Groove Holmes "shut out" of jazz clubs

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

so i was listening to that live 1982 rec. someone linked to, groove keeps saying how what a pleasure it is to be able to play for an audicence once again, how he couldnt for many years, but now hes back to take care of bussiness. another place he mentions he was 'shut out' of jazz clubs.....whats the beef? does anyone know about groove holmes history who can help me understand what hes talkin about?

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

ok you guys ,heres what irks me about this

1st of all ITS 1982, who would be shuttin out groove in 1982?

2nd of all groove seems from his record covers that hes very nice, i cant immagine him trying to cut someone with a broken beer glass or nothin

i would like to understand grooves frusteration in this- if you listen to him he sounds very frustered he wasnt able to perform, or somethin

[Jim Alfredson]

You realize that the Hammond organ was about as popular as the accordion in jazz in the mid-70s all through the 80s?

[Pete C]

You realize that the Hammond organ was about as popular as the accordion in jazz in the mid-70s all through the 80s?

Not on the "chitlin' circuit," which still existed to a degree. I don't think that's what was going on. I doubt Jimmy Smith had trouble getting work.

[GARussell]

I read that because he had been stiffed/not paid by club owners, Groove kept a pistol in his organ bench. Maybe that had something to do with it.

[Jim Alfredson]

Jimmy Smith is / was THE name on the Hammond. He could always work. Groove, not so much. A lot of the "lesser" guys had to add synths and other stuff to try to stay current which mostly backfired, mainly because their hearts weren't in it.

And maybe he was just a pain in the ass to work with.

[clifford_thornton]

frustered

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

jim tell me more: ive heard people allude to that. the hammond really fell out of popularity? but it allways sounds so good! adding synths on top of it i think is awesome, but the awesome is allways #1!

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

i cant listen to groove holmes right now i finally have a mono "Freak Out!" zappa lp with mono 'trouble every day'

[Jim Alfredson]

In the 80's you couldn't give a Hammond away. The newest digital synths were in, even the previous generation of analog synths were out. It really was Joey DeFrancesco's singing to Columbia, thanks to his brief stint with Miles, that brought the Hammond in jazz back from the dead.

[Larry Kart]

frustered

blustrated

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

There were all sorts of things going on in the late 70s/early 80s affecting Soul Jazz organ.

Bob Porter has mentioned two points, each interesting.

1 CTI/Kudu exclusive contract with RVG. (I'm not sure how serious this was)

2 (on sleeve of "The scorpion") Kenneth Gibson's election as Mayor of Newark and reforming "peripheral activities" around the organ rooms. (how relevant to other places? Probably the same "peripheral activities" going on)

But also

3 Blaxploitation movies. The black cinema audience was, at the time, the only growing part of the cinema audience. In terms of competition for entertainment dollars in the ghetto, this was a serious matter. The organ rooms everywhere would have been hurt by this.

4 Disco. Organ rooms were no cover no minimum local drinkeries, paying for live music. Discos were cheaper to run and people could dance to their favourite current hits. More competition for black entertainment dollars.

5 Manufacturing moving out of city centres to the suburbs and coincidentally the better paid black workers moving out there with them. Average earnings in the ghettos would have reduced.

Jazz clubs had never been much of a place to find Soul Jazz organists, except JOS. So, if the organ rooms were getting knocked on the head through economics and the police, leaving only a few jazz clubs, people like Groove would have HURT. They were "saved" by the emergence of "Acid Jazz" in Europe, which started in about 1983, but didn't result in many gigs until the mid/late eighties, as I recall.

MG

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

whats the difference between an organ room and a jazz club?

[AllenLowe]

I give up. What's the difference?

[Claude]

What's an "organ room"? Even Google can't find an explanation.

[JSngry]

It's a neighborhood bar that had organ groups as the live entertainment. As much a hangout as a "venue", if not moreso. Still a "jazz club", just a subset thereof (and actually a subset of a subset - the "black jazz club"), maybe the difference between entertaining in your den instead of you living room. You still gotta behave, but the vibe - and the guests (or vice-versa) - is significantly different.

[Pete C]

From Gene Ludwig bio (emphasis mine):

"Gene grooved harder than the others... I really do love everybody that sits at that bench... no matter who they are or what kind of music they play... but somehow, those who reach the audience quicker and with the most passion, leave me with the more lasting impression. It didn't take me long to figure out what Gene did to that crowd that night to get the response that he got and win over so many new fans: HE PLAYED THE BLUES... That's what those folks came to hear. They wanted to be taken back in time to the old days of the 'Organ Rooms' where every club had a B-3 on the stage and smokey, inner city soul jazz was the gravy of life. When Gene kicked off with Jimmy Smith's 'The Sermon', he was telling that crowd that there's still truth in this music... it hasn't left us and never will... and more importantly, he wasn't afraid to play Jimmy's sound. As an admitted disciple, he was reminding us just how important this is to us all. Gene Ludwig has always been that kind of a player. He knows where he came from and how he got where he is... no frills, nothing pretentious... just SOLID ORGAN GROOVE... That's Gene Ludwig."

http://www.geneludwig.com/pages/bio.html

[Jim Alfredson]

Just hung out with Gene on Sunday.

[Bluerein]

MG: your point no.1 was certainly true for a number of years in the beginning/mid 70's

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

MG: your point no.1 was certainly true for a number of years in the beginning/mid 70's

Yes, I know it's true. But was it an important factor, which is what I wondered about. I dunno. Paul Goodman was recording Don Patterson for Museand Bobby Pierce for Cobblestone. Michael DeLugg was recording Bu Pleasant for Muse. Malcolm Addey was recording Holmes & McGriff for Groove Merchant and Carl Wilson (with Gator Tail) for Muse. Richard Aderson rercorded Carl Wilson (with Gator Tail) for Muse. Eddie Harris recorded Earland in Berkeley. Eddie Korvin recorded Sonny Phillips (and with Houoston Person) for Muse. Someone called John Struthers recorded Gene Ludwig in Pittsburgh for Muse. I can't really see that the absence of RVG from the Soul Jazz scene meant a loss of quality in the Soul Jazz organ albums that were recorded. There were fewer of them, though.

What might have been more important was the absence of Blue Note and, particularly, Prestige new releases. But that was to do with their takeovers, not RVG being snagged by CTI - though I guess it provided a window of opportunity for Taylor to step in. But it looks like the organ groups' time had passed, largely because of the other factors I mentioned.

There is, possibly, another factor, though. Muse carried the Prestige flag from '72 and it seems to me that Joe Fields wasn't actually trying to get hit albums, possibly because of the cashflow implications, possibly because his distribution arrangements weren't up to it. In all the years since he started Cobblestone - four times longer than Lion & Wolf were in the LP market - he only had one album in the R&B charts and none on the pop charts. Soul Jazz is part of popular black music and it needs hit records to keep the musicians before the public's eyes.

MG

[JSngry]

otoh, Muse did ok saleswise in the 70s w/Richie Cole, Eddie Jefferson, Houston Person, Etta Jones (later in the decade, I know), Charles Earland (again, a little alter in the decade) + some others. Different times, though, and these records hit with "jazz audiences" than with "soul jazz audiences", most of whom had by then moved to the more "modern" sounds of Grover, Sanborn, etc.

Which is just to say that Fields had a market for his product, aimed at it, and often enough hit it. It just wasn't a market that was going to produce Grover #s, and really, I don't know that Muse had the budget - or even the aesthetic inclination - to make Grover-type records. But when it was safe for organ jazz to come back in the water, they could be found on Muse. but yeah, it was a different crowd who was digging it by then.

As for anything Don Schlitten-related, I don't know that that guy ever used Rudy more than occasionally, if at all.

[chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez]

so rudy recorded solely for CTI at one point? so rvg recorded then cuts the discs himself, thats what his stamp is on them, is that right

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

otoh, Muse did ok saleswise in the 70s w/Richie Cole, Eddie Jefferson, Houston Person, Etta Jones (later in the decade, I know), Charles Earland (again, a little alter in the decade) + some others. Different times, though, and these records hit with "jazz audiences" than with "soul jazz audiences", most of whom had by then moved to the more "modern" sounds of Grover, Sanborn, etc.

Which is just to say that Fields had a market for his product, aimed at it, and often enough hit it. It just wasn't a market that was going to produce Grover #s, and really, I don't know that Muse had the budget - or even the aesthetic inclination - to make Grover-type records. But when it was safe for organ jazz to come back in the water, they could be found on Muse. but yeah, it was a different crowd who was digging it by then.

Yes - Joe had a market and hit it well. Not sure that, in the late seventies, he wasn't at least in part aiming at the Soul Jazz crowd. Just think of the sleeves of those Houston Person, Groove Holmes, etc albums with sexy black ladies on them (see Sexiest album covers thread )

As for anything Don Schlitten-related, I don't know that that guy ever used Rudy more than occasionally, if at all.

I have one or two Schlitten jobs done at RVG's (can't name them, though). Apparently he preferred to use Richard Alderson because he let Don smoke spliffs.

MG

[JSngry]

otoh, Muse did ok saleswise in the 70s w/Richie Cole, Eddie Jefferson, Houston Person, Etta Jones (later in the decade, I know), Charles Earland (again, a little alter in the decade) + some others. Different times, though, and these records hit with "jazz audiences" than with "soul jazz audiences", most of whom had by then moved to the more "modern" sounds of Grover, Sanborn, etc.

Which is just to say that Fields had a market for his product, aimed at it, and often enough hit it. It just wasn't a market that was going to produce Grover #s, and really, I don't know that Muse had the budget - or even the aesthetic inclination - to make Grover-type records. But when it was safe for organ jazz to come back in the water, they could be found on Muse. but yeah, it was a different crowd who was digging it by then.

Yes - Joe had a market and hit it well. Not sure that, in the late seventies, he wasn't at least in part aiming at the Soul Jazz crowd. Just think of the sleeves of those Houston Person, Groove Holmes, etc albums with sexy black ladies on them (see Sexiest album covers thread )

Oh, definitely. He was aiming for that crowd, holding on to them as they aged, instead of following the more "current" trends...you can find a few "funky" Muse albums w/"keyboards" and funk rhythms, but mostly their output in that realm seemed to be aimed at the same people who would buy Houston Person albums since there weren't going to be any new Gene Ammons ones...that's an exaggeration, but...

all in all, though, that Muse label had a pretty impressive run in many ways.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

otoh, Muse did ok saleswise in the 70s w/Richie Cole, Eddie Jefferson, Houston Person, Etta Jones (later in the decade, I know), Charles Earland (again, a little alter in the decade) + some others. Different times, though, and these records hit with "jazz audiences" than with "soul jazz audiences", most of whom had by then moved to the more "modern" sounds of Grover, Sanborn, etc.

Which is just to say that Fields had a market for his product, aimed at it, and often enough hit it. It just wasn't a market that was going to produce Grover #s, and really, I don't know that Muse had the budget - or even the aesthetic inclination - to make Grover-type records. But when it was safe for organ jazz to come back in the water, they could be found on Muse. but yeah, it was a different crowd who was digging it by then.

Yes - Joe had a market and hit it well. Not sure that, in the late seventies, he wasn't at least in part aiming at the Soul Jazz crowd. Just think of the sleeves of those Houston Person, Groove Holmes, etc albums with sexy black ladies on them (see Sexiest album covers thread )

Oh, definitely. He was aiming for that crowd, holding on to them as they aged, instead of following the more "current" trends...you can find a few "funky" Muse albums w/"keyboards" and funk rhythms, but mostly their output in that realm seemed to be aimed at the same people who would buy Houston Person albums since there weren't going to be any new Gene Ammons ones...that's an exaggeration, but...

Actually, not a great deal of an exaggeration, I think. I can't offhand think of another tenor player who embodied so well what Jug was, musically and in the community, but was always himself, not anywhere near a clone.

all in all, though, that Muse label had a pretty impressive run in many ways.

And Joe still ain't doin' too bad with Highnote/Savant. (Though Fedora seems to have fallen by the wayside.)

MG