Charlie Parker Trio - Kansas City Acetates Sep. 1942 

I feel that way too, drugs are to blame I think

@@raulcaldeira8071He got addicted to heroin at 16 years old. The Cherokee recording took place when he was 22. This was 6 years into his addiction, so you can’t “blame” his drug addiction to not liking the music he recorded in his mid 20s.

@@raulcaldeira8071Honestly, it’s just plain insulting to attribute you not liking somebody’s musical integrity and style on their own personal drug addiction.

​@@The_Ex_Boxing_Nerd that's right. Often can peoble not follow the devellpment of an artist without thinking that he was better when he was yong. Perhaps easier to understand because he had not yet found his way. Later he becomes more complicated and that's where I find the greatnes. .

Barney Kessel recorded several tracks with Bird in 1947 on Dial records. Also there’s some great live recordings from the early 1950’s with Parker and Kessel on the Jazz at the Philharmonic sessions.

Cool! I will seek those out. Thanks.

" the soloist commands an almost mystical power over the song" ? It is about music here, with notes, melody , hamony and rythm, God has nothing to do here (if God exists). Charlie Parker had only his horn to show and to do what he was able to do, and was alone on the earth. Everybody had to do with him from the day he started to play and record his music, and Jazz was defenitely different after him. Even in 2022 , it is true challenge to understand and play his music, not only for saxophonists, for any jazzman, and forget this "mistycal way" to help you to reach that goal. Listenning, analyzing, and working your instrument, every day, step by step.

Dude you just completely misunderstood what I said. Oops. But thanks for the lecture. My point is that when the harmony of a tune is obscured by accompaniment that is not straightforward and obvious, as it is in most great jazz (like say chord substitutions, or maybe inversions where the root is difficult to place by ear, or maybe a bass player who is pedaling on a tone other than the root, or maybe the pianist’s rhythmic displacement of certain chords, or even just a bunch of extensions in the comping that add ambiguity) THEN it can SEEM like the soloist has some kind of mystical power, like he’s making something from nothing. In reality, the tune is the tune, regardless of the accompaniment. That’s just how traditional jazz works. There’s a progression, or form. Everyone is playing it, no matter how fancy. When the accompaniment is stripped-down, devoid of all the wonderful harmonic fake-outs and tasty ambiguity we normally expect from high level jazz players, as it is in THIS GUITAR-ONLY VERSION, then it is easier (for me at least) to see that the soloist doesn’t “command an almost mystical power over the song,” that he is in fact just playing changes. As other commenters here have noted, even though this is early in Bird’s career you can plainly hear some of the trademark stuff he always does, even in later years. He was pretty well-formed by this point. But because the guy accompanying him was just strumming quarter notes using chord grips that sound like rudimentary harmony, the rudiments of Parker’s approach are just a little bit easier to grasp here. So, you were actually agreeing with me even when you thought you were having an argument.

the guitar can provide more of that "chunk chunk" Basie Band guitar groove, therefore, cheaper than piano bass drums, to hire for a cheap recording. economics.

@@MarkTarmannPianoCheck_it_out he didn’t have much at that time, for sure. Kept pawning his sax to stave off dope sickness. Good description in Stanley Crouch’s Kansas City Lightning. A sad tale.

🙃

I was having lunch at a local café and this older man came up to me to compliment my shirt, it was an image of Tony Williams, turns out it was Carl. So I got to meet him, briefly.

Yes I believe it was recorded in 1943. However, I don't think anyone is 100% on that.

I think he was great even here, don't you?

Check out his Ko Ko

Listening to the music while reading the words: TRUTH

....non sembra anche a voi? Che Parker possa essere accostato a Socrate? Tutti e due emblemi di arte e filosofia che si sposano ? E tutti e due non insegnano nulla , ma , semplicemente con la musica e con le domande... fanno partorire maieuticamente ciò che2 riguarda il nostro ricordo del bello ? 😎

more than good :) he is already at his best, with different accomaniment this could have been masterpieces at all. These pieces are very impressive...

mmm I wouldn't say: here he is already completely himself and Bechet's conception sounds to me really far from his (but it could be interesting to listening to bird according to your impression) - Sometimes I hear some Benny Carter and Hawkins laying back somewhere in his phrasing. Most key point of his Cherokee solo are the same as later Koko's... but also in the other pieces you can find a lot of lanmarks of his. he basically never changed and when he died he basically played the same way as here - it would have been intersting to see his reaction to free and modal jazz, but I bet he wouldn't have changed anything in his approach.

I definitely hear the Bechet influence.

It's so good. I've only listened to Cherokee so far but I'm hearing Lester Young.

@@bennyamon3043 maybe it's Hodges' who was influenced by Bechet - I honestly can't hear it, but, maybe it's me

Buster Smith!!

The guitar player is Efferge Ware. As far as I know, there's no bass. It was recorded (according to Charles White) at Vic Damon studios in Kansas City, in mid September 1942). Hugs and kisses from Buenos Aires, Argentina?

It seems to be a drummer, though. Name: Little Phil Philips, also from KC.

Like Bird, and nobody else. How a jazz fan couldn't recognize him and confuse him with Lester ? He plays dozen of licks he invented and will play all the rest of his life. Perhaps will he abandon a bit this swing vibrato.

@@Thouveninpascal I totally agree - he basically plays the same way he played several years later

@@Thouveninpascal He didn't say he thought it was Lester, only that he sounds like Lester. I hear some of that. It's not a dig against Bird. Lester was a genius, as well, and both were from Kansas City, Lester being someone who trail-blazed a few years earlier than this,. It's true that Bird in later years denied that Lester's playing influenced him (perhaps he was tired of being asked about Lester)... Whatever, this is one of the greatest documented solos in the history of music, period. Miraculous, really.

Probably still couldn’t play like Charlie

@@craigkeller True.

Listen and you can hear the drummer. Parker just quoted “Let’s Fall in Love” This guy was something else.

Picasso is primitive, Parker is sophisticated.

I desagree but each one of us is entitled to his/her opinion- www.christies.com/img/LotImages/2016/NYR/2016_NYR_12069_0049C_000(hermann_max_pechstein_stilleben_mit_akt_kachel_und_fruchten_kurische_w052510).jpg?mode=max

@@Rickriquinho Picasso is sophisticated as well. Sorry to disagree with you even on this - am sure we don't disagree about Bird at all...

@@emilianoturazzi Picasso is not, you have been brainwashed by modernist ideology.

@@Rickriquinho Picasso himself said (paraphrased) "When I was a young child, I could draw like Raphael. It has taken me a lifetime to learn to paint like a child".