Oscar Peterson vs. Art Tatum

Nobody -- not Oscar, not anyone -- can rival the virtuosity and harmonic genius of Art Tatum. But having said that, I find Art’s playing to often veer into exhaust-the-listener excess. Too much genius in a 3 minute tune can be exhausting.

I’ve heard Oscar play live (not in person, but concert footage or talk show appearances). I never heard one bar of canned/practiced notes. He, too, was a harmonic genius, but one more fluid and audience-attuned. One of the great jazz pianists of the 20th century IMO.

My favorite, though, particularly adjusting for era, is Teddy Wilson. Many similiarities between Oscar, Art and Teddy, but TW played the fewest notes to reach the harmonic sweet spot, at least to my ears. He also absolutely excelled at accompanying singers (so many great recordings with Billie Holiday), which is something Art didn’t do as well.

Then again, it’s kind of stupid to compare great pianists like this. Each one is a generational talent, and once they’re gone, there’s not direct replacement. 

https://forum.audiogon.com/posts/2925767

Agree the use of "versus" is a legitimate way to tag a comparison, but its use in this particular case, comparing AT to OP, is silly for reasons already explained: they played in different eras, had vastly different influences (AT was in fact a major influence on OP), audiences and careers, etc.  They are both great, and frankly, beyond comparison.  Why even try? A comparison between Oscar Peterson and Miles Davis might be more apt, at least in the way we have discussed: their differing attitudes to LIVE audiences. I saw both perform multiple times. Unlike OP, Miles never spoke to the audience or introduced a number. He often wandered off stage and frequently turned his back to the audience, not for sonic effect (he was mostly amplified when I saw him) but to communicate better to other performers, and not to the audience. He thought himself an artist not a performer and did not need audience approval. Oscar Peterson was a gracious performer and enjoyed interacting with fans. Just so you know, I like "Bitches Brew" and even "On the Corner"...Miles' recorded work deteriorated less than his live playing in the later years. 

Art Tatum's best recorded work was done during the 78 RPM era, which is outside the experience of the audiophile audience. Some later work is preserved in mono on the Pablo label and is worth exploring. Oscar Peterson's best recorded work was done in the stereo LP era and has been reissued frequently in audiophile sound. This is yet another reason a comparison between the two seems silly in an audiophile forum.

Honestly, Tatum had "set pieces" too.  If you listen to his recorded output from the mid-40’s to the mid-50’s, you’ll hear the same approach to various tunes.  Some of the 50’s recordings, like the Ray Heindorf private recordings, show some variation from the Granz recordings, but at that point he pretty much settled on his presentation of some of his classic performances.  Some of this was due to his declining health, but the other factor was that his fans expected a certain reproduction of his classic interpretations, and he was happy to oblige.  I’ve never considered Peterson "formulaic," but you you will hear many tropes repeated.  I find Tatum, on the whole, a more gratifying performer despite his repetition of approaches to many tunes, probably because he was just less "commercially" inclined.  But Peterson could surprise and delight.  His "Exclusively for My Friends" series of albums have many, many wonderfully spontaneous moments.

Kind of Blue is the gateway drug for me into Jazz. My father had one of the largest Peterson record collections next to Kareem before the fires. Now I really appreciate his music. Thanks for the Art Tatem tip