Exceptional and awful takes

For the seminar on Fred Hylands I will be giving in a little over a month, I have to pick two records that exhibit two sides of Hylands' studio playing. One is to be a very good take, and another is the worst of the worst we know of. The good take will be decided later, as that will be harder to choose than the bad takes. Last evening, I listened to many of the bad takes I know of, which just happened to be all from pre-1900, even though I have heard some bad takes from after then. Some of Hylands' bad takes are hard to believe that they were issued, with mistakes that are unbelievable. Of course, the bad takes are just as interesting as the good takes, in fact they are more so sometimes, because the mistakes are unexpected. The first record that Ryan Wishner and I discussed as far as the bad takes go is one by Steve Porter:

Steve Porter---Columbia's richest gambler

After taking a few listens to a few records by Porter, it seems that he wasn't really a very good singer early on, in fact, he was worse than Dan Quinn was, which is really saying something. Porter was really only integrated into the "Columbia Clan" because he was rich, and he had befriended Russell Hunting before everyone else did(in 1895 in fact). His massive wealth did him well at Columbia, and it earned him a job singing for their Graphophones in 1897, even if he wasn't a very good singer. He always had weekends playing golf or sailing in his yacht to look forward to after singing so much in the studio during the week(this actually stated in an edition of The Phonoscope). The record by Porter than was suggested for the bad takes to choose was an 1899 take of "In the Baggage Coach Ahead". 

Here's the take:

https://ia800307.us.archive.org/33/items/StevePorter/StevePorter-IntheBaggageCoachAhead.mp3

It's not a very good take as far as Hylands piano accompaniments go...

The piano playing is really scattered and rushed, much like most of the bad takes I know of. Much like Hylands usually did, if he was out-of-sync with a singer, he was ahead of them most of the time, and this Porter record does indeed exhibit that, but it's not clear enough to prove the point with a bad take. It's pretty awful regardless. Another bad take by Porter and Hylands is their 1901 recording of "Carrie Nation in Kansas". It's hilarious, but the piano playing is very weird and full of mistakes, such as Hylands' signature triplet thing at 38 seconds in. Hylands' rhythm is not the best either, it's pretty steady, but gets out of sync with Porter's singing at some points. Also! Listen to the sketch at the very end, which sounds much like those crazy Spam-war(Spanish-American war) 1898 descriptive selections by the Columbia orchestra(such as this fun one here!).

Who's that howling back there?

Damn! Who is that?! That's sure as hell some howl! It's more prominent than all of the ones on the Columbia orchestra descriptive selections about field battles. I can't tell if the howl comes from piano distance, but it sounds like it does. Hmm... ... ... Maybe that's a clue... ... ... 

Yes, all of the bad takes in terms of piano accompaniment are more likely than not recorded when Hylands or the featured singer was intoxicated. Of course, it would have to be just that, and the types of wild playing vary in fact, there's the anxious and very quick playing, and there's the scattered and weird slower playing like on the 1901 Porter cylinder above. Maybe those two different types of playing mean different influences...

The possibly white-ish powdered influence on Hylands can be heard on records like this one: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ynt_zj1wmTo

(skip to just over a minute in for the record to finally start...)

The playing I mean here is the solo at the end primarily. It's quick, rushed, and scattered. It's very hard to keep up with when attempting to play the solo by ear, which is exactly what I'm getting at. I have heard this type of solo from Hylands a few times, one is from a disc of "Bye Bye my Honey" by Billy Golden, and another is from a 1903 recording of "The whistling Coon" by Billy Murray, as well as a 1902 Murray recording of "Has anybody Seen our Cat"(this is a newly slowed down transfer by the way!). 

These two in the links above are not really bad takes necessarily, but they're strange enough for to take notice. When I say bad takes, I mean records like these:

Will F. Denny's 1899 Columbia of "How'd You Like to be the Iceman?"

George W. Johnson's 1898 Columbia of "The Whistling Girl" 

Steve Porter's 1900 Columbia Concert cylinder of "A Bird In a Gilded Cage"

George W. Johnson's 1898 Columbia of "The Laughing Coon"

George Schweinfest's 1899 cylinder of "The Bob White Polka"

Spencer and Harding's 1899 Columbia of "Larboard Watch"

Len Spencer's early 1902 Columbia of "On Emancipation Day"

one of many alternate takes of "The laughing Song" by George W. Johnson

These bad takes are either bad on the piano players' part, the singer's, or both. Now when I say good takes, I mean these:

Len Spencer's 1899 Columbia concert of "Warmest Baby in the Bunch"

(can't share the link, sorry...)

a really good take of "The Laughing Song" by George W. Johnson

Billy Golden's 1899 version of "Turkey in the Straw"

Collins and Harlan's fantastic 1903 Zon-O-phone of "Ephasafa Dill"

Collins' 1903 Zon-O-Phone of "Bill Bailey"

Will F. Denny's 1902 Columbia of "Just because she Made Dem Goo Goo Eyes"

Steve porter's 1901 Concert Columbia of "Mamie"

Billy Golden's 1898 Columbia of "Roll On the Ground"

Bob Roberts' exceptional 1903 Columbia of "I've got to go Now"

It must be noted that the last cylinder listed here is a newly-posted record on Youtube, that was posted just to-day, and turned out to be among the best examples of Rag-Time on early Columbia records. All of the 1903 to 1905 Columbia's Roberts made with piano accompaniment sound like that record, with pristine and top-liner Rag-Time piano behind him. I hope I have made it clear that it's hard to choose just one record of these good and bad takes, though as far as the bad takes go, Johnson's "Whistling Girl" is especially so compared to the others listed, so does Spencer's "On Emancipation Day". Those two exhibit a mix of all the bad things about Hylands' playing when it wasn't at its best. On the other end, the good takes are more hard pressed when trying to pick one that is better than the others. The first one listed(that isn't a link) is one that can be considered a good and bad take, as it's a fantastic example of late-1890's Rag-Time, but Spencer's singing on it is particularly awful. The piano playing is weird and scattered, to make matters better, which is certainly Hylands by all means. 

With this dilemma, I would like ideas from other collectors on this, choosing one good take and a bad take, please drop your ideas in the comments on this post! 

As Hylands once advertised:

All mail cheerfully accepted!

Hope you enjoyed this! 

Ossman's "Peaceful Henry" and the Slow Speed Phenomenon

Recently, I have been digging through much of Hylands' later recordings for Zon-O-Phone, Columbia, and Leeds, and from this I have found a much clearer way to identify that it's surely Hylands. Whenever I listen to many of those 1902-05 Columbia and Zon-O-Phone's, I ofttimes have the itching feeling at the back of my mind that the pianist might not be Hylands, though after doing some close listening this evening, I am very certain on many of the records. 

Before I get into that, I must share the transfer I did of Ossman playing:

(from Professor Bill's Website)

Ossman was known to have been the only one who recorded this piece of classic Rag-Time, and as far as I have found, this claim has stayed put. Anyhow, here's that slower transfer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcNRtlzclII

On the album, the record was transferred at the written key of C, which does make sense, but according to the announcement, and the speed that Ossman plays it at, this would not be logical. So the new key is a B flat, though I wanted to make it just a trifle slower, so the key could be absolutely even, but my machine would not allow for it. This was a very strange thing, but it sounded great after I messed around with the speed. 

Now this brings me to the second part of this post, the slow speed phenomenon. Simply, this is a very strange effect of when playing acoustic records slow(much slower than one usually would). The effect of this is that notes deep in the bass that aren't heard when played at normal speed cannot be heard, can be heard played very slow. This is a bizarre effect that no one can understand why it is so. The primary example I have for this theory is a recording by: 

Bob Roberts 

and 

Fred Hylands.

Anyhow, here's a much slower version of Bill Bailey by Hylands and Roberts, recorded in c.late-1902:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0bW0uXjcFI&feature=youtu.be

It's the most bizarre thing I tell you! Notes deep in the bass can be very well heard, more so than at normal speed. None of the smartest record collectors I know have any clue as to why this happens at a slower speed. I played all of my Hylands accompanied records very slow this evening, and found an amazing new stylistic attribute to Hylands' playing. It is an attribute that many have been associating with Ben Harney for decades, which is the deep single bass notes in the left hand, which, to many, is a far-off anticipation of "stride". This similarity to Harney makes full sense, as Hylands was a distant acquaintance of his in 1896 to 1900, and certainly would have played in a similar way to Harney, as they hailed from neighboring states. Any recording(especially with piano accompaniment), of the acoustic era will sound purer and darker if played much slower. When I say this, I mean playing the records slower than the usual speed they are meant to be played at, to where an even and reasonable key can be ascertained. 

Another record slowly played record that has this bizarre thing is the transfer of "She is More to be Pitied than Censured" by J. W. Myers: 

Yes indeed. Just to refresh, here's that transfer:

http://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/search.php?queryType=@attr+1=1020&num=1&start=1&query=cylinder15570

This one is not really in the same state as the record of "Bill Bailey" that I have, as it doesn't actually sound very decent at the speed it's played at. The transfer I made of "Bill Bailey" sounded halfway decent, which was surprising, as usually I cannot stand records played too slow. Actually, if that speed I played it at is the correct speed, I would not really be too surprised, as it doesn't sound too far off from Roberts' true vocal range. For a good indicator, here's a record of Roberts where he sounds similar:

http://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/search.php?queryType=@attr+1=1020&num=1&start=1&query=cylinder15771

Hmm. Maybe F is the right key for Roberts' "Bill Bailey"... It does make sense, because that's the key that most Jazz bands play it in, and Arthur Collins used to sing it in E(a half-step down from F). 

Sorry to get a little side-tracked, back to Mister Myers. I was actually listening to the one Myers record I have last evening using the same slow speed technique, and found some fascinating little observations. I am fully against playing Myers' records too slow, as he was the best of all the 1890's recording stars, with the best sense of pitch and rhythm, it's very uncommon to hear him hit a wrong note. I listened to a record by Myers I hadn't heard in long while recently, and found that he doesn't sing very well on it. This does not come up very much with Myers, and it really surprised me. Enough talk, here's that record: 

Myers singing "Tammany" in c. 1905

For a long time I had assumed that the singer was Dan W. Quinn, but after listening very closely to how certain words were annunciated, I found that it had to be Myers. The only other reason I assumed it was Quinn was because of the off-key singing at the chorus, which was solely a Quinn characteristic. I was referring to how Quinn sang on his Berliner of "And the Band played On" with Fred Gaisberg from 1895, but I found that the singing styles were not a match. It had to be Myers, I could just hear the Welsh. 

Now to get into something a little different, I had a short e-mail conversation with my dearest friend Craig this past week or so, and he mentioned that he noticed on many of his Zon-O-Phones, that the pianist sounds like at least three different pianists. Craig has at least hundreds of these 9-inch Zon-O-phones with piano accompaniment, much like this red hot piece of Rag-Time. There's a reason why they are valued to pianist-mad collectors like Craig, Ryan Wishner and I. Zon-O-Phone's are more mysterious than Victors with piano accompaniment, as there are not any ledgers whatsoever that survive from this company's earliest six or so years, which could be classified as the second half of the piano accompaniment era(1899-1905). Craig had told me that he knows which pianist is Hylands on those 9-inchers, and he could distinguish a few different styles, hence a few sitting pianists. 

I have not heard enough of these Zono's to be able to fully catch the differences, but I have noticed at least two different styles from the ones I have heard. The record in the link just above is one that had Hylands on piano for certain, as it's almost identical to the 1902 record of it by Roberts I have in my collection. I own no piano accompanied Zono's, but I want a haul of them terribly, the piano is just too good to pass by. 

Now to share many of the piano-accompanied Zon-O-Phone's I have heard, and let's see if some differences can be caught. 

Here's Collins singing "If Time was Money, I'd Be a Millionaire" from 1902.

I think I know who's on this one behind Collins. This one sounds an awful lot like Banta, and not very much like Hylands. The left hand's swiftness is a little misleading though. The fifths in the left hand though indicate a more Banta approach to the style. This is the very reason why Zon-O-Phone's are the worst when it comes to pianist identification. 

This next Zono is another Collins one, this time from 1902, and played far too fast, but has very unusual accompaniment to it:

https://ia802300.us.archive.org/31/items/ArthurCollins_part2/ArthurCollins-TheManWhoPlayedtheTamborin.mp3

This one has got me stumped, and it has for a while, as I have never really known who to lean more to here, Hylands or Banta, or maybe someone else? I now think of leaning more toward Hylands on this one, as the syncopation isn't really as jagged and jarring as Banta's. The left hand sounds strong and anxious like Hylands', which is immediately the first thing that is a red flag that the pianist is Hylands, this is a great indicator more than anything else. I am only saying that because Hylands didn't always play those broken walking octaves, but he always played that type of left hand I just explained. Another obvious indicator of Hylands is the fact that at the end of the introduction at the beginning, middle interlude, and ending solo, he plays a high trill with a large tenth/twelfth chord in the left hand, and this is something that Banta NEVER  did, and probably couldn't do, as his hands were not able to reach a tenth very well. 

Now those earliest Zon-O-Phone's are a little less diverse with piano accompaniment, as most of them sounded uniform in that way. These are a little harder though when it comes to identification of pianists. Here are a few early Zono's:

(these are all from 1900-1901)

Charles P. Lowe Plays "Happy Days in Dixie" with Hylands

(this one is obviously Hylands, as I used this cylinder here for a stylistic comparison)

Collins sings "Just because She Made Dem Goo Goo Eyes" with Hylands(?) 1901

This one is very hard to tell, but I am leaning far toward an obviously tipsy Hylands. Most attributes of Banta can be debunked here. This record is pretty wild! 

Denny sings "Ain't Dat a Shame" recorded in 1901 with Hylands

The piano accompaniment is far too showy and attention-eager for it to be frugal Frank, so it would probably be flamboyant Fred. 

Edward Favor sings "Say You Love Me Sue" in 1900 probably with Hylands

I am about 95% sure that Hylands is on this one, because I heard a different recording of this tune by Dan Quinn on a very obscure disc label in 1899 where that same strange left hand pattern at the chorus is played, that I don't think Banta would be so reckless as to play a left hand style that strange and hard to play. Also, the fast playing of the solo at the end is very much like Hylands on all those Columbia's. That same anxious and strong left hand is also very prominent more so toward the end of the record. Now I'm very aware of the fact that Hylands seems to be on all of these Zon-O-Phone's, but here's the thing, I have actually heard a Zono from 1901 that has a much more Banta style to the piano accompaniment, which indicates accompaniment diversity. 

The two I'm the most on-the-fence about are these two here:

Denny sings "Ain't You My Lulu" recorded in 1900, with Banta more likely

(that's a strange one!)

Emile Keneke plays "Pretty Peggy" recorded in 1901, probably with Banta

I am very unsure on this one, as there's an awful lot of fifths in the left hand, but I do know for sure that Banta played those often. Many of those fifths can be heard on his late-1890's Edison cylinders. 

Sorry about not posting in so many days, it's been hard to conjure a single subject to speak of, as so many ideas have come to mind within the last week. 

Hope you enjoyed this! 

Mina Hickman before Ada Jones and Some interesting alternate takes

I know nothing of Mina Hickman, but she was a very early female recording artist who needs to be noticed. No one I know has any information on her either, so it's very weird of a case. The only reason I've had a spark of interest in Hickman is because I heard a cylinder yesterday by Len Spencer and Mina Hickman(with Fred Hylands on piano!). I was not at all expecting this duo, I didn't even know that Hickman ever made records with Spencer! That says quite a lot about Spencer's ideas when making records, that he already had  female partner on records before Ada Jones. 

Ada Jones didn't join Spencer on records until 1905, and several years before that, Spencer had Minnie Emmett and Mina Hickman. These two ladies were the "token women" of the Columbia and Victor companies, as this was long before Sophie Tucker and Ada Jones. It was in fact Emmett that Harry Spencer tested his device for recording the female voice in 1897. I don't know any details about this device, but it must have been an interesting contraption. Anyhow, that record of "Reuben and Cynthia" by Spencer and Hickman is here.

(It's the second take listed on the page). It's very weird indeed. Len Spencer, Mina Hickman, and Fred Hylands, on a cylinder in 1901. I wonder where she came from, how and who discovered her, and when exactly. I don't know if it was before 1900, because that's when she began making records. She's a little hard to find any information on, as no matter where you go to find any, you won't find it. Before I began this post, I dug around for anything on Mina, and I couldn't find anything that didn't have to do with listing the records she made. Now, there's something that tells me that Hickman might have been one of those pretty women that Hylands and Spencer endorsed in 1899-1900 on their sheet music covers. She might have been one of those ladies that Hylands or Burt Green had to "bribe" to get her involved with their firm(if you know what I might be getting at...). 

If anyone knows any personal information about Mina Hickman, like where she was born, and when, please comment here!

Now onto the second part of this post. 
This first record is by these two here:

Freddy Hylands 

and Dan Quinn.
Now it's been a while since I have highlighted a record by Quinn, and it's time to do that once again, also to pay my kindly dues to the Quinn family. 
Now this record is one that I don't think I have ever pointed out on here. It's a fun English comic song with great lyrics and fun piano playing. 
Here are two takes of "The Penny Whistler" by Dan Quinn and Fred Hylands, 
recorded in 1903
Now these two takes are very different. Much more than one would think listening to them just once through. The first thing I need to point out about these two takes is that Hylands' rhythm is very unsteady and kind of broken. This is one of those few times where it really sounds like Hylands was drunk on both of the takes. Usually it's one take that's especially noticeable, but both of these are a mess. I do think that take 2 is a little better rhythm wise than take 5. Take 5 is a real mess, and since it was recorded later, it can safely be assumed that Hylands had some drinks between takes. They aren't that far from each other though, it's only a difference of three takes. Three can make a difference. 
Also, here's some observations to make about the differences of these takes;
-Take 5 is slower
-Take 2 has a different 10 second solo by Hylands at the end from take 5

-There's this very slight melodic change that I don't think any of you were able catch, at about 0:15 in on take 2, Hylands hits the same note in the bass between the chords, but listen to that on take 5-- it's a different note!(with a different weird chord also...)

**now that melodic difference ^^ is a very "Hylands" thing, as he did that quite often in his regular playing, which is adding weird notes, octaves, or chords that are not exactly equal with the notes that are being played in the right hand, but do as  matter of fact work when you play them, not exactly when seeing them written**

Now for an even better comparison, here's a different take of it! On a disc this time:
here's the same song but on a Columbia disc,take # not given though :-(
This one also has Hylands on piano, and it's even more interesting and weird from the other takes. This one has some odd aspects to it that were not present on the other ones. You can notice that Hylands' rhythm is even worse on this one than on takes 2 and 5. This one is slower!(at some parts...)The solo at the end is very different from the other two though, and what it is, is very odd, It's kind of a strange little dance section with very rushed trills(as he knew he was running out of time!). 


Onto the second batch of takes. This next one is a bunch of takes of "Bill Bailey" by differing singers and Hylands, all recorded within a few weeks of each other. This song was recorded so many times in 1902 that there's no doubt to be many different takes by the same artists and different ones. Now this first one is a 7-inch of the song with Bob Roberts:
here's take 11.
sounds just as slow as it needs to be, with a perfect tempo chosen by Hylands, paired with fantastic right hand improvisations.
now that you've internalized that take:
here's take 12. 
Quite different indeed. Here are differences:
-Take 12 is slower
-Hylands' rhythm is a little more shaky on take 12
-Hylands was more controlled in playing on take 11
-Hylands hits two chords at 1:26, whereas on take 11, he doesn't do that
- Hylands' left hand is much more steady and controlled on take 11

They are very interesting takes indeed, but there are more! As I said, this song was recorded many times in 1902, so it is easier to find other takes of this one than others. This next take was probably recorded on the same day as the last two, but was released on a cylinder, so it has a much different sound to it. 
Here is another take of Bob Roberts singing "Bill Bailey". 
This is a very fun take as well, even if it's not exactly the same as the other ones. There's quite a lot different about this one. The piano playing is the most Hylands you could get, as every aspect of his playing is present, even the broken octaves(they're hard to hear though...). 
This take is much like Arthur Collins' Zon-O-Phone from the same time, which you can hear here. Now this Zon-O-Phone is one of the most wild examples of Rag-Time I have ever heard on records from the piano accompaniment era. It beats everything Hylands did with Len Spencer in the late-1890's ten fold. It's really an amazing record, with Hylands playing till he dropped on the last strain. One thing is for sure about this Zon-O-Phone, it's not Banta on piano! 

Now this final take is by Collins as well, but it's a Columbia this time, and it's the famous record of "Bill Bailey" that everyone uses. 
Here you go. 
I love that on all of those CD's that had this record on it always say that the pianist is "anonymous" or "unknown", or if they want to seem like they all know what it it they're talking about, it'll say Frank P. Banta. HA! That's all just mush! We all know it's Fred Hylands, and now that he's not forgotten, we can place him rightfully in the section of "Studio pianist" on this record. Seeing the pianist as "unknown" or just "Studio pianist" always irritates me greatly, as they were very hard-working musicians who were almost worked to death for the singers. 

Anyhow, onto a record that's a little bit of a different one. It's a record by a singer I don't mention too often on this blog:

Yes indeed(that's him in c.1900)
Now this cylinder is a bit of a mystery, as the record company cannot be traced. 
here's "My Honolulu Lady" by Frank C. Stanley, c.1898. 
This is a fascinating cylinder, as the record company is unknown, the date is very unsure, and the piano accompaniment is fantastic. Now I have a notion that the piano accompaniment is by Fred Hylands, even if it's an unknown or forgotten record company. The Rag style in the accompaniment is too syncopated and "lazy" if you will for it to be Frank P. Banta. I know that this cylinder cannot be a pirated Edison cylinder, and it is also important to remember that many independent record companies started up in the 1897-1900 era(when this cylinder was recorded), and Frank Stanley did make records for many of these obscure companies in his earliest days of record-making. It's a fantastic cylinder either way, that, even though it's very quiet, it's still very clear, and has the Rag-Time piano mastery of Fred Hylands. 

I hope you enjoyed this! 

"Professor" Banta and "Professor" Hylands

Fra

Yes indeed, Frank P. Banta, the pianist of Edison who worked himself to death. 

Banta, much like the other early studio pianists, is a very mysterious character as far as the early recording stars go, as his personality is questionable, and his background is also one that has briefly been challenged. The things that his son said in the 1940's are only what a four to eight-year-old recalled, and also what his polite father did, who also wasn't home too much to see his two children. Him being quiet and passive seems somewhat accurate, as there were never any reports of complaints from him, and he continued to work for Edison and Victor until the week that he died. As my friend Ryan Wishner and I discussed last evening, it's hard to know what Banta was really like, though I am convinced by the "introverted" personality he has long been described to have had. I have the feeling that he might have been extremely complicated however, but not in the way of being broken and frustrated at one time, and another time being wild and drunk(that sounds a little more like Fred Hylands!).He must have been complicated in a sort of quiet way, not constantly spreading about his troubles, and demanding for things. He would probably be staring off in the distance often, deep in thought between takes, and would have to be snapped or hollered at to get his attention fully. He would probably work even after the recording days, as he wanted to get work done, other than that he did in the studio. 


Now to refer to the title of this post. I noticed in one of my sources researching a little bit on Banta recently(on Professor Bill Edwards' site) that an ad from 1892 suggested Banta to be a "Professor"(and for those of you Rag-Time nerds out there, you know exactly what that means, if not entirely sure of it, it would refer sometimes to a brothel pianist or rough saloon pianist). Reading that struck me, because that connotation being attached to Banta's name is something that could mean a few different things, other than the two things I just listed, and that it was so early on in the era of popular vaudeville accompanists, it is odd. Banta was regarded as the more "proper" of the studio pianists of the 1890's, as he was very well trained(at least said to be by others, not really from his own words... hmm...), also that he was calmly-tempered, and that he was an exceptional bandleader. The title of "Professor'' would not usually be associated by me with Banta, it would more than likely be associated with Fred Hylands. That's, if you're referring to the connotation of brothel pianist with the term. Hylands would(and could be to many) be considered as a "Chicago Professor". Why? Well, Hylands got his start playing on his own in Chicago, wandering around, and playing at saloons, small vaudeville houses, and yes, brothels. This is why he was so loud, and also why his style was so much like that of the style that some described by those who went to Chicago in the years after the World' Fair in 1893. It's a very distinct style that can be heard the best on any record of any sort of "coon song" on the Columbia label from 1898-1904. 

Banta was able to play Rag-Time just as wildly as Fred Hylands, even if he wasn't really known for doing so. He probably thought doing that used too much energy for a single take, as there were plenty more takes from other singers he had to do, saving his energy for all takes was his strategy. Even with all of this supposed "culture" from Banta's playing, he was still able play things like this here. Or like these two here:
https://ia902605.us.archive.org/27/items/GoWayBackAndSitDownByWillF.Denny1901/GoWayBackAndSitDown1901_64kb.mp3

https://ia802503.us.archive.org/33/items/WillFDenny/WillFDenny-AintDataShame.mp3

These cylinders back up the "professor" title somewhat, especially the last one listed. It is odd, Banta played "Ain't Dat a Shame" very well and Ragged, more so than expected, but it's not nearly the same as Hylands' version. 
Here's Hylands' with Bob Roberts.
Hear! The differences are so obvious, and are great in their own ways. Banta could get pretty ragged sometimes, not on every record he's playing Rag-Time, but on many of them. He starts off pretty tame, and plays some ragged sections here and there, until toward the second verse, he begins to get wild and all over the place, almost speeding ahead of the singer. This sequence is very much so on his takes with Silas Leachman playing Ben Harney's "Mr. Johnson Turn Me Loose". He plays exactly how I described the sequence. 
Another thing about Banta, is that he probably also heard Ben Harney play onstage in the mid-1890's, just as Hylands did, and was inspired even more to play syncopated cake-walks and "coon songs", as even when he can be heard playing one of Harney's songs, you can hear the inspiration. I thought for a long time that it was Hylands on the takes of "Mister Johnson" by Leachman, but come to find out that the wild and shaky Rag-Time playing was by the supposedly "more proper" Frank P. Banta. One thing Banta could never get right about playing Rag-Time was keeping a steady tempo throughout. You can hear on many records that he was on that he could keep a moderate cake-walk tempo at first, but by the last part of the record, the speed would be much faster(and NO! It's not just because of running out of time on the records!). 

Another thing that gives away the title of "Professor" for Banta is the fact that he played fifths in his left hand octaves. That is very strange to me. That was a characteristic of mid-western/southern rag players, and Banta was from New York. Hmm... I think he was in Chicago at one point, so that might be a clue. Here is one example of Banta playing quite a lot of fifths:
http://adp.library.ucsb.edu/index.php/matrix/detail/100002497/Pre-matrix_B-3354-I_need_the_money
It's very weird that he did that, because that is something that could be expected from Hylands' playing more than Banta's. I haven't heard Hylands play that too much in his left hand, but he had the just as interesting and queer habit of playing walking octaves.  Hylands had the best sense of rhythm of all the early house pianists, Banta comes second, if not last or the same as the others. It sounds slightly biased I know, but Hylands really was his own category of weird when it comes to the early house pianists. Banta was kind of the same way, but he had the same sense of rhythm that Fred Bachmann, Gaisberg, Christopher Booth, and Albert Benzler had(though Benzler's rhythm was worse than the others somewhat...). 
I still don't understand where Banta playing fifths came from. It was obviously part of his playing style, but I don't know where it could have come from, it might be from how he just learned to play the piano. Doing that might have been a habit he never got rid of that he had since the beginning of playing. It certainly wouldn't be something that a piano teacher in the 1870's would approve of at all. I would imagine that a piano teacher of Banta's probably would have hit his hands in anger at seeing that he had the habit of playing fifths in octaves. Banta also played broken octaves in the right hand sometimes, which must have been an imitation of Hylands, as there's not a doubt in my mind that they had both heard each other play, either on records, or at shows. Banta tried to imitate Hylands' "boogie" sounding style by playing broken octaves in the right hand and pairing that with slightly syncopated chords in the left hand, to give the effect that Hylands' broken octaves had. He probably couldn't get how that was done, or thought it was too frivolous. You can hear a great example of this at around 2:02-2:03 on this record here. I believe that there was also another example of this on one of the cylinder by Will F. Denny toward the beginning of this post as well. 
It's also funny that Dan Quinn called Hylands "Professor'' on a few occasions, which must have made him smile from the piano, you a hear that here(it's transferred too fast though...). Now that's accurate for a thousand reasons! Hylands is also pretty drunk on this one also(hear him having way too much fun laughing from the piano chair!). Quinn also called Banta that on some records, in fact, since Quinn preferred having Banta as his pianist, he must have meant the more respectable connotation of the term for Banta. With Hylands, he probably meant the opposite, even though Hylands probably thought of it either way. Hylands was a freak, Banta was a more moderate version of that. 

I hope you enjoyed this! 

Columbia's busy studios

These are pictures of studio musicians in their house studios from the 1890's. These are probably both Columbia's studio however, as we are sure the first one is a Columbia studio picture, but the second one is up for debate. I think it's a Columbia studio picture, for several reasons. 

One, that piano man. Recognize that face and figure? 

Yep, that resembles Hylands pretty suspiciously...(take a look!)

The second thing I see is that I have never seen an Edison studio looking like that(mind you that Columbia was housed in and office building on the whole second floor in 1898). I have seen several Columbia pictures, and am pretty sure that that second picture is indeed a Columbia shot from 1898. Also try to notice that the two rooms in the pictures aren't really that different in appearance. In the edition of The Phonoscope that these two pictures came from, they even say that they are focusing on the record talent of the Columbia Phonograph company, and that pretty much gives it away, even if they don't particularly specify the pictures and mention them in detail. They are fascinating pictures nonetheless. 

When you really dissect that studio band picture, you can really get a sense of how they balanced everything, as they are standing on tables(with chairs on tables!) and sometimes I have heard of them standing on boxes and chairs. There's only about ten people anyhow, and you wouldn't really think of that few people making those band records at Columbia in 1898, but it always varied, there were people who didn't show up, came in later, and were kicked out of their personnel, it was constantly changing. There are sometimes where you can hear that room more than others, and you can really tell that it's that room in the picture they're in. This is one of those cylinders. It's a quiet one, but you can still get the idea. You can hear it on this cylinder here as well. The thing about these two cylinders is that they were both recorded in 1898, and they must have used that studio quite a lot in 1898 to 1900, because I can still hear that same room as late as 1900. You can hear them play in that room on this(messy) cylinder here from 1900. 

To step away from the Columbia orchestra specifically, here are some examples of this recording room from that photograph. These next few are by:

Vess L. Ossman, the German Irishman.

Yes indeed, that vain banjo man that had the worst temper.

This one I one I have shared before, but it's one that just happened to be recorded in that room from that picture, here you go with that cylinder that's the first one that starts just as you click on the video. It's Ossman's "A Bunch of Rags", from 1898 even though they say 1899 as the recording date. Hylands is the pianist, but I'm not really sure who the announcer is, it might be Ossman, but then it might be the recording engineer. This next one might be one recorded in that room as well, here is Ossman's "Darkie's Patrol" from 1898, with Fred Hylands on piano.  Since Ossman was right at the end of the horns, his effect on the room was not always heard very well, unlike Hylands on the piano, where his distance oftentimes can be heard by the acoustics of the room. You can really hear the room on Ossman and Hylands' "Whistling Rufus" from 1899.(I still think that that is one of Ossman's best records, that exists to-day, as it captures Rag-Time better than most examples I have heard). 

Since I mentioned it, I would like to stray off to some of the best examples of early recorded Rag-Time, other than Ossman's Ragged masterpiece of " A Bunch of Rags". 

This first one is by the great and obscure:

Silas Leachman.

Here is Leachman's "Turkey in de Straw", from 1901.

I have no idea who the pianist is. It's either Hylands or Banta. 

It's a perfect unintended example of Rag-Time. When I say that, I mean that it isn't a Rag in itself, but the rendition in the accompaniment makes a Rag. Leachman must have been all for such a thing, he wasn't really a musician himself, but he liked to newest style of syncopated piano that the house pianists he was encountering played. 

This next one is an example of the Columbia orchestra's mastery under Fred Hylands from 1903. Here's "Peaceful Henry"(Harry Kelly) by the Columbia orchestra. It's the first thing listed on the playlist. It couldn't be better, it's actually an authentic Missouri slow drag from 1901, recorded under the direction of an Indiana Rag pianist. 

This next one is by Dan Quinn in 1901, this time with his favourite pianist Frank P. Banta. Here you go. It's a perfectly planned out record, and the accompaniment is absolutely on time with Quinn. I'm pretty sure that Banta's on the piano, as with Quinn, he always preferred Banta over Hylands. It's like this one that's also on my top early Rag-Time records, Quinn's "When Mister Shakespeare Come to Town", from the same year. I do however lean more toward Hylands on this one, because of certain things the accompaniment features. But it's still a mystery to the few collectors who have bothered to listen close enough to the piano accompaniment. 

This next one is by Arthur Collins and Fred Hylands. I have shared this one several times before, but that's only because it's perfect for proving many things about records from 1901. Here's Collins' "When Mister Shakespeare Comes to Town", from 1901. Not from 1906! Now those few Collins and Hylands Columbia's are always interesting, because Collins had a knack for vocal Rag-Time, and Hylands as we know had a little more than a knack for the style. Among these odd collaborations of ego powerhouses(Collins and Hylands that is), is Collins' famous rendition of "Bill Bailey" from 1902. I would have to say that Collins' "Bill Bailey" is one of my top ten favrouite records of this time, because it's so tame and ragged, and it's "Bill Bailey", you can't go wrong with that! 

To finish off, here is Bob Roberts and Hylands' Ragged specialty "Bill Bailey' from 1902, with amazingly slow and perfect accompaniment.(This one's for you John Reed-Torres!)

I hope you enjoyed this! 

Things Found in "Variety" and other similarities

Within the last few days, I have been searching through editions of Variety magazine for general information about any people I might know. One thing that I found a whole lot of was Burt Green and Irene Franklin. More particularly Irene Franklin, but in most of the things about them I saw, he was mentioned at some point. I also have been looking for anything on the Hylands' mentioned somewhere. They are indeed mentioned, but I haven't found too much yet. I have found many of the people that Hylands worked for, or knew very well. I did find this:

Hmm, that's interesting. I found this in the October 14, 1915 issue of Variety, rather than a date closer to his death. I think she remarried in 1916, or was it 1917? I don't really remember, but it must have been a few years after Fred died. I have always wondered what Fred and Marie's marriage must have been like, whether it was filled with love and attentiveness, or had love, but was not clear upon first seeing them. It's hard to know, but clearly Marie must have missed him after he died, and probably wore black as customary the year after he died. I always have thought that Fred and Marie's marriage was a very convenient one, as they were both stage performers who just happen to live in the same area when they met, and found each other good enough for one another to run off together.  I have no idea really, but I would like to assume that their marriage involved lots of booze, love, fights, adventures, and performances. 
Another marriage that was full of love I have read a whole lot about lately is these two here:

Yes indeed! That's Burt Green, Irene Franklin, and the older of their two daughters. Well, that's Burton Green folks. At last! I finally found a picture of him(that unfortunately could be a better picture!). 

There he is. Now this is one of those times where I wish I had photoshop. I would do so much to fix the lighting of this picture, because, as you can see that can be an issue here. I really want to sketch Burt Green, but I need to make this picture look better for me to get to it more precisely. It seems that from this picture, Burt and Irene's first daughter was about three or four years old in 1912. That would make her born in 1908 or 1909, the year after they supposedly married(which as in 1907). It's so odd, Burt Green looks like a shorter version of Len Spencer in a lot of ways, from what I can see of him. I could definitely see him and Fred Hylands being friends and publishing partners. I'm pretty sure that he was better off as a person and partner when he married Irene. That first wife of his must have been holding him down. He did seem to have lived more fully with Irene and his two daughters. 
From what I have found, Burt and Irene were everywhere, touring in all the theaters possible in every state, and eventually going off to France and England too. They were also a very revolutionary stage couple, as they were the first act to have an official advertisement on a magazine cover, and here it that very cover:

My god! How that gets the point across! Now mind you, this was the first of its kind, paid advertisements on magazine covers were experimental in the 1910's, and this one is the very first one. Burt and Irene were really the most popular couple in vaudeville from 1908 to 1918, and nothing could stop their popularity and praise. Burt could never have gotten the amount of attention he got with Irene than if he stayed with his first wife, he would only be as popular as his friend Fred Hylands(who could have been more popular on the stage). They made a handful of records together as well, two Edison cylinders in 1912, and four sides for Columbia in 1915. I really want to hear their Columbias! I will certainly look out for the only two sides they did, which are conveniently on a single two sided Columbia, so if I see one side, I sure as heck got the other one too. Burt and Irene were having too much fun on their recordings, that Burt messes up lots of notes and plays all sorts of funny melodies alluding to other things. You can really tell they were madly in love, and it lasted up to the day that Burt died. 

In further geeky studies from these last few days, I have found a few more interesting new records from the Santa Barbara website. This first one is by an artist I only mention here and there:

S. H. Dudley!
Here you go with Dudley and Banta's rendition of the 1896 hit "Chin Chin Chinaman" from c.1897.
What a comical record! It has all of Dudley's specialties put into one, his dialect skills, and his signature whistling. But how could I forget Banta's playing! It's wonderful! It's quick, comical and very fun.
These next few records are not from the Santa Barbara website, but they're Bob Roberts records. 
Now I think I have spoken of Bob Roberts' records briefly before.

There he is, in c.1903. Roberts was not particularly a popular artist when he began in 1902 and 1903, but by 1904, he was up there with the most popular artists like Arthur Collins and Billy Murray, which is really saying something. One thing that is interesting about his first three years making records is the piano accompaniment on most of his early records. It's pretty much always Fred Hylands. They must have proved to be a very good duo, both musically and personally. 
He made a large batch of 7-inch Columbia's in 1903 and 1904, all with the accompaniment of Fred Hylands. Here are some of them, all with wonderful accompaniments!
https://ia802704.us.archive.org/35/items/BobRoberts/BobRoberts-IveGotaFeelingforYouCoonSong.mp3
https://ia802704.us.archive.org/35/items/BobRoberts/BobRoberts-Alexander.mp3
https://ia802704.us.archive.org/35/items/BobRoberts/BobRoberts-BackBackBacktoBaltimore.mp3
https://ia802704.us.archive.org/35/items/BobRoberts/BobRoberts-BytheWatermelonVineCoonSong.mp3
I cannot get enough of Hylands' playing on these! He's so wonderful!
These later records are, in my opinion, the best examples of Hylands' playing overall, the earliest brown waxes of his may have gotten more syncopation and rhythm, but these get all his dynamics and power on the piano. 

I will still continue to look through Variety for more information about all those performers I know of, especially for the name Hylands.

I hope you enjoyed this!