Jazz for aficionados

A few comments about some recent clips and mentions:

Rok, Benny "At Carnegie Hall" was my very first jazz record. I don't know how obvious it's been based on past posts, but I love Benny and that style of music in general. Personally, I don't understand how a truly comprehensive discussion on jazz can take place without substantial mention and discussion of players like Goodman, Artie Shaw, Harry James and others from that period. The level of artistry, within that style, is fabulous; not to mention their contribution to paving the way for the more modern players. I would like to see more of it on this thread.

I am sure O-10 meant the comment as a generalization, and I certainly don't know what he considers a "good living", but while it is true that many jazz artists didn't get their due, just as many made very good livings. Going back in time, and speaking of Benny, sidemen in his band (and others) made upper-middle-class incomes, and the leaders did very well. Today, someone like Wynton, makes in excess of 2 million a year, and sidemen in his band have incomes in excess of $200k.

Grover is one of the "pop" saxophone players who consistently receives the respect of other musicians; he can really play! His recording of Operatic arias "Aria" is beautiful and shows a sensitivity that so many pop saxists don't have. Highly recommended.

My grandmother used to say: "if you don't have anything positive to say...."

I wish I could share my fellow enthusiasts' enthusiasm for Johnny Lytle. I find his playing rudimentary and lacking in sophistication. There are various reasons why some players fade into obscurity; in this case the reason is obvious IMO. His improvising on "St Louis Blues" is almost like that of a young jazz student in music school; he doesn't make all the changes and resorts to the same blues scale over the changing harmonies. He may have "speed"; but, so what? He uses way too much sustain pedal which makes his playing sound "swimmy". And what is up with those xylaphone (bells) at the end of "Summertime"? Huh?

OK, how do I really feel about .....?

Johnny Lytle:
Dang!! The Frogman is a hard taskmaster.
Lytle is a 'soul-Jazz' player. The 'groove' is the thing. Almost like instrumental R&B. And, as you yourself have done in the past, to indicate a player's ability: He played with Armstrong, Lionel Hampton, Miles, Nancy Wilson, and Bobby Timmons etc.... And recorded over 30 albums.

The bells on 'Summertime'? I don't know what that was. St Louis Blues? I liked the tempo and the 'groove'. This is not 'Giant Steps' type improvisation. Was not even the intent. Lounge music.

Give Mr Lytle some love! :)

Cheers

Frogman, as always, I appreciate your comments. All music is subjective, and jazz is more subjective than most genres of music. I approach music from a purely subjective point of view; while I read history, I listen to music; consequently, when what I read disagrees with what I hear, the book goes in the library, while the music goes in the record collection.

Johnny Lytle's "St. Louis Blues" comes on slow and easy, like that St. Louis woman with her diamond ring; and I know a lot about them. I believe Rok stated the case for Johnny Lytle quite eloquently.

Charlie Parker and the other giants of jazz that "Nica" supported made a lousy living. Although Wynton makes a fantastic salary, he's an exception.

While I'm quite aware of Benny Goodman, Harry James, and Artie Shaw; as close as my music collection will come is Stan Kenton. His big band is well represented in my collection, and his range of music is as wide as the Pacific Ocean. I know Rok remembers when he was in the Columbia Record Club, and we received those records we didn't order, but you could send them back; well Kenton's records didn't go back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3EkI3ISz28

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN9sp6ApX4o

Here are a couple of tunes by Stan, maybe Leersfool could enlighten us on the unusual brass horns.

Enjoy the music.

Frogman, "I love Benny and that style of music in general. Personally, I don't understand how a truly comprehensive discussion on jazz can take place without substantial mention and discussion of players like Goodman, Artie Shaw, Harry James and others from that period. The level of artistry, within that style, is fabulous; not to mention their contribution to paving the way for the more modern players. I would like to see more of it on this thread."

Would you be so kind as to enlighten us, you have the floor.

Enjoy the music.

******* I don't understand how a truly comprehensive discussion on jazz can take place without substantial mention and discussion of players like Goodman, Artie Shaw, Harry James and others from that period.*****

That would be easy to do. There are not that many players that 'must be' mentioned in a history or comprehensivbe discussion of Jazz. A small percentage.

The Label, BLUE NOTE, for instance, is more important to Jazz than any of the people you mentioned. In fact, I am not sure they played Jazz at all. They all took solos, and displayed great skill on their instrument, but I am not sure that much 'improvisation' was going on.

*****The level of artistry, within that style, is fabulous; not to mention their contribution to paving the way for the more modern players.*********

Technically proficient? Without a doubt. But so was Maurice Andre, and any number of players in classical Orchestras. They just don't play Jazz.

To paraphrase a very popular bumper sticker down here in the Bible Belt:

No Blues, No Jazz
Know Blues, Know Jazz

Pretty much sums it up.

And Shaw's 'begin The Beguine' is one of my all time favorite tunes. All these guys made great music. Great Swing and big Band music.

In fact, I had heard a LOT of Harry James and Goodman, before I ever heard ANY Miles or Morgan or Hubbard et al. Maybe that's indicative of the problem. A lot of people were accepted as being things, that they were in fact, not!!

Cheers