Andrew Hill - Lift Every Voice

[mke]

This may be a rare case in which the previously unreleased tracks (a session with different musicians recorded a year after the issued session) are better than those on the original album. Unless the album was released before the second session was recorded, I'm really surprised that they didn't use the second session, or some mix of the two.

Of course, this album's particularity is the quintet + choir format. Once you get past the slightly dated weirdness of it all, there's a fair amount to enjoy. It starts out great with a funky "Hey Hey" (yes, the female voices do punctuate the tune with "hey! hey!") in which the voices serve a rhythmic role. Carlos Garnett injects squealing free/blues energy and under Woody Shaw's solo, Freddie Waits plays an almost free-time funky swing not quite like anything else I've heard. Actually, it kind of sounds like... Nasheet Waits.

The last track of the original album, "Ghetto Lights" is the other highlight, as the vocal writing is at its most multi-layered. Nice solos, too, but nothing that equals the stunning version on Bobby Hutcherson's "Dialogue."

Waits is perhaps the album's main problem, actually. He often sounds a bit over-eager, which is probably the last thing you want to be when playing Hill's music. An egregious example is on "Two Lullabies," when Waits injects a heavy back-beat as if to kick Shaw's solo into a higher gear, but seems as surprised as we are to learn that Shaw's solo spot is actually over. He then fumbles his way back into a quieter groove. On the very next track, he does something similar at the end of Garnett's solo, but, not having forgotten the form, nails it, so the fill serves as a full stop. Also, on the title track, he and Richard Davis don't gel at all, so the tune sags a lot despite some nice solos.

None of these problems occur on the second session, with Ben Riley and Ron Carter. The whole session sounds, on the one hand a lot smoother, on the other, more conservative, despite the vocal arrangements being slightly better.

I wonder if Hill's late '60s shift away from his more difficult music is a sign that the opinions he's expressed on Cecil Taylor had already taken hold at that time. The problem is that he becomes a little too mainstream and his music loses its strength, becomes a little too ordinary, whereas the mid-60s albums are all momentous occasions. It seems to me that "Dusk" and "Time Lines" strike a good balance between these two poles.

[amfortas]

What were the opinons he expressed about Cecil Taylor?

[hearsay]

Yeah, I agree that second session is quite strong. In fact (although I haven't listened to it in a while) I recall it having some of Hill's strongest playing. The vocal arrangements may also have been better, but I find them all very hoky and rather superfluous.

I've never heard Hill's remarks about Cecil Taylor, but his most Taylor like record, "Compulsion", is monstrous! I don't think he ever did anything else quite like the fury of that record.

[mke]

Originally Posted by amfortas

What were the opinons he expressed about Cecil Taylor?

Posted here.

"Compulsion" is ferocious indeed. I've only heard it once, must listen again.

[hearsay]

I too wonder if Hill was trying to appeal to a wider audience or a black audience by adding a groovier element to his music, but I think you start climbing a slippery slope as an artist whenever you try to appeal to critics, or a certain type of demographic or whatever. There's really no need, of course Hill's experience as a black american and a jazz musician is going to be reflected in his music. I think it does artists a disservice when they try to play up certain aspects of their background or associations or even political views, when all those things will be reflected if they just try to be sincere and expressive.

[mke]

It might have had something to do with the label's general direction, but I think Hill also sincerely wanted to make more accessible music. Or, at least, music that was different from what he'd been doing. "Dance With Death," "Lift Every Voice" and "Grassroots" (Dance is probably the best of the three) show this shift. I haven't heard much of Hill's output between his last BN albums and "Dusk," but it seems to me that he's been slowly working his way towards this late-in-life sound for a while and probably couldn't have reached it without this somewhat lacklustre run.

[Dick Bowman]

Originally Posted by mke

... I haven't heard much of Hill's output between his last BN albums and "Dusk," ...

The Steeplechase and EastWind (in particular) sessions contained some excellent music - I think.

[amfortas]

I find Hill's attack on Taylor bizarre and incomprehensible, in relation to his target and to his own music.

Imo, to claim that Taylor 'abandon[ed] the feeling that was the essence of black music' is utterly absurd; Taylor's emotional impact is stunning.

I dont think 'accessiblity' is artistically relevent to music; people like what they hear or they dont.

It also makes no sense in relation to Hills own music; his outstanding recordings for BlueNote( Andrew!, Judgement, Point Of Departure, etc) were never likely to be popular with the masses, and hardly seem 'accessible' in relation to 'pop music' then or now.

Just about to order Compulsion, sounds interesting !

[mke]

I was as perplexed as you are. But if you look at Hill's music's arc from the late 60s on, you can see that he certainly didn't pursue in the direction of "Compulsion."

[amfortas]

Originally Posted by mke

I was as perplexed as you are. But if you look at Hill's music's arc from the late 60s on, you can see that he certainly didn't pursue in the direction of "Compulsion."

Im trying to get a copy of Compulsion, doesnt seem to be in print, so i guess ill have to settle for a 2nd hand copy....how do you rate Compulsion?