Jimmy Garrison bootleg

[damonsmith]

Originally Posted by Jason Sypher

Up to that point in the tune there was absolutely no indication that they were going to take it out. Do you think?

I think hiring Jim Garrison is an indication things will probably go "out" at some point.
If it were Monty Budwig, Sonny Dallas, Sam Jones or any number of other great players it would be a different story all together.

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by damonsmith

He could have been lost, or he could have been trying to push things out and Warren wouldn't go with him so he came back.
He could have just heard that line, played it and came back it.

It is great to be able to keep forms solidly, but not being able to hear music past the song form being "the law" is what is disturbing in the thread.

I hear him stop supporting the harmony, but I also hear a beautiful, strong line that, to me, is more important than "All the Things you Are".

Of course you (and we all) hear a strong melody, it's a perfect example of a solid bassline for the bridge. Playing that strong melody at the wrong time in the form is a mistake. And like Jason Sypher stated, we've all been there, no big deal. My problem is not with Jimmy Garrison, nor with the music being made. But with the people who refuse to indentify what happens, and make it into a musical choice of one of the great icons of jazz.

Of course music isn't technical ability on an instrument, nor is it the execution of some elaborate theoretical idea. Both of these things can be used to create music that is an expression of the musicians emotions. And that emotion is what counts. I think we all agree on that.
But part of learning our craft is analyzing what happens in music. That's what I tried to do, nothing more, nothing less.

[thepontif]

Originally Posted by contrabart

There is music I consider generally invalid. Whenever I hear electronic dance beats I turn away in disgust. I don't tell people not to like it but knowing I have a more thorough understanding and knowledge of music than they have I consider my opinion more valid.
I agree that both Wynton and Branford have said things when they were young that were too opinionated and in a manner that was questionable. But didn't we al go through a phase like that? I've read an interview with Branford in which he admits being "too cocky for his age" during interviews in his younger years.

But I agree with you that it's about taste, everyone's entitled to theirs, and it certainly isn't a moral issue.

I think we generally agree, then.

[Phil Smith]

Originally Posted by Jason Sypher

Finally got a chance to listen. He's lost, and more than once. Warren is doing his best to guide him back but Garrison seems quite oblivious. Who hasn't been there. What's the big deal?

The big deal is that some are arguing that he's not lost but instead making a bold and clever harmonic statement. He could be doing both at the same time. I think OP just wanted to get acknowledgement that what was heard was what it was.

[thepontif]

He is lost, plain and simple. Suggesting he's "making a deeper musical statement" is kind of a cop out. Right statement, wrong time.

JG was a great musician. It seems like a pretty lame "taste" call to start playing a bunch of out crap in such an inside context. Like good musicians are supposed to do, he plays to the situation...and gets lost.

Admittedly, the first time I listened, I thought maybe he was just trying stuff too. Then I went back and listened and ignored the vibes (something I like to do anyway :-)). No doubt about it.

No disrespect to Ed Fuqua. Ed, listen again with this in mind and it is SO clear.

I don't care that he's wrong, but I hate couching mistakes in some BS mystique about intention (which is the WRONG word, by the way...it's INTENT). Wrong is wrong, and music isn't random any more than spoken language is. Music's a language, no matter how "out" it gets, and these guys weren't having the same conversation at the same time for a while.

Sometimes cool things happen in those situations. Geoffrey Keezer likes to just play stuff wrong on purpose to see where it leads....but he sure as hell doesn't keep forcing down the throats of a band who isn't responding to it for a chorus and a half. We generally DO respond to it, and it's usually awsome. But skipping 8 bars of the form arbitrarily isn't part of that paradigm.

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by thepontif

He is lost, plain and simple. Suggesting he's "making a deeper musical statement" is kind of a cop out. Right statement, wrong time.

JG was a great musician. It seems like a pretty lame "taste" call to start playing a bunch of out crap in such an inside context. Like good musicians are supposed to do, he plays to the situation...and gets lost.

Admittedly, the first time I listened, I thought maybe he was just trying stuff too. Then I went back and listened and ignored the vibes (something I like to do anyway :-)). No doubt about it.

No disrespect to Ed Fuqua. Ed, listen again with this in mind and it is SO clear.

I don't care that he's wrong, but I hate couching mistakes in some BS mystique about intention (which is the WRONG word, by the way...it's INTENT). Wrong is wrong, and music isn't random any more than spoken language is. Music's a language, no matter how "out" it gets, and these guys weren't having the same conversation at the same time for a while.

Sometimes cool things happen in those situations. Geoffrey Keezer likes to just play stuff wrong on purpose to see where it leads....but he sure as hell doesn't keep forcing down the throats of a band who isn't responding to it for a chorus and a half. We generally DO respond to it, and it's usually awsome. But skipping 8 bars of the form arbitrarily isn't part of that paradigm.

Amen to that. (Thanks for correcting the intention/intent, this is not my first language.)

About Keezer, my favorite piano player, I'm not so sure about him playing stuff "wrong". Not sure if you mean it like that either. If his "mistakes" are intentional they're not wrong are they? I've never heard him play anything that wasn't related to what was going on around him. Even the crazy **** he plays on Ray Brown's "Live at Starbucks", in Ray's clearly defined concept, isn't out of place. But I don't get to see him play very often here in Holland, unfortunately.

[Jason Sypher]

Originally Posted by damonsmith

I think hiring Jim Garrison is an indication things will probably go "out" at some point.
If it were Monty Budwig, Sonny Dallas, Sam Jones or any number of other great players it would be a different story all together.

Really? You think he would be profiled?With all the varied playing he has done? I think your just grasping for straws here. So you're going down with your conviction that he meant everything he played and then and just wasn't hip enough to go with him? I'm not dissing, I'm genuinely interested in your perspective.

[Eric Hochberg]

Originally Posted by Jason Sypher

So you're going down with your conviction that he meant everything he played and then and just wasn't hip enough to go with him? I'm not dissing, I'm genuinely interested in your perspective.

I assume you meant "Chaisson wasn't hip enough to go with him"? If not, sorry.

I think Garrison was trying to take the music "out" but Chaisson wasn't responding. Really, I only hear a few bars of this and I don't think Garrison was "lost", just going for something different than the incessant walking the chords. Nothing tentative about his playing there. I think he gave up with this idea and went back to playing straight ahead. I agree with most of Damon's observations.

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by Eric Hochberg

I think Garrison was trying to take the music "out" but Chaisson wasn't responding. Really, I only hear a few bars of this and I don't think Garrison was "lost", just going for something different than the incessant walking the chords. I think he gave up and went back to playing straight ahead. I agree with most of Damon's observations.

Wrong. Listen again. Transcribe the whole bassline if necessary. He's simply playing the bridge 8 bars too soon.

[Jason Sypher]

Someone transcribe it so we can really know for sure...just eight bars.

[Eric Hochberg]

Originally Posted by contrabart

Wrong. Listen again. Transcribe the whole bassline if necessary. He's simply playing the bridge 8 bars too soon.

Go ahead and do it if you want to "prove" your point.

[Chris Fitzgerald]

[moderator hat]
Regardless of who is "right" on this issue - and we'll never know empirically because Mr. Garrison died in 1976 - please keep the conversation respectful. I have an opinion on the matter, but don't feel that it's necessary to state it at this time, as it would only fuel the fires. I hear it a certain way, but if someone else hears it differently, that's fine; and I will say this - there are several players involved in this thread whose knowledge and playing I greatly respect whose opinion on this is matter is divided in this instance, and only one side of this division lines up with the way that I hear it. This changes my degree of respect and regard for the playing and knowledge of all of the aforementioned players exactly not one iota.
[moderator hat]

[contrabart]

Here it is. Played changes above staff, original under. Starts at the first bar of the chorus in which it goes wrong. In bar 13 Ab major should be under staff.

[Eric Hochberg]

You got it. I retract my post...

[Jason Sypher]

I think that would hold up in the Supreme Court no?

[Treyzer]

Good Lord take me now! OK, back to shedding.

[Jason Sypher]

So seriously and civilly. What do you all think if this, particularly those that were in the "JG is taking it out" camp. That's as inside as a bass line from the Hot Sevens... And I think it's cool that we have these discussions and these differences in hearing...

[contrabart]

Originally Posted by Jason Sypher

That's as inside as a bass line from the Hot Sevens...

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by Jason Sypher

So seriously and civilly. What do you all think if this, particularly those that were in the "JG is taking it out" camp. That's as inside as a bass line from the Hot Sevens... And I think it's cool that we have these discussions and these differences in hearing...

OK, I'll bite. I heard the line as "JG skipped the second section of the tune and went straight to the bridge, and it took him a while to get back with the soloist. Thank god I'm not the only one who occasionally does that".

I record a lot of my gigs, and every once in a when listening back (admittedly, usually while multitasking and soaking in the vibe of the recording while driving or working in my office) I'll hear this kind of diversion happen. When it does, I then try to go back and determine who dropped what, and if possible how it happened. When it's the soloist, there's no way to know and no point in asking IMO. When it turns out to have been me, for better or worse the answer is usually just "momentary brain fart".

When it's happening and I catch that it's happened, these days I try not to worry about how it happened or whose "fault" it was and try to focus on spacing out the changes to let the "outside-ness" breathe and make sense until I can figure out how to line back up with the other players. I used to really sweat it when this would happen. I don't any more. Sometimes when walking down a sidewalk, I catch my foot a crack or my shoe catches on the ground and I lose my balance for a few seconds. I usually just resolve to pay more attention and get about going where I'm going. People get momentarily distracted, and stuff happens. When it does, it doesn't make whatever was happening a failure - it's just a part of life that happens to the great and the humble alike.

[Phil Rowan]

Bingo. Plus, we don't know if some smokin' hot babe happened to walk in the room causing JG to briefly lose his attention to the form (attention being finite). Doodoo happens. It's weird how getting lost can happen on the simplest of tunes too, right?