[78-L] Common = undesirable?

[Taylor Bowie]

Indeed, when the College Conservatory of Music in Cincinnati ejected their 
78 rpm collection in 1988 there was another large instance of EFHJREM. And 
it's a pity they are so prevalent, as they are really very good records, but 
they survive in such high numbers that makes them undesirable. I also tend 
towards his later LP albums from "The New James" on -- no one suspected he 
would become such an outstanding bop player; moreover he retained the same 
measure of expressiveness and bravura that makes his early work so 
exceptional. I can do without the string section he had in the early 40s; 
indeed, so could have James as he once noted, but it was there for 
commercial purposes.


Uncle Dave Lewis uncledavelewis at hotmail.com


Hi Uncle Dave,

I would take respectful exception to the idea that a record is not desirable 
if it's common.  I enjoy and play plenty of the rare or scarce ones in my 
collection,  but also get great pleasure out of playing many of my "common" 
records by James,  Goodman,  Dorsey,  Ellington,  Miller,  Basie, Whteman, 
etc.

An interesting thing I've noted is that while many of those records are very 
common,  it's not always easy to find really nice copies of some of them. 
My particular bugbear is getting clean Kay Kyser Columbias.  I bet I've run 
through 20 copies of Strip Polka (with great Herbie Haymer tenor solo) 
trying to find one which plays well.  And despite it having sold about ten 
zillion copies,  I've never found an unplayed Pushin' Sand/You're So Good To 
Me (love the second side).

Also,  I love the James band with strings.  If I were rich and could put a 
dance band together,  it would have  a string section.


Taylor B