AOTW Dec.26

[danasgoodstuff]

After considering many options, including more recent and more obscure albums, I decided to go with this CD which combines 2 Prestige LPs and one compilation track to collect all the tracks recorded at the session on Sept.15, 1969. Several reasons: it affords an opportunity to discus CD reconfiguration; I know our gracious hosts are big fans of Don Patterson; and while it might look at first glance like a 'typical soul jazz organ date', I feel it has enough distinguishing features to make it interesting...

And, it's readily available so here 'tis-

BROTHERS 4

Sonny Stitt

Don Patterson

Grant Green

Billy James

Brothers 4

Creepin' Home

Alexander's Ragtime Band

Walk on By

Donny Brook(sic)

Mud Turtle

St. Thomas

Good Bait

Starry Night

Tune Up

Sept. 15, 1969 RVG, NJ

[pryan]

Where can I get a copy? Looks like a smokin' lineup.

[danasgoodstuff]

It's one of those Fantasy owned things you gotta get before the new owners remainder it...CD is from 2001, so it shouldn't be too hard to find.

Edited December 20, 2004 by danasgoodstuff

[pryan]

Thanks, I'll try to order it ASAP. Carpe diem, as Jim says.

[mikeweil]

Excellent selection! Stitt and Patterson were a great team - Patterson always coaxed out the best in Stitt. Grant Green fits in fine here, too, and Billy James could accompany Patterson like no other drummer.

I'd recommend all Stitt/Patterson discs - perhaps we could expand this to a general Stitt/Patterson discussion?

Edited December 20, 2004 by mikeweil

[Brad]

I'll have to dissent here. Except for one song, you've got Sonny playing the varitone, that awful attachment he used on his sax. Absolutely ruins the record. In my view, most of Sonny's work with the varitone is to be avoided.

[mikeweil]

I'll have to dissent here. Except for one song, you've got Sonny playing the varitone, that awful attachment he used on his sax. Absolutely ruins the record. In my view, most of Sonny's work with the varitone is to be avoided.

C'mon, it's not that bad! His swing and phrasing come very nicely with the Varitone.

So let's discuss Stitt/Patterson in general, as I suggested. I will post a list of all sessions and CDs later today. (My Patterson disco is too large to attach the file here.)

[Brad]

Probably a general discussion will be good although my collection of Patterson/Stitt is rather skimpy since that's not my favorite kind of Sonny. I know some (not many, I belive) people like the varitone. I don't particularly like it. Here's what what was said in the Stitt Mosaic:

"When Stitt comes back to Roulette in 1966 to record five albums, Hugh Glover was producing and Sonny was playing mostly Varitone, a fiendish invention that attaches to a saxophone and produces an instantaneous extra sound an octave below the note being played on the horn. It also destroys the timbre of the saxophone and the personality of an artist's sound. Eddie Harris and Lou Donaldson were among the other esteemed players who fell prey to the contraption."

Later on Zan Stewart who wrote the notes describes the attachment as "dastardly."

[mikeweil]

I never heard Stitt play the Varitone (or else) in person, but I did see Eddie Harris, who used a number of self-designed attachments besides the Varitone to enhance and diversify his sound - in no way did it obscure his musical personality. I can understand what these people say: If you would record the sax only with a direct input from the varitone, it would be true, but so the recorded sound is a mix of the natural sound and the Varitone. I always thought it fitted Stitt's swing and smooth phrasing very nicely.

The personality of a sax player is partly his sound, but also his choice of notes, his phrasing and rhythmic conceptiopn, and this is not affected by the Varitone - that is why you still recognize them in spite of the Varitone.

Harris appreciated another aspect of it: Due to the slight amplification he did not have to exert himself as much.

If these players wouldn't have liked it, they wouldn't have used it - even Coltrane tried it. Perhaps it is different today, where sax miking is vastly improved. I found it very hip - for guitarists it is "natural" to use pickups and stuff - why not for saxophonists. I saw Wolfgang Puschnig use effects like wah-wah, echo and phasers to great effect, Steve Hall did the same on a Kevin Hays Blue Note CD.

If one dislikes it, okay, but there's no reason for a generalized putdown.

[mikeweil]

Later on Zan Stewart who wrote the notes describes the attachment as "dastardly."

Sorry, but this goes beyond what a critic or author of liner notes is allowed to say, IMHO. It was the artists' decision, not the producers', to use the varitone.

40 years after the electric revolution in jazz, some still haven't learned a thing.

[couw]

Later on Zan Stewart who wrote the notes describes the attachment as "dastardly."

Sorry, but this goes beyond what a critic or author of liner notes is allowed to say, IMHO.

yeah, but it's a cool word! dastardly.

[king ubu]

quite a dastard discussion going on here

[mikeweil]

Who's calling me postings "dastardly"?! Let's go out and fight, you dastard!

[Brad]

If one dislikes it, okay, but there's no reason for a generalized putdown.

The personality of a sax player is partly his sound, but also his choice of notes, his phrasing and rhythmic conceptiopn, and this is not affected by the Varitone - that is why you still recognize them in spite of the Varitone.

Hope you weren't referring to me . I was just quoting what the writer said, although I was obviously using his writing to embellish my dislike for the thing.

I never heard Eddie Harris use but have heard Sonny use it (on cd) and IMHO it ruins his beautiful sound. Sonny should sound like when he played with Jug, on the Roost recordings or late on the Tune Up/Constellation cd. That is beautiful music. To me, the varitone just ruins and destroys his beautiful sound. I agree with your statement that "the personality of a sax player is partly his sound, but also his choice of notes, his phrasing and rhythmic conception" but not with the statement that "this is not affected by the Varitone - that is why you still recognize them in spite of the Varitone" because what comes out of the horn ruins what goes in.

However, we'll probably never agree on this attachment. I don't want to use the "d" word

Edited December 21, 2004 by Brad

[mikeweil]

Hope you weren't referring to me . I was just quoting what the writer said, although I was obviously using his writing to embellish my dislike for the thing.

No, the blow was towards ubu - some fun exchange.

"darstardly" is too harsh a word to use. But each to his own taste.

[danasgoodstuff]

actually, one of the reasons I chose this was that, to my ears, the dreaded varitone is barely noticable, like Stitt forgot to turn it up or something...Also, I actually prefer this to the other Stitt/Patterson I've heard...I'll try to do a full length account of what I do like about Brothers4 on Boxing Day.

[cannonball-addict]

You never hear Don Patterson's name but he's such a bad cat!

[JSngry]

If Stitt had used the Varitone on TUNE UP or albums of that ilk, it might have ruined the music, because that's music w/a different intent, on many levels. But Stitt on Varitone w/an organ group is perfect, I think, because it fit in with the overall vibe of the people they were making that music for at the time they were making it.

Context matters.

[danasgoodstuff]

I think that 'fitting the context' is why I prefer this one to some of Stitt's other organ combo work where to my ears he just dished up his usual bebop stuffs irregardless...it's not better Stitt, per se, but it makes a better whole.

[Brad]

If Stitt had used the Varitone on TUNE UP or albums of that ilk, it might have ruined the music, because that's music w/a different intent, on many levels. But Stitt on Varitone w/an organ group is perfect, I think, because it fit in with the overall vibe of the people they were making that music for at the time they were making it.

Context matters.

I never thought about that but I see Jim's point although I don't agree with it. The varitone just ruins the sound. One lp of Sonny's that I really love is at the DJ Lounge. That recording is just not going to grab me the way it does if he had used the varitone.

[mikeweil]

I don't have the time right now to type out all the Stitt/Patterson sessions, and the layout is ruined if I copy and paste it from my Don Patterson discography, which is a .doc file in its current state - anybody wanting this pretty much complete Patterson disco may send me an e-mail to miguelito54@gmx.net and I will send the file.

I find Sangrey's remarks very fitting about the Varitone in this context - I like Stitt as much with it as I do without - like on his Impulse sessions.

But let's - PLEASE !!! - give some credit to Patterson - he was real BAAAD!!! Take his solo on Starry Nights on this CD, all chords, with a registration any other organist would use only for one chorus - it's pure passion and so expressive, it has me calling out YEAH! YEAH! all the time when I listen to this - absolutely grand! I will trade any five Jimmy Smiths for one Patterson. (You can ban me from the board for this )

Patterson was one of the greatest, period. And Billy James! Usually I hate it when a drummer plays simple eighth notes on rock or bossa beats, but Billy's sound great.

Five stars - no: five thousand stars for this!!

[mikeweil]

... because it fit in with the overall vibe of the people they were making that music for at the time they were making it.

... and that includes me, for sure!

[JSngry]

If Stitt had used the Varitone on TUNE UP or albums of that ilk, it might have ruined the music, because that's music w/a different intent, on many levels. But Stitt on Varitone w/an organ group is perfect, I think, because it fit in with the overall vibe of the people they were making that music for at the time they were making it.

Context matters.

I never thought about that but I see Jim's point although I don't agree with it. The varitone just ruins the sound. One lp of Sonny's that I really love is at the DJ Lounge. That recording is just not going to grab me the way it does if he had used the varitone.

This is all subjective, of course, but I can't say for myself that his tone is "ruined". I would say that it's changed, though. Now, that might seem obvious, but it's not just a matter of being changed in quality, it becomes a matter of being changed in intent.

Think about the changes that were going on during the time that Stitt used the varitone, mainly the movement to "say it loud, I'm Black and I'm proud". I don't think this should be overlooked or dismissed, because most of Stitt's work in these days was in venues where the clientele was being directly affected by these changes and this new philosophy. Men and women both were feeling liberation and more than a bit of "militancy" (not in the "hateful" way, but more in the "I'm going to be who and what I am as fully and blatantly as I can and I don't care who does or doesn't like it" way).

The varitone gave Stitt's horns an edge that allowed it to cut through Patterson's organ, which then allowed Patterson to play as loudly and proudly as he wanted to, which then gave James full reign to do the same, and the whole thing kinda looped around on itself. This was not the dynamic of bebop at work, this was something else entirely, and I personally think it speaks perfectly to and of the time and place from which it sprang.

Check out the Label M side of this trio at The Left Bank in Baltimore from 1971. That shit is LIVE in every sense of the word, and LOUD too. You can hear the crowd a little bit, and it's quite apparent that they were as live and loud (and proud) as the band was. It ain't nothin' but a BIG party going on. I don't think that that trio would have had that effect on that crowd, and countless others like them, if Stitt had not used the Varitone. It was part of the "electricity" of the moment, and in more ways than one.

Now, that's not to say that every time he used it, it worked like that, because Stitt was as variable in being engaged in the music as he was consistent in his technical command of being able to deliver it, which is to say extremely so. But I do think that the Varitone served a more directly cogent purpose for him than beinge "merely" a gimmick or a fad. I can certainly understand why some people don't dig it no matter what, but I would like for that personal dislike to display an acknowledgement of the real benefits that it provided as well. Since those benenfits pertained almost exclusively to the social aspects of the music (and make no mistake - Stitt spent the vast percentage of his career playing social music), I don't expect a lot of today's fans to automatically be aware of, understand, or appreciate them. After all, it's now a much different time, place, and vibe. But the comments of certain critics, people who should know better (if not necessarily differently) play right back into the longstanding tradition of dismissing organ music and the entire milieu from which it sprang and flourished for reasons that might best be described as culturally condescending and at worst as flat-out, if probably unknowingly, racist.

My only point is that it's entirely possible to not like what one is listening to and at the same time be aware of and understand/appreciate what it is that one is not liking. It's not necessarily necessary, but I do think it's desirable. That's all. In Stitt's case, one can not like the Varitone, for sure, but I think it neat to understand more of what what the Varitone really was for him and his mucic of the time.

[mikeweil]

Very well said, Jim!

[Brad]

I'm not as expressive as Mr. Sangrey but obviously I disagree. From my point of view, the although the sound is changed, it's not for the better. Regarding what was going socially and politically, interesting theory, just a theory however. I don't see a bunch of other musicians who had as much to say as him feel they couldn't say it through their tenor or alto. I can dig the argument about wanting to say it louder since the idea was to go electric at the time. Witness the rhubarb when Dylan went electric. Perhaps that's the nub. Electric was fine but somehow the varitone didn't do the same for the sax as for the guitar.

I hope you're not grouping me into that class of people who don't like organ since I'm a big fan of it. Also to bring up the "r" word for people who don't like organ (and there are many) is quite divisive to say the least. But I do see your point somewhat about the historical/social milieu since I grew up in the 60s. Although I may agree with what you have to say about liking/not liking the varitone, just because I understand the historical/social background doesn't make me like this gimmick any more. And it was a gimmick. I don't see that much of a benefit to it. And something having a benefit doesn't sell records. After a while he gave it up and returned to the alto/tenor where he made and had some big records.

When people remember Sonny, it won't be for the varitone, thank goodness.