JSngry

Ok... I've long avoided The Singers Unlimited, because they reminded me of Paris Rutherford doing a KVIL jingle, only better (and if you don't get the reference, and you probably won't, then don't sweat it). That plus I'd only heard them with Oscar Peterson & The Boss Brass, two acts which I likewise blanketly avoid. But... I got to feeling brave the other day & got a copy of their album w/Robert Farnon, Sentimental Journey, and was freakin' blown away. No shit, that's some heavy stuff, both Farnon & Puerling. Opiated cough syrup, Gil Evans Barbara Song heavy. That's a good thing, yeah, that's a good thing. So I got emboldened to check out two more sides, Feeling Free (w/Pat Williams) & A Special Blend (w/Claire Fisher) and... UH oh... A few cuts aside (notably a "Mood Indigo" that is all the way there), we're back in jingle land. Yeah, I hear the quality and harmonic sophistication of the arrangements, but I need..."more". I certainly "appreciate" these two sessions, I just don't like them. But I love the set with Farnon. So - where to go from here? I'm thinking the three A Capella albums might be the route for me to go to get what I love out of this stuff, which is wild-assed imagination without the "cute" that Puerling has indulged in ever since Day One w/the Hi-Lo's (a quality which has often made me cringe, but Clark Burroughs could pull it off like probably nobody else alive, and even with him there were more than a few moments of wincedom. But it was ok, it was ok...). The thing I'm noticing about these three albums is that the Farnon set is all standards, with the tempos all down or down-ish, which allow the phrasing to "float", thereby letting the voicings "hang" into the reverb. The other sides focus more on up tempos & have some contemporary pop tunes, which leads to a generally stilted kind of metronomic phrasing that just doesn't work for me all that well. Plus, the latter two albums are recorded with the fucked-up L.A. uber-isolated close-miked sound and then the horns pulled down into the mix but ht bass and drums are left up and they really don't hook up that well, and they don't swing even if they do. But the Farnon set is perfect. And I'm thinking that the A Capella albums might lean more in the direction of the Farnon set than anything else - the emphasis on ballads and really badass vocal writing. Would that be correct? I doubt we got that many SU buffs on here other than those who've already stepped up to say good-bye to Mr. Puerling, but anybody who can get the gist of what I do & don't like about what I've heard so far & can point me towards some more of what I do, hey, much love and big props to ya'!

Is this a union gig, this festival? Are y'all union players?

Who is this little dweeble anyway? What happened to Butch Thompson?

And an un-united one even better...

So far, it's proving to be a perpetual "work in progress", but one worth the effort.

I want that Coldwater Flat thing w/Oliver Nelson. That's a good'un!

There's a good few paragraphs to be written about how Miles' method of playing w/Harmon involved "playing the mike" in a way not dissimilar to the way that Crosby did, to make the mike an integral part of the actual projected-to-the-listener sound, as well as how this could be seen as the beginning of an interest in electronic coloration of his sound that would more fully blossom later on, but I don't know that you need a full CD's worth of material to make the point.

That sounded really old. Until I realized that I was as well... Me too. No, what really gives you the feeling of "old" is when you do the math and realize that by any reasonable standard you're closer to the day of your death than you are the day of your birth. Kinda puts you in the mood to let go of the shit that keeps you from being happy lest you spend the rest of your days in unnecessary misery.

As for his playing, now, here's a guy playing ideas that threaten to explode his temples with a French "classical" saxophone tone. That's "edge" out the ass to me, at least of "edge" and "subliminal" are not contradictory, and in my mind they're anything but... His best writing's like that too (and I'll freely stipulate that there is ample evidence of his writing available that is not his best...), you listen to the surface and there's all this..."grooviness", but inside it, there's all this cluster shit and lines with these wide ass intervals that are only sometimes related to the base harmony, and once again, it's the writing equivalent of having your temples about to pop through a French classical saxophone tone. The guys who "lay it all out" who are unambiguous about where they're coming from are always going to be "the heroes". But the guys who for whatever reason layer their stuff, who have it exist on multiple levels of "meaning" simultaneously, who might even be using a language to subvert it, hey, those are the guys I go to once my hero worship is exhausted. Because their's is a whole 'nother kind of struggle.

You've not heard Black, Brown, & Beautiful (the one on flying Dutchman) then...

Re: Robert Farnon - I just got to hear Sentimental Journey, the album/collaboration he did with The Singers Unlimited, and all I can say is oh...my...god. I get it. I finally get it.

16 Tons, y'all, 16 Motherflukcin' TONS!

I saw Good Neighbor Sam in the theatre w/my folks back when it was new. I was, like, 8 1/2 at the time and didn't notice Romy Schneider nearly as much as I did seeing "how they made" the Hertz ads, which ran regularly on TV back then. And now, hey, Romy Schneider is much beautiful, but DAMN, those piccolos!

Different bari player every take!

Budget envy!

Yeah, the more I listen, the more I think so too. Who the fcuk writes shit like that for a freakin' HERTZ commercial? Even then? I mean, you got the budget for the jingle, you got the budget for a full-ish big band, you got the budget for the Hi-Lo's, now you gonna, what, add to the budget by telling all the saxists to bring piccolos & pay them doubling fees? Or even better yet, hire piccolo players just for those two bars? Apparently so. Because the money would be there. The money would be there. Because the arranger sold the account rep who sold the client that it was all necessary to make the proper impact. Hell, nobody probably even mentioned piccolos outside of the arranger and the contractor. And the money was there. The money was there. And so were the piccolos. Wow.

So...in your mind, the music that sold to a relatively small audience is more "populist" that that which sold to a huge one? Because...why? See, I'm sorry (and the race class thing was a generalized statement that you just happened to get in the way of while it was being hurled, so sorry for any personal offense, none intended, I assure you), but it kinda cracks me up when people assume that commercial music is not "populist" when they're not included in the target audience. There's this romantic notion that popular music is "populist" when the artist is..you know, aiming their work at me, and then when it's not aimed at me any more, then it's just cold, calculated crap for "the masses". Well, that seems pretty...wrong to. I mean, sure, there's plenty of acts that sell out and just go through the motions and eventually become jaded, often to the point of being walking (or otherwise) dead. But the object of popular music is to be popular, to reach people, and to sell product. So if George Benson found that he could be more popular & sell more product by targeting an audience that does not (usually) include me. is that "selling out" or is that just being a damn good businessman? Or is there a difference? To me, there is a difference, and it's to be found in how the act in question comports themself. Do they slack off, go through the motions, show up late or even miss gigs? Do the condescend to their audience in presentation, get sloppy, take the audience for granted? Or do they respect they audience by putting on a good show, giving the people what they came to hear in a manner that makes those who paid there money glad that they did? Although I've hardly had my head to the ground for such things over the years, I've never heard of George Benson being less than 100% professional at any time on any gig. I've never heard of him havoing ragged bands, halfass presentations, or talking down to his audiences. I've never heard a record of his with less than intended top-shelf production values, or music played in other than the way that the target audience for the product would want to hear it played. I've never heard of him not giving the people at his pop shows what they came to hear. And if "the people" does not include stone jazz fans who want to hear him do something else, well hey, let's all just swallow our pride and face the fact that a George Benson pop show or pop record is aimed at a "populist" market that does not include us. If we're not included, that doesn't mean it's not "populist", it just means that there's a brand of populism involved that doesn't include us. And yes, race does come into this, as a general factor. People always asking "Where's the Black jazz audience gone?" well hey - go to a "Smooth Jazz" show or festival and check the demographic. "But that's NOT JAZZ"I hear people saying. Ok, whatever, but that was not the question, dig? It was Cecil Taylor who said (and I'm paraphrasing here, but not too loosely) hat white people have yet to disabuse themselves of the notion that they have something that black people want or need. Make of that what you will, but in my lifetime, I've seen white folks who were into 50/60s R&B call funk "crap", white folks who were into funk call rap/hip-hop "crap", white folks who were into straight-ahead jazz call the various forms of R&B-based Pop Jazz that have come down the pike over the years "crap", in short, I've seen all kinds of white people react to new forms of popular black music that don't immediately hold up a sign that says "FOR WHITE FOLKS TOO!!!" "crap". I see this (and keep on seeing it), and that line from Cecil Taylor seems not altogether irrelevant, even if it is not (nor ever was) the "whole story". But it is there, I believe, and white folk, forever seeing themselves as Fair & Balanced In All Things, don't like to entertain that possibility. Oh well... None of this, btw, is to "defend" George Benson's overtly pop/commercial/whatever career. As I said earlier, it needs no defense, especially from me. But I will defend his business ethic, against any implications that he's not put effort into providing a product that his target audience will find a quality one by their standards. And oh by the way - speaking of business, doesn't it seem as if Benson has done a good job keeping his money? Of reaching a very high level of stardom and not fucking up, either personally of contractually? That puts him in what approximate percentile of people? "Ain't got shit to do with the music" I hear people frothing. Once again, a fundamental misunderstanding as to who/what George Benson Is. His business is the music and the music is his business, and he's handled that the way he wanted to to get what he wanted. Lessee -man has skills. Man hones skills to very high level. Man uses skills to create business for/of himself. Man grows business to the point where man becomes independently wealthy. Man has no reputation for backstabbing or otherwise unethical business practices. Man simply uses what he has to get what he wants. Sorry, folks, but I don't have any real problems with that. The last George Benson album that I would even consider owning for non-professional reasons is Weekend In L.A., and that's like, what, almost 30 years old (and is it just me, or do "jazz fans" sometimes resemble Southerners constantly reliving/refighting the Civil War, as if a Great Wrong was perpetrated that by god, WE WILL NEVER FORGET, and in the meantime, life goes on and on and on for literally everybody else?), and I'm not pissed about that one bit, nor do I feel betrayed or otherwise offended that George Benson has turned out to be a better businessman than damn near everybody I know combined. Pop is not the enemy, and George Benson is not a problem.

The man asked why R&B/pop used to be a mark of shame & now it wasn't so much so. I replied that the music had become technically more sophisticated, which by any objective standard is true. That's why you heard gajillions of cats back in the day saying "Yeah, well, it's not the real stuff, but it does have some changes and some good arrangements, so it's not that bad, not really." Craft matters to a lot of players, and playing popular music that calls for more craft than it used to was noted by those who were playing it when they might well have preferred playing something else - it wasn't perfect, but it was "better" in terms of engaging their particular skills than what such gigs used to call for. That's not me expressing an opinion, that's me relating an "as it is/was" dynamic I observed first hand, and it's in no way unique. I'm not "defending" anything, I'm just explaining a "musician's situation" at another poster's request. I personally don't think that either the newer nor the older stuff needs any defending, since it's all gonna be what you make of it. You can make anything sublime, ridiculous, or anything in between, the only limit is your imagination and spirit, what you're willing/able to use them for.

Oh... But then again, we all got one.

Somebody like.....ALLEN? ?

Yeah, those are flutes. Took me a few times through to convince myself of it, but yeah, those are flutes, or maybe/more likely piccolos. Vocals, of course, by the Hi-Lo's. And a totally screaming lead trumpet. Every time I hear something like this these days, it kinda makes me sad that about 98.7% of everybody just don't know what that shit sounds like live. it'll knock you flat on your ass and not let you back up. If somebody involved in this wasn't dropping acid, they soon would be, if there was any justice in the world,,,

I went. Nice, does what it sets out to do, so mission accomplished. Tell you what - can I go on down to RL Griffin's Blues Palace & try to get you a gig? I'll pimp you as "funkier than George Benson". RL usually books his guest spots on the early show, while people are still getting loaded and making sexual hookups. It's a tough crowd, but when they hear you announced as "funkier than George Benson", they'll stop their socializing and give you a serious listen and an equally serious reception. So, you want Friday or Saturday?

I think he meant James Brown the sportscaster.

You say that with a wink, but believe me when I tell you that the issue of "musical role-modeling" is an issue that is raised more than once and with more than a little seriousness by certain parents & educators involved in the musical culture. Say what you want to about "slickness" and such, but the cats who made that music and those records could all play, and they had to work hard to get to that level of competency, just to go in and audition for a George Benson gig, never mind actually get it. Because you need to know that the people who get hired for those type gigs don't get them by being a one-trick pony. Weaknesses will be quickly exposed and gigs not gotten by those who have them. The notion that hip-hoppers don't have to work to get their music, wrong as it is (although "right" in an analog mindset), is not so wrongly viewed as perhaps a decline in the overall work ethic, not just of the young people of "the community", but of the nation as a whole. And yes - people be talking about this stuff, at length, and with great seriousness. And they ain't all named Marsialis. But of course, the notion of work ethic & upward mobility as it pertains to real people is of no concern to "us". We just want what we want when we want it & how we want it, and the rest of the time, hey, out of sight, out of mind, and let's keep it that way, ok? Ah, the Consumer Life!