The Essential Jazz Records, Volume One: Ragtime to Swing by Max Harrison

[Rabshakeh]

Looks like this book isn't in print anymore.

Does anyone have a list of the 250 records selected?

[Big Beat Steve]

Secondhand copies should be available online at reasonable prices. I see that on eBay.co.uk prices currently start at GBP 6 or so for this Vol. 1.

No doubt some forumists will have a copy and can provide the info you ask for.

However, I would not advise to take any such lists as more than a (very) ROUGH guide for personal explorations. And certainly not as THE Gospel. On the one hand, I would not be surprised if the contents of this list of "essentials" (beyond updates of pressings or catalog numbers) vary from edition to edition of this book. Which begs the question: Why?? (If recordings later deleted  ever were THAT essential ...)
And on the other, who is anyone to tell anybody what to listen to in a MANDATORY way?
Suggestions, recommendations and advice - yes, but beyond?
Tastes and preferences differ, after all.
For example: Within the time and style frame of this Vol. 1, I listen to Louis Jordan much more often than to Louis Armstrong. Though I think I own most of the "essential" recordings of Armstrong too. Does this mean guilty feelings about oversights or "missing out"? Nope ...

Edited February 13 by Big Beat Steve

[Rabshakeh]

2 hours ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Secondhand copies should be available online at reasonable prices. I see that on eBay.co.uk prices currently start at GBP 6 or so for this Vol. 1.

No doubt some forumists will have a copy and can provide the info you ask for.

However, I would not advise to take any such lists as more than a (very) ROUGH guide for personal explorations. And certainly not as THE Gospel. On the one hand, I would not be surprised if the contents of this list of "essentials" (beyond updates of pressings or catalog numbers) vary from edition to edition of this book. Which begs the question: Why?? (If recordings later deleted  ever were THAT essential ...)
And on the other, who is anyone to tell anybody what to listen to in a MANDATORY way?
Suggestions, recommendations and advice - yes, but beyond?
Tastes and preferences differ, after all.
For example: Within the time and style frame of this Vol. 1, I listen to Louis Jordan much more often than to Louis Armstrong. Though I think I own most of the "essential" recordings of Armstrong too. Does this mean guilty feelings about oversights or "missing out"? Nope ...

Thanks BBS.

To be clear: I want the book to expand horizons rather than narrow them.  Particularly with respect to LPs and classic historically released compilations (which are how I prefer to listen to music). I'm not interested in restrictive canons but rather in discovering albums I don't know. 

I know that I am preaching to the choir here, given all the well considered answers you have given in the past to similar posts I have made, but I am consistently frustrated by the lack of attention paid to the "traditional" jazzes and to swing (including RnB variants) past the arbitrary cut off dates granted to them of 1935 and 1947. 

These styles continued to develop, go through waves of expansion and contractions, and bring in new fans for years. They had their own constellations of star players and their own canons of classic albums and all subjective personal favourites. But with time, they have lost ground to the critical consensus of modernist and free lineages. The tendancy in more recent histories is to efface these styles completely and just ignore them past their alloted historical eras.

In the internet age, there are thousands of listicles and sources of recommendations for most every musical genre, from niche forms of electronica to regional variants of Thai music. However it is still all very thin on the ground for later traditional jazz and swing. Certainly there are some decent blogs, but the focus tends to be on the artists and the history, and not on what I am interested in, which is strictly the LPs. This makes it hard for someone working backwards (as I am) to discover the classic records (whether we mean most inspirational / canonical classics or personal favourites). When I was learning about jazz I followed "Best of" lists in magazines, noted records that I saw frequently in shops, took advice from older family members, picked through the Penguins and All music, and then, when the internet started, followed up all those threads on the internet, particularly the old Amazon user lists, and, these days, RYM and discogs lists, as well as posts on Instagram. This was great for helping me to find out about LPs in modern jazz styles, including some very niche or rare releases. But, other than for the big names on Verve, none of these sources really exist for pre-bop styles. For traditional jazz lineage stuff post 1935, in particular, it is a desert out there on the internet, in terms of LP recommendations. 

I have found that generally the best source for this stuff tends to be books on jazz written in the 1970s, when the revivalist generation (for which bop and free jazz were alternative or rival traditions, rather than the base setting for all jazz) was still productive.

The reason why I am looking at this book is that it focuses on LPs, and because the writer has a good reputation.

Edit: I should add that a very kind forum member has in fact helped me out with the index. So thank you again to the individual concerned.

Edited February 13 by Rabshakeh

[rostasi]

We've had discussions here about this book
and Larry Kart has an extensive, incisive look
into the series in this thread (later down the page).

[Rabshakeh]

11 minutes ago, rostasi said:

We've had discussions here about this book
and Larry Kart has an extensive, incisive look
into the series in this thread (later down the page).

Thanks!

[Big Beat Steve]

35 minutes ago, rostasi said:

We've had discussions here about this book
and Larry Kart has an extensive, incisive look
into the series in this thread (later down the page).

Yes that's an interesting thread (which I cannot recall having seen at the time). And I'll do as Allen Lowe did, and copy-and-paste that long review and assessment by Larry Kart of Vol. 2 for future reference.  
Pity he touched on Vol. 1 only in passing. (Maybe a hint at what Rabshakeh complained (sort of) about in his post above, and a reflection of an attitude adopted by large parts of the jazz audience: "Modern Jazz here, Modern Jazz there, Modern Jazz everywhere .. but Swing, or Classic Jazz? Oh yes ... there was such a thing too .. oh well ... ")  

@Rabshakeh:
Your reply touches on many interesting points, and I do understand you quite well (and did not want to insinuate that you'd follow the contents of such "essential" lists without a good dose of comon sense).
What I do not quite get from your post, though, is this: Are you looking for additional info and guidance on LPs woth checking out of swing and-re-swing jazz recorded DURING those eras (i.e broadly prior to 1945), or rather on LPs covering the output of Swing men in the decades thereafter (i.e. what is commonly referred to as MAINSTREAM jazz)?
In the latter case writings by Stanley Dance and Albert McCarthy might be woprth checking out too ... but to be taken with a grain of salt as well ...).

But in fact, (against my better judgment dictated by overcrowded music bookshelves here ) your initial post almost has me tempted to get me a copy of that book too ... Out of sheer curiosity (as a means of maybe gewtting addiotnal input on records I've had for a long time but haven't listened to for ages) and not least of all to compare its contents with "The Collector's Jazz - Traditonal and Swing" by John S. Wilson (published in 1958 and therefore with a different slant, I guess - and long-out-of-date catalog numbers, of course ).

As for this statement of yours, "In the internet age, there are thousands of listicles and sources of recommendations for most every musical genre ... However it is still all very thin on the ground for later traditional jazz and swing", I agree that it seems so. The websites and blogs that immediately come to mind are very specialized and not really "recommendation"-type sites.  And some I am familiar with (that reach out from jazz into R&B too) seem to have been somewhat dormant lately (i.e. the Crownpropeller and Be Bop Wino blogs).

So all in all, your approach about guidance for LPs from that era seems a sound one for the time being.

 

 

[Rabshakeh]

2 hours ago, Rabshakeh said:

Thanks BBS.

To be clear: I want the book to expand horizons rather than narrow them.  Particularly with respect to LPs and classic historically released compilations (which are how I prefer to listen to music). I'm not interested in restrictive canons but rather in discovering albums I don't know. 

I know that I am preaching to the choir here, given all the well considered answers you have given in the past to similar posts I have made, but I am consistently frustrated by the lack of attention paid to the "traditional" jazzes and to swing (including RnB variants) past the arbitrary cut off dates granted to them of 1935 and 1947. 

These styles continued to develop, go through waves of expansion and contractions, and bring in new fans for years. They had their own constellations of star players and their own canons of classic albums and all subjective personal favourites. But with time, they have lost ground to the critical consensus of modernist and free lineages. The tendancy in more recent histories is to efface these styles completely and just ignore them past their alloted historical eras.

In the internet age, there are thousands of listicles and sources of recommendations for most every musical genre, from niche forms of electronica to regional variants of Thai music. However it is still all very thin on the ground for later traditional jazz and swing. Certainly there are some decent blogs, but the focus tends to be on the artists and the history, and not on what I am interested in, which is strictly the LPs. This makes it hard for someone working backwards (as I am) to discover the classic records (whether we mean most inspirational / canonical classics or personal favourites). When I was learning about jazz I followed "Best of" lists in magazines, noted records that I saw frequently in shops, took advice from older family members, picked through the Penguins and All music, and then, when the internet started, followed up all those threads on the internet, particularly the old Amazon user lists, and, these days, RYM and discogs lists, as well as posts on Instagram. This was great for helping me to find out about LPs in modern jazz styles, including some very niche or rare releases. But, other than for the big names on Verve, none of these sources really exist for pre-bop styles. For traditional jazz lineage stuff post 1935, in particular, it is a desert out there on the internet, in terms of LP recommendations. 

I have found that generally the best source for this stuff tends to be books on jazz written in the 1970s, when the revivalist generation (for which bop and free jazz were alternative or rival traditions, rather than the base setting for all jazz) was still productive.

The reason why I am looking at this book is that it focuses on LPs, and because the writer has a good reputation.

I guess that what I am saying is that there are plenty of people out there who think that modernist jazz ended in 1970. But it should be uncontroversial that there was a dense lineage of modernist jazz that has continued to develop since then: the classics of Strata-East, Braxton on Arista, bop revival records like Eastern Rebellion or The Homecoming, Keith Jarrett's flow of solo and trio piano albums, The Bad Plus, the Young Lions, the Art Ensemble, M Base, the World Saxophone Quartet, Pat Metheny, EST, the sensuous mid-period works of Kenneth Gorelick, Cecil Taylor's Berlin concerts, Bob James and his acolytes, Cassandra Wilson, the emergence of European Free Improv as its own thing, Jan Garbarek with the Hilliard Ensemble and on and on and on. I love some of this stuff and I dislike a fair chunk of it too. But from the point of view of the board members I think that we can see these as various points in the evolution of modernist jazz, which has never just been about a stale retread of old Hank Mobley records, regardless of what detractors might say. 

I don't want to be hung up on genre here. The genres and idioms have never been closed off from each other, and there's always been cross pollination, cross genre work, active pollination at the musical level. In many cases these genres have no meaning at all. But where genres do have a meaning is from the point of view of a listener seeking to find the records retrospectively, because when it comes to musicians drawing on traditional or swing idioms, the doors are closed and there is precious little information out there. This music is treated as if it were stepping stones to modernism, and after an arbitrary date it is judged as having ceased to developed, with artists since then being mere revivalists. But that isn't the case at all. The music continued to develop, old roads not taken were finally followed, gruesome commercial hybrids emerged (Acker Bilk; Trombone Shorty) and bolder musicians pursued avantgarde approaches (Lacy, Rudd), etc etc.

Anyway, all very long-winded. The real message is that I want to be able to hear this music for myself and to do so, I need to find out about the records. To find the traditional jazz equivalents of The Homecoming or the Koln Concert or Snurdy McGurdy or Black Codes or From Gagarin's Point of View or Berlin '88 is very hard.  Where there is information about these musicians, it is too often biographical and rarely about the albums. To step back towards modernist jazz again, it is all very well knowing that a musician called Dexter Gordon grew up on the West Coast and played in a certain style, but it doesn't really tell you about the music: about the Wardell Grey duels, the very well regarded Blue Note records, the extraordinary profusion of Steeplechases and the talismanic effect of Gordon's return to the US and the release of Homecoming in particular. 

8 minutes ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Yes that's an interesting thread (which I cannot recall having seen at the time). And I'll do as Allen Lowe did, and copy-and-paste that long review and assessment by Larry Kart of Vol. 2 for future reference.  
Pity he touched on Vol. 1 only in passing. (Maybe a hint at what Rabshakeh complained (sort of) about in his post above, and a reflection of an attitude adopted by large parts of the jazz audience: "Modern Jazz here, Modern Jazz there, Modern Jazz everywhere .. but Swing, or Classic Jazz? Oh yes ... there was such a thing too .. oh well ... ")  

@Rabshakeh:
Your reply touches on many interesting points, and I do understand you quite well (and did not want to insinuate that you'd follow the contents of such "essential" lists without a good dose of comon sense).
What I do not quite get from your post, though, is this: Are you looking for additional info and guidance on LPs woth checking out of swing and-re-swing jazz recorded DURING those eras (i.e broadly prior to 1945), or rather on LPs covering the output of Swing men in the decades thereafter (i.e. what is commonly referred to as MAINSTREAM jazz)?
In the latter case writings by Stanley Dance and Albert McCarthy might be woprth checking out too ... but to be taken with a grain of salt as well ...).

But in fact, (against my better judgment dictated by overcrowded music bookshelves here ) your initial post almost has me tempted to get me a copy of that book too ... Out of sheer curiosity (as a means of maybe gewtting addiotnal input on records I've had for a long time but haven't listened to for ages) and not least of all to compare its contents with "The Collector's Jazz - Traditonal and Swing" by John S. Wilson (published in 1958 and therefore with a different slant, I guess - and long-out-of-date catalog numbers, of course ).

As for this statement of yours, "In the internet age, there are thousands of listicles and sources of recommendations for most every musical genre ... However it is still all very thin on the ground for later traditional jazz and swing", I agree that it seems so. The websites and blogs that immediately come to mind are very specialized and not really "recommendation"-type sites.  And some I am familiar with (that reach out from jazz into R&B too) seem to have been somewhat dormant lately (i.e. the Crownpropeller and Be Bop Wino blogs).

So all in all, your approach about guidance for LPs from that era seems a sound one for the time being.

Thanks! 

Having spent half an hour looking through an online version of the book, it looks really good and I would certainly go for it. Lots of spikey strongly held opinions, nicely expressed and based on a deep knowledge but which of course will be taken with the requisite pinch of salt.  I will buy it if I see it for sure.

And in answer to your question, I am really looking for the latter day stuff. Mainstream swing would be a good example. I can remember the exact day on which I finally identified that it existed as a recorded category: I simply did not know about it until then. And there are so many great records of which I had never heard, including now favourites of mine like The Dirty Old Men by Budd Johnson and Earl Hines. 

What I would say is that the later swing stuff is still comparatively a bit easier to access than the later "traditional" stuff, which is maybe even more closed off. Once I had identified that swing continued it was quite easy to track the albums: it helps that most active musicians came from one of two big bands, and that there were recordings being released internationally on labels like Verve and Pablo even quite late. Whereas the traditional stuff is much more esoteric: it has taken me years to identify well-known names like Jim Cullum or Kenny Davern, and records line Jack Teagarden's albums on Verve have nothing like the recognition that swing music on Verve gets.

[Big Beat Steve]

I agree about the "esoteric" character of latter-day "classic" (or "traditional") jazz. Though I pick up such items from time to time I'd lean much more towards Mainstream Jazz too when it comes to "latter-day" stuff. So if that book covers those artists and recording periods, then go for it, and try to find out about the records elsewhere too.

One I often refer to (without letting them dictate the evolution of my tastes ) for ANY style of jazz is the All Music Guide of Jazz (I have the 2nd ed. of the late 90s that still lists a fairly huge number of vinyl and does not hesitate urging the readers to go for the LPs instead of incomplete CD re-reissues whenever the LPs appear to have been compiled better). (Do I hear some forumnists heave a sigh now who have misgivings about Scott Yanow .. ?? 😄)

Another one is the "Swing" volume from the "Third Ear Essential Listening Companion" series (Scott Yanow again ...) published around the turn of the millennium. A "Bebop" volume appeared at the same time which is also useful. Others that I would have been interested in and that figured in the ad blurb on the back pages of these books somehow never seemed to have made it into print). The focus is on CDs but LPs worth searching are also identified. And of course you can deduce which top-rated music on CDs in its pages would be worth searching for on LP. 

(Noted in passing, sometimes it is interesting and amusing to contrast the ratings of some of the records covered in any of the above guides with the reviews in period issues of Down Beat when the records were new! At times there is an abyss between what reviewers found - or not - in a given record ...)

Then there is the "Swing" volume from the "Music Hound" series of album guides (which I for one bought before i became aware of the Third Ear series). It has its points but I find it a bit lightweight in its assessments and a bit too much geared to newbies.

BTW, both the Third Ear and the Music Hound "Swing" guides also give some coverage to Neo-Swing acts current in the 90s (now almost on the verge of becoming  "oldie" stuff too - but some still remains worth exploring IMO).

 

[John L]

I actually prefer guides that are highly opinionated as long as the opinions are thoughtful and well-informed.   While some of Scott Yanow's reviews can be worthwhile for identifying, for example, the best sounding editions of various recordings, I find a lot of his writing to be rather vacuous in providing any real insights into the music.  

[Dan Gould]

2 minutes ago, John L said:

I actually prefer guides that are highly opinionated as long as the opinions are thoughtful and well-informed.   While some of Scott Yanow's reviews can be worthwhile for identifying, for example, the best sounding editions of various recordings, I find a lot of his writing to be rather vacuous in providing any real insights into the music.  

I have never considered Yanow as an authority on best sounding releases. I've never even noticed that he refers to SQ in his reviews.

What I do know is that when he says "this recording will appeal to fans of ____" or "Mainstream fans will enjoy this" he has never been wrong.

 

Surely there is a place for "highly opinionated" guides but AFAIC Yanow nails the question of "do I want to buy this at the right price?".

[Big Beat Steve]

9 minutes ago, John L said:

While some of Scott Yanow's reviews can be worthwhile for identifying, for example, the best sounding editions of various recordings, I find a lot of his writing to be rather vacuous in providing any real insights into the music.  

Are you thinking, for example maybe, of his exceedingly repetitive habit of referring to the intensity and power of a recording as "quite heated"?
Inept (as if he constantly shied away from using the outright term "hot", but I for one have long since come to read past this ...)

5 minutes ago, Dan Gould said:

What I do know is that when he says "this recording will appeal to fans of ____" or "Mainstream fans will enjoy this" he has never been wrong.

... but AFAIC Yanow nails the question of "do I want to buy this at the right price?".

True, too. That's what I've often found when reading his reviews in the All Music Guide more or less long AFTER having bought this or that record.

Edited February 13 by Big Beat Steve

[jlhoots]

Always liked Max Harrison. 😎

[Rabshakeh]

Yanow's alright. I grew up on Allmusicguide on the internet. Obviously there's no point in following what it says to the letter, but as a tool to expand horizons it is incredible. It taught me more about life than my own parents. 

But on the trad stuff its pretty poor. Lots of records are unreviewed so you don't know what's good and what isn't. And the dreadful deadening phrase "this recording will appeal to fans of traditional jazz" recurs again and again for any record that is reviewed. 

[Rabshakeh]

1 hour ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Another one is the "Swing" volume from the "Third Ear Essential Listening Companion" series (Scott Yanow again ...) published around the turn of the millennium. A "Bebop" volume appeared at the same time which is also useful. Others that I would have been interested in and that figured in the ad blurb on the back pages of these books somehow never seemed to have made it into print). The focus is on CDs but LPs worth searching are also identified. And of course you can deduce which top-rated music on CDs in its pages would be worth searching for on LP. [...]

Then there is the "Swing" volume from the "Music Hound" series of album guides (which I for one bought before i became aware of the Third Ear series). It has its points but I find it a bit lightweight in its assessments and a bit too much geared to newbies.

BTW, both the Third Ear and the Music Hound "Swing" guides also give some coverage to Neo-Swing acts current in the 90s (now almost on the verge of becoming  "oldie" stuff too - but some still remains worth exploring IMO).

Sadly the Third Ear and Music Hound lists don't seem to be on the web for easy viewing. I'll keep an eye out for them though as I go. Thanks for the tip. 

Edited February 13 by Rabshakeh

[T.D.]

I'm OK with Yanow. We seem to share many of the same tastes, and I consider most of his reviews reliable.

OTOH he does appear to "mail in" a lot of AMG reviews, and I somewhat discount the most blatant (IMO) of those.

[JSngry]

This record will appeal to fans of _____.

Why?

Because it's a good record or just because it's _____ ?

And if I'm not especially a fan of _____, is there enough of something in there that I would be well-advised to still check it out?

I get that generalism has it's place, but jeez...an excess of adjectives is just the flip side of not enough, maybe?

Or maybe an informed star rating system ain't the worst thing?

Just buy everything until you figure it out for yourself. Even better, stream everything first. It costs less and you don't have to mess with traffic and other people who you wish were any place besides in your way.

[Dan Gould]

7 minutes ago, JSngry said:

This record will appeal to fans of _____.

Why?

Because it's a good record or just because it's _____ ?

 

There are other clues I follow such as leader and sidemen and tunes.

I snipped your comment about streaming everything ... but when I "consulted" (to the extent that I did) Yanow and AMG, streaming was not a thing. It's still not a thing as far as I am concerned, but I don't check Yanow about many items lately.

[JSngry]

I'm increasingly enamored of streaming. Space is almost gone and money has to last for however long forever is going to be.

And for the hyper-recorded like Stitt, Braxton, Konitz, Shepp, etc. I want to hear it all, but damned if I want to own it all.

Reviews...a lack of an understanding social context doesn't affect the objective qualities of the playing (the "how") , but it sure as hell affects the comprehension of the "why", and therefore the "meaning".

This shit takes work. Maybe it's worth it. Maybe it's not. But if it's not fun, leave it be. And if it is, go all in.

Or not.

[Rabshakeh]

I'm a big fan of the "stream everything" approach, but you have to know what it is before you can stream it. 

[Big Beat Steve]

@all:

As for that " dreadful deadening phrase "this recording will appeal to fans of traditional jazz" (that) recurs again and again " , I agree that this is all too generic. However, in the AMG (and similar) guides I have come to understand this as "this record is among those worth purchasing for fans of ---" I.e. among the better and more deserving or important ones within that particular style of jazz. This does make more sense and is at least saying something, and judging by the records reviewed I am familiar with it usually is quite correct.
However - in those AMG Guides one thing needs to be taken into account: Somewhere in the foreword disclaimer of the book it says something like "undistinguished records are not reviewed". This may be so, but make no mistake: At least in the 2nd ed. I am often using for reference there are many, many records in an artist's entry in the book that aren't listed at all, but clearly not because they are "undistinguished" (indifferent, dispensable, unimportant, forgettable, whatever ...) but because they have long been out of print or because you just cannot include everything by everyone. So there ARE records out there that are at least "Good" and worth checking out but are not in the Guide.

Besides, there is a fair share of records in the AMG Guide that are given poor or lukewarm reviews (with only 1 or 2 out of 5 stars) - often to highlight either poor packaging and programming or, more importantly, an artist who was well past his prime or had drifted too far towards diluted "pop" fare. So in the case of artists with huge output the reader is advised not to embrace everything (particularly from a certain period) but be cautious here and there. Useful advice, but where does the "Undistinguished and therefore unmentioned" come in, then?? And by what criteria (given that some nice recordings clearly were omitted outright as well)?

And in the case of the Third Ear guides, availability of what was in print at the time the book was published is an aspect to be considered. There may be interesting recordings in an artist's discography that just hd been OOP for too long and therefore do not figure in there.
In the AMG Guide the reader is warned often enough that this or that record reviewed may be hard to find or has been deleted, so this compensates somewhat.

And again - comparison of the ratings in both books with those given in Down Beat way back sometimes is mindboggling ...

Edited February 14 by Big Beat Steve

[Rabshakeh]

30 minutes ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Besides, there is a fair share of records in the AMG Guide that are given poor or lukewarm reviews (with only 1 or 2 out of 5 stars) - often to highlight either poor packaging and programming or, more importantly, an artist who was well past his prime or had drifted too far towards diluted "pop" fare. So in the case of artists with huge output the reader is advised not to embrace everything (particularly from a certain period) but be cautious here and there. Useful advice, but where does the "Undistinguished and therefore unmentioned" come in, then?? And by what criteria (given that some nice recordings clearly were omitted outright as well)?

This is the issue for me. As long as Allmusic hits around 60% of an artist's discography it is at least worth reading, but when it comes to what Allmusic considers to be non-core genres (trad and latter-day swing amongst them), you are lucky to have 5% coverage, if any. 

I should add that I have only ever encountered Allmusicguide in its online form. Never seen one of the books. 

[Big Beat Steve]

1 hour ago, Rabshakeh said:

This is the issue for me. As long as Allmusic hits around 60% of an artist's discography it is at least worth reading, but when it comes to what Allmusic considers to be non-core genres (trad and latter-day swing amongst them), you are lucky to have 5% coverage, if any. 

I should add that I have only ever encountered Allmusicguide in its online form. Never seen one of the books. 

The books do seem to do better in their coverage.
Examples:

Albums reviewed:

Coleman Hawkins: 16 pre-1945, 44 post-1945.
Budd Johnson: 5 post-1957.
Buck Clayton: 21 albums post-1945.
Lionel Hampton 9 pre-1945, 22 post-1945.
Edmond Hall. 1 pre-1945, 2 post-1945 (at least a sampling of his outpout, and omissions in this case really can only be due to the recordings having been OOP or on obscure European collector labels that were not easily found in the USA)

And so on ...

And as another example, check this entry...

It takes some thoroughness to dig that deep among obscure artists ...
I can attest to the correctness of his statement as to the existence of a Peck Kelley section. In one well-stocked local record shop copies the Peck Kelley Jam twofer on Commodore sat prominently almost for ages (either they had stocked too many or - more likely - these were slow sellers). I did not pick it up at the time either but  more than 15 years ago I found both the Jam twofer and the twofer on Arcadia at the same time at a shop clearout sale at 2.50 EUR apiece - a price at which you can take chances, and I did not regret it one minute ...

Edited February 14 by Big Beat Steve

[John L]

2 hours ago, Big Beat Steve said:

 

And as another example, check this entry...

It takes some thoroughness to dig that deep among obscure artists ...
I can attest to the correctness of his statement as to the existence of a Peck Kelley section. In one well-stocked local record shop copies the Peck Kelley Jam twofer on Commodore sat prominently almost for ages (either they had stocked too many or - more likely - these were slow sellers). I did not pick it up at the time either but  more than 15 years ago I found both the Jam twofer and the twofer on Arcadia at the same time at a shop clearout sale at 2.50 EUR apiece - a price at which you can take chances, and I did not regret it one minute ...

Well, that is a great example of an excellent and informative short review by Scott Yanow.   After reading it, I did not expect to see his name at the end.

[Peter Friedman]

I have  a copy of "Modern Jazz 1945-70 The Essential Recordings" , by Max Harrison, Alun Morgan, Ronald Atkins, Michael James and Jack Cook. 

I got my copy back in the late 1970's. It is a terrific book that I have consulted numerous times, especially in the first dacade or two after I got the book.  Jazz Monthly was my favorite  jazz periodical, and at one time I had every copy up until it ceased publication. The authors of the above book were all writers for Jazz Monthly. I was highly disappointed when that periodical stopped publication.

 

[jlhoots]

4 hours ago, Peter Friedman said:

I have  a copy of "Modern Jazz 1945-70 The Essential Recordings" , by Max Harrison, Alun Morgan, Ronald Atkins, Michael James and Jack Cook. 

I got my copy back in the late 1970's. It is a terrific book that I have consulted numerous times, especially in the first dacade or two after I got the book.  Jazz Monthly was my favorite  jazz periodical, and at one time I had every copy up until it ceased publication. The authors of the above book were all writers for Jazz Monthly. I was highly disappointed when that periodical stopped publication.

 

I have a copy too. Agree with your assessment.