A Lark Ascending

There's this alto-sax player. Recorded in the 40s and 50s. Did lots of original things, blues things and acknowledged covers. He also had a habit of taking tunes by the likes of Gershwin and Kern, stripping off the melody line, sticking on a new head and then retitling, crediting himself as composer. The orginal is there for all to hear in the chord sequence. Yup, he did a million other things with that sequence but the starting point was the Kern/Gershwin song. And they got nothing! The Gershwin, Kern and other estates have clearly been short-changed by all of this. He's sold countless records over the years..he's even been Proper'd. Perhaps in the spirit of morality being argued for here we should boycott his music due to his deplorable practice of stealing other peoples music and then passing it off as his own. In fact quite a few of his contemporaries, predecessors and successors have done the same. Ah! But he's an artist. He's outside morality. This isn't theft. This is creativity!

Mess up totally accepted and held head low in shame. I should know better than rely on hearsay.

I can't remember exactly how but in the past some UK conductors (and presumably elsewhere) set out the strings differently...possibly swapping one set of violins for the violas. I think Sir Adrian Boult might have been one.

Yes, I know they've been constantly available. But as I understand it they've done nothing like Columbia has done with its Miles material. I'm working totally off hearsay here from boards like this where I've frequently read disappointment about the remastering. I could be completely wrong. I wonder if, when the time comes, Proper etc will even bother putting out sets covering things like the Evans/Davis or Blackhawk discs. Columbia have done such a good job on those and could have the price way down by that point (the Blackhawk 4CD is currently selling close to the price of a Properbox). There doesn't seem any way the job could be done better. Do a brilliant job while its all yours. Think about the general listener as well as the specialist. That's the way to see off the competition from the likes of Proper.

Clementine, We're talking past one another (as is usual in these discussions!). Bear, Mosaic are targeting a minority specialist audience. Thus their care and interest. Proper are targeting a general audience. An audience that does not require perfect sound. By all means opt for the stance that Proper are immoral because they might source their material without acknowledgement. But don't expect them to do things they are not setting out to do. Their sets are not meant for audiophiles. That's like me complaining about all the alternative takes on a Mosaic. If that's not what I want I need to look elsewhere. Like Proper! Brad, It would be interesting to see a universal copyright law. How long would it take the US to come into line with Europe do you think?

The Propers etc are doing something to earn it. Putting an out-of-copyright package together in a format that is appealing to customers who would like that music. After years of having to buy the music on dozens of separate discs (organised that way to maximise company profits) the listener can get a concentrated package for a modest price. Again if the companies originally owning the source material had put in some forethought they could have spiked Proper's guns well in advance. It's hard to think of a more economical way to get a broad cross-section of Bebop than Proper's 'Bebop Spoken Here' set. If the companies owning the copyright had got their heads together in the early 90s they could have done this. In 15 years time someone is going to release the Beatles catalogue or Stones Decca catalogue in the equivalent of a couple of Proper boxes. Whose at fault here? The company repackaging into 70 minute discs (or whatever the format is then)? Or EMI/Decca for constantly repackaging this stuff on half-full CDs at full price?

No I don't have kids. But I am one. My parents have already given me all I need and very little of it was financial. They didn't have very much. I was very impressed by an interview I read with Dave Gilmour, the Pink Floyd guitarist a year back. A man worth millions. He was saying how he intended to donate most of it to charity. He would not endow his kids beyond giving them a decent education, helping start etc. Beyond that he viewed it as mistaken to featherbed their start in life. Where would they get the drive to make something themselves? I'm not arguing against your right to provide for your kids as much as you want. I am arguing that that right should not pass down the generations indefinitely. Now, as I said before, the right of physical property passing down indefinitely is so entrenched there is no hope of any change. I'd hate to see other forms of property go that way, however. If a performers makes a recording then I think its fine that for the next 50 years he/she and his/her kids should reap the benefits. After that...well it's time for his/her descendents to make their own way. [Don't worry, no danger I'll ever be in a position to take away your property rights. Though that would be the least of your worries. I'd be after your right to buy a privileged education or health care first!!!]

Well, yes. If you want to get whisked off to jail. The cards are very much stacked against you, however. The idea of the absolute right to pass on all one's property (short of taxes) for ever more is so entrenched it's very hard to see beyond. To shift artistic/intellectual property law in line with physical property law will not benefit the artist, engineer or whatever. It benefits their successors who've done bugger all to earn it. Here's another thought. In the next four years the Miles Coltrane Prestige's all come out of copyright in Europe. This is music that is going to attract a much wider audience than the forthcoming Benny Carter or Roy Eldridge Proper discs. You can bet your life that Proper and the rest are already planning how to handle this. Get in early with single or double discs as they become PD? Or wait until the last and put out a box (and risk being outflanked)? Now what are those who hold that copyright doing about it. I have OJC single discs. They sound fine to my muddied ears but I suspect they havn't had the full treatment that modern engineering could bring to them. The owners have sat on their asset for the last x number of years. Now would it not make sense for them to hire the best engineers and studios possible, produce a definitive (sorry!) box with exemplary packaging, essays etc and get it out there on the market before the copyright lapses? They could charge full whack and reel in the jazz fans in the next couple of years. And then - like Columbia are doing with their boxes - drop the price a few months ahead of the competition. It strikes me that those with the assets have all the cards until the date things go PD. Which makes me loath to shed tears for them when they find themselves faced with the likes of Proper boxes. Incidentally, just how much of the monies from those former Prestiges go to the estates of Davis, Coltrane, Garland, Chambers and Jones? Of course the prospect of Davis/Coltrane going PD is chicken feed alongside Elvis, Sinatra....

Many, many miles from the standards singers so popular today. Though not difficult. Details of her other UK releases here: http://www.provocateurrecords.co.uk/artist...splay=biography There are many more on Italian labels.

Said a bit tongue in cheek. The concept of passing on property is so ingrained in human society (thanks to those with lots of it and the power to shape the laws the way they want) I don't see that changing for a moment. That we should be able to pass on a reasonable amount of our property to our immediate family seems pretty fair. That the Windsors are passing on billions of pounds worth of the stuff seized by the forefathers centuries ago seems a bit off. But, again, you're into line drawing. And those with lots of it are not going to even allow serious discussion. And those with a little have long been terrified into thinking that the sky will fall in if a different system was to be tried that did not favour those already in possession. Which keeps them voting for those with lots. Clementine Because they're not in the business of specialist, academic, audiophile product. They're selling to people like me who are curious and find what they sell perfectly listenable. There will always be the other guys because there will always be those who want the perfect remastering, every out-take etc. The two markets are perfectly compatible. Now if the likes of Mosaic feel shortchanged by Proper maybe they should be looking at doing their own line for the less committed (and there are plenty of us). I somehow think that's not what they're interested in. In which case people like Proper will always fill the gap.

As a Wyatt fan from the early 70s I bought this as a single and was never too sure if it had any success in the wider world, being completely out of touch with the rock world by the early 80s (I wouldn't recognise a Fall song if it bit me!) But I keep hearing it on the radio - and it made No.68 in Mojo's recent 'Political Songs' poll. So it must be quite well known!

Norma Winstone. Maria Pia de Vito

I think you're being as selective with your ethics as I am, clementine. It's OK to burn a copy for someone who's not well off and you judge to really 'need' it? Hmm. Yes, I accept that Proper falls short in its failure to acknowledge or credit its sources. That's poor practice. But reason to denounce and boycott? Well think of all those companies down the years who short-changed musicians with dodgy contracts, one-off payments and the like, taking advantage of their youth, poverty, naivety or desparation. There'll probably not be too many labels that will survive our moral boycott there. If you want to find the villains who have really 'ripped-off' performers then Proper are way down the list. I suppose in the end we all draw the line in different places. I don't buy stuff that clearly infringes the 50 year copyright. Outside of that I'll buy. But I can understand your greater scruples even if I don't find them completely consistent.

But surely, using your ethics, if I want the Blue Sky Boys on Bear Family I should buy it myself (I'm assuming it's in print). And you should certainly not collude with me by burning me a copy. After all, could you vouch for the fact that I would make the appropriate donation to the appropriate fund? Using your ethics there is absolutely no excuse for burning a CD for anything beyond personal use. Even if it's OOP. After all, with burned copies circulating it might put back a legitimate release. I accept this is all extremely murky. But rather than seeing Proper as "opportunists and vultures" I tend to see them as businessmen/women who've spotted a niche in the market and are operating within the law. Whether they are acting 'morally' will clearly depend on ones own personal morality (I'll admit to frequently breaching copyright in the process of creating teaching materials). Proper also distribute Candid, Rounder, Topic, Arhoolie, Sugar Hill, Free Reed, Yazoo, Document, Blind Pig and other in the UK. If their business practices are so deplorable why do these companies do business with them? Surely they too are compromising the 'moral' high ground by working through Proper?

Oh! Good size. But blurred! (actually, that is exactly what Sherwood Forest looks like with my glasses off...or after a few beers!) Could be I've set my camera at too high a resolution...I've not used it much since last summer. I've put up photos at a lower resolution far more easily.

Hey, I'm a bloke. This is how we are wired! Below is the image done through photo editor as you mentioned. Remember it has to be less than 100K to be accepted. I'm confused as to how some people get beautiful giant images where I get postage stamps. Apologies for derailing a 'Spring' thread into a computer tutorial.

Congratulations!

Yes, it's always bothered me that people can pass on physical property indefinitely . Maybe that's the part of the law that needs to change making each generation work for its own prosperity rather than inheriting it from Daddy! Fat chance!

They are 'legit' within European copyright law. The issue is whether they are morally right to do this. But once you occupy the moral high ground saying you will not buy from a company that does not remaster itself or pay the source company, then you're going to have to adopt some fairly high standards for yourself. No burning CD-Rs or receiving CD-Rs (the blindfold tests are out!). No copying and pasting articles from newspapers onto the politics threads. No scanning pictures or text or downloading images to use yourself without first contacting the copyright owner. No buying second hand. In all these cases the artists, recording companies, writers, photographers etc get no recompense. Now you might respond "Ah, but I'm not making money out of it like Proper." True. It makes your sin a venial one...but a sin nonetheless. I can see Chuck's point about the proliferation of these cheap sets acting as a disincentive to the pioneering companies to do any work on this music at all. Yet I suspect both markets can co-exist. In the same way that you can buy cheap copies of out-of-copyright novels that nowadays are probably just scanned off someone elses edition; yet that does not stop the more established companies putting out more expensive editions. Personally, if I was going to buy a Shakespeare play I'd go for a well-known company because I know I'm likely to get some good commentary. Proper and Mosaic appeal to two very different markets. Mosaic will only ever sell to a small specialised audience - the limited nature of the editions acknowledge this. And that audience will buy the Mosaic anyhow, regardless of the existence of a cheaper edition. If all that existed was the Mosaic then this music would remain the preserve of a small subset of the jazz audience (itself small). Proper and their like put out sets for listeners who want a taste of this music but arn't sure if it's for them. They'll take a chance on a £15 Roy Eldridge or T-Bone Walker. They wouldn't on a £60 box. I can appreciate how infuriating it must be for those who put huge amounts of time and effort into remastering music to see it picked up elsewhere and sold for far less. But until an enforceable law appears that makes specific remasterings protected then this will continue. And people (like myself) will buy them.

Sorry Geoff, I was being unintentionally hemispherist!!!!! Shut your eyes, play a few spring tunes and imagine you're up this end of the world for a moment. Incidentally, I didn't think Sydney had seasons. Whenever we see it on the TV people are on the beach!

Well, I don't live in a yellow submarine but... I think aric has a point here. I was an eleven year old when that music was new. I never knew the album "Yellow Submarine" came off but I certainly knew "Yellow Submarine". Sang all the the variations in the playground too...I half recall a line about "We all live in a bubblegum machine" (perhaps a subconscious comment on globalisation and multinational companies!). So the Beatles may have compromised their chance to be 'artists'. But they connected with a range of listeners well beyond what the more self-consciously 'serious' performers did. In the same way that things like "When I'm 64" got them a hearing amongst older listeners (like my Dad!) who couldn't stomach Chuck Berry riffs but liked the jaunty, music hall style songs. When being judgemental about the huge variety within the Beatles music we need to bear in mind that they were interested in connecting with a much wider audience than most groups then, before or after. Having said that "Yellow Submarine" irritates me almost as much as "Octopuses Garden". But I'm glad they were there.

In general the 80s were "the decade that music forgot" to my ears. However, there were a few gems on the popular front. Most things XTC put out as singles (I'm using that as a definition of 'popular'). Robert Wyatt - "Shipbuilding" One of the great political songs given a perfect performance. Working Week - "Venceremos" and "Storm of Light" Two absolute stormers from a time when jazz was having a brief moment in the sun in the UK. The first had a fabulous melody sung by Wyatt (again!), Tracey Thorn (of Everything But the Girl) and then a wonderful Latin singer plus great solos by Larry Stabbins and Harry Beckett. The second had wonderous organ playing and a glorious vocal performance by Julie Tippetts (ne Driscoll) making a rare appearance beyond the free scene.

Yup. Proper are 100% within European law. No reason why they should feel any obligation to comply with US law in what they produce. I've always felt 50 years is quite enough time for performers to recoup their artistic investment. The 75 year rule is there to protect business interests, not the performers. I understand the argument that Proper are taking advantage of the remastering work of others. I just don't see how you would ever get an enforcable law protecting specific remastering. So its going to happen. And make no mistake, when the 75 years are up it'll be happening in the States too.

Couw, I have been using the Photo Editor programme up to now, but when I tried it on the above photo it just came up tiny! I think I just need to play with the Media Sizer programme. As with all these things the explanation of how to use it leaves a lot to be desired.

Yikes, Chris. Any recommendations? You are talking about one of my heroines! I would strongly recommend her only ECM solo album, "Somewhere Called Home". Norma, Tony Coe an her ex-hubby, John Taylor. A mixture of standards and jazz tunes she's put words to by the likes of Ralph Towner, Kenny Wheeler and Egberto Gismonti. The final track is a version of 'Tea for Two' that is recommended to all red-blooded males! Possibly more immediate (especially to those not attracted to ECM recordings) is "Well Kept Secret" - a mainly standards disc she recorded in the States with Jimmy Rowles just before he died. Fabulous record - as well 'Joy Spring' it has her arrangement of Rowles' 'The Peacocks' (called 'A Timeless Place') that has been widely covered. She's recorded widely with John Taylor and Kenny Wheeler as Azimuth and in collaboration with Canada's 'Maritime Orchestra'. She has this amazing ability to move between standards and more abstract music. The last time I saw her (last October) she was involved in a project doing interpretations on a wide range of Wayne Shorter tunes. In the last few years she's done a couple of nice discs with Fred Hersch. She has a new disc due shortly and another promised with UK pianist Nikki Iles. Details here: http://www.normawinstone.com/home.htm