Big Beat Steve

I suppose what he meant was that Mingus got a lot more publicity (for whatever reason ...) and may have been established better in the "insiders' circles". "Commercial" can be a very relative term you know ... Anyway ... I guess I finally need to search for "All About Ronnie" again. It escaped me when 2001 had that run of Japanese Savoy reissue CDs in their stores in the early 2000s at giveaway prices and all the copies I have seen since were just beyond reasonable in their pricing. As if that platter had become some sort of undergorund cult item since ... As for any possible connections, you invariably make them up entirely in your own head and go with what you assimilate in your own personal listening experiences. I don't think to today's jazz ears Tristano is THAT daunting anymore anyway ... I, for example, find Tristano's Savoy Oct. 23, 1947 session (Supersonic/On A Planet/Air Pocket/Celestia) extremely accessible and appealing for its light, airy "vibe", probably also due to its melodic base. In fact a number of years ago I made up a cassette tape for summer, sunshine car driving where that session was mixed with the likes of the mid-40s George Barnes' Octet etc. (Now some may fault me for not listening closely enough if I digest Tristano that easily but hey, why try to find rocks in your way where there ain't? )

So I figured. But you just sounded so anxious about these. Triggered by this thread, i spun that Rex Steart double LP last night. Mighty fine IMO if you are in the mood for some straight-ahead, unpretentious no-frills, blowing for partying. Yep, Bird, Diz, and Flip in the front line. There are three takes of "Hallelujah," two takes of "Get Happy," two takes of "Slam Slam Blues," and five takes of "Congo Blues." That's it for the first disc. Spotlite SPJ127. It's all been out before too. Including all the alternates. Larger group? That "Dialated Pupils" session with Howard McGhee etc.? Spotlite is your label there too. Just in case you're wondering whether filling the few gaps in what you already would make more sense than shelling out for 10 full-price CDs after all.

Coincidcentally, those past few days I've pulled out my 1961/1962 copies of ORKESTER JOURNALEN to read up on some first-hand info on the jazz happenings of those times, and the July/August 1962 issue had a piece about the "Tristano clan" where this was said about Willie Dennis: "The only brass players in that company were trombonist Willie Dennis and trumpeter Don Ferrara. Dennis' only recording in the Tristano idiom is on an LP from 1955 where he is part of a group led by Ronnie Ball. His playing is so engaging that it seems unfathomable that he later preferred to work with Charlie Mingus' Jazz Workshop. But maybe this was triggered by economical reasons. When the abovementioned record was released it never received any particular recomendations by American critics. Nevertheless it contains music that ought to be reason enough for quite a bit more renown just for the soloists' work. Among the best is Ted Brown's "Little Quail", a medium-tempo melody.The recording is nine minutes long and provides rightfully liberal solo space that goes with the material's quality. Here we find Dennis' best solo, an astonishing experience in its own way. Despite his rather relaxed playing, his phrasing in places is rather distinct and it is surprising that he has not been given more attention among the "name" trombonists." Some DID take notice back then.

I have the Buck Clayton session (rec. on Oct. 10, 1949, BTW) on THREE vinyl reissues: 1) Part of it on "Buck" (Jazz Selection LDM 30.021) 2) All of it on "Buck's Mood" (Vogue DP.73 double album), and 3) All of it again on "Buck Clayton / "Jazz Tracks" (Bellaphon BJS 40181) If you are desperate for this session you han have #3 cheaply (its contents are all on #2 too so it is in my duplicates/sale/trade bin). No doubt there are more reissues. I also have the entire Dec. 8-10, 1947 sessions by Rex Stewart on "Rex in Paris 1947-1948" (Barclay 80.972/80.973 2-LP set) as well as part of it on the Jazz Legend label (Jazz Legend No. 6) - surplus to me too, so you can have that Jazz Legend LP too if you want to.

Sorry but this can't be true just like that. That is, unless printing on non-coated paper (which was the standard type of paper for decades in book printing) has RETROGRADED immensely in recent times. A look at some examples of notable (and comparable) picture-heavy books will confirm this. Example 1: Keepnews/Grauer's "Pictorial History of Jazz" which saw several editions and printings through the 50s and 60s. Early printings from the US were pretty atrocious at times. I remember comparing a 1955 US printing (printed in Yugoslavia IIRC) to a c.1962 UK-edition (printed in Czechoslovakia IIRC) and the 1955 edition really was pretty bad. You can see the difference at a glance because most of the contents are strictly the same - many shades of grey present in the 1962 edition just turned into blotched-out black in that 1955 printing (there may have been other early printings, though, which turned out better). A UK edition from the later 60s that I have is again pretty OK for the state of the art of the times. The paper was and felt the same in each case. Certainly not coated paper. So the problem is not a new one. Example 2: The photo reproduction quality in this book ... http://www.amazon.com/Swing-Era-Scrapbook-Teenage-1936-1938/dp/0810854163 is pretty abysmal. Many photos are way too dark, no contrast, far too little gray shadings. Non-coated paper - OK, but this ....?? And this even though the book comes from renowned Scarecrow Press and isn't that cheap. Example 3: OTOH, this book here ... http://www.amazon.com/Country-Music-Originals-Legends-Lost/dp/0195325095/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=1-1-spell&qid=1411385071 in its orignal hardcover edition is printed on non-coated paper too and overall the whole presentation and "feel" of the book very much has a "vintage" (circa 1960s) touch to it. (Intentionally so??) But the photo reproduction quality really isn't bad at all. In fact, I'd consider it very, very satisfactory. Sky-high above the black blotches in example 2 above. So it CAN be done .... Even without being a printing expert, it looks to me that care taken by the printers (including the prepress stage) is the prime ingredient in coming up with good results.

Hats off to you, then. At any rate, that garb and that wig, that's really odd.

Indeed. Dig this: Anybody out there qwho would have recognized Barrett Deems, former drummer with Louis Armstrong's All Stars??

Not wanting to sidetrack this thread further, but while the Dial set sounds exceedingly tempting, I am more or less in the same situation that Paul Secor has mentioned, so I wonder what there would be in hidden treasures beyond the obvious stuff that most collectors of bebop probably have (i.e Bird, Dexter Gordon, Dodo Marmarosa, all the stuff reissued on Spotlite, e.g. Berman/Harris, Hermanites, McGhee et al)? What remains beyond that? Erroll Garner plus some bought-in recordings that probably were not released on Dial first? There seems to have been a lot that was recorded in France (Blue Star) and then (re)issued on Dial. I'll gladly be proven wrong about the share of truly new items but would be interested in finding out beforehand.

I remeber there was a series of budget-priced pop/rock LPs in the mid- to late 70s that were marketed with the explicit statement that each LP featured 60 minutes of music. I cannot recall the label but to the best of my recollections the records (most if not all of them "Best of" reissues) came from the UK and one of them featured Lonnie Donegan. EDIT: Coming to think of it, the title of this album series was (fittingly): Golden Hour"

veer? Actually, I was imagining from the outset your core tastes run in an essentially different direction but I hope I managed to get my point across to you at least somewhat better. It just is so that I'd find it unfortunate if the problem of how to get people interested in jazz were limited to an approach that says "No you are not supposed to get into jazz this way - you need to get into jazz THAT way and no other way because if you don't then you won't see the light of what kind of jazz really is worthwhile". And this is an attitude that I unfortunately have come across ever so often when it came to getting people interested in jazz.

@A Lark Ascending: As for jazz being danceable, I just meant that jazz had/has to be danceable to that particular segment of "newbies" who got/get into swing (and, by extension, jazz) through other music where dancing is part (in fact, a key element) of the way the music is taken in. Inclusing the lindy hopper scene where, of course, swing jazz is there to provide music for dancing in the first place. There is nothing wrong with just sitting and tapping your feet to the music (I am no all-out dancer myself either) but the music and the beat ought to get your feet tapping intensely and make you want to jump up and "move" (even if you are too "self-conscious" to do so as you put it). That's what I meant. @Steve Reynolds: Yes, I've experienced that sneering attitude vs the "retro swing" trend on that "other" forum and also in quite a few publications from the "serious" jazz set when they commented on that "new fad". What I meant to get across in my initial sentence that you quoted needs to be seen in context with the paragraph that followed in my above post. To paraphrase it: Jazz people complain about outsiders being unaware of jazz and not being able to connect to jazz to increase the jazz audience, and now here would be a jazz-related style - that retro swing movement - that could get people introduced to swing-style jazz and maybe, hopefully incite them to explore what came/comes after swing, and the "serious" jazz public doesn't know better than to denigrate those who go for this style of swing. Believe me - if, like I for one happen to be, you feel to be part of both camps (i.e. "serious" jazz listening AND the rockabilly/early rock'n'roll circuit where many of the "retro swing" bands came from) then you feel the vibes from the respective "other" camp very, very distinctly. Because you basically are very much involved in both sides and notice immediately if one side of what you are into sneers at the other side of what you are into just as much. Get it? As for that "sitting and nodding your head", well ... of course you could easy blame me for over-generalization and I am not going to comment on the free or avantgarde public because I have never been into those events to a huge degree so I won't judge. But yes, I have come across a certain kind of public at jazz events of all sorts who IMHO more or less have been show-offs when exposed to jazz of the "post-danceable" styles of jazz, ... but even swing-oriented mainstream jazz played to a seating audience. I'll freely admit they are not the majority but they do exist and in my experience they are the jazz version of all those well-to-do "good citizens" here who attend classical music or "serious music" events etc. because they perceive it to be "part of what we owe to ourselves to engage in as culturally mature people". Hence that unfortunate tendency over here to try to assimilate jazz and classical music in order to get jazz to be "respectable". Maybe it is hard to get this across to you in the US because the basic approach of the jazz public likely is different in the Us even today and I do not expect you to understand it in full but over here there is such a part of society. Typical of some representatives of what is referred to as the "Bildungsbürger" in German. The somewhat younger version of those people, BTW, would be those who - and this is a true story I got straight from the horse's mouth - would ask a (local) record dealer specializing in jazz to compile them a selection of Blue Notes to go with the designer-style furniture they just had their apartment furnished with. Nuff said now?

Well, no doubt that's true but part of that lack of awareness really is due to the sneering attitude of "pure" jazz fans themselves. Remember how almost each and everybody sneered at the "retro" swing revival of the 90s? I remember some discussions about this maybe 8 years ago when I started out here and on the AAJ forum (where one or two very, very open-minded jazz connoisseurs tried to "blow the horn" for the positive aspects of this retro swing movement) and the reactions by the self-appointed "real" jazz fans on AAJ were, well, condescending to say the least. And this was at the TAIL end of the initial wave of the retro swing movement which was quite a bit stronger in the 90s everywhere, yet I cannot remember the "serious" jazz world was that much more receptive to this retro swing in the 90s. OK, some of this mixture of swing and (Las Vegas) lounge AND punk is a bit cliché-laden, some of it leans a bit too heavily towards punk and is more punk than jazz (but hey, so what?? Why would a mixture of punk and swing be worse per se than a mixture of 70s rock and 70s electric jazz? It's just one brand of rock mixed with a certain brand of jazz serving as a relatively accessible introduction to bridge the gap between rock and jazz, then as much as now) but there were and are interesting bands out there that do add a new twist to the way swing has evolved through the decades. The gist of it: All those retro swing bands did and do provide an introduction to jazz to a LOT of listeners who eventually found out about Basie, Jordan, Waller, Ellington, Armstrong, Goodman, etc., and later bands too. Yes, the Brian Setzer Orchestra or the Cherry Poppin Daddies or the Royal Crown Revue (or whoever ...) did accomplish that ... Happened often - I've witnessed it myself ... not that I am that much of an accomplished dancer but I am close enough to the Lindy Hoppers circles in many contexrts, for example, and there ARE bands that play live gigs in these circles and look beyond the classic big band sound and come up with very interesting combinations, e.g. incorporating gypsy swing, and strangely enough, the swing bands that play this (subculture) circuit include (from all I have seen on stage) musicians who quite evidently find playing to a DANCING audience (of ACCOMPLISHED dancers) definite fun compared to their other gigs playing to the typical seated audences in typical jazz clubs. But then again, the kind of jazz that would attract this kind of listeners not yet imtimately aware of jazz would have to be DANCEABLE. I.e. a music that fills the prime and original purpose of jazz of providing straightforward entertainment. Not some "far out" music where you just sit and nod your head in pensive contemplation, marveling at your own sophistication for being there ... (that kind of listeners is out there too, make no mistake, all those of you who can rightfully claim to be part of the understanding, knowledgeable, appreciative fans of the more avantgardistic kinds of jazz ....).. Mind you, there is a place for contemplativeness and/or "far out" sounds in jazz too, of course, but if this is the kind of jazz that newbies are confronted with for the very first time then it is no wonder many of them are frightened away upon their first contact with jazz. It's just too inaccessible for an initial exposure to jazz. Food for thought ... which needs to do away with any notion of which strain of jazz is obejctively "superior" or more "rewarding" than the other, though. Because, in the end, it is more a subjective matter of which kind of jazz does what for which jazz fan, and after all, one man's meat is another man's poison.

Thanks for your coverage of the LIBERTY Jazz In Hollywood series and the Aladdin-related releases. I've always had a penchant for the Jazz In Hollywood series (now THERE's an overlooked series of records) ever since I discovered an original copy of the LJH6001 compilation at Mole Jazz sometime in the 90s. Will be looking forward to exploring that blog in detail. P.S. Nice period pic of you and your Deux Chevaux next to that Chevy. Must have felt odd driving a contraption like that in US traffic at the time ...

A subject that has been researched and documented from almost any almost angle imaginable in jazz circles, and now it is going to be turned into a stage show, musical (or whatever)? Oh my ... That Grauniad story has some pretty silly nonsense anyway. Charlie & His Orchestra "some of the biggest stars of the war"? In what circles? Among the Allies? Not likely. They were puzzled, maybe amused ... Charle Schwedler's vocals weren't THAT great, intonation, pronounciation and swing-wise (OK, "straight" vocalists often were just as stiff, even in UK and US dance bands, but anyway ....) And after all, the principle of "propaganda swing" wasn't that unknown in WWII (cf. Lucky Millinder's "We're gonna slap that dirty little Jap" or later on Little Jack Little's "Waltz in Berlin", etc.) With the German public? Not sure to what extent these songs were broadcast large-scale over short-wave stations that the GERMANS listened to, but probably virtually the entire German radio audience never heard them anywhere anyway at that time. That alleged broadcasting "at home" is not borne out by thorough publications on that subject in jazz books. Among the musicians? Not likely too many of them talked about those recordings that freely to others during the war, and some even refused to "remember" their involvement 20 years after the war when the first reissues were produced here. So .... ?? And considering the number of documents and radio/TV feature produced and published on this subject, it certainly is no "under-explored area of jazz historiy" either. Overall, a bit sick IMO, this propensity for milking "anything nazi". I don't quite get it, honestly. And please ... don't let that Prince Harry use this as an excuse for another tasteless "masquerade"!

@John Litweiler: Thanks for that list, though I for one would find many of these recordings to be essentials for anybody interested in jazz from that period. I haven't dug that deeply into what would best be referred to as "traditional jazz" (i.e. stylistically pre-Swing era) so have only part of what you list there (but a pretty representative cross-section anyway) but have probably 100% of your swing-era recommendations. In short, I am a bit surprised that you consider them "overlooked". By those who've never gone to the trouble of exploring pre-Bird at all? Yes, that would make sense. Maybe I got the idea of this thread wrong but I understood those recommended "overlooked" recordings to mean unhailed heroes, musicians' musicians, recordings unfairly neglected in reissues, recordings not quite as easily available (and not discussed quite as often) as others but just as fine, etc., and all this WITHIN the style(s) of jazz one might already be familiar with. Anyway, thanks very much again.

Looks like this is the CD version of the Vol. 1 two-LP set (AFAIK Vol. 2 never was issued on vinyl). I was delighted when I discovered that Vol. 1 twofer at the time and I definitely spun my copy a LOT. So it wasn't underrated here (in fact my above post about those "Early Bones" LPs made me think of pulling it out again).

Hi Daniel, thanks for your recommandations. Been just streaming your selection. Frederiksson must have listened a lot to Long Tall Dex. I hear a lot of Gordon in it. Now just listening to Staffan Abaleen Quintet. To me up til now totally obscure - but this is very good! Will come back to it again. As a big admirer of Lars Gullin I know a lot of him and got a handful of his recordings. A gentle giant and real poet. Next I will listen to Hallberg of whom I know only some pieces.. Now again my recommendations of Swedish jazz: Arne Domnerus Favourite Groups 1949-1950 (Dragon) lots of beautiful clarinet in it. Rolf Ericson Miles awaý 1950 -52 (Dragon) love his tone and phrasing Daniel, I must admit my KEY interest in Swedish jazz STYLES fizzles out as of the early to mid-60s but I have PHYSICAL copies of some of your "older" recommendations (Gullin, Johansson, Lindberg) and can confirm these are very much worth exploring. Same for the two recommendations by Balladeer (two of my favorite Dragon reissues). Yes I am afraid this is VERY true (one reason why I have sometimes commented in a bit of a mocking tone about those to whom - by their own admission - even Bird is "old hat" or at best as far back as they'd want to go, because they are so focused on hard bop and beyond but not before). So far, so good (tastes differ, and to each his own, and it would be catastrophic if everybody were hunting down exactly the same records) but still it is a pity IMO because those whose tastes run in that direction are missing out on the FOUNDATIONS of everything that came afterwards. Now, John, if you would like to list your 100 overlooked pre-Bird jazz recordings, I know that I for one would be VERY interested in seeing that list ...

OK, I plead guilty (of sorts ..) to having mentioned "vulgar Bill Harris" first of all which may have led to this name dropping (like autumn leaves) ... Sooo ...just to get back on track in every respect (Prestige and 'bones), tell me, everybody ... are Prestige 7023 and 7030 (J.J. Johnson, Kai Winding, Bennie Green) UNDERrated in the discographies of the respective artists, maybe? In the sense of being recordings that everybody immediately thinks of FIRST when discussing the KEY recordings of these artists...

Well put, MG! A very special character. RIP.

No, I think that's when the footage was shown for the first time on some newsreel or so. At any rate, the 1961 festival took place from 17 to 23 July.

Can I please see Candy Dulfer do the same?

My update crosed with your post. See above ... It wasn't Lars Bagge. As for "evergreen-slentrianen", well, let's call it "evergreen sloppiness" in English.

Jazz Hot mentions two tunes: "Amen", a solo vehicle for Netz, and "Lester Left Town" where Färnlöf was excellent. But no mention of the rhythm section in either of them. Update: I did a search in my 1961 copies of Orkester Jornalen and there they are, picture and all (Sept., 1961 issue): The rhythm section was Göran Lindberg (p), Sven Skantz (b) and Ulf Söderholm (dr). Not to be outdone, OJ said they met with well-earned success (despite some initial nervosity) and the public was particularly impressed by Lars Färnlöf, but the scribe did not fail to mention some foreign critics had seen fit to find the sound too thin (see above ), but at any rate the originals were said to have made a nice change from all those groups who played nothing but covers ("evergreen-slentrianen", a word colorful not only in Swedish but also perfectly understandable in German too but would lose in any literal translation so I wont even try ). Anyway, there you are ... no doubt you will be able to make more of those names than anybody else around here.

Well, I did find a copy of that OJC Joe Holiday CD on Amazon today so am looking forward to hearing more of him at leisure. As for Bill Haris, that Ex-Hermanites LP on Mode is a gas indeed. Must pull it out again (though I must admit I used to listen to it not so much for the trombone part but rather for Terry Gibbs). BTW, for those who cannot locate a copy immediately, Xanadu LP 191 "The Bill Harris Memorial album" has the same contents. BTW, a very nice characterization by JSangrey, that "eloquently rudely wry". Might explain after all why some came to call his style "vulgar" at the time. And, Niko, thanks for the link to that Wother" forum! Wasn't aware they had a jazz forum there too. One to bookmark ...