The Magnificent Goldberg

Clarence Wheeler & the Enforcers - The love I've been looking for - Atlantic MG

Ya think? Is there one more I can't recall? I think that's all the Jags he did. He did a couple more cars: I don't think that's a Jag; I get more of a Bentley feel about that one. Clever shot. And that's DEFINITELY not a Jag. Elegant shot. MG

I've recorded there on that C3. It's as good as you'd think it is. Sounds like those records even live in the room. Here's a pic of me playing Rudy's C3 at his Englewood Cliffs studio that I recently found. Pretty grainy photo, but it's all I got from that session... Cor! MG

The band also recorded a number called "The Boppers". I'll dig it up and give it a listen again. That was originally called "Floogie boo" and, according to the sleeve notes, was written by Cootie and Cleanhead. It was recorded on 4 Jan 1944, some weeks before Coleman Hawkins made the first Bebop record. (Ahem!) MG The cd on which I have it (Jazz Archives) claims that it was written by Cootie alone and that it's the same as "You Talk a Little Trash"-- which it is, just speeded up. However the cd notes also make the dubious claim that the alto solo may be by Bird, so who knows how much they can be trusted. BTW I'd say that Ken Kersey who plays on Epistrophy also brings some Bop to the band. I hadn't noticed that - I'll play them both later. The sleeve of my edition (Phoenix LP1) just gives Williams as the writer of Trash but both him and Vinson for the same song faster. Funny.... ? MG

That's a loaded proposition... Depends on how you're defining those terms. A "lack of technique" has been used to marginalize all types of jazz since Day One by certain "Western" aesthetes. To them, there is one clear standard of "good techinque", and the value of any given expression is defined by how well this particular technique is displayed. By this standard, anybody and (almost) everybody from Louis Armstrong to Albert Ayler has been judged lacking in "sophistication" (or something along those lines.. Of course, the "non-Western" POV, from which jazz is clearly operating from (usually) says that thechnique is only a means to an end, not the end itself. If Monk had less "technique" than Horowitz (or, to keep it in the family, Tatum), that's because his technique was molded to meet his specific needs, to accomplish his personally necessary ends. so if you're going to say that Benson had better technique than Green, and was therefore better able to express himself and therefore in the end "more expressive" (not that that is what you're saying), then you might as well go ahead and say that Al Demiola is more expressive than was Charlie Christian. Techique is only a measuarble/comparative quantity relative to itself. It's ok, imo, opinion to say that Benson had a broader range of technical skills than did Grant, because, yeah, he did. He could play faster, no doubt. But that's where the legitimacy of the compasison ends. It's wrong to equate realtive "techniques" to the relative expressiveness of two players who are both expressing themselves fully and naturally, because in jazz, there is no one standard of expressiveness other than to tell your own story as best you can. )At least there didn't used to be...) And the "best technique" is whatever one(s) it is that enables you to do that. Period. Again, no accusations of such a chauvinistic attitude as referenced qbove are being made here. It's just that when people start talking about "technique" and "expression" as interchangeable qualities, you never know what they mean or where they're coming from. If you want to say that either Green or Benson told their story more effectively than the other, hey, be my guest. There ain't no wrong answer, if you know what I eman. Just know that if the question of thier relative "techniques" is the determining factor either way, then the boat is being severly missed, and in more ways than one... That's put a lot better than I would have done. Thanks young sir... MG

Yeah - the McCann stuff is the only reason I bought the box. Good value for money, I call it. MG

Crusaders - Rhapsody & blues MG

No, it's atypical because it's unstylish; no, naff. MG

Pilgrim Travelers - Shake my mother's hand - Specialty MG

I've given this a bit more thought overnight. What I didn't think of yesterday was the release dates of this and other Jimmy Smith material. Blue Note waited a long time before sessions were issued. According to a 1967 Schwann catalogue I've got lying around, its pages very brown now, the release dates for Jimmy's albums around this time were: House party - Jan 59 The Sermon - Jan 60 Crazy! baby - Aug 60 Home cookin' - Apr 61 Midnight Special - Dec 61 "Midnight Special" and "Back at the chicken shack" were recorded in April 1960; well before "Crazy! baby" and "Home cookin'" were issued. I don't know when the singles were issued, but would hazard that it wouldn't have been too long in advance of "Crazy! baby". So it couldn't have been sales that persuaded Jimmy to change his emphasis, because the relevant records hadn't been released. (Pre-release focus groups ?) (Interestingly, "Bashin'" was recorded only five weeks after "Midnight Special" hit the pop album charts. It obviously wasn't a spur of the moment job, so it had been planned for some little while. Very quick reaction on Creed Taylor's part, it seems.) MG

This is a nice session. I don't think the inclusion of Jackie McLean is nearly as extraordinary as some of the other posts have it. Don't forget that Jackie had been included in four classic jam session albums done for Prestige in '56 and '57 by Gene Ammons: "The happy blues"; "Jammin' with the Gene Ammons all stars"; "Funky"; and "Jammin' in hifi". I think that Blue Note would have regarded him as a natural for this gig, which was very similar, and may have been intended to be. MG

Pucho & the Latin Soul Brothers, too. MG

R&B is a very broad musical category. It includes a lot of adult music. On the other hand, we already loved Lou Rawls when we were kids. His music is for all ages, and for the ages themselves. You'll never find...another voice like his. Ray Charles always said that R&B was adult music, as distinct from Rock & Roll, or Soul, which he said were for kids. (I suspect he was thinking mor eof Motown than Aretha when he said that.) Anyway, I've always thought of Lou as a Soul Jazz singer. And Soul Jazz, according to Bob Porter, is definitely entertainment for black adults. MG

Yeah? Didja know about this one? I bow to no man in my admiration of Teddy! Never seen that one before. That's four I haven't got! Found out the other day, from someone who knew him pretty well, that his favourite album of his own was "Blue saxophone". Mine, too. MG

B B King - Live (with loud audience overdubbed on classic singles) - United MG

Hadn't noticed that. Well, still haven't in the case of Wayne Shorter. But those were still "real" Blue Note covers, if you get what I mean. I wonder if there are any other atypical Blue Note sleeves or if "Crazy! baby" is unique. I can't think of any others. MG

Harold Vick - Straight up - RCA Victor MG

Well, the two longest tracks in the "Home cookin'" sessions were both issued on one 45, so I guess they were all right in length for Alfred Lion - 6:48 goes onto a 45 easily. Of course, they might have been edited, I don't have the singles. Usually, though, Michel Ruppli notes in his discographies the times of such edits and there's nothing in the Blue Note discography - not in my edition anyway. As to the cover of the LP, well I've always had the idea that Reid Miles had a soft spot for Jaguars. Almost all the Blue Note covers featuring Jags were photographed by him, not Francis Wolff. But this album cover is different; it was photographed by someone called Bob Ganley, of whom I've never heard. Wouldn't it be a gas if Reid had deliberately chosen yellow to clash!? Everything about that sleeve isn't quite Blue Note, I feel. With a title like "Crazy baby" (no "Crazy! baby" I just noticed - even more so then) it is certainly not Blue Note style to have a middle class lady in pearls and a tweed dress & coat standing in front of a conventionally photographed Jag in not the right colour for the dress on cobblestones in what I suppose is Central Park. Her expression is as completely uncrazed as one could possibly imagine. And how unlike Blue Note to have a few track titles written on the front cover! But not Quentin Warren and Donald Bailey! I am quite confident that Reid wouldn't unilaterally have chosen that himself; the instructions must have come from Alfred or Francis. But why? Dunno. MG

The band also recorded a number called "The Boppers". I'll dig it up and give it a listen again. That was originally called "Floogie boo" and, according to the sleeve notes, was written by Cootie and Cleanhead. It was recorded on 4 Jan 1944, some weeks before Coleman Hawkins made the first Bebop record. (Ahem!) MG

Jimmy Smiff - Crazy baby - Blue Note MG

I never thought about it until Jim mentioned it. It's possible, but there's not much in the way of evidence, so it's mainly speculation. One thing that might lead to the conclusion that sales dictated the change can be derived from the fact that the 45s from both albums came out simultaneously: 1765 Makin' whoopee/What's new - both from 4030 1766 Mack the knife/When Johnny comes marching home - both from 4030 1767 I got a woman (4050) / Alfredo (4030) 1768 See see rider/Come on baby (both from 4050) 1769 Motorin' along (4050) / Since I fell for you (unissued on LP until LT1092) At the same time Smith was recording "Home cookin'" - 1958 & 1959 - Sonny Clark and Ike Quebec were also recording sessions intended for issue on 45. "Home Cookin'" may have fitted into that framework and the sessions may have been intended for 45s only. But maybe the reaction, when this stuff appeared on juke boxes - I think about two thirds of Blue Note 45 sales went to juke boxes - may have made them rethink; hence the late issue of "Home cookin'". If you think about all 10 of those tunes listed above, it's pretty clear which would have gone best on juke boxes. (I have an ex-jukebox copy of "Back at the chicken shack". God! Was that record played or what! But it still plays now!) Now, I have a 1967 Blue Note catalogue (I confess, I'm a nerd!) and only 1767, 1768 and 1769 are listed. That must indicate better sales for the 4050 singles, mustn't it? We can assume that would have translated into better LP sales. I think we can certainly assume that my reconstruction does account for the issue of "Home cookin'" out of what one would expect its proper order to be. This is all speculation, but not too distant from the scanty evidence. When we go from that point to saying, "did it have an effect on Smith's career?" then we're moving quite far from the existing evidence. But I'd say, "yes, IMO it did have an effect." MG

Although this came out before "Home cookin'", it was recorded later. "Home cookin'" is where the bluesy funky stuff started, I think. I like this album very much, particularly "Johnny" and "Tunisia", too. But I really prefer the "Home cookin'" style. I've played "Home cookin'" a LOT more than "Crazy baby". MG It is interesting that although Crazy Baby! was recorded earlier, it was released after Home Cookin'. I wonder if Home Cookin' sold better and led to Jimmy's shift his focus from post-bop into soul-jazz? Other way round Jim. "Home cookin'" was recorded first and released after "Crazy baby". But you could be right about "Home cookin'" sales dictating a change of style. It would really be interesting if that sort of information about Blue Note (and other companies) was available: sales data; correspondence; that sort of thing. It has always seemed to me that the record companies had a lot to do with the way Soul Jazz developed, particularly in putting together the rhythm teams that drove the development. But there's not much evidence. Or if there is, no one's been bothered to research it. I'm hoping Bob Porter's book on Soul Jazz, which was supposed to come out last November, throws some light on it; whenever it eventually appears. MG

They were friends. When they were playing together, Grant knew he had to control the tempo. If he didn't, George would pick fast stuff and rip Grant to shreds. At a more relaxed tempo, Grant's sound and feeling couldn't be matched by George; nearly, but not quite. MG i totally disagree. Benson has tons more creativity. Much better technique and his clear sound demonstrates it. I wasn't talking about creativity; I was talking about emotion. But both had personal ways of expression. Though George had undoubtedly the best combination of sound and technique, if judged on sound alone, his sound isn't quite as beautiful as Grant's. No contest on technique - George wins hands down. But that was NEVER what Grant was about. MG

What label is that record on and who are the sidemen? I have a record of GL on Muse (recorde in the 70's) which I particularly like. Thanks, Peter It's on Mainstream 6032. It was originally issued on Time 2199 under the title of "Hot organ". Recorded in Oct '64. Personnel is: Randy Gelispie - drums Jerry Byrd - guitar Tunes are: Comin' home baby (Tucker) Teach me tonight (Raye-DePaul) Blues waltz (Max Roach) Elder Smith (Ludwig) Moanin' (Timmons) Sermonette (Nat Adderley) The Preacher (Silver) Gino (Ludwig) It's a proper groove throughout. And it's LOUD! (Like it sez on mine) And HOT! (Like it sez on the original) MG

Although this came out before "Home cookin'", it was recorded later. "Home cookin'" is where the bluesy funky stuff started, I think. I like this album very much, particularly "Johnny" and "Tunisia", too. But I really prefer the "Home cookin'" style. I've played "Home cookin'" a LOT more than "Crazy baby". MG