What is your opinion of this Billy Cobham review?

Zero Mercury Drummer

Senior Member
This Washington Post blogger didn't like the show much..

This is not an invitation to criticize the author, just wondering what the take is on his comments of "indulgence" and BC being too loud.

(I missed the show, but got to see Bozzio solo drumming the night before! DC is busting with drummers this month. Weckl was in town also. )

http://www.washingtonpost.com/enter...4b1482-3a82-11e4-a023-1d61f7f31a05_story.html

By Michael J. West September 12 at 3:06 PM
Fusion, that “prog” 1970s blending of rock and jazz, means either next-level artistry or next-level self-indulgence, depending on whom you ask. The kit set up on Thursday night for drummer Billy Cobham — 12 pieces, plus five cymbals, a hi-hat and at least three Yamaha octopads — dangerously suggested the latter. Cobham’s Spectrum 40 quartet was at the Howard Theatre in celebration of the drummer’s 1973 album “Spectrum,” a fusion landmark that still retains its experimental edge. This suggested the brighter interpretation. The performance at the Howard took the darker path.

Cobham was the greater part of the problem. Right out of the gate with the opening “Sphere of Influence,” he was deafeningly loud; he often subsumed guitarist Dean Brown and keyboardist Gary Husband. It continued into “Fragolino” as well, raising the question of whether a kit with two bass drums really needed so much amplification. And Cobham used both. Indeed, he often seemed hell-bent on engaging every one of the drums in each tune, playing needlessly busy and cacophonous lines. It worked well in the long break that opened “Stratus,” building a real melodic conception, but as accompaniment did not do any favors to Brown’s intricate fingerwork, or what seemed like sexy fills from Husband’s Nord keyboards.

Perhaps this was why, given solo space, Brown and Husband also went overboard. The keyboardist was a glutton on “Stratus,” Cobham’s signature tune, becoming more excessive as he went. Brown, on the closing funk jam (unnamed but sounding suspiciously like Billy Preston’s 1972 hit “Will It Go Round In Circles”), was not only indulgent but cliche, incorporating simple arpeggios that he layered with distortion to sound more elaborate, along with blues-rock licks that were all the rage in the album-rock era.


On the other hand, Ric Fierabracci held his own on a fretless electric bass. He was always audible and nearly always impressive. He had to be so on “Stratus,” whose bass line is the point (despite Husband). But Fierabracci proved his worth in the opening of “Heaven,” combining low bass throbs with pretty, guitaristic figures. “Heaven,” in fact, was the set’s highlight. Everyone, Cobham included, followed the bass’s lead into a softer, more sumptuous groove than usual, and the improvisations were tasteful and inspired. Brown, in particular, developed his solo beautifully. It was the exception that proved the rule.


Or perhaps not. Context is everything at a concert, and the vast majority of the crowd — which, unlike this writer, was old enough to remember Cobham in his “Spectrum” days — loved the show’s every moment, giving the band ovation after ovation and yelping in joy at the most decadent moments. Maybe you just had to be there.

West is a freelance writer.
 
. . . the vast majority of the crowd — which, unlike this writer, was old enough to remember Cobham in his “Spectrum” days — loved the show’s every moment . . .

Maybe this guy has never actually listened to a BC album. His drums are always mixed to the front.

However, the only time I saw BC live was in a smallish theater in 1978. Perhaps things have changed since then.
 
The one time I saw Cobham, in 1992, I had a similar experience.

Despite being a in a small intimate jazz club, Cobham's drums were tuned for, and played like, he was performing at a loud rock stadium show. I was there with numerous other drummers from my class at PIT, and we all discussed the next day how it just wasn't....good. At least, it didn't seem like the same Billy on all those classic fusion albums.
 
I recall that Mahavishnu Orchestra was known for being very loud (back when Cobham played with them) so I'm not surprised at the volume level.

Like Zappa said, "rock music critic" is the most worthless job out there.
 
I've seen BC play live and his volume was fine.. If the reviewer thought the sound was not balanced he should of at least walked around the auditorium to see if he either just had a bad seat or if the sound tech was doing a horrible job. I've seen supposedly pro sound guys crank up the kick sound so loud that it was nauseating.. and patrons had to go to the soundbooth and tell them to turn the %#!? Thing down!

As far as the playing goes I can't say but I've seeb Gary Husband play keys with Mahavishnu and he was awesome. And tasteful.. So .. Reviewers are always questionable .. Sometimes they are more interested in making a name for themselves . By being oh so crtical!
 
One mans opinion. There were probably hundreds of people there, all with an opinion too I bet.
 
I would love to say to this guy....

my man... you went to see Billy Cobham .....

this is a bit like someone going to see Kiss then writing a review that went something like

... these grown men came out in costumes with make up all over their faces .
There were these dramatic explosions and the music was way too loud.....

like.... no shit bro !!

water is wet too
 
...

The language and the phrases he uses, suggest that he is not a serious listener of music let alone, fusion.


...
 
ha ha, Cobham is Cobham. That's why I love him- he's loud, busy, and does his own thing. A lot of people used to typical lighter hitting fusions guys probably are turned off by his style, because it is rather flamboyant. But, that style is what turned people onto to him in the first place. It could also be the position in the room, or the sound guy was a drummer, therefor cranking the drums up, but it also sounds like this guy was shocked by Cobham's style, which still has it's roots firmly in the early 70's. Oh well, to each their own.
 
Well having been there and being acquainted with the reviewer I think it is more a critic's piece than anything informative. It seems he didn't like the show but that doesn't validate his commentary.

There were a lot of drums in that kit but it was Spectrum and Billy, so if you're not looking for that you're at the wrong show. I suspect he got seated in the VIP area right up front. I knew to ask for a spot somewhat back as the PA sound gets lost there against the stage where you're too far underneath the overhead speakers. It's a loud venue with a powerful (but nice) PA, so those criticisms about volume apply to anyone there (often more than this show). As to the mix, Billy was not particularly forward in the house mix, though may have been louder right up front (without the band being reinforced by the PA). That's drums! I found that Ric was actually too loud off the stage. Even though furthest from him his bass cabinet was distinct and clear off the stage as well as whatever of him was in the PA. The house mix <in the house> was good.

In terms of the players Michael only liked the one I liked least. Ric just doesn't have the fluid funky feel that the classic material calls for, but Michael doesn't know the material so may not have realized. There were a few transitional spots where Ric was the weak link. Overall the band was quite good though and were good together. I saw Dean Brown with Billy in the 80's, 90's, 00's and now. He never seemed better. Gary Husband was better and more appropriate than he was on the Spectrum 30 tour. The band was enjoying it, well into the music, and having a good night. Billy still has it, which is amazing given the demanding material and that he's in his fifth decade as a professional drummer.

Very strange is that the review doesn't even mention the show opening with a very personal Q&A with Billy talking in an extended conversation with one of DC's leading local musicians and educators. Apparently that was the first time Billy ever did that for a concert audience (as well as the first of this series with the jazz musicians playing the Howard) and it was really informative and fun. How could one not mention that unique and personal interaction inaugurating a new series of them in a review for a local publication?

The reviewer tends to go to the clubs and to more traditional stuff, which seems to be his comfort zone. That's fine, but don't pan a good show because you are predisposed against the material and concept - and don't criticize characteristics of the venue as if the band had anything to do with those. I like the venue BTW, though I expect it to be at rock levels. It is a huge space.

And that "closing funk jam (unnamed but sounding suspiciously like Billy Preston&#8217;s 1972 hit &#8220;Will It Go Round In Circles&#8221;)" ? Red Baron! One of the three sections of Spectrum they did play... and the one song Billy has probably included in nearly every solo show he's done.

The reviewer is also of the traditional school of journalistic criticism where he wants to be opinionated and will always include some critical element, even in a favorable review. That's the DC and WaPost mode. Mike Joyce, who was the Post's long term reviewer when Michael was likely a kid reading those newspaper reviews, was certainly the local curmudgeon and in all likelihood never in two decades (give or take ?) gave any concert an enthusiastic review. I saw another of the local semi-professional (or more) jazz writer/reviewers at this show too. I'm not sure he wrote anything, but would be curious if he had the same take. I doubt it.
 
Did any non-musician every really enjoy fusion? Most of it was a bit indulgent overblown and showy. Of course being a young drummer in 1975 I loved loved loved the stuff. No matter how much I tried to share it with friends and family no one ever dug it. Some appreciated the virtuosity but not many.

In this case it seems like the critic described the gist of BC's playing fairly well - his opinion of BC's playing probably rings true for people who just like good music and aren't impressed with virtuosity.

The critic described it well but was short on the background and knowledge one would expect from a music critic. Maybe you did have to be there to get it. Noisy weird stuff to those who where not into that scene, manna from heaven for those who where.
 
Looks like the age old problem of a reviewer who dislikes the genre s/he is reviewing.

He had a more pleasant experience at the show than I would have, of this I am certain, but I wouldn't presume to write a newspaper review about it.

The Kiss analogy is a good one.

Is he going to review a Miley Cyrus show and express disdain about how much it panders to the sensibilities of preteen girls?

Or go see Morrissey and say that his band is tight, but he needs to get over himself?

Yeesh. Who was this written for?
 
Back
Top