[Dixielandjazz] Billy Joel "Just The Way You Are" coversion to Swing/Dixieland

[Steve barbone]

LARRY at sign.guy at charter.net wrote: (some polite snips)


> Of course anything is possible in music but sometimes you just shouldn't
> muck with perfect.  It's a matter of taste.  Of course any tune with a
> harmonic progression can be "adapted" to anything and a jazz line can be
> played with it and of course anything with a melody can have a
> countermelody, that I think, is a given.

Agree except that I don't know what "perfect" is.
 
> Sometimes things are improved, for example we Start Alice blue gown in three
> and kick it into 4 as a Dixie up beat tune and the last several bars as a
> waltz.  It works.  I think most people would agree that Beethoven's 5th just
> wouldn't work as a cha cha or waltz or even a Jazz tune but of course
> anything is possible, they turned it into a disco but I don't recall that it
> had any improv in it thus it wasn't jazz.  Another example is "Tea for Two"
> changed into a Cha Cha.  That works well and I think a lot of people prefer
> it that way but that doesn't make it jazz until you change it with chordal
> modification and improvisations on the basic rhythm/chord structure.

Maybe so, but so what? We sometimes play Tea For Two as a Cha Cha and also
Improvise upon it. Is it then "Latin Jazz", "Dixieland Jazz", "Jazz", A "Cha
Cha", or "Pop Music?" Labels are so very confusing. :-) VBG. Where is it
written that one must modify the chords, or improvise on the basic
rhythm/chord structure in order to make a tune into "Jazz"? Tea For Two Cha
Cha as we do it qualifies as Jazz as far as I'm concerned. Using the Same
Chords, Different Rhythm, + Improvisation. And we're not trying to improve
anything by playing a song as jazz. We are merely communicating "Cosa
Nostra" (our thing) to the audience.

> I guess I didn't make myself clear.  I was referring to the basic tune,
> rhythm style and chord structure not that it couldn't have improvisations on
> the melody line.
 
> Don't confuse improvisation and Jazz with the basic structure of a tune.
> They are not the same.  Changing the style of a tune isn't Jazz or
> improvisation any more than changing the key is.  It's of course permissible
> to do those things but I never heard anyone say "Wow did you hear the way he
> rushed his solo" or "That guy blew me away by his key changes."

I don't confuses them and never said or implied that changing the style of a
tune made it Jazz. By the same token, I have heard, many times, jazz
musicians state what you say you have never heard, with both key
modulations, and changes of key that are written into a tune by the
composer. For example the bridges in Cherokee, or Have You Met Miss Jones
in effect, employ key changes. Going up a step, or a half step, or down a
step, or a half step is . . . changing the key. There are lots of key
changes written or implied into tunes that blow listeners away (mostly other
musicians or listeners with EARS) when played by competent Jazz Musicians.
 
> All music can be improvised on but IMO there are limits.  I think that Billy
> Joel's interpretation is pretty good.  A  bossa rock has nothing to do with
> improvising.  You can still keep the chord structure and the basic rhythm
> style.  I'm not aware that playing Jazz has anything to do with meter or key
> and there  is no obligation to change the background rhythm patterns
> (example rock to swing).  While you may change those things and many people
> have done just that, it really begs the point at times and doing it does not
> constitute jazz in any definition I have ever heard.

Yes, all music can be improvised. In fact most of the music over the past
2000 years was improvised. Not much was written out until about 200 years
ago. I think Billy Joel is pretty good too. But I'm not sure I understand
you. Peggy Lee changed the rhythm of "Lover". I would call her version
"Jazz". We could play "Just The Way You Are" just like Joel does, however,
tonight we played it as Dixieland Jazz. It sounded just fine to my ears. And
I consider myself a JAZZ MUSICIAN, better yet, one who today makes a living
as a "working" jazz musician.
 
> it's my feeling that this particular song is not a good choice
> for trad Dixie styling or swing.  There may be many of his tunes that might
> work out well but a tune that has been done in a more or less strict duple
> time is kind of quaint as swing and just doesn't fit quite right.

I respect, but disagree with your feeling. The song in question worked very
well for our band as a Dixieland Jazz Tune. As did many pop tunes of the
1920s and 30s for bands during that time period.
 
> Sometimes a solo becomes so ingrained in the public's mind that to change it
> just doesn't make it.  IMO an example of an ingrained solo is the sax solo
> in "In the Mood" as well as some other Miller things.  I have heard many
> guys including the current Miller band improv through that solo and again
> IMO it takes something away even though they were well done.  That's coming
> from a guy that really doesn't like written solos very much.

Disagree again. The public (most of it, that is) has, IMO, no idea what the
Sax Solo in "In The Mood" sounds like. Personally I hear it as corny. Not
only that, but since it was written out, it may not really be jazz according
to your own prior reasoning. Another example; I love the Picou High Society
clarinet obbligato solo, but I no longer play it as an exact copy. Not only
that, but neither did many reed men who are far more competent than I.
Bechet's versions differ. Ditto for Albert Nicholas, Omer Simeon and a whole
bunch of others. They all added to the original, some, like Bechet, changed
it quite a bit. 
 
> I just think that there a lot of tunes (many modern rock) that just don't
> fit very well as Swing or Dixie and really don't lend themselves to anything
> but what they are.

Agree. I go further and believe that there are many Pop tunes written over
the last century that don't fit well. Especially those "obscure" ones that
the "Artsy" folks love. But I also believe that there are many more current
songs out there that can be adapted quite well to the Jazz idiom. And it is
these "familiar" songs that the audience responds to. Perhaps that is why I
am one of a very few "working" Dixieland Jazz Musicians who actually makes a
living performing it?

Cheers,
Steve Barbone

Cheers,
Steve Barbone