Did anyone else throw up in their mouth upon hearing that Vijay Iyer won five categories in this year's DownBeat Magazine Critics Poll? Top Pianist, top jazz group, top jazz artist, top jazz album and rising star composer. Wow. Maybe someone can explain this to me.
To my ears Billy Joel has a more refined, subtle touch than this guy at the piano. Frankly, I despise the sound he gets from the instrument. He's a great talker and writer, but his playing sounds like self indulgent banging to me.
When I first heard him play a decade ago, I had a mild, disengaged appreciation for his fusing Indian music with jazz, and was able to overlook his piano playing. I wonder... was it this fusion that endeared him to the critics? If so, maybe my recording a duo record with my bagpipe playing father is long overdue. Who would have thought that tapping into the roots of my Scottish-Canadian ethnicity might be the key to attaining worldwide critical acclaim?
Perhaps I'm sounding jealous. Trust me, I'm not. I just question if the critics (and their followers) actually listen to music, or if they formulate opinions based on social trends (fusion = cool.) I really tried to listen to Vijay and find something to like about his music. In his playing, and the conceptual approach to his trio, I simply don't hear much that appeals to me. It doesn't capture my imagination or interest. I can't even listen to an entire CD of his music without reaching for the remote.
You tell me. What am I missing? Certainly there is a musical reason he has won so many awards and was selected as Dave Douglas' successor at the Banff International Workshop in Jazz and Creative Music. I just don'tsee hear it in the music outside of his Indian collaborations (of which his current album is not). Do the DownBeat critics really think Vijay is a better pianist/musician/artist than Fred Hersch, Geoff Keezer, Uri Caine, Luis Perdomo, etc.? I don't.
To my ears Billy Joel has a more refined, subtle touch than this guy at the piano. Frankly, I despise the sound he gets from the instrument. He's a great talker and writer, but his playing sounds like self indulgent banging to me.
When I first heard him play a decade ago, I had a mild, disengaged appreciation for his fusing Indian music with jazz, and was able to overlook his piano playing. I wonder... was it this fusion that endeared him to the critics? If so, maybe my recording a duo record with my bagpipe playing father is long overdue. Who would have thought that tapping into the roots of my Scottish-Canadian ethnicity might be the key to attaining worldwide critical acclaim?
Perhaps I'm sounding jealous. Trust me, I'm not. I just question if the critics (and their followers) actually listen to music, or if they formulate opinions based on social trends (fusion = cool.) I really tried to listen to Vijay and find something to like about his music. In his playing, and the conceptual approach to his trio, I simply don't hear much that appeals to me. It doesn't capture my imagination or interest. I can't even listen to an entire CD of his music without reaching for the remote.
You tell me. What am I missing? Certainly there is a musical reason he has won so many awards and was selected as Dave Douglas' successor at the Banff International Workshop in Jazz and Creative Music. I just don't