COOL, I know Kamasi & many of these musicians personally. As part of the cultural arts scene of L:A we all end up eventually crossing paths. Kamasi and his friends had a 5 year residency at a small bar club in Hollywood 2 nights a week for FREE!!! before his big break with the debut album and subsequent long international tour. They all were bound for greatness. The Keys/Piano player has also been performing with Stanley Clark for 10 years now. WOO Time flies!
Absolutely adore this. Kamasi is extraordinary. There is a wealth of dynamic and inventive musicians in the field of jazz today,merging genres and finding new paths of expression.
That's thundercat on the bass, probably one of the best modern bassists out there. I haven't listened to this album in a few years but it was so dynamic, it really feels like it can go anywhere. Despite being 3 hours long there was never a dull moment.
When you watch the video of Kamasi playing the entire "The Epic," it is simply awe inspiring. There is such joy in these compositions, such love and such phenomenal musicianship- such as Thundercat in this clip here playing his bass. This composition is part of one of the most important pieces of music of the past 20 years. Please, if you haven't, watch the entire video (live, Askim goes for 22 minutes and could go much longer): ua-cam.com/video/0YbPSIXQ4q4/v-deo.html
Edit: as usual (I guess), once you got into the details, you had more interesting things to say about it than when you were talking about how it fits into a broader genre context. I haven't had a chance to listen to this full video yet, but I am always really perplexed by the things you say about jazz. I think I have even heard you say "jazz is just jazz" or something close, with the implication that there aren't distinctively different sub-genres. You complain about traditional jazz just doing the same things, and yet you don't seem to be aware of how much of what is widely called "jazz" is anything but in that traditional format. And it all becomes very circular, where it seems like things that are too avant-garde don't necessarily count as jazz for you. Not sure what you want. "Spiritual jazz" was the obvious label that popped into my head when I heard this cut (which I probably have heard at least once before). Actually, this strikes me as far from being particularly new. It sounds like an amalgamation of things like Pharaoh Sanders, John Coltrane, Alice Coltrane, and maybe Albert Ayler and Andrew Hill. [Was thinking of that one Hill album with a chorus, but it's otherwise not very similar. Also, I thought there were strings and choral parts on Ayler's "New Grass," but based on a quick skim just now, I think I mis-remembered.] The inclusion of strings and a chorus was already there in a lot of late 60's/early 70's "spiritual jazz." It's hard for me not to hear an awful lot of Pharaoh Sanders in Washington's playing, along with some Coltrane. To me it seems very derivative, but maybe I wouldn't feel that way so much if I loved more of this type of music. I am not saying he is not good. Obviously he's an extremely accomplished musician, and I can understand people loving this stuff, but personally I just find it derivative and I would rather hear some of the originals. You even said this was not jazz at one point in the video, when it is well within an already established jazz sub-genre's template. Sometimes it seems like you are largely unfamiliar with jazz from the 60's onward. I guess your training was very focused on the standards and very traditional approaches--culminating in be-bop? I don't know. That's how it seems sometimes. [You might well end up not considering my upcoming request jazz, which I am fine with (although I might argue the point). I also definitely am not counting on you liking it, but I think you will find aspects of it interesting, and you might like at least some of it. But it's too experimental to just expect people to like.]
Your assumption that my jazz education is primarily within the realms of the classics is spot-on. My formal education, both of performance courses and historical ones, was heavily skewed towards the first 50 years or so of jazz. I could certainly use a few full months of jazz requests and insightful comments to get a crash course of contemporary jazz in the same way that this community has educated me on metal.
COOL, I know Kamasi & many of these musicians personally. As part of the cultural arts scene of L:A we all end up eventually crossing paths. Kamasi and his friends had a 5 year residency at a small bar club in Hollywood 2 nights a week for FREE!!! before his big break with the debut album and subsequent long international tour. They all were bound for greatness. The Keys/Piano player has also been performing with Stanley Clark for 10 years now. WOO Time flies!
Absolutely adore this. Kamasi is extraordinary. There is a wealth of dynamic and inventive musicians in the field of jazz today,merging genres and finding new paths of expression.
That's thundercat on the bass, probably one of the best modern bassists out there. I haven't listened to this album in a few years but it was so dynamic, it really feels like it can go anywhere. Despite being 3 hours long there was never a dull moment.
When you watch the video of Kamasi playing the entire "The Epic," it is simply awe inspiring. There is such joy in these compositions, such love and such phenomenal musicianship- such as Thundercat in this clip here playing his bass. This composition is part of one of the most important pieces of music of the past 20 years. Please, if you haven't, watch the entire video (live, Askim goes for 22 minutes and could go much longer): ua-cam.com/video/0YbPSIXQ4q4/v-deo.html
Did anyone else hear Magma, or Brazilian vibes in the vocal/ strings and in the bongos?
This was a great Jazz piece.
You HAVE to listen To all of The Epic. It's a 3hr triple disc epic.
Time never felt so fast listening to a record.
Another great example of why I'm always down with bands featuring two or more drummers. More drums equals gooder.
No one can argue with that math :)
The title is from Turkish and is pronounced 'Ash-kuhm' , meaning 'my love', 'darling'.
Edit: as usual (I guess), once you got into the details, you had more interesting things to say about it than when you were talking about how it fits into a broader genre context.
I haven't had a chance to listen to this full video yet, but I am always really perplexed by the things you say about jazz. I think I have even heard you say "jazz is just jazz" or something close, with the implication that there aren't distinctively different sub-genres. You complain about traditional jazz just doing the same things, and yet you don't seem to be aware of how much of what is widely called "jazz" is anything but in that traditional format. And it all becomes very circular, where it seems like things that are too avant-garde don't necessarily count as jazz for you. Not sure what you want.
"Spiritual jazz" was the obvious label that popped into my head when I heard this cut (which I probably have heard at least once before). Actually, this strikes me as far from being particularly new. It sounds like an amalgamation of things like Pharaoh Sanders, John Coltrane, Alice Coltrane, and maybe Albert Ayler and Andrew Hill. [Was thinking of that one Hill album with a chorus, but it's otherwise not very similar. Also, I thought there were strings and choral parts on Ayler's "New Grass," but based on a quick skim just now, I think I mis-remembered.] The inclusion of strings and a chorus was already there in a lot of late 60's/early 70's "spiritual jazz." It's hard for me not to hear an awful lot of Pharaoh Sanders in Washington's playing, along with some Coltrane. To me it seems very derivative, but maybe I wouldn't feel that way so much if I loved more of this type of music. I am not saying he is not good. Obviously he's an extremely accomplished musician, and I can understand people loving this stuff, but personally I just find it derivative and I would rather hear some of the originals.
You even said this was not jazz at one point in the video, when it is well within an already established jazz sub-genre's template. Sometimes it seems like you are largely unfamiliar with jazz from the 60's onward. I guess your training was very focused on the standards and very traditional approaches--culminating in be-bop? I don't know. That's how it seems sometimes.
[You might well end up not considering my upcoming request jazz, which I am fine with (although I might argue the point). I also definitely am not counting on you liking it, but I think you will find aspects of it interesting, and you might like at least some of it. But it's too experimental to just expect people to like.]
Your assumption that my jazz education is primarily within the realms of the classics is spot-on. My formal education, both of performance courses and historical ones, was heavily skewed towards the first 50 years or so of jazz. I could certainly use a few full months of jazz requests and insightful comments to get a crash course of contemporary jazz in the same way that this community has educated me on metal.