[78-L] Columbia Master Book Vol. 3

[Michael Biel]

I have been complaining and commenting on Rust's REFUSAL to include 
prefixes unless they denote a recording location or differentiate among 
different series with redundant numbering.  With Victor we can't even 
determine the size of the masters, even in some cases where they were 
released -- such as in the 8=inch Bluebirds, Sunrise, etc -- let alone 
if they were electrical and which electrical system was used.  Alan 
Debus forced Rust to include the prefixes in the first edition of 
Complete Entertainment Discography but lost the battle in the second 
edition.

Mike Biel mbiel at mbiel.com

On 5/29/2011 1:08 PM, Ryan Barna wrote:
> Something I wanted to mention about about my praise and complaints about Rust's Vol. 3:
>
> I find it frustrating that he doesn't note the "W" and the "H" prefixes next to the matrix number, especially for rejected numbers. How do we know it was intended for Columbia? or Harmony? And I would also find it fascinating to determine which Columbia recordings were made at their Union Square studios and recording operators (they ARE documented on the cards).
>
> Second, Rust lists several takes as being approved, but we can't trust that they were all released. In 9 out of 10 cases Columbia would only issue one take, as I've found. Columbia typically approved two takes for a number, but in the end, the would only approve one over the other ("first choice" and "second choice"). In many cases the "first choice" was typically issued.
>
> I find the Rust volume useful to see what was made and when they were made, but as far as something academic and thorough (including which take was actually issued), it's useless.
>
> But Rust is not to blame for everything. The cards also don't document the aliases used on the "Special" labels (Publix, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, the theater titles), nor do they document other off-brands like Supertone or Puritone. And if you want complete thoroughness and accuracy, the original discs should also be inspected just to make sure that "second choice" was really rejected. It's a lot of work, but not a bad idea, and I'd be willing to assist in any case.
>
> -Ryan