Big Beat Steve

And here was me wondering what jazzman (or musician) THIS was ... Wouldn't this obit thread be better placed outside the MUSIC discussion section and in the "Misceallaneous-Non-political" section? Or did he record some obscure 45 sometime in an ill-fated attempt to jump on the "celeb goes singer" bandwagon, like other sportsmen did at other times too?

Thanks for alerting me, TKK. Hard to imagine it's already 4 1/2 years since we discussed this. But I cannot contribute much to the UA albums as I don't own or know these albums. So I'll just sit and see what everybody (else) has to say and wait and be on the lookout (till copies come up somewhere, maybe). BTW, anybody else notice that the Youtube nerds who uploaded the "Very Best Of" S-F tracks (that were linked here in the 2019 discussion) saw fit to use the cover art of the "Bix & Tram" LP (of all Jim Flora artwork ...) for display? No doubt something more directly related to S-F AND Jim Flora could have been found?

The Eddie Costa Quintet LP (with the baby buggies on the cover) on the Interlude label is a reissue of this Mode LP 118.

I do have that one too. Bought shortly after the "Sure Do Pull Some Bow" CD. As for your other questions/remarks regarding early rural black/white cross-polliation (either white blues or black country), I think Allen Lowe is THE person to answer this in detail.

Re- the "Tiger Rag" novel: I cannot compare because I don't know the author you mention. I suggest you read up on its "storyline" online (to get an idea of what to expect) and then just pick up a copy if one comes your way at a price you are wiling to invest, and then you read this strictly as a novel. And then let your mind wander while reading and just wonder "what if it actually happened that way and we just have no way of knowing or proving it?" Just one "teaser" to give you an idea of what forms early Black music documented on records ALSO took (this compilation includes jazz and blues in the stricter sense but also goes beyond it): http://www.oldhatrecords.com/cd1003.html

@Allen Lowe: I now realize I ought to have mentioned your earlier compilations (including your "Turn Me Loose ..." CD set and book) for traces of aural pre-jazz documents that may indicate what developments may have been brewing in various other places at that time. @Rabshakeh: Given your puzzlement about Buddy Bolden, the brothels and other stereotypes of events and places surrounding early jazz history in New Orleans and that we will never be able to document a lot of what may have happened there or elsewhere in the musical history leading to the birth of jazz more than 100 years ago, may I suggest you get yourself a copy of "Tiger Rag" by Nicholas Christopher? Of course it ALL is purely, totally fictitious, but I think when you read it you will find yourself wondering "A lot of this reads like it could have happened that way, so what if it actually did happen that way after all?" We'll never know one way or another ...

Agree with John L. Particularly with regard to the lack of recorded evidence until the end of WWI. No doubt that there were developments going on elsewhere that went in a similar direction. Because this probably this was a "thing" that "was in the air". But they are undocumented and largely unexplored. OTOH, even in N.O. there seems to have been a lot going on that remained undocumented. I remember there was a book about early "big bands" (i.e. large-sized orchestras that were NOT marching bands but played for dacing, probably a lot were ragtime orchestras) that were active in the New Orleans area at about the period of the "birth" of jazz or even its immediate pre-history. The total of those orchestras known to have existed was about 100 and not one left a recorded trace. Yet someone managed to fill a book with their history.

I listened to Straight Ahead and The Queen Bee. Maybe it is those "Mancini" overtones (which i certainly had not recognized as such - which isn't saying much) that did not exactly put me off but made me wonder with a feeling of irritation? Could it be that it is fairly "standard" effects and patterns also heard elsewhere that are being reworked here?

OK, so let's take this one step further. I did listen to two samples of tunes on YT (investing more than 4 minutes of "my life" ) and it confirmed that i might well pick it up when the occasion arises. However, while it is not bad at all I am not going overboard either. Somehow it differs from the somewhat earlier 60s sounds of the Basie band that I am familiar with in a way I cannot quite put my finger on. To my ears it somehow sounds less "totally unmistakeably Basie". The section sound (i.e. of the full band outside the solos) sounds strangely and overly familiar for and among big bands from roughly those years. Either I've heard these tunes before (in settings where the band was not identified) or the sound and charts have been copied or recycled over and over again elsewhere - but who was first? I hope it was Basie.

I cannot recall having ever said I'd not pick up that particular record. I would, though certainly not at top/full price (which is MY decision as there are other priorities to cover too). It's just a case of being able to sit and wait until the right occasion presents itself. And in fact I did check Discogs later yesterday to see which pressing would be the most likely to surface here, and I did listen in briefly to a few YT samples. So, sorry to say but the tone of this "4 minutes out of your life" "suggestion" is not something I'd have expected from you. No need to try to "convert" the basically inclined in THIS way. 🤨 Going further back in time, I see. 1944. Available most conveniently for vinyl nerds on Circle CLP-60 and CLP-130.

Am not familiar with Basie Straight Ahead (my Basie collection fizzles out with some of the Command label recordings of the mid-60s and then starts with the Pablos again) but thanks for bringing up On My Way and Shoutin' Again. It might well be time to relisten again (particularly since I personally do like the Hefti charts for Basie, including the Atomic LP). But this will take some time. I still got about 10 LPs worth of Basie to listen to (which were part of a huge secondhand vinyl buying spree some 6 weeks ago, including some 20 Basie LPs, about 2/3 Old Testament adn 1/3 New Testament). As for recommendations of that 60s period discussed here in the most "recent" posts, strange that most should limit themselves so much to studio sessions. One live coupling (released under the The Great Concert title on the (French) Festival label) I find quite exciting are the concert recordings from the Hammersmith Odeon (London, 18 Sept. 1965) and the Juan-les-Pins festival (23 July 1968). These two concerts have also been released individually on separate records.

I know and I understand. But as always - if you do it, why not do it right? BTW, according to the jacket - and yes, contrary to contemporary reviews - the title IS "Midsömmer", as if Lewis figured an "umlaut" makes it look more "foreign". Why, I wonder ... But I realize this picky criticism comes from a non-Anglosaxon angle.

My impressions after a first re-listen (by one who has never found much in Third Stream as I still consider it a dead end of in the long run incompatible genres if your preference is to see the full vitality and swing of jazz preserved, even in its coolest forms): It's an interesting exercise but the horn men (as opposed to woodwinds) really make the difference and bring it off. (And yes, Lucky Thompson is impressive in this setting. And Little David's Fugue is nice.) These soloists may well have triggered my buying decision: "Let's give it a shot and see what John Lewis does if he has to accommodate jazz horns" Otherwise I find some of the classical/third-streamish sections a bit lengthy (though if you take them as somewhat special mood pieces ... ). And the "Swenglish" Midsömmer title is and remains silly (or should I say inept, particularly for an erudite composer?) if the composer wants to convey that "Swedish holiday" feeling as per the liner notes. It's either "midsommar" (Swedish) or "midsummer".

Amazing ... I just checked and noticed I actually own a Verve original of this very LP (MG V 8131). Don't remember where and when I bought it but I must have bought it not only because it was very affordable (vinyl is fine and shiny but cover has pretty bad water staining) but also for Stan Getz, above all, and in fact everyone EXCEPT John Lewis. Will put it on my "spin next" stack now. So thanks for bringing this up, TTK! But this ... "Aaron Sachs was on that album, so I asked him about it. He said he was sitting there practicing Bach on the flute, and everyone else was getting high or something on the break. Then John Lewis asked him what he was doing, and he told him. John Lewis thought about it for a second and said, "Yeah, maybe I should try that some time!", as if it never occurred to him before..." ... OUCH!

Thanks ... Luckily my reading knowledge of Spanish (and a wee bit of Catalan) is good enough to figure out at least the essence of what he wrote in Valencian (though it did require a lot of concentration ). Writing about something that you THINK you are intimately familiar with (Jazz which orignated in the USA) without having the feel for national or regional specificities (such as Spain in this case) is a VERY dangerous thing indeed! Particularly if you have an agenda (beyond the core subject of the biography) to maintain and to make the narrative fit your agenda. So this review does not come as a huge surprise and makes this book another one of those "ivory tower efforts".

Just out of curiosity: So what WAS your impression of the earlier Montoliu bio that you wrote about last January?

Sorry, couldn't think of a better thread title ... And I realize it may be heresy to some around here .... (but so be it ... 😁) What I really am wondering abouot is this: All the world is drooling all the time about the summum of summums of presentation of the Mosaic box sets, including their booklets, in particular. Which in the case of the booklets is an important aspects to me with any box set (regardless of the label), and of course I do admit the class of the Mosaic products as such. I do not own too many Mosaic sets so I cannot really compare too many booklets. But what I do have (and have seen) makes me sit up and take note at times ... Case in point: Some time ago I purchased a NM secondhand copy of "The Complete Blue Note Forties Recordings of Ike Quebec and John Hardee". Fine music, but the booklet is slim and comparatively "basic" (but fair enough, after all it's only a 4-LP set). But what baffled me even without having fine-combed every word of the text is that the contents do look like at least the proofreading stage of the booklet was decidedly sloppy. An erroneous cross-reference that makes it look like the original sequence of the text was supposed to have been different, and errors/typos in the captions and release numbers quoted ... Surprising for a Mosaic set ... Certainly nitpicking in the eyes of some but after all we are talking Mosaic, not just any random PD reissue label. OK, so this set dates back to 1984, but I wonder ... Did others notice as well that production and attention to detail in the booklet contents improved noticeably over time to eventually become sort of the "definite word" on the subject matter covered by the respective box set? But that it DID take time for this improvement/"learning curve" to happen?

Yes, judging by the quantity of Herbie Mann records in the secondhand crates (though not so much in recent times anymore) he must have sold very well over here too.

Sorry, I can't, except to say that they included certain strata of "the media" (music or other). But I did not pay sufficient attention to the persons. And the situation may well have been different from country to country. Certainly these writeups were a flash in the pan but they did happen. Much like with Jazz Rock and, then, Fusion in the 70s. Except that a case can be made IMO that the jazz-cum-rock combination did bring about some interesting "crossover" results. Even if the rock part involved was not all that "advanced" or "progressive" at all but sometimes just meant "rock with horns" sailing under the jazz flag, for example. But what was and is odd is that the same type of jazz persons had shuddered (even in retrospect) at basically similar crossbreeding that happened decades before with R&B , and again scoffed loudly when Punk or R'n'R musicians turned towards Swing and Jump Blues in the 90s (yes, that "Retro Swing" subculture again ). As always, some acts were caricaturesque (but there certainly were hardly any among them that were as insipid and sloshy as certain Fusion "elevator music" sounds ) but others carved a niche of their own that took things in a new and different direction. Even if only for a while and/or only regionally ...

@Rabshakeh: Yes I would not mind some of the smoother excursions of Turrentine et al. either. There are quite a few instrumentalists out there (though not Kenny G) who are quite palatable as "jazzy background" music. What I strongly object to is all those out there who (particularly during the period that "Smooth Jazz" was all over the place) insisted and went out of their way to mediatize that "Smooth Jazz" now was what "Jazz" (i.e. ALL of jazz) was all about and that "Smooth Jazz" was the savior and future of jazz and whatever ... Ouch ... Yikes ... Just like I never felt that "Fusion" (or even Jazz Rock) ever was the beginning and end and future of all jazz at any given moment. They all were/are just ONE substyle among many. These sweeping generalizations cooked up by the media and interested parties (and not so few jazz listeners who all of a sudden felt they were in the epicenter of the action) always grated enormously on me ... As for Connick and consorts, I still feel their "merit" is that they were/are one way of acquainting a younger generation with a style of jazz (or jazz-influenced) singing that without these "intermediaries" would come across as all too outdated and less accessible to the young'uns.

At any rate Harry Connick jr. was/is fairly pleasant swing-like listening that might well have opened up the ears of a younger generation of listeners to Frank Sinatra and similar acts and orchestral accompaniment sounds and might have gotten some to move on to ... who knows who else in jazz ... This would be one way of easing these "jazz newbies" gradually into "real" jazz because all of a sudden a certain brand of jazz will no longer sound that strange or old-fashinoned to them once they have been exposed to Connick, Bublé or whoeever ... (And they all are a notch above the "smooth jazz" fad that for a while was touted by certain media as what "jazz" was all about). But of course this won't work (and probably didn't work) if a certain kind of "jazz" diehards blasts them at once because this kind of swing or jazz was not "advanced" or "art music"-ish enough to THEIR tastes ... And since you refer to specifically to the 90s: Remember how many among what I'd call the "jazz establishment" outright dismissed whatever options of broadening the listener (and therefore buyer) base there were when the "Retro Swing" movement of the 90s made a splash ... Some of this subculture still continues to this day, though on a much smaller scale. But when it made the headlines many among those who saw jazz as nothing but art music to be performed to a seated public at concerts but not as entertainment or even dance music (horror of horrors! ) claimed this music was no good, just noise (an accusation levied at jazz itself decades before so nothing new under the sun), instrumentally insufficient, too much rock in there (even Punk! Horrors again! ), lacking depth (and whatever other put-downs they were able to think of). This certainly did nothing to get more people interested in "jazz" and entice them to eventually progress beyond the acts on the Retro Swing circuit. Pity, because there WAS an audience ... and the door to jazz WAS - and is, for that matter, open in that corner because Retro Swing did attune the ears of many to certain styles of "real" jazz ... I still feel that exposure that introduces people (by offering a common musical ground that the newbies can relate to) instead of ALIENATING them from the genre would help a lot. Particularly since style-wise the jazz scene has for decades not just been fragmented but rather splintered into countless sub-genres that not even within the hardcore jazz fans very many embrace in their totality with the same intensity throughout. Just like in the Rock world and its many, many facets ... I remember the comment of a neighbor (who is in his mid-40s) when we casually discussed musical preferences and I mentioned my intense interest in jazz. His reply essentialy was "Jazz? All that really is too weird and all bizarre for me. I can't get into that." I do wonder what kind of "jazz" he had been exposed to (or should I say "subjected to"?). It cannot have been jazz styles like those of Louis Armstrong's All Stars or Count Basie or Woody Herman or Ella Fitzgerald or - yes - Joe Turner or Louis Prima, nor George Shearing, Oscar Peterson, and probably not even Miles Davis' Birth of the Cool (et al.) or Klaus Doldinger's Passport either ... But of course if you shove any of those free or avantgarde or post-whatever acts down these people's ears as a first "confrontation" with jazz and proclaim that this is what "jazz" per se is ALL about then this kind of reaction by those "outsiders" is fairly inevitable ... And "jazz" WILL remain a niche within niches ...

Ah ... my mistake ...

I am not quite sure what you mean by "only covers up to 1986". Some weeks ago I hit upon the Billboard archive on the Worldradiohistory website (that Cbianchi pointed you to now) after having discussed that mag with a fellow collector interested in the 50s: https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Music/Billboard-Magazine.htm#50s However, to me it looks like it does go on beyond 1986. A random click on the link for an early 1988 copy yields this, for exdample: https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Music/Billboard/80s/1988/BB-1988-01-09.pdf

Quite true. In general I shy away from "lists" thrown out in the wilderness at random, particularly since they all too often aren't just "recommendations" but have a "you must hear these otherwise you're nowhere" tone to it. Which is why I cannot take those "100 records you must hear before you die" books etc. too seriously. I rather prefer lists of recommendations compiled specifically as a reaction to clear-cut questions about recommendations for this or that artist and/or style. One such list that is on this forum is a lengthy list of recommendations for a "core record library" of Soul Jazz records compiled by our forum member The Magnificent Goldberg. Clearly a sensible, down-to-earth list compiled by someone extremely knowledgeable (BTW, where are you these days, MG? It would be nice to have you around again)

I recently scored a very affordable copy of "Trane's First Ride" (Oberon 5100) that feature him with the Dizzy Gillespie Sextet at Birdland in early 1951. I haven't listend to it yet but FWIW the liner notes mention "big chunks of Lester Young" as a discernible influence.