Customer Reviews

The Making of Kind of Blue: Miles Davis and His Masterpiece

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

There are very few facts in this book. Most of the book is about the bio of the musicians and how miles discovered modal. Every chapter is filled with annoying opinions about this or that musician or this or that solo. We can listen for ourselves, don't tell me who's good and who's bad. I'll buy Downbeat for that. There is one small chapter about the actual session and it is very very very disappointing. My recommendation? do not buy this book, I could not finish it, I left in on the plane.

This books reads like it is a collection of excerpts from the author's previous works on Miles and Trane, both of which are infinitely better than this book. The other recent work by Kahn on the making of Kind of Blue is infinitely more informative and original. Niesenson's book provides no real new information on the making of the album. The sole redeeming virtue of the book is the chapter on George Russell. Anyone who has struggled with Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept will appreciate Niesenson's attempt to explain how the "concept" helped shape the direction of Miles, Trane and Bill Evans.

I looked forward to Eric Nisenson's version of the events that made one of the greatest pieces of art, an album that is not just music to me, but life itself. Unfortunately he misses his mark by a long way. I've enjoyed other Nisenson books quite a bit, he does repeat himself quite a bit, but he seems to get under the performers skin and captures their persona for the reader. He's even written a book (Blue, the murder of jazz) about the new establishment of jazz ignoring not only post 1960's jazz music with revisionist thinking but a discrimination against white contributors to jazz. But Nisenson himself seems to be a discriminator.

The opening chapter of the book is great, detailing the mood of the album and the emotions it brings out (I thought I was the ony one who can hear a the air of death, particularly in Flamenco Sketches, on the album). From there Nisenson lists the four major contributors that brought the album from concept to completion. Obviously Miles and Bill Evans are part of this list, writing the songs and controlling the studio environment, they are the keys to what happens on these five songs. The third, George Russell, is important for putting the modal ideas into play before 1959, thus influencing what Davis and Evans heard, and the influence is obvious. The problem I have is with the fourth contributor Nisenson lists; John Coltrane. I have no knock on Coltrane at all, he is one of the most intense musician I have ever heard. But what does he have to do with the influence of Kind of Blue. He showed up at the session and played great, previously he had been playing with reharmonizations of standard chord progressions, but modally did he play anything like these songs before? Not from what I can see. In addition, Nisenson knocks around Cannonball Adderley, for playing too many notes and often being tasteless. But how can he theorize that his contribution is less than Coltrane's? Can anyone imagine the album without Cannonball, no more than any of the musicians who played these sessions. What did Coltrane add that Cannonball didn't? Nisenson's main theory seems flawed due to this thinking, which shows Nisenson's prejudice. Davis, Coltrane and Evans were all innovators in jazz music, as musicians, composers and performers , Adderley was not, he was just a great player. This seems to be a flaw to Nisenson, who finds only innovators important to jazz history. But to any jazz fan, it's the music being played, that brings out the feelings and soul. Something Cannonball had a lot of, but why knock him because he played the same kind of music throughout his career, without blazing a new path. This flaw really ruined the book for me, and the final nail in the coffin, was a poor chapter on the actual recording, which didn't tell me anything new.

With all this complaining, I must say I'm reading Nisenson's book on Sonny Rollins and am enjoying that quite a bit, if you want to read a book about another innovator, Open Sky is for you, but this is not the book for fans of Miles Davis and Kind of Blue, and especially not for Cannonball Adderley fans.

Unlike other reviewers below, I haven't read the author's other books, so I have to judge this one on its own merit. As far as his knowledge, he provides an excellent overview of various jazz styles and competent quick bios of the major players. My problem is with the pastiche-like feel of the book. It feels like the author slapped together a whole bunch of short encyclopedia articles, added some musical commentary and bang, had a book. At times it feels less than professional -- he mentions the drug and dope band thing about 20 times, plus a bit of namedropping on all his personal meetings with Miles.

Despite the fact it reads a bit like a late night college paper, I did learn a lot about jazz history, the lives of the players and the mood of the album. The author knows his stuff in this regard. If you're a big fan of the album, you'll cull some interesting information from this book. Don't let the small writing problems get in your way.

This book has a complete misleading title.

It should be called "Eric's stupid opinions", because this book is certainly NOT about the making of the great record "Kind of Blue".

Just one chapter steps into the sessions, but Eric gives wrong data and introduces Teo Macero as the producer of this record, and that is also completely wrong.

If you want anything serious on this subject buy Ashley Kahn's book, with the same title.

Eric has not done any research at all and uses this book to promote his other work on John Coltrane and other "free" jazz.

That's not only misleading, it's a shame!

Arnold van Kampen, jazzcritic Netherlands.

Okay, there is some interesting information here, but there's also quite a bit of fiction. Too often, the author infers the state of mind of his subjects. So he was a friend of Miles. Was he also psychic?

I agree with another reviewer that the book is fawning. While the author of this book ascribes much of Miles' anti-social behavior to principle, still another reviewer correctly points out that it actually reveals him to be a jerk. The author's adoration of Miles taints his objectivity. The result is an unwitting and failed attempt at a snow job.

Ashley Kahn's book on the making of Kind of Blue (which see) is not as adulatory, but in attempting to include musical information Kahn makes many errors, and glosses over the numerous mistakes Columbia Records made in recording and releasing the album.

Browse through this book for the fun of it, if you're amused by fairy tales and delight in the hype of a press release.

Complaint: The appendix of the book contains a very basic and glaring error in the very beginning of the explanation of the "theory". I find that disconcerting, because if such a simple error can escape the author and editors, it calls into question any and all of his analysis....that said:

I must say that I enjoyed this book, for the most part. I am a professional musician and music theorist and have been fascinated by this period of music...basically jazz between about 1953 and 1962 is my dream time in jazz. Not to say I don't appreciate and respect other eras, but for me, personally this was the real stuff. During this period there was an actual dramatic tension, at times, between the two main concepts (harmonic vs linear) in compositional and improvisational technique. These tremendously powerful concepts even appeared in the same song and albums...Later on the dichotomy...anyway...

As a huge fan of Coltrane, Davis and Evans I really just tore through this book. I too found the author's frequent repitions of his basic ideas annoying. He lays out his thesis in the first chapter, but then seems to write the rest of the book with the assumption that we have forgotten the salient points. And, he just keeps reminding us, over and over again. I found that condescending and a bit insulting.

Interesting read but it feels like the author skims by the information a bit too quickly. Deals a lot with the implications of Kind of Blue on later musicians and on how a lot on how the Kind of Blue sessions came about (both musically and physically). The book also includes a chapter on each of the musicans included in the sessions (there is a chapter on Trane, Cannonball, Davis and Evans. For some reason, Cobb, Chambers and Kelly don't warrant their own chapters). I was sort of disappointed with the book overall as there wasn't a lot on the actual sessions themselves. Good book for the general history of the sessions, but it if you want to dig deep you'll need something more.

Describes events leading up to the sessions, and backgrounds of the musicians more than the actual recording sessions.

Miles Davis remains a legend. Few musicians are revered as much as he was both in life and death. Kind Of Blue, without a shadow of a doubt, towers over every jazz album ever released. Eric Nisenson's account of the Making of Kind Of Blue is gripping. The legend of Miles Davis continues in this book and we are made aware of how exactly an album as grand as this came about. Eric Nisenson takes us through every sinew from a neutral standpoint. Even though he remains an ardent fan of the man this does not stop him from giving an impartial view on the man. The Making of Kind Of Blue is an exciting read and I would encourage any one who has the opportunity to read it to do exactly that.