Jim R Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Well, there are so many options and so little time... but I think this will be a good choice, if only because it tends to be overlooked compared to other Wes albums. So, it's this: NOT to be confused with this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Great choice! I've always been curious about this album, and now I've got a reason to satisfy that curiosity! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeweil Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 If it's okay for you AOW clubbers I would like to join in on this one, have it and like it! Will have a re-listen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randyhersom Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Can anyone tell us which tracks of the box set to listen to to hear this? I burned my Wes CDs from Emusic.com back in the good old days, and so have not booklet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim R Posted January 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 tune up, body and soul, sandu, so do it, movin' along, ghost of a chance, says you; and alternate takes of tune up, body and soul (2), so do it, and movin' along (2). with James Clay, Victor Feldman, Sam Jones, and Louis Hayes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeweil Posted January 15, 2004 Report Share Posted January 15, 2004 In other words, disc 4, tracks 5-11, and disc 5, tracks 1-6 ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim R Posted January 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Well, I haven't had as much time as I'd hoped to review this session before getting this thread off the ground. My son had a bad stomach flu this week, and spent one day in the hospital. He's doing fine now, but I'm still a bit drained... This session was one of my first jazz LP's, and my introduction to Wes Montgomery, and has always been a sentimental favorite. I love the pairing of Wes and James Clay, the rhythm section, and the variety of sounds on this album (Wes of course experimented with his sound on this session, and Clay doubles on tenor and flute). One thing that has been a source of confusion for some is the instrument that Wes used on the first three songs (tune up, body and soul, and sandu). According to Orrin Keepnews, Wes wanted to get a deeper sound to contrast with Clay's flute on these tracks, so he borrowed a special (rare) guitar. It's been referred to as a "bass guitar", and that's not entirely incorrect, but the traditional bass guitar is a 4-stringed instrument which has a lower range than the 6-stringed instrument in question here. Also, the traditional bass guitar design features a solid body, whereas this instrument was (at least partially) hollow. The instrument Wes used on this was a somewhat experimental model made by the Gibson company (the same company that produced the L5 model archtops that Wes favored over the years). It was sometimes called a "baritone" guitar, which I think is a better term for it than "(6 string) bass guitar". It was pitched one octave lower than a normal guitar, and had a longer scale. GIBSON EB-6 The alternate takes on this session are in some cases just as good or better than the issued takes, and as Mr. Keepnews points out in the notes for the boxed set, some of them are restored to their original form after many years (the 11:15 version of body and soul being a fine example). Louis Hayes kills me on this. I think he's been one of my favorite drummers for years, and this session may have been the one that brought him into my consciousness. Pair him with Sam Jones, and you've got an automatic winner. Of course, this session was recorded when they (along with Feldman) were setting nightly grooves with Cannonball ("Quintet at the Lighthouse" was recorded four days after this session). I haven't thought about it in years, but I always used to tell people that Wes' version of "I don't stand a ghost of a chance" from this session was my favorite of his ballad recordings. I can think of a few others that might challenge for that spot now, but this is still among his best, IMO. Time to hit the hay... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Thanks for the explanation about the bass guitar. I always wondered about that. Is that the same kind Jack Bruce used in Cream? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Somehow I've overlooked this one, which for a James Clay buff suchas myself is both inexplicable and inexcusable. Self-flagellation begins immediately! How much tenor and how much flute does Heavy play here? And does he stretch out, or is he given obviously "regimented" space? No matter, It's Clay,and I need to have it. Thanks for the jolt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 I think Wes borrowed that bass-guitar hybrid from Irving Ashby. Yes, he's in great form, he and Clay were a good hook-up, and the rhythm section was empathetic and swinging. And Wes's instincts were right, bass guitar and flute is a hell of a sound. I remember the sound as much as the playing. Joel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim R Posted January 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 (edited) Jim, you get a lot more of Clay's flute than his tenor on this date. The flute comes out on the (3) aforementioned tunes (6 tracks including alt takes) where Wes uses the baritone guitar; as well as on the three takes of "movin' along". Plenty of solo space for Clay on these, especially on the 3 takes of "body and soul". Clay plays tenor only on one song- the two takes of "so do it" (which run a bit over 6 minutes each), and lays out on the other two tunes. One chorus only on "so do it", which amounts to less than a minute, so he's not exactly stretching out on the tenor. Edited January 19, 2004 by Jim R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Too bad, but I have to get this anyway. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnS Posted January 21, 2004 Report Share Posted January 21, 2004 Playing all thirteen tracks straight off is probably too much of a good thing. This isn't my favourite Wes date but there's a lot of good music here. Nice to have an opportunity to hear James Clay, he's a good flutist but a some more of his tenor would have gone down well with me. Not sure that the bass guitar adds too much to the record, more of a curiosity than anything else imo. It would have been wiser I think to have played the originally issued takes in lp sequence. I'll give it a try and reconsider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim R Posted January 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2004 John, I'm kind of with you on the bonus track overkill phenomenon. I always run into this issue when listening to boxed sets, and I usually fail to program my player in order to avoid it. Taken individually, though, I think these are all very worthwhile takes, and I'm glad to have them. Just got to learn to avoid listening to them all at once, I guess. Does anybody else have any particular reactions to the ballad feature on this (Ghost of a chance)? I can't quite put my finger on why, but every time I hear this I'm completely knocked out (of course, I can almost say that about everything Wes did). The way he phrases the melody, the way he weaves his solo... for me it's just pure magic. Too bad there weren't three takes of that... but I think I know why there weren't! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted January 22, 2004 Report Share Posted January 22, 2004 Haven't had a chance to pick this up yet. Hopefully tomorrow..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BruceH Posted January 22, 2004 Report Share Posted January 22, 2004 I hate to admit it, but the flute gets on my nerves a little. BUT (I hasten to add) I'll have to listen to this album some more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeweil Posted January 22, 2004 Report Share Posted January 22, 2004 Re the alternate takes: With Wes they always merit attention, beacuse he never played the same solo twice or in a similar fashion - in the case of this album this is diminished a little bit as he does not use his chord or octave technique on that bass guitar, to hear him solo in a linear fashion all the way is unusual. on his regular guitar he always mixed single note, chordal and octave playing to achieve more variety. And that bass guitar's sound is less warm, almost as if he had used a pick - which he didn't, it is the sound of that axe. Considering how long he worked on his sound, he probably wasn't that satisfied with the guitar sound here, but studio time was running out and two dates for one LP was luxury for Riverside ... Keepnews may have insisted on settling for the given results, as Wes had a reputation of being perfectionist. It is an experiment, and the results are okay for a star soloist with a frontline partner and a rhythm section that were not his regular working band. Well, he was familiat with Jones and Hayes from previous dates, but still.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted January 23, 2004 Report Share Posted January 23, 2004 Any idea how Clay got called for this date? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnS Posted January 23, 2004 Report Share Posted January 23, 2004 In his notes to the box set Keepnews mentions that the mike set up was changed after "So Do It". Jim R, I'd pretty much agree that "Ghost of a chance" is a one of the high spots here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeweil Posted January 23, 2004 Report Share Posted January 23, 2004 Any idea how Clay got called for this date? Maybe Cannonball was involved? He "discovered" Clay for Riverside, he had produced "Sound of the Wide Open Spaces", and Clay's second Riverside LP "Double Dose of Soul" with Nat Adderley and Gene Harris alongside Feldman, Jones and Hayes who are on Wes' LP (October 12), was recorded the preceding day, October 11, 1960. Cannonball's Lighthouse live album was done October 16, and there were sessions by Dexter Gorden, Lenny McBrowne and Bev Kelly in between - one of Keepnews' busy production trips to California. He used to book the same players for more than one session, to mutual advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeweil Posted January 23, 2004 Report Share Posted January 23, 2004 In his notes to the box set Keepnews mentions that the mike set up was changed after "So Do It". Jim R, I'd pretty much agree that "Ghost of a chance" is a one of the high spots here. That setup change improved the guitar sound, for sure, almost as good as on later Riverside sessions, but it obiviously reduced the level on the tenor sax mike, because it sounds even thinner than on the first take. Now Clay had a very lean tenor sound, not voluminous, not much "bottom" - Jim, you can describe this much better than I can - but a tenor with such a hard sound easily overshadows Wes' delicate guitar sound, so they reduced the volume, and the balance in the theme of "So Do It", the only tenor tune, is dissatisfying to these ears. While writing this I listen to this: which I consider a companion album, as it was recorded the preceding day with partly the same personnel. There is more tenor here, and it is far better recorded, warmer and more virile sounding. Strange: same studio, same engineer (Wally Heider), two conscutive days. I hold Clay in high regard, but think the session would have been more successful without him. The two quartet numbers, especially "Ghost", which is magnificent, are proof of this. And it was a little shortsighted by Wes to simply borrow that guitar and record on it. It's not simply a guitar tuned an octave lower. One guitarist I perform with alternates on (acoustic) classical, 12-string, and contrabass guitars and has to approach each of them differently - e.g. an electric bass guitar player could not get a decent sound from the acoustic bass guitar! It takes practice, and as critical as Wes was about his own sound, he should have taken more time to study that instrument. He doesn't sound as sure and fluid on it as usual, no octaves, very few instances with chordal playing. It sounds too thin for these ears, and rarely uses the low E string. You have to adjust the tonal settings differently as well, on the amp and in the recording console. This sounds like he used his amps with his everyday settings, which will not yield an adequate sound. The whole record sounds thinner to me, the bass, the piano, and the bass drum sound in Movin' Along is plain awful. Still a nice record, but IMHO, an experiment with mixed results. Jim, have you heard the Clay record? If not, I think you'll like it better than the Wes date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrdlu Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) One thing that has been a source of confusion for some is the instrument that Wes used on the first three songs (tune up, body and soul, and sandu). According to Orrin Keepnews, Wes wanted to get a deeper sound to contrast with Clay's flute on these tracks, so he borrowed a special (rare) guitar. It's been referred to as a "bass guitar", and that's not entirely incorrect, but the traditional bass guitar is a 4-stringed instrument which has a lower range than the 6-stringed instrument in question here. Also, the traditional bass guitar design features a solid body, whereas this instrument was (at least partially) hollow. The instrument Wes used on this was a somewhat experimental model made by the Gibson company (the same company that produced the L5 model archtops that Wes favored over the years). It was sometimes called a "baritone" guitar, which I think is a better term for it than "(6 string) bass guitar". It was pitched one octave lower than a normal guitar, and had a longer scale. The bass guitar's strings are E, A, D, G, all an octave lower than the four lower strings on the regular guitar. So, if the "baritone" guitar is an octave lower than a normal guitar, then the bass does not have a lower range than the "baritone". The "baritone" is the same, with the addition of two extra strings (and the hollow body is another difference). You can get a 6 string bass guitar, but they are not very common. I think this Montgomery session is kinda boring anyways. There were a couple of boring dates in the Riverside collection, and then, of course, the sensational albums. Edited January 2, 2010 by Shrdlu 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.