Louis Armstrong: Complete Hot Fives & Sevens

[nmorin]

The Columbia has extensive (and imo very nice) notes.  The Columbia has really magnificent sound from the original parts or test pressings for most sides.  The two sets also have different non Hot Fives and Sevens material from each other.

The JSP has good sound, and some may even prefer the sound, but I think the Columbia wins out for me and my ears and my system.  Plus it's a more stately (and expensive) presentation.

Thanks, Lon. I was always curious about the differences between the two boxes. I'm going to try to find the Columbia version.

I think the sound of these recordings definitely turn some people off, especially if their ears are used to RVG's and the like.

I initially couldn't get past that "old" sound, but I remember quite clearly the moment when I could finally hear beyond the limitations of the recording technology, and really hear the music. It took some time, but it was well worth the effort!

I have both the JSP and Columbia sets, and the Columbia set is brighter and (here's where I stretch my memory) has a larger soundstage. The JSP set is warmer. I think which is better is a matter of taste, and, as Lon said, audio system.

The frustrating thing is the differing non-Hot-5-and-7's material; moreover, if I recall correctly, each has tunes here or there that are not in the Classics sequence--and vice versa. The life of a completist can be maddening...

I very much enjoy his 50s-60s work, if not *love* it. His albums with Ella, and the sides with Duke and with Oscar Peterson are very nice.

[BruceH]

I guess I don't understand life, because while I adore the Hot 5 and 7 recordings and some other 1930's Armstrong stuff, I can not stomach any of his post 1930's work. Anything with that Middleton woman, I find to be just silly and demeaning to Louis's artistry- so I don't buy it. I have owned the "California Concerts" and several All Star recordings and have sold them all. Didn't like the WC Handy and other supposed later classics.

Even the Satch Plays Fats album???

(That album KILLS.)

[DrJ]

QUOTE (skeith @ May 27 2004, 07:42 AM)

I guess I don't understand life, because while I adore the Hot 5 and 7 recordings and some other 1930's Armstrong stuff, I can not stomach any of his post 1930's work. Anything with that Middleton woman, I find to be just silly and demeaning to Louis's artistry- so I don't buy it. I have owned the "California Concerts" and several All Star recordings and have sold them all. Didn't like the WC Handy and other supposed later classics. 

Even the Satch Plays Fats album??? 

Hmmm...to each their own, but I respectfully disagree.

I personally think Velma is a perfect representation of one aspect of Armstrong's outlook, personality, and yes even artistry - bringing together the sublime and the firmly earthbound. OK so she was no great diva, but one hell of an entertainer, and it says a lot about her to me that Louis seemed to love having her around. The PLAYS WC HANDY disc is simply a masterpiece on all levels, including Velma's contributions!

Re: Chris's Cosby quote...great story, thanks for posting that. I bet Cosby feels quite differently now (not based on any inside knowledge, just an educated guess - the times were different then sociopolitically) and would probably cringe to think about his former attitude!

[Harold_Z]

Just to weigh in on the Columbia vs JSP sound thing. The Columbia is my preference, but prior to the Columbia's release the JSP was by far the best sounding issue to that point.

I have both.

To cut out Louis's post 30s work is to miss a lot of great music. There are a lot worse singers than Velma Middleton out there.

[John L]

There are a lot worse singers than Velma Middleton out there.

Hey, any 250 pound woman who can do the splits like that is OK with me.

Seriously, I agree. I have never been offended by Velma Middleton the way that some people are.

Edited May 29, 2004 by John L

[Spontooneous]

A question for those whose ears are more acute than mine:

Are there pitch problems in the Columbia box?

I used to monitor a 78-rpm record discussion group on the 'net, but quit doing so about the time this box came out. Before the release, there were fears among the group that the reissue producer wouldn't get the pitch/playback speed right. (Those "78 rpm" records were hardly standardized.)

He apparently had messed up the pitch/speed on some other reissues. (No, I don't remember which reissues they were talking about...)