[Dixielandjazz] Stereo? Mono?

[Marek Boym]

Thank you, Bill.

" 'Duophonic' was used as a trade name for the process by Capitol Records
> for re-releases of mono recordings from June 1961 through the 1970s.

I never realized that records were "electronically (dis)enhanced for
stereo" already at taht early stage.


>
>
> Back in the 1940s and 50s, we avid jazz collectors rarely bought Capitol
> records as, in our opinion, 'real' jazz performances on Capitol were few
> and far between (as they say).
>

Oh, well.  I have never been THAT mouldy, but then, I started listening to
jazz around 1953 or '54, and where I lived any western music with rhythm
was considered "jazz."  There were many jazz bands in Poland in the
mid-50's, but any band had to play "Rock Around the Clock" if it played for
dancing.  I actually listened to anything described "jazz" into the
mid-60's, unyil I came to the full realizaton that the Brubecks or Miles
DAvises or MJQ's did not really appeal to me, even though I preferred
Dixieland (including New Orleans) and swing almost from the beginning.
Therefore, the Teagardens, Daily, and the rest of Capitol's traditional
output sounded good to me - and still do! Only tonight I listened to a 1959
(I guess it's a little past the period you've mentioned) Phil Napoleon
session and loved it.



> A quick look at the content of the 1997 8-CD Mosaic set, "Classic Jazz
> Sessions", shows why. (I have this.)
>
> http://www.allmusic.com/album/classic-capitol-jazz-sessions-mw0000951785
>     http://livingwithmusic.com/linkto/0170.pdf
>

Shows?  Not to me!  I love most of it, excluding the vocals on the Cootie
Williams' sides.


> Even the 1947 Pete Daily records (not on the Mosaic set) were considered a
> bit too 'dixielandish' to us mouldy figs at the time.
> 8>)
>

I only discovered Daily in the 1980's (or even '90's), and liked him very
much. Heard some quite recently,

Very kind regards,
Marek

>
>
>