scooter_phx

Trying to help out Mosaic by suggesting sets

469 posts in this topic

5 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

For the sake of clarity (a bit late now) I'd define a quality PD label as one such Hep or Chrono Classics or early JSP that makes its own transfers. As much as I disdain PD labels that nick other labels' masters, I suppose I have to give credit to those who do a straight nick and don't fuck them up with "remastering", such as late JSP. Sounds like FS belongs in the latter category.

Yeah, "credit due for not fucking up", that's about right. In today's world, that may well count as "quality".  :g

But again - don't pay for that shit unless you want the packaging or are too lazy to do your own work. Myself, I've never gotten really good packaging from them, usually just a bunch of nicely formatted generic/general knowledge. No real insight. It all looks really purty, but I can't say there's ever been anything that was like, oh WOW!

And for the record, I am not at all unfamiliar with being lazy.

1 minute ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Please read my post again. I do have TWO different versions of the original LP and therefore do NOT need the CD (as for the time being the Johnny Glasel LP is not that essential to me). Judging by similar reissues I would not expect much "fine print" there but - like it or not - reality being what it is, doing the legal thing is not the worst thing in the world as long as the sonics are OK. And re- what Captain Howdy said, in cases like this this would have involved doing one's own transfers (to an extent that is not less than what e.g. Chronological Classics did - whose soncis werent alwys top notch either).
YMMV but others' M will be of importance to them only, not to third parties. Because tastes differ.

Wait - you defend their practices, cite a specific example, but then cannot cite those practices as they relate to your specific example?

Now I'm pissed off. I thought I was going to get relevant factual information! :g

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JSngry said:

Wait - you defend their practices, cite a specific example, but then cannot cite those practices as they relate to your specific example?

Now I'm pissed off. I thought I was going to get relevant factual information! :g

You AGAIN did NOT do your reading (or comprehending). :D What I did cite by way of example was ONE example that looks to me - until proof to the contrary is provided - like it IS a case of getting something from FS that has NOT been around on the reissue market before. Not more, not less. Proof to be provided to you because it was YOU who said "how often do you not get a Fresh Sound product that has not already been released somewhere else". I say here is one you get. Now prove me wrong. The rest of the reissue details is "immaterial and irrelevant" in this context. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, JSngry said:

That Eric Dolphy record? PRICELESSLY sketchy!

What could possibly be sketchy about presenting the only documentation of the wonderful collaboration between Eric Dolphy and Cannonball Adderley?  Just because neither one of them plays on 40% of the album, and because there are no commonalites from the Adderley sessions (one actually a Bennie Green session) and the Dolphy session, what makes you doubt that Dolphy came back from the grave to ask Cannonball to make a special guest appearance after the fact?  Cannonball no doubt went back in time to cheer on Dolphy and Co.!  So much cynicism in the world today!  And directed at such a stellar archival reissue effort!

  R-1718791-1273886267.jpeg.jpg

TracklistHide Credits

A1 Jitterbug Waltz
Bass [Uncredited] – Eddie Kahn*Drums [Uncredited] – J.C. MosesFlute [Uncredited] – Eric DolphyTrumpet [Uncredited] – Woody ShawVibraphone [Uncredited] – Bobby HutchersonWritten-By [Uncredited] – Fats Waller
7:05
A2 Music Matador
Alto Saxophone [Uncredited] – Sonny SimmonsBass [Uncredited] – Richard Davis (2)Bass Clarinet [Uncredited] – Eric DolphyDrums [Uncredited] – J.C. MosesFlute [Uncredited] – Prince LashaSoprano Saxophone [Uncredited] – Clifford JordanWritten-By [Uncredited] – Prince Lasha, Sonny Simmons
9:05
B1 Juggin' Around
Bass [Uncredited] – Eddie JonesCornet [Uncredited] – Nat AdderleyDrums [Uncredited] – Albert HeathPiano [Uncredited] – Tommy FlanaganTenor Saxophone [Uncredited] – Frank Foster, Frank Wess, Gene AmmonsTrombone [Uncredited] – Bennie GreenWritten-By [Uncredited] – Gene Ammons
6:30
B2 Little Ditty
Bass [Uncredited] – Eddie JonesCornet [Uncredited] – Nat AdderleyDrums [Uncredited] – Albert HeathPiano [Uncredited] – Tommy FlanaganTenor Saxophone [Uncredited] – Frank Foster, Frank Wess, Gene AmmonsTrombone [Uncredited] – Bennie GreenWritten-By [Uncredited] – Frank Wess
4:00
B3 Awful Mean
Alto Saxophone [Uncredited] – Cannonball AdderleyBass [Uncredited] – Paul Chambers (3)Drums [Uncredited] – "Philly" Joe JonesPiano [Uncredited] – Wynton KellyWritten-By [Uncredited] – Cannonball Adderley
6:27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Big Beat Steve said:

You AGAIN did NOT do your reading (or comprehending). :D What I did cite by way of example was ONE example that looks to me - until proof to the contrary is provided - like it IS a case of getting something from FS that has NOT been around on the reissue market before. Not more, not less. Proof to be provided to you because it was YOU who said "how often do you not get a Fresh Sound product that has not already been released somewhere else". I say here is one you get. Now prove me wrong. The rest of the reissue details is "immaterial and irrelevant" in this context. ^_^

Not my point. Of course it was not on the reissue market before.

But how did they bring it to the reissue market?

Because if all they did was clean up a needle drop, hell, you and me can do that. And if they got the tapes from somebody who found them laying around, hell, you and me could do that too, with a little bit of hustle. Now if they got the tapes, actually remastered them themselves, AND paid the relevant parties, then, no you and me could not do THAT, because we are too poor and too lazy. At least I am. If you're not, then you should be doing that work yourself! :g

Amazon's asking me to pay almost $16.00 for this thing, and even with another record on there, what are they asking me to pay $15.89 for, exactly?

This?

61M7lVyQLxL.jpg

Again, if all I want is the music, what value are they adding with this product?

I mean, I can see buying a used copy for 5 bucks or so, and I can see getting a burn of it from somebody at some point, but 16 bucks? Again - for what?

If they've done more, substantially more, than just find the shit and make it available, I wish they'd say so. But they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, felser said:

What could possibly be sketchy about presenting the only documentation of the wonderful collaboration between Eric Dolphy and Cannonball Adderley?  Just because neither one of them plays on 40% of the album, and because there are no commonalites from the Adderley sessions (one actually a Bennie Green session) and the Dolphy session, what makes you doubt that Dolphy came back from the grave to ask Cannonball to make a special guest appearance after the fact?  Cannonball no doubt went back in time to cheer on Dolphy and Co.!  So much cynicism in the world today!  And directed at such a stellar archival reissue effort!

  R-1718791-1273886267.jpeg.jpg

TracklistHide Credits

A1 Jitterbug Waltz
Bass [Uncredited] – Eddie Kahn*Drums [Uncredited] – J.C. MosesFlute [Uncredited] – Eric DolphyTrumpet [Uncredited] – Woody ShawVibraphone [Uncredited] – Bobby HutchersonWritten-By [Uncredited] – Fats Waller
7:05
A2 Music Matador
Alto Saxophone [Uncredited] – Sonny SimmonsBass [Uncredited] – Richard Davis (2)Bass Clarinet [Uncredited] – Eric DolphyDrums [Uncredited] – J.C. MosesFlute [Uncredited] – Prince LashaSoprano Saxophone [Uncredited] – Clifford JordanWritten-By [Uncredited] – Prince Lasha, Sonny Simmons
9:05
B1 Juggin' Around
Bass [Uncredited] – Eddie JonesCornet [Uncredited] – Nat AdderleyDrums [Uncredited] – Albert HeathPiano [Uncredited] – Tommy FlanaganTenor Saxophone [Uncredited] – Frank Foster, Frank Wess, Gene AmmonsTrombone [Uncredited] – Bennie GreenWritten-By [Uncredited] – Gene Ammons
6:30
B2 Little Ditty
Bass [Uncredited] – Eddie JonesCornet [Uncredited] – Nat AdderleyDrums [Uncredited] – Albert HeathPiano [Uncredited] – Tommy FlanaganTenor Saxophone [Uncredited] – Frank Foster, Frank Wess, Gene AmmonsTrombone [Uncredited] – Bennie GreenWritten-By [Uncredited] – Frank Wess
4:00
B3 Awful Mean
Alto Saxophone [Uncredited] – Cannonball AdderleyBass [Uncredited] – Paul Chambers (3)Drums [Uncredited] – "Philly" Joe JonesPiano [Uncredited] – Wynton KellyWritten-By [Uncredited] – Cannonball Adderley
6:27

That's still a fun LP to listen to. It's like it's own jukebox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, JSngry said:

I would wager, though, that they used the Mercury masters for their Keynote box.

Out curiosity, I downloaded CD 1 of The Keynote Jazz Collection from the interwebs and compared Lester Young's "Just You, Just Me" to the version on my copy of the Mercury Essential Keynote Collection in Audacity. As you can see from the attached screenshots, they are virtually identical. To my ears they certainly sound identical. So much for "24-Bit Digitally Remastered."

 

lester1.png

lester2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fresh Sounds does not claim that the Keynote box is 24 bit digitally remastered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep.

Don't get me wrong, it's a grand idea, just master takes, there's a lot of people who want that. And it is Public Domain. And that box looks nice and shiny, what with it having pictures and stuff.

Just saying...it's a nice "practical" presentation of somebody else's work. I'd but that shit used in a minute, and get a burn of it even quicker. But I ain't buying it new like that, no sir,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Oops, you're right Kevin about they're representing that it's 24 bit.  I was looking at their website. Don't agree as to the rest  

Be that as it may, whether it's 24 bit or not -- and I will take FS at their word -- where else except for the original discs or the Mosaic set are you going to find all this music

Edited by Brad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Brad said:

whether it's 24 bit or not -- and I will take FS at their word

If they 24-bit remastered the Lester Young material, it was the Mercury CDs, and I fail to see the point in that! :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Brad said:

Be that as it may, whether it's 24 bit or not -- and I will take FS at their word -- where else except for the original discs or the Mosaic set are you going to find all this music

uh, from other people? Certainly not from Mosaic!

Is this a trick question?

Pay attention - if all you want is the music, and sure, a lot of people want more than that), but if all you want is the music, if anybody sends you burns of the Mercury stuff, you'll have the EXACT SAME THING as you've bought from Fresh Sounds. Not only the same thing, but produced the same way - original source material replicated as found. burnt, and distributed.

Some people want "product", ok. But the "where else" question is extremely naive. It's that level of naivete that Fresh Sounds loves to find in the consumer.

Jordi loves you!

jordi-pujol-baulenas-albums.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, JSngry said:

Just saying...it's a nice "practical" presentation of somebody else's work.

If that "somebody else" does not complain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then they don't complain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Brad said:

..... where else except for the original discs or the Mosaic set are you going to find all this music

 

To me, I'm afraid, that's the crucial point, and the owners of rights not living up to their respnsibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty basic thuggism, really. You take for yourself from those who either can't or won't object and then say hey, they're not complaining, where's the problem?

We've read about it here over the years, somebody looks at what these labels (inc. Fresh Sound) are doing, weighs all the options, and decides it's just not worth it to pursue remediation. But people chafe. Ask Cuscuna about the impact these labels have had on planning Mosaic projects.

Go ahead, ask him.

It's a small market to begin with. Eliminating perhaps the most significant cost/overhead - obtaining rights and then cleaning up the material as needed - is a distinct competitive advantage. It's definitely "legal", but it's weaselly as fuck.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mikeweil said:
 

To me, I'm afraid, that's the crucial point, and the owners of rights not living up to their respnsibilities.

Agreed.  It's better to have this than not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, mikeweil said:
 

To me, I'm afraid, that's the crucial point, and the owners of rights not living up to their respnsibilities.

Well, that is a point. But another point is that consumers are not living up to theirs by assuming their responsibility for not buying weasel product.

Look - the Mercury/Keynote material was produced legitimately and then released to the wild. It's out there, and will always be out there as long as digital media continues to exists.

Consumers have every right to want this material in a form they prefer. They should have no compunction about entering trading networks to exchange this and other such material on a free and open basis. They should certainly feel free to create their own documentation and share that along with the music - for no commercial gain. They can - especially - combine materials from different origins into one presentation.

We can do this ourselves, people, we have everything we need. We have the music, we have the information, and we have the internet.

But consumers, for the most part, are lazy and/or busy with other stuff. They can't be bothered with uploading/downloading hi-res files, or burning physical copies for their neighbors, or for getting discs in the mail, no, that's to much work. So instead, they reward somebody who does that work for them, never mind the particulars. What they could do altruistically, they pay somebody else to do at a rate that is not on scale with the work that party is actually doing.

They are screwing themselves in the long run, consumers are. In the pursuit of remediating their grievance against rights holders, they are at the same time dis-incentivizing those same parties from releasing any further product.

Again - ask Cuscuna.

And also - what's the over/under on the duration of the gap between how long a Mosaic set comes out, then goes OOP and how soon a Fresh Sound thing comes out that utilizes that same material in whole or in part?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the problem may be the way the industry works, with its need for a profit. A large profit. I'll not start a discussion about capitalism, but that's part of the problem. Burning a copy and xeroxing the paperwork basically is the same thing as a bootleg, only on a smaller scale. Or what about youtube and the steaming services that do hardly pay the musicians? 

We need a quality distributional concept for small numbers, that still is affordable. Not those high brow concepts that Blue Note now seems to favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then, Cuscuna should be incentivized to do boxes of post-1962 material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, mikeweil said:

Burning a copy and xeroxing the paperwork basically is the same thing as a bootleg, only on a smaller scale. 

"Bootleg", to me, carries with ir an implication of commerce. Those great "tlrees" of a decade or two ago were militantly non-commercial. Granted, they dealt in non-commercially released material, but the aim and the result was the same - to get existing material that was not commercially available to people who had a sincere desire to hear it, and with no money changing hands. And remember -there was a "pledge" that if you participated, you were morally obligated to buy the material should it ever be released by its owners.

Such a system of distribution seems to me to be infinitely more practical and consumer-friendly than does an enterprise like Fresh Sounds. Again - what they (usually) offer you in terms of adding value to a set of existing musical data is nothing, absolutely nothing.

Hell whoever now owns the Keynote stuff could just put it all up on a sever for download, and then subcontract somebody somewhere to handle distro of hard product to the remainders who still need that. But that would require a macro-strategy across an entire macro-catalog, and consumers aren't the only ones who are lazy and/or stupid.

So this Jeoge D. Pulotool guy, he''s got a slick racket going on. But in no way do I welcome or appreciate him or it. And off the record, I  think that anybody who does is a tool. :ph34r:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In the pursuit of remediating their grievance against rights holders, [consumers] are at the same time dis-incentivizing those same parties from releasing any further product."
 

Bingo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

So this Jeoge D. Pulotool guy, he''s got a slick racket going on. But in no way do I welcome or appreciate him or it. And off the record, I  think that anybody who does is a tool. :ph34r:

 

What makes you whine so endlessly about FS? How come you are not whining in the same manner whenever PROPER boxes come up? Look at who's got the more original and more varied catalog overall that DOES cover niches. Could it be that you know darn well that there are plenty out there who just want to take the easy route that Proper offers because Proper has stuff that those for whom jazz in earnest begins with hard bop only and who have only a less than all-out interest in earlier jazz are all too happy to grab in the form of budget-priced "Proper" packages of that earlier stuff to satisfy their basic needs (maybe you yourself have similar priorities, who knows? ^_^). If Pujol were ONLY in it for the money he'd often go elsewhere and NOT cover that many obscure niche artists who would never be big reissue sellers ANYWHERE.

Besides, "disincentivizing" is about the silliest "argument" that there is. The "rights holders" have not lived up to so many requests and efforts to keep older music in print as part of making art accessible way too often and too long. If they had cared about what they have in their vaults, they would not have sat on their stuff for so long without either reissuing or leasing it for a really accessible fee (where fees were due at all) with as little red tape involved as possible (after all the reissuers would have done the actual reissuing work). So ... as long as there are PD labels complying with PD laws in THEIR markets - "Use it or lose it". And again - see how many of those who insist on this being a "fee" thing (to grease the palms of the bigwigs in the corporate headquarters?) do not seem to find anything wrong with circumventing this as in the case of the Japanese reissues mentioned before that were picked up galore where according to the fine print they were not supposed to be for sale. Double standards and hypocrisy again ...
And, hey (sorry for borrowing that Sangrey-copyrighted one-exclamation-fits-all blurtout here :D), it certainly is not the fault of European labels if the P.D.laws here okay reissuing originally issued pre-mid-1962 material exempt from license fees. As for who uses what source material, I'd grant there may be doubtful practices but so far definite proof still seems to have been slow in many cases. Besides, as you ought to know if you were honest, burning your private CD-Rs is not the best way to really archive your music in a comparably fail-safe manner in the LONGER run. So this download thing is just a stopgap in many respects at best. And it certainly is not you who dictactes who is supposed to use which format in order to live up to your self-invented yardsticks. That's only you, after all ...
In short, as long as you keep whining about FS but do not go out of your way in EXACTLY the same intensity to blast anyone who brings up names such as Proper, JSP or similar your moral "reasoning" is just not credible. It just seems to bug you no end that with quite a part of their reissue catalog FS have gone - for more than 30 years - where US reissuers have not bothered to go at all.

1 hour ago, Larry Kart said:

"In the pursuit of remediating their grievance against rights holders, [consumers] are at the same time dis-incentivizing those same parties from releasing any further product."
 

Bingo.

No bingo. The majors have been sitting on their asses for so long that any allegedly existing incentive on their part ACROSS the ENTIRE field of music from that era that would warrant reissuing (and part of which has indeed been covered by FS) is not all that credible. You ought to know yourself that many, many of them just could not have cared less.

See my remarks about disincentivizing above. More to the point, maybe one of the two of you can provide conclusive proof of Mosaic ever having seriously planned putting out a reissue set of the Keynote recordings after the Japanese LP set and before FS reissued theirs (remember THIS is what we are talking about here, just in case JSangrey tries to sidetrack mentioning of Proper, claiming it was FS and not Proper who reissued the Keynote CD set). ^_^ So ...?

(And no, the Japanese LP set happened that long ago and is hard enough to come by secondhand on a worldwide scale that the market and the marketing field are wide open for the PD labels - like it or not, because what PD laws are e.g. in Europe is not dictated worldwide by the US of A yet).

Edited by Big Beat Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JSngry said:

And also - what's the over/under on the duration of the gap between how long a Mosaic set comes out, then goes OOP and how soon a Fresh Sound thing comes out that utilizes that same material in whole or in part?

Does FS at least wait until the material they nick goes OOP? If so, I don't really see how that disincentivizes anyone. On the other hand, JSP which as far as I can tell nicked its Louis Jordan box from Bear Family, obviously disincentivizes BF from investing the time and money necessary to produce a box like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

uest

8 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

Does FS at least wait until the material they nick goes OOP? If so, I don't really see how that disincentivizes anyone. On the other hand, JSP which as far as I can tell nicked its Louis Jordan box from Bear Family, obviously disincentivizes BF from investing the time and money necessary to produce a box like that.

Besides, BF usually keep their stuff in print for a VERY long time.

https://www.bear-family.de/jordan-louis-let-the-good-times-roll-1938-1954-9-cd.html

And similarly - again - Proper duplicated the Milton Brown set from the Origin Jazz label (in print when the Proper box was released and remaining in print until not extremely long ago).

http://originjazz.com/product/milton-brown-and-his-musical-brownies-5-cd-box-set/

And so and so on ...

Edited by Big Beat Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.