Big Beat Steve

In this particular area MAYBE. Otherwise definitely not.

No thanks, no point having that material in triplicate!

Most of that was on the Xanadu LP 146 "Live In Hollywood" (and the rest - on vinyl too - was on Jam Session Records JS-101 as well as on the "West Coast Jam Sessions" Scarecrow SC-801/2/3 box set ). And no doubt these are nowehere near all of the reissues of this material. 94 bucks for that older Fresh Sound CD of course is plain silly (to put it mildly).

Seconded. That Bopland CD box is recommended indeed (incidentally it's one my few Wardell CD releases that I mentioned above (though I am still hanging on to my "The Hunt" Savoy vinyl twofer as well;)).

You may be right but the problem with recommendations in threads like the current one is that most of Wardell's recordings have (thankfully) been around in so many packagings and guises and formats and a zillion different combinations that it is really difficult to spell out concrete recommendations that would lead the newbie to the ACTUAL release still in print at this VERY moment. I, for example, have virtually all of Wardell's recordings (and treasure them and would wholeheartedly recommend any of them) but except for a few Basie and Gene Norman concerts they all are on VINYL in various packagings (pressings ranging from the late 60s to the late 80s and 90s) and what good would it do to recommend any of these to anybody starting from scratch NOW, seeing that even if the records were still around (quite a few are accessible in secondhand form) all too many would only go down the CD route nowadays. And sorting out which equals which TODAY in the most sensible packaging really would be a cumbersome chore. This obviously limits concrete discussion of specific releases to those who have bought their recordings in recent times. Or just play it safe initially and go the route of the budget boxes available these days (there is one on Proprer too, I think).

Did anybody ever notice what sounds like a major blooper in Joe Williams' recording of "ALright, OK, you Win" with the Basie band waxed for Clef on May 17, 1955? First he sings the line "I'll do anything you say - It's just got to be that way" and in the next stanza "Anything you say I'll do - Long as its's me and you" But then, when that line comes up again the next time he goes "Anything you'll do I'll say ... (which does not really make sense ) and there seems to be a split second of some snickering audible in his voice but then he catches up fast enough without losing his meter and finishes the line with "Just got to be that way" Intentional? If so, a strange kind of put-on IMO. I dunno ... I have this version on a 70s U.K. Verve LP ("Swiingin' With THe count" - Verve Select 231711) but according to the Bruyninckx discography this is the master take. Bizarre ...

Yes, that is REALLY far out!

Take it easy ... it's all just a hobby ...

Clueless ... it all depends. The kind of effect or hint at how the story might go on you seem to be alluding to comes up in a zillion song lyrics. But is this quite what the "Great American Songbook" lyrics examples cited are all about? I still feel you are stretching the subject of this topic a bit far No need to link a Youtube (of a watered-down version, what is more), BTW. In all modesty I would not be surprised if it turned out I am familiar with more versions ("white folks" or whoever else ...) of that song (and its connotations of those times - which incidentally aren't all finished yet as far as the contents of that song go) than you are ... So no need to be condescending and try to teach ... This song and its variants would make a nice topic by themselves (maybe to discuss how much life there can be in a song or where an answer song goes beyond that answer stage after all) but I still feel that HERE this song is a bit off-topic. YMMV of course ...

To the very best of my knowledge, this song is no way called anything like "Model A Race". And not every Hot Rod was built on a Ford Model A basis. Far from it. BTW, the "hopped-up" keyword won't do it either because the ENTIRE lyrics are about hopped up machinery. And no special play on the song title at the END of the song here, therefore, because the song is not about jalopies throughout either. So ... where's the "... all these songs from the so-called "Great American Songbook" that end with some sort of play on the song's title" angle here?

I guess in 1962 Jan Johansson wasn't as "far out" yet (comparatively speaking) as he was later in the 60s. His "Domnerus period" (see Dragon DRCD 186, for example) sounds relatively straightforward and in keeping with modern mainstream jazz of that period to me. @EKE BBB: What site would you recommend for purchaing within Europe? An Amazon search drew a blank.

I understand that's the way they talk "oop narf"? Or ithis in fact how the Northerners are referred to by the Southerners? Funny about that "err". Isn't that a supposed to be typical for a certain kind of U.S. English spoken as among the "hicks in the sticks"? Browsed through that reprint of Fontaine Fox's Toonerville Trolley cartoons the other day, and his collection of hinterland town characters such as "Uncle Chew Wilson" who likes to spit his "TERBACCER JUICE" all the time (and "termorrer" is another day, of course must have been the result of some keen observation ...

Thanks Marcel! They do talk of a CD there but the way they refer to it its sound seems to be so-so and it probably is OOP anyway.

Yes, they are kind of late to the game. This subject has been coverd in virtually every detail imaginable, even in English (Thanks, Harlequin Records and others ... )

Like a girl from Liverpool I once knew (fleetingly) to whom ugly things always were "ooglee". Though I doubt other regions in Britain are any better once local colors set in. The way the Londoners (or others from Southern England - not normally an area associated with exceedingly outlandish dialects, right? mess the vowels around (like making an "o" that supposedly in "standard" English is to be pronounced like some shading of "a" all of a sudden sound like "oo" or "ew", with "London" becoming "Lewndewn", etc. etc.) can really drive you nuts. I guess I'll pull out my 1958 45 platter of "Hoots Mon" by Lord Rockinghams XI for some fun listening now: "Hoots mon - There is a moose loose aboot this hoose!" (and no, we are not talking about elks! )

Better still: It is even WRITTEN "fort" (and is proncounced "for"). As long as you are referring to a MALE person, of course. "forte" as a word all by itself in French only exists in the sense of a MUSICAL "forte" (i.e. loudness too) As for your pronunciation, never mind if it is "for-tay" or "for-tee", but if somebody would like to point out, for example, that "spelling is not my strong point", do you actually expect him to state something that sounds like "spelling is not my fortified 19th century Far West soldier outpost"? C'mon ... No, seriously, except in certain female variants of the word that means "strong" in all shadings (including a strong = loud voice) the French language has no such "forte" as you imply.

A question that may have been asked elsewhere before but anyway ... Is there an easily accessible reissue of her 1959 Warwick LP out? Being unable to find that one, out of despair a couple of years ago I bought her later "Now and Then" LP on the Stash label (which includes about half of that Warwick LP) but still ...

I agree with you and have regretted this on a number of occasions too but please remember that discographical information beyond the release year and original label and release number (which usually ARE given) is much less important to the typical collector in the R&B, rock'n'roll (r'n'r in the TRUE 50s sense, not in the diluted US sense of the term ) and country (honky tonk/hillbilly boogie) field than it is to the jazz collector. The way I've observed it, collectors in those fields usually want to know when the record was released and which label it originally was on (to check against the originals they may have or are looking for, possibly) but as for the names of all the session musicians, that's not one of their priorities.

Yes I guess there is. Record stores like this - including listening booths - just weren't around anymore (least of all over here) by the time most of us "young(ish) uns" got into jazz. Great. Steve, where did you find that photo? That's his old store on Michigan Street. I can almost smell the cigarettes. Actually that photo is on page 2 of that 74-page 1952 catalog of which the front page is also included. I won that catalog on eBay about 10 years ago at a pretty good price (for my wallet). And the lists and prices inside (and of course that shop photo) make you wish for a time machine ...

O.K., then, if you want it that way ... Grab these if you want some meaty and varied 50s R&B (warblers & thrushes, honkers, vocal groups, instrumentals, you name it - fine music throughout but ABOVE ALL an offering that is not likely to shove too many overlaps with what you already have down your ears ): http://www.acerecords.co.uk/content.php?page_id=60&artist=7605 Haven't bought Vol. 5 ("Further...") yet but if the other four from that "Mellow Cats" series are anything to go by then the entire series is to be recommended unreservedly.

I know you didn't, but others - reading your question - might have got started thinking in the wrong direction.

You'd just discovered the incredibly wide range of substyles in jazz. Reminds me of how I initially felt when I was first confronted with the MJQ when I had been used to all-out swing (both big band and small groups) as my favorite dish as well as some initial taste of Dizzy, Bird and other early bebop heroes.

O.K. that clarifies it. Thanks! I took mid-50s to really mean 1955 (very very early 1956 at the latest) and therefore was puzzled.

Speaking of Percy Mayfield, I am assuming you are referring to SPECIALTY. Ace has been doing Specialty reissues ever since there have been CDs and even before. The entire Little Richard and Larry Williams as well as Guitar Slim catalogs on Specialty (and probably more which I cannot recall offhand) had been on Ace for a long time in the vinyl era. The way Ace has been operating ever since they've ben inexistence rules out ANY misgivings about these reissues being "shady". They are the real deal and have always been. So never mind how they got it. There must have been SOME deal about the Specialty catalog, seeing how long Ace has been covering that label. Honestly - being a collector I don't tend to think about labels like Specialty in terms of "Fantasy" or the like. Fantasy is the colored early Brubeck vinyls, Cal Tjader (and their ilk) and that's that. As for the rest, the world being the way it is today, tie-ups tend to change so fast these days that what's current today is likely to be passé tomorrow. So what then? Besides, if you step back a bit further you will find more seemingly similar reissues done more or less in parallel. Back in the vinyl days a lot of Ace reissues were limited to Europe (non-U.S. anyway) distribution because Rhino had sewn up the U.S. territory. (Occasionally you tended to find both in secondhand bins over here anyway) But if you looked closer and compared you'd find that where Ace tried to cover the whole field in depth, Rhino reissues were notoriously incomplete, omitted tracks, had more scanty playing time, etc. etc. Thankfully those days are over.

Uh oh ... You started something there ... Would it be OK to post all the covers of the RUTLES' LPs? Only the tip of the iceberg ...