Excellent post, pryso. Of course, I agree as I said previously with what you wrote about the folly in deeming any one performance “the best”. A couple of additional points and why I sometimes find it so frustrating to try and discuss some of this. At the heart of my position is what you correctly point out: to deem something ”the best” presumes that EVERY other example of same has been experienced. Highly unlikely and usually not the case. Even more importantly, the unfortunate byproduct of this kind of grandstanding is that in taking this kind of inflexible position and personalizing it, truly interesting discussion of the details around the merits of the performances being compared don’t happen. Not only does it not happen, in trying to justify one’s position sometimes silly things get said. For instance:
**** It’s absolutely impossible for a trio to compete with that musical lineup. ****
That is such a nonsensical and silly comment. So, all those great trio and quartet performances that we have discussed here and revere are, by definition, inferior to heavily produced and orchestrated versions. Really? It’s like saying that a solo piano performance cannot possibly be better than a trio performance. Huh? This is what I wrote in response to O-10’s assertion that my choice for a good example of singer with acoustic ensemble version of “Misty” was not the best choice. Let’s remember, my comment was in response to Rok’s post of Dee Dee’s likewise acoustic version which I felt was “over the top”:
**** Don’t get me wrong, she can practically do no wrong in my book, but those two renditions are practically apples/oranges. The live one is jazz trio only, and far more relaxed and evocative; much more in the spirit of jazz. The studio version...just that. Studio produced; faster, with A LOT of “sweetening”, less intimate. A bit Muzak(ish); what some refer to as elevator music. ****
As I’ve said already, I like that recording a lot, strings sweetening and all. Simply not as much as the trio version that I posted and others like it. Apples and oranges. Moreover, not only do I generally prefer Sarah (and most jazz singers) in a trio setting, but this was a very young Sarah and I feel she became a better and more interesting singer as she matured. And incredibly (more silliness), the assertion about it being Sarah’s “best” is in comparison to a live performance that isn’t even on a record. So, with as long a career as Sarah had and the probably hundreds of times that she sang that song, THAT 1958 recording in a studio was “THE BEST” she ever sang the song. I kind of doubt it. Ironically, my favorite version of “Misty” by Sarah is on the “Live In Japan” record. I didn’t post that because it is not available on the Tube. Most music lovers have never even heard most versions besides the Vaughn/Strings, so what exactly does any of this prove?
I stand by what I wrote as shown above. No joke.
**** It’s absolutely impossible for a trio to compete with that musical lineup. ****
That is such a nonsensical and silly comment. So, all those great trio and quartet performances that we have discussed here and revere are, by definition, inferior to heavily produced and orchestrated versions. Really? It’s like saying that a solo piano performance cannot possibly be better than a trio performance. Huh? This is what I wrote in response to O-10’s assertion that my choice for a good example of singer with acoustic ensemble version of “Misty” was not the best choice. Let’s remember, my comment was in response to Rok’s post of Dee Dee’s likewise acoustic version which I felt was “over the top”:
**** Don’t get me wrong, she can practically do no wrong in my book, but those two renditions are practically apples/oranges. The live one is jazz trio only, and far more relaxed and evocative; much more in the spirit of jazz. The studio version...just that. Studio produced; faster, with A LOT of “sweetening”, less intimate. A bit Muzak(ish); what some refer to as elevator music. ****
As I’ve said already, I like that recording a lot, strings sweetening and all. Simply not as much as the trio version that I posted and others like it. Apples and oranges. Moreover, not only do I generally prefer Sarah (and most jazz singers) in a trio setting, but this was a very young Sarah and I feel she became a better and more interesting singer as she matured. And incredibly (more silliness), the assertion about it being Sarah’s “best” is in comparison to a live performance that isn’t even on a record. So, with as long a career as Sarah had and the probably hundreds of times that she sang that song, THAT 1958 recording in a studio was “THE BEST” she ever sang the song. I kind of doubt it. Ironically, my favorite version of “Misty” by Sarah is on the “Live In Japan” record. I didn’t post that because it is not available on the Tube. Most music lovers have never even heard most versions besides the Vaughn/Strings, so what exactly does any of this prove?
I stand by what I wrote as shown above. No joke.