Martin Denny RIP

thank you mr martin

i will set up a fake palm tree and tune up my marimba in salute

http://www.tikinews.com/

http://www.tikiroom.com/

http://www.atomicmag.com/articles/2002/love_of_tiki.shtml

There is much more.

there was also a pretty impossible Yellow Magic Orchestra cover of 'Firecracker' on their debut record in 1979.

but, i notice, it is also on a denny broadway themed album, are the 2 versions the same?

I scored copies of almost all of his original LPs in pristine condition for $1 each at a San Rafael thrift store about a decade ago, and it has made all the difference.

^^^good question here^^^

I think it has to do w/the advent of stereo records -- all those lounge guys (and adult pop singers a la sinatra/dinah shore/peggy lee etc mode) were some of the first to take advantage of huge sound

a: yes

what about 1993-1998?

what about jass?

Was 1959-1964 the most incredible stretch of awesome instrumental pop music?

what about 1993-1998?

What did '93-'98 have to offer instrumentally? The surf revival? Smooth jazz? Not clowning you, just wondering...

what about jass?

thats a whole nother thread. we're talking about the pop/rock/soul world, where instrumentals are a mild rarity.

But is it so easy to distinguish between jazz and pop 1959-1964? On that easy listening thread I revived, one dude was talking about easy listening as a continuum which incorporated pop and jazz. Here:

Easy Listening was never just a fad for me. it fits into a continuum with soundtracks and black music. there's obvious crossover points with jazz singers (Tony Bennett, Frank Sinatra, Peggy Lee, Nancy Wilson etc), but less obvious ones where it in the instrumentation (orchestras with pop or jazz rhythm sections, moogs, etc), the stripped down arranging, the heavy reliance on standards and pop cover versions, the session players.

As for 1993-1998, I imagine Jaxon means techno/electronica/whatever. And if Jaydee's "Plastic Dreams" counts there, which it should, I say hells yes it was a great time for awesome instrumental pop music.

I suppose I should have assumed the author of the above snippet was a dude. Sorry.

Oh wait - he's Michael. Carry on.

i actually was joshin talking about post rock, but yes, techo definitely is a better instrumental music than eazy. and i love me some eazy.

kenny g - bridge over troubled water (van dyke 12" remix)

dyk

i actually was joshin talking about post rock, but yes, techo definitely is a better instrumental music than eazy. and i love me some eazy.

I read your post backwards (why???) so I thought you were pumping Eazy-E as great instrumental music c. 1993. But I agree: techno >>>>> easy (and Eazy, actually).

Was 1959-1964 the most incredible stretch of awesome instrumental pop music?

I'd say 1969-1975: Chart oddities like "Keem-O-Sabe" and "Love Is Blue" + JB's and Billy Preston funk workouts + Barry White conducting and Philly strings.

Was 1959-1964 the most incredible stretch of awesome instrumental pop music?

I'd say 1969-1975: Chart oddities like "Keem-O-Sabe" and "Love Is Blue" + JB's and Billy Preston funk workouts + Barry White conducting and Philly strings.

I wouldn't say '69-'75 was better than the Ventures/Martin Denny era, but it was definitely interesting, with a lot of semi-novelties on the pop side (Hot Butter's "Popcorn") and furious funk coming from the R&B end (James Brown's "Popcorn").

And don't forget the out-of-nowhere rockabilly of Harlow Wilcox'"Groovy Grubworm" (1969)...

But is it so easy to distinguish between jazz and pop 1959-1964? On that easy listening thread I revived, one dude was talking about easy listening as a continuum which incorporated pop and jazz.

Well, if you're referring to the occasional jazz 45 that made the singles charts back in those years (Dave Brubeck's "Take Five," Jimmy Smith's "Walk On The Wild Side"), that I can understand. But I thought the person meant jazz in general, and talking about some non-Top 40 act like John Coltrane would probably belong in another thread.

Really? By "orchestras with pop or jazz rhythm sections," I thought he meant Bert Kaempfert: "Wonderland by Night," Lawrence Welk: "Calcutta,"
Mr Acker Bilk: "Stranger on the Shore," David Rose and His Orchestra: "The Stripper" (just looking at some number one instrumentals from the period). Right, most jazzbos would puke at the suggestion that these songs had anything to do with jazz. And ack - if this is what counts for "awesome instrumental pop music" 1959-1964 ("Calcutta" puke! gag! wretch! vomit! hurl! upchuck!), I'll stick with techno 1993. But voila.

Really? By "orchestras with pop or jazz rhythm sections," I thought he meant Bert Kaempfert: "Wonderland by Night," Lawrence Welk: "Calcutta," Mr Acker Bilk: "Stranger on the Shore," David Rose and His Orchestra: "The Stripper" (just looking at some number one instrumentals from the period). Right, most jazzbos would puke at the suggestion that these songs had anything to do with jazz. And ack - if this is what counts for "awesome instrumental pop music" 1959-1964 ("Calcutta" puke! gag! wretch! vomit! hurl! upchuck!), I'll stick with techno 1993.

When I think of instrumentals from the pre-Beatles era, even though I dig Martin Denny, I'm mainly talking about Link Wray, Bill Doggett, Johnny & the Hurricanes, Ventures, Lonnie Mack, Duane Eddy, Lee Allen - you know, rock & roll. You may have heard of it? It's an ancient form of folk music that doesn't always receive the just due it should, but these acts will always get some shine from me!
:-)

I don't know WHERE you're coming from with this stranger-on-the-shore malarkey...

TS K-Jo vs. Hoodoo

No, not to start a flame war or shoot down any opposing theories, but I guess when I think of the late fifties and early sixties being a golden age of instrumentals, I tend to think more of Dick Dale than Al Caiola. I just thought it was funny that when this era was mentioned, the loungier acts like Lawrence Welk were brought up, but the rock 'n' soul guys were totally passed over. I know it's a Martin Denny thread & all, but still...

When did we switch to talking about you (and rock & roll)? We were talking (rather politely, I thought) about how Michael from the easy listening thread might have conceived of "orchestras with pop or jazz rhythm sections" (which has now been quoted four times on this thread) and not the more general category of "instrumentals from the pre-Beatles era."

And I wasn't saying that YOU thought "Stranger on the Shore," etc. was awesome pop music from 1959-1964. I was merely wondering if ANYONE thought that.

Sheesh.

current desktop:

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/120/screenshothd7.png

you have very womanly arms

http://bp1.blogger.com/_nxH9e2e4OI8/RyR60fPCDLI/AAAAAAAACQA/yTkNla27APk/s1600/strum-mental-5.jpg

thanking u

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51437R78ATL._SS500_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51hqGZeG7wL._SS500_.jpg

When did we switch to talking about you (and rock & roll)? We were talking (rather politely, I thought) about how Michael from the easy listening thread might have conceived of "orchestras with pop or jazz rhythm sections" (which has now been quoted four times on this thread) and not the more general category of "instrumentals from the pre-Beatles era."

And I wasn't saying that YOU thought "Stranger on the Shore," etc. was awesome pop music from 1959-1964. I was merely wondering if ANYONE thought that.

Sheesh.

All my fault. What you wrote was so vaguely worded that I didn't know WHAT you were drivin' at. Hell, your response above is probably the most understandable post I've seen from you since this thread was revived!

At any rate, although I tend to speak my mind, no disrespect is meant...

-- Kevin John

At this point, I shouldn't be shocked that Vee Jay released other things besides R&B/gospel/jazz, but still that Deadly Ones LP shown above is a surprise...

At any rate, although I tend to speak my mind, no disrespect is meant...

-- Kevin John

-- Rev. Hoodoo
WTF? Is this some kind of Norman Bates stuff?

printed kevin j.'s signature by mistake

no disrespect, but both of y'all just got killfiled.

less nonsense more martin denny album covers

http://www.shellac.org/exotica/images/hypnotiqa.jpg

I LOVE MARTIN.

one summer in the go go 80's i helped this guy move. it sucked. it was hot and he had tons of shit. he paid me a hundred bucks. anyway, he had a huge record collection. he let me dip into it. i got all his buffy st. marie albums and all his martin denny records. and a ccr record. and a nice german pressing of freewheelin'. i listened to the denny albums a bunch. they sounded rad to me. i knew about him in the usual way that a scumfuck like me would know about him: tg, chris & cosey, RE/SEARCH. ya know the drill. but it really got me going on that tip for a while. still great buys everywhere of that stuff at the time. i opened up a hole in the wall store in philly in the early 90's and that's when it seemed that things were peaking. i ended up selling most of my prize specimens. but what the hell i was trying to stay afloat. and i had great conversations with people about the music. and people brought me cool stuff to hear. it was nice. i had some eye-opening conversations with skip heller, a philly dude, he was a WEALTH of knowledge. he had worked with les baxter and yma so he had lots of great stories. he eventually did some of that cool modern cartoon network/ren&stimpy type of raymond scott-derived music for stuff like dexter's laboratory. that seems to be where the best elements of the music went to. commercial animation in the 90's and beyond. and it DOES sound great on teevee.

http://lpcoverlover.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/denny_primitiva.jpg

http://img65.exs.cx/img65/9665/dennyqv3004ic.jpg

http://www.popsike.com/pix/20040326/4004191671.jpg

http://www.shellac.org/exotica/images/enchanta.jpg

as much as i love martin though, i like arthur lyman probably just as much. in one of those big batches of records i bought last summer was a ton of lyman stuff and all kinds of swanky sounds. fun to hear again. walter wanderley up the wazoo.

omg does anyone have that exotic moog record looks so awes

it's good but not astounding, doesn't sound like they spent too much time on it

1957-1962 - untouchable gold stretch, every album great
1962-1964 - drops the hawaiian instruments & goes straight-up lite jazz combo for A Taste of Honey, my favorite album from this stretch is A Taste of Hits -- you'd never guess it was Denny, it doesn't sound distinctive, but it's catchy & totally swings
1964-1967 - cheesy Hawaiian slide guitar dominates, albums like 20 Golden Hawaiian Hits & Hawaii Tattoo are not that great
1968- 1970 - haven't heard many of these but sounds like he started experimenting again, the Moog record is weird and Sayonara is the most spaced out record of his I have

ANYWAY...the reason I brought up the (apparently baffling) distinction between jazz and pop is because I just read a fantastic book called Making Easy Listening: Material Culture and Postwar American Recording by Tim J. Anderson. One of his major points is that the most significant musical revolution of the postwar years in America wasn't rock & roll but rather records. So he has two chapters on My Fair Lady as a property that was exploited across various media but particularly through numberless recordings of the thing in the late 1950s/early 1960s. And a lot of these were instrumentals that blurred the line between jazz and pop (and classical and...).

He ends the book with an analysis of how the discourse surrounding high fidelity recording followed two seemingly opposed strains - one pumping it as a more accurate representation of reality and another as a passport to explore other sounds, other world, hence Denny and the like. But given the lack of standards as to what exactly qualified as high fidelity (basically, any recording or piece of stereo equipment could make claims on it), both strains were united in a campaign to get listeners to better train their ears so they could get the most out of whatever kind of music they were listening to. So Anderson looks at ads and reviews that tried to position the listener as the center of this new sonic universe. But the overall portrait is of genres collapsing into this amorphous mass of stereophonic sound. Which suggests that if 1959-1964 wasn't the most incredible stretch of awesome instrumental pop music, then it's at least a fertile ground to explore such an assertion.

Again, great book. Too bad Steve Shasta will never know about it.