Replies

” Um, “At Last” was first recorded by Glenn Miller in 1942.”

Yes, it was. And, Um, it sucked. Etta James made it, Um, one of the great moments of pop vocal history. I love Glenn Miller. But he and the male singer who did the recording didn’t get the song. The ring and soulful expression of Etta’s voice (it comes from her TOES, man) turned a ho-hum chart into a classic.

Glenn Miller gave a great deal to this country's war effort, including his own life. I don't think that you could find one of today's celebrities in 1,000 who would be willing to do the same.

If you don't like the Ray Eberle vocals, maybe you should try the Pat Friday or Nat King Cole versions.

“At Last” was first recorded by Glenn Miller in 1942.”

Yes, it was. And, Um, it sucked. Etta James made it, Um, one of the great moments of pop vocal history. I love Glenn Miller. But he and the male singer who did the recording didn’t get the song. The ring and soulful expression of Etta’s voice (it comes from her TOES, man) turned a ho-hum chart into a classic.

Like it or not, music can be political, and you are in left field. Artie Shaw, a big liberal, was so upset that Miller's "In the Mood" was more popular than his that he denigrated Miller's music as plebian and said that he wished Miller had died before he recorded "In the Mood". Shaw said that his version was "Blacker", "more soulful" and "in the tradition of jazz". Shaw's version leaves me cold. I haven't a clue what he was talking about, except to puff himself up. Shaw went on to create "symphonic jazz" which he deem more "serious". Of course, his sales went down.

As for "At Last", you have both Miller's and James' on YouTube. Miller's is in 4/4 time and danceable (a hobby of mine). James' is a blues/soul/R&B creation, related to Harry Warren's 1941 composition only in the melody. I can't dance to it, but there's lots of wailing going on. To me, it is so much kitsch. The 1942 original is faithful to Warren's composition.