George Shearing -- Is it wrong to think that

[AllenLowe]

cliches and empty gestures:

1) things that have been played to death, shallow ideas that are flashy and fancy sounding but really just touch the surface -

2) splashy shiny sounds that are just empty from a conceptual, intellectual, and emotional perspective.

[Joe]

The lone studio date with Crosby and Fournier is JAZZ MOMENTS, correct?

Its the only Shearing recording I own, and I can't say I remember much about it. But this thread has prompted me to dig it out...

[AllenLowe]

funny, that was the one Shearing album that my mother owned -

[GA Russell]

When I was in first grade, my sister in eighth grade had a George Shearing book her piano teacher had assigned. I guess he was the first jazz musician I became aware of.

About 1988 I bought the Pausa reissue of The Shearing Spell and loved it. I bought three other Shearing albums and then the Mosaic box. I think that the guy on Boylston St. had the right idea!

[Chuck Nessa]

In the jazz section of a record store on Boyleston (sp?) in Boston in the mid-70's - a guy says to me, "I'm tired of this crazy shit, I'm getting some George Shearing."

That would have been either Discount Records (I was regional manager of that store until Thanksgiving '75) or Minute Man Records (a few doors down the street).

[AllenLowe]

Chuck - I worked for Minute Man at that time (1975) -

Moe Levy was the silent partner.

later I worked in the warehouse, which was full of Roulette cutouts.

Edited October 8, 2010 by AllenLowe

[Chuck Nessa]

Chuck - I worked for Minute Man at that time (1975) -

Moe Levy was the silent partner.

later I worked in the warehouse, which was full of Roulette cutouts.

Morris was not that silent.

[.:.impossible]

Until Thanksgiving? Sounds like there's a story behind this one.

[mikeweil]

Another album rather difficult to judge is his collaboration with the Montgomery Brothers on Jazzland. Shearing was under exclusive contract with Capitol but insisted they let him record that one after sitting in with the Brothers. I kind of like it - Wes and his brothers and Shearing shared a certain approach towards the lighter side of jazz, methinks.

Edited October 10, 2010 by mikeweil

[Ted O'Reilly]

...live at The Montreal Bistro in Toronto. He had Neil Swainson on bass and Reg Schwager on guitar. Can't recall the name of the drummer...

I think it was Dennis Mackrel, wasn't it?

I'm very fond of Shearing as a person, and as a pianist. Just take a look at some of the great musicians who have worked with him, to see how well he's regarded.

[BillF]

I saw Shearing in Leeds, UK in the sixties and recall that he had Red Mitchell on bass. Alluding to his blindness, he said that he personally chose the voluptuous young women who graced his record covers. The only reason I and my hip young friends were there is that it was a double bill with the Junior Mance Trio, which incidentally had Bob Cranshaw on bass.

There's been no discussion of Shearing's compositions as yet. Leaving aside "Lullaby of Birdland", I note that, although I have no Shearing records in my collection, his compositions feature on albums by artists whose jazz credentials are never in question; e.g. "Conception" covered by Bill Evans and "She" by Eric Alexander and Grant Stewart.

[BillF]

Wes and his brothers and Shearing shared a certain approach towards the lighter side of jazz, methinks.

I think you're right there, Mikeweil. I've only recently come across the Montgomery Brothers - as opposed to Wes - and was surprised that the feel was so different from Wes's Riversides. I haven't heard their album with Shearing, but with Buddy moving from piano chair to vibes, I imagine you'd have something sounding very much like a Shearing group.

[mmilovan]

Speaking of Shearing I would probably be one of his real huge fans around this board; his famous MGM recordings with his harmonization of vibes/guitar/piano supported by rhythm section is one of truly enjoyable sounds in jazz, even they sound just as a cliche or molded upon well known schemes.

Yes, there were moments of real pop music with strings attached everywhere, but it is pleasure to listen to!

And all those real giants from an early era: Al McKibbon, Denzil Best and especially guitar genius Chuck Wayne melted theirs sounds in such easy way it is hard to resist.

Why is it so hard to accept easy going music as an art form?

[marcello]

Around the time I took this photo of Chuck Wayne:

the subject of Shearing came up, of course. I was a little taken aback with the rancor that Wayne had for Shearing.

I also remember him saying something like "Shearing ruined Denzil Best" or had something to do with hastening his death.

[Big Beat Steve]

Speaking of Shearing I would probably be one of his real huge fans around this board; his famous MGM recordings with his harmonization of vibes/guitar/piano supported by rhythm section is one of truly enjoyable sounds in jazz, even they sound just as a cliche or molded upon well known schemes.

...

Why is it so hard to accept easy going music as an art form?

Good question ...

Some will probably and automatically reply by stating that "easy going" is synonymous with "not enough depth".

Though I'd venture to say not all of those who proclaim to be able to absorb those "deep" and "complex" forms of jazz REALLY DO understand it inside out. They didn't then and they don't now. Nodding one's head in sophistication is one thing but REALLY absorbing it with every fiber despite everything that might just strike you as "far out" is quite another.

In fact, IMHO it is more a matter of so many jazz lovers being conditioned exclusively on the jazz of that era performed by those "ANGRY YOUNG MEN" and if being angry (and the music that comes from it) is the key word then "easy going" or even "happiness" is just anathema to it all. Especially as it might very well challenge the very concept of this "angry" sort of jazz if you have to admit that at the same time there were other valid forms of jazz too if you are prepared to listen to it on its OWN merits.

That said, I agree with all the good that has been said about his MGM recordings. His Capitol recordings are a mixed bag indeed and you would have to pick the jazzier items carefully. The other day I played his "Shearing On Stage!" album and found it fair enough. Though his pretty feeble jokes he includes in his "emceeing job" as the bandleader do wear thin quite rapidly and sort of mar the overall effect of the music as such.

But did Shearing claim all of his Capitol stuff was hard core jazz any more than the latter-day Wes Montgomery or George Benson did with THEIR works?

OTOH maybe us "Yurpeans" aren't the most "objective" persons to judge Shearing anyway. Considering the substantial influence of the "Shearing sound" on a lot of what was happening in jazz in EUROPE in the 50s (in Germany and Sweden, for example) I think we do tend to approach his music from a slightly different angle and maybe give him more leeway than others would.

Edited October 12, 2010 by Big Beat Steve

[AllenLowe]

I call it Queasy Listening.

[Larry Kart]

I know all about Queasy Listening music. My original post was meant to convey that for me at this time listening to this particular Shearing album didn't give me much, if any, of that Queasy Listening feeling. While there was undoubtedly a "sound," and the presence of a "sound" of that sort is what this sort of music tends to be about, a good deal of other mostly subtle, individual, and fairly interesting stuff was going on too.

About Chuck Wayne's gripe against Shearing: If it had to do primarily with limited solo space, I'd say: "Hey, that's the gig," "Yes, George takes most of the solos, but even he doesn't solo that much; it's a basically a group-sound thing, and if it were opened up that much, it probably wouldn't be that popular and also might not even be that effective musically," and (this seems a possibly apt comparison) "Who in his right mind would have complained about lack of solo space in the Claude Thornhill Orchestra?" I have no idea what Wayne's complaint about Shearing ruining Denzil Best could be about and would like to know.

[AllenLowe]

actually, now that you mention it, I heard Chuck Wayne say, one night on Al Haig's gig (maybe 1976) that HE had invented the Shearing sound, had suggested the voicing, and that Shearing never gave him credit for it.

Later, Bill Triglia, who was a nut but a reliable witness, told me he thought this was true. Haig, who was also a nut, did not venture an opinion. I told another veteran jazz guy about this and he said "those guys are all fuckin' crazy, but Chuck's probably telling the truth."

who knows.....

Edited October 12, 2010 by AllenLowe

[Larry Kart]

actually, now that you mention it, I heard Chuck Wayne say, one night on Al Haig's gig (maybe 1976) that HE had invented the Shearing sound, had suggested the voicing, and that Shearing never gave him credit for it.

Later, Bill Triglia, who was a nut but a reliable witness, told me he thought this was true. Haig, who was also a nut, did not venture an opinion. I told another veteran jazz guy about this and he said "those guys are all fuckin' crazy, but Chuck's probably telling the truth."

who knows.....

That explanation makes sense. And Miles copped "Solar" from him, too. Unlucky Chuck.

[marcello]

Allen, Now that I remember. Chuck Wayne told me that also.

[jeffcrom]

Speaking of Shearing I would probably be one of his real huge fans around this board; his famous MGM recordings with his harmonization of vibes/guitar/piano supported by rhythm section is one of truly enjoyable sounds in jazz, even they sound just as a cliche or molded upon well known schemes.

...

Why is it so hard to accept easy going music as an art form?

Good question ...

Some will probably and automatically reply by stating that "easy going" is synonymous with "not enough depth".

Though I'd venture to say not all of those who proclaim to be able to absorb those "deep" and "complex" forms of jazz REALLY DO understand it inside out. They didn't then and they don't now. Nodding one's head in sophistication is one thing but REALLY absorbing it with every fiber despite everything that might just strike you as "far out" is quite another.

In fact, IMHO it is more a matter of so many jazz lovers being conditioned exclusively on the jazz of that era performed by those "ANGRY YOUNG MEN" and if being angry (and the music that comes from it) is the key word then "easy going" or even "happiness" is just anathema to it all. Especially as it might very well challenge the very concept of this "angry" sort of jazz if you have to admit that at the same time there were other valid forms of jazz too if you are prepared to listen to it on its OWN merits.

Wow - there's a lot here. After telling myself that I wasn't going rise to the bait of post #38, I now find that I can't help myself.

The problem with Mr. Shearing's music is not that it is "easy going." Jazz, as well as other areas of music, is filled with music that is pleasant and relaxed, yet which has a core of strength and intelligence. I love Paul Desmond's music, which is as "easy going" (or more so) than Shearing's. It makes very pleasant background music, if that's what you want. But Desmond's improvising also rewards close attention - you can follow the line he's creating and shake your head in wonder.

Shearing's playing makes me shake my head in frustration. The more attention you give it, the worse it sounds. I don't mind that it's "easy going," I just think it's poor improvising. One example out of many: listen to "September in the Rain," from his first MGM session. The first 16 bars are played with the classic Shearing ensemble sound, and I say - nothing wrong with that. It's easy going, it's pleasant, it swings lightly - fine. But listen to the bridge. Shearing plays an unbroken string of extremely fast notes that has absolutely no melodic point - it circles around, it rises and falls, it goes nowhere. I wanted to yell at the record player, "Jeez - take a breath; leave some space!" Forget comparisons with Bud Powell; imagine what Dodo Marmarosa would have done with those eight measures.

Both of you guys seem to think that everyone's objections to Shearing involves the surface of his music - the overall sound. In my case, anyway, that's not true at all - it's the core of his music that's so weak. I listened to all of the MGM stuff I had yesterday, and over and over again the exellent playing of Chuck Wayne and (much to my surprise) Marjorie Hyams demonstrated by contrast how trite and unfocused Shearing's playing is, in spite of his obvious facility and harmonic knowledge.

This, of course, is a subjective opinion, and it's based on incomplete evidence - I haven't heard Shearing's entire output. But as I said before, what I've heard makes me disinclined to explore further. The albums from the 1960s that I have don't really improve my opinion of his playing. Larry and others here have pointed out that there's often some interesting stuff going on in Shearing's recordings. I just don't think much of it is played by Shearing himself.

And Steve, I would respond to your first paragraph two ways - first of all, one can respond to music, any music, without "understanding" it. But I also think that the level of knowledge and understanding of all kinds of jazz seems pretty high in these forums. I think I'd like Shearing's playing more if I had less knowledge and experience of jazz.

[AllenLowe]

agreed - part of the problem with Shearing from that era is that he occasionally tries to sound "boppish", but has no real feeling for that style.

[Jim R]

From reading some of the posts here, you'd think that Shearing died (or stopped recording) in the 60's, and never recorded anything outside the setting of the p-g-v-b-d quintet. I'm surprised that some of you seem to have made up your minds based on such limited listening.

I think Peter Friedman said it nicely in his post. For those of you who want to hear something a little different, I recommend trying the MPS trio recordings, with Louis Stewart and N.H.O.P., which are now over 30 years old.

[AllenLowe]

actually, I cited that era of recording some posts back - this was, to me, better Shearing, more "serious," but somehow missing the mark, as though he'd forgotten how to do it.

just my opinion.

[mmilovan]

Shearing's playing makes me shake my head in frustration. The more attention you give it, the worse it sounds. I don't mind that it's "easy going," I just think it's poor improvising. One example out of many: listen to "September in the Rain," from his first MGM session. The first 16 bars are played with the classic Shearing ensemble sound, and I say - nothing wrong with that. It's easy going, it's pleasant, it swings lightly - fine. But listen to the bridge. Shearing plays an unbroken string of extremely fast notes that has absolutely no melodic point - it circles around, it rises and falls, it goes nowhere.

Oh, well, the same can easily be told during listening to some very famous, well-known, "serious" jazz legends.

And contemporary musicians too.