Jazz for aficionados

Everything Stitt played was creative  .

Although Sonny Stitt was compared to Bird, I think he wanted to sound like "Sonny Stitt".


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mp7zS1uoLwo


This is beautiful, and it sounds like "Sonny Stitt".


One of the first albums I ever bought;


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXZWbr2fFrU

010

I'm not saying they wanted to sound like Bird identically. Thats why I said "almost" to a T. 

After Charlie Parker became "godlike" in the eyes of hundreds of up and coming sax players, they could not help but sound like him as they were using his waxed recordings for practice. Why even Sonny Rollins went through a "Bird Stage" early in his career. I am merely stating that many of the upper echelon sax players of that time and even today could blow off some bebop jams that sound somewhat identical in terms of chord progressions and tone ect.

In his book, Art Pepper stated Bird was a notch above everyone including himself so your right when you stated he would not have said that. Pepper was always modest, to a fault, but he had held a grudge against many black jazz musicians during his early years through to his long incarceration at San Quentin. The cause was all the rumors and backstage whisperings he always heard about " that white boy who tries to sound black on tenor". Yes black racism if you will. Its all in his book. When he was released from prison, and subsequently rehab, meeting his soon to be wife Laurie ( who I have exchanged emails), his career resurged and he played many gigs and also recorded with many great jazz artists regardless of their race. Elvin Jones plays the skins on every recording night at the "Complete Village Vanguard" sessions. and George Cables became his favorite piano player and trusted friend. He states in the book that all was forgiven, and his early distaste of black artists was unjust and bought about by his own insecurities and faults which was the root cause of his addiction.

One of the most interesting stories in all of jazz lore and one which goes to the topic of the evolution of jazz styles has to do with Sonny Stitt. This verified story, however, flies in the face of some of what has been discussed here so far.

The issue of players’ influence on each other’s styles is well established. As pjw suggests there is a big difference between copying an influential player’s style “to a T” and using some of that influential player’s conceptual ideas to inform one’s own playing. The former type of player seldom becomes a major player. The latter type, players like Art Pepper, Phil Woods and Jackie McLean, took some of Bird’s conceptual ideas and added them to their own to create a Bird-influenced, but still personal sound. Bird himself was a big fan of and was very influenced by Jimmy Dorsey (!) and Lester Young. However, there is another force that comes into play in all this that is very interesting, imo.

Some here have at times asked the question “why does jazz have to evolve?” as a argument against the validity of contemporary players’ styles and “new jazz” in general. The answer is simply that it evolves because it has to. It is the nature of the beast. It has evolved from day one and will continue to do so. There is a certain logical inevitability to the evolution of jazz styles. Sonny Stitt is a perfect example:

The story as told by players who were there, players like Kenny Clark and Stitt himself, is that Bird and Stitt lived in different cities and had never had any contact. In fact, because Bird was still new on the scene, Stitt had not even heard recordings by Bird. Yet, when they first met they found that their respective styles were remarkably similar. This is all well documented for anyone who wants to read about it. Stitt had heard other influential players like Hawkins and these influences along with his own voice led him to a similar place as Bird. This is the reason why it is generally and inaccurately believed that Stitt emulated Bird.

Frogman, I consider your thesis quite accurate and valid.

In regard to the evolution of jazz, it also has to sound good. When I ask for opinions on new jazz, I don't get any feedback, that in itself is an answer.

Since it is you in particular who is always pushing "new jazz", why don't you shoot your best shot and give us a sample of what you call "The new evolution" of jazz and we can decide.