Why on earth did Joplin record 'Ole Miss Rag'?
Robert Perry
The subject pretty much says it all. I have found myself completely
intrigued as to why Joplin, during his recording session for the
Connorized Music Roll Company in NYC, chose (or was given) Handy's
"Ole Miss Rag" to record. It seems a very strange choice - you'd think
that he would record another of his own compositions, or a Scott or
Lamb piece. Was "Ole Miss Rag" exceptionally popular at the time?
(1916).
Comments, speculation, conjecture all welcome!
Sauteed Beanfries
You know, that is a mighty good question. Unfortunately I
have no idea. There is no question about whether some of the piano
rolls were edited...because some of the notes on "Joplin's" Connorized
piano rolls have been found to be rather impossible to play. Or at
least, supposedly...I have not gotten my hands on one as of yet...but
I have read about them. It would be another ballpark altogether,
though, if the Connorized Music Roll Company were to have made up (!)
entire piano rolls on their own and misattribute them to Joplin, for
reasons unbeknownst to us...so logic says that Joplin did indeed
record Ole Miss Rag.
I can see that he would have wanted to choose a non-ragtime piece...if
for no other reason than to show people he was not only interested in
the one genre...and Ole Miss Rag is certainly a good, catchy piece.
Maybe he had a special admiration for W.C. Handy, but it's odd that we
haven't heard anything else about it, as we have heard of his
appreciation of the opera of Wagner, or his apprecation of classical
music in general, from newspapers. It's obvious from his styles of
composition (a tango, the waltz "Bethena" which is almost
Brahms-esque, two operas, and assorted types of harmony throughout all
his works) that his musical tastes were rather eclectic, at least by
normal standards...so the style of music to me is not so much
surprising as the fact that we (or at least I, or anyone I know of)
have not heard of any other connection between Joplin and W.C. Handy.
--
Ashley
On 20 Aug 2003 00:45:53 -0700, relian...@xtra.co.nz (Robert Perry)
wrote:
Ragtimebill
>rolls were edited...because some of the notes on "Joplin's" Connorized
>piano rolls have been found to be rather impossible to play.
I drug out my copy of the Ole Miss Rag played by Scott Joplin (QRS Q-203 recut
from the old Connorized "Hand Played Record") just to see. It sounds like
Joplin's characteristic bass patterns, all right. The second time through the
first strain there are some right hand passages which cannot be played by one
player at one time, had to have been augmented. Most of the rest of the roll
is believable, however.
-Bill Rowland
Broken Arrow, OK
Sauteed Beanfries
on these things, I keep my eyes peeled for any ragtime memorabilia on
eBay...my ragtime collection is gradually increasing, but still, it
bugs me referring to things which I'm not sure of. I at least try to
check my information relatively well and make sure my statements are
not totally abstract. I have also heard recorded versions of these
rolls being played, and have deduced by ear that some of the notes
were probably impossible for one person to play at one time.
Actually, I'm under the impression that Ole Miss was not, at any time,
outstandingly popular...I hadn't even heard of it until I read of the
Joplin piano roll cut of it. I haven't seen much about it on W.C.
Handy-related websites, either. I suppose a little more research
wouldn't kill me, though!
--
Ashley
On 24 Aug 2003 03:19:55 GMT, ragti...@aol.comnospam (Ragtimebill)
wrote:
Robert Perry
Ashley, since you haven't yet heard the Connorized roll of 'Maple Leaf
Rag', point your browser here:
http://mmd.foxtail.com/Sounds/benjamin1.html
and download the zip file. It contains a MIDI files scanned from the
piano rolls of "Ole Miss Rag" and "Maple Leaf Rag" performed by
Joplin. (Thanks to Benjamin Intartaglia, another member of this ng!)
As a matter of interest, the zip file also contains a Connorized roll
of 'Ragtime Oriole' played by Wilhelm Axtmann, who was one of
Connorized's 'in house' artists and also responsible for editing.
You'll hear the same bass embellishments as in the rolls allegedly
played by Joplin - which is very interesting indeed..perhaps, sadly,
these rolls contain less of Joplin than previously thought?
Let me also play devil's advocate and toss a random thought onto the
table.. Joplin really DID write Ole Miss, it was swiped by Handy, and
he recorded it for Connorized to try and claw back some form of
recognition - or to thumb his nose at Handy? I seem to recall that for
a period of some years, piano rolls were NOT subject to copyright (or
royalty) laws, resulting in no money flowing to the composer! This
resulted in a long court case that is still used today in legal case
studies regarding music royalty rights!
Comments?
Rgds,
Robert
Sauteed Beanfries <semprec...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<igggkvc4p5rji70ck...@4ax.com>...
Sauteed Beanfries
Intartaglia...those midis are handy to have. I listened to Magnetic
Rag first, then Maple Leaf, then Ragtime Oriole...and I must admit I
heard similar bass embellishments. I don't actually have the sheet
music for Ragtime Oriole, but I'm familiar enough with it to recognize
the embellishments...and since I do have and am very familiar with the
sheet music to Magnetic Rag and Maple Leaf, liberties taken with those
are quite obvious.
I haven't done all that much research yet...I must confess I've been
feeling lazy over the last few days...but W.C. Handy intrigues me. It
sounds like, from what I have read so far, that he might have had a
similar effect on blues to the effect that Joplin had on ragtime.
Your devil's advocate proposition is interesting. I've been trying to
find out the date Ole Miss was actually published. Several websites
credit it as 1918 (as an instrumental, with lyrics by J. Russell
Robinson). However, on Benjamin Intartaglia's website, it says:
"Ole Miss - The New Cannon Ball Rag/William Christopher Handy
1913/Played by Scott Joplin (06/1916)/Connorized 10304"
Besides, if it was published in 1918, how the Heck could Joplin have
recorded it in 1916? Maybe I'm not looking hard enough for a publish
date, or maybe I'm looking in the wrong places. 1913 makes the most
sense, though.
I can't help but think that it's unlikely Handy stole it from Joplin
because W.C. Handy was also black. I mean, not that that makes him a
better person, but in those times especially, one would assume blacks
trying to make it in a common career such as music would sympathize
with each other's troubles and that there would be a sort of
comradery. That wouldn't necessarily hold true in every case, though,
and it's still a possibility that Handy stole it...it would certainly
be interesting and a very important find if he did. I'll keep trying
to absorb information about W.C. Handy and I'll post again if I find
something interesting.
--
Ashley
On 24 Aug 2003 04:18:23 -0700, relian...@xtra.co.nz (Robert Perry)
wrote:
>Interesting responses, so far.
L. Douglas Henderson
Has anybody considered (and I haven't read all the threads, below, at
this point) that Joplin DID NOT 'RECORD' ANY rolls for Connorized? These
are Wm. Axtmann (a.k.a. William Arlington) arrangements, so Joplin got
"money" and "publicity" - ostensibly - from lending his name to the roll
boxes.
Check out titles by this prolific Connorized arranger (the other being S.
A. Perry - Samuel Perlstein, or something along those lines).
Germanic-sounding names changed when The Great War began, so you'll find
many roll staffers with dual names, for this reason.
Rolls are an arranged music medium, in spite of the "played by" texts on
boxes & labels, a marketing effort to make the Pianola seem like a
phonograph, in those days.
Regards,
(signed) Douglas Henderson
ARTCRAFT Music Rolls
http://www.wicasset.net/artcraft/
On 20 Aug 2003 00:45:53 -0700, Robert Perry <relian...@xtra.co.nz>
wrote:
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Ed Berlin
piano rolls, but still have a lingering question about his assertion
that Axtmann recorded the Joplin rolls. The rolls are played badly,
sounding as if they could have been made by someone who had lost his
ability to execute the scores smoothly. As we know, this was the case
of Joplin in 1915-16. Are other Axtmann rolls played so badly?
On other issues regarding the rolls, raised by Ashley & others:
1. I have no clue as to why Joplin should have recorded "Ole Miss", if
indeed he did, or why that roll should even be attributed to him. Do
business records of the piano roll company still exist? (Such things do
re-appear. I recently had the opportunity to examine a cache of Melrose
business records relating to Jelly Roll, John Stark, Louis Armstrong,
and many others.)
2. I do not see Joplin's hand in the composition of "Ole Miss".
3. As to whether Handy would have been so unethical to have stolen a
Joplin composition: he certainly would, and did. Just listen to his
recording of "Fuzzy Wuzzy Rag", supposedly composed by of "Al Morton".
It's a blatant steal of "Maple Leaf".
Ed Berlin
Ed Berlin
piano rolls, but still have a lingering question about his assertion
that Axtmann recorded the Joplin rolls. The rolls are played badly,
sounding as if they could have been made by someone who had lost his
ability to execute the scores smoothly. As we know, this was the case
of Joplin in 1915-16. Are other Axtmann rolls played so badly?
On other issues regarding the rolls, raised by Ashley & others:
1. I have no clue as to why Joplin should have recorded "Ole Miss", if
indeed he did, or why that roll should even be attributed to him. Do
business records of the piano roll company still exist? (Such things do
re-appear. I recently had the opportunity to examine a cache of Melrose
business records relating to Jelly Roll, John Stark, Louis Armstrong,
and many others.)
2. I do not see Joplin's hand in the composition of "Ole Miss".
3. As to whether Handy would have been so unethical to have stolen a
Joplin composition: he certainly would, and did. Just listen to his
recording of "Fuzzy Wuzzy Rag", supposedly composed by of "Al Morton".
It's a blatant steal of "Maple Leaf".
Ed Berlin
shoomis...@gmail.com
pithecant...@gmail.com
> Hi everyone,
At this stage in his life, Joplin was not that highly regarded as a performer on the piano, though in my humble opinion his ability as a composer was far beyond anyone else in the genre, not least many of those who derided his keyboard skills. So perhaps he wanted to show he could still handle it. Probably at this point he was beginning to show early symptoms of the syphilis that would take his life in a couple of years. About a year after he did these piano rolls for Connorized, he cut the Maple Leaf one more time, and by that time, not long before his death, the decline was sadly and unmistakably evident.
As for why he did a blues number, why not? Ragtime and blues may not seem to mix very well, what with ragtime mostly being based on written music, if only as a starting point, while blues is more in the strictly improvisational tradition like jazz. As an amateur pianist myself, back during the 1970s ragtime revival, I wanted to master a hybrid of blues and classic ragtime but was never able to pull it off. But there's a lot more similarity there than we might think, as well as crossover in terms of which musicians performed which music. In the ragtime era, there weren't "ragtime pianists", but rather pianists who played ragtime among the other styles that were popular at the time.
As to the music itself, the B section of the Handy composition is reminiscent of the C section in the "Pineapple Rag".
pithecant...@gmail.com
Many if not most published ragtime rolls had embellishments which would sometimes result in the finished performance being impossible for one person to play. But it's my understanding that someone would usually do the initial cut by playing the piece live, and then the arrangers would add the embellishments.
fred...@gmail.com
Years ago I had a vinyl LP of Axtmann's playing - I cannot recall the name of album. On one side were the "Played by Joplin" rags and the flip side had some of Axtmann's playing of other composers, James Scott and Robert Hampton, I think. It was obvious to me that Axtmann was a brilliant piano player.
Regards,
Fred M. Cain