Chris Potter Setup

[SaxJazz12]

Does anyone here know what Chris Potter's tenor setup is? I know he uses rico jazz select filed reeds...but I was curious what his mouthpiece was...

[Nefertiti]

I have always seen him with links. Either metal or HR. He posted on Theo Wannes website so he might be playing something from Theo.

[SaxJazz12]

i like my link...I'm going to start using that instead of my guardala.

[Tim Price]

The cool thing about CP is he sounds like CP on anything he uses.
I heard him in Robertos trying a Selmer soloist once, sounded just like CP.
I think that Rubber Link, is stock & pretty big. But who knows about those numbers on links. They are so goofy in that way.

What I would take seriously is.....Chris knowledge of history and the DEPTH of his understanding of what came before him. He plays great piano, can sight sing, understands 20th century harmony via Stravinisky and has the tenor going on thru Trane thru Dewey Redman. The other stuff that comes out is pure Chris.

WHY???
CUZ' HE IS A STUDIED CAT.
A mouthpiece is only a tool. One small part of his craft. Small

Why not take note and go back to the future with Chris.
Listen to where he came from. What he HAS studied. He's a sheddin' kid.
You can hear the EVOLUTION he gets is thru STUDY.
Why not...instead of forkin' over 150 bucks on a Ebay mouthpiece
wim, go take 150 bucks worth of classical piano lessons :!:
To get some fingerings down.
Go buy a Stravinisky score & the CD and study it.

Take a Bird solo, and ONLY write out the rhythms NOT the notes- sing them to make your rhythm stronger.
LISTEN to this guy CP....his rhythm is SICK !!! Cool stuff.
Concentrate on only RHYTHM till October watch what your playing does.

Try it, just don't buy another mouthpiece ok? hahahha- :cyclopsa:
Its in the notes and tones you study. What you WORKED at.
Chris Potter is a shining example.A HARD WORKER.
Mouthpieces are fun/ but nothing beats SERIOUS study. ;)

[Super 20 Player]

Mr. Moderator, close this thread and make it a 'sticky'. Mr. Tim has said all that needs to be said.

[Pete]

Umm, sticky the fact that a change in mouthpiece is essentially a marginal change (provided you're not using a true piece of junk) and you should practice more and invest in lessons instead?

I thought that was kinda self-evident.

(I will also note that some mouthpiece types are essentially required for the horn to play in tune properly. For example, you really need a large chamber mouthpiece to make a Buescher "True Tone" play in tune properly.)

=======

I've been in the saxophone history biz for almost six years and not a day goes by when someone asks me if horn X will make 'em play better or if horn Y used by somone famous will make 'em sound more like that famous person.

I've gotta say that nothing I write dissuades these people from believing that fancy new equipment will make 'em sound like $famous_player.

=======

FACT: You need good equipment that's mechanically sound. Some of that equipment is better than others. We can help you, on this Forum, to try to determine what's junk and what's not.

FACT: Just havening good equipment ain't gonna make you sound like the next Charlie Parker, Paul Desmond or even Saxpics.

FACT: You need to have a good teacher, practice daily and study both the horn and music. Yes, you can say that $dude didn't do any of that and sold billions of records. 99.9999999% of the time you're not gonna be that $dude.

[Tim Price]

AMEN huh?? LOL.

I hope guys can realize that " its the Indian NOT the arrow".

I feel for some of these guys Pete and Sup20. These mouthpieces ain't cheap. In all sincerity....Chris Potter is beyond anything he plays.I doubt if even writing out a solo could come NEAR him. He's THAT creative.He was that way 20 years ago. Stubblefield MADE HIM show him his drivers license on a Mingus Big Band gig cuz he thought the guy was a pre-teen , because he looks so young.LOL- ( and STILL does ) Chris is gifted.

Also-I know personally that is a BIG runner Link. Like a 9star or 10 star.
STOCK too !!!
My student sold it to him @SamAsh in NyC. He plays it like the champ he is.
I'd _NEVER_recommend something like that to someone UNLESS I heard them
on it face to face.

I usually DO NOT, get involved in mouthpiece threads cuz' its so hard to dispence info UNLESS you hear the guy. IMHO.
But- some guys can point at the RIGHT /WRONG via a vintage sax.
But what happens when mother nature takes hold? And yo uget some kid at 20 sounding GREAT on a Mexican Conn with thread bare pads?? lol.
I hear it at times at clinics and always make it a point to talk face to face to the kid. Sometimes everyone can't AFFORD the new/shiny stuff. And the music comes thru.

I think we are in agreement here.
BTW-Pete.I'm curious. Have you ever heard Chris Potter? I'm thinking, with your Paul Desmond kinda affinity- this guy might really do it for ya.
I dunno. Maybe ya heard him with Steely Dan. Or the Mingus stuff.
In any case- if you didn't check him. He might be someone you like.
jUST DIFFERENT PATHS TO THE ANSWER. :D

I heard a young lady on a Selmer Bundy. With a C star mouthpiece.
She really was playing LINES and bop. She was WORKING around/with , what she had. IMHO- thats very important.

[MojoBari]

I've had to find a "happy place" to go whenever I think of my role as an enabler to those with equipment addictions. I sometimes try to ask frequent clients to tell me which of the mouthpiece I did for them was the closest to their perfect mouthpiece goal. Perhaps we can tweek it to get the rest of the way. Or maybe we can combine the features of two favorites. I'm trying to save them time and money by shortening their search. But then I realize that many of them want to churn equipment. This is their hobby (whether they admit it or not). Some get some kind of creative surge each time they get a new toy. I think we all have experianced this. But some guys are in pain while searching. This is no good if it goes on and on.

[Super 20 Player]

The thing that I've learned from this forum over the past 5 years is that some folks, God bless 'em, just don't ever seem to catch on to certain things. Like the fact that the horn and all the accessories are merely tools, as Tim said. I have repeated my mantra that it's all about "response, not sound" for years, and very few seem to get what I'm talking about. The thing is, I came to that conclusion as a high schooler, 30 years ago. And I'm still playing the same horn and mpc. Granted, it's a great setup, and I was lucky to get it when I did - but regardlesss, I recognized it as such then, and realized that it was up to me from that point on. So I stuck with it. True, I've played around with some different mouthpieces recently, just for kicks - but that experience simply reinforced what I already knew. And I'm just an avid hobbyist.

But there are some experience gigging pro players who post here, who have let fiddling with equipment get in the way of their enjoyment of playing music. That is truly a tragedy.

[Nefertiti]

I wonder sometimes how many of us are giving up our individual sound by reading all this and playing X mouthpiece. What I mean is when I went to Berklee I played a Beechler mouthpiece on a Couf Superba I alto I got off the shelf in some music store . I knew nothing about mouthpieces and horns but I felt like I had my own sound and I loved it. I could make it sound like Sanborn or make it sound more bebopish because that is what I had and I had to make it work. I didn't know that a different baffle would make it easier to sound like Sanborn. I just did pop gigs and did the best I could. In the 90's I played a Super Gonz I on tenor for 7 years. Whether good or bad I liked the sound of it. I wasn't trying to sound like anyone on it but myself. If I did a pop gig I would get in that groove. Sometimes people would come over and say I sounded like Brecker. Little did I know I had the wrong mouthpiece for that sound. It seems to me like the guys in this business who have an individual sound are the guys who have a piece whether good or bad and play it and make it work. Sanborn, Brecker, Picket, Seamus Blake,..........I wonder how many of us would have a more individual sound if we knew nothing about this and still played on that old berg larsen or dukoff or whatever . The mouthpiece we found out here wasn't that good but yet for years we were playing on it and getting gigs and compliments and being hired for the sound we created on it. I understand having knowledge about such things and having a well faced piece and all but how much of our originality are we losing with all the talk about sounding like so and so. I understand wanting to imitate but when we all switch to a Guardala to do it what does that do to the majority of people's own sound and development as individuals. Just a thought.

[Pete]

<Major Snippage™>
BTW-Pete.I'm curious. Have you ever heard Chris Potter? I'm thinking, with your Paul Desmond kinda affinity- this guy might really do it for ya.
I dunno. Maybe ya heard him with Steely Dan. Or the Mingus stuff.
In any case- if you didn't check him.Nope. I'll check to see if he's got any CD's available in my local library next time I go. If'n he's got a website with MP3's, I'll be more than happy to check 'em out.

I might have to actually post the long missive I sent to Hurling about why I don't like most sax players :).

==========

I'll consider, with the other SOTW staff about creating some sort of "warning" about falling into the fallacy of thinking that equipment is gonna help you more than practice & lessons. Mind you, that's not exactly what this thread was about, but as far as TopicShift™ goes, it was a pretty logical one.

[Pete]

Link to some clips: http://www.artistdirect.com/nad/music/artist/songs/0,,480711,00.html

Not really my cup o' tea, I must say. I think some comparisions can be made to the Coltrane style. I just don't really care for it.

Gotta run!

[JMac]

...I might have to actually post the long missive I sent to Hurling about why I don't like most sax players :)....Ouch. We try to be nice sometimes :cry: . Most of the folks I've met here seem pretty nice :dontknow:. :D

[Tim Price]

Trane? Hmmmmm. Me thinks Trane might of been a depature or a spring board. Tho'...I thought he was more acessiable because of that.Imho.

But I regress..here lies the point via mouthpieces.
Trane used nothing bigger than 6 stars. Maybe a tad more from Frank Wells.
But thats kinda it.Chris is more big with modern Rico select reeds which I bet the old school guys would love.

OK-with the poetics implied from both artists. You might hear a agile array of inertial constraints. EG-tip openings vs artistic ability.
Desmond and Chris BOTH obtain..." Contrary Motion" to its infinity.'
By that I mean- NO CLICHE. Ok? Paul never played cliche phrases nor does Chris. But~ they both flirt with a artistic sense of unwieldiness.
Paul is more documented. Eg-traditional.
Where Chris...and this is my long time fascination with his conception,
is more dangerous, with apprerehensions of imminent urgency.As if all points were on the verge of getting away, or out of hand.To me its a lag along looseness ( that DESMOND has as well, but in a different way ) but contains a on the edge "play for your life" that I never heard in years from players in this art form. In that sense- Trane might endow his tone more because of the smaller "tip opening". Via-more OVER BLOWN tones.

The differnce between Desmond/or Chris is mighty.Further than the Contrary Motion. More of a "whoa" and "can't stop". Paul being " woah".

Within all this Trane had a more explosive tone because of...harder reeds and a smaller tip opening. ( eg-old school )
Chris is more from our era- tho' even with a huge Link tip, his experience controls it. Its a bridge all players cross when their chops get to it.

To me- this is why..I love all the personalties in this art form.
That insurgency of the art. The personality in the SOUND.

Some folks hear a mouthpiece.
Some folks hear- THE ARTIST.

Perplexing yes. Fascinating- OH YEA.
Chris Potter IS something to cheer about.

[madav]

I'm not going to disagree with anything said here, as it is all spot on - but I just want to add one thing, and that is that there are a couple of benefits to changing mpc's, first it helps critically evaluate your tone/response, and secondly it helps generate flexibility in the embouchure.

Oh and regarding Chris Potter, there are a couple of fantastic live CD's with Steve Swallow that are definitely worth getting...

[Pete]

I might have to actually post the long missive I sent to Hurling about why I don't like most sax players
Ouch. We try to be nice sometimes :cry: . Most of the folks I've met here seem pretty nice :dontknow:. :DHmm. Seems to have gotten lost in translation. Let me try again:

"I might have to actually post the long missive I sent to Hurling about why I don't like most sax players' tone and style of playing."

I tend to like most people that play the sax, even if I don't like how they play :D.

Gimme a few, Tim. I'll post it.

[Pete]

OK, this was referencing the fact that I posted in the thread, "What are you currently listening to" and my answer didn't include anyone playing sax. Hurling asked me if, at least liked Gerry Mulligan:


... I don't dislike Mulligan, Pepper Adams or any of the other baritone "greats" -- I just never really bother with 'em, tho I've heard the Mulligan recordings with Miles Davis. Very decent.

I even remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I heard Mulligan died.

My "style" of bari playing puts an emphasis on the horn's rich lower and middle registers. I don't care about altissimo. You want altissimo on a bari? Have the alto player play the part! (I've stunned former teachers by playing decent altissimo on bari, btb, so it's not a case of, "You can do it and I can't, so I hate you.")

I dunno. I guess you can say I don't like jazz that much. I very much enjoy listening to and playing big band stuff, but it's difficult to find that kinda music for free (i.e. on the radio). I like the Dave Brubeck quartet stuff: it's mentally stimulating without being harsh.

... But it's not something I want to listen to every day and I find too many "small ensemble" jazz cuts to be repetitious <expanded on in the below post>.

As much as I like playing classical music on sax, I really think that (a reference you'd might get) Yo-Yo Ma sounds better on 'cello playing the Bach 'cello suites than even an extremely good bari player does. I think where saxophones shine in classical music is within the confines of a good quartet/ensemble with music written expressly for the instruments, rather than transpositions.

Why don't I play clarinet more, then? Because a) a lot of "good" clarinet players are really, really snobby and don't have (IMHO) a very good tone: a clarinet tone isn't supposed to approximate a breathy sine wave. It's supposed to be reedy and have warmth and b) while I'm fairly good at playing clarinet, there are so many people that are so much better, I'm considered below average.

(Jazz bass clarinet is way kewl, tho.)OK, back to Chris Potter, Coltrane and the rest: I strongly dislike the "honking" low-end sound. I consider it almost an insult to the horn. I sometimes want to walk up to these guys and say, "Dude. Let me hear you play a low Bb. OK. Let me get my tuner. Hmm. Every note you play lower than D sounds the same ...." I want to hear a pure tone, not a diesel truck horn.

Dynamic contrast wouldn't hurt, too. And I don't mean transitioning from fortissimo to molto blastissimo. Let's hear you play some stuff pianissimo.

Back to repetitous jazz: I hate the style of jazz that's, "OK, I'll play the theme and fake a few solo lines around it. Then the piano can pick it up and then the bassist. Then the trumpet player ..." After the second solo around the same theme the solos start sounding the same.

It also makes me think, "I was creative enough to come up with a 4-bar phrase that sounds good, but not creative enough to come up with an entire song, so I'll just let everyone take a solo and hope no one notices."

Do my likes or dislikes mean squat? Not particularly. I seem to remember the folks from Buffet saying that the classical saxophone market is about 5% of the saxophone market and I only like a very small percentage of classical saxophone players.

Just so y'all think I'm only partially insane, instead of completely insane, I do enjoy hearing, say, Lenny Pickett bust out the sax solo at the beginning and end of Saturday Night Live and I'm envious of that altissimo range. I also smile every time I hear Vince Giordano play bass sax on A Prairie Home Companion, even if the style isn't to my taste. I also attempt to go and see any big band that's coming to a stage near me, provided the tickets are cheap.

I also have a weakness for Coltrane's, "My Favorite Things", even though the only pro soprano player I've heard that has worse tone is Maynard Ferguson. I've also transcribed and studied Giant Steps. Heck of a lot of 16ths.

The last sax player I heard in person was a guy that plays tenor in my friend's "bar band" (although, before that, the last sax player I heard in person was Eugene Rousseau when he had a concert at Arizona State University).

[Chris S]

Pete, I understand and agree with what you're saying, but I'm not so sure that I think CP fits into that category. If you get a chance to listen/pick up CP's "Lift! - Live at the Village Vanguard," listen to Okinawa. Some of the most beautiful playing I've ever heard.

The thing that I enjoy about CP is that his solos make sense. There are so many players out there (especially younger ones) that can burn changes. WHO CARES? It's not about showing hoe many notes you can fit into a small space, it's what you do with that space. It's better to play 3 good notes than to play 5 bajillion bad ones. CP's solos are VERY melodic to me, moreso that Trane really.

You know what, I will even BUY a copy of Lift and send it to you, if you don't like it, get rid of it, sell it, whatever. You just email me or PM me your snail mail address or PO Box and I will send it on Monday.

Chris S

[Pete]

Addressage sent.

I listened to about a half-dozen of the clips from the website I mentioned above and wasn't terribly impressed, but I try to remain open-minded.

Further, when I get said CD, I will write a review for www.saxontheweb.net -- which would then make three articles that Harri has from me that he hasn't published yet (recent article that Harri put in the Announcements as "new" from Ian is almost two years old, from what I hear).

[Super 20 Player]

Classic sotw ying/yang thread. This one could have come straight from the old eesite board, back in the day...
Here we have the pentultimate working jazz musician, trying his best communicate what he hears in Potter's playing, to someone who, while he still loves music and playing the saxophone, has made up his mind that this particular genre doesn't necessarily appeal to him. There is no resolution. Both are so firmly entrenched in their worlds that neither will ever be able to fully comprehend the other's point of view.

Try to imagine Tim selling his instruments and taking up computer programming, in order to make a steady living and have secure health care benefits. Imagine Pete walking away from the security of his job to take up the life of a working musician in New York City.

This is why I hang around here. Thanks, guys. 8-)

[Pete]

No, I don't feel that's an accurate representation, S20.

To me, the question was, "Does Saxpics like CP's playing?" My answer, "No. Not the stuff I've heard, at least." And then I posted my reasons why I don't like it -- and then said that I'd be more than happy to be convinced otherwise.

In no way, shape or form have I said that Tim Price's or anyone else's opinion of CP's playing is inaccurate. I don't think opinions can be inaccurate, nor do I think mine are any less valid or compelling because I'm not a street musician. Hey, I've got enough cred.

Additionally, if I don't like $genre and I'm asked to write a review of it, but I don't like $genre, I can at least do my best to talk about a person's technique, etc. However, I don't believe this is a question of genre: I like, say, Desmond. Are you trying to say that he's not a jazz player because he doesn't sound, to my ear, very much like CP?

======

I also try not to imagine taking up computer programming. I loathe it. I'm not a programmer and never pretended to be one: I fix computers, users and software problems. I occasionally have to deal with code, but that's not my job. I DO deal with php and SQL code here on the SOTW Forum, when I have to.

Gotta motor!

[Chris S]

I fix computers, users and software problems.

You fix users? That's quite a feat, Pete!

:)

Chris S

[Super 20 Player]

Pete, I didn't say that you had rejected Tim's analysis of Potter, or that you had suggested anyone should join you in your position on the matter. I said that you had decided you didn't care for that genre of music, for your own reasons, based on this statement:


I dunno. I guess you can say I don't like jazz that much. I very much enjoy listening to and playing big band stuff, but it's difficult to find that kinda music for free (i.e. on the radio). I like the Dave Brubeck quartet stuff: it's mentally stimulating without being harsh.

... But it's not something I want to listen to every day and I find too many "small ensemble" jazz cuts to be repetitiousMy main point was that I love watching these kinds of threads develop, and that we don't get many of them any more.

My other point was that, despite your stated willingness to be convinced otherwise, I don't think Tim will ever be able to convince you to listen to enough of Potter's music to learn to appreciate it in the same way as he does.

Likewise, I don't think Tim will ever be able to grasp your perspective on music, either. He is a full-time, full-bore musician. It's what he was born to be. To say, "Nah, I don't even bother listening to that stuff" is gibberish to him.

Oh, and I apologize if I insulted you by implying you were a programmer.

Chris - I am a programmer, and unfortunately, there's NO fixing users. :(

[Pete]

I disagree: if you can't fix users, you're not using your people skills effectively.

User's Problem: Computer too slow.
Reality: He's got a Pentium-90 built in 1996. It IS too slow.
Techie Problem: Convince user to live with it because management ain't paying for new computers.

I'm generally very successful in this kind of situation.

======

I was a full time, full bore professional (i.e. paid) musician for 10+ years and I've been a successful amateur musician for an additional 10+ years. As said, I've got sufficient cred and we don't need to discuss my resume.

You're absolutely, positively right: nothing that Tim says will make me like CP's music. Only listening can do that, that's why I took up the offer of getting the CD.

I can appreciate Tim's points regarding CP's music and even agree with some of them, but that's not the point. Do I like the tune or don't I? Do I like the way the guy plays or don't I? Questioning the significance of CP's work for jazz is something completely differerent and I'm not qualified enough to talk at length about that, because I'm not a jazz historian -- that's Paul Lindemeyer's job. I am qualified enough to talk about CP's tone and technique -- and why I do or don't like what he's playing.

Note that I haven't told anyone to stop buying CP's records.

Back to Tim's actual post, he feels that CP uses Coltrane as a springboard and adds the Desmond component and goes beyond it. If we wish to discuss THAT, I'd respond, "Are we talking about the Desmond component or the Dave Brubeck component (because we have to take that into account)? It's one thing to discuss the style the person plays and another to discuss the tone."

Putting that last statement another way, Desmond's tone was once described as "a dry martini". That's not the way I'd decribe CP's. It's an awful lot heavier and much more Coltrane-esque -- and it's not just because the two play tenor.

(Again, only using the two musicians to compare and contrast.)

Discussing CP's entire body of work and comparing and contrasting melodic/rhythmic styles with those of Desmond, Coltrane, etc. I probably could do after awhile, but I'm not up for it at the moment: I don't know enough of CP's work. Remember: I'm only posting in this thread because you invited me by PM'ing me, S20, and this thread was originally about someone's equipment setup, not about my particular taste in music.

=======

All that being said, I mentioned awhile ago that you should study both the horn and the music. It's always a good thing to listen to how the sax is being played in all sorts of genres and then concentrate on what you like. Develop your own style or become a student of a master of the style you like.

=======

Oh, regarding programming, no, I'm not insulted and I don't mean to offend you. Was just trying to make a point about communication and failed. I also wanted to disabuse folks of the notion that there's only one kind of computer job and any "computer guy" is interchangable with another. Heck, I used to do computer support for programmers.

[Super 20 Player]

Pete, I've obviously offended you. I sincerely apologize. It wasn't my intention to mock anyone, nor did I mean to turn anything you said around.

[Pete]

You haven't. Just don't stir the pot. This ain't about Tim Price's opinion vs. Saxpics'.

[Razzy]

My article on basics is indeed about 2 years old, but the first part was put up about 1.5 years ago, after just shy of a hundred people personally requested that I email it to them. The 2nd part of the article, however, was put up very recently. I think Harri wanted a 2-part effect, and hey, that's his call ;) I want to write something about my experience of the first year in music college. Nothing yet, so plan to wait a while! If I wait till the end of August when I'm done working for my school and playing shows and other things I got through my school, I can include that stuff in there too.

Anywho... I dig CP's playing, especially on alto, and his sound is not only one of those that I like, but which I've emulated and added to my playing. Some guys I love to hear but wouldn't want to sound like... Joe Lavano, Bird, Christlieb, Getz... there aren't many "big hitters" like these guys that I don't enjoy listening to for ideas, but very few of them would I actually want to add into my tone pallette.

As Chris said, CP's solos make sense, and they're also very lyrical. A lyrical virtuoso who breaks some new ground with each record? You bet I'm listening to that.

I've found more and more that mouthpieces, well, they're important, but of course they're not everything. Once you find a "school" of mouthpieces that you like (I like closer tip, HR, low baffle, round chamber), play around a bit and you'll find something that responds really nicely for you. Hearing what my teachers can do with a Meyer was pretty inspiring too, so I knew it was possible and what to shoot for. So, it probably helps to hear a live sound or have a teacher that can do a lot with a given piece, and to see if it works for you. My fellow students and I all got lucky in that our teacher's recommendations worked well for us and continue to.

I liken it to singing. You want to sound a certain way, and you also want it to be comfortable for you. People's voices are what they are; they can be improved/changed, but YOU are always in there, no matter what, waiting to come out. So the mouthpiece is not like finding another voicebox; it's like finding another microphone or something. The voicebox is still your own. What you work on when you practice your tones and stuff is getting yourself to come out in the playing, regardless of what it has to go through. For me the search is for something that takes what I give it in a way that I like. I think I've found that and I'm going to stick with it.

[SactoPete]

I'm intrigued by the description of Potter's playing... could someone recommend a couple of "representative" CDs of his for me to listen to? If you could only have one, what would it be?

[Tim Price]

:) Free stuff here;

http://www.chrispottermusic.com/downloads.aspx

Full discog here;
http://www.chrispottermusic.com/discography.aspx


My fav. this week is ;
Concord Duo Series 10 (Audio CD)
~ Chris Potter, Kenny Werner

I'd say Chris speaks from the hip. He's his own man on the horns.

A LITTLE LISTENING GOES A LONG WAY. :D

Enjoy.

[NickR]

Is Chris on a Mark 6, BA or SBA?

[Chris S]

I'm intrigued by the description of Potter's playing... could someone recommend a couple of "representative" CDs of his for me to listen to? If you could only have one, what would it be?

I'd start with one of the discs with the Dave Holland Quintet (Not for Nothin' is my personal fav) or CP's Lift!-Live at the Village Vanguard (incidentally the one that I sent to saxpics). I think these are maybe the most accesible.


Is Chris on a Mark 6, BA or SBA?

I think he's on a BA or SBA, pretty sure he's not on a Mk VI.

Chris S

[AMASAX]

Is Chris on a Mark 6, BA or SBA?

Couple yrs ago when i heard him up close in Denton at a NASA conference he was playing a silver plated SBA tenor.

Mthpce was a rubber Otto Link, pretty wide open(9 or 10, i think) that he bought off the shelf at a music store in NYC.

I specifically asked him at a clinic what setup he was using, and he mentioned BA/SBA tenor and then talked a bit about the Link. I know Selmer saxes pretty well, and it was obvious he was using an SBA tenor; probably just doesn't know the diff between some of the models.

[Pete]

I just wanted to tell you that I got the CD that thesonandall sent. I've listened to it through a couple times.

Thanks for the CD, dude!

I've been a little busy editing (don't laugh: I'm actually good at doing this, if I take more than 2.5 seconds to do it, like on my website) an article that our own Hurling Frootmig is going to be posting somewhat soon -- plus I've had a few other interruptions (garden plumbing accessories) that I had to deal with, but I will keep my promise and listen in depth and write a review.

I'm also toying with a design to electronic-ize my sax value stuff, so wait for that, too.

Just so ya know ... listening to "A Love Supreme" at the moment ...

[JPSaxMan]

I've been in the saxophone history biz for almost six years and not a day goes by when someone asks me if horn X will make 'em play better or if horn Y used by somone famous will make 'em sound more like that famous person.

I've gotta say that nothing I write dissuades these people from believing that fancy new equipment will make 'em sound like $famous_player.

=======

FACT: You need good equipment that's mechanically sound. Some of that equipment is better than others. We can help you, on this Forum, to try to determine what's junk and what's not.

FACT: Just havening good equipment ain't gonna make you sound like the next Charlie Parker, Paul Desmond or even Saxpics.

FACT: You need to have a good teacher, practice daily and study both the horn and music. Yes, you can say that $dude didn't do any of that and sold billions of records. 99.9999999% of the time you're not gonna be that $dude.

As David Sanborn once said, "You can manipulate as much as you want, but at one point you have to stop copying and start making your own sound."...I'm pretty sure I'm entering that stage now after playing for seven years. That's a fraction as opposed to some of these cats, but for me, it's something worth notable mention.

I am now taking private lessons, finally learning all twelve scales, I was just given a lesson on pentatonic scales, and hopefully moving on to the blues scales shortly. I am years behind the curve, I know, but now I'm loving all this knowledge. I can now do 10 of the 12 scales from memory.

I just had a very important learning lesson the other day while at jazz camp. I have a solo in "Moondance" and I was coming in late on the written solo and it was kind of getting boring to listen to. So my director said, "This is a test...you're gonna improvise (no challenge to me) but now I'm gonna make sure you come in on the soli"...and I thought, oh man, here we go. Keep in mind that I have always relied on a cue from the director or a fill cue from the drummer to indicate the end of a solo. It took A LOT of work for me to count while I was soloing. I screwed up once or twice through but finally the third or fourth time I did it accurately and ended coming in on cue at the end of the solo. I will now devote myself in jazz band (and maybe even outside of jazz band) to count the 16 or 8 or even 24 bars in the solo to make sure I'm in check.

Now I'm sorry this had very little to do with Chris Potter. But I agree with saxpics...this stuff takes a lot of effort. I spend an hour or more practicing my private lesson material now that I have time to. I strive to make it big one day, so I best start working at it.

By the way I absolutely dig Chris Potter. #1 in my book. I think he also plays on a Conn New Wonder? I'm going to double check on that. :D

[carr]

JPSaxMan,

You are very lucky in that you realize what it takes to be successful at this, (hard work) and it is great that new knowledge is something that motivates you. Bust your can on this while you have the time. Once you get older, get a job, have kids, etc., there won't be as much time for learning/practicing/playing - now is the time to do that. Good Luck!

[JL]

It took A LOT of work for me to count while I was soloing. I screwed up once or twice through but finally the third or fourth time I did it accurately and ended coming in on cue at the end of the solo. I will now devote myself in jazz band (and maybe even outside of jazz band) to count the 16 or 8 or even 24 bars in the solo to make sure I'm in check. :D

JPSaxMan, I realize we are getting off-topic, but I've got a tip that may belp you with this. I've played Moondance many times and it's a favorite of mine (although I can't get one of the members of my present band to agree to play it). If you learn the structure of the tune and the MELODY really well, you won't have to count bars as you solo. In fact, it is very difficult to play a good solo and count bars. You can play 4 bar phrases, but even then it's hard to keep track of exactly where you are just by counting.

So try this: Learn to play the melody exactly (what the vocalist would sing). Then play that over and over, noting where the tune changes (vocalists would say from the verse to the chorus, I believe). Moondance has a very specific structure and once you know it, you won't get lost. Same is true for most tunes. Try it and see what happens.

Now, let's see what was that about Chris Potter's setup? Sorry to take the thread off in a different direction, but I can sympathize with JPsaxman and thought he might be able to use this idea.

[JPSaxMan]

I appreciate your insight guys. JL, my solo is the part of the song when the piano player is going during the original, therefore I have no vocalist to fall on (crap :(). But I do believe I need to learn to count because as I might start gigging soon, I might have to count my bars and then let the other soloist come in or get back to the song. So...we'll see what happens. Thanks guys (all of ya) for tolerating the off-thread response!

[Razzy]

JPSaxman, here's some advice based on experience, take it or leave it... developing your own sound I think is something that only happens after you've studied a lot of other players, played with a LOT of different people, and developed a sound concept based on years of experience in performance situations. Maybe my idea of a personal sound is just a little more lofty than most, so here's an idea: I think that about half of all college music graduates on saxophone have a very good personal sound... probably less than that. It's good that you're going for individuality, you should always go for that, but don't discount studying other players and transcribing their solos to the nth degree. After all, once you've put a lot of time into studying player X, and an equal amount of time studying player Y, well you're on your way to getting a personal sound! The key is time well spent and lots of it.

In order to get there, I think you need to be at a pretty advanced level of technique, at least in your specific idiom. Get past the hump of knowing all of the common scales, chords, and progressions, and being able to apply them, and THEN you should focus more on getting "your sound". I think this is just a thing of priorities, and I think you will make a lot more progress that way, but only you can really say. Notice I say "I think" a lot. It's not my intention to make any bold statements here; I think this stuff because it's what is working for me. I don't think I have quite a personal sound yet, but I bet some of my contemporaries would disagree, simply because their standards are not as high as mine. Right now I'm still transcribing a lot and finding out what I like by seeing what sticks and what doesn't.

Secondly, JL's got the right idea about Moondance, and indeed, every tune you'll find yourself playing in every performance situation EVER! Once you can hear the form, you no longer need to count, you just "arrive" at the destination and you are free to solo. Getting to the point that you can hear a form and use it to your playing advantage takes a LOT of hard work and time spent with the horn. For now, count it all out if you feel you must, but I think that if you listen enough and play enough through the changes (arpeggiating the changes was the way I did it), you'll eventually just hear wherever you are in the tune. Even if it's a repetitive tune like "So What", you eventually just develop a feeling for how long 8 bars is. Do you think Trane was thinking, "Oh man, here comes the change to F minor 7, I'd really better catch this F minor 7, oh man here it comes, CRAP!" Don't think so :) He just knew where it happened, he could hear it. You'll get there, don't think it's beyond you to get there even in a few weeks time with a couple of tunes. You'll get a feel for a chorus, once you've worked on understanding what a chorus is, and you'll be able to hear it, trust me! Counting will be a thing of the past, except perhaps during drum breaks :D

[JL]

I appreciate your insight guys. JL, my solo is the part of the song when the piano player is going during the original, therefore I have no vocalist to fall on (crap :(). But I do believe I need to learn to count because as I might start gigging soon, I might have to count my bars and then let the other soloist come in or get back to the song. So...we'll see what happens. Thanks guys (all of ya) for tolerating the off-thread response!

Well, I have to admit this is much more interesting to me than Chris Potter's setup, lol. Because I know full well that I could play his exact set up and still sound nothing like him!

But just to clarify, JPsaxman, I realize you were speaking of an instrumental version of Moondance. That doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't learn and play off the melody. You can do that with the sax as well as a vocalist does with the voice. I do sometimes count bars when I'm not playing, but I simply can't do it when I am playing. So, as Razzy says, I'm talking about what works for me, with the assumption that it might work for you, or others, also.

To expand a bit, in the case of Moondance, and most tunes in general, there is a given structure that repeats itself over and over (I'm sure you know this, but you can put the knowledge to good use). For Moondance, I look at it as an "A" section of 16 bars, and a "B" section of 16 bars. The "B" section sort of breaks down into two different "subsections" of 8 bars each. Then the whole thing repeats, ad infinitem, until the band finishes the tune. Now, most of my playing nowadays involves fairly simple tunes (and Moondance would qualify here) that I play by memory without charts. I prefer to play this way for various reasons. The point is, without written material, I have to be aware of the arrangement and stucture of any tune in order to play my parts and solo, so this is how I do it. Give it a try---listen and absorb the tune, then try playing it.

[Pete]

As threatened, review is now posted. http://www.saxontheweb.net/Resources/ChrisPotter.html

[Mike Ruhl]

As threatened, review is now posted. http://www.saxontheweb.net/Resources/ChrisPotter.html :lol: That's why I listen to Getz...

[jvsax]

IMO, Chris Potter constructs beautiful long phrases that display tremendous musicianship and creativity. Chick Corea does this too, and I love his playing as well. Chris also has burning chops on alto, tenor, and soprano, and an almost instantly recognizable voice. To me, that's great jazz.

[brassnaked]

The unmitigated arrogance of undeserved authority, is the single most terroristic threat ever posed to civilization. Does that type of behavior really work with some people? That's not a review...it's a frontal assault on the person, not the music. Transparent vomit...just my opinion, I could be wrong!

[frankbiff]

From the review:
flying fingers and lots and lots of notes

When I need that I usually listen to some bluegrass.

[Nefertiti]

Brassnaked,
What are you talking about? :shock:

[SaxJazz12]

It sounds in your review like you're falling victim to your own personal taste rather than giving an unbiased review.

I happen to think Chris Potter has a great soprano tone--probably one of the better one's out there actually. Also, in many ways good tone is subjective once you get to a certain point. There are definitely certain elements one should have in their sound but each person's sound is ultimately going to be different. I didn't know that Maynard played soprano, but I'm sure it sounds awful and Coltrane's soprano sound is nothing compared to his amazing tenor sound.


Additionally, I find his playing to be very melodic and "swinging" (although maybe not in the literal sense of the word like Basie, Dex, Prez and Hawk).

You frequently mention Paul Desmond and I agree with you that he is a master. He's also really underrated. That guy had so much soul and wonderful chops. It is too bad that so many players of my generation skip him over in favor of sounding like Kenny Garrett or Steve Coleman.

It's okay if you dislike Chris Potter. But, how much of him have you really listened to? You might enjoy his CD Grattitude or Unspoken more that his newer stuff. That being said--everyone has a right to their opinon and we're all going to like who we like.

[dirty]

Brassnaked, you are grossly overreacting. It's a sad day when a man can't state his own opinion for fear of disagreeing with someone.

I think that Peter's review is quite reasonable. I can see why someone might not like the album, and it's not as though he blasted the entire album without listening to it. He wasn't even that harsh. He even conceded that although he didn't like the album, he thought that Chris Potter was a "very good tenor player." He clearly tried to see what so many people on this forum (myself included) liked so much about this album, but it just didn't appeal to him. That's cool. You've got your opinion and he's got his.

[brassnaked]

Brassnaked, you are grossly overreacting. It's a sad day when a man can't state his own opinion for fear of disagreeing with someone.

Yeah, I agree...I DARE to disagree with Pete's "review?" and you're all over me for disagreeing with it.............hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!
Fascinating!
BTW: I can't help but compare this review with Kurt Loder's famed "Rolling Stone" review of Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" where he stated that it was the worst piece of garbage they ever recorded, it was the beginning of then end for the band and they'll be lucky to sell 1000 copies of the record...IT STAYED ON THE TOP 100 for OVER 20 YEARS!!!

[Super 20 Player]

Well, fwiw, I happen to agree to with Pete. Modern mainstream jazz is derivative, and his issues must be pretty common among the general populace, or its popularity wouldn't have dropped off so much over the past 30 years, eh? That said, I enjoy listening to Potter, and players of his ilk from time to time. But I listen more from the perspective of an awed amateur player than anything else. Obviously, as a lover of the sax, I enjoy hearing it played well. I'll listen to anyone and everyone from Ace Cannon to John Zorn. But I wouldn't expect my wife non-musician wife to listen, let alone enjoy Chris Potter or Branford. And these guys realize they're playing to a limited audience. Branford has spoken at length about it on many occasions. It took him a while to come to terms with it, but he finally has (as I knew he would, I have a lot of faith in him).

Anyway...Chris Potter is a fantastic musician. But the music he plays is not to everyone's taste. What's so hard about that to accept?

[Tim Price]

This review was very depressing to me. The way he couches his remarks are as if what he is saying is FACT, and not just his opinion. It's almost as if he ( Pete ) is trashing the artist PERSONALLY, rather than the art !!
The comment about the soprano playing via curved soprano was WAY off base IMHO.
He's most certainly entitled to his OPINION regarding his music.That's where one HAS to draw the line...he turned a CD music review into something else.

Saxjazz said it best and very honestly.." It sounds in your review like you're falling victim to your own personal taste rather than giving an unbiased review " I couldn't agree more.

In the 2o years I've done reviews for "Saxophone Journal " I always talked about...what the music does NOT what it doesn't. I can't take this review seriously at all. Sorry.
He actually infers that Chris misses notes and all kinds of odd off base comments, many that can't even be proved, let alone taken seriously?
I'd hope this review never reaches the front page at SOTW as it shows something I personally don't think is necessary in the saxophone world.

Nuff said.Just MY opinion.Different strokes

[Rahspeak]

huge potter fan here. seen him live on many occasions, it has constantly been a source of inspiration for me. I agree that this CD review does not at all reflect my experiences with his music, and that it makes some highly subjective claims...for example...poor soprano tone...clearly subjective. in Dave Holland's subjective opinion, Chris Potter has a great soprano tone, that's why Holland, one of the world's foremost jazz artists and bandleaders, has Potter play soprano on so many of his tunes. Also, the lines that got me were :

In my opinion, the problem with most jazz today is not that it’s derivative – and it generally is -- but that it’s needlessly deconstructive and repetitive.

“Deconstructive” in the sense of: due to the lack of any real melody, you have a bunch of folks trying to pick apart one another’s solos. This can sound pretty similar after awhile – like you could lift a 30, 40 or more bar solo out of one “composition” and slap it in another without the audience really noticing the difference.

and

In my opinion, Potter has a problem coming up with an identifiable melody. I’ve listened to Lift at least a dozen times and if you played a snippet for me from the middle of virtually any of the solos on this CD and asked me which tune it came from, I really couldn’t tell you.

you could play me ANY snippet from any song on this album, or several other of his albums for that matter, and I'd know the difference immediately. one of the reasons I listen to Potter's recordings so often is because I constantly find new things in them, and his discography just sounds to me like he's going somewhere different each passing year. this is all talking about his recordings mind you, seeing him live is a whole different game. and I happened to be at the Vanguard in November 2002 when Lift was being recorded...my first time seeing Chris play, and I was hooked from there on.

however Brassnaked, I gotta disagree...when you talk about "undeserved authority"....Pete works hard keeping this site up and running...if he wants to use the forum as a platform to express an opinion and can have a link to his opinion on the front page of the site, as opposed to having to write it in one of these threads like the rest of us, well I think he deserves that right, all you gotta do is read it, or not read it, and agree or disagree. you have every right to disagree and I'm right there with you but Saxpics deserves the right to have his review up on the sight, IMO.

[Tim Price]

snip//however Brassnaked, I gotta disagree...when you talk about "undeserved authority"....Pete works hard keeping this site up and running...if he wants to use the forum as a platform to express an opinion and can have a link to his opinion on the front page of the site, as opposed to having to write it in one of these threads like the rest of us, well I think he deserves that right, all you gotta do is read it, or not read it, and agree or disagree. you have every right to disagree and I'm right there with you but Saxpics deserves the right to have his review up on the sight, IMO.

Dude-That was me Tim Price who made the comment about the review on the front page. I have no issue with where things go but my concern was there are a lot of us who have worked real hard on this forum to keep things positive and educational. The fact that there was an EDGE and the issues I addressed in my original post on this were kinda distressing. Chris Potter is a major player and also an extremely sought after player. We can all agree to disagree on our likes and dislikes. I have no problem with that. That's what makes the world go around. And my concern was my original claims that it was a little past a review. If somebody doesn't like something that's quite okay with me, but as I said my original issues being I felt the review went somewhere else. As I said before...I think "Saxjazz said it best and very honestly.." It sounds in your review like you're falling victim to your own personal taste rather than giving an unbiased review " .
For a young person or somebody who has never been on this site to see that review might not reflect the best intentions and decorum that we are trying to present here.
As it stands now that is my opinion and we all know as individuals we feel strongly about certain issues. I said what I'm going to say and I think it's fair enough that it be known. That's my last take on this thread.

[Bill Mecca]

dang internet, I had a long reply typed up hit post and the server was unreachable, so it's gone.

This may not be as eloquent as the original.

It's a review, it';s Pete's opinion and thats Fact. question: if an audience of 100 attends a Chris Potter concert how many Chris Potter's are there?

Right, 100. we each bring our own unique life experiences, preconceptions, likes, dislikes to everything we encounter. You know the old saying, you can't please everybody, well its trite for a reason.

Pete doesn't like Potter's tone on soprano, so? He did like the tune, and thought it would have sounded better to his ear on tenor. that's his opinion. It's a review.

FWIW, if I remember correctly, the "reviews" in SJ are actually entitled "Reccomended Recordings" so there is a predispostion they will be positive. I doubt anyone would reccomend something they didn't like.

for those who are die hard potter fans, they will dislike the review, for those who kinda like his work they may agree or disagree with parts, for those who hate Potter's playing they may think the review was too easy on him. It's all part of Mass Communications. In the end we are all an audience of one.

BTW, wasn't it Leonard Feather who hated Bird's tone and also criticized him saying he couldn't get thru a tune without quoting the Woody Woodpecker theme? Guess that ruied Parker's career and his influence on the medium huh? (sarcasm intended).

bottom line, chill, there are far more important things in this world to worry about.

[Rahspeak]

sorry Tim, I think we have a misunderstanding. I was responding to where brassnaked complained about the "unmitigated arrogance of undeserved authority", and I was saying I think Pete's authority on this site is well-deserved, even as much as I disagree with parts of that particular review. you (Tim) also have contributed so much to this site that if you choose to call him out on what you think was a job poorly done with this review, that's fine with me too.

that's it for me in this thread as well. I'm off to listen to Dave Binney's Bastion Of Sanity....some fantastic CP on that one! I've been wearing this CD out...

[Newkstime]

Chris Potter is a fantastic hardworking musician. As per what setup he plays he discusses it in the gear section of the latest Jazztimes. Older HR link 9 with an actual tip between a .95 and .105 and 4 1/2 reeds. Amazing how playersget such individual sounds out of such similar setups.

The more I hear Chris Potter the more I like him. For so more melodic playing check out the new Kenny Wheeler album "What Now?"

[jazzbluescat]

Out of that "class of three": Potter, Alexander and Redman, I'm more into Alexander. He's not really as baroque-like or fancy as Potter, nor flamboyant as Redman, but, man, what a tone.

[brassnaked]

It's a review, it';s Pete's opinion and thats Fact.

Pete's opinion is Fact?

[Razzy]

Avoid reading this if you want to get any idea of a well-written review or any sense of the actual quality of this music. I've read plenty of half and half or even negative reviews done in a tasteful, elegant manner; this is not the case here.

[Bill Mecca]

the fact is, it's his opinion. ;)

[Razzy]

Opinion or fact, there's one thing we should all learn as musicians: how you say it is just as important as what you say.

[SaxJazz12]

As a jazz studies major and someone who will be a student of this music forever, I find it to be really ignorant to limit myself to what I listen to. I enjoy the lead alto playing of Marshall Royal just as much as I love listening to Ornette. Ben Webster's HUGE sound as much as Bob Mintzer. And if you listen carefully--you can hear connecting tissue in all of it. It is truly all valid.

I always try to stay out of those conversations where people try to define jazz...ie knocking the fusion movement or the avante garde as anti jazz. When I listen to Lonnie's Lament on Coltrane's Crescent I hear so much of the same warmth and passion that I hear in Hawk's Body and Soul.

And another thing--calling modern jazz derivative is just like me calling those who play steeped in the tradition "stuffy" and "wanting to turn jazz into a museum piece". I find that players who play more "modern" (whatever that means....early in this thread Branford and Chris Potter were mentioned)...are VERY steeped in the tradition. To play in a modern style well and convincingly, you'd better have all your bases covers when it comes to understanding the tradition. Likewise, a lot of players who play more traditional styles (again...whatever that means) sound just as new and hip as anything Dave Douglas (who is incredibly hip) plays.

To say it's all valid and it's all good is not wishy washy. It's the nature of the music we play. As Bird said "they teach you there's a boundary line to music, but man, there is no boundary line to art."

[jvsax]

I'd hope this review never reaches the front page at SOTW as it shows something I personally don't think is necessary in the saxophone world.


Believe me, you're not alone.

[Hurling Frootmig]

Would someone be kind enough to send me a copy of the recording. It's not available on Yahoo Unlimited Music.

I think reviews have to be taken with a grain of salt. I am a huge Paul Desmond fan but find that some of his later work is lacking in a number of areas. It doesn't change the fact that I'm a huge fan and respect his body of work. I just like some more of it better than some other stuff.

I'm not a huge Parker or Coltrane fan. I respect their technical abilities but their music doesn't always connect with me. I prefer listening to a number of guys who were seriously influenced by both though.

[dirty]

Brassnaked, you are grossly overreacting. It's a sad day when a man can't state his own opinion for fear of disagreeing with someone.

Yeah, I agree...I DARE to disagree with Pete's "review?" and you're all over me for disagreeing with it.............hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!
Fascinating!
BTW: I can't help but compare this review with Kurt Loder's famed "Rolling Stone" review of Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" where he stated that it was the worst piece of garbage they ever recorded, it was the beginning of then end for the band and they'll be lucky to sell 1000 copies of the record...IT STAYED ON THE TOP 100 for OVER 20 YEARS!!!
Brassnaked, in defense of myself. I was saying that it sounded an awful lot like you were absolutely blasting Saxpics for his opinions. I used similar language to your post to illustrate my point. I, however, did not refer to anything as "transparent vomit" or say that his review demonstrated "the unmitigated arrogance of undeserved authority" that "is the single most terroristic threat to our society." I think those words are far too strong. Especially when one's authority is as well-earned as his. Had he decided that he didn't like the album and proceeded to ban all discussion of Chris Potter, then we would have had some oppression on our hands. This is not the case, however.

Although I defend Pete's right to his opinion, I personally love Chris Potter and everything he's done. I disagree with most of Pete's review, but that's my opinion.

[brassnaked]

Had he decided that he didn't like the album and proceeded to ban all discussion of Chris Potter, then we would have had some oppression on our hands. This is not the case, however.


Now it's not! But it WAS heading in THAT direction...isn't it interesting to note that SEVERAL people have now chimed-in to basically state the same thing: Everyone has the right to like or dislike someone else's music...but the method in which the dislike is presented can sometimes be so patently offensive that some of us just can't stay quiet.
Be VERY careful when poking a stick in a bee's nest...sometimes the bee's will bite back!!!

[LarryG]

I just tried to read the "review", (more like rant), that was "threatened here", (kinda sets the tone don't it?). I couldn't even get past the first section without thinking, oh oh, somebody didn't take their Wellbrutrin XL today, or they took too much? Can't remember a review I have ever read that took this tone, and the writer is still being taken seriously.

As a human being, as well as an amateur musician, I was offended. It's fine to state an opinion, but good taste shouldn't be cast aside when you do it. I think you threw courtesy, as well as integrity, out the window on this one. Three things to think of when you do your next review, 1. Don't confuse Honesty with Integrity.....2. You are supposed to throw away the first draft of anything over 20 words... and 3. Envison what the artist you are reviewing would comment if/when he reads that review even after he regains his composure.......

There is only one person in the world that when they state an opinion it becomes "FACT", and that is my wife.

This place is fast becoming just like TV for me. I really don't need to find out how long it takes you guys to mow your lawn. Go read a book instead.

[brassnaked]

I'm rapidly beginning to see why so many people have migrated AWAY from this forum...but at the same time I'm also encouraged that so many have stated their disdain for the piece of crap masquerading as a music review written by an obviously spoiled brat that is so insecure that you can almost hear him screaming, "Notice me Mommy...Notice me." Maybe the truth is simply that some people are just not very good writers...and apparently, never will be!
Oaky, I'm done...

[Super 20 Player]

You know what? I think I owe Tim and especially Pete yet another apology.

I started this whole mess way back at the beginning of this thread by PM'ing Pete to suggest he close the thread after Tim's first post. This thread started out as a discussion of Potter's gear. Tim posted what I thought was a particularly eloquent response. I PM'd saxpics at that point, because I thought it would be good to close the thread at that point, and make it a sticky.

But somehow, I think Pete misunderstood my PM, and thought I wanted him to jump into the thread. I didn't pay any attention to the thread for several days after I sent the PM, and the next thing I knew, Pete and Tim were engaged in a discussion not of Potter's gear, but of his music in a general sense. I was kind of amused by their their exchange, and posted that effect, which offended Pete, and he told me so in a PM. I apologized at that point, and deleted my offensive post (I think, I'll have to go check that).

But anyway, saxpics got involved in this thread because I pointed it out to him.

That said, I'd like to point out that Pete never wanted to write the so-called "review" in question in the first place. He resisted doing it for a good while. That's why he said "as threatened" when he posted it outside of the thread. The reason I bring this up is because I notice that those of you who were the most offended by the his "review" seem to think it was unsolicited. I don't think it was. I think he posted it out of the frustration of trying to explain his point of view to people who seem to put musicians like Michael Brecker and Chris Potter up on a pedestal.

We're all entitled to our opinions. If you can't handle someone disagreeing with you, then yes, maybe it's time you migrate somewhere else for a while. But if you decide to stay, I encourage you to read the whole thread, and try to understand the context in which the the things you're reading have been written.

Again, I sincerely apologize to Tim and Pete for having set them at odds in the first place. It was not my intention. I thought we were just having a little fun. Obviously some of us take some of this a lot more seriously than the rest of us.

Mr. Moderator, I respectfully reqeust that you please close this thread.

[Pete]

Being an Admin can be a good thing. I wish to respond to some of the posts here and I can post in locked threads.

This also might be a first: it's a review of the reviews of my review.

First,

The unmitigated arrogance of undeserved authority, is the single most terroristic threat ever posed to civilization. Does that type of behavior really work with some people? That's not a review...it's a frontal assault on the person, not the music. Transparent vomit...just my opinion, I could be wrong!Yes, you could be.

First, ANYONE can submit an article on ANYTHING to Harri to publish on www.saxontheweb.net (he has the final say on what goes on his 'site, of course). I think I've made that relatively clear in the past. In the specific case of this review, I not only had Harri review it before it was "published" but I also let the entire SOTW staff (that is, all our Moderators and Admins) take a look -- and asked if I should just post my review in this thread or if Harri wanted it for his website. He said he did. If'n you're going to say that the reason it was published is because of my "undeserved authority" you're flat wrong. If you want to blame someone for why it was published, Harri's e-mail is admin-at-saxontheweb.net.

BTB, I became a Moderator on this forum several years ago when a) I wrote to Harri and said I wouldn't mind being considered and b) because a majority of the SOTW columnists at that time said I'd be a good choice. I'm an Admin because I take care of the techie stuff because I'm a pro computer tech with lots of certifications and stuff, so I'd call any "authority" I have "deserved" and any cracks at me, specifically, why someone isn't posting here "undeserved".

(Yes, if'n you hadn't noticed, I was moderately annoyed with your posts. I'll live with it. No harm done. If you wish to discuss further, PM me.)

==================


It sounds in your review like you're falling victim to your own personal taste rather than giving an unbiased review.

I happen to think Chris Potter has a great soprano tone--probably one of the better one's out there actually. Also, in many ways good tone is subjective once you get to a certain point. There are definitely certain elements one should have in their sound but each person's sound is ultimately going to be different. I didn't know that Maynard played soprano, but I'm sure it sounds awful and Coltrane's soprano sound is nothing compared to his amazing tenor sound.

Additionally, I find his playing to be very melodic and "swinging" (although maybe not in the literal sense of the word like Basie, Dex, Prez and Hawk).

You frequently mention Paul Desmond and I agree with you that he is a master. He's also really underrated. That guy had so much soul and wonderful chops. It is too bad that so many players of my generation skip him over in favor of sounding like Kenny Garrett or Steve Coleman.

It's okay if you dislike Chris Potter. But, how much of him have you really listened to? You might enjoy his CD Grattitude or Unspoken more that his newer stuff. That being said--everyone has a right to their opinon and we're all going to like who we like.
I list all of that in my review. a) I think Potter's soprano tone is sub-par and no one's going to convince me otherwise. I've also been told that most modern jazz soprano saxophonists have tone worse that this. I weep for this. b) Of course the review's my opinion -- I have problems writing other people's opinions :D.

I said in an above post that if you wanted to evaluate CP's contribution to jazz you DON'T want me to write it because that ain't my scene; it's more Tim Price's. However, if you wanted my opinion, as a person that mainly plays classical, if I liked the CD, I have to say no. I've also gotta say that I checked out other reviews (I believe I mentioned this in mine) and they are not universally, "Chris Potter is great! This is the best CD evar!!!"

Additionally, the reason I got this CD is because, in the opinion of the guy that sent it, this is some of CP's best work. Indeed, as I mentioned, I thought "Okinawa" was pretty nice, but I disliked that soprano tone. Put it on tenor and it's a winner. I also did listen to other samples of CP's stuff, so I could write, "he does experiment with different time signatures quite a bit on his other CD’s". No, I didn't buy the entire CP library, I just listened to the clips.

When you see a review in the paper, you either get a review from a "true believer" -- one who has every single album available from $artist, all his bootlegs and live recordings, etc. -- who will almost invariably write a favorable review and his audience is specifically people that like that music or you're gonna get a review from someone who has some general knowledge on the subject and writes a review for a general audience. That's me and that's what I've done for ALL the reviews I've written for SOTW (although I also have specific knowledge to review Paul Cohen's and Jay Easton's work).

===============


This review was very depressing to me. The way he couches his remarks are as if what he is saying is FACT, and not just his opinion. It's almost as if he ( Pete ) is trashing the artist PERSONALLY, rather than the art !!
The comment about the soprano playing via curved soprano was WAY off base IMHO.
He's most certainly entitled to his OPINION regarding his music.That's where one HAS to draw the line...he turned a CD music review into something else.

Saxjazz said it best and very honestly.." It sounds in your review like you're falling victim to your own personal taste rather than giving an unbiased review " I couldn't agree more.

In the 2o years I've done reviews for "Saxophone Journal " I always talked about...what the music does NOT what it doesn't. I can't take this review seriously at all. Sorry.
He actually infers that Chris misses notes and all kinds of odd off base comments, many that can't even be proved, let alone taken seriously?
I'd hope this review never reaches the front page at SOTW as it shows something I personally don't think is necessary in the saxophone world.

Nuff said.Just MY opinion.Different strokesTim's entitled to his opinion and he has way more credentials than I do, however I am going to stand by my comments, even about the curved vs. straight. Brief comment on that:

I was originally a clarinet player and moved to sax. I had the opportunity to pick up soprano and almost immediately put it down. The reason was because I started playing it like a clarinet and got a blasty "scattered" tone, very much like I feeel CP's is. I tried a curved sop a bit later and my tone was much more focused.

And it wasn't the horn: the straight horn was a mint Selmer Mark VI. The curved horn was a broken Buescher stencil (had a couple broken keys and needed new pads -- it had white kid). Same mouthpiece on both: a Rascher.

I've also seen lotsa posts and heard several players say that if'n you're having problems with straight soprano, try curved. So that's where I'm coming from.

I'm also trying to inform people that CP's tone isn't necessarily what a soprano's supposed to sound like, nor was John Coltrane's.

What I said about a note being missed on "Okinawa" is what I heard: partway through the song, CP plays some low note and it seriously sounds like a blast from a kazoo and doesn't sound like it's anywhere near in tune. Why'd I print that? To demonstrate why I didn't like his soprano playing.

===========

Bottom line: the review is on Harri's site because he felt it was good enough, not because I felt it needed to be there. No, I didn't *want* to listen to this music or write a review, but the gentleman that sent it to me wanted to convince me to like CP's music, even after I said I didn't care for it, so I felt obligated to listen to the CD he sent several times -- with as much of an open mind I could give (if you think it's closed, because you don't like my review, I can't convince you otherwise). Again, major kudos for liking an artist enough to want to send folks CD's. Remember that I did say that I'd write a review; I didn't say I'd write a review only if I liked it.

I also did find some bright spots and I printed those. I don't see much comment on that.

I think CP's a good tenor player, but I really don't care for repetitive solos and the lack of identifiable melody. Yes, I know that's the "style". I said that if you like this "style", you're gonna really like CP. I don't and LOTS of other people don't, too.

Anyhow, this thread was closed by someone other than me. If you want to blast me further for my review, please do so, but via PM or e-mail. I can't guarantee immediate response, but I'll do the best to answer everyone.