Lord 8.0 is out

[Bluerein]

Just to inform those who don't know already the new CD-Rom by Tom Lord is out (8.0).

[Christiern]

Is it as sloppily thrown together as his earlier cribs?

[Bluerein]

It might be sloppy or not complete or whatever you might think of it but i find it the most handy and fast reseach tool I've come across ever. If I doubt something or it's not to be found in Lord I'll check elsewhere too but 99% of the times Lord has what I need to find.

[brownie]

I'm like Bluerein. And happy with the Lord!

No discography can be complete

If I see something that is not there and have details on it, I email to the Discography site and help contribute.

[neveronfriday]

I'm like Bluerein. And happy with the Lord!

No discography can be complete

If I see something that is not there and have details on it, I email to the Discography site and help contribute.

I would consider this to be a much more intelligent thing to do than just complaining about it everytime the program is mentioned.

[brownie]

I should add that the Lord (I subscribe to the online version) is very easy to handle, even for this computer idiot

[Christiern]

I would consider this to be a much more intelligent thing to do than just complaining about it everytime the program is mentioned.

Reading and grasping a post before responding to it might also be regarded as a measure of intelligence. I wondered if vol. 8 was as sloppy as the previous volumes have been--that is an observation followed by a question, not a chronic complaint.

[neveronfriday]

I would consider this to be a much more intelligent thing to do than just complaining about it everytime the program is mentioned.

Reading and grasping a post before responding to it might also be regarded as a measure of intelligence. I wondered if vol. 8 was as sloppy as the previous volumes have been--that is an observation followed by a question, not a chronic complaint.

Man, relax, I didn't even read your post.

I was referring to complaints that pop up all over the place regularly.

Edited November 24, 2007 by neveronfriday

[Christiern]

I would consider this to be a much more intelligent thing to do than just complaining about it everytime the program is mentioned.

Reading and grasping a post before responding to it might also be regarded as a measure of intelligence. I wondered if vol. 8 was as sloppy as the previous volumes have been--that is an observation followed by a question, not a chronic complaint.

Man, relax, I didn't even read your post.

I was referring to complaints that pop up all over the place regularly.

Ja, så må du undskylde!

[Ken Dryden]

I have purchased several of the previous editions of Lord's CD-Rom Jazz Discography, so I understand Christiern's comments. With so much data, it is a challenging task to proofread everything, so errors will inevitably creep in. Record labels and artists often don't take the time or trouble to correctly spell the names of musicians or song titles, while they sometimes get them wrong or even omit them entirely (like the notorious hidden tracks). Labels often omit one or more instruments played by someone doubling on two or more. There are also multiple versions of some song titles listed (for example, "On Green Dolphin Street" and "Green Dolphin Street," or "Oh! Lady Be Good" and "Lady Be Good") that can end up being compiled separately. Then composers often use the same title for different pieces, so before you can say there are so many versions of a particular work, you have to be sure they all are by the same composer (tough to do unless you own all of the LPs and CDs given).

That said, I haven't seen any similar product that attempts to be as thorough as Lord's reference work. It was particularly helpful to me when I used to produce a radio program, as it was far more complete than any on-line reference source for jazz.

[bertrand]

It is my understanding that Lord has not incorporated most of the comments given to him from one version to the next.

However, he seems to be much more diligent with the subscription service, so that may be the way to go.

Regardless, most discography sites (including Lord) fail to include the composers, and I feel this is a major omission. When several pieces use the same title, how do you know which is on the record?

Two examples:

1) Butch Warren's 'Lost' is not the same tracks as Wayne Shorter's piece. Wallace Roney recorded Wayne's piece, but also recorded another piece called 'Lost' (either he wrote it or Jacky Terrasson, I'll look it up later).

2) Butch Warren's 'The Way I Feel' is not the same piece as John Patton's, nor is it the same as the track with unknown composer that Red Mitchell and Harold Land recorded!

So I think composer credits are needed for a discography to be complete. The discographies produced through Brian (e.g. those on Mike Fitzgerald's site) have composers, and this has been a precious resource for me.

Bertrand.

Edited November 24, 2007 by bertrand

[neveronfriday]

I would consider this to be a much more intelligent thing to do than just complaining about it everytime the program is mentioned.

Reading and grasping a post before responding to it might also be regarded as a measure of intelligence. I wondered if vol. 8 was as sloppy as the previous volumes have been--that is an observation followed by a question, not a chronic complaint.

Man, relax, I didn't even read your post.

I was referring to complaints that pop up all over the place regularly.

Ja, så må du undskylde!

"Den man elsker tugter man."

[Christiern]

[Face of the Bass]

For somebody who doesn't know anything about this, what does Lord have that you can't find for free online? Also, where does it draw the line at what counts as "jazz" and what does not? I know that's a difficult question, but any help would be appreciated.

[Christiern]

For somebody who doesn't know anything about this, what does Lord have that you can't find for free online? Also, where does it draw the line at what counts as "jazz" and what does not? I know that's a difficult question, but any help would be appreciated.

When you can't find this on the internet, you will have the answer to your question:

Think of thousands more pages like it.

The above is from Vol. 2 of the Rust discography, it covered the 1st 40 years, or so. The best one for post 1942 was Jepsens, which was being updated by Erik Raben when Lord stepped in and literally plagiarized the works of his predecessors. Lord had better distribution and there is barely a market for one such set, so Erik had to stop work when he reached Vol. 8. Unfortunately, Lord is not as meticulous as his predecessors, who were not in it for the money.

[Christiern]

As for how discographers distinguish between jazz and that which isn't, the line can be mighty thin at times, so they generally err on the side of jazz, as it were.

[Larry Kart]

Just to put these facts and point of view on the record, here's something I posted on another board several months ago. In particular, note the distinction made -- in Edward Berger's review [in the "Annual Review of the Institute of Jazz Studies 12"] of Lord quoted from below -- between Lord's methods and those of ethical discographers:

> Bob VanLangen <bobvl@...> wrote:

>

> Today's Wall Street Journal has a most interesting article on the

> discographer Tom Lord, written by John McDonough who is, for my

> money, the best reviewer DownBeat has at present. It is a half page

> overview of Lord's work. Starting with the 1917 recordings by the

> Original Dixieland Jass Band it covers the 582 recordings of Misty,

> 1675 of Body and Soul, 1184 of 'Round Midnight... and so it goes.

> As I have noted before, this is not the first time the WSJ devotes

> a full half page (what an oxymoron!) to jazz and the Great American

> Songbook... good for them! Let's hope Rupert Murdoch's hitmen keeps

> their avaricious paws off this space.

Haven't read McDonough's piece yet, but it should be said that Lord is at the

least an ethically challenged figure, if not an outright plagarist, and that his

work is grossly unreliable. I quote from Edward Berger's review in the "Annual

Review of Jazz Studies 12" of Lord's "The Jazz Discography Version 3.3":

"Unfortunately, the content is not always as reliable as the software. Anyone

who has paged through 'The Jazz Discography' will quickly discover its

anomalies, idiosyncrasies, and out-and-out errors. Duplicate entries are a

frequent problem... Other common errors include transposed issue numbers,

incorrect record company names... inconsistent forms of label names, incorrect

release information" etc. "Overall, one gets the impression that Lord is more a

collator than a researcher. He has collected massive amounts of information from

a variety of sources, often without applying critical judgment or even common

sense.

"Lord's copyright notice includes the standard wording: 'The use of any part of

this publication reproduced, transmitted, in any form by any means... without

prior consent of the publisher is an infringement of the copyright law.' Had

Lord himself heeded this warning, 'The Jazz Discography' would not exist.

Discography, particularly comprehensive discography, is by its nature a

cumulative endeavor, with new works building upon the base of knowledge

established by earlier researchers, a well as by informal networks of current

contributors. But the massive amount of material lifted by Lord verbatim form

other works has crossed a line.... [O]ne may not [according to the U.S.

Copyright Law] copyright 'works consisting entirely of information that is

common property and containing no original authorship.... Applying those

guidelines to the world of discography, one need not credit any particular

source for the recording date of Armstrong's 'West End Blues,' since it is

available in countless works. But Lord has appropriated without attribution vast

amounts of original information, particularly from the more detailed

bio-discographies....

"By Lord's own admission to Barry Kernfeld [co-author with Howard Rye of the

essay "Comprehensive Discographies of Jazz, Blues, and Gospel"] 60 to 65 percent

of 'The Jazz Discography' was taken from [Walter] Bruyninckx (who himself took

freely from [Jorgen] Jepsen), not to mention the copious copying from more

specialized discographies....

"Kernfeld and Rye concluded their comprehensive assessment of jazz discography

by advising music librarians against purchasing Lord's work on ethical

grounds.... Counterculture gadfly Abbie Hoffman may have provided the answer to

this moral dilemma when he wrote 'Steal This Book.' Perhaps the ultimate justice

would be to borrow [Lord's] CD-ROM and copy it. But that, of course, would be

illegal."

I should add that, in CD-ROM versions of his work subsequent to the version

Berger reviewed, Lord has corrected few of the vast number of factual errors

that have been pointed in reviews of "The Jazz Discography" written by those

knowledgable in the field.

[Christiern]

Thank you, Larry. But will they believe?

[Chuck Nessa]

Lord has compiled the most information in the most convenient format but I refuse to give him any money.

All discographies have errors but the others have original errors. Previous editors like Rust, Jepsen, Rabin and Bruyninckx have invested many years and thousands of hours (read money) providing this information. Those guys stood on the shoulders of earlier researchers.

From my experience, Lord has taken their work without as much as a "thank you" and gone into business. I once complained online about Lord errors for sessions I produced. Lord contacted me and bitched about my posting. I pointed out all he had to do was contact me for complete details and he said he never contacted labels because they never cooperated. If he never contacted labels, where did he get his information?

I have provided details to discographers for about 40 years, starting with Francois Postif in 1969. In print format a number of the above mentioned discographers have thanked various "vault custodians" at the major labels and their predecessors.

I'm sure Lord will win.

Correction, he already has.

[Christiern]

That occurred to me, too, Lord's failure to contact people who have the knowledge he lacks. Jepsen and Raben both contacted me on various occasions to see if I could fill in missing information or offer a correction. I have never heard from Lord, nor from any of his minions, assuming that there are such creatures.

I, too, refuse to pay a penny for his misinformation. He sent me his first CD when I was with Stereo Review--When I saw clear signs of plagiarism, I gave the disc to one of the victims, Karl Knudsen.

[neveronfriday]

Yeah, I remember reading that WSJ article.

So jazz geeks may quibble about this inclusion or that omission. But Mr. Lord has cast a wide net, knowing that revisions will be easy and that in the 90 years since the first jazz record the definition of jazz has become a moving and often controversial target. Now with its legacy securely digitized, the music has a basic reference work that can move as fast as the music.

Yeah, right.

Edited November 25, 2007 by neveronfriday

[Bluerein]

Oh now I get it your ego's stand in the way. Because Lord didn't consult you (the know all's of jazz) it's a bad discography.......Ok I'll stop giving him my money now and donate some to you....

[cannonball-addict]

People still buy CD-ROMs?

[Daniel A]

Oh now I get it your ego's stand in the way. Because Lord didn't consult you (the know all's of jazz) it's a bad discography.......Ok I'll stop giving him my money now and donate some to you....

I don't look at it this way. From what I've heard here (but mostly elsewhere) I'd rather give my money to Bruyninckx.

[JSngry]

"Ego" is subjective. Plagiarism is not.