According to Rick Lopez’s indispensable William Parker GIGography the bassist has been performing with Fred Anderson and Hamid Drake as a unit since the late 90s, but until recently none of the results were available in stores. Eremite steps in and stoppers the commercial gap with this two-disc digipack of a concert by the trio taped in Vermont in late ’04. Is wait to hear these three working collaborative magic in sliver platter form worth it? No surprise to the faithful, the short answer is that it most certainly is.
The first disc comprises a single 44-minute piece that opens to the quiet click of Drake’s rims. Parker’s amplified bull fiddle soon joins the drummer and Anderson’s fulsome tenor arrive close behind. The line voiced by the leader isn’t that far removed from the standard Fred phraseology, at least on the surface, but it’s an argot so tractable and visceral that harping on the presence of ample precedence seems both petty and pointless. There’s something comfortingly methodical in the trio’s playing, particularly in the case of Parker and Anderson who share a tendency to gravitate toward highly personal caches of pet progressions. The robust linear thrust of their improvisations, while habitual, fleshes the music with a heavy carapace of Soul.
Ostinato asides abound in the maze of Parker’s fervent plucks. His solo toward the mid-point of the first disc is full of bobbing clusters that dance off the strings in plump passels. Drake punctuates sparingly until another vampish groove hardens and Anderson returns, less animated than before, but no less rhythmically-attuned in his articulations. Parker’s tone congeals into a thick salve, coating the bottom bracket of the trio’s sound and shading the spaces between Drake’s rolling syncopations. Another acceleration in tempo and the three are soon sprinting along again at a raised clip, one that disperses into a protracted forum for Drake’s polyrhythmic expertise as sticks blur and a barrage of beats rain down from his kit. The percussion clouds part and the trio turns pensive. Drake wields wisking brushes, Parker tugs another corpulent line and Anderson blows slow and somber phrases that preface an the impending resolution that feels more like a case of opportune adjournment than clear-cut consensual dénouement.
The second disc contains the final two thirds of the concert parsed into three tracks. Anderson opens the action acapella, blowing arpeggiated variations on a recognizable blues-structured riff for the better share of five minutes. The piece expands with the entrance of Parker and Drake and the three alight for another epic expedition in rhythmically-responsive improvisation. Bass and drums dominate the next half dozen minutes locking and releasing on what reads like an atlas of smoothly morphing grooves. Episodes for Parker’s tightly threaded hummingbird bow, dense freer form trio interplay and pockets of hard finger-popping funk ensue as Drake calibrates his sticks to scrolling checklist of shifting meters and undulating beats.
The distances between the signposts sometimes stretch to indulgently lengthy spans, but the three never let the music devolve into circumlocutory tail-chasing. On the second track Parker sets down his bass and switches to the nagaswaram, his nasally muezzin tones overlapping with Anderson’s tapered tenor pitches to create some surprisingly adroit and lyrical harmonies reinforced by the trance-inducing pulse of Drake’s palpitating frame drum. Again, the trip suffers a shade from overly-ambitious mileage, but Parker proves a minor revelation on his double-reed, convincingly adept at working within its timbral confines and peripherally-skilled at prompting the saxophonist out of his comfort zone of stock phrases and patterns. The disc’s final piece finds the three players occupying similar rhythmically-infused space with some of the finest and most nuanced playing of the entire set. An inevitable ramp up by Parker and Drake, goads Anderson toward more booting saxophonics, but once again the end arrives with a dispersive sigh, not a declamatory bang.
Long form extemporization is one of the watch-phrases of free jazz. Numerous are the ensembles that stretch their material beyond the point of prudence, erring on the side of lassitude-heavy surplus when communal economy would serve their purposes far better. Anderson, Parker and Drake have the praxis of organic improv down to a naturalistic science. Together they largely sidestep the pratfalls of needless loquacity, turning in a generous concert that reflects their shared exalted status and points to a partnership possessing no portents of growing stale.
~ Derek Taylor
Posted by derek on September 13, 2005 12:11 PMSounds nice 'n' all, and I almost ganked it from the Kim's used bin the other day, but reading your review has about clinched it: I just don't think I need one more Fred Anderson CD in my life, particularly not one where the first disc is a single epic track. More and more each day I'm becoming more of a jittery, iPod-shuffle kinda guy; I just ain't got that kinda time.
Posted by: pdf at September 13, 2005 3:22 PMWord. I went through a similar experience after spending time with Fred's 2nd Delmark album, a crisis of faith where I wondered if he was starting to tap out & resort to the perpetual retread. Back Together Again brought me back on board, particularly the piece, I think it's "Lama Khyenno," where he probes that deep tonal groove. The reach of feeling there almost made me wish Drake would set down his frame drum and clam up... almost. This one's nothing radically new when all's said & done, just the old tried & true reconstituted & shored up into a very enjoyable package. For me & I'm guessing a lot of others, that's more'n enough.
The review above is me frontin' the protracted MAP prose style. Speaking of Mr. Parker, maybe it's just me, but you & he should kiss & make-up. You've both got far better things to do than volley canny invectives back & forth.
Posted by: derek at September 13, 2005 4:11 PMThe Camp Derek Accords.
Posted by: Jessse at September 13, 2005 4:31 PMWell, I found the duo with Drake a major disappointment, so.....
Posted by: ND at September 13, 2005 4:45 PM..... we disagree? Nothing new there ;) When did it switch from minor to "major", Nate?
Camp David's track record trumps Camp Derek's by a solid mile. Jesse, you in for Mssr. Mould on the 28th? And how 'bout the Brötz and Evan Parker/Mark Sanders gigs next month?
Posted by: derek at September 13, 2005 6:05 PMFunny; I found Back At The Velvet Lounge to be the most satisfying Anderson disc since Quartet Vol. 2, certainly better than On The Run. And the duets disc bored me comatose...agree with Nate that it's a major disappointment, and a very minor album.
Posted by: pdf at September 13, 2005 6:34 PMIt switched one way when I decided to be nice--I wrote a review calling it "lightweight" & then decided at the last minute to change it to "middleweight", which is how it appeared in print. It's not a terrible CD, but it's a total so-what of an album.
Posted by: ND at September 13, 2005 6:45 PMkey words in the review are "the faithful". I'm no Anderson completist, so the recommendation probably doesn't apply to me. When I hear that Fred has a new recording combo that involves a shift in instrumentation, bone herhaps, I'll be more inclined to pick up another of his discs. Anyway, I put his music in the same predictable camp as David Ware's, although the Anderson/Drake/Parker trio I heard live at Earshot a few years back knocked my dick in my watchpocket. That show was exciting.
Posted by: al at September 13, 2005 10:57 PMDerek
As stated last year on another bbs, I dug the duo, the Tibetan mantram duet also my fave. But that's as much a shared lineage practice with Hamid thing, as it is a strictly musical appreciation, for me.
Down with Mould if my procrastinating self hasn't lost out to what is surely a sell out homecoming gig?
What is the venue for Botz & Evan/Sanders, respectively? The latter pulls me more...
Best
Jesse
Is Anderson's tenor really "fulsome"?
Does it really sound offensively flattering/insincere?
Or is this the venial mistake - one common in music criticism - of using the word to mean "full".
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fulsome&db=*
Posted by: Anonymous pedant at September 14, 2005 5:27 AM“knocked my dick in my watchpocket”- gotta remember that one, Namor, good stuff!
Jesse, I haven’t shelled bills on tix for Bob yet either. It’s S.R.O. so hopefully there won’t be a problem with the box office running dry. If you want I can put four of ‘em on the plastic for payback at a later date ($12 each w/ a couple buck surcharge apiece from the tix company). Lemme know.
Info on the Brötz and EP gigs below (thanks to James L. & Scott H., respectively). The latter shows are part of this year’s Minnesota Sur Seine Fest celebrating the ever-effulgent Paris/Twin Cities improv nexus. Full happenings at: http://www.surseine.com/schedule.html
Peter Brötzmann / Nasheet Waits
Minneapolis College of Arts & Design 612.874.3700
Thursday, Oct 13
9:30 pm
Native Drum Group from MN
Left for Dead:
Barney Bush: vocal
Tony Hymas: keyboards
Evan Parker: tenor & soprano saxophones
Edmund Tate Nevaquaya: flute, singing, drum
Merle Tendoy: singing, drum
Jean-Francois Pauvros: guitar
Geraldine Barney: singing
Mark Sanders: drums
Wednesday, Oct 19, 8pm @ McNally Smith College of Music, St. Paul, $12 advance, $15 door
19 Exchange Street East
Anthony Cox & Mark Sanders duo
Fat Kid Wednesdays Invites Evan Parker
EP: tenor & soprano saxophones
Michael Lewis: tenor, alto & soprano saxophones
Adam Linz: double bass
JT Bates: drums
Sunday, Oct 23, 4pm @ St Paul Chamber Hall, $15 advance, $18 door
Huss Music Room Third Floor, Hamm Building, 408 St. Peter Street
Sorry for the semantic confusion AP. I intended “fulsome” to connote healthy or abundant, aligning w/ definition #3 of the word over at dictionary.com, but it looks like they note a usage problem over there. Probably should’ve chosen a different adjective to avoid any potential imbroglios.
Posted by: derek at September 14, 2005 6:14 AMDerek's not wrong, but it's a word to use carefully: see Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: ful·some
Pronunciation: 'ful-s&m
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English fulsom copious, cloying, from full + -som -some
1 a : characterized by abundance : COPIOUS b : generous in amount, extent, or spirit c : being full and well developed
2 : aesthetically, morally, or generally offensive
3 : exceeding the bounds of good taste : OVERDONE
4 : excessively complimentary or flattering : EFFUSIVE
- ful·some·ly adverb
- ful·some·ness noun
usage The senses shown above are the chief living senses of fulsome. Sense 2, which was a generalized term of disparagement in the late 17th century, is the least common of these. Fulsome became a point of dispute when sense 1, thought to be obsolete in the 19th century, began to be revived in the 20th. The dispute was exacerbated by the fact that the large dictionaries of the first half of the century missed the beginnings of the revival. Sense 1 has not only been revived but has spread in its application and continues to do so. The chief danger for the user of fulsome is ambiguity. Unless the context is made very clear, the reader or hearer cannot be sure whether such an expression as "fulsome praise" is meant in sense 1b or in sense 4.
But, Derek, fix the "Is wait" nit in paragraph 1! Plus "arrives" not "arrive" in par. 2, &c.
Good ol’ Nate, always one to jump at the chance to get his copy editor geek on. Please tell me I’m just seeing a pixilated mirage & you didn’t type in an entry from Merriam-Webster as a post? Better to spend your downtime pouring a frosty tall one & putting feet up to the sounds of Mssrs. Monk, McPhee or Marsh, IMO.
Posted by: derek at September 14, 2005 3:47 PMI didn't type it in, just pasted it in from www.m-w.com. -- I wasn't copyediting, just reading; if I copyedited it there'd be a lot longer list of errata, probably.
Posted by: ND at September 14, 2005 4:03 PMI figure if a word sends us to consulting dictionaries, it means it's not really a living, active part of our minds and it's best to just skip it entirely. In my opinion, a writer should never consult a thesaurus and only consult a dictionary for spellchecking or specialized concrete nouns. I wrote four more long paragraphs about this and related topics below, but I just deleted them. Just this quick opinion will do. I'm like a bug flying to a lamp when it comes to language discussions. It's even more interesting a topic than music to me.
Derek, I've been greatly enjoying your reviews lately! You're a wiz. I had two paragraphs on this topic I just spit out and cut, so this simple compliment will have to do!
I'll say this for Derek, his review of the new Rutherford disc, made me put it on my list...
Posted by: walto at September 14, 2005 7:43 PMWell, I (& Derek) already knew what it meant without consulting the dictionary, it's just when a word is under closer scrutiny that the dictionaries come out. I wouldn't have though that it was a sufficiently rare or unusual word to inspire much debate, to tell the truth. -- FWIW consulting my own writing via Google I see that on the few occasions I've used "fulsome" it's tended to refer (negatively) to DD Jackson ("the fulsome piano stylings of DD Jackson" being one phrase).
Posted by: ND at September 14, 2005 7:49 PMfulsome has been on 4 SATs in the last 2 years, always with the definition of cloying or insincere, and paired with praise or flattery.
Posted by: joe at September 14, 2005 8:53 PMI remember the first time I heard The Man In Black's bracing album within those walls.
Posted by: Jesse at September 14, 2005 9:27 PMNate, here are two more words for you: “niggling” and “picayunish”. Sometimes it’s not a bad idea to cap the red magic marker and save the ink for circumstances that really matter.
Mike & Walt, much obliged for the votes of confidence.
Jesse, in the spirit of Nate’s editorial sedulousness, I believe that’s “Fulsome” sans “e” that you’re referring to ;)
Posted by: derek at September 15, 2005 7:52 AMWell, if you object that strongly just delete my last few postings.
Posted by: ND at September 15, 2005 3:45 PMI greatly enjoyed Nate's posts, FWIW... I have no plans to ever use the word "fulsome" or other similarly sketchy adjectives in my life, but before this thread I'd never noticed it or had any idea what it meant, so it's been, you know, educational... Actually, those typos jumped out at me too, but I think the proper thing to do is send a private email to the writer instead of clogging the Comentellen with stuff of no benefit to anyone else... Routine netiquette I'd say. (Likewise for requests to fix typos in comments, which is very easy for the lead author to do under Bags' distributed editorship model.)
Posted by: Michael Anton Parker at September 15, 2005 4:27 PM
As Cloris Leachman's character offered to the existentially kicked in the teeth Timothy Bottoms character [The Last Picture Show]:
'Never you mind, Derek, never you mind...'
Pauvros & Parker? A fulsome combination if ever I saw one..
Posted by: Dan Warburton at September 15, 2005 10:21 PMNate, you miss my point. I have no problem with constructive critique from a colleague (dare I be presumptuous & call you that? :), what I do “object” to is the tea & crumpets snootiness that sometimes laces your directives. I can’t be the first person to accuse you of such habitual haughtiness, can I?
Anyway, I have the Bags French horn packed with some flavorful licorice tobacco if you’d like to join me in smoking from it for peace-making purposes.
Posted by: derek at September 16, 2005 8:00 AMWell, I would hardly claim to be free of posting the occasional snoot, but what I posted above was to say that your use of the word was correct.
Posted by: ND at September 16, 2005 3:14 PMIs there any place that Peter Brötzmann / Nasheet Waits aren't playing? They're even making it to my sleepy sub-backwater of improv; of course having seen them at Vision (have they been performing continually since June?!?) there's not quite the urgency of catching them. But do we get EP/Sanders? Nooooooooo.
I wonder if Vandermark would approve of this critical pissing match.
Posted by: Captain Hate at September 26, 2005 7:17 AMVandermark pčre or fils? :)
Posted by: Dan Warburton at September 26, 2005 10:13 PMI for one love this double disc from the trio. In addition to the actual music on the discs, the sound quality and the way it was recorded by Eremite really does it for me.
Posted by: Dan at November 8, 2005 12:21 PM.................................................. © 2003 - 2006 bagatellen ..................................................