Big Beat Steve

Just a brief look at the reverse side of this coin that will might be "food for thought" for EU forum members: Now that there is the EU-USA customs duties agreement whereby EU exports to the USA will be subject to 15% customs duties for the time being (until further notice, or should I say "until further whims"? ) but USA exports to EU countries are for the most part at 0 (zero)% duties, I for one wouldn't hold my breath that we as private buyers will now be able receive any shipments of records, CDs or similar all duty-free to our doorsteps. It just does not seem likely, given the general regulatory climate. Not to mention that duty-exemption thresholds applicable until now have been ridiculously low for some time, and prohibitive mailing rates by US shippers have probably killed most transactions anyway.

But there is another saying that us collectors ought to heed every now and then: "He who lets himself be carried away will be lost!" (Before collecting turns into "hoarding of many things" )

Thanks very much for that link, Hopkins! 👍 I am not concerned by the original question as I do not own that set, but that booklet will serve me very well as additional background info to my 4-CD Properbox "The Original Source" that essentially covers T-Bone Walker's 1940-51 output.

O.K., regardless of what Lord says, if I got the above findings right, the session of 25 April 1952 should read like this in the discographies from now on ?

Mine too. Past Perfect Silver Line label. Time to spin it again now, I guess.

And in the end this is just the mirrored image of all those sellers on Discogs (and eBay - and Organissimo, FWIW ) who will not ship outside the USA. Understandable, sometimes a real pity, but that's the way it is. Not just now with all those weirdass tariff "politics" right now but for quite some time already due to ever-increasing USPS rates (and probably more involved paperwork or other - perceived or real - uncertainties at the seller's end). BTW, @Stefan Wood: Did you at one time live in Washington, DC? If so, I bought from you through eBay in 2004.

Nondescript cover of a latter-day reissue. In case anyone's wondering, it's this one: https://www.discogs.com/de/release/4116417-Lucky-Thompson-Lucky-Thompson

As far as I can see (Page 11 of the Lester Young Part 3 document) the basic info (dates, lineups, tunes) remains the same the for dates discussed above but he is more detailed in analyzing the contents of each tracks (solos, etc.). OTOH he does not list the track lengths or the record releases. So both sources together would give the best possible overview. And the descriptions of the solos should help clarifying which tune is from which date. So ... thanks for the link! I downloaded all 3 files "for future reference". And will certainly do so with others too.

No, not really ... but many years ago I compiled my own cassette chock full of all the versions of "Jumping At The Woodside" that I was able to come up with from my records. Played it over and over again without tiring of it ... Many versions by Count Basie, of course, but amazingly different anyway through the years, and then there were Lester Young, Bob Wills, Lambert Hendricks & Ross and others ... By now I would have even more versions in my collection. Re- "Summertime:" Two suggestions (off the beaten tracks of the usual): Dave Phillips & The Hot Rod Gang ("Wild Youth" LP, obviously modeled on the 1958 version by Gene Vincent ) The Slingshots ("Big Noise From Northwood" V.A. LP) (both from the early 80s)

So that settles it. (Or back to the starting grid? ) However, if all the names mentioned by Leonard Feather were in the lineup(s), though apparently never all of them at the same time, and if these weren't all the musicians present (according to your post he did not mention Wynton Kelly and Aaron Bell present on 25/04/52), then the "different dates" must include the one from 4 August 1951 because that is the only one that has Earl Knight in the lineup (with "Neenah" and "Lester Leaps In" recorded at both possible dates indicated above). And as you have seen in the "Lestorian Notes", several more Birdland Broadcasts exist from April/May 1952 with the same lineup as on 25/04/52. But none of the tunes recorded at these subsequent dates match those of 25/04/52.

My Prez discography ("Lestorian Notes" by Piet Koster and Harm Mobach, published in 1998, so I don't know if this one or the one by Jan Evensmo is more up to date) lists the session of 25 April 1952 like this: I then tried to narrow down the recordings to the line-up given by Feather, and according to the musician index Earl Knight only appeared once with Pres - on the session hereafter of 4 August 1951: But Earl Knight and Lee Abrams together at one and the same session apparently never happened - at least not on any known recordings. So ...? Like Niko said, the 25 April 1952 date is the most likely candidate, but the line-up announced by Feather then would be incorrect. If all this is what you already arrived at as well, Medjuck, then sorry - but I tried.

According to JEPSEN it is a different take. The one on JWC-512 is listed as the alternate take. The other one (the "master take", then) is listed by Jepsen and Bruyninckx as being the one on "Swingin' Like 60" (WL-1289) but only Jepsen lists PJ-13 (This is The Blues) for this take as well.

The Affinity reissues of the two Frank Rosolino LPs from the Kenton Presents series matched the originals somewhat better. BUT ... don't you agree that what Affinity did with the covers of the reissues of the Bethlehem LPs (reissued at about the same time) was much, much worse? It's only their availability and affordability that saves them ...

So how do the Canadians pronounce the city of "Quebec"? From what I remember from those I've encountered around here or heard on Canadian Army radio (when there still was such a thing here) it is more like "kwe-BEK" or "ke-BEK" but rarely "QWEE-bek" or "KEE-bek". I.e pronounced with the stress on the end (as with the habitants referred to as the "ke-BEKKERS"). But as you indicate, it apparently is different with his name.

Yes, from all I've read before I realize it's like you said. But for a CONSCIENTIOUSLY programmed re-reissue that's no reason not to include them this time around IMHO. After all, as you confirm they WERE intended for marketing as 45s. Or was it a matter of playing time? (Which I somehow find hard to believe if there had been a will - considering that the set has 3 LPs).

So it really is so that they now omitted those 2 missing tracks for the THIRD time? Beats me why ... All on the premise that these 2 tracks were not released originally on 45s so "for authenticity sake" there is no need to include them now because they strictly speaking were not part of his 45 discography? Regardless of what collectors might be craving for? Do they really need to ride the "upgrade to new format" or "milk new buyer segments" train THAT blatantly?

So there were specific US-printed and equipped OJC covers? I bought lots of OJCs new throughout the later 80s and the 90s but cannot recall ANY single European-printed OJC cover (i.e. usually from Mikulski/ZYX in Germany in my case) or other printing distributed over here that had anything resembling an "OBI". There often was a much smaller sticker either on the shrink wrap or on the front of the cover itself, but it included only some sort of promo texts. And as it was easy to detach them without leaving marks they did not survive. However, in some cases the reissuers added the recording dates on the Prestige OJC reissues that did not have them originally (squeezing in a line of text in a font that usually differed from anything else on the back cover and that looked very much like an afterthought). Examples: OJC 054 (7031 - "Art Farmer Septet") and OJC 296 (7166 - "Workin'" / Miles Davis). I don't know, though, how many of these there were overall.

Will read this again when I get around to it, so thanks for the link. But in THIS thread I would not want to go too far into BN territory. The "Prestige/Milestone" twofer experience is a case of its own!

Which reissue series would this have been? I do not own all that many OJC CDs but those I have include the original liner notes, as do the OJC (and similar, somewhat earlier) LP facsimile reissues reproducing the original cover artwork and layout. OTOH, that crop of Don Schlitten-produced Prestige/New Jazz reissues from the 60s/early 70s featured updated, insightful liner notes from (what I have seen at a quick glance at my LPs) the likes of Mark Gardner, Martin Williams, Chris Albertson, Doug Ramsey, Dan Morgenstern a.o. Not a bad selection of writers IMO. But I think you are right about not knowing (initially!) what you got when looking at the exterior of the Prestige twofers. For example, a photo of Miles Davis from (more or less) the "Electric Miles" period on the cover when 1956 classic quintet sessions are inside can only be attributed to the tastes and expectations of the average jazz buyers of the early 70s. But the insides of those twofers tell it all - so no doubt about what the buyer gets. And after all, this out-of-tune cover artwork problem was one that occurred with most reissue labels of the 70s (and often later as well). Good idea!

Oh yes, I remember these well and they remain important elements of my collection. I am also among those who started buying quite a few of these soon after the collecting bug got a hold (from 1975-76 onwards in my case). Though probably not the "usual suspects" that others went crazy about. IIRC the first one I ever bought was the one by Blind Lemon Jefferson (talk about lowest of lo-fi to those then youthful ears! ). Its inner sleeves first acquainted me with the concept of those "Milestone Twofers". Those I next remember getting an awful lot of spins here were those by Dizzy Gillespie ("In The Beginning"), Wardell Gray, George Wallington and the "Prestige First Sessions 1949/50" V.A. anthology. But over time I also stocked up heavily on Miles (this mostly was before the OJC facsimile reissues of the individual LPs hit the bins everywhere) and sundry hard boppers. I had become aware of the existence of the Blue Note "brown paper bag" twofers (mentioned by Milestones) early on but they remained outside the affordable price range of my student's purse for a long time. Truth be told, I've been using the term of "twofer" as a generic one for a long time now to encompass the 2-LP sets of other labels, particularly those on RCA Bluebird from the 70s and those on Savoy released in the 80s. Same approach, overall, and always good value for money ...

I must admit, though, that I find the "Elvis Sings Thelonious Monk" idea way more exciting. Considering what can probably be done with AI today, can't someone geeky enough out there get to work and cobble some soundalike sound samples of this up? This should REALLY be fun!

Back to "great finds made" ... Here's a great music find not in the grooves but between the pages … The other day I met up with a high school classmate from our “Class of 79” who had told me she had started selling off the jazz record collection of her deceased father and wondered if I was interested. Purchases from that collection will be on the back burner for me for the time being, but in her dad’s jazz book corner the below item caught my eye … So I offered her 50 Euros outright for this book, which she was pleased to accept (in fact she had intimated earlier that she did not expect to make much money from disposing of her father’s books – jazz books included). As a bonus, a free copy of the “Eddie Condon Treasury of Jazz” (1st edition of 1956) came my way too. The Bird book is in NM condition (no scuffing to speak of, no splits of the box, no loose pages - which I understand can happen with this book), just some very minor fading of the box spine. I’ve now placed an order with a specialist shop for a premium cardboard archiving box of the right size to hold the book and maintain it in its current condition on my bookshelf for the rest of my days. Needless to say, I was (and am) pleased with this find – even if the vinyl part of my inspection of that collection should come to nought.

Which basically means that commercially produced and released music records are out of the game. None of these are "unique" (and even limited pressing runs usually are way more numerous than "limited" runs of authorized/official prints of works of art). Royalties were/are paid (hopefully) on the pressings of NEW records (discs) and secondhand (re)sales are outside any royalty arrangements. For good reason IMO.

Basically I agree with you almost all the way, mainly because this is a can of worms where sooner or later others might try to sneak their "art" into these laws too and nobody knows where to draw a line that will STAND. Yet I think some of your examples are a bit far-fetched or off-target, such as destruction (on purpose or not) or loss. Because - no sale, no royalties due. It's as simple as that. And if an object remains unsold but is passed on through the generations (whichever way this occurs) then it's no royalty-inducing (recorded) sale either. As for rare or one-off classic cars - fair point, but is this ever enforceable on a wider level? Not nearly all of these are linked to any single designer who would qualify as an artist who would be entitled to royalties in the sense of the EU Directive, for example. But getting back to the topic of this thread, I still fail to see how this could ever be invoked for any of the collectible records we are talking about. Even a pressing run of only 500 or 700 makes any of these highly "collectible" LPs mass products by comparison. A high-$$$ sale would relate to only one copy of a far larger number of copies of the "original" but not to THE "original" work of art, and these copies of the orignal pressing run all are the same and do not nearly meet the criteria of the "limited productions or signed works" outlined in the directive. "Signed works" (of art) typically would refer, for example, to printings of some drawing or picture specifically produced by or on behalf of the artist in a limited run identified as, for example, the x-th copy of a run of y copies (as in "5/50" next to the artist's signature on the object, for example). No record signed individually by an artist for the record owner at some later date would even remotely be covered by this. If it was about, say, one-off test pessings or acetates or metal masters of a (later) regular release, this might be different, but would such test pressings or acetates meet the "visual art" criteria? The only case where conclusions about whether records could ever be covered IMO would occur if collectible bibliophile books (either first printings or limited runs identified specifically as the "x-th copy of a total of y numbered copies" would somehow end up being covered under this Directive. Would my numbered copy of the "Kenton Era" 4-LP box set on Capitol all of a sudden become eligible for royalties to either the Kenton Estate or the (uncredited) designer of the cover and booklet if I were to sell it? (Highly unlikely, given the condition of my copy of that set, but you get the idea )

Indeed it is! Beyond all legal terms and convolutedness, the below link may also help in clarifying the EU Directive in a more down-to-earth way: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al26049