The talk sounds great, wish i could have been there. Her comment does raise some interesting questions. Did she give any indication of what percentage of songs were slower tempo and what percentage of people danced to the slower songs? Did all the lindy dancers sit down when the slow songs were played? Did the dancers think of themselves as dancers or lindy dancers? Did they only dance lindy or was it just that lindy was their first choice? How about bands? Were bands expected to play only "lindy" music?Soma-Guy wrote: Sugar Sullivan, who was one of the dancers at the Savoy from 1948 to 1958 claims that they rarley danced Lindy to slower tempo songs. The savoy dancers were great dancers and able to dance differently to different songs and tempos. One of the dances they liked doing was called, "Ballroom." You can see it in "When the Spirit Moves." Also they did the "Slow Grind" or other dances. (See the Jive Junction thread called "Dancing the Slow Grind" to see more on that discussion.)
why does everyone hate "wade in the water?"
Moderators: Mr Awesomer, JesseMiner, CafeSavoy
To get back on topic, i don't have all the versions of "Wade in the Water" mentioned, but i have most of them. And to me, none of them are better than Eva Cassidy's. But taste is a personal thing and mine was developed from a background of soul. However i disagree with the idea of enforcing one's taste on others. To me much of the whole phenomenon of "hated songs" is because some people try to enforce their personal tastes on others. And i think that's different from the phenomena of overplaying songs.
I don't know if Dave is right about Eva Cassidy's version getting started with Dan Mez's compilation since i'm from DC where she played and recorded. It might have gotten started with one of the local wcs djs who play the circuit.
I don't know if Dave is right about Eva Cassidy's version getting started with Dan Mez's compilation since i'm from DC where she played and recorded. It might have gotten started with one of the local wcs djs who play the circuit.
Great questions!
She didn't talk about percentages of slow or fast songs. She didn't even talk about beats per minute. I was chatting with her at one of the dances and someone came up and started talking about how they performed a routine that was 250 bpm. She then said, "Beats per minute, beats per minute? It's always beats per minute. We didn't bother with any of that."
And Sugar never considered herself, to the best of my knowledge simply a "Lindy Dancer." They would practice everything. She must have named 10 different dances that they worked on, danced and practiced at the Savoy. She showed an interview with Al Minns in the early 80's. Al described what he taught and danced as "Basic Jazz dancing." The Lindy was just one of these dances. These people were versitile and could dance everything. That's one of the key things that, I have found, keeps repeating itself from reading about and hearing interviews with, the great Savoy dancers. When the music changed, they changed. They didn't bother dancing Lindy to slower tunes. Sugar, as I have said, said when the music got slow they danced the "ballroom." Once again check out the ballroom section in "When the Spirit Moves."
And she never talked about what bands were expected to play at the Savoy. But from what I know, if the bands didn't play a good chunk of smokin' "Hot Jazz" in the evening then the crowd would tear them apart. Sugar kept saying how the steps and moves she was teaching were best done when executed quickly. She kept asking for faster music for the class to dance to. So I think yes that a large majority of night at the Savoy were fast. Sugar said they would practice seven days a week from 10-4. And the steps the bad-ass Savoy dancers were practicing were the same ones she taught us. So you would think if they didn't get a chance to bust this stuff out they would raise some trouble.
I was the videographer for the evening and these are her EXACT words, "You see the pace that we danced. . . Basically most of it was very, very fast. We either danced slowwwww or we danced fast. There really wasn't to much in between."
She didn't talk about percentages of slow or fast songs. She didn't even talk about beats per minute. I was chatting with her at one of the dances and someone came up and started talking about how they performed a routine that was 250 bpm. She then said, "Beats per minute, beats per minute? It's always beats per minute. We didn't bother with any of that."
And Sugar never considered herself, to the best of my knowledge simply a "Lindy Dancer." They would practice everything. She must have named 10 different dances that they worked on, danced and practiced at the Savoy. She showed an interview with Al Minns in the early 80's. Al described what he taught and danced as "Basic Jazz dancing." The Lindy was just one of these dances. These people were versitile and could dance everything. That's one of the key things that, I have found, keeps repeating itself from reading about and hearing interviews with, the great Savoy dancers. When the music changed, they changed. They didn't bother dancing Lindy to slower tunes. Sugar, as I have said, said when the music got slow they danced the "ballroom." Once again check out the ballroom section in "When the Spirit Moves."
And she never talked about what bands were expected to play at the Savoy. But from what I know, if the bands didn't play a good chunk of smokin' "Hot Jazz" in the evening then the crowd would tear them apart. Sugar kept saying how the steps and moves she was teaching were best done when executed quickly. She kept asking for faster music for the class to dance to. So I think yes that a large majority of night at the Savoy were fast. Sugar said they would practice seven days a week from 10-4. And the steps the bad-ass Savoy dancers were practicing were the same ones she taught us. So you would think if they didn't get a chance to bust this stuff out they would raise some trouble.
I was the videographer for the evening and these are her EXACT words, "You see the pace that we danced. . . Basically most of it was very, very fast. We either danced slowwwww or we danced fast. There really wasn't to much in between."
I agree that tempo and feel are important. Tempo is a little easier to delimit, there's tempos below which and above which charleston isn't that much fun. That staccato feel you mentioned is a good start for defining a charleston song, but is it sufficient for defining a lindy song. Take John Kirby's "920 Speciall" at 160 bpm; would you consider a lindy song? You could charleston to it, but it doesn't really call for charleston. The feel of the song is much smoother. Also, weren't you guys were discussing in another thread about the change in swing music to a more steady rhythm? But i agree that lindy songs should have "the bounce." It's funny how since the advent of hollywood, there isn't as much mention of the bounce.julius wrote:both tempo and feel. i don't know the songs you listed so i cannot answer. to me, charleston is a somewhat staccato movement that isn't meant to be ultra fluid (although if you look at whitey's doing very, very fast back charleston in the old clips, it looks like a locomotive -- very smooth, fast, and powerful).
i would say it's more feel than tempo, the more i think about it. i've certainly goofed around doing solo charleston to very slow tempo songs and it didn't feel nearly as unnatural as doing it to wade in the water.
And i agree with you about the song, i wouldn't put it in my list of canonical lindy songs. Although i do have this big band version of "Wade in the Water" that's attributed to Tommy Dorsey. but i can't really find any reference to him recording it.
In comment as to Sugar's comment about tempo's at the Savoy. You also have to put her in perspecitve that she is considerred the 4th generation of dancers at the Savoy and did not start dancing there until post ww2.
From my understanding preferred tempos changed overtime at the Savoy. During Whitey's time the speed was fast, right after the WLH heyday my understanding is the average tempo went down. From I can figure this would be somewhere in the 1941 time period. If Lucky Milander's recordings during this period are an indication of music played there it could support this since he was a house band during this period. And then from what I understand the tempos sped up again for the post ww2 generation dancers.
To paraphrase and maybe Peter needs to correct me the average tempos over a 30 year period at the Savoy went something like this;
medium-fast, to fast, to medium, to fast.
From my understanding preferred tempos changed overtime at the Savoy. During Whitey's time the speed was fast, right after the WLH heyday my understanding is the average tempo went down. From I can figure this would be somewhere in the 1941 time period. If Lucky Milander's recordings during this period are an indication of music played there it could support this since he was a house band during this period. And then from what I understand the tempos sped up again for the post ww2 generation dancers.
To paraphrase and maybe Peter needs to correct me the average tempos over a 30 year period at the Savoy went something like this;
medium-fast, to fast, to medium, to fast.
I don't think the song has to be staccato in the hot jazz way. It just can't be too elastic with time -- when the phrases and notes slur together too much, it becomes a very fluid song with little discernable charleston feel. Even the smoothed out Basie four-beat still distinctly separates the beats, thanks to the all-American rhythm section.CafeSavoy wrote:That staccato feel you mentioned is a good start for defining a charleston song, but is it sufficient for defining a lindy song.
Like I mentioned, the charleston that we see in lindy clips is an pretty smooth motion unlike the hit-and-hold motions of charleston in the 20s. That reflects the change in the music from hot jazz to swing in my opinion.
Short answer: necessary, but not sufficient. That's why I said
"one of my criteria" not "my only criteria" :)
-
JesseMiner
- Posts: 1034
- Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2002 5:36 pm
- Location: San Francisco, CA
- Contact:
Those are very important words of wisdom for us to always remember as DJs. Keep that in mind for all the great songs you like to think of as "overplayed".Nate Dogg wrote:Funny thing is that it is not overplayed to the newer dancers who have started dancing within the past year (at least locally). It is a new tune to them.
I'm with Mike on this one.Mike wrote:Just wait a couple of years. Then it'll be "old skool" and you'll be cool for playing it.
Seriously, it is a great song and a great version. I don't dislike it, it has just been overplayed. I am unlike most people, I think, in that I don't get sick of songs being played too much. Unless the song is lame, of course.
Couldn't agree more.CafeSavoy wrote:To get back on topic, i don't have all the versions of "Wade in the Water" mentioned, but i have most of them. And to me, none of them are better than Eva Cassidy's. But taste is a personal thing and mine was developed from a background of soul. However i disagree with the idea of enforcing one's taste on others. To me much of the whole phenomenon of "hated songs" is because some people try to enforce their personal tastes on others. And i think that's different from the phenomena of overplaying songs.
Jesse
So when would one play Wade in the water or other overplayed songs? I have found in most cases for me both at home and at exchanges that the experinced dancers make the decisions on who dj's when and who is invited back. So these days I almost always play to the experienced dancers unless an event organizier says he wants something specific, there is a themed event, or i'm playing only to inexperienced dancers.
This is a change, I used to play to get maximum amount of dancers on the dance floor througout the night. I now play to experienced dancer for reasons mentioned above.
Wade in the water pisses some people off mostly experienced dancers, similar to In the mood, most Glenn Miller songs, mamba #5, motown songs, most neo-swing, anything that resembles a WCS song. I classify them all as "songs that piss some people off" hence I will never play them. Most of what is mentioned above is liked by newer dancers. When do you play them?
Jesse when was the last time you played Wade in the Water? Have you ever played in at an exchange or an event in the past year?
Julius you have made a similar comment but as far as I know you don't DJ but you said overplayed songs should be played for newer dancers, when do you think it is approriate to play it?
This is a change, I used to play to get maximum amount of dancers on the dance floor througout the night. I now play to experienced dancer for reasons mentioned above.
Wade in the water pisses some people off mostly experienced dancers, similar to In the mood, most Glenn Miller songs, mamba #5, motown songs, most neo-swing, anything that resembles a WCS song. I classify them all as "songs that piss some people off" hence I will never play them. Most of what is mentioned above is liked by newer dancers. When do you play them?
Jesse when was the last time you played Wade in the Water? Have you ever played in at an exchange or an event in the past year?
Julius you have made a similar comment but as far as I know you don't DJ but you said overplayed songs should be played for newer dancers, when do you think it is approriate to play it?
Sorry if I sound agitated but I am. I can't believe that some of the people who are arguing that this song thould be played also do entire sets, hours of djing sometimes without a single familar song for a standard dancer. Don't get me wrong that's the way I would prefer it, but then you guys turn around and say play overplayed songs for begginers when you yourself don't seem to do it too often bothers me.
Maybe a descpription of when you decide to play entire sets of unfamilar music and when you would decide to play sets with some or mostly familiar music would be cool. and when and how often would you put in overplayed songs.
Maybe a descpription of when you decide to play entire sets of unfamilar music and when you would decide to play sets with some or mostly familiar music would be cool. and when and how often would you put in overplayed songs.
Briefly scanning this thread I don't see me saying such a thing. But to answer the question, you should play it whenever you feel it is appropriate. Cmon, that's part of DJing -- knowing when the crowd will want something and when it doesn't.Roy wrote: Julius you have made a similar comment but as far as I know you don't DJ but you said overplayed songs should be played for newer dancers, when do you think it is approriate to play it?
-
Mr Awesomer
- Posts: 1089
- Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2002 10:21 pm
- Location: Altadena, CA
- Contact:
I can't think of a single piece of music that would not piss off someone.
Therefore, by your guidelines, we should all gather in a room together and stare at each other as we listen to silence.
...oh wait, that silence is sure to piss someone off. Hmm, now what?
Therefore, by your guidelines, we should all gather in a room together and stare at each other as we listen to silence.
...oh wait, that silence is sure to piss someone off. Hmm, now what?
Reuben Brown
Southern California
Southern California
Sometimes the room is ready for an 'overplayed' song.
I recall some DJs spinning 2-3 versions of Moten Swing in relatively rapid succession at the last SFLX. Perhaps the song is a little tired, but under the right circumstances it can still delight everyone involved.
Wade in the Water is just another example.. and I think I speak for many when I say that I enjoy playing it or hearing it or dancing to it when the time is right. It may only be once in a blue moon, but it isn't *never*.
For the few people who get their knickers in a knot about particular songs they don't want to hear, I think they should take the time to re-evaluate what's really important in life. 4:02 isn't going to kill anyone.
I recall some DJs spinning 2-3 versions of Moten Swing in relatively rapid succession at the last SFLX. Perhaps the song is a little tired, but under the right circumstances it can still delight everyone involved.
Wade in the Water is just another example.. and I think I speak for many when I say that I enjoy playing it or hearing it or dancing to it when the time is right. It may only be once in a blue moon, but it isn't *never*.
For the few people who get their knickers in a knot about particular songs they don't want to hear, I think they should take the time to re-evaluate what's really important in life. 4:02 isn't going to kill anyone.
I don't think that is true. Some people might not like certain songs but there are some songs that people really just hate. Wade in the water being one of them. In the Mood is another one. Jump, Jive and Wail is another one.GuruReuben wrote:I can't think of a single piece of music that would not piss off someone.
Therefore, by your guidelines, we should all gather in a room together and stare at each other as we listen to silence.
...oh wait, that silence is sure to piss someone off. Hmm, now what?