Chuck Nessa

Good excuse to buy a new car. I can't get it either. I blame Bush and DeVos. www.whatyoudontknowaboutdick.com/

Missed that. Do you really think I read your posts?

My guess is the WC series sold so poorly in the first pressing they declined a second and threw out the printed material.

Only if you know the current market price for a bushel of corn and the amount of US government subsidies used to generate this bushel/price.

Good answer. Why not play it on a 4 track machine for even more flexibility? I know the answer which is the same as the reason to avoid a simple stereo playback. FWIW, I think the highest quality transfer can be made by transferring on a full mono machine and patching problems by picking undamaged bits via multitracking. It takes more work but pays sonic results. You do have to deal with matching tape noise beds but it works very well. I certainly hope someone is paying for high quality copies of these original masters as they whip by the tape heads. I told you he'd have an impressive answer. The proof, though, is in the pudding as they say. I've heard some of Steve's work on these tapes (not the MJQ specifically, but others from the OJC catalog) and they are by far the best sounding versions of this material that I've ever heard. I'm not really choosing sides or picking a fight here, just presenting options as I see 'em. I just want all to see there are no friggin' absolutes. I do think all these companies are damaging the "historic" master tapes by remastering again and again. Get it right with current technology and do it again when the technology improves significantly. Use technology for something other than a marketing opportunity.

No mention of his playing on Bill Dixon's "Intents and Purposes" or in tents and porpoises. Dandy!

My guess is they were scrambling at the last minute to find a woman and missed Amina.

I attended one of the sessions for that record. Ron Carter was on the date too.

Good answer. Why not play it on a 4 track machine for even more flexibility? I know the answer which is the same as the reason to avoid a simple stereo playback. FWIW, I think the highest quality transfer can be made by transferring on a full mono machine and patching problems by picking undamaged bits via multitracking. It takes more work but pays sonic results. You do have to deal with matching tape noise beds but it works very well. I certainly hope someone is paying for high quality copies of these original masters as they whip by the tape heads. I told you he'd have an impressive answer.

Producers are the guys who are supposed to direct the engineers. Done plenty of this. I'm sure SH will give you an impressive answer.

I beg your pardon....................... Why are they playing a mono tape on a stereo machine?

Up for any possible input. Thanks.

Gee Jim, I thought you could toss this off the top of your head Some days Jim can't find the top of his head. Me too.

SHIT, the boobs popped in my hand!

My real argument is why should anyone get free stuff from people spending time and money to generate the "stuff". My argument has little to do with me. My passing along this info for free is another discussion.

I would hope most of the folks in Holland, MI would retire. This entire community scares the shit out of me.

Clem, your might have "stepped on your dick" here. I believe the Chess/Aristocrat recording was a cover of Baby Face Leroy Foster's recording (with Muddy and Little Walter) on Parkway done a month earlier. Little Walter always claimed authorship. Delmark issued this on vinyl (DL-648) and cd but I strongly recommend the lp - they robbed the cd of the recording's soul.

Don't wanna burst any bubbles but I'd say "a fraction of a generation". Numbers can be argued and really don't mean shit. Are you being as ironic as I was? Didn't notice your ironic smiley.

FWIW, I keep my printed discographies (and even buy more) to crosscheck the data.

I provided information for you from the cd-rom of Walter Bruyninckx work. It is a PDF file and can be updated and edited if you have the software. Rust, Jepsen, Bruyninckx, Rabin and many others (earlier and later) have invested years of work in this and need both recognition and payback. Discography is a time intensive and exacting task. I started my record company in 1967 and started answering letters from discographers a year later. I'm not sure you have any idea of the work and expense involved in building the database now being expanded. I find complaining about the lack of free/easy info and offering some sort of "free will offering" insulting to these fine researchers. FWIW, the DESOR information would be still in it's infancy without the earlier, exhaustive work of Massagli, Pusateri and Volonte supported by their customers. This age of instant free information can be disturbing to some of us who paid for the data and now feel the need to be a "good guy" and provide it to others. I can't imagine how Brian Rust or Walter Bruyninckx would feel about it.

It's in most of the discographies. Please buy one. I probably won't. But rather than explain why here I'm going to start a new thread re: printed discographies on the discography thread. You're welcome to attack me there. I didn't get this from a "printed discography".

Thanks Mark.

Interesting.