Grant Green Club Mozambique UK release

[Soul Stream]

THanks for the rundown MG! Yeah, can't wait for this one tommorrow. I'll be first in line at the record store for sure.

This release and the new Dr. Lonnie Smith are really making my Summer this year. Can't wait!

[DMP]

I thought "Jan Jan" (for me the highlight of the "Lighthouse" double LP) was by "The Fabulous Counts."

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I thought "Jan Jan" (for me the highlight of the "Lighthouse" double LP) was by "The Fabulous Counts."

Yup - Moses Davis was the organist in that band. See the thread on Davis here

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php...=0entry528973

MG

[CJ Shearn]

my friend ordered this for me as a belated b-day gift, hope it comes soon.

[ghost of miles]

Just got the Lonnie Smith in the mail today and am planning on picking up the Green within the next week. Dan and MG--great discussion, very interesting.

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

u r nutz chewy's riding his bike to record store at O 12 hundred hours tonight

[monkboughtlunch]

Sound samples are up on amazon.com. This sounds pretty good. And I'm not a big fan of Green's 70s period. It appears Green really put a lot of work into the arrangements on this. This may be superior to Alive and Lighthouse.

[DMP]

Thanks MG - you learn something every day!

[king ubu]

Interesting discussion that went on here, indeed! Me being some kind of a historian, I cannot but wholeheartily agree with the below post (my emphasis).

I think it's very difficult to call the recordings of those musicians R&B. That would place them with Professor Longhair, Charles Brown, Amos Milburn etc, which doesn't seem to work for me - and I doubt that it would work for you, either. Certainly, they shared the objective of R&B, and it's also true that the boundary (if that's the right word) between the two groups of musicians was permeable (much more so in the forties than later), but they were nonetheless jazz musicians who were playing jazz.

I think the key point is that there WAS a continuum, as you've so rightly said. The '60s and '70s recordings made by the musicians I mentioned in my earlier post - those that lasted that long, anyway - are clearly Soul Jazz, and I hope you'd agree. But these later recordings show both that the men were playing essentially the same music and that their objective in doing so was the same.

To me, the point in time when a kind of music is generally recognised and identified is an important historical point only in terms of the critical appreciation/marketing of the music. That is, of course, not a negligible matter when dealing with commercial music. But it's frequently the case that those who make such distinctions stick are behind the general public and the musicians themselves. A good, and related, example is the recognition and identification of R&B, which occurred in 1949; a fair while after R&B developed. (And there were, of course, extraneous reasons why this identification was needed more quickly than that for Soul Jazz.)

Further, it seems to me that the development of Soul Jazz can only be seen coherently in its whole development up to the Smooth Jazz of the present day if one looks at the music right from its origins in the forties, and traces its parallel development with R&B.

MG

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Just got the Lonnie Smith in the mail today and am planning on picking up the Green within the next week. Dan and MG--great discussion, very interesting.

The Lonnie Smith (and the True Blue Organ Trio) are winging their way to me from CD Universe at this present moment. I'm hoping True Blue Organ Trio turns up in a day or so. Smith will take a bit longer. These, and the recent Mel Sparks, are making this a fairly memorable year for the GROOVE.

MG

[pasta]

TODAY!!!! FINALLY!!!!!

[Soulstation1]

Music Clips

[Soul Stream]

Got this today. I guess one usually thinks of a live club recording as a chance to stretch out a bit, which isn't much the case here. I really dig the songs and arrangements, the soloing is short and reigned-in in many instances (although not all, Grant DOES dig in on some things here and it's pretty burning. I'm not sure Ronnie Foster really was happening until he made his "Chesire Cat" LP on which he kills.) Maybe this was supposed to be a more "commercial" live outing. Maybe I'm in a bad mood. Anyway, the sound is better than "Alive" for sure, but uneven and makes you wish RVG had made the flight out. The mix is just unbalanced and some things are undermiced. Also, hate the organ sound he gets here, doesn't help make the case for Ronnie Foster too much.

Any live Grant Green to me is definatley worth listening to repeatedly. I'll have this in the CD player for a loooong time no doubt. I've waited for years to hear this. Maybe my expectations were too high. Grant never seems to be that into it like he was on Lighthouse and Alive...I thought for sure he was going to blow up on "Bottom Of The Barrel" (a real killer one chord groover), but he cuts his solo short. Idris is killing on this thing, although the sound doesn't help him either all that much.

All that said...I do love this sort of shit.

Also, Bob Beldon says 13 sets were recorded. Yet there's only 8 songs on the CD? We can't even get a double CD out of 13 sets.....????

COME ON BLUE NOTE!!!!

It's funny...what Grant Green is doing on Mozambique DEFINATELY is the blueprint to what Soulive is doing. Tight heads, popular songlist, funky, short solos...Fender Bass-like left hand with stabbing chords and hard-single note right hand on the organ... Say what you will, Grant was way ahead of his time on this stuff.

Edited July 18, 2006 by Soul Stream

[monkboughtlunch]

Thanks for the review. I haven't heard this, but I doubt the odd sound you describe is due to undermic-ing.

I think the multitracks are missing and the CD you hear is nothing more than a rough mono reference mix, presumably for the producer to review the material.

If the balance is off, it's probably because the rough mixes were done on the fly, and never intended for commercial release.

[Soul Stream]

Thanks for the review. I haven't heard this, but I doubt the odd sound you describe is due to undermic-ing.

I think the multitracks are missing and the CD you hear is nothing more than a rough mono reference mix, presumably for the producer to review the material.

If the balance is off, it's probably because the rough mixes were done on the fly, and never intended for commercial release.

Wow. I didn't know these were reference tapes. It STILL has better sound than alive! That said, I hope they find the multi-track tapes someday. Mixed properly this could bring the whole session up a little.

I've really been enjoying the hell out of this CD. Grant absolutely nails you to the wall on some of his solos like "I AM SOMEBODY!"....definately feeling him on this.

This session is really growing on me. I think yesterday I was in a bad mood and hadn't listened well enough

[pasta]

it's quite a great thing to have this stuff finally out for us to dig!

[connoisseur series500]

This session is really growing on me. I think yesterday I was in a bad mood and hadn't listened well enough

Yes, whenever I'm in a bad mood, everything sounds bad. When I'm happy, everything sounds good.

[Soul Stream]

Yeah...this live set is just killer...I mean PATCHES!!!! Never thought I would ever be able to hear that song and enjoy it again in my lifetime. Grant's burning that thing....

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

is the original patches just as funky? which is the orginal/famous version again now?

[Soul Stream]

is the original patches just as funky? which is the orginal/famous version again now?

Clarence Carter had the original hit. It's a real, real, real sappy soul song. More of an "up" slow song (if that makes sense) than anything. Kind of funky in a Muscle Shoals kind of way, not what you'd traditionally think of as "Funk." But you'd definatley hear how Grant would hear the hit and cover it.

[DMP]

Not that this CD needs anymore analysis (the comments and opinions above cover a lot of bases), but my 2 cents...

1) The sound quality is a factor, and probably lessens the impact somewhat. It's certainly acceptable.

2) I agree with Bob Belden's points about the repertoire and audience. I heard Green's groups of this period several times in the kind of venues Belden describes - they usually led off with "Ease Back" and continued with similar material. One time, seemingly out of the blue, they did a 20 minute version of "Fancy Free" which caught me by surprise - later it turned up on the "Lighthouse" LP's - but this wasn't typical of what they were doing. ("Maiden Voyage" showed up on the last "Alive" release, it's in a similar vein.)

3) Green never put on a "show" the way (say) Jack McDuff or Jimmy McGriff would - his group pretty much played the music unadorned. (The Miles Davis of the organ lounge?) But Green always had a big smile on his face when he comped those repetitive figures behind the other soloists, and when Claude Bartee was finished he'd pop the sax out of his mouth with a big grin.

4) Green almost always used Idris Muhammad on his albums - a wonderful drummer in this (and, as it turns out, ANY) setting. But his regular drummers were no slouches, either, just as strong in their own way. I think one of the reasons for the success of the "Lighthouse" session is the drummer from his regular working band. (All in all, I still think that record is the most accurate representation of Green "live" - the extra musicians give it an extra oomph, but Green's quartets were pretty exciting as they were.)

5) Even Grant Green has only so many licks to play over a vamp.

Edited July 20, 2006 by DMP

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Thanks DMP - that kind of two cents is worth a lot to those of us who never saw him in person.

MG

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

how did they put on a "show"?

[Soul Stream]

Thanks DMP, I can only imagine what Grant would have been like live during this era. Having caught the tail end of this sort of venue in the early 80's, I do think I know what kind of audience they were playing for and what people would expect. I'm sure Green did nothing less than deliver.

Say what you will about the music played. But that it was played with utmost professionalism is not an issue. No slacking on that gig any night of the week I would suspect.

[DMP]

Some groups were conscious about entertaining the audience, and went beyond simply playing the music. McDuff, for example, would drop a handkerchief to signal the band's entrance (anyone remember "Gin & Orange?") or go into that Count Basie "One More Time" routine. He would plan the set to get the most impact from the music - something many groups didn't do. (How many times have you sat waiting in the audience while the group discusses what to play next?) Joe Dukes was almost like a "show drummer" - something you don't get from the records - there was a strong visual element to his playing. (Red Holt played a similar role in the original Ramsey Lewis Trio.) The tunes themselves had all kinds of "hooks." He would really work the audience, conscious that the crowd wanted to have a good time. The group always seemed to be well-rehearsed, and, of course, the music could easily stand on its own. Johnny Lytle really didn't need those colored lights, and you don't necessarily have to play the Hammond organ with your tongue.

Green's groups pretty much just played the music, without many extra-musical elements, in a solid, professional manner. Although the music they played was very approachable and catchy - Green didn't need to stand on his head. Believe me, the audience always left smiling.

Does this make any sense?

Edited July 20, 2006 by DMP