Big Beat Steve

Indeed?? Maybe not "technical English" in the sense the tech terms are used here? But I agree it is confusing and not very clear to those who are interested enough to read these descriptions and think them over. So some rewording could not do any harm.

Of course I am not familiar with these particular "cereal box" cardboard records but I do have a few from other sources (in most cases very thin vinyl glued onto a cardboard backing, as Kevin Bresnahan says). Some that seem to have been relatively frequent here in the later 50s and early 60s are recordings by German pop singers pressed on these promo vinyl-sheet singles, with the cardboard backing of the thin vinyl providing promo messages e.g. for radio or shoe manufacturers. Usually the recordings were not linked to the products but there also were recordings made specifically with promo lyrics relating to the products. Or sometimes just providing some music as a gimmick, such as a series of promo thin-vinyl 45s by the French branch of the ESSO gas brand (Exxon to the U.S. ) covering the various regions of France, with each 45 containing traditional folk music from the respective region. There also were "sound postcards", with the vinyl attached to a square cardboard postcard. Usually with a mixture of music and invitational messages from the place or location promoted on the postcard. Similar promo sound postcards relating, for example, to car manufacturers are very collectible with car buffs. The oddest item I came across is a thin floppy transparent single (no cardboard backing!) titled "Engine Faults" given away with a late 50s issue of the British "Car Mechanics" monthly mag and to be played at 33 rpm. I played it only once, placing it on a real 45 for support (it sounded wobbly and decidedly lo-fi), and unfortunately it got kinked in storage since so it's probably unplayable now.

This might lead one to believe that the 45rpm (multi-)EP versions of 50s LPs on Capitol might have been sonically superior?

Aw well ... with all due respect, that album certainly was nice, given its release year and the prevailing musical trends of that period (that certainly were NOT Western Swing that this album was supposed to be part of), and I like listening to it every now and then too. But within the ACTUAL stylistic framework of WESTERN SWING it was glib, slick and bit overproduced to the extent of having had a lot of its spontaneous edges honed off. Not to mention the "something for everybody" repertoire typical of such albums of that day. So - ho hum ... Even the Bob Wills/Tommy Duncan 1960 reunion recordings for Liberty had more punch within that stylistic idiom IMHO. Anyway ... what I think some around here in this discussion do not quite appreciate is not so much the fact that some records are on Capitol but the multitude of labels that seem to be made to sail under the Blue Note reissue flag. Understandable ... Among the stack of CDs that ride in my car as food for my CD player there is a "Stan Kenton in Hi-Fi" CD from what is called "The Blue Note Collection", with the typical Blue Note label design on the CD too, as if to cash in on the "Blue Note" image throughout too. Which looks just silly, silly, SILLY on that record!

Update: Item 8): Metronome Yearbooks: 1955 and 1956 editions now sold and gone.

Sonorama reissue of an obscure 1965 release on Elite Special (bought yesterday for the "Jazz from Germany" section of my collection)

PDF file received safely. Thank you very much again, Romualdo!

Hi Romualdo Thanks very much for your proposal. I will send you a PM as soon as possible in the course of the day for the follow-up of this.

Up again ... Does anyone have any idea if a scan of the the booklet accompanying the 12-CD "Classic Capitol Jazz Sessions" Mosaic box set is available anywhere online? (The fact that the T-Bone Walker Mosaic booklet showed up on archive.org had me wondering but the booklet does not seem to be on file there) Some 15 years ago I bought an "orphaned" copy of this set through eBay.com: All 3 jewel cases with the discs and the small booklets just giving the discographical info, but no box and no big booklet/book. Apparently a cutout copy. Hence my question. Thanks in advance!

Just a brief look at the reverse side of this coin that will might be "food for thought" for EU forum members: Now that there is the EU-USA customs duties agreement whereby EU exports to the USA will be subject to 15% customs duties for the time being (until further notice, or should I say "until further whims"? ) but USA exports to EU countries are for the most part at 0 (zero)% duties, I for one wouldn't hold my breath that we as private buyers will now be able receive any shipments of records, CDs or similar all duty-free to our doorsteps. It just does not seem likely, given the general regulatory climate. Not to mention that duty-exemption thresholds applicable until now have been ridiculously low for some time, and prohibitive mailing rates by US shippers have probably killed most transactions anyway.

But there is another saying that us collectors ought to heed every now and then: "He who lets himself be carried away will be lost!" (Before collecting turns into "hoarding of many things" )

Thanks very much for that link, Hopkins! 👍 I am not concerned by the original question as I do not own that set, but that booklet will serve me very well as additional background info to my 4-CD Properbox "The Original Source" that essentially covers T-Bone Walker's 1940-51 output.

O.K., regardless of what Lord says, if I got the above findings right, the session of 25 April 1952 should read like this in the discographies from now on ?

Mine too. Past Perfect Silver Line label. Time to spin it again now, I guess.

And in the end this is just the mirrored image of all those sellers on Discogs (and eBay - and Organissimo, FWIW ) who will not ship outside the USA. Understandable, sometimes a real pity, but that's the way it is. Not just now with all those weirdass tariff "politics" right now but for quite some time already due to ever-increasing USPS rates (and probably more involved paperwork or other - perceived or real - uncertainties at the seller's end). BTW, @Stefan Wood: Did you at one time live in Washington, DC? If so, I bought from you through eBay in 2004.

Nondescript cover of a latter-day reissue. In case anyone's wondering, it's this one: https://www.discogs.com/de/release/4116417-Lucky-Thompson-Lucky-Thompson

As far as I can see (Page 11 of the Lester Young Part 3 document) the basic info (dates, lineups, tunes) remains the same the for dates discussed above but he is more detailed in analyzing the contents of each tracks (solos, etc.). OTOH he does not list the track lengths or the record releases. So both sources together would give the best possible overview. And the descriptions of the solos should help clarifying which tune is from which date. So ... thanks for the link! I downloaded all 3 files "for future reference". And will certainly do so with others too.

No, not really ... but many years ago I compiled my own cassette chock full of all the versions of "Jumping At The Woodside" that I was able to come up with from my records. Played it over and over again without tiring of it ... Many versions by Count Basie, of course, but amazingly different anyway through the years, and then there were Lester Young, Bob Wills, Lambert Hendricks & Ross and others ... By now I would have even more versions in my collection. Re- "Summertime:" Two suggestions (off the beaten tracks of the usual): Dave Phillips & The Hot Rod Gang ("Wild Youth" LP, obviously modeled on the 1958 version by Gene Vincent ) The Slingshots ("Big Noise From Northwood" V.A. LP) (both from the early 80s)

So that settles it. (Or back to the starting grid? ) However, if all the names mentioned by Leonard Feather were in the lineup(s), though apparently never all of them at the same time, and if these weren't all the musicians present (according to your post he did not mention Wynton Kelly and Aaron Bell present on 25/04/52), then the "different dates" must include the one from 4 August 1951 because that is the only one that has Earl Knight in the lineup (with "Neenah" and "Lester Leaps In" recorded at both possible dates indicated above). And as you have seen in the "Lestorian Notes", several more Birdland Broadcasts exist from April/May 1952 with the same lineup as on 25/04/52. But none of the tunes recorded at these subsequent dates match those of 25/04/52.

My Prez discography ("Lestorian Notes" by Piet Koster and Harm Mobach, published in 1998, so I don't know if this one or the one by Jan Evensmo is more up to date) lists the session of 25 April 1952 like this: I then tried to narrow down the recordings to the line-up given by Feather, and according to the musician index Earl Knight only appeared once with Pres - on the session hereafter of 4 August 1951: But Earl Knight and Lee Abrams together at one and the same session apparently never happened - at least not on any known recordings. So ...? Like Niko said, the 25 April 1952 date is the most likely candidate, but the line-up announced by Feather then would be incorrect. If all this is what you already arrived at as well, Medjuck, then sorry - but I tried.

According to JEPSEN it is a different take. The one on JWC-512 is listed as the alternate take. The other one (the "master take", then) is listed by Jepsen and Bruyninckx as being the one on "Swingin' Like 60" (WL-1289) but only Jepsen lists PJ-13 (This is The Blues) for this take as well.

The Affinity reissues of the two Frank Rosolino LPs from the Kenton Presents series matched the originals somewhat better. BUT ... don't you agree that what Affinity did with the covers of the reissues of the Bethlehem LPs (reissued at about the same time) was much, much worse? It's only their availability and affordability that saves them ...

So how do the Canadians pronounce the city of "Quebec"? From what I remember from those I've encountered around here or heard on Canadian Army radio (when there still was such a thing here) it is more like "kwe-BEK" or "ke-BEK" but rarely "QWEE-bek" or "KEE-bek". I.e pronounced with the stress on the end (as with the habitants referred to as the "ke-BEKKERS"). But as you indicate, it apparently is different with his name.

Yes, from all I've read before I realize it's like you said. But for a CONSCIENTIOUSLY programmed re-reissue that's no reason not to include them this time around IMHO. After all, as you confirm they WERE intended for marketing as 45s. Or was it a matter of playing time? (Which I somehow find hard to believe if there had been a will - considering that the set has 3 LPs).

So it really is so that they now omitted those 2 missing tracks for the THIRD time? Beats me why ... All on the premise that these 2 tracks were not released originally on 45s so "for authenticity sake" there is no need to include them now because they strictly speaking were not part of his 45 discography? Regardless of what collectors might be craving for? Do they really need to ride the "upgrade to new format" or "milk new buyer segments" train THAT blatantly?