Big Beat Steve

James Last ... UGH! Had some good credentials as a German jazz bassist of the early to mid-50s who played with many of the big (German and touring foreign) jazz names, and then (from the mid-60s or so) led an ultra-well-known big band in Germany (and still leads it, I think, though he is well into his 80s). The "James Last sound" has been a trademark for decades around here - for better or worse, because he really was a jack of all trades and shrewd businessman, as he "big banded" everything in sight, ranging from the pop hits of the day through local folklore, light classics, "party singalong" records, and the usual big band swing "warhorses", of course. The musical competences of the band members always were high, but this was NOT a "swing" or "jazz" or "progressive" big band (except for some symbolic excursions into that field) and was never meant to be but rather left its mark as an all-round easy listening party pop big band. It had become a common quip that whenever any sort of marketable music with mass appeal potential crept up anywhere within hearing distance, James Last was sure to arrange it into his book, pouring his "my sound fits all" molasses over the entire score to mold it into another example of the typical "James Last sound". Whatever chart hits or musically hot mainstream, middle-of-the-road trends there were, pretty soon there was bound to be a James Last record of it in the shops. And, having come of age muscially at a time - the 70s - when he really was a big shot in the mainstream pop world around here, I can assure you that sound was the "easy listening bane" of everybody out for something musically more substantial. Germany's revenge for Mantovani, Lawrence Welk, Percy Faith etc. combined, if you want ... Honestly, with the benefit of hindsight, if I'd been forced to listen to German mainstream big bands all the time, I'd have preferred Max Greger or even Bert Kaempfert or the post-jazz "Black Forest" period Horst Jankowski any time. But I'll admit that nostalgically speaking, some of his repertoire can pass as some sort of "exotic"/"exotica" act as it was sooo typical of the middle-of-the-road tastes of those times that in a way it becomes quite exotic decades later (and, in case TTK reads this, his band DID gig in "lounge" settings too ).

Now that was mean (at least to German forumists )! Of all creepy covers you had to pick that one ... Don't know about what some (SOME!!) U.S. listeners/buyers would dare to consider "sexy" but I can assure you neither that feller nor his record covers were EVER considered "sexy" by ANY of his followers around here (but not fascist either ) ... But O.K., I admit I am not too familiar with the standards of some of the more prudish incarnations of good, homely U.S. "sexiness" either so who knows what they would fall for ...

How so? Certainly not by expressing enthusiasm for American Music and seeking opinions on the catalog. Nor would Moms be the first person to distance themselves from certain regions of free jazz, in no uncertain terms. In any case, a stirred pot makes for a good brew. :tup on all counts. At any rate, this thread has stirred my curiosity for the American Music catalog too (though "oldtime" jazz usually is not the top of my favorite styles of jazz and is taken in relatively moderate doses). As for the Climax label, I think the topic has been discussed before, but how come there are other Climax 78s (probably European, but ONLY European??) out there that also duplicate the Blue Note blue 6 white label layout but include decidely NON-oldtime recordings (such as Wynton Kelly) that have also (originally) been issued on BN? And they do not look or sound like cheapo bootlegs at all. Anybody got concrete info on the background on THAT offspring of the 'Climax label? As for "messy bop", care to name a couple of examples to this bop enthusiast (who can take in a LOT of bop - i.e. BEBOP late 40s style - in all its varieties?

I wouldn't have thought of Crown as a "typical" jazz label per se either (though some of their "Modern Jazz Stars" albums are a JAZZ discographer's nightmare ). But I can assure you that Crown is widely considered a typical 50s R&B label (and to a lesser extent a Country label), which - judging by the evidence of their releases OVERALL - is incorrect but that's how it is widely perceived (even if only because the BULK of their "collectible" items is from the R&B field), and there are real collecting nuts out there who'd pick the tiniest details of their releases in those fields apart in order to document and cover everything. "Poor man's Blue Note obsession", maybe??

My copy of Way Out Wardell was on Crown. I bought it around 1961 in a drugstore. That music came from Gene Norman's Just Jazz concerts and early 78rpm releases were on "Modern Music" (the first incarnation of the Modern label) so there is a direct link to the Biharis there. Several Crown LPs with music from that concert were issued. Not according to their most recent online catalog. But the Gene Norman concerts have been reissued quite often elsewhere, including on CD. O.K., point taken - not the most musically correct classification. Now how would one broadly classifiy "adult" instrumental music of those days that is neither straight-ahead jazz nor straight-ahead pop nor teen pop nor easy listening nor ...? Just to give a rough idea? And regardless of where their live gigs (if any) took place. But I think you did understand what I was getting at. The music you named is quite atypical of "anything Crown" so it's not the kind of music one tends to think of when that label is evoked. BTW, what label(s) are your CD reissues on?

Crown is a very wide field, you see. So if you are not really that specific in your question then the answers (ANY answers) really risk being far off the mark you are looking for. OTOH, of course, knowing some of your preferences from previous posts I ought to have figured out you were hinting at some not so obvious "lounge" acts, right? So the question to me would be: Are/were the CROWN recordings lumped in among the assets of Modern/RPM or aren't they?

I'd venture a bet that there are very few "Crown" master tapes as such since the bulk of what Crown (re)issued were previously recorded/issued on the Modern/RPM label(s). And whatever there was in the way of Modern/RPM masters, acetates, tapes, etc. was purchased lock stock and barrel (legal rights and all) by the British ACE label quite some years ago. And from what I've seen on THEIR reissues they used the earliest/most original source material available whenever possible. Hence their various subseries focusing on acetates and other previously unissued/unreissued material from the Modern/RPM vaults.

Sure all that was "new" stuff, at least by the standards of the usual discography of those R&B greats from the 40s/50s. Johnny Otis (whose label this was) did a whole series of those LPs with R&B men from the 40s/50s who had been living in the shadows by some time in the 70s. In the case of Amos Milburn, for example, he had already suffered a stroke by the time of his recordings for Blues Spectrum in 1973 which had left his left side paralyzed, so for the recordings Johnny Otis played the left hand on the piano and Amos played the right hand and did the vocals. I used to see the LPs from that series fairly regularly in the shops in the late 70s/early 80s but never picked any of them up as I was more after the "real thing" form way back and have always been a bit wary wary of "updated stuff" where afro-haired backing musicians tried to do their "funky thing". But historically speaking no doubt they are interesting. No doubt there is a full discography on the web out there. Google is your friend! BTW, as for why Roy Milton is behind the drums on that album cover pic, no doubt that's because in his original band he did play drums.

Any George Wallington on record is an asset IMO so I recommend this one too. The music may indeed not be essential and the idea behind it (40s bebop standards given a new - 50s - lease of life) may be "predictable" but the music is fine anyway. I am not sure about the Interlude reissue that JohnS mentions. The record guides I have access to describe the Interlude reissues (511 and 1011) as straight reissues of this Mode LP. If there are extra Marty Paich tracks they may have come from his two Mode LPs (105 and 110).

Haven't read the full interview yet, but all I can sayafter a first glance: EXCELLENT!

Having only heard of (and seen) "monochrome" red, blue - and even green - Fantasy vinyls myself, I am beginning to wonder if Chewy's item maybe is some sort of pressing plant glitch (where they threw the colors from different pots together)??

Some more suggestions about where to look for record release dates (at least approximate ones): - Down Beat (Record Reviews yearbooks as well as individual issues which may also carry ads for new releases and give clues as to which release number was the most current one at which date in the catalog of the respective label) - Down Beat Yearboks - Same for Metronome (yearbooks - with lists of most important record releases of the year - and individual issues) - "Jazz'n Pops - A comprehensive Catalog of Jazz and Popular Longplay Records" (issued regularly at that time) and similar record catalogs - Record label flyers and catylogs, as suggested by Chewy

Another "Solo Flight" cover: Another possibility of a "Sextet" album (looks like a 70s pressing to me so it may still have been current at the time of that interview):

There is that quip that goes something like this: Speaker 1: Ted Lewis really can make the clarinet talk. Speaker 2: Yes, and it usually says: "Please put me back in my case!" :crazy: Who was it again who said that? Eddie Condon??

Interesting ... and which of the U.S. distributors would ship to Europe? Or are there European distributors too?

Good man! Nailed it ...

Yes, in a way they were - on vinyl by VSOP in c.1986 as a "fake" repro of "Mode LP 128" (which originally was never released) but the nondescript cover drawing gave it away as NOT being a 50s repro, since - contrary to the CD artwork now used, it seems - it was not in keeping with the Mode style at all. Great record indeed, though. Time to spin it again ...

I have a (German) jazz guide here that includes a very lengthy list of jazz standards (including "Move") with sample notations of the first few bars, lists of recording artists, composer and publisher credits etc. for each tune, and it does NOT mention any other (older) standard/Tin Pan Alley or other tune (or its chords) that may have served as the basis for this tune. As the authors/compilers of that book were very thorough in their approach (which may also have been due to the fact that the publishing house had a background in classical music) I am inclined to believe them.

This one was out as a facsimile reissue LP about 10 years ago.

YES, PLEASE!!

Thanks for highlighting "All What Jazz". This would be the one subtitled "A Record Diary 1961-71" and reprinted in 1985, right? Sounds like an interesting read, especially if you - like me - find it interesting to read "contemporary" publications with the benefit of hindsight. Often "contemporary" pubications that came right from when the items they wrote about were more or less current give far more interesting insights and you can draw your own conclusions (adding what you know about the subject yourself) more freely than if you read up on the subject matter in more recent publications where the subject has ben "pre-digested" for you by the historian/author. Larkings "blind spots" certainly wouldn't frighten me - after all I've "survived" (and actualy found quite a few interesting insights in) several books by Hugues Panassié who no doubt had far more blind spots than Philip Larkin.

I can understand that you would not be willing to underdeclare the value on the customs form, but to the best of my knowledge the "gift not merchandise" thing should not be a problem as I THINK "Merchandise" is a required indication only if the item is being sent by a professional dealer. The attitude of that fellow may seem strange indeed but somehow I'd sympathize with the "jiffy pack" requirement. If it had happened to you (like it had happened to me) that you a) receive an LP between two THIN slices of polystyrene taped together and b) an LP thrown into a THIN record mailer without ANY padding and in both cases the parcel had been hit at an angle by some other item, thus BREAKING the vinyl of the record packed inside then you'd be dismayed forever too. Not to mention those sellers who skimp on packing material by reusing PIZZA boxes. Which in each case happend with U.S. sellers, BTW. Maybe this U.K. buyer has been through all this too, leading him to think that the risk of some sellers over in your country just not knowing their front from the back (when it comes to diligently preparing items for the LONG overseas trek) is real. He seems to be doing you injustice indeed but, again, "once bitten twice shy". Blame it on those SELLERS who came before you and screwed up things good. It's unfortunate but that's life, I am afraid. Good luck!

@Brownie. So these were diferent from and no overlaps with the commonly known black & Blue LP series of those times, e.g. the "Jazz Greatest Names" series? This was the Black & Blue series I remember being all over the place in the record shops in the mid- to late 70s.

Please bear with me for getting back to you once more about this, but there are SEVERAL sides to this matter. I have done a lot of buying through eBay (including from the USA) and other onine mail order services and am doing a fair bit of shipping to other countries in another field of private hobby (though NEVER through eBay) so I do feel concerned by all this and I do think I can fairly see BOTH sides. I agree that haggling by the buyer usually is a no-no (see below why I stress "usually") if the seller actually makes it clear BEFOREHAND what the shipping EXACTLY will be. However, your statements leave me doubting on several counts: 1) What do you mean by "what S&H could cost and what I want up front (against a subsequent rebate)"? Don't you give them an EXACT, precise and definitive amount of what you will be invoicing? Why not? Can't be that hard to figure out. And shippping oversize items to some isolated Pacific island or to Inner Manchuria can't the be standard case, after all. 2) True, the buyers may be getting a hard to find item but that's what they are paying the ITEM price for, not any EXTRA outlay beyond the actual and bare, naked shipping costs. They are buying the item at the price of the ITEM (plus regular shipping rates) from you and are not buying (nor are they supposed to be, IMHO) the extra efforts you require to get the item shipped at all. First and foremeost, this is a problem to be assumed by the seller because that is where the problem originates (seeing that other sellers don't seem to have that problem). After all it is not the fault of the buyer. And I would figure any seller keen on actracting business would go out of his way to find ways of offsetting this shipping drawback compared to other sellers more favorably located. I've heard that stuff about "having to queue up separately for overseas shipping" from sellers in the past too (though rarely, very rarely) and find this hard to fathom. In short, blame it on the U.S. Postal Services and the way they still (and for no good reason anymore) seem to be organized as if DOMESTIC shipping services are the hub of the WORLD. In the name of fairness, I can only say that the only way out either is to cover this by some sort of "calculatory mix" (other items may be more straightforward to ship) or decline overseas shipping and selling at all. For better or worse because I assume you know how greedy some overseas buyers may be for some items that won't fetch you nearly as much inside the U.S. Of course you still can charge whatever handling you want for what you consider to be an extra effort on top of the bare postal rates and the buyers will have to live with that, but don't be surprised at their reactions. It's a tradeoff either way. 3) Besides and as a related matter, as for wanting to being covered for it being a hassle to going to a NYC post office etc., are you in the business of being paid for running errands and will this fact of running errands against payment show up in your income statement? ;) Apart from the fact that the hassle ought to be the same for domestic shipments if the hassle is in getting to the post office at all. Otherwise, see 2) above. 3) As for haggling "usually" being a no-no, and though I don't know of course if this - strictly speaking - applies to you at all, there is a very concrete reason to why people tend to haggle if they have a hunch there is a reason why they ought to: I have seen it more than once that sellers have indicated totally idiotic, over-the-topic shipping rates in their item descriptions that go far, far beyond any margin of, say, 1 or 2 or 3$ added for handling (which I would not even want to haggle about). Classic example: I want to buy a book that isn't even of the coffee-table variety and the item description splurts out shipping costs of something like $36.15 for that single item for European destinations (yes, that "Shipping Calculator" feature is about the dumbest thing they ever introduced on eBay) and you know darn well that one of those Global Priority Flat Rate envelopes (again .... my favorite example because tried and tested for SO MANY items: Who wants weight-sensitive rates if he can have THAT "global" rate?) will get that you you for something like $13.50 or so then - yes, I do take the liberty of asking the seller if there aren't maybe other, much more cost-efficient options. And yes, if the sellers balk at reacting to that in a really cooperative way I also take the liberty of interpeting this as meaning "Don't bother me, I want to rip you off on shipping and want to get rich on shipping overcharges Big Time!" or, at best, as "I couldn't care less about giving good service. Take it or leave it." Again, I certainly would not want to insinuate that anything like that applies to you but potential buyers don't know yet who you are and what they are up against with you either and their inquiries may be motivated by the fact that they have been taken for a ride before. So in a way you will have to make good for what others have screwed up, at least in the way you approach your customers. BTW, I cannot see this is any different all the time with U.S. domestic shippings (some sellers seem to be balking constantly at even considering shipping by media mail, for example, whereas are only too willing to go for that very economical option - which we Europeans envy you for ). Or is that there are many sellers out there who grew from Petri dishes and were methodically trained strictly in the art of getting rich quick on overcharging shipping? Sorry for being so outspoken but the subject on hand IMO warrants it. And again, I can see both sides of the story as I have been doing my share of shipping parcels abroad too, and I have had to do some thinking here and there too to keep my shipping costs within reasonable limits in order to be able to keep up with their own domestic rates, and it has been worth the effort every time. Not to mention the fact that many of the items I have shipped were FAR more time-consuming to pack safely than any measly 12in platter to be slipped into a ready-made mailer. And this although I would not consider myself the most philantropic person in the world - I just try to come up with a really fair deal.

I agree, but on that level I'd just as well go for "Good Vibes", Terry Gibbs' autobiography. Really VIBE-rant, eh... vibrant.