Accomplished Drummers Make Bad Records?

I like to listen to fusion & prog. albums, its great stuff. I would never want to play (again) in a band of "musician's musicians" though. If the listener has to have a deep understanding of music theory to enjoy an album then it really alienates people who are casual listeners.
 
I just marvel at the fact that very few super-educated musicians/drummers seem capable of making music on, say, a Peter Gabriel kind of level, meaning something that can be inspired and played with feel and skill but also reach an incredibly wide audience. Why didn't Tony and McLaughlin make a pop-inspired album, given the heyday of The Beatles, Crimson, Hendrix, Cream, etc.??

I don't know why they didn't make a pop album instead of a jazz album. But at the time, what they were doing was considered to be crossover music, and they did play rock venues. And since you've done your homework, you know Jack Bruce played with Lifetime, Tony was a Beatles fan, and Hendrix was a huge influence on Miles.

Perhaps because if they did, they'd be crucified by the intelligentsia of the jazz world? Or, do such musicians consider the Beatlesque pop song an inferior musical art form?

It was crossover music, and they did get some criticism for it.

If you try playing Mahavishnu Orchestra or Williams Emergency or Weckl, etc. to the same audience, it will most likely fall utterly flat

Not at all. I've seen Medeski Martin and Wood play music utterly indebted to Tony Williams Lifetime (and the record Emergency in particular) for houses packed with young audiences. There were times when they'd be playing what was basically free jazz and the kids would be screaming.
 
Yeah, I think someone mentioned that Tony wanted Miles to tour with The Beatles? Anyone have the details on this?

I would have loved to see Miles Davis (with Tony on drums) touring with The Beatles. That would have been a real event.

There seemed to be more interaction between pop music and jazz--i.e., crossover--back in the Sixties and Seventies. Of course, this could just be nonsense nostalgia on my part.

Sting has gotten ripped both ways for his modern-day crossover attempts--by both jazzers and rockers. Of course, his general arrogance/personality doesn't help the matter any.

Brad Mehldau's trios have done a lot lately with mixing pop and jazz worlds--playing Radiohead songs, Oasis songs, etc., in jazz styles.
 
I think we have a perfect case in point on our very boards. Check out this wonderful piece of work, & also check out the comments from myself & others. http://www.drummerworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65961
It's that old muso perspective thing getting in the way again. This band, truly fresh & highly skilled as they are, risk missing out on the recognition they (imo) rightly deserve. They can go either way from here. The uber muso/wow arrangement route, or extract some of that lovely content & expand it into a more accessible format. I think these guys really have the opportunity to place a foot in both camps. By way of example, taking that very cool handclap/vocal syncapation vibe as the hook, & constructing the song around it. Sprinkle a few bits of quirky cleverness over the track, & there you go. As a muso, I find their work very attractive, &, selfishly, think they should just keep going as they are. I'm not sure they'll get to where they want to be like that though.
 
(Forgive me, I didn't read many replys and got provocated, so here goes:)

WTF, Emergency is "boring PhD stuff"?!

I listened to it when I was a kid and it was powerfull experience even back then. And I still listen to it for the same reasons. Each time I get something new out of it.

Now I can totally understand if you think that way of some Miles Davis' music, I still have hard time with some parts, but I always liked Tony Williams. And the love for him has nothing to do with music education. _Nothing_. It's all about the music and how the group plays together.
 
Why didn't Tony and McLaughlin make a pop-inspired album, given the heyday of The Beatles, Crimson, Hendrix, Cream, etc.?? Perhaps because if they did, they'd be crucified by the intelligentsia of the jazz world? Or, do such musicians consider the Beatlesque pop song an inferior musical art form?

If you listen to Miles Davis Quintet with Tony on the drums and compare it to the solo stuff that he did after that there's a clear shift towards the rock music. And most of those who took the step towards fusion music back then were indeed crucified because of it by the jazz critiques back then. But I just think they made the only choice they could logically have made by fusing the stuff they hear all around them (the pop music) with the music they were used to play. They weren't traditionalists, they were innovators by nature. I don't know what they felt about The Beatles and similar popular bands, but I'm really glad they didn't start to mimic anything, they just fused music they heard and liked. Most of the stuff were improvisations on the spot anyways, that's a very fundamental difference to popular music.
 
I think we have a perfect case in point on our very boards. Check out this wonderful piece of work, & also check out the comments from myself & others. http://www.drummerworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65961
It's that old muso perspective thing getting in the way again. This band, truly fresh & highly skilled as they are, risk missing out on the recognition they (imo) rightly deserve. They can go either way from here. The uber muso/wow arrangement route, or extract some of that lovely content & expand it into a more accessible format. I think these guys really have the opportunity to place a foot in both camps. By way of example, taking that very cool handclap/vocal syncapation vibe as the hook, & constructing the song around it. Sprinkle a few bits of quirky cleverness over the track, & there you go. As a muso, I find their work very attractive, &, selfishly, think they should just keep going as they are. I'm not sure they'll get to where they want to be like that though.

I was trying to think of who this reminded me of and then I realized it was Gentle Giant.

I never didn't get pop music. I thought Mmbop was a great pop tune, which this band seemed to have done an arrangement of. You can have a pop sensibility and still be able to hear something more. One is not exclusive of the other. It's jelly beans vs. caviar, its soda pop vs 12 year old scotch.

I think the original post begs the question why do some people write great sophisticated music; but they can't write a simple pop tune? It's a fair question; but what about the opposite, why can some people write a great pop tune, but they can't write anything with real depth?
 
I was trying to think of who this reminded me of and then I realized it was Gentle Giant.

I never didn't get pop music. I thought Mmbop was a great pop tune, which this band seemed to have done an arrangement of. You can have a pop sensibility and still be able to hear something more. One is not exclusive of the other. It's jelly beans vs. caviar, its soda pop vs 12 year old scotch.

I think the original post begs the question why do some people write great sophisticated music; but they can't write a simple pop tune? It's a fair question; but what about the opposite, why can some people write a great pop tune, but they can't write anything with real depth?

I was thinking Zappa, early Godley Creme (eg. the album L) and 10cc's more adventurous moments eg. Une Nuit in Paris; the music has a similar mock opera vibe about it to me.

As for your question, I guess those at the musical mountaintop like the views and are loathe to come down while those at the foothills often don't know what's at the top of the mountain and don't care to find out, or they figure the climb isn't worth the pain ...
 
Before this goes off into too many different directions...

Any time a side man or someone who's better known as a part of a group decided to do a solo album or side project, they often encounter any one of a few problems that result in a less than spectacular album:

The person in question is so determined to do something different than what they are known for, they lose focus on the songs in favor of "look what I can do" (i.e. a pop guy makes a shread album, or a sidemen puts one song in every style of music he/she can muster up rather than a cohesive collection of songs).

They record it in bits and pieces in-between numerous tours and sessions, and prevents them from creating any cohesive vibe.

or conversely

They only have a two week window in-between session/tours, and rush through the recording process to get the whole album done in that time without spending the time and care to make a better album.

Because of budget/time restrictions, they can't assemble a "band" so they call in favors from everyone they know and convince assorted name players to all contribute one song of performance for cheap/free, and while the album may have great individual performances, the album as a whole is rather haphazard because every track has different people on it, recorded at different times in different studios.

Or, they do get one person for each instrument, but due to time/budget constraints, the parts are recorded by each person in different studios, in different parts of the world, and no one is ever in the same room at the same time, and sometimes, they never even meet. So while the songs may be great, and the performances on an individual basis are great, the album as a whole sounds sterile, and just overall lacks any kind of vibe when compared to an album by an actual "band".

Obviously, these don't apply to Tony, Elvin and such, because they put together actual bands who were in the same room.

And sometimes, despite any/all of the above circumstances, someone does create a great record.

To the other points, if someone doesn't like prog or fusion, they don't like it. No amount of musical greatness is going to change someone's opinion on it. And why should they?

As I said in another thread (that Polly turned into a 2nd thread) if we were concerned about making music for the masses, this would be "drum programming world" because we'd all be just discussing what beats we programed for the latest Debbie Gibson/Britney Spears type person.

That said, I love a lot of complex music. I'm a huge fan of Rush, Dream Theater Fates Warning and other prog. But still, a lot of junior bands in these veins write bad music, because there is a difference between writing a "good song that happens to be complex" and writing a song that is "complex for the sake of being complex". And for too many prog/fusion bands, they have a hard time telling the difference.
 
I was thinking Zappa, early Godley Creme (eg. the album L) and 10cc's more adventurous moments eg. Une Nuit in Paris; the music has a similar mock opera vibe about it to me.

As for your question, I guess those at the musical mountaintop like the views and are loathe to come down while those at the foothills often don't know what's at the top of the mountain and don't care to find out, or they figure the climb isn't worth the pain ...

I have been listening to The John Blackwell Project's latest 4ever Jia, which Paul Quinn sent out. It is a really phenomenal album with Will Lee, Paul Pesco and cameos by Esperanza Spaulding, Gregg Bissonette, Luis Conte and a host a great musicians. One of the wonderful things about it is the mix of styles: prog, smooth jazz, r and b, fusion, ballads, it's all there. I was listening to Mahavishnu's Inner World which aimed to do the same thing back in 1976. Crimson was on to that as well, a mixed and match of songs with instrumental interludes and assorted composition, of course Zappa as well. I really enjoy the mix because I am going to get tired of the prog after two songs, the fusion after two songs, the r and b after two songs. Good musicians should be able to do it all.
 
Yeah, I think someone mentioned that Tony wanted Miles to tour with The Beatles? Anyone have the details on this?

I would have loved to see Miles Davis (with Tony on drums) touring with The Beatles. That would have been a real event.
The idea was explored and quickly dismissed by Brian Epstein. Supposedly mutual acquaintance Billy Preston floated it out there under the 100% insistence of Williams.

The tour and recordings Miles DID want were the Jimi Hendrix collaborations a year later, after Williams had already departed. In fact Hendrix actually asked Miles Davis to be on an album and somehow or another that turned into a Hendrix project with Gil Evans too.

However upon hearing of this, Hendrix's incredibly shady agent Michael Jeffery shut it down, afraid that a collaboration with a jazz musician would destroy the Hendrix core base
 
I have been listening to The John Blackwell Project's latest 4ever Jia, which Paul Quinn sent out. It is a really phenomenal album with Will Lee, Paul Pesco and cameos by Esperanza Spaulding, Gregg Bissonette, Luis Conte and a host a great musicians. One of the wonderful things about it is the mix of styles: prog, smooth jazz, r and b, fusion, ballads, it's all there. I was listening to Mahavishnu's Inner World which aimed to do the same thing back in 1976. Crimson was on to that as well, a mixed and match of songs with instrumental interludes and assorted composition, of course Zappa as well. I really enjoy the mix because I am going to get tired of the prog after two songs, the fusion after two songs, the r and b after two songs. Good musicians should be able to do it all.

Checking it out on YouTube, Ken. So far it reminds me of an Aussie band in the 70s/80s called Crossfire, who I saw live a fair bit and had their debut album (great musos and their drummer Ian Bloxsom was killer). Here's an example with obvious MO influence at the intro and maybe RTF and Weather Report influences later. My fave was a really cool little funky modal number called Oddball but it's just about impossible to find anywhere now.

Like you, I've always loved eclectic bands and could never work out why most people liked bands where song after song sounded like a clone of each other, almost as though they were rewriting one song over and over until they got it right. Gigs where the band's beats, tempos, progressions, timbres, volumes and melodies are similar - song after song - bore me to tears.

Back to drummer records, I always liked Feels Good to Me by Bill Bru, even if the production was strangely patchy at times. Great title track, Back to the Beginning was really cool and Sample and Hold had some amazing moments. Billy Cobham's Spectrum had some great tunes - Stratus and Red Baron are classics - tracks that offer soul and personality rather than just great musicianship.

Damn, would have liked to have heard Jimi and Miles together - that would have been a feast.
 
Last edited:
There are those who compose music within a narrow range of what are considered the canons, or conventions of art. This was one of the main targets of critical theory, whose proponents included philosophers such as Adorno and Horkheimer. But their attack included not only the music that fell under what was deemed "popular", but more importantly the sinister machinations of the "culture industry" that produced it. So anyone who decries the "sameness" and inanity of pop songs nowadays, and/or complains that the music industry is bereft of taste, was beaten to the punch by the Frankfurt School in the 1940s.

On the other hand, there are those whose work is intentionally intended to smash through the limits imposed by traditions and canons. One example is Pierre Schaefer. As weird as it did and still sounds, Musique Concrète was the foundation for many of the recording techniques and electronic music we take for granted today. It was also the source of the concept of music as the organization of sounds not merely tones from musical "instruments", but sounds from the environment as well. However, because of the experimental nature of these musicians, not all of the concepts from this group work or are assimilated directly into the mainstream. I myself can't bring myself to sit and listen to a lot of the "New Music" I played in the 70's. But my knowledge and understanding of the history of the fringe is vital to me whenever I have to deal with popular artists who are looking to go beyond the limits of the 3-minute pop song. They are quite surprised when I mention that what they think is a new idea was actually done many decades before by some otherwise obscure, "PhD" type.

Finally, I will also agree that there are a lot of fine musicians (not just drummers) better known for their virtuosity in playing, but whose compositions I feel REALLY SUCK. I won't name names here, but everyone has their own list. None of those the OP mentioned is on my list though.

P.S. If anyone wants to diss Stewart Copeland's post-Police work, don't forget that his scoring for The Equalizer was one of the integral components that made it one of the most popular TV shows of the 80's.
 
Jazz history is inundated with numerous rebuttals as numerous drumming leaders recorded stellar music.

1. The Max Roach/ Clifford Brown recordings are among the best small group jazz recordings ever.

2. Gene Krupa never made a bad big band record, while the stuff with Anita O'Day and Roy Eldridge was absolutely superb.

3. Ditto Chick Webb recordings, and not just the ones with Ella Fitzgerald.

4. Elvin Jones released several exemplary albums as leader.

5. People might diss some of the Cobham output, but Spectrum was a really good album.

6. Every one of the Thad Jones/ Mel Lewis recordings were among the best big band recordings of their time, while Mel and Friends was IMO the best hard bop small group album of the 1970s.

7. The quintessential European big band albums of the 60s were led by Kenny Clarke and Francy Boland.

8. Say what some of you want about the Buddy Rich output, but his 1966-71 Pacific Jazz period was wonderful.

9. OK some jazz hardcores think Hamilton's a little too sterile and diss him for hanging with Diana Krall. But the Clayton/ Hamilton Jazz Orchestra was the 1990's answer to Basie.

10. Rashied Ali always recorded great music.

11.BLAKEY'S JAZZ MESSENGERS ALBUMS 1-500.

Maybe we need to expand our search a little.
 
I don't think that the issue is really whether drummers make good leaders. The issue was musicians making music that did not have appeal to non-musician friends.

I think that the idea that somehow writing a pop tune like Boys Don't Cry is somehow superior or more challenging than some of the stuff Joe Zawinul and company have done is just pure bullocks, yes. Not that I don't think that there is an art in writing a good pop tune. And folks spend years developing the craft, as Billy Strayhorn or the great Tin Pin Alley writers, Johnny Mercer, Hoagy Carmichael and later Cynthia Weil and Carole King. I remember reading an interview with Diane Warren where she talked about spending 12 hours a day, six days a week composing songs. She's a bit strange so I don't doubt that.

There is a trend that ran in bebop's propensity to criticized the notion of having to work with a singer, as Gene Krupa, Chick Webb, and Buddy had to. I don't know how true it is that the great boppers actually looked down on singers. I doubt that. But you statement about Jeff Hamilton and Diana Krall shows that it is still prevalent among some. If you want to make instrumental music, you are limiting your commercial appeal. Having a singer as a front person surely adds to appeal and could get you more radio airplay.


That kind of schism that the Frankfurt School epitomized really is not part of the history of music. All the greats wrote in a myriad of genres. The most popular 'pop' tune ever written is Beethoven's Ode to Joy. The type of thinking the posits certain types of music making as somehow superior to others is really BS.

The point I made was that often the most popular of musical expressions are influenced by the most avant-garde of musical experimentation. Look how influential Stockhausen was on Miles and The Beatles, or Debussy on Gershwin and Ellington.
 
Last edited:
The issue was musicians making music that didn't not have appeal to non-musician friends.

I wish the OP had put that under a different heading than "Accomplished Drummers Make BAD Records?".

Here are some more drummers with multiple BAD releases to their names:
Roy Haynes
Paul Motian
Peter Erskine
Jack Dejohnette
Brian Blade
Joey Baron
Jim Black
Bobby Previte
Dannie Richmond
 
I once read a review of Thomas Lang's "Something Along Those Lines" album that referred to it as "NAMM music"; that it was typical of the sort of wank music that you hear at a NAMM show.

OK, I can see that. I tend to agree with some of the others here that much of that kind of stuff is for the MUSOS, and the rest of the folks would rather have The Fray or whatever. It makes sense that it should be this way. Much like Zappa noticed, people tend to treat music the way they treat wallpaper, or the sort of magazines they have on the coffee table. It isn't there to be the focal point. It's part of the overall environment a person sets up for themselves.

Thus, a musician is as likely to have Rush or Dream Theater playing...even as background, because it helps establish the tone of things for their other activities and they are comfortable with that kind of racket going on. A non-musician is less likely to put up with it.

Also, and I forget where I heard this, but is it realistic to say that the ONLY way you can express yourself is in 17/8? I can see that as a one or two bar thing for drama's sake, or if the really bitchen groove you came up with happens to reside there (remember, nobody gives a rip that Pink Floyd's "Money" is in 7), but unless there is some soul or groove to it, it's just a bunch of technical experimentation.

Not that there's no value in that, but the fringe has earned its name, and drummers who make really technical-but-highly-unappealing albums are going to be a lot closer to that. Chances are that a drummer who needs to break away from a pop gig in order to satisfy some more creative urge already knows this.

I have heard a lot of musician dogma about sticking to your creative guns and not compromising into "pop-land", but if you're going to do that you had better crank out some quality stuff. Rush, Tool and DT get away with it because what they write could actually translate to other formats and still sound good.

I don't think that's all that easy, especially as a side activity.
 
If the world was brought up with "muso" music, would it then be accepted because people would be used to hearing that sort of stuff? I think the average person may find "muso" msuic boring simply because they grew up and absorbed other types of music such as pop. I mean, Bollywood music is huge in India, but you wouldn't catch me listening to it.
 
Back
Top