Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 2:43 pm
I'll chime in with my own take on ITM.
In the Mood is a well crafted arrangement, with an incredibly memorable theme. The whole getting softer and softer, and then getting loud thing, very effective. Well played, tight.
However, it does have down sides. It was played by a band who could play jazz sometimes, but wasn't particularly a hot band. The main original recording by Miller is more about the arrangement than any improvisation. That means that, on its own, it was a well crafted arrangement that may not have really swung that well, but well crafted and perfectly played.
But add to that the cultural baggage, both in popular culture and our subculture, and you have something that is radioactive to some people, including me. There is a subtext to ITM and people that play or DJ it. ITM is certainly one of the first "swing" songs most people hear in life. It is also the thing that non-swing people think of emblematically as "swing." That means that playing or requesting it can (and generally does) imply being a novice about swing. Of course, a person who requests or plays it may well be an expert, more often than not it screams "newbie." To musicians, specifically the guys that I might hire to play in my band, it says, this is another corn-ball nostalgia band that isn't real jazz. It tells them that this is band that is just going through the motions. It tells them that this is "just another gig" and not something they should really be going for.
So is ITM really that bad, or really that good? I think it is definitely NOT the greatest swing record - milquetoast at worst and culturally significant at best. It is not a bad recording, because there are bad arrangements and bad performances from the era that are far worse and far more square. Still, I think songs like Shaw's "Lady Be Good", or Basie's "Woodside," Goodman's "Ridin' High," or Duke's "Cottontail," and many other lesser known tunes that could easily beat it out for a good arrangement and that really swings.
Personally, I don't and won't play it. If people request on a gig, I will flat out tell them "no" without making excuses to sugar coat it. If a client specifically requests it before the gig, I tell them "no" and give them the option of hiring someone else if that's important to them. My whole reason for having a band is to play real swing music which is completely danceable (to jitterbugs at least), and if possible to highlight songs that are lesser known and less than obvious, but still great. ITM implies too many things that I don't want to be about. It tells my musicians that I don't care. It tells my audience (particularly the swing dancers than know) that I don't really know the era well enough to find other tunes. It says were just another mindless, generic swing band with no originality or authenticity.
It may not mean these things to everyone, but that is what it means to me. ITM is not evil, and is certainly not the worst song or recording out there. I will grant that it is well crafted. However, its baggage far outweighs the positives. It is emblematic of many of things I try to avoid.
Without intending to open a side discussion on the merits of that song, I find that Sing, Sing, Sing, while having the similar pop culture significance, doesn't carry the same negative baggage for musicians, and there it is far better on its own. I could watch the clip or the Goodman band from Hollywood Hotel playing SSS a hundred times. Goodman, Krupa, James in 1937-1938 - some of the absolute masters of the craft at their peaks. Jimmy Mundy's arrangement is simple and tight. The Carnegie Hall version has that great solo by Jess Stacy. We've all had our experiences seeing a band with a modern drummer who plays a drum break that totally loses all the dancers, but still I think there is something much more there, especially in those seminal Goodman recording/movies.
In the Mood is a well crafted arrangement, with an incredibly memorable theme. The whole getting softer and softer, and then getting loud thing, very effective. Well played, tight.
However, it does have down sides. It was played by a band who could play jazz sometimes, but wasn't particularly a hot band. The main original recording by Miller is more about the arrangement than any improvisation. That means that, on its own, it was a well crafted arrangement that may not have really swung that well, but well crafted and perfectly played.
But add to that the cultural baggage, both in popular culture and our subculture, and you have something that is radioactive to some people, including me. There is a subtext to ITM and people that play or DJ it. ITM is certainly one of the first "swing" songs most people hear in life. It is also the thing that non-swing people think of emblematically as "swing." That means that playing or requesting it can (and generally does) imply being a novice about swing. Of course, a person who requests or plays it may well be an expert, more often than not it screams "newbie." To musicians, specifically the guys that I might hire to play in my band, it says, this is another corn-ball nostalgia band that isn't real jazz. It tells them that this is band that is just going through the motions. It tells them that this is "just another gig" and not something they should really be going for.
So is ITM really that bad, or really that good? I think it is definitely NOT the greatest swing record - milquetoast at worst and culturally significant at best. It is not a bad recording, because there are bad arrangements and bad performances from the era that are far worse and far more square. Still, I think songs like Shaw's "Lady Be Good", or Basie's "Woodside," Goodman's "Ridin' High," or Duke's "Cottontail," and many other lesser known tunes that could easily beat it out for a good arrangement and that really swings.
Personally, I don't and won't play it. If people request on a gig, I will flat out tell them "no" without making excuses to sugar coat it. If a client specifically requests it before the gig, I tell them "no" and give them the option of hiring someone else if that's important to them. My whole reason for having a band is to play real swing music which is completely danceable (to jitterbugs at least), and if possible to highlight songs that are lesser known and less than obvious, but still great. ITM implies too many things that I don't want to be about. It tells my musicians that I don't care. It tells my audience (particularly the swing dancers than know) that I don't really know the era well enough to find other tunes. It says were just another mindless, generic swing band with no originality or authenticity.
It may not mean these things to everyone, but that is what it means to me. ITM is not evil, and is certainly not the worst song or recording out there. I will grant that it is well crafted. However, its baggage far outweighs the positives. It is emblematic of many of things I try to avoid.
Without intending to open a side discussion on the merits of that song, I find that Sing, Sing, Sing, while having the similar pop culture significance, doesn't carry the same negative baggage for musicians, and there it is far better on its own. I could watch the clip or the Goodman band from Hollywood Hotel playing SSS a hundred times. Goodman, Krupa, James in 1937-1938 - some of the absolute masters of the craft at their peaks. Jimmy Mundy's arrangement is simple and tight. The Carnegie Hall version has that great solo by Jess Stacy. We've all had our experiences seeing a band with a modern drummer who plays a drum break that totally loses all the dancers, but still I think there is something much more there, especially in those seminal Goodman recording/movies.
. Glenn Miller, in Britain at least, seems to be someone that most of the general population is familiar with, so it works as a reference.