Talk:The Amazing Bud Powell, Vols. 1 & 2

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Jazz Low‑importance

	Jazz portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Creation attribution

I merged the 12"s from The Amazing Bud Powell [1] and The Amazing Bud Powell, Vol. 2 [2] to create The Amazing Bud Powell, Vols. 1 & 2 [3]. TlonicChronic (talk) 16:36, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TlonicChronic: I'm confused. We already have articles for the individual volumes, and almost all of our sources treat the two volumes as separate albums. Why do we need this article? --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are articles for the 10"s (which are separate albums from one another and the twelve inches), and an article for the twelve inches, which are for practical purposes the same. They even share a track listing on the back of the record. Before there were two articles each about two unrelated albums. Now there are three: two articles of unrelated albums, and one of related albums. The twelve in volume 1 is not a reissue of the ten inch, and ditto for volume 2. There are four separate albums here, two related, two unrelated. TlonicChronic (talk) 14:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I'm even more confused...

I am pretty certain that the music here is identical to the music of the two individual albums. What I would like to see, and would entirely support, is a comprehensive article for the entire compilation, including vol's 3, 4, and 5. I wonder if that was what you were attempting to create with this article. We already have, in fact, The Complete Blue Note and Roost Recordings as an article. Maybe we could merge the content of this article into that one? After all, there is massive overlap between this article and that one. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 18:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For Bud Powell on Blue Notes, there are two ten inch studio albums, BLP 5003 & BLP 5041 (unrelated), two 12" compilations, BLP 1503/04 (related), and three additional 12" studio albums, BLP 1571, BLP 1598 & BLP 4009 (unrelated). That's seven albums: five studio albums (two 10"s, three 12"), each with their own page, and two compilations, with a joint page. (See Bud Powell's discography page or the Blue Note discography page)

Compare BLP 1501/02, 1505/06, 1510/11, 1521/22 & 1531/32.

Practically speaking, no one cares about the 10"s, but these six pairs of 12" compilations are very important (frequently reissued and critically re-evaluated).

None of these should be merged with The Complete Blue Note and Roost Recordings, which is a separate compilation of it's own. (Compare 1510/11 and The Complete Blue Note Recordings of Thelonious Monk).

Complete is more of a sessionography page. The joint page is for a pair of compilations with joint recording dates, release dates, and track lists. TlonicChronic (talk) 19:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TlonicChronic: Okay, but you can't say that the name of the artist is "The Amazing Bud Powell." That was the name of the album, not the name of the musician. Take a look at The Genius of Ray Charles or any other album that involves such descriptors in the title. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 23:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The Amazing Bud Powell" is an epithet. Look through Blue Note's catalogue, it's full of them. Every two volume comp we talked about, with the arguable exception of Genius of Modern Music, are the same. These are self-titled compilations: Miles Davis, Volumes 1 & 2, The Fabulous Fats Navarro, The Amazing Bud Powell. If you look at the back of the sleeve of the original releases, or you look at the label on the original records, you'll see what I mean. These albums were credited to The Amazing Bud Powell. Blue Note simply issued "Vol. 1", "Vol. 2", "Vol. 3", etc., (they're practically nameless, something Blue Note actually did with a lot of their 10"s) but attach that to the artist's name. TlonicChronic (talk) 00:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that, but if you look at the personnel listing, they will use the musician's actual name, and all reliable sources attribute their album to their real name. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 23:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, which is why I have the chronology artist, the lead artist, and the personnel artist as Bud Powell, with the name credited on the album (appropriately linked) paired with the album title in the infobox. TlonicChronic (talk) 00:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]