Lazz

Thanks for the high-street tip. <insert pretend shocked and stunned emoticon here> I haven't paid retail for ages. Most times, though, that's been due to having something of interest to offer in return. Like regular trade, for example. Or hard cash. Even, at the most basic, at least scoring more than one unit. My concern is that to nickel & dime over single track prices like these may too easily encourage a reciprocal willingness to skimp on quality of service. Maybe that's just me - but if a total stranger expects to chip me on my rate when I'm offering them a deal anyway then, even though circumstances may encourage me to take the business, they sure wouldn't have my fullest attention. And I would hence be more concerned about what I risked ending up with if these guys did prove so ready to haggle. Maybe I'm missing something essential about red-book standards but I only apply 'em to production masters, myself. (Production master = format delivered to manufacturer.) Can't see the relevance outside of that function. Maybe smueske knows more .... Hey Steve !! Is the Q track encoded with MP3s ? Would MP3 work as acceptable format for production masters ?

Betcha they wouldn’t . Why would they bother? And why would you expect them to ? £74 is less than standard cost of one hour studio time in London. Sounds like they do a good job so it sounds to me like that could be a good deal. Only way to tell for sure – as Steve suggests – is to suck it and see. Especially when their service is so cheap. Steve’s other suspicions don’t present themselves to me as a big deal. Mixing and mastering in the same house is quite normal (and essential) practice in the current studio world. And there’s really no reason at all to think they don’t use professional industry standard tools to do their job, either. They offer to send you a mixed and mastered MP3 across the internet. Not a ‘production master’. And certainly not at that price. The production master is where we expect ISRC to be encoded on the Q track. And where there is any legitimate expectation for a studio to do that job, the reciprocal legitimate expectation is usually for you, the client, to provide them with the necessary numbers. I don’t envisage any of that happening here – or needing to happen – so, no problem. Their client list sure looks encouraging – why not give ‘em a whirl ? And let us here all know about the results. I wonder what Prometheus has to say about it. Where is he when he’s needed ? Probably mixing and mastering.

I noticed it will feature Bert 'play-in-a-day' Weedon, the Agatha Christie of guitar.

I had one when I wrote it. .... and how come monosyllabic has five syllables anyway.

Bohemian Rhapsody made an impression on me because of vocal orchestration. But I love a capella as a thing itself rather than a design embellishment. And have always wished to take part - though my voice doesn't have the right qualities (or perhaps I should say absence of them). If I did though, I definitely think I would be fearful of missing, and being so nakedly exposed in my blunders. Whenever I have tried harmonising a capella in the past I found two significant things happened: first, it felt so good it surely should have been illegal; second, that feeling didn't stop innocent passers-by wincing visibly at the noise we were making. It's hard to do well, I think - of course it is, just like everything else - but, done well, I find it stunning and very beautiful. Historically, most of what I have enjoyed listening to has been American. I always dug the Hi-Lo’s (where the Beach Boys got their close harmony from), and Gene Puerling’s work with Singers Unlimited – way too cheesy for most people but there is incredible craft and silken craftiness inside there. (And Gene only passed a few months ago, so I have been re-visiting recently.) The Persuasions are another favourite of mine from the grittier side. More contemporaneously, I get stolen away and blown away by the soul and sophisticated polish of Take Six – and there is also some more recent vibrant young street mob whose name escapes me but who built a quick and deserved rep through a viral YouTube film of them performing on the Paris metro... they were hits across the euro-festival circuit this summer.... what's the name Anne? From outside of the US, vocal groups I also love are Vocal Sampling from Cuba, those lovely state women’s choirs from Bulgaria, a Malagasi band called Rossi who feature a lot of juicy a capella, the extraordinary and very cool Mediterranean choral polyphony out of Corsica and Sardinia (you owe it to yourself to get some – honest), and I am very fond of listening to songs from the Baka – the real honest simple field recordings more than the hi-tech studio-mix aberrations. Only classical stuff I have is from Arvo Part. Mixed bag – but all amazing. I love a capella.

When I have a finished song, the changes are already there along with the structure, written out on a lead-sheet. I guess this is the basic arrangement. When the chart gets handed out to the players on a gig, we just go for it while listening hard. There may be some preceding conversation about feel and groove and who is going to take a solo, but any arrangement after that is usually an on-the-spot process, save that occasionally there may be some rhythmic accents that I want everyone to hit so I write those onto the sketch. Otherwise it’s pretty much player-dependent. The real big fun for me arranging-wise is when I choose a piece forthe larger ensemble pad. This means four rhythm and three horns: trumpet/flugel, tenor/soprano, and trombone. The piece can be one of my own tunes or it could be a cover – the bigger ensemble is intended to be able to do weddings and dancable music for functions and so I like to have a goodly selection of songs people know and can recognise – but I like to do them in a different style from the original source. So the first stage is to get the idea. This usually takes around two weeks of running the tune around in my head until I have something alive and threatening – mainly consisting of a ‘feel’ concept along with a bunch of lines and figures for those lovely brass and reed instruments. After that it’s another two weeks of harmonising those lines and writing out all the parts. That’s the juice for me – I am slow at it because I’m still learning, but I like the harmonising aspect and I like the therapeutic mechanical meditative aspect of drawing up a nice chart that’s easy to read for everyone under dodgy lighting conditions. I get a huge kick out of the fact that this is not behaviour which is generally associated with singers – so it does me huge favours on the impression front. The harmonisations which have been giving me the most pleasure are fourths – which some of my own pieces lend themselves to quite nicely – and the use of two significant chords as basic harmony sources. For example, I will take the IV and the V as the two significant identifying 'characteristic' chords of a key and then harmonise each melody note as if it were the top note of an inversion of either of those two chords – gives it a sweet sound and a direct association with the key – great for R & B and pop stylings. Apart from those two little harmonising techniques – fourths and significant inversions – I tend to pay attention to voice leading using the third and seventh tones and adding ninths, elevenths and thirteenths as appropriate for my third note. Hope that makes sense.

"Of couse I believe in free-will........... I have no choice." I.B.Singer

Oooh...touchy. You said you don't think about 'stuff like that'. I thought 'stuff like that' referred to the general tenor of Jonathon's point: i.e. juxtapositions, emotional impact, musical context, placement... I believed you showed consideration to these qualities. Apologies if I am mistaken.

I am not sure that I am quite ready to believe that about you yet. Just from what I've read of yours - it's not easy to take the dimissal on board.

Oh John. I love Thomas Hardy. His love poems are so deeply horny. (Stan Laurel, on the other hand... )

Great idea, Steve. But I was hoping for someone else to have already done that work for me - I am typically short of the tiime needed. Oh - and it was not my intention for you to be 'corrected' about BIAB. That was just my opinion about its earlier incarnations. I am sincerely interested in knowing more about your serious doubts. That would be helpful. I think I'm going to ask Peter and Ollie Gannon directly. As well as my mates at those academies.

I think it should go to a C. (..... thanks for the suggestion.)

Their context appeared to be (without me being in actual attendance, I mean) one of battling against aimless noodlage from the kids and stressing the greater importance of general musicianship and ensemble playing. I also think that play-time is a perfectly legitimate purpose. That's how we learn, isn't it ? But getting lost in play-time is exactly what I'm fearful of - and, knowing myself as I do, with good reason too. Guess I'll have to jump off that bridge when I get to it. You know we are both convinced already. I love Band-In-A-Box. The original intent was to extend the approach of those Jamie Aebersold and 'Music Minus One" play-along type series and I think they did that really well. Initially for jazzers (like those play-alongs), it meanrt that you could practice improvising or patterned exercises productively for specific repertoire without having to call your friends in as rhythm section - and you could do it in any key, feel, or tempo you wanted. Plus - because top-line jazz players and educators were involved in developing the package - it was absolutely fit-for-purpose. Whether, with all the latterly added bells and whistles, it's actually fit for my currently envisioned purpose or not - I have no real idea yet. I can see that it prints damn good lead-sheets - which is definitely what I need. But in, say, scoring out a musical for eight instruments - does it automatically transpose from score into the different instrument keys ? Does it place a limit on the number of staves ? Guess I'll just have to ask 'em - they are local lads, after all. But if you can expand on your doubts for me first, Steve, that would be a good start. (I know Finale and Sibelius can do what I want - even though the learning curve will be steep - but BIAB comes at one quarter their price, and already that plays better on the jewish piano.) Oh - Sorry for being such a Luddite - but, what's a DAW ?

I wish I could do all that - you guys make me envious. My way of working is to write things out on paper and eventually have people play it. Works fine for gigs - but nowadays they are few and far between. Works perfectly for studio recording, too - but that involves patient readiness to wait for a project opportunity or need and money to hire the players. What doesn't get satisfied in the mean-time is the desire to listen to sound shapes for songs ahead of either of those circumstances happening. One day I plan to install some kind of techno-muso software and gizmoid stuff - personal ideal is to be able to pre-hear and critique and modify written arrangements which I have been scribbling - and then print-off neat notation - seems it would be a great tool for me - but I have been postponing and procrastinating for a long while due to my grave concern that the opening of pandora's box may seduce me into disappearing up my own bum. Guys I know teaching musoid courses at Middlesex and the Royal Academy always stress to their students that they should always know what they are going to do before they switch-on the computer - there has to be a purpose - random noodlage and fooling is frowned upon. That kind of rigor would seem to avoid or restrict the risk of anal disappearance - but how do you guys deal with the problem ? Or has it simply not become an issue for you ? My other question is about package recommendations for my purposes. The notation software choices seem to be either Sibelius or Finale. But maybe Band-In-A-Box will handle all I want. Only ever known BIAB before as a practice tool - which is why I always think so highly of it - but it has now developed way beyond those origins and might be just the job for multi-stave notation too. Any opinions or input or experience ? If and when I did move into the 21st century, I see no reason for my filing system to change much: Large brown envelopes marked with song-title and containg full score and duplicate parts. Pads/books for each instrument with individual parts for the pieces. On a computer I would name those same files by song-title

"Lazz I cannot remember for certain, but I wanto say Bill Evans' drummer's kit at one time" Hey - which one ? Was it Joe LaBarbera ? The first trio and the last trio were the best for me. Scott LaFaro aqnd Paul Motian in the first; Marc Johnson and Joe LaBarbera in the last. I see Joe maybe once a year as he passes through. If it was he, I can tell him you've been beating them and making a noise.

Nope. Didn't work, Donna. I couldn't read it at all. love Lazz

That's great Rob - thanks. Gonna watch the other five parts later. I had only previously been aware of VDP as a lyricist until someone recently brought his name forward to me as an example of a good string orchstrator. I never knew he did that - apparntly I never knew he did lots of things. Very interesting guy.

Interview with Van Dyke Parks

Special prize for the 'Freud squad' (psychiatrists). I know I will steal that and use it.

Chronic multiphonics. Involves a huge amount of practice and constant consciousness and control. Hugh Fraser is my friend's name - does a lot of teaching now, too - as well as over here on the west coast, he flies regularly to stints in Eire and at the Royal Academy in London. The guy who discovered the technique and set the standard for it died 3 years ago. His name was Albert Mangelsdorff. He figured out that if you blow one note while singing another down the tube then, according to the interval between them, the laws of physics creates the third note. Through knowledge and manipulation of the over-tone series (apparently) it becomes possible to occasionally create a fourth note - unless it's my over-enthusiastic ears responsible for deception. Hugh and Albert are two of my favourites. In the UK it has to be Fayaz Virji and Paul Taylor, I reckon - though there are others. Most of the others I favour are dead though - such is life. Gary Valente is marvellous and still alive. And perhaps you are too young to have heard the great Scot, George Chisholm.

If your nephew persists then that's something hell have to get used to. It is well known, for instance, that the definition of an optimist is a trombone-player with a pager..... But, seriously, I have many favourite trombonists. It's a list almost as long as mine for guitarists in fact. A friend of mine once played me 'My Funny Valentine' - chordally - one a trombone, for example. Now just get that - one single trombone playing three and four note chords !! He's pretty damned good - and so was the geezer he learned the trick from.

Now, stop that, Joe. I've listened to your stuff and it just ain't true. (You self-deprecating auld sod)

Yadira sounds lovely. Beautiful name.

Boom boom.

Jazz doom ? WTF.