Tunes published in 1928 will be entering public domain in 2024

 As of January 1, 2024, U.S. copyright will expire for works published in 1928, including the following songs:

Back in Your Own Backyard (Jolson, Rose, Dreyer)

Basin Street Blues (Williams)
The Big Rock Candy Mountain (trad., copyright 1928 by McClintock)
Crazy Rhythm (Caesar, Meyer, Kahn)

Hooray for Captain Spaulding (Kalmar) (Groucho Marx theme song)

How Long, How Long Blues (Carr)

I Can't Give You Anything But Love, Baby (Fields, McHugh)

I Must Have that Man (Fields, McHugh) 

I Wanna Be Loved By You (Stothart, Ruby, Kalmar) 

I'll Get By (As Long as I Have You) (Ahlert, Turk)

If I Had You (Campbell, Connelly, Shapiro)

It's Tight Like That (Whittaker, Dorsey)

Let's Do It, Let's Fall in Love (Porter)

Love Me or Leave Me (Kahn, Donaldson)

Lover, Come Back to Me (Romberg, Hammerstein)

Mack the Knife (Weill, Brecht) (music and original German lyrics are PD in 2024, English translations are still under copyright)

Makin' Whoopee (Kahn, Donaldson)

The Mooche (Ellington, Mills)

Pirate Jenny (Weill, Brecht)

Softly, As in a Morning Sunrise (Romberg, Hammerstein)

Sweet Lorraine (Burwell, Parish)

Sweet Sue, Just You (Young, Harris)

West End Blues (Oliver, Williams)

What Keeps Mankind Alive? (Weill, Brecht)

When You're Smiling (Shay, Fisher, Goodwin)

You Took Advantage of Me (Rodgers, Hart)

This list includes mostly jazz-oriented and jazz-adjacent songs, and was selected from lists found on Wikipedia and on Jazzstandards.com. Some dates were uncertain; in those cases I went by the copyright dates on images of the original sheet music. Please let me know of any errors.

Further detail on most of these songs is available on Wikipedia.

Note that for the Kurt Weill songs from “Threepenny Opera,” English translations were made after 1928, and those lyrics are still under copyright. The music and original German lyrics are PD in 2024.

In classical music, notable pieces entering public domain are Bartok's String Quartet #4, Gershwin's An American in Paris, Ravel's Bolero, and Villa Lobos' Chôros No. 11, Chôros #12, and Quinteto (em forma de chôros).

For more popular, jazz, and classical pieces entering the public domain, see the Wikipedia article 1928 in Music.

United States copyright law is quite restrictive as compared to many other countries. According to the provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976 and the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 (aka "Mickey Mouse Protection Act"), works published or registered before 1978 remain under copyright for 95 years.

With the passage of the 1998 law, the cutoff date for works entering the public domain became 1922, with any works published in 1923 or later remaining under copyright. Beginning in 2019, however, the clock began running again, with each new year bringing one more year of songs and other works into the public domain. Over the next 20 years or so, most "Golden Age" jazz standards will lose copyright protection.

Many other countries have shorter terms of copyright; one common formula is the life of the author plus fifty years (see this table). For example, in Canada you can record pieces written by Wes Montgomery (d. 1968) John Coltrane (d. 1967), Igor Stravinsky (d. 1971), Louis Armstrong (d. 1971). Lee Morgan (d. 1972), or Kenny Dorham (d. 1972).

1n 1924, Mickey Mouse will be entering the public domain. Below is an excerpt from last year's post on copyright expiration, regarding the Mickey question:

However, if you are thinking of utilizing Mickey's image in 2024, you should consider that copyright will only expire on images from cartoons released in 1928, such as Steamboat Willie. In those early images, Micky had a somewhat different visage, with a longer, rat-like nose. He did not not yet have his white gloves or red shorts; they came later. If you want to use the white gloves or red shorts, you will have to wait a few more years.

Here's an interesting article on the subject, with an image of Mickey as submitted for copyright in 1929. It looks to me as though Mickey's nose had been altered a little by then, closer to its current look. He has his white gloves, too. The image is in black and white, so I don’t know about the red shorts. 

By the way, Minnie Mouse also appears in the 1928 cartoons, though I don't think she is credited by name.

In addition to copyrighting Mickey, The Walt Disney Company has also registered him as a trademark. US trademarks can be renewed every 10 years, potentially going on forever. Disney has a strong case for Mickey as a trademark, but less so for many of their other characters, who will be falling out of copyright in the next few years. Here is an article from the Western New England Law Review that covers in depth the legal standing of Mickey and other Disney characters.

More links:

2022 NYT article on Mickey copyright

Copyright Law of the United States (Wikipedia)

A Complete History of Rico Reeds - dissertation by Neal Postma

 Every now and then I run across some really interesting information on the "Sax on the Web” forum. A recent thread led me to to a dissertation by Neal Postma, A Complete History of Rico Reeds.

The paper certainly lives up to its title. The story begins in 1928, and the dissertation follows the development of the company up to its purchase by J. D'Addario & Co. in 2004. Chapters cover the inception of the company, leadership and reed designers, reeds, accessories (including Gregory and Gale mouthpieces), cane cultivation, marketing strategies, and the acquisition by D'Addario. 

It's a great read (pun intended). Here are a few nuggets of information that came up:

1) Rico "Orange Box" reeds (formerly brown box, and before that branded as Roy J. Maier) are exactly the same reed as La Voz. There is no quality difference, and no difference in the cut. It's been this way since La Voz was introduced in 1948, and it's still that way:

The La Voz Corporation was set up as a means to appear not to have a complete monopoly on the reed market. They also tried to lure customers that were not happy with Rico reeds. The company produced a reed with the name La Voz, but it was the same exact reed as a Rico Orange Box. Rico color sorted the cane for La Voz reeds, but they did not playtest it. The only other difference between these two reeds was the strength grading. Roy J. Maier (and Rico Orange box) used strengths 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, and 5, a total of nine strengths. La Voz strengths are soft, medium-soft, medium, medium-hard, and hard, a total of five. The reed’s design is the same…The company first introduced this reed in 1948 after only ten years of production of reeds under the Roy J. Maier branding. It was not widely known at the time that Rico even made La Voz reeds, much less that they were the same exact reeds as the Roy J. Maier cuts. In addition to wanting a different reed on the market, Rico introduced this reed under a different company name that went as far as to have a separate PO Box so as to avoid the appearance of having a monopoly on the American reed market. Marketing practices led the public to believe that the La Voz Corporation was an entirely different manufacturer. 

Neal Postma got this information from from Jess Gonzales, Materials Manager at D'Addario, in 2017. Although D'Addario may have replaced and upgraded their reedmaking machinery since then, the same information about Rico vs. La Voz reeds was cited in a 2022 podcast by Wally Wallace, quoting Andrea Harrell, the present D'Addario Woodwinds Product Manager, in a recent conversation (Wallace's reed discussion starts at about 15:05).

The Rico Co. presented La Voz as a superior reed to Rico, but that was strictly a marketing ploy - and apparently still is.

2) Rico Royal (now just called "Royal") is just a regular Rico reed that has had the bark partially filed off, in a "French cut." 

3) In past years, the same basic Rico reed has been branded as "Roy J. Maier," "Conn Diamond Cut," and a number of other names. "Plasticover" is the same reed with a partial plastic coating.

However, Mitchell Lurie reeds (another Rico product) are a different design. "Select Jazz" reeds are a different design also, and they are made with better cane. 

4) Although this info did not come from the dissertation, Wally Wallace also quotes Andrea Harrell saying that D'Addario sources its cane in both France and Argentina, but intermingles the stock. Thus, a purchaser would not know which was the source of the cane. Perhaps for most purchasers, it doesn't matter.

5) Strength is measured with a machine that tests for flex ("resistance"). I recalled reading somewhere that some manufacturer supposedly used a machine that assigned strength by putting a light behind the reed to check the density. Apparently this was incorrect. 

Googling this question, I came across this post on the Clarinet BBoard:

About 15 years ago, one of the Van Dorens was in Montreal and gave a reed presentation. He explained that there is no difference in *thickness* between a 2 1/2 strength reed and a 5 strength reed (a fact one can confirm by measuring the reed on a micrometer like a Perfectareed). He explained that the phenomenon that determines a reed's strength is the cane's density. He described the density gauge Vandoren uses. If you look at the butt of a Vandoren or Rico reed you will see a horizontal band of "teeth marks". These are marks left by a spring gauge that presses into the butt of the reed, measuring the cane's density. The resulting density measurement determines the number strength the reed is assigned.

The point about all reeds of a given design having the same thickness is correct, but the last part of this post seems to be incorrect, or at least unclear. The spring gauge may hold the butt end of the reed, leaving a mark, but the reed is checked for flex the same way as Rico/D'Addario has for many decades, as shown in this video from Vandoren (animation shows a flex test at 2:14). “Density” may not be exactly the right word to use here, although density does relate to flex.

This is probably a good place to quote the (maybe apocryphal) story about the time that clarinetist Stanley Drucker visited the Vandoren factory, and asked Bernard Vandoren if he could be introduced to "the guy who puts the one good reed in every box."

6) Beginning on p.80 of the dissertation, Postma describes recent scientific studies of cane playability. One 1998 study in Australia seems to have influenced management at D'Addario:

All of the characteristics correlated to strong performance had something in common: they were all related to the vascular bundles in the inner cortex. In short, the performance of a reed is determined by a high percentage of fiber and a low percentage xylem and phloem. Xylem is a tissue found in plants that water and dissolved minerals will travel through to disperse it throughout the plant. Phloem is a similar tissue found in plants that food and nutrients travel through as they are dispersed throughout the plant.

While Rico did not commission this study, it was reviewed by Bill Carpenter and those who were running the plantations at the time. This is a relatively new study, and cane cultivation practices are still being developed. Rico/D’Addario holds propriety over techniques used on their plantations to increase the fiber percentage and lower xylem and phloem percentages in their reeds, and they do not wish to disclose any trade secrets.

The clear implication here is that D'Addario may be able to improve cane quality as time goes on. 

For a clearer look at reed anatomy, including vascular bundles, xylem, and phloem, check out this previous post.

Here's a discussion on SOTW discussing the Rico Orange Box vs. La Voz question. There's certainly a lot of disbelief and denial!

Here's a video from Rico/D'Addario on how reeds are made, including a shot of the strength grading device.

One more - a video from Marca Reeds showing their manufacturing process. No English subtitles, but you can see that it's a smaller operation, and less automated.

Song from the Old Country - Don Pullen, Béla Kéler, and Brahms

Here's the latest installment of tune-detective-I-can't-resist-this-stuff.

One of the members of my jazz combo class suggested that we try playing "Song from the Old Country," a tune written by Don Pullen and played by the Don Pullen-George Adams Quartet. It's a cool piece, with what comes across to me as a Cuban flavor (after the slow intro):

I wondered what "the old country" in the title referred to, exactly. Usually the term is used to mean the European country of one's ancestors, if one is European-American. For this song, it didn't seem to fit. Was Pullen somehow referencing Cuba or Africa? The answer came to me when, out of the blue, I noticed a strong correspondence between the theme of the song and the second theme of Brahms' Hungarian Dance #5 (0:37 in this recording):

The harmony is the same, the melody somewhat parallel, and there's a rhythm break in the 7th measure. Pullen gave us a clue in the title.

Digging a little further, it seems that Brahms did not actually write this theme himself. Wikipedia notes,

In 1850 Brahms met the Hungarian violinist Ede Reményi and accompanied him in a number of recitals over the next few years. This was his introduction to "gypsy-style" music such as the csardas, which was later to prove the foundation of his most lucrative and popular compositions, the two sets of Hungarian Dances (published 1869 and 1880).^[3][4]

Only numbers 11, 14 and 16 are entirely original compositions.^{[citation needed]} The better-known Hungarian Dances include Nos. 1 and 5, the latter of which was based on the csárdás "Bártfai emlék" (Memories of Bártfa) by Hungarian composer Béla Kéler, which Brahms mistakenly thought was a traditional folksong.^[5]

The borrowed theme starts at 2:04 -

Anyway, that explains the title of the Pullen tune. The class has had quite a bit of fun with it; the changes are very natural, and easy to jam on. 

Bonanza, My Favorite Martian, Rossini, and Prokofiev

Here's a twofer installment of "Tune Detective!"

My sister Laura was visiting this weekend, and at one point the conversation drifted to TV shows from our childhood. My wife brought up "Bonanza." Remembering the theme song, I first thought of how it evoked thundering horses' hooves, which led me straight to the extremely similar single-note, repeated-rhythm motif in Rossini's "William Tell Overture." I am quite certain that this resemblance is no accident.

The "Bonanza" theme was written by David Rose, who wrote music for movies and television from 1938 until his death in 1990. Here is his IMDB page.

Of course, the "William Tell" theme had already long been used in "Lone Ranger" radio and TV shows.

My sister then mentioned a conversation she had years ago with George Greeley, a somewhat distant relative of ours by marriage, when she lived in Los Angeles. Laura had been introduced to George by our cousin. George had a long career in the Hollywood music business as pianist, composer, conductor, and musical director; his IMDB resumé begins in 1949. His musical career began as an arranger for several prominent pre-WW II big bands. 

Among many other credits, George wrote the theme song for "My Favorite Martian," a TV show that my sister had been a fan of, as a kid. George mentioned to her that in writing the theme, he had been influenced by Prokofiev. When Laura told me that, and played me the "Martian" theme on Youtube, it was pretty clear that George had taken a cue from Prokofiev's "Peter and the Wolf."

I hadn't known much about George Greeley, but looking at his IMDB bio, he had an incredibly active and productive career: Arranger for Tommy Dorsey, Glen Gray, Abe Lyman, and other big bands; conductor for a World War II Air Force band; then arranger for Hollywood radio shows; staff pianist and orchestrator for Columbia Pictures, where he "would fill out the sketches provided by composers that included Max Steiner...Leonard Bernstein, and Dmitri Tiomkin;" pianist on "hundreds of motion pictures;" his work in movies as composer, conductor, and musical director; and later as concert pianist. His complete IMDB bio is here. I'm honored to be even distantly related, though there is absolutely no genetic connection, and I never met George.

Billie's Bounce - What are the right notes?

Comparing versions of “Billie’s Bounce”

Charlie Parker’s blues “Billie’s Bounce” is a staple in the jazz repertoire. Most jazz musicians know it well, and it has been recorded by dozens of legendary players. It appears in many fake books. Comparing recorded versions by Parker and others, and comparing with various print versions, there are disagreements on a number of details. How should this tune really go?

I became interested in this project after reading an article by Henry Martin in Music Theory Online, discussing Parker’s compositional techniques. The article included an image of a lead sheet in Parker’s hand titled “Bill’s Bounce” from the 1945 copyright submission, deposited at the Library of Congress. This chart was significantly different from the way I had been playing this tune for many years, and also did not match the most widely-known print versions - those in the Real Book Vol. 2 and Charlie Parker Omnibook.

To clarify Parker’s intentions, one primary reference has to be the Savoy master, which was the last of five takes recorded on November 26, 1945. This would have been the only available reference for most earlier musicians, until the other four studio takes were released by Savoy in 1956. 

The Library of Congress lead sheet in Parker’s hand is significant, but perhaps not definitive. It does not completely match Parker’s recordings. It would not have been known to most musicians of the last 70 or so years (although it would have been available, had anyone cared to ask).

Other significant references are the other four Savoy takes recorded that day, and also three live Parker recordings from 1946, 1950, and 1951. The live recordings have poor sound quality, and different transcribers may hear them differently. Indeed, even the Savoy studio recordings are heard differently by various transcribers.

Less significant, but definitely interesting, are various print sources. Each represents a (sometimes anonymous) transcriber’s hearing of the tune. Fake books have been a major influence in disseminating “common knowledge” versions.

My thanks to Henry Martin for his comments and suggestions, and to Carlos Ribas, for spectrum analysis of some notes in the recordings.

My proposal for a "correct" melody is at the end of this post.

Points of difference 

Points of disagreement between various recorded and print sources are shown below, on a re-charted copy of Parker’s Library of Congress manuscript. Title, chords, and other features, including octave changes in m.6 and m.11, are copied exactly from the original manuscript.

1. m.1 beat 2+, G or G#
2. m.1 beat 4, D or Eb
3. m.3 beat 4, eighth note D on 4+, or not
4. m.4 beat 2, turn or not
5. m.5 beat 2+ and beat 3, Obvious typo in manuscript for these two notes. Note on beat 2+ is either A or Ab. Note on beat 3 is Bb in all sources.
6. m.8 beat 2+, E or F
7. m.9 beat 3, turn or not
8. m.9 beat 4+, F or G

Recordings

As I hear them, except where otherwise indicated. I should note that when trumpet and alto are both playing, it can sometimes be unclear whether the most audible note is Parker’s or the trumpet’s.

Savoy take 5 (master), Nov. 26, 1945

Youtube link

1. G on the first three heads. Last head uncertain, possibly G#. Mark Voelpel, transcriber for the “Best of Charlie Parker,” heard G# on the last head. Henry Martin heard G on all 4 heads.
2. Eb on all 4 heads
3. eighth note D on 4+ in all takes, but ghosted so much as to sometimes be almost inaudible.
4. turn
5. A on 2+, but possibly Ab in first head
6. F
7. no turn
8. F (Voelpel heard F#. No other transcriber or print version agrees with this.)

Savoy takes 1-4, Nov. 26, 1945 

Carlos Ribas used spectrum analysis on two spots to determine pitch, as noted below. All 5 takes have the same notes, except as indicated below. Quite a few clams from Miles. 

Youtube links: Take 1  Take 2  Take 3  Take 4

1. I heard G on all of these takes. Carlos electronically measured G# on first head of take 1 (Voelpel agreed, in a blog comment). Carlos measured G on the beginning of the Parker solo on take 3, where Parker quotes the head. 
2. Usually Eb. Also clear Eb on take 3 Parker solo, where he quotes the head. Possible D in first head of take 1.
3. eighth note D on 4+ in all takes, but ghosted. Clearer on take 2, head #2.
4. turn in all takes
5. A on 2+
6. F
7. no turn
8. F 

Finale Club, Los Angeles, 1946

Sound quality is poor. At start of his solo, Parker quotes the first chorus of his 1945 recorded solo on the take 5 master.

Youtube link

1. G (possibly G# on third head)
2. Eb (possibly D on third head)
3. first head no eighth note D on 4+, other 3 heads ghosted (uncertain)
4. turn
5. A on 2+, but possibly Ab on third head
6. F
7. no turn
8. F

Pershing Hotel Ballroom, Chicago, Nov. 5, 1950

Sound quality is poor. Splices in tape eliminate beginning of solo and beginning of out-head. Band is local musicians; Parker does not play harmony part, but rather plays entire melody.

1. G
2. D
3. no eighth note D on 4+. Poor sound, but I don’t hear the note, ghosted or not.
4. no turn
5. hard to hear, perhaps Ab on 2+
6. F
7. turn on last 3 heads
8. F

Hotel Diplomat, NYC, Jan. 19, 1951

Youtube link

1. In m.1 of second head Carlos measured G. I hear G both times.
2. Eb
3. I hear no eighth note D on 4+, but uncertain; almost inaudible
4. no turn
5. A on 2+, on both heads
6. F
7. turn
8. F

Clark Terry and His Section Eights, 1947 V-disc

Henry Martin suggested that this may have been the first recording with the fifth note played G#, and possibly the source of this commonly-played “mistake.” This version adds a turn on m.8 beat 2. Parker is not on this recording.

Youtube link

1. G#
2. D
3. no eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. Ab on 2+
6. F
7. turn
8. G

Print sources

Library of Congress Manuscript

Lead sheet in Parker’s hand. If it was created after the recording session, it either reflects Parker’s recollection of how it was recorded, or his thoughts after the session on how he wanted it to go. Copyright was registered 12/1/45, just 6 days after the session, so it is also possible that this chart was created before the session.

1. G
2. D
3. no eighth note D on 4+
4. no turn
5. typo in manuscript - eighth note on 2+ should be either A or Ab, going to Bb on beat 3
6. F
7. no turn
8. F

Charlie Parker, Composer

Book by Henry Martin, examining all of Parker's compositions. “Billie’s Bounce” chart is modeled on Savoy master (take 5).

1. G
2. D
3. eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. F
7. no turn
8. G

Charlie Parker Omnibook

Transcriptions mostly by Ken Slone. However, the head seems to have been copied exactly from Aebersold Vol. 6 “Just Bird” play-along pamphlet (1976), so probably not transcribed by Slone, who created most of the rest of this book (1978).

1. G#
2. D
3. eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. E
7. turn
8. F

The Best of Charlie Parker

Transcriptions by Mark Voelpel (pub. Hal Leonard) Head is mostly based on take 5, with some consideration of other Parker recordings.

1. G#
2. Eb
3. No eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. F
7. no turn
8. F#

Selected Fake Books

Library of Musicians’ Jazz

1950s or 1960s (?) bootleg, unknown transcriber. Note items 1. and 2.

1. G
2. Eb
3. No eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. F
7. no turn
8. G

The Great Gig Book

1980s (?) bootleg. Note items 1. and 2.

1. G
2. Eb
3. No eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. F
7. no turn
8. G

Charlie Parker Tune Book

Collection of head transcriptions on fredparcells.com

1. G#

2.  Eb (in sax harmony part)

3.  No eighth note D on 4+

4.  no turn

5.  Ab on 2+

6.  F

7.  no turn

8.  F

Original “Classic” Real Book Vol. 2 

1970s or 1980s bootleg, unknown transcriber

1. G#
2. D
3. eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. E
7. turn
8. F

Real Book Vol. 2 (pub. Hal Leonard)

Typo in m.1 beat 1 - missing a natural sign. Notes match version in bootleg “classic” RB vol. 2; probably derived from there. Unknown transcriber.

 

1. G#
2. D
3. eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. E
7. turn
8. F

The Bird Book, aka Charlie Parker Real Book

Transcriptions by Masaya Yamaguchi. This chart appears to be from the same digital file as the Hal Leonard Vol. 2 Real Book (same font, identical spacing, etc.), except that this file has been edited in two spots: In bar 1, to add a natural sign that was missing in the RB, and in bar 9, where the last note has been changed from F to G.

1. G#
2. D
3. eighth note D on 4+
4. turn
5. A on 2+
6. E
7. turn
8. G

Conclusions and comments

Regarding each point of difference:

1. Most of Parker’s recordings have a G here. Parker and/or Miles seem to have played the fifth note as G# in some of the Savoy takes. The manuscript says G. Perhaps there was some experimentation in the studio, and they tried it both ways. Alternatively, perhaps there were intonation issues. Martin hears all 3 live recordings as G, every time.
2. The manuscript shows D, but Parker seems to have generally played Eb. In Savoy take 3, where he begins his solo quoting the head, he also clearly plays Eb. Several print sources, probably modeled on the Savoy master, show Eb. In many Parker blues solos, he plays the flat 7 note (Eb in this case) in bars 1 or 4, before a chord change to Bb7, thus making the F chord sound more like V7 of Bb. The Eb works nicely in voice-leading as the alto line continues to D (the third of Bb7) in the harmony part, below the trumpet line.
3. There does seem to usually be an eighth note D on 4+, but it is ghosted.
4. Parker plays a turn here in all recordings except the Pershing Hotel and Hotel Diplomat (in those recordings, he adds a turn in bar 10). It’s the sort of embellishment that one might sometimes choose to play, or not. 
5. The manuscript clearly shows wrong notes here, although it may be pertinent that it seems to show a half step. Parker seems to have played it as A to Bb nearly always.
6. In the recordings, Parker plays F every time. The only sources showing E are the bootleg Real Book, the Hal Leonard Real Book, and the Bird Book, which may derive from each other (in that order), to some extent.
7. Most sources show no turn here, though the Omnibook does, and there seems to be a turn in the Pershing Hotel recording, as well as in the Hotel Diplomat performance. As mentioned in 4. above, this is an embellishment that one could just call optional.
8. This note is played F in all Parker recordings, though it is often hard to hear clearly. The manuscript shows F. G sounds fine here, and is the root of the Gm7 chord. Many charts show G, but that seems not to be what Parker intended. Voelpel heard F#.

Performers who play the fifth note G#

The 1947 Clark Terry recording may have been the first recording that used a G# for the fifth note. Martin speculates that this could have been the starting point for this “error.”

Clark Terry             Clark Terry and His Section Eights, 1947

Shelley Manne             The Three and the Two, 1954 

John Coltrane and Red Garland     Dig It, 1957

Stan Getz and JJ Johnson     Opera House, 1957

Lee Konitz             Very Cool, 1957

Dexter Gordon             Bouncin’ with Dex, 1975

Jim Hall                     Live in Tokyo, 1976

Ella Fitzgerald and Tommy Flanagan    Montreux ’77

Oscar Peterson             Encore at the Blue Note, 1990

Dizzy Gillespie     To Bird With Love, 1992

Phil Woods             Just Friends, 1994

Errors or improvements?

Performers have altered Parker’s notes at least since Clark Terry’s 1947 recording, and probably earlier. These common alterations do generally make musical sense, and it’s easy to see why some of these “mistakes” caught on. 

1. Playing G# here evokes the time-honored blues motive b3 to 3, and would match the notes in m.4, beat 1.
2. D here matches the 1 to 6 motive heard repeatedly in the first 4 bars and the last 2 bars. Eb here makes sense as voice-leading into the IV chord.
3. An additional eighth note D again repeats the 1 to 6 motive
4. Turns are a standard bop decoration, and completely plausible here.
5. Ab here is a chord tone. Also, the Ab to Bb is repeated two beats later.
6. E here still works as an enclosure note.
7. Again, turns are a standard bop decoration.
8. G is the root of the II chord here. F is less predictable, but apparently what Parker played. F# here (per Mark Voelpel) would match the Gm#7 chord that the melody outlines in this measure.

The fifth note - intonation issues?

In take 1 of the Savoy session, Carlos Ribas’ spectrum analysis of the fifth note of the take 1 first head measured G#. To all other indications, Parker intended a G here. It is at least possible that the G# was due to intonation issues. Concert G often plays sharp on both trumpet and alto saxophone, perhaps sharp enough to register as a G#. Of course, this is just speculation.

• Parker played a Conn 6M alto around this time. I own a 1929 Conn (slightly earlier vintage), and it does play fourth-space E (concert G) rather sharp. But it's not certain what make of alto Parker played on the Savoy (or other) recordings.
• John Worley, a respected Bay Area trumpet pro, tells me that this note can be sharp on trumpet as well. Thus, maybe Parker and Miles were both playing this note sharp.
• In a 1959 article for The Jazz Review, Sadik Hakim, who played piano on other songs at this session, wrote, “After three tries at Billie’s Bounce…Bird left to get a better horn and reed.”

Criteria for a better chart

Most charts have probably been intended to reflect the Savoy master (take 5 from the November 6, 1945 session), since that has been the most generally available recording. The four additional studio takes were released by Savoy in 1956. The live recordings seem to have surfaced relatively recently. Beginning perhaps with Clark Terry’s 1947 recording, common practice, as well as various fake books, has introduced some features that were not as Parker intended. 

A good chart should represent the intentions of the composer as closely as possible. In the case of “Billie’s Bounce,” I feel that this would be reflected in the way he had settled on playing it in the Hotel Diplomat recording from January 15, 1951, five years after the initial recording. The Hotel Diplomat recording actually is fairly close to the Library of Congress manuscript. The only differences are in m.1, beat 4, in the last note of m.3, and in putting a turn in a different spot. 

A chart based on the Hotel Diplomat recording is shown below, melody only. Chords and harmony parts are omitted.

The chords

I have not attempted to define the “correct” chords. I feel that Parker would have been comfortable with his rhythm section playing just about any standard bop variation of blues. The manuscript has some standard harmonic features, and an unusual G7 in m.9 (another typo?). On the five Savoy takes, Dizzy Gillespie (on piano) plays a different variation, including Am7 Abm7 in m.8, going to Gm7 in m.9. And in Parker’s blues solos, he is always very free in outlining alternate blues progressions, regardless of what the piano and bass are playing.