JSngry

Mosaic's probably not the outfit to do it, but if somebody could collate ALL of the Boyd Raeburn airshots and such that seem to exist and present them in complete form, in chronological order with properly documented personnel, I could be interested...those charts are widly variable in quality (to put it mildly...) but the bands themselves...whoa, sometimes/often.

But Sheryl Crow is smart/savvy. What has she herself kept hold of? Are the lawsuits being filed on behalf of The Great American Musical Heritage or on behalf of specific artists/estates? Not saying that any of this exonerates Universal in any way, just wondering how/if it goes to figuring a specific damage claim within the definitions of the legal system..

I'm expecting to at some point get queasy about an argument developing about what it means to archive "properly", and then we get into a argument about what the purpose of an archive is, is it to keep material available in usable form, or is it to preserve everything in its most original form, is it to be a library or a museum? And then, whose property is it anyway, and then...the whole thing gets ugly, especially when in cases like Bryan Adams, it appears that the artists themselves have a better source than the label, and then what, does the label then seek to take that property back from the artist, and if not, what kinds of doors does that open? There's j lot of wobbliness going on in all this, it seems. Wobblewobblewobble. Interesting times...

Well, ok, what does the contract read in that regard? Exactly what is the verbiage?

Some badass/kickass Boyd Raeburn band, streamed here: https://pastdaily.com/2016/07/31/boyd-raeburn-club-morocco-l-1945/

I did enjoy the Tingen book for dealing with that music as music, for looking at what WAS going on instead of what WASN'T. He wasn't the first to deal with it from a reality-based perspective, but he certainly wrote a good book about it. The only groan I had was that he also included some Sri Chowhoundy type of MacroCosmicUnity about the philosophy of it all, and a little bit went a long way, especially since I do not share the same concept of how much is a little bit. But thankfully, that stuff was segregated away from the musical part.

I bought the Ken Vail Bird's Diary, and...it's more fun to think about reading than it was actually reading it.

And don't be surprised if they counter with some variant of, of we got it somewhere, hell, YOU probably got it somewhere, and read the contract again, whose property is it, really?

I'm just wondering what counter will made to the "hey, we're sorry we fucked this up, but the bottom line is that it's our property that was lost, and the nature of what was lost still leaves plenty of ways for us to sell your product going forth, so....what's the basis of your claim again?".

The real WOW factor for the Chambers books the first time around was that it listed all the bootlegs. That was a bigger deal then than it is now.

Swed & Carr are good for data. Chambers writes a good "fan book", the only problem being is that the music loses him around 1968 or so, and the writing follows suit. In it's time it was indispensable (at least Vol 1 ws), but today....eh.... Whatever your poison, supplement it with these two: But hell, ead the autobiography anyway. It gets the desired results: https://www.thedailybeast.com/miles-davis-penned-popular-musics-best-autobiography

yeah, they can try that. And then UMG show their data about how nobody buys that shit anymore, been trending downward and continues to trend downward, you wanna settle for $29.95, draw up the papers right now. Otherwise, we still have all we need to sell your shit going forth, especially for the skullograph, so how much are you losing again, pony boy?

Only random parts!