Duke Ellington and Jelly Roll Morton on Tap at Mosaic

[Chanders]

So looks like those who speculated that early Duke was coming (at some point) fron Mosaic were right. And more! Really great news. 

From the Jazz Gazette

Future Sets: 1920s Jazz

In addition to inquiries about the upcoming Louis Armstrong release we also have received inquiries on other early jazz sets we may be considering. While these 2 sets won’t be released for a couple of years we are in the process of sourcing the material:

Jelly Roll Morton: The Complete Early Recordings 1923–1927

Duke Ellington: The Complete Brunswick, Columbia, Victor & OKeh Recordings 1924–1929

Edited July 12 by Chanders

[John L]

Great news!    I would hope that Mosaic could expand that Duke set slightly to include all the early recordings, not just the Brunswick, Columbia, Victor, and Okeh.  Almost none of the other recordings of the period made for Blu Disc, Pathe Actuelle, Gennett, and Vocalion have undergone any serious remastering.   In fact, this set would even seem to need to include Blu Disc recordings since Ellington did not record for any other label until 1925. 

[gmonahan]

Be still my heart! I agree with John that we need it all, but just having the damn Okeh material all together in best available sound would be wonderful. This is all great news for those of us who cherish the beginning of the music!

 

[jazzbo]

Good news! All great music!

[miles65]

21 minutes ago, John L said:

Great news!    I would hope that Mosaic could expand that Duke set slightly to include all the early recordings, not just the Brunswick, Columbia, Victor, and Okeh.  Almost none of the other recordings of the period made for Blu Disc, Pathe Actuelle, Gennett, and Vocalion have undergone any serious remastering.   In fact, this set would even seem to need to include Blu Disc recordings since Ellington did not record for any other label until 1925. 

The starting point of 1924 make me believe that those will be included. Ellington started recording for Pathé Actuelle in 1925, Brunswick in 1926, Victor 1927, Okeh in 1927 and  Columbia 1927. Okeh and Columbia where different companies at the time. Duke recorded for Gennet in 1926. Those will be in the public domain in 2027. If all recordings will be included the are 176 tracks on 8 CD's. 

That means that there will have to be a 1930-1931 set to connect to the 1932-1940 big band and 1936-1940 small groups set. It would fit on 5 CD's.I wonder what Mosaic will do with the 1932-1934 Victors.

 

 

[medjuck]

Were the "Hit of the Week" recordings in that period?

[jazzbo]

I believe those "Hit of the Week" were 1930 recordings.

[miles65]

30 minutes ago, jazzbo said:

I believe those "Hit of the Week" were 1930 recordings.

March 1930 to be precise. Hit of the Week was an answer to the depression. It came up with one record a week on hard cardboard sold at newsstands.

Edited July 12 by miles65
typo

[Brad]

Sounds like it may be awhile before we see these. 

[miles65]

 

3 hours ago, Brad said:

Sounds like it may be awhile before we see these. 

If Mosaic waits till all recordings included are in the public domain the Jelly Roll Morton set will not be issued before 2028 and the Ellington set not before 2030.

It is in the Gazette: While these 2 sets won’t be released for a couple of years we are in the process of sourcing the material:

[tranemonk]

Just not doing it for me. I know I'm in the extreme minority but I don't get the Louis Armstrong love. I've tried. I got one or two of the Mosaic sets and no matter what I just don't like him. Sorry. 

[Chanders]

15 hours ago, tranemonk said:

Just not doing it for me. I know I'm in the extreme minority but I don't get the Louis Armstrong love. I've tried. I got one or two of the Mosaic sets and no matter what I just don't like him. Sorry. 

For a long time, most of the Armstrong material released on Mosaic- his work with Decca and RCA primarily- was sen as lesser or inferior Armstrong (certainly compared to his revolutionary work as a younger man. That view has been challenged recently, led by folks like Ricky Riccardi who has written a 3-part biography of Armstrong and has contributed to a lot of the Mosaic liner notes. The argument is that critique of the later Armstrong rests in part on the uncertain boundary between jazz and popular entertainment, particularly jazz as it exists post-bop. Nevertheless, you wouldn't be alone in seeing Armstrong's Mosaic material as somewhat peripheral to mainstream jazz. 

If you don't like *any* Louis ... well, what to say, tastes differ. 😉 I would just finish by saying that early jazz often takes more "work" to enjoy as a listener, in part because of recording quality and in part because it is musically a step removed from the musical world we live in in the 21st century. In my experience you have to get past its inherent oddness to appreciate it on its' own terms. Nonetheless, as I said before, tastes differ. 

[John L]

55 minutes ago, Chanders said:

If you don't like *any* Louis ... well, what to say, tastes differ. 😉 I would just finish by saying that early jazz often takes more "work" to enjoy as a listener, in part because of recording quality and in part because it is musically a step removed from the musical world we live in in the 21st century. In my experience you have to get past its inherent oddness to appreciate it on its' own terms. Nonetheless, as I said before, tastes differ. 

Yes, taste is taste.  But for the case of Louis Armstrong, I think that it makes sense to keep your ears open for a while.  I know quite a few people who didn't take to Armstrong immediately but later became big fans.   It can be worth the effort.  

[Big Beat Steve]

On 7/14/2026 at 10:58 PM, tranemonk said:

Just not doing it for me. I know I'm in the extreme minority but I don't get the Louis Armstrong love. I've tried. I got one or two of the Mosaic sets and no matter what I just don't like him. Sorry. 

I think that in a way I get what you mean. And I'm not necessarily talking about his 20s recordings (which, as Chanders said, you have to "get into" on the terms of what 20s jazz - particularly of the "acoustic" era - is all about). I've come to appreciate Louis Armstrong (of all periods) quite a bit for what he is, but still he is not my #1 go-to jazz trumpeter. Apart from the fact that I've always been skeptical of what "everyone" drools about (I prefer to explore and make my own choices that suit ME, and I find that "mandatory listening lists" are bunk ), his big band and (in particular) All Stars recordings for a long time did not do all that much for me.
Trying to think about why this is so, it gradually dawned on me that (in very simplified terms) he "just" goes "wham" and "blast" and there his tone is and the notes are out straight. Whereas other trumpeters that I prefer shape, modulate, accentuate and build up their notes and lines in different ways that somehow transmit more swing and "atmosphere" to me. I'm not so much thinking of 50s Miles Davis or Chet Baker here (difficult comparisons), but also men like Roy Eldridge, Hot Lips Page, Buck Clayton or even Frankie Newton. To me and my tastes even the either fiery or ballad recordings of Eldridge and Page, for example (and regardless of who basicaly influenced whom), have more of that shaping and modulation (should I say "nuancing"?) that gets me in a more immediate manner. No doubt instrumentalists or music theoreticians would tear these impressions to shreds, but the overall sound patterns - as perceived according to one's tastes - just are what they are and that's that. 

Edited July 16 by Big Beat Steve

[jazzbo]

Louis Armstrong as a pioneer is a strong fact that I personally can't ignore. I hear so much of his playing in trumpeters that i admire that followed such as Ray Nance, Ruby Braff, and so many others, some mentioned above. 

It took me a while to really appreciate his work. Beyond the astonishing technique and exploration of the early years there were the superstar years that were hard for me to really relax into. It was appreciating the wonder of his singing that got me there, and again grappling with his undeniable pioneering aspects in that field. In fact it was his singing along with that of his sometimes teammate Jack Teagarden that led me to really understand jazz singing and learn to love so many jazz singers, starting with Billie and moving on to so many others such as Fats, Carmen, Betty and more.

After my initial decade of jazz listening (the 'seventies) and beginning to assimilate all the accolades and the reverence from musicians that I did then admire so much (such as Miles and his words about Pops) I began to become a real Armstrong fan. And when I learned more about his life that deepened.

Edited July 16 by jazzbo

[AllenLowe]

20 hours ago, Chanders said:

For a long time, most of the Armstrong material released on Mosaic- his work with Decca and RCA primarily- was sen as lesser or inferior Armstrong (certainly compared to his revolutionary work as a younger man. That view has been challenged recently, led by folks like Ricky Riccardi who has written a 3-part biography of Armstrong and has contributed to a lot of the Mosaic liner notes. The argument is that critique of the later Armstrong rests in part on the uncertain boundary between jazz and popular entertainment, particularly jazz as it exists post-bop. Nevertheless, you wouldn't be alone in seeing Armstrong's Mosaic material as somewhat peripheral to mainstream jazz. 

If you don't like *any* Louis ... well, what to say, tastes differ. 😉 I would just finish by saying that early jazz often takes more "work" to enjoy as a listener, in part because of recording quality and in part because it is musically a step removed from the musical world we live in in the 21st century. In my experience you have to get past its inherent oddness to appreciate it on its' own terms. Nonetheless, as I said before, tastes differ. 

sorry I have to make a correction - "that view" was challenged long before Ricky, as he would be the first to admit. Dan Morgenstern single-handedly revived the reputation of the later Armstrong (meaning, 1933-1945) when he wrote the liner notes to a Decca 1930s reissue LP (which was unfortunately weighted down with reverb). Almost every major jazz critic of the last 50 years, from Gary Giddins to Francis Davis to me will tell you what a life-changer those notes were as they pointed out what should have been obvious but which was seriously clouded by Gunther Schuller, whose "Early Jazz" is, sadly, becoming more and more irrelevant (the album Dan wrote the notes to was "Rare Items 1935-1944"). But please let us be a bit more historically aware  and give proper credit, as this is very old news taken up even by Wynton and Crouch in the 1980s.

As for the All Stars years, well, there are some nice things and even some great things but I part company in general with Ricky on that. They just don't compare to the Decca period in terms of a sense of amazing discovery. And btw I MUST NOT forget to mention the EARLY RCAs which were also quite revolutionary but which also have been understood for some time pror to Ricky (I wrote about all of this in my jazz history about 35 years ago, but I am far from the only one).

Edited July 16 by AllenLowe

[Chanders]

3 hours ago, AllenLowe said:

sorry I have to make a correction - "that view" was challenged long before Ricky, as he would be the first to admit. Dan Morgenstern single-handedly revived the reputation of the later Armstrong (meaning, 1933-1945) when he wrote the liner notes to a Decca 1930s reissue LP (which was unfortunately weighted down with reverb). Almost every major jazz critic of the last 50 years, from Gary Giddins to Francis Davis to me will tell you what a life-changer those notes were as they pointed out what should have been obvious but which was seriously clouded by Gunther Schuller, whose "Early Jazz" is, sadly, becoming more and more irrelevant (the album Dan wrote the notes to was "Rare Items 1935-1944"). But please let us be a bit more historically aware  and give proper credit, as this is very old news taken up even by Wynton and Crouch in the 1980s.

As for the All Stars years, well, there are some nice things and even some great things but I part company in general with Ricky on that. They just don't compare to the Decca period in terms of a sense of amazing discovery. And btw I MUST NOT forget to mention the EARLY RCAs which were also quite revolutionary but which also have been understood for some time pror to Ricky (I wrote about all of this in my jazz history about 35 years ago, but I am far from the only one).

Apologies Allen, there was no intent to slight your work or the work of the many others you mentioned, all of whom are field defining. I was just trying to mention some of the names that have come up recently in the threads about these boxes. 

Edited July 16 by Chanders

[AllenLowe]

1 hour ago, Chanders said:

Apologies Allen, there was no intent to slight your work or the work of the many others you mentioned, all of whom are field defining. I was just trying to mention some of the names that have come up recently in the threads about these boxes. 

oh that's fine, thanks for saying that  - it's not me I worry about; Dan Morgenstern was just a giant of American jazz writing. He wrote stuff about Armstrong (including liner notes for a Columbia LP that covered some of the same era) that were also important to Armstrong's rep.

[tranemonk]

I know this is a me thing... but if there is ONE trumpeter that I want to listen to first... It's Lee Morgan. I know it's decades after Armstrong and a completely different context but when I listen to him, I hear him. I'm not annoyed, overwhelmed or nudged into him... I want to hear more of him and his writing was awesome. 

As far as vocalists go... I go to Nat Cole first (as a male), Billie, and then Anita O'Day. 

Maybe it's because I'm not a musician but I have tried with Armstrong and I just don't care. Okay go ahead let me have it... 🙄

[JSngry]

This was in the house for literally as long as I can remember.

So I don't need an intellectual appreciation of Louis Armstrong (although I've developed one). I still have the same sensation of unbounded exhilaration that I had as a 3 year old. When that dies, I die.

Hopefully.

[mikeweil]

I hear ya! Would be a very nice theme for a thread.

On 7/17/2026 at 2:09 AM, JSngry said:

So I don't need an intellectual appreciation of Louis Armstrong (although I've developed one). I still have the same sensation of unbounded exhilaration that I had as a 3 year old. When that dies, I die.

Hopefully.

 

[jazzbo]

On 7/16/2026 at 5:49 PM, tranemonk said:

I know this is a me thing... but if there is ONE trumpeter that I want to listen to first... It's Lee Morgan. I know it's decades after Armstrong and a completely different context but when I listen to him, I hear him. I'm not annoyed, overwhelmed or nudged into him... I want to hear more of him and his writing was awesome. 

As far as vocalists go... I go to Nat Cole first (as a male), Billie, and then Anita O'Day. 

Maybe it's because I'm not a musician but I have tried with Armstrong and I just don't care. Okay go ahead let me have it... 🙄

Interesting to me because as much as I do like Lee Morgan he would be low down in my top ten if he were in my top ten trumpeters. I find differences in taste fascinating.

[John L]

15 hours ago, jazzbo said:

Interesting to me because as much as I do like Lee Morgan he would be low down in my top ten if he were in my top ten trumpeters. I find differences in taste fascinating.

Yes, I like Lee Morgan a lot but there are a number of trumpet players who do even more for me, and Louis Armstrong tops that list.   That said, I don't listen to the All Stars very often.   I prefer most of my Armstrong vintage 1925-1946.  

[Clunky]

About twenty years ago I was listening to a lot of early jazz. I recall the startling effect of hearing Louis on a 78 , his phrasing and approach sounded to much more modern that what had come before. It's easy to miss that idea  now with what has happened since especially with modern jazz but he was revolutionary.

[gmonahan]

He was just an entertainment personality when I was young. I think I first realized there was something else when I picked up (probably in a bargain bin) the old "Hello Dolly" LP on Kapp and listened to his version of "Moon River." The soul of that struck me--and I was still in my teens. After that, another LP here and there and now, here I am with shelves bulging with glorious music from the beginning of his spectacular career to the end! Yes, there's been some junk now and then over the years, but even the Disney record is pretty good! I'll take his marvelous music every which way.