Grateful Dead - the Most Overrated Band Ever?

[sphinxsix]

42 minutes ago, bluesman said:

His pitch and intonation were excellent

I could present you immediately a dozen of his live recordings (usually not official ones) where they weren't. 

 

I said earlier that his playing was probably technically best in 1964-69 period at the same time I think e.g. Dizzy was much better technically player, in particular when they both played with Bird (ok. Miles was almost a beginner back then..). Like I said - doesn't matter, IMO he was a better and more interesting musician by ..miles.. 

 

How about some music from the above mentioned period of his fantastic quintet..?  

 

 

 

[sphinxsix]

3 minutes ago, bluesman said:

I suspect that any issues with technical prowess were directly related to substance abuse, at which he was apparently also expert.

I must admit my knowledge related to these recordings doesn't reach that far, but I'd agree that of course at least some of his technical issues might have been related to different substances abuse.

 

[sphinxsix]

 

18 hours ago, bluesman said:

As a person, Miles was a perpetual mess.  Read his autobiography (the one co-authored by Quincy Troupe)

One of my favorite books about jazz! I said here twice recently - If my choice of music was to be based on the personality of a musician I'd probably have no Miles music in my library at all.. I OTOH would highly recommend the book 'Kind Of Blue: The Making Of The Miles Davis Masterpiece' by Ashley Kahn and Jimmy Cobb, in particular if you like the album. An extremely interesting stuff!

 

18 hours ago, bluesman said:

movie Miles Ahead, which is well worth seeing

I actually didn't like it that much, with biography like Miles' there is IMO no need to create fiction for a movie, the very facts from his life are amazing, amusing and ..everything in between and outside these two - in short - absolutely enough.!

 

18 hours ago, bluesman said:

An apocryphal story's been published so many times that it's probably true.  In 1982, when Musician Magazine asked what he did between '75 and '81, Miles answered: “Nothin’. Gettin’ high. I didn’t feel like playing the trumpet, didn’t feel like listening to music. Didn’t want to hear it, see it, smell it, nothin’ about it… I didn’t come out of the house for about four years… But then Dizzy came around and said, ‘What the f**k are you doing? You were put here to play music!’ So I started back.”

There is a recording of a phone interview with MD from this period by a college radio guy. The interview begins like this - the radio program host is calling Miles, after a couple of beeps Miles pickups the phone (he probably forgot about the interview) and not knowing who's calling he says in aggressive, harsh voice - 'What do you want.?!'. That's simply his way of starting a phone conversation.! The program host just freezes..

 

18 hours ago, bluesman said:

He was notoriously unfaithful to his wives

Yeah, he definitely was son of a gun with women!

 

18 hours ago, bluesman said:

Miles never really achieved peace, equanimity, or true joy in life.

Maybe that is what he tried to realize when he took up painting in his later years. He was a much better musician than painter though, that's for sure.

 

17 hours ago, Jud said:

It really wasn't so much his trumpet playing at all (though he did have a talent for saying a lot with a few notes

That's absolutely true! IMO this is an example of transforming one's weakness (e.g. playing technique) into strength - something that is musically fascinating and resonates with audience's emotions. 

 

17 hours ago, Jud said:

I don't know that there has ever been another jazz musician in the vanguard of three revolutions in jazz: Be-bop (as sideman to Charlie Parker along with Dizzy); cool jazz; and fusion.

You forgot to mention his 'free' period 1964-69, which BTW was very different free form from eg Coleman's or Coltrane's - in particular as far as the rhythm section was regarded - it was still disciplined and.. my god T.Williams drumming - just amazing, how old was he when he joined the band - 16.? I remember Miles mentioning instances of 'smuggling' Tony into the clubs while he was still too young to be there in accordance with the law..

 

5 hours ago, Jud said:

I like a bunch of Herbie Hancock's music, and I had never thought of him as not being in the same league either.

Same here.

 

5 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

Re. technique, I too think he was decent, not great.  Doesn't matter; what he said speaks directly to my soul.

And not only too yours I guess! Well, if I had to describe the basic characteristics of his his tone I'd probably say that it's kind of blue () and lonely, BTW someone (I don't remember who at the moment) said that no-one in music has explored the phenomenon of loneliness in a way Miles did.

 

5 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

Finally, a last idea that I have always found interesting.  Miles was tough, brash, didn't take shit off of anybody, etc. but played the most tenderly beautiful music.

Agree on that! Although it's difficult of course to call eg Agharta, Pangaea or Live in Tokyo 'tender' albums..

5 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

Coltrane instead was the most gentle soul (my son says he was "an angel sent down to us'"), but suffered a reputation as sounding "angry," an "angry tenor." 

Definitely not based on 'Ballads' or the Hartman album..

Anyway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_(psychology)

As for creative process itself AFAIK it often comes out of neurosis:

Does Neuroticism Breed Creativity? Study Says 'Yes'

 

Well, Miles has at least been on stage for a couple of decades, in case of Trane, his solo career covers a period of about a decade, in case of Hendrix it was even shorter, can't help but wonder what would the later two do next... (yeah, I know the question isn't particularly original!) 

 

[sphinxsix]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

"Suffering for your art?"  Certainly not all, but many.

Actually some artists who are aware of this are afraid or simply refuse psychotherapy fearing they might stop being creative after (while being maybe a little more happy)! AFAIK it's also sometimes not an easy challenge for therapists - to help a human being with his problems while not killing the artist within him.. 

 

[sphinxsix]

41 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

I was just about to note that this thread has wandered, now catapulted off-topic, then chuckled to myself that maybe it isn’t......

I personally have no problem with that.

 

[sphinxsix]

13 minutes ago, bobbmd said:

I don't agree with what you say but will defend to my death your right to say it!(Patrick Henry/Voltaire). That said (and I said it before) ONLY those who grew up in the 60's amid the chaos of wars killings of JFK RFK MLK riots protests have the RIGHT and PRIVILEGE to comment on quality 'overratedness'  etc of the DEAD Dylan EC and others-- they are OURS to critique, like or hate.

 

Think you need to be more clear - do I have the right to say it or judge them or no.? 

 

[sphinxsix]

Guys, some time ago I started the thread 'The Greatest Guitarist of All Time'. I strongly tend to agree with most (I strongly believe) critics and music lovers that according to the criteria mentioned by me (no jazz or classical guitar players) the most important, revolutionary and the greatest one ever was Jimi Hendrix. From my point of view everyone whose guitarists shortlist didn't begin with his name was in fact saying - Hendrix is overrated. And there were tens of people who preferred some other guitarist as their candidate for the 'greatest' one (some also claiming Jerry Garcia was their personal no 1), just tens of them. I didn't take none of these posts personally, I also don't have a notebook with nicks of all of the authors of these posts written in it and obviously I  don't remember them, haven't been interested in cultivating these memories. I wasn't personally offended by none of these posts. We are all different, we value different music and it's natural. 

My attitude to GD had been expressed in short in the very first post of this thread. In a blunt, maybe even provocative way (I know there are many fans of the band here), that's the way I am. Sometimes. Sometimes I consciously provoke to stir things a little, that's right, I think that some know it already.

I said in my first post 'I expect the discussion may be quite hot.'

I also said 'Let's stay relaxed..'

IMO some here really take the whole thing too personally. I would never express emotions in a way some here did if someone said that 2 performers whom I regard as the most important performers in the late 60's and early 70's - Hendrix and Led Zeppelin  were overrated or the most overrated ones. That's you, that's your music taste, there is IMO no (or at least should be no) music taste totalitarianism. Or any other for that matter.

However I wouldn't like to instigate feelings and conflicts like that here and if someone thinks his feelings have been hurt by this thread or whatever I said here and thinks it'd be better if this thread was closed - I give him hereby the right to simply ask @The Computer Audiophile to close the thread and I'm personally asking Chris to respect that. Simple as that. 

Happy Easter everybody (regardless of his music taste)! 

[sphinxsix]

1 hour ago, cab33 said:

 

Vanilla Sludge

Wrong thread, I believe 

 

[sphinxsix]

1 hour ago, bluesman said:

I can’t tell you how unhappy that makes me - and on so many levels.  That’s so profoundly sad that I won’t denigrate it with humor.  I’m very sorry if that’s really true.

 

One of two saddest things I've heard in my entire life, the other one being somebody's confession that he has never had a friend.

 

[sphinxsix]

9 hours ago, MarkusBarkus said:

I grew up in a mid-size city NE US and my reality was so removed from what I perceived the Dead to be about it was completely alien. Un-relateable. At least to me/then...maybe still, I guess.

 

I grew up in Europe which could possibly make the whole process of relating to the GD phenomenon even more difficult. I've gone through the half of the 4h long (nomen omen) 'Long Slow Trip' documentary and I think I have a better understanding of the whole thing than ever (the second half should add to it at least a little bit), yet still their music (just like I foresaw it earlier here) just doesn't touch me. I only quite(!) liked the opening credits blues (I'm much more open to blues than country) - but IMO it also was nothing special. Seems that in general I'm not interested in country related music, that's simply not my thing, sorry. I have no problem with relating to eg Hendrix and J. Joplin - but they both were much more based in blues of course. Actually what I have seen so far in this doc  would rather confirm my view of GD as a half amateur band, on a couple of levels actually - from their instrumental technique to their inability to record in a really professional fashion, really interesting material in a studio. I am also still not convinced by theories saying - they were mostly a fantastic live band, for me they weren't - IMO they were just really loved and adored by their fans with whom they were able to create a quite amazing, friendly, relaxed atmosphere during the concerts, without the usual division 'we are the stars and you are our audience', rather kind of - we all are more like people of the same kind, friends, maybe almost like a family. This is all very nice and fantastic on many levels but on the level which is the most important for me in the whole thing, which is simply music - it's still like I said not convincing.. 

And so..

9 hours ago, MarkusBarkus said:

(I) think the Dead suck. Still. Is that too harsh?

For me - no, it is not.

Just please don't take it personally, guys, it is not meant to be taken in such way.

 

[sphinxsix]

At the same time I've got lots of sympathy for these guys now - seems that they not only led the lives they wanted but at the same time they also made lots of money! I've only succeeded with the former thing 😊