--------------------------------------------------
From: "Michael Biel" <[log in to unmask]>
> I have the exact opposite attitude.  The body of work of a performer
> exists as it was recorded in the studio.  The ordering of the items in
> the album is usually an afterthought that rarely includes the performer,
> just as the performer almost never knew what the album cover would look
> like.  If "album continuity" actually meant something, they would record
> it in the studio in that order.  Just recently I did hear a discussion
> by George Avakian about how he decided on programming LP tracks, but
> that was his decision alone as producer, not the performer.   In a live
> concert the performer usually makes the choice.  That is not the same. 
> And if there HAS to be a certain order, every one of their concerts
> would be ordered in the exact same order.  Some do, and others NEVER do!
> 
> The pacing of an LP is different when it is combined into a CD with no
> turn-over break.  Comments have been made about the British LPs of the
> Beatles as opposed to the U.S. albums.  Some American listeners were
> disoriented when they could only get the British versions on CD, so
> Capitol put out a set of CDs of the American albums.  But those were
> arranged by the Capitol people without any input from the producer or
> performers.  But it is what the American kids grew up with and they
> preferred it.  And TRUE Beatles fans want to hear the recording sessions
> to learn how the tracks themselves were built.  You can't know that from
> just the "finished product".
> 
> Studying recording sessions with busted takes and alternate takes in
> order is similar to studying rough drafts of a writer.  Studying the
> drafts of great documents like the Declaration of Independence and
> speeches like the Gettysburg Address and FDR's Declaration of War where
> you can see how words and phrases were tried, changed, and modified
> gives great insight into the creative process.  Hearing a talented
> performer's recording session can be similar.  Certainly you have
> attended orchestral rehearsals.  Same thing.  THEN when you hear the
> actual performance or the approved take you know more about what went
> into it.  
> 
I was about to reply when I noticed this is ARSCLIST and not 78-L...?!

Anyway, as a dedicated collector/accumulator of 78's (by definition
singles)...I am more used to discographies that list performances
separately (since they were released on separate 78's...?!). Now,
obviously, discographies including LP's and other sets of tracks
will be more complicated to organize (and become infinitely more
complicated as their included recordings do...?!).

Also, note that the inclusion of alternate takes and "breakdown"
partial recordings only becomes interesting and important when
the artists involved WEREN'T playing from the same scores for
each! An artist like Ellington, for whom different takes are very
audibly different, will have listenable recordings which include
alternates; OTOH, many if not most dance bands of the "78 era"
played from extant scores...and it is sometimes necessary to
play different takes simultaneously to find any differences!

Steven C. Barr