SD is one of the blog's earliest and most loyal supporters, so I made it a priority to unearth more Siravos from the cartons in my cavern of a basement. Here is the result of my search.
![]() |
| George Siravo |
The cover you see above is from the LP's original incarnation on RCA Victor's subsidiary Vik label. Recorded in July 1957, it probably came out later that year under the title "Swing Hi Swing Fi." A good example of hi-fi it was, too, with a wide range and good instrumental balance. My only niggle would be that because it is a multi-miked but single-channel recording, the musicians sometimes sound like they are standing on top of one another.
Stereo was supposed to address this phenomenon, and when it came along in a big way in 1958, people were astounded by what they heard. The tendency back then was for engineers to park some of the instrumentalists over on one side and some over on the other, with nothing in the middle, so as to emphasize that you were hearing two-channel sound, let there be no doubt about it.
So when RCA decided to put out a stereo version of the Siravo LP in 1959, that's exactly what it did - hole-in-the-middle stereo. Too bad the ham-handed engineer in charge used a 14th generation tape for a master and then added clumsy reverb to the whole thing, resulting in a sonic horror that does not do justice to the performances.
Since "hi-fi" was dated as a marketing gimmick and "stereo" in vogue, RCA renamed the mess "Siravo Swing Session" and issued it on its budget line, Camden, in the cover below. (You may think that's the same photo as on the mono release, but look closely and you will see it's from a different negative. I just wonder how the drummer managed to play his kit with the the pieces scattered all over the place.)
On to a few words about the music. Siravo reached way back for his repertoire choices, with all tunes composed in the first three decades of the century. I imagine some of this was impelled by royalty considerations, but the arranger did have a taste for the real oldies. His previous LP for Vik was music by Stephen Foster and his 19th century contemporaries.
Siravo of course updated the material, turning the "Twelfth Street Rag" into a rhumba, and using an R&B motif to intro "Margie." (I might note that he then turns that figure into a riff that is suspiciously similar to Kenyon Hopkins's famous theme from the film The Strange One, which came out a few months before "Swing Hi" was taped.) Otherwise, you will hear many echoes of Siravo's big-band background, including one arrangement that sounds a lot like a Benny Goodman recording with Charlie Christian that I can't place.
As usual I've included a run-down of personnel where known. Soloists are not noted, but my guess is you are hearing (among others) Buck Clayton on trumpet, Boomie Richman on tenor, Toots Mondello on alto, and Buddy Weed on piano. Terry Snyder is on vibes, and is probably also the xylophone player on "Twelfth Street Rag."
One final note: the title "Siravo Swing Session" predates "Sinatra's Swingin' Session!!!" by a few years. Somewhat ironic, since half of the Sinatra LP (arranged by the irreproachable Nelson Riddle) was a remake of the "Sing and Dance with Frank Sinatra" album that Siravo arranged for Columbia. That was probably not lost on Siravo, who by that time was on the outs with the Voice. (See this good article on the arranger.)




18 comments:
Links (Apple lossless):
Swing Hi Swing Fi (mono - Buster appoved!)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/593ra15o9w8f2rg
Siravo Swing Session (stereo - Buster says beware!)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/kld8e9x8zzb81nx
Thank you! He was one of Artie Shaw's chief arrangers in 1944-45, and I've always loved his work there, but never heard his own albums. Looking forward to it.
Enjoy, Grover!
a million thanks to you, Buster, for kindly posting more Siravo at my request. Based on the above, I am sure I also will prefer the mono version but I'm downloading both! thanks for the link to the Siravo article as well. He deserves to be more well known (I think I've said this before!)
Thank you! Can't get enough of Mr Siravo, one of the GREAT arrangers.
Hmm. So far I prefer Sweet Sue in Mono, But Cheerful Earful in Stereo. Am I nuts? Don't answer that too quick
Thanks for the rundown on the mono-stereo differences. I need both, of course, but I appreciate you going to all the trouble. And I certainly give a listen to anything on the Vik label, they released some great stuff at a fantastic pace during their brief existence. Thanks again!
Hi folks! Please help yourself to either the stereo or mono, and let your ears decide.
Doug, I would never call you nuts!
Ernie, I agree about Vik. Good quality label.
I have fond memories of the Vik label, also. If I'm not mistaken, it released both volumes of Maynard Ferguson's Birdland Dreamband. Then there was "X," another Victor subsidiary, which, if I remember correctly, was devoted to reissued of 20s and 30s jazz, lots of it dixieland. Is my memory accurately intact? Didn't know about "Sinatra's Swinging Sessions," except that the singer did everything he could to sabotage it. I thought his ire was directed at Capitol. But now I see where 'Ol Blue Eyes may have been aiming for a two-for-one special.
David - I think you are right, and I may actually have had one or two of those "X" issues here once upon a time, but I think they were blues reissues. There also was a subsidiary named Groove that specialized in R&B.
Also I think there was a Neal Hefti record that was on "X" for some reason.
Thanks for these new Siravo posts. A great musician indeed. You are right the mono version sounds more gathered, unified, not only technically but also musically speaking.
Thank you so much, Buster!
Siravo is great, either in mono or stereo!
Thanks, centuri and gpdlt.
Centuri - interesting point, and I agree. This demonstrates that our perceptions of the quality of the music and performances are highly dependent on the quality of the sound.
mono version is the winner! but both are very much appreciated! thanks again, Buster
Buster, you are a star. Thank you so much.
I was going for the stereo, but after reading your "hole in the middle" stereo explanation, I can see why the mono would be preferred. Thanks!
Thank you!
Post a Comment