Jazz artists play Beatles

[A Lark Ascending]

My favourite Beatles cover isn't jazz at all but a version by the great Irish band De Danann - starts as a sentimental ballad, becomes a roaring set of reels and fades from the 'la-la-la la-la-la-la's (on mandolin, I think!) into a bodhran solo.

Only equalled by their Handel adaptation - 'The Arrival of the Queen of Sheba in Galway.'

[JSngry]

Or Stones?

[JSngry]

Yeah, Stones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DH-n_QtnmY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LljzZqT9HUw

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

A couple of interesting ones I've just reminded myself of, by playing this one

Jimmy Ponder - While my guitar gently weeps - Cadet (arranged by Bob James and very nicely)

And Bobby Bryant did a nice version of 'Happiness is a warm gun', as well as 'While my guitar gently weeps', on this PJ LP, which also includes George Clinton's 'I wanna testify'.

Bobby Bryant - Earth dance - PJ

MG

[JSngry]

Not Jimmy Ponder.

[JSngry]

[Teasing the Korean]

I can never listen to the Beatles' version again, because of the way he repeats that three-note phrase at the end of bar 4 each time.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Teasing the Korean

[StarThrower]

Mike Manieri released two volumes of Beatles material on his NYC Records label.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Let's get honest. What this was - especially back in the 1960's - was jazz musicians and their record companies looking to cash in. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not sure this was invariably the case. The Beatles meant nothing on the R&B singles chart (as opposed to the Stones, who did have a few R&B hits). So when musicians like Willis Jackson whose albums were definitely aimed at the black community, recorded their songs, it doesn't seem to me like a good strategy for cashing in; you don't cash in on something that's unsuccessful.

MG

[ArtSalt]

The MJQ did a version of Yesterday during their 1969 Space sessions a Abbey Road when they were briefly on The Beatles Apple label.

Jack Sheldon did a sub-Las Vegas crooner medley that included Honey Pie on his 1969 MOR pop and lounge jazz affair The Cool World of Jack Sheldon.

As for jazz rock covers, I quite liked Charlie Hunter's version of Cobain's Come As You Are.

There's also a German DJ, known as DJ Coconut who has done latin-jazz covers of The Yellow Magic Orchestra and other groups that may well prove interesting, but I haven't listened to any yet.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Yes, getting back to other rock songs that jazzmen play, Odell Brown & the Organizers did a fabulous version of Donovan's 'Mellow yellow'. Donovan's version swung pretty well anyway. Surprised more jazz musicians haven't recorded it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr0RPh8QzCo

MG

[paul secor]

Let's get honest. What this was - especially back in the 1960's - was jazz musicians and their record companies looking to cash in. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not sure this was invariably the case. The Beatles meant nothing on the R&B singles chart (as opposed to the Stones, who did have a few R&B hits). So when musicians like Willis Jackson whose albums were definitely aimed at the black community, recorded their songs, it doesn't seem to me like a good strategy for cashing in; you don't cash in on something that's unsuccessful.

MG

It's possible that Willis Jackson or others who appealed to a black audience didn't have a primary interest in recording Beatles songs, but perhaps their record companies did. Even then, rock (and funk) had put a devastating hit on the jazz market and everyone was looking for a crossover success, however it might happen.

[tomatamot]

The Jazz Crusaders, on several Pacific albums.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Let's get honest. What this was - especially back in the 1960's - was jazz musicians and their record companies looking to cash in. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not sure this was invariably the case. The Beatles meant nothing on the R&B singles chart (as opposed to the Stones, who did have a few R&B hits). So when musicians like Willis Jackson whose albums were definitely aimed at the black community, recorded their songs, it doesn't seem to me like a good strategy for cashing in; you don't cash in on something that's unsuccessful.

MG

It's possible that Willis Jackson or others who appealed to a black audience didn't have a primary interest in recording Beatles songs, but perhaps their record companies did. Even then, rock (and funk) had put a devastating hit on the jazz market and everyone was looking for a crossover success, however it might happen.

You may be right that it was the producers who got these songs recorded by Gator and others. But these musicians had always been interested in playing white pop songs like 'Glory of love', 'Angel eyes', 'She's funny that way' and 'South of the border' etc etc. I saw the Beatles songs as being part of that thread of entertainment jazz.

MG

[paul secor]

Let's get honest. What this was - especially back in the 1960's - was jazz musicians and their record companies looking to cash in. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not sure this was invariably the case. The Beatles meant nothing on the R&B singles chart (as opposed to the Stones, who did have a few R&B hits). So when musicians like Willis Jackson whose albums were definitely aimed at the black community, recorded their songs, it doesn't seem to me like a good strategy for cashing in; you don't cash in on something that's unsuccessful.

MG

It's possible that Willis Jackson or others who appealed to a black audience didn't have a primary interest in recording Beatles songs, but perhaps their record companies did. Even then, rock (and funk) had put a devastating hit on the jazz market and everyone was looking for a crossover success, however it might happen.

You may be right that it was the producers who got these songs recorded by Gator and others. But these musicians had always been interested in playing white pop songs like 'Glory of love', 'Angel eyes', 'She's funny that way' and 'South of the border' etc etc. I saw the Beatles songs as being part of that thread of entertainment jazz.

MG

You may be right also. The only way to know would be to ask any of the artists or producers who are still around and hope for a straight answer.

[Steve Reynolds]

Hate me for this if you like:

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Peace and Blessings

[GA Russell]

Ramsey Lewis Trio - And I Love Her (from my first jazz album, Hang On Ramsey!)

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Let's get honest. What this was - especially back in the 1960's - was jazz musicians and their record companies looking to cash in. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not sure this was invariably the case. The Beatles meant nothing on the R&B singles chart (as opposed to the Stones, who did have a few R&B hits). So when musicians like Willis Jackson whose albums were definitely aimed at the black community, recorded their songs, it doesn't seem to me like a good strategy for cashing in; you don't cash in on something that's unsuccessful.

MG

It's possible that Willis Jackson or others who appealed to a black audience didn't have a primary interest in recording Beatles songs, but perhaps their record companies did. Even then, rock (and funk) had put a devastating hit on the jazz market and everyone was looking for a crossover success, however it might happen.

You may be right that it was the producers who got these songs recorded by Gator and others. But these musicians had always been interested in playing white pop songs like 'Glory of love', 'Angel eyes', 'She's funny that way' and 'South of the border' etc etc. I saw the Beatles songs as being part of that thread of entertainment jazz.

MG

You may be right also. The only way to know would be to ask any of the artists or producers who are still around and hope for a straight answer.

I just looked up the sleeve of Gator's 'Really groovin'', in which he notes that he was on his regular summer gig in Atlantic City when Frank Sinatra, who was singing in the club next door, came and sat in with his band. Gator was pleased he'd thought they were that good. Note that he recorded, or had recorded, 'Where are you' in Feb 1960 (though it wasn't released until after 'Really groovin''. I'm sure Gator and the band knew Sinatra's book rather well.

Bob Porter did say that Prestige wanted hit records but the context in which we were talking implied R&B hits, not pop hits. But obviously, Bobby Weinstock wouldn't mind wherever the money came from

MG

PS I don't think the Beatles were played much on black radio. Probably the exception was 'Come together'; 'Abbey Road' made the R&B album charts for a few weeks in early '70, a couple of months after it went onto the pop album chart, by which time Syl Johnson was already putting together 'Is it because I'm black', which included 'Come together', a song with some relevance to the black community in those days.

[Hot Ptah]

Let's get honest. What this was - especially back in the 1960's - was jazz musicians and their record companies looking to cash in. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yes. To me, nearly all of the jazz covers of the Beatles badly miss the feel of the music, and veer close to easy listening or worse.

[crisp]

Why is there a difference between jazz musicians playing Rodgers & Hart songs and jazz musicians playing Lennon-McCartney? I think there is one, but why? Are Beatles songs inherently inferior to those earlier pop songs?

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I don't think there's a difference in principle. In practice, there are differences between the specific jazz musicians and their specific approaches for the specific songs - as well as, perhaps, their reasons for playing those specific songs (referring to what Paul Secor said, which I don't disagree with but think there are probably a lot of exceptions). But, even if we know musician X recorded Beatles song Y for purely commercial reasons, don't we also know that musician A recorded Rodgers & Hart song B for purely commercial reasons? I think we know that must have happened at least as frequently.

MG

[Hot Ptah]

Why is there a difference between jazz musicians playing Rodgers & Hart songs and jazz musicians playing Lennon-McCartney? I think there is one, but why? Are Beatles songs inherently inferior to those earlier pop songs?

Many jazz fans would like to think so. I do not dislike pop or rock music, or find it inherently inferior to jazz. Pop and rock is different, not inferior. I try to find what is good in every style of music, on its own terms.

I think that the Beatles recorded and performed their own material with a sensibility and style which has little or nothing to do with jazz. So to me, it almost never sounds good when jazz musicians try to play their material.

Maybe if the Beatles had not recorded their songs, and all we had was sheet music of their compositions, it would be different for me.

I definitely think that the best versions of the Beatles songs were recorded by the Beatles, with rare exceptions. I disagree with The Magnificent Goldberg on that.

I think what is different about the Beatles is that they used the British music hall tradition as one tool among many in their songwriting, so there are glimpses here and there in their songs of something that might be interpreted by jazz musicians in the way that the Great American Songbook is interpreted by jazz musicians. But to me, the Beatles used the British music hall tradition not in a straightforward way, but in a way that commented on the prior tradition without becoming part of it--sometimes with a sort of affectionate send-up of the prior tradition. Also, the British music hall tradition was only one of many musical tools the Beatles used, and their songs and albums were often packed with a great variety of their different influences and musicial tools, used in a new way which was quite original.

So to simply try to play jazz on those parts that sound vaguely like a old standard pop song, without getting the feel of the Beatles' mind-set, often produces dreadful results, in my opinion.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Hot Ptah

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Gotta say that I never liked the Beatles much. The only recordings I liked were 'Love me do' and 'She's a woman'.

MG

[Hot Ptah]

Gotta say that I never liked the Beatles much. The only recordings I liked were 'Love me do' and 'She's a woman'.

MG

It's personal and subjective, like musical taste in general. I always liked the Beatles, from the first time I heard them. I got tired of them for a while because I had heard all of their albums so much, but I keep coming back and listening to them every once in a while. It could really be generational, I think. I was seven years old when they were on Ed Sullivan for the first time, and remember the whole family sitting around mesmerized, with my parents calling them animals. They were the soundtrack of my youth from then until they broke up, then their solo careers were very prominent at my school and on the radio. They were what I knew as music from a young age.

Discovering McCoy Tyner, Charlie Parker, Sun Ra, etc. much later, I obviously went off into many other directions, but I don't hate the music I liked as a kid.

[crisp]

I notice that jazz musicians didn't touch pre-Beatles rock and roll (an area I'm developing a taste for right now). There aren't any (or many) jazz versions of Goffin and King, for example, and those songs are just as melodic as Rodgers and Hart (with better lyrics).

I've often wondered if there is something about rock'n'roll songs that resists improvising -- lack of syncopation perhaps? Or did jazzers just not listen to that music?