Howard McGee - Cubop City

[Big Wheel]

some exchanges of ideas between Maggie and Machito´s trumpet player Mario Bauza.

Since this thread is now all about nitpicking, I'll add some: Mario Bauza was not "Machito's trumpet player." He was the musical brains behind the whole operation of that band and pretty much created Afro-Cuban jazz by himself. If anything it would be fairer to call Machito "Mario Bauza's frontman", but they started the band together so let's just let each share the credit.

Much more oral history at this great Bobby Sanabria interview: http://www.jazzwax.com/2008/03/kenya-in-concer.html

[king ubu]

Kinda like that weirdly squealing Mick J. is but Charlie Watts' singer, I guess ... but no matter about all the name-calling and nit-picking and other idiocy, I'd still like to know about the "vulgar" thing, too!

[Big Beat Steve]

No wanting to reproach anything specifically to you, King Ubu , but I really don't see what's so damn difficult to understand about that "vulgar" term in the first place unless those who refuse to understand really, REALLY are dead set on sticking to the very strictest sense of the word and refuse to grasp what can be implied by the term.

In the end it's a matter of "if you can't feel it you can't understand it" but IMHO Danasgoodstuff wasn't far off the mark when he used the term "crude" instead.

Without wanting to speak for the thread opener, to me the yardstick here seems to be the typical JAZZ rhythm sections of the day. And compared to those the mambo rhythms and rhythm sections might indeed appear "vulgar" in their all-out approach. Call it crude (NOT in the sense of John Lee Hooker's idiosyncratic non-meter rhythms of course), call it exuberant, call it exhibitionistic, call it "no holds barred", yes, even call it vulgar ... whatever ... the gist of the idea is always there IMHO.

For example, I clearly remember my first listening impressions after having bought that reissue of Machito's late 40s/early 50s recordings on that Pablo twofer ("Mucho Macho Machito"). Great music but you felt thoroughly exhausted after listening to it in one go (even more so than even after a spell of listening to intense 40s bebop or all-out honkin' sax R&B, the latter of which cannot exactly be called sophisticated BTW and has indeed been called vulgar by some ... ). And listening to Maggie's "Cubop City" from the Afro-Cubop Spotlite album again, the difference is evident because for all its latin flair the rhythm section there clearly plays a subordinate role (not unlike some Dizzy's big band recordings of that era), as opposed to the entire rhythm section all falling over each other all the time in indeed quite a lot of mambo recordings of that era.

Deliberately exaggerated? Yes ... And don't get me wrong, I like mambo, and I wouldn't have used the term "vulgar" myself in comparing those rhythms. But I understand the idea ... and there is nothing inherently wrong IMO with an occasional dose of well-placed "vulgarity" even in music anyway (unless you want your music all subdued and insipid all the time).

But if those who still frown upon the use of the term "vulgar" cannot see the above (or insist on sticking to a verbatim understanding of certain key words) then such discussions are pointless. In the end it all boils down to personal tastes anyway, and nobody but REALLY nobody has a monopole on deciding what is appropriate there. There IS no absolute truth there. One man's tastelessness is another one's "meaty" taste, and one man's tastefulness is another one's insipidity. Nuff said ...

Edited November 27, 2012 by Big Beat Steve

[paul secor]

I don't care all that much, but shouldn't it be up to the starter of this thread to explain what they meant when they used the term? Not good to say something and start a discussion and then just disappear.

Edited November 27, 2012 by paul secor

[Big Beat Steve]

I agree, it just is so that the term in question appeared fairly understandable to me (even more so after what Danasgoodstuff wrote earlier).

So let's just hope the thread starter has not been frightened away by the nitpicking that occurred in the meantime.

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

I don't care all that much, but shouldn't it be up to the starter of this thread to explain what they meant when they used the term? Not good to say something and start a discussion and then just disappear.

I'm sure he's worried about getting caught in a JETngry crossfire. Um, can we move past this? These 'report to moderator' notifications are so upsetting when I'm trying to enjoy a pair of Maple Bacon and Spicy PB&J donuts with my coffee.

[JSngry]

I'd just like to know what the referential spectrum was. I'd not call Machito "vulgar" myself, not even close. I would call some Hollywood-ish overly-exaggerated/simplification of basic Latin percussions vulgar. Then again, I'm into all kinds of percussion-driven music where there's drums on the left, percussion on the right, and there's nowhere you can go without finding something being percussed on, even electronically. And in those musics, it can range from sublime to ponderous. It's a big spectrum.

So all I was really wanting was some kind of reference as to what the OP considered "vulgar", and why this date was not that. For all I know, the OP might be a deep connoisseur of Afro-Cuban rhythms and feels that most use of Latin percussion in jazz settings results in a watering-down of the Latin element to serve commercial ends, and they consider that vulgar. Or at the other end of the spectrum, they might not enjoy percussion in their jazz at all, and find full-frontal Afro-Cuban elements "vulgar" in the sense that "African = primitive". You can find plenty of people who fall in with either side of that spectrum, and, obviously, in-between as well.

A world like "vulgar" only has meaning relative to the user's spectrum. And in any kind of dialogue, until you know the listener's reference points, you don't know what they mean. So yeah:

The rhythm section is less vulgar than is the case on a lot of mambo recordings.

I don't know what this mean. I might know what it means, and I might think I know what it means, but I can't know what it means until the person who said it comes back and gives me a Point B to go with their Point A.

I was willing to let it go, just figure that for whatever reason the OP did not want to engage, and ok, that's cool, just let it go and move on, in the end, I know what I like and don't like, so really...yeah. But some people wanted to go someplace else with it for whatever other reasons, and now they have, and now we still don't know what the OP had in mind.

Not even close enough for jazz!

[king ubu]

Well, Weizen, tell that to those who used that button ... anyway, thanks Big Beat Steve, and honestly I didn't go that far in my thinking, since the term "vulgar" just is ... too vulgar for what's under discussion here, in my opinion.

Another point though is that all too often, jazz rhythm sections play some sophisticated take of ... whatever rhythm it really is, some samba variant or some slightly Latin or whatever for an intro and/or theme, but then revert to their regular straight 4/4 swing - which makes a Latin affair into straight jazz and doesn't really deserve the name "latin" any longer as they just use that to spice up some of their usual sticks. I find that pretty boring many times, or rather I regret the regular change to swinging straight 4/4 as soon as a theme is done with and the blowing starts. That might or mightn't be a different question from the one raised in the opening post here, I wouldn't know (I've not heard that Maggie album).

Ya know, sometimes all that banging 4/4 swing is pretty vullegar, too ... and some Latin stuff is pretty darn sophisticated by comparison - even if you might be exhausted after listening to it. Being exhausted, again, has nothing to do with vulgarity - at least in my book.

[Big Beat Steve]

Fair enough.

So let's see if the thread starter will elaborate some more on this.

[JSngry]

Probably not. Like Weizen says, they're probably thinking that this is a house of lunatics.

Which it is, but we're (mostly) all friendly lunatics once you make it in the door and get though the hallway into the den. But getting through that hallway is a real booger sometimes!

[king ubu]

yep!

not sure what the double "e" is doing there, though

probably dancing to some vulgar boogee!

[J.A.W.]

Weizen is right. I've tried time and time again to lure people who love jazz to this site, but more often than not they are turned off by the constantly recurring negativity, bickering, sarcasm, arrogance and paternalism of some members - or so they tell me. Others have left because of that. I know, there are jazz boards that are worse in these respects, but that's not the point.

[JSngry]

yep!

not sure what the double "e" is doing there, though

probably dancing to some vulgar boogee!

[mikeweil]

The problem is that "vulgar" is a more or less derogatory term when used in such a way, implying that jazz rhythm sections were more "sophisticated", "refined" or whatsoever. I dare say that jazz fans or critics/writers using such terms do not fully understand how African American ryhthm functions. On a superficial level, Afro-Cuban rhythm is closer to African than Jazz rhythm - and here comes the whole out of date thing about African music being "primitive", "primal" etc. in comparison, which is, please forgive me, total nonsense ignorant of the ingenious development of African and Afro-American music (of which jazz is a part, too, but with comparatively higher European influences). There are many things in the rhythms of Machito's or any other Afro-Cuban rhythm section that are very sophisticated and there are many more jazz musicians who have no idea how it works than who have.

It's the European part of our education that still makes many music fans downplay the importance of rhythm, and it's not really helpful in appreciating rhythm all by itself.

Re: Bauzá - Machito himself has been reported to have said that Mario Bauzá was the music's architect, he himself was just the mason. It was Machito's Band, he was the frontman and gave the opportunity, but Bauzá created the arrangements, and most importantly, the guajeos. But it took the singer and all the band members to bring it to life, especially the rhythm section with one of the greatest son pianists, René "Flaco" Hernandez, bassist Bobby Rodriguez, bongocero José Mangual, congero Luis Miranda, and timbalero Ubaldo Nieto (all heard on the track with Howard McGhee).

Jim, this is worth checking out - McGhee and Brew Moore blow on top of the Cuban brew just like Bird did. There is a nice Tumbao CD with most of this stuff:

On the cover, from left to right, Machito, his sister Craciela, and Mario Bauzá.

Edited November 27, 2012 by mikeweil

[JSngry]

Oh, THAT'S the one, then, it's a Machito date, not a McGee. Of course. Or is there a separate McGee date with the same title?

Yes, I know this one, and agree to its excellence.

I'm good with Machito from this period almsot universally. Funny how his sound became somewhat "old fashioned" as the music progressed, but it never lost its essence, and eventually came back around as "classic".

[Big Beat Steve]

Looks like the 4 tracks featuring Maggie and Brew are the ones that also are on the "Afro-Cubop'" Spotlite LP (dates match for 3 of the 4 tracks and who knows if the 4th one was 100% correct on the Spotlite LP).

As for there being another McGhee date with the same title, a 2-part studio version of Cubop City with McGhee backed by the Machito band was recorded in November 1948 and released on Roost 502.

I agree with you, Mike, about the misconceptions many Europeans (and "US-Europeans") have about Afro-Cuban rhythms. A question of initial listening impressions ... Maybe that "vulgar" word should just have been put in quotation marks in the first place? At least thats how I understood it.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Ah, now Mike has posted the Tumbao CD, I see I have most of this in the Machito Proper Box. Great stuff! I wondered why Bebop didn't take over the world when I heard it for the first time.

MG

[mikeweil]

As for there being another McGhee date with the same title, a 2-part studio version of Cubop City with McGhee backed by the Machito band was recorded in November 1948 and released on Roost 502.

This rare item was included on a recommendable Verve compilation:

[Gheorghe]

Finally some answers that refer more to the music.

I got the Spotlite LP as well as a CD that´s more a sampler and got some of the stuff with Maggie and Brew. I really like all of the stuff.

And Bird on those 3 tracks on side 2.

The arrangement of How High the Moon is also very interesting, very boppish.

Well, about the European part of our education......, I heard about people downplaying the importance of rhythm, but I suppose that´s not a jazz audience.

I don´t listen to anything else than jazz or afro-american music, so I don´t know how a non-jazz listener feels about it.

[king ubu]

As for there being another McGhee date with the same title, a 2-part studio version of Cubop City with McGhee backed by the Machito band was recorded in November 1948 and released on Roost 502.

This rare item was included on a recommendable Verve compilation:

Wanted to mention that one - very good compilation, worthwhile even if you already have the tracks with Charlie Parker!