Big Beat Steve

You mean, the masters were destroyed then, so this may have completely nixed any incentive on Universal's part for reissues? I agree that even among the majors Decca was not at the forefront of jazz with its 50s catalog but there were interesting items. Though I tend to lump in Coral with Decca when thinking of the Decca catalog, two specific Decca items I'd single out are these: https://www.discogs.com/de/master/569863-Various-Das-Is-Jazz https://www.discogs.com/de/release/10002630-Kurt-Edelhagen-And-His-Orchestra-Jazz-From-Germany My appreciation may also be so because it was hard work obtaining the "Jazz From Germany" LP. I had won an eBay auction in 2000 or 2001 for this item (VG++) but due to the clueless (non-)packaging by the hick from the US sticks seller (sorry to put it that way) it arrived halfway broken through. Quite a shock because at that time it would have been anybody's guess when you'd be able to get your hands on another copy. A couple of years later I scored another copy from the US at a good price (which this time arrived safely) and to make up, this second copy turned out to be a first pressing with the black label (whereas the first one that had arrived cracked had the rainbow Decca label which AFAIK makes it a somewhat later - early 60s? - pressing, though the covers are 100% identical). And like I said, MCA reissued a lot of "Decca jazz" in Europe in the 70s (most of it originally on Coral, of course), Fresh Sound did a few more in the 80s, so the ground was covered at that time to some extent as far as availablity of the music itself was concerned.

Considering everything (from the 50s when not all musical styles were primarily geared towards LPs yet) I think so too. Another indicator: I just checked my copy of an "Al Smith's House of Jazz " catalog (dating from sometime in 1953 and arranged by label in its contents of jazz and more or less jazz-related LPs), and it has the following (approximate) numbers of pages allocated to the labels mentioned here: Decca - 2 p. Coral - not quite 1 p. US Brunswick - not quite 2 p. but OTOH ... Capitol - 6 p. Columbia - 11 p. RCA Victor - 5 p. (Liberty wasn't in the running yet) So could it be that this explains that to some degree?

An interesting question - one that I've been wondering about (thinking of the jazz or jazz-ish catalog) recently too ... BUT .... when you say "Decca", do you lump in "Coral" along with Decca or do you draw a clear line between the two? I know over here Coral and Brunswick (ie. European Decca) releases from the 50s (that are of interest to me) do come up regularly, and who is on which label is rather interchangeable or seems to have been a random decision by the A&R people at the time. OTOH most of the original or very early US pressings on Decca or Coral came my way through the internet, at least as long as it wasn't country LPs. But maybe I am biased with regard to my awareness of their catalog because MCA reissued a fair lot from their 50s Decca/Coral catalogs here in my formative collecting years in the the 70s. BTW, yes - TTK, I do think that your limited exposure to older Decca LPs may well be so because they had fewer artists that you would search actively for.

Wow, that sounds like a lot!

How many pages do they dedicate to Paul Gonsalves' rabble-rousing 27-chorus solo (on you know which tune)?

Yes, that's not impossible - see the following statement I made in my original post: "So I attributed this to someone having put a more recent vinyl pressing inside the original sleeve (was the original record shot, maybe?)." As I explained in a later post I did this myself in the case of the Mulligan/DEsmond LP on Verve. But in the case of the Impulse LPs evidence mentioned by others in this thread (and on Discogs) makes me believe this mismatch wasn't due to this reason but part of the sales practices, with an apparent (intentional or accidental?) overflow of covers printed beforehand and used up over time. A bit like in the case of other labels such as Blue Note and Capitol where it seems that during the 60s and possibly later U.S. covers were printed and shipped worldwide and then used with LPs pressed in the respective country. So you ended up with an LP that clearly had a comparatively thick U.S. cardboard cover but a vinyl marked "manufactured in West Germany", for example.

Not wanting to unduly continue the pastime of just rattling off what one owns of any given artist's platters 😄, here is a slightly different aspect to how to explore an artist or what to keep an eye on. In the field of Modern Jazz I've always been particularly interested in the early, formative and/or "youthful" years (call it whatever you may) of a "name" artist when he was in the midst of the scene and musical happenings, with decidedly less emphasis on their (much) latter-day works of "hey I'm still around" (as they might lead into any random direction - or at any rate into one that is rather removed from what originally attracted me to the artist). So in Dankworth's case I essentially and so far ended up with the following (dictated partly by availability, but I did and do not have any completist aims). - Johnny Dankworth 1953-58 feat. Cleo Laine (EMI Retrospect Series - a nice introductory compilation LP to the artist - the first by him that I got my hands on, back in the 90s) - Swinging In the 50s - IAJRC 39 (1953-57, rarer tracks often overlooked in the reissue market) - Bundle from Britain (Top Rank, 1959 - one that I had to have after having read various reports on the 1959 Newport Festival) - The Big Band Sound of Johnny Dankworth (Roulette, 1959-61) plus the - Waxing The Winners 1952-53 and 1954-55 LPs on Esquire (which include some Dankworth-led Melody Maker All Stars sessions) - a clear case of the "early period" of the artist, but in an atypical and interesting all-star setting

Exactly ... you nailed it IMHO. Like I tried to make this point in another discussion a while ago ... Anyone from the "free" (or "avantgarde") players who considers himself on a muscially or artistically higher level than everything that (stylistically) came before him (within possibly more formal conventions) would have to be able to (for example) "out-bird Bird" (on Bird's musical ground) first before he could lay any claims to have attained an artistically higher level. If he cannot or isn't able to (and at any rate, "I don't play like that" would be a lame excuse - or attempt at an explanation - for not being able to), then he may well have branched out SIDEWAYS into a DIFFERENT or NEW direction but certainly not into one that (by itself) is on an artistically higher level.

Paywall ... But anyway ... Some recommended JAZZ listening here: https://www.discogs.com/de/release/4131168-Bernie-Nerow-Trio-Bernie-Nerow-Trio One of the few Mode originals I have in my stash of Mode LPs.

I've owned this book for about 20 years now. Good value for money and recommended. I must admit I had omitted this from the list in my initial post because its contents go beyond jazz. But the jazz content is high indeed. Of course those who own the Alex Steinweiss, David Stone Martin and Jim Flora books will not find much that's new to them here but overall it is a very good overview, particularly of the 78rpm album and 10" LP era.

OK, I understand now ...

Really sorry to contradict you, but the book DOES have quotes (in fact, it largely consists of quotes, though the layout and the lengthiness of many quotes may make them harder to remember as such - see excerpts below; my copy is the 1955 printing by Peter Davies Ltd., London). However, I am not sure either how much of the contents still stand up as substantial eyewitness accounts and are not rather lore or anecdotes (time to re-read it, I guess). And I still consider "Swing To Bop" superior because it its more in-depth and focused - which of course is easier to accomplish as it covers a narrower time frame. and I admit I may be biased because both Swing and Bebop are among my main areas of interest in jazz (including the transitional recordings that straddle the stylistic fence).

Very interesting ...

Not so sure about the invalidity of the "pre-history" tag ... I understand this in two ways in THIS context: On the one hand: The elements and sounds of the music were there but not (or at least not enough) out in the open for the general music-buying and listening public to be really aware of it on a wider scale. You had to look (i.e. listen) for it hard to really notice it. Which gives rise to the existence of tomes like "What was the first Rock'n'Roll record?" by Jim Dawson and Steve Propes (incidentally feat. Ella Mae Morse with Freddy Slack and their "House of Blue Lights" in chronological place #4 out of 50 ). So at the time the "music in the making" did not yet go under a name of its own that would have identified this "new" style (and made it an entity easier to market, as you say). And in hindsight this was why the term "pre-history" later came into use to give these early blossomings of a style a name (or categorization) anyway. Like in MANY other areas of facts and events that eventual become part of history. E.g. the Minton's Playhouse sessions can be (and are, really) considered the pre-history of Bebop but wouldn't it be a bit of a stretch to claim this style as such actually started there and then as a FULL-FLEDGED style? On the other: I do realize a term like "pre-history" (that is coined after the fact) is also used because it may convey a touch of special "insider's awareness" to those who explore this niche music. A kind of "enlightened musical archeologist" feeling. Human nature ...

Some accounts of the career of Ella Mae Morse (and her place in the pre-history of R'n'R) point out that she did have some stylistic influence on Wanda Jackson.

You nailed it and your reaction is spot-on. This is one that I have already read more than once and yet would enjoy picking up again at ANY given moment (as one of surprisingly few among the MANY jazz books I have on my bookshelves), starting on it again and continuing without any urge to put it away again too soon afterwards just because I've read it before. It's instructive and entertaining in equal doses over and over again. If it is not on "recommended reading" lists (surprising - and all the loss of the compilers of such lists) then the only explanation I have is that these lists were compiled too long ago or the compilers (cluelessly enough) figured they'd had the "oral history" base covered by "Hear Me Talkin' To Ya" (which was fine in its time and still is nice but IMO "Swing to Bop" towers sky-high above it today). If there is to be reading on desert islands, then this is a desert island book for me. Or to make matters clearer, I have owned this book for about 25+ years and remember packing it in my summer holiday gear at least once (possibly more often) on the premise that if the worst should come to the worst and I'd be stuck in my caravan on the campsite on one or more rained-out days then this book would enable me to let my mind wander for as long as the book lasts. Even though I would not have the music handy that goes with the book. Nuff said? I think so ...

I saw several copies of these through the years. However, since at least the 1949-1959 volume was likely to overlap with most of what I already had I passed them up. I have a different pressing with a different cover (BN-LA-158) of the 1939-1949 volume, though.

Now that is a case where she wasn't among the first to do a substantial cover version (i.e. one that did not water down the original, as was too often the case then) in the PRE-R'n'R days, and therefore is not really a case of "proto R'n'R" (but just a plain R'n'R cover song - which is alright but not one of her trailblazing records). "Razzle Dazzle" is a carbon copy (arrangement and all) of the ORIGINAL which was recorded in May 1955 and released in June 1955 by none other than Bill Haley & His Comets. The producers behind Ella Mae Morse (no doubt involving Dave Cavanaugh aka "Big Dave" as he figured on the "Barrelhouse ..." LP shown in an earlier post here) quickly jumped on the bandwagon and had her cut it in August 1955. This version is very nice but does not really add much that's new or different (except the femme vocal instead of Bill's voice 😁).

Here's a variation on this theme ... I had tried to get a copy of this in the early 2000s (the Jim Flora cover art of course was and is a big selling point too ), but originals (on eBay.com) were priced out of my range, and the FS reissue was nowhere in sight. So I grabbed the above 3-EP set version of this LP when a nicely priced item showed up on eBay. Sadly this release is one track short compared to the LP (apparently the playing time of the LP exceeds that of the 3 EPs) which is a rare occurence with these EP versions of LPs (that usually repackage the entire contents). But for me it did nicely, and I feel if I desperately need that ifnal track I can always go on a hunt for the FS reissue again.

A bit early this time, but ... well ... So ... any other Ella Mae comments?

Hey, you're leading this discussion astray! 😁 But to answer your question: Yes - pages 82 to 88.

"Proto rock'n'roll" describes it fairly well. She had two careers - first as the swing and boogie vocalist with Freddie Slack and with early solo records in the 40s, culminating in the groundbreaking "House of Blue Lights", and then, after a hiatus of several years, in the 50s, as a solo artist with studio big bands, and hit it with the much-covered "Blacksmith Blues". She was about the first white female singer to pick up songs before the actual R'n'R era that are usually associated with Bill Haley and other major R'n'R acts, and did covers of R&B hits that were way more credible and substantial than those by other white cover artists (particularly of the female variety). The chapter dediced to her in Nick Tosches' book "Unsung Heroes of Rock'n'Roll" is well-earned. Her "Barrelhouse Boogie and the Blues" and "The Hits of Ella Mae Morse and Freddie Slack" LPs were reissued by Capitol in the mid-80s and gave her name and her songs wider awareness in R'n'R jiver and dancers' circles.

Yes ... but the reissues certainly are not what the others posters' questions and misgivings about the Jubilee pressing defects were all about. Because they referred to the original pressings. Different bag ... ... apparently a mixed one ...

Yes Niko - there are five volumes only in the actual "Jazz West Coast" anthology series on Pacific Jazz. Those of the others (out of the total of 15) are on the Pacific Jazz or World Pacific labels (depending on pressings), and the JWC /Jazz West Coast connection is in the JWC catalog numbers only, but on some releases these seem to have been added on later reissues only (e.g. WP-1257 that became JWC-514). Hence the uncertainty about which belongs to which series. And as for the original five "Jazz West Coast" compilation volumes, one might even go one step further and count in the variations released back then (even disregarding the license pressings of the JWC LPs on French Swing or others). For example, a variant of JWC Vol. 2 (JWC-502) was on Jazztone J1243 ("A West Coast Jazz Anthology") which has the same contents except that one Chet Baker track was exchanged for a different one. The list of the 15 LPs that Jazzcorner shows more or less corresponds to the list that you get when you enter "Jazz West Coast" and Pacific Jazz on Discogs and click on the result that refers to the LABEL. As for the single tracks not on other vinyl releases from back then - yes, this is so. And certainly part of the nightmare of Pacific Jazz discographers (I wonder what James Harrod would have say to this? ) And IMO it also explains why some of these Jazz West Coast series anthologies (as well as other V.A. compilations on Pacific Jazz) received rather lukewarm reviews by Down Beat (and probably other mags too) because the reviewers felt these were a rehash of other releases with not enough really new tracks added to make the package fully worthwhile. Preferences and criteria for appreciation clearly change over time ... 😁