Post-1960 Mosaic Sets

[Joe Bip]

Joe Harriott? 

Michel Petrucciani?

Betty Carter?

[Late]

11 hours ago, Joe Bip said:

Joe Harriott?

Maybe in conjunction with Michael Garrick? I'm not sure how many discs a Harriott set would be. I'd support the endeavor.

[JSngry]

Betty Carter would be a GREAT choice, no matter how they put it together.

[gmonahan]

On 12/5/2025 at 11:25 PM, Big Beat Steve said:

I realize tastes do differ, but overall I find this series certainly not bad but a somewhat lukewarm affair. Many years ago I had a small number of them (that came my way almost by accident) but sold them off again at a time when I did not yet do this with items that were NOT duplicates. These LPs do not seem to be that rare in the secondhand bins either. So apart from the historial angle such as Mingus' last bass work being for that series I am not sure there is a huge market for these recordings given the Mosaic treatment at Mosaic prices. 
In hindsight somehow I also feel the radio man (who presented these newly-released records in a jazz radio show here) wasn't all wrong when he wondered publicly and with less than maximum appreciation what the producers behind this series (or Lionel Hampton) were possibly thinking with titles such as "Lionel Hampton presents Gerry Mulligan" - as if someone with the status of Gerry Mulligan needed to be presented by someone like Lionel Hampton - certainly a major figure too but no longer as hot in the running as Mulligan conceivably still was at that time. So ... a mixed bag, I'd say. 

Well, a major reason I'm interested is that I have not heard most of them. It may indeed be that they're not all that impressive, though, given the people who recorded for the label, it sure seems to me like there must be some good stuff there. As for "Lionel Hampton presents," that's just marketing. Hampton was--or maybe imagined he was-- a very big name, and while Mulligan certainly was a giant of the music, if one was trying to appeal to a more general public, it's possible that putting Hampton's name on the record might--I repeat, *might*--sell a few more records. I'd just like to hear them all in Mosaic order!

 

[felser]

15 minutes ago, gmonahan said:

Well, a major reason I'm interested is that I have not heard most of them. It may indeed be that they're not all that impressive, though, given the people who recorded for the label, it sure seems to me like there must be some good stuff there. As for "Lionel Hampton presents," that's just marketing. Hampton was--or maybe imagined he was-- a very big name, and while Mulligan certainly was a giant of the music, if one was trying to appeal to a more general public, it's possible that putting Hampton's name on the record might--I repeat, *might*--sell a few more records. I'd just like to hear them all in Mosaic order!

 

They have shown up on a number of budget labels under a number of different names.  I've heard many of them, have held onto a few, they are pretty routine affairs for the names involved, nothing revelatory or near to the standards of the artists' best or most meaningful work.  But nothing wrong with them, either.  Hampton actually does play on many of them.

[JSngry]

The Hampton/Hines record is dandy! But those guy defaulted to dandy.

The Bull Doggett record was fun as well.