R&B/R&R tone of the past and the present

Subtone Sam · 08-30-2003, 05:55 PM

I've been wondering about this sometimes: how would K.Curtis and other great R&B blowers of the 50' and 60's sound today?

R&B/R&R has changed considerably since 50's and 60's,volume levels have gone up and saxplayers need to compete with all the electronics on stage;no matter how well miked,monitoring seems to be always a problem.

I think it is safe to say that the BASIC sound (not miked/recorded) of the Curtis-era players was better than many of today's players.One reason for this is that they used darker mouthpieces (Berg 2 chamber,Links) those days and high baffle mouthpieces always have a problem of sounding thinner than lower baffles.But for todays volume and intensity levels,many R&B players choose high baffle mouthpieces because its easier to get that power needed out of them.But this sacrifices tone,in most cases anyway.

I think all R&B saxplayers want great acoustic tone AND the power needed for todays music,I know I do.But,as far as I know,even Curtis didn't get the "right" sound for his music always with just playing technique.Part of his sound was made in the studio with phase difference and slightly overdriving (tube) amp.This makes the tone brighter and more projective than it actually is.

Many R&B players today base their sound on Curtis' sound,on his RECORDED sound and end up sounding much brighter than Curtis must have sounded in real life and play through PA which thins the sound even more..so,sometimes it doesn't sound so good anymore,just harsh and thin.

So,it is basically about sacrificing tone for the power and cut.

Any thoughts?

saxduck · 08-31-2003, 11:33 PM

I can't comment on King Curtis' recorded vs. live sound. However, I have had the pleasure of speaking with with a famous contemporary of his (Boots) about exactly this thing. Randolph felt that NO ONE was keeping up with the 'sound' of modern Rock and Roll as far as tenor sax was concerned. He chose a horn and set-up that he felt would be capable of producing the edgy effects when he wanted that as well as the subtones when he felt that as well. (From your screen name, I infer that you should be a student of Randolph's in that he is the master of lower stack subtones, despite all the RnR he has done, you can't miss his amazing facility with the soft low notes.) Boots is a true gymnast on tenor as Benny Goodman was on clarinet.

I'm not sure what you're asking. Lots of people overblow trying to get power and volume. You don't do that in the recording studio normally.

michaelbaird · 12-26-2003, 09:41 AM

I heard Boot's Randolph back in 1987 at his club in Printer's Alley. He had a huge lush sound. Is he still playing? He has to be really old now.

Bill Mecca · 12-26-2003, 08:07 PM

Boots is still playin, in his 70's now.

http://www.bootsrandolph.com

HonkBopSax · 12-31-2003, 05:23 PM

I've always been more partial to Jr. Walker than King Curtis, mostly for his rhythmic sense, but I think that the bigger problem is that fewer groups are playing music that supports R&B sax. THere is the occasional swing band that will do some Tiny Bradshaw or Roy Milton jump charts, but for the most part, it seems to me that the ability to go out and play R&B sax is getting more and more scarce.

That being said, I think there are also more choices in terms of equipment - and greater precision in the making of the equipment. However, I've never heard anybody that sounded like Jr. Walker (with the possible exception of Lenny Pickett) or any of the great sax blasters of the past (with the exception of Sax Gordon). But even those two have taken so many elements and made them their own, so to my ears, they are doing something new.

For mouthpieces, I've always loved the Links. Takes a while to find a good one, but once you do, as Bob Shepard said, "It's the Mack truck of mouthpieces. It can do anything you can do." I've tried Dukoff's, Guardala's, etc looking for a brighter sound. I got it, too, but baffled mouthpieces never sound fuller or more personal than my Link.

Bill Mecca · 12-31-2003, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonkBopSax

I've always been more partial to Jr. Walker than King Curtis, mostly for his rhythmic sense, but I think that the bigger problem is that fewer groups are playing music that supports R&B sax.

Interesting. I'm just the opposite, while I love Jr's rhytmic sense and his choice of "tasty" notes, I prefer Curtis's tone, just sounds fuller and more robust. And as for the 2nd half of your statement, I wholeheartedly agree. And most local bands, jsut don't knwo how to use a sax. (these things go to 11)

HonkBopSax · 12-31-2003, 05:55 PM

Bill,

I've never known why, but I've just never been a big King Curtis fan. Not sure why - though I think one of my favorite tracks in history is his version of 'Let it Be'. Man, now that to me is some soulful playing!! The thing I dislike about Jr. Walker is that he does start to play and sound the same when I listen to his stuff for a while. Similar ideas, etc, but always impressive. I was listening to 'Satan's Blues' this AM and was liking his slow blues playing more than his more energetic stuff.

Another good album I just picked up is Hank Marr (B3) 'It's 'bout Time!' with Gene Walker on tenor. Whoo! I wish I'd heard of him earlier!

Gregg W. Jackson · 12-31-2003, 06:22 PM

Subtone Sam, who do you think defines the R&B/R&R sound today? In other words, who would we be comparing to King Curtis or Junior Walker?

It would be interesting to look at people who were playing R&B/R&R in the '50's and '60's and who are still playing today. Some players who come to mind are Plas Johnson, Jim Horn, and Gil Bernal. I'm sure that there are more.

Also, it would be interesting to hear from some of our participants, such as John Laughter and Steve Goodson.

Bill Mecca · 12-31-2003, 06:25 PM

Maybe you just haven't heard the right King 'Curtis stuff ;-)
I agree about Jr. that is one of my dislikes, it starts to sound the same, and there is a nasal quality that bothers me in his tone.

Have you heard KC do Fever? off and Old Gold album, which is now part of a CD with that album and another, the collection is Night Train. His tone at the start of that tune is just, right there.

Wonder what he would sound like today?

BTW did you ever find that videotape? ;-)

Happy New Year!

HonkBopSax · 12-31-2003, 06:31 PM

Not that the question was directed at me, but since I'm on, I'd like to take a stab at an answer about who defines the sound today. I think it's probably guys like Gordon Beadle, Greg Piccolo, John Feirrera, Doug James, Scotty Shetler, Gene Wise (Delbert McClinton's sax man) and Kaz Kazzanoff. To me, these guys have taken the music of the past, and done their own thing to it to make it personal.

**John Laughter** · 01-02-2004, 02:21 AM

Gregg, I will be glad to add a few thoughts for asap. Been on the run this weekend so give me some time! Interesting subject. It would be good to hear from Steve.

**John Laughter** · 01-03-2004, 04:25 AM

A few thoughts regarding Subtone’s question; was King Curtis’ sound better than today’s players? I have always thought of Curtis’ tone as being on the brighter side with some edge, especially on “Memphis Soul Stew” and “Soul Serenade.” Fine sound! I do not disagree with you at all Subtone. We are probably simply talking about “degrees” of darker vs. brighter which is all in the ear of the listener.

King Curtis vs. Ernie Watts, Marc Russo, Dave Koz, Clarence Clemons? Not so sure that there is a tremendous difference in tone between many of the players who have done a lot of session work.

In thinking back to the 50s/60s and viewing photos of the players in those days, it does appear that Bergs and Links were favored among some of the top R&B players and jazz players alike, as well as the rock players. However, I do not recall thinking about the “tone concept” that much or discussing it at the local music store. I simply listened to all sax sounds from Billy Vaughn to Lee Allen. But then I was only 15 or so at the time and as long as it was a sax playing the solo I did not care if it was rock, R&B or to a lesser degree, Lawrence Welk. My first m/p for rock was a metal Berg in 58 because it was “the thing” to play in a rock/R&B combo. I then went with the Links for several years then returned to a hard rubber Berg because I saw a photo of Curtis playing one. We were impressed by photos even in those days : )

I do not recall much discussion about baffles in those days. We did buy and trade used m/p’s that were supposed to be better because of some “internal reworking.” Some simply used stock m/p’s. However, in listening to Sil Austin’s “Slow Walk” and Grady Gaines’ solo on “Keep a Knockin’”, I hear a fair amount of edge which makes me believe that even though the high “baffle” may not have been popular on a wide spread basis, that some of the early players were experimenting with reworking the internal design of their m/p to get more projection, volume and tonal changes. Plas Johnson’s tone on "Pink Panther" is somewhat dark and sweet but he had edge on “Short Fat Fannie” by Larry Williams and Jesse Powell had a good edgy tone Darren’s “Splish Splash” which raises yet other questions; what did the recording studio do to the EQ to produce the edge or darken the tone. What type of mic was used, etc. Or, did Plas and the other artists go into a session with a different setup or did they, as many pros do, change the embouchure and airflow to produce more edge or warmth for a particular session to enhance the style? On the other hand, Gene Barge’s tone on all of the hit records by Gary “U.S.” Bonds’ was, to my ear, a much darker tone than his counterparts. Ronnie Wakefield’s tenor solo on “Shop Around” by the Miracles was a darker tone. On the other hand, although not R&B, “So Rare” by Jimmy Dorsey was full of edge! And what about Earl Bostic’s screaming alto! Jr. Walker has, to my ear, a little thinner/brighter tone than some of his contemporaries. His tone reminds me of a small tip opening and hard reed. Not bad at all, just different. I believe that is what Bill is referring to. Outstanding sax player and I really like his music, especially “What Does It Take.”

In listening to these recordings I find that the R&B musicians and rock & rollers offered a wide range of tones in the Top 40 area in the 50s and 60s. That may not have been the case with the jazz and R&B that these same musicians played in the clubs and concert halls.

The 50s/60s players appear to have used plastic, hard rubber and metal m/p’s. Lee Allen used a plastic Brillhardt and plastic reed but did not have what I would call a dark or bright tone. He was somewhere in the middle as was Chuck Rio of the Champs on “Tequila” using a plastic or hard rubber m/p. Most of the Motown tenors had a darker tone. Charlie Chalmers had a real bright tone on “Land of 1000 Dances” by Wilson Picket. Is it that bright in real life? I have no clue. Was it his mic or the sound engineer’s EQ preference?

I recall hearing about some players having the m/p worked on and opened up to get a bigger tone but, as you have pointed out, very few players were concerned about battling with a guitar on stage. We did learn that a metal m/p would help to “produce a rock/R&B sound” but the young players usually never questioned why or how it worked. The idea of a baffle, at least in my memory, did not occur until the late 60s when all of the heavy guitar work became popular along with (acid rock).

Would Curtis be able to fit into the pop music world of today? I believe so and agree with Boots’ remark that most people, both players and the audience, are not that critical about tone provided that it is not grating on their nerves or parting hair due to volume. I believe that Curtis would have adjusted his tone to play on modern day recordings and that he would probably have stayed up with trends in the recording industry in order to survive and make a living. I also believe that he would be able to use the same tone he used with the Coasters and Aretha and would have stayed booked . As for concerts and today’s electric volume, it would just a matter of turning the mic up on the solos.

On the other hand, some of the older players would have fallen from favor due to their technique and approach to playing modern styles. Some would have gone with the flow and changed with the tide and survived while others would fight the new styles and play less and less as time goes by.

I have a lot of appreciation for Jr. Walker, King Curtis, Lee Allen, Randolph and all of the players from all sides of the sax music scene because they helped to make the instrument popular which has helped many of us stay employed through the years. As for likes and dislikes for particular tones/players, I tend to go with a given hit record that they have recorded rather than a given player. Some of my favorite past players have not always done so well, in my opinion, on their own LP as they did on the hit record sessions for others.

At any rate, sax tones in today’s R&B and pop music are extremely versatile, and, to my ears, have been varied for many years. There is no longer a “typical rock/R&B tone.” Some are warm and dark such as “True” by Steve Norman of Spandau Ballet or “I’ve Had The Time of My Life” from the movie Dirty Dancing and some have a forceful edge like Glenn Frey’s “Livin’ Right” with Bill Bergman. One with extreme edge is the alto solo on “Hands to Heaven” by Breathe. So I feel that most of the old players would have fit in well as long as they did not have a tone and technique that might be considered “dated” to the recording engineer. I also believe that “some” the old players would have changed m/p’s in time to stay with current trends. Who knows for sure?

As for the sax becoming scarce in your local R&B/rock bands, I agree. Beach bands (shag music) on the east coast still use a horn section. The two bands that I work with have horn sections and will continue to use 3- 4 horns as long as the wedding/private party market will support the numbers. Not so in the club scene. Guitars, keyboard and drums are the norm for financial reasons.

And most local public high school and college band programs do not usually encourage students to join a local rock or blues band. Many of the teachers still put down “pop music” in general so the student graduates with little or no practical stage band or dance combo experience only to sell the horn after it remains in the attic for a few years. Many of us had joined a garage band in the late 50s/60s in our teenage years. Very rare these days to see a young horn player in a local rock/blues band with the exception of a trendy swing band as HonkBopSax indicated.

The whole issue of old Berg/Link chambers vs. the newer $300-$500 m/p’s with special baffles and designs will continue on into the future. Just a matter of personal choice, or in some cases, your wallet! Actually I think that it is good that we have more choices although it must get confusing at times to many sax players.

Gregg mentioned Jim Horn who is one of the few survivors who still records the Top 40 hits, the most recent being “Got My Mind Set On You” by George Harrison and possibly (unconfirmed) the Brooks and Dunn’s hit “You Can't Take The Honky Tonk Out Of The
Girl.” Not sure what Jim plays today. Photos show what appears to be the hard rubber Berg. Great tenor tone.

Again, just a few random thoughts for what it is worth.

JL · 01-03-2004, 04:53 AM

All interesting thoughts, John. On the bright vs. dark sound thing, to those who mostly play through a mike (most R&B/Blues players) I'd suggest not going overly bright when selecting a mpc. The reason I say this is that most sound systems will brighten your tone. I ran into this the other night on a gig. Even though I told the sound guy to roll back the highs, he obviously didn't do it. When I started playing my tone was so bright and screechy that I just moved away from the mike until the tune was over and I could get word to him to cut back those highs. Once he fixed it, things were much better, but it was still brighter than my normal tone.

Volume and a full-bodied tone is another thing. I like to have a big bold sound (and not rely too much on a mike for that), but not overly bright. The whole microphone/sound system thing is a real adventure!

**John Laughter** · 01-03-2004, 03:29 PM

JL, so true about the mic/sound system thing. Ongoing battle. Every gig has its little ups and downs on the P.A. That is why I really like having control of my own EQ and volume knob when possible!

JL · 01-03-2004, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Laughter

....I really like having control of my own EQ and volume knob when possible!

Yeah, on gigs where we bring our own sound system, there is no problem. But when relying on others, it becomes an issue. Occasionally, in small clubs when I play with just one guitar, bass, & drums, I can get away with no microphone. I really like this situation---obviously can't take advantage of any special electronic enhancement, but at least I know I'm getting my real sound out there.

Carter · 01-15-2004, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Laughter

Gregg mentioned Jim Horn who is one of the few survivors who still records the Top 40 hits, the most recent being “Got My Mind Set On You” by George Harrison and possibly (unconfirmed) the Brooks and Dunn’s hit “You Can't Take The Honky Tonk Out Of The
Girl.” Not sure what Jim plays today. Photos show what appears to be the hard rubber Berg. Great tenor tone.

John, my kids were watching some sort of awards show on TV the other night, when Brooks & Dunn came on to play the song you mention. I had never heard it. The song was played live, and unless Jim Horn is a hot-looking blonde with a tight black dress and boots to match, he wasn't playing the sax part that night!

I actually felt sorry for the sax player; her part was weak, hard to hear, and a little flat. Given the set-up for a "one off" like that, I'll bet she couldn't hear a thing.

**John Laughter** · 01-15-2004, 05:04 AM

Carter, when I first heard the song I did a little research to find out who played the solo to add the name to the book. I received an email about an ad for a female to appear in the video. It was an audition ad in L.A. The company wanted an attractive female who could "look like she was playing the sax." I later found the name but do not recall it at this time. The same lady also toured with Rod Stewart so she would have to be a fairly strong player.

I posted the question on various message boards and sent an email to the B&D web site. No response from B&D but we did get the following;

YOU CAN’T TAKE THE COUNTRY OUT OF THE GIRL- ? TENOR
BROOKS & DUNN-CD credits (horns); Jeff Coffin, Jim Horn, Steve Patrick and Samuel Levine.

So, it appears that they are using an attractive lady for the live concert and video but may not have used her in the session. I say that with caution because I simply do not know.

It is not the first time that beauty has taken the place of the session sax player. "The Heat Is On" video used a fine looking lady but she did not play the solo on the session.

So the question continues....who played the solo on the session?

**John Laughter** · 01-15-2004, 08:57 AM

Carter, I am told the Katja Rieckermann is the lady on the B&D video, however, she is not listed on the CD credits;

http://experts.about.com/q/608/2039698.htm

http://www.lincolnadler.com/PressKit/latimes2.html

http://www.mucker-treff.de/html/7__preisfrage.html

Not sure if she was the female that your children saw on the awards show.

Carter · 01-17-2004, 04:34 PM

John,

Judging from the picture, that's the lady who played the awards show. My comments above were probably understated. Her part was pretty awful, but since she appears to be a legitimate pro, my guess as to the source of her problems might be accurate.

It's easy to be disappointed by a live performance in a setting such as an awards show. Many times you see a singer you admire really lay some clams due to the poor mix and ineffective monitors. My guess is that Katja was in the same boat, and could hear for anything. Although she had a bell mounted clip mic, I didn't notice an in-ear monitor.

That being said, I would wager the only place the quality of the performance has been discussed is right here on this forum. I noticed another thread on the subjuct in misc. discussion. Katja is quite attractive, and 95% of fans probably only wanted to know who the hot blonde in the miniskirt was.

**John Laughter** · 01-17-2004, 06:51 PM

Carter, you are so right about live performances. It can be a hit and miss situation, even with pro sound people. I have played in concerts with a lot of "oldie" acts and I have found one thing that is a let down over the years. Most sound people simply do not know what to do with horns and they can be given a set list which points to the songs that have a "sax solo" and 9 out of 10 times the volume finally gets turned up when you are playing the last few notes. I now play these concerts with no expectations and simply have another Coors lite and make the best of it

I saw a David Sanborn concert in Atlanta which started with an excellent balance. The last hour however sounded like a bass solo. Not sure why they allowed that to happen. I went to see Jay Davidson with Cinderella and Jay may as well not been on stage. He could not be heard over the guitar volume.

It is no secret that good looks; both male and female help to sell records and promote bands in the area of "pop music." Today's country music sure has some nice looking talented ladies; Shania, Faith, Martina and many more!

Quote:

My guess is that Katja was in the same boat, and could hear for anything.

I am sure that she is used to by now! Anyone who spends any time at the mercy of sound people get use to it over the years. Hopefully she will get a chance to show what she can do in a good situation on T.V. in the future.