Talk:Boogie-woogie

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Music/Music genres task force Boogie-woogie is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardize music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good article status.Music/Music genres task forceWikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forceTemplate:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forcemusic genre articles United States: Music Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject American music (assessed as Mid-importance). African diaspora Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

The final paragraph contains several grammatical errors and seems incoherent in places. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2CD0:4F20:6000:FD0F:7FEA:D13 (talk) 05:52, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no mention of Jimmy Yancey in this article? I'm researching a project on this genre and its piano beginnings, and Yancey is often reffered to as "the father of boogie woogie". Though he may be not as famous as some of the artists talked about on this page, he should be written in. Thoughts?

If you have verifiable information about Jimmy Yancey, and can provide a link(s), or a reference(s) for that information, figure out a way to work it into the article. P.S. New subjects should be added at the bottom of the Discussion page. I'll move this there myself if you or someone else doesn't do it in a few days. Steve Pastor 21:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I love listening to music (including boogie woogie) but don't have any skills to analyze the musical structure of what I'm hearing. So, with a little help from those of you who have those skills, I would love to know the following. John Lee Hooker's "Boogie Chillun" can be called boogie woogie? Stylistically, musically, structurally, or in whatever way? If yes, could you explain for me what the distinctively boogie woogie elements of "Boogie Chillun" are? I think Hooker's music is known for its use of one-chord tone. Does this aspect of his music have anything to do with the boogie woogie style per se? --Oichiro 03:22, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Boogie Woogie doesn't have to use 12 bar blues, it can be based upon one bar blues, or upon something other than blues altogether. It usually is based upon level rather than chords though. Boogie chillun is played on guitar, not piano however. This makes it Boogie, not boogie-woogie.--148.197.5.18 17:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose moving this article back to "Boogie woogie" from the current title of "Boogie woogie (music)" Once this move is made, "Boogie woogie (dance) would be linked as a disambiguation at the top of the page. Comments? -- Infrogmation 07:01, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm inclined to think the dance form of the boogie-woogie is well-known enough that the disambiguation page at boogie-woogie is justified and that this page should remain at boogie-woogie (music). —Lowellian (talk) 01:05, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

I see this came from another article, but I can't accept this without further documentation. Slaves were freed during the American Civil war. The West was still a frontier in the 1860s, and most of our "national railroad system" was certainly not built by then. Please come back with something to substantiate this statement. Steve Pastor 23:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

google railroad 1860 miles to get to this url [1] No question that the majority of our railroad system was built after 1860, which is just a few years before slavery was ended in the U.S.. Besides, boogie woogie didn't emerge until the early 1900's over half a century after slavery was abolished. Who are the critics who think otherwise? Steve Pastor 20:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you follow the link provided for this slave/railroad statement, you will see text from a real book that contradicts this statement, and agrees with the Robert Palmer information. Steve Pastor 16:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Roll 'Em, Pete" is now considered one of the first rock and roll records. ??? Actually, if you read the listed link, you will find that it is listed under the Hot Swing section. Anyone care to rebut?Steve Pastor 16:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the late 1940s & early '50s popular American music was undergoing many changes, and many new styles and combinations of old styles were developing. It's not unusual to see a single song, or performer, or album, or record label, classified in several different ways. Much musical classification has little or nothing to do with the music, and everything to do with commerce. (E.g., "R&B", which is really a racial marketing category, and has practically nothing to do nowadays with actual Rhythm & Blues music.) Much of it has more to do with academic theory and theoretical categories than with what the actual performers and their fans thought about the music. Pete Johnson is usually described as a boogie-woogie pianist. His most famous vocalist, Big Joe Turner, is usually described as a blues artist. Their music may be described with pretty much equal accuracy as rhythm & blues, hot, hot swing, jump, early rock & roll, jive, blues, barrelhouse, or boogie-woogie (and probably some other terms that I'm forgetting).

Jdcrutch (talk) 18:48, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, you talk boogie woogie and you've got to mention Little Richard. See here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzJRkXza-t0 Gandydancer (talk) 01:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, hear Lucille in there? :) Gandydancer (talk) 01:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is claimed that Source 5 (BOOGIE WOOGIE: Its Origin, Subsequent History, and Continuing Development -- by John Tennison (A.K.A. Nonjohn) -- Updated November 3, 2010.) verifies the first sound recordings of boogie woogie occurred in 1919. However, the author's own website: http://boogiewoogie.com/index.php/history/30_-_the_earliest_sound_recordings_containing_boogie_woogie_bass_figures/ says the following:

The Rocks” by George & Hersal Thomas (recorded February, 1923) and “The Fives,” (performed by Joseph Samuel’s Tampa Blue Jazz Band) and also written by George & Hersal Thomas (and also recorded February, 1923) are the earliest sound recordings of which I am aware that contain Boogie Woogie bass figures. Moreover, Fletcher Henderson’s recording of “Chime Blues” on Black Swan Records was recorded at a similar time (circa March,1923) and also contains a Boogie Woogie bass figure.

In particular, the website goes on to affirm:

Thus, the February 1923 recordings of “The Rocks” and “The Fives” should be regarded as a 1st-place tie for the earliest sound recording containing a Boogie Woogie bass figure.

This clearly pushes the first recording back from 1919 to 1923. At the very least, there is an ambiguity here, and either a different source is required, or the text needs to be amended to acknowledge these contradictions. --TonyFleet (talk) 15:39, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you should mention how Beethoven's piano sonata no.32 was the first work with boogie woogie elements. this is well known. see the wiki page of the no 32 piano sonata of Beethoven for details.

Why does the "typical boogie-woogie bassline' not match the "regular bass figure" shown previously in the article? I know there are variations but this isn't made clear and could be (is) confusing for people new to the subject. 90.204.116.151 (talk) 17:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhere among all the foolishness about "mbuki-mvuki" and other African terms, there really should be some discussion of the homegrown term "wooly booger", meaning pudendum muliebris. Given the sexual origins of at least the names of so many other genres and terms in African-American music (jazz, rag-time, rock & roll, groove, etc.), that one seems pretty plausible to me as the origin of "boogie-woogie". I know I've seen that theory advanced in a book somewhere, but don't have time to track it down.

Jdcrutch (talk) 19:15, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention in this article of the essential (AIUI) property of boogie-woogie: it is an attempt to reproduce on a piano the sound of blues played on a guitar, complete with bent notes and blue notes. This results in the 'dirty' chords and trills that are sh characvteristic of the style.

Instead, there is a huge middle section dedicated to the geographical origins of boogie woogie, which seems pretty pointless - I imagine it must have originated wherever there were blues musicians and pianos, which is roughly everywhere. MrDemeanour (talk) 10:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"...boogie piano players were first heard in the lumber and turpentine camps, where nobody was at home at all."98.110.40.14 (talk) 00:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone had fun there, and nobody noted it until now. Steve Pastor (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the edit where this material was added to the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boogie-woogie&diff=prev&oldid=395387639

It looks like a legit addition. It doesn't however, add anything to our understanding of the subject matter. Does anyone object to removing that phrase? Steve Pastor (talk) 19:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just heard of Shizuko Kasagi who was "Queen of Boogie-Woogie" in Japan during the occupation. could someone write something about the boogie-woogie diffusion outside USA? Was it a consequence of the US participation to the WWII ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 15.195.185.78 (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boogie-woogie. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927234920/http://www.lpdiscography.com/d/Daniels/charlie.htm to http://www.lpdiscography.com/d/Daniels/charlie.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's with this artifican ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CE:B713:CBBA:D55F:49F9:E329:34A1 (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]