I do like the album, Kind of Blue. However, I never understood why it has been considered to be so far superior to other classic jazz albums from the same period, such as Mingus Ah Um, Time Out, and A Love Supreme. Could somebody explain its superior importance so that I can have a better understanding?
I don't think it is necessarily so much "better" than those other albums. It is more accessible and easier to market than most jazz albums, so it is more popular with non jazz fans, which makes its reputation higher.
Of course, it is my favorite jazz album. I like the way it sounds better than I like the way any other jazz album sounds.
Same here. It just comes together so perfectly. No clutter and the timing is perfect. personally my favourite is Bitches brew. Nothing matches it sheer sonic intesity. Nothing like it since, except maybe Kid A
I’ve wondered about that myself, RR. I think Kind of Blue was hugely influential on every artistically ambitious jazz musician for a decade after it came out, which translates very easily into critical acclaim. Something similar happened with Pet Sounds.
No disrespect intended to the album. I’m no jazz expert, but among the albums you mention I think Kind of Blue is the standout, although I haven’t heard Mingus Ah Um. Time Out is fun but a bit of a novelty record, if you know what I mean, and A Love Supreme, while very good, is a little too much of an idiosyncratic personal expression for me to really warm up to it.
schleuse, I think you would really love the Mingus record. It is both modern (for its time) and a big tip of the hat back to the glory years of New Orleans and big band jazz. Check it out if you get a chance. In the same vein, though a little more raw is Mingus' Blue and Roots LP.
Just to tag a few of the comments here, I think Kind of Blue's superiority is owed to a few different things which are more or less interrelated. Like Paul alluded, it's just incredibly easy to listen to -- which certainly doesn't mean that the music isn't intricate or complex, but it's not atonal (like Davis' later work, eg. Bitches Brew), and it's not long-winded either (only five pieces), it's just sonically and musically, a very pleasing listen. And going back to my comments from the album poll, it's the perfect record for almost any occasion; cooking breakfast, taking a late-night drive, making love to your lady -- it's almost the perfect background music. Yet, it you want to throw on the headphones and listen a little bit deeper (to say, Evans' sprinkling of upper-register piano notes, or Cobb's snare brushes), it allows that. Either way, it doesn't demand anything from you other than to just enjoy its beauty (I'm plagiarizing myself here). Add to the fact that the performances you hear on the record were almost entirely improvised, it makes the beauty of music that much more powerful. And I'm not a religious guy, but sometimes you wonder if these six musicians were just merely conduits, channeling something from another place. It's that f$cking good.
From Ashley Kahn's book, "Kind of Blue: The Making of the Miles Davis Masterpiece" --
"Still acknowledged as the height of hip four decades after it was recorded, Kind of Blue is the premier album of its era, jazz or otherwise. Its vapory piano-and-bass introduction is universally recognized. Classical buffs and rage rockers alike praise its subtlety, simplicity and emotional depth."
"...Kind of Blue lives and prospers outside the confines of the jazz community. No longer the exclusive possession of a musical subculture, the album is simply great music, one of a very, very few musical recordings our culture allows into the category marked 'masterpiece'".
