but he’s arguably responsible for everyone under 40 on that bandstand. Considering how much those in the arts like to “celebrate” education, I take that as a slap on the face that one of the giants of jazz pedagogy was written out of so many articles. Simply look at this title. [Note: This entry is largely about Braxton and some Jarrett, and not an overall report. So I can get away with it.]

That about sums it up, at least for this post. Will I be tuning into the live stream in 2015? Let’s wait and see the recipients list first.