JETman

It's a different world. With all the cd's I've bought, and am still buying, I for one wouldn't mind a slowdown in the reissue department. I know, this is blasphemy here on this board, but I'm sure I'm not the only one sick of buying the same titles two and three times over. Besides, there's alot of great new music out there.

How was the sound on the original vinyl?

Is this the musician in you talking, or the "lover of music with eclectic tastes who wants to be anything BUT white" talking?

Ok, Low boy.

Ok, you win. I apologize for misunderstanding your original post.

I generally agree with you. I have all the expanded and unreleased stuff from those two albums on a Columbia collection called "Nostalgia in Times Square." I certainly like having and hearing the full length stuff. The thing is, though, that Mingus went into those sessions knowing that he would record more than he would use. The original albums reflected his conception of how they should sound. The expanded "Mingus Ah Um," which I also have, simply doesn't have the same pacing as the original. I'm glad the full length performances are out there, but I feel they should supplement Mingus's original albums rather than replace them, IMHO. Very well said!

Tommy Lee? Is he a drummer? I thought he was only the guy on that Pam Anderson's private tape... One and the same. He's the drummer for Motley Crue.

You must be way more advanced in years than I thought!

Why not get and keep both? Music that isn't the artists' vision is not necessarily bad. Obviously, things like amount of music allowed on an lp and other factors often entered into editing decisions. FWIW, these unedited versions are excellent, and do not suffer from the recent decision to expand, rather than remain true to, the original lp.

I believe they are the full length versions that were originally released on the Complete 1959 Columbia Recordings 3 cd Sony/Legacy set and Mosaic lp set.

Note that in your orinal post, you said "both" Candid sessions. I replied that there are more than 2 sessions, not albums. So are we talking about: Charles Mingus Presents Charles Mingus Mysterious Blues Reincarnation of a Lovebird ? Mingus recorded only twice for Candid - Oct 20 and Nov 11, 1960. This material is now spread over 4 discs. The best material is on the 2 original issues called Mingus and Charles Mingus Presents Charles Mingus. All well and dandy, but my point, however inconsequential it may seem, is that one session does not necessarily correspond to only one album, and vice versa. Just trying to point out the error of Mr. Lowe's ways.

What do we call albums produced from more than one session then?

What does beautifully produced have to do with anything? Sucky music can be done "just right", but it's still never gonna be more than sucky music. OK?

Note that in your orinal post, you said "both" Candid sessions. I replied that there are more than 2 sessions, not albums.

There are considerably more than 2 Candid sessions, and they are all fantastic!

Do NOT skip "Mingus Presents Mingus" with Dolphy and Curson on Candid AND "Tijuana Moods" (Mingus' personal favorite) on RCA.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I always wondered how anyone could even listen to the Beach Boys, let alone find their music interesting.

Why doesn't it compute? I just don't dig "greasy" music. Not my thing. After years of digging Jimmy Smith, for instance, I realized that most of it sounded like roller-skating music to me.

That's ok, I won't hold my breath! Your loss. I'm afraid you're the one who's not listening.

Lee Morgan (aka Last Session) and Lee Morgan Live at the Lighthouse are fabulous, desert island discs for me. Larry Young, Bobby Hutcherson and McCoy Tyner also did good work during this period. Ok, I'll give you those four! But most of it was dreck. How 'bout Turrentine's "The Look of Love"?

Any late 60s/early 70s Blue Note album. Turrentine's "Always Something There" is a prime example of crud! Albums that are too greasy also annoy the hell out of me.

Phil Collins was considered quite a facile drummer in his time. May not be your cup of tea, but listen to any Genesis album between 1973 and 1981.

Well, fuck him! Can't. He's now gone.

Definitely earlier. How many 1970s jazz albums have you heard that seem to be lacking the "real" meat on the bones? Not only poorly (and cheaply) recorded, but poorly conceived as well. This seems to be true, I believe, more in the area of the avant-garde, where people are especially quick to heap the word "genius" onto music that sometimes is too difficult for the music consuming public to understand. "If we don't get it, it must be great".

I have always found the art displayed there to be, shall we say, lacking.