[pkopwqzsdcvbn]

Sorry Chip, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. While I agree that Krall has had (and continues to have) top-of-the-line musicians in her band, she herself is neither an outstanding pianist or vocalist. She's on record herself as saying she's uncomfortable with 'up' tempos. I realize that my opinion of her as a singer (that's she's competent but uninteresting) is completely subjective, but it should be obvious to any student of jazz piano that she's no Art Tatum. Once again I want to stress that I'm not saying she sucks. Just that there's lots of people out there who do what she does, and many who do it as well or better than she does. I'm just baffled by why she, in particular, has risen so far above the pack.

Usually this has to do with things like charisma and star quality, but there again to me she seems stiff and distant. The reason I mentioned Nat Cole in an earlier post was that after seeing Krall on TV I pulled out a couple of Cole CDs (Nat "King "Cole, the Trio Recordings, volumes 1 through 5. These are mostly acetates of radio broadcasts of the Trio) and was struck by how different Coles versions of tunes in Krall's repertoire come across. Krall's arrangements are indeed "tight and hip" but for the most part they are identical to Cole's. Cole's vocal presence is phenomal (he's a seasoned old-school show business professional and knows how to put a song across) while Krall sounds stiff and affected.

I haven't heard her new CD of Elvis Costello and original material, and I'm wondering if she's looser with that stuff. This was certainly the case with Holly Cole, who never sounded comfortable singing standards, but really loosened up on her album of Tom Waits' material.

I don't personally care much for Holly Cole either, but just in terms of stage presence she's got Krall beat all to hell, and yet she inhabits a much lower level on the success and celebrity scale. This is what's got me puzzled.Krall is the Ice Queen, and the public really goes for that, it seems. Maybe it's the Bjork factor.:-)

As for owing her a debt of gratitute for keeping jazz before the public...maybe. I'm with Nation on that one, though. I've never seen one incidence of someone who never listened to jazz before going out and buying an Eric Dolphy record because they dug Dianna Krall. Back when jazz was still pop music, these kinds of singers (Jerry Southern, Rosemary Clooney, Anita O'Day) kind of existed more in a separate market. Sometimes they recorded with jazz bands, and jazz musicians played on their records (but then they played on everybody's records in those days) but serious jazz listeners didn't pay them much attention, and their fans tended to not be into straight ahead jazz.






*disclaimer* This is not a snipe at Krall. I think it's fine that she has a career, and by all reports she's a nice person. I just don't see her as 'superstar' material, both in terms of musicianship and stage presence.