Emanem 4088
This recording of three fine pianists struggling to work together is very uneven. I’ve mentioned elsewhere that I have a great deal of respect for Keith Tippett as a solo pianist, but find him too "bossy" as an ensemble player. Actually, however, he’s proven in the past, and again here, that he’s capable of nice duets with Howard Riley. Riley is not (usually) quite so bossy in this way, and is what might be called a good counterpuncher. While he doesn’t as often initiate the attack as either of his compadres here, he is capable of cogent commentary on pretty much anything that’s going on around him. So, he and Tippett mostly get along pretty well on Another Part of the Story, just as they have in the past. In addition, Riley’s support of Tilbury (when the latter is allowed by the others to take to the lead) is generally pretty cogent. But one or another pianist’s desire to turn up-tempo sections into Cecil Taylor mimicry (plus piano preparations) or slow, meditative material into versions of hypnotic Bartokian adagios mostly doesn't work at all. I like the second cut, "Equanimity," with its chordal choral center surrounded on each side by glittering arpeggios. And there are lovely bits to be found within each of the other seven improvised pieces. But there are also nasty outbursts of style-conflict and miscommunication that pop up all over the recording. Tippett will break into some gospel riffing while everybody else is gently scrapping a string or two with paper clips; a Feldman-style passage is overtaken by a Ganelin-style waltz. I also think listeners may sometimes be distracted from the central story by instances of needlessly showy chops displays. I like a cutting contest as much as the next guy, but in a Cagean work? Whatever. It’s my view, in any case, that each of these musicians can be heard to much better effect on many other recordings.
Walter Horn
I covered this disc for Cadence awhile back & came to pretty much the same conclusion as Uncle Walto. Tilbury seems the odd man out to me much of the time & there’s a lot of feather ruffling/puffery going on. “Bartokian”...hmm, I like it.
Posted by: derek at May 18, 2004 6:39 AMWalter, nice, thoughtful review. I was expecting something much more lacerating, to be honest--I thought you had a big slam on tap--but your specifics ring true for me, and this despite the fact that my overall impression of the album is more positive. When I first heard this termed a fiasco--I believe Jon called it that a few weeks ago here--I wondered what I was missing; I thought perhaps the reference was to something extramusical, like egos clashing or a fight breaking out because one of them swiped some piano preparations from someone else (the bizarre catalog of these on the label made me think they were taking inventory, or at least competing in the "outrageousness" of their toys). This really is a Riley/Tippett show--to my ears it seems very close to their Interchange, which I've recently gotten but listened to just once-- with Tilbury consigned to applying decorative spangles around the edges. And for my tastes there are also too many lush, Ferrante-and-Teicheresque moments. Still, I've found it odd that this album has gotten such divergent critical reactions, with excoriations along with appearances on year-end tops lists. Do you think this was because some Tilbury partisans saw this as a big step backwards for him into more staid improvisational territory? Like maybe by agreeing to participate he was being something of a sellout, or even a tushieface?
Posted by: William Lawless at May 18, 2004 6:59 AMThanks for the comments, gents. I was afraid that the slightness of these remarks helped explain why they never made it (I don't think) into the pages of STN.
As for the extra-musical environs of the release and what Tilbury's inner circle may have been muttering at the time, never having been initiated into these sorts of mysteries, I'm probably not the best person to ask.
BTW, I like the Ferrante & Teicher comparison. Very apt, IMO.
Posted by: walto at May 18, 2004 9:39 AMI like to hear more "fiasco" of that sort in the future.
One of the rare improvised multi-piano records that I've liked to listen to more than once.
And, maybe, the only chance we will ever have to listen to Tilbury in a more "muscular" context than usual (to quote some critic speaking about something completely different: " it isn't pretty, but isn't it compulsive?"). To discover that he can perfectly compete with the boys on their own ground was a great moment.
I'm ready to produce the Riley-Tippet-Tilbury next record!
I remember you having liked this one, LeMo. BTW, do you know the Crispell/Graewe duo set on Leo? I'll take that's one of my favorite multi-piano releases--I especially love the microtonal stuff.
Posted by: walto at May 18, 2004 11:10 AMI haven't heard the Graewe/Crispell pair-up, but didn't I read in a few places that it, likewise, was less than a success? Not that that matters, of course, but it makes me wonder if multi-pianation is an especially ear-of-the-beholder kind of deal. Or that when it comes to piano teamings, there's a greater temptation to attempt odd-duck combinations (Mary Lou Williams and Cecil Taylor being paradigmatic). BTW, Walter, or anyone--any thoughts on the Crispell/Schweitzer duo CD that since I read Jurek's gush on AMG I haven't been able to find on offer anywhere?
I'm listening to Graewe's solo Concert San Francisco 1995 (Music and Arts) right now, and it seems like a one-man version of Another Part of the Story, one much better told, IMO...
Posted by: William Lawless at May 18, 2004 12:50 PMI don't know the Graewe/ Crispell cd but I have The Crispell/ Schweitzer who is close to the best thing than both players have ever done.
Multi piano playing is common in classical music.
In jazz it's more rare.
There was a band here in belgium who reunited four pianists playing impro & composed music called "Le Bureau des pianistes".
They have done few excellent CDs.
Cecil Taylor/ Mary Lou Williams is certainly a total failure. A real "fiasco" for real thi time.
Even though my overall opinion of the disc is higher than Walter's, that's a damn good review.
Posted by: Captain Hate at May 18, 2004 4:44 PMTotally unrelated, but just heard from Nate that Elvin Jones has died. RIP
Posted by: dan warburton at May 18, 2004 9:58 PMTotally related.
Posted by: Michael Schaumann at May 18, 2004 10:06 PMMaybe not unrelated :
I've just received Fred van Hove's last solo, "Spraak & Roll" a double CD released on his own label WIM. It's excellent !
LeMo, I think you should definitely pick up Crispell/Graewe (if it's still available). Best two-piano thing since Stockhausen's "Mantra" IMHO. I predict you'll LOVE it!
Posted by: walto at May 20, 2004 5:55 AMNever too late to thanks a good benefactor. I bought few days ago in second hand shop that Crispell/Graewe record and, yes Walto, I LOVE it. Certainly a masterpiece on his own.
Thanks again for the recommandation.
He, he, Don't know what happen with the posting, but it's quite spectacular. Aniway, Walto, you've been praise has many time as you deserve!
Heu, somebody can help, maybe?
My pleasure, LeMo. So glad you like it.
BTW, Santa Gokhan gave me a copy of the Schweitzer/Crispell for Xmas. Though I've been enjoying it, I have to say I like the Crispell/Graewe more, probably because there's more rhythmic diversity there--not so many 4/4 bars filled with 16th notes (and, of course, the Graewe/Crispell has all those cool microtones!)
But for those who'd like to hear "new Bartok" pieces improvised on the spot--it's certainly hard to beat Schweitzer/Crispell!
Posted by: walto at January 30, 2005 5:39 AM.................................................. © 2003 - 2006 bagatellen ..................................................