The sheets above the piano keyboard don't look like music notation but just ordinary handwritten lists/comments/notes or whatever. As far as I know, Dave Brubeck was not a strong reader of music notation.

yes indeed

Not at All, Keith Richards

ukposts.info/have/v-deo/m2KrqaiRoJ1lrWw.htmlsi=Mlx2OCs1Xvck5dOo

@@alfching2499 Keith Moon too, may be.

Keith Partridge.

Pretty standard clothing for jazz musicians at the time.

its the original way it was recorded. Not an arrangement. A little faster is all.

​@@sethwexler6910no, the middle portion with the saxophone and the piano is very different

All drummers in the jazz world stop and pay homage at the shrine of Joe Morello.

Im surprised he didnt use an 18 inch bass drum. Wouldve never used a 22 for this group and music.

I will ensure you receive a refund.

Because currently, the more AI filtering that is applied, the less real everything looks. I have the un-filtered version on my channel too, if you want to compare the differences.

So relaxed that when he laughed with relief at the end of the Unsquare Dance recording, they kept it on the record.

Remaster. That is his last name. It's French, I think. Sometimes written "re' Master". Always pronounced: "Remma Stir". He was the conductor for the quartet, and was typically situated in the wings, stage left, in the eye-line of Dave.

@@CharleyHolland Ah, yes. Monsieur Remaster. He was also the guy that mixed Dry Martini's for Paul to make sure that he always sounded like one.

but live they wouldnt want to play it like the recording.

Hey, it’s jazz. I’ve heard a number of recordings (both studio and live) of this and other Brubeck & Co numbers, and there are many variations, usually in the solos. Not uncommon.

On the big hit Take Five (written by Paul Desmond), with that ungainly 5/4 beat, the boys got better and better playing it after the famous recording. Some live versions are very fast and quite surprising.

You need a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) or audio software. I use Logic Pro. Get some half-decent monitors. Listen to some great sounding recordings, then flip over to the music you're mastering, and try to adjust the various EQ controls until it sounds more like the reference track. Keep going backwards and forwards until it's as close as you can make it. You can also use the audio spectrum analyser, which is a visualisation of the music across the audio range. That might give you some clues... but ears are better. There's a function in Logic called Match EQ, which also can help you cheat a bit. There's plenty of remastering videos right here on UKposts. Good luck!

lol

@@sethwexler6910 you should check out Paul Gilbert's cover of this

I think you will find that that is a minority opinion around these parts.

Wolfie would have loved Hell out of this, and you know it!

I think so. Brubeck's sound was simply one of many types of jazz, which took form just 50 years prior to this 1962 recording, and quickly diversified in many directions. Brubeck's music was comparatively studied, structured and accessible, which might not be to every jazz lover's liking... and that's the question you're probably actually asking here. I consider the popular music of Brubeck contemporary George Shearing to be jazzy, but not jazz. But either musician and their respective band members could smoke up some real stuff if they wanted to. They probably just couldn't make it pay.

*intellectual, could have or could've*

Waaaaa waaa

Pseudo, not psuedo. Throwing rocks in a glass house.

​@@jim2376haha, this is not the right context for that sentence.

Intro typical of the pseudo intellectual nonsense of the time. As if the listener needs it explained!