Jazz bassist time line

[debasser!]

Hello folks,

As part of my preparation for a dissertation I'm doing I thought I'd put together a little time line of jazz double bassists. It's fairly light on the more recent side of things, but really the whole thing expands so much and I can only have it so large, it obviously just contains what I consider to be 'significant' bass players, and I know that will spark off a few discussions! But that's what I'm putting it up here for.

I was originally considering doing it as a lineage concept, but to be honest, I'm kinda overwhelmed by it. A few things are obvious, things I've learnt here about who took lessons from who, then things like Blanton influencing just about everyone, but then, everyone is influenced somewhat by their peers also, no man is an island etc, so I have kinda left it, but none-the-less, comments would be welcome, just forgive me if I have left your favourite off and educate me!

Now, I hope this jpg upload works!

Had a hard time getting a decent quality pic out of it. It's a little annoyingly small IMO. You can see how a line connect lineage chart would make things extremely messy too.

Regards,
Damian

[Ed Fuqua]

That's OK, but maybe instead of a timeline do a family tree kind of grouping?

[TroyK]

My heart aches with the ommision of Butch Warren, born 9/8/39 in Washinton DC and still living and playing there after a not so easy life. He appears on 30 someodd recordings of major importance in the early 60s. Toured the world with Monk. Played with Dex, Dorham, Joe Henderson, Jackie McLean, Booker Ervin, Walter Bishop Jr., Sonny Clark, Ike Quebeck, Bobby Timmons, Horace Parlan, Tyner, Turrentine, Mobley...

Please, for the love of all that is holy, give the man his props.

[Mark Perna]

I'm a little confused by your listing by date of birth. I think listing by period active would be more insightful and organizing by family (as Ed said) would be even more insightful. Knowing that Paul Chambers and Scott Lafaro were born about the same time tells me pretty much nothing about them as stylists. In fact, it obscures stylistic information.

mark

[Ed Fuqua]

Much less all the guys who were all over the spectrum age wise but were playing the same music with the same cats. It all intertwines....

[TroyK]

Originally Posted by calivox

I'm a little confused by your listing by date of birth. I think listing by period active would be more insightful and organizing by family (as Ed said) would be even more insightful. Knowing that Paul Chambers and Scott Lafaro were born about the same time tells me pretty much nothing about them as stylists. In fact, it obscures stylistic information.

mark

I agree...and you left off Butch...

[chop_1992]

I would suggest putting the decade(s) that a player is active and then beside the name put (b. 1951 - ) or (b.1951 d. 1990) or whatever. You would have to put several bassists in many decades (Milt Hinton in six decades), but it would make the chart more clear. Now it looks like the players are only active in the decade that they were born.

Besides that, it's a good start . . .

[Ed Fuqua]

How about instead of a timeline, it's a string chart! You know, who used what when.

[chop_1992]

You mean "string theory," Ed?

[txstatebass]

Originally Posted by chop_1992

I would suggest putting the decade(s) that a player is active and then beside the name put (b. 1951 - ) or (b.1951 d. 1990) or whatever. You would have to put several bassists in many decades (Milt Hinton in six decades), but it would make the chart more clear. Now it looks like the players are only active in the decade that they were born.

Besides that, it's a good start . . .

Agreed. It's a good start but activity would be more useful. Keep it going!

[Ed Fuqua]

Originally Posted by chop_1992

You mean "string theory," Ed?

As in, "In theory, I should like some of these strings"?

[Alan Vorse]

As someone who studied with Anthony Cox, I appreciate you including him. I do agree with previous posts though: grouping players together by decade of birth dosen't tell us much about the music these men made.

[hdiddy]

Rather than a tree, I'd rather see a Gantt chart. One that shows the birth, age, death, and prime years. You can then see how the ages overlap and get something useful. DOB means little in comparison.

Also, it's easy to miss a bunch of other bassists. Major Holley, John Clayton, George Mraz, and Scott Colley need to be on that list. If you're going to include Reid Anderson, I'd think you want Chris Woods, Ben Allison, Brian Bromberg, and a bunch of others that I know I can't think of.

[TroyK]

Originally Posted by hdiddy

Rather than a tree, I'd rather see a Gantt chart.

GEEK!!!!!!

Originally Posted by hdiddy

Also, it's easy to miss a bunch of other bassists. Major Holley, John Clayton, George Mraz, and Scott Colley need to be on that list.

Ah yes! And Slam Stewart! You can't have a historical bassist referrence without Slam Stewart.

And how's it coming with Butch Warren?

[hdiddy]

I believe Slam is already on there. Oh yeah... Eddie Jones might be a worthwhile mention since we already got Walter Page.

And yes, I am a geek.

[Dogbertday]

Decades aren't even the right grouping IMO. I would go by major styles and include the years that the style was active then list each bassist under which they played (ie. Early Big Band, BeBop, Cool, Hard Bop, Free, Fusion, etc. etc.). I find this way most useful because the genres overlap and every play doesn't. I know that it may pidgeon hole some players but grouping by imperfect categories that are constantly being refined is what history, politics, and science is all about.

[debasser!]

Well, I'm glad my little time line started of some interesting discussions.

I did mention that I had originally thought of a 'lineage' type chart but felt to be honest a little overwhelmed. This was a good way to get started, find out some important omissions in the chart, and get different ideas on how it might be best bought forward. So the fact that it tells you little about their stylistic approaches wasn't really the point of this particular timeline.

I do find it interesting though, to look at it from this perspective, for example that Gary Peacock and Paul Chambers were essentially peers age wise. It also made me realise how early the world lost Paul, even though I knew he had died young.

I apologise for Butch Warren, Major Holley, John Clayton, George Mraz, and Scott Colley, I don't know Scott Colley, or Eddie Jones, so will check them out, but that's what you guys are here for to point out such things! At some point, the list has to stop and not everyone's going to agree with it! I'll add those guys.

I'm considering all the very good suggestions on how to make a list like this a different type of list and therefore more useful. The program I'm using doesn't make the layouts quite as easy to use as I'd like, which was another reason I gave up on the lineage idea straight away. I'll have a little think about it, but if I was to attempt some sort of lineage chart, I would need all your input because I wouldn't have that sort of knowledge at my fingertips or the time to research it really. My dissertation isn't about the history of jazz bass, but it would be interesting to have some chart like that available.

hdiddy, can you explain a Gannt chart? (Saves everyone else googling it which is what I'll do in a minute!), I've already got Brian, but will add Chris Woods and Ben Allison. There are so many contemporary guys playing that probably should be on the list but I'm going to concern myself mainly with the historical side of it rather than trying to rate everyone currently playing!

Anyways, I'm new to these posts and tend to ramble once I start, so thanks again for all your input, keep it coming, if anybody want to collaborate with it, the program I'm using is a mac program and built for collaboration.

Damian

[hdiddy]

Gantt chart just displays a time span over the X axis. Typically used for task/project management.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gantt_chart

Instead you should just borrow the idea and show how the age and prime of each player overlaps. You then see how certain groups of players may have influenced eachother by the period that they all overlap. Lineages would also be interesting to display and would still be possible. For example you can link Jimmy Blanton -> Ray Brown -> John Clayton -> Kristin Korb (it's how I think of that particular lineage) and then see how other players overlap that (like McBride for instance).

[debasser!]

I think I can imagine what you mean Hdiddy, (I looked at the wiki page, but had a hard time imagining one that wouldn't be so crowded, what do you suggest are on the axis?)

Perhaps a little more thinking tonight and I'll be able to see what you mean. You wouldn't just whip one up there for us with lineage thrown in would you!

In seriousness though, I take it you have dates across the top, then list the bass players from bottom to top, and use like a bar graph to mark their dates of birth etc, with a different colour for when they are/were active. I have seen a classical chart like that without the active part.

I still think the lineage would be extremely messy. It might be fine to mark out one or two... but think about how many lines there would be. If you reduce the total of bass players down to 10 - 20 you might have a little more chance. If you're going to have more, I think it would be nessecary to spread the chart out in order to see the relationships between certain types of players..... my head hurts thinking about it!

[TroyK]

Originally Posted by hdiddy

Gantt chart just displays a time span over the X axis. Typically used for task/project management.

GEEK!