Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

8799Re: [RedHotJazz] Re: Noone on Oliver's Camp Meeting Blues

Expand Messages
  • ALAN BOND
    Sep 1 5:12 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Folks,
                    Answer - YES
      TTFN - 007

      --- On Thu, 1/9/11, Howard Rye <howard@...> wrote:

      From: Howard Rye <howard@...>
      Subject: Re: [RedHotJazz] Re: Noone on Oliver's Camp Meeting Blues
      To: "red hot jazz" <RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com>
      Date: Thursday, 1 September, 2011, 12:19

      This is a disagreement caused merely by failure to define terms. Bailey was
      unquestionably technically superior in 1940 but does this make him a better
      jazz player? Many commentators, especially those oriented towards
      traditional jazz, have thought otherwise.

      John Chilton¹s ³Deficient in the emotional directness expected of the
      greatest jazz musicians¹ (Grove) is at least a sustainable comment, but not
      in respect of his earliest recordings. It¹s clear to me that he chose to
      play in a more detached style with Kirby and on other later associations.
      Some of his blues accompaniments show that it was a choice and that he could
      still achieve a different balance between emotion and technique when he
      wanted.


      on 01/09/2011 12:06, ALAN BOND at alan_bond@... wrote:




      >   
      >
      > Hi Folks,
      >                 That sounds like a reasonable theory to me and I don't think
      > we are going to get any closer unless new information surfaces.
      >                 I am afraid I can't agree that Buster Bailey was a better jazz
      > player in 1923 than he was in, say, 1940. His work with John Kirby alone is
      > proof of that. It's very like saying that Ian Wheeler was a better player when
      > he was with Ken Colyer than when he was with Chris Barber. Musicians develop
      > their skills over time just like anyone else who takes an interest in their
      > craft and they are also subject to other musical influences.
      >
      > TTFN - 007
      >
      > --- On Thu, 1/9/11, David Brown <johnhaleysims@...
      > <mailto:johnhaleysims%40yahoo.co.uk> > wrotIe:
      >
      > From: David Brown <johnhaleysims@...
      > <mailto:johnhaleysims%40yahoo.co.uk> >
      > Subject: RE: [RedHotJazz] Re: Noone on Oliver's Camp Meeting Blues
      > To: RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com <mailto:RedHotJazz%40yahoogroups.com>
      > Date: Thursday, 1 September, 2011, 9:52
      >
      > Many thanks Nick for the definitive discographical overview and history.
      >
      > You put your finger right on the nub -- why -- what source was there for --
      > the continual discographical amendments ?
      >
      > Perhaps somebody with Storyvilles -- and an index -- could check for this
      > topic.
      >
      > What this proves is that the clarinet on the Columbias has always been
      > contentious and it is not so easy to pick and open to alternative aural
      > interpretation. I myself have heard it both -- if not all -- ways over the
      > years.
      >
      > The 7 rejected takes might also suggest a problem with the musicians rather
      > than the equipment. Certainly Noone on 'Chattanooga' sounds less than his
      > fluent best and the playing on the other three sides is stronger. I can't
      > think there was any temperamental or musical clash between Oliver and Noone
      > and maybe the latter was 'under the weather' and, for reasons of safety, an
      > alternative was found for the next day's session.
      >
      > As to Buster, he was a better jazz player earlier, when his models were New
      > Orleanian, and before his studies with Schoepp which I  consider the reason
      > for his drastic change is style. But I also note that Noone studied with
      > Schoepp.
      >
      > The tenuous and circumstantial documentary evidence would seem to come down
      > for the Columbias having both Noone and Buster.
      >
      > Aurally, you pays your money and takes your choice but I believe, without
      > doubt, that Noone is on 'Chattanooga'.
      >
      > Dave
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >

      >   
      >
      >

         
      Howard Rye, 20 Coppermill Lane, London, England, E17 7HB
      howard@...
      Tel/FAX: +44 20 8521 1098




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      ------------------------------------

      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 23 messages in this topic