What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Jazz History For Dummies - 70's Sun Ra Funk/Fusion (1 Viewer)

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
I earlier planned a more in-depth thread on the subject of jazz history that proved overly ambitious. For myself, saintsfan's Beatles thread is a model of musical exposition. I'm going to set my sights lower. Since this subject is broader (covering a genre and not one group, albeit IMO the greatest group), we won't get into the same level of forensic detail in most cases. The intent here is more of a synoptic overview and general map, enough to convey a rudimentary sense of the territory, so others might be better positioned to discover and explore paths that may be of interest based on their specific taste.

I'll try, where possible, to make it multimedia, and include some representative songs and videos, as well as cites and references, including relevant autobiographies, biographies and histories.

The primary source is Ken Burns brilliant 10 part History of Jazz documentary. I used to think I was knowledgeable about the subject, but after watching this, realized what I actually knew was very sketchy, and almost non-existent in terms of roots and origins. Just watching the series (episodes are about one hour, I think, so an investment of time) could convey vastly more than anything I could say here, so if nothing else this prompts a few people to check it out that wouldn't have otherwise, this will have been worthwhile.

In the spirit of keeping it simple, at least initially, I'll draw the history in broad lines, with a few seminal, representative figures of historical importance in greater detail, rather than dozens of musicians in a more diffuse manner. I'll try to keep it chronological to convey a sense of evolution, and how some eras may have been characterized by greater bursts of creativity relative to others.

A provisional outline:

1) Louis Armstrong, the alpha and omega, who's genius was making a gift of the modern conception of time. Listening to him at the beginning is like a Rodin relief sculpture in which the figures seem to be struggling to emerge from the very matrix they are embedded in. It isn't hyperbole to suggest (as others have), that as Einstein was to physics, Armstrong was to jazz in the 20th century. In simultaneously being jazz instrumentalist/stylist 0, AND a foundational singer, he is ridiculously unsurpassed. Imagine if Charlie Parker was as popular a singer as Sinatra. He didn't barnstorm the globe and beguile and transfix millions for a half century for nothing. I used to think of him as the guy that sang It's a Wonderful World and Hello Dolly and hammed it up by mugging on stage, but he was way deeper. Miles once said that there was nothing that could be played on the trumpet he hadn't already done.

2) Big Band Orchestras - Duke Ellington and Count Basie

3) Primary Influential Sax Artists - Coleman Hawkins and Lester Young

4) Piano Architects - Art Tatum and Thelonious Monk

5) Bebop - Dizzy Gillespie and Charlie Parker

6) Cool/Modal/Fusion - Miles Davis and John Coltrane

7) Avant Garde - Ornette Coleman

This would take us as far as the sixties and seventies.

There are some brilliant bass players (Charles Mingus as both an important instrumentalist and band leader) and drummers (such as Max Roach and Art Blakey), some of which may receive sporadic and haphazard coverage, but it seems better to complete coverage of a few iconic figures, rather than get bogged down and leave unfinished dozens through being spread too thin.

Another primary source here, in addition to the Ken Burns doc, is the work of critic Gary Giddins, who has a seemingly photographic memory, encyclopedic command of the material, the rigor of a historian and insight of a poet.

Armstrong (a.k.a. Satchmo or Pops) will be the first chapter or installment to follow.

* Needless to say, anybody can jump in and contribute about artists or sub-genres they are familiar with (I'm not that well versed in the last category), and feel free to ask or answer questions.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A taste of one of Armstrong's most famous early masterpieces, West End Blues. I don't think anybody was playing anything remotely this advanced at the time (1928). In the Burns doc, Wyton Marsalis noted that to this day, it would be extremely difficult to play with his masterful sense of time and crystaline intonation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W232OsTAMo8

 
My knowledge of and appreciation for jazz comes from my love of fusion and working backwards. That and my brother once telling me my jazz collection was sorely lacking and giving me "#####es Brew" for my birthday. I was surprised to learn (at the time) John McLaughin contributed to that album (and had a title named for him). I kinda consider that album to be the birth of fusion.

Miles is by far my most-listened to jazz artist, but I do have some Coltrane, Weather Report, Monk, and Hancock in my collection. I have Coltrane's '65 recording "Live in Seattle" but it gets a little too "out there" even for me - and I'm pretty tolerant of experimental music.

I didn't see all of Burns' documentary, but I did see the first ep where he talked about the origin of the name "jazz" in the late 1700's. I look forward to reading along!

 
#####es Brew is an oft-cited demarcation line for the beginning of fusion (and I was a lot like you, BTW, as far as working backwards from my entre). His then-wife Betty Mabry hipped him to the soul of James Brown, funk of Sly Stone and rock of Jimi Hendrix. I'll probably have more to say about this later, but you can hear some proto-fusion emerging from the primodial sludge like the first amphibians crawling from the sea onto land in songs like 1983... (A Merman I Should Turn To Be), Rainy Day, Dream Away and Still Raining, Still Dreaming from Electric Ladyland. Coincidentally I just talked to his brother Leon a few days ago.

If you are interested in fusion-era Miles, a highly recommended DVD is Miles Electric: A Different Kind of Blue, with about a 40 minute concert from the Isle of Wight (one of Hendrix's last documented concerts, right before he died), as well as a lot of interviews from former band members (including McLaughlin, Herbie, Chick, Zawinul and Shorter, as well as Carlos Santana).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the appropriate place to begin is the prehistory of jazz: Field hollers and ragtime.

I took a great class in college on the history of jazz and those two genres were critical in understanding the early years of jazz in New Orleans.

 
I think the appropriate place to begin is the prehistory of jazz: Field hollers and ragtime.

I took a great class in college on the history of jazz and those two genres were critical in understanding the early years of jazz in New Orleans.
This isn't intended as a comprehensive, but more of a suggestive history, but I agree jazz didn't emerge from its New Orleans cradle fully formed. I want to keep it simple so doable, but an important early figure is Jelly Roll Morton. He didn't invent jazz as he claimed, but he played a role in popularizing it (one of the first to transcribe jazz?).

We can add or change things on the fly. If you want to contribute anything, whether a write up or even pointing to a wiki entry or pasting and copying an article or excerpt on this, or any other subject, feel free, and that goes for everybody. If not, that's cool, too. I don't know a great deal about the deep origins (some of that is oral and not written or recorded history), so some of what we know may be second hand. I think Alan Lomax did some great field recordings (Jelly Roll, among others) of blues and country, but not sure how far back that went (not before the '30s or '20s?).

Ragtime was rediscovered for many and they know of it through Marvin Hamlisch's use of Scott Joplin in the deservedly famous, Oscar winning (?) score for The Sting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
#####es Brew is an oft-cited demarcation line for the beginning of fusion (and I was a lot like you, BTW, as far as working backwards from my entre). His then-wife Betty Mabry hipped him to the soul of James Brown, funk of Sly Stone and rock of Jimi Hendrix. I'll probably have more to say about this later, but you can hear some proto-fusion emerging from the primodial sludge like the first amphibians crawling from the sea onto land in songs like 1983... (A Merman I Should Turn To Be), Rainy Day, Dream Away and Still Raining, Still Dreaming from Electric Ladyland. Coincidentally I just talked to his brother Leon a few days ago.

If you are interested in fusion-era Miles, a highly recommended DVD is Miles Electric: A Different Kind of Blue, with about a 40 minute concert from the Isle of Wight (one of Hendrix's last documented concerts, right before he died), as well as a lot of interviews from former band members (including McLaughlin, Herbie, Chick, Zawinul and Shorter, as well as Carlos Santana).
I do have "A Different Kind Of Blue" but haven't watched it in a couple years. I remember Carlos being prominent on the DVD, and performance is great. Just watching people like Airto with his gadgets. Was that the performance Miles says "we'll play it first and tell you what it is later"?

I also have the Jethro Tull DVD from the same Isle of Wight festival.

 
If somebody started a Civil War thread and said they were relying on Ken Burns documentary, I'd have plenty to say. When timschochet started his ACW thread, though, he relied more on Shelby Foote's 3-volume opus.

I don't know anyone who is a jazz aficionado who likes Burns' film. You can find quite a few criticisms of the flaws, gaps and lopsidedness of the film. I think this one sums it up nicely.

By all means, continue - this should be a great thread. I'm not trying to be too negative here, I just think it's fair to present an alternate viewpoint.

It Don't Mean a Thing

Joe Goldberg Jazz,

directed by Ken Burns.
PBS, 2001.



The first shot you see is New York City at night. The first sound you hear is Louis Armstrong’s trumpet, and the first voice is Wynton Marsalis. And there, plus a few additions and repetitions, you pretty much have it: Ken Burns’s Jazz.

There are two great twentieth century American art forms, and now one of them has been used to explicate the other. Ken Burns’s Jazz takes up nineteen hours of air time, although some of that time is taken up with vintage “soundies”—the videos of the day—and promotional material. Burns says it is seventeen and a half hours long. At any rate, is is about three times as long as Erich von Stroheim’s Greed.

Jazz arrives preceded by a huge marketing blitz. Videos of the film were available before the film finished airing on PBS, for $149.50, or $199.50 for DVD. There is also an elegant coffee table book from Knopf, for $65, and a five CD boxed set for $59.98. Further, the two record companies most closely involved with the boxed set, Sony and Verve, have released an additional twenty-two CDs, eleven each, dealing with individual musicians. This has the unfortunate effect of turning the film into a long infomercial for its products, and reducing its heroes, Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington, to action figures.

The first track of the CD set is by Louis Armstrong, and the last is by Wynton Marsalis with the Lincoln Center Jazz Orchestra, of which Mr Marsalis is director, thus recapitulating the early jazz movies in which the jazz man finally becomes legitimate by playing with a symphony orchestra—“making a lady out of jazz,” as Paul Whiteman called it. This may be the course of the music as Mr. Burns sees it, and is almost certainly how Mr. Marsalis sees it—as a long tradition leading up to and culminating in himself—but it hardly is the only view, or even the majority view. It is, however, the view that most people will now have. As jazz retreats from the night clubs and enters the academy, these tapes are going to become a ubiquitous teaching tool.

Ken Burns has said that six years ago, when he began this project, he had hardly listened to jazz at all. Some might think it arrogant of him to suppose he could make a long film on a subject he knew so little about. But, like George W. Bush, he was shrewd enough to surround himself with experienced hands. In such a situation, though, the neophyte is likely to wind up in the hands of people at least as skilled in self-promotion as in the ostensible subject. **** Cheney was charged with finding someone to run as Vice-President with Mr. Bush, and who did he find? Mr Marsalis has been in charge at Lincoln Center for years, where his programming and personnel choices have made him controversial. His spokesperson has been Stanley Crouch, a burly man sufficiently light on his feet to have been one of the five authors introduced to America by our new First Lady on the night before the inauguration. In a fallow, regressive period of jazz history, Mr. Marsalis has become the Prize Boy, the King’s Own Trumpeter, the Designated Jazz Musician. And along the way he has learned that history depends on who writes—or speaks—it.

For all the skyscraper-and-neon shots this film contains, it could have been called Night and the City. For all the shots of men on the road it could have been called Planes, Trains and Automobiles or, in Allen Ginsberg’s phrase, boxcars boxcars boxcars. It is curious that, in a project where the main problem would seem to be “What do you show while the music’s playing?” Burns chose to spend most of his time in the earlier era of jazz, where the least film is available.

For example, the first great jazz musician is generally considered to be Buddy Bolden, the New Orleans cornetist. There is only one known photograph of him and no known recordings, although rumors of an Edison cylinder make it jazz’s Maltese Falcon. The story is that one day Bolden wandered away from a parade in which he was playing and spent the rest of his life in a hospital for the insane, his brain having been ravaged by syphilis. So what does Burns do? He closes in on a shot of a man who is almost certainly not Buddy Bolden leaving a parade which may not even have taken place in New Orleans while we hear Wynton Marsalis play an approximation of the music Bolden is thought to have played. For all the anonymous newspaper quotes he employs, Burns used nothing fromComing Through Slaughter, the wonderful impressionistic book about Bolden by Michael Ondaatje, proving, as Burns does throughout the film, that there is more than one way to have a tin ear.

Voice-overs are an enormous problem. For all the hours devoted to music in this film, only one piece plays complete without interruption: Louis Armstrong’s masterpiece, “West End Blues.” Burns says that one of his main questions to himself was, “How do you know when to shut up and listen?” One possible answer would seem to be: when the music is more interesting than you are. Burns interrupts classics like Sidney Bechet’s “Summertime” and Duke Ellington’s “Black and Tan Fantasy” being played, without identification, to an audience that may never have heard them before. These seminal works do not appeax in the CD box either, nor do Charlie Parker’s “Parker’s Mood” or Thelonious Monk’s “‘Round About Midnight.” (A far more useful survey is The Smithsonian Collection of Classic Jazz, assembled by Martin Williams. It ranks up there with Harry Smith’s Anthology of American Folk Music.)

While Louis Armstrong is playing, a musician named Matt Glaser shakes his head in time, and scats along. Then Wynton Marsalis imitates vocally the sound of Sidney Bechet playing the soprano saxophone. This is recorded over, and drowns out, the sound of Sidney Bechet playing the soprano saxophone. Later, Marsalis imitates the sound of the entire Basie band, instrument by instrument, a moment Burns says he loves. But what is needed, as Wallace Stevens said, is “not ideas about the thing, but the thing itself.”

If there is an epiphany to be found, Burns will miss it. His voice-overs recite encomiums from people long forgotten, but when he comes to a classic early portrait of Ellington from The New Yorker, he cites the magazine, but not the author, Richard O. Boyer. And there is no mention of the great conductor Ernest Ansermet’s prescient appreciation of the young Sidney Bechet, whom he heard in Europe. You might think that someone who made his reputation with Civil War soldiers writing home would have a feeling for the heartbreaking letters King Oliver wrote his sister at the end of his life. And that someone whose forte is moving a camera over still photographs might have included some of the striking portraits of New Orleans jazz musicians taken by a teenaged Look magazine photographer named Stanley Kubrick. And even though Artie Shaw tells him how difficult it was to travel with Billie Holiday, he didn’t get—or use—what Shaw told me the one afternoon I met him: that it was actually in his contract how many feet the black trumpeter Hot Lips Page had to keep between himself and the other members of the band while onstage (I think it was fifteen). And while it isn’t mentioned, the clarinet music heard just before the introduction of Benny Goodman, who, with Shaw, was one of two Russian Jewish clarinetists to popularize swing, was Klezmer music. Jass didn’t come only from ragtime, nor were ghettos always black.

Along with his films on the Civil War and baseball, Burns says that Jazz is part of a trilogy on America, and that the connection between them is improvisation. Still, Burns manages to miss what might be the most acclaimed instance of improvisation in the history of jazz: in his section on the Benny Goodman 1938 Carnegie Hall concert and its rousing closer, “Sing, Sing, Sing,” he neither mentions nor plays Jess Stacy’s transcendant, unplanned piano solo that was the high point of the evening and Stacy’s career. Burns himself refuses to improvise, and instead recycles his favorite licks: camera moves over still photographs, talking heads, quotes from documents, background music. And that may be because, for long stretches, Jazz is not about jazz at all.

It is about the relations between blacks and whites in America. So were the films about the Civil War and baseball. It is obviously Ken Burns’s subject, and it is a worthy one. But it seems strange for a show called Jazzto find time for A. Philip Randolph, but not for Bill Evans, the most influential jazz pianist of the last half century, or for the greatest of blues pianists, Jimmy Yancey, whose story you might think would appeal to Burns—he spent his last years as a groundskeeper for the Chicago White Sox. Burns tells us about the two-year recording ban during World War II, and the segregation of the troops, but for all his cameras’ love of old record labels, there is no look at or mention of V-Disc, under which, during the strike, the musicians’ union allowed recordings to be sent overseas to the troops. Many of these were made by Duke Ellington, and they are collectors’ items today. And for all the assiduous collecting of white insults to black musicians in the south, where is this one to the man who, while he might not be America’s greatest composer, had a compositional gift that certainly makes him a greater figure than Armstrong—“Duke, if you’d been a white man, you’d have been a great musician”? While overlooking this, Burns tells us about a man who listened to Armstrong one night and went on to be a Supreme Court clerk who worked on Brown v. Board of Education. Far better to have told of Ellington’s pride on the night of FDR’s death, when his network radio show was kept on all night so there would be a frequency over which to transmit necessary bulletins, and Ellington’s was the only music heard on that sorrowful night.

This returns us to Marsalis, who talks about “Louis” and “Duke” in this film as though he’d had lunch with them yesterday, even though he has said he didn’t get Ellington’s music until he was in his twenties. Nor has this kept him from attaching his name as co-composer to rearrangements of suites by the greatest orchestrator in jazz history, or, for that matter, to Igor Stravinsky’s “Histoire du Soldat.” If he reveres Ellington so much, he might have demonstrated it by repaying the Pulitzer committee’s refusal to give his hero a prize by declining the one given to him.

Classical pianists have a phrase for their colleagues who win prizes all the time. The best, the ones with real temperament, usually offend someone, and don’t win—the great Martha Argerich once quit as judge at an International Chopin competition when it did not award the prize to Ivo Pogorelich. But the kids who win the prizes are neither the best nor the worst; they are those who know what the judges want and how to give it to them. They are called competition pianists. I think that Wynton Marsalis, who has all the technique in the world but never played four bars that moved me, is a competition pianist. I think that Ken Burns, whom PBS has taken to calling “America’s Filmmaker”—were you polled?—is another.

The great tenor saxophonist Lester Young once approached a young hotshot who was showing off by racing around all over his horn and said, “That’s all very nice, but can you sing me a song?”

Young shows what he meant in his brief blues chorus that so moves Billie Holiday in the clip taken from the CBS program The Sound of Jazz. And Ken Burns has assembled other wonderful stuff. From the same CBS show comes Count Basie intently watching Thelonious Monk play the piano. A shot of a riverboat at night shows how entranced the young Jack Teagarden must have been when he stood on the shore and heard Louis Armstrong playing from one. Armstrong himself, in a tuxedo, probably from the Thirties, is as much a dancer as he is a singer and trumpet player as he performs “Dinah.” Marsalis closes his eyes against the insupportable thought of racism. The recurring shot of the young, tuxedoed Frankie Trumbauer holding his saxophone like an offering. Dave Brubeck tells of being shown the cover of Time magazine with his picture on it by Duke Ellington, who should have had the cover first.

Several fine jazz writers are connected with Burns’s project: Otis Ferguson, one of the great precursors of today’s critics, named but not identified; the historian Dan Morgenstern, who was a consultant to the film; Nat Hentoff, who speaks with the authority of someone who was there. But the island of lucidity in an often gaseous sea of platitudes by dancers, actors, and baseball players who had a nice time one night is Gary Giddins, the jazz critic of The Village Voice, who is unfailingly interesting and informative.

Some critics have objected to what they call the film’s use of the “great man” theory of the music. In a music so personal that each player has his own tone, time, harmony, in which an accolade is to say a player is “telling his story,” in which two players (Armstrong and Parker) had an influence so pervasive that players of every instrument tried to sound like them, I don’t know how else you’d do it. Indeed, the lack of great men is probably what’s been wrong with jazz, ever since a steady flow of them—Parker to Rollins to Coltrane—stopped suddenly in 1967 with Coltrane’s death, almost exactly contemporaneous with the ascendency of rock and roll. Even before that, it had lost its social function. It is no accident that Benny Goodman’s theme song was called “Let’s Dance.”

“I’m about history,” Ken Burns says, “and history is about stories that are over.” So, after Coltrane’s death, when he is no longer able to apply the elegiac mode, the years go by in a rush, with some important figures not mentioned at all. Prior to 1950, the judgmental work has been done for us. It requires no great acumen to call Armstrong and Ellington the two great figures of the music. But after that, the times require a nicety of judgement that Burns doesn’t possess.

Or could it be that a critical evaluation of those years would reveal that Miles Davis bestrides them like a Colossus, diminishing Wynton Marsalis’s claims to importance? Stanley Crouch made his reputation with a notoriously vicious article about Miles. And Davis returned the compliment by saying of his would-be usurper, “He keeps making speeches, but I don’t notice anyone asking him any questions.” Which is as good a description of Marsalis’s role in this film as you could want.

So it’s Ken Burns’s Jazz, but it isn’t mine, and it may not be yours. Who knows what the future will bring? Since Ornette Coleman posited a music with no set rhythm, chords, or melody lines, there was no place further for the music to go, so it turned back to the neoconservatism we have today, just as classical music reacted to total serialism with minimalism. The composer Arthur Honegger foresaw this in the late Forties, saying that we would atone for all the cyanide we were getting by being forced to drink sugar in the future. Well, the future is here, and we’ve got plenty of sugar—they call it smooth jazz or contemporary jazz—but only a few great men, and fewer all the time, as they keep dying off, with hardly a candidate in sight, unless you count a modest man like the guitarist Jim Hall, who makes it look so easy no one notices. Not even Ken Burns, who didn’t include him.

Or maybe jazz did die way back then. I remember back in the Sixties, when the jazz magazine Metronome folded, a wake was held in the magazine’s offices. In the doorway appeared the great bassist Charles Mingus, just back from England, looking very Hitchcockian in a black three-piece suit and bowler hat, with a magnum of champagne under each arm. Across the room, Mingus spotted his then trumpeter, Ted Curson. “Jazz is dead, baby,” Mingus shouted jubilantly to his sideman. “Ain’t you glad?”

Joe Goldberg is the author of Jazz Masters of the Fifties and a few hundred liner notes. He is a regular contributor to Billboard.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I earlier planned a more in-depth thread on the subject of jazz history that proved overly ambitious. For myself, saintsfan's Beatles thread is a model of musical exposition.
Thank you so much. I appreciate the shout out and I am looking forward to reading the thread...

 
The thread title is Jazz History for Dummies, not Afficionado's. :)

But input, whether in the form of alternate views as you put it or however else, is encouraged. Feel free to add whatever you want to.

When I mentioned Burns doc as a source, I didn't mean I intend to ape his presentation in its entirety. I'll leave out much (almost everything) of what he covered about societal and cultural contextual matters. While the emphasis in this thread isn't really on depth (you could write books just about Armstrong alone, and many have), I probably will cover some things he didn't. More properly I could have said the series was an inspiration to me in pointing me towards some musicians I wasn't that well acquainted with, due to gaping holes in my informal jazz history education (this thread is intended in a similar spirit). I knew of Ellington and Basie, but I'll always be thankful to the series for my increased appreciation of them (to the point they are among my top 5 favorite musicians/bandleaders, with Armstrong, Lester Young and Miles Davis). I knew a fair amount about Miles already. I again knew of Armstrong but was inspired to explore him further through the series. I didn't even know who Lester Young was, or how influential he was to the post-war sax players, or that he came to prominence from Basie's band.

I scanned the article, it does seem pretty negative (not to be negative, either :) ). I've heard many of the criticisms or variations of a theme on them. What can I say, I liked it, I'm sure some don't (maybe even non-afficionados). I put a link to the first episode (there are other installments on youtube), maybe others can judge for themselves. If it is something like 10 hours, can you think of any comparable AUDIO/VIDEO resources you would recommend more, if so, please recommend. I also mentioned in the OP critic Gary Giddins as a guide and authority, I think afficionados might know about him, he is one of the few (only?) causes for praise in the entire article. No doubt it is a personal history. But you could ask 100 jazz congnoscenti what their outline would be like, and you would probably get 100 different answers. I don't think it would be possible to please everybody. It probably isn't what you would want as a primary source for writing a thesis for a PhD on musicology. I get how the gaps and lopsided criticism might be more problematic for some than others.

On the level of what would be an optimum balance between breadth and depth, there may have been other ways that would have been better for a greater number of viewers, but not sure how you would determine that without polling large numbers of people or having focus groups? I would add, some might not like the fact that obscure skronk maven Archie Shepp didn't get much or any coverage. For myself, I would rather leave out Archie Shepp, and a dozen or dozens of Archie Shepps, to hear more about foundational giants like Armstrong, Ellington, Basie, Young and Miles (and many more, Tatum, Monk, Gillspie, Parker, Coltrane, Coleman, Goodman, Shaw, Rollins, Beiderbecke, Hawkins, Powell, Brown, etc). That is again a matter of subjective, personal taste. It probably isn't ideal if you want an enclyclopedic, one-stop-shop kind of audio-visual reference, but I'm not sure if anything of this magnitude, for all its limitations and flaws, is better or even exists. Certainly there is nothing to prevent supplementing the history presented in the doc series with additional material, whether audio (intersperse mention of artists, songs and albums you like), video (bios or concerts of individual musicians, many avail at netflix) and text (Giddens has a recent co-authored history called, you guessed it, Jazz).

I'm somewhat at a disadvantage in that I'm not a musician, so there are some places (like how Parker may have used flatted fifths in the creation of Bebop???) I just can't go, except maybe describing them in an academic way. This is just a simple, rudimentary intro for the interested layperson who may not already know a lot about it. If some already know a lot, or more than me :) , not sure if they will get much out of it, with the qualifier that there could be additions from others that augment what I write about, that could represent a value add to the thread beyond that. I know for a fact there are some here that know a lot more about the subject than me, hopefully they will contribute if they are interested. Ideally, this thread could be like an inclusive mosaic of different tastes, sensibilities and perspectives.

* Episode 1 - Jazz Gumbo (spanish subtitles)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjzTMME5Dm4&list=PL1E9CF53D6FF4AE18

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fair enough, just throwing it out there Bob. A lot of people who love jazz are more than a little annoyed that novices think of Burns film as the definitive treatment.

It's like anything - ask a subject matter expert their opinion, it will often be totally different from the general consensus. To accept populist opinion would go against the very idea of nuanced understanding.

Looking forward to following along and chiming in occasionally.

 
A provisional outline:

1) Louis Armstrong, the alpha and omega, who's genius was making a gift of the modern conception of time. Listening to him at the beginning is like a Rodin relief sculpture in which the figures seem to be struggling to emerge from the very matrix they are embedded in. It isn't hyperbole to suggest (as others have), that as Einstein was to physics, Armstrong was to jazz in the 20th century. In simultaneously being jazz instrumentalist/stylist 0, AND a foundational singer, he is ridiculously unsurpassed. Imagine if Charlie Parker was as popular a singer as Sinatra. He didn't barnstorm the globe and beguile and transfix millions for a half century for nothing. I used to think of him as the guy that sang It's a Wonderful World and Hello Dolly and hammed it up by mugging on stage, but he was way deeper. Miles once said that there was nothing that could be played on the trumpet he hadn't already done.

2) Big Band Orchestras - Duke Ellington and Count Basie

3) Primary Influential Sax Artists - Coleman Hawkins and Lester Young

4) Piano Architects - Art Tatum and Thelonious Monk

5) Bebop - Dizzy Gillespie and Charlie Parker

6) Cool/Modal/Fusion - Miles Davis and John Coltrane

7) Avant Garde - Ornette Coleman

This would take us as far as the sixties and seventies.
8) Primary influential guitar -- Django Reinhardt and Charlie Christian (maybe Wes too)

 
I used to have some Christian and have some Django and Wes, CC, but don't know as much about them as some other musicians. But good catch, they are no doubt foundational (I love Grant Green's laid back groove, but couldn't call him foundational) on an important instrument. Any volunteers for chapters/sub-sections gratefully accepted, I think maybe you mentioned something about them in another thread. Or just add in whatever you feel like, if anything, songs, videos (not sure if any exist for the first two, but there is definitely stuff from Wes), articles, etc.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I used to have some Christian and have some Django and Wes, CC, but don't know as much about them as well as some other musicians. But good catch, they are no doubt foundational (I love Grant Green's laid back groove, but couldn't call him foundational) on an important instrument. Any volunteers for chapters/sub-sections gratefully accepted, I think maybe you mentioned something about them in another thread. Or just add in whatever you feel like, if anything, songs, videos (not sure if any exist for the first two, but there is definitely stuff from Wes), articles, etc.
:yes: I threatened to write at length about Django. I still might.

 
Fair enough, just throwing it out there Bob. A lot of people who love jazz are more than a little annoyed that novices think of Burns film as the definitive treatment.

It's like anything - ask a subject matter expert their opinion, it will often be totally different from the general consensus. To accept populist opinion would go against the very idea of nuanced understanding.

Looking forward to following along and chiming in occasionally.
I don't know if this thread is the proper scale for a definitive treatment, Bobby, but as to extra resources, what do you prefer in that category?

Burns series needn't be the only source of inspiration. Other than a roughly chronological order being in common, my outline is a lot more sparse and skeletal. I may also refer to Giddins, among others, who is fairly knowledgeable.

Intros can be for different purposes and addressed to different levels of interest, not everybody may be looking for a definitive treatment in an intro. But I think extra detail can be added where others want to, so we might have, if not something for everybody, at least of general interest.

Extra resources can be pointed out for others wanting additional level of detail.

IMO, if through watching the series, others have their interest piqued and are motivated to explore further, than in my case, I was grateful for exposure to musicians I may not have discovered otherwise.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anybody interested in the early days of Jazz, in Search Of Buddy Bolden by Donald Marquis is quite good. Read that book a million times. It really puts you in turn of the century New Orleans as well as gives most of the known info about Buddy Bolden.

I'd be happy to contribute a write up on Bolden as the story probably starts with him if you want

 
Anybody interested in the early days of Jazz, in Search Of Buddy Bolden by Donald Marquis is quite good. Read that book a million times. It really puts you in turn of the century New Orleans as well as gives most of the known info about Buddy Bolden.

I'd be happy to contribute a write up on Bolden as the story probably starts with him if you want
On the point of New Orleans, Armstrong, Bolden, Morton, etc., there was a layer of German and Jewish influence going back years. It's a little discussed there, but it's a strain in the creation of the musical art form known as jazz.

 
Anybody interested in the early days of Jazz, in Search Of Buddy Bolden by Donald Marquis is quite good. Read that book a million times. It really puts you in turn of the century New Orleans as well as gives most of the known info about Buddy Bolden.

I'd be happy to contribute a write up on Bolden as the story probably starts with him if you want
Outstanding, saintsfan, I learned more from your thread than any other music thread I've ever read in the FFA, and probably any thread at FBG period (I rediscovered the Beatles through it). I can't possibly think of a better choice to get things rolling.

Make it so.

We could jump around, this may just be a non-linear history (like the Pulp Fiction fractured narrative), but agree Bolden is a great lead in, as he is the INDIVIDUAL I associate most closely with the birth and inception of jazz.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FROM POPS TO SLY (a non-linear interlude).

Chimes Blues was one of Armstrong's first recordings (1923), by King Oliver's Creole Jazz Band

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Those Sly tunes(and most funk) are just built on a second line beat the 20's(and earlier - pre Armstrong at least)- to the late 60s funk. Guys like Smokey Johnson and Earl King and Earl Palmer and Eddie Bo grab that and get a bit more funky and the Meters add those George Porter bass lines - it's the versatile drummers with that beat that those cats in New Orleans come out of the womb with - they've been doing it for centuries.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Louis Armstrong feels like a pretty late place to start. I think to do this right and comprehensively, you need to go back to, e.g., Robert Johnson (or earlier) and hit on blues.

I took the history of jazz course here as a freshman many years ago, was so so good.

 
:popcorn:

Without realizing it, I've been waiting for Bob to do this thread. Kind of like that Jazz standard, Call Me Maybe. Looking forward to following along and harumph harumph about all the jazz I learned in my jazz class in college.

:harumph:

 
Buddy Bolden…The Legend

No figure in the history of jazz is as shrouded in legend as Buddy Bolden. By the time people started researching the origins of jazz, like 40 years after Bolden blew his last note, Bolden was long gone and all that was left were people who remembered the early years. We know Bolden was important because his is the one name that continued to come up when talking to any of the “old timers” in New Orleans. However, because all we had was information from the memories of musicians from 40 years ago, a bunch of information started floating around about Bolden that probably wasn’t true. Much of it came from an interview that Jazzmen magazine from an interview with Bunk Johnson, an early jazz cornetist. Much of that information was false, either due to Bunk’s memories being 40 years old or to put himself into a more prominent role. Bunk Johnson was not in Bolden’s band. That is a fascinating story, outside the scope of this, but look it up.

Here is a short list of the Bolden legends:

Bolden was a barber - There is no evidence that Bolden was a barber. In those days, it was common for people to hang out in barber shops, especially musicians because they could get information on gigs and such and it’s possible Buddy learned to play cornet from a barber, but Bolden was not a barber

Bolden edited a scandal sheet called The Cricket - There was a paper that was found later called the Cricket, but Buddy Bolden’s name was not associated with it. There was a person who worked for the paper named Bolden, so maybe that’s where it came from.

Bolden played really loud - This one appears to be true, but how loud was he?? Jelly Roll Morton said that Bolden would be playing at Lincoln Park, which was uptown and he could be heard in the center of town. So, how true is this?? Really, it’s unknown. In a straight line, uptown to the center of town was probably only two miles. Also, in the days with no traffic and such you could probably hear pretty far, especially over water. Some people said they could hear Bolden across the river in Gretna. Once again, we will never know, but I think it’s safe to say he was loud. Almost everybody who heard him said he was

Bolden went insane - Once again, this one is true, but people can’t help but heap legend on top of it. Some say he went insane, but actually returned to New Orleans in 1917-1918. Bolden never left the hospital. He died there. Also the cause of his insanity. People say he had VD. Once again, nobody knows. People say he drank himself into insanity. He drank a lot, but can you drink yourself crazy?? He went crazy because he couldn’t make his musical ideas become reality because of lack of thorough musical training. This comes because I think his mother once said he appeared afraid of his cornet. Once again, nobody knows as there was no interview with Bolden himself.

Bolden made a recording - The search for the elusive cylinder started when Willie Cornish, who unlike Bunk Johnson, was actually in Bolden’s band, said they made a cylinder. A massive search started and it has never been found. IMO, it is not only possible, but likely that Cornish’s memory is correct. It is also likely that the cylinder, if it did exist is probably gone forever. The materials recordings were made of in those days were not very durable. Even if we found the cylinder, the quality would likely be so poor it would be difficult to know if it was Bolden at all. It would probably raise more questions than it would answer. The company that supposedly made the cylinder had a shed in the back that was destroyed in the 1960s. Could the cylinder have been in it?? We will never know.

Bolden was a pimp - Once again, who knows. Being a famous musician in his community, Buddy certainly was surrounded by lots of women, so it’s easy to see how this got started, but we don’t really have any evidence that Buddy pimped out these women.

Bolden played while parachuting to the ground in Lincoln Park - This one is very Paul Bunyan. There was entertainment in the park and definitely a guy would would parachute. There is no way it was Buddy Bolden. Could the guy have had a similar name?? Maybe, but there is no evidence that Buddy ever played his cornet in any other way than on the ground.

Next….Buddy Bolden…The Man

 
Louis Armstrong feels like a pretty late place to start. I think to do this right and comprehensively, you need to go back to, e.g., Robert Johnson (or earlier) and hit on blues.

I took the history of jazz course here as a freshman many years ago, was so so good.
I had a few reasons for the more abbreviated, cursory outline. At one time I planned something more sprawling, but it was so daunting, it ended up being hard to get started. This seemed at least more manageable and doable, and something I can see through. We could discuss dozens of artists (and maybe we will?). I just find it more likely that for someone with little exposure to jazz, pointing to a few acknowledged geniuses and masters might be more likely to pique interest to the point they would want to venture out and explore more branches of the jazz tree on their own. I don't disagree with what you are saying, it might be just a slight philosophical difference in the best way to proceed.Fortunately, we could have the best of both worlds. We already have one volunteer, and saintsfan has generously offered his time to do a write up on the, IMO, consensus first great jazz artist, Buddy Bolden. We might have another contribution on jazz guitar (Django, Charlie Christian, possibly Wes Montgomery). Anybody who wants to contribute write ups from periods before, during or after the stated outline framework will be much appreciated. I've always wanted to do a collaborative thread like this, it will be more encompassing through division of labor, some having greater relative expertise in different, specific areas (we also have generalists and synthesists capable of providing context and showing how the parts fit together) and more insightful through multiple perspectives and stylistic diversity (it is an honor to share a thread with saintsfan, a far more organized thinker and coherent writer than I could ever hope to be :) ). I have often referred to the SP as a thousand-eyed monster that sees everything, and through its collaborative harnessing potential, a intelligence augmentation and amplification agent. This thread can be intended in that spirit.

There are other things that do interest me that I could talk about, so I could circle back around later and fill in gaps, or address them as the muse strikes. I just don't want to get bogged down early with excessive detail, so as to facilitate completing the primary outline as envisioned. It may well evolve as we go.

Some possible sub-chapters:

You could write a book just on West Coast Jazz (Tedd Gioia did). Baritone sax player Gerry Mulligan, after a stint as arranger for the Claude Thornhill Orchestra, was one of the arrangers at the Gil Evans/Miles Birth of the Cool sessions (so was classically influenced John Lewis, later of the MJQ - Modern Jazz Quartet). He than teamed up with trumpet player Chet Baker on the West coast, creating a sound that propagated widely. I think he also did some arranging for the Stan Kenton Orchestra. Dave Brubeck and Lester Young influenced sax player Paul Desmond were also key players in this "school".

You mentioned Robert Johnson (Scorcese did an interesting series on the blues worth looking up). There are regional blues "dialects". New Orleans of course. Chicago (Muddy Waters and Howlin Wolf). Memphis (B.B. King). Texas (Lightning Hopkins). Early on, in addition to New Orleans, Chicago and New York were important in the history of jazz. But one of the biggest and most important regional styles and influences came from Kansas City, because it incorporated the blues. Interestingly, it's most famous son, Count Basie, after being discovered by music business legend John Hammond and propelled to stardom, was himself an import from the East coast (Red Bank, NJ).

Not sure Piano architects is the best header description for Art Tatum (I think it is accurate in describing the radically different conceptual style of Monk). He was a virtuoso, maybe the greatest in the history of the jazz. World famous classical musicians were in awe of his technique. Another important pianist was Fats Waller. He had a gig playing organ in a theatre and became a mentor to a young Basie, giving him tips the latter used to secure a similar gig in KC. Bud Powell was a very important pianist, probably more famous in his prime than Monk. Dexter Gordon's brilliant performance in Round Midnight was reportedly an amalgam or mash up of Powell's ex-pat days in Europe, as well as Lester Young. Of everything I learned in the Burns series, Young was by far the greatest single revelation for me. I'm looking forward to that chapter, which has some overlap with Basie, with who he first came to prominence. Young had a legendary tenor duel with Coleman Hawkins (may have been alluded to in the Altman film Kansas City?). They played all night, Hawkins was bested for the first time ever, was late for a gig with his band and reportedly burned out the engine of his car trying to make up the lost time.

Anyways, there is no shortage of material for additional chapters if there is time and interest later. Some will suggest themselves through the process of doing this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ken Burns' Jazz is available on Netflix streaming. I will consider my first homework assignment. :thumbup:

 
Buddy Bolden...The Man

Buddy Bolden was born in New Orleans in 1877. His father died when he was 6 years old, so he lived with his mother and his sister and quickly became the man of the house.

Information on Buddy's schooling is not really known. Friends say that he didn't start working until after he finished school and since the first time anyone ever saw him relating to music was in 1894, it may be assumed that he did finish high school. It is possible that the painting of Bolden that we have was a high school portrait. Bolden appears to have been literate.

Buddy's musical education is, once again, somewhat unknown, but the area of town he lived in had lots of music. The marching band tradition in New Orleans goes back very far. Funerals, parades, dances, picnics, etc always had music (and still do in New Orleans). It is a reasonable assumption that Buddy heard lots of marching bands in his youth. Some think that Buddy attended a school called the Fisk School for Boys in which it is known that several teachers taught music. Buddy may have received his first education in music in his school.

Another major source of music, as it is with most people, is church. Buddy certainly heard music in his church. The Boldens were known to have been Baptists as far back as anybody could trace. People reported seeing Buddy coming out of church later in his life, 1904-1905 timeframe and was singing as he was coming out, so it certainly appears that church was an influence at some point in Buddy's life.

Around 1894 or so, people who knew Buddy said that he started taking formal lessons from a neighbor on cornet. Apparently this neighbor may have been having a relationship with Buddy's mother, so maybe he acted as kind of a surrogate father to Buddy. Once again, so little is known. What is known is that if Buddy started playing cornet at age 17, he was getting a late start compared with other musicians.

By 1897, Bolden's band had started to take shape and this is when most people report first seeing him. Reports of Bolden blowing the tuning slide out of the cornet (physically impossible) or playing Home Sweet Home so sweetly that soldiers going off in a boat jumped off to get back home just add to the legend that is Bolden.

Around 1900, the Bolden Band for which he is most famous took shape. This is the period of time that Bolden started getting good jobs. From polite society events to picnics in the park to playing in Storyville, most people who recall Bolden heard him in this period. Although he was unknown to white New Orleans, he was a celebrity in black New Orleans. Around this time, his chief rival was a guy named John Robichaux, who was a trained Creole musician and led a band that was the more polished band. Bolden's band was known as a honky tonk band, although there is evidence that Buddy's band could also play the polite society type events. At this time, there was a rivalry between the downtown Creole musicians, who were trained musicians and the uptown black musicians, who were rougher and largly untrained.

In any event, Buddy's Band became the biggest in their little slice of New Orleans until around 1905 when Buddy started to act erratically. Lots of reports of erratic behavior like walking off the bandstand in the middle of a song, not showing up for gigs, drinking too much, talking to himself, etc. By 1907, his band had had enough and they kicked him out of his own band. Shortly after, Buddy was sent to the hospital in Jackson, Mississippi and he never recovered. After a time, he calmed down and became a quiet patient. He died in 1931, spending the last 24 years of his life in the hospital. When he died, there was no jazz funeral for the one time "King" of New Orleans cornet. He was buried in an unmarked grave in Holt Cemetary, largly forgotten. His band continued without him becoming the Eagle Band.

Next...Buddy Bolden...The Music

 
Buddy BoldenThe Legend

No figure in the history of jazz is as shrouded in legend as Buddy Bolden. By the time people started researching the origins of jazz, like 40 years after Bolden blew his last note, Bolden was long gone and all that was left were people who remembered the early years. We know Bolden was important because his is the one name that continued to come up when talking to any of the old timers in New Orleans. However, because all we had was information from the memories of musicians from 40 years ago, a bunch of information started floating around about Bolden that probably wasnt true. Much of it came from an interview that Jazzmen magazine from an interview with Bunk Johnson, an early jazz cornetist. Much of that information was false, either due to Bunks memories being 40 years old or to put himself into a more prominent role. Bunk Johnson was not in Boldens band. That is a fascinating story, outside the scope of this, but look it up.

Here is a short list of the Bolden legends:

Bolden was a barber - There is no evidence that Bolden was a barber. In those days, it was common for people to hang out in barber shops, especially musicians because they could get information on gigs and such and its possible Buddy learned to play cornet from a barber, but Bolden was not a barber

Bolden edited a scandal sheet called The Cricket - There was a paper that was found later called the Cricket, but Buddy Boldens name was not associated with it. There was a person who worked for the paper named Bolden, so maybe thats where it came from.

Bolden played really loud - This one appears to be true, but how loud was he?? Jelly Roll Morton said that Bolden would be playing at Lincoln Park, which was uptown and he could be heard in the center of town. So, how true is this?? Really, its unknown. In a straight line, uptown to the center of town was probably only two miles. Also, in the days with no traffic and such you could probably hear pretty far, especially over water. Some people said they could hear Bolden across the river in Gretna. Once again, we will never know, but I think its safe to say he was loud. Almost everybody who heard him said he was

Bolden went insane - Once again, this one is true, but people cant help but heap legend on top of it. Some say he went insane, but actually returned to New Orleans in 1917-1918. Bolden never left the hospital. He died there. Also the cause of his insanity. People say he had VD. Once again, nobody knows. People say he drank himself into insanity. He drank a lot, but can you drink yourself crazy?? He went crazy because he couldnt make his musical ideas become reality because of lack of thorough musical training. This comes because I think his mother once said he appeared afraid of his cornet. Once again, nobody knows as there was no interview with Bolden himself.

Bolden made a recording - The search for the elusive cylinder started when Willie Cornish, who unlike Bunk Johnson, was actually in Boldens band, said they made a cylinder. A massive search started and it has never been found. IMO, it is not only possible, but likely that Cornishs memory is correct. It is also likely that the cylinder, if it did exist is probably gone forever. The materials recordings were made of in those days were not very durable. Even if we found the cylinder, the quality would likely be so poor it would be difficult to know if it was Bolden at all. It would probably raise more questions than it would answer. The company that supposedly made the cylinder had a shed in the back that was destroyed in the 1960s. Could the cylinder have been in it?? We will never know.

Bolden was a pimp - Once again, who knows. Being a famous musician in his community, Buddy certainly was surrounded by lots of women, so its easy to see how this got started, but we dont really have any evidence that Buddy pimped out these women.

Bolden played while parachuting to the ground in Lincoln Park - This one is very Paul Bunyan. There was entertainment in the park and definitely a guy would would parachute. There is no way it was Buddy Bolden. Could the guy have had a similar name?? Maybe, but there is no evidence that Buddy ever played his cornet in any other way than on the ground.

Next.Buddy BoldenThe Man
Beautiful intro. Can't wait for the next installment. Mucho danke, saintsfan! :) I was thinking about the stories of how Bolden could reportedly be heard for miles (and you are right, much of his bio is shrouded in myth). Louis was very loud. Not just for reasons of crude recording equipment, but so he didn't completely drown out the rest of the band in the recording mix (no mixing boards in those days, direct from the horn onto the recording media itself), he had to be backed away from the rest of the ensemble.

Armstrong's range was also astounding and mythic to his contemporaries, he could hit dozens of high C's in mind boggling runs.

Something I meant to say earlier to convey a sense of his prodigious influence and pioneering, trailblazing role in the history of jazz, he didn't just change the conception of time for trumpet players during his stint with the Fletcher Henderson Orchestra, but literally ALL instruments (himself a giant and massive stylistic influence historically, fellow Henderson Orchestra memeber and tenor sax artist Coleman Hawkins noted that nobody had heard anything like his playing before him).

What was it about his sound that was so special, and that revolutionized the music of his era, single-handely dragging it into the future with his modern conception of time. In a word - SWING.

What is swing? For a music challenged person (what is the technical definition and meaning of a "bar"?), it would be great to get some input from the thread. I think it has to do with a different way of putting the accent on the beat than how it had formerly been done, prior to Armstrong. That was his major innovation, a central linchpin in the history of modern music, so maybe if we can collectively understand it better, we can in turn better appreciate the foundational role it played and impact it had on his contemporaries and the 20th century, with shockwaves radiating out from around his presence like the meteor that struck the Yucatan Peninsula and ultimately killed the dinosaurs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Buddy Bolden…The Music

OK, so what did Buddy play that was so different from what came before?? Why is Buddy considered the first man of Jazz??

We know ragtime existed before Buddy, so “ragging” or syncopating tunes was common. Marching bands and brass music existed before Buddy. The blues existed before Buddy. Church music existed before Buddy. These things are all considered some of the roots of what became jazz.

So, what did Buddy contribute?? Well, many people who were around at the time think that Buddy was one of the first to incorporate a looser more improvisational style of ragtime. This raises the question of whether or not Buddy could read music. Once again, opinions are all over the place. Some people say he faked it all the time implying he couldn’t read. Others say he could read, but often the embellishments he made up on the spot were often better than what was written.

Many also think that Buddy was the first one to play the blues with primarily a brass frontline Strings were not lead instruments in Buddy’s band the way they were in other dance bands of the time. The string instruments in Buddy’s band were rhythm instruments. This playing of the blues is consistent with the recollections of the Bolden Band being a “gut bucket” or a “honky tonk” band with a rougher sound than his contemporaries. People around at the time report that Buddy was at his best playing those low down blues. They talk about the “moan” in his cornet and some even compare it to they wailing sounds you’d hear in church.

The combination of the brass and the blues made Bolden most popular among the dancers in the city of New Orleans. It was said that Buddy would be playing a gig in Lincoln Park and Robichaux’s band would be playing in Johnson Park across the street. At some point in the show, Bolden would “call his children home” which for him meant he would play a little lick or whatever on his cornet at the dancers at the more polite Robichaux concert would walk over to Lincoln to hear the rougher, more exciting Bolden band.

The song that is most identified with Bolden is a song called “Funky Butt.” There was a hall in New Orleans called Union Sons Hall where Buddy played a lot of shows. In those days before the advent of air conditioning in New Orleans very humid climate, you can imagine that inside could be very uncomfortable. Add a bunch of people dancing and grinding and you can imagine that the air could get kind of “funky.” Therefore, you can imagine it would be easy to improvise the following lines

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden say

Funky butt funky butt take it away

I thought I heard him say

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden shout

Open up the window, let that bad air out

I thought I heard him shout

The song became so identified with that hall that the hall was given the unofficial name Funky Butt Hall. This song has been covered by Jelly Roll Morton, Sidney Bechet, and Dr John.

Lastly, I would LOVE for someone to put together an album trying to kind of recreate the Bolden sound. I know it wouldn’t sell great, but it would be a lot of fun. Humphrey Littleton did that several years back, using vintage instruments and such, but it’s not widely available. A movie on Bolden’s life (supposedly in the works for several years) might accomplish this, but not sure when or if that will ever get done.

Anyway, thanks for letting me contribute and I look forward to reading the rest of the thread.

 
FROM POPS TO SLY (a non-linear interlude).

Chimes Blues was one of Armstrong's first recordings (1923), by King Oliver's Creole Jazz Band

People talk about hearing the future so often, but Chimes Blues is one of the few times where it's literally true. Oliver was certainly a gifted musician for his time, but listening to Armstrong play that little solo on Chimes Blues, it's like the clouds lift and you can see heaven or something. It lifts the whole song for the first time (and absolutely not the last). The swing. The power. That beautiful bright, clear tone. Oliver had to know he wasn't the best musician in his own band.

 
Not to get ahead of things, but just a preview by fleshing out the outline with a bit more detail and specifics.

Duke Ellington - We will cover his massive influence on the history of jazz. He was superhumanly prolific, with about 2,000 compositions attributed to him. When he was robbed of A historic Pulitzer Prize over the advice of two judges on the panel, they quit. Along with Basie, they survived the death of the big band era and kept their respective orchestras going (with the exception of a brief interruption by Basie) for the better part of a half century through sheer force of personal magnetism and charisma. Along with clarinet virtuoso Benny Goodman, Ellington broke smaller groups out of his larger orchestra ensemble, like fractal sound experiments. it was all part of his painterly sonic pallete! Not unlike Rembrandt's unsurpassed ability to capture and render light and shadow, or Van Gogh's unique sense of color and brush strokes. Teddy Wilson, a gifted African American pianist, joined Goodman and drummer Gene Krupa in such a break out group in the first performing integrated band (it had happened on record before, but not in front of audiences, at least not in such a high profile vehicle). Later they made the trio into a quartet by adding another African American, vibes virtuoso Lionel Hampton.

Count Basie - Covering his pre-Orchestra scuffling days, than divided into the Old and New Testament eras/iterations. The Old Testament was characterized by genius soloists like Lester Young. After he briefly broke the band up post-war, the reformed New Testamant version had a different structure. Being hard to have so many great soloists on the payroll, the stars became the arrangers, such as Neil Hefti, chief composer of the landmark Atomic Basie album. It is impossible to talk about Basie without talking about the All American rhythm section, the greatest in the history of jazz, IMO. Featuring Basie on piano, Freddie "the Human Metronome" Green on rhythm guitar, influential drummer "Papa" Jo Jones and unsung hero, bassist Walter Page. The Basie Orchestra was formed through the collision or "Borg"-like merging or assimilation of two earlier groups, one of which was the Walter Page Blue Devils (a regional slang for barbed wire cutters?). Jones mentioned in interviews that Page had taught his group how to play. This does illustrate that being a band leader was a different skill set from being a musician, and Basie ended up usurping the two aggregations by force of his personality, like a sun collecting planets in his orbit. Basie and Ellington came from the New York stride school of piano (after ragtime, before boogie woogie). Unlike his royal peer Duke, the Count had a very sparse, austere style, sometimes called epigrammatic. One musician astutely pointed out Basie LEFT OUT more than most pianists played! :) So did drummer Jones, who had a very light sound by pioneering the use of cymbals to keep time. Green always played acoustic guitar. Together they breathed the rhythm like a four brained organism playing as one. Because of the collective lightness of their style, you could here everything going on around them in the Orchestra like it was mixed on the fly by master Blue Note engineer Rudy Van Gelder, they didn't didn't stumble over each other's sonic frequencies.

Lester Young - He may have learned something about space from his apprenticeship with Page and Basie. He had a very quiet, thoughtful, reflective style of playing. Just as Louis was a profound influence on Coleman Hawkins, sometimes the conceptual breakthroughs could cross-pollinate between instruments in other directions. Miles admitted to greatly admiring Young, and his spacious, less is more approach to playing was almost certainly an influence on Miles economical style. Miles played with bebop legends at the beginning, such as Charlie Parker. He learned early he couldn't compete with Dizzie Gillespie on his virtuosic speed runs, and was almost demoralized through this lack of technical fluency. Parker and others encouraged him to not try and copy anybody, but to find and embrace his own style, make it work for him and turn it into a strength. What did that turn out to be? By putting more feeling into one note than some symphony orchestras couldn't come close to. This exploration of acoustic space led to the modal, chromatic and scalar sonic experiments heard in Kind of Blue (like a stylistic or genre-creating wind tunnel or laboratory), later culminating in his late '60s-mid '70s masterpieces - from In a Silent Way and #####es Brew all the way to his Afro/Indian/Jazz/Funk/Rock ensembles heard in On the Corner, Get Up With It, Big Fun and live works Dark Magus, Agharta and Pangaea, before his "retirement". His signature conception of space was informed by Young. Coleman Hawkins had a more robust tone and sound, and was probably a bigger early influence on many of his sax contemporaries. But Young's quieter tone and arguably greater lyricism as a soloist was a huge post-war influence on sax players like Stan Getz, Paul Desmond, Lee Konitz and many others, and because they were influential to THEIR peers, you could make a case Young has the larger overall influence today.

Miles Davis - The collaboration with Gil Evans that led to landmark recordings such as Sketches of Spain will figure prominently. As will the collaboration with John Coltrane (Bill Evans and others) in probably the best known album in jazz history, Kind of Blue (Ashley Kahn wrote a book just on that session, as well as the situational context, of course). Later when Miles was the most famous jazz artist in the world, he could steal top talent just by snapping his fingers, but even earlier, he had an uncanny ability for recognizing and developing talent, such as Coltrane, who was plucked from obscurity (I think on the recommendation of his drummer who was from the same city, "Philly Joe Jones"?). But his bands over the years comprise a virtual who's who of jazz history, which we will cover. Later, the great '60s quintet with Wayne Shorter, Herbie Hancock, Tony Williams and Ron Carter were pushed nightly to play better and differently by Miles creating loose, free form, unbounded sonic frameworks (almost avant garde at times) through which to innovate. In the '70's, he would utter cryptic, enigmatic, zen koan-like sayings such as play like you don't know how to play to coax innovation from his charges. Through his presence, example and playing, in the 70s, he at times seemed like an explorer headed into the sonic jungle, motioning the band with an acoustic and electronic gestural language with his horn and increasingly synths - come here, let's explore in this direction. Another important sub-chapter tapped for covetage - before fusion lost its initial explosive energy, and became enmired, ossified and spent in formula, the genesis of nearly all of the first top bands were birthed directly by Miles sidemen: the heavily rock influenced Tony Williams Lifetime with John McLaughlin and the criminally underrated Larry Young (called the Coltrane of the organ for his nuanced playing not easily accomplished on that instrument), Herbie Hancock's funk-inflected Headhunters (became the best selling jazz album ever, surpassing #####es Brew), Wayne Shorter and Joe Zawinul (played with Miles, In a Silent Way was his composition) formed Weather Report, and Return to Forever, spearheaded by Miles keyboard ace Chick Corea.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Buddy Bolden…The Music

The song that is most identified with Bolden is a song called “Funky Butt.” There was a hall in New Orleans called Union Sons Hall where Buddy played a lot of shows. In those days before the advent of air conditioning in New Orleans very humid climate, you can imagine that inside could be very uncomfortable. Add a bunch of people dancing and grinding and you can imagine that the air could get kind of “funky.” Therefore, you can imagine it would be easy to improvise the following lines

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden say

Funky butt funky butt take it away

I thought I heard him say

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden shout

Open up the window, let that bad air out

I thought I heard him shout

The song became so identified with that hall that the hall was given the unofficial name Funky Butt Hall.
If I recall correctly, this is considered one of the very first uses of the word funk(y) in music. Also, I'm fairly certain a long surviving member of Bolden's band always insisted the song was about flatulence. The funkiest bass lines sound... a little gassy. :)

 
Buddy Bolden…The Music

The song that is most identified with Bolden is a song called “Funky Butt.” There was a hall in New Orleans called Union Sons Hall where Buddy played a lot of shows. In those days before the advent of air conditioning in New Orleans very humid climate, you can imagine that inside could be very uncomfortable. Add a bunch of people dancing and grinding and you can imagine that the air could get kind of “funky.” Therefore, you can imagine it would be easy to improvise the following lines

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden say

Funky butt funky butt take it away

I thought I heard him say

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden shout

Open up the window, let that bad air out

I thought I heard him shout

The song became so identified with that hall that the hall was given the unofficial name Funky Butt Hall.
If I recall correctly, this is considered one of the very first uses of the word funk(y) in music. Also, I'm fairly certain a long surviving member of Bolden's band always insisted the song was about flatulence. The funkiest bass lines sound... a little gassy. :)
In a non air conditioned building packed with people I'm sure there were all kinds of smells. Not hard to imagine flatulence, B.O., undergarments that didn't get washed often, etc...

Open the window and let the bad air out...

 
Buddy Bolden…The Music

The song that is most identified with Bolden is a song called “Funky Butt.” There was a hall in New Orleans called Union Sons Hall where Buddy played a lot of shows. In those days before the advent of air conditioning in New Orleans very humid climate, you can imagine that inside could be very uncomfortable. Add a bunch of people dancing and grinding and you can imagine that the air could get kind of “funky.” Therefore, you can imagine it would be easy to improvise the following lines

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden say

Funky butt funky butt take it away

I thought I heard him say

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden shout

Open up the window, let that bad air out

I thought I heard him shout

The song became so identified with that hall that the hall was given the unofficial name Funky Butt Hall.
If I recall correctly, this is considered one of the very first uses of the word funk(y) in music. Also, I'm fairly certain a long surviving member of Bolden's band always insisted the song was about flatulence. The funkiest bass lines sound... a little gassy. :)
In a non air conditioned building packed with people I'm sure there were all kinds of smells. Not hard to imagine flatulence, B.O., undergarments that didn't get washed often, etc...

Open the window and let the bad air out...
Of course, but it isn't funky breath or funky body or funky armpits or even funky room... it's funky butt. :lol:

 
Buddy BoldenThe Music

OK, so what did Buddy play that was so different from what came before?? Why is Buddy considered the first man of Jazz??

We know ragtime existed before Buddy, so ragging or syncopating tunes was common. Marching bands and brass music existed before Buddy. The blues existed before Buddy. Church music existed before Buddy. These things are all considered some of the roots of what became jazz.

So, what did Buddy contribute?? Well, many people who were around at the time think that Buddy was one of the first to incorporate a looser more improvisational style of ragtime. This raises the question of whether or not Buddy could read music. Once again, opinions are all over the place. Some people say he faked it all the time implying he couldnt read. Others say he could read, but often the embellishments he made up on the spot were often better than what was written.

Many also think that Buddy was the first one to play the blues with primarily a brass frontline Strings were not lead instruments in Buddys band the way they were in other dance bands of the time. The string instruments in Buddys band were rhythm instruments. This playing of the blues is consistent with the recollections of the Bolden Band being a gut bucket or a honky tonk band with a rougher sound than his contemporaries. People around at the time report that Buddy was at his best playing those low down blues. They talk about the moan in his cornet and some even compare it to they wailing sounds youd hear in church.

The combination of the brass and the blues made Bolden most popular among the dancers in the city of New Orleans. It was said that Buddy would be playing a gig in Lincoln Park and Robichauxs band would be playing in Johnson Park across the street. At some point in the show, Bolden would call his children home which for him meant he would play a little lick or whatever on his cornet at the dancers at the more polite Robichaux concert would walk over to Lincoln to hear the rougher, more exciting Bolden band.

The song that is most identified with Bolden is a song called Funky Butt. There was a hall in New Orleans called Union Sons Hall where Buddy played a lot of shows. In those days before the advent of air conditioning in New Orleans very humid climate, you can imagine that inside could be very uncomfortable. Add a bunch of people dancing and grinding and you can imagine that the air could get kind of funky. Therefore, you can imagine it would be easy to improvise the following lines

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden say

Funky butt funky butt take it away

I thought I heard him say

I thought I heard Buddy Bolden shout

Open up the window, let that bad air out

I thought I heard him shout

The song became so identified with that hall that the hall was given the unofficial name Funky Butt Hall. This song has been covered by Jelly Roll Morton, Sidney Bechet, and Dr John.

Lastly, I would LOVE for someone to put together an album trying to kind of recreate the Bolden sound. I know it wouldnt sell great, but it would be a lot of fun. Humphrey Littleton did that several years back, using vintage instruments and such, but its not widely available. A movie on Boldens life (supposedly in the works for several years) might accomplish this, but not sure when or if that will ever get done.

Anyway, thanks for letting me contribute and I look forward to reading the rest of the thread.
Oh, hell yeah!Thanks for the thorough and insightful intro to Bolden, a fitting pre-Armstrong start.

When you mentioned whether or not he could read music, and how it was a moot point because what he was improvised was often better than what had been written, it made me think that written composition is sometimes viewed as superior in some way to improvisation. But as you said, sometime improvisation is superior.

And what are composition and improvisation exactly, anyways, maybe they aren't as separate as we think, and better described as two sides to the same coin. It is true that some of Bach's works appear to be painstakingly worked out like a mathematical or logical system, evedinced by the precision and perfection of the counterpoint, like how a crystal is formed from the underlying shape and structure of its elements. But weren't the various strands of the composition at one time separately improvised? And in assembling the architecture of how the various strands fit together, were those earlier instincts or decisions improvised. If so, it is only later, when these various improvisations are combined in a temporal compression as one work, that we say it is "composed".

A genius like Armstrong or Young may have had countless rhythmic, melodic and harmonic sequences or strings in their head, and a massive latent repository of musical information instantly available (Young was reportedly one of the greatest ever in terms of his seeming boundless, overflowing, volcanic musical imagination, with the ability in his prime to effortlessly riff on a song for an hour straight without even coming close to playing the same thing, but make it ordered and melodically coherent. Another word for that is genius. But the ability to combine melodic elements for the solo on the fly is almost like some biochemical components that more or less readily "fit together". Armstrong and Young probably didn't pre-memorize entire solos (though they may have parts, or beginning, middle and ending blocks that could be reconfigured and mixed and matched into new patterns with kaleidoscopic twists), but maybe the contents and topological organization of the musical information available to recall from their brains were more like how chess masters are said to have a staggering wealth of possible moves in there head, not in a discrete and separate form, but in the form of larger sequential move structures, in terms of patterns and interrelationships of moves. Are the chess masters "composing" from memory or "improvising" on the fly their game?

It seems to me there is a back and forth between improvisation and composition at both the level of a Bach and Armstrong or Young. They just seem different because of different temporal aspects, with the ability of Bach to fold together his many improvisations into a compression or layering of time making it a composition, but there is also a latent compositional instinct and logical, coherent and organized musical intelligence that ALWAYS informs the work of Armstrong and Young's best improvisations.

Mozart, who revealed his genius early as a child prodigy, is an intetesting case, almost like a giant colossus bestride the twin worlds of composition and improvisation. He was the only musician I ever heard of that claimed some of his works were revealed all at once. That is freaky and hard to even imagine. On a different scale or level, but to convey a sense of what that might be like to experience that MUSICALLY, it could be like taking all the words from a novel, and holding them in the correct order in your mind and consciousness SIMULTANEOUSLY! :) But the brain can process anything from mathematical theorems to scientific and technological inventions beneath the level of conscious awareness and understanding (there is a whole sub-chapter in the history of creativity and invention in which the solutions came almost unbidden, so to speak, when the scientist, who had earlier steeped himself with knowledge about a problem, was otherwise occupied at the moment of breakthrough and insight - not limited to science, either, while we don't usually think of it like that, the poem Kubla Kahn about Xanadu, or it's inspiration, was "improvised" by Samuel Coleridge Taylor during an opium-induced dream, after first priming or pre-programming it with information about the source material and subject matter). Maybe Mozart's sub-conscious was just improvising really fast, in a way that seemed instantaneous to his more sluggish, sloth-like conscious awareness?

Maybe composition and improvisation are inextricably linked at a deep, fundamental level, but we don't know it because we can't (yet) peek behind the curtain of consciousness to see the ordinary man working all those gizmos in the back, giving off the illusion of a wizard ? :)

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top