Blindfold Test #3 - Discussion

[maren]

Harry Allen (our hero) - "Jazz" - 1980's / 1990's

Harry Allen (not our hero) - "Rap" - 1920's

AMG reviews are often maligned, but what this one said about the Rich-Little-of-the-tenor-Harry-Allen seems 'spot on' (as Bev might say): "In the liner notes, Allen gives thanks to the jazz fans in Japan, mavens of the carbon copy. When Harry meets his own true voice on his instrument, perhaps then the listener will be the one dancing. Until then this is for specialized tastes..."

As far as the RAP Harry Allen (also 80s and 90s, not the 20s!) "hero" might be overblown, but he's not insignificant in my book. Have to at least empathize with the guy who, as a black music critic and supporter-of-rap at the Village Voice, had his freedom of opinion/expression challenged by Stanley Crouch's fist, which broke Allen's jaw and got Crouch fired. (Allen then spent some time in Public Enemy's entourage, as a publicist and occasionally onstage, cited in "Don't Believe the Hype" as "Harry Allen -- media assassin.")

What does this have to do with blindfold test? Well, I guess my familiarity with 80s rap equates to not having logged enough jazz listening time to be bold enough to participate... (where's the EMBARRASSED smilie?)

Edited October 26, 2003 by maren

[marcoliv]

thanks Jim,

i haven't read this particular one but i´m following your words then, as this is mentioned in the book.

if you want, i can double check with a friend of mine, Mr.Jairo Severiano, who wrote several books about the history of brazilian music, if ever Tom took some piano classes with Heitor.

be sure that i didn´t take your words offensively

my knowledge of brazilian music is not so accurate as my orientation was always to funk & jazz.

if you need any help with Portuguese please let me know. i´ll be glad to help

as i know brazilian cd´s can be very expensive in the US, you and any other member of this great forum, can ask for my help on this side too.

Marcus Oliveira

[JSngry]

You ask fair questions, Dan & Jim.

I will attempt to address them as civily and respectfully to your sincere intent as possible. I am not offended because of the context of being fooled in a blindfold test. I am offended for reasons having to do with what I know, both through personal experience and through conversing with many other players, goes into developing a totally personal sound. Without getting too dramatic about it, let's just say that for some people, there is what, for better or worse, can be called a "spiritual" element to that pursuit. I would strongly suspect that Getz was one of those people for whom music was more than just a means to a paycheck, a way to get laid, or an inside move to the best drugs. I'm fully aware that there are many in this forum who scoff at such notions as "spirituality" in general and especially in music. Whatever - make your own music in your own way for your own reasons. And if you're not a player, feel free to adopt your own perspective of what those who play it are up to. To each his/her own.

Knowing that Allen doesn't always play like this, well, ok, that's a relief. Still, it strikes me as a "clever" notion that betrays a certain cluelessness about certain things (no, I'll not elaborate. Sorry.) that tells me that this kid is of the "new school" that feels that playing "jazz" is more important (not more fun, but more important) than playing music. Big difference. I know that might sound cryptic and/or pompous, but it's going to have to do. But, yeah, I think it's evil, and that it defiles everything I hold sacred about the human spirit. That brings us back to the "spiritual" angle again, so we're back to the to each his/her own thing. Again.

Yeah, I read that bio on AMG, and the one word that came to mind was "programmed". Like the son ofa football coach who never has a chance to be exposed to anything but football. The AMG bio doesn't say this though, so that's no doubt my cruel projection of the distaste I'm feeling at this item coming into play. But I gotta think that Allen thinks it cool to be able to do what he does. I don't.

As for Hyman, I've heard him do his "imitation" thing in person, and it's harmless. He's a gifted player who may or may not have a deeply personal voice of his own, but the bottom line is that he does it as a schtick of sorts, as a novelty act. He's up front about that, and frankly, he although he captures the stylistic essences of the various pianists quite expertly, that's as far as he goes. He makes no attempt to capture (steal?) their souls (again, to each their own as to how "real" a concept this may or may not be). It's a carnival sideshow, Hyman's trip is, good clean fun, nothing more.

The whole imitation thing is not nearly as simplistic as my gut reaction to this item might make it seem that I feel it is. Liek I said earlier, there always more to something than meets the eye or ear. For instance, there's an album where Lee Konitz & Jackie McLean play together, and for some reason, in the middle of a ballad. Lee all of a sudden goes off and starts speaking Jackie's language, and quite convincingly, with an intensity that is kinda spooky. But that's Lee Konitz, somebody who you know understands the nature and value of a personal sound more than most. So there's gotta be a reason why he's doing this other than he thinks it's cool or some other juvenile assumption.

Which, if Allen doesn't play this way elsewhere, is what I think he had in mind - that it would be "cool" to do an album where he totally co-opted Getz' sound down to the finest, most personal (hint, hint) nuances (hint, hint), not because he knew Getz well and wanted to express his feeling of deep loss or something like that, but just because GAWRSH, MICKEY, LOOK WHAT I CAN DO. AIN'T I CLEVER? No, it ain't clever. You're in WAAAAY over your head, Dude. But you seem to be enjoying it quite a bit anyway. That's...the way that kinda thing usually works. You're getting the "rewards" up front, payment due at an undetermined later date. But DEFINITELY due.

Always read the fine print before you sign.

[Jim R]

As far as the RAP Harry Allen (also 80s and 90s, not the 20s!) "hero" might be overblown, but he's not insignificant in my book.

maren,

It wasn't my intent to degrade the rapper, or in fact to comment on him at all. I only used "not our hero" to emphasize that it was a different Harry Allen from the one being discussed here ("our hero" was tongue in cheek, of course). I was only pointing out the latest in a long history of amusing gaffes I've encountered on the AMG site. Some kid's going to see that and say to his friend- "DUDE, check it out- rap was happening in the 1920's!"

Marcus,

Thanks again for your insights. I certainly value your perspective and knowledge.

[JSngry]

I was only pointing out the latest in a long history of amusing gaffes I've encountered on the AMG site.

Dude, the whole Major "Wholley" thing just about had me in stiches!

[maren]

I was only pointing out the latest in a long history of amusing gaffes I've encountered on the AMG site. Some kid's going to see that and say to his friend- "DUDE, check it out- rap was happening in the 1920's!"

Got it... that's definitely one for the blooper file!

[Tom in RI]

I am not very familiar with Harry Allen but I did meet him once or twice as a record store employee when he was in high school. He was into Don Byas and Coleman Hawkins at the time. Being from RI he had Scott Hamilton as an obvious (and successful) role model. Personally I'd say that it took Scott quite awhile to be accepted on his own terms and not seen as a tired retread, maybe some still see him that way. Personally, I have nothing against someone choosing to play in a particular style, but, I think Harry may have gone a bit overboard here. Anyway, when I heard the track I figured Getz with some European arranger thinking vocals would be cool.

[Dan Gould]

Another question for Jim S. (and anyone else who's hear the record I'm about to reference):

Have you heard Walter Davis, Jr.'s In Walked Thelonius on Mapleshade? Solo Monk, and I swear its Monk himself and no one else. I don't have the disc at hand, but as I recall, the liners talked about the fact that Davis felt very out of sorts trying to deal with Monk's music. Davis is a very spiritual man and actually claims that Monk appeared to him and its as if Monk were in the studio with him when he laid down these tracks. It certainly sounds like it.

Does this make Davis, at least in this recording, intrinisically evil? He almost completely cops Monk, from start to finish.

Or is possible that you are especially offended by Allen because he plays your instrument, so the issue of finding a personal voice and sound cuts closer?

[Tom Storer]

Although I don't share Jim S's sense of moral outrage over Harry Allen's doing a spot-on Getz imitation, I would probably react with some kind of disapproval if he hadn't come right out and said here I am, Harry Allen, playing just like Getz in a tribute to Getz. I think what Jim is getting at in general is the difference between emulation and forgery. But forgery is dishonest because you're hiding the fact of imitation. If Allen sounded like Getz all the time and didn't acknowledge it, you could say that people unfamiliar with Getz would be the victims of some kind of fraud if they loved Allen and bought all his records. But that doesn't seem to be the case; he made his Getz tribute for people who do love Getz, or wish to learn about him. If he's a copycat on this record, at least he's up front about it. For my money he'll only spend a short time in limbo and not go directly to hell for all eternity.

[JSngry]

Another question for Jim S. (and anyone else who's hear the record I'm about to reference):

Have you heard Walter Davis, Jr.'s In Walked Thelonius on Mapleshade? Solo Monk, and I swear its Monk himself and no one else. I don't have the disc at hand, but as I recall, the liners talked about the fact that Davis felt very out of sorts trying to deal with Monk's music. Davis is a very spiritual man and actually claims that Monk appeared to him and its as if Monk were in the studio with him when he laid down these tracks. It certainly sounds like it.

Does this make Davis, at least in this recording, intrinisically evil? He almost completely cops Monk, from start to finish.

Or is possible that you are especially offended by Allen because he plays your instrument, so the issue of finding a personal voice and sound cuts closer?

Haven't heard that record, Dan. But it's worth noting that Davis knew Monk personally, and whatever personal and spiritual intersection he had, or claims to have had, with Monk both during an after Monk's lifetime is functioning at a whole different level than as far as I'm concerned. We're talking about one life's DIRECT effect on another, a personal relationship, not the broader field of impersonal musical influence. Some might not see the need to make that distinction. I do. Yet again, to each his own.

As for the issue of it being my instrument, no. That's got nothing to do with it. Although I've never heard anybody do as thoughrouh an imitiation as Allen does here on ANY instrument, that's not it at all. There are certain areas of music that I myself hold "sacred" (the infamous reaming I gave that Ron Carter Bach album awhaile back was intentionally nasty for the sake of comedic effect, but the meaning was 100% sincere). Tone is one of them. Perhaps the greatest of them. Not the general tone, but the EXACT tone. Instrument doesn't matter. Influence, sure. Very liberal borrowing, yeah, sure, if you have to. But outright "xeroxing"? Sorry, not for me. All the great players tones are their personal voice, and that voice is used to convey their unique stories. Phrases like "thejazz language", "I hear ya'", "he's really saying something", etc. are not just hip argot. At least they didn't begin as such. Some players literally put their life into their music, all aspects of it, but especially the voice, the medium used to tell that story.

What irks me is not the instrument, it's the premise - that Stan Getz' life as expressed through his music has no more meaning to Harry Allen than to serve as fodder for a "tribute" album. I don't doubt that his intentions were sincere (God, I hope so), but it's really, REALLY fundamentally misguided to "pay tribute" to somebody in this manner. It's no tribute at all, really, unless "telling" somebody in effect, "Hey babe, I dug your life, your individuality, and your soul so much that I decided to make a carbon copy of it to use for myself". Misses the point of the original entirely, imo, and that's just the least offensive of the implications. A life, any life, means something, and the work of a life such a Getz' should mean a heck of a lot more to a practitioneer of the same craft than to be fodder for a novelty record.

Really, if Allen REALLY "got" Getz to the degree that his imitation seems to want to lead us to believe that he has, then his own music would be full of staggering beauty, deep soul, and undeniable originality. THAT'S what Getz was all about in the end (and although I'm very ambivalent about many specific pieces of Getz' overall output, I unambiguously recognize him as one of the giants of the music becuse of those exact qualities in the overall balance of his life's work). Is Allen's own music like this? I don't know, I've never heard it, at least not that I know of. Why? Nobody's ever made noise like that. The best I've heard is along the lines of "Harry Allen? Good young mainstream type player." Well, good. Those are the type of guys I get to when I get to them, no rush, and maybe I like them, maybe not. It's not like they're either setting the stage for tomorrow or else played a role in creating what is now yesterday. They're players playing, and I can fully respect and appreciate that, but I don't think that even their staunchest advocates would claim that they're the "type" of player that sombody like Stan Getz was.

Another reason that I'm skeptical as to how much Allen really "Gets Getz" is in the actual performance. Man, I was DIGGING this cut because of the overall rhythmic feel, especially the drummer. But the music had a special resonance to me becasue I was convinced that I was hearing Getz in an inspired setting playing inspired music. But it's not - it's Harry Allen's "tribute"/imitation of Stan Getz in an inspired setting playing inspired music, a life's story told in the voice of that life by somebody who has not lived it (and yeah, upon further reflection, the "tricked in a blindfold test" element DOES play a role here, not in my overall disgust, but definitely in the vehemence with which it was expressed. More about that shortly). If it were literature, it would be akin to somebody writing a tribute, not a satire, or some other gentle tweaking, but an alleged heartfelt tribute, to Benjamin Franklin in the form of writing a few "additional" chapters to his autobiography in a TOTALLY convincing manner. Of what value is that, especially if the author doesn't attempt to add something of their own to the mix? Are we supposed to be impressed by the author's literary skills? Impressed at their total understanding of Franklin? Glad to have morte chapters to a classic work, even if they're totally fraudulent, just becasue we can't get enough of the writing of good ol' Ben? No to all, afaic. Such an endeavor is frivilously misgided at best. indicative of some real neuroses on the part of the author at worst.

Here's the REAL tragecy imo - Since the music was already happening at such a tight level, why didn't Allen just go ahead and play HIS thing, tell HIS story? Pressure from a producer? Lack of confidence in his own ability? Feeling intimidated by the shoes he was attempting to fill? Why not play Harry Allen? If you got the tunes and the general atmosphere, you got more than enough to make a commercially conventional tribute album from a business standpoint. So why the compulsion to run from yourself and hide in somebody else's shadow? All the answers I come up with point to either lack of understanding as to the deeper implications of making music in the footsteps of your heroes or a deepseated fear/distrust/disinterest in/of pursuing those implications. Either way, it's totally lame from my POV.

I've had time to cool off a little bit since my initial posting of disgust, and all things considered, the views expressed by Tom Storer above come a little closer to the way I feel now. Knowing now that this performance comes from a tribute album and that Allen supposedly doesn't sound like this ALL the time. If I'd ahve known in advance what it was, I'd have still gotten riled, still cussed him out, and still condemned him to hell, but not as seriosuly as I did in my earlier posts. I still think that this is a seriously misguided endeavor on a lot of different levels, but coming as it does in the form of a "tribute" album, ok. The cat only gets red-hot iron rods up the ass for a fixed time, not for all eternity.

And again, I can't stress enough that no matter how intensely I have expressed myself on this matter, that htese are my personal feelings ONLY. I make no claims of omnisicience or of having the inside track as to what is or isn't "good" or "right" in anything, especially music. Although I make no apologies whatsoever for my feelings on this matter and the depth with which I feel those feelings, I'm FULLY aware that it's just me, and that somebody can have quite the opposite view just as deeply and legitimately. All I was expressing was the disgust that I felt at a piece of music that offends nearly every sensibility that I have about music (except for good arrangements and stuff like that. But that's back to the "face value" trip again, and as I've said, that's not me). Strange as it might seem in a world where it seems like EVERYBODY is trying to sell you something or persuade you of something by attacking your personal adequacy and validity at SOME level, I'm content to live by my "code" for no other reason than it works for me, and to take pleasure in the fact that other people are living by their "code" for no other reason than it works for them. So if I'm somehow leaving the impression that I think that anybody who likes this Harry Allen piece is as clueless and soulless as I find him (well, ok - THIS PIECE) to be, that's not where I'm coming from AT ALL! We all got out quirks, and things that make us tick differently than each other, and this is one of mine. Simple as that.

And now, I would REALLY like to not discuss the issue further (as if anybody's probably going to WANT to...), at least not "me". It really is a personal thing, and as much as I can pour out, thre is a limt of how "exposed" I'm willing to get when it comes to talking in great depth about music, and this is really, REALLY it. We're getting into "tell us about your sex life" territory here, if you know what I mean...

[Jim R]

Well, this might be a good time to pose the question... when should I start up the ANSWERS/Further discussion thread? At this point, slightly less than two thirds of disc recipients have posted here, but I'm beginning to feel like the auctioneer who isn't going to be getting any more bids... Opinions welcomed (but I think I'm inclined to do it soon)...

[desertblues]

Go for it Jim!

[JazzAddict]

I have to agree with Jim regarding the Harry Allen track. I have no respect for the guy and I'm sure Getz must be rolling in his grave. This track, if not the entire album in question, is not a tribute, but an insult. What Harry Allen did is identity theft .

Two of the most personal aspects in music are the performers voice (there instrument in combination with their tone and overall sound), and their approach to the music (concept, idea's, etc.). Stan Getz had one of the most unique and personal tones of any tenor saxophonist. It takes years to develope a tone like that. Next, we have Getz's concept. His phrasing, the way he developes a solo, licks, and other identifiable trademarks that make Stan Getz who he is. Some of you mentioned that Harry Allen doesn't always sound like Stan Getz. If this is true, then why bother with an exact reproduction of Getz's sound for this recording? It would take months, if not longer, to be able to reproduce Getz's sound as well as Allen did. Then you have the question of the phrasing, idea's, and other characteristics that are trademarks of Stan Getz.

Not only did Allen copy Getz's sound, but he also took Getz's idea's and musical concept. I'll go as far as saying that Allen almost stole Getz's memories and thoughts. It's as though Allen found a recording of Getz playing this tune, transcribed the entire performance note for note, put together a band and recorded the same song playing the transcription note for note, while having a perfect imitation of Getz's sound. Why go through the trouble? Why not take the recording of Getz, slap your name on it, and tell the producer to put it out on your album.

How would Nike like it if somebody started up a company, copied their product line, slapped on the Nike logo and sold it as theirs? To me, the Harry Allen recording is no different. This is why I find it to be totally disrespectful and Allen should be ashamed of himself.

Now I'll be quiet....

[connoisseur series500]

Yes, Jim, now for the answers....

(as if I will be able to recognize more than 10% of the musicians )

[Jim R]

Not only did Allen copy Getz's sound, but he also took Getz's idea's and musical concept. I'll go as far as saying that Allen almost stole Getz's memories and thoughts. It's as though Allen found a recording of Getz playing this tune, transcribed the entire performance note for note, put together a band and recorded the same song playing the transcription note for note...

Hmm... while I understand the underlying concept of what Jim was talking about, I'm not so sure we're not going overboard a tad. Whether or not he copped Getz's "concept" and "ideas"remains slightly blurry for me. As for "memories and thoughts"... I'm not sure I even follow you there. Anyway, once you're that close to Getz's TONE, and you're playing Jobim tunes, isn't it possible you're going to be accused of copping the whole "concept"? I've heard a lot of saxophonists play this genre of music, and very few really "get" the rhythmic nuances and swing like Getz did. Maybe the fact that Allen is in Getz's league when it comes to having that ability is working against him here to some degree. I'm not necessarily defending Allen entirely here, I'm just trying to be objective.

The part about "it's as if he transcribed a Getz solo...", well, I'm not buying that. He DIDN'T copy any Getz recording note for note, so I think that part is unfair and over the top. I still haven't listened to the whole CD with the purpose of analyzing the whole thing to see how much of Stan I hear throughout, but I'm inclined to say that if it hasn't already jumped out at me (a complete "xerox" of Getz), I'll probably disagree with the notion. That's not to say that I don't recognize a significant similarity, but beyond the tone he was using, I'm not yet convinced about the "concept/phrasing/ideas/etc" issue.

[randyhersom]

1. A nice, Brazilian groove, played with polish and subtlety. The melody calls to mind a Target commercial with the sung words "sweet happy life", but I can't quite place the souce. It feels familiar. It would be kind of clever and flashy to begin two straight tests with Jack Wilson. That's a possibility, and without a better guess at hand, I'll go with that.

2. A vibes and piano led quartet, swinging easy. The unobtrusive drums could well be Connie Kay, and nothing else rules out the possibility of the Modern Jazz Quartet in its less chamber-jazz oriented moments.

3. This has a west coast feel, but not conclusively. I can't rule out Lee and Wayne either. Not dark enough to guess Miles, I'll go with Lee Morgan.

4. Sounds like the guitarists date. Somebody just a shade more modern than Wes Montgomery. Pat Martino perhaps?

5. Nice chops, but the tenor is also quite willing to luxuriate in his tone, Clifford Jordan is a possibility.

6. Absence of drums suggests a couple of possibilities. I'm going with Ray Brown trio instead of the earlier Oscar Perterson trios.

I'll guess Gene Harris and Barney Kessel.

7. My guess is Joe Pass and Oscar Peterson. Not as showy as I'd expect from Oscar. Not sure who else Joe duetted with.

8. I already had Stan Getz in mind before the voice came in, and knowing he made albums with Jobim, Bonfa and Gilberto, I'm inclined to stick with that guess.

9. Unusual line-up, Alto, Tenor and Baritone over rhythm. Not much clue. Duke Pearson?

10. Kenny Burrell? Nice rhythmic feel.

11. I'm thinking Hampton Hawes, although I can't put my finger on exactly why. Quite lovely.

12. Stanley Turrentine is a possibility. Perhaps Horace Parlan on piano.

13. A Bird tune for sure, I'm pretty sure it's Yardbird Suite. I'll guess Jimmy Bruno, but it could easily be somebody earlier and more famous.

14. Sarah Vaughan singing Double Rainbow. There are little production touches that may suggest a later recording, but I'm thinking this is Pablo era Sassy.

15. I can't quite peg this as Soprano or Alto sax for sure. I'm leaning toward Soprano. Reminds me some of Clifford Jordan's playing on Art Farmer's Blame it On My Youth. With the soprano featured so much more than the other horns, I'll guess that this is Clifford's own date.

16. I'm enjoying this lush, heart on sleeve ballad approach. Kenny Barron could pull this off. I'm not sure who else could or would, but I'm looking forward to finding out.

[A Lark Ascending]

As usual I'm hopeless when it comes to guessing this stuff.

But I'd just like to say how much I've enjoyed this disc. In particular the guitar tracks. I love the sound of the standard jazz guitar and this disc has given me plenty to explore (when I know who is who!).

One thing I've found with both discs. It gives a little insight into the comments people are making on the board. When I see posts from Dan and Jim R in future I'll have some sort of context as to where they're coming from, something the little soundbites we talk in on these boards often disguises.

Now, here's a further puzzle.

What's the connection between Blindfold 3 and Jesus Christ Superstar?

Edited October 28, 2003 by Bev Stapleton

[A Lark Ascending]

Note to JSngry,

On no account listen to or buy a CD by Jim Tomlinson (Mr. Stacey Kent). And rather than buy a Stacey CD get someone to burn you a copy with the tenor playing removed.

Take this as advice from your doctor!

[Harold_Z]

1.  The melody calls to mind a Target commercial with the sung words "sweet happy life", but I can't quite place the souce.

The TARGET commercial is the same tune with English Language lyrics (as opposed to the original Brazilizn lyrics) and the vocalist singing that commerical is.....PEGGY LEE.

Just a little blindfold test within a blindfold test.

Edited October 28, 2003 by Harold_Z

[DrJ]

Well, I also don't have quite the fervor about it as Jim, but for what it's worth, I totally agree that the Harry Allen Getz act is lame. I'm not quite as deeply offended as Jim, but I can definitely understand the sentiment as I felt a twinge of the same feeling on learning this wasn't actually Getz (probably not quite as deeply because I am not a musician). I might modulate that opinion a little if this is the only track on the album on which he does this, but only a little - it's still not cool and, more importantly, a pointless exercise.

Look at it objectively - when I look back at the discussion, pretty much EVERYONE said this is Getz or (as I said, suspecting that because this is a blindfold test, there's gonna be at least a couple attempts to trip us up!) "someone wearing his dirty drawers." To put it bluntly, in looking at my track record of guessing who's who and that of 90% of the other participants here - we just ain't that good. I'm not offended in the least to have "missed" this one, because I miss just about all of 'em (and therein lies the fun of all this!). So for me and all the rest of us to jump immediately on thinking this was Getz, the guy has to have pretty much co-opted his whole sound, phrasing, etc. So it's patently obvious that the guy is flat out aping Getz, I don't even see how there can be an argument about that point. I can't believe a pro would do something like this - it's the kind of thing that a music major in college might do to learn about what makes a great player's style sound personal or something. Strictly academic.

So personally, I think that's DEEPLY unfortunate, because like Jim, I don't think this is any way to pay tribute to someone. Maybe slip in a little Getz lick or favorite piece of melody or quote, for humor and affection, but don't take his whole style note for note...that's DIS-respectful in the extreme (hear that scraping sound? That's Getz turning over in his grave).

In fact, I don't see how what Allen has done is much different than a writer plagiarising a whole paragraph or chapter of one of their favorite writers' books and then calling it a "tribute." Okay, he didn't play a Getz solo (that I'm aware of) note for note, but we're into splitting hairs at that point. And anyway, Getz was far more about sound and phrasing and style than note choice, wouldn't you agree?

I would also point out that I felt the tune was pleasant but didn't really float my boat (I gave it 2.5 stars, saying "there's much better Getz out there), whereas generally I'm a HUGE fan of Getz even on his worst days. So this gets to another crucial point - sounding like someone is NEVER the same as actually BEING that person. Something in our ears usually gives the ruse away, no matter how detailed the deception. Gee, Allen must feel great that he's able to muster a convincing "Getz on a mediocre to poor day" thing.

Regardless of whether anyone else agrees with this line of reasoning, perhaps the most salient point is that Mr. Allen certainly won't be getting any of my hard earned shackles in exchange for any of his recordings or live performances.

Edited October 28, 2003 by DrJ

[JSngry]

Well, you know me - Mr. Sunshine and all that, so I'll take my frown, turn it upside down, let a smile be my umbrella/splash guard while I'm pissing on Harry Allen and take the opportunity to ask where else I can hear that drummer? I'm STILL digging him!

[JSngry]

Note to JSngry,

On no account listen to or buy a CD by Jim Tomlinson (Mr. Stacey Kent). And rather than buy a Stacey CD get someone to burn you a copy with the tenor playing removed.

Take this as advice from your doctor!

But Doc, I LIKE pop music!

(Although, as much as I can handle, even enjoy, Kent, I think an entire CD by that tenor player might be too many spoonfuls of sugar with no medicine which with to make it go down on, or whatever....)

[A Lark Ascending]

I'm so concerned about this that I've just sent an e-mail to Candid records requiring them to ensure that no copy of Tomilinson's 'Brazilian Sketches' goes within 100 miles of Texas!

[Joe]

Harry Allen, Getz, or Zoot, that track is perhaps my least favorite on this disc.

As to the current controversy, it's Nietzsche who tells us:

"One repays a teacher poorly by remaining a disciple."

[P.D.]

On the Harry Allen thing... is all the album Getz i"inspired" or just this one track...

Perhaps in the notes it points out that this specific track was Harry trying to do Stan

Rather like Jack Purvis doing Copyin' Louis.

Jim once declared that Purvis sounded like " His kind of guy".. though I agree, not for totally musical activities.

Allen certainly doesn't do Getz impressions on his other albums.. least the ones I've heard.

The covers of these always bothered me a bit though... the music is far from being a Blakey impression.

Edited October 28, 2003 by P.D.