You may think you’ve heard Evan Parker with just about every sort of ensemble by now (from string orchestra to jet engine) but, at least so far as I know, Alder Brook is his first recording with a wind quintet. It’s dynamite. September Winds consists of Peter A. Schmid (bass cl., contrabass cl., contrabass sax & taragot); Hans Anliker (trb.); Jurg Solthurnmann (alto & sop. sax); and Reto Senn (cl., bass cl. & taragot). The disc, recorded live at the highly resonant Kirche Erlenbach, is naturally lush and enveloping, and the music is unfailingly gorgeous. There are eleven improvised pieces here, ranging from about 2.5 minutes to over eleven, but the inspiration, perhaps because of the magnificent aural environment, perhaps because of the aggregation of tremendous talent (solar flares that day? blessings by the glorious god Shamash? something they shared at breakfast?) never flags. Each player shifts seamlessly from rushing river to racing skiff and back (and which is the master here, river or boat?) Those (like me) who swoon at each new instantiation of Parker’s Impossible Soprano Whirlygig will get a taste of this in the perfect environs for it; those sick to death of these (perhaps mildly Liberacian) displays will be glad to hear that this one lasts only about four minutes. Around it, one will discover excruciatingly exquisite chorales, breathtaking toccatas, killer passacaglias, and one concerto for trombone and click-popping mechanism. It is, to my apparently not-so-jaded-after-all sensibilities, a remarkable achievement—as if one had stumbled upon the Julliard Quartet improvising Carter’s 6th while the master was furtively, hurriedly trying to write it all down. Parker is at the very top of his game here, but he’s not blowing any of his compadres away on Alder Brook. Each artist had that one day he’d been dreaming about all his life until then: the day when every passage danced like a thousand butterflies…and there were somehow all these other species of beautiful butterflies nearby that understood just what his thousand would do next and where there too—not waiting or even anticipating, but engaging, circling, leading, following.
OK. Inept and unworthy hyperbole finished. If you buy one disc this year, etc.
Walter Horn
Hey, you're pulling out the stops for this one. I think you've picked the wrong disc for it (it's nice, but even in terms of Parker releases this year I'm plumping for _Chicago Tenor Duets_) but it's always nice to see a little enthusiasm, especially from a legendary Mr Critical like yourself!
Posted by: nate at December 5, 2003 7:44 AMYeah, this one absolutely blows me away. I think, FWIW, Mr. Parker has had at least one disc on my end-of-year faves list every year since 1998.
Query: has Evan Parker ever WRITTEN a piece of music? I have the sense that he's a 100% instrumentalist/improvisor, with no compositions to his credit. (Mr. Dunmall would do well, IMHO, to emulate Parker in this regard.)
Posted by: walto at December 5, 2003 8:24 AMCount me as a fan of the kinder, more laudatory Uncle Walto. Though I am wondering if he’s been dipping into the holiday egg nog/candy stash as a source of his good cheer. And I’m still among the admirers of the prickly pear species of Horn cactus.
Interesting question about Parker’s composer credits. Maybe something on his electroacoustic ECMs?
Sorry lads, but this album did nothing for me whatsoever. The fault, dear Brutus, etc etc..
Posted by: dan warburton at December 7, 2003 9:30 PMAs I've said many times, I find these kinds of disagreements fascinating, if also sort of dispiriting.
I mean, you take Dan and me. In some ways, very similar background and training (though I'm about ten years older). Both did conservatory time. Both play as well as write about music. We've listened to an awful lot of the same sort of stuff for the past umpteen years. But I say this record is the shiznits, and he doesn't like it at all. I've already hinted that Dan's 40 faves of all time, had only one or two discs on it that would make any similar list of mine. Most of the others wouldn't be on a top 500 list.
Still, I read and enjoy Dan's always well-wrought and informative (unlike my own) prose, because, well, who else are we supposed to read? But, as I've said on several occasions, there doesn't seem to be much point to all this reviewing and reading reviews business--unless you're lucky enough to find somebody with the same approximate taste in almost everything. In a way, I think we write for soul-mates as well as read in hopes of finding them.
That's why I (again, sorry, Derek) like the idea of giant reviewer preference databases. Music enjoyment needs a Bill James type.
Hey, Mone?!
Posted by: walto at December 8, 2003 4:30 AMOkay Walt, I’m sold ;) Let’s make a collective New Year’s resolution to design a database for Bags. First of its kind most likely & a beast that will certainly trump the rickety & bloated animal that the AMG is turning into (tongue lodged only partly in cheek here).
I’m still wary of the review as primarily ‘consumer guide.’ I read them mainly for entertainment and to keep abreast of what’s out there. Phrases like “certain to be at the top of many year end lists” don’t do much for me. In this respect I agree with Walt. A summary statement like that isn’t going to part crisp bills from my billfold if the reviewer’s tastes stray far from my own. And if a review’s reasonably well written, a reviewer’s biases should float easily to the surface of the prose. It’s more important to me ‘why’ a reviewer came to the conclusion that he or she did rather than the conclusion itself. That’s where creative description comes in (the key element of a review IMHO).
For example, I’ve not heard BLACK WATER or BLOOD SUTRA yet, but my familiarity with Rudresh Mahanthappa and Vijay Iyer coupled with Walt’s and Nate’s (& others) praise of the discs has me wanting to hear both. I’m reasonably sure I’ll be pleased with each when I do. The confidence comes because both Walt and Nate have made it clear on several occasions why they feel the way they do.
.................................................. © 2003 - 2006 bagatellen ..................................................