In this kind of research, there is usually no benefit to speculating about broadcasts, for two reasons: One is that it is exceedingly unusual for a song to be in the repertoire of bands that are broadcasting before it has been recorded. The other is that it is very difficult to learn a song from one hearing on a broadcast, assuming Parker happened to be listening at that moment. THANK YOU JIM
In my Bird discography I have "Probably may-November 1940 . Thank you for the analysis and dating update. The late Phil Schapp was the first to argue for a 1940 dating.
Also I put the full recording out Philology Cd 5/18.2 Vol. 1/4.
I of course have the Parker discography that you co-wrote with Norman Saks and Len Bukowski, which was the state of the art in the late 1990s. It has been superceded by Peter Losin's online discography at plosin.com Your fine work is appreciated of course. Yes, it was first released on the Italian label Philology, along with many other firsts on that label. They released it on an LP before the CD that you listed. THANK YOU ROBERT!
The idea that you can carbon-date a solo by the quotes buried inside it—Eldridge's lick can't predate October 1938, the “I Thought About You” nod can't predate that October 1939 copyright—is the most exciting thing I've read about a recording in ages. It turns the performance into its own timestamp. I write about the stuff hiding under the surface of songs, usually the gap between what a track sounds like and what it means, so watching that same buried-layer detective work done with this much rigor was a real thrill. And the neighbors-threatening-to-evict-him detail explains everything. Wonderful piece.
Yes, this kind of, as you call it, "carbon dating" is a real thing among jazz researchers. I took a look at your own Substack work--very cool! You might add this to your list: I personally have seen one event, and heard of others, where "God Bless the Child" was sung as part of a religious occasion—despite the fact that the lyrics completely contradict that! THANK YOU J.P.!
Thank you—that means a lot, and what a perfect example. The gap between those lyrics and a religious setting is exactly my kind of thing; "them that's got shall get" is not really a blessing. I'm adding it to the list. Fair warning that I queue pretty far ahead, so it won't run for a while, but I'd be glad to send you a note when it does. Appreciate you taking the time to look at my stuff.
One more thing---I too have been tempted at times to feature a song at an event based on its nice title and nice melody--but when I noticed what the lyrics were really saying, I moved on to something else. You wrote a revealing article about a song that people often feature at weddings whose background is negative!:
I feel like it's a kind of stubbornness that gets into people--"I like the title and the melody, so I'm not listening to the lyrics." Here's another article on that topic:
Re: using the released version of tunes for dating -- how about a broadcast that preceded it? Might Bird have heard it?
In this kind of research, there is usually no benefit to speculating about broadcasts, for two reasons: One is that it is exceedingly unusual for a song to be in the repertoire of bands that are broadcasting before it has been recorded. The other is that it is very difficult to learn a song from one hearing on a broadcast, assuming Parker happened to be listening at that moment. THANK YOU JIM
Just a remarkable analysis of Bird's genius and his study of improvisers on every instrument.
In my Bird discography I have "Probably may-November 1940 . Thank you for the analysis and dating update. The late Phil Schapp was the first to argue for a 1940 dating.
Also I put the full recording out Philology Cd 5/18.2 Vol. 1/4.
I of course have the Parker discography that you co-wrote with Norman Saks and Len Bukowski, which was the state of the art in the late 1990s. It has been superceded by Peter Losin's online discography at plosin.com Your fine work is appreciated of course. Yes, it was first released on the Italian label Philology, along with many other firsts on that label. They released it on an LP before the CD that you listed. THANK YOU ROBERT!
New perspectives (to me, at least) on the old masters are always welcome.
The idea that you can carbon-date a solo by the quotes buried inside it—Eldridge's lick can't predate October 1938, the “I Thought About You” nod can't predate that October 1939 copyright—is the most exciting thing I've read about a recording in ages. It turns the performance into its own timestamp. I write about the stuff hiding under the surface of songs, usually the gap between what a track sounds like and what it means, so watching that same buried-layer detective work done with this much rigor was a real thrill. And the neighbors-threatening-to-evict-him detail explains everything. Wonderful piece.
Yes, this kind of, as you call it, "carbon dating" is a real thing among jazz researchers. I took a look at your own Substack work--very cool! You might add this to your list: I personally have seen one event, and heard of others, where "God Bless the Child" was sung as part of a religious occasion—despite the fact that the lyrics completely contradict that! THANK YOU J.P.!
Thank you—that means a lot, and what a perfect example. The gap between those lyrics and a religious setting is exactly my kind of thing; "them that's got shall get" is not really a blessing. I'm adding it to the list. Fair warning that I queue pretty far ahead, so it won't run for a while, but I'd be glad to send you a note when it does. Appreciate you taking the time to look at my stuff.
Exactly--and "Money, you've got lots of friends" isn't a religious sentiment either! I queue far ahead too--no worries. THANK YOU J.P.!
One more thing---I too have been tempted at times to feature a song at an event based on its nice title and nice melody--but when I noticed what the lyrics were really saying, I moved on to something else. You wrote a revealing article about a song that people often feature at weddings whose background is negative!:
https://jplangarfel.substack.com/p/the-most-played-wedding-song-in-the
I feel like it's a kind of stubbornness that gets into people--"I like the title and the melody, so I'm not listening to the lyrics." Here's another article on that topic:
https://creators.yahoo.com/lifestyle/story/wedding-music-that-isnt-actually-about-love-songs-that-have-been-confusing-couples-for-decades-115123294.html
Thank you for sharing such excellent ornithology! Looking forward to digging into Mr. Purcell's Substack... 🎶 🎷