[Dixielandjazz] Armstrong and solos and innovation

[Stephen G Barbone]

Marek keeps asking why Armstrong (and others) who play virtually the  
same solo time after time  when performing or recording, do not play  
EXACTLY the same solo. We all agree with you Marek, but do not obsess  
about if a note or two is different. To us it it still the same.

IMO, it is because most all musicians who improvise, do not write  
their improvisations down and consciously try to play them exactly as  
written. Using Armstrong as an example, he spent years refining his  
solos as he played them and probably in later years, listened to them  
on his recording machine.

And like many other improvising musicians, he had his favorite licks  
which he often repeated. So the solo ends up as being almost exactly  
alike each time, but usually never exactly alike. I think the only  
time a  musician plays the EXACTLY same solo is when he is reading, or  
has made a conscious effort to MEMORIZE the exact same solo. (as in a  
musician trying to emulate Bix)

I think all of the improvisors who play similar solos time after time  
have put certain licks and/or devices in place during subsequent  
performances and they leave them there. However, because they are  
still improvising in part, they do not, or in fact cannot, play the  
same exact solo time after time.

Why would anyone want to hear the same basic solo except for a couple  
of notes here and there? Like, once you've heard someone play the High  
Society clarinet obbligato, why would you want to hear him do it again  
and again? Just to hear one or two different notes? (very few  
clarinetists play the EXACT same solo each time)

Armstrong always sounded fresh in my ears no matter how many times he  
played the same solo (except for a note or two). But then, I didn't  
spend thousands of hours listening to the same solos by him. Nor pick  
nits about same solo vs. exactly the same solo. The essence of what he  
was doing musically comes through loud and clear in a relatively short  
time. And, Louis was Louis.

As for songs vs. solos, I don 't think Louis spent a lot of time  
trying to perfect the Exact Song line. And so his melody line may have  
been slightly different in each performance. On one hand, this  
infuriates purists who insist on reproducing exactly what the composer  
wrote, while on the other makes no real difference to the more casual  
listeners.

Should he have continued to innovate? Who among us has the weight to  
judge that? He was probably unable to do so. Like many Jazz musicians  
he said his piece at a young age and was content with it. What would  
have happened had he continued innovating? Probably the same  
innovations we got with Roy Eldridge, Dizzy Gillespie, Miles Davis,  
Fats Navarro, Clifford Brown, Freddy Hubbard, Terrell Stafford, et al.  
Where else could the music have gone and still be different? We might  
remember that the main innovations with Armstrong as well as later  
with Bop were rhythmic. The harmonic changes from Dixieland to Bop  
were already there in classical music and already put forth in jazz by  
Bix and Pee Wee Russell..

With respect to Dr. Billy Taylor, perhaps he was romanticizing the  
subject with his "what if" question about Louis continuing to innovate?

Cheers,
Steve Barbone
www.myspace.com/barbonestreetjazzband