Big Beat Steve

To get some "period" insight for background info, try to get a copy of "The Jazz Scene" by Francis Newton (first published in 1959). The Down Beat "Music '63" Yearbook says this about the book: "A fine, new thinker in jazz probes without cant or bombast the origins and directions of jazz and has much to say about social and business aspects of the music."

You're on a PLYMOUTH ride?

I remember seeing that one in the racks and bins for quite a while back then but never picked it up. I remember I was quite unsure what that mix of country and R&B was supposed to amount to, and besides, somehow R&B guitarists that might have gone "all funk" in their later days (I'd been licked in other cases - cf. Bo Diddley and Johnny Guitar Watson) caused me to be overly cautious at the time . I probably was wrong in this case but at the time I thought that NOTHING EVER among his output could top Gate's "San Antonio Ballbuster" album on Red Lightning (a record I still cherish, FWIW).

Very nice anyway. "very nearly lost Balmoral". ... Hee heee ...

It's an interesting read (and shows that - regardless of Wolfe's part in it - Mezzrow was a better writer (or narrator?) than clarinet handler - which of course ain't sayin' much ) but in this category of "early memoirs" I definitely find Eddie Condon's "We Called It Music" more compelling ...

And another one (a peripheral figure in the "musician" sense but nevertheless a very important female personality in spreading swing-era jazz as part of popular culture): Norma Miller (with Evette Jensen): Swingin' At The Savoy. The Memoir of a Jazz Dancer. Temple Press, N.Y. 2001

You didn't like the Burnett James bio on Lady Day? http://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/billie-holiday/author/burnett-james/

I find Sherrie Tucker's "Swing Shift" an exceedingly mixed bag. Though the subject matter is very interesting (and I still don't regret buying the book, though mainly for want of something more readable throughout on exactly this subject), this is one of those books where the author clearly has an agenda and goes out of his (her, in this case ) way to make the narative and the facts fit that agenda. Ho hum ... (and yes, all those "second wave feminist" references in there do get on this reader's nerves - and no, I was NOT influenced by Chris Albertson's opinion on that book in writing this! ) As for additions, there also was a biography of Billie Holiday by Burnett James (called just that - "Billie Holiday", though I have no other info on the English-language edition(s) - my copy is a French translation and publication by Garancière (Paris) from the 80s .

47 years. Way too early. Can't recall having consciously heard the NDR big band featuring him but can imagine the loss. R.i.P.

Amazing that the obit to linked to in the initial post should expresly mention the 1956 European/Swedish tour with Rolf Ericson. It's easy to imagine this was an eye-opener as far as the open-mindedness of the audiences and general public was concerned but on the other hand it must have been a surreal experience in other ways. Rolf Ericson was forced to replace all four instrumentalists after less than one month because they were so junked out as to be unusable for the demands of such a tour. According to the news coverage in Swedish jazz mags Ernestine Anderson was the one who tried to hold things together (and of course stayed on for the remainder of the tour) but to no avail ... Quite a personality she must have been ... R.I.P.

Thanks for clarifying this, John L. On seeing the opening post (the Count is fine any time) I was very tempted but I have all three volumes of "Count on The Coast" so will probably pass this up after all

FWIW, there seem to be quite a few websites out there these days with biographical data of "the" Gene Harris that assume that this Jubilee LP actually was his recording debut, stylistic differences notwithstanding. Also FWIW, there are several sites showing the original Jubilee pressing (including the back covers) and this confirms that the liner notes on the FS reissue LP that mention his classical training, Juilliard plus concerts in classical settings etc., do match the original liner notes so are "period correct". http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GENE-HARRIS-TRIO-Our-Love-Is-Here-To-Stay-LP-JUBILEE-JGM-1005-US-1955-JAZZ-MONO-/262288404615 http://page9.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/k209563353 http://karyoubinka.blog93.fc2.com/blog-entry-163.html

Interesting thread. (Had not yet lurked around here the first time this was current some 11 (!) years ago now). Actually, whenever a Gene Harris Thread comes up here (which is not exactly a rare occurrence as we know) I wonder when this "other" Gene Harris will be brought up. I bought his "Our Love Is Here To Stay" LP on Jubilee (FS facsimile reisue) some 15 years ago and do like it quite a bit. So I'll be interested in the outcome of this further research.

Not quite yet, actually. 45 years, to be exact. The book first appeared in 1970. And updated editions are around (and they did not suffer from this updating IMHO, so what holds up today often is not even 45 years old yet).

Rest in peace, and thanks for the groundbreaking work at a time when not many others cared. And thanks for holding some very worthwhile jazz and R&B books in stock at your Bloomsbury Book Shop when I shopped there in 1977 and through mail order in the years thereafter. Providede me with some excellent input (and impetus) for my future collecting "career".

Copies ARE around: Maybe the experts who run the Red Saunders Research Foundation website can be of assistance? See this page .. http://myweb.clemson.edu/~campber/aristocrat.html About two thirds down in the Aristocrat entry there are label shots and some descriptions.

A fine 'LP for all those who are not too "brain-heavy" in the appreciation of jazz from that period and like to take their music with a grain of light-heartedness, appreciating examples of what ACTUALLY made the African-American community shake a leg to in those years. "Que pasa Chica" and "Shotgun Boogie" by the Cab have proven their worth as excellent record hop fare among those around here who are into swing and jump blues. I doubt, though, that Yusef Lateeef is in the Ernie Fields band lineup. I cannot see any "Bill Evans" credited there BTW, two tracks by a Jimmy Hamilton-led pickup group from (probably) 1953 are also on that record. 5 more reissued Ernie Fields tracks from 1949 (originals recorded for Gotham) can be found on Krazy Kat LP KK 814 ("Big Band Blues").

I wouldn't doubt it, all I wanted to point out is that it is pretty much impossible (at least for me) to give a less subjective description of how I perceive the difference even if the CD version does NOT sound "harsh".

It most definitely can. Overall I'm not telling which way the results are going to end up but there can be a definite difference. Lately I've been listening to more vinyl again, incuding long series of Ellington, including his 30s Columbia rcordings (that were issued in a row of 15 twofers on CBS in the 70s). I don't have Vol. 15 but have 12 out of the other 14 on vinyl (and the other 2 on CD) so towards the end I shifted between vinyls and CDs and was surprised to see that the vinyl just sounded "warmer" and had more "presence" whereas the CDs were not harsh but perfectly listenable they somehow just sounded "colder" and "doctored". Hard to describe neutrally (even less in a scientifically sound way) but but while the CD tracks sounded fine per se they just tend to sound more "synthetic". I wasn't expecting that difference but it was there. An impression I also had with quite a bit of 40s jump blues reissues I've been listening to lately, though in some cases the CD version of one and the same track (that i compared just out of curiosity) did win out. The bottom line to me is that rock on the one hand (particularly if it is from the 70s onwards) and swing/early R&B on the other hand emphasize different types of sound that make up the overall sound (and listening) expericene. I know this is not going to convince you but you are not going to get any scientifically proven or provable bottom line out of this anyway because people just do not listen to music with a machine-like, analytical mindset all the way. It all depends on the kind of sound you EXPECT to hear, and, anyway, depending on the medium you most often listen to your ears will adjust to the sound they are likely to get. But if you shift between those mediums you might be surprised to find there Is a difference. I was not expecting to notice that difference during my "Ellington" listening period described above but it was there. It's a highly subjective matter and one man's meat is another man's poison so any discussion like "this cannot be, you're just romanticising" is pointless.

Ouch ... I must admit I cannot consciously recall having heard Johnny Cash sing "Daddy Sang Bass" but there is a truly ATROCIOUS version (IMHO) of that song by Carl Perkins (from his 60s CBS days) out there that made me shudder when I had to listen through it on an LP from that period that I once owned so any possible enjoyment of that song as such will be marred forever to me ... OTOH, "One Piece At A Time" is hilarious! It was a good laugh among the small circle of us "traditional" country fans here when it was released at the time and still is very enjoyable today. I understand someone actually built a car following the lyrics of that song ... As for other favorites, many of his Sun items, of course, starting with "Luther's Boogie" ("Luther Played The Boogie").

About this being parody or not: I'd tend to agree with what JSangrey said about this being "observation" rather than parody. There is another example of it on their 1st Lighthouse All Stars 10in LP on Contemporary: "Big Girl". And then, for some more samplings of this, try to listen to more or less the same crowd of West Coast jazzmen having a ball as "Boots Brown & His Blockbusters" on the "Rock That Beat" LP on Groove (RCA). Half of the tracks are by this West coast crowd, the other half by the East Coast equivalent (Cohn, Travis et al.) sailing under the flag of "Dan Drew & His Daredevils". Not quite the real (black) deal, of course, but not really caricaturesque or parody to the ears of this fan of Honking Sax R&B either but more a case of good natured "hey, we can do it too" rampaging. Just some fun and far better IMHO than many other attemps by white bands at sounding like the real (black) 50s R&B deal back then.

Assuming it was not a Buy It Now price at $7,000 this makes me wonder how such a bidding race came all about anyway. There must have been at least TWO who pushed each other into that sky-high price region. What was the other one (or were there several?) thinking? Or was this a bogus bidder trying to push the other one up in an attempt at inflating the final price for the seller? Amazing no one seemed to feel like wanting to bid any amount between 2,500 and 7,000 the second time around and STILL end up with a price lower than the 7,000 that he missed out the auction the first time. (Yes I know such things happen but it is not the usual outcome)

It depends on what the going rate for such an item (which can be researched by almost anybody today) would be.

Like it's been said here, if you can find such an original or early pressing/edition (whatever) at a bargain price - sure, jump on it. But if you are alrady sky-high in top$ collector price ranges then it is what I may call feitshism (in the sense that Scott mentions and that agree about it - i.e. you drool about having the item, regardless of the price) or maybe narcissism (because someone may think he is a better being because he owns such items). Of course some degree of (minor) fetichism or narcissism is in most of us collectors (because we'd like to get our hands on historical items too in an attempt of grabbing a piece of history so these items do become a sort of fetish to us or because we feel oh so proud owning these items which makes us guilty of some degree of narcissism ;)) but as long as it is really a matter of getting the items at a real bargain price (which I do suppose is what this "Great Finds" topic is all about) then it is a relatively innocent kind of collectionitis IMO. Haven't all of us here who are into collecting (and not just consuming) our favorite music realized we were born waaaay after our favorite period of music so whenever we find one of those early pressings we sort of make up for us having come of age too late to be able to buy the records (or whatever other collectabilia) at the time they were available off the shelves in the shops? But $7000 for one single vinyl platter? Jeez ... that "eBay madness" topic here did not get started by chance either. There is a limit to what is reasonable after all. Honestly, I really don't want to brag, but just looking at my bank accounts I'd be able to buy the (very) occasional $7000 original pressing too and not feel the dent hurting my account but I'd never, never, never, EVER spend any such amount (not NEARLY such an amount!) for anything like that - EVER (not even coresponding over-the-top sums in other fields of my collecting hobbies). Actually I could not even think of any single record I'd want to sell the proverbial grandma, wife and children for in order to be able to pay an amount in THAT realm ... Simply because I'd be dead sure I'd not get my money's worth and I feel there are LOTS of ways of spending my money in a better and more worthwhile way, regardless of how much of a collector I am. And even as an investment it's pretty unsafe IMHO too buying in those realms. One slump in the overall market and economy and you'll be losing money, and there's no way of predicting the Asians and their insane buying habits will be around forever. At least not enough of them. No, I still feel there is a bit of a difference between trying to make history unhappen (i.e. by making up for the fact that we came too late to have been around when the items we covet were current) and just using history to speculate. Nobody lives forever, and those who rounded up a pizeless collection of early pressings in their younger day in the 50s will make some impressive profit when they sell off their collections before they bow out (or when their heirs do) but those who shell out $7000 today? Less likely ... And remember those Lee Morgan (et al.) 1st pressings probably are less unique than a mid-19th century 1st printing book. But anyway ... to each his own ... just sayin' ...

1st) IIRC I was referring to another statement that claimend ANYBODY enthusing about chancing upon a "great find" an being glad he found it (and telling about it) was indulding in nothing but fetichism. 2nd) About your question: I am pretty sure I am not the only one who'd answer something like this: a) More likely worship himself about his amazing superhuman power (including monetary power) of being able to round up such "desirable" items. b) Not sex with "it" but more likely have sex in some "other" way just by thinking about (at long last ...) owning that item. Which just might amount to the same thing to the person concerned. To cut a long and in the end redundant discussion (because opinions differ) short, as a collector you can enthuse about a lot of your collecting finds but there is a limit of what might be called reasonable (even if you stretch those limits to the point of bursting) and beyond those limits you'd better not be surprised if you won't be admired anymore but rather ridiculed (because most everybody else would feel you have not gotten your - collecting - money's worth, unless you're in it only for the purpose of speculation which is a different matter altogether).