Reggae Dread Academy · Guided Listening
Marcia Griffiths, Sonia Pottinger and the Evidence Behind the Sound
Learn to explain a recording thoughtfully and credit its makers accurately. Begin with two performances, then follow the people, releases and sources behind them.
Music History & Credits
A record carries the work of people whose names may be easy to miss. This course connects attentive listening with careful recognition.
A record reaches us as a finished sound. This study asks us to slow down and notice both the performance and the evidence around it. We begin with Marcia Griffiths’s voice, then consider songwriting, arrangement, production and the work of making a release available. Sonia Pottinger’s documented production role gives us a way to discuss authority without assuming that a single credit explains every decision. You will compare two recordings of one song, describe what you hear, and follow each claim back to its source. The aim is attentive listening with accurate credit, including the confidence to leave a question open.
Headphones or speakers, a way to take notes, the four worksheets and access to the linked sources. The study suits independent learners, listening groups and introductory classrooms.
External audio access may require an account or subscription, and availability varies by region. No audio is rehosted here. If a full recording is unavailable, document an authorized substitute and verify its edition before proceeding.
Your core comparison
Use the exact listening routes below. Your first task is to note the player’s title, edition, running time and access date. The comparison asks what you can establish; it does not supply invented listening observations.
Recording A · Studio One
Open the Soul Jazz Records presentation from Studio One Rockers. Use it as the reference for your A timestamps.
Locate: the early Studio One recording. Keep the upload date distinct from the recording and original release dates.
Open recording A on YouTube ↗Recording B · Naturally
Open Naturally / Steppin’ on Apple Music and select “Feel Like Jumping” in the Naturally sequence, track 6.
Locate: the later album recording in the linked 2017 digital edition. Use its player for your B timestamps.
Open recording B’s album on Apple Music ↗A title, upload year or compilation cover alone cannot establish which performance is playing. Use the Release-Version Tracker. If the sources do not settle a detail, record the uncertainty.
| Question | What the packet supports | Keep this limit visible |
|---|---|---|
| Early recording: named roles | The artist’s discography names Bob Andy (writer), Jackie Mittoo (arranger) and Clement “Coxsone” Dodd (producer). S3 | The interview describes collaborative creation; a short credit is not a complete allocation of authorship or rights. S5 |
| Later album: production | The discography identifies Sonia Pottinger’s production of Naturally. S3 | Album-level attribution does not identify every musician, harmony singer, engineer or individual decision. |
| Which release contains the track? | Doctor Bird’s DBCD02 listing places it sixth under Naturally. S4 | Catalogue information describes that edition; it is not a full session ledger. |
| What does the artist remember? | Griffiths recalls feeling comfortable working with Pottinger and discusses returning to earlier repertoire. S6 | Testimony supports an account of experience; it does not reveal all contractual terms or financial outcomes. |
Module 01 · 75 minutes
Turn two listens, a set of credits and an artist’s account into one short, carefully credited listening card.
Open recordings A and B, sources S3–S6 and the worksheet packet before starting. The timings allow two listens to each track with brief pauses. If access or reading takes longer, extend the session and preserve the comparison activity.
| 0–7minutes | Orient Read the three questions and the short introduction, or watch the companion introduction when available. Identify A and B in your Release-Version Tracker. |
|---|---|
| 7–19minutes | Listen to A Play the Studio One selection once without writing. Play it again, pausing as needed. Log two audible details and one question; use the player’s timestamps. |
| 19–31minutes | Listen to B Select “Feel Like Jumping” in the Naturally sequence. Repeat the same process. Note a possible contrast, then replay both passages before treating it as an observation. |
| 31–42minutes | Read the credits Use S3 and S4 with your Contributor Map. Distinguish the early recording’s credits from the later album’s production credit. Leave unsupported personnel blank. |
| 42–52minutes | Read the artist’s account In S5, read the creation-of-the-song passage; in S6, the Pottinger and revisiting-repertoire passage. Summarize in your own words and record the interview date. |
| 52–62minutes | Compare the evidence Complete the Source Comparison grid. Label one source-supported statement, one interpretation and one unknown. Discuss why these categories are useful. |
| 62–72minutes | Make a listening card Write 100–150 words on one recording. Include its edition, two observations, a sourced credit, an interpretation and a question. Pair it with a separate credit line. |
| 72–75minutes | Share and revise Exchange a card or read it aloud. Name one change made because of evidence. Keep the unresolved question for the later modules. |
Confirmed in the source: the identified document explicitly supports the claim at the stated scope. Interpretation: your reasoned account of what a sound or relationship means. Unknown: the sources consulted do not settle it.
An observation is something you can point another listener toward. A conclusion about identity, intention, ownership or income may need evidence beyond the audio.
“I listened to [artist, title, edition, link]. At [time], I hear [specific detail]. At [time], [second detail]. I interpret this as [reading]. [Source] credits [name] with [role and scope]. I have not established [question]. To investigate, I would seek [evidence].”
This is a writing scaffold, not a claim about an actual passage. Add a separate contributor line and source links.
Companion introduction
Use the introduction below to prepare for the lesson. Keep the worksheet beside you and pause whenever you need to open a recording or source.
Before you name the people behind a record, listen to what they made possible. Notice a voice entering, a rhythm repeating, or a phrase leaving room for another sound. Your first response may be pleasure, surprise or recognition. This lesson asks you to keep that response, then become more precise about it.
Welcome to Who Made This Record?, a Reggae Dread Academy study connecting Marcia Griffiths, Sonia Pottinger and the evidence behind the sound. Download the worksheets using the link near the top of this description. You can write by hand or take notes alongside the page. No music-reading experience is needed.
We will return to three questions throughout the course.
What can I hear?
Who is credited, and by which source?
What is confirmed, interpreted or still unknown?
The first question directs your attention to the recording. The second asks you to recognize the people whose work is documented. The third helps you explain your conclusions honestly. You can have a strong interpretation without pretending that every detail is settled.
Our core comparison uses two recordings of Feel Like Jumping. Recording A is the Studio One selection presented through Soul Jazz Records. Recording B is the later version on Naturally, available in the linked Naturally and Steppin’ digital collection. Select the track in the Naturally sequence.
Write the edition and player address on the Release-Version Tracker. Check what the displayed date describes. A release date, a remaster date and an upload date are different pieces of information. If your player is unavailable, document the authorized edition you use instead and check that it contains the intended recording.
Pause this video and listen to A once without trying to fill every box. Then replay it and write two details. Give each a timestamp. Repeat the process with B.
Separate an event from your response to it. For example, “a second vocal sound enters after the lead phrase” describes an event. “That response makes the performance feel communal” offers an interpretation. This is an example of the method, not a report about a particular moment in either track.
If you cannot confidently identify an instrument, describe the sound. You can say “a low repeating figure” and leave the instrument uncertain. Accuracy grows through careful attention, not through using the greatest number of technical terms.
Now open the course source packet. Compare the artist’s discography with the named reissue listing. Keep performer, songwriter, arranger and producer as separate roles. The title of a song does not tell you that the same people performed on every recording of it.
When a source credits someone at album level, preserve that scope. Do not quietly turn it into a complete account of every track’s session. A missing credit is a reason to investigate, not permission to insert a familiar musician’s name. Your map can contain a useful blank.
Read the linked Griffiths interview passages about creating the song and working with Pottinger. What does a participant’s recollection help you understand about collaboration, confidence and returning to earlier material?
An artist’s account and a release listing have different purposes. One may describe how an idea developed; another may give a concise attribution or identify tracks on one edition. If they differ, explain the difference and say what further evidence would help. Neither needs to be stretched into an answer about every contract or payment.
Choose one recording and write a short listening card. Name the artist, title and edition. Include two audible details, a documented credit, one interpretation and one unresolved question. Add the listening link and the source for the credit.
Ask a partner to find your edition and check a timestamp. Then ask whether they can trace your contributor’s name back to the evidence. Revise any sentence that blurs what you heard with what you inferred. The aim is to help another person listen while making the work behind the recording more visible.
Return to the three questions: What can I hear? Who is credited, and by which source? What is confirmed, interpreted or still unknown?
The full Academy study extends this method through vocals, songwriting, production, labels, release versions and source comparison. Your final project is a credited listening guide. Bring your curiosity and keep your questions open. Thoughtful listening and accurate recognition can grow together.
The full course
Begin with the signature lesson, then deepen one skill at a time. Suggested total: 4 hours 45 minutes, including the introduction. Take additional time for repeated listening or group discussion.
Completion ticks and card notes save in this browser when storage is available. They are not submitted to Reggae Dread. Download your card to keep a separate copy.
A listener can notice something important before knowing its technical name. A voice may begin before the beat, a low repeating figure may continue under a phrase, or a group of voices may answer a lead. Start with what you can locate in the recording. Then decide what you think it does.
This opening module is the 75-minute signature lesson. It compares two recordings of “Feel Like Jumping” and introduces all four worksheets. No music-reading experience is required. Use plain language and include a timestamp from the player you actually heard.
Try it: write one immediate response after an uninterrupted listen. On the second pass, replace a broad word such as “powerful” with an audible detail that might explain your response. If you cannot confidently identify an instrument, describe its sound or role and mark the identification tentative.
Make: two Listening Log entries and a short credited listening card. Keep one unresolved question visible.
“Lead” and “harmony” describe musical roles. Neither tells us how much preparation, judgment or invention a performer contributed. Listen for entrances, sustained notes, answers, unison passages and changes in vocal density. Ask how the relationship directs your attention.
Return to one passage in each core recording. Sketch a simple sequence in words: lead enters; another voice answers; instruments continue. If you hear only one clear voice, record that result. Do not manufacture a harmony part to fit the exercise. A doubled vocal can also make one performer sound like several.
For an optional comparison, open “Lively Up Yourself” on the linked Natty Dread edition. The official Marley album page names the three I-Threes members. That supports an album-level contributor entry; it does not let us label every audible part as Griffiths, Rita Marley or Judy Mowatt. [S7][S8]
Activity: use two columns: “vocal event I hear” and “identity supported by a source.” Leave the second blank when needed. Discuss how harmony work can shape a recording even when listeners remember the lead artist’s name first.
Make: a 100-word explanation of a vocal relationship, with two timestamps and a clear limit on any personal identification.
A song can be performed again; a particular performance can be recorded, mixed and reissued. Those are related activities with different contributors. A familiar title is therefore a starting point for research, rather than a complete identity for an audio file.
The artist’s discography attributes the early “Feel Like Jumping” to Bob Andy as writer, Jackie Mittoo as arranger and Clement “Coxsone” Dodd as producer. Her interview adds a recollection of creative collaboration. Preserve both statements with their sources instead of quietly replacing one with the other. [S3][S5]
Activity: enter writer, arranger and performer as separate rows in the Contributor Map. Next to each name, record what the source actually supports. Add a note where testimony describes a contribution that the short discography credit does not fully explain. Do not infer ownership percentages, sole authorship or royalty receipts.
JIPO distinguishes musical works from sound recordings as protected categories. This course uses that distinction to keep our questions precise; it does not decide the rights in either selected recording. [S9]
Make: three sentences explaining the song, the chosen recording and the evidence for one credit. Then name the document you would seek to answer a remaining rights question.
Production can involve choosing repertoire, organizing a session, shaping a performance, funding work and deciding which results to release. The balance varies. These are possibilities to investigate, not a checklist of actions automatically performed by every credited producer.
For Naturally, the course packet identifies Sonia Pottinger as producer at album level. Griffiths’s account of their relationship adds a performer’s perspective on working conditions and trust. Neither source is an itemized diary of every studio decision. [S3][S6]
Activity: choose an audible contrast between recordings A and B. Write it as an observation first. Then test the sentence “Pottinger chose this sound.” What additional evidence would connect the difference to her personal decision? A session account, production note or corroborated interview might help. Until then, describe the contrast without assigning its cause.
Discuss women’s authority through named work: the singer’s interpretation, the producer’s documented role, and the relationships needed to make a release possible. Avoid explaining a musical choice through a claim that women naturally produce or sing in one particular way.
Make: a 150-word production note with one supported credit, one question about process and one specific source you would seek next.
A label name on a sleeve can look like a complete answer to who made a record. It is only one clue. The original label, recording studio, producer, publisher, reissue imprint and present listening service can be different entities.
Use the paired Naturally / Steppin’ release as a practical example. Cherry Red identifies Doctor Bird and catalogue number DBCD02. Apple’s linked digital edition carries its own date and a Sanctuary/BMG sound-recording notice. Those entries describe the editions in front of us; they are not a complete history of the original sessions or later agreements. [S4][S2]
Activity: draw a short route in your notebook: people making the performance; a recording; a particular release; your player. Under each stage write only the names your sources support. Put a question mark beside any studio, licensing relationship or distribution step you cannot document.
Ask what work becomes less visible when a listening service displays only a track title and lead artist. Treat the missing fields as research questions, not proof that no one did the work.
Make: a release-identity paragraph that correctly distinguishes the artist, album, edition, imprint and platform. Do not turn a label credit into a claim about everyone’s income.
A re-recording involves a new performance. A remix reorganizes recorded material. A remaster works on the presentation of an existing recording. An edit changes the length or structure. These terms can overlap in release histories, so read the named edition and check the evidence before choosing a label.
For this course, A is the Studio One recording presented through Soul Jazz; B is the later Naturally recording in the linked digital collection. An album history, a reissue date and a video-upload date answer different questions. The artist dates Naturally to 1978; Apple dates the paired digital edition to 2017. Record both with their labels. [S3][S2]
Activity: fill both columns of the Release-Version Tracker. Compare duration, opening, vocal delivery and ending. A different duration alone does not prove a new performance: silence, edits or playback presentation may account for it. Explain which combination of evidence supports your version description.
If access forces you to use a different release, give the replacement URL and edition. Check it against the intended recording before transferring your timestamps. Do not silently substitute a live performance, remix or compilation with unclear provenance.
Make: an A/B entry that another learner can reproduce, including a note on what remains uncertain about the session or transfer.
An interview can tell us what an artist remembers and values. A release listing can identify the track sequence on a named edition. A contract can address a defined agreement. None automatically answers every question about a recording.
Activity: compare the official discography, the relevant Griffiths interview passage and the Doctor Bird track list. For each, identify its creator, purpose, date, subject and limits. Look for a claim they share and a detail they describe differently. Return to the original page rather than relying on a search snippet.
Use “confirmed in this source” precisely: it means the source explicitly supports that statement. Where sources disagree, name the disagreement. A firsthand account has particular value for experience and intention; it is still a recollection shaped by the interview context. A commercial listing may be precise about its own edition while remaining silent about an original session.
Pay attention to names and spellings. Sonia Pottinger and singer Sonya Spence are different people. Keith Anderson is the name associated with Bob Andy; identity information should come from a source, not a guess based on similar text.
Make: a Source Comparison sheet with one confirmed attribution, one listening interpretation and one unresolved question. State what new evidence would change your conclusion.
Your final guide should help another person listen. Build two short cards, one for each core recording, then add a brief comparison. Aim for 450–650 words overall. A class presentation or accessible audio narration with a written credit sheet can meet the same goals.
Each card needs the artist and title; the exact edition and authorized link; two timestamped observations; documented contributor roles with sources; one interpretation; and one unresolved question. Finish the comparison by explaining what changed in your understanding when you checked credits and testimony.
Activity: exchange drafts. Ask a partner to open the specified edition, locate one timestamp and trace one credit to its source. Revise any sentence that makes an interpretation sound like a documented fact. Keep source notes short enough to follow and detailed enough to reproduce.
Credit an album-level role as album-level when the packet does not establish track-specific detail. “Not established in the sources consulted” is a useful result. It respects contributors without filling the gaps with familiar names.
Make: a final listening guide and a short change note explaining one correction. Use the assessment rubric. You finish this study when you can explain a recording thoughtfully, show your evidence and credit its makers accurately.
Write, compare, revise
The complete packet contains six US Letter pages. Print at actual size or choose “fit to page” for A4. Each worksheet carries the same three questions as the introduction.
Download the complete worksheet packet ↓
Two passes through each recording, with timestamps and separate observations and interpretations.
Download Listening Log ↓Connect each documented person to a role, a source and the scope of that credit.
Download Contributor Map ↓Compare three sources, then build a short credited listening card.
Download Source Comparison ↓Keep recordings, editions and dates distinct in an A/B comparison.
Download Release-Version Tracker ↓Prefer digital notes? Use the listening-card builder below or reproduce the worksheet headings in your preferred accessible notes app.
Your first credited card
Use your Listening Log and Contributor Map. The 75-minute lesson asks for 100–150 words plus credit lines. Module 8 expands the work into two cards and a comparison, 450–650 words overall.
Final project · Module 08
Score each criterion 0–2: 0 = absent or misleading; 1 = present but needs clarification; 2 = clear and traceable. Aim for at least 8/10 after revision. This is a learning guide, not a formal qualification.
| Criterion | A strong response shows |
|---|---|
| Audible detail | Two locatable observations for each recording, separated from the learner’s interpretation. |
| Contributor credit | Documented names, roles and sources; the scope of each credit stays clear. |
| Edition accuracy | Specific, reproducible listening links and dates labelled according to what they describe. |
| Source comparison | An explanation of what release information and artist testimony each contribute. |
| Honest limits | At least one unresolved question and a realistic next source to consult. |
Check the two audio routes in your region before the session. Open the targeted interview passages in advance. Print the four worksheets or provide accessible copies. Learners may describe rhythm, texture and timing in everyday language. A partner can operate the player; do not assess hearing acuity or knowledge of notation.
Give the first listen uninterrupted attention. On replay, allow pause and discussion. Ask “Where can we hear that?” before correcting terminology. When a learner names a musician, ask “Which source gives that credit for this recording?” Use group roles—listener, source reader and recorder—and rotate them.
Instead of “That is wrong,” try “Your interpretation is plausible; add the audible detail supporting it.” If a student credits a specific harmony singer without evidence, retain the vocal observation and revise the identity to “not established in the sources consulted.”
The discography’s brief credit and the interview’s account of collaboration should remain identifiable as different forms of evidence. Do not demand that students settle songwriting ownership from this packet. For a release-sequence question, prioritize the particular edition’s listing; for the artist’s experience, identify and discuss the first-person account.
“Doctor Bird’s DBCD02 track list places ‘Feel Like Jumping’ within Naturally. That establishes the track’s position on this edition; it does not identify everyone heard in the recording.” A full listening answer must add observations collected by the learner.
For a two-session class, finish the first meeting after the listening and credit comparison; begin the next with testimony and the short card. If only a preview is accessible, label its time range and limit observations accordingly. Complete the full-recording comparison when authorized access is available.
Source packet · Checked 2 October 2026
S1–S6 support the signature lesson. S7–S8 are an optional vocal extension; S9 provides general rights context. This packet does not establish complete session personnel, current ownership shares, contract terms or royalty receipts.
Authorized label listening route. Record the title, channel, running time and access date shown in your player. The upload date is not the session date.
Licensed digital edition, dated 11 August 2017. Select “Feel Like Jumping” in the Naturally sequence (track 6). This is the course’s later recording.
Use the DISCOGRAPHY paragraphs about the early hit and the two Pottinger albums. Website post dates elsewhere on the page are not original release dates.
A particular CD edition and its track sequence. It identifies “Feel Like Jumping” under Naturally; it does not supply a complete session personnel list.
20 September 2017. Read the questions about working with Bob Andy and creating “Feel Like Jumping.” First-person recollection provides evidence of the creative process.
29 September 2017. Read the questions about meeting Sonia Pottinger, recording the albums and revisiting repertoire. Compare recollection with edition-specific track lists.
Optional vocal extension: identifies the I-Threes as Rita Marley, Marcia Griffiths and Judy Mowatt. Album context does not identify every voice at each second.
Optional listening extension: select the studio “Lively Up Yourself.” Keep the 1974 album date separate from the 2013 remaster notice.
General background: musical works and sound recordings are separate protected categories. This page does not determine ownership of the selected tracks.
Explore Reggae Dread’s Deep Dives for catalogue and cultural-economics articles, or take the Jamaican Riddim Economics Academy study to develop your understanding of songs, recordings and rights.
The Academy’s wider question remains practical: what changes when we recognize the people and work behind the sound?