I Don't Know What This Means

[JSngry]

http://www.allmusic.com/album/whats-it-all-about-r2206660/review

"Betcha by Golly, Wow" stands as a revelation: its truly inventive harmonies and jazz syncopations are -- and one suspects they always have been -- inherent in the tune's basic architecture.

Is the reviewer saying that the appealing elements of the song as written have been there all along?

Uhhh....yeah. Isn't that kinda like saying that the red meat and sweet smell of the strawberries at the market are - as one suspects they always have been - inherent in the fruit's basic architecture?

I mean, what is there to suspect?

I don't know what this means.

[papsrus]

Maybe he thinks that Metheny was able to extract from the tune's "basic architecture" some harmonies and syncopations that were not evident in its "pop" form, but only emerged when a jazz sensibility was applied?

That the structure of the tune lends itself naturally to these harmonies and syncopations?

[JSngry]

Yeah, but I don't see how you don't notice that in the original "pop" version. That tune was obviously way hip when The Stylistics did it. If you don't hear that, you're not hearing the song, you're just hearing the "style"

Check this shit out, check out those changes!

As far as "syncopation", again, it's already there. I don't know what's not already there for the hearing.

Hell, Freddie Hubbard was all over that tune back in the day. Some others were too.

It's not like you gotta change shit around on this one to make it hip. All you gotta do is keep playing the tune instead of cycling the chorus over and over like The Stylistics version did. If you get distracted by that to the point of losing the song itself, hey, your bad, not the song's.

That's what I mean - what is there to "suspect" "was there" when it's obviously already there? Chord changes be chord changes, dig? Doesn't this cat trust his ears enough to hear an inventive pop song when he hears it? Does he need confirmation/validations of his suspicions by hearing the song played by a jazz musician?

It just don't make sense to me.

Edited June 18, 2011 by JSngry

[Dave James]

http://www.allmusic.com/album/whats-it-all-about-r2206660/review

"Betcha by Golly, Wow" stands as a revelation: its truly inventive harmonies and jazz syncopations are -- and one suspects they always have been -- inherent in the tune's basic architecture.

Is the reviewer saying that the appealing elements of the song as written have been there all along?

Uhhh....yeah. Isn't that kinda like saying that the red meat and sweet smell of the strawberries at the market are - as one suspects they always have been - inherent in the fruit's basic architecture?

I mean, what is there to suspect?

I don't know what this means.

It's nonsense. Mr. Jurek is clearly over enamored of his own descriptive abilities. It's a sentence that when you first read it, sounds profound, but, upon further review, you realize he's really said nothing.

Also, I'm very upset at the attribution of the song Pipeline to The Ventures when it was originally recorded by the Chantays. Sloppy journalism, Tom, just sloppy. You should have spent more time fact checking and less on your florid prose.

Edited June 19, 2011 by Dave James

[Bill Nelson]

Jurek decoded: "'Betcha By Golly' has favorable aspects which reflect its origins.

"At the end of the day, it is what it is."

(The AMG review proves Jurek has graduated to a level where he's fully qualified to write reviews for 'DownBeat'.)

[Chuck Nessa]

Other things to worry about.

[Big Wheel]

Jurek decoded: "'Betcha By Golly' has favorable aspects which reflect its origins.

"At the end of the day, it is what it is."

(The AMG review proves Jurek has graduated to a level where he's fully qualified to write reviews for 'DownBeat'.)

Exactly. Jurek's reviews only make sense once you start with the principle that he knows nothing about music and is constantly trying to cover for that fact by spewing BS in the manner of a college freshman.

Edited June 20, 2011 by Big Wheel

[John L]

This actually strikes me as one of Jurek's more coherent statements (of course, that is not saying a lot). Ironically, I interpret it to mean exactly the same thing that Jim S is saying - that the structure of the composition itself is rich and therefore quite conducive to being jazzed up. As I interpret it, "they always have been" means that "they" already existed before Metheny reworked them.