Stand-out years in swing history?

Everything about the swinging music we love to DJ

Moderators: Mr Awesomer, JesseMiner, CafeSavoy

Message
Author
User avatar
Eyeball
Posts: 1919
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:11 am
Contact:

#16 Post by Eyeball » Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:21 am

CafeSavoy wrote: But how can you exclude Mckinney Cotton Pickers, early Chick Webb, early Fletcher Henderson, and all the early hot bands of the early 30s.
They all pre-date the Swing era that he topiced about. Great bands, but he excluded them in the thread title.

Haydn
Posts: 1277
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 5:36 am
Location: London

#17 Post by Haydn » Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:49 am

dogpossum wrote:I'm going to answer this in reference to how I actually DJ, rather than how I listen to music at home ...

... I've noticed lately that I tend to move between years or periods when I'm DJing - it's a nice way of doing smooth transitions. I like the way the musical changes between periods make for obvious transitions.

So I might play:

- 50s Jimmy Witherspoon with Jay McShann
- 50s Basie with a shouter vocalist (Rushing perhaps)
- late 40s Basie instrumental
- early 40s Hampton (something fun and high energy)
- 30s Lunceford
- early 30s Ellington
- late 20s or perhaps something 'charleston'
- a modern band doing an early 30s/'sounds early 30s' song (Boilermakers perhaps)
- a modern band doing something that sounds both 'old' and modern (someone like Carol Ralph is good here) - I'd think of this as 'modern new orleans' in my head, though I know it's not an accurate description. From here I could go modern again, or...
- 30s Bechet
- 40s Ory
- something 'new orleans'/'swing' cross over (eg 'All Star Strut' (1940) by the Metronome All Stars or 'The Blues A' (1937) by Artie Shaw)
- mid 30s Andy Kirk (1936 or so)
- late 30s Ellington
- early 40s Artie Shaw
- mid 40s Louis Jordan
- some 'Kansas' vocal stuff from the mid to late 40s - Bus Moten or Julia Lee or Walter Brown with Jay McShann

- and then I'm back where I started - with the shouters. I could go on to the 'modern' stuff (ie 50s and later) or go back to the earlier stuff. I've noticed that by the time I get to this point I'm really relaxed and have a better idea of what the dancers are into. Then I tend to play a whole heap of that - get a bit more specific.
So you're moving between different bands and styles, checking out what the dancers are responding to. But I counted 17 different 'styles' there, so even if you only played one of each, it would take you about 50 minutes to complete the cycle. If you're doing a short set, that would use up most of your time wouldn't it, or have I misunderstood?

Haydn
Posts: 1277
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 5:36 am
Location: London

#18 Post by Haydn » Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:51 am

CafeSavoy wrote:... The Basie biography, good morning blues, also gives a great glimpse of KC, places on the chitlin circuit ...
What is, or was, 'the chitlin circuit' :?:

User avatar
dogpossum
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2003 10:42 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

#19 Post by dogpossum » Sun Jan 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Haydn wrote:So you're moving between different bands and styles, checking out what the dancers are responding to. But I counted 17 different 'styles' there, so even if you only played one of each, it would take you about 50 minutes to complete the cycle. If you're doing a short set, that would use up most of your time wouldn't it, or have I misunderstood?
Yeah, that's about right - an hour's set. And I noticed when I was writing that list (looking up past sets for reference) that I was using era/style/artist/bpm/'energy' to choose songs. All that and without a bunch of real dancers to watch!
I guess this is why a 2 hour set is nice. Though I find that if that first hour goes badly by the time I get to the end of it I'm 'right, that's it - where's the next DJ?' I did a few sets when I was just starting DJing, though, that were really long and I was the only DJ for a crowd of people who really wanted to dance. In that situation, if I can't get it together I think 'right, let's just start again from the beginning' and pull out a nice, safe hi-fi 50s Basie track that everyone loves. 'Every Day I have the Blues' (Breakfast Dance and BBQ version) was my go-to song for a while there. But that was for a crowd/scene that (at the time especially) favoured hi-fi and weren't so interested in Ye Olden Dayes.


I also noticed that I completely misread the thread title. Sorry.

And, I think that it'd be really interesting to 'visit'
CafeSavoy wrote:Mckinney Cotton Pickers, early Chick Webb, early Fletcher Henderson, and all the early hot bands of the early 30s.
Sure some of them are what I'd think of as 'pre-swing', but these guys are essential figures in 'swing history' so they seem utterly relevant. Also, utterly awesome.
... I keep thinking of those two volumes of Gunther Schuller's books. Reading through 'The Swing Era' made me realise how important the relationship between bands was - who left which band to start up with what band. Who heard such-and-such's band and was totally inspired. Who was taught to play what instrument by who. The role of managers, producers, venues in all this... I think I'd probably really like to sit in on a recording session or two if I had a time machine.


On a side track, Brian in Melbourne has done a couple of sets where he's played just one artist all night. He did a Basie set quite a few years ago that was a couple of hours long and absolutely freakin' awesome. 'One artist, many years' as an alternative theme?

CafeSavoy wrote: it's interesting to see which songs they keep in their book and how they've changed (e.g., old and new testament "Shorty George") and also which songs they didn't seem to repeat (e.g., "shout and feel it"). Ellington did alot of both since some of his songs were designed for specific instrumentalists and he would retire them until he had an instrumentalist who he felt could do it justice. Also Duke was open to ideas from the instrumentalists, so when Ray Nance joined the band he added to violin to C Jam Blues and it has pretty much stuck.
This is something that I find really interesting. Comparing (for example) Basie's later and earlier versions of the same iconic songs has been a really good way of learning not only about how swing music changed over the years, but also how band leadership was important. As a DJ, I like the fact that I can play the same song by the same band recorded in different decades and please two completely different groups of dancers. Kind of like a swing out itself - same step, completely different feel or look, depending on who's doing it with whom.




...all this kind of emphasises (for me) why Reyned's Yehoodi show (based on the Great Day photo) was so awesome. They were a group of people who were just in a photo together. But putting together the set demonstrated a whole series of more interesting connections.

User avatar
remysun
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:39 pm
Location: Motown

#20 Post by remysun » Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:05 pm

CafeSavoy wrote: And Duke was also open to influences outside his band as when his palette expanded after he heard Louis Armstrong in the 20s. Incidentally, lots of musicians changed after they heard Armstrong, I think Coleman Hawkins said he totally changed after he heard Armstrong.
This brings up another question. Why are musicians more open to outside influences than their audience? Sometimes the wrong crossover can actually alienate fans, but usually, the artist has to bring the music to the masses.

User avatar
CafeSavoy
Posts: 1138
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:25 pm
Location: Mobtown
Contact:

#21 Post by CafeSavoy » Sun Jan 18, 2009 8:16 pm

dogpossum wrote:
CafeSavoy wrote:Mckinney Cotton Pickers, early Chick Webb, early Fletcher Henderson, and all the early hot bands of the early 30s.
Sure some of them are what I'd think of as 'pre-swing', but these guys are essential figures in 'swing history' so they seem utterly relevant. Also, utterly awesome.
I agree that those artists are what i think of as proto-swing or early-swing, but if John wants to nickpick, the thread title is "Stand out years in swing history" and not "stand out years in the swing-era." People come to blows over where they draw the line, but i tend to agree with John Szwed who wrote:
John F. Szwed, Jazz 101 wrote: "The history of the swing era can be divided into two parts: the first, a period of pre-swing from 1924 to 1932, and the second, from 1932 to the mid-1950's. The two can be distinguished by the size of the bands and the relationship of their parts, the flowering of swing phrasing and rhythm, and the development of mature and individualized soloists. (The transition to a new kind of swing was probably smoother than it appears, but during the depression of 1930 to 1932, very few records were made, and thus very little documentation exists for this period of change.)" -- John F. Szwed, Jazz 101

User avatar
Eyeball
Posts: 1919
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:11 am
Contact:

#22 Post by Eyeball » Mon Jan 19, 2009 4:16 am

CafeSavoy wrote:but if John wants to nickpick, the thread title is "Stand out years in swing history" and not "stand out years in the swing-era."
I don't want to nit-pick and I want to "nickpick" even less.

If you went to a lecture or bought a CD called "Stand Out Years in Swing History" and the lecturer only discussed or the CD only presented music from 1924 through 1932, then called it "Swing history", would you feel you had been adequately served?

User avatar
CafeSavoy
Posts: 1138
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:25 pm
Location: Mobtown
Contact:

#23 Post by CafeSavoy » Mon Jan 19, 2009 4:23 am

Eyeball wrote:
CafeSavoy wrote:but if John wants to nickpick, the thread title is "Stand out years in swing history" and not "stand out years in the swing-era."
I don't want to nit-pick and I want to "nickpick" even less.

If you went to a lecture or bought a CD called "Stand Out Years in Swing History" and the lecturer only discussed or the CD only presented music from 1924 through 1932, then called it "Swing history", would you feel you had been adequately served?
That's a strawman argument and you know it. Of course if they were only going to cover the early part of swing music, it would be more appropriate to state so. Similarly, if someone presented a history of swing and left out Fletcher Henderson, early Chick Webb, and McKinney's Cotton Picker they would be a dilettante. You are trying to make an argument where one doesn't exist. I guess you still miss jivejunction.

User avatar
Eyeball
Posts: 1919
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:11 am
Contact:

#24 Post by Eyeball » Mon Jan 19, 2009 4:35 am

CafeSavoy wrote:
That's a strawman argument and you know it.
No, I don't know it.

I made my point. If you don't agree with it, fine. If I hurt your feelings, I apologize.

I'll defer to the famous Mr. Szwed. He'll give you the answer that you endorse. He's always on a steady course, so talk to Mr. Szwed.

User avatar
CafeSavoy
Posts: 1138
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:25 pm
Location: Mobtown
Contact:

#25 Post by CafeSavoy » Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:50 am

Eyeball wrote:
CafeSavoy wrote:
That's a strawman argument and you know it.
No, I don't know it.

I made my point. If you don't agree with it, fine. If I hurt your feelings, I apologize.

I'll defer to the famous Mr. Szwed. He'll give you the answer that you endorse. He's always on a steady course, so talk to Mr. Szwed.
Ha ha, now the emotional argument. But that's cool. But just to be clear. Are you saying that you can exclude Fletcher Henderson and early Chick Webb from swing history because they are before the swing-era?

User avatar
Eyeball
Posts: 1919
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:11 am
Contact:

#26 Post by Eyeball » Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:21 am

CafeSavoy wrote:
Ha ha, now the emotional argument. But that's cool. But just to be clear. Are you saying that you can exclude Fletcher Henderson and early Chick Webb from swing history because they are before the swing-era?
Go right to the source. Talk to Mr. Szwed. People yackety yak a streak and waste your time of day, but Mr. Szwed will never speak unless he has something to say.

User avatar
fredo
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:59 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

#27 Post by fredo » Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:12 am

Eyeball wrote:
CafeSavoy wrote:
That's a strawman argument and you know it.
No, I don't know it.
Just because you didn't know you were making a strawman argument doesn't mean you weren't.

User avatar
J-h:n
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 6:09 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

#28 Post by J-h:n » Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:08 pm

Haydn wrote:What is, or was, 'the chitlin circuit' :?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitlin%27_circuit

Locked