Big Beat Steve

OT on: Allen, I think that case of "principals" falsely used for the "standards that you have" is a typical case of just plain laziness and couldn't-care-lessness that has been creeping in of late (because I keep noticing this at alarming rates in relatively recent years,much more so than in past decades). All too many out there in journalism clearly need to get their act(s) together more thAn ever. @TTK: I tried not to nitpick too much. OT off.

Assuming that Matt Shipp SAID this (and did not write this), maybe those who transcribed what he said might check out the MAJOR difference betwen "principals" and "principles". Might lend a bit more credibility to the thoroughness of Shipp's statements if they cleaned up their act for his sake. Or were they all in school (where principals are a BIT MORE likely to be found. My oh my ...

Interesting! As for the Aristocrat sides, a tiny bit of information and some label shots are here: http://myweb.clemson.edu/~campber/aristocrat.html

Thanks for wording succinctly what after reading that piece I felt was the bottom line of it if you look at it reasonably. I doubt any of those "feds" at any time ever said "We're gonna shove some methanol-poisoned alcohol their way to teach them a lesson when they drink it". It was those who misused that stuff for making bootleg alcohol who were responsible. Like JSangrey said, if you are dealing with illegal/illicit substances from illicit sources, you are running a BIG risk at your very own peril. Like those in even lower strata of society did with "canned heat" and the like. Probably the key problem of this responsibility of substance abuse is that nobody probably ever fored the abusers at gunpoint at any time to drink or shoot until they became addicted in the first place. It was their very own decision. And then, at some point it became hard if not impossible to turn around and head back. But the original, initial responsibility that led them up that path remains with themselves, not with any third parties. Which to this day remains the key problem of addiction and how to get the addicted out ouf that vicious cycle.

Looking forward more than ever now to receiving mine but of course around-the-world shipments do take longer. Thanks in advance anyway, Pete!

Sounds quite plausible that this sort of pressing plant prioritizing is penalizing the small ones but I hope this isn't like this everywhere. I must admit I had not consciously heard about this Record Store Day thing at all until this year, though it must have been around even here for a while. Our local paper yesterday even ran an article about RSD and our (few remianing) local record stores and their activities on this day (and in past years). One (that I have often checked out actively as it is the only remianing one with a sizable jazz and blues section) did have a few special vinyl releases out for RSD, i.e. by small (regional) labels and bands, so I figure THEIR pressing plants were alright. I did not go there yesterday, though, as whatever special they had on was way outside my preferred styles of music.

Actually there have beens scribes who (correctly or incorrectly) have pointed out that his LP "The Thrill is Gone" had rather a programmatic title because his albums of that time had already become heavily overproduced and his music by that time had lost a lot of its original impact - and that was in the early 70s!! Am no expert on B.B. King's music (even less of his "later" days) so won't judge this but there seem to be some to whom B.B. King has been going downhill for 40 years!

Considering your nick I am a bit surprised that in your "fudging" you excluded the heyday of bebop.

But everybody who was around in the 70s and 80s and was actively listening to music then could/can relate to those scenes of "Hi Fidelity". I could, anyway ... - I made quite a few mix tapes for others - and received some -, not so much for proselytizing but just for exchanging tunes - in the form of personalized playlists - that others did not have among their vinyls. I remember, for example, the time I made a "mix tape" for a buddy who was mainly into r'n'r/r&B/country from the early postwar period and then out of curiosity one day asked me to tape him a C-90 selection of bebop just to expand his musical horizon a bit. I think he was pleased because I mixed in liberal doses of bebop/R&B "crossover" tunes (Jug, Leo Parker, Frank Motley et al.) to "ease" him into the idiom. It was fun ... And of course it was a thing of its time and has been superseded. But should that keep ANYBODY from keeping on indulging in it just for personal entertainment as long as the "raw material" is still available?

I am willing to tackle CD-Rs and accept the "learning curve" for "mix CDs" but basically I agree with you, and those mix tapes are about the main reason I still use those cassette decks every now and then. (I've never liked buying albums on cassette or copying entire albums to cassette to "archive" them, though. Winding made listening all too uncomfortable for me) Depends on the period. Jazz became chic in the 80s. Those people the dealer was talking about probably hail from thereabouts. MG Well, that discussion took place in 2002/2003, and the moment when this dealer was called upon to "compile" that oh so sophisticated set of BNs happened a couple of months before that. So pretty late AFTER the 80s.

As I have to limit myself to TWO decades, I'd say this: Jazz, Blues/R&B, Country/Western Swing: 1935 to 1955 Rock'n'Roll/Rockabilly (i.e. REAL rock'n'roll, not the US definition of "rock'n'roll" extending past Beatlemania to include what would otherwise just be labeled "rock";)): 1954 to 1964 and then again 1990 to 2000 (though the latter might move forward or backward in 5-year intervals depending on my mood)

I have a hunch - like others said above - that this cassette thing may indeed be going on as an individualist way of marketing the music in some strata of undergrund/subculture bands. I've heard such statements in passing here and there without paying much attention to the details (cassettes are of - now limited - relevance to me only as blanks to record), but I'd believe right away that there IS such a thing. As to how far widespread, well ... Agreed that the sampling methods may have been odd and that having no intention of listening to the items makes these cassette buyers less than credible, but these problems of being "show-off" characters only exist elsewhere too. You know, ever since a secondhand record shop owner told me of one of those well-off yuppie apartment owners who, as part of furnishing his designer-furniture equipped apartment, asked this very record dealer to compile him a set of "must have" hard bop Blue Notes (Japanese pressings on upwards, but leaving him largely free rein as to which actual records to include as "must haves"!), I am a bit wary of some of the hype surrounding Blue Notes and their objective desirability too. Because ... how many like that who view BN's above all as a means of DISPLAYING their "sophisticated finer tastes" potentially ARE out there?

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"?