AllenLowe

I remember the bassist had a foreign accent, maybe European or South American, because we talked to him a bit. But English was not his native language. And I was very close to the shooting. It was pretty awful.

I was a student there, yes; there was also something called the Straight Country and Blues Committee which did incredible vernacular work. I also recall, on the same night a student was shot to death in the student center, a great Sam Rivers Trio concert; were you involved in that as well? I do remember perhaps the first time I saw Sonny, at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, 1969 or 1970; and a few of us went who had spent time listening to his Prestige and Impulse work; we sat there, he had a conga player and god-knows-what-else, and we kept looking at each other, wondering "when is he going to start playing?" It was all vamps and rhythm, drums and conga; and then, before it appeared to have even begun, it was over.

I agree completely in terms of his status. Listening to Worktime, at the tender age of 14, basically led me to spend a lifetime dealing with this music in one way or another. And it's funny because yes, I listened over and over. Spent days in my room trying to figure out what the hell he was doing - and why - on There's No Business Like Show Business. Though there was a night, in Binghamton, New York, when he played Strode Rode (circa 1974 or '75) and all things seemed possible..

In my opinion, of those 3, only Bo Diddley (the exception that proves the rule, like Chuck Berry) is a true rock and roller; has to do with basic instrumentation (a quartet, string band format, close to the Delta set up); and because he is basically a country musician at heart. Most down-home rock and roller in history. I find Little Richard to be closer to R&B, and Fats....well, worst performer with a good reputation. Basically a good songwriter, terrible singer and mediocre pianist (I have expressed this opinion before and it usually generates a bit of hate mail). Stylistically he is a hybrid, that N.O. R&B thing, lots of Latin tinge. Personally I find Prof. Longhair to be more significant a musician. getting closer, only about 10 years behind - hoping to start work on my country music history, Joe, which will essentially do just that. As for Harmonica Frank, he, along with evangelical guitarists like Utah Smith and Claude Ely, may be the Rosetta Stone of rock and roll's pre-history.

I agree; I actually think that he and Lucille made a very conscious decision, just after that, that he was gonna make some money, lighten up his repertoire and approach, thicken up his rhythm section. More power to Sonny, he deserves as much money as he can make, but the music suffered. yes, nothing wrong with joy; lotsa fun stuff in Sonny's oeuvre in these years. Still, it's like James Joyce doing a graphic comic. It's gonna capture my attention, but it ain't Ulysses.

I happen to think that I did a better job than anyone else in my own history/prehistory of rock and roll. The key is to look not at blues and r&B but at hillbilly and country music (both black and white), also evangelical guitar players like Brother Claude Ely and Utah Smith. I think r&B in particular is another animal. In it I wrote a long chapter on country music and its relationship to rock, and was quite happy to find that Tony Russell, to whom I sent it, approved and called the chapter "significant." Basically, I call it a white way of thinking about black music. And a very original way at that.

I heard Sonny MANY times after 1969 (I actually saw him at a very ill-fated Town Hall appearance in '69). Yes, that's right, I am discounting a lot of what he did over half a lifetime. But it happens. Think Lou Reed, who stopped doing much of interest for me after about 1970. I am sure there are others. Not saying that Sonny didn't have his moments, but he lost his true focus, to my way of hearing. It's not heresy to observe such a thing, and certainly Sonny has nothing to apologize for, but though some of those later groups were solid, nothing put him in the same artistic frame of mind as his work from, say, 1956-1969. There is just no comparison. Larry Kart, are you out there?

maybe.....actually now that he mentions it, it does make sense (I'm tired of toting' such a heavy download).....

well, how about uploads? Is there a difference?

oh....neither is very good, I think.

I vote for a good rhythm section.

that book is really garbage - full of the usual cliches, badly written, too packed with "facts" that ultimately add up to nothing. Worthless in my opinion. I hate to be so blunt but it has been praised by a lot of jazz people who don't know the subject. I actually read it initially for a U press and told them to send it back.

not sure that his estimation of DeArango's playing is really accurate - though I have to admit I haven't heard much if anything from after the 1940s.

I can't help thinking what Jamil Nasser told me years ago - he thought Sonny was really thrown for a loop when Coltrane became the dominant tenor, and hence his wandering in search of something to put him on a higher plane - the bridge, the mohawk, and then I guess meditation. I love Sonny, but for me his playing ended around 1969. Maybe he shoulda just given it all up and hired a decent rhythm section.

I am very tempted on this one, but I would like to know who is doing the sound work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Correctional_Institution,_Seagoville

I'll pretty much by anything on any label as long as the sound is OK. I feel (like probably everybody else around here) that I single-handedly supported the jazz industry for 50 years, and so I can relax a little bit now, since it has never really supported me.

Works well - EXCEPT - it no longer burns CDs, though the CD port recognizes CDs. I am assuming this can be fixed. Specs are: macbrook pro 13 inch processor 2.4 intel GHz intel core i5 memory 4 gb 500 gb hd $300 plus domestic shipping.

well, Larry, one thing I would say is that the maternal, "I'll-take-care-of-things-you-just-play-music" female spouse is rampant in jazz players of that generation, so I am not sure that that is really a factor either way. It's just the way it generally was. (In other words, she could have been an "anti-Helen" and yet still a maternal figure).

he and I had a bit of a to-do (friendly but awkward) about how much Gioia's remarks miss the mark.

yeah but this is jazz, where a steady gig is, was, and will always be GOD. No musician would turn down that kind of gig in those days, or now, with a leader like Monk, who was not only famous but pulling down real fees.

Larry, probably the most interesting thing Al Haig ever said to me was that he didn't remember the audiences at Billy Berg's as being hostile but rather non-comprehending ("they were flummoxed" were the exact words he used).

well, I will jump in here and over-state my position. Thanks to Larry, last year I started to listen to Rouse away from Monk - and was surprisingly pleased. I like his non-Monk work, but I will say I absolutely cannot stand his Monk work, cannot even listen to it, I find it almost - repulsive, sorry to say. He is self conscious with Monk in the worst possible way; fighting above his weight class? Trying to be Monkish at times through mannerism instead of real style. Ponderous and, worst of all, boring. But he sounds great on that recording above with Watkins, BTW, the one time I heard Rouse in person, in the '70s with my friend Bob Neloms on piano, Bob said to me afterwards, "why do they think he's so great?"

I tried exposing myself to people for jazz, and it did not turn out well.

I am very capable of having fun, as a matter of fact I am a fun guy and I have fun constantly. My middle name is fun. And those two are not fun.