Big Beat Steve

Being too lazy to think hard about any such shortcuts, even with the old system I used the following purely "mechanical" method to break up quotes when I wanted to reply directly but separately to several sentences in a lengthy quote: I open the same topic a second time in another window of my browser, access the "quote and reply" feature by clicking on "Quote", then I mark the quote in its entirety with my cursor (including one line above and one after the quote to make sure the entire quote is marked) and copy it to my original reply post with Ctrl-C and then Ctrl-V. You can even copy the quote directly in the post you have accessed via "Quote" to reply to a quote (so no need toopen the topic in a second window to access the quote). But IF you open the topic a second window this allows you to reply to quotes from several different previous posts in one go by copying the previous quotes into your reply post. This I can do as often as I like and then have the quote more than once in my post and can now delete unwanted sections from each of the copied quotes and reply to what's left of the quote directly underneath the respective quote. Like this: Here I could now comment on whether king ubu's method is indeed clever. And here I could state that I have no idea how to handle this either. Not the most elegant way but it works each time.

Interesting! Recommended reading to accompany this: http://www.allbookstores.com/Sins-City-Real-Los-Angeles/9780811823197 ;)

How about this: "Jockey Jack Boogie" by Johnny Wicks Swinging Ozarks feat. Preacher Stephens on tuba, reissued on Pearl LP 13 (Delmark) About as odd as they comme ... but fascinating ...

Ah, should have thought of that ... Thanx!

My point is that unless you are a subscriber (or take out a "free one-month suscription" or some such - which of course one is liable to forget to cancel in time and then gets signed up for good) you cannot read the story beyond the first few lines. See?

Don't tell me you are trying to lure people into taking out a subscription for the WSJ...

I depends on the direction you want to pursue to go from there in your quest for "raw vocals and slide guitar" ... (not "better" in the strictest sense of the world but "evolving" ...) I have a hunch you could do worse than to check out the recordings by HOUND DOG TAYLOR on the Alligator label.

As well ... Never mind the "offended" problem by using the word "plodding" IMHO. First of all, I cannot see much of an "offended" attitude in the replies of those who praise the book here. Anyway, you are entitled to your opinion. Opinions differ, so do assessments of works of "literature". Isn't this quite natural? And honestly (and totally P. in-C. ), in order to feel "offended" on a level such as this where the entire "crime" consists in using a qualifier such as "plodding", IMHO (again) it takes a real determination and zeal to allow oneself to be "offended" in order to be able to feel "offended" at all. In short, the use of the sentiment of being "offended" seems to be overinflated anyway these days (maybe to quiet dissenters, who knows? - "I feel offended by what you say, so thou shalt nevermore reiterate what thou just said and I shall therfore be free from any obligation of having to refute your statements by facts" - A bit of an easy way out in any "discussion", I feel ... ). So much for that, as for that "plodding" feel of being overwhelmed by the focus being extensively (maybe too extensively) on the minutest details of recordings that a given artist (and subject of said biography) left behind, I for one do understand your feelings and I tend to agre to a certain extent. Maybe because I am a non-musician (just an interested listener). You being a musician and therefore possibly be better equipped to make something of such analyses, I'd figure there is a point to your judgment. And aren't there many books like this? Case in point: "Infatuation - The Music and Life of Theodore Fats Navarro" by Petersen and Rehak. There the music really is dissected almost to the tiniest atom. And though I have almost all of the released key recordings examined it is extremely tough listening closely enough to make something of ALL the analyses. So I must admit so far I've skipped a good deal of those analyses - and yet I don't regret having bought it. I tend to regard it as a sort of "commented discography" to be pulled out when I feel like spinning Fats' Savoy or BN recordings, etc., at length.

In the mid-90s I bought this 1962 "fanzine" book in a Norfolk thrift shop: Fittingly (for THIS occasion), the back cover looks like this: The brief 1-page bios (with pic) on the some 100 pages inside cover an odd range of "name jazz artists, ranging the entire scope from Basie, Blakey, Mingus, Maynard Ferguson, Kenton, Manne, Monk as well as Shake Keane and Tony Kinsey etc. etc. via Bo Diddley, Cleo Laine and Ray Charles to Sid Phillips and Nat Gonella and then on to Beryl Bryden, Colyer, Terry Lightfoot, George Melly and then Clinton Ford (who??), Ed Corrie (??), "The Alberts", The Clyde Valley Stompers as well as Nero & The Gladiators and last but not least a very youngish Dudley Moore. So it wasn't all trad but the trad share was substantial. Wonder how many British jazz fans of 1962 would have appreciated ALL of them equally ...

Came on sort of late (2006?), discovered org more or less at the same time as AAJ but after a spell of hanging out on both I found this site here much more pleasant, lively and informative ... So I can only join in with the others ... Thanks for the forum and for all the stimulating and informative discussions on matters music! Hope things will continue that way ...

Suggested reading on this subject: "The Restless Generation - How rock music changed the face of 1950s Britain" by Pete Frame (Rogan House) The reasons behind the popularity of trad jazz as one important aspect of the YOUTH's pop music (as opposed to mainstream popular music churned out by the established powers in music business) of the day and its links with what became rock'n'roll and the British blues scene of the early 60s are described vividly and in detail here.

Yeah, "I'm Going Home" on "Recorded Live" is a killer track . Almost my #1 reason for going for that album, though the rest ain't bad at all either. But considering tha musical context of that period of the 70s, this tune showed that some still could do some straight ahead kick-ass stuff that really MOVES. RIP.

Great first-hand reminiscences, MG! And could it be that we are about the same age, freelancer? When I started listening consicously to radio (must have been in early 1974) I was 14 but somehow most of what was current and in the charts or what was "the thing to listen to" among my age peers never clicked with me. Time and again I've tried to remember how it came about that the then-current pop on the hit parades or even all that hard rock etc. never caught my ear but I really cannot recall. Pop fare on the charts must have sounded inspid to me (disco was total no-no anyway and total anathema to my developing tastes in music by black artists from Day One) whereas hard rock, prog rock (or whatever) appeared over the top and a bit like overamplified noise (with a few exceptions, see below). I guess music was to be no-frills and straight to the bone for me because what immediately held me spellbound, OTOH, was 50s rock'n'roll on the one hand (Bill Haley, Chuck Berry and above all Eddie Cochran were early r'n'r favorites) and jazz from "dixieland" (o.k., beyond the inevitable George Lewis' "Ice Cream" which was an early ear-catcher, a lot of it would qualify as "classic jazz") to swing (big bands and beyond) as well as whatever vintage blues sounds radio had to offer. Luckily radio had a few good shows where you'd learn about a lot of jazz and blues artists in a short time. Another early influence was a weekly history of country music on AFN that introduced me to a lot from Hank Williams to oldtime string bands. Soon after I started buying records in the spring of 1975 (my first two records ever bought were LPs by Duane Eddy and Johnny & The Hurricanes , certainly due to radio oldies show exposure), jazz and blues records followed, and reading on music matters must have helped a lot, particularly Joachim Ernst Berendt's Jazz Book. Within a year or so this cautiously led me to explore Diz and Bird of 1945, and upon listening through that entire Prestige twofer it sounded quite logical to me from the start (contrary to my initial fears). So things went on from there ... I must unconsciously have been pigeonholing certain things,though, because while I did pick up blues records by John Lee Hooker, Lightnin Hopkins or Elmore James or even Ma Rainey and Robert Johnson pretty early on (at 16 or 17), for some time I didn't quite know what to make of R&B and Jump Blues acts such as late 40s/50s Louis Jordan or Buddy Johnson. File them under swing or not? Took me a while to appreciate this sort of "crossover". I guess most of my age peers considered my music tastes quite oddball, and IIRC except for the perennial classics of 60s British bands (such as the Beatles and Stones) Ten Years After were almost the only common ground (somehow their blues rock and ability to rock & roll if called upon - the Recorded LIve album is one that's still a keeper - did manage to grab me). And when it came ot the Moody Blues, for example, I preferred to stick with their (just-reissued at the time) first Decca LP which appealed much more than their later psychedelic affairs. And I remember that while I never was that impressed with those hard rock guitarist heroes of the 70s, after listening to the likes of Elmore James on record or to Big Joe WIlliams on stage in 1977 I figured to myself that anything beyond the gutsy essentials of blues guitarists like them was likely to be just gimmicks .. Ah well, youthful folly and a lost cause for mainstream stuff from the start, I fear ...

Another series of "smaller" and quite affordable box sets that would provide a good overview of a wide range of artists (many quite worthy of attention but not credited with comprehensive reissues of their own elsewhere) is on the U.K. FANTASTIC VOYAGE label. The "Let Me Tell You About The Blues" series of 3-CD sets looks like quite a good point of departure for "startups" in this field. They have regional compilations on New Orleans, Nashville, Detroit, Atlanta, West Coast, Texas, new York, Memphis and Chicago: http://www.fantasticvoyagemusic.com/genre/blues/ But note that they are partly pre-war, partly post-war (some more so, some less). Take your pick ...

Hey, please cut a non-native speaker of the English language some slack, will ya? (Or write better yourself in a language that is foreign to you ;)) No doubt he meant to say "underLine". Isn't it so, Mike?

Uh oh ... this is going to be a long, long list if you really want to get into details. Starting with Satch (of course), and even before .. carrying on through the Harlem Hamfats and their ilk, plus danceable big bands such as Chick Webb, Andy Kirk, Erskine Hawkins, Lucky Millinder, Buddy Johnson, etc. etc., Louis Jordan of course, Louis Prima (he had done much more before his Capitol/Vegas days), small groups such as Leo Watson's groups, The Cats & The Fiddle, Slim Gaillard (Slim & Slam and well beyond), yes, and bebop can be fun and uplifting too, starting with Dizzy (and I for one find a lot of early Gene Ammons quite exuberant too), and a lot of R&B too (examples to numerous to mention), and so on. As for more recent acts, I might mention certain less-punkish and jazzier neo-swing acts of the 90s but that might only get me into the line of fire with purists (who insist on jazz as serious sit-down concert hall music) so I'll pass for now ... Honestly, the premise of such a query about jazz might be a bit out of focus if you approach jazz from the angle of a listener who's been weaned on hard bop of the "Angry Young Men" faction (and onwards into more recent decades) and understands this to be what jazz is ALL about. True, hard bo and post bop are part of the many-faceted aspects of jazz. in fact the core of jazz joyful as it was (and is again these days in certain subcultures) is intended above all as DANCING music (which doesn't usually take place in the form of slow fox steps so is bound to be rather joyful).

Interesting to see what hapens if they really try to revive most of the 765 items, and possibly a good opportunity to act fast and grab the ones you missed the first time around and realize NOw that yu want them. BUT - any word on where they will be available except from Worlds Records? Because it does sound odd to start such an ambitious project if you are all set on closing down. And it might not the that worthwhile cost-wise for non-US buyers to have to order them from the US.

By coincidence a couple of days ago I received a recent auction win - all 1964 issues of the Swedish jazz mag Orkester Journalen, and the March issue happens to have a (three-star) review of this record: Katie Bell Nubin's voice is well-suited to the gospel style. The orchestra is said to be under the direction of Dizzy Gillespie but he can be heard only in a scant few tracks and has a more prominent role only in Where's Adam and Come Over Here which thanks to his efforts turn out to be the best on this record. Gillespie is all himself here but the other orchestra members appear to be restrained so their playing lacks the personal touch. Katie Bell is no great singer, at any rate not in the class of her daughter Sister Rosetta Tharpe, but she presents her music competently. A nice and engaging record. Opinions do differ, as you can see.

Judging by his liner notes alone, I agree he is excellent. As for his book writing, did he ever do something corresponding to "Country Music Originals - The Legends And The Lost" (which I for one find really excellent) on the BLUES?

I would have included both of these as well but on the one hand I understand the book by Alan Lomax (which I found very interesting) is seen critically by some who have a problem with the persona of Alan Lomax as such. And "The Story of The Blues" was an excellent, one-of-a-kind book for a very long time (I remember I borrowed our local "Amerika Haus" library copy countless times in the mid-to late 70s and early 80s) but I am not sure whether it is still that easily available. But if you can pick up a secondhand copy at a nice price -- grab it and use it as a history source book along with "Nothing But The Blues" They complement each other well.

I fully agree with Paul Secor's recommendation of the Penguin guide and the discographies for reference (am not familiar with the other bios he mentions so cannot comment no them). For a general history of the blues that gives you the overall picture both with excellent and vivid (and therefore not overly scholarly) texts as well as great illustrations, I strongly recommend "Nothing But The Blues" by Lawrence Cohn (Abbeville Press). As I assume you lean towards the older forms of the blues the following books may be of interest: - "In Search of the Blues" by Marybeth Hamilton - "Escaping the Delta - Robert Johnson and the Invention nof the Blues" by Elijah Wald (I bought it upon recommendations on this board and the consensus seems to be that this book is less controversial on this complicated subject matter than other well-known books on Robert Johnson) - "Screening the Blues - Aspects of the Blues Tradition" by Paul Oliver (looking at the topics of the blues through its lyrics) - "Voyage au pays du blues - Land of the Blues" (bilingual French/English) by Jacqes Demetre and Marcel Chauvard (covering a trip by two French blues enthusiasts to the key places of the blues in the USA of 1959 - puslished in book form quite a few years ago but should still be available through the website of the French blues mag "Soul Bag").

:g

A seminal figure and cult personality among German 60s music fans, even beyond Beatlemaniacs. Though the packaging of his Hamburg recordings for reissue at times led buyers to believe that certain recordings were with Beatles backing when in fact they weren't (No, not My Bonne and Ain't She Sweet- this one with Lenn on on vocal - , that WAS the Beatles). The LA Times obit, incidentally, is also wrong about the "Beat Brothers" moniker, that WASN'T the Beatles, only Tony Sheridan's recordings with that backing group are often lumped in with the Beatles recordings in reissues (My point ...) RIP

Just in case anybody's interested: This is also available as a VINYL 2-LP set. Not listed on amazon (at least not on amazon.de) but where I picked it up (yeah, at a real brick-and-mortar record store - one of the last ones locally) it wasn't that much more expensive than the CD at the "going" Amazon rate + shipping. And of course this format allows the booklet to be presented much better.

I wouldn't say so: 1) You've got an AWFUL LOT of leeway in what would be "acceptable" in English one way or another. Or so it seems to me anyway. I work with the English language day in, day out, and quite often I have a hunch this or that phrase or wording that crosses my mind just doesn't sound right to me (that "how" thing above on the face of it would have sounded a bit too "German", i.e. translated verbatim, to me too, BTW, and I'd have opted for one of the two other versions as well). But after googling I've often found these "suspicious" phrases actually are in frequent use, and not even primarily on shoddily written blogs or forums or awkwardly translated sites only but on relatively "respectable" genuine English-language sites). 2) The problem with French as used by native speakers in writing does not look like a problem of "past decades" to me. I'd say written French is mistreated and abused TERRIBLY these days by an awful lot of "native speakers" (and writers). The ability of writing that language correctly as a "native speaker" seems to be going down, down and yet further down all the time. O.K,, many English native speakers seem to be incapable of differentiating between "principle" and "principal" (and the like, for example), but among the French? Ugh ... sometimes it's really garish what you read on forums, etc. This problem is getting pretty bad these days with German too and you have a feeling many schools spawn a generation of semi-illiterates as far as their writing skills go, but French seems to be even harder hit. Small wonder ... I've been told by friends in France that from a certain level in school the teachers aren't even supposed to correct any of the faults of their pupils anymore in their written tests (and of course are not to downgrade them for their faults either).