Finally the Blues

[medjuck]

Since I've got my laptop on my lap as I'm listening it's easy to ask questions and make comments. Hope you don't mind.

Disc 2: Who's the pianist on Barrelhouse Blues?

And you suggest (correctly I suspect) that Gershwin had heard some James P.Johson. Do you think Zez Confrey did too or do you think he heard Gershwin?

[AllenLowe]

thanks, Chuck, though I like basic corrections - I think with collectors there are sometimes issues that are worth engaging. Of course, I also kick myself for missing stuff.

actually, I think Barrelhouse may have James P. on piano, though I'll have to look for my discography -

as for Zez, I know very little about him, though I think everyone was listening to everyone else in those hot house days - however, I have noticed on some of his solo pieces how much he sounds like Eubie Blake, sometimes uncannily so. I do not know if this is a coincidence or not.

[AllenLowe]

stephenrr - in case you're reading this - I'm having some problems with my messenger - but I have plenty of boxes left -

[Big Beat Steve]

I disagree with Steve on most of this - of course, spelling errors should be corrected - but it's a question of understanding who played the music and when, and while Chicago Rhythm Kings is indeed the name of the band, I would rather know who was in it, especially from a perspective of 80 years. It's like calling all of Charlie Parker's sides as being by Charlie Parker - not by Charlie Parker's All Stars. Or James Brown, and not James Brown and the Famous Flames. Silly to worry about that kind of thing.

My point is just this:

I do see that in most cases a leader's name (under whose name the recordings were first issued and are comonly listed) is indicated and a few soloist's names are thrown in the ring afterwards. So you at least can GUESS where to look up the music for further info. But wouldn't it be easier for the listener who wants to investigate the music further (e.g. the rest of the respective sessions) if this were handled that way throughout? Sometimes rattling off a few names really can get even those fans of the music hung up who have access to the usual discographies (at least in the case of the hardcopy versions or those with no elaborate search function or index).

E.g. who or what is Johnson/Nelson/Porkchop? That way of writing leaves it open to guess if this is just a rundown of names of a recording originally credited otherwise (see the "Teschmacher (sic)/Spanier/Sullivan/Krupa" item discussed above) or if they actually appeared like that on the 78s label. The comments on the tracks by these leave you none the wiser as to their actual identities, and the release number in the "discography" is a total mystery as no label is given at all. Why does the interested listener have to go here to AT LEAST get a clue as to the identities of the artists as a BASIC starting point for further research?

http://www.answers.com/topic/nelson-rhinoceros

After all Lonnie Johnson isnt' just anybody.

Again, I really don't mean to slight the overall scope and achievement of the opus at all, just wondering about this aspect that at least in my opinion unnnecessarily confuses things for those interested in further exploring the music. And that's not silly at all.

Edited April 25, 2010 by Big Beat Steve

[AllenLowe]

it's called reality - this project would not get done if I were required to get that level of detail. One person, one basement, one studio, one year, 3000 choices of music to narrow down to 925 cuts - each requiring individual restoration, mastering, sequencing, and then notation - 80,000 words of text, the equivalent of a small book (maybe 150 pages of text) - no assistance, financial or technical. Just me.

So,not perfect but done because of the importance of the overall project - and truthfully, anyone listening and reading knows what was recorded and when it was recorded, and has some substantial historical perspective on the recording itself, from the prime movers in each performance to some of the technical/social/historical issues. The notes (which one critic has called "a work of art themselves") are detailed enough, I believe, for the scope of the collection. Anyone wanting further detail and explanation has plenty of options. As far as I can see, no one else has even attempted something like this in terms of integration of styles and collation of sources.

and ultimately that is, I believe, of greatest importance - and it may seem impertinent, but you are perfectly free to try something of similar scope. See you in a year.....

Edited April 25, 2010 by AllenLowe

[stephenrr]

Thanks Allen....I did get your email and already pushed the PayPal button. Looking forward to exploring some (for me) totally new areas of Blues history.

[Big Beat Steve]

Please don't get worked up, Allen, I am NOT AT ALL debating the selection of the music as such and I do realize that eventually it all boils down to a matter of personal priorities. And of course it's "only" the track and artist listings we are talking about, and actually my comments on that aspect are more an expression of regret than of criticism. Those who want more info will have options to look elsewhere and of course will HAVE to look elsewhere. Yet providing that info in a manner that avoids inconsistencies and the spelling issues IMHO would not really entail much extra work and effort and at the same time would raise the buyers' impression of the dedication that went into this project even further.

Just MY stance on reality ...

This from somebody who - in another field of collecting/hobbyism - has invested countless hours of researching, checking, double checking and cross checking information himself for a final result that was to be as close as possible to a definitive reference work ("definitive" obviously being a goal virtually impossible to achieve), and all this with zero monetary compensation (being "only" the proofreader, and the author certainly did not get rich either) and no outside support except one's own archives and research knowledge. So yes - I have been through unpaid research and compilating efforts myself. But again, it's obviously a matter of one's personal priorities that determine the general approach so we'll leave it at that, at least as far as I am concerned.

Again, good luck for the further volumes.

Edited April 25, 2010 by Big Beat Steve

[AllenLowe]

just defending my work and happy to talk about all of this. I think these are legitimate questions/issues. Just a matter of reaching real-world conclusions.

Edited April 25, 2010 by AllenLowe

[rostasi]

I've been working in the yard nearly all of this beautiful day...

Really The Blues Volume 1 text

Rod

[AllenLowe]

I'm gonna have to give you co-authorship. Thanks for the work.

[Hot Ptah]

I started listening to CD 9, then CD 8, then CD 7. My son was in the car with me as I listened and I imagined that he might like the later recordings better.

WOW! This is a great set. It is an amazing stew of acoustic country blues all time classics, early jazz works in blues form, spirituals, piano blues, and some undefinable odd songs, which I especially love. 'Ham Beats All Meat"--wow, there had been a hole in my listening soul before I heard that one for the first time!

There is enough of the "must include" well known artists and their classic songs, but then so many obscure songs too. I love the song on Disc 9 of the physician and woman patient--it reminds me of a similar routine by Lonnie Johnson in which he was a dentist. I had not known that the Lonnie Johnson song was only a part of a song tradition about women and medical men.

Before hearing the three CDs which I have listened to in this set, I had thought that I had a decent working knowledge of earlier blues recordings....but no, I can already tell that I did not.

Allen, I wonder if you could tell us why you chose to include two takes of Helen Morgan singing the same song on the same date?

[Neal Pomea]

Easy Rider Blues, Soileau and Robin (for Leo Soileau and Moise Robin), per Tony Russell's book.

[rostasi]

Easy Rider Blues, Soileau and Robin (Leo Soileau and Moise Robin)

I'm expecting differences of opinion.

As I've said, I wouldn't have even done this if the tracks were already in the database, but since I needed to have the names for iTunes, I decided to do it the way that I would be comfortable with. The Devlin' Tune discs were already in the CDDB, so I hardly noticed the mistakes until a later time. So, if you feel better with "Soileau and Robin", then you should change it for yourself. I stayed with just "Leo Soileau" because this seems to be the most frequent way that it's been presented on disc ("The Early Recordings Of Leo Soileau" for instance). Same with the previously mentioned "Johnson/Nelson/Porkchop" - yes, it seemed odd, but there appears to be an agreed preference over the years for their names to be presented that way (except close dashes linking their names seemed to also be preferred: "Johnson-Nelson-Porkchop").

As for comments about inclusions of band members: yes, I agree that "Charlie Parker All-Stars" is better than just "Charlie Parker", but it is also better than the artist listed as: "Parker/McGhee/Gray/Marmarosa/Kessel/Callender/Lamond" or some other config. I think that's where the "liner" notes come in - extrapolating on the sidemen's genius.

Anyway, I'm still looking forward to the remaining discs. I'll probably keep my corrections to myself this time.

[AllenLowe]

well, I would call them clarifications - corrections are in order for title mistakes (eg The Vamp/The Wamp) and spelling. I worry mostly about date and personnel/leader errors. So far I have not really seen that kind of problem (except the McCoy/Rosie/Rosa Mae Moore, which was based on an apparently inaccurate LP notation) - disliking my the method of formatting (which is based on the old reference librarian idea of point of most common reference) is somewhat different. To me, if you can look at it, know who was playing and when, and then see supportive notes that are accurate and in depth and have relevant emphasis, than the job is done. And I don't really lose sleep over certain kinds of shorthand.

Corrections are fine - I think the problem is a certain collector's righteousness (and I don't ascribe this to you, Rosatsi) that is meant to intimidate the uninitiated as less pure in intent, and that can have an inhibiting effect on projects like these.

as for "two takes of Helen Morgan singing the same song on the same date? " - mastering error. Either that or I just can't get enough of that heavenly warble....

Edited April 26, 2010 by AllenLowe

[Dan Gould]

If there is a mastering error, isn't it likely a track was left off?

We want replacement discs! We want replacement discs!

Just kidding, I think you've done a helluva job, leave the complaining to the peanut gallery.

[AllenLowe]

funny thing was that as I mastered the thing I kept confusing Helen Morgan with Ruth Etting - very different singers, yet somehow with a similar aura. I'm hoping there are few if any actual mis-identifications of tracks - as far as I know there are 2 on That Devilin' Tune, not bad considering that it, too, had over 900 cuts. Really the Blues was mastered on hard disc - Devilin Tune on DAT - so Really the Blues was a lot quicker and easier to do, and less prone to confusion. Typos are another matter, as I did only some of the proofreading; in the graphics stage there was some assistance, but it's unfortunately an occupational hazard in the reissue world.

Edited April 26, 2010 by AllenLowe

[Hot Ptah]

funny thing was that as I mastered the thing I kept confusing Helen Morgan with Ruth Etting - very different singers, yet somehow with a similar aura. I'm hoping there are few if any actual mis-identifications of tracks - as far as I know there are 2 on That Devilin' Tune, not bad considering that it, too, had over 900 cuts. Really the Blues was mastered on hard disc - Devilin Tune on DAT - so Really the Blues was a lot quicker and easier to do, and less prone to confusion. Typos are another matter, as I did only some of the proofreading; in the graphics stage there was some assistance, but it's unfortunately an occupational hazard in the reissue world.

I am referring to CD 7, Track 24, and CD 8, Track 7. Both are listed as Helen Morgan, "Can't Help Lovin' That Man."

If this was a mistake, please rush out a corrected copy with a different song on CD 8, Track 7, so that I can be one of a few with the special collectors edition of Really the Blues, the impossibly rare version with two Helen Morgans.

Edited April 26, 2010 by Hot Ptah

[papsrus]

Tons of brilliant stuff here Allen. Most of which I certainly had not listened to before. I love the variation, the shifting terrain, in the way it is all presented, too. On disc 8, for example, the listener goes from the absolutely otherworldly 'Old Time Baptism PT 2' (RM Massey) to Frances Hereford & Jelly Roll Morton's incredible 'Midnight Mama' in the space of three tracks!

And upon listening to the opening track on disc 8, 'Every Day of the Week Blues' (Pink Anderson, Simmie Dooley), I immediately thought, "Well, I now know where Dylan came from."

[Big Beat Steve]

Anyway, I'm still looking forward to the remaining discs. I'll probably keep my corrections to myself this time.

DON'T!!!!!

Edited April 26, 2010 by Big Beat Steve

[AllenLowe]

yes, they are both the same recording (the two versions of Helen Morgan) - I think also that I transferred both an LP version and a CD version and didn't realize they were both still on there. Unless they sound exactly the same, in which case I think I was confused by the matrix numbers - one of which was

090290289089082908908920890892089082908208908984787676732456563724 a

and the other was

090290289089082908908920890892089082908208908984787676732456563724 b

(I was trying to confuse Big Beat Steve) -

[Hot Ptah]

yes, they are both the same recording (the two versions of Helen Morgan) - I think also that I transferred both an LP version and a CD version and didn't realize they were both still on there. Unless they sound exactly the same, in which case I think I was confused by the matrix numbers - one of which was

090290289089082908908920890892089082908208908984787676732456563724 a

and the other was

090290289089082908908920890892089082908208908984787676732456563724 b

(I was trying to confuse Big Beat Steve) -

One of the versions is listed at over 3 minutes and the other is listed at under 3 minutes. I have not listened to them back to back several times to determine if they are identical otherwise. There is such a wealth of great material to get to, that I did not want to stop and do that.

[AllenLowe]

there could be some speed variation - or difference in header or footer time - when I have a chance I'll check it out.

[rostasi]

Just listening to the first seconds of each - the 2:58 version on Disc 7 has a thinner sound

than the richer (more bass) sounding 3:04 version on Disc 8. Also, some speed variation too.

Also, that's "Every Day in the Week Blues."

[Big Beat Steve]

yes, they are both the same recording (the two versions of Helen Morgan) - I think also that I transferred both an LP version and a CD version and didn't realize they were both still on there. Unless they sound exactly the same, in which case I think I was confused by the matrix numbers - one of which was

090290289089082908908920890892089082908208908984787676732456563724 a

and the other was

090290289089082908908920890892089082908208908984787676732456563724 b

(I was trying to confuse Big Beat Steve) -

What for?

I am no matrix number fetichist. I'll leave that to the Blue Note geeks around here.

But in fact I do seem to remember a CD on the Ace label that had the same song on it twice by mistake and Ace (e.g. through a note in the Blues & Rhythm mag) went out of its way to launch a recall. :D

So ...?

(But I take it that you have double-checked Vols. 2 to 4 of that package to make sure this doubling up was a sole and single occurrence? )

[Hot Ptah]

No recall is needed as far as I am concerned. I am not complaining even if there was one duplication. With the immense riches of this set, it doesn't matter. I brought it up only because I thought that there might be an interesting story about two takes of the song.

I am feeling grateful toward Allen, more so as I explore this volume even further. What a great collection! Allen really has a knack for picking songs with a distinctive quality within their stylistic niche.

Edited April 26, 2010 by Hot Ptah