Blues organ (with bass player): which manual?
Laird Nelson
When playing a support role (comping) in a traditional blues idiom, is
there a convention as to which manual to play (top? bottom? both?)?
My gut (and ear) tells me in general to stick to one manual.
Thoughts?
Laird
Tony
Obviously various opinions. In my opinion, 'it doesn't matter' because you
are talking about a physical interface, (keyboard) Using what skills you
have to be most comfortable in what manual you choose matters, assuming you
are not playing bass. Various band organists play different ways. Actually,
imo, two manuals are not needed in a blues band why many do so well with the
single manual clone. When it gets to a point where you can preset both
keyboards for rapid change of sound to make the playing more interesting
then it matters, imo. I have seen many guys just use one keyboard (of two
keyboard organ) just for 'palm smears' and glisses with a rare use hear and
there. Non-band players (single) or bass playing organists: we are talking
about a different animal.
Tony
Laird Nelson
> Obviously various opinions. In my opinion, 'it doesn't matter' because you
> are talking about a physical interface, (keyboard) Using what skills you
> have to be most comfortable in what manual you choose matters, assuming you
> are not playing bass. Various band organists play different ways. Actually,
> imo, two manuals are not needed in a blues band why many do so well with the
> single manual clone. When it gets to a point where you can preset both
> keyboards for rapid change of sound to make the playing more interesting
> then it matters, imo. I have seen many guys just use one keyboard (of two
> keyboard organ) just for 'palm smears' and glisses with a rare use hear and
> there. Non-band players (single) or bass playing organists: we are talking
> about a different animal.
Hey, thanks for the detailed answer.
I ask because I'm one of the eighty seven gazillion organ players in the
world who moved there from piano. I have an old Hammond M2 in the
basement, and a voce v5-with-Motion Sound pro3 that I gig with. I'm
really comfortable with making the v5 work with a single manual, but if
I try to do anything interesting at home with the M2 using both manuals,
it's always sounded a little weird.
I'm used, from a jazz and blues piano perspective, to comping when I'm
soloing. Now, I know enough to open up my comp chords somewhat on the
organ (otherwise you get mud), but it still doesn't sound right. I
guess your left hand ends up being more useless on a Hammond in a blues
setting than it would be on a piano?
FWIW, I've been playing jazz piano for twenty some years, so I'm not a
novice when it comes to style, ear, etc.; just trying to learn my way
around a new beast.
Thanks again for the advice,
Laird
Tony
> I ask because I'm one of the eighty seven gazillion organ players in the
> world who moved there from piano. I have an old Hammond M2 in the
> basement, and a voce v5-with-Motion Sound pro3 that I gig with. I'm
> really comfortable with making the v5 work with a single manual, but if
> I try to do anything interesting at home with the M2 using both manuals,
> it's always sounded a little weird.
Yeah, I hear ya. I agree. I play piano too and comping on the piano fits
beautifully, both hands, but using two keyboards for comping on the organ
(one lead, the other comping), other than the theater players, it does not
sound right and 'too much organ' , imo and interferance, perhaps with guitar
comping.
> I'm used, from a jazz and blues piano perspective, to comping when I'm
> soloing. Now, I know enough to open up my comp chords somewhat on the
> organ (otherwise you get mud), but it still doesn't sound right. I
> guess your left hand ends up being more useless on a Hammond in a blues
> setting than it would be on a piano?
Even watching rock guys play, like in Santana video, you will notice that
Chester Thompson hardly uses his left hand (except some show business
theatrics) except for, like I said, palm smears, etc. With jazz players
playing bass, they comp by dropping down for a fraction of a second to the
higher/middle register of the bass-playing, lower manual, usually on
838000000 and makes an *nice* funky effect spotting a chord here and there.
> FWIW, I've been playing jazz piano for twenty some years, so I'm not a
> novice when it comes to style, ear, etc.; just trying to learn my way
> around a new beast.
I love piano and it's expressiveness as much as the Hammond sound but
differently. Also, if one reads scores too, etc., piano has really been
written for a long time to *perfection* and is actually more mainstream in
jazz recordings than the Hammond by spades. Having said that, in blues, rock
or jazz or anything else, it is very cool and sensual, and the 'ultimate',
to play the aggressive growl, scream, cut, spit, fat leads, big chords,
sustainability, hornlines and 'electricness' of the Hammond sound, imho.
Tony
Doug S
Other than the percussion on the 2nd set of drawbars of the upper manual,
and the presets (if you use any) on the manuals, there's no difference.
My church music director - trained on a piano - will often use only
one manual at a time but go back and forth between the manuals based
on preset/drawbars. He would do this much more often than left-hand lower
and right-hand upper
On a video tape on Gospel on the B-3, the guy played left hand on the
upper manual - rather unusual, but if you want the percussion on the
left hand, it made sense. Since this is what I play, I kinda picked it
up too.
Slightly off-topic, If I remember right, he had drawbars set at:
Upper Bb - 88 8000 000
Upper B - 88 8800 000
Lower Bb - 80 8808 008
Lower B - unused
Occasionally he would turn percussion off on the upper B drawbars or
pull the 1' drawbar on the upper Bb set for variety.
Doug
--
Doug S. (do...@cc.ysu.edu) (http://cc.ysu.edu/~doug/)
The shadow of a dog never bit anyone -- Kenneth Copeland
The Three R's of Microsoft: Reboot, Reinstall, fixed in next Release -- me
Stamp out html e-mails: http://wearcam.org/nomime.htm
------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
Want to have instant messaging, and chat rooms, and discussion
groups for your local users or business, you need dbabble!
-- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dbabble.htm ----
Acme Diagnostics
I have considerable experience playing B3 in blues and jazz bands, but
played bass as well (left hand + pedals doubling to get the kick). As
they say, I think like an organ player and not a piano player and I
think that's part of what you're looking for. Two hands on the same
manual (left-comping) is for piano players (have done that) and church
music (did that gig too), or Bob Ralston on Lawrence Welke playing bass
with feet only or selling organs at the mall (not a blues compiment!
Did too much of that). None highly respected for blues in my
experience. Of course exceptions to everything. I don't think a typical
blues room would shoo Keith Emerson out the door! Earl Grant played
(and danced!) feet only, and he could sound good on anything.
I think it depends on the feel you want. In my experience what excites
blues audiences (and players) the most is the Jimmy Smith feel, which
describes most blues/jazz organists (you did say "traditional."). Like
someone mentioned, 838000000 or similar on the lower manual. So
comping behind horns, you're going to be right-hand on lower mostly
with simple cute Smith-type rhythmic chops (raised 9ths anyone?). But
playing bass you're stuck with the setting or similar, so if I didn't
have to play bass, I would tone it down, probably to 818 or something
still hollow but prettier like 8174 00000 or whatever you like. It was
always somewhat of a problem that that comping was a tad loud. The
setting for the fifth harmonic was always a trade-off between bass
volume (never enough) and comping.
Comps need to be short because it overpowers. Well, any early Smith
album where he plays bass will teach that comping pretty quick (even
though you're not interested in bass, those are the albums where he
does the interesting blues comping - all right-hand, mostly lower
manual).
Then on the upper manual, usually have any more serious and louder
drawbar combo (usually somewhat inverted U shaped).
Smith et al would get excited for 4 bars here and there on the upper
manual, then drop back to lower for most comping, or almost all
drawbars pulled out for when the horns get excited or such or any other
fancy stuff, which happened a lot in the blues bands I played in. Or
sometimes louder comping with the Smith solo sound approx. 888000000
with 5th short perc. We had a "honker" that used to play Red Prysock
for like 10 minutes, etc. (audience loved it) and I was pretty much
*holding* close to full drawbars with two leslies floored throughout!
Sometimes we'd have 5 horns (people sitting in, etc.) all blowing a
harmonic note together, etc., so you have to keep pushing them and
there's just no comping rule there, except that you are definitely
right-hand on the upper manual and sometimes two leslies ain't enough!
One feel I would urge every blues (or jazz) player to add is the
Brooker T comping on Willie Nelson's first big hit album (I think it
was the "Stardust" album, and the two cuts to pay attention to would be
Stardust and Georgia and maybe one or two others. Brooker "made" that
album (of course I'm prejudiced, but a few non-organists agreed). If
you can comp ballads with that sound and feel, you will make a lot of
friends! Very simple, churchy, BTW. Like Miles Davis, only the spaces
are harmonics you don't use (Hehe, not so simple!). Brooker really has
ears, Well Willie had something to do with it (!) - leaving some neat
spaces himself.
Sorry, that's the only way I know how to play blues, and nobody ever
asked me to play it differently - only more like it!
Having mentioned those two players, and not that anyone cares, I must
say my favorite organ player was Groove Holmes.
Hope some of my nonsense applies. I'm sorry that it may sound a little
pretentious, because I know there are a lot of great Hammond players
here, some certainly ahead of me, of all types of music, and I do
respect all types (12 years classical lessons, for instance).
Larry
Laird Nelson
> I have considerable experience playing B3 in blues and jazz bands, but
> played bass as well (left hand + pedals doubling to get the kick). As
> they say, I think like an organ player and not a piano player and I
> think that's part of what you're looking for.
Yep. You say you played bass as well. I want to *avoid* playing bass
lines because our bass player does them so well and I want to stay out
of his way. That frees up my left hand, and now I'm not sure what to do
with it. I know what to do with it on a piano, but not necessarily on a
Hammond. So I'm less concerned with how to walk bass, which I can do
OK--in fact, I'm more comfortable in an organ trio setting because at
least then I know what my left hand is supposed to do!
> Like
> someone mentioned, 838000000 or similar on the lower manual. So
> comping behind horns, you're going to be right-hand on lower mostly
> with simple cute Smith-type rhythmic chops (raised 9ths anyone?). But
> playing bass you're stuck with the setting or similar, so if I didn't
> have to play bass, I would tone it down, probably to 818 or something
> still hollow but prettier like 8174 00000 or whatever you like.
OK, that's almost exactly what I use, weirdly enough. Maybe there's
some kind of universal Hammond sweet spot! Quick! Get an anthropologist!
> It was
> always somewhat of a problem that that comping was a tad loud.
I'm behind two guitars, a tenor and a trumpet, and one seriously loud
vocalist. Too loud is not my problem. :-)
> Comps need to be short because it overpowers. Well, any early Smith
> album where he plays bass will teach that comping pretty quick (even
> though you're not interested in bass, those are the albums where he
> does the interesting blues comping - all right-hand, mostly lower
> manual).
OK, so the left hand pretty much dangles, then, or fills in little
rhythmic bits? That's kind of what I'm doing now. I'll hit an octave
stab or two to set up a quick right-hand-on-lower-manual chord comp.
> Then on the upper manual, usually have any more serious and louder
> drawbar combo (usually somewhat inverted U shaped).
> Smith et al would get excited for 4 bars here and there on the upper
> manual, then drop back to lower for most comping, or almost all
> drawbars pulled out for when the horns get excited or such or any other
> fancy stuff, which happened a lot in the blues bands I played in. Or
> sometimes louder comping with the Smith solo sound approx. 888000000
> with 5th short perc. We had a "honker" that used to play Red Prysock
> for like 10 minutes, etc. (audience loved it) and I was pretty much
> *holding* close to full drawbars with two leslies floored throughout!
Love that. Nothing like that in the world. At all.
Cheers,
Laird
Tony
> Two hands on the same
> manual (left-comping) is for piano players (have done that) and church
> music (did that gig too), or Bob Ralston on Lawrence Welke playing bass
> with feet only or selling organs at the mall
Mall selling is 'one finger chord' demos and "come here and I will show YOU
how to play the organ in 5 minutes using one finger" (most of them went out
of business except down in States like FL - this is a still a big industry,
I believe, in FL with the 'seniors' or was)
It is/was 'two hands on the same manual' only on single manual organs at the
Malls as all the dual manuals had the 'one finger chord' enablement only on
the lower manual. This was a wonderful business at the right time - early
middle 70s (before my time - in it). The smart store manager would ask the
organist not to play traditionally but use the 'single finger', not to scare
a customer and most/almost all did, other that store concerts.
Bob Ralston, beforementioned, who is a fantastic musician (I find his piano
playing super) uses a theater organ on the old Welk show and not all
registrations are available on both manuals. Hammond has identical-capable
registrations on both manuals - most/almost all of other organs do not. He
played an aweful Thomas organ. and made it sound as good in the genre as one
can get with a Thomas - proving once again it 'ain't' necessary what you
play, if you can play great - great playing overcomes mediocre instruments
many would still pay $$$$ as cover to hear Ralston play today with a aweful
old Thomas. (Richard Groove Holmes sounded great on two DX7s, his clone
choice at the time, it was hard to hear the mediocre clone capability of the
DX7s because of excellant playing and excellant bass lines)
In traditional classic playing *two hands* does not mean *two things going
on* this can also be true on jazz, blues etc.
There may be a chord run-down of one chord or triad or fourths - the right
hand may be playing 3 or two notes of the chord/triad and the left hand may
be playing a single note. This is not comping (in this case) but normal
techniques of advanced playing that everyone does if so an articulate run
down or chord-melody is called. This is commonly two hand on one manual, as
one example. Gosple-like, one could interject a chord-melody in blues like
this - 2 hands on one manual.
About players like Ralston making even an aweful organ sound good: <in that
genre>
Commonly, players (or think they are players) are hung up on audio sound
and not playing. "Yeah I am going to buy that clone that has a 1 or 2
percent better sound - here is $2000" or whatever. "It will make me sound
GREAT!!" The truth is, IMO, if a lot/most of these people just picked up the
phone, called the local studios for one of their better teachers in their
area, even one or two months of advanced lessons will make the person sound
better than his new 1 or 2 percent better sound clone, IMHO. "Naaaa that is
rocket science.... Means I got to get in my car drive 10 or 15 minutes and
wait five . . nope . pay 30 or 35 bucks . . rather cut my lawn...
beside I am great no one can teach me!" <unquote>
Tony
Acme Diagnostics
Laird Nelson <laird...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Acme Diagnostics wrote:
>
>Yep. You say you played bass as well. I want to *avoid* playing bass
>lines because our bass player does them so well and I want to stay out
>of his way. That frees up my left hand, and now I'm not sure what to do
>with it.
This my sound crazy, but when I've had a bass player and guitar,
best place for the left hand is in my pocket. Just can't see how
you wouldn't be overplaying with two hands. If you didn't have enough
spread to do some of the big chords, might come in handy to add that
one note. But more than a four-note chord, like a raised 11th or 4 4ths
and it's not going to sound right. Very IMO. I think you'd be annoying
those guitar players, and the sound would be too dense. Then you
get into a volume war - sure you know about that.
I've played in piano trios (a little) and the comping is mostly two
hands and you get to do the wonderfully complicated chords, and on the
piano you get this beautiful blend. But on the organ, with a 16' and 8'
stop pulled, you're left hand is almost already in midrange not to
rumble the low notes, and that puts your right hand too high. If you
only used the 8' stop, then it would work just like on the piano, but
wouldn't blend the same way.
Maybe that would sound good ( I must have tried it in 35 years, tried
lots weirder things), but wouldn't sound too usual! I think you'd agree
that "what sounds good" is all cultural conditioning, so really can't
stray too far from that. OTOH, maybe that's the one style that would
put you in the charts! Suspect other piano players have tried it.
>I know what to do with it on a piano, but not necessarily on a
>Hammond. So I'm less concerned with how to walk bass, which I can do
>OK--in fact, I'm more comfortable in an organ trio setting because at
>least then I know what my left hand is supposed to do!
Yes, it's easier in a way. Horn players like it because you can do all
those interesting chord things on the fly. Not that I have anything
against guitars. Beautiful instrument too, I like full band sounds.
Just talking about personal satisfaction here and things to keep you
intellectually occupied until 2:00am <g>.
>> playing bass you're stuck with the setting or similar, so if I didn't
>> have to play bass, I would tone it down, probably to 818 or something
>> still hollow but prettier like 8174 00000 or whatever you like.
>
>OK, that's almost exactly what I use, weirdly enough. Maybe there's
>some kind of universal Hammond sweet spot! Quick! Get an anthropologist!
Hehe. Nothing funnier than a bunch of psychologists analyzing music!
I'd say the sweet spot was invented in black churches. But those
simple settings are mainly why I brought up Miles. Sounds like you're
an old pro, but some folks think that because there's so much there,
need to use it a lot. But just one drawbar is an instrument in itself,
something that would take time to master, and by itself could do a lot
of people-pleasing.
>> It was
>> always somewhat of a problem that that comping was a tad loud.
>
>I'm behind two guitars, a tenor and a trumpet, and one seriously loud
>vocalist. Too loud is not my problem. :-)
HEHE! Been there! Give me some ear plugs! Specially when the guitar
does B.B. King right next to your ear - could lose your mid-range
hearing pretty fast!
>> Comps need to be short because it overpowers. Well, any early Smith
>
>OK, so the left hand pretty much dangles, then, or fills in little
>rhythmic bits?
No. Nothing for the left hand to do in the blues band you describe
while comping blues rides by the horns with a guitar in there. Not
saying I never used both hands comping with my right hand up close to
the high register - and not saying the horn player didn't turn around
and give me a funny look either! I'd just listen to the other players,
get into the sound, and concentrate doubly-hard on those chops, pick up
on the guitar, figure out what will blend, etc.
Even when you're soloing, I'd let the guitars do the comping. After
all, from their POV this is the only time *you're* out of the way! On
the piano (soloing) two hands helps a lot with fingering, and I've seen
that on organ occasionally. But the organ is much faster - when you do
get to that one ride where you're going to blow everybody away, your
hand is going to be flitting and hitting random notes so quickly nobody
including yourself can even tell what notes there were. Completely
different from doing impressive runs on the piano - on piano you can't
flit - the action is just not there. I comped some Smith cuts like
that. Slow them down, and he's just hitting random notes some of the
time, well not really because his hand naturally gravitated to the
patterns, but unlike piano, the values (timing, duration, etc.) of the
notes go all over the place. But my point is that a left hand would
just get in the way at that speed. A better player than I might
disagree, but that's my experience.
On the piano, of course the left hand has monumental responsibility,
and that's what you've probably developed most. Big adjustment to
not use it a lot on the organ. Now that I recall, in this one band the
guitar player told me to go ahead and comp my own solos on a
couple of tunes and he laid back. Nice to be able to do that sometimes,
especially on your feature tunes, and a different feel for the audience.
>That's kind of what I'm doing now. I'll hit an octave
>stab or two to set up a quick right-hand-on-lower-manual chord comp.
Eggsactly! You're a team with the soloist, especially the tenor
player. Tenor players are almost a special case with the B3. Lots of
recording history, they are really tuned in to what you are doing. Of
course it's routine to be busy on the 1st 4 bars to set up a release.
>> with 5th short perc. We had a "honker" that used to play Red Prysock
>> for like 10 minutes, etc. (audience loved it) and I was pretty much
>> *holding* close to full drawbars with two leslies floored throughout!
>
>Love that. Nothing like that in the world. At all.
Yeah. Nothing in the world! Nice to meet someone with similar ears.
Larry
Acme Diagnostics
"Tony" <hammondeerN...@yahoo.net> wrote:
>"Acme Diagnostics" <LFinez...@partpostmark.net> wrote
>
>> Two hands on the same
>> manual (left-comping) is for piano players (have done that) and church
>> music (did that gig too), or Bob Ralston on Lawrence Welke playing bass
>> with feet only or selling organs at the mall
>
>Mall selling is 'one finger chord' demos and "come here and I will show YOU
>how to play the organ in 5 minutes using one finger" (most of them went out
>of business except down in States like FL - this is a still a big industry,
>I believe, in FL with the 'seniors' or was)
>
>It is/was 'two hands on the same manual' only on single manual organs at the
>Malls as all the dual manuals had the 'one finger chord' enablement only on
>the lower manual. This was a wonderful business at the right time - early
>middle 70s (before my time - in it). The smart store manager would ask the
>organist not to play traditionally but use the 'single finger', not to scare
>a customer and most/almost all did, other that store concerts.
Yeah, I did a lot of demoing. That all sounds right. Lowrey had this
nice thing called "Auto Orchestra" and whatever chord you played on
great, it would play under your melody note on swell. Really
interesting jazz runs. Never heard that recorded, surprised nobody ever
did it. Well, it was a Lowrey - what else could you do!
>Bob Ralston, beforementioned, who is a fantastic musician (I find his piano
>playing super) uses a theater organ on the old Welk show and not all
>registrations are available on both manuals.
Yeah, he was great at what he did. That's between me and you. If the
guys heard me say that, they'd never let me forget it. I used to do a
pretty good Ralston impression. Smile and everything. :-)
>Hammond has identical-capable
>registrations on both manuals - most/almost all of other organs do not.
There are organs besides Hammonds? <g>
>He
>played an aweful Thomas organ.
Yeah Thomas had to be the absolute worst.
>and made it sound as good in the genre as one
>can get with a Thomas - proving once again it 'ain't' necessary what you
>play, if you can play great - great playing overcomes mediocre instruments
>many would still pay $$$$ as cover to hear Ralston play today with a aweful
>old Thomas. (Richard Groove Holmes sounded great on two DX7s, his clone
>choice at the time, it was hard to hear the mediocre clone capability of the
>DX7s because of excellant playing and excellant bass lines)
I remember him with a Moog (or similar) on top of the B3, and he was
just playing around with it, and I was thinking, get rid of that thing!
I think the DX7 was a respectable ax.
>
>In traditional classic playing *two hands* does not mean *two things going
>on* this can also be true on jazz, blues etc.
Oh yes. Just as you say. Completely different audience, conditioned to
completely different things. Dissonance expected on a pipe organ, etc.
>There may be a chord run-down of one chord or triad or fourths - the right
>hand may be playing 3 or two notes of the chord/triad and the left hand may
>be playing a single note. This is not comping (in this case) but normal
>techniques of advanced playing that everyone does if so an articulate run
>down or chord-melody is called.
I call it "Phantom of the Opera." Just kidding. I dig where your coming
from.
(see here's my shovel! <g>). I like to just improvise classical organ
music.
Got me thru more than one wedding or church service. Then the lady
inevitably asks, "Who wrote that prelude?" "Umm, gee can't exactly
remember.
I think it was Brahms Etude in D-flat." Anyway I do a lot of what you
describe.
Especially nice on a string synth too. On a pipe organ, doing the
progressions similar to what you describe, and single note left hand,
actually pretty hard for it to sound wrong even with random notes if
you keep moving.
>This is commonly two hand on one manual, as
>one example. Gosple-like, one could interject a chord-melody in blues like
>this - 2 hands on one manual.
Agree. Can do lots of stuff. I've mainly be talking "in general,
traditional, comping behind horns, blues" etc. There's also hoedown
type music that goes over in blues rooms some times. Fast polka with
*very* busy right hand, comping left on the great manual. Smith did one
of those on an early album. Forget which one.
>About players like Ralston making even an aweful organ sound good: <in that
>genre>
>Commonly, players (or think they are players) are hung up on audio sound
>and not playing. "Yeah I am going to buy that clone that has a 1 or 2
>percent better sound - here is $2000" or whatever. "It will make me sound
>GREAT!!" The truth is, IMO, if a lot/most of these people just picked up the
>phone, called the local studios for one of their better teachers in their
>area, even one or two months of advanced lessons will make the person sound
>better than his new 1 or 2 percent better sound clone, IMHO. "Naaaa that is
>rocket science.... Means I got to get in my car drive 10 or 15 minutes and
>wait five . . nope . pay 30 or 35 bucks . . rather cut my lawn...
>beside I am great no one can teach me!" <unquote>
Hehe. True. Old saw: "A lot of good players come out of Berkeley."
Answer: "Yeah, and they were all good going in." I think it's
frustrating for some players.
Larry
Tony
> Yeah, I did a lot of demoing. That all sounds right. Lowrey had this
> nice thing called "Auto Orchestra" and whatever chord you played on
> great, it would play under your melody note on swell. Really
> interesting jazz runs. Never heard that recorded, surprised nobody ever
> did it. Well, it was a Lowrey - what else could you do!
Me too. LMAO! This was right after I came out of a fully booked band to get
into the so called "cleaner" end of the business. (you figure it out the
buzzword "cleaner" going around to funnel money instead of play in a venue
LMAO!) I felt like an ass at first playing in front of a Mall crowd then we
all had fun doing it. I huffed out a lot of Viscount and Gem organs too,
I feel bad about now - but the customers had fun. Gem was the first, a
horrible plastic organ, to come out with a 'Musicoder' digital, little
computer on the cheekblock and the newbies could just follow the LEDs on the
keyboard.
> Yeah, he was great at what he did. That's between me and you. If the
> guys heard me say that, they'd never let me forget it. I used to do a
> pretty good Ralston impression. Smile and everything. :-)
Amazing pianist.
> Yeah Thomas had to be the absolute worst.
Then in the old days you had, like I said, Gem and Viscount. Abominable
organs.<---
> I remember him with a Moog (or similar) on top of the B3, and he was
> just playing around with it, and I was thinking, get rid of that thing!
> I think the DX7 was a respectable ax.
The bass kicked ass on 'Richards' DX7. You could tell it wasn't the Hammond
on the treble, but the great playing railroaded through.
> Hehe. True. Old saw: "A lot of good players come out of Berkeley."
> Answer: "Yeah, and they were all good going in." I think it's
> frustrating for some players.
Hey look at Coltrane. How a teacher can change a style. Now an Icon in the
vocabulary of the 'name' jazz artists who give interviews and bow to the
name like a religious figure and shiek to namedrop. BUT earliar Coltrane
when he was doing hard classic bop, in my opinion, was his best. I have
heard swingin' early recordings of Trane and swore it was, arguablely the
greatest jazz soloist of all time, 'Bird' as I was boogieing in my car
listening to jazz radio to be surprised finding it was early Trane.
This is when, in my opinion, (opinions may differ) in the days he was
playing his 'Bird'-cop style. . .Major groove. . . Classic-jazz,
relatable, Parker/Dizzy style. . .Later after he studied and woodsheded
with Philadelphia teacher, <name edited> he went into the near-avant garde
approach (he had to practice in a church, neighbors complained at his
residence, told by one of his relatives in a radio interview)- 50 per cent
of the audience walked out on him or booed unfortunately while he played his
legacy of sonic effects. This happened in a major French concert where he
was almost booed off the stage. The other half loved the progressive,
near-avant garde style. (I say, near-avant garde because he kept to the
chord progressions)
His last album when he was ill is repeatedly cited as "unlistenable". So you
are right, the result of some after "instruction" can be questionable
depending on opinion and taste. In jazz, I want to hear some driving bop.
or great chordal beauty in a ballad. Wynford Marsialles (spelling?)
recently said in an interview, "Coltrane knew his weaknesses and worked and
fixed them." Well if the end result was cerebral, near-avant garde instead
of swinging bop that made you want to click your fingers and bob the old
head and be riveted - I am not sure what he worked on made him any more fun
to listen to, other than intellectually resolved, sonic impressions.
Tony
Laird Nelson
> Hey look at Coltrane. How a teacher can change a style. Now an Icon in the
> vocabulary of the 'name' jazz artists who give interviews and bow to the
> name like a religious figure and shiek to namedrop. BUT earliar Coltrane
> when he was doing hard classic bop, in my opinion, was his best.
Oh, praise God; there's someone else in the world who thinks like I do!
YES. His early fifties stuff was TREMENDOUS.
Probably should follow up to rec.music.somethingoranother.bluenote....
L
Acme Diagnostics
>
>Amazing pianist.
I'll take your word for it. I don't recall, but vaguely remember him
playing piano. I do remember that woman who played ragtime and thought
she was great too. I'm also thrilled by piano rolls so you can judge
just how sophisticated I am on the piano <g>. I liked Ramsey Lewis's
style for jazz. He had a good lack of cliche's.
[On Groove Holmes]
>> I remember him with a Moog (or similar) on top of the B3, and he was
>> just playing around with it, and I was thinking, get rid of that thing!
>> I think the DX7 was a respectable ax.
>
>The bass kicked ass on 'Richards' DX7. You could tell it wasn't the
>Hammond on the treble, but the great playing railroaded through.
I can imagine. I tend to judge players on their best days, and I
thought Holmes was very inconsistent. But on his best days, he just
nailed me to the floor more than any other player. Misty was probably
my favorite organ single of all time, and I think E-flat is the most
beautiful jazz key on a B3, whereas it seemed most of the other players
were C/F/G/B-flat. He did a blues called "Fingers" on one of his albums
which, to my ears, was technically superior to anything I had ever
heard, including by Smith.
This was also in F, so could compare in that technically friendliest
blues key. Holmes was clearly the master on bass (jazz/blues) and I
think all agree with that. My ear likes bass a lot.
>> Hehe. True. Old saw: "A lot of good players come out of Berkeley."
>> Answer: "Yeah, and they were all good going in." I think it's
>> frustrating for some players.
>
>Hey look at Coltrane. How a teacher can change a style. Now an Icon in
>the vocabulary of the 'name' jazz artists who give interviews and bow
>to the name like a religious figure and shiek to namedrop. BUT earliar
>Coltrane when he was doing hard classic bop, in my opinion, was his
>best.
I thought that too. Not that I'm anywhere near qualified to judge. But
most decent sax players told me he was the greatest. I remember hearing
one of his "freedom" cuts for like 15 minutes in the '70s, and, ummm...
well on dark and stormy nights in my gothic cellar I used to try
totally weird stuff, but kept my fangs hidden on stage. Wasn't making
enough money to be sure they wouldn't lock me up.
>I have heard swingin' early recordings of Trane and swore it
>was, arguablely the greatest jazz soloist of all time, 'Bird' as I was
>boogieing in my car listening to jazz radio to be surprised finding it
>was early Trane.
>
>This is when, in my opinion, (opinions may differ) in the days he was
>playing his 'Bird'-cop style. . .Major groove. . .
>Classic-jazz, relatable, Parker/Dizzy style. . .Later after he
>studied and woodsheded with Philadelphia teacher, <name edited> he went
>into the near-avant garde approach (he had to practice in a church,
>neighbors complained at his residence, told by one of his relatives in
>a radio interview)- 50 per cent of the audience walked out on him or
>booed unfortunately while he played his legacy of sonic effects.
Hey maybe we lived on the same street and had the same neighbors!
Ever walked the streets near Bezerkley at night (or any large music
school). It's so funny. Sounds like a zoo on the loose! Somebody
should record it and call it "Freedom Jazz on Boston Nites." Probably
go platinum.
But get you point about the teacher. My jazz teachers were mainly
comping albums, plus a lot of good players showed me stuff, most
not organists. I'd pick up about one trick from each (local) organist
I heard. My motto: "Always be the worst player in the band."
>This
>happened in a major French concert where he was almost booed off the
>stage. The other half loved the progressive, near-avant garde style.
>(I say, near-avant garde because he kept to the chord progressions)
Well, seriously, I look at the jazz progression as a pyramid. The
better you get, and outputing your "greatness" on stage, the fewer
people who will understand/appreciate it. Being somewhat of an
economist musician, I saw that as a losing strategy. Eventually there
would be only one appreciator (me). But if I was famous already, maybe
I'd try it out.
But the really best musicians, IMO, stay mostly in the envelope, just
push it the right amount. A lot of us could play really great garbage
if we spent years practicing it, but what's the point? Music is mainly
a social event, ain'it? ('Scuse my GA accent!)
>His last album when he was ill is repeatedly cited as "unlistenable".
>So you are right, the result of some after "instruction" can be
>questionable depending on opinion and taste. In jazz, I want to hear
>some driving bop.
>or great chordal beauty in a ballad. Wynford Marsialles (spelling?)
>recently said in an interview, "Coltrane knew his weaknesses and worked
>and fixed them." Well if the end result was cerebral, near-avant garde
>instead of swinging bop that made you want to click your fingers and
>bob the old head and be riveted - I am not sure what he worked on made
>him any more fun to listen to, other than intellectually resolved,
>sonic impressions.
Agree.
Hey, getting back to demoing - If I wanted to draw a crowd - just play
something with bells in it! And the psychology - if you played the
right song, any stop sounded like that instrument in that song. Like a
stupid violin stop that didn't sound anything like a violin, but if you
played Tennessee Waltz, the lady would say, "Oh! That sounds just like
a violin!" I bet if we listed the 10 most popular stops and the
appropriate demo tune, they'd be all the same tunes, eh? Or the same
two or three.
True story, just recently: My wife was playing a new album, and it was
all this pipe organ playing flute stops. So I told her how nice that
organ sounded, going on an on about flute stops on pipe organs, etc.,
and she interrupts: "I hate to tell you this, Larry, but that's a pan
flute!" Could have sold it to me for $50,000!
Larry
Tony
> I can imagine. I tend to judge players on their best days, and I
> thought Holmes was very inconsistent. But on his best days, he just
> nailed me to the floor more than any other player. Misty was probably
> my favorite organ single of all time,
Me too!! .me too! . . .yes! .I LOVE that tune! I have heard
it a million times and it is a classic and probably the short version the
biggest selling organ jazz single that hit the pop charts, also.
>"Fingers" on one of his albums which, to my ears, was technically superior
to anything I >had ever heard, including by Smith.
Fingers is *outrageous*, I agree. Ah . . it is killer. Richard was a
remarkable man.
I learned it (Misty) a couple (maybe more) of years ago (certainly not like
'Richard') but a decent copy or cover all 6.5 minutes and LOVE to play it at
least once a week or so. It is a euphoric tune to play too, if you have it
worked out fairly accurate. I posted some bass lines he played, here in
amho, quite some time ago of it maybe some are in the archives.
Coincidentally, that you brought this up, a couple months ago, I decided I
wanted to play the tune singularly, I wrote out the guitarest's chords, in
Finale that came out nice. Putting in the drum part, and sequencing a jazz
guitar with my synth rack - it is hilariously fun to play. And let me tall
ya -- the guitarest is doing some beautiful ideas on chording, some of the
guitar chords behind that tune are brilliantly simple and restrained..
just in the perfect spots he embellishes. . the whole tune is a. .
'piece of work' . .I tried doing this tune with a couple guitarests and
it sucked (guitar) without the right chords. (one guy told me, "that is
stupidly easy!, 5 minutes, 5 minutes!!!" well, it was so bad I stopped
playing. I think he started playing the fake book chords. (totally
different, obviously) Now I have some guitar chord manuscript. (for the long
version). The guitar part behind the Hammond lead sounds easy but has more
than at first is apparent.
Tony
Acme Diagnostics
Ok, I will elect myself!
Prop #1: Coltrane was at his best in the '50s doing classic bop.
Prop #2: A music teacher can change the style of a player who is
already highly accomplished, successful, and mature in his playing, and
are there other examples?
Larry Fine
Acme Diagnostics
"Tony" <hammondeerN...@yahoo.net> wrote:
>"Acme Diagnostics" <LFinez...@partpostmark.net> wrote
>
>> I can imagine. I tend to judge players on their best days, and I
>> thought Holmes was very inconsistent. But on his best days, he just
>> nailed me to the floor more than any other player. Misty was probably
>> my favorite organ single of all time,
>
>Me too!! .me too! . . .yes! .I LOVE that tune! I have heard
>it a million times and it is a classic and probably the short version the
>biggest selling organ jazz single that hit the pop charts, also.
At the end of the last chorus just before the ending where he breaks
out of the melody with the Eb-D-Db - - - C-Db-C-Bb-Ab-G... That's the
most genius part to me. I mean, theorists could make a lot of honcho
over the whole piece leading into those 4 bars! And you know some
others would bury the feel with too many notes, but not Richard...Then
you know it's coming...!!! It's just so exciting! Then when it comes,
all I can think of is that Dr. Smith quote from Lost in Space, but
instead of "Oh, the pain, the pain," it's "Oh, the groove, the groove!"
Then the final chord (4's) is just so ***PRETTY*** and how it resolves
the whole piece to me is just pure genius. I think you could make
something out of Eb, tone-wheel sine waves, 4th harmonies (maybe not
and I'm just imagining it). Anyway, I've stolen that a zillion times on
other tunes.
>>"Fingers" on one of his albums which, to my ears, was technically superior
>to anything I >had ever heard, including by Smith.
>
>Fingers is *outrageous*, I agree. Ah . . it is killer. Richard was a
>remarkable man.
You're the only one I've talked to who remembers it. What a shame.
I imagine him saying, "Oh, you like that technical stuff, eh? Well, not
really my bag, but I'll give a try..." (Blows everybody away.) I have
also thought that his settings were less forgiving and harder to play
right.
>I learned it (Misty) a couple (maybe more) of years ago (certainly not like
>'Richard') but a decent copy or cover all 6.5 minutes and LOVE to play it at
>least once a week or so. It is a euphoric tune to play too, if you have it
>worked out fairly accurate. I posted some bass lines he played, here in
>amho, quite some time ago of it maybe some are in the archives.
I"ve played it frequently too - other players request it a lot. I never
really comped it exactly (not that I could have played it anyway) but
tried to maintain the feel. It's always a showstopper.
>Coincidentally, that you brought this up, a couple months ago, I decided I
>wanted to play the tune singularly, I wrote out the guitarest's chords, in
>Finale that came out nice. Putting in the drum part, and sequencing a jazz
>guitar with my synth rack - it is hilariously fun to play.
Yeah, I used to do that trick. Not lately, but it's great. BYOB - Be
your own band! I can see how it would work best with that tune, since
you don't mind it being the same every time, that's just what you want.
I used to have a piano-organ trio (!) appearing nitely in my living
room (I could manage a symbal on my 4-track Teac). <g>
>And let me tall
>ya -- the guitarest is doing some beautiful ideas on chording, some of the
>guitar chords behind that tune are brilliantly simple and restrained..
Yes! I am forever talking about spaces and how important they are (to
me anyway). A mature guitar player - worth his/her weight in gold. Next
time I hear it, I will listen more closely - thanks.
Remember "The Sermon" and all this great drummer did was play the
ride symbal for like 25 minutes? Hehe. Musta got paid double for that!
>just in the perfect spots he embellishes. . the whole tune is a. .
>'piece of work' . .I tried doing this tune with a couple guitarests and
>it sucked (guitar) without the right chords. (one guy told me, "that is
>stupidly easy!, 5 minutes, 5 minutes!!!" well, it was so bad I stopped
>playing. I think he started playing the fake book chords. (totally
>different, obviously) Now I have some guitar chord manuscript. (for the long
>version). The guitar part behind the Hammond lead sounds easy but has more
>than at first is apparent.
It pays to be a good comper - and you obviously are. Comping that
guitar is a piece of work. I never comped the organ completely, never
mind the guitar. But I've comped guitar voicings that I liked on other
stuff - they are superior to typical keyboard voicings in a lot of
cases, IMO.
Here's something - we've all played Girl from Ipanema probably more
than any other single tune, prime sit-in tune, etc. Pull out the
original - no band ever did it like that, nor as good, IMO. I actually
enjoy listening to the original, even as many times I and others have
butchered it over years. There's some guitar.
Larry
Tony
> At the end of the last chorus just before the ending where he breaks
> out of the melody with the Eb-D-Db - - - C-Db-C-Bb-Ab-G... That's the
> most genius part to me. I mean, theorists could make a lot of honcho
> over the whole piece leading into those 4 bars! And you know some
> others would bury the feel with too many notes, but not Richard...Then
> you know it's coming...!!! It's just so exciting! Then when it comes,
> all I can think of is that Dr. Smith quote from Lost in Space, but
> instead of "Oh, the pain, the pain," it's "Oh, the groove, the groove!"
> Then the final chord (4's) is just so ***PRETTY*** and how it resolves
> the whole piece to me is just pure genius. I think you could make
> something out of Eb, tone-wheel sine waves, 4th harmonies (maybe not
> and I'm just imagining it). Anyway, I've stolen that a zillion times on
> other tunes.
In the *long version* cut in the end I got this. And this is an old text
file I may have edited it later and not saved it.
Eb2 G1 Ab1 A1 Bb1 B1 C2 D2
Eb2 G1 Ab1 A1 Bb1 D2 Eb2 G1
Ab1 Eb2 C2 Bb1 Ab1 Eb2 C2 Bb1
Ab1 B1 Eb2 D2 Db2 C2 Db2 Ab1
G1 G1 D2 Db2 C2 Bb1 Ab1 G1
F1 G1 Ab1 A1 Bb1 Bb1 A1 Ab1
G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1
B1 B1 B1 B1 Bsustain C2 Gb
F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 F2
Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2
G2 G2 G2 G2 G2 G2 G2 G2
C2 C2 C2 C2 G2 G2 C2 Gb2
F2 Eb2 D2 C2 Bb1 Ab1 G1 Bb1
F1sust A1sust Bb1sust D2sust
Eb2sust G1sust Ab1sust A1sust
Bb1sust . . . . . . . Eb2*sust . . . . . .
(more below)
> >Fingers is *outrageous*, I agree. Ah . . it is killer. Richard was a
> >remarkable man.
>
> You're the only one I've talked to who remembers it. What a shame.
> I imagine him saying, "Oh, you like that technical stuff, eh? Well, not
> really my bag, but I'll give a try..." (Blows everybody away.) I have
> also thought that his settings were less forgiving and harder to play
> right.
That was on the 'American Pie' album. I have the old vinyl on that. I think
Sonny Rollins produced it. I tell you another different kind of tune, a
latin-like tune Groove did REAL NICE on that album. A tune called
'Catherine'. I know that too. I learned that about 15 years ago a fun
cover/tribute tune. 'Fingers' and 'Catherine' are on that album plus a
beautiful arrangement of, 'Who Can I Turn Too'. The bassline on "Who Can I
Turn Too" is beautiful.
There is a sample of 'Fingers' there, though I have not heard it. (sample)
> I"ve played it frequently too - other players request it a lot. I never
> really comped it exactly (not that I could have played it anyway) but
> tried to maintain the feel. It's always a showstopper.
Yes, it is a Hammond signature tune in that jazz style and you don't have to
be into jazz to like it.
> Yeah, I used to do that trick. Not lately, but it's great. BYOB - Be
> your own band! I can see how it would work best with that tune, since
> you don't mind it being the same every time, that's just what you want.
> I used to have a piano-organ trio (!) appearing nitely in my living
> room (I could manage a symbal on my 4-track Teac). <g>
Yes sir. I didn't use the tape back then, but I practiced my single and duo
with a Rhythm 77. Remember them?
> Yes! I am forever talking about spaces and how important they are (to
> me anyway). A mature guitar player - worth his/her weight in gold. Next
> time I hear it, I will listen more closely - thanks.
And this is the difference between a player and an artist. The artist thinks
how *someone else* hears the tune or effect or lack of, or space. Could be
incredibly dumb, even, if the tune calls for it. Requires discipline and
restraint. (and recording) The 'player' just plays trying to sound good
without such a codified picture.
> It pays to be a good comper - and you obviously are. Comping that
> guitar is a piece of work.
Took me all 'freakin' day to get it close too, not "five minutes!"
>I never comped the organ completely, never
> mind the guitar. But I've comped guitar voicings that I liked on other
> stuff - they are superior to typical keyboard voicings in a lot of
> cases, IMO.
Yeah, and what a marriage made in heaven, the Hammond organ and jazz guitar
chordings. :)
> Here's something - we've all played Girl from Ipanema probably more
> than any other single tune, prime sit-in tune, etc. Pull out the
> original - no band ever did it like that, nor as good, IMO. I actually
> enjoy listening to the original, even as many times I and others have
> butchered it over years. There's some guitar.
Yeah, nice idea. One of the nicest arrangements I was in with this old
standard was a guy who played it on flute and took off with a nice jazzy but
tasty solo, with the Hammond.
Tony
Acme Diagnostics
"Tony" <hammondeerN...@yahoo.net> wrote:
>"Acme Diagnostics" <LFinez...@partpostmark.net> wrote in message
>
>> At the end of the last chorus just before the ending where he breaks
>> out of the melody with the Eb-D-Db - - - C-Db-C-Bb-Ab-G... That's the
>
>text file I may have edited it later and not saved it.
>
>Eb2 G1 Ab1 A1 Bb1 B1 C2 D2
>Eb2 G1 Ab1 A1 Bb1 D2 Eb2 G1
>Ab1 Eb2 C2 Bb1 Ab1 Eb2 C2 Bb1
>Ab1 B1 Eb2 D2 Db2 C2 Db2 Ab1
>G1 G1 D2 Db2 C2 Bb1 Ab1 G1
>F1 G1 Ab1 A1 Bb1 Bb1 A1 Ab1
>G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1
>B1 B1 B1 B1 Bsustain C2 Gb
>
>F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 F2
>Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2 Gb2
>G2 G2 G2 G2 G2 G2 G2 G2
>C2 C2 C2 C2 G2 G2 C2 Gb2
>F2 Eb2 D2 C2 Bb1 Ab1 G1 Bb1
>F1sust A1sust Bb1sust D2sust
>Eb2sust G1sust Ab1sust A1sust
>Bb1sust . . . . . . . Eb2*sust . . . . . .
Only vaguely remember the long version, but that sounds like the
bass line (thanks - I hear it, including his neat pedal growl here and
there!).
>> >Fingers is *outrageous*, I agree. Ah . . it is killer. Richard was a
>> >remarkable man.
>>
>> You're the only one I've talked to who remembers it. What a shame.
>
>That was on the 'American Pie' album. I have the old vinyl on that. I
>think Sonny Rollins produced it. I tell you another different kind of
>tune, a latin-like tune Groove did REAL NICE on that album. A tune
>called 'Catherine'. I know that too. I learned that about 15 years ago
>a fun cover/tribute tune. 'Fingers' and 'Catherine' are on that album
>plus a beautiful arrangement of, 'Who Can I Turn Too'. The bassline on
>"Who Can I Turn Too" is beautiful.
Don't recall "Catherine" now, but "Who Can I turn Too" blew me away.
And you're right about the bass. Absolute tops. Great changes too.
I played it a lot myself, but not much in clubs. Most players were not
familiar with that arrangement. But I was indulged now and then
anyway. I didn't to a very good job on it either. Misty is structurally
tight, but that song, the way Richard did it, could leave you hanging
here and there if you didn't have his talent. Well, unless there's a
guitar player there who knows it, have to comp the changes yourself
right-hand while trying to play the melody. Doesn't sound right going
back-and-forth to the pedals.
>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000005OTC/qid=1083985618/sr=1-13/ref=sr_1_13/104-
>
>There is a sample of 'Fingers' there, though I have not heard it.
>(sample)
Don't have the equipment right now. Maybe this will get me off my butt
to fix that stuff up.
>> I used to have a piano-organ trio (!) appearing nitely in my living
>> room (I could manage a symbal on my 4-track Teac). <g>
>
>Yes sir. I didn't use the tape back then, but I practiced my single and
>duo with a Rhythm 77. Remember them?
Hey, wasn't that the long squat one with the on/off "touch bar?" If so,
yeah I really liked that one compared to the previous assortment. I
like Latin music, so drum boxes were fun for that. Had a good Bossa
Nova IIRC, and a somewhat crispier ride symbal than the others.
>And this is the difference between a player and an artist. The artist
>thinks how *someone else* hears the tune or effect or lack of, or
>space. Could be incredibly dumb, even, if the tune calls for it.
>Requires discipline and restraint. (and recording) The 'player' just
>plays trying to sound good without such a codified picture.
Agree, also about the recording. I call it ears. The thing about
recording though, is that people shouldn't let it discourage them. I've
seen that happen. Like a teenage girl looking close in the mirror and
finding all kinds of faults. I've done maybe 50 arrangements on my
little Korg sequencer, but only one I'd ever let anyone hear. My wife
walks in and asks, "What are all those clicking noises?" <g>. But
doesn't mean anything. I played the one I liked during a break and the
other guys were like <crickets chirping> so that's how it goes (7/8
time, like I said, more outside you get, the less appreciators,
assuming it was worth anything anyway.).
>> It pays to be a good comper - and you obviously are. Comping that
>> guitar is a piece of work.
>
>Took me all 'freakin' day to get it close too, not "five minutes!"
I hear that. Get pretty good at judging cassette rewind time, eh? <g>
Hey, I just remembered back the last time I was working for a
piano/organ store, around '85, they had this top-of-the-line Kimball.
After what we said about those brands, I have to say I really enjoyed
playing that. Nice strings too. Did some sales concerts with it (don't
be impressed!).
Sorry to be sacreligious. Of course it was no B3 (et al), strictly
commercial.
Larry
Tony
> Don't recall "Catherine" now, but "Who Can I turn Too" blew me away.
> And you're right about the bass. Absolute tops. Great changes too.
Yeap. You are right on. ahhhhhhhhh . . ooooooh . man . that is a
beautiful bassline in 'Who Can I Turn to' a piece of work that truly catches
the ear.
> Misty is structurally tight, but that song, the way Richard did it, could
leave you hanging
> here and there if you didn't have his talent.
Absolutely. Yeah, the long version is written kind of like a concerto, where
it goes off in tangents of the chords and the only thing that could save you
is a guitarest who could 'ear out' where you were going if you lost it. If
you had the chords sequenced, there is no where to go and definitely would
be hanging as different verses go off differently in places.
> Well, unless there's a guitar player there who knows it, have to comp the
changes yourself right-hand while trying to play the melody. Doesn't sound
right going
> back-and-forth to the pedals.
Every guitar player will think he/she knows it, until listened closely.
Another brilliant thing Richard does in that tune is bottoming out the
baseline at the tops of select versions for effect and tension. He unisons
the first 4 tones or 5 starting on the Eb on the chosen spot. There is where
Hammond bass foldback works beautifully, not to 'go there' (that low) until
the low bass pedal tones are unisoned to bottom out the line to create a
*beautiful* effect and ear catching and 'changeup'. Like Ray Brown reaching
for the very lowest tones of his stringed bass. When you listen to the tune
next time, listen where he selects to do that - it is brilliant.
> Hey, wasn't that the long squat one with the on/off "touch bar?" If so,
> yeah I really liked that one compared to the previous assortment. I
> like Latin music, so drum boxes were fun for that. Had a good Bossa
> Nova IIRC, and a somewhat crispier ride symbal than the others.
That's it! Yes. They were nice for Bosa Novas, etc.
Walter Wanderly did a couple hits of organ latin that hit the pop charts
like 'So Nice'.
That tune was played and overplayed on the Top Ten stations, like 'Misty'.
> Agree, also about the recording. I call it ears. The thing about
> recording though, is that people shouldn't let it discourage them. I've
> seen that happen. Like a teenage girl looking close in the mirror and
> finding all kinds of faults.
This is really true for vocals. A lot of people have good or acceptable
vocal ability and don't use it. Some of the best vocalists hate their voice.
The person is too close to it.
> Hey, I just remembered back the last time I was working for a
> piano/organ store, around '85, they had this top-of-the-line Kimball.
Yo, remember that teaching CRT one of those Kimball models had? The buyer
could take music lessons off of the organ. I think it had a ROM or
something.
> After what we said about those brands, I have to say I really enjoyed
> playing that. Nice strings too. Did some sales concerts with it (don't
> be impressed!).
> Sorry to be sacreligious. Of course it was no B3 (et al), strictly
> commercial.
B3s then were pretty out in 1985 except church. In bands the Prophet 5 was
hot. Yamahas were pretty hot with their organ school and contests that they
took to higher levels to get winners. The parents of the winning students
use to come in and buy very expensive console Yamahas and had NO interest at
all in Hammond organs. The school idea was smart. By creating the organ
schools that created a lot of interest and their parents bought them a new
Yamaha organ then a bigger one later, if they were competing. I don't know
what they do now. Another one around that time . . .Wurlitzer Omnis?
That was fully digital, I think. Keyboard Computer name.
Tony
Acme Diagnostics
"Tony" <hammondeerN...@yahoo.net> wrote:
>"Acme Diagnostics" <LFinez...@partpostmark.net> wrote
>
>> Don't recall "Catherine" now, but "Who Can I turn Too" blew me away.
>> And you're right about the bass. Absolute tops. Great changes too.
>
>Yeap. You are right on. ahhhhhhhhh . . ooooooh . man . that is a
>beautiful bassline in 'Who Can I Turn to' a piece of work that truly
>catches the ear.
Now having recalled it some more, especially the bass lines, one more
round of cheers!
<snip>
>Every guitar player will think he/she knows it, until listened closely.
>Another brilliant thing Richard does in that tune is bottoming out the
>baseline at the tops of select versions for effect and tension. He
>unisons the first 4 tones or 5 starting on the Eb on the chosen spot.
>There is where Hammond bass foldback works beautifully, not to 'go
>there' (that low) until the low bass pedal tones are unisoned to bottom
>out the line to create a *beautiful* effect and ear catching and
>'changeup'.
I can't follow that description entirely, but I know that Richard, more
than any other, "bottomed" his harmonies with the pedals for a pure
(harmonic) frequency blend, which at the time was probably only
possible with a Hammond, and without the obvious dissonance of some
other players and other types of organs, and that is indeed a beautiful
sounding thing. In any case, I'm sure we hear the same things so are
describing the same thing. And I hear it from every organist familiar
with Holmes.
But let's point out that this applies to blues/jazz and maybe other
venues, but not classical, where I want to hear a certain dissonance.
Now that I think about it, this makes somewhat of a distinction in
cultural conditioning. I'll have to remember that for the psychologists
in other groups!
>Like Ray Brown reaching for the very lowest tones of his
>stringed bass. When you listen to the tune next time, listen where he
>selects to do that - it is brilliant.
I can't recall every instance, but I do recall. Like at the end of the
first verse, his cute run down on the base ending on low E and I think
he bottomed that with the pedal. Anyway I would if imitating him. I
will listen. Thanks. Hey, let's not take anything away from Smith like
with Organ Grinder Swing. He knew how to do it too, obviously.
>Walter Wanderly did a couple hits of organ latin that hit the pop
>charts like 'So Nice'.
>That tune was played and overplayed on the Top Ten stations, like
>'Misty'.
Yes, played that a lot in the '60s, some in the '70s. Great tune.
Remember the reverb. Remember when "reverb" was hot! Had to add
it to the Leslie and turn this rod that stuck out the top, between
tunes on stage, hoping your fingers didn't get clobbered!
>> recording though, is that people shouldn't let it discourage them. I've
>
>This is really true for vocals. A lot of people have good or acceptable
>vocal ability and don't use it. Some of the best vocalists hate their
>voice.
>The person is too close to it.
Yes, and now that I think of it, I *was* thinking mostly about
vocalists. I see you've been there and done that too. <g>
>
> > Hey, I just remembered back the last time I was working for a
>> piano/organ store, around '85, they had this top-of-the-line Kimball.
>
>Yo, remember that teaching CRT one of those Kimball models had? The
>buyer could take music lessons off of the organ. I think it had a ROM
>or something.
Sorry, I don't remember that. Mainly worked with the top-line ones
<smirk> :-)
>> After what we said about those brands, I have to say I really enjoyed
>> playing that. Nice strings too. Did some sales concerts with it (don't
>> be impressed!).
>> Sorry to be sacreligious. Of course it was no B3 (et al), strictly
>> commercial.
>
>B3s then were pretty out in 1985 except church. In bands the Prophet 5
>was hot. Yamahas were pretty hot with their organ school and contests
>that they took to higher levels to get winners. The parents of the
>winning students use to come in and buy very expensive console Yamahas
>and had NO interest at all in Hammond organs. The school idea was
>smart. By creating the organ schools that created a lot of interest and
>their parents bought them a new Yamaha organ then a bigger one later,
>if they were competing. I don't know what they do now. Another one
>around that time . . .Wurlitzer Omnis? That was fully digital, I
>think. Keyboard Computer name.
Thanks for the history. I missed out on all that. Was a purist up until
it made no more sense to move them for commercial gigs, then bought a
clone. Then finally, the synths, DX7, etc. At one time, I had a new B3
all refinished in ebony, and two Lowboys the same (I think you could
order them that way, if not I had them refinished). So at least the
"organ" had soul! (Humor not lost on lots of friends, especially in
certain rooms.) Also had a new B3 in the box in the cellar because they
were constantly rumored to stop making them.
Larry