25 of 26 people found the following review helpful
SOMEWHAT LESS THAN THE COMPLETE ELLA & LOUIS,
This review is from: The Complete Studio Recorded Duets (Audio CD)
At the risk of looking a gift horse in the mouth, I have to take issue with the title of this compilation. Seven of the 19 tracks which comprise "Ella and Louis Again" have been omitted, and only four tracks from the "Porgy And Bess" album are included, as against a total of 16. I cannot understand why someone has felt it necessary to hype a perfectly good product. For what is here is a delight, and purchasers will not be disappointed provided they accept that the contents are less than is claimed. But for that canard I would have awarded five stars.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 10 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 25 Mar 2009 10:13:35 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 28 Apr 2009 16:44:04 BDT]
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Mar 2009 22:54:48 GMT
Last edited by the author on 26 Mar 2009 07:15:04 GMT
Well, living in Normandy I was using a French word which fits the context. If you consult a dictionary you'll find it means a false rumour. I was not making a judgement, but stating a fact. I'm sorry if you consider that unhelpful.
In reply to an earlier post on 26 Mar 2009 12:34:47 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 28 Apr 2009 16:44:16 BDT]
In reply to an earlier post on 26 Mar 2009 15:25:24 GMT
I really don't understand why you have chosen to be confrontational over this issue. It should be obvious that I used the word canard in respect of the misleading title (that is, The Complete Studio Recorded Duets). As I stated quite specifically, the fact is that it's not complete. Perhaps you'd like to suggest an alternative word, which I'll be happy to substitute provided it conveys a similar meaning.
In reply to an earlier post on 8 Apr 2009 09:37:07 BDT
JJA Kiefte says:
It's none of my business really, but the literal French meaning of "canard" is "duck"; when used in English however (I looked this up in Longman) it means "a false piece of news", so as far as I can see Barry used the word in its proper context. And why it should be deemed 'pretentious' if someone is not content to limit himself to just the basic vocabulary of 3000 words we need to make ourselves undestood is beyond me, if you'll pardon my French.
In reply to an earlier post on 21 Aug 2009 01:30:30 BDT
David Benson says:
Dear Mr. McCanna
Just to say I have very much enjoyed reading your beautifully written reviews. Posting a comment seems the only way of communicating with reviewers, since no email address is displayed. And they keep losing my reviews too... maddening! I shall save copies of them from now on so I can repost rather than recompose.
In reply to an earlier post on 13 Jan 2011 11:50:19 GMT
Molly Brown says:
Barry, I love your reviews and your knowledge of Jazz. I have got lots of new ideas from you, and had a chance to explore artists I would never have found otherwise. Thankyou.
In reply to an earlier post on 13 Jan 2011 13:24:10 GMT
Many thanks to both David Benson, and LOL, for your kind words, which are encouraging, and mean that my reviews are having the desired effect of spreading appreciation of the music I love.
Posted on 26 May 2011 17:38:40 BDT
Mr. Charles R. Day says:
I have owned the classic Ella & Louis recordings since their release in the fifties and would like to offer a possible explanation for Avid's somewhat disingenuous description of its release as the 'complete' duets. If memory serves, I believe that both artists do not sing on every track (it may even be that some were recorded when the other was not present) - 'Let's Do It', for instance, features only Louis singing, and I believe there may be others which feature only Ella singing (as I say, I have not gone back to check).
But there is another reason why Avid's claim may be false - in some of the tracks where Ella sings, there may well be a trumpet obligato which, in effect makes those tracks duets anyway - to say nothing of the few Decca tracks featuring them together.
What is most puzzling is that all of the Ella & Louis tracks can be got on two CDs anyway, plus, I believe, the few Decca tracks - assuming you leave off the 'Porgy & Bess' numbers, of course.
Finally, regardless of my comments above, these sessions are perceived as an entity and one really is misled into believing one is getting the three LPs complete - it brings to mind another 'trick' that is sometimes played - doing a compilation of tracks by Sinatra, Martin and Davis Jr and selling it under the rubric of 'The Rat Pack'
Posted on 15 Mar 2013 09:15:09 GMT
Last edited by the author on 15 Mar 2013 09:29:25 GMT
Mr. D. Bain says:
I think some of the commenters here are losing sight of the original review. This set may or may not contain every studio recorded duet between these two jazz icons. However in defence of the record company the info on Amazon does NOT claim to contain all three albums, Ella and Louis/Again/Porgy and Bess. What it DOES say is 'the complete recorded duets'. Many tracks on each of these albums are sung by EITHER Ella or Louis alone. The review states that seven of the 19 tracks on 'Ella and Louis again' are not present, yet the original LP/CD only has 12 tracks (I have it in front of me as I write) and ALL 12 are here, as are ALL 11 tracks from 'Ella and Louis'. We don't however get all of Porgy and Bess, only 4 tracks from that album are included here. A further 8 tracks which never appeared on either of the 3 albums is also included. Furthermore, one comment mentions that although Louis doesn't sing on a specific track he does play trumpet so that should count as a duet, I would interpret that as a solo voice with a trumpet accompaniment and not a duet, unless of course the track consists only of voice and trumpet with no other instruments, which it does not.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›