Eric Dolphy

[AllenLowe]

you're missing the point here - it has nothing to do with the 'in crowd' but with coming to grips with brilliant musical minds like Eric DOlphy's - in 1954 you have a major figure in mid-point, between his earliest playing and his mature, revolutionary work - who wouldn't be interested in such a thing? Why do we listen to the early work of Bird? Of Mingus? Miles Davis? Because it's not only genius in embryo but it's great music at ALL stages of their musical lives. Like early Bud Powell, early Monk, early Louis Armstrong - all of these played brilliantly even before they came to maturity. And it's all absolutely fascinating to listen to.

[AllenLowe]

"does knowledge of the entire history of an artist--from cradle to grave--really constitute a comprehensive "understanding"?

what else would give us comprehensive knowlege? We listen to Mozart, Beethoven, Nancarrow, John Cage, Ellington, Cecil Taylor, Sun Ra etc et through all stages - why not Dolphy?

[ep1str0phy]

you're missing the point here - it has nothing to do with the 'in crowd' but with coming to grips with brilliant musical minds like Eric DOlphy's - in 1954 you have a major figure in mid-point, between his earliest playing and his mature, revolutionary work - who wouldn't be interested in such a thing? Why do we listen to the early work of Bird? Of Mingus? Miles Davis? Because it's not only genius in embryo but it's great music at ALL stages of their musical lives. Like early Bud Powell, early Monk, early Louis Armstrong - all of these played brilliantly even before they came to maturity. And it's all absolutely fascinating to listen to.

Absolutely fascinating--man, I agree with you. However, I'm not sure that the merits of the music make for "essential" listening. Part of the problem is that we're dealing with a fairly vague definition of "essential." Operationally, several individuals seem to suggest that by essential we should mean those works that are absolutely invaluable toward developing an understanding of an artist. Perhaps, instead of comprehensive, I should say "sufficient"--a sufficient "feel for" the "essence" of an artist (and I apologize for drawing the conversation into such nebulous dregs). Is it truly necessary to examine every last facet of a musician's work in order to "get" that artist? Moreover, will thorough documentation better render the psychology, spirit, and "essence" of a specific musician? Speaking hypothetically, is my understanding of Dolphy inferior for having not heard the Brownie sides? Of course, limited familiarity with an artist's discography impairs knowledge of history, technical development, etc. But--for the neophytes, the laypeople, issues of economy and choice--is it all really the same? Part of a whole, yes... but would Dolphy say that it's all equally worthwhile? I mean, the Brownie album, bootleg concerts, even the Blue Note outtakes (none directly approved by ED himself)... what's really essential in understanding Dolphy the artist, his craft, and ideal?

Edited January 8, 2006 by ep1str0phy

[AllenLowe]

'will thorough documentation better render the psychology, spirit, and "essence" of a specific musician? '

absolutely - but even more so in jazz, because it's not just esoterica but potentially great music - so we get to enjoy it at the same time as it increases our understanding of a great artist -

'Speaking hypothetically, is my understanding of Dolphy inferior for having not heard the Brownie sides? Of course, limited familiarity with an artist's discography impairs knowledge of history, technical development, etc. But--for the neophytes, the laypeople, issues of economy and choice--is it all really the same?'

well, I would assume that if you are posting on this site you are not a neophyte. And yes, your (our) understanding of Dolphy is virtually impossible without hearing anything from this middle period. Since CHuck will not enlighten us about those mystery recordings, I will assume that all we have in the early Dolphy discography (and I have done the research) are uncertain big band appearances in the late 1940s and than a skip to 1958 with Chico Hamilton. It's similar to problems with documentation of Lester Young - we have nothing real early, only the first mature playing. So, given the opportunity to not only fill in the historical blanks but also to hear what will likely be great music, I would regard these home recordings as essential.

Edited January 8, 2006 by AllenLowe

[blake]

Is this the same session that's (at least partially) spread out over the first 2-3 volumes of the Brownie's Eyes series on Philology?

[brownie]

On the website of JazzHot, the French review, you can have a look at a list of private records by Clifford Brown that has been compiled by Paolo Piangiarelli of Philology Records. 27 albums not available for sale!

This is the link:

http://www.jazzhot.net/fr/indexfr.html

Click on the cover image of Clifford Brown and go to the line 'enregistrements non officiels' in the Clifford Brown section. Wait a few seconds for the link to work...

Quite an impressive list!

[AllenLowe]

just tried it - and unless I goofed, I find no mention of Dolphy recordings -

[brownie]

Allen, my French is obviously better than yours -_-

I see Eric Dolphy appearances on vol. 3, 4 and 5 of the series!

[AllenLowe]

ou la la - merde! will try again -

[ep1str0phy]

'will thorough documentation better render the psychology, spirit, and "essence" of a specific musician? '

absolutely - but even more so in jazz, because it's not just esoterica but potentially great music - so we get to enjoy it at the same time as it increases our understanding of a great artist -

'Speaking hypothetically, is my understanding of Dolphy inferior for having not heard the Brownie sides? Of course, limited familiarity with an artist's discography impairs knowledge of history, technical development, etc. But--for the neophytes, the laypeople, issues of economy and choice--is it all really the same?'

well, I would assume that if you are posting on this site you are not a neophyte. And yes, your (our) understanding of Dolphy is virtually impossible without hearing anything from this middle period. Since CHuck will not enlighten us about those mystery recordings, I will assume that all we have in the early Dolphy discography (and I have done the research) are uncertain big band appearances in the late 1940s and than a skip to 1958 with Chico Hamilton. It's similar to problems with documentation of Lester Young - we have nothing real early, only the first mature playing. So, given the opportunity to not only fill in the historical blanks but also to hear what will likely be great music, I would regard these home recordings as essential.

I'm just not sure that it's impossible to apprehend the "spirit" of the man with only a select set of recordings. I agree that added documentation can add to certain types of understanding--again, historical and technical details, developmental minutiae (not to demean any of it)--but I'd also argue that there's an intangible aspect to Dolphy (and other great artists/musicians) that projects itself immediately--a gut, supra-intellectual understanding. Again, I'm lapsing into fairly nebulous territory. But I cannot subscribe to the idea that a (relative) neophyte's fairly basic cognizance of Dolphy--the sound, the spirit is in any way inferior to ours. A feel for that "spirit" is far more immediate than knowledge of synthetics, rhythmic idiosyncrasies, timbral liberties, etc. It's the pivotal aspect of the artist's "whole"--that sort of "it" that critics and analysts strain to describe. Moreover, it's seems possible that certain recordings better represent this "it" better than others. At the very least, many, many people seem to consider "Out to Lunch" more essential than, say, the Hamilton sides (or even something like "Iron Man," more example). I've exhausted a somewhat obscure point, but I'd like to see someone else account for this--especially because we're dealing with the sort of esoterica (the Brownie sides) in question.

As far as the "uncertain" big band appearances are concerned: I actually asked Gerald Wilson about this once. He said he took Dolphy on a bunch of rock and roll sides--presumably a euphemism for some of the known material, perhaps something forever lost to the void. At the very least, those "anonymous" early sides include some Mingus cuts. Important enough, no?

Edited January 8, 2006 by ep1str0phy

[AllenLowe]

not much to verify on the early big bands - HOWEVER - and this is a big however - there is an alto solo on one of the Roy Porter sides that I think is Dolphy because he plays, near the end of it, a series of big intervallic skips - quite amazing for 1948/49, quite outside the prevailing harmony - and so, you see, this is why we like to hear the early work of revolutionary improvisers -

Edited January 9, 2006 by AllenLowe

[ep1str0phy]

Seriously--and to return to more solid ground--does anyone have the Simosko Dolphy book? It may have dealt with some of the material in question (the early works, I mean). The closest I've ever come to owning a copy was last Fall--when I borrowed it from a local library.

[JSngry]

Seriously--and to return to more solid ground--does anyone have the Simosko Dolphy book? It may have dealt with some of the material in question (the early works, I mean).

I have it, and to my best recollection, it doesn't.

It's a "difficult but worthwhile" book, if you know what I mean.

[ep1str0phy]

Seriously--and to return to more solid ground--does anyone have the Simosko Dolphy book? It may have dealt with some of the material in question (the early works, I mean).

I have it, and to my best recollection, it doesn't.

It's a "difficult but worthwhile" book, if you know what I mean.

Hm. Does anyone know what CN was talking about?

[Daniel Andresen]

I alway thought that only vol. 1 & 2 were issued.

Can anyone tell me how many of those 27 were isssued (and if vols 3-~ are still avauilable)?

[blake]

I alway thought that only vol. 1 & 2 were issued.

Can anyone tell me how many of those 27 were isssued (and if vols 3-~ are still avauilable)?

I have the first 5 volumes. I'm sure Brownie can tell us how many, if not all, of the 27 were issued.

[Ken Dryden]

I have the Simosko bio of Eric Dolphy and I don't remember it mentioning these rehearsals with Clifford Brown. Here is the link to my All Music Gudie review of the CD:

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:6au67ui050j0

I would caution that the audio quality and level of performances will make this CD appeal mostly to hard core completist collectors of Clifford Brown and Eric Dolphy.

[AllenLowe]

I've ordered it - as I mentioned - now, I don't know yet how bad the fidelity is - but I really do object to labeling interest in this as being only for completists - now, if there were 10 recordings commonly available for that period for Dolphy, that would be one thing - but this is, at least per general availability, the ONLY thing there is - and he is too important to ignore his middle period -

just like 1940-42 Bird is not just for completists - or early 1950s Miles - or 1943 Bud POwell - or 1940 Dizzy - or 1923 Armstrong - or 1923 James P Johnson - or 1950s Jaki Byard - or 1945 Lenny Tristano - or 1948 Lee Konitz - or 1920s Coleman Hawkins -

Edited January 9, 2006 by AllenLowe

[brownie]

I have the first 5 volumes. I'm sure Brownie can tell us how many, if not all, of the 27 were issued.

I have no idea on the number of CDs released in the series. Have none of them. From what I understand, only a few of them have been made available on special orders.

None of them is included in the Philology label page:

http://www.philologyjazz.it/.

Got several of Clifford Brown's unissued items mentioned in the Philology article from other sources.

[Ken Dryden]

The only reason that I suggested that completists would be the ones interested in this Dolphy/Brown CD is due to the condition of its sources. The tapes have dropouts, fidelity is so-so, the tape may be stretched in some places and there is a fair amount of noise. Don't say that you haven't been warned.

That said, I bought a copy and don't regret it, though I never have invested in the various recordings of Charlie Parker that feature only his solos from live gigs.

[Alexander Hawkins]

A couple of quotes from the Simosko (1996):

Gerald Wilson seems to have been one of Eric's most vital musical associates throughout the earlier years of his development [...] Eric definitely recorded with Gerald Wilson at some point during the mid-1950s, but no information is available. Wilson himself has stated that he has moved around so much that he can't find anything. Existing discographies fail to clarify the situation, as details on Wilson's record dates are quite hazy for that period of his career. However it is known with reasonable certainty that Eric's first featured recorded work was with Roy Porter's superb big-band of 1948-50, which included such eventual notables as Art and Addison Farmer, Jimmy Knepper, Joe Maini, and Russ Freeman (1996: 31).

For Eric Dolphy, however, Ornette Coleman's was a new direction full of exciting potential [...] That Dolphy did not share Coleman's problems of acceptance with other musicians is evident from the associations he held at the time. Clifford Brown, Max Roach, Harold Land, and Richie Powell were among those who used to go over to his house to play whenever they were in town; and Eric and Harold Land did a lot of woodshedding, as did Eric and Buddy Collette (1996: 36).

[jazzbo]

That said, I bought a copy and don't regret it, though I never have invested in the various recordings of Charlie Parker that feature only his solos from live gigs.

Those are among my favorite Bird live items!

[Alexander Hawkins]

I should add - from the discography at the end of the book - that this information (about the Wilson recording) was provided to Simosko by Dolphy's parents. They also mention a session, 'Los Angeles, c. 1956-57' (1996: 104), with the 'Eddie Beal Combo'.

Edited January 10, 2006 by Red

[.:.impossible]

Seriously--and to return to more solid ground--does anyone have the Simosko Dolphy book? It may have dealt with some of the material in question (the early works, I mean).

I have it, and to my best recollection, it doesn't.

It's a "difficult but worthwhile" book, if you know what I mean.

I think this is a fantastic book. More essential than a bad dub I'd think. The book does cover a lot of the aforementioned music as well, though there is a hole in the discography from Gerald Wilson until that Eddie Beal combo.

There is a great first-hand recollection of Dolphy's working band in 1956 by a friend of his, Lillian Polen on page 37. The previous pages talk about his relationships with Ornette Coleman and John Coltrane as early as 1954, as well as his practice sessions with Land, Roach, Brownie, and Richie Powell.

[Pete B]

I have the first 5 volumes. I'm sure Brownie can tell us how many, if not all, of the 27 were issued.

I have no idea on the number of CDs released in the series. Have none of them. From what I understand, only a few of them have been made available on special orders.

None of them is included in the Philology label page:

http://www.philologyjazz.it/.

Got several of Clifford Brown's unissued items mentioned in the Philology article from other sources.

I believe if you email Mr. PIANGIARELLI he will sell cdrs of whatever volumes you want.