September 28, 2006

old and new

Posted by dogpossum on September 28, 2006 11:45 AM in the category djing and lindy hop and other dances and music

My new CD has another version of Jive at Five for my collection.

I love this song more than anything. I love the way the rhythm section stomps along (hello Freddy and Jo - guitar and drums - and bass-player-whose-name-I-do-not-know). I love the featured muted trumpet. I even love the wandering saxophone. And the piano? Lovely. My favourite version (which features all these things) is a 1939 jobby, by Count Basie (and orchestra) of course. It trucks on in at 175pm.
I DJ it very rarely, in part because I have been afraid of 'higher' tempos until very lately (we had an epiphany last week - quicker transitions. Yes, yes, we knew, we had been told before. But now we Know). And it's 'lowerenergy', and I tend to prefer playing faster stuff only if it has 'highenergy'.
But things have changed, now, so I will soon play it every single time I DJ. Every. Single. Time.

I never tire of this gem.

I have also played a version by Jo Jones from this album, which is wonderful. Jo Jones (whom I wrote about here) was Basie's drummer for ages. And rocks). That's a great song, but it's 4.07mins long, and has a big fat bass solo in the middle which goes down like a ton of bricks with dancers. Especially since the whole song is 182bpm. It is still a mighty track, made even more wonderful by Jo's spoken introduction: "you hold up five fingers in each hand" and the chunky drum intro. The trucking rhythm section is emphasised (not surprising, considering Jo is a drummer, and this is his band), though the piano still gets in there... but with more vigour, and I think it's all in a different key (again, I'll have to think about it) - taken down a bit...?

But this new Basie album has another version of Jive at Five on it. It rolls along at a ponderous 147bpm, which kind of kills the sprightly, uplifting feeling of the original (sounds corny, but it really is uplifting - it makes you feel like trotting along on your tippy toes... well, that and stomping along with the rhythm doods).
But it's a neat track, with a trombone solo substituted for the sax solo (I think it's substituting - I can't remember - something's different there, anyways. I'll have to have a look), some nice additions and embellishments to the original version. It'll be a good track to play for noober dancers.

I have embarked on a Grand Scheme of late - playing newer 'more accessible' (ie hi-fi, or slightly slower, or simpler) versions of great old school tracks, then (over a series of gigs - not during the one song!) substituting the 'originals' and fading out the newer versions. This has worked a treat with songs like Viper's Moan, where I started with Mora's Modern Rhythmists' version, then used the Willie Bryant version (which is vastly superior - I am currently obsessed with Bryant and his band. This is some HOT shit). Similar stuff has happend with the Lincoln Centre Jazz Orchestra's version of C-Jam Blues (though I am thoroughly sick of that song, and wouldn't play it again unless I had to), with other DJs (obviously echoing my sentiments) pulling out alternative versions.

I really like C-Jam Blues, but my preferred version is a Duke Ellington version from 1941 (the Blanton Webster era) which sits on 178bpm and rolls along. The LCJO version rocks - it's live and very exciting - but it sits on 143bpm, and while the energy really builds in this top-notch contemporary reworking of a great song - it kind of loses the original energy of the faster version. There are some different things going on in the rhythm section too, and the neat violin solo in the third phrase has been replaced by a trumpet, which, while cool, isn't quite as cool as the original. But that could just be the gypsy jazz in me showing.

I don't play it very much, but Sydney Bechet's version of Stompy Jones would be a good way of getting to Ellington's (fabulous) version. Interestingly, Bechet's version sits on 216bpm, while Ellington's is about 199bpm. Ellington's is vastly superior, in part because he's using a whole orchestra, while the Bechet version I most prefer (Bechet and his New Orleans Footwarmers) uses a smaller group (5 or 6 or something). One of the neat things about the Ellington song (as I discovered reading Gunther Schuller's Swing Era) is the layers and rhythms (layers of rhythms?) going on in his version.
The Ellington version I prefer is a 1934 job, while Bechet's is from 1940. I could talk about Bechet and revivalist New Orleans jazz, and the way the rhythm section works in each, but I can't really be bothered.

One of the side effects of listening to all this stuff with an ear to dancing is that I've become obsessed with rhythm sections - with the way each note is played in terms of tempo and timing and accent and emphasis, rather than in terms of melody or tone or pitch. I guess it's because it's difficult to make those things visible in your body, when you're essentially working with a percussive instrument.
I'd never really thought about all this rhythm stuff when I was singing a lot at school - then I was all about pitch and stuff.
I'm also fascinated by the idea of polyrhythms. Which I need to learn more about.

Posted by dogpossum on September 28, 2006 11:45 AM in the category djing and lindy hop and other dances and music