Big Beat Steve

Funny .. I've had exactly this experience time and again (with music that was far from being "free") while relaxing in my lounge chair late at night and listening to a CD (which need not be meditative or "lounge-ish" or "after hours" at all). While sort of dozing off but still being awake enough to realize there was music being played I found myself ever so often thinking to myself "Wow, never realized this sounded so good/uplifting/had so much punch/drive/energy ... (whatever ...) .. I'll have to listen to that closer again later on .." But when I played the track again later (or the next day) while fully awake I rarely managed to find the same excitement in it. Sure the track was good but compared to my previous "uplifting" experiene it just sounded sort of "flat" ... Maybe the music that comes through to you is "filtered" in a way that makes it much more "intense" (don't know how else to describe it) when you are in a state somewhere between still being awake and only subconsciouly realizing what is going on..

Yes, these are four of the six tracks from the 16 Feb. 1955 session. Missing are "Sonny Howard's Blues" (maybe a bit too R&B-ish for the compilers?) and "Mr. Sandman" (a bit too pop-ish? But still very nice and a surprise in this setting ...)

Looks like that's the one I was referring to ("Best by Test" is one of the tracks, though the complete session actually includes six tracks). Could Jepsen and Bruyninckx both have been wrong about the recording date? They give a date of 16 Feb. 1955.

In fact the photo COMPLETE with the ceiling (even a wee bit more) is in the "Celebrating Bird" book by Gary Giddins, and cropped versions (showing only part of the ceiling) are in "Black Beauty White Heat" and Ken Vail's "Bird's Diary" (and certainly in others). So the photo in the "Taking Off" booklet seems to be the rarer one which is not seen often.

Probably the sessions EXCEPT the 1955 trio session, right? Seems like that latter one has not been served that well by easily acessible reissues. Apart from that, the above reissue probably is the one Lazaro Vega saw mentioned. But again - "For the Ears" and Coleman Hawkins is a confusing combination because this refers to two separate sessions.

No idea where the above record (?) title comes from (it's neither on my UK 10inch release nor on my 12in reissue and the Goldmine guide does not list such a title either for the US Vanguard 10in releases either) but this must be the Aug. 16, 1954 session which includes both "It's the Talk of the Town" and "Fore!" etc. Am just spinning it now. Nice, very nice ... and as usual Sir Charles Thompson gives an effortless flow to it all. BTW, the Vanguard session that produced the "For the Ears" track did not have Coleman Hawkins in the lineup.

Reminds me of another anecdote (probably true and with a somewhat sad tinge to it) that I read somewhere: When the subject of his withered looks came up among fellow musicians, Chet remarked that his wrinkles all came from laughing Whereupon Jack Sheldon quipped:" Nothing can be that funny ..."

I'll second Pete Frame's book. The links between post-war trad jazz scene (and some mroe modern jazz too) and the rising rock subculture are explored in a fascinating way. In a way it is a particularly interesting read if you read this as well as Simon Spillett's bio of Tubby Hayes (not concurrently but without excessive time in between) to get two different viewpoints of how the musicians from the jazz and "non-jazz" fields vied for the listeners' attention (and money) in the 50s and 60s. Judging from your initial question, BillF, I take it that you are not overly keen on Jim Godbolt's books on "Jazz In Britain" (particularly his second volume on the 1950-70 period)? I'll admit that even to me (I'd not consider myself an expert on British jazz from those decades) it reads a bit superficially and like the author has certain favorites and tends to give others short shrift. But as an itroductory book I still find it quite useful. And even though it covers "only" a regional part of British jazz history, I'd definitely add a recommendation for Bill Birch's privately published "Keeper of the Flame- Modern Jazz in Manchester 1946-72".

+1 And his 50s VANGUARD recordings too! (Not to be slighted, those sessions ...) RIP (Had not figured he was still was around - and could it be that his name was constantly omitted when talk came up about those musicians still alive who had recorded with Bird?)

Good point and very easy to imagine ... and probably furthered by the fact that even "way back" there were (male) blues singers who were no great vocalists in the stricter (technical) sense of the term as compared to, say, black singers across the spectrum from Jimmy Rushing to Billy Eckstine etc. (and I'm not even seriously including Bon Bon ) but by strictly technical standards would rather qualify as "croakers". However, considering their background and the message they conveyed this was totally immaterial and beside the point and the way they sang was the way they felt and that's that, rough and unpolished or not. But maybe in later years this has been turned around into what you describe as a "license to sing" by those who by ANY yardstick really cannot sing ... Singing poorly today as an imitation of singing in an "rough-hewn" manner back then ...? Though I'd venture a guess there is also some idolatry at work today when evaluating the "real" blues from long ago when there were singers with thin, weak, wavering, unfitting voices too, though it is not always openly admitted by diehard blues fans that such cases did exist (but rather this lack of competence is glossed over as "proof of authenticity") Am just reading "South to Louisiana" where Guitar Gable (no coincidence, that name) makes the point of never having wanted to sing on record because he was aware of his shortcomings as a singer but calling in King Karl instead ... etc. etc.

Still a dance floor filler in certain circles. And then ... Most notable names in the (collective) lineup are Chris Griffin, Ernie Royal, Taft Jordan, Jonah Jones, Red Allen, Charlie Shavers, Tots Mondello, Eddie Bert, Bart Varsalona, Kai Winding, Urbie Green, Lennie Hambro, Al Klink, Sam The Man Taylor, Ernie Caceres, George Barnes, Eddie Safranski, Harry Jaeger, Cozy Cole, Mickey Baker, Oscar Pettiford, Panama Francis.

I agree with you as for the importance of their vocals, I just am pretty sure that others would place more emphasis on their guitar mastery in the overall picture. Or to put it another way, the "subordinate" role of their "guitar accompaniment" seemed to be less clear-cut than with other (particularly earlier) bluesmen. Hence my question.

Assuming that you name these countriest of country blues artists (and granting that country blues is but one of the strains of blues) for what they did with their (guitar) accompaniment, where exactly does the guitar begin to dominate the vocals? What about Brownie McGhee? Elmore James? T-Bone Walker? Gatemouth Brown? etc. (I was tempted to name Johnny "Guitar" Watson next but refrained for obvious reasons ... ) And if these blues artists would indeed be rated more as guitarists than as vocalists then would Bob Koester's statement about "most WHITES" still hold true or wouldn't there maybe have been a split (or "remodeling") earlier on when blues still was primarily a music for the black community?

Good point/good question ... Maybe a case of drawing a line between "those in the know" and "those all too clueless" and making those who embrace that statement feel oh so much better in nodding wisely to themselves "yeah, I am not one of those 'most' ones ..."? As for what you call a "truism"; I would call it a case of "stating the obvious" ... And maybe Koester DID refer to "white blues fans" after all - in the sense that he may have been thinking of Johnny Winter, et al and their white followers. And if you think of it he may have a point because there were quite a few of those who, when their status in blues is evoked, were invariably praised as oh so excellent "blues guitarists". But just as excellent "blues vocalists"?? Which of course begs the question of where to draw the line and who still is legitimately filed under "blues" and who isn't and is in fact "just rock" ...

IIRC he did a Jimmy Lunceford tribute album (which was reissued fairly regularly), and he also did an album "The Fox in Hi-Fi" on Brunswick in 1955 or so which is quite sumpin' else (unless you like your 50s jazz all "highbrow" throughout). Stellar line-up of jazzmen doing an R&B-tinged album in the vein of the jazzmen-studded orchestras providing backing for many R&B tour packages or recording for the Alan Freed movies or of the Westcoasters/Eastcoasters on the "Boots Brown & His Blockbusters/Dan Drew's Daredevils" on RCA Groove. This album was circulated widely and I have (favorable) reviews of the album (and the EPs taken from it) from Germany, France and Sweden and the gist of all their praises is that "if you have to have rock'n'roll, play it like this and with musicianship like this." Signs of the times ... Conventional by modern jazz standards but "far out" and rough & uncouth by dance band standards ...

16 ... wow ... You sure drove your point home ...

Joself Albers (1888-1976 - famous BAUHAUS artist, emigrated to the US after 1933): I was given this record by a school buddy's father in my very early collecting days in about 1975/76 as he knew about my interest in 50s music and 50s records (and actually cleared out some of his unwanted stuff). Odd at first but interesting (and at times actually this latinized percussion stuff is interesting to listen to, particularly late at night ) ... and I had already been aware of the Bauhaus tradition so this has been part of the (small) "Misc. Music/Easy Listening" section of my collection ever since.. I'd known for some time there were more by Albers in the same vein (a selection were on show at the "Le Siècle du Jazz" jazz & modern art exhibition in Paris in the summer of 2009), and then, during my holidays in Southern France, two weeks ago I came across this one at a small Sunday-morning fleamarket in a small town that I passed trough (and stopped out of curiosity) for a measly 1 euro. How can you go wrong at that price ...

Beware! Purchase prices quoted by a DEALER are a FAR cry from the selling value to an actual "final consumer". If you'd want to sell at all, "avoid the middleman" (to quote an eBay record seller from long, long ago ... )

Very true. Although most of these (except the Linn and Griffin on Atomic as well as the Butterfield AFAIK) have been reissued I don't know how many times in all formats (which very likely lessens their desirability - except to hardcore "strictly 78-rpm only" listeners , and those collecting extremists probably would already have a lot of these) this is a very nice bunch and I'd hang on to it by all means, particularly if it is "part of the family history", as in this case.

As an outsider (native speaker-wise ) looking in, am I right in assuming that - disregarding dialects and local variations - prononcing the "t" in "often" is definitely more common than pronouncing it in "listen"? To my ears, "liss-ten" would sound very, very stilted and way over the top (both in the UK and the US versions that I am familiar - and somewhat comfortable - with).

Now how do all of you pronounce "oftentimes"? One t, two t's or no t?

Indeed. Picked up this EP from 1956 at one of the fleamarkets I browsed during my recent holidays in Southern France.