God, I wish critics would stick to wines and not burden us with their musical preferences.

Parker used to write about Neil Young et al constantly, and now it’s Neal Martin. Actually he has been doing this for some time, but it just got to be a little annoying. His just completed article on the glorious 1959 vintage has just been published by Vinous. Let me say up front, that unlike Parker, Neal is an excellent writer, but why on earth should anybody care what he thinks about jazz?

This gem
“ Where’s the melody? The aleatoric nature of jazz, zigzagging like a fly trapped in a jar, keeps me at arms length. I completely understand why others are fanatical, obsessive about this musical form, but I must accept that just like single malt whiskey and golf, jazz ain’t for me.”

Neal is happily obsessed with music. That’s one of the things I really like about him.

Shouldn’t this be in the critic’s bingo thread? [stirthepothal.gif]

I have no problem with his talking about music. I like having a little more fleshed out picture of him as a person. I think it enhances his writing about wine. He posts food pictures on FB sometimes and chats about that, too. I find people talking about what they are interested in to be interesting. I don’t think he has any responsibility to limit himself to wine talk. He’s not a machine.

Clearly Martin is multi-faceted in every dimension, a towering vertical force of nuance and pedigree.

You admit in an online board that you’re still reading Parker? neener

Nah, definitely belongs in the curmudgeon thread.

No, please note the words “used to”. I stopped reading the Advocate many moons ago. And I am pretty sure he doesn’t write for them any more.


No mention of Dave Brubeck…?

A lot of the Vinous articles are great, and super informative. But, I have found I rarely, if ever, read Neal’s.

Honestly, he seems like a great guy, but his writing style (including many references to music that are far too obscure for my pedestrian tastes) is not for me. Many others seem to love his articles. So, to each his own, I guess… [cheers.gif]

You don’t like it, don’t read it. There is an “ignore” feature for critics as well. [cheers.gif]

Proof, once again, that you can’t mention Parker without drawing the ire of the Parker Haters.

It is embedded in the article. I want to read about 1959s, so have little choice but to read the other crap. But I would prefer if he didn’t include or separated it from his wine writing. I really don’t give a monkeys that he doesn’t like jazz.

I like Neal Martin’s writing, which I find refreshingly unpretentious and modest. He has always included musical references, it’s part of his DNA and he has always done separate musical reviews for first TWA and now Vinous. Personally I like most of his musical taste anyway so I enjoy them. Most of the wine articles’ titles are cryptic references to albums or songs and again, I enjoy that. Occasionally, the producer profiles also veer into musical references, like his one with Nicolas Glumineau which was all about The Cure - it was one of my favourites! But each to their own - even if the music bugs you, you can always just focus on the wine parts.

I like Neal’s writing, on the random occasion I read it, but can you really trust anyone who doesn’t like jazz?

Right? Or single malt scotch! :slight_smile:

I love his writing and that he is a music geek. BUT I was shocked when I read that!

People who don’t like jazz are just kind of shitty in bed too.

I read wine articles to find out more about wine. I even balk at most of my musician friends recommending music to me, so I’d rather not hear any thoughts on someone’s musical opinions. Music may even be more of a personal preference than wine.