Dmitry Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 I've neither heard nor seen this one. Good shtuff? Kenny Garrett is on it as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 You might try to hunt down this instead: Which is a two disc set, so you get the other album they did. Frankly, Garrett didn't make that much of an impression on me, but the two leaders and Mulgrew Miller are very fine. Definitely a big Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzbo Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 Yes, thanks for reminding me of this one guys! I'm not the greatest of Hubbard fans, but I like him here and Woody is wonderful! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 Definitely a worthy addiditon! Unlike Dan, Garrett made a huge impression on me the first time I heard one of these albums (don't remember which one). I was hanging w/a friend who was doing a Saturday night FM jazz show, and he put whatever album it was on. I was grooving along nicely until the alto solo brgan (and be forewarned, KG's solos are basically "cameos" in comparison to those of the principals). "Who the fuck is THIS motherfucker?" I distinctly rememeber saying (well, shouting, actually...) after just a few notes. It was my first time hearing Garrett, and he didn't sound like ANY other altoist I had ever heard. This was around the peak days of the "Young Lions" hype, and somebody playing in that style with a totally original sound (yeah, his lickage was Wayne-ish, but that TONE!!!!!) was the last thing I was expecting, but there it was. Can't say that he's since consistently provided the same excitement for me that he did that night (there have been moments, however), but I immediately took note of the name, and have kept an ear cocked for his work ever since, one of the very few players of his age and genre from that time that I do so for. So, don't buy it expecting to hear a lot of Kenny Garrett, but do know that his contributions are consistently excellent (if you dig his thing), a very tasty icing on a cake of already above-average quality. Freddie & Woody are in prime form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooter Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 I just have the vinyl of [Double Take] - anything which includes a Brownie tune. Good album. I remember hearing Woody on the radio saying, if I've got it right, people often compared his playing with Freddie's and commented how similar their styles. He disputed this, saying that the intervals they play when improvising were completely different - Woody's much wider. Woody's a favorite of mine, not so much Freddie. I never liked his horse neigh gimmick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJ Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 (edited) Man, there is just VERY LITTLE LOVE for Freddie on this board sometimes! Anyway, I agree with tooter in that I can't imagine anyone confusing Freddie with Woody at least in their mature periods. It's the intervals but more than that - phrasing, the way they build solos, almost everything. I enjoy these Freddie/Woody pairings and recommend them to pretty much anyone who posts regularly on this board - you're gonna enjoy them, it's pretty much a given. But don't expect anything sublime. Hubbard, way better here than on many contemporary dates, is still a mere shadow of his former self to my ears. Woody plays very well as he always seemed to, so highly valuable to hear these dates for that reason alone, and Garrett's and Mulgrew Miller's contributions are always a pleasure, although both are really underutilized here as others note. But there is still ultimately a lack of that extra spark needed to make this date the classic it should have been. The strong feeling of nostalgia seems to trump any truly musical reason to get together - exemplified by the de-emphasis of Garrett and Miller, so that it sounds exactly like Two Old Giants with Rhythm and a Guest Young Lion (the main purpose of the date, after all) rather than a Band. The sterile 80's period recording is another factor sapping away some musical vitality. So to me, a qualified success. You'll enjoy it, but I bet you won't love it, if you follow. Edited May 20, 2004 by DrJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnS Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 A timely reminder. I've not spun these for a while. They definitely deserve a play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmitry Posted May 20, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 There's someone selling this 2-fer on Amazon for $140. Bizarre prices on Amazon marketplace. I routinely see Verve Elites for $100-200. I wonder if anyone takes that hook... I'll be on the look-out for this one now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 Man, there is just VERY LITTLE LOVE for Freddie on this board sometimes! Anyway, I agree with tooter in that I can't imagine anyone confusing Freddie with Woody at least in their mature periods. It's the intervals but more than that - phrasing, the way they build solos, almost everything. I enjoy these Freddie/Woody pairings and recommend them to pretty much anyone who posts regularly on this board - you're gonna enjoy them, it's pretty much a given. But don't expect anything sublime. Hubbard, way better here than on many contemporary dates, is still a mere shadow of his former self to my ears. Woody plays very well as he always seemed to, so highly valuable to hear these dates for that reason alone, and Garrett's and Mulgrew Miller's contributions are always a pleasure, although both are really underutilized here as others note. But there is still ultimately a lack of that extra spark needed to make this date the classic it should have been. The strong feeling of nostalgia seems to trump any truly musical reason to get together - exemplified by the de-emphasis of Garrett and Miller, so that it sounds exactly like Two Old Giants with Rhythm and a Guest Young Lion (the main purpose of the date, after all) rather than a Band. The sterile 80's period recording is another factor sapping away some musical vitality. So to me, a qualified success. You'll enjoy it, but I bet you won't love it, if you follow. Agree. Not essential, but good. Don't pay $140 ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John L Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 (edited) Man, there is just VERY LITTLE LOVE for Freddie on this board sometimes! Hey, there is plenty of love for Freddie in my house! (Of course, I don't live on Elm Street.) I think that Double Take is a fine album, the better of the two collaborations between Hubbard and Shaw. If you find it, I wouldn't hesitate to pick it up, but maybe not for $140. Hell, I might even consider selling you my 2-fer for only $100 Edited May 20, 2004 by John L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooter Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Anyway, I agree with tooter in that I can't imagine anyone confusing Freddie with Woody at least in their mature periods. It's the intervals but more than that - phrasing, the way they build solos, almost everything. It was Woody I hope I was quoting correctly - he's the one who mentioned the intervals. But I do agree, very different in many respects. It seems from what I've read that they got on famously together though, personally and musically. You can hear it I think. I do like both Woody and Freddie and listen to them separately and together a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.