Big Beat Steve

So if Boplicity had packed their CDs the usual ACE way the TWO Hawkins LPs would indeed have made up a nice reissue CD (as stated earlier). One LP only on one CD only is a bit skimpy. Unless the actual CD reissue includes alternates, etc.

What I meant was something else, King Ubu: The Dootone reissues by Ace of course are legit, though this is a pointless aspect since they were made in a time frame that is and remains P.D. in Europe - what counts, though, is that Ace has the Dootone files, it seems, and therefore is more likely to come up with alternates, acetates. etc. Which might make for potentially interesting reissues. But I cannot see any link between Dootone and the last three items linked and shown above (Hawk, Baker, Hamilton). Except that they are also reissued on Boplicity. I am not sure if the Hawkins LPs actually were ORIGINALLY recorded for Crown (i.e. Modern/RPM) but apparently (from what has been said above) the Baker/Hamilton items are rehashes of material originally recorded for Pacific Jazz. No idea how Crown came by them back then (but if you go by some of the semi-anonymous V.A. Crown samplers released it was no isolated incident) but at any rate they seem to have been part of a "budget line" marketing plot of REissuing items that had already been release elsewhere before. Nice to have as an oddity from those times if you can grab an orignal LP but IMO at bit pointless as a reissue of the actual album right now, given that those tracks ought to be around elsewhere in their Pacific Jazz packagings. Now could Crown possibly have had the first-generation masters for those Baker/Hamilton recordings in their vaults at all? Did PJ relinquish ownership of those masters to Crown? I wonder if Ace are doing themselves a real service by going that route because IMO it detracts a bit from their usually thoughtfully produced (and fully packed) CD reissues from their Modern/RPM vaults. Could it be that Ace haven't quite come to grips yet as to how to best repackage original LP releases for reissue instead of 78s?

Look out, everybody .. if you move seamlessly from Dootone into the Crown label without any distinction between whether the said Crown releases actually were genuine Modern/RPM recordings or maybe recordings from other labels that somewhow had ended up with Crown for "second time around marketing" in the form of reissues for the budget market or whatever, then the implications of where the masters (possibly available for reissue) may be and what is available where else and from which primary source may change drastically ...

A quote given in another currently ongoing topic here sums it up nicely, IMHO: :g

Not wanting to derail THIS discussion, but in what sense do you expect to find yourself with a "can of worms" there? There are no worms there, just the WHITE counterpart of not-so-city-slickerish popular music to BLACK 1935-55 territoy band swing (at first) and city blues/R&B (later on). The only thing that could happen to you is that you might discover all sorts of crossbreding in BOTH directions in the black AND white U.S. popular music off the beaten tracks of MOR mainstream pre-rockn'roll pop churned out by the majors in those two decades. If you want to go into it and explore the (approx.) 1935-55 era with an eye on quality and diversity, you cannot go wrong with the Krazy Kat CDs. Each and every one of them is good (OK, some may lean a bit more towards early 50s Honky Tonk country music but the boundaries are not rigily fixed anyway, just like they weren't all the time between black jazz and R&B). ;) Anyway ... in THIS discussion the Krazy Kat records that tomatamot alluded to probably are the vinyl reissues from the 80s. Here is a listing that should have most of the LPs http://www.wirz.de/music/krazyfrm.htm

Lots of vinyl reissued (or alternate tracks sometimes issued for the frst time) in the 80, manly from the Gotham label. These days (CD reissues) Krazy Kat is mainly focusing on Western swing (EXCELLENT stuff!) but has been dormant for a while: http://www.interstate-music.co.uk/index.html

Yes, Buddy Johnson is great. His EmArcy Recordings from the 50s (which is what BF apparently has collated) are quite nice too but tend to be a bit formulaic IMO (I have the Official 80s reissues of those 6 or 7 EmArcy LPs they did at the time) and need to be taken in somewhat smaller doses, i.e. less than one LP at a time. Those EmArcy LPs IMO were among those that did not really do the then "new" concept of 12-inchers a great service. Too much of a "something for everybody" programming. I feel the somewhat earlier Decca sides were better. If you want to go for 50s "powerhouse sax" LPs on EmArcy, go for Red Prysock! Nice thread, BTW. Missed it the first time around, apparently, even its brief return in 2007. And this thread ought to be read in conjunction NOW, I think:

Just to add to the picture: Check out these too: George Wallington Al Haig Claude Williamson Dodo Marmarosa

What does "re-ify" (or "reify"?) mean, please? No matter what Whyton may have to say, this review is off-putting just because of the apparent writing style of the book, and if what the reviewer says about the STYLE of this book is only correct by 50%, then ... oh well ... Why cannot these "academics" relax a little sometimes and stop their academic navel-gazing for a moment to see when their subject on hand calls for an at least SLIGHTLY more "down to earth" treatment if they care about reaching their target audience AT ALL? After all you can be scholarly and still be comprehensible. Or is a PH.D. required to listen to "A love Supreme"? (No, I have no idea who WIll Layman is and with what grains of salt his reviews may have to be taken, but I have come across this problem of academics going overboard in academic blurb when dealing with jazz before (though apprently nowhere near as badly as here) and I DID obtain a University degree too - in a field not a zillion miles away from (academic) writing so normally "ought" to get to grips with a fair dose of scholarliness)

Ted Gioia's book is terrific Tom. It's the best jazz book I've come across. Gordon's book is much more in-depth IMO, Gioia's book needs to be expanded in the next edition. For me it was the 1993 CD boxset: Chet Baker, The Pacific Jazz Years. That really turned me onto the West Coast sound, although back then, it was more difficult to research musicians. Disagreed to some extent. I've read both, and while Gordon's book has a more detailed analysis of specific LPs/recordings and a more comprehensive guide to "suggested listening", Gioia's book IMHO manages better to transmit the background, context and feeling of that time and place in the context of the music so Gioia "fleshes out" the musical setting a bit more beyond the way it is experienced strictly through recordings and discographical listings. So both have their strengths and complement each other, but when I want to read up on the context of WCJ as a sort of background to listening to the music, I find I reach for Gioia's book far more often. Particularly since if I am after comments on specific recordings I check Alain Tercinet's book which covers even MORE WCJ recordings (not always quite as detailed but it does cover more ground).

A belated THANK YOU to King Ubu for highlighting this CD series. I've put half a dozen from that series in my amazon (seller) shopping cart right away last night ...

Just to round off the picture: There is another glimpse at his jazz (trumpet/trompinette) playing in this book: Boris Vian - Jazz à Saint-German by Frank Ténot (published by Editions du Layeur in 1999): http://www.amazon.fr/Boris-Vian-jazz-%C3%A0-Saint-Germain/dp/2911468317/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382726546&sr=8-1&keywords=Boris+Vian+Jazz+%C3%A0+St.+Germain It looks like it is OOP but who knows ... secondhand examples may be around. Apart from dwelling on Vian's involvement with early postwar jazz in Paris, it includes a 15-track CD with (privately recorded) jazz by Vian and the Claude Abadie Orchestra (rec. in 1946) and with a group of his own (rec. in 1944 and 1947) that includes Claude Luter, the Fol brothers, Jef Gilson (to name just the better known ones) in the two lineups. A very particular mixture of "Trad jazz" and more modern sounds with a special twist that you have to hear to grasp.

Can we at least agree that neither Charlie Barnet (who also recorded "Redskin Rhumba", BTW) nor Jim Flora nor those who happen to have reissued this LP with the original Flora cover will be excommunicated?

Like Kurt Tucholsky said in 1919 upon the question "What is satire allowed to do?" "EVERYTHING!" Too bad the pendulum swings back in so many ways into a network of instrumentalized offendedness (that often is only out to quiet those who voice criticism in the sharpest way possible to get the message home so you HAVE to confront the issue) in today's world. I can see the point of keeping up the tradition of this team's name (though I can also see the reasons that ought to speak in favor of choosing a more up-to-date name) and if the Onion sees fit to publish the article along the lines of "If you as the owner of this team cannot see any reason why this name that offends a certain group of people ought to be thought over, then how about becoming the butt of such offensive terms yourself just so you see what it feels like?" Isn't this quite obvious, just as obvious as the fact that it is only this VERY person that is targeted and nobody else? Instructive at any rate ... never heard the term "kike" before ...

Indeed. Including on the much-loved (and perfectly legit) "Original Vogue Masters" CD reissue series of the late 90s.

Sorry to hear that. RIP I always enjoyed his "Waxing with Whittle" LPs on Esquire that gathered a lot of his early 50s recordings - fine, concise, intense examples of how modern jazz was received and molded here in Europe.

:D So true ... Happened to me time and again. Though for the most part only in the case of secondhand vinyl that was fairly cheap to start with, and overall I've been able to pass on about 3 quarters of those items without too much fuss, sometimes even with a small profit (which offsets part of the cost of most of what I haven't been able to shift yet ...)

Well, the Lionel Hampton CD clocks in at 79:14 minutes (three 10-inchers!). Couldn't get much more onto a CD than that ... But you are right about couple of the other CDs (Konitz, Pettiford, Schifrin ...) Got my box set today and as King Ubu said it is very nicely produced indeed. The box, the booklet, the cardboard replica LP covers of the individual CDs - very nice, and at that price (2 euros per CD, not much more than the price of a good blank), who is ANYBODY to complain ... ), even discounting those that one invariably already has elsewhere (sometimes it's nice to have them together in such a '"compact" form too). Only drawback(s): When playing the CDs you wil have to refer constantly to the booklet because the sleeves reproduce only the covers (and therefore track listing) of the "primary" LP included on the CD but not of the bonus(es). And to read the back cover liner notes you'd almost need overcorrected reading glasses. So now (sorry for hijacking this thread a little) a couple of my black Vogue Original Masters CDs from the late 90s look like they're becoming redundant as they are duplicated by 100% by the CDs in this box set. Anybody among European forumists out there interested in swapping the following for others from that series that I don't have yet and that are not on the CD box? - Andre Hodeir - The Vogue Sessions - Jimmy Raney - Visits Paris Vol. 1 - Barney Wilen - Tilt - Martial Solal - The Complete Vogue Recordings Vol. 1

Well, there you see how tastes and preferences vary ... I am not a big OP fan and have only relatively few of his records (but need to complete my range of those "Exclusively For My Friends" LP series done for MPS in the 60s if the occasion presents itself) but OTOH I cannot really find much listening PLEASURE in those recordings of you know who that show a tormented, torn soul on off-days when he was below par even by the "standards" of his worse days (and which, if we assume that playing the piano was the major way of expressing himself, very much amount to "public striptease of the soul" and just are painful to hear because somehow I am not sure it always is appropriate to be listening in in situations like this ). In a way I can see the fascination of this kind of "candid" self-expressions but would have found some of these records much more worthy of being "unfit for release" than those sessions (that might have disturbed some "legacy") mentioned in that current BN thread here ... If I had bought a larger number of this kind of BP records I therefore am not sure if they wouldn't have ended up being sold off or traded ... End of O.T.

I must admit you've got a point there ...

@David Ayers: Note I am not specifically referring to the umpteenth alternate take of this or that track where the master take is well known (as well as one or two "current" alternates, maybe). I was thinking of tunes that had never before been released (and maybe not recorded by the artist on any other occasion) or even of entire sessions that had remained in the can (for whatever reasons) and may include music never heard anywhere else in that particular form (again, tunes not recorded elsewhere by this artist or lineups that never got together again in this form anywhere before or after). Speaking of BN, cannot recall the details but wasn't there talk of some Grant Green and Horace Silver sessions somewhere on this forum that would fall into that bracket, for example?

OTOH, there have been recordings where the alternate take released decades later showed that it clearly was rejected because one of the featured stars (maybe the leader who had the final word) did a fluff. But since another soloist blew a superior solo (compared to the master take) it was in order for it to be released later on and we should be grateful for it. Better than those "spliced" takes that were often used in other cases IMO. As for sessions or tunes rejected for "artistic" reasons, isn't this often rather subjective? I.e. a 98% (or even 95%) result may fall short of a 100% perfect result but still is highly welcome and appreciated by diehard fans of the artist/lineup in question (and those probably would regard an 80% result just as highly as a 98% result). AND it could add to the appreciation of the evolution of the artist in question. As for what a discography is supposed to include - largely agreed. Keeping allegedly "dud" (and therefore unissued) sessions under cover would be uncalled for.

I am not so sure about breakdowns, etc. (unless they have already been released). I cannot see they add all that much. Obviously during many studio sessions there must have been breakdowns, so ... In a pinch I could live with it if the umpteenth alternate of well-known tune X from an oft-reissued session were not mentioned in such discographies but what I would hate to see omitted are rejected tunes or sessions that might not even have been released anywhere at a later date (and may not even have been recorded elsewhere at all). I'd find it very interesting and enlightening to see what might have been recorded beond the issued and may just remain buried in the vaults. And this is where I have a hunch that some of those sessions might have been omitted because they just MIGHT "threaten the legacy" ("Hey, it cannot be that word seeps out that our beloved legendary artist X has done a session that was considered a dud and rejected outright!") Though, from what I have seen in other discographies (not BN ), it sometimes can be frustrating to be able to look behind the curtains in that way. If you see that a session includes released tunes that sound like they are mostly run of the mill fare whereas those that are marked "rejected" or "unissued" sound like hot flagwavers then this makes you wonder what kind of clout the A&R men had over the artists at that time ...

I've hardly ever sold anything out of my collection (except a scant few obvious duds and duplicates or items replaced by more compehensive follow-up purchases that duplicate the earlier purchases by 100% or are in other ways more desirable - but even those weren't very many). Maybe this was a mistake because I am running out of shelf space fast both for LPs and CDs but I'd be hard pressed to round up more than, say, 0.5% of the discs I've got if I had to set up a record stall at a garage sale somewhere. But lately I've come to regret a few late 60s/early 70s hard rock/"classic rock" LPs that I sold about 15 years ago because they really never mattered that much to me (they had been chance purchases in my very early collecting days, probably trying to explore some common ground with what my pals commonly listened to). My son (going on 14) lately has taken a keen interest in Metal bands and much to my surprise (spurred by the lineups at certain festivals that he has followed on late-night TV) this even includes early 70s hard rock acts such as Deep Purple, Alice Cooper and others. (Hey, so much for him sneering at me at 50+ for listening to (mostly) 55 to 80 year-old music, and him at not quite 14 starting to dig 30 to 40+-year old music! Now who's listening to older stuff? ) At any rate, I'd have loved to pass on my copy of that "Lord Sutch Meets Heavy Friends" LP and a few other items to him ...

Cary Ginell spells quality in music history writing (though I haven't seen him in this stylistic context often yet ). Wonder if the book might reveal new angles on the Mrs Eckstine/Stan Hasselgard involvement. Some say there seems to be a mystery there ...