Before I get flamed, does anyone not like Charlie Parker that much? I don't dislike him, I just find him a little bland.
It's interesting that this topic comes up so regularly here. I guess it's because Bird (and Coltrane, similar threads about him from time to time) are such iconic figures and their music is complex.
I didn't really enjoy him the first time I heard him, either. But although you are entitled to your opinion, "bland" is not really an attribute I would pull out when talking about Bird, his music was just too rich, complex, innovative, crazy and influential to really call it bland. You can say it leaves you cold, though, but as others have said: it might take some time and listening and - voilà - you see a whole new universe in Bird's music.
Absent the historical nature of the recordings, I don't think many would care to listen to Parker. He is an iconic figure in the jazz world, which is great. But the recordings are generally poor in sound quality, and the man's playing does not leave a lot to enjoy if you're not serious about jazz.
I enjoyed listening to that. Thank you. I love most all Cannonball, btw, b/c his personality often screams through the recordings. For some reason, however, it seems as though Bird was in a chemically altered state for much of his playing.This is pretty good sound quality
Ditto.I wasn't all that interested in Charlie Parker for years until I bought the Omnibook a few months ago. I sat down with the book and listened to the corresponding recordings. Then I started really appreciating his music, mainly because I was making a serous effort to listen to it.