John L

I keep coming back to the private collection too, some of that really bluesy stuff that can be SO potent.

Like many here, Yes is a band that I can only admire from a distance. They don't move me.

Albert King was amazing. I really miss him and his concerts.

Yes. Don't let the format put you off from hearing the music. It is sublime, and the sound quality is quite good, even for MP3s derived from AACs.

Yes, you do lose something, but it is hard to hear the difference for these kind of recordings, at least to my ears. Your comment did make me think a bit - it is not really proper to only make this music only available in a format for which one company has a monopoly over the software. I will mention that to Loren. If they make AACs available, they should also make MP3s available.

Installing iTunes is free and takes a couple of minutes. Once you download the tracks, you can immediately convert them into MP3s using iTunes and then use them in whatever other program you choose.

http://jazzmuseuminharlem.org/savory/ If you don't have iTunes, download it now.

Very good point. It is not as if they had to contend with a CD-length constraint, and people who prefer not to listen to them could just program them out. At any rate, there are other unreleased items with Lester Young in the Savory collection. So we might hope for a "featuring Lester Young" volume 2.

This is a truly incredible release, a huge new chunk in fine sound from my favorite big band ever assembled, and a new installment in the early magical years of Lester Young. The sound quality on most tracks is superb. This release has made me VERY happy.

I like this album quite a bit. It actually exceeded my expectations. I particularly like the way that they do the title track, Hoo Doo Man, and Everybody Knows About My Good Thing.

Volume 2 features Lester Young! Great news.

There is at least one more picture - my avatar.

A bit of information gathered from the Internet: Roost Records didn't even exist until 1949. So the records could not have been issued before then, and the matrix numbers would suggest that they might date from the early 50s. On the other hand, the session itself was apparently recorded by DeLuxe, an R&B label that never issued the music itself.

In his biography, Peter Pullman also presumes that the Roost session was not from 1947. He writes as if it is accepted as certain, and that the early 1949 session for Clef was Bud's first session as a leader. It is a bit frustrating that he doesn't make it clear exactly why he thinks that.

Right

These are live radio broadcasts from the Jazzhus Montmartre in Copenhagen from the 1960s. They were all previously released on separate Steeplechase albums bearing the names listed on the back of the box.

This was the way that I first got the Blue Note Monk as well. A lot of my introduction to classic jazz came from 2-fers on Blue Note, Prestige, Savoy, and Verve.

That's true, and which afterthought on the same music has the impact can depend on which generation you are from.

On the subject of FLAC files and CDs, there may some confusion here on what we are talking about. When a music CD is created, as opposed to a CD that stores files, the burning process essentially transforms everything into WAVE and then puts it on the CD. So there is no question here about whether the CD player can play MP3 or FLAC. It is just a ordinary music CD in any case. On the other hand, it is also possible to use a CD as a place to store files such as MP3, FLAC, or WAVE. Yes, not all CD players can read those kind of CDs. Some can, some can't. Most cannot read FLAC. Some programs (iTunes, for example) do not offer to load or burn FLAC files. So the files first need to be transformed into WAVE or MP3 before they are loaded into iTunes and /or burned.

While there are no advantages of converting from lossy (MP3, AAC) to WAVE files, there can be disadvantages. When they circulate, people can wrongly get the impression that they are lossless representations of the original source. They also take up more room and cause iPod batteries to wear down faster. Therefore, there is no reason ever to do it.

I think that there are two primary issues. First, compiled 78s were often not meant to be packaged as an album. Second, 78s can be compiled in many different ways, and often have been. So what is a better "album?" - a three LP set that compiles most of Armstrong's best Hot Fives and Sevens (The Columbia series), a three or four disc set that compiles all of them (JSP, Columbia CD), a single LP that gives a best of perspective? It is much easier just to speak of the single 78s themselves. The albums were afterthoughts.

Louis Armstrong, yes. I got interested in jazz just about the time of Louis Armstrong's death. RCA put out a memorial 2-lp set of his recordings on that label. That music just blew my mind completely. There was no going back from being a hard core jazz fan after that.

I like James Carter better in the organ trio context than in other contexts where I have heard him. I really went for Layin' in the Cut when it was first released, and still enjoy it quite a bit. Out of Nowhere also has some fine moments (IMO). Where I get off the bus with James Carter is when he starts trying to summarize the full history of jazz saxophone in the course of a 2-minute solo.

There are actually quite a number of artists whose artistry falls through the cracks of literature and music - the bard (chanson) tradition in Europe, for example. Like with Bob Dylan, the brilliance can be in the particular marriage of music, lyrics, and delivery, not literary enough for literature, not musical enough for "serious music" awards, not enough of a stage act for drama. Bob Dylan inspired 1000s, including myself, and it is very gratifying for me to see him get a Nobel.