Ornette Coleman Music

Although there is no justification for the one star rating, I must confess I do agree with many of the last reviewers points. It is a show-off album where Coleman's abrasively self-conscious soloing overshadows much rhythmic, let alone melodic chemistry. It is a prime piece of early free jazz indeed, a subgenre that is not without its divinely morbid spirals into atonal bliss, but also not without its rambling, compositional indulgences. There are plenty of innovative moments on the album to justify a place in the history books for students of the craft, though a classic piece of music that does not necessarily make.

Ornette Coleman is a revoluationary musician. I do not like his approach to music. I do not like the way he plays the saxophone nor do I dig his tone. There is one thing I do respect about him: he opened the doors for many musicians and sparked an evolution in this music we call jazz. He opened many people's ears to start exploring.

"The Shape Of Jazz To Come" isn't my kind of jazz album. I came to the music with no pre-conceived notions and a clear and open mind, but yet I still couldn't get the vibe. For one thing, I like chords. I like to hear harmony. This recording just didn't really draw me in. I love horn players and a great rhythm section, but I would have liked to hear chords being played by a pianist or guitarist.

Free jazz is something that always bothered me, because the music itself is chaotic. It's not very interesting or melodic. It doesn't have anything a listener or even musician can grab onto. It's just totally "up in the air" so to speak. You can't make heads or tails out of it. It's something that just hasn't ever appealed to me. I have listened to Coleman, Cecil Taylor, John Zorn (he's actually done some good music), Coltrane's free period, Derek Bailey, Evan Parker, Anthony Braxton, etc. I'm sorry but this music just doesn't do anything for me.

"The Shape Of Jazz To Come" was a milestone in the beginnings of free jazz, but I have yet to hear a single free jazz recording that makes me want to keep listening.

I would only buy this album for its historical purposes. I'll always listen to Miles, Monk, Blakey, Clifford Brown, Gillespie, etc, because their art is timeless and can be enjoyed by everyone.

Two of the albums most influential to my understanding of jazz both came in 1959. Bill Evans masteripiece Portrait in Jazz and Ornette Coleman's The Shape of Jazz to Come. Bill defined the piano as the well-spring of jazz, Ornette thought the piano was the whole problem. Ornette's frentic solos were a stark contrast Bill's cyborg-like restraint. For all their differences, one thing on which the could agree was that traditional chord voicing had to go. These are both great ablums in their own right, but its all the more exciting to listen to them in context with full knowelge of all that they would inspire in other artists. To be sure, there are a great number of other highly influential albums of that time, but for me, these two stand apart from the pack.

I think a lynching (at least verbal) would be appropriate for the people who said he should be burned and destroyed for messing with the precious jazz formula. I think the risks Ornette Coleman took are VERY appropriate. Besides, unpredictability can be fun, and Ornette Coleman demonstrates this with glee. He does know too much is just _________ annoying and it doesn't sound daring or challenging, it just sounds bad, or _____. Unlike his most famous album (maybe, Free jazz, there isn't two seperate quartets for each channel. There are also only four members. The sound is very clean on this album, but there is a sense of adventure on this album.

Whenever I listen to it, there's always something to listen to. This is one of those albums like that, but this album really is just FUN. Now, introspection is awesome. But I appreciate music on pretty much all of it's fronts, those deep meanings, those messages, the dancing, or just plain on listening how people use their voices as instruments. Such as this. Don Cherry and Ornette Coleman do that, but they really just seem to have fun. The drums and bass are focused and run like the wind. Only in Lonely and Lonely Women are they toned down to beauty and melancholy, respectfully. The rest just rip, glide, and go insane.

Ornette Coleman and company deliver a well rounded, excellent, focused jazz album, not bound by any scales or time signatures. They build on the bebop/hardbop and modal jazz and add a bit of raw, addicting dissonants, and a great sense of freedom. That's my favorite thing about this album, is that it has plenty of that, but there is a great sense of freedom and very tuneful.

It's really not just a great way to slowly get into the world of free jazz and noisy music (everything from later Coleman to John Zorn's Naked City). Besides, it's not one album you'll forget after using as a stepping stone. It's not really a stepping stone, it's just an album that happens to be a good introduction for some people. I don't care what your excuse is (as long as it's not to be "cool". If so, your a _________ moron), get it.

9/10

1959 is to jazz what 1977 is to punk rock: glorious. John Coltrane's Giant Steps. Miles Davis recording Kind of Blue. Charles Mingus and his eponymous Mingus Ah Um. And my personal favorite, Time Out by the Dave Brubeck Quartet. 1959 also introduced one man whose debut album shook the foundations of jazz and introduced a shift in jazz music that is still felt today.

The young man with the plastic horn. Unprecedented.

Ornette Coleman's The Shape of Jazz to Come

Jazz had not seen anything like it. It would be safe to assume that no one thought anything of this caliber would be possible. With its apparent lack of chords, its atonality, and its complete disregard for traditional jazz conventions, Ornette Coleman's debut album angered many. It was easily dismissed as junk, noise, garbage. This isn't music, many said. For them, this wasn't jazz.

But it was. And is.

The Shape of Jazz to Come is prophetic in its title. This album would immensely influence John Coltrane, Eric Dolphy and countless other musicians, both within and outside of jazz. And its verberations can still be felt in jazz. John Zorn has taken much from Coleman. Pat Methany has worked alongside Coleman.

With this debut, Coleman paved the way not just for avant-garde jazz, but for free jazz as well. Such a possibility must have been unforeseeable in 1959. The Shape of Jazz to Come established a path for those seeking a new take on jazz to follow. In this way, the album served as an exodus, the music contained within serving as aural guideposts to jazz's new land.

There is a story that details how Ornette Coleman performed a show in front of a crowd to whom he was a relative unknown. Halfway through Coleman's performance, the crowd, unable to process the new jazz they were listening to, chased Coleman off the stage, seized his plastic horn, and destroyed it. I imagine The Shape of Jazz to Come elicited the same dangerous reaction from others.

A necessary reaction.

Although there is no justification for the one star rating, I must confess I do agree with many of the last reviewers points. It is a show-off album where Coleman's abrasively self-conscious soloing overshadows much rhythmic, let alone melodic chemistry. It is a prime piece of early free jazz indeed, a subgenre that is not without its divinely morbid spirals into atonal bliss, but also not without its rambling, compositional indulgences. There are plenty of innovative moments on the album to justify a place in the history books for students of the craft, though a classic piece of music that does not necessarily make.

Ornette Coleman is a revoluationary musician. I do not like his approach to music. I do not like the way he plays the saxophone nor do I dig his tone. There is one thing I do respect about him: he opened the doors for many musicians and sparked an evolution in this music we call jazz. He opened many people's ears to start exploring.

"The Shape Of Jazz To Come" isn't my kind of jazz album. I came to the music with no pre-conceived notions and a clear and open mind, but yet I still couldn't get the vibe. For one thing, I like chords. I like to hear harmony. This recording just didn't really draw me in. I love horn players and a great rhythm section, but I would have liked to hear chords being played by a pianist or guitarist.

Free jazz is something that always bothered me, because the music itself is chaotic. It's not very interesting or melodic. It doesn't have anything a listener or even musician can grab onto. It's just totally "up in the air" so to speak. You can't make heads or tails out of it. It's something that just hasn't ever appealed to me. I have listened to Coleman, Cecil Taylor, John Zorn (he's actually done some good music), Coltrane's free period, Derek Bailey, Evan Parker, Anthony Braxton, etc. I'm sorry but this music just doesn't do anything for me.

"The Shape Of Jazz To Come" was a milestone in the beginnings of free jazz, but I have yet to hear a single free jazz recording that makes me want to keep listening.

I would only buy this album for its historical purposes. I'll always listen to Miles, Monk, Blakey, Clifford Brown, Gillespie, etc, because their art is timeless and can be enjoyed by everyone.

Two of the albums most influential to my understanding of jazz both came in 1959. Bill Evans masteripiece Portrait in Jazz and Ornette Coleman's The Shape of Jazz to Come. Bill defined the piano as the well-spring of jazz, Ornette thought the piano was the whole problem. Ornette's frentic solos were a stark contrast Bill's cyborg-like restraint. For all their differences, one thing on which the could agree was that traditional chord voicing had to go. These are both great ablums in their own right, but its all the more exciting to listen to them in context with full knowelge of all that they would inspire in other artists. To be sure, there are a great number of other highly influential albums of that time, but for me, these two stand apart from the pack.

I think a lynching (at least verbal) would be appropriate for the people who said he should be burned and destroyed for messing with the precious jazz formula. I think the risks Ornette Coleman took are VERY appropriate. Besides, unpredictability can be fun, and Ornette Coleman demonstrates this with glee. He does know too much is just _________ annoying and it doesn't sound daring or challenging, it just sounds bad, or _____. Unlike his most famous album (maybe, Free jazz, there isn't two seperate quartets for each channel. There are also only four members. The sound is very clean on this album, but there is a sense of adventure on this album.

Whenever I listen to it, there's always something to listen to. This is one of those albums like that, but this album really is just FUN. Now, introspection is awesome. But I appreciate music on pretty much all of it's fronts, those deep meanings, those messages, the dancing, or just plain on listening how people use their voices as instruments. Such as this. Don Cherry and Ornette Coleman do that, but they really just seem to have fun. The drums and bass are focused and run like the wind. Only in Lonely and Lonely Women are they toned down to beauty and melancholy, respectfully. The rest just rip, glide, and go insane.

Ornette Coleman and company deliver a well rounded, excellent, focused jazz album, not bound by any scales or time signatures. They build on the bebop/hardbop and modal jazz and add a bit of raw, addicting dissonants, and a great sense of freedom. That's my favorite thing about this album, is that it has plenty of that, but there is a great sense of freedom and very tuneful.

It's really not just a great way to slowly get into the world of free jazz and noisy music (everything from later Coleman to John Zorn's Naked City). Besides, it's not one album you'll forget after using as a stepping stone. It's not really a stepping stone, it's just an album that happens to be a good introduction for some people. I don't care what your excuse is (as long as it's not to be "cool". If so, your a _________ moron), get it.

9/10

1959 is to jazz what 1977 is to punk rock: glorious. John Coltrane's Giant Steps. Miles Davis recording Kind of Blue. Charles Mingus and his eponymous Mingus Ah Um. And my personal favorite, Time Out by the Dave Brubeck Quartet. 1959 also introduced one man whose debut album shook the foundations of jazz and introduced a shift in jazz music that is still felt today.

The young man with the plastic horn. Unprecedented.

Ornette Coleman's The Shape of Jazz to Come

Jazz had not seen anything like it. It would be safe to assume that no one thought anything of this caliber would be possible. With its apparent lack of chords, its atonality, and its complete disregard for traditional jazz conventions, Ornette Coleman's debut album angered many. It was easily dismissed as junk, noise, garbage. This isn't music, many said. For them, this wasn't jazz.

But it was. And is.

The Shape of Jazz to Come is prophetic in its title. This album would immensely influence John Coltrane, Eric Dolphy and countless other musicians, both within and outside of jazz. And its verberations can still be felt in jazz. John Zorn has taken much from Coleman. Pat Methany has worked alongside Coleman.

With this debut, Coleman paved the way not just for avant-garde jazz, but for free jazz as well. Such a possibility must have been unforeseeable in 1959. The Shape of Jazz to Come established a path for those seeking a new take on jazz to follow. In this way, the album served as an exodus, the music contained within serving as aural guideposts to jazz's new land.

There is a story that details how Ornette Coleman performed a show in front of a crowd to whom he was a relative unknown. Halfway through Coleman's performance, the crowd, unable to process the new jazz they were listening to, chased Coleman off the stage, seized his plastic horn, and destroyed it. I imagine The Shape of Jazz to Come elicited the same dangerous reaction from others.

A necessary reaction.