Village Vanguard session with Bill Evans


Hi folks, could you explain why the Village Vanguard recording with Bill Evans is so famous? What qualities does it possess?
I'm asking this question because I can't explain why the recording is so great. If I'm listening to Kind of Blue with Miles Davis quintet I can understand why it is a famous recording. It is because it has an almost Zen quality to it: the timing was perfect and also the organization of the music --> the musicians played the right notes at the right place. There were no redundant notes.

Chris
dazzdax

Showing 4 responses by ghosthouse

Dazzdax, Aldavis -
I wish you a Happy New Year...
Here is a link to a series of videos with Bill Evans discussing his art.

The first link (#1 of 5) will take you to the site with various other segments and contains remarks pertinent to Aldavis' comments.

See also the 4:33 clip (there are 2 with the same title), Bill Evans - The Creative Process and Self-teaching. I found this discussion meaningful in terms of Dazzdax points about the relevance of economy to the creative process.

Hope you enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm6V7bWnVpw&feature=related

PS -
This site also contains an 8:22 interview with the producer of the Village Vanguard recording that started this thread.
BB King said, "It ain't the notes you play. It's the notes you don't...." or so I heard he's reputed to have said. In any case, I don't find DazzDax idea "curious" - it isn't really about "note counting"...that's simply code for another manifestation of "less is more". There's a video of Bill Evans talking with his brother about a related concept (authentic vs non-authentic performance based on a solid understanding of the fundamentals). I don't take DazzDax question as "dissing" the Village Vanguard sessions, rather trying to stimulate some worthwhile discussion about what makes some music great. (Thanks for eliciting the wonderful quote from Miles about Evans' playing. I had not heard that before...it is certainly a propos).
Aldavis - Well said! Especially regarding "transcendence" but the potentially subjective nature of that experience is more fodder for discussion! If you "get it" and I don't...is it great art for you but not for me? Doesn't great art rise above the invidual experience? There must be some objective elements that allow great art to survive over time, changes in culture, modes of thinking etc. I'm not sure what role for the subjective expericence. I think it must play a part - but what weight to give it? I do agree economy can't be the only element defining great art or great music (I didn't intend to imply that). Look at architecture in a Rococco or Baroque style vs some modern minimalist construct. Each has something wonderful about it. Good point also to raise Miles' complaint to Coltrane. In a Coltrane bio I started reading, he's reported to have said, "...why do you have to play so long?" (or words to that effect). When I first read that, I thought it was an ego thing on Miles part about time in the spotlight...in this context now, I'm thinking Coltrane's approach violated (maybe too strong a word) Miles' own sensibility. One more thing I'll add about what defines great art is, "Time". The passage of time is like some erosive process...some stuff gets washed away. Other things remain like bedrock revealed. Setting aside the perhaps distoring effects of commercial interests, we want to listen to Bill Evans and many others decades and centuries after the fact because they tapped into something enduring. Transcendent? yes, I think so too.
Dazzdax - so glad you enjoyed the stuff at that link. I neglected to give credit to my brother-in-law (a gifted musician in his own right) for showing it to me and enabling me to share it. I'm a relative newcomer to jazz and Bill Evans specifically, but I agree with your assessment of his "genius" as a musician. AND he's not too shabby as a philosopher either! I especially appreciate his obvious humility and lack of pretention. Wish I could have met him.