Thursday, December 31, 2015
Thursday, December 24, 2015
Happy Holidays
T'is the season, and I want to take this time to wish all of my readers the happiest of holidays, and may you find your dream horn under your tree this year. I want to thank the many readers world-wide that have encouraged me to keep this blog going. I was pleasantly surprised by how many readers I had world wide. This of course encourages me to step up my game and make this blog even more informative and more accurate.
I want to thank all of my readers from the following countries: US, Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium (the birthplace of Adolphe Sax), Denmark, Italy, Spain, Poland, Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, and even New Guinea.
I want to thank all of my readers from the following countries: US, Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium (the birthplace of Adolphe Sax), Denmark, Italy, Spain, Poland, Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, and even New Guinea.
May this year bless all of you with the fulfillment of all your dreams, and a saxophone to go with them! See you next year!
Friday, December 18, 2015
Johnny Hodges: An Appreciation
John Cornelius Hodges was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts on July 25, 1906. Harry Carney, the great baritone player and his bandmate in the Ellington Orchestra was a neighbor. He began by playing the piano and then the soprano saxophone, in which he was largely self-taught. When the great soprano saxophonist Sidney Bechet came to Boston to appear in a show called Jimmy Cooper's Black and White Revue, Hodges, then 14, went to see the show and stuck up a friendship with Bechet, who encouraged him and gave him some lessons on the soprano. Eventually, Hodges would make a reputation for himself around Boston before moving to New York City in 1924. He played for not only Sidney Bechet, but also in the bands of Lucky Roberts, Lloyd Scott and Chick Webb, before finally joining Duke Ellington's band where he would be the featured soloist for the rest of his life, with the exception of 1951-55 when he left the band and went solo. However he rejoined the orchestra in 1955 and was there until his death on May 11, 1970, from a heart attack in his dentist's office.
Johnny, along with Benny Carter and Willie Smith, was one of the original big band alto stylists. By that time, he switched to alto saxophone so as not to be compared to Bechet, and only played the soprano rarely, and after being featured in Benny Goodman's famous Carnegie Hall concert in 1938 playing a soprano solo, never played it again after that. He was given the nickname "Rabbit" because of his fondness for lettuce and tomato sandwiches. His tone was lush, lyrical and smooth, and he excelled on ballads and slow blues, always emphasizing tone over technique and flash, although if you ever listen carefully, there is a tremendous amount of technique and control needed to play the way he did. He made frequent use of glissandos, making the saxophone sound as if it used a slide instead of keys. Ellington wrote many pieces with his various soloists in mind, as did Billy Strayhorn, his alter ego, and they wrote probably more for Hodges than just about anyone else. Among them, my personal favorite "Prelude To A Kiss", and also, "Isfahan", "Jeep's Blues", "Daydream", "A Flower Is A Lovesome Thing" "Don't Get Around Much Anymore", among others.
On stage, it was often hard to reconcile the stance and lack of expression in Hodges' face with the expressive, lush and swooping tone coming out of his saxophone. Ellington stated that women in the audience often swooned when Johnny played a ballad. When I hear Johnny playing a ballad or a slow blues, it just makes me close my eyes, sway and go "yeeeaahhh!"
In Ellington's eulogy of Hodges, he said, "Never the world's most highly
animated showman or greatest stage personality, but a tone so beautiful
it sometimes brought tears to the eyes—this was Johnny Hodges. This is Johnny Hodges. Our band will never sound the same."
"He gets an idea, thinks up a countermelody, and you end up with a whole
new song," said Ellington trombonist Lawrence Brown of Hodges.
Johnny Hodges played a Conn 6M saxophone, then switched to the Buescher Aristocrat "Big B", then the Buescher 400, and finally a custom made Vito, made in France, just for Johnny. He left behind a rich musical legacy with one of the greatest orchestras and composers in jazz, as well as his own orchestras and collaborations with other bandleaders and musicians. Although I can't imagine anyone who plays the saxophone not knowing who Johnny Hodges is, just in the event you are not familiar with him, or need a reminder, I have included links to his music to reacquaint you with one of the greatest saxophone masters ever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4EnjP2NGcE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4EnjP2NGcE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgVm4NLMBcI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iJU8ec0DWk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA_JxaA1ddA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad_NFvmyPvA
Thursday, September 3, 2015
Paul Desmond: An Appreciation
Lately I have been going through my digital music library and taking taking all the recordings of the saxophone players who have influenced me the most and creating separate play lists dedicated to each artist. The idea is to have everything I have of that artist in one place so I can spend some time listening to just them. Playing the alto sax, I started with my main influences on that horn; Benny Carter, Johnny Hodges, Paul Desmond, Cannonball Adderley, Charlie Parker, etc., and will expand my lists to include tenor players, as well as the few baritone players, soprano players, etc. I listen for what makes them unique, their tone, their harmonic approach, the devices each one uses that are as identifiable as one's handwriting. Every player will have musical devices that they will use over and over again, no matter how harmonically sophisticated they are, and when you listen to anyone long enough, you begin to hear what they are. Just like when a person talks, using phrases or expressions unique to the individual, so it is with music, another language. In the coming weeks, I will write articles on those saxophone players I spend the most time listening to.
Although Benny Carter and Johnny Hodges are my main influences on saxophone, Paul Desmond has also been a big influence on my playing. He came along at a time when Charlie Parker created a new jazz language, and everyone followed. While Paul Desmond definitely admired Charlie Parker, he forged his own sound and musical identity not beholden to Parker. His sound was light and airy, his lines melodic. His improvisations were thematic, and as a result, he could play one chorus after another and not repeat ideas, yet he never meandered aimlessly, he just made his statement and then made room for someone else. Many called his music cerebral, but I disagree. He did have a highly developed intellect and great sense of humor, but the lyricism of his playing showed a man with a deep sense of beauty. His use of altissimo (notes above the normal register of the saxophone using alternate fingerings) sounded so effortless you would think that they were a normal part of the saxophone's range.
Paul Desmond was born Paul Emil Breitenfeld in San Francisco in 1924. His father was Jewish and his mother Irish-Catholic. Later on, when he changed his name to Desmond, he joked he did it because "Breitenfeld sounded too Irish". He began on the clarinet when in high school. During WWII he was drafted into the US Army, but he joined a military band and never saw combat. Dave Brubeck and Paul Desmond first met in 1944 when Brubeck tried out for the 253rd Army Band which Desmond belonged to. According to Desmond, he was taken aback by the chord changes Brubeck was playing at the audition. After they were both discharged, Paul Desmond got a gig with the Jack Fina Orchestra. After finishing with Jack Fina, Paul Desmond approached Dave Brubeck and convinced him to hire him for a group and in 1951 the Dave Brubeck Quartet was formed. The group stayed together until 1967, but Brubeck and Desmond still played together on and off until Desmond's death in 1977. The most famous composition in the Brubeck repertoire is "Take Five", which was composed by Desmond. During his time with Brubeck and after the break up of the quartet, Desmond did other projects as sideman or soloist with Gerry Mulligan, Chet Baker, Jim Hall, the Modern Jazz Quartet and others. Paul Desmond played a Selmer Super Balanced Action with a M.C. Gregory 4A-18M mouthpiece and Rico 3 1/2 reeds.
The Dave Brubeck Quartet (l. to r. Paul Desmond, Dave Brubeck, Joe Morello, Eugene Wright)
Paul Desmond was not just known for his music, but also for his dry wit and sense of humor and clever use of puns. Many of his "Desmondisms" have become famous. For example, when seeing an old girlfriend in the company of an old but obviously rich gentleman, Desmond remarked "So that's how the world ends, not with a whim but with a banker".
Other Quotes and Desmondisms:
Other Quotes and Desmondisms:
I think I had it in the back of my mind that I wanted to sound like a dry martini.
I have won several prizes as the world’s slowest alto player, as well as a special award in 1961 for quietness.
I was unfashionable before anyone knew who I was.
I’m glad [Ornette Coleman] is such an individualist. I like the firmness of thought and purpose that goes into what he’s doing, even though I don’t always like to listen to it. It’s like living in a house where everything’s painted red.
On the secret of his tone: "I honestly don't know! It has something to do with the fact that I play illegally."
Of writer Jack Kerouac he said, "I hate the way he writes. I kind of love the way he lives, though."
His response to the annoying banality of an interviewer, "You're
beginning to sound like a cross between David Frost and David Susskind,
and that is a cross I cannot bear."
Walking into his record label's office and seeing a large potted plant "With fronds like these who needs anemones?"
That wit and dry sense of humor could also be heard when playing his solos, in the quotes he uses. It is a popular jazz game to insert a quote from another song into a solo, and while for the most part the quote sticks out, even from the greatest players, Desmond had a way of playing it like it was actually part of the song he was playing, and it often has taken me several listenings to realize what the quote was. For example, in "Blight Of The Fumblebee" from his recording with Gerry Mulligan "Two Of A Mind", he inserts a quote from J.S. Bach's 5th Brandenburg Concerto, which is integrated so well into his solo it sounds as if it was written in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RZbByVdiBI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RZbByVdiBI
At Montreaux, Desmond plays a beautiful version of a song called "Emily" which was the theme for a movie called "The Americanization of Emily", and he quotes a song "Would You", which was used in the classic movie "Singing In The Rain". He integrates the quote so subtly that the only indication of him having played it is the self-pleased smile he has after playing it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZbahdBHv9E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZbahdBHv9E
Paul Desmond had a taste for Scotch whiskey and was a heavy smoker. He was also known to have dabbled in LSD. When he was diagnosed with lung cancer, he quipped to the doctor that his liver was still healthy. Paul Desmond played his last concert with Dave Brubeck in New York City in February 1977. On May 30th 1977, Desmond passed away. He was cremated and his ashes scattered.
Paul Desmond may not have been a musical innovator, but he was an original in every sense of the word. His tone is instantly recognizable when you hear it, his way of phrasing and use of counterpoint unlike anyone else's, and his lines are sheer beauty. His love of melody could make you forget that his improvisations were filled with original and complex changes. As he said:
“Complexity can be a trap. You can have a ball developing a phrase, inverting it, playing it in different keys and times and all. But it’s really more introspective than communicative. Like a crossword puzzle compared to a poem.”
“Complexity can be a trap. You can have a ball developing a phrase, inverting it, playing it in different keys and times and all. But it’s really more introspective than communicative. Like a crossword puzzle compared to a poem.”
Here is more of Paul Desmond
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
Thoroughly Modern Sax
When I began this blog 5 years ago, it started on a whim. I never wrote much of anything in the past except for what I had to write for school, and that never turned out too well anyhow. However, I love the saxophone and saxophone music and sax players (most anyway), and so it is a natural thing for me to just sit down and write my thoughts and to be able to play different saxophones and write about them in order for people who want to play, or even those who have played for a while, choose a saxophone that would be right for them, both musically and financially. I am lucky that I have worked in the business and though retired now, still know lots of people in the business and so always have access to new and vintage saxophones that I can play to my heart's content and then when I come across something new or different, I can write about it here.
For anyone who has been reading my blog from the beginning, you know that I started out still thinking that vintage saxophones were superior to their modern counterparts in build quality and tone. At one time I believed that if it wasn't made in the USA, Europe (particularly France and Germany) or Japan, than it was simply not very good. At one time I would have been right, but there have been developments in the industry and improvements in saxophone design and production that have made me do a complete turnaround in my thinking. When saxophones like the Conn M series, Buescher Aristocrats and 400's, King Zephyrs and Super 20's, Martin Committees, and of course Selmer Balanced Action, Super Balanced Action and Mark VI's were made, they were the best of their time. There are still a number of players who prefer to play vintage horns today, particularly Mark VI's and would not even consider a modern saxophone. They still have the belief that the old horns sound and were made better back then. The reason for this thinking stems mainly from the fact that the more a fine instrument is played and the longer it is played, the more resonant, or "broken in" it will sound. However, if an instrument is not well made, you can play it every day for a hundred years and it will still sound and play like crap.
For many years, there wasn't any saxophone, including any Mark VI I've played that sounded better than my old Conn 6M. Of course, the ergonomics of the horn left much to be desired, but for the longest time I thought that had to be the trade-off for a saxophone that I considered better than any modern horn, and I thought that for a long time. I have changed my mind considerably in the last five years. I have also completely changed the way I look at saxophones coming out of Asia other than Japan, particularly Taiwan. When I lived in Taiwan from 2000-2001, I had seen and played many saxophones made there, and they all looked good, but quality was still questionable. It was mostly quality control. The metals were traditional brass, and they built horns with copper, silver and nickel finishes, and they sounded alright if they were properly regulated. Most of the time I found there was a little sloppy work in the soldering of the posts, regulation of the key heights and placement, and there weren't any real qualified sax techs anywhere in Taiwan that I knew of, except for maybe one or two in Taipei (I lived in a city called Tainan in the south west) that could properly set up a horn. However, since that time, as a necessity, they have upped their game considerably and at this point there are Taiwanese companies producing world class instruments, something that was unthinkable 15 years ago. For some time, the Taiwanese companies were and still are building student and intermediate saxophones for the more established names, but now they have established themselves in the world market, with their own brands and in my opinion, are building some truly great saxophones, and very importantly, at prices that a working professional on a budget can afford without compromising on quality, sound and playability.
The next country for ultra-cheap saxophones of dubious quality has been China. Again however, things are improving there as well. Because of the cheap labor, many established companies have contracted Chinese manufacturers to build student and intermediate saxophones for them under their name. The thing about Chinese and Taiwanese factories is that they are new and modern, and they use the same kind of machinery that all of the major manufacturers use. It's really all a matter of quality control, quality of the brass and the individual parts and properly training the workers to perform the tasks required in building saxophones. The majority of the process of building a saxophone is repetitive and done by machine, and it doesn't take any great skill, just being conscientious in doing the job well. The rest is up to quality control. If strict guidelines are in place, and each instrument is thoroughly checked and gone over by a qualified technician before it is packed and leaves the factory, then no matter where it's made, it should be a decent enough instrument. This is why Yamaha for example, builds their 26 and 480 saxophones in China with no loss in quality, because of their quality control. Indonesia and Vietnam are other Asian countries where passable instruments are being made. There are no more saxophones being made in the US anymore because it's just too costly to do so. The Powell Silver Eagle was a noble effort to bring a superior US made saxophone to the market, but it proved to be too costly and so the project was discontinued.
As for the big 4 manufacturers, Selmer, Keilwerth, Yamaha and Yanigasawa, they continue to build top grade saxophones and their product is improving all the time. They all utilize computer programs to better analyze brass composition and create a more consistent alloy, key placements and heights, acoustics, etc. This alone has helped make modern saxophones better than ever. It was a necessity anyway. Music has changed quite a bit in the last 150 years or so since the saxophone was invented. The modern saxophone player must play a greater variety of styles and an increased range from the 3 1/2 octave range of older saxophones to having to play a 4 plus octave range, and that requires extra keys, tone holes and a change in bore size, neck diameter, etc. Intonation is also more accurate on modern saxophones because of the improvements in design. Also, let's face it, ergonomics are better and keywork is slicker and more positive than on old saxophones, including the Mark VI. While the Mark VI was the template for all modern saxophone design, there has been a continuous tweaking and improvement in key placement and heights, and the newest saxophones feel better in my hands than even a Mark VI, at least in my experience and opinion. There have also been other design improvements that make having to adjust keys and key cups less often than like on many old saxophones. Braces and posts that secure key rods so they remain more stable and do not bend or move as easily. Stronger bell to body braces that also add to the resonance of the saxophone, improvements in the neck, a very crucial piece of the sax, as well as expanding the bell bow. These improvements allow a freer flow of air and less turbulence in these parts of the saxophone, allowing the sound to come out cleaner and freer, and in the newest saxophones, playing down to Bb is easier than ever, as is reaching the highest notes. I recently played the Buffet Senzo, and if you read my review of it, you know that they redesigned the bell bow, and low Bb was the easiest and smoothest I have ever played on any saxophone thus far, and they utilized computer programming to come up with just the right dimensions for the bow.
Before the advent of computer design, workers had to rely on their experience and lots of guesswork in building the saxophone. As I noted in my article on the Mark VI, Jerome Selmer had told me that during the run of the Mark VI, workers did not work from a set of plans or blueprints. They used their experience and a little imagination and initiative in building the Mark VI, and they continuously changed things without any consistency in how it was done. Jerome Selmer even joked to me about it, and said if the worker had a good night before, like in the company of a lady, he did a good job the next day. If he had a lousy night or was in a lousy mood for whatever reason, it was not so good. This certainly would explain why I find each Mark VI different from one another, and it makes no difference what the year of production or serial number is, regardless of what anyone believes or has been told.
Another thing about saxophones being built today compared to vintage saxophones is that modern student and intermediate saxophones have achieved a quality at a price point that was not possible even 10 years ago. In fact, many of the so-called intermediate saxophones that are coming out of Taiwan for example, look and play like a top grade professional saxophone without the price, which makes them an attractive and very practical alternative to the Big 4, regardless of how one might wish to own a Selmer, a Keilwerth, Yamaha or Yanigasawa. The Yamaha 480 is marketed as an intermediate saxophone, and it's made in China, yet it's still a quality instrument, and having played it fairly extensively, I found it to be a good alternate or back-up horn for a pro player. Excellent keywork and good tone at a good price. The Buffet 400 line is a saxophone I have written a lot about, because it's another saxophone made in China under a company that is known for top notch instruments, and their quality control is also very much in place, and so here is another intermediate priced saxophone for the pro player that doesn't skimp on quality. Chateau saxophones, made by Tenon Corporation of Taiwan, is making excellent saxophones at a price that seems impossible for an instrument of such high quality, playability and tone. This is a new line that so far has impressed me the most of all the new brands that have hit the market. P. Mauriat saxophones were one of the first new saxophone brands to have established themselves in the marketplace when it was completely dominated by the Big 4, which was not easy to do, but they were able to do so by offering a saxophone that was a little different than what the others were making, and then getting endorsements from top level pros.
At this point in time there is a greater choice of quality saxophones for players of all levels than at any time in history, and that's a good thing. It puts instruments in the hands of more players or would-be players than ever before and at prices to match one's budget. With improvements in design and technology, a student can now afford a saxophone that will not just be "good enough to learn on", but actually good to play and that the student doesn't have to fight so as not to get discouraged early on. For the working pro, who may often need to double and have more than one instrument, it's possible to have a pro level horn without the cost, since the majority of pros are not famous headliners pulling in thousands or millions a year, but just getting by doing what they love. Most of the working pros I know are playing saxophones like Cannonball, Jupiter, Yamaha 62's or 480's, and others that are not the Big 4, but certainly are performing as they need them to, and looking the part on stage. Even my old friend Chuck, who for years would only play Conn Chu Berry altos, has gotten a greater number of gigs, as well as having to play a greater variety of music, and realized that the old Conn did not cut it for many of these gigs, and so he finally broke down and got a silver plated Jupiter, which is made in Taiwan and he found he likes it. Even a few well-known players I know have traded their Mark VI's for Selmer References, P. Mauriats, Yamaha, Yanigasawa and Selmer Series II and III saxophones. So there it is.
As for me, as much as I still love my old Conn, I am finding the newer saxophones just so much better in every way. Sure, there is a special quality about the Conn because it has been played for many years and also the sentimental value it has and still holds for me. Just the same, there are things that I cannot do on the Conn that I can with modern saxophones, especially in the range of the horn itself. As for sound, well, they are sounding great out of the box, and can only get better with time. I no longer hold on to the belief that vintage is better, because I have played enough of modern saxophones to convince me that they are better now than ever.
Thursday, August 6, 2015
"I'm A Jazz Musician, Not An Entertainer" Part Deux
A short while back, I was scrolling down my Facebook homepage, seeing what my friends had posted. Most of the time it's endless political posts, always showcasing the bias and partisanship of the poster, whether they are based on facts or common sense or not, but also posts from my musician friends, whether posting a music video, or writing about their gigs, sometimes accompanied by pictures, and sometimes just opining about music in general. One of my friends, a bassist, commented on how he was having dinner in a restaurant and they were playing "fusion" style jazz, and that he was actually enjoying it. It didn't take long for the "real" jazz musicians to make their comments. One of them wrote "The Creed Taylor Syndrome". For those who may not know, Creed Taylor produced recordings in the 60's and 70's featuring some leading players like Wes Montgomery and Paul Desmond, but in a more commercial setting, having them play contemporary standards of the time, with orchestral arrangements and whatever improvising the player did was done within the context of the melody, never straying far from it or the arrangement. I commented that while I am not a big fusion fan, it's still nice to hear melody once in a while instead of the incessant assault of scales and chords and the constant reharmonization of a tune until the tune itself is buried under the weight of all that. His response was to show a photo of Kenny G, and captioning it "Mr. Melody". I guess he thought he was being clever and funny, and I guess he thinks that if you listen to and like Kenny G, then you are just not hip and aware, and that somehow there is actually something wrong with listening to Kenny G. A little snobby, no? Well, he's not my cup of tea either, and I don't buy or listen to his recordings, but that doesn't mean I think there's something wrong with those people who do. So I asked him, "How many recordings have you sold lately? How many people showed up at your last gig, and when exactly was your last gig?" No response! I thought so.
I'm not here to tell anyone what kind of music to listen to, but I find it funny and annoying that so many musicians will put down any other musicians if they decide to play more commercially accessible music, or to entertain their audience and play to that audience. Since the dawn of humanity, music was not just an expression of life, but a celebration of it. Music was and is played so that we can have fun, get away from the everyday drudgery or concerns of the day and reconnect to ourselves, and with others. When I go to my favorite bars and clubs, where many of my friends play, and I see the crowd dancing, cheering, responding to the music, then it's easy to see why they are always getting the gig. The crowd loves them, and it is a crowd, not an empty room they're playing to. They get the crowd to have fun, so they stay, they buy more food and drinks, and that makes the house happy, and they book the band for more gigs. The band is happy because they will get more gigs, which means they keep working.
To my friends who want to stay "real", by all means, stay "real", but don't behave as if somehow you are morally or spiritually superior as a musician because you choose to be a "real" jazz musician, or bitch about why you're not making as much money as someone you think is not up to your standards. Also, don't think that those players who entertain and play more commercial styles of music didn't practice as long and hard as you, or that they didn't see their fair share of heartache and rejection at not getting a gig or a place in a band, or didn't have to work all those jobs they hated while honing their craft and trying to get work doing what they loved the most. The difference between them and the "real" jazz musician is that they understood what it took to get those gigs and play in those bands, and went about doing it without all the bitching and moaning I hear from the "real" musicians.
As I said, I'm not here to tell you what to play or what and who to listen to, but whenever you play to an empty or near empty room, whenever you don't get called back for another gig or to be in a band, only you can know why that is, and it isn't from some kind of "injustice", it is because you are not playing what people want to hear and giving them a show they want to see. Now, I know plenty of "real" jazz musicians who understand the game, and they will take whatever gig, and play whatever style of music is necessary to keep working. When they can make a living playing music, they will then have the time to kick back with other like players, and play the stuff they really are into. There are those die hards though, and they are laughable to me, because they are uncompromising about their musical "principles". They work jobs not related to music that they hate doing, and bitch about it constantly. They are always criticizing musicians that play more commercial styles and entertain with remarks like "nah, he's just not adventurous, not exploring, not saying anything, doesn't stretch himself", blah, blah, blah! Okay, but he's making a living playing music, not on a loading dock. Of course, there's nothing wrong with working on a loading dock or any other kind of honest work, but when you bitch about it because you are not making a living as a musician as you'd like, think about it. Many of the "real" musicians, when they do get a live gig, play with an attitude of superiority and indifference to the audience. They play and look like they're having a bad day or life. Believe me, most people do not enjoy something like that.
It's very hard to make a living as a musician, especially these days. The most successful musicians I know do whatever they have to in order to earn enough money to pay the bills and support a family. They take all kinds of gigs, make themselves accessible for lessons as well as use Skype to expand their student base, take all kinds of gigs in all styles of music, dress for the gig, be reliable and on time, and are not afraid to entertain their audience. They know that those people cheering and dancing and shouting for more are helping them to do what they love to do. Maybe it's time for the "real" jazz musicians to get real, or please just shut up!
I'm not here to tell anyone what kind of music to listen to, but I find it funny and annoying that so many musicians will put down any other musicians if they decide to play more commercially accessible music, or to entertain their audience and play to that audience. Since the dawn of humanity, music was not just an expression of life, but a celebration of it. Music was and is played so that we can have fun, get away from the everyday drudgery or concerns of the day and reconnect to ourselves, and with others. When I go to my favorite bars and clubs, where many of my friends play, and I see the crowd dancing, cheering, responding to the music, then it's easy to see why they are always getting the gig. The crowd loves them, and it is a crowd, not an empty room they're playing to. They get the crowd to have fun, so they stay, they buy more food and drinks, and that makes the house happy, and they book the band for more gigs. The band is happy because they will get more gigs, which means they keep working.
To my friends who want to stay "real", by all means, stay "real", but don't behave as if somehow you are morally or spiritually superior as a musician because you choose to be a "real" jazz musician, or bitch about why you're not making as much money as someone you think is not up to your standards. Also, don't think that those players who entertain and play more commercial styles of music didn't practice as long and hard as you, or that they didn't see their fair share of heartache and rejection at not getting a gig or a place in a band, or didn't have to work all those jobs they hated while honing their craft and trying to get work doing what they loved the most. The difference between them and the "real" jazz musician is that they understood what it took to get those gigs and play in those bands, and went about doing it without all the bitching and moaning I hear from the "real" musicians.
As I said, I'm not here to tell you what to play or what and who to listen to, but whenever you play to an empty or near empty room, whenever you don't get called back for another gig or to be in a band, only you can know why that is, and it isn't from some kind of "injustice", it is because you are not playing what people want to hear and giving them a show they want to see. Now, I know plenty of "real" jazz musicians who understand the game, and they will take whatever gig, and play whatever style of music is necessary to keep working. When they can make a living playing music, they will then have the time to kick back with other like players, and play the stuff they really are into. There are those die hards though, and they are laughable to me, because they are uncompromising about their musical "principles". They work jobs not related to music that they hate doing, and bitch about it constantly. They are always criticizing musicians that play more commercial styles and entertain with remarks like "nah, he's just not adventurous, not exploring, not saying anything, doesn't stretch himself", blah, blah, blah! Okay, but he's making a living playing music, not on a loading dock. Of course, there's nothing wrong with working on a loading dock or any other kind of honest work, but when you bitch about it because you are not making a living as a musician as you'd like, think about it. Many of the "real" musicians, when they do get a live gig, play with an attitude of superiority and indifference to the audience. They play and look like they're having a bad day or life. Believe me, most people do not enjoy something like that.
It's very hard to make a living as a musician, especially these days. The most successful musicians I know do whatever they have to in order to earn enough money to pay the bills and support a family. They take all kinds of gigs, make themselves accessible for lessons as well as use Skype to expand their student base, take all kinds of gigs in all styles of music, dress for the gig, be reliable and on time, and are not afraid to entertain their audience. They know that those people cheering and dancing and shouting for more are helping them to do what they love to do. Maybe it's time for the "real" jazz musicians to get real, or please just shut up!
Thursday, July 23, 2015
Friday, June 19, 2015
The Golden Age Of Saxophone Manufacturing Part 2: If I Could Only Own One Saxophone
Part 2 is about saxophones that cost 3 grand and over brand new. However, for this article, I am only discussing the latest models and versions since it is my opinion based on what I've been playing that with great improvements, from utilizing computer technology to advances in manufacturing technology, it is my feeling that we are in a golden age of saxophone manufacturing and that saxophones really are better than they ever were. Even lesser known and lesser priced saxophones are at a level of quality not possible 20 or 30 years ago, and that match or exceed the quality and sound of many professional saxophones of that time. Saxophones that are being marketed as step up or intermediate horns are more like entry level professional saxes at this point. Many are that good.
This doesn't mean that you should throw away your Mark VI if it is the horn that works for you, but in the last few years, I have seen a fairly large number of players trade their Mark VI's for a new Selmer, Keilwerth, Yamaha, Yanigasawa, and P. Mauriat. Two great players I know, Sonny Fortune and Richie Cole used to play Mark VI's, now they play References. When I was still working in music retail, I had several players trade their Mark VI's for a new top of the line horn. In many cases, a saxophone can be compared to an automobile. Automobile aficionados love the old classic cars. They may own one or more of them. Sometimes they take them out for a drive, but not often, because being old cars, they require a high degree of maintenance which is costly, not to mention the parts if you can still find them, and sometimes it requires the custom manufacturing of a part which always runs into money. The fact is, they're beautiful to look at, fun to take on that occasional drive, but are simply not practical or desirable for every day use, because they will break down more often, and the cost of repairing it and replacing parts can be prohibitive.
I mentioned this in my earlier article on the Mark VI Mystique, that more Mark VI's than any other horn came into the repair shop in the store I once worked in, as well as in the shop of my own repair tech. The key rods, posts and screws wear down in time, and there's only so much reaming of a key rod that can be done before the screw can no longer make contact with the rod and the action slips. There is only so much of the neck tenon that can be burnished to stretch it out in order to keep it tight on the body before the metal thins out too much or cracks. Once it gets to the point where you have to replace parts, the cost and practicality of doing so no longer makes sense. Yes, I understand the emotional attachment one can have for a trusted old instrument, and as long as yours is in top working condition and sounds good, there is no reason to change. On the other hand, if your horn is beginning to rattle, and it starts to spend more time in the repair shop than on the bandstand, it really is time for a new saxophone.
I really believed until not too long ago that the older saxophones were better, but playing dozens of new saxophones has convinced me otherwise, from key action and build quality to sound. Add to that the leaps in technology in the manufacture of mouthpieces, ligatures, accessories, etc., and the saxophone player has choices that were just not available years ago. Of course, I still love my old Conn 6M, just like so many players still hold on to their Mark VI's or King Super 20's, but since playing so many new saxophones, I know what the limitations of these old horns are. Of course, sometimes a limitation can be an asset if you have a particular style or sound and what and where you play and the audience you have, but the majority of working musicians these days, as well as those in school and university programs play a greater range of musical styles and have a greater range of technical requirements for the music they play, and they must have a modern instrument to keep up with that.
I chose saxophones that I have personally played and would be happy with if they were the only saxophone I could own. Of course, out of this group, I have preferences and have listed them in the order that I would choose them if my first and subsequent options were not possible. To my own playing experience, these represent the best of what is out there, but this list is hardly inclusive and again, based solely on what I've played and my opinion. I am only showing the alto versions, but the soprano, tenor and baritone versions of these models are of equal quality. Some newer saxophone models like the Selmer Seles Axos, and the Limited Edition Adolphe Sax model, Theo Wanne's Mantra, Steve Goodson's Saxgourmet, etc., I have not yet had the opportunity to try, and when and if I do, you will read about it here. Maybe later I will be able to afford some video equipment and post myself actually playing the instruments for you to hear. Keep in mind that this is like my hobby, and I am not yet making any money or receiving samples or anything from doing this. I just love playing and discussing saxophones.
Anyway, here is my short list of the best of the best and what I would own if money were no object.
BUFFET SENZO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEXoR47t5k4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP9hOhRnzjA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNpnm9_2fwE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PLTHLdEpys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m17jq15JLZw
SELMER REFERENCE 54
The Selmer Reference 54 came about by analyzing, with the help of advanced computer technology, the brass alloy composition and the bore size of the best Mark VI they could find which was made in 1958. Reference 54 refers to the first year of the Mark VI's production, 1954. They added modern improvements in the keywork and placement of the tone holes for better intonation. When I first tried the Reference 54's when they were first unveiled in 2001, I was not overly impressed. Yes, I liked them, but I still had reservations. 10 years later, when Selmer unveiled the Dragonbird References and Series II and III horns, as well as the latest addition References, I was very impressed. In that 10 year span, there were even more advances made in computer and manufacturing technology, and I literally played dozens of horns that day. The picture on top from that show is only a fraction of what was on display and there for everyone to try. Every horn I picked up that day played consistently well. I played sopranos, altos and tenors, and every one of them sounded and played great from the get go. The References were my favorite of them all. This time, I had no reservations, and that day I felt that I would love to own this horn. Far more consistent in sound and action than any Mark VI I ever played. When I say consistent, I don't mean they all had a cookie cutter tone. I mean that whatever your mouthpiece, reed and ligature setup and style is, you are bound to get the sound you are looking for. A modern classic as far as I'm concerned.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EjsP8yW8do
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLIj4B7qmH0
YANIGASAWA A-W020 and A-W037
I have always been impressed with Yanigasawa saxophones. Excellent build quality, keywork, sound and overall playability. These two are among my favorite saxophones, though I lean a little more to the W020 because of its higher copper content and what I feel is a warmer sound. However both horns have great tones and are suitable for so many musical styles. Several years ago, a friend of mine was working on cruise ships, and he generally needed both alto and tenor, but for this one cruise, he only needed the alto. He had an old Martin Handcraft alto that sounded fantastic, and his tenor was the Yanigasawa 992 bronze. Since he would be gone 3 months, he didn't want to leave it in his house just in case (this is New York after all), and he didn't want to drag it with him on the boat if he wasn't going to use it, so he left it with me. I played it for 3 months and it was the best tenor I ever played, so I could see why he chose it. You can't go wrong with a Yanigasawa.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoqP8TrcDJg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsYSF5vJF8M
KEILWERTH CX-90
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9Zgqw4LD34
YAMAHA CUSTOM 82Z
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL_WpCQ1kFc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUJpaNePyyo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvMcI6mbm6o
YAMAHA 875-EX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3LjB0Eih00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMSbtCrV4WM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpF3jaatlxk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyInBTiGK4Y
SELMER SERIES III
The Selmer Series III is made from a brass alloy with higher copper content, like the Reference 54's, and so it has a slightly warmer tone than the Series II. The bore size is a little smaller, and it has a venting key for C# which helps bring that note into line. Selmer quality, keywork and sound are all evident here, and this is another horn that can handle many musical styles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvlciVAyx9Q
Keilwerth SX-90R
The Keilwerth SX-90R is the flagship model of the Keilwerth line. First marketed under the name H. Couf, for the man that designed it, once it gained a foothold on the American market it was marketed under its own name and has taken its place amongst the Big 4 saxophone manufacturers. The SX-90R has rolled tone holes, but rather than drawn and rolled from the existing metal, they solder on tone rings. The idea is that should the tone hole become damaged, it is easier to remove the ring, fix the tone hole and then replace the ring. The drawback is that the rings can be placed unevenly and create leaks in the horn. However, regardless, it is a beautifully made and sounding saxophone. I favor the brushed nickel finish model pictured here, because I liked the warm yet clear tone that suited my playing style very nicely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLtdNu14i64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4WjPd6psEE
SELMER SERIES II
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMKHjOOxnhM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxZtirKjzcE
Since officially retiring, I will now find the time to search out as many horns as I can find and try them all. The one plus when working in music retail was that I had access to many new saxophone models. The minus was that they were limited by availability and which brands my store could carry. Some brands are not available in stores near me, so this limits what I can try. However, the quest will go on.
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
The New Golden Age Of Saxophone Manufacturing Part 1: My Personal Favorite Student and Intermediate/Entry-Level Pro Saxophones
Many players still hold the image of the dedicated craftsman sitting at his bench, hammering away at the bell, meticulously hand fitting every part and fitting it all together, and the delicate and steady hand of the engraver putting an artistic touch on the final product. There is still some handwork being done, mostly in the soldering of the posts and rods, and in placing and adjusting the set screws and key heights and in the engraving, and some manufacturers still have their workers hand hammer the bell hundreds of times while heating, cooling, reheating in a process called annealing which is supposed to make the bell more resonant. I know that Selmer has stopped having their workers do that because of severe wrist injuries and carpal tunnel syndrome. The majority of the work is done by machine, from stamping out the bell, bow and body shapes, forming the neck, drawing the tone holes, etc. Computer technology has allowed manufacturers to better analyze and determine more accurate ratios of zinc to copper for the brass as well as other metal compositions for more consistent tonal qualities, the best and most accurate placement of the tone holes and their heights for better intonation and also how the bow size helps the air flow better so that it's easier to play the low notes down to Bb and A(for baritones) and be able to apply a wider range of dynamics to them. Because of the big improvement in manufacturing techniques, I really feel that we are in a new golden age of saxophone building. The Big 4 are still building top of the line instruments, but with new improvements, and many of the lesser known companies from Taiwan as well as some proprietary brands like Steve Goodson's Saxgourmet, Phil Barone and Tenor Madness, to cite just a few examples, are taking advantage of the modern manufacturing techniques and marketing high quality saxophones for the professional as well as the serious student at prices that won't break the bank. This is a great thing, because now more quality instruments can be put into the hands of serious players, whether student, amateur or pro.
The purpose of this article is to highlight the best saxophones that I have personally played extensively and found to be my favorites that would be suitable for the student and the working professional on a budget. My criteria was also that soprano saxophones be under $2500, alto saxophones under $3000, tenors under $3500, and baritones under $4500. The prices represent the upper limit but it would be possible to find these horns for much less depending on the dealer. However, always remember to never go too cheap. If the price is too good to be believed, then it isn't too good and you can believe that. This list is not extensive, and there may be other great saxophones that fit this criteria and can be had for even less, but I am only discussing saxes I have personally tried and can recommend with no qualms. This also represents saxophones when purchased brand new. The price of used saxophones is arbitrary anyway. However, if you can find these models used in good to excellent playing and cosmetic condition, then by all means go for it. Still, I prefer purchasing a new saxophone because even over just the last few years, there have been big improvements to saxophone manufacturing and the newest versions of even the time tested models will have these improvements. Keep in mind that some of the models I highlight here started out as being anywhere from so-so to okay, but became much better as they were tweaked and improved. So here are my personal recommendations. Of course, if you still have the chance to try them out personally, that is much better, but if you don't have access to a music store and buy online, just make sure that it's from a reputable dealer with a liberal return or exchange policy. In any case, these saxophones represent in my opinion a good value in both money and sound.
YAMAHA YAS-26 and YTS-26
YAS-480 and YTS-480
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct0w-gVTqmg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh6sGSE1sbU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JSbZ06afkE
YAS-62III and YTS-62III
The YAS-62III and YTS-62III are the latest incarnation of Yamaha's entry-level pro saxophone, and until the introduction of the Custom Z and EX line, the only one. Since its introduction as the 52 and on to the 62, 62II and now 62III, it has been one of the most popular and best selling professional saxophones on the market, and for good reason. Excellent build quality and reliability along with a good solid tonal core makes this saxophone a great choice for any player either looking to step up from their student horn or any working pro that needs a workhorse for all the studio gigs, wedding gigs, club and bar shows, etc. Slightly darker in tone than the 480, this saxophone can handle a variety of styles from classical to jazz to rock. A versatile, no-nonsense, no frills saxophone easy on the budget as good pro saxes go.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI88dv_CdTk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBPL84qIgcg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJumxFmHnJ8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqEoasEzyB4
BUFFET 400
Since its introduction in 2008, the Buffet 400 line has become quite popular, and for good reason. Priced at an intermediate level, these are really professional horns and represent in my opinion one of the best saxophone values out there. Many players have already written me to tell me how pleased they are with their 400's. Many others are surprised that a saxophone in its price point can look and sound so good. The only complaint I have about it is rather minor, in that the key pearls are not real pearls but plastic. That was one area where I was disappointed because many saxophones at that price point have real pearl or abalone key touches. On the plus side, the keys are concaved in a way that really keep the fingers fitting nicely and comfortably into them. Other than that, no other complaints. The 400 comes in two finishes, a honey gold lacquer and a matte or vintage lacquer. The alto and tenor have double arms on the low C B and Bb keys, which keeps those keys in better adjustment. I also find the key action sure and solid, like the Yamaha. The 400 is available as an alto, tenor and baritone. If you've read my earlier reviews of this horn you already know I like it. A great horn for the pro player as well as a the advanced student.
For my readers in Brazil:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5poNv64cVRg
CHATEAU
Chateau is fairly new to the market, though their parent company Tenon in Taiwan has been making saxophones since 1979 for other names before marketing their own line. I have only played the altos shown, not the tenors, but I was incredibly impressed with the build quality, appearance, keywork, and above all the sound. These are in my mind another one of the best buys out there. The ones you see here have double arms on the low C, B and Bb keys and real rolled tone-holes, not soldered on tone rings. The first two horns from the left are made from 93% copper, which gives them a warm and complex tone. The next one is solid brushed nickel with beautiful abalone pearl key touches. It has a slightly brighter tone than the copper models, but still full and rich. The last one is a beautifully finished cognac lacquer and the brass is made with 85% copper content, which gives this horn a warm tone that is well suited to classical as well as jazz. They are all beautifully hand engraved on the bell bell rim, bow and neck. At this time, these horns can all be had for under $2500, and I saw the Cognac Lacquer model going under 2 grand, so if you have the chance to try these horns, I highly recommend them. For the working pro, these saxophones are not only a good value dollar-wise, but have a great sound and appearance and will help you look and sound every bit the pro you are.
P. Mauriat
P. Mauriat has always been among my favorite new saxophone brands because they not only make top grade saxophones which have been adopted by some of the best players in the business like James Carter, Greg Osby and my friend Keyan Williams, but they have constantly worked on improving their saxophones. I know Alex Hsieh, the president of Albest, the parent company of P. Mauriat, and he cares about his product and travels out of Taiwan extensively not just to attend the trade shows, but as a good-will ambassador for the saxophone. He always listens to suggestions on how to improve the saxophone from other players and often incorporates those suggestions into his horns, quite often introducing a new model to accommodate those suggestions. He even liked one of my suggestions on how to improve the low G# to Bb pinky cluster, and when I have the chance to visit him in Taiwan, he will sit down with me and actually have me draw it out and explain it. It doesn't matter whether he ends up using it or not, it's still nice to know he's willing to listen. Since the beginning of P. Mauriat's introduction to the marketplace, the 67R and 66R have been their flagship saxophones. It achieved almost instant popularity with pros because not only the price point, but because of its big, full sound. It was one of the first modern brands to employ real rolled tone-holes, which are drawn and rolled from the existing metal on the body rather than being soldered on. The dark lacquer, gold lacquer, and unlacquered models can still be had at a great price. The tenor is literally a beast, and the first time I played it, it reminded a lot of the old Conn Chu Berry, which is a good thing. The 66R and 67R are available in a variety of finishes. The tipped bell soprano is one of my favorite sopranos. The curved neck with the bell turned slightly outward allows you to actually hold the saxophone more comfortably while it projects a little more to the audience. I have had issues with the keywork in the past. Often, the keys felt spongy and soft, and some keys would even rattle, so the tech would have to spend some time tightening them up. I'm glad to say that the latest horns don't seem to have that issue, and I hope they keep it up. Overall, one of the brands you have to try.
CANNONBALL
Tevis and Cheryl Lauket began their enterprise by playing with a not so good sax in their kitchen, and by changing some things about it, like the neck, they found that they could improve the sound and intonation of the sax by tweaking various things. They eventually raised some money and got a dedicated manufacturer in Taiwan to build the saxes for them. They set up a second facility near Salt Lake City Utah where technicians would then do all the final adjustments and engraving before they went out to the shops. Contrary to what many people think, these were not named after Cannonball Adderley. I have to admit that I was not a big fan of the earlier incarnations of the Cannonball line, but over the years I've noticed many improvements and at this point, I consider them among some of the best saxophones you can buy if you're a serious student or working pro. In the earlier models I found the keywork to be a little mushy, but now I find it solid and sure. They are also one of the few manufacturers that are still using traditional point screws for their keywork, whereas many manufacturers today use what's called a pseudo-point screw. I'll perhaps write an article about that later, but won't go into the differences now, and in fact refer to this article by Stephen Howard who could explain it better, being a repair tech.
http://www.shwoodwind.co.uk/Glossary/Points.htm
http://www.shwoodwind.co.uk/Glossary/Points.htm
The two saxes pictured here are my favorites of the Cannonball line. On the left is the Brute, part of their Vintage Reborn series. It features a dark vintage lacquer which looks like raw aged brass and beautiful hand engraving. Most of the other Cannonball's use laser engraving. This and the tenor version have a great big sound and I really like the stone key touches. They look cool and felt great under my fingers. The tenor on the right is the Peter Christlieb signature model. This tenor has a cognac lacquer finish and a rich warm sound. Of course these are my favorites, but many of the Cannonball saxophones come in at excellent price points and come in a wide variety of finishes. I suggest giving them all a try.
In my next article I will discuss the top of the line saxophones which I would own if money were no object. No, I will not be discussing the Mark VI, just the new saxophones. Stay tuned.