Big Beat Steve

Much too nightclubbish (call it "sophisticated" if you want) to be "vulgar" . In fact, those who really like that early pre-Atlantic Ray Charles stuff (and who therefore are bound to like Charles Brown and his ilk too) are likely to appreciate Bill Samuels too (because his style falls into the same bracket). Considering that other (comprehensive) Samuels reissue is OOP now but has been available for a long time, I'd wager a guess that those who WANT Samuels have already been served. So - yes, that combination stinks a little. HOWEVER, the reissuers of that Ray Charles package are not the only guilty ones. Remember how Document used to proceed often (and still does)? And Blue Moon too (but ... stop ... that's Andorran! Evil! Evil! So no surprise ... ) No, seriously, this practice is annoying (given the relatively recent availability of the Samuels CD) but I think in almost all instances it is a case of the discography of the artist in question being too slim to make up a full CD (and without the Samuels stuff the playing time on that TWO-CD set would have been laughable, right? ) so the compilers throw in a few bonuses that might appeal to the target buyer group. While the stylistic lineage is not to be denied here, it would have made more sense to me to fill up the CD with a couple of very early other R&B tracks where Ray Charles was the session pianist. (But ... hold it ... that would have meant research and possibly remastering! ) (Yet I consider getting that set to finally replace my old "20 Golden Pieces" series LP of Ray Charles Swingtime tracks.) BTW, as for MG's comment about those Miami sides being included at the end of the Ray Charles tracklist, while I do not have my Leadbitter/Slaven discography on hand, I seem to recall they listed one or two tracks more than those in that set. So ...? (They might be retitled alternate takes, though)I

Another case of "had no idea he was still around". RIP and thanks for the music!

All the Bill Samuels items were reissued on CD 5112 in the CLASSICS BLUES & RHYTHM SERIES before. The Penguin Guide to Blues Recordings sez thus: "A crooner with the exageratedly precise diction of Al Hibbler,. Samuels applied his velvet-fog voice to standards like Ghost of a Chance ... occasionally diversifying into Louis jordan jive numbers ... and an infrequent blues" and goes on to describe the contents of this CD as "svelte lounge music." It ain't THAT mediocre, though, that CD. Cannot see that Ray Charles played piano on these sessions so are these really just fillers?

According to Bruyninckx, this doesn't look like there is any connection with Savoy: Sonny Stitt (as, ts), Richie Cole (ts), John Handy (ts, as), Bobby Hutcherson (vib), Cedar Walton (p), Herbie Lewis (b), Billy Higgins (d) Recorded live at Keystone Corner, San Francisco, ca. September 1981, released earlier on the 32 Jazz label.

Thanks for the reminder of that one, Mike! A pretty unlikely place for CT to appear in movie centered on a "Teenage music vs Tin Pan Alley moldy figs" plot. Have it among my 50s rock'n'roll movies on VHS. Time to dig it out again ... (No, I did NOT choose my forum nick after that one )

Looks like the 4 tracks featuring Maggie and Brew are the ones that also are on the "Afro-Cubop'" Spotlite LP (dates match for 3 of the 4 tracks and who knows if the 4th one was 100% correct on the Spotlite LP). As for there being another McGhee date with the same title, a 2-part studio version of Cubop City with McGhee backed by the Machito band was recorded in November 1948 and released on Roost 502. I agree with you, Mike, about the misconceptions many Europeans (and "US-Europeans") have about Afro-Cuban rhythms. A question of initial listening impressions ... Maybe that "vulgar" word should just have been put in quotation marks in the first place? At least thats how I understood it.

Fair enough. So let's see if the thread starter will elaborate some more on this.

I agree, it just is so that the term in question appeared fairly understandable to me (even more so after what Danasgoodstuff wrote earlier). So let's just hope the thread starter has not been frightened away by the nitpicking that occurred in the meantime.

No wanting to reproach anything specifically to you, King Ubu , but I really don't see what's so damn difficult to understand about that "vulgar" term in the first place unless those who refuse to understand really, REALLY are dead set on sticking to the very strictest sense of the word and refuse to grasp what can be implied by the term. In the end it's a matter of "if you can't feel it you can't understand it" but IMHO Danasgoodstuff wasn't far off the mark when he used the term "crude" instead. Without wanting to speak for the thread opener, to me the yardstick here seems to be the typical JAZZ rhythm sections of the day. And compared to those the mambo rhythms and rhythm sections might indeed appear "vulgar" in their all-out approach. Call it crude (NOT in the sense of John Lee Hooker's idiosyncratic non-meter rhythms of course), call it exuberant, call it exhibitionistic, call it "no holds barred", yes, even call it vulgar ... whatever ... the gist of the idea is always there IMHO. For example, I clearly remember my first listening impressions after having bought that reissue of Machito's late 40s/early 50s recordings on that Pablo twofer ("Mucho Macho Machito"). Great music but you felt thoroughly exhausted after listening to it in one go (even more so than even after a spell of listening to intense 40s bebop or all-out honkin' sax R&B, the latter of which cannot exactly be called sophisticated BTW and has indeed been called vulgar by some ... ). And listening to Maggie's "Cubop City" from the Afro-Cubop Spotlite album again, the difference is evident because for all its latin flair the rhythm section there clearly plays a subordinate role (not unlike some Dizzy's big band recordings of that era), as opposed to the entire rhythm section all falling over each other all the time in indeed quite a lot of mambo recordings of that era. Deliberately exaggerated? Yes ... And don't get me wrong, I like mambo, and I wouldn't have used the term "vulgar" myself in comparing those rhythms. But I understand the idea ... and there is nothing inherently wrong IMO with an occasional dose of well-placed "vulgarity" even in music anyway (unless you want your music all subdued and insipid all the time). But if those who still frown upon the use of the term "vulgar" cannot see the above (or insist on sticking to a verbatim understanding of certain key words) then such discussions are pointless. In the end it all boils down to personal tastes anyway, and nobody but REALLY nobody has a monopole on deciding what is appropriate there. There IS no absolute truth there. One man's tastelessness is another one's "meaty" taste, and one man's tastefulness is another one's insipidity. Nuff said ...

So I stand corrected. The recording dates and credits like "Terry Gibbs Quartet with Pete Jolly" or "Terry Gibbs Quartet with Steve Allen" apparently were enough initial info for me to pull the trigger (and seeimngly fooled me into remembering there were more details to it). BTW, looking at the credits on my cover here and those shown above, one detqil that makes me snicker now is "Production and COordination: JIM PEWTER". He of the countless nostalgia pop/r'n'r oldies shows ... Nothing against that, not at all (he sure knew his stuff around 50s rock'n'roll etc.) but here he must have taken the sophisticated road to "Coolsville" for a change ...

As for the lineup - yes, it was listed on the back, along with recording dates (not always correct as we now know). But you indeed had to overcome your initial hesitations about the run-of-the-mill looks of the covers. In my case the combination of Terry Gibbs, Pete Jolly and Red Norvo meant three reasons to look closer (and the low price at that clearout sale didn't detract either ), so ... bingo for the first one ever bought from that series. Haven't been able to buy many more from that series ever since, but the mental note to look closer whenever another one comes my way definitely is there. So ... a big Thank You to James Harrod from me too.

You know ... the reason I was asking is that - judging by contemporary writeups - this particular Newport tour was taken VERY, VERY badly by a significant number of the European participants once they arrived on U.S. soil and saw what they had to put up with (not least of all due to the "Mr knows it all" attitude of Marshall Brown). Bernt Rosengren from Sweden wrote some extremely candid and bitter reports about the Stateside experiences in contemporary Swedish jazz mags and if only half of what he wrote is true it is easy to see why he felt the urge to publicly let off steam. So I would not have been that surprised if the memories of Ruud Jacobs had not mellowed in full even after all these decades either and he still had somewhat ill feelings about that tour.

AN interesting (if controversial) topic, this International "Youth" band. Just out of sheer curiosity: What do you mean by "Today Ruud won't speak"? Is he no longer able to (health-wise) or is he UNWILLING to discuss this subject?

Now that Bob Graf has repeatedly been hailed as a revelation this thread, would it be amiss to point interested listeners to THIS easily available reissue? http://www.freshsoun...ns-cd-3111.html Looks like this does NOT overlap with all of the Delmark reissue.

Thanks for that informative link. Good to be able to check out all the details on those scant few Sessions,Live LPs that I have (bought them secondhand in relatively recent years, can't recall having seen them in my very early collecting days - or even later on - when they were new or still current - and those nondescript covers would probably have made me shy away before even checking the details on the back cover).

Good to hear there is indeed no booklet. I had been wondering about that ever since I got that box set secondhand (with secondhand purchases something might have got lost along the way after all). Reading Chris Albertson's interesting recollections, those Columbia remasterings of the 70s, then, were as good as they could possible be with the technology of the time, and summing up the other statements the Frogs seem to be a bit better but not THAT much, it seems ... So the Columbia/CBS set will remain good enough for me.

I'll invite you to my next fondue party, if it ever gets cold enough to have one. I suppose you realize fondue isn't really something linked to Bavaria but rather to SWITZERLAND. OK, OK, small difference if you use the U.S. distances as a yardstick but STILL it is a difference - and a not negligible one .. Of course, if you insist on serving steins of Bavarian beer (ask Weizy for a taster ) to go with the fondue then it might pass for something at least remotely resembling "Bavarian" tradition ...

Indeed, ordering from Frog is no big deal. I've ordered 1 or 2 CDs from them last year too - as well as the "Frog Blues and Jazz Annuals" Vols. 1 and 2 - great reads! Shipping costs weren't THAT over the top either. Speaking of Columbia LP reissues of the Bessie Smith opus: How does the 10-LP box set reissued in the 70s CBS Special Products series compare SOUNDWISE with the 2-LP sets (those with the colorful painting artwork on the covers IIRC) that were around back then? I have the box set (LSP 14100) that was marketed exclusively through the "Zweitausendeins" shops and mail order service. Anybody any idea and/or aural experience? Same remastering and same pressing quality as the 2-LP sets? The back cover of the box says "Produced by John Hammond, Chris Albertson" but no other specifics. They sound quite decent to me but I've never heard the 2-LP sets so cannot compare.

Just found another one among my early US pressings: "For Jazz Buffs" - Shorty Rogers, Chances Are It Swings (LPM-1975) (stating the obvious, that subtitle, ain't it?) Were all RCA Victor LPs released chronologically during that period or were there several series running in parallel? Because I cannot find any such phrases on the LPs in the 1500 titles that I have (and these look very much like late 50s to me, contrary to the c.1955-57 1000/1100 and 1300 series).

+1 :tup Though the others named above (such as Herman, Basie, Clarke/Boland) certainly were no slouches either.

I understand, but being a vinyl man at heart I came from the opposite end. At least the Storyvilles from that LP have long since been completed on vinyl. Enjoy your listening!!

True, good sound and great recordings. But very annoying track compilation. A bit here, a bit there, but nothing even halfway complete (neither live Storyville nor studio sessions). Bought my copy in my relatively early collecting days (29 years ago) to get a taste - which I did (and liked it), but whenever I tried to complete those sessions, this turned out to be impossible without running into just that annoying amount of overlaps that would have made it less appealing to buy those other vinyls (because it would have taken several LPs - if they could be found - to round up EVERYTHING on that LP and phase it out for good).

I'm with Brownie here. Will have to get used to it, but am unimpressed. Too busy, too gimmicky (those miniature avatars on the overview page do not serve any useful purpose IMO).

Never heard it called "middle jazz". I always knew it as "mainstream". Same thing. Synonymous. I just wanted to use a term that specifically coincided with the period when this music was recorded. Was in use in the UK too IIRC. Check out period copies of "Jazz Monthly" featuring Albert McCarthy's writings.

You want to talk about which Vanguards exactly? About those that the label became famous for among fans, i.e. those done in the 50s, including releases by Mel Powell, Vic Dickenson, Ruby Braff, Sir Charles Thompson, Urbie Green, and others? In short, "middle jazz". Those shown in the initial posts above seem to point into another direction and era.