Beyond Category

If you have been following this blog and posts that I've made here and there on the Internet, you'll know that I believe that the essence of jazz - and really music in general - revolves around freedom.  If you think about the best and most free-feeling times in your life, I would be willing to bet that there is a memorable soundtrack playing good time tunes on infinite repeat on the turntable, tape deck, CD player, or iPod of your mind.


Last month, as I was searching for ways to bring TIMKAT Entertainment back from a (way too) long hiatus, Robert Glasper's "Black Radio" was released.  I listened to a few of the tracks, actually expecting a trad jazz vibe, but instead was challenged by what is likely to be a truly groundbreaking album.  The more I listened, the more it occurred to me that Glasper had created something very fresh for a new audience.  Here is a pianist and vocalist that dared to mix break-beat, jazz rhythms, rap, soul, neo-Soul, Nu-Jazz, all these labels, to ultimately deliver a unique experience to the listener and meanwhile express his innermost feelings as an artist. 

What I like best about Black Radio is its daring musical and social spirit and most of all, you guessed it, its freedom to be, defying those confining labels. Duke Ellington often said that extraordinary people in his life were "beyond category" and that's a great way to describe many artists' inner creative urges to grow beyond conventional bounds.  It is often difficult to recognize art that will endure while enjoying it in the present, but I think Glasper and team are headed in that direction.  Time of course will either be a gentle or cruel judge, but usually one of the most fair.

Lately, it would appear that going beyond category shouldn't be too difficult for creative people to accomplish, as some of the most pervasive and powerful influences in media follow set formulas that have evolved over the past 15 years and therefore lulled us into a collective social slumber in its wake. Regardless, it continues to be an elusive treasure to possess.  

Take the "reality TV show" format, for example.  Whether or not most have noticed it, this show's format, like the classic sit-coms and variety shows of the past, follows a basic formula as follows:

1. Introduce characters (...often filled with despair and woe ...)
2. Create a conflict  (Host highlights said despair and woe ...)
3. Rise the conflict to a semi-climax (Characters become upset that host highlighted their problems)
4. Cut to commercials to keep suspense ... (... because why else would we keep watching?)
5. Hit a breaking point (climax)  (Characters are now in total meltdown mode.)
6. Resolve conflict, end show (Characters eventually see the light and are grateful that the host 'saved the day.'  Thank goodness.  Tune in next week and we'll do it all over again!) 

If you're not sure about this analysis, use these notes the next time that you watch shows like A&E's "Hoarders: Buried Alive" and Food Network's "Restaurant Impossible."  While completely different in subject matter and characters, the format of the show is the same and so far has been a recipe for ratings success.

Music is also not immune to having established a set formula; in fact, in composition and theory courses, we learn that there are many "song forms".   Here, I'll illustrate a traditional standard or pop song.  Start with a Verse - Repeat the verse with different lyrics - Move to the chorus or "hook" of the song - Rinse and repeat through verse and chorus again - Throw in a bridge for variety - Spin back through the final chorus hook - End song, coda out.  Or to music geeks, it's song form AABAABCB ... repeat B and fade out ...

As artists of all stripes, we were well-schooled in formulas.  What are scales and chords if nothing more than a convenient way to package the study of music into bite size pieces?  What are the blues if nothing more than a great formula of three chords that help to tell a story? 

I'm not knocking formulas - please don't misunderstand.  We need them as a basis when learning new skills, concepts, and patterns.  We need them to grasp the functions of the world around us.  However, when an artist "busts out of school" to weave new formulas and result in new ideas - together, this is extraordinary, this begins to stroll toward beyond category, and this is what most artists I've met yearn for, regardless of if they actually ever reach that goal.  The pursuit itself is more than worthy.

As usual I've slipped down the rabbit hole of rhetoric and so I'll get to my point.

TIMKAT is still a tiny jazz entertainment company, but lately, the mammoth drive to push outside of a (boring) comfort zone has challenged me to think in new and creative ways in order to swim upstream in a world that doesn't always rush out to buy jazz records.  This month, I am delving into the idea (thanks Mr. Glasper, though we may never meet!) of mixing and matching sounds that most would never say that they go together in order to grasp a new concept. 

One such light bulb went on for me a couple of weeks ago:  what if I dared to combine two things that I love into a potentially new and funky sound -- house music and classic jazz -- break-beat and smooth-jazz, for starters!  Unclassic the classic and un-smooth the smooth.  Could it be done?  Is it possible to take an Irving Berlin track such as "Change Partners" and turn it into a raving club anthem?  Is it possible to shift "Star Eyes" into a funky and irresistable beat that folks would love to crank in the car? I don't know, but like Glasper, I am willing to push some boundaries to find out.  As a result, I have started the investigation by opening conversations with folks outside of the jazz world (DJ Jason Wolfe: Basement Funk Vol 1 from House Candy Music is a bit of inspiration, for example) but still within the industry to pursue that dream. 

Pushing boundaries doesn't always win a creative person a warm and deserving welcome.  For example, some people (critics included) hated Charlie Parker with Strings in 1952, saying Bird had "sold out." Others couldn't get their minds around John Coltrane's A Love Supreme in 1964.   American audiences avoided Disney's Fantasia in November 1940. The movie was a flop then, but it is suddenly a masterpiece today.  We hear the same dismissals today when some posit that Esperanza Spalding's music isn't really jazz. 

[Begin Soapbox Aside:  If there is anything that needs to be dismissed, it is not their creative efforts; rather, it is our ingrained double-standards and narrow preconceptions on the art form itself.  Furthermore, it appears that as Spalding can be dismissed that her work isn't really jazz, Glasper can be hailed as having "one foot planted firmly in jazz and the other in hip-hop and R&B."  To each artist's credit, I think they are both doing the same thing -- pushing the envelope, challenging convention, and inviting us to indulge in that flight -- in delightful but different ways that fit their own personal styles best.   :End Soapbox Aside]

Because as I mentioned, isn't the essence of jazz about freedom?  Logically, it follows that if jazz is about freedom, then no one has the right to shackle an artist into a subjectively convenient category that arbitrarily dictates what's real and what's not.  And speaking of formulas, how's that one for a trusted method to how to approach music and life?  Be free.

Best always,
Kathryn Ballard Shut
President, pianist, idealist
TIMKAT Entertainment, Inc.
Twitter: @timkatent

LINER NOTES: Retrospective: Tim Ballard's Singing Positive to the People (2012)

I don't envy the job of people that sit down and choose to write a memoir. The task is daunting and full objectivity is impossible. How does one objectively recall facts about what happened during his or her life, as though that person were an innocent bystander, and still put the subjective heart, soul, memory, and feeling of what it was like to have personally experienced the events in the memoir? That's exactly where I find myself in writing these liner notes, as not only the surviving press agent for Tim Ballard, but also as his daughter, in introducing you to Tim's timeless soul album, Singing Positive to the People.


In late 1978, I turned six years old and remember my father giving me the vinyl 33 1/3 LP album to play on my Soundesign turntable. I listened to the nine tracks again and again in my room, not quite understanding that it was a “covers” album - that the tunes I was hearing had already been made very famous by legendary groups such as Lou Rawls, The Commodores, Full Moon with Buzz Feiten, The Stylistics, Hall and Oates, the Brothers Johnson, and Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes. My friends and I happily roller skated to it in the basement, oblivious to its deep and musical excellence. To me, it was my dad's band doing the killer job as they always did – so killer, that when I finally heard the original artists' versions many years later, I marveled at how truly talented and tight the entire Oklahoma City-based ensemble really was.


In fact, I felt a little guilty in admitting that I was slightly disappointed with the original versions in some cases. For example, when I later heard Buzz Feiten and Full Moon's easy groove on “Need Your Love”, I missed arranger David Powell's amazing Tower-of-Power-like original horn interludes and relentless, driving funk on the Singing Positive version. And when I heard “The Love I Lost” -- as excellent as Teddy Pendergrass is – and one of my all-time favorite vocalists -- I had to admit that regardless of if my father sang it or not, as a professional, master musician, Tim had given Ted a great run for his money. It was only as an adult that I realized that I had owned a gem of a recording for years, but most of the world had never heard it, and wouldn't for many, many more years. In fact, I could not have known then that the only way that the world would hear it, would sadly be after Tim passed away, through my actions alone, and thanks to the endless reach of the Internet.


Almost thirty-five years later, Singing Positive has the opportunity to experience a rebirth in the digital age and a chance to gain a new following. The master tapes have long since been lost (… given away, gambled in a poker game, traded for something else, who knows? It's all typical musicians' lore …), but I didn't let that stop me. I enlisted the incredible studio talents of Mr. Colin Chapman of Satori Systems and his connections in Boulder, Colorado to perform the cleanest digitization of vinyl that I've ever heard, and the talented Ms. Lynne Menefee of Menefee Creative in Baltimore, MD to refresh the cover art work. And if there is an occasional pop of the vinyl, it's the perfect way to send us nostalgic listeners right back to our Soundesign (or Marantz!) turntables of 1978, bulky black headphones on, lying on the floor, eyes closed, volume cranked.


The saying goes that what is old is new again, and I hope that you will feel the same way when you hear Singing Positive to the People for yourself. A great mix of Quiet Storm, driving Funk, heartfelt Soul, and the best of 1970's R&B, this album puts Tim's unique touch on the tunes that inspired him to thrill audiences during his days at Oklahoma City venues such as the Onyx and the Razz-Ma-Tazz. It's a testament that truly good music never goes out of style, and all of the tunes on the album deliver on that promise, including such rarely-heard classics as Hall and Oates' “Las Vegas Turnaround”, Paul Williams' “Sunday”, Bell and Creed's “Stop, Look, and Listen (To Your Heart)”, and Buddy Johnson's “Since I Fell For You”, all styled as I've never heard anyone else do.


Singing Positive is on CDBABY in digital format (June 2012) and CDs will be available after June 12, 2012. (http://www.cdbaby.com/artist/timballard).  It will also appear later in 2012 on all major media download sites, such as iTunes, Amazon, Rhapsody, and a new service – Amazon CD On Demand -- where customers can still order a physical compact discs to play anywhere they choose. (Regrettably, the album will no longer be available on vinyl, cassette, or 8-Track tape. That's the downside to the Internet Age!)

For more information about Tim Ballard and TIMKAT Entertainment, write us at timkatent@gmail.com, 'Like' us on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/timkatent) and follow us on Twitter @timkatent.   May you enjoy this treasure every bit as much I have for the past 35 years.

Sincerely yours,
Kathryn Ballard Shut /shoot/
President, pianist, musical legacy
TIMKAT Entertainment, Inc.
Denver, CO, USA
Web Portal: http://about.me/timkatent

PRESS RELEASE: TIM BALLARD - Singing Positive to the People

March 20, 2012

TIMKAT Entertainment, Inc.

Denver, CO, USA

Email: timkatent@gmail.com

Follow on Twitter @timkatent

PRESS RELEASE

TIM BALLARD - “Singing Positive to the People” (2012)


There is a popular saying: “What's Old Is New Again”, and this could not be any truer than when referring to master vocalist Tim Ballard's collection of timeless 70's Soul Classics on Singing Positive to the People.


Recorded and distributed only on vinyl to a limited following in Oklahoma City in 1978, Singing Positive has been expertly digitized and will be released via all major media outlets and CDBABY in Summer 2012, just on the eve of the album's 35^th Anniversary.


Featuring all-time soul favorites originally recorded by superstars Hall and Oates, Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes, The Commodores, The Stylistics, The Brothers Johnson, Lou Rawls, Full Moon (Buzz Feiten), Paul Williams, and Lenny Welch, Singing Positive provides a delightfully hip trip back to the Golden Age of Seventies Soul and Fusion sound. The album boasts all original horn arrangements, tight vocal harmonies, and infectious funk on tracks such as “Need Your Love” and “Sunday”, two great hits that have since fallen out of collective memory but are once again brought to life by this masterful recording.

Singing Positive reaches beyond the bounds of being just a covers album, due to Tim Ballard's vocal mastery at breathing unique life into beloved musical stories. Soul lovers of the time will no doubt revel in the journey down Memory Lane, while a new generation of fans will find the grooves and funk intriguing enough to enjoy the songs on their own merit while venturing to compare Ballard's rendering with the originals.

The album will be available for direct purchase from TIMKAT at CDBABY (http://www.cdbaby.com) in Summer 2012 or later throughout the year at all major media outlets, such as iTunes, Amazon, Amazon CD On Demand, and Rhapsody. Reviews are welcomed on blogs and in magazines and copies can be mailed to timkatent@gmail.com.  


TIM BALLARD – Singing Positive to the People Track Listing:

1. Las Vegas Turnaround
2. Let's Fall In Love All Over Again
3. Young Girls Are My Weakness
4. Stop, Look, and Listen
5. Need Your Love
6. Sunday
7. The Love I Lost
8. Since I Fell For You
9. Get the Funk Out of My Face

Strawberry Fields .... Forever?

I really had to hand it to Ringo Starr for his comments in this Billboard Magazine article; however, I also had to note that this was not the first time society has experienced "unaware kids", even in the age of the Internet.  Due to the nature of just being kids, some level of unawareness, otherwise known as inexperience, is bound to pop up eventually.


While some might argue that it would make more sense for kids to do a Google search on names such as Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr before publicly tweeting or posting blunt questions such as "who the hell is that?", the reality is that the rapid convenience of blogs and Twitter has mysteriously prohibited some young people's abilities to effectively look up such information themselves. 


Step into the time machine with me once again and let me take you back to about 1994 for a story on The Beatles and general "unawareness."  I was almost 22 years old that year, a first-year senior in college, and armed to the teeth with a dial-up modem connection to the world and a roaring 486 personal computer.  At the time, the Internet was beginning its meteoric rise and engines such as Netscape and America On Line (AOL) were two powerful, pre-eminent, Windows-based, graphical user interfaces available; both of which eliminated the need to type command lines and allowed us to view pictures as well as text content.


As the World Wide Web emerged thanks to our ability to access it with Netscape, the attraction of newsgroups also flourished, and at that time, I blogged (before there was such a word!) primarily on the Steely Dan and Beatles newsgroup boards.


The Beatles board in particular received a lot of traffic then because new compact-disc editions of the group's entire catalogue were being released for the first time.  It was the 30th Anniversary of Beatlemania in America, and Capitol Records (EMI) was milking the profit machine for all it could.  As a result, as adults raced into the record stores to get the same albums they owned on vinyl -- now on CD -- their kids saw the Beatles albums advertised and heard them played overhead.  Rather than ask their parents about the group (so uncool), they naturally sought out places on the Internet where they could ask (other, older) fans about the music. 


At the same time, the newsgroups were a great place for the kids to log on and educate us presumed "old farts" that BRITNEY SPEARS ROCKS FOREVER!!! and THE BEATLES SUCK!!!!!  That I could stand; that was just a fourteen year old being rebelliously and immaturely fourteen.  However, at least the kids still knew who Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Starr were.  What they didn't know was the jargon that accompanied the "archaic" recordings.



Growing up with vinyl records, we Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers took it for granted that everyone and his sister knew what a 45 RPM single was.  We figured everyone knew what 33 1/3 LP meant and how this was different from an EP.  We even dared to assume that everyone on the board knew what a "record" even was. 

We were wrong.  Times were changing.  Almost daily, someone, usually a ten to fifteen year old (who, by the way, would be in his or her 30s now!) first asked "What's an LP?   What's 45 RPM mean?  Vinyl?" and then of course never neglected to remind us that BRITNEY RULES!!!


At first, most people on the boards nicely answered their questions. Invariably, after the daily onslaught, fans grew weary, and an FAQ was finally drawn up.  After that, the kids were mocked, told off by the fans that felt they didn't have time to answer idiotic questions like these.  The fans wanted to talk about the music and in egregiously nerdy detail!   They wanted to dive into Lennon's incredible use of the mellotron in the psychedelic period of the group (1966-1970 - think tapes playing backwards and the electronic flute sound on "Strawberry Fields Forever" and you've got it.)   They wanted to discuss who was a better songwriter and/or lyricist: Lennon, McCartney, or neither, opting instead for the "Dark Horse", George Harrison.  They wanted to know how Paul and Linda were doing with their new vegetarian frozen food line.  The last thing they wanted to be was a New Webster's Dictionary of technological wonders of the 1960s and virtual babysitters for pre-pubescent Britneyphiles.


Fast-forward to today and no one is even talking about Britney anymore.  Eighteen years later, it's the kids of the kids I was just talking about that are asking for verification of a pop legend's identity.  Now it's all about Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, Pitbull, and who the hell is Paul McCartney? 


(As an aside chuckle in retrospect, if the teenybopper set even knows who McCartney is --- and most assume that they do and that the Twitter trend was really a big joke --- it likely didn't help his image to have released an easy-listening standards album.  It no doubt missed the ears of the Beliebers and Gaga-monsters.  They just probably figured it was some old guy singing some really old songs on the Grammies.  Time passes.  Paul probably doesn't care and why should he!  He's hitting his demographic square-on and selling well.)


The fleeting world of the young is not a new phenom; the juvenile pronouncements today are exactly the same as they were on the Beatle UseNet boards in 1994.  With this, we can safely assume that the next generation in 2030 will be asking us  ... "what's a CD?   What's an mp3?  What's an iPod?" -- and amazed that we used to TYPE STUFF?  (So uncool.)


Ringo's attitude is right on the mark; he knows who he is, what he has achieved, his undisputed place in history, and perhaps the most important thing that comes with age, security, maturity, and experience --- knowing that kids will be always be kids. 


Best always,
Kathryn

---

Kathryn Ballard Shut
TIMKAT Entertainment
Denver, CO, USA
Email: timkatent@gmail.com

Twitter: http://twitter.com/timkatent
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/timkatent
MySpace Music: http://MySpace.com/timkatent
Album Sales on CDBABY: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/TimBallard
GRAMMY365 Networking: http://www.grammy365.com/users/timkatent

Independent Review: The Jeff Hamilton Trio, "Red Sparkle"

Submitted to JazzTimes Community Pages on March 8, 2012 at http://jazztimes.com/community/articles/29672-the-jeff-hamilton-trio-red-sparkle 
Reprinted here for your convenience and comment.

Jeff Hamilton Trio - "Red Sparkle"

Class, sophistication, original material and inventive takes on classics make this album a delight to both critical musicians and casual listeners alike.

As a native Colorado-based jazz musician and enthusiast, I often drop over to the Bailey-based Capri Records to see what's new in the jazz world. Today I picked up The Jeff Hamilton Trio's newest effort, "Red Sparkle", released in Feburary 2012, and was immediately and aurally rewarded for the venture.


The Jeff Hamilton Trio is in essence a standard jazz threesome, made up of Tamir Hendelman on piano, Christoph Luty on bass, and Jeff Hamilton on drums. All of the musicians in this outfit are world-class, at the top of their game, and their rich experience in jazz truly shines on this album. The entire album, all ten tracks, is an ongoing and cohesive musical conversation throughout.


The album opens with a Hamilton original, "Ain't That a Peach"; a great and driving blues shuffle. From the first riffs on Hamilton's drum, this tune does not beg to be noticed; it takes you by the throat, throws you on its shoulders for a ride, and commands you to tap your foot during the journey.


Next, once you've departed the blues train, the trio takes you on an inventive trip to Thelonius Monk's world, with his classic, "Bye Ya", only this time, the group has smoothed it out and given it a less angular mood than Thelonius' original 1960s rendering. The gem of this tune lies in its flawless samba beat, held tightly throughout Hamilton's solos and traded-fours interplay with Hendelman and Luty. Two minutes into the piece, the fellas are in full Latin mode with constant rhythmic interchanges between Hendelman's comping left-hand and imaginative solos, to Luty and Hamilton's unfailing adherence to the groove. A delightful offering that had me bopping along, even as I wrote this review!


Usually by the third song in an album, I have an idea of what the rest of the effort will sound like, but Hamilton and team continue to throw fantastic curve balls to that experience. On the third track, "On and On", the trio pleasantly surprises with a complete overhaul of Stephen Bishop's 1977 pop ballad, beginning with Hamilton's almost-tribal toms and Luty's enchanting bass vibe. It is only when Hendelman introduces the melody at about 50 seconds in that you may recognize the tune and say, "Yes, indeed, this works, and in fact... I like it better than the original!" Gone is Bishop's influence on the tune; this treat is now fully and gently under new ownership and re-presented for us to enjoy once again. It is easily one of my favorite offerings on the album.


"Hat's Dance" is the next original tune (Hendelman and Hamilton) and is a joyful, straight-ahead swing, that continues to impress with its driving and yet understated command of rhythm and time. It is a tune sure to be enjoyed by serious listeners of jazz for its technical sophistication by the group, as well as swing dancers and casual listeners for its fun groove. The word "Dance" in the title is fitting; as a swing dancer, I would love to get up and move to this one.


Two Johnny Mercer (original lyrics) offerings come next in the shuffle. The first, "Too Marvelous for Words" (Whiting-Mercer), was made popular originally by vocalists such as Frank Sinatra and Billie Holiday in the 1950s. Here, the trio approaches it with a slightly quicker tempo than usual, and also incorporates more "Monk-like", angular rhythms and breaks thoughout the solos. However, the overall effect is a fantastic hard bop romp that features Hendelman's amazing and imaginative soloistic style, coupled with Luty's tight doubling of the melodic line, and Hamilton's tasty brushwork on the kit.


The second Mercer-era offering is "Laura" (Raksin-Mercer), from the 1944 film of the same name. This tune takes the most liberties with tempo of all of the tracks on the album, is a piano feature, and is made more modern by the gorgeous use of Hendelman's polychordic structures (quartals, sustained fourths) and perfect use of simplicity and space in the melodic lines. The concept of the tune is deeply based in pauses and heavy rubato time, which in turn shows how tightly this group listens to each other's aural cues. And while Luty's bass execution is flawless throughout the entire album, I especially enjoyed hearing more of his beautiful and round tone on this track.


Leaving Mercerville, the seventh track on the album is "A Sleepin' Bee" (Harold Arlen - Truman Capote). This offering is primarily a bass and drum feature, as the tune is masterfully constructed as a traded-fours exchange (think Neal Hefti's "Cute") in which each member of the trio holds his own throughout the conversation.


Two of the three remaining tracks on the album are Hamilton and Luty compositions, with the third being a Ray Brown one, previously recorded as a vocal edition with Judy Roberts and Brown himself.


Track Eight is "Red Sparkle" (Hamilton), the album's namesake and neither the name nor the music disappoint. This is a bright, very up-tempo, unforgiving hard bop romp that features primarily Hamilton and Hendelman, but well-supported by a very, very understated, light bass treatment, so light that Luty at first uses it to accentuate the drumming and solos, much as a trumpeter might blow kicks in a big band chart to generate excitement. Luty doesn't even "walk bass" until almost two and a half minutes into the tune and by that point, he is fully on board, locking tightly with Hamilton to create a magic carpet for Hendelman to fly upon as he solos with dizzying dexterity. While frenetic, the delivery of the track is never out of control, kind of like when one rides a "Wild Mouse" rollercoaster that feels like it should fly right off the rails, but always turns on the track, and just in time. The chart eventually fades out to Hamilton's rock-solid, militaristic riffs and leaves the listener's room no doubt spinning with delight. A masterpiece not only of composition but also of execution by
the trio; rookies need not apply!


After the wild ride, Hamilton and team begin to wind the album down with the Ray Brown composition, "I Know You Oh So Well", and as mentioned, this originally was recorded with Hamilton, Brown, and vocalist Judy Roberts; however, this time, bassist Luty brings his bow to converse with Hendelman's treatment of the melody and the effect is brilliant. The sentiment of the chart still retains the mood of a "vocal" chart, as it is a beautiful edition of a timeless jazz ballad, coupled with classical sensibility.


Finally, the album closes with a Christoph Luty original work, "In An Ellingtone" and delivers a perfect end to a tight, flawless, and wholly enjoyable album. While the title of the chart recalls Ellington, as a fellow pianist, I believe that I heard more Horace Silver's style of the mid-1960s, from Hendelman's raised 9th voicings and Silveresque triplets in the melody, to Hamilton's heavier drive and rim clicks on the drums. In any event, the track is a tasty blues trip that completes an album that delivers an entire package of swing, Latin samba, blues, pop ballad, and hard bop.


"Red Sparkle" is definitely worth owning and is one of the few albums that I immediately downloaded, just from hearing the samples. From the Capri site, the album can be downloaded for $9.99 or a track at a time for $0.99 each. The physical CD media is pricier at $14.99.


For more information, visit the Capri Records site at http://caprirecords.com/artists/jeff-hamilton-trio to enjoy it as much as I did.

Best regards,
Kathryn Ballard Shut
President, Pianist
TIMKAT Entertainment, Inc.
Denver, CO, USA

Twitter: @timkatent
Email: timkatent@gmail.com

Best,
Kathryn

Long-Lost Musical Cousins: Roy Clark and Blues / Jazz

About a week ago, a friend of mine, lead guitarist in a great rock band called Drew 6 (Kansas City), posted a YouTube link on his Facebook page.  The link showed the legendary Roy Clark, a guest star and featured artist on an episode of the popular television series, The Odd Couple (1971).  


Mr. Clark astounded the characters of the show, Oscar (Jack Klugman) and Felix (Tony Randall) when he decided to perform something different than what they expected of him (aka Felix's request for "more Bach" and Oscar's request for "Mountain Dewww!") and launched into an amazing rendition of the classic Spanish tune, Malagueña.  The expressions on Klugman and Randall's faces, together with the audience's applause mid-performance, said it all. It was obvious that in character or out, the actors were just as enthralled and moved by Clark's performance as the studio audience, who rightly exploded into monstrous applause when Clark finished with a final olé!


That night, I sent a video response back to my friend's Facebook page, showing a different side of Mr. Clark's work, this time with a performance of Duke Ellington and Juan Tizol's classic Caravan on the Hee Haw television show (1969).  Both of us traded glowing tweets and Facebook comments about the music throughout the evening and marveled once again at this living legend that could seemingly play anything, any style, any level of difficulty.  Mr. Clark was (and is!) a timeless master of his art.


Then it hit me ... Classical guitar.  Duke Ellington.  Roy Clark.  "Caravan" ...  Hee Haw!?  At first glance, it seemed like a bizarre place to showcase a jazz standard; and yet, as I thought about it further, I knew that "crossing over" from one musical style to another in this fashion simply does not make much difference to the artist.  A true musician studies music and by this admission, must embrace different styles not only to suit his or her audience, but also study a plethora of styles while on the journey to mastering his or her instrument.  On both The Odd Couple and the Hee Haw performances, Roy Clark does exactly that.


When Hee Haw was popular (1969-1971 on CBS, and again for over 20 years in syndication), I was a child, so I couldn't appreciate the acting and artistry behind the weekly goofiness written into the show.  In my child's mind, everyone on the show was a bunch of real hillbillies that loved and joked about their "simple" country lives; in reality, however, the concept of the show resulted in country music's response to Rowan and Martin's 'Laugh-In', and its music couldn't be any more serious.  The show was not only an immense success in syndication to a wide variety of television viewers due to its comedy, but also because it provided a major stage for the biggest stars in the country music business (1969 - 1992) to showcase their talent.  In that spirit, Hee Haw also opened its stage to other non-country music entertainers, such as the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, Ernest Borgnine, Leslie Nielsen, Eddie Rabbitt, and many, many more, thus broadening its appeal to a wide range of viewers.   In retrospect, goofy or not, the show truly exhibited some of the greatest performances known in rock, blues, bluegrass, and country music, all ushered weekly into American living rooms by master musicians Roy Clark and Buck Owens.  Let's focus next on the dexterity of Clark's Caravan performance mentioned earlier.

From the first downbeats laid out by Buck Owens' band, The Buckaroos (all excellent Nashville musicians in their own right), Mr. Clark playfully raises his eyebrows at the camera, as if to say "get ready folks, this is going to be good", and he delivers.  The entire performance is a flawless fusion of classic Middle Eastern "phrygian" modes and melody from the original Ellington/Tizol chart, but further enhanced with Clark's warm and tasteful blues, jazz, and country riffs in the solos, all set to a solid, driving, and unfailing Western beat.  Taken together, the performance warms my soul and inspires me to think of Mr. Clark differently than I ever had before, every time I watch the clip. 


Just listen to Mr. Clark's smooth blues riffs, particularly at 1:49, when Roy solos and The Buckaroos launch into a straight-ahead, up-tempo swing that would play just as well in any jazz setting today.  There is no filler, no fumbling, not a note out of place.  Everything flows and belongs there.  The phrasing is clean and tells a fantastic story. The Buckaroo rhythm section is in command and Mr. Clark is free to fly his magic carpet sound right overhead.


Listen again to the heartfelt blues riffs at the break (2:18), where it's just Roy and the drummer, and feel the infectious swing return for another dancing joyride at 2:38.  Marvel at how effortlessly The Buckaroos shift from a "Rawhide" Western two-step beat into straight-ahead swing, complete with a kick on the snare to cue everyone into each new phrase on-time. 


And finally, dig Mr. Clark's wailing cadenza at the end of the tune, which is nothing less than the blues at its best.  All told, the experience is tight and flawless, perhaps one of the best three minutes and thirty-three seconds of music out there. 


So why talk about Hee Haw and country music on a jazz blog?   First, because country music and jazz share a common ancestry.  Jazz is, just like country music, a rural storyteller's music!   Both are grandchildren of the blues and by that association are musical cousins. And finally, as stated before regarding a musician's education and skill, truly good musicians are not limited to only knowing how to play one particular style of music.  As listeners, we can learn to appreciate their talent for what it is, no matter what style of music they choose to present.


An additional bit of country music and jazz lore in closing: in the early 1950s, the alto saxophone legend, Charlie Parker, also known as "Bird", was often fond of dropping a nickel into the jukebox and listening to country music in diners while on tour. One day, one of the members of his band asked him why he, a hard-core bop musician, even bothered with listening to the whine, drivel, and simplicity of country music. Parker didn't miss beat and replied, "Just listen to the stories!"  In the case of hearing Roy Clark and The Buckaroos perform Caravan on Hee Haw, I have no doubt that Bird would agree, only this time, the stories are timelessly captured within the joy of the music itself.


Best,
Kathryn

---

Kathryn Ballard Shut
TIMKAT Entertainment
Denver, CO, USA
Email: timkatent@gmail.com

Twitter: http://twitter.com/timkatent
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/timkatent
MySpace Music: http://MySpace.com/timkatent
Album Sales on CDBABY: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/TimBallard
GRAMMY365 Networking: http://www.grammy365.com/users/timkatent

Response: The Slate Blog: Great American Songbook

In response to The Slate Blog - "Standard Issue:  Why Do Great American Songbook  Albums by Pop Artists So Often Disappoint?", Jeff Turrentine, 28 Feb 2012: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2012/02/paul_mccartney_s_kisses_on_the_bottom_and_the_problem_with_great_american_songbook_albums_.html?tid=sm_tw_button_toolbar&wp_login_redirect=0

 

 

 

Reply, posted as TIMKAT / Kathryn Ballard Shut
3:32 PM Eastern, Tuesday, February 28, 2012

The "Great American Songbook" is aptly named due not only due to the timelessness and collective memories of the songs found within, but also because a good majority of those tunes demand a level of vocal (and sometimes instrumental) dexterity. These are songs that have so far stood the (relatively short but growing) test of time because they continue to speak to a new generation of listeners each time.

The first secret of this collective Songbook lies in its ability to "tell a story", and this is often where I have been sometimes disappointed in the endeavors of otherwise-great musicians today. Some have failed to sell me on the story, the mood, the feeling, and the context of the original song. As some here have already written, some just blow through the charts unconvincingly, so it feels as though we're being cheated on its meaning. Irving Berlin, Duke Ellington, Cole Porter, the Gershwins, and other Tin Pan Alley writers of the day understood this delicate balance and therefore worked to craft a piece of art -- that also just happened to speak to people and sell!

In the jazz world, there is an educational maxim for instrumentalists to learn the *lyrics* that go with a song, as well as the melody, because it is said that if the musicians know and believe the "story", that sentiment will eventually come out of the instrument, and I believe this is true. It is easy to push buttons on a horn; it is another thing entirely to commmand an audience's rapt attention, to bring it to its feet in excitement, or to tears with feeling. Again, it is a testament to the power of the story, the irresistible coupling of lyrics and music, that allows people to relate to the song and rate it as a 'keeper'.

And finally, as mentioned, there is a technical dexterity that these songs demand of the artist. Outside of the regular "pop" or "rock" parameter of a few chords per chart, these songs constantly change modes to evoke a mood and the melodies by definition are often not kind. The underlying chords are by definition more complex (example: 'Round Midnight) and therefore some of the melodies demand more of the vocalist.

All this said, on a positive note, I applaud today's musicians for attempting to keep an American treasure, the Songbook, alive, but also understand, as a fellow jazz pianist and vocalist, truly how daunting that task can be. I'm truly thrilled that the classics once again cause some chatter!

Best always,
Kathryn Ballard Shut
President, Pianist
TIMKAT Entertainment, Inc.
Denver, CO, USA

Twitter: @timkatent
Tim Ballard on CDBABY: "Great American Songbook" - telling the story at http://www.cdbaby.cd/cd/TimBallard

Millionaires in a Recession - Jazz Music's Revival and Our Place In It

On the same evening as one of the film industry's biggest nights (The 84th Annual Academy Awards, aka "Oscar Night", February 26, 2012), vocalist Dianne Reeves and her band took the stage in the beautiful East Room of the White House to entertain a room full of heads of State and, presumably, jazz enthusiasts.  Through the magic of Twitter, her staff posted a new picture on Monday morning of the event, at https://twitter.com/#!/iampetermartin/status/174157907280142336/photo/1

For those that do not have Twitter, permit me to set the scene of the photo.  Imagine a large, yet intimately seated, white paneled, colonial room where soft and low light emanates from several gorgeous, multi-tiered crystal chandeliers hanging overhead. The audience is dressed impeccably in tasteful and conservative evening gowns and tuxedos.  Dianne herself is beautiful in a periwinkle blue flowing gown, the sapphire jewel in a sea of pure black and white dress-settings. The room itself is as stately as always.  A painted portrait of first President George Washington, hangs behind the stage and has exclusive front-row access to Dianne's vocals, as well as to the sounds of her quartet on piano, bass, drums, and guitar. 

Take all of this in stark contrast to everything that we learn about jazz's early roots. Backwater.  Poor.  Church-based.  And later, found in brothels.  Red-light districts.  Seedy locales.  Speakeasies.  Called "jungle music", amongst other horrible racial and cultural slurs.  Marvel again at its evolution, celebrate its revolution, as well as its deep and subtle impact to popular music today, and realize that this is a music that has grown up in the space of only about 100 years. Within that time, jazz's image has amazingly gone from a poor man's spiritual music all the way up to entertaining the realm of the elite.

Now focus this wide camera shot in tighter, to the point of today's thought.  Each week on sites such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and various Internet blogs, I constantly see music lovers reaching out to the global online community, asking for help on what to listen to in order to better appreciate jazz. 
And each week, while the majority of people are helpful and positive, without fail, there is at least one snooty jerk on every site that replies back to these innocent jazz potential proselytes with a blistering admonishment to buy a book on the subject, "go look it up", and by the way, what these newbies think is jazz "isn't really jazz."  Conversation abruptly ends, feelings are hurt. 

Times like these offer the greatest opportunity for these jazz snobs to offer guidance on their favorite artists for review, but instead, the impact is negative; it no doubt just pushed the listener away from ever pursuing jazz again as an interest and once again tarnished jazz's already unfairly-presented  subculture.  At another level, I continue to observe fellow musicians and critics online woefully mourn why jazz fails to attract and retain as large of a worldwide following as rock and roll or blues.  This should never have been jazz's fate, but in America, it has been so for the past sixty years. 
Stanley Crouch, a major contributing journalist for jazz magazines such as Jazz Times, said it best when interviewed on Ken Burns' "JAZZ", and I will paraphrase it here: Jazz is a welcoming music, it says, "come on in."  I agree fully with that, but I am also a jazz lover, so I already embrace that understanding.  But for the jazz "newbie", even though the music may say, "come on in", some of jazz's presentation may have unintentionally implied, "stay the hell out."

Most people cannot relate to White House Black-Tie affairs, the Oscars, and, as Billy Crystal joked on Sunday night about the film industry, to "millionaires in a recession giving themselves golden statues."  I wager that most people would probably agree with Dizzy Gillespie when he remarked in the 1950s that audiences wouldn't "care if we played a flatted 5th or a ruptured 129th."  And sadly, this old joke rings true:  "What's the difference between a blues musician and a jazz musician?:  The blues musician plays 3 chords a night for 1,000 people.  The jazz musician plays 1,000 chords a night for 3 people. "

But that's what people may experience with a limited understanding of jazz today -- it is often shown in movies and in other media as background music for a very elite party.  It is swarmy, out-of-date, boring filler for the Oscars, Emmies, and Golden Globes.  It is strictly a high-class, sleek black-tie affair at Lincoln Center.  It is utterly unapproachable at Carnegie Hall; and finally, it is only for the most powerful in the White House East Room.  Ergo, "Snobby Rich Music For Snobby Rich People."
What an irony!  How did this happen to a musical tradition that started out as a healing salve amongst poor, itinerant workers in the South, to be seen as Snobby Rich Music?  And more importantly, how do we return jazz to its rightful status as a "welcoming music" that most feel so estranged from?
One idea would be for these jazz snobs to stop pushing people at books and academia and telling them to go look things up on Google.   That's like telling someone whose car just broke down to just fix it, based on a mechanic's manual that one can find on the Internet.  If you don't know where to begin, how do you research the subject meaningfully?

Another idea could be that those snobs out there stop berating a jazz "newbie" for not having the entire history of jazz internalized by now, because it's still a young and evolving art form, and in truth, they are unseasoned music lovers that are asking for collective assistance from more experienced jazz fans.  In that, we (if I may include myself as a non-snobby jazz ambassador!) are in the unique position to act as mentors to place new jazz listeners, musicians, even composers -- on the road to the same joy that we revel in as self-appointed aficionados. 

To complete the analogy, as in the film industry, by broadening the jazz fan base and returning jazz to its rightful place as a welcoming music, we collectively stop representing those "millionaires in a recession that award ourselves golden statues" and instead bring in a new following.  Admittedly, in this case, a "statue" is neither a Grammy nor Oscar; it is a metaphor for the music itself, to which less than 5% of the world actively listens, and with our gentle enthusiasm and support to a new generation of fans, could easily grow.

It might not even hurt us to play a jazz gig in jeans from time to time (such as in this clip, copyright CBS, 2008: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNw46j0nNOs&feature=fvsr --- and by the way, if you read some of the comments below the video, you will find hateful little snipes about her music.) It is this pompous, pretentious attitude that has no place in a welcoming music such as jazz, and that's what's keeping this art from reaching more people. 

I don't mean to sound so gloom and doom; there are plenty of everyday jazz ambassadors out there, helping new fans to learn about this incredible art form, both on and off the stage.  For example, bassist/vocalist Esperanza Spalding is doing a tremendous job of mixing her personal style (the hair, the voice, the bass!) with her immense talent, and turned on a new group of fans to jazz influences when she topped Justin Bieber as a Grammy winner overall (Best New Artist) and again in her category (Best Jazz Artist).  English songstress Adele, while not an jazz artist, is still mixing blues and jazz influences into her original music, and therefore slowly pulling people to discover where that all came from.  Ken Burns' documentary series 'Jazz' has been shown in several schools around the United States over the past decade to spark an interest in this American art form, and the revolution is slowly catching on.  And of course, veteran vocalists and talented jazz musicians such as Patti Austin, Tierney Sutton, Dianne Reeves, Diana Krall, Michael Bublé, Harry Connick, Jr, Herbie Hancock, and even Tony Bennett (still doing it in his eighties!) continue to bring people into the jazz listening world through their collaborations with pop and rock stars.  As a result, jazz is likely as popular as a choice in American music as it has ever been in recent years.

Now jazz just needs us to continue to support these efforts - musicians, fellow listeners, composers, writers, educators.  We have the power to keep the fires burning, to truly embrace the "welcoming" spirit of jazz, and to melt that immobile statue down into a warm and joyous gift for all.

Best always,
Kathryn Ballard Shut
TIMKAT Entertainment
Denver, CO, USA
Email: timkatent@gmail.com
Twitter: @twitter
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/timkatent

Response: Billboard: Breaking Records Yesterday and Today -- "How Will I Know"?

Watching the feed on Twitter today, the Denver Post put out this article about the success for relative newcomer, Adele, and her second (multiple Grammy winning) album, "21":  http://www.heyreverb.com/2012/02/22/adele-21-billboard/.  The short blurb reads:

NEW YORK (AP) — Adele’s album “21″ has spent 21 weeks atop Billboard’s Top 200 albums chart — and its 21st week is the biggest one yet.   Nielsen SoundScan said Tuesday her sophomore album sold 730,000 copies the week after her Grammy Awards sweep. It’s the longest stint for a woman at the top of Billboard’s album chart, displacing Whitney Houston’s “The Bodyguard.” It’s also now sold 7.3 million copies.

I like Adele and I think she's got a great future ahead of her.  She's got real soul, good lyrics, songwriting with feeling, all of the things that make a good mix of what will reach people for the long-term. But that's not what bothered me about this headline, as I would never seek to take anything away from her.  What bothered me was the inequal standard of "breaking records" mentioned by Billboard Magazine. Granted, Adele has swept the Grammies and mega-sold albums; these are amazing achievements.  But one caveat reminds us that she's doing it in the Internet Age! 

Think about when Whitney first hit the scene in the mid-1980s.  Back then, we were spinning vinyl records and tapes.  There were no CDs yet, and there definitely was no Internet.  There were no digital downloads, no mp3s, no iPods, no smartphones, no iPads.  No Facebook.  No Twitter.   No YouTube.  No Pandora.  There was a record company's A&R department, their marketing, their producers, their studio, their equipment, and their distribution channels.  There was the local radio station that could choose whether or not to spin the latest releases and how often. There was only MTV, only about 4 years old at that time, the biggest way that artists could break through.  And there were local record stores.  If you were fortunate to hear the record on the radio in your area, you jumped into your car (or had Mom take you) and headed to your indie record shop or the Mall and picked it up for way too much money (I remember it was about $8.99 for an album).  Everything was very localized for the listener.

In the Information Age, all of this sounds delightfully quaint, but this was the world that Whitney took by storm by 1985.  In the U.S., the Walkman had freshly hit the scene to allow people to take her tapes along with them everywhere; the larger "boom box" was the only other thing out there. That was the state of musical portability. 

But here's the most important point: Whitney became an international sensation, both in the U.S. but also in countries with less media accessibility than they have today.  Remember, in 1985, the Berlin Wall was still up and dividing Germany.  Russia was still in a Cold War with the United States, still Communist, and therefore heavily restricting media that flowed into the country.  There were countries known as Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and the U.S.S.R. In the middle of this, Whitney managed to hit globally and against all odds - an African-American female with one of the most powerful and delightful voices the world had ever known.  She broke down these barriers and the music persevered. 

Therefore, it's not very surprising that Adele today was able to break Whitney's record for The Bodyguard:  she's a great artist and hopefully will continue to make great music!  However, when Billboard talks about breaking records, let's be sure to compare apples and oranges: timeframes, prices, and most of all, musical accessibility to worldwide listeners.  The world has changed in so many ways since Whitney became a star.  Few can argue that it's just easier to get a hold of music on the Internet and by standards, at $.99 a track on iTunes, it's cheaper.  In the 1980s, a 45 RPM single used to cost me about $3.00 - even with two songs on it (A and B sides) that's way still more expensive than today's iTunes pricing, especially when accounting for inflation. 

A click of a mouse can buy you the newest releases in seconds, and I am sure this is part of Adele's amazing viral success.  She has set the bar even higher for record-breaking releases in a short amount of time.  But please remember, my caution is not about Adele the musician - she is great!  It is about being fair when talking about musical accessibility to listeners and comparable track pricing, and the two vocalists started in very different times in history to suffer a generically whitewashed comparison today.  It is not about bashing Adele, but rather preserving the fact that Whitney built the same house with fewer tools.

Best always,
Kathryn Ballard Shut
TIMKAT Entertainment
Denver, CO, USA
Email: timkatent@gmail.com

Twitter: http://twitter.com/timkatent
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/timkatent
MySpace Music: http://MySpace.com/timkatent
Album Sales on CDBABY: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/TimBallard

Response: CNET: Rick Broida "Does It Still Make Sense To Buy CDs?"

Original Source:  http://news.cnet.com/8301-13845_3-57377283-58/does-it-still-make-sense-to-buy-cds/?tag=mncol

Response:

-----

Great post, thank you, Mr. Broida!

Time and changes are the only constants in life and in no other place has this been felt as heavily as in the physical media market. We live in an "on the go" society, with phones in cameras, tablets that will fit in a large purse, and cars that can play our favorite songs digitally by our mere command. It is also evident in the pricing of CDs and movies, which have chronically dropped to well below the $10 threshold, even for Blu-Ray.

As a small entertainment company (est. 2007) that works in booking live gigs, selling music online, and working with radio stations to stream selections, we learned as early as the middle of this past decade that the future resided with digital downloads and the ability to stream music to attract new listeners. However, because we specialize in a jazz market, we have also chosen (for the time being!) to continue to offer music on CD as well. Part of this is generational; most of our listeners are of the Baby Boomer Generation and older, if not born just after that, and accostumed to playing physical media. By this I don't wish [to] offend anyone - many Boomers are *extremely* savvy when it comes to digital sites and could teach the rest of us a thing or two, but others are completely mystified by it and often don't even own a computer, tablet, or smartphone. Either way, we wanted to make our music accessible to both styles and cater to our audience.

Another reason to consider why digital media works so well is due to avoiding higher physical media overhead and storage costs on the supply side (sellers).

A case in point: about 3 years ago, seeing that our CD stock was running low, I called several replication houses for a quote. Once artwork, packaging, compact disc media, and shipping were added, at the lowest-priced one, I was told that it would be easily $1,200 to duplicate 500 discs. That meant that with each disc, I would already be in the hole by at least $2.40, and again, most discs now and even then priced around $5-10 max. The helpful lady on the phone said that my price would go down with greater volumes ordered, which makes sense when considering setup costs for the copy house, but that didn't help me! Less than 5% of the worldwide music-buying public is made of jazz fans, and being independent artists, we'd have to start winning Grammies and getting other major press to sell at these 'higher volumes.' Eventually, right or wrong, I decided that it just wasn't worth it, and once the CDs in stock are gone, that would be it. To testify of the power of digital media, we have made a little money in streaming songs and more in online sales, and still have that little stack of CDs in stock (CDBABY, Amazon) from 3 years ago.

Anyway, thanks for reading - great topic. Should you wish to connect with me to discuss more, I'd be happy to chat at any of the links below.

Best always,
Kathryn Ballard Shut /shoot/
TIMKAT Entertainment, Inc.
Email: timkatent@gmail.com

Twitter: http://twitter.com/timkatent
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/timkatent
MySpace Music: http://MySpace.com/timkatent
Album Sales on CDBABY: http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/TimBallard