MILES DAVIS

I am a pompous sort of person so I tell people I quite like jazz. And, unless I am in a state of self-deception, I actually do. As a committed rock fan the world of jazz is quite a daunting place (imagine being new to rock music and buying albums by the Beatles, Dylan or the Stones for the first time) and so far I haven't strayed too far from its standards post-war roots. I have a few John Coltrane albums but mainly, so far, I have concentrated on Miles Davis who, if we are to rely on the rock analogy again, is the Beatles of jazz. Now I want to say this straight-away: I am a fan of rock music. Sure, I have a fondness for pretentious rock music now and again but jazz is a whole new ball-game. Unlike Prindle's Miles Davis reviews I'm not going to opt out of ambitions of objectivity but really I am in no state to give you an accurate low-down of the quality of jazz albums. I am, more or less, a fish out of water. But I'll give it a go. Thus I plead with you, if you are a jazz expert, do not berate me for my ignorance or inaccuracy. Obviously if you disagree about a purely aesthetic judgement I've made then please send me your comments but I freely admit I don't understand the complexity of jazz, there is little point in you simply confirming it.

So, with that caution heeded, less us turn to a rock fan's critique of Miles Davis. Miles Davis is the man. Even a rock fan like myself found it easy to enjoy Miles Davis fairly quickly. Even if you do not have a single jazz album I think it is hard not to truly enjoy and love Kind of Blue. Miles was also one of the coolest musicians, rock or not, to ever grace this (not so) fair planet. I remember reading an anecdote which involved Miles snorting cocaine with the Stooges, back-stage at one of their concerts. Not so unusual you might think (after all he did famously jam with Jimi Hendrix) but remember at the time the Stooges were the most ridiculed rock'n'roll band ever. They were a shambolic bunch of junkies who couldn't even play their instruments properly. Jazz is, of course, an ultra-snobbish genre where musical virtuosity counts for nearly everything. And here was the greatest living jazz musician of the twentieth century hanging out with the most inept band of the twentieth century. To me, that's why Miles Davis was cool. And that "fuck-the-rules" attitude is also behind the reason why Miles is so great. It is often said that he wasn't the greatest trumpet player ever (apparently Louis Armstrong was), although he was still pretty special. Neither was he jazz's best composer or arranger (Duke Ellington was at least one of those, so I've been told). But he was jazz's great adventurer. He instigated a jazz revolution three separate times: the "cool" sound of the late-forties/early-fifties, the modal jazz of Kind of Blue and the electric rock fusion of the late-sixties/early-seventies. Indeed, in that respect he is perhaps superior to any other twentieth century artist. He may not have been blessed with the same artistic genius of Bob Dylan (although there is no doubt he was a genius, even if that word is often applied too liberally) but he was along with Dylan and perhaps the Beatles (although they were great more collectively than individually) one of the great musical visionaries of the twentieth century.

Given the fluidity of jazz groups I am not going to list any particular groups Miles worked with (unless it is strictly necessary) but he also had a great skill for picking uniquely talented musicians to work along-side. I wouldn't say he owes his success to them or anything (after all, he was still the "ideas" man) but I'm sure they are partly responsible for the sheer quantity of great albums he produced. To mention but a few: the most famous musicians he worked with include arranger Gil Evans; saxophonists John Coltrane, Cannonball Adderley, Gerry Mulligan, Wayne Shorter; pianists Bill Evans, Herbie Hancock, Chick Corea; drummers Max Roach, Jimmy Cobb and bassist Paul Chambers. And that's just on the albums I own. Crikey!

I think it is fair to say that I am at least starting with the first album Miles made that was of any importance. Indeed, the importance was so resonant that it wasn't even picked upon straight away. Obviously I may be wrong and I'm just going on what the sleevenotes tell me, but I think this album consists of three sessions (two in '49 and one in 1950) Miles recorded with his nonet that were subsequently deemed to be massively important and released as this album in the late fifties. But this is all so confusing, and jazz albums are re-released so many times, so I've just stuck with the dates of the actual recordings. At any rate, I think some of this album was released on different records before this overall release. Anyhow, the reason this here album is so important is because Miles assembled himself a nonet (nine people) and brilliantly fused the orchestral side of jazz with the improvisational freedom of bop (or bebop). Thus for the songs there is a compact brass section playing an irrepressible little melody before a few members of the crew (mainly Miles and saxophonist Gerry Mulligan) branch out for some brief solos. Mulligan's importance shouldn't be overlooked as, as well as some immaculate playing, he also composed three of the best tracks on here ("Jeru", "Rocker" and the peerless "Venus de Milo"). Indeed, there doesn't seem to be any good reason why this should be credited as a Miles Davis album and not a Gerry Mulligan one. I guess Miles' name was put on it because it was released at a time (in the late fifties) when he was getting really big. Also on hand to deal with the orchestral side of the arrangement is Miles' infamous buddy Gil Evans who presumably scored the orchestral arrangements just as he did on Miles' later triplet Miles Ahead, Porgy and Bess and Sketches of Spain. This is obviously a less grand affair than those three albums (less so than Sketches of Spain in particular) and I think the small-scale of this album actually makes it more listenable than the full orchestral albums. Whereas the 19 strong orchestra on Miles Ahead may be deemed by some to be too "brassy", all toots and parps, on here the band are never too intrusive just playing the melody with an irrepressible swing. Every song on here has a nice, memorable melody and catchy hooks (if that applies to jazz music) and given that practically every song weighs in at under three minutes this is almost like pop-jazz. Each song seems to be taken at the same laid-back tempo, even the ballad ("Moon Dreams"), and the atmosphere underlying the album is undoubtedly a cool one. It is almost the feel of the album as much as the novel approach that makes it so ground-breaking although perhaps such a mood could only have been created through the nonet approach. In fact, that seems likely given the balance between orchestrated melody and swinging solos. The only real complaint from the faultless melodies and laid-back tempo is that the songs themselves are hard to distinguish from each other. I actually had to directly compare "Jeru" and "Boplicity" just to make sure they were not the same melody reprised. It may just be my problem (it is much harder to identify songs with their titles if there are no lyrical references) but the tone of the music does not vary quite as much as it does on his more progressive bop albums, like Kind of Blue or Miles Smiles. In any case, it is the overall feel that is most important here and it is the album as a whole that impresses as much as the individual songs. There are absolutely no clunkers and every song could be a hit single. Do they even release singles in jazz music? Anyway, it is a perfectly accessible album even to those newly-acquainted with jazz (why are you looking at me?) as it is eminently listenable throughout, even if you ain't too keen on brass. And for the fans of normal music the Rudy Van Gelder edition includes a bonus track with proper singing on it ("Darn that Dream"). It is actually easily the worst song on the album, sort of sub-standard Sinatra, but the lyrics seem a similar idea to the Smiths' "Last Night I Dreamt that Somebody Loved Me". Except not as well executed. Anyway, "classic album!" say the critics, "10*!" say I.

So after a bit of dossing around in the fifties Miles reunited with his best-bud Gil Evans and released another crucially pivotal release, not just in his career but in the history of jazz music as a whole. This was also one of the first albums he recorded on Columbia which may go some way to explaining why they refer to this as, and I quote, "One of the greatest jazz recordings of all time!" and an "American masterwork!!". To be fair, though, this album is sometimes overlooked by the non-jazz-purists when assessing Miles' catalogue. Sketches of Spain (released in 1960) is often regarded as the best and most important of the orchestral albums (Porgy and Bess is the other famous one). I guess Sketches of Spain was a more ambitious attempt to transcribe a classical piece into a jazz composition whereas this album is pure jazz man. Still, this album seems ultimately more consistent and that little bit more enjoyable. This album certainly has more in common with Birth of the Cool in that the individual songs are all reasonably short (most around four minutes). On the other hand, the album is meant to represent an entire suite so there are no gaps between songs (the gap between the side 1 and 2 was erased for the CD remaster) and each ending segues seamlessly into the beginning of the next number. There is actually a medley on here ("The Meaning of the Blues" and "Lament") but you can hardly distinguish it from the flow of the rest of the songs. The segue from "The Maids of Cadiz" to "The Duke" is particularly impressive. Miles also blows on the flugelhorn rather than trumpet which does not make a great deal of difference (to the jazz lay-man) but it does make his solos slightly more airy and lighter-sounding. I also don't really see what Prindle's problem with the brass is all about as it really isn't at all intrusive. This is certainly a superior album to the marginally overrated Sketches of Spain. Some of the tunes on here you can just dig all night. The opening "Springsville" and "The Duke" have wonderful melodies with sprightly hooks tackled superbly by the 19 strong band. Indeed this album might well be seen as the natural progression from Birth of the Cool as similar ideals apply, only on a slightly grander scale. The album is still very relaxed-sounding and avoids the bombastic approach to orchestrated jazz that some practitioners indulge in (Duke Ellington's Such Sweet Thunder is a little bombastic at times). Most of the material on here are covers. Miles and Gil co-wrote the title track (which isn't one of the strongest tracks) and Gil, himself, wrote "Blues for Pablo" which, as the name suggests, is essentially blues but it remains a stand-out track. Miles' playing is possibly best on "New Rhumba" with him engaging in a continuous interchange with the orchestra. The album ends, as it begun, with a sprightly little number - "I Don't Wanna Be Kissed (By Anyone But You)" - again with a good a hook as you can shake a fist at. Miles' soloing right at the end is also a superb end to the album. As with the majority of the Columbia/Legacy releases, there are a few bonus tracks of alternate versions of songs. You'd have to be a pretty keen connoisseur of jazz, though, to really notice much of a difference. Still, that's the nature of bonus tracks in general. Given that I own so little of Miles' catalogue it feels a little risky to give out another 10* album but what can I do? He makes a flawless jazz album and I have to give it 10*. That's the nature of the game.

Well, at least I don't have to give this album 10*, the couple of standard bebop numbers, "Two Bass Hit" and "Billy Boy", ensure that this isn't quite a perfect work of pioneering art. Instead this is just an average fantastic album by Miles, just as he was reaching his formidable stride. Despite not being quite perfect we do still get another unique musical innovation on here, though. Obviously you'll all be familiar with the modal jazz blue-print laid out in Kind of Blue. Well, some of you might be interested to learn that it actually started here, in the form of the title track. Yes that's right, "Milestones" is actually (as far as I know) the first example of modal jazz. You also might be interested to learn that our ol' buddy John Coltrane is on board now (maybe for the first time - I admit it, I don't know) along with alto saxophonist Cannonball Adderley. Thus for "Milestones" we get a simple bass line over which the trio take turns to solo. Despite Coltrane playing tenor sax both saxophonists swap ranges quite frequently meaning often it is only Coltrane's patented sheets-of-sound approach that betrays a distinction. Not that I'm any sort of expert but I think Miles' soloing on the album as a whole is some of his most accomplished. "Milestones", the song, is actually pretty short (less than six minutes) but it makes its point sure enough. The point, in essence, being "look, modal jazz!". Like I said at the beginning, the inclusion of old jazz numbers "Two Bass Hit" and "Billy Boy" is what lets the album down slightly as, the latter in particular, they are just standard jazz tunes for the musicians to play over. Paul Chambers even gets a chance to show off a few bass solos (using a cello bow) and Red Garland's piano is also very effective. Actually while I'm at it I may as well go the full hog and mention drummer Philly Joe Jones whose drums, on some of the songs, sound like they are mixed like MC5's Back in the USA, being all tinny. Actually jazz producers don't get mentioned much, although I guess most albums are recorded live (Bitches Brew excepted but we'll get back to that later). In any case I doubt Jon Landau was behind this album. It is also noticeable that a few of the songs rely on the standard blues structure, in particular the lengthy (although no less brilliant) "Sid's Ahead" which is a slow blues. It is an interesting conflict that Miles should have put the slowest track directly after the first, "Dr. Jackle", which must be one of the fastest jazz songs ever. I've seen it referred to as "Dr. Jackie" and even "Dr. Jekyll" (as on the album cover) but I'm presuming "Dr. Jackle" is the correct name. Anyway, it features all three brass-men squealing away intensely. The album ends with a rendition of Thelonius Monk's classic "Straight, No Chaser", the original of which I've not heard although I have heard shit grunge band Bush's song of the same name (which, amazingly, isn't as good). Like "Sid's Ahead" "Straight, No Chaser" stretches out for over ten minutes with the melody being played only at the beginning and to sum up at the end, with solos-a-plenty in between. Still when you're getting Miles Davis, John Coltrane and that Cannonball bloke blowing at you, it can't be a bad thing. And indeed it is not. You might even be bold enough to argue that it is a good thing. If you like jazz, of course. As it happens I don't, I'd much rather be listening to Aerosmith but I have to lie so I look more sophisticated than my friends.

Did you know Miles' middle name was "Dewey"? What a stupid name. Anyway, Miles Dewey Davis was far from a lazy man so after putting out another bebop album (Milestones) he thought he'd have another pop at that orchestrated jazz lark and got Gil on the phone again and suggested tackling a bit of musical theatre. After rejecting Fame! because the punters might confuse it with the David Bowie song of the same name Miles and Gil decided to follow everyone else and record a version of the Gershwins' Porgy and Bess (hence the title for this album). As a whole the sound of this album isn't noticeably different from Miles Ahead and I've only opted for a lower rating because this album is a little bit less good; which seems as good a reason as any. Interestingly, this album doesn't rely on the same running order as the play as the songs are switched around and some are excluded (not that I've seen a production of it, mind). Even more audaciously Gil Evans actually throws in a piece of his own, "Gone". Perhaps as a result of being the orphan of the set "Gone" is probably the weakest link in the overall performance. It seems too much in the thrall of up-tempo be-bop to really match the mood of Gershwin's own efforts. I'd also say a couple of the slower numbers perhaps lack the melody of the material on the impeccable Miles Ahead. And what's up with Gershwin's grammar? "Bess, You Is My Woman Now" and "I Loves You, Porgy" would certainly put a frown on an English teacher's face. Not a music teacher, though, that's for sure (even if they are two of the more easy-listening numbers in the set). I tell you what's not easy listening, though, and that would be the album's undisputed centre-piece: "Prayer (Oh Doctor Jesus)". Miles soloing is amazingly tortured and desparing, against which Gil brings his orchestra in and out with an immensely powerful hook, like a divine thunderstorm. It certainly stands up as some of the most powerful music I've heard Miles (or anyone, for that matter) produce. Its power and intensity also marks it out against the more laidback surroundings of the other pieces. It is quite a feat for it to take the plaudits for being the best song when it is up against an all-time classic. Indeed, it is a rare enough occasion for me to listen to a jazz album already knowing a tune on it but when the livin's easy, that's inevitably the result. Yes, "Summertime" is of course on here but it is given a relatively modest reading, especially when compared to John Coltrane's dischordant deconstruction of the classic on his excellent My Favourite Things album. The set begins with the most incredibly bombastic sequence imaginable before it thankfully settles into a mid-tempo, strolling stride. Certainly "The Buzzard Song" is a fine way to open an album, which I presume was chosen as such by Miles given he abandoned the original running order of the opera. On the other hand, the decision to end the album with the jaunty "There's a Boat That's Leaving Soon for New York" seems like a poor one, leaving an underwhelming finish and an impression of incompleteness. Certainly it doesn't sound like a natural finale for such an impressive set. Personally I would have preferred something a bit more important sounding, like "My Man's Gone Now" or perhaps even the original finale: "Oh Bess, Where's My Bess". Finally, I shall offer a few words of commendation for the superlative swing and tight arrangement of "It Ain't Necessarily So". As for overall commendation I shall say this: Normally I'm dead against all this musical theatre luvvie lark but Miles even makes George Gershwin & co. seem cool. Another great example of Miles' approach to orchestrated jazz and, man, that "Prayer" song is just the BEST.

Let me put this bluntly: This is one of the all-time greatest albums ever. Don't bother trying to argue, it is simply a fact. I realise it is rather populist to say so (particularly amongst us jazz laymen) and therefore snobbish types claim it to be overrated but I say: "fuck 'em". Fuck 'em good style. If I was a band-ratings type of person I would not hesitate to award monsieur Davis a 5-rating as this album is clearly a 15-strong album. It is, to repeat, one of the greatest albums ever; jazz or not. The opening two songs, "So What" and "Freddie Freeloader" (what a great name for a song that is) are two of the most perfect compositions ever in any genre. Not a note, NOT A NOTE, is wasted. They represent twenty minutes of sheer, pure musical perfection. Perhaps "So What" (the more famous composition) is the better (ignoring the paradox that something can be perfect yet worse than something else). Like "Milestones" it is a fairly simple bass riff, ending in a couple of chords, over which the same players as before (Miles, Coltrane and Cannonball Adderley) improvise using only a pre-prepared scale, therefore releasing them from the chore of having to rely on chord changes. Thus this is the very essence of modal jazz - the absence of chord progressions so the soloists only rely on a scale. Very clever stuff and very, very visionary. I'm sure it dramatically changed the role of instrumentation not just in jazz but in music as a whole (the whole idea of improvisation was created by jazz). The sleevenotes mention the Allman Brothers but I'm sure the likes of Cream, Pink Floyd and every prog band ever would never have existed as we know and (perhaps) love them, if not for this album and Miles' visionary innovation. Of course the innovation is made all the more impressive by the playing on here which, as was the case on Milestones, is faultless throughout. Obviously I'm sure Adderley was a great musician but John Coltrane and Miles are veritable jazz legends. Any doubts over Miles' ability as a composer or soloist should be soundly put to rest when listening to this album. Indeed, he actually composed every song on here, although there obviously isn't much complexity as it is the mood and swing of the band that help determine the strength of the compositions. From his Milestones' sextet, Jones and Garland have departed and are replaced by Jimmy Cobb on drums and Bill Evans on piano duties apart from "Freddie Freeloader" for which Wynton Kelly provides the (excellent) piano. "Freddie Freeloader" certainly has a fascinating swing to it that you can't help but be caught up in. Watch out for that gradual intro to "So What" (and thus the album) though as it is pure creative magic. "All Blues" measures in as the longest composition (stretching out for over eleven minutes) and is constructed around a sort of quivering, vibrating riff. It is probably the song on here that is most similar to the original modal jazz "Milestones". Thus "All Blues", like the first two songs, is a more up-tempo (although undoubtedly laid-back) effort. For the remaining two songs, the short "Blue in Green" and the final "Flamenco Sketches", Miles digs out the mute for his trumpet and thus both songs are played slow and deliberate. Adderley doesn't play on "Blue in Green" and its track positioning, after the jaunty "Freddie Freeloader" certainly shows the different moods of the album (although the mood of "cool" runs through the whole thing). I think "Flamenco Sketches" might just rank as the weakest track on the album (in a strictly relative sense) as "Blue in Green" features some mightily impressive piano playing in case the slower tempo isn't really your thing. They even, rather pointlessly, include an alternate version of "Flamenco Sketches" as a bonus track although I can't tell any real discernable difference. I guess it is included as a carrot to tempt the vast majority of record owners who already own this album. And really, if you have any interest in music I think you should be one of them. Alright, maybe if you don't venture much further than AC/DC this might not be to your tastes but if you at all like prog rock you'd be a hypocrite not to have this in your collection. Indeed there are few rock albums that are better than this. After all it is, for the final time, one of the greatest albums of all-time.

From: Steve Harvey

I am far from an expert on jazz theory (trying to get there as fast as I can), but I can assure you that "So What" definitely has chord changes and a couple of different scales. (I know this because I am learning to play Miles' solo on guitar).
Some jazz modal theory did eventually evolve in the direction of trying to break free of chord changes and progressions -- I believe that Miles was later interested in the composer Ravel partly because Ravel's concept of modality and chords allowed more use of chromaticism, and freedom from strict chord progressions. But a lot of jazz modal theory, while it allows more freedom of scale choices, is actually MORE demanding on the musician because instead of just saying "play this scale against this chord", one instead says "any of these half-dozen scales will work along with this chord, but each has a different character and different implications", all of which must be well-understood to be used properly. More choices does not always make life easier.
You also state in the same review "the whole idea of improvisation was created by jazz" which is utterly, completely false. J.S. Bach was famous for his abilities to improvise on organ, for instance, and I have no doubt that people have been improvising from the moment they first started banging rocks against sticks and calling it music. Music would not exist without improvisation.
Also (and this is nit-picking), I think you're unfairly dismissive of Cannonball Adderly, when you say "Obviously I'm sure Adderley was a great musician but John Coltrane and Miles are veritable jazz legends." Adderly may not be a mainstream household name, but he's definitely a very famous, well-respected player in jazz circles.

From: Kurt Preston

Just a really minor note: you made a statement on your Miles Davis page that "the whole idea of improvisation was created by jazz". That's far from true. During its romantic period, classical musicians were offered some freedom to modify and improvise with the melody they were given, in a fashion not entirely unlike jazz. In classical music alone, there are probably many instances of this that date even before that phase. Though I'm no expert in musicology, I know that many types of ethnic music involve improvisation, and I'm certain that many of these styles emerged before jazz did. Jazz took the element of improvisation a substantial step further, built an entire formal musical structure around it, but it wasn't the first genre to experiment with spontaneity.

[Before a third person fancies ridiculing my stupid statement made above can I clarify that I meant jazz "popularised" improvisation, it obviously didn't "invent" it? Perhaps I should have just stuck to reviewing stadium rock... - JF]

From: David Haesler

Nice to see a rock fan's perspective on Miles' work.
I have come to Jazz via Rock and find it fascinating. I love all sorts of rock ,prog rock, blues rock and now Jazz.
I have all the md albums you list and agree with most of your comments.
I cannot get into the brassy, orchestral Gil Evans work on the whole, maybe that will come.
I like your review of Kind Of Blue. The first 2 tracks are for me the pinnacle of Jazz. It's odd that "Freddie Freeloader" is not more lauded as a cut, as for me it is perfect and IMHO, the best track on the album. Wynton Kelly's piano solo is sublime; but it is the interplay between all the instruments which is perfect and the reason why each cut can be listened to over and over again; because whilst you listen to the Kelly solo all the other players are wending their way into your perception so each time the focus can shift subtly allowing me to hear it fresh (no i am not on drugs). I have listened to "Freddie Freeloader" literally countless times; maybe a few hundred and it ALWAYS gives me chills. The number of people I have tried to convert to it and the album is huge. However I have little success :(
And what about the contrast between the subtlety and beauty of the sparingly played Davis solos against the power and complexity of Coltranes blasting sax, where each note he plays is comprised of a complete run. Words do not do it justice.
Incidentally have you heard the 'off' take of Freddie? Kelly's solo is all completely different and it shows just how improvised these cuts were.
Anyhow I am with you that Blue is one of the finest albums of all time. It just gets better and better, the more you delve into it, the better it gets and oddly, it seems to encourage analysis rather than suffer from it.
Cheers
David Haesler
Coltrane Live at Birdland; great!

In terms of popular critical adulation this ranks as one of Miles' best albums. However, I was reading this jazz anthology (like a review website but in a book and about jazz) and they reckoned that this album is overrated by the people less knowledgeable about jazz than the connoisseurs and thus Miles Ahead (the real peak of Miles' orchestral albums) therefore gets overlooked and underrated. So I figure it makes me look clever if I go along with them and also claim this album to be overrated when, in reality, I haven't got the first clue. Actually that book did seem to make sense as I did always prefer Miles Ahead to this album so now I have proper critical backing. Strangely the jazz anthology mainly criticised the album's centre-piece - the opening "Concierto de Aranjuez" which I just find ludicrous. Surely they were just being obstinate for pretension's sake. The concierto is famously an adaptation of a classical piece and it seems to me to be some of the best jazz Miles (and Gil, for that matter) have ever come up with. I'm not just flabbergasted by the book's opinion I am also flabbergasted by the piece, it is simply fantastic. It has this wonderful, military sounding, hook and Miles' soloing is perfectly complemented by the brilliantly subtle orchestration. It is never overblown and it compels the listener throughout. Not just perfect jazz but perfect music. It is the rest of the album, to me, that lets it down a tad. Not, however, the final piece, which is also a lengthy number, composed by Evans, which has a similar theme to "Concierto". Actually the same theme runs through the album - a sort of spanish military one. For instance, I don't even know why Evans' claims to have composed "Saeta" as it seems to solely consist of Miles playing a sort of last-stand style solo with military drums in the background. It perhaps recreates the drumming before a military execution with Miles, the victim, playing his final song. Anyway, atmospheric as it is it doesn't really go anywhere ending up with Miles just droning away for much longer than is necessary. "Will O' the Wisp" and "The Pan Piper" are both better which again have a sort of military feel to them, both featuring a repetitive hook with Miles soloing away over the top. You can certainly see the diversity in this album, though, even compared to his other orchestral albums. Certainly this is a different sort of jazz compared to the relaxed, cool-sounding, more melodic orchestrated jazz of Miles Ahead. It was also a brave decision to tackle a classical piece (which is widely perceived, according to the sleevenotes, as the best jazz adaptation of a classical piece ever, in the whole history of the world) - a bit like ELP, but good. Mind you a man of Miles' stature and genius never takes a brave decision as every thing he touches turns to gold. And "Concierto de Aranjuez" is overflowing with genius. Unfortunately the three short numbers in the middle fail to match the majesty of the two lengthy suites (even if one is self-penned). Therefore, not quite another perfect album from Miles (another 9* for you, sir) but a pretty fine effort all the same. For the record, Columbia also give us a new bonus track, "Song of our Country", which is alright but it at least means you don't have to turn the album off straight away.

Miles did loads more albums in the early- to mid-sixties but it wasn't really until a couple of albums after this one, with the release of In a Silent Way, that he initiated yet another jazz revolution and pioneered the electric rock fusion jazz. This album, unfortunately, is merely standard bebop, infused with the spirit of free jazz, and taken to its visionary extreme. What a cop-out. Now I'm not the world's greatest expert on jazz (probably about 7th in the world listing) but it certainly seems that Miles has taken a few cues from the free jazz pioneered by Ornette Coleman on his excellent The Shape of Jazz to Come album. Although Miles' quintet lacks the sparseness of Coleman's arrangements the repetitive bass patterns sound similar (particularly on the brilliant "Footprints") and the way the trumpet and saxophone play the same hook in a sloppy togetherness definitely seems influenced by the double saxophone combo on The Shape of Jazz to Come (never has an album title seemed more appropriate). Of course, free jazz (I presume) was born out of the furore Miles created with his modal jazz (the idea that one has the freedom to solo over a basic arrangement) so Miles was of course responsible for this new form of jazz even if he wasn't a direct proponent. Indeed, I think this album is the closest Miles came to free jazz, unlike John Coltrane who experimented much further with it. It might even come down to different generations as I presume Miles was older than both Coleman and Coltrane and therefore more rooted in the traditional bebop side (although God knows he wasn't afraid to experiment). Free jazz was of course vilified by the jazz traditionalists because it horrifically placed more emphasis on expression and emotion than sensible technical virtuosity. Anyhow again the sleevenotes tell me that the music played on here is called "freebop" which makes sense given it combines free jazz and bebop. There also seem to be traces, to me at any rate, of the electric jazz of Bitches Brew. The bass seems similar at times and the rippling arpeggios of new boy Herbie Hancock echo the omnipresent wash of keyboards on the aforementioned album. Hancock is a real star of the show on here, actually. His solos (particularly on "Circle") are magnificent and inventive and his general rhythm playing seems superior to that on most of the others of Miles' albums. "Freedom Jazz Dance" is perhaps one of the most interesting numbers on here (although not quite the best) as it perfectly represents a half-way point between the old (free jazz) and the new (electric jazz). The bass riff seems straight out of Bitches Brew whereas the soloing between Miles and saxophonist Wayne Shorter is heavily influenced by free (and modal) jazz. I guess that serves as a good indication of the roots of Miles' electric fusion. Both this and Bitches Brew were produced by the same person (Teo Macero) and Wayne Shorter also remained on board for the later album. Wayne Shorter actually composed three of the tracks on here. The opening "Orbits" and "Dolores", whilst undeniably strong pieces, aren't really the finest moments on here but "Footprints" almost certainly is. For the record, Miles only composed one piece: the equally excellent ballad "Circles". The final "Gingerbread Boy" also heavily indicates the direction of Bitches Brew, not that it sounds electric, but the vamps and soloing are in a very similar style. It probably just pips "Freedom Jazz Dance" to the post, though, for the best tracks list. I should also mention that there is not one bonus track on the reissue (not even alternate takes) as the songs were all recorded in one take (therefore relying on the impulsive expression of free jazz). Therefore, an album laying the foundations for Bitches Brew with its visionary "freebop". Unfortunately, this album is not quite a radical new innovation in jazz which on Miles' track record, is something of a surprise.

So Columbia finally got around to remastering and re-releasing In a Silent Way and little ol' me finally got around to buying and reviewing it. So is it as good as everyone says? Is it Miles' second best album? Yup. Yup indeed. Since I first wrote this page I've come to the realisation that I'm not such the jazz fan I initially thought I was. I was listening to Duke Ellington's Such Sweet Thunder the other day (supposedly one of the great orchestrated jazz albums) and, man, was I bored. It was like Iggy Pop and Johnny Thunders were mocking me for my self-imposed sadness. Similarly, surely if I like jazz I like Charles Mingus? Well, not so far. The Shape of Jazz to Come by Ornette Coleman I can dig when I'm in the right mood (it is hardly a hangover cure) and I'm reasonably keen on John Coltrane (A Love Supreme in particular) but, at the end of the day, the realisation I have reached is that I mainly just like Miles Davis. It is not just a case of being the best of a boring bunch, though. I really, really like Miles Davis. Obviously Kind of Blue is one of my favourite albums of all-time and I even really like his orchestrated jazz (better than Sir Duke, Stevie). In fact, the only Miles Davis album I have trouble appreciating is the montrosity that is Bitches Brew. Everyone comes along and tells me it is his greatest achievement but I simply can't get into it. So when I first heard this album - similar idea but shorter and with coherent melodies - I finally realised what the fuss about Davis' electric fusion was all about. This is a simply wonderful album and, in my mind and out of what I've heard, clearly behind only Kind of Blue on the pedestal of Miles' achievements. Obviously being half the length of Bitches Brew is a good start (one disc instead of two) but this just sounds so much more coherent and penetrable. Of course it is still inherently free in its arrangement (usually just relying on a basic vamp with plenty of space for improvisation) but the less instruments means a sparser sound and they also seem to blend a lot more subtlely. It is almost as if Miles made Bitches Brew and then ironed out the flaws for this album. Assuming he wasn't the Marty McFly of jazz, though, I doubt Miles could have zipped back and forth through time. So instead, he came up with this radical and brilliant idea and then just made it infinitely more complex second time around. Obviously, there are different moods on the two albums as well with this being more peaceful (obviously) and serene and the latter being harsh and aggressive. Miles achieves this serene effect through the use of a hammond organ by Joe Zawinul. Instead of the violent wash of electric pianos on Brew Zawinul's organ provides an angelic sounding basis for Corea's and Hancock's tinkering electric pianos to duel with John McLaughlin's electric guitar. For the first side of music, "Shhh/Peaceful", a basic nine-minute vamp is gone through twice with Miles and Shorter taking turns to put in some delicate solos, over the top of the bed of keyboards and Tony Williams' cantering, unrelenting cymbal caresses. As I've already made clear, the peaceful serenity of it is the key to success but it does slightly fail to match the majesty of the second side - "In a Silent Way/It's About that Time". It only forms one track on the CD (presumably to recreate the feel of the sides of vinyl) but is divided into three parts. Parts A and C are essentially the same piece, the title track, and book-end the eleven minute "It's About that Time". Indeed, the title track(s) is one of the loveliest pieces of music I've ever heard on a Miles Davis album. McLaughlin plays a simple yet seductive guitar riff before a single electric piano joins the fray with eventually Miles and Shorter playing the title riff together. It truly is amazingly sparse but unbelievably astounding in its beauty. After it ends, however, the band launch straight into "It's About that Time" which shares similar dynamics to "Shhh/Peaceful" but with a more memorable climatic hook. Indeed, the second side certainly shows just how far the emerging art-rock scene was influencing Miles. The title track is effectively what King Crimson wanted to achieve on the tedious "Moonchild" (from In the Court of the Crimson King) whilst the hook on "It's About that Time" is a glorious appropriation of rock dynamics. As I've been implicitly suggesting throughout this review, if you do want to check out Miles' rock fusion work then I would vehemently recommend this album ahead of Bitches Brew. Not that the latter isn't (probably) a great album but there are few musical achievements in any genre that match the transcendent brilliance of this album. Infallible proof that you don't even have to like jazz to love Miles Davis. Truly the greatest man called Miles that I can think of off-hand.

DUB-DUB-DUB-DUB-DUB-BLEAUGH. DUB-DUB-DUB-DUB-DUB-BLEAUGH. Tap-tap-tap. Yes, I admit it - this is the album that I really just don't understand. In the immortal words of Giorgio Moroder in his cameo in Electric Dreams: "What the hell is going on?". Tinkle-tinkle-tinkle. THREE electric pianos are used meaning we get a sort of wall of keyboard orientated sound over which Miles blows away on his electronically treated trumpet and I just get confused. Now of course this was an absolutely pivotal release in jazz, pioneering jazz-rock fusion (as I noted in my introduction Miles was hanging around with the rock crowd a lot in the sixties - and credit to him, I say) and it does seem to be a truly fantastic ground-breaking album. But, alas, I just don't understand what's going on. It is too complex and too ground-breaking for a mere mortal like me. You might think, being a rock fan, I would prefer this album but I actually really like his bebop stuff. This is just too much for me. Obviously it must be a great album and it no doubt deserves 10* but I thought it a little too cheeky to award an album 10* when I don't really understand it so I've settled for 9*, knocking a point off just for being impenetrably complex. Just to rub salt in the wound Miles has delivered two CDs of the stuff making this one of the longest jazz albums around. The first CD only has two tracks, one is twenty minutes long ("Pharaoh's Dance") and the other twenty-six (the title track). Both are probably the highpoint of the set (although "Miles Runs the Voodoo Down" might be the best - I find it hard to tell). I did actually listen to this album all the way through but I have only done it once. There certainly is a strong rock influence to be heard. For perhaps the first time Miles recruits a guitarist, John McLaughlin (who even gets a song written for him), who definitely adds to the rock feel. Interestingly he doesn't solo away for ages but plays funny snatches of contorted licks and lays on some unsettling effects. He actually plays a bit like "pretentious bastard" Robert Fripp which is unsurprising given the Frippster claims to have been heavily influenced by jazz (adding to his unbearing pompous pretension). The one influence I do sort of see in this monolithic jazz concoction is of Syd Barrett. Yes, silly as it sounds, in the repetitive vamp of "Bitches Brew" I very definitely hear the traces of the middle section of "Interstellar Overdrive" where the music breaks down in much the same manner. Of course Miles may not have listened to Pink Floyd (he seemed more interested in American rock music) but this is definitely influenced by psychedelia in general. To up the complexity ante Miles also enlisted TWO bassists, an acoustic and electric one, which also lends a rock feel with the thumping bass in the background. While we're at it I may as well mention the THREE drummers and TWO congas players. Miles certainly wasn't concerned with paying people's wages. Actually I don't know how rich he was as jazz isn't really a massive seller. Certainly not as rich as the Eagles which is not a very pleasant thought. Still, Miles was too cool to care about money. This album also pushed back the boundaries of production in jazz in that, instead of concentrating on live takes, Miles overdubbed a lot and also used loads of effects on his trumpet (principally echo, it seems). You've also got to remember that Miles was in his mid-forties when he made this album. I don't think anyone made an album quite as pioneering and groundbreaking as this as late in their career, even if some artists (Bob Dylan perhaps) have made just as good albums late on. We also get a new bonus track, "Feio", which consists of Miles making seal noises on his trumpet. The whole album is undoubtedly ground-breaking and brilliant and I really do enjoy it to a large degree. Unfortunately, it is just that little bit too complex for my liking, making it stray towards (although never reaching) the point where you just can't be bothered listening. I'd actually quite like to take it away with me somewhere (a desert island perhaps?) as my only album and that way I'd be forced to listen to it until I properly appreciated it. And when that happens I'll no doubt come back and raise its rating to 10* but until that day I'm bottling out of making that decision. In any case, if I give Miles too many more 10*'s we'll have a hell of an artist on our hands.

From: Steve Harvey

You state "Miles certainly wasn't concerned with paying people's wages. Actually I don't know how rich he was as jazz isn't really a massive seller... Still, Miles was too cool to care about money" which is completely untrue. Miles cared a LOT about money, espescially the fact that as a black musician and a jazz musician, he wasn't given the same treatment and oppurtunities by the record company as the up and coming white pop stars (who, incidentally, were often doing little more than copying existing blues styles). Miles fought constantly with the record company about money. In some cases, this was completely justified (in terms of protesting unfair treatment based on race), but Miles was also a tough customer to work with in that he would take out huge loans from the record company for ambitious projects that may or may not have been profitable and in some cases never even got recorded. I recommend John Szwed's biography "So What", which has a lot of interesting detail about Miles' dealings with the record companies.

• Return to the main page

Email me at: jackfeeny@yahoo.co.uk