Big Beat Steve

Jokin'? I bought this new in the shop more than 20 years ago. along with a couple of other LPs done in the same style. Wasn't this distributed in the US? To me it was a must-buy for the very reason that it went back into the early 50s 10-inch era that was NOT what the USUAL Prestige reissues usually covered (i.e. excepting Wardell Gray and George Wallington et al., they usually amounted to all the hard boppers and their discographical roots - and ONWARDS, but not back, from there on). I'd welcome a more comprehensive reissue of the EARLY Prestiges too. The one below was a step in the right direction but was only a start, of course: https://www.discogs.com/de/Various-First-Sessions-194950/release/9156228 There ARE a few rarities and obscurities in the Prestige 78 and 10-inch discography but of course it would required close searches to see which in fact has not been available in an at least passably accessible maner elsewhere. Even most of the Joe Holiday recordings are around by now. And the reissuers would have to decide where to draw the line. No doubt the leased recordings (e.g. from Metronome) which made up a sizable portion of their 10-inchers would be out, I guess.

"Ansambl Solistov Tamaza Kurachvili": "Blus Dlja Budi" (i.e. Blues for Buddy?)

Not a musician but probably of almost the right age group. The Peanuts were big on TV here (and I did like watching them) at the time I got seriously into listening to jazz at 14 and buying records at 15 from 1975 onwards but the music to it was about as un-jazzy to me as it could be. More something like elevator music. And unconsciously this rubbed off even later. One of the very few jazz LPs I ever disposed again after having got hold of it (this one was part of a package deal) was Stan Getz's "Children Of The World". To start with, I was rather underwhelmed by the music (compared to the - much earlier - Getz I liked) but the - in my (then) view - silly and un-jazzy cover no doubt played some part in it too. (Being totally put off by a cover might in fact be a good subject for a topic all by itself - if it doesn't already exist)

Considering that the RCA LP (for those who'd care to take a look at the track listing) has three of the tracks from that session, this is exactly why I said that TTK now has "three quarters of The Complete Art Tatum on RCA". Point settled.

Great shirt, great slogan. Could well picture myself getting me one too. But unless you wear it exclusively at jazz concerts catering to the "more mature set", aren't you getting tired of explaining to whoever you socialize with who "this Stan Kenton is"? (or, at the very least, why you'd pick THAT dude ...)

I also have that LP. The liner notes do not give much in the way of session details. The Tatum tracks come from a 4-track session (that yielded 2 78s) that he recorded on Jan. 20,lm 1947. So you now have 3 quarters of "The Complete Art Tatum on RCA". The Mary Lou Wiliams tracks that you asked about in your other thread are from two sessions (8 tracks) from July 24 and October 7, 1946 (both with all-girl groups).

That "Are You Ready To Rock" video sounds treacherously like lip-synching to playback, It's sooo much like the 45 (which I've spun countless times for my own amusement ever since i received that record in 1975 or so. It still gets surprised reactions from the crowd - and amused looks of "here did he dig THAT up?" from those really in the know - when it's being spun at the occasional rockabilly/real r'n'r record hop)

I suppose you wanted to say that it's for people who "don't know that they like THAT style of jazz", i..e modern jazz (if you want to use a WIDE term and to split it into further sub-categories). Jazz is a stylistically very, very wide field and I know more than one who are quite into other styles of jazz but would RUN from KOB et al. Which is perfectly legitimate as it works the other way round too with those who will consider anything BEFORE KOB just "old hat" too. (NO, those who do not stand in awe before KOB are NOT missing any point of what "jazz" is all about, it's just that they explore other areas of jazz with more interest, just like those do who get all excited about jazz rock, avantgarde (whatever ...) etc. as the ultimate in jazz. Different tastes in a wide field that can accommodate them ALL) I see what you mean and understand. I bought my copy of KOB only about 6 months ago (not saying which reissue ) on a sudden impetus but had never really missed it during the 43 years of jazz record buying before. Had heard it here and there before but as this is one of those you could always get if you wanted to through the decades there never was any urge, particularly since my main and deeper focus is in several areas of jazz elsewhere (just like yours is, I presume).

Frances Wayne. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Wayne

How big was Spike Jones popularity-wise in 1948? And wasn't Red Ingle's spoof of "Nature Boy" a hit the same year? An attempt at jumping on the bandwagon, maybe?

Yes you've go a point there. (Though I am a bit surprised at the number of cover-up meanings that seem to be coaxed out of the word "junk" ) But regardless of what the actual ly intended connotions were, what WERE they thinking, then? This cover did not happen THAT long ago. Certainly not in the laissez-faire late 60s/early 70s.

No wow. Just telling it like it happened. Like I said, different experiences, different reactions, different associations, and like I also said several times over before, the garb and the placing of the names had and has different connotations for me, though - like I also said - I do understand your reaction based on your past experiences. As for "objectivity", do some googling for tastelessest LP covers ever from the past X decades and I do think you are bound to come up with worse examples than this (which - AGAIN - I DO find utterly silly).

Quote: Well, the title of the record is SUPRISE! x2. Never known an illicit watch-vendor to use that word when hawking their wares. Flashers, otoh, that's more than a cliché. This may all be hypothetical to you, but I had a good friend who as it turned out was a flasher, got convicted, did 90 days in jail might well still be on probation for all I know. He's not a friend anymore because although he owned up to it to explain why he was going to be unavailable for a while, he never really admitted that he had a problem past getting "overheated from time to time". I had a teenage daughter at the time, and the first thing I did was to let her know was that this guy was like this, and then ask her had ever ever even hinted at anything with her. She said she hadn't, but then she told me about guys her own age who were up to shit like that, just pulling out their junk and looking for a reaction. So yeah, the whole "flasher as joke" thing is not funny to me. And if the album title had been, Hey, Wanna Buy A Band? or something like that, your logic would make sense to me. But it's not, and it doesn't. No, flashers as a joke aren't funny but "surprise" or not, my first reaction to this cover definitely was a case of "hey, wanna have a look-a at da guys I gotta in-a my band-a?" just like those "special deals" displayed for purchase in the same manner, given the placing of the names and given the outfit - which is NOT typical for flashers, isnt it? Whereas it certainly is typical for a certain type of these peddlers. Can happen even over here and even in recent times, unbelievable though this may be - I remember an instance some 10 years ago when I was just chatting innocently with a friend in the passageway leading to his garage's backyard in some really deserted industrial estate when some pseudo-upscale-looking sedan pulled in and some Southern-looking feller (yes, I am not sorry to state he clearly was of gypsy background, stereotypes or not - it was unmistakable and that area does have a sizable - and all in all perfectly straightforward and honest - population of that background) jumped out, dressed in some awfully styled pinstriped double-breasted suit, watch chain and all, showing off a load of watches he had for sale at an oh so special price as "leftovers from trade fair stall displays". Sounds incredible? Well, though afterwards we laughted, figuring this could only have happened in old B-movies, we DID feel bugged and annoyed at the time and told him in no uncertain terms we were NOT takers. So you will have to take my word for this to be true just as much as I have to take your word for your story to be true. In a situation like yours I'd probably have reacted like you but basically it's still is different strokes and I don't see much reason to go about to see where there is sex out there in public that one can elect to feel offended about. In short, silly cover of doubtful taste that I for one would not find a selling point at all but not that big a deal to work yourself up about if you look at it objectively..

Who says it was ever meant to insinuate something about a sex offender and make fun of it? Look at the words of the band members written inside his coat. Ain't you never seen caricatures of those greasy small-time would-be mafiosi giving unwary passers-by a glance at their ware of doubtful origin (such as watches of all sorts) hung in the same places inside their coats in an attempt to peddle their stuff? The garb matches too, in a cliché-like manner ... Silly? Yes. Off-putting? Yes, for its silliness - to me as a record buyer, for example (but that's only me). Maybe not flattering either but it must have been intentional so who are we to judge from today's vantage point? There have been FAR more shocking record covers across the board through the decades. Anyway ...AFAICS certainly no reason to obsessively project "sex" into this as a reason for offendedness. It ain't necessarily all about sex out there ...

Regardless of how one feels about every detail of the recordings, you must admit that the lineup is quite something ... And actually the "Dr Kildare" track is just one of many different TV features ...

Does that matter for the CURRENT state of the debate (which may well have flared up - as you no doubt ar eaware - once certain posts have been deleted very recently for the very same conflict with existing rules)?

So if you deleted this or that political post in this thread during recent days as it seems, what's keeping YOU from deleting JSangrey's Time cover post (which - like that of many others - I find EXCEEDINGLY political too)? After all its been brought to your attention by now. (Is there really any question or doubt about photos carrying and being able to carry an immensely political message?) Or is one mod deleting another mod's post out of the question? FWIW (and even if it only adds another repetitive layer to the debate), needless to say that on grounds of fairness I agree with what Brad and Paul Secor said here recently about one rule for everybody. Once you start enforcing rules, enforce ONE set of rules vs EVERYbody. Wouldn't that be just a matter of fair and square fairness all around?

In addition to the Aaron Bell LPs of 77 Sunset Strip and Victory At Sea already mentioned above, here are some LPs I picked up through the years (for the fun of it - as "period" jazzy lounge oddities): https://www.discogs.com/de/Video-All-Stars-TV-Jazz-Themes/release/2342371 https://www.discogs.com/de/Harry-Betts-His-Orchestra-The-Jazz-Soul-Of-Doctor-Kildare/release/6464553 https://www.discogs.com/de/Metropolitan-Jazz-Quartet-Plays-The-Great-Themes-From-TV-Shows/release/5511023

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturm_und_Drang You might perhaps want to borrow a different word from a foreign language to describe your (political) turmoil(s). Remember it is various styles of jazz in particular (that are being discussed here on not so frequent occasions) that THRIVE on these intentional extremes of emotion. No safe heaven in the true, artistic sense of the term, then ...

But for a non-musician the sections that go BEYOND the biography and the purely disocogrpahical details are a TOUGH read.

Fascinating indeed and meriting a serious "tangible" release - but .... Lewis Porter (THE Lewis Porter who isn't just anybody in the field of jazz history) writing, in all earnest (talking about "Sleepy Time"): "The Rene brothers appear to have been musicians ..." "Appear"? Really? Can he be serious? What kind of blind spot is this? Leon Rene had a VERY long and many-faceted career in the music business. Is it that hard to put the bits together e.g. from Leon's pic (taken in his early days) with the Buddy Petit band in the "Pictorial History of Jazz" (first published when Leon Rene was still active) to the Excelsior and Exclusive labels that he and his brother Otis ran post-war (and these labels were not just "any" indie label either) and Class Records later on. Nitpicking? Maybe, and nobody knows everything, but still this sort of unevenness in historical awareness is rather amazing to come from a seasoned pro.

I am not so much actually referring to this forum but to advanced music listeners (who might well be termed collectors) in general - many of them in what is termed "rock" - who just do not seem to be too interested in READING up on their musical preferences in the sense that they (sort of) collect books or mags on their music too. An impression I have gotten in various discussions. So I am not that surprised (maybe less than JSngry) by Chewy's position. And yes - I am biased, considering myself a collector of printed matter on my preferred styles of music too.. Yes, both R&B and gospel. The foreword says "All known details on jazz, blues, rhythm and blues and gospel sessions are included ...". However, it also says (in the 1980 edition): "Savoy files ... are far from complete - this is especially true for early sessions and for 1966-75 sessions. Files covering this last period had yet been found, and listings for these years have been limited to jazz releases and index of gospel albums". Apart from their entries in the chronological session listings, the gospel series are scattered throughout the book in numerical order.

The "Al Haig meets ..." and "Nat Cole meets ..." volumes, in particular, were ear openers to some of the rarer sessions on Dial and elsewhere. And I think I relatively wore out my copy of the Dodo Marmarosa LP too (one of those cases where I ought to have picked up a cheap NM spare copy when the occasion presented itself).

Not a rare occurrence in the field of music collecting (not just jazz). Collecting music (in the sense of buying it more thoroughly than an average music consumer would do) - yes. But reading about it, either for discographical reference or background knowledge of the history of the artists etc.? No ... what for? "Reading? What's that? Too academical! Keeps me from LISTENING!" That's the impression I got in a number of cases, strangely enough.