Variations in fake books and recordings

[John A.]

The original real book chart for ATTYA isn't too bad actually.

OTOH with other RB tunes, I've effectively had to relearn them later on. The current real book is a lot more accurate.



It certainly is. (Or you could listen to Undercurrents.)

Without wanting to digress too much, I think the main issue on the straightahead jazz front with piano and guitar comping mud is actually primarily acoustic and role oriented, not harmonic. If you are both comping with typical bebop comping rhythms that are slightly different with a similar sound (usually a bassy sustaining sound on guitar) the result is a mess. Unless you are going for a more modern approach to comping, the actual nature of the harmony might not be that problematic. A lot of comping is 'finding the space' anyway. Having another free comper complicates that.

So obviously, post Jim Hall, the guitar took on a far more pianistic role in the ensemble, something we today take as a basic fact. In fact guitar had been playing alongside piano for decades, but the role demarcation in the 40s/50s piano/guitar/bass trio was very specific with the guitar effectively changing between the role of a drummer and a horn and the piano being well, a piano, but often being careful about that left hand (although of course many of those pianists grew up in the stride and boogie-woogie era.)

Between them Evans and Hall on their own kind of made that playing semi-obsolete, but I feel undercurrents actually offers a modern take on that tradition, with Hall's modernist rhythm guitar playing being one of the more fascinating 'roads less traveled by' in guitar comping. OTOH Evans knew how to accommodate guitar, clearly.

So the old school trio can seem a bit written out of jazz history. But some of the biggest trios in jazz were guitar, piano, bass including Jim's own first record of course. And if pianists aren't used to playing with guitar, they are also going to struggle of course. If their basic comping reference point is, say, Evans, Jarrett or Herbie (as is the case for many players), and they've not spent time with earlier styles of piano playing, the guitar is surely an obstacle. They aren't going to want you doing the straight four thing either, that's for sure haha. (TBF I sometimes feel the same way - I sometimes like to comp in a more modern way.)

But for a typical Sunday jazz gig with a pianist with a more straightahead approach if you get the acoustics right (so the guitar is sufficiently tonally different from the instrument it's comping for) the harmonic side of it less a problem than can be supposed.

Ah well I totally failed not to degree there haha. Sorry.

A couple of counter-points ...

Ahmad Jamal/Ray Crawford is kind of a precedent to that Hall/Evans Undercurrent relationship. Also, the way Evans and Hall worked out how to play together is actually quite different from the way they did it in a full group -- Interplay is a lot more like the traditional guitar/piano relationship. There, they take turns comping, or Hall plays rhythm guitar while Evans comps. There are also plenty of examples of guitars playing "pianistically" before that point (e.g., Tal Farlow, Johnny Smith). I think it's more that Hall established a direction for piano-less groups.

As far as the issue of mud goes, if they're both comping together behind another soloist, there's definitely also an issue of harmonic mud (and eating up all the notes the soloist wants to play). And god forbid there's a vibes player, too.

[ragman1]

Personally I just grab the first one I can find - Google's quite good - and check out the changes on backing tracks, real books, etc. If it looks as though as there's a 'standard' version that gets used I play that. It really isn't worth having a nervous breakdown about. You can always change it later.

In any case, the idea is to play the damn thing, not waste time searching out the 'perfect version'. Who cares?

[AllanAllen]

I'd love to have that info so I could find the recordings. Sadly, none of the 39 I have as pdfs or the 6 loose leaf and spiral bound volumes I bought between '59 and '64 contains any such reference. If you could let us know which specific books have that info, I (and others, I'm sure) will go out and find them. Here's my pdf fakebook collection:

Attachment 107073


When I was a kid, I recorded late night jazz shows from the radio to my father's Webster-Chicago wire recorder. I listened to / recorded / learned from Ed Beech, Symphony Sid, Oscar Treadwell etc. We had a 75' tall antenna tower behind the house for my father's Stromberg-Carlson "hifi" console with a multiband radio. At night I could get New York, Chicago, and even the west coast when the heavens permitted. Even during the day, i could catch some distant jazz shows with a little luck and a sunspot or two.

First edition of The Real Book Vol 2 has it on some songs. The second edition doesn't have suggestions. Of course, there is the lead sheet OP posted too that has it. Not sure if that's from an earlier version of RB, I thought the RB had the Parker/Gillespie intro on it.

[Reg]

I'd love to have that info so I could find the recordings. Sadly, none of the 39 I have as pdfs or the 6 loose leaf and spiral bound volumes I bought between '59 and '64 contains any such reference. If you could let us know which specific books have that info, I (and others, I'm sure) will go out and find them. Here's my pdf fakebook collection:

Attachment 107073


When I was a kid, I recorded late night jazz shows from the radio to my father's Webster-Chicago wire recorder. I listened to / recorded / learned from Ed Beech, Symphony Sid, Oscar Treadwell etc. We had a 75' tall antenna tower behind the house for my father's Stromberg-Carlson "hifi" console with a multiband radio. At night I could get New York, Chicago, and even the west coast when the heavens permitted. Even during the day, i could catch some distant jazz shows with a little luck and a sunspot or two.

Nice collection... I have too many also... Sometimes you need to do a little work from year and publisher etc. Most of Sher Publications are good, Real Books, Worlds Greatest, European Real, All-Jazz as well as the Hal Leonard books... Just Jazz from early 70's...there are many...

I still have the early version of Real Book, before was called real Book...Lots of different tunes etc... but, all the tunes actually listed recording... lead sheet was from. I know I did for all my transcriptions while at Berklee.

Again... your old like me... we know most of the versions etc...You host a local Jazz Jam I think... I've also hosted a few Jazz jams... for a few decades, mainly because I had the music and could direct etc... anyway... I use to have different sessions have different themes... artist, leaders, labels, styles etc... which obviously help creates a lot of different arrangements of same tunes... which help young, (and old) players become aware etc...
The Theme thing was really fun and very popular....

[RLetson]

FWIW, the "Classic Real Book" PDFs I have often list the source recordings. These are, I suspect, scans of the original, illegal, under-the-counter RBs, hand-written (in various hands)--they certainly look exactly like the hard-copy volumes I saw years ago. Despite the availability of corrected legal volumes, these files seem to remain widely used.

Interestingly, the legal, typeset New Real Books I've seen often include a parentetical "as played/sung by" notation under the composer credit, though without indicating a specific recording.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

It really isn't worth having a nervous breakdown about. You can always change it later.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

your old like me

Old??? We're barely broken in, just like our books.......

[Christian Miller]

A couple of counter-points ...

I don’t see them as counter to what I’m saying, more as additional context…

Ahmad Jamal/Ray Crawford is kind of a precedent to that Hall/Evans Undercurrent relationship.

I feel Evans took a lot from Jamal generally.

Also, the way Evans and Hall worked out how to play together is actually quite different from the way they did it in a full group -- Interplay is a lot more like the traditional guitar/piano relationship. There, they take turns comping, or Hall plays rhythm guitar while Hall comps.

There are also plenty of examples of guitars playing "pianistically" before that point (e.g., Tal Farlow, Johnny Smith). I think it's more that Hall established a direction for piano-less groups.

Exactly - sorry if my wording wasn’t clear.

As far as the issue of mud goes, if they're both comping together behind another soloist, there's definitely also an issue of harmonic mud (and eating up all the notes the soloist wants to play). And god forbid there's a vibes player, too.

I honestly don’t think the harmony thing is the central issue. People do sort of see everything through the harmonic lens, you can find plenty of harmonic ‘clashes’ on record between horn players and pianists. They seem less acute because the pianist is staying out of the way or because the horn player simply overwhelms the acoustic piano.

The problem as I see it with piano and guitar is they have a similar sort of sound and inhabit a similar register and dynamic. The same with two guitars. Tbh when comping for guitar I avoid extensions altogether - but that’s more a registral thing, the extensions in common grips tend to go exactly where the guitarist is playing their solo. If I play an E on the B string and the comping guitarist is playing a standard Cmaj9 grip, it’s going to be a register issue with that whole tone, even though they agree in terms of chord scale theory or whatever. (This gets boiled down to a science with melodic triad/quadrad theory btw.)

This really is something that bugs me haha. I try to be the comper I would want to play with and stay out of the way for my part… or at least listen carefully to what the soloist is doing and shape my playing appropriately.

OTOH when I’m comping for a horn it matters far less.

Clashes can always be legitimised by resolution in any case. Paying close attention to ensemble is key. It’s a practical issue rather than a theoretical one. It would still sound awkward if everyone agreed in advance exactly what extensions to play. You would still get awkward rhythmic clashes and issues with register. You can solve register issues dynamically, or through tone colour too. Turning down the guitar and hitting a little harder (to reduce sustain and bass as much as volume) is one way. Playing a predictable rhythmic pattern is a way to solve the rhythm issue.

(as of course is sitting out lol).

Jim switching to rhythm and walking the chords is a case in point.

[Bop Head]

Looks like the Million Dollar Library.

[rpjazzguitar]

If the thread is morphing to guitar and piano issues, I'd like to start by listing a few ways of creating problems.

1. Chords simply clash. Eg, in an extended ii V thing one instrument plays a few of them up a half step. Cool if you both do it, or neither, but very uncool if one does it.

2. Chords don't clash that severely, but you're in the same register and/or the tonality is too similar. This is the sort of thing that happens when the guitarist is using typical grips on E D G B strings and the pianist is in the same register with his left hand. Then you can get situations where one is playing Cmaj9 and the other is playing C6 and things get pretty dense. And that's before we think about the bassist and the soloist. A pet peeve of mine is hearing guitarists with treble rolled off simply creating mud in that register.

3. Rhythms don't work together. According to one well known Brazilian guitarist, it's possible to have four chord instruments work well together. But, if you have four chord instruments, it's probably a lot easier to make mud than art. For two chord instruments to work, it seems to me, that at least one of them needs to be doing something predictable. For example, if the pianist is doing what I call "stick and jab" comping, the guitarist can't do that too. In an older swing tune, the guitarist may be able to go Freddie Green (which is a whole other thread on how to do that). Or, the guitar can play pushed half or whole notes, or find a way to ornament over the stick and jab. If, OTOH, the piano is predictable and not too busy, the guitarist has a lot more freedom.

The key issue is that the band as a whole needs to sound better with you than without you and you have to be insightful in making that determination.

One simple way to avoid the piano/guitar clash is not to have a horn or other lead instrument. That reduces the amount of time that piano and guitar will be comping together -- and what's left is the bass solo where everybody tends to be quieter and sparser than the bassist actually wants. As soon as you add a lead instrument, the battle between piano and guitar may begin.

A strong enough comping guitarist may be able to play in such a driving jazz style that the pianist will have to find his way around it.

Overall, the point is that several planets have to line up for it to work.

[AaronMColeman]

If the thread is morphing to guitar and piano issues, I'd like to start by listing a few ways of creating problems.

1. Chords simply clash. Eg, in an extended ii V thing one instrument plays a few of them up a half step. Cool if you both do it, or neither, but very uncool if one does it.

2. Chords don't clash that severely, but you're in the same register and/or the tonality is too similar. This is the sort of thing that happens when the guitarist is using typical grips on E D G B strings and the pianist is in the same register with his left hand. Then you can get situations where one is playing Cmaj9 and the other is playing C6 and things get pretty dense. And that's before we think about the bassist and the soloist. A pet peeve of mine is hearing guitarists with treble rolled off simply creating mud in that register.

3. Rhythms don't work together. According to one well known Brazilian guitarist, it's possible to have four chord instruments work well together. But, if you have four chord instruments, it's probably a lot easier to make mud than art. For two chord instruments to work, it seems to me, that at least one of them needs to be doing something predictable. For example, if the pianist is doing what I call "stick and jab" comping, the guitarist can't do that too. In an older swing tune, the guitarist may be able to go Freddie Green (which is a whole other thread on how to do that). Or, the guitar can play pushed half or whole notes, or find a way to ornament over the stick and jab. If, OTOH, the piano is predictable and not too busy, the guitarist has a lot more freedom.

The key issue is that the band as a whole needs to sound better with you than without you and you have to be insightful in making that determination.

One simple way to avoid the piano/guitar clash is not to have a horn or other lead instrument. That reduces the amount of time that piano and guitar will be comping together -- and what's left is the bass solo where everybody tends to be quieter and sparser than the bassist actually wants. As soon as you add a lead instrument, the battle between piano and guitar may begin.

A strong enough comping guitarist may be able to play in such a driving jazz style that the pianist will have to find his way around it.

Overall, the point is that several planets have to line up for it to work.

Most of the time it sounds better to just let one or the other comp. Only problem with this is the piano will 95% of the time just assume it's the comping instrument and the guitar becomes another horn. But Ideally I think it's better to have just one instrument comp at a time...95% of the time that sounds better anyway.

As for the OP, I'm a beginner struggling with this. Learning common subs has helped a lot. But the thing that makes the most sense to me is just looking at the notes in the chords and what the chord is doing in that part of the tune. Most of the time looking at the chord's roll in the tune helps me figure out why there are 87 different variations!

Last thing (and maybe this is very elementary) but most differences I see are usually either diminished chords in different inversions and end up being the same chord, or a ii V with just the ii or just the V or both, or a sub for the ii or the V or both. This accounts for most of the variations I see. And it takes time but eventually you see all of this in real time. I'm not there yet but I'm starting to see the reason for most of the differences in lead sheets.

[mr. beaumont]

I'm happy to let the piano comp. Lets me do some little things, chord stabs, inside string punches, CC style "riffs," stuff I don't necessarily get to do if I'm the only harmonic instrument.

[RLetson]

I think I may have mentioned this before, so apologies if I have: Some years ago, I recall one of my workshop teachers remark on what a pleasure it was to play in an ensemble with Robert Redd because he made room for the guitar. Interesting, I thought, because a playing partner used to grouse about playing in bands where the keyboardist didn't make that kind of room.

When I started sitting in (as guest rhythm guitar) with a well-established group whose guitarist/leader generally operated in horn-like boppish mode, I came to understand how little space there can be for a non-horn-like guitarist when there's a strong keyboardist who's also used to being the primary ensemble glue. (Also how irrelevant swing-rhythm playing can be in such a context.) The experience has cast a "now I get it" light on my understanding of the history of jazz and its various post-WW2 branchings. Also on the wisdom of playing-where-they-ain't and of knowing when to sit out altogether. They call "Oleo" and my status reverts to audience.

[Christian Miller]

If the thread is morphing to guitar and piano issues, I'd like to start by listing a few ways of creating problems.

1. Chords simply clash. Eg, in an extended ii V thing one instrument plays a few of them up a half step. Cool if you both do it, or neither, but very uncool if one does it.

2. Chords don't clash that severely, but you're in the same register and/or the tonality is too similar. This is the sort of thing that happens when the guitarist is using typical grips on E D G B strings and the pianist is in the same register with his left hand. Then you can get situations where one is playing Cmaj9 and the other is playing C6 and things get pretty dense. And that's before we think about the bassist and the soloist. A pet peeve of mine is hearing guitarists with treble rolled off simply creating mud in that register.

3. Rhythms don't work together. According to one well known Brazilian guitarist, it's possible to have four chord instruments work well together. But, if you have four chord instruments, it's probably a lot easier to make mud than art. For two chord instruments to work, it seems to me, that at least one of them needs to be doing something predictable. For example, if the pianist is doing what I call "stick and jab" comping, the guitarist can't do that too. In an older swing tune, the guitarist may be able to go Freddie Green (which is a whole other thread on how to do that). Or, the guitar can play pushed half or whole notes, or find a way to ornament over the stick and jab. If, OTOH, the piano is predictable and not too busy, the guitarist has a lot more freedom.

Brazilian music is more comparable to swing or early jazz that modern jazz in this respect. People know a clear cavico or guitar pattern and the piano can play lightly. Same as any groove rhythm section in a way.

I would be comfortable playing in a group like that.

otoh in swing, having, say, three guitars and a banjo strumming away with a stride pianist is a lot of fun!

It’s when people are improvising and responding to a soloist it gets messy.

Amplification changes things as well.

The key issue is that the band as a whole needs to sound better with you than without you and you have to be insightful in making that determination.

One simple way to avoid the piano/guitar clash is not to have a horn or other lead instrument. That reduces the amount of time that piano and guitar will be comping together -- and what's left is the bass solo where everybody tends to be quieter and sparser than the bassist actually wants. As soon as you add a lead instrument, the battle between piano and guitar may begin.

A strong enough comping guitarist may be able to play in such a driving jazz style that the pianist will have to find his way around it.

Overall, the point is that several planets have to line up for it to work.

This is a huge problem for jazz workshops tbh, there’s usually about 10 chordal instruments lined up it seems, all of whom would benefit from doing a bit of comping but all of whom are still learning the ropes.

the main place it comes up in for me is big bands and jams. On gigs I’m booked either as the sole chording instrument or rarely, frontline.

(I sometimes do a dual guitar Manouche style set up as well, but that’s fine as it’s rhythm stuff.)

I don’t really play jams much any more.

Tbh the onus is usually on the guitar player to make space for the piano. The parameters of what you then do, or don’t do is dependent on how the pianist plays. For trad big band, playing rhythm is the obvious default but it’s not the way for every chart… anyway we’ve talked about this elsewhere.

[Christian Miller]

It also should be understood that there are some VERY capable pianists who also seem to have no idea how to comp for guitar, and others who do it brilliantly .

It’s really interesting.

[John A.]

It also should be understood that there are some VERY capable pianists who also seem to have no idea how to comp for guitar, and others who do it brilliantly .

It’s really interesting.

Yup, yup, and yup.

[Reg]

Yea... I don't have problems working with Pianist... even new players. I actually talk with them and make quick verbal performance arrangements. And discuss how we want to work together with the rest of the rhythm section, Harmonic styles etc... it usually only takes a few minutes to hear our styles. Usually one blankets and the other accents. They're both fun styles to comp.

here's a Tune wrote a long time ago... we were pretty good at working together,

[robbro@coastwifi.com]

when an art form like jazz has been around for a hundred years or more it is subject to the folk process

[ragman1]

Exactly, but I don't think various versions is the real problem. The problem here is the confusion it creates in the player's mind. Which one to play? More choices = more confusion!

[Christian Miller]

The more you learn the more you know, and the better your ears get so those decisions are not problematic.

[mr. beaumont]

The more you learn the more you know, and the better your ears get so those decisions are not problematic.

Or at least you get to know the parts everybody gets squirrelly with and lay out and listen the first time through

[John A.]

Exactly, but I don't think various versions is the real problem. The problem here is the confusion it creates in the player's mind. Which one to play? More choices = more confusion!

I think this whole issue is a bit overblown. In a large majority of cases, the RB changes are consistent across editions, with other sources, and with what non-RB’ers people play. The exceptions are managed by discussion. You get the occasional train wreck at open jams where people don’t talk before starting a tune. But it’s not like this is a constant problem making it impossible to play.

[ragman1]

I think this whole issue is a bit overblown.

Absolutely, that's the whole point. Just get on with it!

[rpjazzguitar]

One thing that some kb+guitar groups do which I don't like is having one lay out while the other comps.

I find the transitions jarring. I just don't like the way it sounds.

I think it may be necessary for students, but shouldn't be needed for pros.

In Brazilian or other groove based music, it makes it easier to define two roles. I'll call them pulse and ornamentation. And, the piano and guitar can trade them off. The pulse needs to be reasonably predictable so that the ornamenter can figure out something that will contribute without conflict. You will hear a sophisticated version of this on, for example, Chico Pinheiro's recordings with Fabio Torres on keys. Guitar often drives the band while the keyboard ornaments.

Perhaps you could think of Freddie Green as the pulse guy and Basie as the ornamenter.

Funk may be a little different (I don't claim expertise in this area). Multiple instruments may all pulse, sparsely, and fitting together like a puzzle.

[John A.]

One thing that some kb+guitar groups do which I don't like is having one lay out while the other comps.

I find the transitions jarring. I just don't like the way it sounds.

I think it may be necessary for students, but shouldn't be needed for pros.

In Brazilian or other groove based music, it makes it easier to define two roles. I'll call them pulse and ornamentation. And, the piano and guitar can trade them off. The pulse needs to be reasonably predictable so that the ornamenter can figure out something that will contribute without conflict. You will hear a sophisticated version of this on, for example, Chico Pinheiro's recordings with Fabio Torres on keys. Guitar often drives the band while the keyboard ornaments.

Perhaps you could think of Freddie Green as the pulse guy and Basie as the ornamenter.

Funk may be a little different (I don't claim expertise in this area). Multiple instruments may all pulse, sparsely, and fitting together like a puzzle.

The pulse vs ornamenter distinction makes sense on Latin tunes (especially bossa nova, where the guitar is the pulse), but maybe less so on typical swingtime standards, where harmony instruments might not be "pulsing" as explicitly. The way I see that, the potential variations are:

1. piano comps, guitar lays out when not soloing
2. guitar comps, piano lays out when not soloing
3. piano comps, guitar plays 4x4 rhythm guitar
4. piano is the prime comper, guitar ornaments
5. guitar is the prime comper , piano ornaments
6. nobody comps.
7. guitar piano actively comp simultaneously


It seems to me that the most musical approach is to mix it up with all of the above over the course of a set. Sometimes switching off between roles within a tune, sometimes a tune at a time. A good way to keep the transition between two compers from being jarring within a tune is to wait for when a new soloist takes over and to have nobody comp for the first 4-8 bars, then the new prime comper comes in.