complete (?) blue horizon sessions

[lazy poker]

a very heartily hello to everyone!

though I'm a newbie here, i already have been an avid reader of "ledge" threads for quite some years now. I became a real ledgie, simply because there are questions and thoughts, nagging me again and again, and i decided i need to get in touch with you out there to try and find some answers . . . and maybe share the odd thought here and there . . . and in general to have fun with you concerning all things FM. when i say "all things" i have to admit that my obsession with FM comprises mainly the first few phases, so to speak - from the very beginnings up to . . . say, around the time of "kiln house" (the green / spencer years, mostly). also i'd like to point out that it's my fate to be german - so, please, don't judge too harshly on me if you detect bits of faulty english here and there . . . i try to do my very best! this as a brief intro only.

back on topic: "the complete blue horizon sessions" series (FM and others) raised several questions to me, which - as far as i know - hadn't been discussed here (please, correct me in case i'm wrong).

starting with the FM set. ages ago i aquired a bootleg cassette with what seemed to be an unedited version of "blues jam at chess". apart from including tracks that have been completely unissued (until their appearance in said 6 cd set) there were a few full-length tracks which have been cropped down for the album. i'll have to try to dig out this cassette from somewhere in my vaults again, but i clearly remember noticing, for instance, some choruses in "watch out" that have been edited out for the album. and this wasn't the only track that underwent such "surgery". and the release of the sessions box made me wonder why mike vernon didn't include the complete tracks. there's little guessing why they have been edited in the first place: there wasn't that much happening in those choruses - no really exciting soloing or stuff going on. but why not leave the tracks in their original entirety for this release (we're talking of about half-a-minute parts, adding approximately 2 or 3 minutes (the MOST) to the total playing time) - for completeness' sake!

on to duster bennett. the COMPLETE sessions? definitely NOT! first of all: "bright lights, big city" already had a fade-out on the live album. and i do confess: i generally HATE live music being faded out! even worse: the "sessions" release has an even earlier fade-out - a whole chorus or 54 seconds in digits worth! next: as every afficionado of duster's music will know: "fresh country jam" (released as a single B-side) is from the very same gig. to me it would've been a logical thing to re-instate that track at its original spot in that evening's setlist. it was not to be. not enough with that: the cd releases "blue inside" (indigo) and "bright lights, big city - the collector's duster bennett" (castle) both present not only exactly this version of "fresh country jam" plus a rather entertaining spoken intro by duster, which again was left off the remastered blue horizon platters. two more tracks from the memorable april 15 1969 gig at the angel hotel ("it's a man down there" and "further up on the road") can be found on those indigo and castle cds only! AND: i find it very hard to believe, that the house band - led by top topham and peter "blue" - really should've been on stage that night for 2 numbers only.

okay, there are some reasons or pseudo-reasons that might spring to mind - limited cd playing time, artistic or musical aspects, etcetera and so on. but then this project should've not been tagged "complete", as it simply ain't that. (btw: i could go on at least about the champion jack dupree release, but i will leave it at that for the moment being.)

following the release of his duster bennett biography i had an e-mail correspondence with martin celmins. though i asked him about these aspects, too, he didn't share his thoughts about them with me. sadly, i couldn't get in touch with mike vernon, who surely is THE man who could really shed some light on all this - if he would. anyway, i would be curious to know what YOU might have to say about it. maybe somebody could come up with more enlightening assumptions or even facts.

thanks a million in advance, and keep on rockin'

p.s. what a thrill it is to be on the same forum as jeremy spencer! jeremy, i can't thank you enough for your music and inspiration to me as a guitarist - then, in the days when i was starting out (and hadn't even heard about elmore before), and now, that you still amaze me with your sophisticated and tasteful playing. sorry, but i just had to get that off my chest . . .