 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: justme
Date: 2010-11-15 23:34
John:-,
Here's Pete Fountain playing this back in 1958:
Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-S5r0rwFu0
"A critic is like a eunuch: he knows exactly how it ought to be done."
CLARINET, n.
An instrument of torture operated by a person with cotton in his ears. There are two instruments that are worse than a clarinet -- two clarinets
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2010-11-16 00:12
CLARINET, n.
An instrument of torture operated by a person with cotton in his ears. There are two instruments that are worse than a clarinet -- two clarinets.
"What's the difference between a Clarinet and a Bass Clarinet?"
"A Bass Clarinet BURNS longer!"
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2010-11-16 02:50
Yes - both versions are excellent. I have seen the Peplowski one earlier on in my Youtube browsings, but my thanks to the poster (Mr/Ms 'justme') for the Fountain version.
I think I prefer the PF effort as it has more of a New Orleans feel to it, although I admire KPs fluency and accuracy.
This number is, as we say in our neck of the woods, a 'multi-themer' given that it works its way through a number of keys (Bb, Eb & F) before finishing in Ab (that's Bb of course, for you legit folks). The final theme in Ab is difficult enough and the wild tempos usually tapped in for this number by most band leaders, is a good test for any clarinet player.
Interestingly enough KP adds an Bb key change to the final theme. I'm not quite sure why though as it does not really add anything, except for a string of high G notes for about a half of the chorus. Geez, that's nit picking isn't it? I wish I could play as well, to tell the truth. Still it's jazz and there are no rules that I know of anyway.
.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-11-16 04:29
>> Interestingly enough KP adds an Bb key change to the final theme. I'm not quite sure why though as it does not really add anything, except for a string of high G notes for about a half of the chorus. <<
It adds that "surprise" transposition/modulation that is common and is done in many songs towards the end. I think it is common even in some New Orleans type songs (that's what I remember but I'm really not an expert in this music).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2010-11-16 08:45
''It adds that "surprise" transposition/modulation that is common and is done in many songs towards the end. I think it is common even in some New Orleans type songs (that's what I remember but I'm really not an expert in this music).''
Usually this number is done the same way by every band, hence the common term ''traditional'' is given, by many, to this type of music and these types of bands.
There are SOME numbers which never change and Tiger Rag is one of them, High Society is another. It's difficult enough to pull off as it is, and the addition of another chorus, in an easier key, hardly makes for a surprise. If KP had modulated to (say) Db, an even harder key, I'd have been surprised.
On second thoughts - I WAS surprised - that he did it in the first place!
There are thousands of other tunes which can be modulated, ad infinitum, this one just happens to one of those which most jazz players perform as a set piece. Anyway, my last sentence of the first posting still applies - sigh!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-11-16 09:30
First, I'm only saying what it adds, not that it's necessarily worth adding it But I'm not saying it's not either
How any particular song is (usually) played is not necessarily important... and it's not important at all that it is an "easier" key... but this whole tone trans/modul is probably the most common. If it happens to be an easier key, that's what it is. I assume they chose this for the whole tone "rusprise" sound. It's just a very common thing to do. The most often I hear this idea is in arrangements of known local songs. Usually the original version doesn't have it and it is only added in a certain arrangemnet later. Basically an arranger's trick sort of.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2010-11-16 10:35
''.....It's just a very common thing to do.....''
Not necessarily with the music I play and listen to, and not with the piece in question.
''...I'm only saying what it adds, not that it's necessarily worth adding ...''
In this instance it adds not much, in my view, and if seemingly it adds nothing, then why do it?
This is my very subjective view naturally enough, and you are entitled to disagree of course. I did not say it could not be done, but the need seemed to be absent and the there's the tradition thing...........with this tune and some others.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2010-11-16 14:26
When you've exhausted all of the riffs and have run out of ideas, transpose. PF did not have to resort to that to stay interesting to the very end. KP has wonderful technique, but for my ears, a little too much of a "good thing". Great guitar work--I enjoyed his stuff.
BTW, we should all thank LW for keeping live instrumentalists employed and on the air for so long--and for "discovering" PF--as well as Henry Questa--for all of us to enjoy all these years. Otherwise, like so many talented clarinetists without a "national" stage, he/they may have gone unheard and unknown. Just my thoughts.............
Post Edited (2010-11-16 15:19)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2010-11-16 18:46
When you finish watching the video, click on Art Tatum's version, which is equally amazing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaPeks0H3_s&feature=fvw
You'd swear the man had three hands, or maybe four.
Ken Shaw
Post Edited (2010-11-16 18:46)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2010-11-16 19:31
He's one of my favorites, I listen to his CD in my car often. He's one of the greats, gets a great tone too. ESP http://eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2010-11-17 17:04
That was pretty awesome. I liked it a lot. Thanks Ken for playing it and JJM for finding it. Gimme about forty more years and I'll have some good stuff up on youtube. I'll be the guy in the walker playing clarinet as well as your typical college grad.
Alexi
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2010-11-17 22:20
I looked through my collection the other day and discovered that I have 30+ versions of tune, including that one recorded by the Original Dixieland Jazz Band.
The playing is typical of it's time in musical history. It's fast, furious and good fun - but fairly dated nowdays. The ODJB version has become the benchmark for TR (rightly or wrongly) and as such, many bands, particularly those of the striped shirt and boater hat variety, refer to this version.
Having looked at my list, there are two notable versions one should also listed to in order to get a better appreciation of this piece which has been relegated to that of 'warhorse' over the intervening years since its historic recording debut in 1917.
I refer to the equally fast and furious, but nonetheless elegant and virtuosic version by Duke Ellington, from 1929, which featured some fabulous playing by Barney Bigard. I have it on a CD compilation called ''Barney Bigard Story''. You can also find it with a little searching, at the 'Red Hot Jazz' website.
In a different mood altogether is a fascinating version by Kenny Davern, leading a piano and drums trio at Hanratty's NYC in 1981. I don't know exactly how you might access this one as I have it on a CHAZ JAZZ LP from that period and it may be unavailable on CD. Suffice to say it's played at a measured pace with beautiful interplay from within the trio.
If you liked the Peplowski and Fountain versions, these two versions from Ellington and Davern are a must.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2010-11-18 05:09
>> Not necessarily with the music I play and listen to, and not with the piece in question. <<
Yes, all I meant was that, it was so common with other "similar" music (i.e. other songs) so it doesn't really sound different to me in yet another song.
>> and you are entitled to disagree of course. <<
I don't disagree. I just said 'what' it adds, not 'why' they added it. Whether adding that was meaningful to anyone listening, I think it was for many people who head that usual whole tone "surprise" change. When I heard it, I just thought "Oh that".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
