Post 542: HOW MANY MUSICIANS DOES IT TAKE TO FORM A JAZZ BAND?

How many musicians does it take to form a jazz band? I suppose you could get away with two: a clarinet and a banjo playing 'Rosetta' on a street corner would be just fine.

With four (say: sousaphone, banjo, clarinet and trumpet) you certainly have a band: you produce a full sound and can tackle a huge repertoire.

But of course, when most people think of a traditional jazz band, they picture six or seven musicians, with a 'front line' of three including a trombone and a 'rhythm section' of three or four, which may include a pianist and a drummer.

So is it possible to go above seven?

In theory, I would say 'No'. With greater numbers, there is a risk that the musicians will get in each other's way. What started as lovely music could become a din, especially if several of the instruments were using amplification.

So is it possible for a traditional jazz band to function with as many as ELEVEN players? Surely not.

Of course, in the case of bands playing from printed arrangements, there is no problem: the arranger has done the thinking and the musicians need only play what is on the stand in front of them. This is more akin to old-style dance band music and it is not the kind of traditional jazz to which I am referring.

I am more interested in bands where improvisation, teamwork and creativity are highly valued and nobody plays from printed music. 

Well, I can point you to an example where we see a traditional jazz band of ELEVEN musicians playing very well indeed.

How is this possible?

For a start, they are outstanding musicians, all respectful of each other's roles and of the overall sound. They are well directed - by a leader who gives neat and discreet signals, so that they all know who is taking the breaks and who is to take the next solo and when to go back to Part A. They are seated in such a way that everybody can see the leader's signals (very important). They make sure that all instruments can be heard. Note what discipline and restraint there is among the other players during the tuba solo chorus. Listen to the clarinet and saxophone and note how they never trespass on each other's notes. Importantly, nobody in the band is using amplification, so the overall acoustic effect is fine.

It is a performance filmed in Royal Street, New Orleans. We have to be deeply grateful to that indefatigable video-maker codenamed Wild Bill for being there to film the event for us. What we have is a group made up of some members of Tuba Skinny, with star guests sitting in. They are playing Shake it and Break It.

CLICK HERE TO SEE WHAT IS POSSIBLE, EVEN WITH ELEVEN PLAYERS.

Post 474: 'SHAKE IT AND BREAK' - SORTING OUT THE CONFUSION

You may have noticed that our jazz bands play two quite different tunes that are both called Shake It and Break It. This used to cause me confusion and I learn from correspondents that it has puzzled some of you too.

Although I may be wrong on some points, I will try to sort out the confusion by explaining what seems to have happened, as far as I can tell.

SHAKE IT AND BREAK IT  (1)

This tune was composed in 1920 by Lou Chiha (music) and H. Qualli Clark (lyrics). No, I did not make these names up!

It consists, after an Intro, of three strains of 16 bars each.

As played by our jazz bands, the first strain (normally played twice) seems to be in a minor key and involves some arpeggios being prettily run around. The second strain is in the related major key and its main characteristic is that it is a stuttering melody allowing for two two-bar breaks.  This is the strain used by most bands for the improvising of solo choruses.

The original words of the song suggest that it's about a 'new dance' in which the ladies 'shake' their taffeta dresses.

There is a terrific recording of the King Oliver Band playing what I have described so far. They play that first strain and then stick entirely on the second strain. Listen to the recording by clicking here.

Today's top band - Tuba Skinny - uses only the same two strains as King Oliver: CLICK HERE.

Many other bands (like Oliver's and Tuba Skinny) omit the third strain completely - finding quite enough to work on in the first two strains.

However, the tune and lyrics of the third strain dominate in blues singer Charlie Patton's recording entitled Shake It and Break It from 1929. So, although this has the same title, it sounds quite different from the King Oliver version. Charlie plays just this melody - not the two strains heard on the Oliver recording.

When the tune is played today by jazz bands, the third strain is sometimes added to the two previous strains and is played in the same key as the second strain and there is a vocal for this third strain only - a vocal that freely adapts the words of the original.

A reader has kindly sent me a photo-copy of Chiha and Clark's original printed music:

SHAKE IT AND BREAK IT (2)

This tune is often introduced by bands as Shake It and Break It; but it is actually Weary Blues, composed in 1915 by Gates, Matthews and Green. As you probably know, Weary Blues (which sounds anything but weary), has three strains. The first two are both 12-bar blues, usually played in F. The melodies are snappy and memorable.

Then there is a third strain, usually in Bb. This is exciting, with rapid riffs full of quavers, and a chord sequence on which musicians love to improvise. So this is the strain on which solo choruses are played.

Why do some bands announce this tune as Shake It and Break It? I am fairly sure it is because they fit words to that third strain. They are pretty well the same as those of the third strain in the 'official' Shake It and Break It ('Shake it! Break it! Hang it on the wall', etc). That, I think, is what has caused the confusion.

CLICK HERE for a performance of Weary Blues - played brilliantly by one of today's greatest bands and without the vocal - but under the title of Shake It and Break It.

For a performance of Weary Blues (correctly titled) but with the Shake it and Break It lyrics sung by Ben Polcer at  4 minutes 11 secs, click here.

====================
FOOTNOTE
The books Enjoying Traditional Jazz and Playing Traditional Jazz - both by Pops Coffee - are available from Amazon.

Post 190: TUNES WITH SIMILAR CONTENT

Shake It and Break It (the 1920 tune of that title by Qualli Clark and Chiha), That Da Da Strain (1922, Dowell and Medina) and Willie the Weeper (1920 Melrose, Bloom and Rymal, but probably taken from an earlier song) are examples of tunes that have a surprising amount in common, if you analyze their opening strains. There are plenty such groupings, I think, in the canon of traditional jazz tunes.

Here's Shake It and Break It.

And now consider That Da Da Strain.

Finally, here's Willie the Weeper.

All three tunes have a first theme that comprises sixteen bars in a minor key (the Verse, if you like) followed by 16 bars in the related major key (the Chorus).

Look at those first themes. All three tunes begin by tumbling down the arpeggio of the minor chord in a very similar way.

All three tunes make considerable use of the related 7th in those sixteen bars.

All three tunes use an 8 + 8 structure in those first 16 bars, with each 8 very similar to the other.

Even in the major key second strain, two of the three tunes open with the same V7 - V7 - I  -  I structure.

Footnote: I am very grateful to the correspondents who supplied me with these copies of the music.