Big Beat Steve

I'm just an "ordinary" jazz fan and collector (though of relatively long standing ) and far afield from the States so of course I DID take in the series from one end to another. As for its relative merits, I guess I am somewhere between the "naysayers" and the "aye-sayers" (though maybe just a WEE bit towards the "Nay" side ). Being sort of on the outside (of the producers/behind the scenes jazz in-crowd people), I'd summarize my impressions like this: - Narrative to be taken with a grain of salt - yes (but only to be expected when something like this is produced for general public media consumption- YES, CONSUMPTION! ). - Historical facts: A bit too much slanted towards Pops and Duke as the all-encompassing continuum. A few stereotypes - yes, but to those who are moderately knowledgeable the presentation of historical facts is fair enough to spur them into doing their OWN reading. Again, a grain of salt is in order. But would the newbies remember the oversimplified facts as such later on anyway? So the harm done isn't THAT immeasurable IMHO. - Interviewee bigwigs: Marsalis, Crouch and that other one (white, short-bearded assistant college fesser type - can't think of his name right now) often came across a bit as "I am so important that only I can give you the lowdown on this" to me, but a lot of their comments made me automatically think of "To whom are they again and again stating the obvious"? Which in turn calls for that grain of salt as oversimplification goes with mass audience target groups. Not perfect but all too normal and to be expected. BUT - the footage is priceless and deserves to be taken in again and again. And this footage alone is worth the price of admission (free in my case as I taped it straight off the TV set ) And the image sequences do conjure up a fitting atmosphere IMHO. Now as some feel the narrative is doing the subject a disservice and as the music does not very often come directly from the footage but is a (non-sync) overlay of studio music, the excellent footage might even work with different (but stylistically related) jazz sounds after all. In fact, these visual impressions that might even work with slightly different sounds remind me of a rock club I used to visit for live concerts quite often in the 90s. They had a habit of having MTV run continuously on their overhead TV sets all across the dancefloor - video clips of hit parade fare, Beavis and Butthead toon sequences in between, and it did make for some nice stimulation, even though the music spun by the DJs was quite different style-wise. So why not try this with the Ken Burns series for a change in the same manner? Just turn off the sound, let the film run and put on your favorite jazz from the respective era yourself? It's all there. Imspiring jazz stills and footage, sequences that do create an intense atmosphere at times, Beavis and Butthead in between , it's all there. So what more do you want?

Did I sound like I'd want to do THAT? Otherwise, I agree with your comments about the value of the material included on Hep reissues, for example, as a probably better starting point for somebody who'd start from scratch.

O.K., thanks for the confirmation. As I have not been able to find a track list during an initial search, I take it from what you say that the set has a fairly large share of later recordings?

Wilson was great in the 30's & 40's - got a little sleepy in later years. This set appears to be a mixed bag. One of his finest later performances was with the Benny Goodman quartet reunion, recorded for RCA in 1963. In which respect do you consider this to be a mixed bag? I guess a lot of his prime leader dates of the 30s/early 40s have been reissued a zillion times (e.g. his big band on Tax and elsewhere, his small grups on various CBS twofers) but what exactly is there on this set that would be exceedingly hard to come by elsewhere among his earlier work (even for those who've been collecting for quite some time)? Or is it just there are too many of his later dates that you find "sleepy"? (I see what you mean, though - beyond a certain dose polishedness, politeness and gentlemanliness can be a bit too soothing).

So would the lineup indicated on the back cover be correct for ANY of the tracks at all?

As it happens I have that one too (bought by an aunt of mine on location during a trip to the USA in 1974 that happened to include a visit to a club where Max played - and, though not a jazz fan, she thoughtfully had it autographed by Max Kaminsky and a few of his band members). Will give it a listen later to see what it's all about. Bruyninckx' discogaphy isn't of any help as he lists the mjusicians from the back cover as the line-up (and a rec. date of c.1955) for the entire LP. Would be a bit surpised if copycat Lord listed anything substantially different.

Jeez, what did you smoke, all of you?

Considering how much one has seen in jazz 78 rpm albums (containing anything from 2 to 5 78s) through the years without ever being able to afford them there must have been an AWFUL lot. Just have a look at that famous and often-reproduced photo of the storefronot of the Commodore Record Shop that was chock full with jazz (or jazz-ish) albums. And no doubt this was just a TINY fraction of what was available just at the time that pic was taken. And for a more recent glimpse at a little bit of what there was back then, have a look at this and DROOL! http://www.gokudo.co.jp/Record/SPRec/index.htm I am glad I've accumulated a handful 78 rpm albums in the course of the years (including items by the Lamplighter All Stars, Hazel Scott, Mildred Bailey, and a few more) but these are next to nothing compared to what there was. Many of them would be worth acquiring just for their cover artwork!

Dig this, above all, from the Newsweek interview. Very sensible points. Q: Do you agree that perhaps Congress should step in and somehow clear up the tangled web of copyright law as it pertains to something like the Savory collection? A: Well, yeah, yes I do, because—let’s put it this way: as things stand now, the odds are stacked against this material being widely accessible. And it’s my goal to share this. The last thing we want to do is make this music almost as inaccessible as when Savory had it to himself. Right now people have to physically come into the museum and listen to it. We’re talking with Mosaic records about how to possibly release it, but it’s complicated. And you know, I don’t think it’s fair for a great-grandchild of a sideman from one of these bands to hold up the whole thing, trying to get a little bit of money for something his great-grandfather did one night in ’37. But people also have to realize—I mean, on Facebook there’s been a healthy discussion that’s sort of morphed into the “corporate America vs. the poor jazz musician” thing. And that’s not the right way to look at it. No major corporation is interested in issuing this material. Mosaic has a full-time staff of three. The National Jazz Museum in Harlem also has a staff of three right now, though we may grow to a staff of seven or 10. There’s this perception that “oh, man, the artist is gonna get ripped off again,” but sales are in the low thousands for the currently issued stuff. I hope that there is a way to get around some of this. The John Kirby Sextet’s radio performances from 1940 aren’t on the same scale as Walt Disney’s copyright. And still, while I think this is the major musical archeological find of the last few decades, there’s a misunderstanding of the commercial potential. Even the main jazz artists don’t sell that well.

I wouldn't dispute what you say; which is why I referred to his "more 'jazz'-oriented works", nothing more. What I was actually trying to get at is that he DID do something that apparently was intended as a Latin offspin of Westcoast R&B at that time (as evidenced by the handful of tunes that was reissued on various R&B compilations). Which only goes to show he was TOUCHED by what happened in that field (touched, nothing more). And like I said, this name was thrown in the ring as a "starter", not more. I'd be very interested to see more tangible (and more predominantly Cuban) examples of "Latin jazz" on the West Coast myself. BTW, I am sure not all the East Coast Latin/Cuban (mambo) music had THAT much of a jazz tinge either. And if it should turn out to be so that out West the crossbreed of Latin and jazz music concerned more the crossbreeding of Mexian (and not Cuban/Puertorican) with (U.S.) jazz music and musicians (due to a lack of Cuban/Puertorican musicians out West) then that might be a finding to take into account as well. Cross-fertilization basically could occur in many forms.

A great book, that "Latin Jazz" by Raúl A. Fernandez. Thanks for the reminder to look at it closer again. As for TTK's question, try LALO GUERRERO for a starter. I know his more "jazz"-oriented works would be more like Latin R&B and a lot less like Latin bebop but anyway ... Anyway, I'd be interested in finding out more about any Central Avenue equivalents of the N.Y. bop-cum-mambo artists you named too.

Now look ... I don't know if you have done much BUYING on eBay (or on the web) but if you knew the kind of money that non-U.S. bidders/buyers have paid for items mailed from the U.S. then you'd know this just is a two-way street, that's all. If you want to get an item from across the pond, when it comes to shipping costs (assuming the shipping costs have been set fairly and squarely) then it is a matter of PAY UP OR SHUT UP for the buyers. It is as easy as that. No need to take a loss on shipping. State the kind of savings people can make on shipping by buying several items from you but that's that. Now of course if you are all intent and dead set on those U.S. or Far East bidders going crazy and outbidding themselves in a bidders' race until they drop nearly dead from exhaustion and if therefore you are hesitant that these shipping charges will make potential bidders shy away then I guess nobody can help. You can't have your cake and eat it, you know. Same for the question of starting bids. Though I don't like reserves I guess that's the way to go in your case. At any rate, if you really are that afraid that a potentially valuable record might actually sell for just the opening bid of 9.99 (making one very happy bidder in the process) then this is something you either just accept as part of the game or just set a high bid. But a reserve won't guarantee you better results as the item might just remain unsold for several listings just because the reserve is never reached. You know, sellers who start with low starting bids even on highly collectible items usually make out alright overall when considering all their auctions. Some you win (by getting more than anticipated) some you lose (by getting less). It's all part of the game (and of the FUN of this eBay thing - what fun is left on that platform anyway - and the fun of potentially getting something for really cheap might be an impulse for keen bidding too). I for one would never bid on any item with a starting bid that is high enough to indicate the seller wants nothing but the full collectors' worth (with little room for potential future appreciation for the buyer) and nothing less. I'd feel sort of ripped off because in these cases I might as well buy an item from a set sale list/site so why bother waiting for the end of the auction at all? And honestly, if I ever got wind of any seller (of items of interest to me) being worried as much about not getting the full value on each and every item as you profess here I'd steer VERY clear from those auctions. Please note the following is definitely not directed against you (I have no reason to doubt your good intentions) but on a more general level, while such an attitude is fully understandable, to me such an attitude would reek way too much of one of those cases where the bidders who secure a relatively valuable item at a low (or opening-bid) price would potentially incur a huge risk of getting a mail stating "sorry the item has been damaged or lost in the meantime and the auction therefore has to be cancelled". It's happened before, and not exactly rarely, and not surprisingly it has happened mostly in cases where the winning bid for an item was surprisingly low. You know, a couple of months ago I placed a bid on a job lot of NOS engine and other parts for a 50s classic car (value easily 300 or 400 euros if the parts had been bought individually at "O.K." but not excessive prices) and of course was exceedingly pleased when I got it all for the opening bid of ONE euro (!). But I did fear the worst about the outcome of the auction (especially since the seller was very uncommunicative apart from 1 or 2 automated mails) until the parcel actually showed up on my doorstep. Seasoned bidders will know what I mean ... So by all means do take ALL aspects of auctioning psychology into account but please don't look at things from your angle only and do realize that you can't have your cake and eat it in EVERY aspect of life. Good luck!

Now really ... what's making you think that most of those here who clamor for the issue of the "not so obvious" "name" choices among the recorded material on these discs have NOT listened closely enough to the existing recordings by Herschel Evans (or others of similar stature of whose recordings on these discs we aren't even aware of yet)?? Is there any well-founded knowledge for these insinuations? Do you really feel like those who'd dearly love to hear all that might be on these discs will have to earn their entry ticket to that musc first by proving (to you or to whomever?) that they have dissected enough of the existing music down to the last shred of notes? Sorry, I find this rather unjustified and unjust. You may not like what I'm saying here as (though I've been into jazz for well over 30 years and have probably listened closely to much more 30s and early 40s jazz than many of those around here to whom anything before Miles or Trane is just no man's land) I am just a plain and simple jazz lover and collector (and may indeed not have paid my record buying dues by buying enough RECENT releases - that that's my and only my business) and certainly am not one of those producers with tons of behind the scenes insight - BUT: If you feel like pecking at those who (in your opinion) drool too easily about any new snippets of dusty old recordings seeing the light, then why don't you go and peck at those who go haywire each time over the umpteenth reissue of this or that Miles or Trane stuff with MICROSCOPICAL sound improvement or about this or that snippet of not-yet-released tapes by Miles or Trane (or the like) that invariably will be hailed as a MAJOR discovery in jazz. As if Miles and Trane were the BEGINNING and END of all jazz ... Whereas these late 30s Savory recordings indeed look like they might fill gaps in what otherwise has gone unrecorded back then (as opposed to much more widespread on-location recording going on in the late 50s and 60s etc.). So with all due respect - please DO keep things in perspective!

Exactly my thoughts and wishes about any CD sets that might materialize from all this.

What?When?Where?How??? :excited: :excited: GottahaveitGottahaveitGottahaveit!!! (Calming down mode on: 15 CDs would cover only a tiny part of those discs, right? I can only hope they will not stick with the big, bigger, biggest names only. Nothing against Benny Goodman, for example, but he has been served real well with airshots anyway - but hearing Herschel Evans, Chu Berry or the like stretch out really well in informal settings, now THAT would be sumpin'!)

I won't be taking any sides in this pricing or sales strategy thing, but at any rate (to me, at least) lists like Popsike seem to be way off base in many cases and might really result in "ill guidance".

This Savory material is one box set (or series of box sets) that I'd gladly place a SUBSCRIPTION for!

Yes, very sad news. RIP. His photographs are among the very greatest in jazz photography, although I admit I'd really have a VERY hard time deciding overall whether I'd prefer Herman Leonard or Bill Gottlieb (probably depends on the mood I am in).

Mindboggling! I do hope they will do some sort of project of releasing this music to the collector public. And 70 years after the recording date even U.s. copyright should not be that much of a problem anymore? Let's keep our fingers crossed.

Checked my LPs and sure enough, have it too (found in the special offers bin at what is probably the last local brick and mortar secondhand records store with a decent jazz vinyl selection). On my (secondhand) copy a previous owner scribbled "Chubby Jackson & His Knights" on the back cover above the Bill Harris All Stars credits. No idea offhand where he got this info from but maybe this is a lead as to where the music originally really originated.

Check out your old copies of the DOWN BEAT ANNUAL. The 1963 issue has a lengthy feature with a rundown and brief descriptions of (U.S.) jazz books from the very beginning. It does mention the books by Whiteman and Osgood (see above) for the year 1926.

Perhaps major labels still follow an unwritten rule not to poach each other, despite the European copyright law. So how come these tracks are on the US box? If I read the item descriptions on Amazon correctly both were reissued by Sony. So how come Sony managed to include them for the US release but not for the European one? Doesn't look like a case of "not poaching each other" but more like some other behind the curtain scheme...

Isn't it sad that Jack Parnell seems to be remembered - even here - mainly for such trivia as that Muppet thing (of which I, for one, wasn't even aware, BTW, and do not think I missed anything)? Didn't he do enough recordings of his own and under his own name that would merit some remembrance? Or was that too long ago? Brits, speak up!

Sammy Price Herman Chittison For starters by these artists, the early post-war stuff by Jimmy Jones Billy Taylor And if it's got to be a little bit more bluesish than that, don't miss Little Willie Littlefield and Champion Jack Dupree

Please set me straight: What are the really, really superlative qualifications of contributors to CLASSICAL music mags when it comes to reviewing early blues? Not that being really sympathetic to the music would automatically result in a positive or rave review, but it certainly is an essential ingredient to an in-depth understanding of what you are supposed to review. Wonder what reviews of classical music would turn out like if you were to review that music from a JAZZ (or rock or whatever) angle. As for the rest: Disgusting! And a case for big, fat whistleblowing IMHO.