tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7456569807955439977.post3320046247975136222..comments2023-10-10T05:35:14.022-07:00Comments on Jazz 88s: Celeste + Jazz = Blech!Jazz 88'shttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18255939527483740013noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7456569807955439977.post-20701523379827507312009-12-17T18:31:31.949-08:002009-12-17T18:31:31.949-08:00I will listen again. Even then, I'm not sure I...I will listen again. Even then, I'm not sure I'll agree with you. But I'm open to anything. (Except maybe the tuba as a lead instrument in jazz. I have an album somewhere of tuba bebop. It's not natural.)Jazz 88'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18255939527483740013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7456569807955439977.post-22646785343157528632009-12-16T17:06:38.501-08:002009-12-16T17:06:38.501-08:00Actually, your reference to Monk and the celeste i...Actually, your reference to Monk and the celeste is moot: Lewis used the celeste in the 1930s. (He recorded "I'm in the Mood for Love" on the instrument during that song's first flush of popularity, around '36.)<br /><br />I dig the celeste in jazz. Lewis's 3 celeste pieces in the '61 album you mention are actually slow blues. It works damned well in that application. Listen again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com