Big Beat Steve

You mean, there'll never be enough Jug anyway?

Agreed with you about the likely packaging methods (unfortunately ...), and I can only repeat what I said before: This is where SOME of the oh so lambasted European P.D. labels excel in the grounds they cover (box sets or not ...). How much of where they go in relatively uncharted territory would EVER be coverd by the majors? As for box sets outside the classical world, it all depends on someone who DARES to do it and who above all has all the SAVVY to come up with REALLY sensible programming. A bit OT (but a necessary remark as will be seen later), here is one example in the field of 50s rockabilly: http://www.goofinrecords.com/shop/index.php?topic=50&ryhma=5&orderi=vuosi1&tuote_ID=26812 http://www.ebay.de/itm/V-A-THE-TEXAS-BOX-10-CD-BOX-with-200-PAGES-BOOK-ROCKABILLY-ROCK-N-ROLL-/251406005657 This was compiled late last year by two hardcore collectors from Europe, following numerous U.S. "field trips" to find stuff for their own collections etc. They did a self-produced run of 500 sets at a price that more or less matches that of what Bear Family, for example, would charge for their box sets, and the book that come with the set definitely can hold its own with the production quality of the Bear Family items. As for the contents, even advanced collectors are not likely to have all THAT many of those records in other form (least of all as original 45s) because the compilers had the good sense to EXCLUDE the core of those records that would normally fall squarely into that subject matter but were/are fairly easily available on other reissues (these omitted records are mentioned in the book, though, including label shots, etc., in order to give a representative picture of those obscure labels) and therefore can be expected to already be in the collections of many of those collectors who would be the target group for this box set (of course there ARE a number of duplications and overlaps with older - sometimes OOP - reissues in that field but not excessively many). And what's in there certainly is not very often a matter of "scraping the barrel" (not more so than with some crude blues originals that you really find so odd that they become enjoyable again ) but rather lots of music worth discovering for the first time. Sound quality varies (but listening through lots of 78rpm-era music my tolerance level is fairly generous, and I know I'd love to hear lots of 40s bebop and R&B even with the fidelity of the worse ones here ). At the festival where I got mine these sold like hotcakes (relatively speaking); wonder how long it will take until this run of 500 is sold out ... Now tell me, you all - WHY OH WHY cannot some really KNOWLEDGEABLE jazz buff-turned-producer compile something in the same vein, filling likely collectors' gaps in a TARGETED manner in the wider field of jazz? E.g. in the field of 40s or 50s indie label R&B or in the field of small-label bebop? And probably there would be a lot to be explored in the never-before-reissued back catalogs of many somewhat better-known jazz labels as well, particularly among their 10-in LPs, many of which never made it to 12in or to reissues? Or how a bout the entire field of "Eurojazz" up to the early 60s or so - all those vinyls that had been snapped up by Japanese collecting geeks at insane prices for years if not decades (Take a look at ANY well-stuffed website - or discography - on those subjects and you will realize how much there is out there that is still awaiting reissue or has been relatively difficult to obtain elsewhere on other reissues)? Is it really so that the (at first glance) oh so unsophisticated rockabillies really know THEIR audiences that much better to be able to (fairly correctly) assess the market than would be the case with even very, very advanced collectors in jazz? Or are we all so very snobbish that we choose not to look beyond relatively narrow stylistic boundaries of our preferred subgenres WITHIN jazz (which would doom such a project if a knowledgeable hardcore collector out there were ever to attempt such a task)? Just wondering ...

I for one would go for a Jug box set if it concentrated on his recordings that originally were done as ALBUMS. I have most if not all of hits 78-rpm era recordings that have since been reissued on Mercury, Chess and Prestige but relatively little of his (numerous) Prestige albums, for example. But basically I agree with you. To those collectors who have been aroudn a while, box sets are nice for filling gaps in one's collection in one swoop and because they rarely have very, very huge blanks in their collections of their preferred music they will invariably end up with duplications. Maybe this is one reason why there IS a market (though apparently not a sufficiently huge one) budget-priced box sets - if I have 4 or 5 out of the 8 CD's worth of music on a given box set (and if those albums are in a format I am not likely to dump just because of the box sets), would I be willing to pay big bucks for an 8-CD set of which I can use only 3 or 4 CDs? Always assuming, of course, those box sets are programmed SENSIBLY - which often isn't even the case with reissuers that would be called "legit" around here.

Can you confirm, Bigshot, that it contains everything that's on the Verve boxset? I am not (a) Bigshot, but looking at the listings among the reviews, I'd doubt it. THIS box set covers the years 1944 to 1953, whereas the original 10-CD box set (both the one with the huge book and the better-priced one from Universal Italia) contain the "COMPLETE" JATP from 1944 to 1949. And they cannot possibly have extended the playing time THAT much within this Membran 10-CD set to include another 4 years of JATP?

Have you got a link for this, Bigshot? EDIT: I found it at Amazon: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jazz-at-Philharmonic-Norman-Granz/dp/B002PDB9LE/ref=sr_1_3?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1397488727&sr=1-3&keywords=membran+10+box+sets The reviews with THIS particular amazon listing, howver, raise more questions as to the contents than they answer.

Not familiar with that kind of records (and their contents) at all, but on that Atlantic cover, Stiller looks a lot like a reborn Ernie Kovacs to me.

Nice, and nice to be able to put a face to a name too. The kind of shops we miss over here.

Since the rents are so often invoked for the demise, are there in fact ANY stores of this kind anywhere that actually OWN the building (or floor) they reside in? I know there was at least one (possibly two) here in my hometown that did own their buildings, and in at least one case their closure (before the heyday of the internet) was due to gross mismanagement.

No you don't. This was discussed here. I have a lot of the Fresh Sound RCA vinyl reissues from the 80s (though not the "Panic Is On", unfortunately, but for the meantime am content with an original 50s pressing cardboard sleeve 2-EP set of that LP - though it's missing a track or so from the LP contents). Fresh Sound did indeed use the (then-current) RCA logo widely on their reissues at that time and quite a few of these reissues even carried stickers on the back cover that specifically said something like "Reissued by Fresh Sound by special agreement/with special permission of RCA" (or so - just like many of their reissues of labels then owned by WEA carried similar stickers). It may be hard to believe for those who are suspicious of any European reissues (except UK, strangely ) but I find it exceedingly hard to fathom that FS would have gone so far as to make such claims if they were all bogus. No doubt they would have gotten themselves into very hot water and above all would have left an all too easily traceable (and unncecessarily obvious) trail with such stickers, claims and small prints. In short - like it or not - there have always been European reissue labels that were far, far more adventurous than their US counterparts among the majors that apparently just sat it out because the immediate and easily calculable benefits weren't large enough to them.

Paula Prentiss was quite cute in that fishbait movie with Rock Hudson - though in a manner that would drive ANY man into "mental issues" if you'd ever come too close to such a gal for too long in real life.

Had already sent PM about Hendersonia but shipping rates might be hard to digest ..

Of course you are right about not being familiar enough with the contents of one's collections so one ought to have enough listening to do to keep yourself busy for quite some time. I've never been overly worried about the drying-up of certain releases/reissues either. It just is so that in cases like the "savoury Savory" collection where the contents fall right into the core of one's personal jazz interests (like mine ), things are slightly different but even there I won't cry and pine forever if things remain buried after all. It just is a pity ... No doubt you will realize this is quite a natural thing to happen, just looking at how all those hard bop fanatics out there drool over any new snippet of previously unreleased Miles, Blakey, Morgan, Mobley (whoever ...), though overall and by reasonable standards such new discoveries often do not add much of ADDED value to the overall opus of the musicians involved. Something that just is a BIT different with quite a few of the 30s jazzmen where the recorded legacy is a bit more spotty. Not many need the zillionth live version of BG's "Rachel's Dream" but beyond that there is a lot where considerable gaps remain (that just MIGHT be filled by the Savory collection). As for the public domain and inheritance laws, surely you yourself will admit that these laws are no eternal clear-cut matters of principle and overall fairness but highly arbitrary matters that have been dictated and enforced by wrestling, lobbying and levering of powers at work that, for example, might want to prevent certain MAJOR sellers from falling into the public domain (such as the Beatles etc. when the European laws changed recently) or whatever was at stake to the big players in the US when they tightened down their laws again (maybe it was the Glenn Miler estate that had a hand?). Which appears to be why these laws have changed several times after all .... And yet ... compared with other realms of professional life where a lot of individual creativity (that on objective grounds should not be considered any less important or valuable than whatever any musician did at any time) remains outside any sort of ongoing decade-long (and therefore almost eternal) royalty settlements, this kind of royalty regulations as they are now in the music business sometimes appears rather out of place to me. Particularly because with the way they are set up it is the big players that cash in but the anonymous (to the general public) journeyman sidemen or studio musicians (who were invoked as benefitting from the new European regulations) in fact do not profit to such a huge extent from the new regulations after all (as investigations into the matter over here have shown). It is just the bigwigs that get bigwiggier. In short, the highly moral grounds that had been invoked for changing the European copyright/royalty/public domain laws proved to be largely bogus upon closer inspection. There COULD be settlements where deals could be worked out that should be beneficial to all parties involved, particularly in cases of those tapes where no record companies are involved (which removes one major obstacle). I can only invoke the example of the Route 66 labels from the 70s that on the face of it were bootlegging the record companies but supported the artists, i.e. by starting by paying an ADVANCE artists royalty (at the going rate) for a pressing run of 2000 albums to the featured artist (don't know to what extent the sidemen were covered but often the featured artists/session leaders were hugely pleased in finally seeing some money from those 25 to 30 year old sessions after all). Besides, rarely were any of those sessions we are talking about limited to only ONE musician involved. Now what if the descendants of several musicians would be delighted to see their ancestors' music released under a royalty settlement that would appear fair to them but ONE such heir obstinately refuses to go along with it? The majority being held hostage by the whims of a minority? Do you have any real argument to support why those who say "No" should prevail over those who says "yes"? Is there any valid reason why the rights of those who'd say "yes" are to be less worthy of being fulfilled? Just my 2c

A question to those in the know (to make sure I understood correctly what I read earlier in this thred and saw elsewhere): "Only" the Blackhawks Vol. 1 to 4 were ever released on vinyl (I have Vols. 1 to 3), and Vol. 5 was/is "CD only"?

Can heirs inherit something their family has never owned? Did the tapes lay in the basements of those "heirs"? King Ubu has it spot-on. This copyright law of such "works" is grossly skewed as it is. Umpteenth generations of "heirs" cashing in for something they never had any hand in coming up with in the first place? Like King Ubu said - fair enough for spouses (and possibly children). But beyond that? Hey, assume a 50-year period during which you can KEEP earning money from something you did once, but beyond that it ought to be fair enough that this "keeping earing" business is over and ended. Just imagine the same thing going on for any scientist, engineer or whoever who comes up with an important invention, new technology or whatever within the scope of his work? Take a guess how many of those will be able to take out a patent for themselves. Not many ... at best it is their employers that file a patent (and even THOSE are limited). And to what extent are there engineering or science "royalties" (or something comparable) out there? And now don't tell me each and every "artist" towers that sky-high above the importance of the entire spectrum of renowned and knowledgeable scientists, engineers, researchers etc. The least that that ought to be done is a "use it or lose it" clause (i.e. market it or forfeit it). Happens in LOTS of other strata of business too where marketable goods or goods of general interest are concerned. Just check out the entire trademark segment. In my job I am in that part of business myself that might be handled along those royalties by not so much of a stretch of imagination too if you ride a principle to death. But the practice is that a fee is paid for the job to be done and then the one who pays out is free to use the object of the service performed against payment of the invoice. Fair enough and I am not complaining (though I am at the "fee receiving end" of it all, as opposed to any royaltiy business ...). Another example of the principle evoked not being a universally applicable one. Hey, I am almost beginning to feel some understanding creep up inside of me for recording sessions done against a payment of flat fees and that's that ... After all, once the music has been played, ALL the rest of the work along the line (right down to the finished product and to marketing, including re-marketing) is done by other parties than the musicians (unless you are your own composer, producer, marketer, label/streaming company owner, etc.) ...

Assuming its all about royalties: What's the idea of being afraid that some descendants of musicians involed back then would bitch NOW about these recordings being issued NOW? Shouldn't they rather be glad that they might receive some kind of remuneration (even if only a token amount, given the likely sales and the modalities of splitting any royalties raised)? Or are those who hold the recordings really afraid that those descendants would be ASHAMED of what their ancesors did and would not want them to see the light of day for THAT reason? The US royalty regulations have zigzagged so often in my impression that I've given up attempting to read some clear principle into them, but assuming the 70-year P.D. cutoff date does not apply because the recordings have not been issued before at all (so "70 years after first issue" would not be aplicable), shoul'dn't the regulations in force cover such cases anyway?

in case this is the seller - http://www.ebay.com/usr/ftfym65 - that`s the one I just linked to Greg M. I´ve ordered a couple CD`s from him via Ebay recently (the only communication was the update via Ebay about the CD`s shipment) and the goods made it within 2-21/2 weeks to Europe......securely packed parcel`s and factory sealed cd`s. It IS this seller ... (see above) But now you got me really worried. I have checked my mails again but since receiving an automatic Auctiva purchase confirmation and my payment confirmation from Paypal (I paid immediately after making my purchase) I have not received ANY shipping information from whomever ... And 3 weeks since my payment have passed. to calm you down.......regarding my last two items (ordered the same day individually) i received a ebay notification reg one item, wondered about the second item (didn`t hear a word....) and received two days ago BOTH items in ONE parcel.... again there are alternatives reg other sellers, but this guy has all Sam Most (within reach) Greg M. was interested in..... Just received an eBay confirmation from that seller regarding my item bought and paid for on 4 April (!!): Item is now marked as "shipped". In short, a full FOUR weeks after the purchase this character finally sees fit to ship my item!! WTH?? And no word at any time about it being "temporarily out of stock" (on the contrary - mine was proclaimed to be the last in stock, and right after I had made my purchase the item was relisted with 2 said to be in stock). Am I amused? You bet I'm not! And I cannot really say I can wholeheartedly recommend this kind of business practice. I've half a mind of leaving feedback that reflects this. And I must say by and large this ties in with the expriences I have heard from other European buyers who have bought from Japanese sellers through the years. Helter-skelter shipping, close to zero communication (unless you limit yourself to receiving preassembled standard text modules - guess why ...), etc. I realize others around here had had better dealings (congrats to them) with Jap. sellers and I sincerely regret now I have never tried Hiroshi Tanno when he was still doing business (because his customer service seems to have been stellar indeed) but yet ...

That's indeed more or less what I referred to as "pre-swing era" jazz.

I still play cassettes that I recorded/compiled myself in the 80s/early 90s in the cassette players in my (late 50s) cars and many of these cassettes still play very well except in those segments where they had become entangled/folded/"accordeonized" (remember those tape pileups? ) before and now play with some crackle and sound loss through those tape segments. Any loss of fidelity wil probably be just as much due to abrasion deposits on the heads in the player. What I meant was that it might be interesting to see if those 80s tapes that had come my way will stand being re-dubbed again without some mixup of sound, i.e. will those old recordings disappear altogether or will they remain as background noise in the quiet sections of the new recordings? I remember that being a problem with some mid-70s cassettes I overdubbed again later in the 80s.

Yes, this has fast become a pretty far-ranging "throw your hat in the ring too" free-for-all. Not sure what the thread starter exactly means by "early jazz" but assuming that many come from a "hard bop and beyond" jazz listening experience where Bird is VERY old jazz , to many jazz listeners this term probably (and unfortunately) is not limited to its original meaning of PRE-swing era jazz anymore. So here's another plug to second the recommended SAVOY 2200-series 2-LP sets. And if you feel like you would like to explore the very early post-war R&B side of jazz too, then don't overlook the "Roots of Rock'n'Roll" series of twofers (the Joe Turner item listed above is only the tip of the iceberg). A few V.A. compilations of note in that "Roots" series are: The Roots of Rock'n'Roll (SJL 2221) Honkers & Screamers (SJL 2234) The Shouters (SJL 2244) Ladies Sing The Blues Vol. 1 + 2 (SJL 2223 + 2256) The Vocal Group Album (SJL 2241) Southern Blues (SJL 2255) As for nice V.A. compilations of ACTUAL "early jazz", also try those on the JAZZ ORACLE label (and take your pick ... you will be busy ... ) Many of the compilations have a regional focus.

I can't recall this was a matter of specific brands. I rather had the impression it was related to the age of the cassettes. If I feel like it, I might try to see if this is so one of these days ...the other day I unearthed a huge stack of cassettes my parents had recorded off the radio (mostly literature readings) back in the 80s.

I remember, but it happened very, very rarely with the cassettes I overdubbed (and I overdubbed a lot and still must have several of them).

I have a hunch that some around here would be inclined to silently and tacitly wish that usable copies of the Savory discs/tapes would find their way to some place (or rather, studio) in Spain or Andorra. ;)

Indeed ... they were leased from Metronome - I overloked that. And they are scattered over various Metronome reissues (most sensibly reissued in keeping with the original sessions on those twofers from the 70s), and part of them have since been included in the CDs on Gullin on Dragon. So irrelevant to that Atlantic box. But still ... (see above)

If they'd included Lars Gullin's LP done for Atlantic I'd have jumped for it and taken the others (all those that I don't have yet) as add-ons, but so ... But the compilation seems like a bit skewed a bit towards a "certain" kind of obvious anyway (no Lee Konitz? no Jimmy Giuffre? no Mitchell-Land's "Hear Ye"?) (Yes, priorities DO differ! )

Not sure if you can exclude "swing" from what is an essential ingredient in jazz. Jazz can swing in many ways, not all of them immediately recognizable the way you'd recognize a jazz tune that in the "classic" manner "swings like mad", e.g. what Jimmy Giuffre (yes, an ofay! ) once said when asked where the beat of his music is: "It is understood." The same might go for the way swing is experienced in his music too IMO. And if it is there, you will feel it if you have a feeling for that particular style of jazz. But to say outright "No, swing is no longer required for a style of music or a kind of playing to qualify as jazz ANYWAY"; I dunno .... E.g. jazz notable Joachim Ernst Berendt sort of lost his target IMO when he openly proclaimed in his later days that swing is no longer needed in and for jazz. (Well, this was when he was on his all-encompassing and rather esoteric "world music" trip anyway ....) The process of dispensing with swing from the start IMO only leads to all too many styles of music that cannot be categorized anywhere else to be "filed under jazz". Uncalled for, IMO. Or should Jazz have become a sort of stylistic leftover grab bag where everything can be lumped in for marketing purposes? So in this particular case I tend to side with Crouch and the "moldy figs". If you evidently cannot and don't swing by any stretch of the imagination you may be playing interesting and satisfying music but you ain't playing jazz.