Art Blakey at the Jazz Corner of the World

[adh1907]

I have the 1994 Doubletime 2CD reissue.  It’s a great session. Lee Morgan on good form. Mobley is a bit squeaky on occasion. As far as I know, this session has not had any further reissues. No RVG or Classic or Tone Poets. Anyone know why? 

[jazzbo]

The Japanese have reissued these dates on cd more than once. I don't think that is a reason the US Blue Note hasn't; in general the expansive reissue objective we saw at the time of "Doubletime" just can't or won't exist today.

Edited November 15 by jazzbo

[Kevin Bresnahan]

That is weird. No European LP releases back the in the 60s either.

[felser]

I've always considered the sound quality of those two albums to be somewhat substandard.  They may not do well in the semi-audiophile series.

[Brad]

I’ve always thought the sound was pretty good. I’m sure the audiophiles would probably complain a little bit.  It would probably make a good Classic.

Just as it’s been reissued in Japan in cd, it’s also been reissued in vinyl. 

[Kevin Bresnahan]

14 hours ago, felser said:

I've always considered the sound quality of those two albums to be somewhat substandard.  They may not do well in the semi-audiophile series.

I always liked the live sound on those recordings, with a "you are there" feel. I don't think they sound like bootlegs at all.

[Stonewall15]

I have the 2002 Blue Note RVG 2-CD set released by the Japanese. Excellent sounds.

[felser]

41 minutes ago, Stonewall15 said:

I have the 2002 Blue Note RVG 2-CD set released by the Japanese. Excellent sounds.

Different albums, "Meet You At The Jazz Corner of the World", recorded 1960, as opposed to "Jazz Corner of the World", recorded 1959, correct?  I agree that the sound on "Meet You...." is much better.

 

[adh1907]

Yep, two different sessions. I wonder why Blue Note gave these records, released within a year of one another, such similar titles. I wonder if there has been confusion within modern Blue Note as a result, leading to comparative neglect of the earlier date. (At the Jazz Corner, not Meet you at the….).

[mjzee]

1 hour ago, adh1907 said:

Yep, two different sessions. I wonder why Blue Note gave these records, released within a year of one another, such similar titles. I wonder if there has been confusion within modern Blue Note as a result, leading to comparative neglect of the earlier date. (At the Jazz Corner, not Meet you at the….).

I've wondered whether there's a Morris Levy connection, "The Jazz Corner Of The World" being another name for Birdland, which Levy owned.  Another intriguing question is why these weren't simply called "Live At Birdland."

[John L]

4 hours ago, felser said:

Different albums, "Meet You At The Jazz Corner of the World", recorded 1960, as opposed to "Jazz Corner of the World", recorded 1959, correct?  I agree that the sound on "Meet You...." is much better.

 

 

 

To each his own, I guess.   For me, it is just the opposite.  I like the sound on the set with Mobley just fine.  But I do not like the sound on "Meet You.." at all.  I am far from an audiophile but I actually avoid listening to "Meet You..." because of the sound.   

[Daniel A]

8 hours ago, mjzee said:

 Another intriguing question is why these weren't simply called "Live At Birdland."

Perhaps because there had already been two Blakey albums called "A Night at Birdland".

 

 

[Kevin Bresnahan]

10 hours ago, John L said:

To each his own, I guess.   For me, it is just the opposite.  I like the sound on the set with Mobley just fine.  But I do not like the sound on "Meet You.." at all.  I am far from an audiophile but I actually avoid listening to "Meet You..." because of the sound.   

I agree with you on this. For some reason, I've never been a fan of the sound on "Meet You..." either. The RVG CDs in particular sounded harsh to me.

[adh1907]

On 11/17/2024 at 11:12 AM, Kevin Bresnahan said:

I agree with you on this. For some reason, I've never been a fan of the sound on "Meet You..." either. The RVG CDs in particular sounded harsh to me.

I have just played or attempted to play these back to back, I had to give up on the RVG twofer ‘Meet you…’. The distortion on the sax and piano was awful. It’s now in the charity pile. The earlier CD (at the Jazz Corner) with Mobley sounds good, lively, in the room sound. I wonder if there is a big difference in the original vinyl issues. 

[Gheorghe]

I have all of them since I like all live albums of my favourite artists. Even the early fifties thing with Clifford Brown and Lou Donaldson has a good sound. 
I also like that "room sound" on the 1959 album, and maybe the other one "Meet You..." has a bit of a scrambled eggs sound, I am not so much receptive to problems like that. My hearing is not so trained for all them details, I had to deal with so much in my live. Lousy club pianos, bad PA systems and still cooked. I have been thru all them off the air recorded Boris Rose and so on, and enjoyed the exitement of that music, studied it and all, so I am not really an audiophile. 

But all the albums have some of the most exiting live music of that era. If I remember right, on the "Meet You" it´s already Wayne Shorter on ts. But still not Freddie Hubbard on trumpet. 

By the way, after the departure of Shorter and Hubbard as the 60´s went on I somehow lost trace of who was the next Messengers. It´s somehow a mess, it became a steady line again in the late 70´s with that then brand new group with Bobby Watson, Valery Ponomarev and James Williams..... and all that followed, Donald Harrison, Mulgrew Miller and so.....

[Peter Friedman]

I don't recall anyone here mentioning that "Meet You At The Jazz Corner Of The World" is on this Mosaic Box :

The Complete Blue Note Recordings of Art Blakey's 1960 Jazz Messengers

Edited yesterday at 03:41 AM by Peter Friedman

[adh1907]

I don’t have that. How is the sound on that issue? The RVG CD reissue is awful.

[JSngry]

Blue Note did not always release records with perfect sound quality. The Cult Of RVG would have think otherwise, and although they're largely correct, like all cults, they confuse often or usually with always.