Big Beat Steve

@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.

@Rooster_Ties, I assume you dont want all of the Pablo covers either?

You don't get it, Chewy. you don't get it one bit. If you had seen lots more French record covers (not only jazz) from that period (late 50s and early 60s) you'd have noticed that this combination of picture, typeface, subtitling etc. is typical of a HUGE lot of the French output of that period. Signs of the times. Just like BN or Prestige covers released in other countires were in their own right too. For the buyer of that time, though, the original AMERICAN "BN style" was of pretty little concern, I think. And if these were "variations on a (original Blue note photos) theme" then it suited the marketing purpose fine, so that's that. Besides, it is not a BN phenomenon either. French Atlantic pressings (or licensed releases, such as on the Versailles label), for example, sometimes - but not always - had even more radically divergent cover artwork. It's just that people seem to be drooling about BN all the time, overlooking the "rest" and not getting the wider picture of the record scene (and the marketing strategies at work) AT LARGE. Oh yes, and they DID do their own pressings for French Atlantics, for example.

Interesting listing, and there are SOME that are timeless and essential indeed (such as "Hear Me Talking to Ya") but otherwise the listing does look a lot like some attempt at being "intellectual" throughout to me. Or why would the "jazz prose" be given that much space? You might just as well give "We called it music" or the like a shot. Because in THAT book the jazz scene of that time really did come alive. And not in a fictional or imagined way (at least mostly not ). I also have a somewhat uneasy feeling about the Giddins/Deveaux book. Haven't read it in detail but what I've seen of it hasn't made me jump for it. Hope Deveaux gets a more balanced say there than in his "bebop" book. And that Ira Gitler's "Swing to Bop" did not get a mention is a real shame. In short, one might rightfully claim that there are as many valid "Top Ten" lists as there are dedicated and substantially knowledgeable jazz fans.

Sure, surface mail is out. Global Priority Flat Rate may well be inefficient for LPs (due to the size of 12in LPS, apart from the fact that these mailers are specifically for printed matter anyway). Agreed too. My example, however, was just that - an example (there may be other shipping options that are generally overlooked for specific shipping needs too). Imagine wanting to buy several of those period record catalogs or other record-related printed items and then having to go to the greatest pains to explain to the seller (who after all offers worldwide shipping) that there ACTUALLY IS such a thing as Global Priority Flat Rate in his very own country. Quite galling, I can tell you ... (especially if you run into somebody who does not take too kindly to being told - even in the politest of words - by a "furriner" what is right in front of his doorstep). And this despite the fact that offering really good, economical overseas shipping rates should be a BOOST to his own (international) business and therefore in his very own interest, isn't it?

Which sounds quite reasonable to me in every respect, and in keeping with past personal experience.

Another pair easy to confuse (if you go way back in jazz). Corky CORCORAN and Corky CORNELIUS Makes me wonder, though, if this was intentional to a a degree in that the Corcoran one maybe picked his nickname (or "inherited" it by way of third parties) from the Cornelius one as that one died rather young and at a time when the Corcoran one just abut made his first impressions on the swing scene.

Carl Perkins and Carl Perkins. I know I never did, but I remember one or two (who were familiar with the guitar-playing Carl only) who were really baffled to "find out" he "also played piano" and recorded on a DOO-WOP R&B label.

What Dave says ... Buyers who say they would be willing to pay only so much for shipping IMHO are just full of you know what ... Allowing the seller to recover his FULL shipping expenses would only be fair, but NOT more than that, except maybe a $ or so for extra packaging, padding or whatever. Some sellers really go overboard in what they would charge for "handling" (hey, funny ... I guess nobody would mind receiving their LPs in used SECONDHAND record mailers if this helps reining in shipping costs, and proudly boasting some blurb like "all LPs will be shipped in a BRAND NEW mailer" ... hey, big deal ... especialy if this means shelling out separately). And as long as some sellers are not even afraid of shipping their records in secondhand 12in PIZZA BOXES (!!! happened to me more than once with sellers from the U.S.) there are a lot out there who would need to clean up their act too. Not to mention those who charge airmail but ship sea freight, those who go wildly overboard in stating shipping prices beyond all reasonable limits and are NOT EVEN WILLING to listening to pleas from buyers (who tend to gain much experience with what shipping rates would be best) to go for the most economical (and tried and tested) airmail rates. Beats me every time, for example (when buying printed matter), how often I have to tell U.S (NOT "domestic only") sellers that they DO have something like Global Priority Flat Rate envelopes which are FAR more cost-efficient than any airmail or weight-sensitive rates. Under what pebble have these fellers all been living all these years, I wonder???

I have the one with the "expanded globe" cover as a 10" U.S. pressing (Capitol H 460) that ONLY has "This modern World" on it.

Like I said, Sidewinder, that system has its incongruencies. Or could you imagine a system where a situation could very well arise where you could be obliged to pay into it but will definitely NOT get anything out of it because you don't qualify? But again, that could easily occupy a topic of its own. And I hope it will work out far more straightforward to Mike.

Such a thing would be regarded as the downfall of civilization in the United States. The situation isn't quite as clear-cut as Mike describes it and there are a HUGE amount of snags and injustices (not necessarily concerning musicians but other professions lumped in under "artists") in that system but that's an entirely different story.

By ALL, ALL,ALL means!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Somehow I can't find that all that funny ...

Also check out the recordings made for the MOLE JAZZ (yes, of the record shop fame) label. It also seems that some recordings released on Doug Dobell's "77 Records" label at least were made "in cooperation with Ronnie Scott's Jazz Club". No doubt an internet search will yield many trails. Good luck!

Just in case it is of further comfort to you ... earlier today I placed it on my Saved Items list through my national Amazon site. Though recordings from that period are a bit outside my key area of interest I got sort of curious ... All the fuss and a possibly overdone bass man notwithstanding ...

Sorry to disagree again, but that would be carying things far too far in my humble opinion. What's wrong with making like-minded music lovers and/or collectors aware of items that have been released/reissued? Especially in a minority niche market like this. All the readers and forumists are mature people (aren't they? ) to decide for themselves if they want to follow it up or check it out. And even if there was such a rule it would be oh so easy to bypass it by having such items mentioned by third party "straw people". I still feel the gist of this thread is that however noble the intentions were, the way it all hnas been handled (or rather the way it has evolved) it has been overdone and therefore took on an outward appearance where the risk that it looks somewhat dubious has risen disproportionately. Now what good would that do? But that's been said often enough so let's leave it at that ...

I for one did not use the term "unethical", I just find it unreasonable to handle this thing the way it has been handled and then enthuse about the outcome the way it has been done here through a LOT of earlier posts. Which is why I had my concerns about it all backfiring too. Like I said earlier, it would have been VERY wise to spread out the "remedying" reviews over a much longer time span - and cut out that "helpful" nonsense which in the way the ratings have been heaped up the way it happened makes it all look less than credible. Or can you show me any other reviews (of a real niche item) that are just one or 2 days old at best ANYWHERE on Amazon that have already amassed 10 or more "helpful" ratings within these 1 or 2 days? Amazon just don't work that way ... Sorry to be quite blunt but if there are those who claim that one is being "cheap" if one has reservations about this whole APPROACH then all one can say in return is that the way this review and rating affair has been handled COLLECTIVELY really is nothing but childish. Sorry for the well-intentioned individual contributions but the overall picture is just that IMHO ...

I guess nobody would have mentioned this "how come nobody wrote a review earlier" if it hadn't been for this reciprocal shoulder patting and "hey, we're going to rub this really in" attitude that had sprung up here in no time at all - THAT'S where the clucking started and that's what just MIGHT be considered just as cheap, you know. But again you missed the point IMHO: Nobody would have been required EVER to "hover" over that Amazon review section for years and years just to see if any sort of RE-action had been called for. NO - the point is: What was it that PREVENTED others (who bought that disc and were utterly pleased) from just writing a genuinely positive review at the time they bought it to let people know that this is something that they might want to give a try too? After all THIS is what the review section is for in its essence. Not for attempts at "making up". And such reviews would have helped the product during the entire time span, not only at this (late) date, especially since any poor review (such as the one that triggered this) would have had far less of an impact if it had been up against 4 or 5 glowing reviews right from the START. So much for what friends really can do to help a deserving cause ... Yet even these attempts at "making up" would have been understandable, but going overboard like it happened with everybody pushing and shoving at getting their say in there both in the reviews and this "helpful" nonsense really - now really ... is the risk of backfiring (again, that cumulation of identical review dates looks exceedingly strange) really worth THAT?

Didn't you get me or did you deliberately go out of your way to AVOID understanding me? Friends do not need to WAIT to have to band together. They will act on their very own in favor of somebody else because they feel the desire to do so no matter what everybody else does. They are just as likely to be there to show their support IN GOOD TIME and do not wait until after the (alleged) damage has been done. Now how's the score here? That clearer now?

Real friends don't need to band together but they show their support on their VERY own and through their own impetus as early as possible after having obtained the object that they feel could do with a helping (reviewer's, in this case) hand. Not exactly unethical either, you know ... (No, I am not going to name examples again but some day maybe the difference between banding together in a latter-day attempt on the one hand and acting on one's own as a person capable of such individual action on the other will become apparent ;) Like I said, that helping hand would and could have helped during the past few YEARS ... Opportunity missed? Maybe, but don't blame it on those who pointed it out ... )

Of course I respect your point of view too. After having had a much closer look at that review section I just felt that all parties concerned were walking a very thin line of overdoing things, right up to the point of the whole affair backfiring. Each review on its own may be genuine but the overall impressions when all the details (incuding posting dates etc.) are taken together just give a picture that might very well run contrary to the original intentions. And what good would that do?