[Dixielandjazz] Dixieland Jazz, Eddie Condon

[Stephen G Barbone]

> "Robert Ringwald" <rsr at ringwald.com> wrote:
>
> Steve Barbone posted some comments on Eddie Condon's Town Hall  
> concerts and
> the Condon mid 1950 Columbia recordings, written by Bob Rawlins:
>
> (snip)
> These are among my favorite Condon recordings.  I don't like his
> 1950's Columbia recordings.  I find they are over-arranged,
> commercialized, and the mix and sound are all wrong.  Everything is
> too crisp, separated, and "modern" sounding.
> (snip)
>
> Wow!  I could not disagree more.  While I enjoyed the Town Hall  
> series and
> featured them on my radio show in Los Angeles, my opinion is that  
> the mid
> 50s Condon recordings are just about the best OKOM ever recorded.   
> If I was
> going to a desert Island, they, along with just about anything Louis  
> did,
> would be my first choices to take with me.
>
> Every time I hear the  Columbia 1950 Condon recordings, I shake my  
> head and
> say, "It just doesn't get any better than that.
>
> (snip)
> "over-arranged,
> commercialized, mix and sound are all wrong, too crisp, separated."
> (snip)
>
> Ridiculous.  What is wrong with hearing a band as if you are sitting  
> 20 feet
> in front of them and hearing them under the most optimal  
> conditions?  Plus,
> the guys on the Columbia recordings were some of the finest OKOM  
> players in
> the world, playing at their peak, obviously recording under great
> conditions.  As I said, it just doesn't get any better than that.
>
>
> "modern sounding"?
> (snip)
>
> Perhaps one of the reasons why Condon was able to hang on so long.

I spoke to Bob Rawlins about those quotes a few months ago. I think  
what he was trying to convey is that the 1950 Columbia sides are too  
well juiced up, and not what the band would sound like if you were  
sitting in front of them.

Example is the balancing that Columbia did. The individual sounds are  
all very clear, drums muted, solo horns made more prominent, etc., so  
that while the music one hears is excellent, if you were listening  
live in front of the band, sound would have been very different  
regarding the mix.

Columbia has often been accused of adding lots of bass and muting  
treble etc., which while it improves tone (for some), it is not what  
the band sounded like live.

I think Rawlins belongs to the group that prefers accurate "live"  
sound over perfect recorded sound. I don't disagree with that view. I  
think some of the Columbia's just don't do justice to what Condon  
Groups (and other jazz bands)  really sounded like. Plus, some of the  
energy is missing.

This was also the view of Bob Maheu who is quoted in Sudhalter's "Lost  
Chords": "If you could only have heard it back then . . .Eddie and  
some of his cronies . . .that music would hit you like a fist, a blast  
of superheated steam. It was powerful . . . The records? Yeah, some of  
them capture it a bit - but you should have heard what it sounded like  
live. You wouldn't have believed your ears. It was the most  
emotionally powerful kind of jazz I've ever heard. But that's gone  
now." pgs 298-99

Those of us who saw/heard that music live are indeed lucky. I think  
most would agree with Maheu's views and would be interested in`  
comments.

I think Bob (Ringwald) is right on about "modern dixieland" which is  
often how Condon described his work from the 1950s on. That, plus the  
way Condon promoted the music are surely two of the main reasons he  
remained relatively popular until his death in 1975. And why  
Dixieland, in general, suffered after Condon and the gang died off.  
Some of the magic had died with them. (IMO)

Cheers,
Steve Barbone
www.myspace.com/barbonestreetjazzband