Jazz artists play Beatles

[robertoart]

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

MG

Don't like their Rockabilly covers then MG?

Their Arthur Alexander covers are good too. Soldier Of Love.

They did great takes on the Motown girl groups too. Please Mr Postman etc.

[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

Don't like their Rockabilly covers then MG?

Their Arthur Alexander covers are good too. Soldier Of Love.

They did great takes on the Motown girl groups too. Please Mr Postman etc.

I had the originals of all that stuff (well, not the Rockabilly), which I greatly preferred. To me, for example, no one needs to ask whether Barrett Strong's version of 'Money' is better than the Beatles or not; it self-evidently is.

[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

Don't like their Rockabilly covers then MG?

Their Arthur Alexander covers are good too. Soldier Of Love.

They did great takes on the Motown girl groups too. Please Mr Postman etc.

I had the originals of all that stuff (well, not the Rockabilly), which I greatly preferred. To me, for example, no one needs to ask whether Barrett Strong's version of 'Money' is better than the Beatles or not; it self-evidently is.

Oh, I don't agree, and I have heard each version over 500 times. They are different, and I certainly understand where someone who prefers the Barrett Strong version is coming from, but the Beatles version is really good, to me.

As you said, you just don't like the Beatles, That's fine.

[robertoart]

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

MG

Don't like their Rockabilly covers then MG?

Their Arthur Alexander covers are good too. Soldier Of Love.

They did great takes on the Motown girl groups too. Please Mr Postman etc.

I had the originals of all that stuff (well, not the Rockabilly), which I greatly preferred. To me, for example, no one needs to ask whether Barrett Strong's version of 'Money' is better than the Beatles or not; it self-evidently is. They never bettered that stuff for sure. How could they.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

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?

I've got a few jazz recordings of Goffin/King songs. Off the top of my head:

Natural woman

Go away little girl (2 or 3, maybe more)

Will you still love me tomorrow

Hey girl

MG

[Hot Ptah]

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?

I think that jazzers did not listen to that music. I read that Chick Corea first listened to the Beatles albums just a few years ago, for example.

I have heard New York studio vets, the first line guys, talk about doing sessions in the 1960s and their hearts sinking when they opened the sheet music for their jingle session and saw the rock and roll triplets. To those guys, rock was just simple, dumb music. They never listened to the best rock albums, never understood the vision or sensibility of the rock musicians.

To me, that is why some attempts to play rock material by jazz musicians sounds like Dean Martin on the Hollywood Palace TV show singing "The Times They Are A Changin'". He can get the notes right, and the words correct, but has zero feel for the material.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Hot Ptah

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

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?

Aside from Goffin/King, I think the answer to your question is something different. Cos look, 'Bo Diddley' swings like mad, and the number of jazz musicians who use that 'Bo Diddley' rhythm shows that they weren't/aren't immune. But in the Rock & Roll days, virtually the only jazz that was selling big was west coast jazz. Can you imagine Chet Baker or Gerry Mulligan playing something with that rhythm? Or Lennie Tristano, to move the discussion eastwards? They just weren't doing that sort of thing.

MG

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?

I think that jazzers did not listen to that music. I read that Chick Corea first listened to the Beatles albums just a few years ago, for example.

I have heard New York studio vets, the first line guys, talk about doing sessions in the 1960s and their hearts sinking when they opened the sheet music for their jingle session and saw the rock and roll triplets. To those guys, rock was just simple, dumb music. They never listened to the best rock albums, never understood the vision or sensibility of the rock musicians.

To me, that is why some attempts to play rock material by jazz musicians sounds like Dean Martin on the Hollywood Palace TV show singing "The Times They Are A Changin'". He can get the notes right, and the words correct, but has zero feel for the material.

You're probably right there, but some did. I'll do a bit of looking through my collection and see what it looks like. Because the studio guys you're talking about may very well have been a completely different bunch of people from the jazz musicians I listen to.

MG

[Hot Ptah]

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?

Aside from Goffin/King, I think the answer to your question is something different. Cos look, 'Bo Diddley' swings like mad, and the number of jazz musicians who use that 'Bo Diddley' rhythm shows that they weren't/aren't immune. But in the Rock & Roll days, virtually the only jazz that was selling big was west coast jazz. Can you imagine Chet Baker or Gerry Mulligan playing something with that rhythm? Or Lennie Tristano, to move the discussion eastwards? They just weren't doing that sort of thing.

MG

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?

I think that jazzers did not listen to that music. I read that Chick Corea first listened to the Beatles albums just a few years ago, for example.

I have heard New York studio vets, the first line guys, talk about doing sessions in the 1960s and their hearts sinking when they opened the sheet music for their jingle session and saw the rock and roll triplets. To those guys, rock was just simple, dumb music. They never listened to the best rock albums, never understood the vision or sensibility of the rock musicians.

To me, that is why some attempts to play rock material by jazz musicians sounds like Dean Martin on the Hollywood Palace TV show singing "The Times They Are A Changin'". He can get the notes right, and the words correct, but has zero feel for the material.

You're probably right there, but some did. I'll do a bit of looking through my collection and see what it looks like. Because the studio guys you're talking about may very well have been a completely different bunch of people from the jazz musicians I listen to.

MG

Some of them are exactly the same guys! It is difficult to generalize, though.

I agree that many soul musicians, and jazz musicians playing soul jazz, came up with worthy interpretations of rock songs. Wilson Pickett's "Hey Jude" for example, is much more credible as a piece of music than Bing Crosby's "Hey Jude", to me.

[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?

I've got a few jazz recordings of Goffin/King songs. Off the top of my head:

Natural woman

Go away little girl (2 or 3, maybe more)

Will you still love me tomorrow

Hey girl

MG

Well I've probably got a few -- that's still not many. I have dozens of jazz versions of numerous Rodgers & Hart songs on the other hand.

Still, I appreciate the discussion -- just what I was hoping for. I've been guilty of ignoring rock'n'roll for years just as Hot Ptah says jazz musicians once did. Now I'm collecting Ace Records releases of this material and finding it a treasure trove -- there was great skill and craftsmanship in these sides.

Can any musicians here chime in on what they feel about playing Beatles and other post-rock'n'roll songs? I'm still suspecting that they resist jazz interpretation for some reason that as a non-musician I can't figure out.

Edited September 25, 2013 by crisp

[robertoart]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yx0hY2NJNVA

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

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?

Aside from Goffin/King, I think the answer to your question is something different. Cos look, 'Bo Diddley' swings like mad, and the number of jazz musicians who use that 'Bo Diddley' rhythm shows that they weren't/aren't immune. But in the Rock & Roll days, virtually the only jazz that was selling big was west coast jazz. Can you imagine Chet Baker or Gerry Mulligan playing something with that rhythm? Or Lennie Tristano, to move the discussion eastwards? They just weren't doing that sort of thing.

MG

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?

I think that jazzers did not listen to that music. I read that Chick Corea first listened to the Beatles albums just a few years ago, for example.

I have heard New York studio vets, the first line guys, talk about doing sessions in the 1960s and their hearts sinking when they opened the sheet music for their jingle session and saw the rock and roll triplets. To those guys, rock was just simple, dumb music. They never listened to the best rock albums, never understood the vision or sensibility of the rock musicians.

To me, that is why some attempts to play rock material by jazz musicians sounds like Dean Martin on the Hollywood Palace TV show singing "The Times They Are A Changin'". He can get the notes right, and the words correct, but has zero feel for the material.

You're probably right there, but some did. I'll do a bit of looking through my collection and see what it looks like. Because the studio guys you're talking about may very well have been a completely different bunch of people from the jazz musicians I listen to.

MG

Some of them are exactly the same guys! It is difficult to generalize, though.

I agree that many soul musicians, and jazz musicians playing soul jazz, came up with worthy interpretations of rock songs. Wilson Pickett's "Hey Jude" for example, is much more credible as a piece of music than Bing Crosby's "Hey Jude", to me.

Yeah!

But also, those early Rock N Roll records swung and because, largely I feel, of the jazz musicians employed on them. Records like The Drifters' 'Such a night' and 'Money honey' and Joe Turner's 'Shake rattle & roll' (all written by Jesse Stone, who ran a big band in KC and Omaha in the twenties and thirties) had great jazzmen on them and swang terrifically. Connie Kay was a regular in the Atlantic studios with Jesse on those sessions. Other jazzmen who appeared with great regularity were Willis Jackson, Lloyd Trotman, Sam 'The Man' Taylor and Panama Francis. Same was true of King's recordings, often the same people.

One thing I think happened was that those guys couldn't get recording contracts in the fifties and, when they did, as far as the black community was concerned, the thing was Soul, not R&R or R&B. So you got a lot of those musicians recording soul songs, plus a few classic R&B/R&R songs like 'High heel sneakers', 'Charlie Brown', 'Blue Monday' and so on.

MG