scooter_phx

Trying to help out Mosaic by suggesting sets

431 posts in this topic

Here's the story on how Capital sued Naxos:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_Inc._v._Naxos_of_America,_Inc.

The result was (I think)  that Naxos  (Canadian) no longer sells into the US.  Their Ellington series was terrific-- good mastering and several cuts which were "orphans" and not available elsewhere.   But I certainly see Capitals side of it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Captain Howdy said:

. Of course the likelihood of anyone other than Mosaic ever wanting to legit release this material is slim to none.

Not true at the time the deals were made - Blue Note/EMI frequently put out both individual tracks and entire box sets after the same material was issued by Mosaic.

That was then, though.

Share this post


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

I can perfectly understand that a licensing deal is negotiated for a fixed amount of copies produced and no rights granted for any additional copies being produced. So when they are gone, they are gone.
But letting oneself additionally be manhandled into a deal where you can sell the items only for a limited period of time (that as far as I recall wasn't even always that exceedingly long) and then forfeit any right to go on selling the remaining copies though you haven't even reached the contractually agreed volume is a - top put it kindly - "undersmart" move IMHO in THIS niche market and not one that serves the collectors' clientele out there.

I presume that it was the only way they could get the deal.  I like the way we all presume we're smarter than they are. 

Share this post


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

Not true at the time the deals were made - Blue Note/EMI frequently put out both individual tracks and entire box sets after the same material was issued by Mosaic.

That was then, though.

I actually greatly prefer and have kept the BN/EMI presentations of the sets I can think of (Green/Clark, Quebec, Nichols).  Really well done  Those were the days my friend, we thought they'd never end.

Share this post


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

Not true at the time the deals were made - Blue Note/EMI frequently put out both individual tracks and entire box sets after the same material was issued by Mosaic.

That was then, though.

Even if they don't release physical product, they can still put them up on iTunes et al, the way they did with the Nat King Cole material (and some others which escape me atm).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

21 minutes ago, medjuck said:

I presume that it was the only way they could get the deal.  I like the way we all presume we're smarter than they are. 

I realize fully well this was the only way they could have got the deal.
But as we all know, the jazz niche market is not that full of "hit" sellers in the stricter sense of the word but if there are good sellers then they sell moderately well over a longish period of time. So it takes time to accumulate a high total. So the prospect of having to get my sales over and done with within a fairly limited period of time would have made me feel very uneasy.
Mosaic may for a very long time have been a special case to the hardcore buyers of the label but I remember it wasnt only me who often postponed buying this or that reissue by a name artist (regardless of the label) when we were aware reissues of that material had been around before and were likely to be around again later on. Whereas if I came across a really unexpected reissue by an overlooked "special-interest" artist where you'd not really expect to see a decent reissue I jumped on it as it was "now or never" and who knew how long the item would be available as it probably would never amount to huge sales in absolute numbers.

Edited by Big Beat Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

Even if they don't release physical product, they can still put them up on iTunes et al, the way they did with the Nat King Cole material (and some others which escape me atm).

Generally, that would not be for Mosaic to do. Their leasing agreements are very specific about how they can offer their product.

I'm not an iTunes guy, so let me ask - how was the Cole Mosaic material put up on iTunes? As a Mosaic product or as Capitol or some other kind of EMI product?

Share this post


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

Generally, that would not be for Mosaic to do. Their leasing agreements are very specific about how they can offer their product.

I'm not an iTunes guy, so let me ask - how was the Cole Mosaic material put up on iTunes? As a Mosaic product or as Capitol or some other kind of EMI product?

That's what I meant: I assume  the material reverted to Capitol/EMI after the license with Mosaic expired and EMI made it available digitally, not Mosaic. So at least in that respect it would be in EMI's interest to see the license expire, leaving EMI with freshly remastered material to sell. No work or expense for EMI, all profit.

I'm no iTunes guy either, but Amazon lists it as a Capitol release. https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Capitol-Recordings-King-Cole/dp/B002RXMFWY/ref=tmm_msc_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Share this post


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

That's what I meant: I assume  the material reverted to Capitol/EMI after the license with Mosaic expired and EMI made it available digitally, not Mosaic. So at least in that respect it would be in EMI's interest to see the license expire, leaving EMI with freshly remastered material to sell. No work or expense for EMI, all profit.

I'm no iTunes guy either, but Amazon lists it as a Capitol release. https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Capitol-Recordings-King-Cole/dp/B002RXMFWY/ref=tmm_msc_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Correct. Masterings of licensed material Mosaic ordered and paid for are owned by the rights holders, not Mosaic, and they can do with the masterings what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, ok then. apparently there's something call "Capitol Vaults Jazz Series"  that is an umbrella downloadable label for all sorts of EMI (including Blue Note) jazz material.

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1280&bih=865&ei=hsHRXJmaOISesQWP9rn4AQ&q=Capitol+Vaults+Jazz+Series+itunes&oq=Capitol+Vaults+Jazz+Series+itunes&gs_l=psy-ab.3...4952.6706..7290...0.0..0.124.638.6j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0j0i22i30j33i299j33i160.PNt2kJcwc_E

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1280&bih=865&ei=mcHRXL2qOYTGsAXFxbaACw&q=Capitol+Vaults+Jazz+Series+amazon&oq=Capitol+Vaults+Jazz+Series+amazon&gs_l=psy-ab.3...124305.127335..128064...0.0..0.117.839.11j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......33i160j33i299j0j0i22i30.quatqYNu32c

33 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

That's what I meant: I assume  the material reverted to Capitol/EMI after the license with Mosaic expired and EMI made it available digitally, not Mosaic. So at least in that respect it would be in EMI's interest to see the license expire, leaving EMI with freshly remastered material to sell. No work or expense for EMI, all profit.

Yeah, there you go. EMI has/had in Mosaic a "laboratory" to do THEIR work for them (although I'd suppose they pay for it in some weird cost-center bingo card way). Not just do the work, but gauge interest, at least from their perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore, the major labels can now pull individual tracks out of that Mosaic material for compilations, either their own or for others who want to license them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in theory Warner could reissue two of the rarest Mosaic sets, the Basie Studio Roulette and the Maynard Ferguson Roulette. If only they would.

Share this post


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

So in theory Warner could reissue two of the rarest Mosaic sets, the Basie Studio Roulette and the Maynard Ferguson Roulette. If only they would.

 

Or even just release them for downloading and streaming.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think (I don't really know, though  I do know how it works on DVD releases) that the owners of the original material do not own the new masters if they're done by Mosaic or whomever else. 

To change the subject,  the new copyright laws mean that record companies and artists now get some payment for streaming whereas only publishers and writers got anything from radio play.  I don't know the cost of preparing music for release on streaming but I'm hoping that this will encourage rights holders to  make almost everything they own available. 

Share this post


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

Yeah, there you go. EMI has/had in Mosaic a "laboratory" to do THEIR work for them (although I'd suppose they pay for it in some weird cost-center bingo card way). Not just do the work, but gauge interest, at least from their perspective.

They had a 50% share in Mosaic if I remember correctly?

Also I think Universal (not Warner) owns the Roulette catalogue? (Most of EMI's classical holdings went with Warner, most of the jazz with Universal.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, king ubu said:

They had a 50% share in Mosaic if I remember correctly?

Also I think Universal (not Warner) owns the Roulette catalogue? (Most of EMI's classical holdings went with Warner, most of the jazz with Universal.)

The Roulette label is now owned by the Warner Music Group. After acquiring EMI Universal had to sell Roulette and a few other labels to comply with the conditions of the European Commission.

[edited to correct an error]

Edited by J.A.W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, J.A.W. said:

The Roulette label is now owned by the Warner Music Group. After requiring EMI Universal had to sell Roulette and a few other labels to comply with the conditions of the European Commission.

Ok, thanks! I knew that (MPS is a case as well), but was unaware Roulette was part of the divestment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, crisp said:

So in theory Warner could reissue two of the rarest Mosaic sets, the Basie Studio Roulette and the Maynard Ferguson Roulette. If only they would.

Warner Japan has released nearly every Basie album in their 24 bit reissue program of a few years ago. They sound fantastic. Not all the material that was in the two Mosaic sets (but also material that was not) and the sound is even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roulette had some big R&R hit catalogues, fwiw. Maybe that factored into the forced(?) sale? Or not?

 

Share this post


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

Roulette had some big R&R hit catalogues, fwiw. Maybe that factored into the forced(?) sale? Or not?

 

But forced sale to the *other* party (the one that got the other half of the cake) is a bit ridiculous (MPS was sold to Edel, a German label much smaller - that's more like it ... but you merikins like it big ;)).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

31 minutes ago, JSngry said:

Roulette had some big R&R hit catalogues, fwiw. Maybe that factored into the forced(?) sale? Or not?

 

If so, probably Post-REAL R&R R"&R".

In real R&R, what did they have? Ronnie Hawkins? The Rock-A-Teens? Jimmie Rodgers? Buddy Knox? Joey Dee in a wider sense? Except Joey Dee and Rodgers, little in mega sellers in actual R'nR.

 

Edited by Big Beat Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, David Ayers said:

 

Or even just release them for downloading and streaming.

 

Noooooooo!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, king ubu said:

Ok, thanks! I knew that (MPS is a case as well), but was unaware Roulette was part of the divestment.

Sorry for the silly error ("requiring" instead of "acquiring") - now corrected.

Share this post


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

If so, probably Post-REAL R&R R"&R".

In real R&R, what did they have? Ronnie Hawkins? The Rock-A-Teens? Jimmie Rodgers? Buddy Knox? Joey Dee in a wider sense? Except Joey Dee and Rodgers, little in mega sellers in actual R'nR.

 

Tommy James & The Shondells.

That's still R & R to me, it's still stuff that a garage band can play and rock out on, at least until it stops being that. But yeah, them. Nobody was thinking of just "Rock" when "Hanky Panky" hit.

Share this post


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

Tommy James & The Shondells.

That's still R & R to me, it's still stuff that a garage band can play and rock out on, at least until it stops being that. But yeah, them. Nobody was thinking of just "Rock" when "Hanky Panky" hit.

For my money, this was one of the FINEST pop records ever produced.  Simply sublime.

 

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.