Big Beat Steve

I received my shipping notice yesterday (9 January), and delivery is still announced for next Monday (12 January). Keeping my fingers crossed now ... Am really looking forward to that book. Though I am sorry to say that the earlier "Listening To Prestige" session presentation Vol. 1 (1949-53) I ordered and received before Christmas, though really interesting, is a bit of a mixed bag (or "uneven", to put it another way) IMO and to the extent I've so far read it.

You made me hesitate, but I checked the early posts in this thread again and I see that on 24 June last year I posted "10 months till publication might be an unbearably long time, though." Which does indicate April 2026. So it's good to see everything seems to be going to plan with readying the book for publication. (It has happened before that long-awaited books have been been postponed almost endlessly) So I'm definitely looking forward to April.

Am I totally mistaken or hasn't the release & delivery date for that book been April 2026 all along? At least that's what amazon.de said all the time.

Yes - my copy (published by University Press of Mississippi according to the title page) is marked "Printed in France by Amazon, Bretigny-sur-Orge, FR" on the final page inside.

The reason I was asking was that the publishing details on amazon.de indicate "Excelsior Editions" as the publisher, and that's all. Same as for the "Jazz With A Beat" book of 2024 (which clearly was a "print-on-demand" printing according to the "small print" on the final page). So this had me wondering about the distribution of this book. I see on amazon.com (USA) now that "Excelsior Editions/State University of New York Press" is indicated on that site. Not that I find anything wrong with the print-on-demand process (at least for virtually all of the books I so far have received that way) but this maes me wonder if maybe they are not shipping actual paper copies to be stocked at Amazon warehouses around the globe to fulfill worldwide orders far from the USA but have a file at some printing certer (or several such centers) on other continents and print according to orders received and ship from there. Well, we'll see once it arrives ... My order is now indicated for delivery here on 12 January (next Monday), i.e. the originally indicated delivery date. OTOH it has not yet been marked "shipped".

A question just out of curiosity to those who already received their copies: Supposing the copies you ordered and received are paperbacks, are your books actual publications (and printings) by a publisher and his in-house (or subcontracted) printer (as it used to be the case with books for almost as long as books exist) or are they book copies produced as "print on demand" items (as it increasingly has become the case in recent years, particularly with books on niche subjects). My copy of Tad Richards' "Jazz with a Beat" (Excelsior Editions too) received in 2024 has a small printer's imprint on the final page that says "Milton Keynes UK Ingram Content Group UK Limited" (as did certain other books I ordered via Amazon at about the same time), and my copy of "Listening to Prestige Vol. 1, 1949-1953" (originally published in 2015) received last December has the following imprint on the last page: "Printed in Poland by Amazon Fulfillment, Warsaw". So both clearly "print-on-demand" jobs. Both books look and are perfectly OK as paperbacks, but since different printing centers are probably used depending on where the book is ordered and shipped to, this might perhaps explain the differences in respecting the publication deadlines indicated up front.

I see your point and you are totally right about the vinyl hype negatively affecting the "going price" of newly pressed vinyl. Yet I wonder if that music would have been pressed at all if there had not been this hype. The silliest thing about this hype, however, IMO is the prices charged for newfangled "collectible" series that contain music that has been round the reissue block a zillion times before, including on vinyl. (Need I say "Blue Note" or would this be heresy? ) However (and please beasr with me if i am a bit outspoken in what follows ), as for this statement of yours, "And that this resurgence is clearly distorting reissues with bonus material suppressed that should be available on any CD reissues", first of all I cannot see there is any obligation to include "bonus material" on any CD reissues. (Besides, isn't there a clear distinction between "previously unreleased or previously orphaned extra tracks" from the session(s) that the core reissue is all about on the one hand and oft-touted "bonus tracks" that actually are a more or less vaguely related number of tracks (often an incomplete (!!) second LP) to somewhat augment the playing time of the CD reissue? This latter kind of bonus material can be an asset but sometimes is downright expendable IMO and is likely to be a buying decision only to relative newbies. And secondly, since you are displeased with vinyl reissues that are limited to the contents of the orignal LPS (which is understandable, given the usual practices of many other labels on the reissue market at large), were/are you just as dissatisfied (and vocal in your discontent) with those CD reissues (from Japan, in particular) that also stuck to the exact LP contents (as outlined in my post yesterday in this topic)? So could these complaints about not giving the buyer extra tracks be related to VINYL in the first place at all?

Sleuthing indeed. Hats off! It is this sort of "grassroots" research of what seems to be minor details at first (superficial) sight that actually fleshes out ANY page of history!

Not so sure ... and not because I'd be against peace, unity and love: I realize the "what vinyl are you spinning" thread was started here when vinyl was not yet subject to a resurgence of interest and an ultimate hype in some areas and therefore stressed the particular nature of music on vinyl - as oposed to the then more current formats and media. (Or so I have always understood it ...) And even as it is used today, posting there just might (rightfully) place the accent on the fact that it its precisely music on VINYL that people are spinning. And bypassing those occasional posts that (to me anyway) look just a bit like "showing off" ( along the underhanded lines of "look what supreme pressing I have!" ) , it will certainly be of interest to some (SOME! Others, please disregard! ;)) what someone listens to on vinyl and WHY it is vinyl or any particular release/pressing on vinyl that does it for him, etc. Whereas the generic "What are you listening to" thread places the accent elsewhere and not on one specific format and this can and will lead to different slants in the discussions or feedback. Besides, at any rate I'd guess anyone is free to post even what he listens to on vinyl in the "What are you listening to" thread (which does NOT exclude vinyl, does it? ). But forcing everything together in ONE single thread would make this too much of a hodgepodge IMHO. Nothing to really be gained from that. So this is a classic case of pros and cons that cannot please everyone. Besides, what is begining to baffle me a bit here is that there really seem to be some who feel vinyl fans are way too touchy if they ask not to see their preferred format dismissed too harshly - and then these "non-vinyl" people in turn seem to find nothing wrong with being touchy enough themselves to make a point of publicly announcing they are going to avoid the vinyl forum or vinyl discussions. Is that really necessary? And is it necessary to dig confrontational trenches just because of such petty matters? I hope it all boils down to just some misunderstanding once the dust has settled and everyone has slept it over. And please remember, those of you who feel you are not leaning towards the vinyl camp, for every release or reissue that is "vinyl only" (which seems to be a bone of contention and starting point for quite a few critical remarks about vinyls as such) there are and have been dozens (no, hundreds!) of CD-only releases and reissues over time, and nowadays an increasing number of "download or streaming only" releases as well. So everyone always loses out somewhere unless he equally adopts ALL formats in his listening and/or collecting hobby. But "I've dumped my turntable XX years ago and resent being forced into a situation where I would be forced to obtain one again because I want to listen to that music" should really not be a criterion, should it? ...

I've heard from my son (who is a lot into Heavy Metal) that newcomer bands in that music niche even in recent years have promoted their first recordings via CASSETTES at gigs and that there even has been a sort of small resurgence of this medium in these circles. Surprising - and certainly caused by a bit of "old school" or "retro" motivation too. Because, after all, doing CD-Rs of your music is an easy thing to do these days. (HOWEVER ... from what I heard from various sides in very recent years Heavy Metal seems to be another music style where vinyl is "in" and CDs are "out".)

On occasion I did and do spend more than 25 EUR on a secondhand record in recent years. Including quite a bit more (though still well within the 2-digit realm) if it was never-reissued originals I had had my eyes on ever since I started collecting. OTOH, as for condition and the icing on the cake or bargain trophies that Clifford Thornton appropriately referred to, I am not going to list all the originals I scored at 1 to 2 EUR each in recent months and did not hesitate grabbing even though condition often was just a "solid VG" and not better (they do play through, often surprisingly quietly, and even on more "worn" copies background ticks or crackle NEVER overwhelm the music anywhere), nor make excuses for buying them in the first place. Not even for the occasional "cheesecake cover" originals just for the amusement of the covers at that price. (Talk about collectors' quirks ... )

I get what you mean about those extra tracks. And you've got a point there. BUT ... did those who complain about these missing extra tracks on LP reissues also complain just as loudly - or possibly louder, given the frequency of the problem - even back when there were (and probably - in intervals - still are) tons and tons of JAPANESE CD facsimile reissues of 50s jazz LPs that included exactly the original tracks and that was all, resulting in dismal playing times? (Savoy Jazz/Nippon-Columbia CDs or Solid Records/VMG Salsoul/Verse Music CDs for example, anyone? ) I have a vague recollection that when this point was raised the usual reply was something like "the Japanese are sticklers for originiality of the contents, track sequence, cover art reproduction and so on, except that it's on CD because that is the state of the manufacturing art - THEIR art - so we just have to live with it, and besides, "thou shalt not criticize Japanese reissuers because they are a boon to us who want to get reissues at all." In short, I am not even accusing anyone of double standards, but it's just so that you cannot please everyone all of the time, it seems. Because no doubt some also may prefer facsimile VINYL reissues - like Fresh Sounds a.o. already did them in the 80s.

Actually, what I was referring to are REISSUES on small to tiny labels geared towards collectors. All of them taking advantage of European P.D. laws. So not quite comparable with the examples you (certainly correctly) desribe. And prices of 18 EUR on up per LP (as seen the other day) for most of them just isn't a level that I am going to bite at anymore. Particularly since you are likely to find that a good part of what you get on these records you already have on other collector's labels (re)issued earlier.

Looks like in a way this predates the below use of such shelves.

Funny ... this feeling you describe sounds strangely familiar. Although I tend to shrug that off too - collecting is not an all-out rational thing so inevitably not everyone who is into the "core" of it (i.e. music of a certain style) will approach it the same way beyond that "core" of a common interest. In the case of our music this might, for example, be those who feel more comfortable storing and indexing their music on a hard drive and accessing it there on demand and don't necessarily attach maximum importance to liner notes, recording dates and the like. Just like some (like me, as you may have guessed) enjoy reading about the music in many ways whereas others can't be bothered even one second with printed matter relating to the music they listen to (noticed every now and then out there ...). It's a bit like in my other collecting interest - collectible cars. I'm one of those who also enjoys rounding up all the documentation, both historical and technical, to go with my cars and burying myself into them to LEARN about the cars, their maintenance and their history. Whereas others "just want to drive" (the same kind of cars). Which is all very well, but at other moments they are not above asking the most clueless questions to "those in the know" because one day they do need some info after all but never bothered to learn even the basics about their cars themselves.