Favourite rhythm sections

[Rcartes]

What are people's favourite rhythm sections? Mine, by far, is the Herman First Herd's: Ralph Burns, Billy Bauer, Chubby Jackson and Davey Tough. Absolutely peerless, mainly because of Jackson and Tough (though Tough's replacement, Don Lamond, was no slouch), swinging like the proverbial.

But others? Clearly, the long-term Basie section (Basie/Green/Page/Jones) must figure very highly, as would Miles' from the Kind of Blue era (Bill Evans or Wynton Kelly/Paul Chambers/Philly Joe/Jimmy Cobb). And would you count the Jarrett Standards trio as a rythm section? It's surely rather more than that!

Finally, two personal favourites: from the 1940s, Al Haig/Tommy Potter/Tiny Khan (or Max Roach), and from the late 20s/early 30s, Luis Russell's group: Russell/Will Johnson/Pops Foster/Paul Barbarin.

Interestingly, when I set this question on a US forum a few years ago, almost no one knew anything before the Miles Davis period: knowledge of earlier jazz was pathetically inadequate.

PS: I was going to label this "The greatest ..." but realised that would be too definitive in what's really a subjective matter.

[Beef Oven!]

Jaco Pastorius and Peter Erskine. Or just Jaco on his own!

Just listen to Peter Erskine in this performance, one of the best drummers ever - orgasmic!!

[Serial_Apologist]

Herbie Hancock on piano, Ron Carter on bass, and Tony Williams, drums, with the Miles Davis Quintet from 1964 to 1968 - for changing the interactive relationship between rhythm section and lead in relatively straight ahead jazz the way Ornette Coleman already had.

[Ian Thumwood]

I totally agree with R Cartes' suggestions.

The Herman band of the late 1940s was simply one of the greatest big bands ever and the First Herd has always struck me as a significant marker in the quality of musicianship. Listen to most of Herman's contemporaries and I think you will find that this band was far tighter and more cohesive. Listening to their white contemporaries, the experience must have been shocking.

The original Count Basie rhythm section is a no brainer, probably because this band represented the most significant development in jazz between Armstrong and Parker. There are rhythm sections before Basie and those that came afterwards. It is the greatest rhythm section in jazz, no doubt. I would also suggest that the whole notion of rhythm sections should mean that this thread is dominated by big bands. I also concur about the Luis Russell orchestra but some of the Fletcher Henderson records made in the 1930s also feature a rhythm section that is right on the money. They make an interesting contrast where the arrangements were later performed by Goodman and the latter's rhythm section was the Achilles heel of the 1930s band. as it lacked cohesion. The 1940s band Goodman laid was exceptional and when he had Mel Powell, John Simmons, Charlie Christian and Sid Catlett in the rhythm section it is alleged that Goodman sacked the drummer because they took the attention away from the clarinetist. One musician in that band suggested that Goodman could not control that rhythm section.

In any discussion, Miles is going to crop up. I totally agree with SA but with the earlier bands, I must admit that I much prefer hearing Wynton Kelly on piano than either Red Garland or Bill Evans. Kelly is the ultimate "small group" pianist and I always feel worked more for the band when it came to comping that anyone else. I am surprised that no one had mentioned Charlie Mingus and Dannie Richmond yet.

The contemporary scene is a bit more controversial and I feel that the whole concept of having a great rhythm section has tended to go out of the conversation. It is almost as if the idea of having a rhythm section that swings is old fashioned. I look at who is playing drums on the contemporary records I buy and there are few line up where you get a consistent piano / bass / drums these days. Some bassists tend to work a lot with one particular drummer yet there is very much a mix and match element in so many recordings these days that the combination of players in regular groups seems rare. I always liked it when Marc Johnson and Peter Erskine played together in groups like Bass Desires and John Abercrombie's trio back in the 1980s. So much of the current scene seems geared to either fusion-type bands or the whole, introspective ECM type stuff with those "knitting needle" style of drummers where comparison to the likes of Basie or Miles second quintet style of swinging is eschewed. I have been listening to Steve Lehman's "Mise en abime" this week where Tyshawn Sorey is on drums and I felt that this music had an edge and energy to it that is missing from so much contemporary jazz.

[Serial_Apologist]

The original Count Basie rhythm section is a no brainer, probably because this band represented the most significant development in jazz between Armstrong and Parker. There are rhythm sections before Basie and those that came afterwards. It is the greatest rhythm section in jazz, no doubt.

I would think every generation came up with innovations that intended to top those of previous generations - what more signifies progress? - up until the present day, that is, when many of the ideas of progress have hit the buffers of disillusionment; and I put that down to a Postmodernist apologism for progress's reversal in many areas of life, not just music or the arts. You won't find many parents saying (as mine did) "We want things to be better for our offspring than they were for us our our parents". This may seem farfetched, but as an unreconstructed modernist pining for beyond capitalism as generalisation for me it still holds true, evidenced by where life as a whole seems to be in a downward direction.

I am surprised that no one had mentioned Charlie Mingus and Dannie Richmond yet.

Good point, Ian.

The contemporary scene is a bit more controversial and I feel that the whole concept of having a great rhythm section has tended to go out of the conversation. It is almost as if the idea of having a rhythm section that swings is old fashioned. I look at who is playing drums on the contemporary records I buy and there are few line up where you get a consistent piano / bass / drums these days. Some bassists tend to work a lot with one particular drummer yet there is very much a mix and match element in so many recordings these days that the combination of players in regular groups seems rare. I always liked it when Marc Johnson and Peter Erskine played together in groups like Bass Desires and John Abercrombie's trio back in the 1980s. So much of the current scene seems geared to either fusion-type bands or the whole, introspective ECM type stuff with those "knitting needle" style of drummers where comparison to the likes of Basie or Miles second quintet style of swinging is eschewed. I have been listening to Steve Lehman's "Mise en abime" this week where Tyshawn Sorey is on drums and I felt that this music had an edge and energy to it that is missing from so much contemporary jazz.

Having experienced the likes of Milford Graves and Don Moye who went "beyond" relatively simple swing generating into a more fluctuating approach to the perceptability of pulse and momentum (closer to how the heart beat fluctuates perhaps), and the varying ways in which the likes of Tony Oxley, Tony Levin, Tony Marsh and Han Bennink have dealt with this aspect, I have to say both approaches are valid, and that swing will probably be updated in its execution by interacting with its more complex "successor", the way fusion drumming injected jazz swing sophistication into Fusion after gestating in some of the more interesting blues rock bands here in the 1960s.

[Ian Thumwood]

Yes, but the thread is about rhythm sections and not just drummers.

I concur with your comment about the "free jazz " drummers but your list sums up what was happening 40-50 years ago. The fact that there are no longer so many long serving groups injazz means that a lot of the "great rhythm sections" do not have the opportunity to develop. I think the best example is the American bass and drummer who share the same surname but are no related. They are always great together. I have forgotten their names.

One other great rhythm section to be added. I always love Eric Revis, Joey Calderazzo and Jeff "Tain" Watts with Branford Marsalis. Watts is an absolute monster but when I have heard him perform live I am always struck by the range of his dynamics and shear craftsmanship. This band was together for a long while and has only recently been broken up.

The curious thing with the current scene is that no one seems to think beyond one project. I like to see musicians mix things up yet the absence of bands which have a long life span has served to undermine the whole notion of star rhythm sections.

the Basie rhythm section was incredible and has always seemed like a massive sea change in jazz for me. Everything before this sound "vintage" whereas the Basie band seems to reach right in to much of the 1950s. If you like, it was the blueprint for so many other big bands, right from the 1940s where you can hear the influence of Basie on bands such as Lucky Millinder - try "Mason Flyer."

The other "great" rhythm section has to be the once Ellington assembled in the 50's and 60's when he had bassists like Jimmy Woode and Aaron Bell as well as the terrific Sam Woodyard on drums. Ellington is, in my opinion, the most under-rated pianist in jazz and is overlooked as a soloist. Without Ellington, there is no Monk or Andrew Hill.

[Quarky]

I guess the term rhythm section inevitably dates the band to the 1950's and earlier, before matters got freed up.

Not a great fan of Oscar Peterson, but in terms of rhythmic excitement, and highly integrated instruments, I would rate Oscar's groups as truly great stand alone rhythm sections.

[Rcartes]

I totally agree with R Cartes' suggestions.

The Herman band of the late 1940s was simply one of the greatest big bands ever and the First Herd has always struck me as a significant marker in the quality of musicianship. Listen to most of Herman's contemporaries and I think you will find that this band was far tighter and more cohesive. Listening to their white contemporaries, the experience must have been shocking.

The original Count Basie rhythm section is a no brainer, probably because this band represented the most significant development in jazz between Armstrong and Parker. There are rhythm sections before Basie and those that came afterwards. It is the greatest rhythm section in jazz, no doubt. I would also suggest that the whole notion of rhythm sections should mean that this thread is dominated by big bands. I also concur about the Luis Russell orchestra but some of the Fletcher Henderson records made in the 1930s also feature a rhythm section that is right on the money. They make an interesting contrast where the arrangements were later performed by Goodman and the latter's rhythm section was the Achilles heel of the 1930s band. as it lacked cohesion. The 1940s band Goodman laid was exceptional and when he had Mel Powell, John Simmons, Charlie Christian and Sid Catlett in the rhythm section it is alleged that Goodman sacked the drummer because they took the attention away from the clarinetist. One musician in that band suggested that Goodman could not control that rhythm section.

In any discussion, Miles is going to crop up. I totally agree with SA but with the earlier bands, I must admit that I much prefer hearing Wynton Kelly on piano than either Red Garland or Bill Evans. Kelly is the ultimate "small group" pianist and I always feel worked more for the band when it came to comping that anyone else. I am surprised that no one had mentioned Charlie Mingus and Dannie Richmond yet.

The contemporary scene is a bit more controversial and I feel that the whole concept of having a great rhythm section has tended to go out of the conversation. It is almost as if the idea of having a rhythm section that swings is old fashioned. I look at who is playing drums on the contemporary records I buy and there are few line up where you get a consistent piano / bass / drums these days. Some bassists tend to work a lot with one particular drummer yet there is very much a mix and match element in so many recordings these days that the combination of players in regular groups seems rare. I always liked it when Marc Johnson and Peter Erskine played together in groups like Bass Desires and John Abercrombie's trio back in the 1980s. So much of the current scene seems geared to either fusion-type bands or the whole, introspective ECM type stuff with those "knitting needle" style of drummers where comparison to the likes of Basie or Miles second quintet style of swinging is eschewed. I have been listening to Steve Lehman's "Mise en abime" this week where Tyshawn Sorey is on drums and I felt that this music had an edge and energy to it that is missing from so much contemporary jazz.

I pretty much agree with you on everything in your post, Ian, except for your advocacy of Charlie Mingus. For me, whatever his other gifts, he was a profoundly unswinging bass player - think of the Quintet of the Year (Bird, Diz, Bud Powell, Mingus and Max Roach at Massey Hall). Those recordings are badly let down by the bass playing: someone like Tomy Potter would have been a much better choice (apparently, Mingus pissed off the other musicians by insisting on being right next to the recording mike, spoiling the balance.

[burning dog]

I may prefer a Wynton Kelly solo to a Red Garland one but you cant beat these as a unit IMO

[Braunschlag]

Jaco Pastorius and Peter Erskine. Or just Jaco on his own!

Just listen to Peter Erskine in this performance, one of the best drummers ever - orgasmic!!

Jaco, on his own - perfect, he didn't need anyone else. When I ran school big bands I eventually came to the conclusion that bass and drums were plenty thanks! Guitars struggled with flat keys and pianists were all neurotic. The first time I ever heard the Word of Mouth big band I didn't even notice there was no piano or guitar. Women and rhythm section first!

[cloughie]

Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker, John McVie and Mick Fleetwood.

[DracoM]

Percy Heath and Connie Kay would have to be in mine somewhere.

[Richard Barrett]

Herbie Hancock on piano, Ron Carter on bass, and Tony Williams, drums, with the Miles Davis Quintet from 1964 to 1968

That would be my answer too, without hesitation.

[cloughie]

I guess the term rhythm section inevitably dates the band to the 1950's and earlier, before matters got freed up.

Not a great fan of Oscar Peterson, but in terms of rhythmic excitement, and highly integrated instruments, I would rate Oscar's groups as truly great stand alone rhythm sections.

Ray Brown and Ed Thigpen though Herb Ellis or Barney Kessel did a good job before he decided on drums rather than guitar.

[Serial_Apologist]

That would be my answer too, without hesitation.

Most of the, for me, greatest rhythm sections consist of those which have built on that one. For me it's difficult to see how jazz standards can be played by ignoring what that particular grouping achieved and yet having something new to add. One runs the "risk" of moving beyond what some will see as a threshold defining the limitations of "jazz", though usually, ime, finding it difficult to specify precisely where the break comes for them - but I think that's more a case of the artist being not ahead of his or her time, but of most people being behind theirs, as it has been succintly put.