Big Beat Steve

How many sealed copies are there of the "Butcher" cover LP and what would they fetch, I wonder?

I wouldn't want to derail your thread unduly, Joel, and obviously I wasn't there either so suffice it to say that what I remember from those various jazz mag reports on the Newport festival and the entire "Youth band" tour really was fairly shocking to read. Swedish sax man Bernt Rosengren wrote an article where he bitterly complained about the way the musicians were treated like kindergarten kids, how several musicians had plans of immediately returning home after ONE week of that U.S. stay (and only stayed on board after Willis Conover intervened) and how Gerry Mulligan was so smitten by the band that he not only wrote a chart for the band but also volunteered to come along to the Youth Band's projected appearance at the Brussels World Fair to appear with them there, only to be turned down because Marshall Brown "found him too poor a musician to be part of that project". Nuff said? Guess so. Other reports published at the time more or less went into the same direcion. No doubt he was a teacher in the right place and for the right purpose to further your musciianship at the time you were in his class, and by all means do hold him in high esteem for what you have learnt from him - but, please, don't do it for that 1958 Newport band project.

Very sorry to hear about your loss. Keep looking forward anyway. On a totally unrelated note (i.e. the following is really not a matter of respect towards of the just deceased - Marshall Brown has been gone for close to 30 years, it seems), though, this remark of yours had ME shake for a second: No doubt Marshall Brown has rightfully earned credentials in various fields but please try not to mention his "fame" in connection with the "Newport Youth Band" (I assume you are referring to the INTERNATIONAL Newport Youth Band of 1958, not to the Farmingdale band) - that is, unless you want to incur the ire of many, many European jazz musicians and scribes who witnessed that band project in connection with the Newport festival (those who still are around anyway). I won't quote from reports about that Stateside trip of European jazz musicians (all of whom had been looking forward to that event though they by no means were still "young"sters anymore) published throughout Europe but by all accounts most of the musicans really were bitterly disappointed by the condescending treatment and straitjacketing they received during that trip, mainly due to Marshall Brown's attitude which might probably best be described as "patronizing". In short, an opportunity was missed and many feelings were hurt.

Something for Chewy to get his hands on ...

One day I will get round to spinning my 70s disco records again. Or maybe not. Disco ... ha! Just fit for frisbeeing or dart throwing! I am talking about genuine 50s rock'n'roll and rockabilly (and their today's offspring bands in the rockabilly subculture). Music which I still like a lot but which has receded a bit into the background in my listening habits and also in what I would normally spin in my rare DJ activities.

Same here. (Well, almost ... though it's not a matter of having lost complete interest in but rather of music that has moved down a good deal on my priority scale). And sometimes events intervene that unsettle things considerably. A couple of weeks ago a friend asked me to do the DJ-ing at his 40th birthday bash. In compiling the music suitable for that event and knowing the musical preferences of a good deal of those who will attend, this has led me to revisit quite a large number of my platters that I haven't listened to for years (my preferences have shifted though I still hold on to those records). Very nice and satisfying even for myself, though I do not know how long it will be before I revisit these records again after tonight's DJ activities are over. But this makes it even harder to give a percentage figure. Though I guess it is at least 10% that I will never listen to again. But which 10%???

'Bout time SWR radio did something with their "Treffpunkt Jazz" and other jazz concert performances that have taken place at their premises for decades. Just checked their website but so far only the big, bigger, biggest names have been graced with a release. Whereas they could have done SO much to further the discography of German jazz greats (or "Eurojazz" in general) too. Thanks anyway for mentioning this label.

Actually, if you just want to listen into some of his jazzier stuff first and get to make the rounds at fleamarkets and garage sales, try to get hold of the record Marcel mentioned above ... ... which actually is a 10" LP with 8 tracks including the 5 that Marcel mentions (I am not aware of an EP but it may have existed). The Swiss pressing more accessible to you is on the ExLibris label. The German Opera (record club) label pressing isn't extremely rare so maybe the ExLibris one isn't either? The 4-CD box I mentioned offers a wider variety, of course.

I'd say so, yes. Jazzier, yes - more adventurous, not if you take all-out jazzmen like Mangelsdorff or Naura as a yardstick, but compared to Hazy's more mainstream output, yes, definitely. But you cannot compare it with that CD that you showed above because a good deal on that CD is made up of 40s big band recordings, and though that big band is very good IMO the overall sound is still a few steps away from the 50s Sextet recordings. A lot of the tracks on that 4-CD set have that unmistakable Hazy Osterwald Sextet sound, even when they venture into fairly straight-ahead jazz, while others that might best be described as "jazzed-up" instrumental pop still come across as "spiced up" versions of what you usually got to hear from them (no matter how good the commercially released versions were). There are few titles included there that they also recorded commercially, but just as a case in point: "Violetta Rock" and "Whisky Time" were released commercially on Heliodor and are nice enough. But if you compare them to the radio versions you might say that for the latter recordings they decided to pull the stops. "Whisky Time" has those catchy vocal exhortations of the title of the tune every now and then throughout the track but whereas the calls on the Heliodor version sound like "May I call Whisky Time now, please?", on the radio version they sound like "Hey, Whisky Time, man!!". See what I mean? (Hard to imagine for those not familiar with the typical Hazy Osterwald Sextet sound and antics, but us others we should be able to figure out, right? )

Thanks, King Ubu, while you added that link I did a search on Amazon and compared the track listing. 12 of the tracks duplicate Elite Special SJLP-6318 (first released in the 70s but in print fairly long - I bought mine new in the late 80s). Not sure whether the remaining 10 would warrant buying that CD. These are commercially released recordings, it seems, whereas the 4-CD box set I mentioned above is made up of studio recordings made for Radio Zürich and Radio Geneva and intended for airplay only, it seems. So this may be the reason why they were able to take more chances with their repertoire.

No, never seen it before.

My recurring thought about the interview blurb uttered by certain persons was: "Imposter" Yes, "spitting out chesy platitudes" is a nice way to describe it. Stating the obvious while pushing one's own (alleged) importance up front was how I felt about it. But the historical footage is really priceless and worth the entire documentary any time. To those who already have a substantial knowledge of the history of jazz anyway. They can hear and see between the lines.

Marcel, as for Hazy going "commercial", let's not be mistaken. His band had more swinging musicianship to offer than most other bands that went from swing jazz to more mainstream pop fare at that time. If you can, check out his "Classic Collection 1951-1964" 4-CD box set (Strictly Jazz 6260052). There are not only (strongly) "jazz-flavored" tracks in there but also some amazing straight-ahead jazz, 1963/64 versions of tunes such as Milestones, Freddie Freeloader, I Remember Clifford and Sack O'Woe. I think it's fair to say he and his musicians tried to keep their jazz chops intact, even if as a side business only.

I fully agree with your "overall" point that cheapo sets (such as by certain labels we all know about) rip off serious, decent and deserving reissuers such as Uptown by jumping on THEIR bandwagon and taking advantage of them. And I'd stick with Uptown in any such case anyway. But you know what? I know that I will be getting screwed if I fell into the trap of any of those CD resellers who'd charge me waaay more for one single CD than what an entire set of these discussed here would cost me (there is only one of that entire series that I'd ever be tempted by and I already have half of it on vinyl. But among the rest, one or two of the others would set me back more than the price of that entire set if bought from the usual internet platform suspects). THIS is where bitch slaps are in order. Now if that set should help to cut the ground from under the feet of those resellers who charge such obnoxious prices then I know that humanity will be rendered a SERVICE. Because pricing excesses will be kept at bay. A way out? Make the corporate labels keep things in print. Everything. No dice? Then once things enter the P.D. the rule of demand and supply (and willingness to pay or not to pay so much or so little for so much or so little quality - or vice versa) will settle it. Simple as that. That's part of life too. Like it or not.

http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/panorama/schweiz_jazz_hazy_osterwald_gestorben_1.15330511.html Sorry to hear his. RIP And thanks for plenty of entertaining music.

I did realize that. Yet ... your definition of "legit" is not what would legally be considered "legit" once the P.D. rules apply. And again ... to artists screwed out of their royalties this would still be splitting hairs.

Like I said, I can't and won't vouch for it (one way or another), least of all with live recordings or airshots that may be noisy from the start. I just listened as closely as I could (hard, though, if you have to switch back and forth between your turntable and CD player) and did not detect anything really noticeable. OTOH, as long as there have been turntables where you could "fine-tune" your playing speed in the + and - direction (and this has existed since the gramophone era after all and well into more recent turntable times), some cases really make me wonder what the fuss is all about as long as the music does not degenerate into some kind of mickey-mousish giggle. Live recordings often ARE a mess soundwise and yet one is often glad to have them. And NO - I have not listened to those Rockland dubs yet. BUT - this reminds me of something else about this box which I find a bit odd: Last night I listened to the "Best Plucking In Town" album on CD9 (which is a sort of compilation and some if not all - didn't check closely yet - of the tracks are included in the individual artists' LPs too). Track no. 14 "Blues for a Stripper" (clearly from the Mundell Lowe Soundtrack on CD 3) has a very odd sound drop-out around the 2-minute mark where the volume ebbs off and then comes on again after about 25 seconds. A defect on this CD reissue - or, worse still, on my own CD set? - or a defect that was already present on the original LP? Anybody got that original LP to compare? Anyway ... wanting to listen to that track in its true fidelity, I spun track no. 9 on CD 3 (which has the full soundtrack). Surprise - a totally different tune. Closer aural comparison (I briefly listened into the others to see if there was a track sequence mixup) seems to indicate that track 9 is THE SAME as track 1 (the title track of that Satan In High Heels soundtrack). But no trace of the track on that compilation. Whazzat? A mixup here on this reissue or an overly "faithful" duplication of a programming error on the original vinyl? Anybody got THAT LP to compare? Odd ... Happens with the best of us (including a box set done by one of the forumists here and promoted widely here - and rightly so - a couple of years ago) but still it makes you wonder ...

Some labels may not be legit in the US but since even the new European copyright laws are not retroactive (i.e. P.D. cutoff dates are not tightened down retroactively) these labels are legit elsewhere at least as far as 50+ year old reissues are concerned. And since those 50+ years old reissues comply with the PD rules applicable there, no royalties are due there. Point. Sorry, but the rest of what you say is just this - a cop-out. If high moral standards about paying royalties are what the No. ONE concern is then one cannot just stop halfways and not go all the route. Besides, the Basie/Kapp/Decca case is elementary knowledge of the history of jazz. And at least at the time Basie wrote his autobiography it did not look like substantially better settlements had been reached beyond what John Hammond had been able to improve upon the screwy orignal "deal" so somebody out there earned a fat check during all those decades that did not include sufficiently fair payment to Basie. And again - this is just ONE example. You can make (possibly valid) complaints about cheapo packaging and cheapo fidelity but it just is not very convincing to try to play the royalty card if you are not willing to go the whole way with THAT question. If royalties are actually being withheld then it makes little difference to those affected by whom they are being withheld.

How many of you (decade-)long-standing collectors out there did get this worked up about Count Basie getting proper royalties when they bought the (superfically speaking) "official" reissues of his Decca recordings in past decades? Do I smell a whiff of hypocrisy there somewhere, maybe? This just to mention ONE tip of a not so small iceberg - if the above is the main line of reasoning. Or is it to be condoned totally by the buyers if artists are ripped off by their own labels?

His "Diesel Smoke Dangerous Curves" was a gas (almost literally ) and this (and the like) is what he will be remembered for at any rate. RIP

I've only compared a good deal of the "Bird Is Free" album and I could not rightly say I detected any there. But then again, that recording has a lot of background noise (sometimes actually foreground noise) so I am not sure any correction would really have made itself felt in any significant way. It's far from unlistenable, though, and I remember that a long time ago when the mood beset me one of my late-late hour habits was to put on that album, turn off the lights in the room and relax in my easy chair. Made you feel almost as if you were straight in that club, sitting at one of the tables amidst all the chatter and glass and bottle clinker and listening to the band. Not musicologically correct, no doubt, but WTH?

So ... I received my 30-CD box set today. As I already own a few of the records contained therein I did an aural comparison (note it's strictly an AURAL comparison via my MOR sound system - which will eventually get upgraded but is amply good enough for the size of my music room - so I can't vouch for any subjective (ultra-)high-end listeners' sensitivities ) with parts of the following vinyls: - CD 17 vs Charlie Parker "Bird Is Free" (original/early repress on CP Records): No reduction of the club atmosphere background noise, overall same fidelity except that the CD seems a little bit brighter, clearer, but not significantly so - so the difference may be due to the state of my vinyl or the (not very old) stylus of my turntable. Hard to say ... OTOH some of the tracks on the CD do have a tiny bit of hiss at the beginning of some tracks that my vinyl doesn't (and that then ebbs away). - CD 4 vs The Marty Paich Quartet featurign Art Pepper on Tampa TP28 (Japanese - Victor - reissue) Clearness and fidelity overall the same - a little bit brighter on the CD maybe - but strangely in this case my NM, all shiny Japanese repress has some minor hiss in the quieter sections that is not present on this CD reissue. So on this count I find the CD just ever so slightly better. - CD 1 vs Cecil Payne performing Charlie Parker Music (very early UK pressing (DG) on the Egmont label) Fidelity overall the same (again maybe a bit brighter on the CD) but the stereo effect on the CD comes across clearer. The instruments are divided more clearly on left/right. I could live quite well with my vinyl but the CD is an improvement. Though I wonder whether this is the result of the present remastering or whether they "brightened up" an earlier reissue (I picked up my Cecil Payne LP secondhand in London in the mid-90s and remember that around that time this particular UK budget pressing was not exactly rare for a while there - as if quite a few collectors had dumped their copies at that time. Was there a current CD reissue of that record out at that time?). The liner notes say "completely remastered" (though not by whom or where) but overall I cannot see any really significant remastering improvement (except for that overall ever so slightly brighter sound, no matter how that came about) but OTOH no "deadening" of the overall sound either to my ears, at least not on those samples I compared. So i for one can live with the results. As the Bird Dials included in this set are around in a zillion different reissues and remasterings, no doubt others will have more/different things to say when comparing their CDs/LPs with those included in this set. The packaging is OK, sturdy and presentable, the booklet does not contain much info apart from the blurb on the CP label also found on their website, plus an essay on Charlie Parker and full track and session lineup details on all the contents. But hey ... this box set cost me a mere 39.51 euros from amazon.de. THIRTY CDs for some 39 bucks, i.e. not quite 1.32 euros PER CD! Who am I (who is anybody) to complain about anything at that kind of money? And BTW, before this degenerates into another P.D. label and/or "buying cheap" bashing spree (as happened recently on another thread on a box set series discussed before anyway), YES - some the recordings included herein are not yet 50 years old (some were made in the latter part of 1962 and in 1963) so whoever is behind this must know what they are doing with all their product marketing, and each CD bears a mention indicating Copyright by Membran Media GmbH AS WELL AS "Licensed by Copyright Group Ltd." (whatever THAT means ...). If these are all false claims, good luck for the sequels this might lead to ... In short, yer pays yer money and yer takes yer chances ...

Which is why one can read as many books by Hugues Panassié as one sees fit to and STILL enjoy both bebop and white swing. :g

This ... http://futurenoisemusic.com/product.aspx?id=738

Look at it closely .. I am not being any more reductionist than you are. In your above statement as well as in the one preceding it, you subdivide "all of jazz into various sub-genres" yourself. Which is a statement of fact because there ARE different styles of jazz so nothing wrong about that, no matter who makes that statement. And good and not so good jazz was made in all styles through the histroy of jazz. As for hard bop being the artistically most successful style of jazz, that would be a matter of personal preferences and can indeed be contested but depends on what criteria you would consider essential for "artistic success". ANY style preceding hard bop can make that claim depending on whether you are willing to accept to see each style of jazz on the terms of its time and depending on whether you value the groundwork or later embellishments higher . It may be argued that most hard boppers by and large were technically more proficient than most 20s jazzmen (though in order to prove that they would have had to show they were able to play 20s jazz just as well as or in fact even better than 20s jazzmen, assuming this earlier jazz is technically and artistically more simple ) and they may have accomplished musically more advanced feats than 20s and 30s jazzmen, but does this alone make them "artistically more successful"? Not by a long shot if one is willing to judge music on the terms of the time the music was actually made FIRST. So IMHO it again boils down to personal preferences and therefore is pointless to try to debate. And let's face it - while I would not dare to judge what made Jones/Baraka write what he did in 1963, by that year hard bop had already become an also-ran in the field of jazz. By that time contemporary jazz hard been split wide open into soul jazz and free jazz, to name just two which were apart from hard bop. 1963 was to hard bop what 1947/48 was to big band jazz. It was still around but was it still the pacesetting form of jazz?