The place for jazz videos

[BLUESNIK'S REVOX]

"Blues Walk" is something of a Bluenote classic, not because of any deep profundity but because it epitomises a certain Bluenote groove. And as Ian says, that on it's own terms is really enjoyable. I've got one of those eight album box sets of Lou's dates up to about 1960. These are more interesting to me for their sidemen, Kenny Dorham, Donald Byrd, Horace Parlan etc etc, but are all OK. I find LD somewhat over sweet on ballads, but livable with. Art Pepper dismissed him as just an updated Louis Jordon, which actually may not be such a bad thing.

As to SA's thought about insecurity and competitive technique, I've been listening to Hubert Fol, a French alto player who was one of the first Europeans to really pick up on Bird. Despite his useful chops he's not at all flashy maybe because he also had a big Johnny Hodges affection. He stopped playing in the 60s because of "mental issues", but interesting in his own way. Lovely version of "You go to my head" which I may suggest to JRR

[Ian Thumwood]

These records had a broader, popular appeal. I totally get the comparison with Louis Jordan but only from the perspective that he was another alto player who sought to bridge jazz and pop. Sixty years later, I think this idea is probably lost of most of the jazz audience but it is really no different from , say, Dave Sanborn although Donaldson was doing this through bop. The stuff with the organ dominated groups are OK although I think there are intonation issues on the record i have and I do not find Tommy Turrentine to be more than average. To my ears, the combination of Bird and Soul Jazz is slightly incongruous although in a way that I find amusing. The music is not too deep and has a feel good quality about it. In my opinion some of these Blue Note organ groups can be uneven. Always wish I had bought some Big John Patton when they were available and think some kind of apogee was reached with Fred Jackson@s Hootin & Tootin which swapped a refraction of Parker for jazz which reflected early Coltrane.

I quite like groups with organs in and would definitely argue that they have their own criteria as to what is successful with groove being the key element against which this stuff is judged. It is populist and some of Donaldson's material could be slight. However, if you don't find it enjoyable, you are missing the point. I expect this stuff probably helped finance records by the likes of Andrew Hill and would not be surprised if it had an audience from outside jazz.



From the remarks Wynton made, Donaldson was no slouch as a musician and was respected by his peers. I get the impression that he was good company and amusing to chat to in a curmudgeonly sort of way. Marsalis was clearly amused by him I think he would have been a rewarding interviewee.

[Serial_Apologist]

S A

I think the point of Donaldson was that he was looking to maintain the connection between jazz and thr general public. Sure, many musicians of his generation had bags of technique but Donaldson's music in the 1960s sought to reconnect with a more mainstream audience. He was really vociferous about the music having a groove. Maybe more populist than Cannonball. Nothing to dislike about his music . It was always about enjoyment.

Fair comment.