1. Home
  2. music
  3. 199012-1647

Oscar Peterson vs. Art Tatum

Mosaic recently released a compilation of CDs entitled The Classic Oscar Peterson Trio Studio Sessions With Ray Brown and Ed Thigpen.  In the opening notes Bob Blumenthal correctly writes that Peterson had "technique and harmonic fluidity to rival Art Tatum" and yet that fact has troubled me for years.  Everything the trio played was well rehearsed.  Nothing was left to chance.  Anyone who ever went to hear the group live commented on how they played the same tunes, the same riffs, same everything night after night.  This was a well staged act.  I heard Stanley Turrentine in Chicago years ago and he covered some Coltrane things.  It was uncanny and when I spoke with him he said "Oh yes, once someone shows me how to play a piece, I can play just about anything.  The difference is that John can stand up there and think that shit up as he goes along.  The difference between true genius and the rest of us mere mortals."  And that is the difference between Oscar Peterson and Art Tatum.  Don't get me wrong, Peterson is terrific and this set is well worth hearing.  In my youth I wanted to be a drummer and learned to play brushes from Ed Thigpen.  Wonderful stuff.  Truly.  Just keep it all in perspective.  With total respect for everyone involved including Bob Blumenthal, who I grew up reading while I was a student at Berklee, when it comes to INVENTIVENESS, harmonic and otherwise, there is Art Tatum without equal.  Oscar Peterson definitely had the chops, but he could not think that shit up as he went along.  It has only taken me 60 years to figure this out, but then I am also a mere mortal.

billstevenson
vinylrestingplace's avatar
vinylrestingplace
48 posts
 

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.

dogearedaudio's avatar
dogearedaudio
299 posts
 

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.

dauest
4 posts
 

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

More to discover