favorite jazz eras

[alocispepraluger102]

1935-1945 without doubt.

it was so fertile and there was so much overlap.

[papsrus]

Tell me more. I'm just getting into this general era now, with Ellington, and now the Basie Decca recordings. All of it wonderful.

I'm coming from listening almost exclusively to more contemporary stuff -- post 1950s certainly, but mostly music of the past decade -- so it's taken some adjustment to "hear" this earlier music. A first pass at the Basie Decca recordings, for instance, was a delight. But a second listen was much more revealing; much more rewarding. I expect it will open up to me more with each fresh pass.

The same can be said for any music, I suppose. But I find it especially noticeable with these earlier recordings. A little patience pays off big time.

Anyways, recs, recs, recs for this period. I know this general time frame has been discussed on the Ellington thread, but what others?

[mikelz777]

Just a quick look at individual CDs in my collection (not counting any of my box sets) it looks like the largest number appear between 1956 and 1962 (probably pretty common) but my collection spans from the 20's to the 00's.

Edited January 31, 2008 by mikelz777

[ghost of miles]

Papsrus, check out V. 3 of Allen Lowe's DEVILIN' TUNE series, which covers 1934-1945. It's a 9-CD set, and he frequently sells it (and the other volumes) here for insanely reasonable prices. Comes with a very good booklet about the period, too, drawn from his book of the same name.

[BillF]

For recorded jazz: c.1945-1965; i.e. from the outset of bop recording to the end of the "jazz boom".

Edited January 31, 2008 by BillF

[MoGrubb]

I960s John Coltrane and Miles Davis.

[AllenLowe]

2010-2020; this is the time period in which Ken Vandermark was proven to be the next Bird - and in which his new agent, EDC, finally got him on the Ed Sullivan Show -

(Twilight Zone music in background: da da da da; da da da da)

[BeBop]

Me, uh, I like The Sweet Bands! Yes, the schmaltzier the better. Sorry. Nothing against 'em. Just making fun of my name.

I tend to gravitate toward revolutions - the early 40s and late 50s/early 60s in particular. Individual players sometimes show marked style changes as they work to cope, adapt or resist. And groups benefit (or don't) from the differences in style or vision of their participants.

[kh1958]

1920 to the present.

[JohnS]

Mid 50s to mid 60s. But lots earlier and later. I'm definitely a hard bopper at heart.

[Big Beat Steve]

c. 1935 to c. 1955 as the core era (swing, bop, cool), with a representative selection of "classic jazz" and hard bop thrown in as well.

I agree that the 2nd half of the 30s and the 40s (up to early 50s) were incredibly fertile, and the documented transition from swing to bop (and R&B) is always fascinating, down to the most obscure surviving recordings.

[jazzbo]

1917 to 1955.

Then skip ahead to Ayler and Filles de Kilamanjaro through Miles' retirement.

Edited January 31, 2008 by jazzbo

[paul secor]

Might be seen as avoiding the topic, but I think in terms of music and musicians, not eras. In that sense, I guess I agree with kh1958's post.

Edited January 31, 2008 by paul secor

[Neal Pomea]

The era prior to the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998.

[7/4]

I960s John Coltrane and Miles Davis.

yep, the '60s...

[king ubu]

Mid 50s to mid 60s. But lots earlier and later. I'm definitely a hard bopper at heart.

I wouldn't call myself a "hard bopper at heart", but those years make up the core of my collection so far, too... but more with interest towards the boundary-stretching stuff, Mingus, Coltrane, Shepp, Dolphy, Hill...

But I have many of bop's most important recordings, too, as well as getting more and more into earlier jazz (Duke, Prez, Basie, Lunceford, to name a few favourites).

The 70's are covered rather thinly, so are the 80s, after which I have more again.

Also I have some out stuff discussion of which was restricted mostly to the funny rat (r.i.p.) thread here, of late, however, my listening has been more conservative again, I guess... less challenging stuff just fits better if time is short or if it's just background listening at work.

But in the end, what is my favourite era - I'm not sure I could really answer that question, as the accidental way in which I'm building up my collection doesn't necessarily reflect what I love best. Also as far as live concerts are concerned, my taste is *much* more progressive and into free stuff, I'd likely never attend any of those young post-boppers live (never did so at least, to this day) - things like Instabile, ICP, lots of free improv, Sclavis, local people, Irene Schweizer, Co Streiff, but also occasionally some old guys if I get a chance (Benny Golson, for instance, or the late Benny Bailey, or Dr. Lonnie Smith). But I really wouldn't see a point to hear anyone live whose music is heavily leaning onto all those great Blue Note albums - if I want that, I open a bottle of my favourite alcoholic brew and sit down in our living room to enjoy the real thing.

[mikelz777]

Papsrus, check out V. 3 of Allen Lowe's DEVILIN' TUNE series, which covers 1934-1945. It's a 9-CD set, and he frequently sells it (and the other volumes) here for insanely reasonable prices. Comes with a very good booklet about the period, too, drawn from his book of the same name.

I'd second the recommendation on Devilin' Tune v.3. It would be an excellent buy if you're looking to explore artists from this era. It would be about 220 songs from various artists and does have an informative booklet. Look for Allen Lowes' various posts for the set in buy/sell/trade section and you'll see he offers them at a very reasonable price. I've purchased and very much enjoyed vols. 2,3 and 4.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

For me, THE era is the period 1942-1954. This is the period in which Swing split up into Bebop, Soul Jazz and R&B. But also, it’s the golden era of the Gospel Quartet, and the most important period in the development of City Blues. (It’s also the period in which Country music developed, though I confess to having little interest in that.) Furthermore, the period saw the efflorescence of numerous regional styles, which contributed their own special feel to the overall scene. And, perhaps closely related, it’s the period of the first generation of indie record companies specialising in contemporary black music of one type or another.

One of the striking things about that period, to me, is that the musicians and singers were not confined to their boxes; the boundaries between the different genres of black music were extremely permeable in those days. Clearly, there was some money in this for a jazzman who was wanted on an R&B date. But the sense of the era that comes through to me is that this wasn’t entirely a matter of being paid for the gig; that the musicians were willing participants; because they sensed the unity of all that music that was exploding into creativity at that time.

And the black mass audience accepted this situation with enthusiasm! If you look at the R&B charts for that period, of course, they’re dominated by Louis Jordan, Nat “King” Cole, the Inkspots, Lionel Hampton and Duke Ellington (the top five chart acts of the forties). But you also see Charlie Parker, Dizzy Gillespie, Cecil Payne (!), Lester Young, Coleman Hawkins, the Original Five Blind Boys of Mississippi, the Trumpeteers, the Angelic Gospel Singers, Ella Fitzgerald, Billie Holiday, King Pleasure, Billy Eckstine, Gene Ammons, Bing Crosby, Illinois Jacquet, Johnny Hodges, Sonny Boy (John Lee) Williamson, T-Bone Walker, Muddy Waters, Memphis Slim, Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Erskine Hawkins, the Andrews Sisters and Buddy Johnson. To me, that era says that people (and I mean the artists as well as the general black public) felt that there was one kind of music - black music – with many different but closely related ways of expressing it.

The artistic implications of this period are obviously interesting. But for me, it’s impossible to look at this period without thinking about how it all happened; about what was going on that made this era so creative in so many directions at once.

In my view, the key point was the mass migration of the thirties, and continuing later, out of the rural areas into urban areas. This arguably did even more for black prosperity than the New Deal – not only for those who moved, but for those who remained. And much of this new prosperity was directed into luxury areas – zoot suits, wide ties, two-tone shoes and, primarily, entertainment. (It also had the effect of concentrating the black population so that it could be reached more easily by small organisations, facilitating the emergence of the indies.) The migration also superimposed one set of regional styles over another, giving rise to the wonderful variety that is seen in those days. But there is a psychological point to migration, too, which I think was important in the way black music developed in this period. Migrants look both forwards and backwards. Especially since, even though things were a lot better, Chicago, Detroit, LA, Oakland, Newark, New York, Cincinnati or Philly were not, in fact, the promised land. So there is homesickness, even for Jim Crow country, as well as the excitement of the new, sophisticated and hip. And because there were patterns to the migration, there were usually plenty of people from back home, wherever that happened to be, to make music that was from home but also firmly placed in the here and now.

(Although I’m not a Country music fan, it’s interesting to note that there was a similar migration among whites at this period, which had a big impact on Country music. I recall an interview Dolly Parton did on British TV in which she talked about her family moving out of the Appalachians into the Midwest, and making the point of this migration’s impact on that music.)

Of course, migration was not the sole factor involved; the war was important, as was the general increase in the prosperity of the US as a whole, following the Depression.

I also have a rather tentative feeling that something else may have been going on, which may have had an impact. In the twenties and thirties, Harlem (and possibly other ghetto areas) had been a “tourist” destination for well heeled white people attending highly profitable clubs like the Cotton Club. I think this stopped and, in New York, the musical centre of gravity moved to midtown. To a large extent, I think ghetto residents were left alone to do what they liked without having to make music that would be generally commercial, because you could make plenty of money just out of the black market, as Herman Lubinsky intended to do when he set up Savoy, and succeeded in doing. One of the things that can be seen during this period was that it became more and more difficult for black artists to get records on the pop charts and for white artists to get records on the R&B charts. To some extent this may have been because the majors controlled the pop charts while, increasingly, the indies controlled the R&B charts. But I also think that black music and pop music were really diverging at this time.

MG

[AllenLowe]

"there was a similar migration among whites at this period, which had a big impact on Country music. "

yes, think Oakies and Bakersfield; Merle Haggard, Buck Owens, Roy Hogsed; also, tons of Western Swing moving west, also Rose Maddox and family -

[Big Beat Steve]

"there was a similar migration among whites at this period, which had a big impact on Country music. "

yes, think Oakies and Bakersfield; Merle Haggard, Buck Owens, Roy Hogsed; also, tons of Western Swing moving west, also Rose Maddox and family -

Indeed, though Roy Hogsed predated Haggard, Owens and Bakersfield by more than just a few years (and stylistically too). Merle Travis would be a much more contemporary major name who made the trek west at the time Roy Hogsed appeared there.

@MG:

Very well put, especially the Bop/R&B "crossover" evolution. Many jazz fans don't realize this to this day and still draw a strict dividing line between jazz and R&B, and yet at the time the boundaries were nowhere near as sharp as latter-day jazz fans mainly concerned with (jazz) art for art's sake made them to look. Leo Parker and Gene Ammons are just 2 examples of this crossover type of jazz.

(MG, I am a bit surprised, though, that your preferred jazz era has sort of moved backwards in time from your focus on Soul Jazz. Anyway, welcome to the club! )

[papsrus]

Papsrus, check out V. 3 of Allen Lowe's DEVILIN' TUNE series, which covers 1934-1945. It's a 9-CD set, and he frequently sells it (and the other volumes) here for insanely reasonable prices. Comes with a very good booklet about the period, too, drawn from his book of the same name.

Papsrus, check out V. 3 of Allen Lowe's DEVILIN' TUNE series, which covers 1934-1945. It's a 9-CD set, and he frequently sells it (and the other volumes) here for insanely reasonable prices. Comes with a very good booklet about the period, too, drawn from his book of the same name.

I'd second the recommendation on Devilin' Tune v.3. It would be an excellent buy if you're looking to explore artists from this era. It would be about 220 songs from various artists and does have an informative booklet. Look for Allen Lowes' various posts for the set in buy/sell/trade section and you'll see he offers them at a very reasonable price. I've purchased and very much enjoyed vols. 2,3 and 4.

Thanks! I'll pursue that.

[clifford_thornton]

I think 1 and 4 are still available directly from him.

Looking forward to my sets!

I'm pretty much an 1890s-2000s kinda guy, too. Many musicians from many different periods.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

(MG, I am a bit surprised, though, that your preferred jazz era has sort of moved backwards in time from your focus on Soul Jazz. Anyway, welcome to the club! )

Well, era means the whole thing to me. And if one looks at later Soul Jazz periods, I don't feel there was nearly as much going on for me generally - although the Soul Jazz of the sixties and seventies is my meat entirely.

But in the sixties and seventies, there was a lot of Hard Bop, which is kind of only a bit to my taste, and Jazz Rock Fusion, which is a LONG way from my taste. On the plus side, of course, in R&B there was the development of Soul and Funk, (but also Disco... hm...) and in Gospel there was the beginning of the development of the community choir movement, but that really didn't start to get really good until the mid-seventies. But what was happening in Blues at that time? Nix. Well, the invasion of the white guitar heroes, you could say. Or the conversion of Blues to something that was played on college campuses. Ho hum.

So, when I look at the sixties and seventies, Soul Jazz, Soul and Funk were by and large the only game in town for me.

MG