Ossman`s 'Ragtime Medley' Transcribed

[Shawn McSweeny]

The Clifford Essex score for 'Ragtime Medley' doesn't represent Ossman's remarkable c. 1898 Columbia performance - found here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0iJ84t7Fhg .

For a more faithful score, the recording was edited to reduce noise, enhance signal and reduce tempo by nearly half, while preserving score pitch. Transcription was done measure by measure. The result is considerably closer to Ossman's performance.

PDFs in DOT and TAB notation are below. The notation markings - positions, important open strings and right hand fingering - are my suggestions. Feel free to find your own. A digital playback of the transcription is also provided.

Note : This post follows a November, 2024 Discussion where concern was expressed for the titles of the medley's component strains. In an attempt to preserve the performance while repudiating its original context, the strains are identified in the score by composer surname only.

[Shawn McSweeny]

Here's the TAB :

[Jody Stecher]

Well done!  And thanks.

[Shawn McSweeny]

Hi Jody,  My hope is Ossman's arrangement will get played some, but if not, at least it's been preserved. 

[thereallyniceman]

First Class, Shawn!  Preserved it will be.

Thank you again for all the time and effort put into these works for everyone to share.

Ian

[Richard William Ineson]

Well done Shawn, Ossman was a phenomenal banjo player and I suppose that Clifford Essex had to trim Ossman's  arrangements down to make them accessible to his customers. Does anyone know if any of Ossman's original arrangements of his recording output still exist?

[Shawn McSweeny]

Richard, I think you have it exactly right on CE's approach to his published Ossman scores.

As for any Ossman's originals :  Recording artists at that time were required to provide the studio with a copy of their arrangement. The ledgers from the top US recording studios of that era have survived and are in the hands of enthusiasts affiliated with DAHR (Discography of American Historical Recordings)   https://adp.library.ucsb.edu/ . However DAHR is silent regarding arrangements. I suspect that over the years, as recordings were dropped from studio catalogues, stacks of aging arrangements were discarded. 

In light of that, I've transcribed a few other Ossman recordings (fairly accurately) and can post them here, if interested. 

[Jody Stecher]

Are you sure it was the studio and not the record company that required the written arrangement?  Did any record company own their own recording studio in 1898? My impression is that most companies rented available rooms and used portable equipment at first. Columbia Records did not have their own studio until 1948.   I can see why a record company would want to have a written arrangement and would have the power to demand it. But would an independent studio have such authority?  Would a hotel that rented a room have the authority or even the interest?  And what about people that got recorded who did have written arrangements?  What about blind recording artists?   Something may be missing from the narrative here. 

Shawn McSweeny said:

Richard, I think you have it exactly right on CE's approach to his published Ossman scores.

As for any Ossman's originals :  Recording artists at that time were required to provide the studio with a copy of their arrangement. The ledgers from the top US recording studios of that era have survived and are in the hands of enthusiasts affiliated with DAHR (Discography of American Historical Recordings)   https://adp.library.ucsb.edu/ . However DAHR is silent regarding arrangements. I suspect that over the years, as recordings were dropped from studio catalogues, stacks of aging arrangements were discarded. 

In light of that, I've transcribed a few other Ossman recordings (fairly accurately) and can post them here, if interested. 

[Shawn McSweeny]

Not possessing your clear perspective on the subtleties therein,  I presumed the term 'recording studio'  as interchangeable with 'recording company' . Clearly my bad.

[Trapdoor2]

I think Edison had the only "studio"...and true to form, Edison owned the air the artist breathed. I doubt Ossman had a formal written arrangement, unless he was to be backed by a studio orchestra. The money was in the sheet music...but that would have been an deal done independent of the recordings...at first.

1898, nobody knew anything. Would it catch on? Could you make money at it?

Blind? Female? Black? They were ripe for the picking. Wild west...the lawyers came later.

[Jody Stecher]

Oh! In the movie business "studio" and "company" are near synonyms. It hadn't occurred to me you were using the term that way. In the recording world it was different. It can be confusing with other terminology as well. "Producer" in the film world means the person(s) who provided the money to pay for the project whereas the producer in the recording world is something similar  to "director" in the film world. Not quite the same though.

Some Mid 20th century record companies did own their own studios and the equipment therein. Others rented time at independent studios. Some did both as it was more convenient and cost effective to record, for instance, a 20 piece band close to where those musicians lived than to have them travel 2000 miles or more to wherever the company's corporate office and own studio was located. It made sense to send one producer to where the band was located and hire a local engineer and good facility,   But in 1898 there were not many studios to either own or rent.  There was one in London for instance. But Ossman was on the other side of the Atlantic.   Even in the 1960s some record companies preferred to use hotel rooms, both large and small, with good acoustics and bring in the equipment and engineer.

Anyway, thanks for explaining what you meant. Now I understand.

Shawn McSweeny said:

Not possessing your clear perspective on the subtleties therein,  I presumed the term 'recording studio'  as interchangeable with 'recording company' . Clearly my bad.