Horace Silver etc on Stan Tracey - 1966...

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Thought this was interesting. Part of a 1966 Blindfold test by the Horace Silver Quintet (inc Woody Shaw & Tyrone Washington) when they played the UK (inc Ronnie's) and were recorded by BBC TV (now where's that tape?)....

"AM. Mayhem”— Stan Tracey Quartet (Stan Tracey—piano, Bobby Wellins—tenor, Jeff Clyne—bass, Jackie Dougan—drums). Composed by Stan Tracey. From “Jazz SuiteUnder Milk Wood”, Columbia.

Washington: Is that Stan Tracey on piano?

Silver: That’s what I was thinking, too. Mm—bass player’s sharp, isn’t he? Not Johnny Griffin on tenor, is it?

Washington: No. Whoever it is has been influenced bv Rouse. Is this Ronnie Scott, I wonder?

Silver: No—could be Tubby Hayes, though.

Ridley: There’s another one—I heard him on the radio. Sounds like old crazy Tony Crombie on drums.

Silver: Yes—that’s got to be Stan Tracey. I don’t know of anybody else that sounds as much like Monk as he does—even in the States. Even Randy Weston—he’s out of Monk, but he’s got more of his own thing going. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t Ronnie, though, because I’ve been hearing a lot of him—almost every night.

Tomkins: (giving details): The tenor player’s name was Bobby Wellins.

Ridley: Yes, that’s who was on the radio —playing with the big band.

Silver: It’s a strange thing—I’ve commented to a few people in the club about this, too. When Stan plays with his Trio, or behind Ronnie or Tubby, it’s very evident that he loves Monk. He borrows a lot of harmonies, phrasings and whatnot from Monk. Yet—when I hear him play behind Ernestine Anderson, he doesn’t sound like Monk. In other words, he doesn’t use the same chord formations behind the vocalists. It’s like hearing another piano player in the same night. Which is kinda odd, you know.

Humphries: Maybe it’s because he can’t use those things. Maybe she doesn’t want him to use them.

Silver: Well—take myself, for instance. I was inspired by Monk, but more so by Bud Powell. And, although I’ve found my own identity, I’ll play little things sometimes that remind me of Bud. If Stan, fine musician as he is, could branch off—with the Monk influence—but into something completely original, he would play that way in any context If Monk sat down behind Ernestine, it would still sound like Monk. That’s the point I’m trying to make.

Washington: I enjoyed the tenor playing. It seems like Rouse dominates, but I also hear Griffin in him—which is good.

Silver: It was a good group on that record. The bass player was swinging, and the whole rhythm section had a good groove. It wasn’t no exceptional composition—just a little blues lick. But the whole thing had a happy, popping feeling.

Ridley: The bass did sound nice. I like a bass player to break up his lines a little more, though, to have more of an interval between some of the notes. But, as you say, he had a nice groove. He kinda lost me for a minute when he went into his solo—but he got back on the track.

BN.

[Serial_Apologist]

Thought this was interesting. Part of a 1966 Blindfold test by the Horace Silver Quintet (inc Woody Shaw & Tyrone Washington) when they played the UK (inc Ronnie's) and were recorded by BBC TV (now where's that tape?)....

"AM. Mayhem”— Stan Tracey Quartet (Stan Tracey—piano, Bobby Wellins—tenor, Jeff Clyne—bass, Jackie Dougan—drums). Composed by Stan Tracey. From “Jazz SuiteUnder Milk Wood”, Columbia.

Washington: Is that Stan Tracey on piano?

Silver: That’s what I was thinking, too. Mm—bass player’s sharp, isn’t he? Not Johnny Griffin on tenor, is it?

Washington: No. Whoever it is has been influenced bv Rouse. Is this Ronnie Scott, I wonder?

Silver: No—could be Tubby Hayes, though.

Ridley: There’s another one—I heard him on the radio. Sounds like old crazy Tony Crombie on drums.

Silver: Yes—that’s got to be Stan Tracey. I don’t know of anybody else that sounds as much like Monk as he does—even in the States. Even Randy Weston—he’s out of Monk, but he’s got more of his own thing going. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t Ronnie, though, because I’ve been hearing a lot of him—almost every night.

Tomkins: (giving details): The tenor player’s name was Bobby Wellins.

Ridley: Yes, that’s who was on the radio —playing with the big band.

Silver: It’s a strange thing—I’ve commented to a few people in the club about this, too. When Stan plays with his Trio, or behind Ronnie or Tubby, it’s very evident that he loves Monk. He borrows a lot of harmonies, phrasings and whatnot from Monk. Yet—when I hear him play behind Ernestine Anderson, he doesn’t sound like Monk. In other words, he doesn’t use the same chord formations behind the vocalists. It’s like hearing another piano player in the same night. Which is kinda odd, you know.

Humphries: Maybe it’s because he can’t use those things. Maybe she doesn’t want him to use them.

Silver: Well—take myself, for instance. I was inspired by Monk, but more so by Bud Powell. And, although I’ve found my own identity, I’ll play little things sometimes that remind me of Bud. If Stan, fine musician as he is, could branch off—with the Monk influence—but into something completely original, he would play that way in any context If Monk sat down behind Ernestine, it would still sound like Monk. That’s the point I’m trying to make.

Washington: I enjoyed the tenor playing. It seems like Rouse dominates, but I also hear Griffin in him—which is good.

Silver: It was a good group on that record. The bass player was swinging, and the whole rhythm section had a good groove. It wasn’t no exceptional composition—just a little blues lick. But the whole thing had a happy, popping feeling.

Ridley: The bass did sound nice. I like a bass player to break up his lines a little more, though, to have more of an interval between some of the notes. But, as you say, he had a nice groove. He kinda lost me for a minute when he went into his solo—but he got back on the track.

BN.

Hadn't seen that previously, so thanks, BN. Telling how these fine Americans, far from dismissing the stuff ours were producing at the time, judge it on their own terms. And positively. Interesting too that Tyrone compares Bobby's playing with Charlie Rouse's - that comparison had never occurred to me, but in can see that now. Rather a pity they were presented with that particular track, nice though it is - they would have found more positive things to say re originality about the other tunes on that famous album, the one criticism many of the visitors had of ours was being too indebted to them, I'm sure about that.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

And ...a bit more on ...

"Raga Megha”—Joe Harriott Double Quintet (Joe Harriott—alto, Chris Taylor—flute, Eddie Blair—trumpet, John Mayer—violin, harpsichord, Pat Smythe—piano, Rick Laird—bass, Ganley—drums, Diwan Motihar—sitar, Chandrahas Paigankar—tamboura, Keshav Sathe—tabla). From “Indo—Jazz Suite”, Columbia.
Silver: Ravi Shankar. No, it can’t be. He’s never recorded with a jazz rhythm section, to my knowledge.

Ridley: Oh, no, this is John Mayer.

Washington: Yes, Joe Harriott’s IndoJazz.

Ridley: They played this composition at the concert we went to on Sunday at the Mermaid Theatre.

Shaw: It’s not the same trumpet player, though.

Silver: I’m not all that hip to Indian music, but I liked that. I enjoyed Joe Harriott’s playing, the piano solo was cute and, with the flute and everything, it was a nice piece of music. I can dig combining jazz with all types of music. I’ve been getting a lot of inspiration lately from different folk musics. The more the jazz musician travels abroad to various countries, the more ideas he can pick up.

Ridley: I liked that very much. In fact, I enjoyed the concert, too. Some of the things were interesting and some seemed kinda drawn out and boring. They laboured the point too much on a few things, and it never quite got off the ground. I used to play violin, and I’m very fond of the instrument. So when I hear someone like John Mayer who can really play it, man—it knocks me out. It calls for a very unorthodox fingering to be able to play these Indian scales, the ragas and what have you on the violin. And he played it beautifully—had a lot of control. Interesting experiment.

Shaw: This interpretation was much better than on the concert, because it had more of a jazz feel. I didn’t recognise it at first. The trumpet player was more or less a studio musician—a little too classical.

Washington: There’s just one thing about it that i haven’t really gotten used to—and that’s the pedal point you keep hearing.

Silver: Well, it’s the same thing Coltrane does—or used to do quite a bit on some of his modal–type stuff.

Shaw: You have to take into consideration, too—those cats change their scale any way they want it, but they keep that same tonality. We’ve got twelve tones—they’re limited, you can say. But they can alter the whole time mood and the colour—using that same drone. Like, they can change in the raga and be way out.

Washington: I just keep waiting for them to modulate into another key for a minute—I don’t know why.

Ridley: Yes, I can dig that.

Silver: Well, you know, a couple of years ago modal playing was quite popular What about those modal things that Miles used to play—I know he’s not playing ‘em so much now—or that ‘Trane used to play. Did you get that same feeling on them?

Washington: Like what, for instance? “So What”?

Silver: That sort of thing, yes. Although that does have a change.

Washington: There’s a bin change on that. Plus the way Miles and ‘Trane play—finding so many other notes."

BN.

[Ian Thumwood]

This was quite interesting to read but somewhat old news insofar as the post is trying too presuppose the attitudes of American musicians regarding their European counterparts. As jazz has evolved, the Americans have been more open to European musicians so that you are unlikely to encounter the kind of comments that Eddie Condon made in the 1930's.

It is a bit lazy to suggest that Stan Tracey sounds more like Monk than any other pianists, even from the perspective of 50 years ago, Certainly he comes out of Monk but it is really salutary to listen to discs such as the Avid compilation on Tracey's early work and compare it with his colleagues on the other side of the Atlantic. There are elements of this record where the music being produced by the British musicians was entirely derivative but "Little Klunk" is a fascinating record when you consider that it is exactly contemporary with the period before Monk gained universal approval with Columbia. To my ears, Tracey is probably a bit ahead of the curve on this record. Clearly Tracey had his ears open to Monk and the likes of Herbie Nichols and Mary Lou Williams too but I would suggest that Duke Ellington is almost as significant in many respects. Tracey's phrasing is also totally different from Monk. "Little klunk" is more than a match for Monk's Prestige records, for example although the Avid collection is not always as consistent.

I have been quite intrigued of late by Woody Shaw. Surely an example of a musician who deserves more credit and someone who has become increasingly obscure. A lot of his live performances are cropping up on albums of late although no one here seems to have picked up on this fact.

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

Huge admirer of Woody Shaw. There is some amazing live stuff on Youtube, particularly (for me) the quartet with Stanley Cowell, up there with Booker Little. Shaw had the ferocious stamina, technique, commitment and very personal approach that should have taken him to much greater recognition. Deeply saddening how it all ended.

[Ian Thumwood]

I had no idea that Woody Shaw placed in Silver's quintet and, like most people, my knowledge of him stems from the "Unity" album which I think is one of the very best that the label produced. He also crops up on "Grass Roots" by Andrew Hill although his reputation stems from records he made in the 1970s. This was a strange decade and one where I feel there are similarities to what is happening today with many musicians getting over-looked in favour of more peripheral stuff. I agree that it was tragic what happened to him yet the music he performed was not in vogue. The whole 1970's scenario is tragic with a great number of players who found themselves marginalised by taste when they were at their prime and lumbered with production values which were frequently unsympathetic. The Jimmy Heath biography picks up on this regarding the pressures in the Heath brothers band. What made it worse was that some of the more interesting players in the 1970s retreated to the lift scene which further marginalised the music. We could do with more musicians like Woody Shaw today.

Incidentally, I once had quite a lengthy conversation with Stanley Cowell after a gig and he was one of the nicest musicians I have encountered- a real gent. I think that only Dennis Irwin, Huw Warren and Uri Caine come close to being a communicative and interesting. Cowell was very enthusiastic about the music and very straight talking - a bit like Michael Brecker who similarly had the ability to express the music very lucidly and without mystique. It is fantastic when you encounter musicians like this and then discover that are just as much fans themselves as musicians. Cowell was a marked contrast from the likes of Kenny Werner who I found pretty intimidating and scarily eccentric or Tigran who was more interested in talking about how good he was as opposed engaging in a two way conversation. Stanley Cowell is another musician who I feel deserves more credit. He was staggeringly brilliant at the gig I heard and maybe somewhat at odds with your interview regarding of differences in ability each side of the Atlantic. Someone like Stanley Cowell is operating at the kind of level that few musicians in Europe manage to attain. I would put him in the same class as John Taylor of Bobo Stenson who are all working at an extremely high musical level. There are plenty of younger pianists who may be more lauded than Cowell but most of them aren't even close.