I see the AAJ writer says the Celluloid order is "right," but doesn't explain how he knows that. Did he ask McLaughlin?Originally Posted by musicislife
I see the AAJ writer says the Celluloid order is "right," but doesn't explain how he knows that. Did he ask McLaughlin?
Johnny Mac is the man.
The original godfather of fusion guitar and still searching....pushing forward.
What other guitarists from that era are doing that??
no tunes, no dynamics, no nosebone
I think John McLaughlin has had experience playing lead chord style in old standards from the 30's and 40's. He was a fan of Django Reinhardt. Although Django played chord lead style quite exceptionally different than Johnny Smith and Eddie Lang or anyone due to the damage brought to the fingers of his left hand. Farlowe, Kessel....Barnes and Les Paul ...I'm certain they all played chord style melody ....not choosing to do it all the time...but they all developed amazing single note improvisation by jamming to what we know as "old standards" and they developed in all the keen and secret areas of playing outside the melody . I believe a good portion of John McLaughlin's development was exposing himself to the same concept of playing as the aforementioned.
He hardly reveals it on his albums and I've only heard him play "My Foolish Heart" from The Heart Of Things. And he is using an effect on the guitar which I wouldn't have chosen.,but I'm certain that he could play some of the Farlowe and Smith arrangements with no trouble . If I were to sit down with John McLaughlin and ask him to teach me a Bucky Pizzarelli chord style arrangement....from the early 70's....he would know the fingering ...he would have a quicker understanding of how to play it in a few minutes. It would be much less time and study for him. He worked with several guitarists that were more Latin based and he studied music from India...but I believe he has a background in Swing Jazz and Progressive Jazz. I'm sure he could display a different side to his playing if he wanted to.
You read exactly what I read. Ask Kelman to reach out to the guy. I know journalistic standards are fairly low, but I've gotta assume that he wouldn't have stated it without verifying it first. Fwiw, I doubt McLaughlin would remember at this point, or even care. His opinion of Alan Douglas isn't terribly high.
Walter Kolosky has written one or two books about McLaughlin, but I haven't gotten around to finding them yet.
So then, chances are he knows what he's talking about.
He's a huge fanboy, but he's done his research.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"And this is the chorus.....or perhaps it's a bridge...."
The two MO concerts I saw were probably the most intense musical experiences I've had as an audience member. Devotion, Bitches Brew, IASW, Jack Johnson, Shakti, Friday Night in SF, Electric Guitarist, too many to list, incredible. His playing and compositions are still excellent. I haven't enjoyed his tone for a long while now. I wish there would be a MO reunion tour. RTF, Brand X. The time is right.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have the 1972 Douglas US vinyl and the running order is as pb2015 states.
I also checked Discogs. It shows that the album opener was Dragon Song on all versions of the release until 1984 when it was released by Celluloid with a different running order (on a Netherlands copy the second side running order is changed by putting Sirens after Purpose of When).
Even though, at the bottom of the review page the release date is shown as 1970, Celluloid is the label that is listed at the bottom of the page of the review. So it appears to me that the reviewer has a Celluloid vinyl copy which, rather than restoring the original running order, is actually the beginning of the incorrect running order versions.
My fave from McL, but....
This album is probably in the top 10 "most tampered with" in regards to its original form
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicts to complete nutcases.
First of all, your reasoning implies that the reviewer is a dope who believes that the running order on his copy is correct simply because it is the one on his copy. That is simplistic thinking, at best. There could be many reasons for the inconsistencies, and it wouldn't be the first time that a US record company has screwed things up (even with the very first issue!!!) - especially one as small and insignificant as Douglas. I was going by what the reviewer said, and you'll notice he even states "don't ask". Since he's written a couple of books about Johnny Mac (one within the last couple of years), I assume he's reachable and would be willing to state the reasons for his findings.
In other words (and I'm well aware of the reputation of the membership of boards like this and Hoofy's to do so first before anything else), DON'T shoot the messenger.
It's funny how when you hear things alters one's perception. I've always thought RTF was the "slick" fusion when compared to MO, but as a teen into mostly metal in the '80s I gravitated to that raw, edgy playing on MO's first two albums. I'm not familiar with Iceberg or Energit, but will give them a listen. I should also revisit RTF.
Mahavishnu Orchestra is my favourite fusion band. I totally enjoy all of their releases, except Inner World. I'm not sure if this has been mentioned but the book, "Power, Passion and Beauty: The Story of the Legendary Mahavishnu Orchestra" by Walter Kolosky is an excellent read. It gives you a real feel of the era of the band. I'd say John McLaughlin is generally treated in the press as one of the most innovative and technically adept guitarist of the 1970s. So, just about right.
Last edited by mozo-pg; 08-11-2016 at 11:58 AM.
He has definitely earned his place as godfather of fusion playing. When Miles Davis asked him to join his band he wanted a player that does not sound like a “normal” jazz guitarist. His quick and ragged scale playing style was and still is highly inventive. I prefer his acoustic playing so. I love Spaces and his duo playing with Corryell. The Shakti records are my favorite ones. His playing style fits perfectly with Indian music IMO. I saw him only once with Remember Shakti and it was awesome. On the other hand he does not swing at all. His playing of jazz standards is always a bit angular. Same is true for Al Di Meola btw.
Zappa on Mc Laughlin: "A person would be a moron not to appreciate McLaughlin's technique. The guy has certainly found out how to operate a guitar as if it were a machine gun. But I'm not always enthusiastic about the lines I hear or the ways in which they're used. I don't think you can fault him, though, for the amount of time and effort it must have taken to play an instrument that fast. I think anybody who can play that fast is just wonderful. And I'm sure 90% of teenage America would agree, since the whole trend in the business has been 'faster is better'."[
Dieter Moebius : "Art people like things they don’t understand!"
I saw John live too, about six or seven years ago. Without over exaggeration, it was transcendent. One of the best concerts I've seen in the last 10 years. It was in a small church and everyone has an excellent view of the band. John surrounded himself with pedigree musicians who complimented John's virtuoso playing.
A fine post, Mr. Kelman!
I fully agree...underrated.
The slick RTF came in later IMHO. The earlier albums have a much different sound...the first two don't have guitar, for one thing. And yes, even Hymn Of The Seventh Galaxy with Bill Connors (the first one with electric guitar) was much rawer than what followed. Where Have I Known You Before, the first one with Di Meola, is in a similar vein- it's No Mystery where they got less raw IMHO.
Last edited by JJ88; 01-12-2017 at 03:50 PM.
John, did you ever get your hands on that Montreux box set that was available for a short time? It included 17 CDs of Mcaughlin performing in many different musical situations over the years. I wanted that set so bad, but it cost something like 250-300 dollars even before it was sold out.
For some reason I managed to post this in the Zappa thread - here it is in the right context
I have two perspectives on McLaughlin. The first is based on my early experiences with MO. I was a kid into prog and hard rock, and I was at a friend's house arguing about who was heavier, Black Sabbath or King Crimson. My friend's dad came in, an old hippie, and he said "I can settle this, there's someone who is heavier than both". We stared bug-eyed at the cover of the record he brought out - Birds of Fire. He put it on - one of the mid-tempo tunes, and it absolutely blew my mind. The stately, heavy, transcendent progression of arpeggiated, electric 12-string, the fierce unison runs of intricate melody, the absolutely unfathomable drumming. I was sold. Listened tons to the classic MO albums in my teens, and progressed to Shakti and many of his collaborations. I admire his guitar playing immensely.
But the interesting thing is that time has not fared well with MO in my opinion. That's my second perspective. I've become quite the fusion connoiseur over the years, and going back to MO albums is never as satisfying as going back to say, Weather Report. MO is visceral, raw, transgressive even. But both compositionally and playing-wise the albums seem a little immature compared to Weather Report especially. WR is my favorite fusion outfit, and Zawinul and Shorter were absolutely genius composers on those records, and their soloing was very self-less, always serving the composition. With MO it feels more like - ok, we have a cool progression or groove going here, let's burn some rubber with our instruments. And the more ambitious compositions, especially on Visions, seem a little haphazardly put together. I also have a serious problem with the sloppiness of the guitar/violin unison runs - both timing and intonation are often way out there.
So - childhood heroes, and McLaughlin is a one of a kind guitar innovator. You cannot possibly overrate him. But MO themselves - not quite as timeless as Weather Report at least. Is my take.
Great player.The only side of his playing i don't dig is when he tries for more straight-ahead stuff...he just doesn't have a feel for that kind of playing imo, but his generation of players moving away from that idiom was a key moment in jazz guitar and gave us plenty of great music.
In what way did I shoot the messenger?
The ONLY thing I implied was the possibility of a mistake. If you wish to run with my comment into other territory about the man's intelligence, that's you putting words in my mouth and nothing more. I was making an observation based on my personal experience and, most importantly, on available information. I postulated and said "appears to me..."
On the other hand, what you're implying, and asking me to not question, is that all of the album's releases for the first 14 years of it's existence had an "incorrect" running order. So since stranger things have happened, I'll play along for a minute. If that's the case, I'm assuming that the definition of "incorrect" is that McLaughlin would have, for some reason, swapped the sides. But whether it is that or some other technical/manufacturing reason, all I can ask is, "So what?"
I have been listening to this on vinyl since I bought it in 1972. For me it's "side one" or "side two." That's how the material is blocked out. Some CDs have side one starting the disc. Some CDs have side two starting the disc. When I listen to the vinyl, I don't always play both sides, or if I'm playing both sides, I don't always play side one first. For me the music works perfectly well either way. So the bottom line is that the "running order," in terms of a CD, is not relevant in any way for me.
If we were talking about scrambling the individual track order over the entire playlist, then I would be concerned. But we're not. We're talking about "side one" or "side two." With this particular album, I don't understand the effort to make this into a big deal. From where I'm standing, it's not.
Of course, this is such subjective territory, YMMV...and I'm fine with that.
I think musicislife was correct earlier in mentioning that McLaughlin unfortunately disowned the album and doesn't care about it, so there probably isn't any "correct" order.
Do you have an original 1970 pressing? I have seen running orders mysteriously change between 1st and 2nd pressings. Small indies were quite lame back in those days.
McLaughlin did not put the album together. Alan Douglas did -- even connecting pieces of music that weren't meant to be connected. This is why Mac was disgusted with Douglas.
The switches you refer to on CD aren't simple side 1 for side 2 exchanges, if indeed they are switches. I don't personally care either. Someone asked, and I tried to be helpful by offering up what I had recently learned.
If anybody wants to find out more about the how's and why's, they can contact Kolosky.
I have similar mixed feelings about MO. In a way, I absolutely adore that they could be on the verge of a train wreck at any time. And there are times when I will quite literally laugh out loud at how utterly mind boggling McLaughlin could be in both thought and execution or even attempted execution.For some reason I managed to post this in the Zappa thread - here it is in the right context
I have two perspectives on McLaughlin. The first is based on my early experiences with MO. I was a kid into prog and hard rock, and I was at a friend's house arguing about who was heavier, Black Sabbath or King Crimson. My friend's dad came in, an old hippie, and he said "I can settle this, there's someone who is heavier than both". We stared bug-eyed at the cover of the record he brought out - Birds of Fire. He put it on - one of the mid-tempo tunes, and it absolutely blew my mind. The stately, heavy, transcendent progression of arpeggiated, electric 12-string, the fierce unison runs of intricate melody, the absolutely unfathomable drumming. I was sold. Listened tons to the classic MO albums in my teens, and progressed to Shakti and many of his collaborations. I admire his guitar playing immensely.
But the interesting thing is that time has not fared well with MO in my opinion. That's my second perspective. I've become quite the fusion connoiseur over the years, and going back to MO albums is never as satisfying as going back to say, Weather Report. MO is visceral, raw, transgressive even. But both compositionally and playing-wise the albums seem a little immature compared to Weather Report especially. WR is my favorite fusion outfit, and Zawinul and Shorter were absolutely genius composers on those records, and their soloing was very self-less, always serving the composition. With MO it feels more like - ok, we have a cool progression or groove going here, let's burn some rubber with our instruments. And the more ambitious compositions, especially on Visions, seem a little haphazardly put together. I also have a serious problem with the sloppiness of the guitar/violin unison runs - both timing and intonation are often way out there.
So - childhood heroes, and McLaughlin is a one of a kind guitar innovator. You cannot possibly overrate him. But MO themselves - not quite as timeless as Weather Report at least. Is my take.
But there is just no way as I age and appreciate many different aspects of musical thinking and discipline that I can square with something like McLaughlin's solo on "Dawn." I almost view this as somewhat indicative of how little the average person who thought he was listening to something highbrow back when that album appeared actually understood about music. That solo is Exhibit A of having not the faintest clue about a little something often misunderstood or even ignored; musicianship.
Just my 2c.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks