Which Mosaic Are You Enjoying Right Now?

[JSngry]

At least one!

 

[Brad]

That’s a travesty.  

[ghost of miles]

[JSngry]

23 minutes ago, Brad said:

That’s a travesty.  

How so?

[Larry Kart]

23 minutes ago, JSngry said:

How so?

Indeed. I assume the altoist is Ernie Watts, but who is the trombonist?

[Brad]

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

How so?

There’s something about Buddy Rich that is so uncool and square playing a song like Norwegian Wood.  They just don’t go together. Like I said, a travesty. 

[paul secor]

I agree with Brad. It sounded like lounge type crap to me.

[JSngry]

I don't know what kind of lounges you guys have gone to. Ah, I forgot, Buddy Rich, haters gonna hate.

That's I fine, y'all do Buddy Rich, I do Oscar Peterson, y'all do Buddy Rich, the difference being that Buddy Rich wasn't fake.

Here's some jazzlounge Beatles, but I don't think it's  a travesty either, not with legs like that

 

[JSngry]

 

Is a hookah bar a lounge?

 

[Brad]

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

I don't know what kind of lounges you guys have gone to. Ah, I forgot, Buddy Rich, haters gonna hate.

That's I fine, y'all do Buddy Rich, I do Oscar Peterson, y'all do Buddy Rich, the difference being that Buddy Rich wasn't fake.

Here's some jazzlounge Beatles, but I don't think it's  a travesty either, not with legs like that.

 

That's pretty awful stuff, but it's Jackie and Roy.  The Liebman cut wasn't bad; it has feeling  

Try to deflect all you want but I guess that wasn't sufficient; you had to throw in a sexist comment. Whatever works for you. You love Buddy, good for you. That Norwegian Wood version is terrible, no matter how you cut it.  

Edited September 23, 2018 by Brad

[JSngry]

Those were great legs, those leggings or colored hosiery, whatever they were, very striking, very stylish. I applaud the fashion, nothing sexist about it at all, unless appreciating fashion is sexist.

I don't love Buddy Rich, god knows. But yeah, the guy drove, he was Tony Williams before there was a real Tony Williams.

Here's the deal - They played NW as a jazz waltz, as a 6/8 swinger. If you didn't know it was a Beatles tune, you'd not hear it as a "jazz version of a Beatles tune". So your mind is already thinking one thing, telling your ears what you're going to hear before you even hear it. We all do it, but it's fucked up, it's lazy thinking, and it's why we're all so easily manipulated by image and "culture". Buddy's driving that band like a man possessed, and they're more than up to the task (except for the guitarist who muffs the ending and knows it right away, he looks at Buddy in near fear!), and oh, it's A Beatles song, that's a travesty. No - the travesty is that we already know what to hear before it's even heard. And then we actually hear nothing. Nothing.

Here's a bit more of a travesty, although again, a helluva band. But 4/4? Seriously?

All this to answer the question of how many jazz versions of Beatles songs there have been, and the answer is quite a few actually. Quite a few.

[Brad]

Thanks for the pontificating and letting me know what I think. God, I feel so better already  I listened to both the Rich version (again) and Basie's, and I marginally prefer the latter, which leads me to the conclusion that Beatle tunes may work better in small settings. I listened to the Organissimo album the other day and it's a terrific album. It has soul that the others don't, all in my opinion, of course. 

By the way, fwiw, my original question was more on the rhetorical side. 

Edited September 23, 2018 by Brad

[JSngry]

You're welcome, and here's one that should really uplift your spirits!

 

5 minutes ago, Brad said:

..which leads me to the conclusion that Beatle tunes may work better in small settings.

Yes, this one was a bit of a chart hit!

This one was not:

So, your point appears to be sound!

[JSngry]

Uh-oh, small group, travesty (unless you like that kind of thing), theory needs more testing...

 

Poor Buddy Rich, he didn't realize that post-Beatle Paul McCartney sucks!

 

[Brad]

Thanks for the additional links but maybe it’s a case that these songs don’t translate that well into a jazz format in that the artists are playing them more or less straight up. 

Sorry if I hijacked the thread. Maybe there should be a separate thread on the topic, rock songs played by jazz artists. 

[T.D.]

Discs 5-7

[T.D.]

Discs 1-3

[paul secor]

John Patton - disc 2

I love the way that Clifford Jarvis breaks up the time and still keeps a groove going on That Certain Feeling. To me, it sounds a bit like a Roy Haynes type approach.

[Rooster_Ties]

16 minutes ago, paul secor said:

John Patton Select - disc 2

I love the way that Clifford Jarvis breaks up the time and still keeps a groove going on That Certain Feeling. To me, it sounds a bit like a Roy Haynes type approach.

That Certain Feeling is probably my favorite John Patton album.  I don't often buy very many Japanese discs that are dupes of material I already have on CD as part of a Mosaic -- but I made an exception for That Certain Feeling (yeah, a little because it's split between two discs on the Select),  But as much or more simply because it's such a cohesive album, that really seems to dig in deep. 

[JohnS]

4 hours ago, paul secor said:

John Patton - disc 2

I love the way that Clifford Jarvis breaks up the time and still keeps a groove going on That Certain Feeling. To me, it sounds a bit like a Roy Haynes type approach.

Great set Paul.  

[paul secor]

John Patton - disc 3

[John Tapscott]

On 9/23/2018 at 11:31 AM, JSngry said:

Uh-oh, small group, travesty (unless you like that kind of thing), theory needs more testing...

 

Poor Buddy Rich, he didn't realize that post-Beatle Paul McCartney sucks!

 

You know, I'd much rather hear Buddy do Big Swing Face, Love for Sale, Bugle Call Rag, Time Check, Groovin' Hard, Time Out, etc. than the Beatles tunes.  But I'm old and wise enough now to know that Buddy had a payroll to meet, and hey, if mixing in some arrangements of fairly current pop tunes helped  keep the band on the road and making some new fans and making records,I'm cool with that . It was the 60's and 70's, after all. And that arrangement of Norwegian Wood by Bill Holman is not bad at all, IMO. I liked it when I was a teenager. It's still OK, though not one I would request. 

Edited October 2, 2018 by John Tapscott

[JSngry]

I really, really like that Uncle Albert thing. Seriously. Excellent writing, and the solos are all in.

[Scott Dolan]

If you haven’t heard any McCartney since Linda died, then you should. His late career resurgence has been nothing short of astonishing. Notable albums being Run Devil Run, Chaos And Creation In The Backyard, Egypt Station, and Electric Arguments (as The Fireman). 

Post-Beatles McCartney most definitely does not suck. It just had a couple of down decades between the Ram/McCartney years, and the post Linda years. 

 

[JSngry]

I was kidding about post-Beatles McCartney sucking. To the immediate point, "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey" has long been a favorite (and Jazz Fans Of All Ages should note that the Admiral Halsey flugelhorn is played by Jazz's Own Marvin Stamm!). If Buddy Rich playing Norwegian Wood would be a "travesty", how much more of a travesty would it be for him and his band to play an post-Beatles McCartney song, which is by the definition of the popular wisdom of a certain time (and which apparently is oblivious to the detailed, panoramic production of the entire song), already a travesty? In other words, it was a joke all around. Sometimes I pull 'em of, sometimes I don't..

I also read the recent GQ interview with Paul, and it's great. Recommended reading if you're at all a fan.