Finally I have found an extensive John Lee Hooker sessionography, as part of one of The Great R&B-files Created By Claus Röhnisch. The release date November 3 for "Boogie Chillen'" (Modern 20-627B) is mentioned there several times (pages 16, 21 and 23).
I have to admit that Wikipedia has a footnote on the November 1948 release date saying, Several sources list the recording date as November 1948, which is the date Murray [Murray, Charles Shaar (2002). Boogie Man: The Adventures of John Lee Hooker in the American Twentieth Century] uses for the record release by Modern Records.
Anyway, I have found an even earlier chart entry for "Boogie Chillen" which makes the November release more plausible. It is already listed in the regional R&B chart for San Francisco in the Cash Box magazine issue of December 25, 1948, p. 23, apparently compiled from reports for the week ending December 18. Like in the Billboard, the official Cash Box review for "Boogie Chillen" was printed only in March 1949 (March 5 issue, p. 13). Both clips have been added to the images.
@xiphophilos:
Your last edits, though well-intended, were not correct. The given specific date (November 3, 1948) was not the recording date but the reputed release date. Although the source for the day is not available on the web anymore and the record was not reviewed in Billboard before March 5, 1949, it is agreed upon the release month of November 1948 (see Wikipedia) and the recording two months before, in September 1948.
As the review confirms, the original catalog number was 20-627, like all numbers in the 500/600 series with the 20- prefix, even though the prefix is not listed in Billboard's Race Records charts. Strangely, but confirming the earlier release date, the first chart entry of "Boogie Chillen'" was in the January 8, 1949 issue for the "Week Ending December 31" (1948), i.e. more than two month before the Billboard review, and the record was listed as "Boogie Children" then, although no record label with this spelling is known.
Both entries (Modern 20-627 and Modern 627) have now been merged because it is essentially the same record, only with the catalog number updated on the later pressing.
In fact, the record with the "20-" prefix is the original issue. For unknown reasons, Modern (Music) 500 series, in contrast to its 100/200 series, had this prefix from the beginning, continued in the 600/700/800 series until #20-823 but strangely intermitted for numbers 807 to 813 (without prefix). As the prefix was completely abandoned in mid-1951 from #826 (824?) on, Modern #627 (without retail price notation and side designations) was apparently a later variant of Modern #20-627.
So both entries should be merged, with the number 627 listed under "Other Cat#s".
Both versions slholzer mentions below are in this database; I've linked them below. Am I correct in assuming that the one with the 20-prefix is a reissue?
There are two versions of this record. The illustrated version is numbered 627 and has no A/B side designations. The alternate version is numbered 20-627 and does have A/B side designations. For the record, the A/B sides are correctly assigned in this entry. I would be very surprised if this were the only Modern label recording that appeared in two such versions, but as of yet this is the only one I've documented.
Bill, I agree 100% about remakes, had the Vee-Jay cut on a Stateside EP about 50 years back, and it's also a goodie. Johnny Guitar Watson's recut of 'Gangster of Love' on King in the 60s is the exception to the rule being far better & tougher than his original 50s cut.
Although I usually hate re-makes as a general rule, I actually prefer JLH's re-cut for Vee-Jay in 1959. The '59 re-cut was used in "The Blues Brothers".