Michael Weiss

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=93036531

Must have skimmed over this before. Thanks for the thought Dan.

Speaking very seriously here: 1. Take out all of your recordings of Monk playing Round Midnight. 2. Cue up each recording to the measures in question - as they exist in the first, second and last eight bars of the tune - the in-head and the out-head 3. While selection is playing, sit at your instrument, and try to find the notes being played. 4. Repeat, 50 times if necessary, until you find your answer or have at least narrowed down the possibilities. 5. Notate your findings as you go. This is how we do it. We go to the source, and develop our ears in the process.

I just pulled out an old logbook. In addition to five record dates, it looks like I played over 350 gigs with Griff. That's a lot of notes! This is in the kitchen of the Vanguard from May, 2000. From left to right: Griff, Ben Riley, Lou Donaldson, me, Frank Wess, Vanessa Rubin.

Cuisinella Wait for page to fully load, then watch video clip in lower center of page.

What a great piece, Larry. You really get it. This makes much more sense. It's perfectly understandable how a recording of an interpretation of a piece by someone other than the composer can become more popular than the composer's. But the "Real Book" is another can of worms. I often remind students that the Real Book was written by Berklee students like themselves, replete with downright mistakes, incorrect assumptions, and without concern about making a definitive representation of the song. Hopefully, this lesson becomes a major turning point in the student's desire to do their own homework. One could argue that, of all the negative effects that learning to play jazz in schools has yielded, the Real Book has to be one of the worst, along with all the "how to" method books.

I think it's safe to assume "correct" is meant as the composer's intention. That's kind of a no brainer. Would you want someone else's reharmonization of your tune to be considered "correct?" [Hadn't read Sngry's comments until now, which are always more astute and well put than I could ever express.] On a professional level, you understand the need to learn tunes correct. To do your own research. Because you can't afford to be busted on the bandstand if you want to earn respect. On some amateur/college level things unfortunately are different. Monk's music in particular demands precision: much of the time, even most of the time, chord changes do not do him justice, because certain voicings and "movements" aka resolutions, are integral parts of the composition. Any serious musician takes it upon his/herself to listen closely to every recording of the tune and compare. The elements of a tune that Monk ALWAYS played...well that should tell you something if you're paying attention. I played several Monk tunes with Steve Lacy, and we discussed some things in the minutest detail!

Amazing, the sophisticated ears you had at 13-14 years of age. Are you fucking for real? You might want to rethink that statement. I can't believe you haven't already been called on that yet.

Might have to play "The JAMFs Are Coming" tonight.

Cø7 F7 Bb7 Cø7 F7 Bb7 Ab-7 / Fø7 Bb7 Cø7 F7 Db7 B7 Ab-7 / Fø7 Bb7

Was down again for the secong set tonight. Aside from Daniel Sadownick who came with me one night, Billy Hart and Roswell Rudd are the only other musicians I saw there (that I knew or recognized) the whole week. What's up with that?!?!? Where were the pianists?

Oxley always blended well with Cecil and was hair-trigger fast in catching Cecil's rhythms. From an overall sonic perspective, just a few seconds of rest here and there would have been welcome. Granted, it's very intelligent movement, but there are plenty of pieces in classical piano literature that require the same kind of hand crossing movements that Cecil uses. The Feinberg Sonatas are full of passages like these. Cecil's technique is totally grounded in classical training and because of THAT he is able to play and execute whatever he wants to. And though it is motherfucking physically demanding he makes it look beautifully graceful. And his stamina, physically and mentally, is astounding. Each set, Cecil plays about as much piano as most of us play in a week. Two sets a night, six nights in a row at 79.

Heard the second set tonight. Cecil played beautiful themes, gorgeous sonorities and with the stamina of a man half his age. Believe me, that's a shitload of piano playing - two sets a night, for a 79 year old, pretty much nonstop for 70-90 minutes at a stretch. The NYTimes review is a pretty good reference.

What a great photo. Everyone looks to be having a great time. This makes me want to pull out my Victoria Spivey LP, Basket of Blues with Lucille Hegamin and Hannah Sylvester, recorded in 1962.

Would love to see what other gems you have in that photobucket!

21 years ago today. Downtown on Water Street. L to R: Me, George, Todd Coolman, Eddie Gladden.

1st set last night was great. Wish Cecil was playing solo, which he almost was (duo with Tony Oxley). Cecil to me sounds as if he'd play the same thing no matter who is playing with him or if he was by himself. But here, the percussion chatter just wouldn't stop - a little laying out here and there would have gone a long way IMO. The only other pianist I saw there was George Wein!

Friday & Saturday, July 25-26. This time I'll have a trio with Ugonna Okegwo and Lewis Nash. Sets at 8:00pm and 10:00pm. For more info: Kitano website

Track one is a swinging G minor quasi (no IV chord) blues from here. My man Sonny Clark has an early momentary lapse in concentration in his third bar, hitting a major third, but corrects himself immediately.

Different bari player every take! The whole saxophone section! The driver keeps missing the car seat so....fire the band. Maybe only one take a day?

Flutes? Those were the same seagulls@00:02! Let's see, which jingle arrangers were dropping acid in 1964? The lead trumpet is bad mf. Wonder who that was?

Sorry if this has been posted somewhere else before but if not you're in for a treat. Soul TV show, 1972 http://youtube.com/watch?v=jxN8ThnHSLM http://youtube.com/watch?v=RXevcNHOeS8 Warsaw, 1974 http://youtube.com/watch?v=Z6mA6gbfcsk http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=K_Nhb_W-2T8

I think you've busted Holden quite succinctly.

I'm not at all familiar with his work. The little I've heard hasn't grabbed me yet, but I really need a more thorough exposure. What's your favorite? Check this out: Ain't no big deal. Nope, but I'm on it right away, chief. Feinberg's music is so under-recorded, anything would be welcome.

Cherokee was typically fast, but not ridiculously fast. Caravan, Fine and Dandy, Best Things in Life Are Free were faster. The only one I know who plays ridiculously fast is Grant Stewart. He plays Cole Porter tunes faster than Max Roach and Johnny Griffin. I never thought I'd play with someone who played tempos faster than Johnny Griffin, but Grant does and rips too.