Print

Print


Hi David:

There seems to be trouble on this list with the WSJ article link. Here it is again:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577195080015884786.html

According to the article, ODJB did _perform_ but perhaps may not have _recorded_ at Columbia's 
studio in the Woolworth building before the Victor session. This from Bruce Raeburn at Tulane, as 
quoted in the article.

-- Tom Fine

PS -- see the Jazzwax blog today for a truly crazy story from the 60's!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Weiner" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Jazz's First Record Turns 95


>I thought it has been well and firmly determined that the ODJB did NOT do
> a Columbia session in January 1917 and the first time they stepped into a
> Columbia studio was in May.
>
> Dave Weiner
>
> On 2/22/12 1:04 PM, "Art Shifrin" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>My edition of Brian Rust's 1897-1942 contains 1,753 pages of cylinders
>>(one
>>that I found quickly is by Wilbur Sweatman's Band on page 1515, recorded
>>in
>>Minneapolis circa 1903 - 1904) and disks of various 'speeds'.  I don't
>>know
>>all of which and how many of those listings precede the Victors by the
>>ODJB.
>>
>>But a glaring irony are the FIRST two recordings made by the ODJB for
>>COLUMBIA on January 30, 1917. According to Rust (presumably based on
>>Columbia recording ledgers) it was issued in the USA on 10" #A2297 & in
>>England on #2903.  They are Darktown Strutters Ball (master 77086-3-4) and
>>Indiana (master 77087-2-3)  I recall reading X years ago that the two
>>sides
>>were not issued until shortly after the high sales of their Victor 18255
>>became known by Columbia officials.
>>
>>As already cited, the issue of being first is debatable.  In this case at
>>least two criteria are contradictory: when recorded versus when issued.
>>The Jazzwax blog refers to the Victor SESSION
>>of 02-26-17.  It was self-evidently not the ODJB's first.  The blog is
>>very
>>interesting and entertaining, but its lack of reference to the Columbia
>>session is very questionable.
>>
>>Additionally, there are the criteria of what comprises jazz.  I don't know
>>a way of searching Rust's
>>listings for ALL listed recordings made prior to February 26, 1917.  The
>>posting citing Sweatman's work easily at least, leads to a few.  But what
>>others are there (in this edition or other compilations)?
>>Which 'experts' regard which as JASS aka JAZZ?
>>
>>A respondent to the Jazzwax blog cites (
>>http://www.loc.gov/jukebox/recordings/detail/id/928/ )
>>Vess L. Osman's   "St. Louis Tickle" as being the first (Victor 3037-2
>>single sided 10" disk # 4624 & later issued on two sided 16092 Rust page
>>1199).  My opinion is that it's NOT jazz
>>but ragtime.  I'm interested in other opinions, including those who are
>>musicologists.  Note that the data in the link states that some of the
>>issues of 16092 were NOT by Ossman, but recorded later.
>>
>>By Rust's criteria, Ossman previously recorded Jazz. (pages 1197 -
>>1201....commencing with Berliner 7" #467 Ragtime Medley recorded in NYC on
>>October 9, 1897).  If a composition containing "Rag" or "Ragtime" ARE jazz
>>recordings, then might that mean that the terms were at any time synonyms
>>for Jas or Jazz?   Or, do the two terms in a title preclude the
>>performance
>>from being Jazz?
>>
>>Finally, several times I tried the link
>>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577195080015884786.
>>h=tml?KEYWORDS=3Dgarment+district+is+where+jazz.
>>It did not access WSJ article.
>>
>>Art Shifrin
>