I'd be grateful for some help. I am indexing a 1936 song folio entitled the
TIP TOP ALBUM OF CARSON J. ROBISON SONGS: TOGETHER WITH HILL COUNTRY BALLADS
AND OLD TIME SONGS, compiled & edited by Joe Davis, published by Tip Top Pub
Inc of New York.
My problem is that the contents page lists 50 titles, which correspond to
the actual contents up to page 18 and again from page 50 onwards, but bear
no relation to the songs in the section in between. This copy therefore
seems to be a combination of two different folios.
My question is - are they all like this, or do I simply have a rogue copy?
Steve Roud

I wasn't following very closely, so I may have missed something on this one.It seems far more likely to me that in a musical context gig could have come
from the Elizabethan sense of the word 'jig'.
C.R Baskervil  defines it thus:  ..... in its standard form was a short
burlesque comedy sung in verse and interspersed with lively dancing.It seems there are some thirty-odd texts of these stage-jigs extant.  They
don't get many re-runs these days.I suppose to nail this down we would have to find some 15 - 18th cent. use of
the word in this context..... I leave it as a class exercise.   :-)  --  Marcus
Merrin PhD. B.Sc. MRSC(CChem)
Chemistry and Internet Solutions
EmptyAir Consulting[unmask]

John Moulden and Other Etymologists:Wentworth and Flexner, generally considered to be a reliable scholarly
source for American slang up to 1960 (its publication date), dates
"gig" in the meaning of a job or performance to ca. 1915-1920, basing it
on Louis Armstrong's 1958 biography; and on Alan Lomax, _Mr. Jelly Roll_
[Morton] published in 1954.The much older Farmer and Henley, Slang and Its Analogues (1890-1904),
offers a definition of "gig" as descended from the French _gigue_ (a
dance) to mean "fun; a frolic; a spree" with just maybe a hint of sexual
license as in the 1888 use: "A laughter-loving lass of eighteen who
dearly loved a bit of gig."Ed

Steve,My copy is published by M.M.Cole, with a copyright date on the back cover of 1930.  It is entitled, "M.M. Cole Edition of Carson J. Robison's World's Greatest Collection of Mountain Ballads and Old Time Songs. "  The Contenets page (which may not be the same as your contenst page) correlates perfectly with the actual songs.  I'll be happy to send you whatever additional information you would like.Lew Becker

Steve,My copy is published by M.M.Cole, with a copyright date on the back cover of 1930.  It is entitled, "M.M. Cole Edition of Carson J. Robison's World's Greatest Collection of Mountain Ballads and Old Time Songs. "  The Contents page (which may not be the same as your contents page) correlates perfectly with the actual songs.  I'll be happy to send you whatever additional information you would like.Lew Becker

What is Archie Green's e-mail address?  (If he has one.)
--
john garst    [unmask]

John:  He has none.  Try telephone (415-552-3741)
Norm-----Original Message-----
From: John Garst <[unmask]>
To: [unmask] <[unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 11:44 AM
Subject: Archie Green>What is Archie Green's e-mail address?  (If he has one.)
>--
>john garst    [unmask]
>

Folks:Just in case anyone is looking for it, there is a four-volume set of
Randolph's Ozark Folksongs, one volume hardbound, three softbound, for
sale for a total of $56 at Lawrence's Books, in Torrance, Calif.Use abebooks.com to check it out.  The price seems right for this critical
state collection.Ed

On 12/16/00, Ed Cray wrote:>Folks:
>
>Just in case anyone is looking for it, there is a four-volume set of
>Randolph's Ozark Folksongs, one volume hardbound, three softbound, for
>sale for a total of $56 at Lawrence's Books, in Torrance, Calif.
>
>Use abebooks.com to check it out.  The price seems right for this critical
>state collection.Isn't Randolph still in print? I got my copies new, and the
Homestead Pickin' Parlor (the local folk music store) has copies
of several volumes sitting on their shelves.Of course, those are probably more expensive than a used set....--
Bob Waltz
[unmask]"The one thing we learn from history --
   is that no one ever learns from history."

Folks:Bob asks if the four-volume Randolph Ozark set is still in print.  There
was a reprint from the State Historical Society of Missouri, but I do not
know if it is still available.  (Norm Cohen's one-volume abridgement may
still be available from Illinois.)And $56 for the four volumes _is_ a pretty fair price.Ed

The State Historical Society reprint volumes have the distinct advantage of
an excellent introduction by W.K. McNeil and additional bibliographic
information. However, they omit at least 15 songs which appear in the
earlier set (presumably because of copyright problems?) - so the true
scholar needs both the originals and the reprint on his/her shelves!!
Merry Christmas all
Steve Roud----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: <[unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2000 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: Randolph> Folks:
>
> Bob asks if the four-volume Randolph Ozark set is still in print.  There
> was a reprint from the State Historical Society of Missouri, but I do not
> know if it is still available.  (Norm Cohen's one-volume abridgement may
> still be available from Illinois.)
>
> And $56 for the four volumes _is_ a pretty fair price.
>
> Ed

Dear Ballad-listers,Actually, it was the University of Missouri Press that did the four-volume
reprint of _OFS_ (less the problematic items to which Steve alluded). The
State Historical Society of Missouri was the original publisher (1946-50).Missouri's web site indicates that only volume 4, _Religious Songs and
Other Items_, is still available, at $39 cloth and $19.95 paperback.A useful address to bookmark:  <http://aaup.pupress.princeton.edu>.  This
is the home page of the Association of American University Presses.  In
the WWW section click on "AAUP Member Home Pages."  Then click on the
press you want to check.  You can also search *all* member presses by
staying on the AAUP home page and using the "Search the Books Catalog"
feature.  When I did that for _Ozark Folksongs_ just now, I got the same
information about volume 4 of _OFS_.  There was also an entry for volume
3, indicating that the cloth was out of print (OP).  Noting about the
corresponding paperback, but since that didn't come up on Missouri's web
site, I assume it went OP before the cloth.  Presumably volumes 1 and 2
went OP some time ago, which is how it usually happens--the later volumes
in a series or multi-volume set hang around the longest.  Same thing
happened with Bronson, as I recall.As for the one-volume abridgment of _Ozark Folksongs_ that Norm Cohen
edited for us, that is currently out of stock (OS) but not OP.Well now, given the opening, let me ask:  If this one-volume version
*were* available, would any of you buy it?  Do you know people who would
buy it?  Better yet, would any of you (or your colleagues) assign it as a
required class text?  If so, then I'd have a stronger argument for a
reprint.  Thanks for any and all advice.Holiday greetings to all!JudyJudith McCulloh
Assistant Director and Executive Editor
University of Illinois Press
1325 South Oak Street
Champaign, IL  61820-6975
(217) 244-4681
[unmask]On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, roud wrote:> The State Historical Society reprint volumes have the distinct advantage of
> an excellent introduction by W.K. McNeil and additional bibliographic
> information. However, they omit at least 15 songs which appear in the
> earlier set (presumably because of copyright problems?) - so the true
> scholar needs both the originals and the reprint on his/her shelves!!
> Merry Christmas all
> Steve Roud
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
> To: <[unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2000 5:26 PM
> Subject: Re: Randolph
>
>
> > Folks:
> >
> > Bob asks if the four-volume Randolph Ozark set is still in print.
There
> > was a reprint from the State Historical Society of Missouri, but I do not
> > know if it is still available.  (Norm Cohen's one-volume abridgement may
> > still be available from Illinois.)
> >
> > And $56 for the four volumes _is_ a pretty fair price.
> >
> > Ed
>

On 12/17/00, Judy McCulloh wrote:[ ... ]>As for the one-volume abridgment of _Ozark Folksongs_ that Norm Cohen
>edited for us, that is currently out of stock (OS) but not OP.
>
>Well now, given the opening, let me ask:  If this one-volume version
>*were* available, would any of you buy it?  Do you know people who would
>buy it?  Better yet, would any of you (or your colleagues) assign it as a
>required class text?  If so, then I'd have a stronger argument for a
>reprint.  Thanks for any and all advice.I don't teach a class, and am not a professor, so I'm talking out of
turn here :-), but I don't think I *would* use this book for a class.
The point of a class text is to experience the whole range of a
regional collection. An abridged version (which must inherently lack
either the full range of texts of the more popular songs, or many
of the less popular songs) doesn't do that. Rather, the sort of
book to use for a region's songs is something like Eddy or Cox --
not nearly as comprehensive as Randolph, but covering everything
the collectors found.Put it this way: Abridged Randolph and Eddy both have subsets of
the material in their local states. But Eddy's subset evolved
naturally -- it's what turned up in a more limited skimming of
the material. The abridged Randolph, even when done by someone
with the taste and skill of Norm Cohen, is still a "laboratory
product"; it didn't turn up in the field.If I were to urge the republication of an abridgement, I think
the obvious one is Bronson's _Singing Tradition_. Or, perhaps,
it's time for an abridged version of Child. It might be possible
to publish Child in one volume if one limited the number of texts
printed and left off the critical apparatus and such and left out
the songs never collected in the field. An abridged Child is not
like an abridged Randolph; Child is an overview, and abridging
it merely means you get a more distant overview. But abridging
Randolph changes its nature completely.Or perhaps another approach: All these books are songbooks. Perhaps
something like one of Botkin's books would be a better tool for a
folklore course.
--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
2095 Delaware Avenue
Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4801
651-454-8994 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

Robert makes many valid points about the drawbacks of the one-volume
Randolph Ozark Folksongs.  However, the 4-volume set is "complete" only in a
very limited sense: there was a lot of material VR collected that he chose
not to include; also, an important and major category was necessarily
omitted--namely, bawdy songs.  I used those arguments in justifying editing
a 1-vol. edition, tho I was and still am sympathetic to RW's point of view.
(Reminder:  anything I say on this topic is bound to be biased.)
Norm Cohen-----Original Message-----
From: Robert B. Waltz <[unmask]>
To: [unmask] <[unmask]>
Date: Sunday, December 17, 2000 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: Randolph>On 12/17/00, Judy McCulloh wrote:
>
>[ ... ]
>
>>As for the one-volume abridgment of _Ozark Folksongs_ that Norm Cohen
>>edited for us, that is currently out of stock (OS) but not OP.
>>
>>Well now, given the opening, let me ask:  If this one-volume version
>>*were* available, would any of you buy it?  Do you know people who would
>>buy it?  Better yet, would any of you (or your colleagues) assign it as a
>>required class text?  If so, then I'd have a stronger argument for a
>>reprint.  Thanks for any and all advice.
>
>I don't teach a class, and am not a professor, so I'm talking out of
>turn here :-), but I don't think I *would* use this book for a class.
>The point of a class text is to experience the whole range of a
>regional collection. An abridged version (which must inherently lack
>either the full range of texts of the more popular songs, or many
>of the less popular songs) doesn't do that. Rather, the sort of
>book to use for a region's songs is something like Eddy or Cox --
>not nearly as comprehensive as Randolph, but covering everything
>the collectors found.
>
>Put it this way: Abridged Randolph and Eddy both have subsets of
>the material in their local states. But Eddy's subset evolved
>naturally -- it's what turned up in a more limited skimming of
>the material. The abridged Randolph, even when done by someone
>with the taste and skill of Norm Cohen, is still a "laboratory
>product"; it didn't turn up in the field.
>
>If I were to urge the republication of an abridgement, I think
>the obvious one is Bronson's _Singing Tradition_. Or, perhaps,
>it's time for an abridged version of Child. It might be possible
>to publish Child in one volume if one limited the number of texts
>printed and left off the critical apparatus and such and left out
>the songs never collected in the field. An abridged Child is not
>like an abridged Randolph; Child is an overview, and abridging
>it merely means you get a more distant overview. But abridging
>Randolph changes its nature completely.
>
>Or perhaps another approach: All these books are songbooks. Perhaps
>something like one of Botkin's books would be a better tool for a
>folklore course.
>--
>Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
>2095 Delaware Avenue
>Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4801
>651-454-8994 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
>
>The Ballad Index Web Site:
>http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html
>

Folks:Judy confirms what Amazon.com states: The Randolph reprint, Vols. I-III,
is out of print.  Vol. IV is available, according to the website, for
$19.95, with a 4-6 week delivery time.I still say $56 for the reprint (one volume hard, three soft) is a pretty
good price.Ed

Folks:I have some problem with Bob's argument about the value of the Cohen
abridgement of Randolph's four volumes.1) Contrary to Bob's arguments, the one-volume abridgement is fairly
representative of Randolph's collectanea (other than the bawdy material,
which same Norm points out Randolph himself had to exclude).2) I don't think there are any other state collections as broad as
Randolph's, with the possible exception of the Brown (North Carolina)
collection edited by H.M. Belden.3) What might be missing from Randolph (work songs, black folk genres in
general, etc.) is missing from every other state collection I can think
of.  Then there are no lumbering songs, no "ethnic" music, no chanteys,
etc. -- none of which are found in the state collections with which I am
familiar.4) Botkin's treasuries are fine, but are often full of what his great
critic, Richard Dorson, called "fakelore," material of dubious oral
currency.  And there are few songs/ballads in these.5) Reprinting Bronson's _Singing Tradition_ is a fine idea, but not as a
text in a classroom.  It is, after all, merely a collection of those Child
ballads which came down to us with tunes.  And a highly selected,
laboratory (Bob's word) selection at that.6) Reprinting Child is an even better idea, but it is not and never will
be a textbook.  What it leaves out would require another book.  Or
two.  It is not even a a complete collection of folk ballads.EdOn Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Robert B. Waltz wrote:> On 12/17/00, Judy McCulloh wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
> >As for the one-volume abridgment of _Ozark Folksongs_ that Norm Cohen
> >edited for us, that is currently out of stock (OS) but not OP.
> >
> >Well now, given the opening, let me ask:  If this one-volume version
> >*were* available, would any of you buy it?  Do you know people who would
> >buy it?  Better yet, would any of you (or your colleagues) assign it as a
> >required class text?  If so, then I'd have a stronger argument for a
> >reprint.  Thanks for any and all advice.
>
> I don't teach a class, and am not a professor, so I'm talking out of
> turn here :-), but I don't think I *would* use this book for a class.
> The point of a class text is to experience the whole range of a
> regional collection. An abridged version (which must inherently lack
> either the full range of texts of the more popular songs, or many
> of the less popular songs) doesn't do that. Rather, the sort of
> book to use for a region's songs is something like Eddy or Cox --
> not nearly as comprehensive as Randolph, but covering everything
> the collectors found.
>
> Put it this way: Abridged Randolph and Eddy both have subsets of
> the material in their local states. But Eddy's subset evolved
> naturally -- it's what turned up in a more limited skimming of
> the material. The abridged Randolph, even when done by someone
> with the taste and skill of Norm Cohen, is still a "laboratory
> product"; it didn't turn up in the field.
>
> If I were to urge the republication of an abridgement, I think
> the obvious one is Bronson's _Singing Tradition_. Or, perhaps,
> it's time for an abridged version of Child. It might be possible
> to publish Child in one volume if one limited the number of texts
> printed and left off the critical apparatus and such and left out
> the songs never collected in the field. An abridged Child is not
> like an abridged Randolph; Child is an overview, and abridging
> it merely means you get a more distant overview. But abridging
> Randolph changes its nature completely.
>
> Or perhaps another approach: All these books are songbooks. Perhaps
> something like one of Botkin's books would be a better tool for a
> folklore course.
> --
> Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
> 2095 Delaware Avenue
> Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4801
> 651-454-8994 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]
>
> The Ballad Index Web Site:
> http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html
>

Ed, stop me if I'm wrong, but didn't Kittredge edit a "student edition" of
Child? It seems to me that such an abridgment is sort of what these ballad
scholars are calling for in this exchange. As for the edited Randolph, I was
just asked to check on the song "S.A.V.E.D" in my original editions, as it isn't
in the reprinted collection. Copyright problems, I assume. As for the Frank
Brown collection of North Carolina material: Randolph would never have been
caught so unaware as to print "T for Texas, T for Tennessee" with a note saying
"We have not found this in other folksong collections." (Do we blame that on
Belden?) Maybe I'm just inclined to favor the autodidacts of the folklore world,
excepting Sandy Ives, whose writing is like a good, warm conversation, in spite
of his academic credentials.
    Sandy PatonEd Cray wrote:> Folks:
>
> I have some problem with Bob's argument about the value of the Cohen
> abridgement of Randolph's four volumes.
>
> 1) Contrary to Bob's arguments, the one-volume abridgement is fairly
> representative of Randolph's collectanea (other than the bawdy material,
> which same Norm points out Randolph himself had to exclude).
>
> 2) I don't think there are any other state collections as broad as
> Randolph's, with the possible exception of the Brown (North Carolina)
> collection edited by H.M. Belden.
>
> 3) What might be missing from Randolph (work songs, black folk genres in
> general, etc.) is missing from every other state collection I can think
> of.  Then there are no lumbering songs, no "ethnic" music, no chanteys,
> etc. -- none of which are found in the state collections with which I am
> familiar.
>
> 4) Botkin's treasuries are fine, but are often full of what his great
> critic, Richard Dorson, called "fakelore," material of dubious oral
> currency.  And there are few songs/ballads in these.
>
> 5) Reprinting Bronson's _Singing Tradition_ is a fine idea, but not as a
> text in a classroom.  It is, after all, merely a collection of those Child
> ballads which came down to us with tunes.  And a highly selected,
> laboratory (Bob's word) selection at that.
>
> 6) Reprinting Child is an even better idea, but it is not and never will
> be a textbook.  What it leaves out would require another book.  Or
> two.  It is not even a a complete collection of folk ballads.
>
> Ed

I'm not trying to start an argument, but I think Ed has misunderstood
me. So I'll try to clarify. Keep in mind that *all* of this is in the
context of a folk song course. Nothing else. I'm trying to make sure
the students know what they need to know.On 12/17/00, Ed Cray wrote:>Folks:
>
>I have some problem with Bob's argument about the value of the Cohen
>abridgement of Randolph's four volumes.
>
>1) Contrary to Bob's arguments, the one-volume abridgement is fairly
>representative of Randolph's collectanea (other than the bawdy material,
>which same Norm points out Randolph himself had to exclude).And which is lacking from every regional collection, for that matter.
It's too bad that there wasn't a combined publication of Randolph
and Randolph/Legman.But this isn't the point I'm making. Randolph/Cohen is probably a
more representative collection of Ozark songs than Eddy is of
Ohio songs. But the mere fact that it has limits defined by the
editor makes it fundamentally different from an inclusive
collection.This is not a defect in Child, because Child is *already* a
compilation.It's a different sort of a work. Not better or
worse; just different.Compilation *is* a defect in a regional collection. Cox or
Eddy, for all their limited scope, are *natural* collections.
I regard that as an important distinction. I don't think a
human being (even Norm Cohen) can edit a collection so as to
maintain that distinction.This doesn't make Randolph/Cohen useless. Randolph contains
a lot of junk. If you want good, representative texts of
Ozark material, then Randolph/Cohen is much easier to manage,
and has all the "good stuff." But that's a different use.>2) I don't think there are any other state collections as broad as
>Randolph's, with the possible exception of the Brown (North Carolina)
>collection edited by H.M. Belden.Agreed -- and the Ozarks preserve a wide variety of material rarely
encountered elsewhere. But that's an argument for republishing
Randolph in its entirety. :-)Again, I'm speaking specifically of a folklore course. Students
in such a course should see all the range of material that turns
up. The fragments. The unidentifiables. The mixtures. An abridged
edition will perforce give up some of this. It makes it harder
for students to realize what they are facing. :-)I say that as a joke, but it's a serious point. I went into the
Ballad Index project with no idea how many odds and ends and
fragments there are floating around. A student *needs* to see
all these items to know what lies ahead.>3) What might be missing from Randolph (work songs, black folk genres in
>general, etc.) is missing from every other state collection I can think
>of.  Then there are no lumbering songs, no "ethnic" music, no chanteys,
>etc. -- none of which are found in the state collections with which I am
>familiar.Of course. I don't think Randolph, in *any* form, is a complete text.
No state collection is. You need many books for a good course. But one
of those should be "everything found in the state.">4) Botkin's treasuries are fine, but are often full of what his great
>critic, Richard Dorson, called "fakelore," material of dubious oral
>currency.  And there are few songs/ballads in these.Depends on the collection. _American Folklore_ has many songs. The
others don't have nearly as much.The charge of "fakelore" can hardly be denied. If you already have a
folk *song* course, it's useless. But I'm trying to sneak into
folk song into a folklore course. If there is something better for
that quest, I don't know of it. The two genres are generally
separated (even by Randolph -- he published an Ozark *folklore*
book, too :-).But I'll admit that my mention of Botkin confused the issue. I
was talking about a different need.>5) Reprinting Bronson's _Singing Tradition_ is a fine idea, but not as a
>text in a classroom.  It is, after all, merely a collection of those Child
>ballads which came down to us with tunes.  And a highly selected,
>laboratory (Bob's word) selection at that.I don't see that as a fair criticism. Child itself is a laboratory
selection (as you pointed out in your next item). If Child is held
up as a model, then Bronson is a logical supplement. Now be it noted:
I don't have a high opinion of the Child canon. But if it is granted
canonical status, it needs the tunes. The four-volume Bronson is
what we really want, just as we want the four-volume Randolph.
But given what Child is, _Singing Tradition_ is a more reasonable
classroom item (as a supplement to Coffin, perhaps) than is
Randolph/Cohen.To try to make this clearer, let's assume that I were somehow responsible
for a folk song class. I would probably want to use at least six books:Laws I & II
Two "state" collections, one from the north and one from the
  south (e.g. Eddy or Cox; if we have one such "pure" collection,
  then I would allow Randolph/Cohen as well. But there must be
  the "pure" collection)
One "subject" collection, featuring a type of music (e.g. Beck
  or Hugill)
One "summary" collection (e.g. Bronson's _Singing Tradition_,
  or Coffin/Renwick)
--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
2095 Delaware Avenue
Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4801
651-454-8994 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

To delurk briefly, I would like to second this opinion that the four-volume
Bronson is what we really want!   Does anyone know if it has ever been available
in soft-cover?Paddy Tutty"Robert B. Waltz" wrote:> The four-volume Bronson is
> what we really want, just as we want the four-volume Randolph.
> But given what Child is, _Singing Tradition_ is a more reasonable
> classroom item (as a supplement to Coffin, perhaps) than is
> Randolph/Cohen.
>Paddy Tutty
Prairie Druid Music
http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/wuidland/

Sandy:Yes, George L. did edit a abridgement of Child's ten fasicles for
students.  (Houghton published it, I believe.)  But I still don't think it
will serve as a text in an American folk song class:  it is, after all, no
more than a subset of Child ballads.  There are so many other forms of the
ballad not included: broadside, North American, fo'c'sle, bawdy, etc.And what about all the other forms of folk song?Ed

On Mon, 18 Dec 2000, Robert B. Waltz wrote in part:
>
> To try to make this clearer, let's assume that I were somehow responsible
> for a folk song class. I would probably want to use at least six books:
>
> Laws I & II
> Two "state" collections, one from the north and one from the
>   south (e.g. Eddy or Cox; if we have one such "pure" collection,
>   then I would allow Randolph/Cohen as well. But there must be
>   the "pure" collection)
> One "subject" collection, featuring a type of music (e.g. Beck
>   or Hugill)
> One "summary" collection (e.g. Bronson's _Singing Tradition_,
>   or Coffin/Renwick)
> --This is truly an academic question: what texts to use in a class.Right now, at the minimum of $50 per volume, you would have students
laying out $300 for a three- or four-unit/hour/credit course.  I think
most would agree that is just too much money.In my opinion (never humble), the two Laws books are researchers' tools,
never intended for classroom use.I don't know what a "state" collection proves.  You can say in one line
that good collectors sweep up a lot of non-traditional material,
fragments, pop songs, folk rhymes, etc., etc.  Not to mention tales,
jokes, anecdotes, local legends, etc.And I don't know what you can learn from Hugill's 609 pages that might be
generalized to miners (Korson), lumberjacks (Gray, Rickaby, Beck) or
cowboys (Lomax, et al).  That all trades have both ballads and worksongs?Bronson is too narrow in scope.  No childrens songs to be found there.  No
bawdy ballads.  No American ballads.There have been collections of ballads: Mac Leach did one in the Fifties,
memory serving.  But as much as we love them, ballads are just a small
part of that corpus we call American folk music.  If you are teaching a
folk song class, you have to range more widely.Lastly, we would have to decide just what thrust this class was to take,
and thus revive an argument that dates to the first years of the 20th
C. within the American Folklore Society: is folklore a humanity or a
science, that is, is it a branch of anthropology or of literature?  The
answer to that depends upon your world view.Me?  I got my B.A. in anthro.Ed

Agreed, Ed. Not to be used as a text for a class in general folksong, but
then, neither would the abridged, paperbound Bronson do for that purpose.
Forgot that was the goal of the list's exchange. Randolph is still the best,
in my mind, for the Anglo stuff (sans bawdy), because he knew his songsters
better than most academics. Included stuff that would have made Creighton
vomit. But he's have to be supplemented with a good survey of Afro stuff, for
sure, and Hugill and Rickaby, and... Ah, well.
    Sandy

Oh, yes -- and Cray, for those who can't afford Randolph/Legman! Sorry for the
omission in the previous post! %^)
    Sandy

In coming up with a list of textbooks for an American Folksong course, one
has to remember several things: first of all, americans are not just
Anglo-Americans or Afro-Americans, and one would want to include studies of
the song of at least a sampling of the diverse ethnic groups in this
country.  One survey text is Nettl's Folk Music of the United States, which
gives students at least a taste of some of the ethnic musical traditions in
this country.  Also, one would want to present a picture of how songs
function, either for individual singers, or within community contexts.  I
thinkof repertoire studies, such as Abraham's book on Almeda Riddle, or the
recent book on Jeannie Devlin, Never Without a Song.  And Ives' books on
Larry Gorman and Joe Scott--OK, those guys are Canadian--address, from a
historical perspective, song and community.  OK, gang, any other textbook
suggestions?  I have various syllabi kicking around, which I can unearth,
and I'll add to the list.  But, any other takers?        MargeE-mail: [unmask]

On the corrido, there's Paredes' With His Pistol in His Hand.  by the way,
there are lots of good videos around, too, and I'll unearth some resources
there, too.  I did use quite a few videos on music and song, including one
that was shot in Northern Indiana that spoke of Tambouritza traditions in
"the region."  anyway, more later.        MargeE-mail: [unmask]

This is a most interesting thread, going from the availability of a song
collection to a call for textbooks.Were I credentialed enough to teach in a college or university and called
upon to offer a course in Folksong or even North American Folksong, there
are two books that I would choose.The first, which I sadly understand is out of print, would be Folk Song in
England by A.L. Lloyd.  This book offers an overview of folksong and
balladry to include virtually all categories, except for gospel and
spiritual, and even these are given mention. It is very general, yet very
inclusive; ballads, lyrics, work songs, ribaldry, ancient and modern songs,
and with many tips of the hat to American variants. Above all, it is very
readable and yet has enough footnotes to please the most persistant pedant.The second tome would be Traditional American Folk Songs  by Anne Warner.
This wonderful compendium of the Warner collection would round out the
class. While not a complete picture of American folk song, being a
collection of songs collected in Eastern  states, it does present a
selection of both lyrics and ballads, all of which were being sung well
into the 20th Century.  This is surely a most valuable link to past
generations of singers and can serve to inspire those new to the folksong
tradition. This book is all the more important since the release of a
selection of Frank and Anne's field recordings on CD last year.On an entirely different note, did anyone else on this list tune into All
Things Considered on Saturday to hear Sam Hinton singing his song,  "Its A
Long Way From (some organism whose name I can't remember and would be
loathe to attempt to spell)"?A joyful Yuletide to All  -  Tom

On 12/18/00, tom hall wrote:>This is a most interesting thread, going from the availability of a song
>collection to a call for textbooks.I thought we *started* with the issue of textbooks. That was why the
issue came up. :-) I hope people don't think I'm trying, e.g., to
"slam" Randolph/Cohen. If you want to just sit down and find something
from the Ozarks, I think it much easier to use than the big volume.
I just think a student of folk songs needs to understand something
which is not evident from most cleaned up songbooks (including
Child): That very many collections are fragments, that they often
contain foreign and floating verses, that the original piece often
cannot be discerned or reconstructed. In other words, that folk songs
are *messy* things.>Were I credentialed enough to teach in a college or university and called
>upon to offer a course in Folksong or even North American Folksong, there
>are two books that I would choose.Which just goes to show how hard all this is, because no two of us
have named the same books. :-) (Though I don't consider my list
definitive. While I know what I would like to demonstrate, I don't
know which are the best books out there.)[ ... ]>The second tome would be Traditional American Folk Songs  by Anne Warner.
>This wonderful compendium of the Warner collection would round out the
>class. While not a complete picture of American folk song, being a
>collection of songs collected in Eastern  states, it does present a
>selection of both lyrics and ballads, all of which were being sung well
>into the 20th Century.  This is surely a most valuable link to past
>generations of singers and can serve to inspire those new to the folksong
>tradition. This book is all the more important since the release of a
>selection of Frank and Anne's field recordings on CD last year.And yet, I find that book a little bit strange. It's another laboratory
product, but that isn't the only reason. It just seems like an odd set.
Take "Yankee" John Galusha, one of their best informants. All his
material is obscure -- most of it never turned up anywhere else. It
just seems odd. Maybe Galusha wrote it.And there is the problem I mentioned above: All the pieces are nice
and pretty and complete. I don't think you can properly teach a folk
song course without dealing with the problem of sorting and identifying
fragments.Plus, I really do think you need to show the difference between
collections by region versus collections by occupation. Hard to
do from Warner. :-)--
Bob Waltz
[unmask]"The one thing we learn from history --
   is that no one ever learns from history."

<<The first, which I sadly understand is out of print, would be Folk Song in
England by A.L. Lloyd.  This book offers an overview of folksong and
balladry to include virtually all categories, except for gospel and
spiritual, and even these are given mention. It is very general, yet very
inclusive; ballads, lyrics, work songs, ribaldry, ancient and modern songs,
and with many tips of the hat to American variants. Above all, it is very
readable and yet has enough footnotes to please the most persistant
pedant.>>Although I think I'd suggest to non-musicologists in the class that they
skip the chapter on the technical aspects of the music, going back perhaps
and reading it afterwards. I've touted the book to many friends who have
been so intimidated by that chapter that they never got to the rest of the
book, where the songs are.<<On an entirely different note, did anyone else on this list tune into All
Things Considered on Saturday to hear Sam Hinton singing his song,  "Its A
Long Way From (some organism whose name I can't remember and would be
loathe to attempt to spell)"?>>Amphioxus. No -- nuts! That's a wonderful song. Maybe the segment's still on
the NPR website."It's a long way from amphioxus, it's a long way to us
It's a long, long way from amphioxus to the meanest human cuss
Well, it's goodbye to fins and gill slits and it's welcome lungs and hair
It's a long, long way from amphioxus, but we all came from there."Peace.
Paul

As we discuss this issue of textbooks for classes, I suddenly find
myself with a question. An important one. :-)What *is* a class on folk song?I mean it. When I gave my list of potential books, I was thinking
of what was needed to train field collectors. They need to accept
that they won't get pristine versions every time, that they'll have
to sort a lot of chaff and have to try to figure out what kind of
wheat is emerging from the chaff.But that's *my* vision. It assumes that the students are already
committed to folk song studies. In this day and age, that's probably
a mistake.So what *are* we trying to teach?--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
2095 Delaware Avenue
Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4801
651-454-8994 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Robert B. Waltz wrote:> As we discuss this issue of textbooks for classes, I suddenly find
> myself with a question. An important one. :-)
>
> What *is* a class on folk song?
>
> I mean it. When I gave my list of potential books, I was thinking
> of what was needed to train field collectors. They need to accept
> that they won't get pristine versions every time, that they'll have
> to sort a lot of chaff and have to try to figure out what kind of
> wheat is emerging from the chaff.
>
> But that's *my* vision. It assumes that the students are already
> committed to folk song studies. In this day and age, that's probably
> a mistake.
>
> So what *are* we trying to teach?
>Simple awareness, and a modest bit of appreciation of singers and songs --Ed

"Robert B. Waltz" wrote:
> It assumes that the students are already
> committed to folk song studies.Ed Cray wrote:
>Simple awareness, and a modest bit of appreciation of singers and songs --Isn't this the difference between an undergraduate course
(probably taken to fulfill some sort of humanities or
general education requirement, chosen because it sounded
"fun") and a graduate course (where the student has already
discovered their interest in the general field, and is
looking to focus in on their core passion, and hone their
career skills)? Not that either is a "better" class than
the other; they simply supply different needs.
In grad school $300 for texts and/or supplies for a class
that was central to my degree was high, but not out of
line. In undergrad I'd have dropped the class.I can appreciate the question of where "folksong studies"
belong; in Literature or Anthropology. I received an MFA in
Theatre, and there were the same discussions about certain
plays, and their authors, being taught in English classes.
Personally, I can see advantages to both views.Kathleen
--
Conery, Kathleen Ann
[unmask]

Please excuse what is probably a foolish question. While I
am a great listener of traditional songs and ballads, I
have no training in the area.
Listening once again to a fine recording by John Roberts
and Tony Barrand, "Dark Ships in the Forest" (I believe...
I've misplaced the sleeve cover), I notice that one of my
favorite songs ("Tom of Bedlam") is from a book that I've
heard of many times; "Pills to Purge Melancholy". What is
this book?
All that I know (or think I know) is that it was published
a long time ago (1700s?) and the author/compiler's name is
D'Urfey? Is it a compilation from other collections, did he
collect these in the field, or did he compose these songs?
Is it available in some sort of a reprint form? Or only
through interlibrary loan? Do the songs include tunes with
lyrics or suggestions of tunes?Kathleen
--
Conery, Kathleen Ann
[unmask]

I'm assuming this was meant as a reply to the list? I must
have some odd default setting as it came only to me.--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:40:21 -0600
From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[unmask]>
Subject: Re: Textbooks and Folk Song ClassesOn 12/20/00, Conery, Kathleen Ann wrote:>"Robert B. Waltz" wrote:
>> It assumes that the students are already
>> committed to folk song studies.
>
>Ed Cray wrote:
>>Simple awareness, and a modest bit of appreciation of singers and songs --
>
>Isn't this the difference between an undergraduate course
>(probably taken to fulfill some sort of humanities or
>general education requirement, chosen because it sounded
>"fun") and a graduate course (where the student has already
>discovered their interest in the general field, and is
>looking to focus in on their core passion, and hone their
>career skills)? Not that either is a "better" class than
>the other; they simply supply different needs.
>In grad school $300 for texts and/or supplies for a class
>that was central to my degree was high, but not out of
>line. In undergrad I'd have dropped the class.Actually, depressing as it is, there are undergraduate courses
in the engineering disciplines where the cost of textbooks
approaches $300. Supply and demand....I would put it this way: The difference is not between graduate
and undergraduate courses, but between specialized and
non-specialized classes. Though I'll concede that even *that*
is more of a distinction in mathematical than non-mathematical
courses -- I could do much better in Shakespeare class than
a lit major could in quantum mechanics. :-)But the question remains, what would we *like* to be
teaching, and what books would be involved?
--
Bob Waltz
[unmask]"The one thing we learn from history --
   is that no one ever learns from history."
--- End Forwarded Message ---Actually when I thought about it... the difference in text
costs might also be related to the fact that my undergrad
days were around twenty years ago now.
Kathleen
--
Conery, Kathleen Ann
[unmask]

Kathleen:_Pills to Purge Melancholy_ is a six-volume collection of stage, street,
popular songs, folk songs and ballads edited by Henry Playford between
1698-1706, then reedited by minor poet/editor/playwright Thomas D'Urfey in
1719-1720.  (Hence D'Urfey gets credit.)  It is the biggest collection of
Restoration songs and ballads, WITH THE MUSIC, I know of.  It is also
unexpurgated.It was reprinted in 1876, and that edition reprinted in 1959 by Folklore
Library Publishers of New York, another of the redoutable Kenneth
S. Goldstein's projects.Ed

If you're trying to order a copy through a library system, you should note
that the full title is:
Wit and Mirth, or Pills to Purge Melancholy
Steve Roud----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: <[unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: Pills to Purge Melancholoy> Kathleen:
>
> _Pills to Purge Melancholy_ is a six-volume collection of stage, street,
> popular songs, folk songs and ballads edited by Henry Playford between
> 1698-1706, then reedited by minor poet/editor/playwright Thomas D'Urfey in
> 1719-1720.  (Hence D'Urfey gets credit.)  It is the biggest collection of
> Restoration songs and ballads, WITH THE MUSIC, I know of.  It is also
> unexpurgated.
>
> It was reprinted in 1876, and that edition reprinted in 1959 by Folklore
> Library Publishers of New York, another of the redoutable Kenneth
> S. Goldstein's projects.
>
> Ed

Ed Cray wrote:
>
> Kathleen:
>
> _Pills to Purge Melancholy_ is a six-volume collection of stage, street,
> popular songs, folk songs and ballads edited by Henry Playford between
> 1698-1706, then reedited by minor poet/editor/playwright Thomas D'Urfey in
> 1719-1720.  (Hence D'Urfey gets credit.)  It is the biggest collection of
> Restoration songs and ballads, WITH THE MUSIC, I know of.  It is also
> unexpurgated.
>
> It was reprinted in 1876, and that edition reprinted in 1959 by Folklore
> Library Publishers of New York, another of the redoutable Kenneth
> S. Goldstein's projects.
>
> EdCyrus L. Day gives an account of the various editions in the 1959
reprint. This is taken from Day and Murrie's 'English Songbooks,
1651-1702', 1940. There are other extant copies of some volumes of some
editions in addition to those he lists of page xii of his Introduction,
but none that I know of are the missing vol. I of the 2nd ed., 1702 or
the 1st ed. of vol. iii, 1702.It's not true that 'Pills to Purge Melancholy' is completely
unexpurgated.Bruce OlsonOld English, Irish and, Scots: popular songs, tunes, broadside
ballads at my website (no advs-spam, etc)- www.erols.com/olsonw
or click below  <A href="http://www.erols.com/olsonw"> Click </a>

On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 03:42:45PM -0600, Conery, Kathleen Ann wrote:> Reply-To:     [unmask]> I'm assuming this was meant as a reply to the list? I must
> have some odd default setting as it came only to me.        Note to all who use this mailing list.  The "Reply-To: " header
is preserved, not reset to the list.  So -- *if* you have it set, as
Kathleen has, the replies will all come to you alone as long as the
replying e-mail program honors the "Reply-To: " header -- *unless* the
person replying notices the "Reply-To: " and takes special action to
reset the address.        Good Luck,
                DoN.--
 Email:   <[unmask]>   | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
    My Concertina web page:        | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
        --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

Don:This is a test, it is only a test.I use U-Dub's successor to Elm, Pine (a Unix program).  Apparently, I
accidentally hit the "h" key, and turned off the full headers.Let's see if this fixes it.Ed

Folks:I am interested in compiling a basic library of folk music as recorded on
hillbilly/country 78s, and later anthologized on CD.  I understand that a
number of smaller labels have reissued these collections, have heard none,
and must turn to the experts here assembled.I know the Carter Family, Dock Boggs, the Stanley Brothers, et al have had
such releases -- not to mention the older collections of bluesmen/women
such as Robert Johnson.Yes, I have the Harry Smith collection as reissued on Folkways.  (I
also understand that there is a fourth volume on Revenant
[www.harrysmitharchives.com/works/anthology4/html]).Ed

On 12/21/00, Ed Cray wrote:>Folks:
>
>I am interested in compiling a basic library of folk music as recorded on
>hillbilly/country 78s, and later anthologized on CD.  I understand that a
>number of smaller labels have reissued these collections, have heard none,
>and must turn to the experts here assembled.
>
>I know the Carter Family, Dock Boggs, the Stanley Brothers, et al have had
>such releases -- not to mention the older collections of bluesmen/women
>such as Robert Johnson.
>
>Yes, I have the Harry Smith collection as reissued on Folkways.  (I
>also understand that there is a fourth volume on Revenant
>[www.harrysmitharchives.com/works/anthology4/html]).I'd try to find a catalog of the Document record label. I've never
seen one (they're based in Austria, of all places), but the number
of reissues I've seen is absolutely astonishing. And it's not just
the big names. I have things like Kelly Harrell and Burnett &
Rutherford, and have seen quite a few others. And while the notes
aren't spectacular, they're far better than the absolutely dreadful
notes County includes with its CD re-releases. Every track is
documented as best they can: Personnel, date of recording, and issue
number.If I had the money, I'd be trying to buy their whole catalog....--
Bob Waltz
[unmask]"The one thing we learn from history --
   is that no one ever learns from history."

When I proposed a course in Folk Song at SUNY Binghamton, I used Pete
Seeger's THE COMPLETE FOLKSINGER, A.L.Lloyd's FOLK SONG in ENGLAND, and Jean
Ritchie's SINGING FAMILY OF THE CUMBERLANDS (which also had a record
attached).  I agree that Almeda Riddle's A SINGER AND HER SONGS by R.Abraham
would be a fine alternative to the last - it could be accompanied by her
Minstrel Record.

Sorry, your browser doesn't support iframes.

   Ed,Yazoo has an extraordinarily fine assortment of CD reissues of
hillbilly/country 78's on about 20 generalized topics.  Each is on a 2 CD
set.  I highly recommend that you get a catalogue and check them out.Mark GilstonIn a message dated 12/22/00 1:03:08 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[unmask] writes:<< I am interested in compiling a basic library of folk music as recorded on
 hillbilly/country 78s, and later anthologized on CD.  I understand that a
 number of smaller labels have reissued these collections, have heard none,
 and must turn to the experts here assembled.
  >>

Document does indeed have a phenomenal catalogue of reissues, but they are
recorded from used 78's with the barest minimum of clean up and many of the
tracks are practically unlistenable.   ... caveat emptor

Ed:
There is no easy (certainly no short) answer to your query.  Five years or
so ago, one could compile a pretty good "basic" library of hillbilly
reissues on LPs.  Now that LPs are passe and we have switched to CDs we are
almost back at the starting gate again.  Some companies are simply reissuing
some of their good LPs on CD; even though CDs can hold almost twice what an
LP can.  So some companies are issuing revised/expanded versions of LPs.
County is doing much of the latter.  Yazoo, about whom Sandy Paton wrote
enthusiastically, has put out some lovely compilations musically, generally
topically oriented.  A serious shortcoming is inadequate documentation:
almost no discographic data (original recording dates, places, etc), and
very little commentary on the selections.  Johnny Parth's Document (Germany)
label is planning to do for hillbilly what he has been doing for blues &
gospel:  reissue everything by every artist, arranged by artist, in
chronological order.  Bob Waltz spoke favorably about that.  Trouble is,
it's hardly a "basic" library.  For many artists we don't need everything
they recorded--especially for anything like a basic selection.  On the plus
side,  Document provides complete discographic data and some background
material as well.  Unfortunately, Parth does not have the patience, it
seems, to wait for good, clean copies; consequently many of the CDs are
marred by very noisy tracks taken from 2nd or 3rd generation dubs from poor
originals.  Of course, if you want the material just for reference purposes,
that may not be considered a serious drawback.
I don't think you can put together the proper basic library on CD at the
moment, but if you want recommendations, mine would include the following.
I make these from the perspective of someone interested in hillbilly music
because (1) it is an important repository of recordings of traditional
artists doing traditional material ; and (2) lots of these artists strongly
affected oral tradition subsequent to their recordings.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Uncle Dave Macon -- a must.  County CO 3505 is the best single-CD available
now
Charlie Poole--one of the most influential No Carolina stringbands.  County
CDs 3501 and 3508 include much of the best.
Skillet Lickers--the most popular of the Georgia bands.  Try County 3509
E V Stoneman--County 3510
Eck Robertson--the first traditional fiddler; probably more here than you
need, but try County 3515
Grayson & Whitter--very influential duo; Ralph Stanley even put out a CD of
their songs last year.  County 3517 has the best
Columbia C4K 47911:  Roots 'n' Blues.  A 4-CD box of hillbilly and black
artists, similar in scope to the Harry Smith Anthology (which is also a
must)
Columbia C2K 47966:  White Country Blues.  A great compilation documenting
the influence of black music on hillbilly musicians
Country Music Foundation CMF 011:  THe Bristol Sessions.  A well documented
package of material from the important 1927 sessions conducted by Ralph Peer
that produced both the Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers, as well as many
other great artitsts
Global Village CD 1004: Native Virginia Ballads.  A reissue of an LP
produced by the Blue Ridge Instutute, tho not all the selections are from
hillbilly recordings.  But as a genre CD, rather than an artist CD, it's a
good choice
RCA 2100-2-R:  Something Got Hold of Me.  If it's still available, this is a
nice compilation of sacred music from the 20s and 30s.
If your budget allows, Bear Family has reissued the complete Carter Family
and the complete Jimmie Rodgers sessions; wonderful packages with extensive
documentation, but not cheap.  If you want to discuss this further, perhaps
I shouldn't clutter up the ballad list with my own personal idiosyncracies.
Norm
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
To: [unmask] <[unmask]>
Date: Thursday, December 21, 2000 10:02 PM
Subject: A Basic Library>Folks:
>
>I am interested in compiling a basic library of folk music as recorded on
>hillbilly/country 78s, and later anthologized on CD.  I understand that a
>number of smaller labels have reissued these collections, have heard none,
>and must turn to the experts here assembled.
>
>I know the Carter Family, Dock Boggs, the Stanley Brothers, et al have had
>such releases -- not to mention the older collections of bluesmen/women
>such as Robert Johnson.
>
>Yes, I have the Harry Smith collection as reissued on Folkways.  (I
>also understand that there is a fourth volume on Revenant
>[www.harrysmitharchives.com/works/anthology4/html]).
>
>Ed
>

If list members were compiling a basic library of folksong recordings, who
would they include in the North American unaccompanied traditional ballad
section, in the sub-heading "complex, decorative style"? I have some
recordings which I think came from the Warner collection, but where else
should I look?Ruairidh Greig----- Original Message -----
From: "Norm Cohen" <[unmask]>
To: <[unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2000 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: A Basic Library> Ed:
> There is no easy (certainly no short) answer to your query.  Five years or
> so ago, one could compile a pretty good "basic" library of hillbilly
> reissues on LPs.  Now that LPs are passe and we have switched to CDs we
are
> almost back at the starting gate again.  Some companies are simply
reissuing
> some of their good LPs on CD; even though CDs can hold almost twice what
an
> LP can.  So some companies are issuing revised/expanded versions of LPs.
> County is doing much of the latter.  Yazoo, about whom Sandy Paton wrote
> enthusiastically, has put out some lovely compilations musically,
generally
> topically oriented.  A serious shortcoming is inadequate documentation:
> almost no discographic data (original recording dates, places, etc), and
> very little commentary on the selections.  Johnny Parth's Document
(Germany)
> label is planning to do for hillbilly what he has been doing for blues &
> gospel:  reissue everything by every artist, arranged by artist, in
> chronological order.  Bob Waltz spoke favorably about that.  Trouble is,
> it's hardly a "basic" library.  For many artists we don't need everything
> they recorded--especially for anything like a basic selection.  On the
plus
> side,  Document provides complete discographic data and some background
> material as well.  Unfortunately, Parth does not have the patience, it
> seems, to wait for good, clean copies; consequently many of the CDs are
> marred by very noisy tracks taken from 2nd or 3rd generation dubs from
poor
> originals.  Of course, if you want the material just for reference
purposes,
> that may not be considered a serious drawback.
> I don't think you can put together the proper basic library on CD at the
> moment, but if you want recommendations, mine would include the following.
> I make these from the perspective of someone interested in hillbilly music
> because (1) it is an important repository of recordings of traditional
> artists doing traditional material ; and (2) lots of these artists
strongly
> affected oral tradition subsequent to their recordings.
> RECOMMENDATIONS
> Uncle Dave Macon -- a must.  County CO 3505 is the best single-CD
available
> now
> Charlie Poole--one of the most influential No Carolina stringbands.
County
> CDs 3501 and 3508 include much of the best.
> Skillet Lickers--the most popular of the Georgia bands.  Try County 3509
> E V Stoneman--County 3510
> Eck Robertson--the first traditional fiddler; probably more here than you
> need, but try County 3515
> Grayson & Whitter--very influential duo; Ralph Stanley even put out a CD
of
> their songs last year.  County 3517 has the best
> Columbia C4K 47911:  Roots 'n' Blues.  A 4-CD box of hillbilly and black
> artists, similar in scope to the Harry Smith Anthology (which is also a
> must)
> Columbia C2K 47966:  White Country Blues.  A great compilation documenting
> the influence of black music on hillbilly musicians
> Country Music Foundation CMF 011:  THe Bristol Sessions.  A well
documented
> package of material from the important 1927 sessions conducted by Ralph
Peer
> that produced both the Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers, as well as many
> other great artitsts
> Global Village CD 1004: Native Virginia Ballads.  A reissue of an LP
> produced by the Blue Ridge Instutute, tho not all the selections are from
> hillbilly recordings.  But as a genre CD, rather than an artist CD, it's a
> good choice
> RCA 2100-2-R:  Something Got Hold of Me.  If it's still available, this is
a
> nice compilation of sacred music from the 20s and 30s.
> If your budget allows, Bear Family has reissued the complete Carter Family
> and the complete Jimmie Rodgers sessions; wonderful packages with
extensive
> documentation, but not cheap.  If you want to discuss this further,
perhaps
> I shouldn't clutter up the ballad list with my own personal
idiosyncracies.
> Norm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed Cray <[unmask]>
> To: [unmask] <[unmask]>
> Date: Thursday, December 21, 2000 10:02 PM
> Subject: A Basic Library
>
>
> >Folks:
> >
> >I am interested in compiling a basic library of folk music as recorded on
> >hillbilly/country 78s, and later anthologized on CD.  I understand that a
> >number of smaller labels have reissued these collections, have heard
none,
> >and must turn to the experts here assembled.
> >
> >I know the Carter Family, Dock Boggs, the Stanley Brothers, et al have
had
> >such releases -- not to mention the older collections of bluesmen/women
> >such as Robert Johnson.
> >
> >Yes, I have the Harry Smith collection as reissued on Folkways.  (I
> >also understand that there is a fourth volume on Revenant
> >[www.harrysmitharchives.com/works/anthology4/html]).
> >
> >Ed
> >
>

On 12/22/00, Norm Cohen wrote:>Ed:
>There is no easy (certainly no short) answer to your query.  Five years or
>so ago, one could compile a pretty good "basic" library of hillbilly
>reissues on LPs.  Now that LPs are passe and we have switched to CDs we are
>almost back at the starting gate again.  Some companies are simply reissuing
>some of their good LPs on CD; even though CDs can hold almost twice what an
>LP can.  So some companies are issuing revised/expanded versions of LPs.
>County is doing much of the latter.As a footnote: They aren't so much revising as recombining. For
example, they converted four LPs of Charlie Poole to three CDs.
A good trick, that: If you had part of their Charlie Poole collection
on LP (I did), you may still have to buy all the CDs to fill out
your set. :-(More irritating is the fact that they *still* haven't come up with
decent liner notes.>Yazoo, about whom Sandy Paton wrote
>enthusiastically, has put out some lovely compilations musically, generally
>topically oriented.  A serious shortcoming is inadequate documentation:
>almost no discographic data (original recording dates, places, etc), and
>very little commentary on the selections.  Johnny Parth's Document (Germany)
>label is planning to do for hillbilly what he has been doing for blues &
>gospel:  reissue everything by every artist, arranged by artist, in
>chronological order.  Bob Waltz spoke favorably about that.  Trouble is,
>it's hardly a "basic" library.  For many artists we don't need everything
>they recorded--especially for anything like a basic selection.I'll agree with this overall -- but I still think that one should have
*all* of at least a few artists' recordings. For example, people who
came to Kelly Harrell from the material on the Folkways anthology
would think that he did mostly pure versions of standard ballads
(Charles Guiteau, The State of Arkansas). But in fact, though his
material is almost all traditional (unlike, say, Charlie Poole),
it's not all ballads; he has something of everything, including
playparties ("Cave Love Has Gained the Day").Harrell might be a good performer to use as an instance of
"everything he ever did" -- it's only two CDs on document,
and these, at least, aren't too noisy.Another good one, from that standpoint (even though it's a bit
more recent) is the Smithsonian/Folkways recording of
Bascom Lamar Lunsford, "Ballads, Banjo Tunes, and Sacred
Songs of Western North Carolina." It's not from the 78 era,
and it's edited (sigh), but it gives a good feel for the
whole range of music people would sing.>On the plus
>side,  Document provides complete discographic data and some background
>material as well.  Unfortunately, Parth does not have the patience, it
>seems, to wait for good, clean copies; consequently many of the CDs are
>marred by very noisy tracks taken from 2nd or 3rd generation dubs from poor
>originals.  Of course, if you want the material just for reference purposes,
>that may not be considered a serious drawback.This brings up some questions, and maybe we should compile a "group"
answer. The Document recordings I have heard are all pretty clean
(better than some of County's Charlie Poole material), and I don't
like fiddling with recordings if they are tolerable as they are.
(Of course, there are cuts which need help; that's a different
story. But I'd consider that the exception rather than the rule.)And I'll admit that they don't have great notes; I'd rather see more.
It's just that the chief competition -- at least from what I've
seen -- is County, and County's stuff is even worse from the
documentation standpoint.Anyway, can we compile a catalog of "good" versus "bad" Document
recordings? This would be helpful to me, at least, in deciding
what to pick up next. (I just discovered the series recently,
and the music store of course doesn't have store plays. They
don't even have the complete series in stock.)I must admit that I've only listened to three of them enough to
be sure of the quality. All are quite good if you ask me:Burnett & Rutherford    (DOCD-8025)
Kelly Harrell Volume 1  (DOCD-8026)
Kelly Harrell Volume 2  (DOCD-8027)(Hm -- just as a though: All three of those came out in 1998. Is
it possible that Document's early releases were un-cleaned-up,
but that they're trying harder now?)>I don't think you can put together the proper basic library on CD at the
>moment, but if you want recommendations, mine would include the following.
>I make these from the perspective of someone interested in hillbilly music
>because (1) it is an important repository of recordings of traditional
>artists doing traditional material ; and (2) lots of these artists strongly
>affected oral tradition subsequent to their recordings.Looking at the list below, I find myself thinking: Can we possibly
*ourselves* compile liner notes for these?>RECOMMENDATIONSSome random observations on the ones I have>Uncle Dave Macon -- a must.  County CO 3505 is the best single-CD available
>nowThis one at least gives dates of recording, though that's ALL it gives.>Charlie Poole--one of the most influential No Carolina stringbands.  County
>CDs 3501 and 3508 include much of the best.Though, since there are only three, you might as well buy the whole
set if you're buying two. :-) Also, anyone buying Charlie Poole records
should pick up Kinney Rorrer's book on Poole. It has complete recording
details, song texts -- and, as an added bonus, a Poole biography.
(The biography is the main point, actually, but I bought it for the
appendices.)[ ... ]>E V Stoneman--County 3510The best notes I've ever seen on a County recording. The bad news?
Well, my copy may be unusual -- but it skips a lot. Yes, the *CD*
skips. It wasn't pressed very well.[ ... ]>Grayson & Whitter--very influential duo; Ralph Stanley even put out a CD of
>their songs last year.  County 3517 has the bestHas dates of recordings, and you can glean facts about some of the songs
from the overall notes. But, generally, another County flop in the notes
department.[ ... ]>Global Village CD 1004: Native Virginia Ballads.  A reissue of an LP
>produced by the Blue Ridge Instutute, tho not all the selections are from
>hillbilly recordings.  But as a genre CD, rather than an artist CD, it's a
>good choiceAnother good one of this sort is Old-Time Mountain Ballads, County
CD-3504. 18 cuts, from Clarence Ashley, Burnett & Rutherford (2 cuts),
B. F. Shelton, Kelly Harrell, Grayson & Whitter (2 cuts), Red Fox
Chasers, Buell Kazee, Blind Alfred Reed, Rutherford & Foster,
Hickory Nuts, Green Bailey, Aulton Ray, John Hammond, Byrd Moore,
Frank Jenkins's Pilot Mountaineers, and Dave Macon. This is another
one with decent discographic data.
--
Bob Waltz
[unmask]"The one thing we learn from history --
   is that no one ever learns from history."

Norm:Thank you for the most excellent list.I would recommend that you continue your suggestions (or I would suggest
you continue your recommendations).  Perhaps you would be willing to
venture into the area of country blues, jug bands, and medicine show
musicians.Ed

Ruairidh:In seeking examples of the "decorative" singing style, you might start
with the Archive of American Folksong two CDs on the ballad (AFS 14 and
AFS 21).  There are some accompanied ballads on these compilations (Woody
Guthrie's "Gypsy Davy" among them) but most are unaccompanied.Beyond that, I suggest Folk-Lyric's multiple offerings, mostly of
northern singers.  One after the other is stunning.Ed

Folks:Dick seems to be having problems with his email system, so I am sending
this to the list for him.The point is this: he stands ready to aid us in our need for CDs.  Which
is good.Now, if he would just let us know what the "new" (or old) releases were
each month --Ed---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 23:10:42 -0500
From: Dick Greenhaus <[unmask]>
To: [unmask]
Subject: Folk and Country re-recordingsHi Ed-
I've been posting this message to the Balld list, but it dowsn't seem to
be getting out. Anyway, Camsco Music, which is me, carries EVERY folk,
old-time country and generally folkish record in print. This includes
Yazoo's splendid series of re-mastered commercial recordings from the
20s and 30s, Document's complete, but unevenly recorded, collection, the
entire Folkways line, Rounder, County, Arhooly, Shanachie, the Bear
Family's monumental (and pricey) collections and whatever else. And my
prices are very competitive to those of people like CDNow and
Amazon.com.you can reach Camsco at:    [unmask]or by phone at:                   800/548-FOLK(3655)You not only get the most complete selection available with one-stop
convenience, but you have unlimited access to whatever small expertise I
may have accumulated.dick greenhaus

Folks:I have an idea that might address Sandy Paton's dilemma:A subscription series.I do not know how many are on the ballad-l list, but perhaps there are 50
people hereon subscribed willing to venture $20 to help underwrite the
republication of the very important Frank Proffitt material.  (I noted
about half a dozen familiar names from ballad-l on the Tabula Gratulatoria
[Latin for "subscribers"] in the recent Edward Ives _festschrift._ By
buying in advance, one helps to underwrite the cost.The price is not too high when one considers that I routinely pay $18.50
for a CD here in California ($16.98 plus 8.5 percent sales tax) and get
nowhere near the comprehensive liner notes Folk-Legacy includes.  We might
even get Sandy to write a retrospective appreciation of Proffitt, whom I
consider to be a singer of the very first rank.Will those with a more mercantile sense (Dick Greenhaus, are you
listening?) please reply.Ed---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:53:11 -0500
From: Sandy Paton <[unmask]>
To: "Cray, Ed" <[unmask]>
Subject: well, I tried!I took your suggestion to heart, Ed, and sent my note to the list, but
never saw it appear there. Don't know what I did wrong. I did add one
additional 2 volume set - I Can't Be Satisfied - Early American Women
Blues Singers. I remember Dick having a full tub of the Document series,
and I got one of the Global Village CDs from him, but that is of field
recordings, not early commercial "rural" stuff.
    What is astonishing to me now is the new Voice of the People series
that Topic has released -- 20 volumes of field recorded material in
Britain, mostly unaccompanied. How in hell do they ever expect to get
their bait back? I'm struggling to get a couple of my own field
recordings onto CD, especially my Frank Proffitt stuff, as I do think my
recordings were done on better equipment than Frank Warner was able to
use for his field collecting, but experience has shown me that they
won't sell enough to cover their production costs, even if you write
another glowing review to give 'em a boost.
    Anyway, if you think my note to you is appropriate for the Ballad-L,
and want to post it there, it's okay with me. I tried, but never saw it
arrive.
    Sandy

To the "folks still above ground" who can do something about it,The Voice of the People series put out by Topic is a treasure as well as a
treasury.  Shouldn't we be supporting any and all efforts to get our own
valuable field recordings out and available?  If a ground swell movement is
needed, let's do what must be done.Sandy Paton needs support to give us what will disappear if he cannot
republicize and give scholarly description to materials from his years of
collecting.  I'm for the underwrite suggestion.Nancy-Jean Ballard Seigel

Folks:Okay, that's two.  Anyone else want to ante up?EdOn Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Nancy-Jean Seigel wrote:> To the "folks still above ground" who can do something about it,
>
> The Voice of the People series put out by Topic is a treasure as well as a
> treasury.  Shouldn't we be supporting any and all efforts to get our own
> valuable field recordings out and available?  If a ground swell movement is
> needed, let's do what must be done.
>
> Sandy Paton needs support to give us what will disappear if he cannot
> republicize and give scholarly description to materials from his years of
> collecting.  I'm for the underwrite suggestion.
>
> Nancy-Jean Ballard Seigel
>

Sure ...
Lorne Brown
Toronto CanadaEd Cray wrote:
>
> Folks:
>
> Okay, that's two.  Anyone else want to ante up?
>
> Ed
>
> On Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Nancy-Jean Seigel wrote:
>
> > To the "folks still above ground" who can do something about it,
> >
> > The Voice of the People series put out by Topic is a treasure as well as a
> > treasury.  Shouldn't we be supporting any and all efforts to get our own
> > valuable field recordings out and available?  If a ground swell movement is
> > needed, let's do what must be done.
> >
> > Sandy Paton needs support to give us what will disappear if he cannot
> > republicize and give scholarly description to materials from his years of
> > collecting.  I'm for the underwrite suggestion.
> >
> > Nancy-Jean Ballard Seigel
> >

Absolutely.Lorne Brown wrote:> Sure ...
> Lorne Brown
> Toronto Canada
>
> Ed Cray wrote:
> >
> > Folks:
> >
> > Okay, that's two.  Anyone else want to ante up?
> >
> > Ed
> >
> > On Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Nancy-Jean Seigel wrote:
> >
> > > To the "folks still above ground" who can do something about it,
> > >
> > > The Voice of the People series put out by Topic is a treasure as well as a
> > > treasury.  Shouldn't we be supporting any and all efforts to get our own
> > > valuable field recordings out and available?  If a ground swell movement is
> > > needed, let's do what must be done.
> > >
> > > Sandy Paton needs support to give us what will disappear if he cannot
> > > republicize and give scholarly description to materials from his years of
> > > collecting.  I'm for the underwrite suggestion.
> > >
> > > Nancy-Jean Ballard Seigel
> > >--
George F. Madaus
Boisi Professor of Education and Public Policy
Senior Research Fellow
National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy
Center for the Study of Testing Evaluation and Educational Policy
Carolyn A. and Peter S. Lynch School of Education
Boston College
Chestnut Hill MA 02494
[unmask]
617. 552.4521
617 552 8649 FAX

I'd be in agreement.Perhaps this question could be posed again after "the holidays" (Christmas to
Europeans.)John Moulden

Now we are five --Ed

Sorry, your browser doesn't support iframes.

I'll subscribe.Lew Becker
[unmask]

Count me in.Mary Stafford
[unmask]I have an idea that might address Sandy Paton's dilemma:A subscription series.

On Sun, 24 Dec 2000 07:49:45 -0800, Ed Cray wrote:
>Now we are five --
>
>Ed
Now we are six --
(Me too.)--
Jeri Corlew

Sign me up too, and let me know where to send the check.At 05:01 AM 12/24/00 -0800, you wrote:
>Folks:
>
>I have an idea that might address Sandy Paton's dilemma:
>
>A subscription series.
>
>I do not know how many are on the ballad-l list, but perhaps there are 50
>people hereon subscribed willing to venture $20 to help underwrite the
>republication of the very important Frank Proffitt material.  (I noted
>about half a dozen familiar names from ballad-l on the Tabula Gratulatoria
>[Latin for "subscribers"] in the recent Edward Ives _festschrift._ By
>buying in advance, one helps to underwrite the cost.
>
>The price is not too high when one considers that I routinely pay $18.50
>for a CD here in California ($16.98 plus 8.5 percent sales tax) and get
>nowhere near the comprehensive liner notes Folk-Legacy includes.  We might
>even get Sandy to write a retrospective appreciation of Proffitt, whom I
>consider to be a singer of the very first rank.
>
>Will those with a more mercantile sense (Dick Greenhaus, are you
>listening?) please reply.
>
>Ed
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:53:11 -0500
>From: Sandy Paton <[unmask]>
>To: "Cray, Ed" <[unmask]>
>Subject: well, I tried!
>
>I took your suggestion to heart, Ed, and sent my note to the list, but
>never saw it appear there. Don't know what I did wrong. I did add one
>additional 2 volume set - I Can't Be Satisfied - Early American Women
>Blues Singers. I remember Dick having a full tub of the Document series,
>and I got one of the Global Village CDs from him, but that is of field
>recordings, not early commercial "rural" stuff.
>    What is astonishing to me now is the new Voice of the People series
>that Topic has released -- 20 volumes of field recorded material in
>Britain, mostly unaccompanied. How in hell do they ever expect to get
>their bait back? I'm struggling to get a couple of my own field
>recordings onto CD, especially my Frank Proffitt stuff, as I do think my
>recordings were done on better equipment than Frank Warner was able to
>use for his field collecting, but experience has shown me that they
>won't sell enough to cover their production costs, even if you write
>another glowing review to give 'em a boost.
>    Anyway, if you think my note to you is appropriate for the Ballad-L,
>and want to post it there, it's okay with me. I tried, but never saw it
>arrive.
>    Sandy
>
>

Count me in.
Roy BerkeleyLorne Brown wrote:> Sure ...
> Lorne Brown
> Toronto Canada
>
> Ed Cray wrote:
> >
> > Folks:
> >
> > Okay, that's two.  Anyone else want to ante up?
> >
> > Ed
> >
> > On Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Nancy-Jean Seigel wrote:
> >
> > > To the "folks still above ground" who can do something about it,
> > >
> > > The Voice of the People series put out by Topic is a treasure as well as a
> > > treasury.  Shouldn't we be supporting any and all efforts to get our own
> > > valuable field recordings out and available?  If a ground swell movement is
> > > needed, let's do what must be done.
> > >
> > > Sandy Paton needs support to give us what will disappear if he cannot
> > > republicize and give scholarly description to materials from his years of
> > > collecting.  I'm for the underwrite suggestion.
> > >
> > > Nancy-Jean Ballard Seigel
> > >

Count us in too. To whom does the check get sent?  Wassail!  Tom & Linn

Ditto for me.Dave PylesAt 12:29 PM 12/24/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>Date:    Sun, 24 Dec 2000 09:29:25 -0800
>From:    Barbara Millikan <[unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Grim Economics
>
>Sign me up too, and let me know where to send the check.=====================
David N. Pyles
acousticmusic.com
P. O. Box 459
Brattleboro, VT 05302-0459
(802) 257-0336 Mon-Thur 9:30am-4:30pm
http://www.acousticmusic.com/frames
http://www.acousticmusic.com/frames/fame.htm
=====================
The last time somebody listened to a Bush, folks wandered in the desert for
40 years

I'm in and I'll raise.It sure would be nice to see the Beech Mtn Anthologies back along with
Gunning and the Tar Heels.Brent Cantrell
Knoxville

Please, put my name on that list as well.Gwen Knighton                                   [unmask]
                      www.threeweirdsisters.com
______________________________________________________________________
Those who abandon their own dreams . . . will try to discourage yours.
______________________________________________________________________
                  -*Cyny Telyn* -- /Sing/ the harp-

On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 05:01:13AM -0800, Ed Cray wrote:> Folks:
>
> I have an idea that might address Sandy Paton's dilemma:
>
> A subscription series.
>
> I do not know how many are on the ballad-l list, but perhaps there are 50
> people hereon subscribed willing to venture $20 to help underwrite the
> republication of the very important Frank Proffitt material.  (I noted        Count me in.        We'll need an address (and probably something specific to make
the check out to, such as "republication fund" or whatever you select.)        Merry Christmas,
                DoN.--
 Email:   <[unmask]>   | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
    My Concertina web page:        | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
        --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

I'll subscribe.Nathan Rose

Good folks all:
    I've written a note of gratitude to Ed Cray, thanking him for his
offer of help with the production costs of the Proffitt CD. I've already
had it re-mastered digitally from the original field tapes and am now
about halfway through the notes for the insert booklet, which will be
about 28 pages (whew!). I'm looking at an early Spring release, if the
creek don't rise.
    What I would suggest is that you all hold onto your hard-earned cash
and let me notify you via the listserv when the "product" is in hand. At
that time, a simple order via phone (800-836-0901) or e-missive
([unmask]) or even (gasp) via our web site's credit card
encrypted order blank. Click on this: <http://www.folklegacy.com>.
Calling gives you a chance to talk with Caroline, always a pleasant
experience, but beware, she may also sell you the "Ballads and Songs of
Tradition" CD that is already on the market. A sampling from forty years
of field collecting, with a booklet of less academic and more personal
notes than usual, but nearly 60 pages of 'em (once reviewed here by our
friend, Ed Cray, his own self)! We can front for the initial production
costs, friends, but it's reassuring to know that a bunch of you ballad
people are willing to place orders. I'll let you know when the CD is
available. In the meantime, let your money earn interest in your mutual
fund account. You all do have mutual fund accounts, don't you? %^)
    With warmest good wishes to all for the holidays and the millennium
to come!
    Sandy Paton (Folk-Legacy's resident folk fogey)

On 12/24/00, Sandy Paton wrote:[ ... ]>    What I would suggest is that you all hold onto your hard-earned cash
>and let me notify you via the listserv when the "product" is in hand. At
>that time, a simple order via phone (800-836-0901) or e-missive
>([unmask]) or even (gasp) via our web site's credit card
>encrypted order blank. Click on this: <http://www.folklegacy.com>.
>Calling gives you a chance to talk with Caroline, always a pleasant
>experience, but beware, she may also sell you the "Ballads and Songs of
>Tradition" CD that is already on the market. A sampling from forty years
>of field collecting, with a booklet of less academic and more personal
>notes than usual, but nearly 60 pages of 'em (once reviewed here by our
>friend, Ed Cray, his own self)! We can front for the initial production
>costs, friends, but it's reassuring to know that a bunch of you ballad
>people are willing to place orders. I'll let you know when the CD is
>available. In the meantime, let your money earn interest in your mutual
>fund account. You all do have mutual fund accounts, don't you? %^)
>    With warmest good wishes to all for the holidays and the millennium
>to come!Just a question on cost saving and liner notes:I've always loved Folk-Legacy's liner notes, and one of these days
I'm going to sit down and figure out how much it costs to get the
notes for the 20 or so albums I have which came without them, and
order them (a complicated task, since they're for CDs and LPs and
I think *one* cassette -- I *hate* cassettes...).But do they really need to be printed liner notes and lyric sheets?
Particularly the latter? That's a lot of paper, and hence a significant
extra expense.Why not just put the lyrics on the CD? Even if you fill the CD
chock-full of music, it's nearly certain that you'll have a few
megabytes hanging off the end. Probably more than a few. Use that
space to create a CD-ROM in miniature. With the lyric sheets,
liner notes, and anything else that springs to mind (photos of
the performers? Tributes from the members of this list, maybe? :-).
There is no added cost, and a lot of added value.I know that there are people out there who don't have CD drives to
read the things. That's why I don't think the *complete* liner notes
should go on the CD-ROM partition. But a CD-ROM lets you put in much
more information than you can supply on paper. And I think that a
*very* large fraction of the audience for a Folk-Legacy disc will
have some sort of computer access.A couple of years ago, Copper Creek records was doing this with
all their CDs. Then, for some reason, they stopped. I hated it.
It was really sad. Not only did it mean that their liner notes
went back from being good to being lousy (I know Folk-Legacy
won't be guilty of that :-), but it also cost me the fun of
digging around and seeing what was on the CD. :-)As an aside: There is probably a great deal of stuff in Folk-Legacy's
archives none of us have ever heard. It would be great if that could
somehow be made available. We're all used to reissues of 78s and the
like; we don't demand the highest sound quality. What are the odds
of a bare-bones in-the-basement A-to-D conversion, and of selling
these things on CD-R? I suppose there are problems with rights and
such -- but I hate to see that material go to waste.--
Robert B. Waltz  - - - - - - - - Ballad Index Editor
2095 Delaware Avenue
Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4801
651-454-8994 - - - - - - - - - - e-mail: [unmask]The Ballad Index Web Site:
http://www.csufresno.edu/folklore/BalladIndexTOC.html

On Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Robert B. Waltz wrote in part:> As an aside: There is probably a great deal of stuff in Folk-Legacy's
> archives none of us have ever heard. It would be great if that could
> somehow be made available. We're all used to reissues of 78s and the
> like; we don't demand the highest sound quality. What are the odds
> of a bare-bones in-the-basement A-to-D conversion, and of selling
> these things on CD-R? I suppose there are problems with rights and
> such -- but I hate to see that material go to waste.
>To which Ed Cray answers (in part) before the Christmas cheer overwhelms
his normally good judgment:I would meld my earlier idea of a subscription with Bob's suggestion of
emptying Paton's basement.  What if we were to subscribe to, say, reissues
and/or new releases on a quarterly basis?Like Bob, I think including the "lesser" songs not released on LP is an
excellent idea.Unlike Bob, I do not think filling out the CD with printed text in lieu of
a booklet is a good idea.  I like those inserts.Ed

 Let's hear it for paper liner booklets !!!    I would also be very
interested in having the Beech Mountain material available on CD and would
happily pay $20 for a copy.-Mark Gilston

>I'll subscribe.Me too.Edie