-
... Chet Baker. Yesterday, I watched the Ethan Hawke film, Born To Be Blue, and it has me thinking about him. I know some of his stuff, but I haven't really studied it deeply. To me, he played very sparsely and often times seemed to be searching for a note rather than playing it with deep conviction. Maybe I am just hearing it this way because he liked to hang back on the beat a bit. That said, his tone has an airiness that I quite like. What is it that made him stand out from the pack way back when - other than not sounding like the Bop stars of the day? When I hear Chet, I always know it is him and I like what I hear, but I am not floored by it.
Maybe I don't understand his playing in the context of what his playing meant at the time...?
-
04-03-2018 10:53 AM
-
I like Chet's approach to the trumpet but I have also wondered how he broke out from the pack: did how he looked have something to do with it?
Originally Posted by artdecade
He is spare and that is a lot different than Dizzy and other bebop players. Also, Chet sings, but even here it is hard to classify. When I first heard his singing I believed it was a joke, but after a while it grew on me.
Oh well, Chet made some nice recordings with Doug Raney.
-
His singing is very much like his playing. Sparse.
-
I love his singing. Other people and I myself relate to his melancholy I think.
-
I find Chet's horn melancholy, but in a way that draws me in a bit. I find his singing to be a bit over the top, but that was him. IMHO his best stuff are things where he is paired with others, but I don't own everything that he released. Art Pepper, Jerry Mulligan, Stan Getz, Phillipe Catherine, etc.
-
How was the singing over the top? seems understated to me if anything
-
I am not disagreeing - I was just being brief. If there is such a thing as being over the top in an understated melancholy way I would say it was Chet Baker's singing. Just my opinion.
-
Everything Happens to Me is the song I first felt was a joke; I.e. just a throwaway recording using a song title that related to Chet's life. Here he doesn't really sing, but instead is mostly just talking in a melodic way. Originally Posted by joe2758
Vocals are like comics in that one's individuality can be what draws some people in and what turns others off.
Like I said, Chet's singing did grow on me and I did own the CD, Chet Sings.
-
Chet was a lot more than just melancholy sad boy. But that's what he gets painted as, I guess. He did do that well. When I hear people talk about that aspect only of Chet Baker's playing, I think "They haven't listened." You hear the same thing with Bill Evans, you hear people talk, you'd think everything he ever played was an Impressionistic ballad.
Chet could swing, play great bop lines too. Check out "Chet is Back," or the afformentioned records with Doug Raney and Philip Catherine. Chet's playing was very lyrical on ballads, but he could get knotty with the best of them on a medium up tune. Chet also had great tone, on trumpet or flugel.
I think people focus on the story way too much. The dude could play.
Check out:
Chet (Prestige records, with Bill Evans, Pepper Adams, etc) (This is mostly ballads, but damn)
Chet is Back (european group with Rene Thomas)
Chet's Choice (with Philip Catherine)
Diane (with Paul Bley)
Any of the records with Raney
Chet's playing on Jim Hall's Concierto is wonderful
She was Too Good To Me (early CTI offering, great swinging group)
The Last Great Concert (there's a My Funny Valentine for the Ages on here, but Chet also does All Blues and some Monk)
If you can hunt down his records with Wolfgang Lackerschmid, those are great too, as well as his ballads records with Enrico Pieranunzi
There's more too. But a listen to these will show his depth and breadth...
-
Good to see Chet is Back gets noticed. Chet with this European band, with Rene Thomas on guitar really swings.
I had one CD and the sound quality was poor, but I got another one and that one was OK.
-
That is why I mentioned that I think that his best stuff was when he played with others including his quintet/quartet/etc. He did play with others a lot, but when I hear him alone I can't help but think that he just fixed and he is focused on it. I may be imagining it since I have never fixed myself though. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
If you can invest the time to transcribe a few of his trumpet solos and analyze them you probably will understand.
I find his melodic sense/creativity outstanding, especially when considering the narrow harmonic boundaries which he limited himself to.
Never was fond of him as a singer though .....
-
I just like Chet’s sound and feel. Says more in one chorus and a few notes than many do.
-
I guess I am stuck on whether he limited himself or was simply limited. There were so many players coming up at that time and I'm unclear how Chet kept up in the discussions. That said, I will have to give these a listen and find out: Originally Posted by JazzNote
I've heard his much of his playing in ballad form so hopefully giving this other stuff a listen will help it all click. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
There you have your answer.... Originally Posted by artdecade
-
Originally Posted by joe2758
I sense that too. His looks mattered---he was a good looking young man and that never hurts. Also, when he was older and his face showed he'd traveled a hard road, there was still something almost romantic about it.
Attachment 52068Attachment 52069
But I listen to him because of the sound of the records. He was not a New York guy and his music had a much more open (aka cool, West Coast) quality. I love how his rhythm sections played. He made some great records. Records that aren't just about how hot the solo is.
I love everything about this track:
-
I always know Metheny when I hear him too, but I'm not really a big fan. Some players are distinctive in their sound and phrasing. That said, I understand why Metheny is so widely regarded even if I don't always care for his music. I am a bit more confused by Chet, because although he sounds nice, there doesn't appear to be much more there for me. Yet. Originally Posted by TOMMO
There you have your answer....
-
I don't think that he was limited, but he was a junkie. Of the musical junkies that I have followed his solo work and singing sounded more like a junkie playing and singing than his other work. There was still a draw in the solo work for me though. Art Pepper was a junkie, too, but his stuff sounded much different to me. All that said, I really need to refresh my listening. I have spent the last few months doing house renovation work in my spare time and am as crabby as Jimmy Bruno on his bad days. Originally Posted by artdecade
-
How is the movie, worth watching?
-
Chet's playing wasn't always at a super high level, but overall I count myself as a fan. A good chance to hear him playing pretty well and in great company is the album "Konitz Meets Mulligan" (or maybe it's the other way around).
Chet Sings would be one of my desert island albums though! Great playing by Chet on that album if you ask me, and Kenny Drew's piano playing is outstanding. Plus it's a nice chance to learn lyrics.
-
It was pretty good overall. Chet is a tough nut to crack, but Hawke does a good job of making him feel real if not exactly endearing. I don't know much about Chet overall but I do know that he was an unrepentant junkie and Hawke plays that angle as his vision. He is not portraying him for sympathy, but just wanted to show what Chet was like during this very specific period of his life - between everything crashing down around him and before his rebirth in Europe. It is an interesting story and probably worth 90 minutes of your time. Originally Posted by whiskey02
-
In the early to mid 50s, his breathy tone and relative sparseness are what made him stand out from the pack, which was dominated by people building on Dizzy Gillespie's virtuosity. Miles got there first, and was really the founder of that "cool" school. But Baker's looks and singing made him the commercial face of it (along with Stan Getz). Also, Baker played a lot of flugelhorn (especially the stuff from Europe in the 60s), so some of what you're hearing as fatness of tone may be that. Originally Posted by artdecade
John
-
In the movie, it seemed like Chet really wanted their (Miles and Dizzy) stamp of approval. The story starts and ends with Chet playing at Birdland. Has anyone done any reading up on Chet? Was this actually a driving factor for him? Originally Posted by John A.
-
I think Chet's music is elegant in its simplicity. There's a straightforwardness that is deceptive.
I will second that it took awhile for me to appreciate him, including his singing voice. The thing now is that I can think of NO OTHER WAY to sing and play certain songs: Let's Get Lost, My Funny Valentine, Time after Time.
Interesting point about the "junkie playing music." For some reason our knowledge of his history really colors the music more than other artists. If we didn't know his story, would the music sound different? Maybe...
As far as his career, unlike some of his contemporaries like Miles and Dizzy he didn't seem too interested in expanding his musical vocabulary much...seems somewhat frozen in time and style. Not that that's always a bad thing...late career Baker is still very good and much better than a lot of stuff out there.
As far as his reputation, I think the highest compliment must be the artists that wanted to work with him. We all respect Jim Hall, Stan Getz, Bill Evans, Philip Catherine, Doug Rainey...they saw something that he brought to the table that no other artist did. That is high praise indeed.
-
From what I’ve read, I think there is some truth in that. I think he felt a lot of pressure getting success very quickly, e.g. winning the Downbeat trumpet poll when guys he looked up to like Dizzy and Clifford Brown were placed behind him. I think some have suggested that the drugs thing could have started as a way of dealing with the nerves and pressure. Originally Posted by artdecade
Reply With Quote
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Today, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading