Downbeat didn't "make this" at all, man. "Original Dixieland Jazz in Hi-Fi" (ABC-Paramount ABC-184; 1957)

 

Back in 1957, Downbeat reviewer "D.C." wrote, "This was a monumental labor of love, but for the life of me, I can’t see the point at all."  Um, did he not read the title--"Original Dixieland Jazz in Hi-Fi"?  Did he skip the notes?  By itself, the title describes the point of this LP.

The reviewer continued: "If jazz is creative, and I’m sure it’s agreed that jazz is just that, then this record must fall into the classification of a curiosity. It seems so pointless to me that musicians with the ability to recreate would rather do that than make something of their own and out of themselves."  Painstakingly recreating 1917 performances in hi-fi IS an act of creativity.  How could it not be?  The reviewer failed to clarify the precise nature of his objection(s), and so we can only guess.  I'm inclined to think he was asserting that jazz, to qualify as such, must be improvised.  And it's possible (no way to be sure) that his concept of improvisation leaned toward the false construct wherein five or more musicians simply "blow" whatever's in their head at the moment.  I hate to ruin anyone's delusions, but a successful jazz performance is more than not a thing of deliberation.

But I can't read minds, and so I can't be sure why this cat was unable to "make" this LP, since "jazz is creative" fails to account for his summary dismissal of this amazing effort.  Plus, given that I've never much cared what Downbeat thinks, I'm inclined to dismiss the review as meaningless.  Imagine a jazz performance in which no one had agreed on 1) the key, 2) the tune, 3) where and when to repeat the verse, if included, 4) the tempo, 5) who plays which solo, and so on.  It would be total cacophony.  That is, unless the players were telepathically united.  Simply put, there's no way to recreate the ODJB's sound without writing it down.  Duhh.

Oh, and there's also the myth that "written-down" jazz isn't jazz.  Right.  Which explains why jazz arranging is a requirement for a Berklee degree.  A for-real cool cat has to know how to write down notes-aroony, dig?

And, my first time listening to these amazing recreations, my reaction was, "They're putting too much of a modern spin on things."  And I figured that it was probably an unconscious "move" on their part.  Then it struck me that the original performances, heard in "modern" fidelity, would inevitably sound unlike the original acoustical 78s in many regards.  In terms of inflection, dynamics, and the soundscape in general.  We're hearing more, simply put.  And, listening to these tracks side by side with the originals, my revised verdict is that these guys did one hell of a fantastic (and worthwhile) job.

The five brilliant musicians are Don Fowler on cornet, George Phillips on trombone, Earl Jackson on clarinet, George Ruschka on piano, and Darrell Renfro on drums.  And it was Fowler who did the astounding task of notating each 1917 "head" arrangement. 

I have no trouble "making this" LP (Daddy-o, cat, man), and in fact it's one of the great, swingsville, can-you-dig-it thrift finds of my "career."  From before Goodwill went nuts and over-priced its vinyl, only to stop putting out vinyl altogether after it stopped selling.  (A major "landmarks in marketing" moment.)  What a shame.  I mean, any cool cat can dig that selling items at 50 cents to a buck means turning a profit.  Whereas, no sales=no bread.  Dig?  Well, clearly someone ain't makin' that scene.  

Anyway, fabulous stuff! 

DOWNLOAD: Original Dixieland Jazz Hi-Fi.zip

The Original Dixeland One-Step

Livery Stable Blues

At the Jazz Band Ball

Ostrich Walk

Tiger Rag

Skeleton Jangle

Sensation Rag

Bluin' the Blues

Clarinet Marmalade Blues 

Mournin' Blues

Fidgety Feet

Lazy Daddy

(Original Dixieland in Hi-Fi; ABC-Paramount ABC-184; 1957)

Lee, real gone