Creed Taylor article in the Financial Times

[mjzee]

It is 40 years since the American record producer Creed Taylor acted as midwife to the quintessential 1970s soundtrack for a generation in love with freshly fitted in-car entertainment. Taylor’s brash, soulful and sophisticated sounds accompanied slick kids with wheels on their search for night-time revels, resonating with an urban America easing back from recent confrontations.

Taylor’s flair for production and market savvy was already proved when he laid down his soundtrack. He had signed John Coltrane for the Impulse record label in 1961 and, while managing the Verve label, brokered bossa nova – “The Girl From Ipanema” won its Grammy in 1965. Nevertheless, his idea that luxuriously packaged street-scene rhythms and soulful jazz would be commercially viable had few takers in 1970, the year CTI – for Creed Taylor Incorporated – went fully independent. He launched an earthier label-mate, Kudu, a year later and dominated the jazz charts for the next decade.

More here:

FT.com

[Teasing the Korean]

Thanks for posting.

I take it that the A&M era CTI masters are still owned by A&M. Es verdad?

[alocispepraluger102]

thanks for the article.

the overly sweetened cti recordings weren't at all to to my taste, with several notable exceptions, but mr.taylor is certainly a key, albeit mercurial figure in committing to wax these essential artists.

[AllenLowe]

it's funny how time conveys revisionist respectability - because those of us who really liked jazz in those days considered those CTIs to be absolute and total crap, with a few exceptions.

[Christiern]

They were.

[AllenLowe]

I worked in a record store at the time, and they played those damned CTIs all day. Drove me up the wall - Benson, Laws, crap, crap, and more crap. The precursor of Smooth Jazz.

[Teasing the Korean]

The good CTI records - those from the pre-disco era that lacked Bob James involvement - have their own aesthetic that is separate from jazz. When I want to hear a jazz record, I don't reach for a CTI album. And vice versa.

Curiously, the more straight-ahead jazz sessions on CTI are the least satisfying. The Fender Rhodes piano and thuddy, close-miked drums don't work in straight ahead jazz, for me at least. However, that production works for the more introspective, delirious, psych funk stuff.

The stuff from the Kudu label doesn't interest me much. It is blatantly commercial. But for a while at least, the best early 70s CTI albums found a way of being accessible and adventurous at the same time.

[Bluesnik]

i don't like creed taylor much, nor CTI, nor A&M. he's resposible, in my view, for sweetening and making jazz (and bossa nova) palatable to an american audience, so that it would sell much and he would get rich. the results are horrible. all bossa albums sung in english are nothing compared to their brazilian counterpart. they're not really bossa. and the same goes for jazz. it is, in effect, the precursor to smooth jazz. i don't doubt that it was, in its day, commercially successfully. but it wasn't jazz (or bossa), but (60s) pop.

[shaft]

Why are you all so negative?

Creed has produced some very good music and took it to the streets. His Impulse stuff was often great and I've never felt that he put down the quality of the music just to sell sell sell.

Wes Montomery wanted to eat too and personally I like both his Riverside, Verve and A&M recordings even if they are different. Depending on the mood etc.

OK, Creed (together with musicians) created some new amalgams like Getz/Byrd Jazz Samba. Who cares if it's "real bossa" or not - the music is great!

Before you bite my head off. I know this is an everlasting topic about jazz's being diluted into soul, R&B, pop, smooth jazz etc. It is a discussion that no one can win.

I don't think the jazz scene would be better off without Creed. Only lesser.

/Shaft

[JSngry]

Creed has produced some very good music and took it to the streets.

psssstttt...here's a dirty little secret that nobody wants you to hear......the overall popular market for more "creative" forms of jazz always benefits from being part of a bigger overall jazz market, not a niche market of and for itself. So even if the stuff that's getting taken to the street in high-visibility format is not to the "purist's" liking, it at least puts stuff on the street instead of leaving the streets empty and vacant.

Truthfully, I think that Stanley Turrentine made some of his best records for CTI. Freddie Hubbard & Milt Jackson too. Definitely Hubert Laws. Not every player has the strength of personality to stand up to being surrounded by a strng production (and not all strong productions serve eery player equally), but those who do can end up with some very distinctive additions to their recorded legacy.

I mean, in what other genre do audiences demand that their "star performers" only adhere to a rigid bare-bones presentation? A great jazz voice is just that -a great voice. And like any great voice, the distinctiveness is highlighted, not erased, by being presented in different settings.

There's plenty of CTI that I don't care for, but there's some things in there that need to be acknowledged as what they are -high-quality presentations of distinctive jazz voices in settings designed to reach audiences beyond the hardcore.

Let's see - distinctive voices, high-quality production, reaching/creating a larger audience...I really don't see a problem with that if it's done right, and often enough it was. It's not the only way, nor should it be, but, really, if you can do it - and do it well, why shouldn't you?

[Guy Berger]

I also think the intensity of responses in this thread is a little "strong" for my tastes (maybe triggered by the effusive FT article). The guy made some positive contributions to jazz history (and I am not a huge fan of his "aesthetic"). The bad stuff is mostly water under the bridge. He wasn't the worst, he wasn't the best.

[Teasing the Korean]

Very much agree with the last three posts. And I stand by my earlier statement that some of those early 70s CTI LPs with those great Sebeskey arrangements found a way to be commercial and very creative at the same time.

Many of those albums had two long tracks per side - hardly a recipe for an instant pop smash, even by early 70s standards.

As for the whether the Getz/Gilberto and similar bossa-oriented projects are "real bossa," or not, frankly, I could care less. The results are what matter; label it as you may.

Edited January 8, 2011 by Teasing the Korean

[AndrewHill]

I like the Joe Farrell albums.

[JSngry]

Selling the records allowed for live gigs like this:

Seattle 7-29-73

Freddie Hubbard (tp); Stanley Turrentine (ts); Hubert Laws (f); Johnny Hammond (org, el-p); George Benson (g); Ron Carter (b); Jack DeJohnette (d); Airto (perc).

1 Xibaba (She-ba-ba) 04:30

2 Unknown 10:52

3 Moment's Notice 07:17

4 Amazing Grace 06:07

5 El Mar 09:18

6 So What 11:15

7 Rock Steady 09:49

8 Working On A Groovy Thing 05:13

9 It's Too Late 11:46

10 Sugar 15:40

11 Cherry 09:24

12 Don't Mess With Mister T. 10:32

13 First Light 13:49

14 Yesterday's Dream 03:28

15 Red Clay 17:09

I'd go to that show, no problem.

Edited January 8, 2011 by JSngry

[shaft]

Thanks for the thumbs up ;-)

I would give an aarm and a leg to go to that concert!

/Shaft

[AllenLowe]

crap is crap

the myth that bad jazz will beget good jazz is just that, a myth. I've been hearing it since 1968.

[JSngry]

Well, nobody's talking "crap" and nobody's talking "bad jazz", unless some absolutist criterion of presentation by definition affecting content is in play, in which case, let me off that train so I can get on one that actuality moves...

What does "beget" something is that creatively executed popularly oriented jazz does create an overall "jazz environment" that makes it easier for anybody who is so-inclined (always a minority, but always out there) to move about and experiment, and maybe actually find some stuff that sticks. I've been seeing that since 1971.

What I don't see happening now is the popularly oriented jazz (either the "preservationist" or the "smooth" variety) having any real creative execution at either inception, production, or presentation. So rather than having a bunch of lakes connected by creeks, you got a butch of stock ponds, artificially kept alive & existing only to serve that which is already there to be served.

You can skin in a lake. But you can't in a stock pond.