Tubby Hayes Interview on Youtube (1960)

[Serial_Apologist]

in the audio, young tubby sounds like someone from the 'seven up' docu series imo ...bless him.

(fwiw, 'seven up docu' tracked a bunch of people, over time, to see where they ended up, and (possibly) why).

Don't remember that one, hsf

[simonspill]

Anybody heard this? Anyone remember it from 1960?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QHmTu451gM

This was broadcast as part of BBC Network Three's Jazz Session on Wednesday November 9th 1960. It was recorded at Studio B5, Broadcasting House, Portland Place on Tuesday October 25th 1960. The interviewer is unidentified. Tubby received a payment of £5.5s for this appearance.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

that would be 5 Guineas then .... and thank you for that biographer's [i assume simon] detailed knowledge ...

[simonspill]

that would be 5 Guineas then .... and thank you for that biographer's [i assume simon] detailed knowledge ...

Yes, 'tis I.

The interview is an excellent barometer of Hayes' musical thoughts at the time. "Tubby's Groove" was released in June 1960 and gained lots of critical praise, with many critics aligning Tubbs to Coltrane. He was seriously checking out both Coltrane and Johnny Griffin, and both influences can be heard on "Tubby's Groove" and "Tubby's New Groove".

However.....Tubby wasn't as convinced by the early Coltrane Impulse LP's and on another Beeb interview from January 1963, he says he thinks that he "got it wrong" about Trane leading the way and cites Rollins as the current front runner on tenor.

These surviving BBC interviews also illustrate very well what a nice, genuine and modest man Tubby was.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

"got it wrong" about Trane leading the way and cites Rollins as the current front runner on tenor.

must say that i agree on the whole [duck]

[burning dog]

Sonny seems impossible to copy!

Both Hayes and Joe Henderson seemed later to tread a middle path between those tenor giants.

Thanks for the extra info Simon

[simonspill]

Sonny seems impossible to copy!

Both Hayes and Joe Henderson seemed later to tread a middle path between those tenor giants.

Thanks for the extra info Simon

I think a strong argument can be made that Tubby effectively synthesised elements from Getz, Rollins and Trane to come up with his mature style. Ultimately he was his own man, but he was strongly influenced by all of them at one point or another. His ballad playing always tipped the hat to Getz and I think in the sheer clout of his up-tempo work he was every bit the equal to Rollins and Coltrane. Significantly he used very few devices that directly echo their work and did what I've always admired in truly great jazz players, he took the inspiration of these giants to help him find his own voice. I also think that musicians outside of the US sometimes do this better than those right in there among the changing fashions.
Other British tenorists stand out; Dick Morrissey, who blended a love of all the 1950s greats to come up with a beautiful natural sounding style. Skid, who worships Trane but has always stressed his inspiration above rote copying. Another is Art Themen, who I was working with on Tuesday night. He's like a mini-encyclopedia of jazz tenor with all sorts of bits echoing Webster, Trane, Sonny, Dexter and more outside players too.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

Other British tenorists stand out; Dick Morrissey, who blended a love of all the 1950s greats to come up with a beautiful natural sounding style. Skid, who worships Trane but has always stressed his inspiration above rote copying. Another is Art Themen, who I was working with on Tuesday night. He's like a mini-encyclopedia of jazz tenor with all sorts of bits echoing Webster, Trane, Sonny, Dexter and more outside players too.

well said!

[burning dog]

I agree Tubby never swallowed whole the Coltrane system like so many others did (mostly US musicians), he was not a Rollins copyist, had the speed of Griffin but sounded nothing like him. He was of the generation of Joe Henderson though his early importance as a British hard bopper with the Couriers leads people to imagine he was significantly older (in fact only 2 years in it). I think they were "in a similar place" in the mid late sixties, not that there was copying involved.

PS

Ive just found an internet reference( by Simon) to Hayes and Henderson treading a middle ground between Rollins and Coltrane. I think the point made is they were between those players approaches to playing IMO not they took bits of the "giants" personal styles, but I wasn't quoting this article in my last post ...honest!!!

http://www.jazzeddie.f2s.com/tubby_hayes.htm

[Quarky]

I think a strong argument can be made that Tubby effectively synthesised elements from Getz, Rollins and Trane to come up with his mature style. Ultimately he was his own man, but he was strongly influenced by all of them at one point or another.

Other British tenorists stand out; .....Art Themen, who I was working with on Tuesday night. He's like a mini-encyclopedia of jazz tenor with all sorts of bits echoing Webster, Trane, Sonny, Dexter and more outside players too.

I would be interested to know how Jazz musicians develop, in this day and age with Jazz having splintered into various types and kinds, with free Jazz, crossover/ fusion, new orleans, hard bop, etc. I guess it may have been easier in Tubby's day, when there was just one type of Jazz current, and musicians could be easily compared. But these days with the benefit of history, I would say Trane and Sonny are just about as different as chalk and cheese. But then I'm not a practising Jazz musician. But I can certainly see Art Themen's point of view.

[Ian Thumwood]

Having played both parts of these interviews the comments are very much of their era and, in my opinion, seem to echo some of the entrenched views of this time. They almost echo the kind of remarks that Trevor Cooper used to indulge in on the old messageboard and share some of the same ridiculous prejudices. The comments are fascinating but I think are pretty narrow-minded and (setting aside the image of a "Pete n' Dud" type sketch that the interview conjurs up) unintentionally amusing with the passage of 52 years. Granted that Hayes' must have been hugely exciting in live performance, his music is further away from us than the styles he considered dated in 1960!

Picking upon Simon's interiguing comment about Tubby's assessment of Coltrane and listening to the remark that, in 1960, Coltrane was on the right track (!!), I have always felt that Hayes' owed a lot to Hank Mobley with regard to his tone and perhaps improvised line (can't write music so I would be intrigued to read if Simon has ever transcribed both soloist's work to confirm this) but with the aggressive attack of the under-appreciated Johnny Griffin. Although there are moments where Tubby goes pretty outside on "Mexican Green" , most of what I have heard of him on record is firmly in a "Modern Jazz" tradition and I would never have placed him in a generation that took their cues from 60's Coltrane. I know he is supposed to have flirted with the Avant Garde but , for the most part, I feel Hayes belonged to that generation of musicians from prior to the Miles Davis 2nd Quintet which was such a line in the sand. His music doesn't sound "modern" today the way that the likes of Wayne Shorter does. He was the archetypal "be-bopper."

It's a shame to read some of the comments here suggesting the reduced influence of Coltrane these days although I do concur with the fact that Sonny Rollins does seem to be more and more relevent concerning the way jazz has developed. I was at a solo John Surman gig on Tuesday and he embarked on a blues which was pure Sonny - another piece mutated into a calypso in a similar fashion. There was a thread a few months back that discussed the same matter. Like Keith Jarrett, I feel there is something fundamental about Rollin's approach to improvisation which is timeless and basically beyond any school of jazz as it is a way of expressing an improvised line to perhaps the fullest potential. Coltrane at full stretch is something to behold and his thorough understanding of scales extending the intervals to suggest different keys was essential in broadening harmony beyond be-bop. This harmonic development has defined the best jazz since the early sixties even if it had it's roots with the likes of Yusef Lateef's exploration of exotic scale.

The comments I almost took exception to in the interview appertained to his attitude to earlier forms of jazz. How different this is these days where I think nearly all jazz musicians have a better grasp of what came before Charlie Parker and can talk affectionately about jazz from the 20's and 30's. Even when being favourable to Louis Armstrong, the reference of Coleman Hawkins illustrates a perceived difference in style between pre and post-war musicians. Listen to the recordings Hawkins cut in the 40s-60's is suggestive that he continued to evolve and nowadays Hayes' approach seems more akin of Coleman than some of today's more harmonically and rhythmically innovative tenor players. (Brecker, Lovano, Donny McCaslin, Chris Potter, Walter Smith, David S Ware, etc, etc.) Play any record by Charlie Parker and it sounds pretty vintage and of another era in 2012!

The final fascinating comment was how he learned to play the vibes and the fact that Victor Feldman was seen as offering the potential for the future of the instrument in 1960. It was also amusing to hear his describe milt Jackson as the most eminent musician on this instrument - a somewhat pointed snub towards Lionel Hampton! I must admit that I find Hayes' vibes playing to be perfunctory but i suppose this comes with the territory if you are familiar with Bobby Hutcherson, Gary Burton ,Steve Nelson or Stefon Harris who have all arrived on the scene since this time. Feldman is someone I am aware of by reputation . I must prefer his work on flute which I do feel is worthy of praise.

All told, the interview was fascinating even if very much a period piece.

[simonspill]

Having played both parts of these interviews the comments are very much of their era and, in my opinion, seem to echo some of the entrenched views of this time. They almost echo the kind of remarks that Trevor Cooper used to indulge in on the old messageboard and share some of the same ridiculous prejudices.

Picking upon Simon's interiguing comment about Tubby's assessment of Coltrane and listening to the remark that, in 1960, Coltrane was on the right track (!!), I have always felt that Hayes' owed a lot to Hank Mobley with regard to his tone and perhaps improvised line (can't write music so I would be intrigued to read if Simon has ever transcribed both soloist's work to confirm this)

Ah, T. Cooper - my nemesis! I'd forgotten about him (thankfully).

Yes, Mobley was a huge influence on both Ronnie and Tubby and the Jazz Couriers and Scott's own bands played his compositions. There is certainly some similarity in linear construction between Mobley and Hayes, although Tubby of course had a far more assertive sounding articulation and delivery. I always felt Ronnie was in many ways far more idiosyncratic than Tubby - and had a more gritty attack. Go back and listen to the Jazz Couriers first album and you'll hear what I mean. It remained that way into the 60s too, as Sonnymoon for Two on 100% demonstrates. I think it was Brian Priestley's review in Jazz Monthly (1967) that said Ronnie cuts Tubby on this track - although I don't agree I can see what he was driving at. However, Priestley rarely had a good word to say about Tubby at the time, being one of the "far too many notes" brigade.

[Ian Thumwood]

I always felt Ronnie was in many ways far more idiosyncratic than Tubby - and had a more gritty attack. Go back and listen to the Jazz Couriers first album and you'll hear what I mean. It remained that way into the 60s too, as Sonnymoon for Two on 100% demonstrates. I think it was Brian Priestley's review in Jazz Monthly (1967) that said Ronnie cuts Tubby on this track - although I don't agree I can see what he was driving at. However, Priestley rarely had a good word to say about Tubby at the time, being one of the "far too many notes" brigade.

Simon

Never really been grabbed by Scott's playing and the early "be-bop" recordings seem enthusiastic at best. (There was a Django track on JRR tonight which was brilliant and demonstrated that some French players were far more relaxed in their approach to the nervous energy that comes from some of the late 40's jam sessions made in London with everyone falling over each other to quote Charlie Parker.) Scott is one of those musicians who I don't dislike but have never been too enthused about enough to explore. He was also someone who tried too hard to give the appearance of being an "archetypal" jazz musician who had disdain for other working musicians. In the end, you just get tired of reading / hearing his comments and the casual " Music Hall humour" laced with references to drink and drugs. In the end, these kind of comments have always got in the way of the music for me and ultimately it just seems tiring. It wasn't as if he was Lee Mack when it came to humour either.

I must admit to much preferring Haye's work which is far more varied in it's input than Scott's. The attraction of Hayes' music is the attack and dynamics. Although there are plenty of saxophonists on the British scene like Harriott, John Surman or Iain Ballamy (or even Soweto Kinch although I am not fan of the Raps) whose work is compelling and original, Hayes always scores because his ability to swing which is something he had akin to Johhny Griffin. Must admitting to preferring listening to Hayes more than Mobley - the latter has everything sown up technically but lacks the aggression of Hayes' best work although I have heard some recordings a friend loaned me where Hayes seems uninterested which surprised me. (I think they stemmed from studio recordings made for radio broadcast.) The appeal for the music on the Hayes CD's I have in my collection (about 4-5) is the aggression and energy of the playing. I also think that he very much had his own voice and style of composition that gave him an edge on his contemporaries.

The whole argument about one style of jazz being superior to others is nonsense . As a rule, I feel that jazz criticism has improved considerably over the last 20-odd years and comments like "far too many notes" are given less credibility. A bit taken aback to read that Brian Priestley wrote this since as he is a musician himself, I thought he might have been more aware of what was going on. I suppose you could still level than argument at some of today's players like Brad Mehldau but I feel it really misses the point about what the music is about. Even the vast majority of the comments made in the Youtube clips would probably be subject to revision if Hayes was alive today and I don't feel they are representative of the situation these days where most jazz musicians would not make these kind of distinctions between jazz recorded in different eras. From the pre-1965 era, the only record of a musician a similar bite working in the UK much have been Bogey Gaynair but I stand to be corrected as this is not an era I am particularly familiar with. In summary, I prefer Hayes as he ticks more boxes.

[simonspill]

Simon

Never really been grabbed by Scott's playing and the early "be-bop" recordings seem enthusiastic at best. (There was a Django track on JRR tonight which was brilliant and demonstrated that some French players were far more relaxed in their approach to the nervous energy that comes from some of the late 40's jam sessions made in London with everyone falling over each other to quote Charlie Parker.) Scott is one of those musicians who I don't dislike but have never been too enthused about enough to explore. He was also someone who tried too hard to give the appearance of being an "archetypal" jazz musician who had disdain for other working musicians. In the end, you just get tired of reading / hearing his comments and the casual " Music Hall humour" laced with references to drink and drugs. In the end, these kind of comments have always got in the way of the music for me and ultimately it just seems tiring. It wasn't as if he was Lee Mack when it came to humour either.

I must admit to much preferring Haye's work which is far more varied in it's input than Scott's. The attraction of Hayes' music is the attack and dynamics. Although there are plenty of saxophonists on the British scene like Harriott, John Surman or Iain Ballamy (or even Soweto Kinch although I am not fan of the Raps) whose work is compelling and original, Hayes always scores because his ability to swing which is something he had akin to Johhny Griffin. Must admitting to preferring listening to Hayes more than Mobley - the latter has everything sown up technically but lacks the aggression of Hayes' best work although I have heard some recordings a friend loaned me where Hayes seems uninterested which surprised me. (I think they stemmed from studio recordings made for radio broadcast.) The appeal for the music on the Hayes CD's I have in my collection (about 4-5) is the aggression and energy of the playing. I also think that he very much had his own voice and style of composition that gave him an edge on his contemporaries.

The whole argument about one style of jazz being superior to others is nonsense . As a rule, I feel that jazz criticism has improved considerably over the last 20-odd years and comments like "far too many notes" are given less credibility. A bit taken aback to read that Brian Priestley wrote this since as he is a musician himself, I thought he might have been more aware of what was going on. I suppose you could still level than argument at some of today's players like Brad Mehldau but I feel it really misses the point about what the music is about. Even the vast majority of the comments made in the Youtube clips would probably be subject to revision if Hayes was alive today and I don't feel they are representative of the situation these days where most jazz musicians would not make these kind of distinctions between jazz recorded in different eras. From the pre-1965 era, the only record of a musician a similar bite working in the UK much have been Bogey Gaynair but I stand to be corrected as this is not an era I am particularly familiar with. In summary, I prefer Hayes as he ticks more boxes.

As they say, horses for courses. I have always liked Ronnie. Not sure that he ever set out to be a comedian, but then again I'm not sure that Lee Mack ever set out to be a world class tenorist! I've always gained the distinct impression that Ronnie commanded a great deal of musical respect, both by English and American players, and I'm sure that the list of the good and the great who praised him (Zoot, Stitt, Kirk, Griffin, Moody, Coleman, Berg) weren't the kind to offer plaudits where none were deserved. Likewise, all the front runners over here (Wellins, Skid, Art etc) always speak highly of Ronnie, and appear to have the upmost respect for him as a musician and not simply as "one of the chaps". I only heard him live once, but have listened to virtually everything he recorded, right from those embryonic Bebop things from the late 40s to the very Berg and Brecker oriented stuff he was playing in the early 90s, and think he really did possess a beautiful talent as a saxophonist. I also think of the fact that it was Ronnie and not Tubby who got the job with Francy Boland/Kenny Clarke. There's a live recording from Paris where Griffin, Tony Coe and Ronnie play long solos on Sax No End and they ALL sound bloomin' marvellous!

Think that's me done here now.

[grippie]

Ah, T. Cooper - my nemesis! I'd forgotten about him (thankfully).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbradio3/MP7054550