Big Beat Steve

Seconded! He has a "bite" there that somehow is mising (maybe MUST be missing) from carefully produced LP-length sessions of the 50s. Not that these 50s recordings would be bad at all - on the contary (in fact the above post has spurred me on to give that "Urbane Jazz" session for a spin), but there are moments (such as in this case) when the 78rpm-length confines really are an advantage for studio sessions as they "condense" the music into its most intense "essence". My close second in this would be "Roy Eldridge at the Arcadia Ballroom" (Jazz Archives JA-14) - live recordings from 1939.

:tup

Wow ... Predating Delaunay's Hot Discography and even Panassié?? Where can I get a copy? @sonnymax: Could it be that the "hundreds of recordings" he appeared on were NON-jazz studio items?

For your erudition, JSngry: BBS, please take a look at this website ... (see above) and you will see where my interests lie. The Org. posts are sort of leftovers. (In the meantime, I tend to agree with J.A.W. )

Holger, you (and your past track record of posts here) are beginning to give me the creeps! Isn't there anything of interest to post in matters jazz but OBITUARIES?

Sad though the triggering event is, this should see some publicity action by Bear Family Records (they've reissued a fair bit of the recordings Ladi Geisler did under his own name). Am not familiar with his Kaempfert involvement and though I've picked up the occasional original 45 of him through the years I find it a bit hard to pin down stylistically. I'd say those who like Jörgen Ingmann and the like should find his recordings appealing too.

Reminds me a bit of some of my hi-fi-minded school buddies in the late 70s who'd drool about the latest hi-fi-fads, i.e. dummy head stereophony and quadrophony recordings. The ultimate listening experience and the super sound to end all sounds, and really THE THING to listen to, according to them. Little did it matter to them, though, that the selection of vinyl platters actually available in those recording technologies was limited to a couple dozen items, not more. Musical contents really seemed to have taken a back seat to effects and sounds. Silly ....

Actually when I started reading this thread now (had never noticed it before) the original question immediately made me think of Frank Strozier too. When I got that original copy of "Fantastic Frank Strozier" on VeeJay I was sort of puzzled about the cover pic as I had imagined him to be Black (O.K., a/a for those who prefer that term) but wasn't so sure about it anymore after seeing that cover. Now what about Jackie McLean, then? What IS the common consensus or established knowledge, then? Can't we just cut out this P.C. or "being touchy" thing for a second and just give a factual answer? I mean, it is NOT something that values or valorizes anybody in any way these days anymore. It's just about stating a fact, one way or another. And haven't subjects such as this been discussed in the case of Creoles too? Without any P.C. qualms? As for me, I've always guessed he falls in the same league as Kenny Burrell or EARLE WARREN (of the Basie band), for that matter, i.e. a very light-skinned Black who might even have passed as White in some contexts. Now tell me frankly, is it so or not?

At times I had (and sometimes stilll have) trouble really enjoying early jazz and blues etc. from the (circa pre-1926) "acoustic" era. It just sounded rather "tinny" to me and it was all too obvious that some instruments were underrecorded and others were overrecorded. Usually I can adjust to it but depending on the reissues/pressings it still can require quite a bit of effort (and it's not necessarily the older reissues that sound "worse" to me). But apart from that, all in all the typical "78 rpm sound" does not bother me on reissues at all, not even if the original copies used for the reissues were less than pristine and some click, pops, hiss and crackle remains. Unless recordings are "restored" in such a way that they become unlistenable (at least to my ears), for instance as a result of heavy noise reduction, boosted highs, etc. Agreed all the way. I have a feeling all too many remasterings and sound restorations (even of music of the 33 and 45 rpm era) have resulted in the originals sounds being "remastered to death". Especially since today's listeners seem to be keen on a more "dynamic" "listening experience" (in line with the way today's music is predominantly recorded and mastered) some of these remastered recordings sound over-accentuated (can't think of a better way to express it offhand) compared to the originals.

She Ain't Got No HAIR (Professor Longhair) Some Gremmie Stole My HAIR Bleach (Jack Marshall Band) Short HAIRed Ugly Woman (Gene Phillips) Tearing HAIR (Joe Thomas) Long Blond HAIR (Johnny Powers) Next, please: BONES

O.K.: Island in the Sun (Harry Belafonte) (obviously...) Sun Ship (John Coltrane) Sun Snog (Pharoah Sanders) Sun Valley Jump (Glenn Miller) That Lucky old Sun (Frankie Laine a.o.) Next one ('cause sidetracked above): ROAD

Bird Feathers Bird of Prey Blues Bird Gets The Worm And so as not to stay in a rut, I'll add: Little Bird (Pete Jolly) Surfin' Bird (Trashmen) Next one: ROAD

Oh, stop whining about your pet enemy Pujol. Even if you try to disguise your whining with smart-aleck streetwise talk, it's still whining. If you want to whine, how about whining about those who openheartedly endorse certain U.K. box sets just because they are oh so convenient to allow them to fill 78-pm era P.D. music gaps in their collections at a good price? And the same kind of gap filling with (50+ year old) P.D. hard bop reissues that fall into the same P.D. domain is a non-no? Aw c'mon ... Little point in ranting on about what MIGHT be done in the reissue field and where Pujol allegedly had the ground covered instead. But outside the well-publicised ripoffs that Uptown (Bird&Diz '45 etc.) seems to have suffered from (which I do NOT endorse, of course, but I doubt you are willing to take note of that, whatwith being in the argumentative rut that you seem to be stuck in), have I ever heard you being just as outspoken about blatant re-reissues such as in the case of the U.K. Ace label that rightfully acquired the King masters lock stock and barrel, did exceedingly well-done reissues, and then whoosh, the market gets swamped with box sets on certain (non-Spanish, BTW) P.D. labels featuring King artists such as Wynonie Harris. Don't you think this would hurt Ace's sales too? All legal as per the prevailing 50-year P.D. laws - right. But "ethical" by the yardsticks of those from your corner of the field? One for you to anwer ... And YET so many jazz fans seem to be drooling about exactly these re-reissue labels on this forum. A skewed perception if there ever was one. So if you are that keen on complaining about one, complain about them all. Because labels keeping a (comparatively) low profile is no excuse for "not wanting to know" for convenience's sake if you are playing the ethics card to the extent you seem to be intent on.

Who's keeping you from promoting free downloads and using them till you drop? Certainly not me. I neither find downloads offensive not would I keep anybody from using them if they prefer so and would not even mind them in specific cases myself either. That's a decision for each and everybody to make - based strictly on where one finds added value in the product and how one would value that added value in terms of cost (or free availability). Yardsticks and preferences on that vary and there is no universally applicable rule of what is supposed to be worth how much to whom, least of all yours. Of course, if we look closer at your claim that P.D. stuff ought to be GIVEN away and not be used to make money with, then obviously this leads us to those "customers" who only want the bare-bones music and do not value artwok, booklets, liner notes, discog info or whatever and therefore go for free downloads. Would all of these "bare-bones" listeners differentiate by reissue label of the physical product (not all of them have axes to grind with specific reissue labels, you know Most downloaders are just listeners )? The material in question being in the P.D., if you search hard enough I'd almost guess download availability would even include entire MOSAIC sets too, right, then? (Remember, there are indeed some who really do not go for liner notes etc. and just want to listen to the music) But where would THAT end?? If you want to condone that - O.K., so be it ... but that's for you to decide. Because - remember: Yer pays what yer are prepared to pay for (or ain't prepared). But once free downloads of P.D. material (ANY P.D. material) are advocated there will be no further distinctions of what "ought" to be downloadable (because one man's "value added meat" is another man's "irrelevant, superfluous poison").

I thought I made it clear in my other post but I'll state it more plainly - It costs 10's or thousands of dollars to bring a copyright infringement lawsuit against these labels and/or distributors. Most labels (or copyright holders of defunct labels) cannot justify spending $50,000 in legal fees to stop the sale of a CD that *might* generate a few thousand dollars in sales. To make this clear again: I am not talking about lawsuits by the companies. THAT problem is known. The question of whether authorization to reissue P.D. material has been granted is an entirely different matter because the product as it is is totally legal in specific parts of the world. So contrary to the example you named where the (pirate-copy) product in question should not have existed in the first place, here it is a case of a product that is legally marketed in one part of the world but strictly speaking cannot be marketed in another (BTW, are you 100% sure that ALL Japanese reissuers of P.D. recordings come away that much cleaner in this question of the 50 vs 70 year P.D. cutoff date, especially with copying being the ultimate form of flattery by Asian "standards")? Now if there are such copyright laws then it ought to be commonly known (to the authorities in charge) that the import of certain goods (in this case CDs in violation of U.S. copyright/P.D. laws) is against the law in the USA. Just like importing certain goods from the USA (certain medical goods in my example above) is against the law in certain European countries. Now why aren't U.S. importing laws being enforced by the AUTHORITIES that are supposed to do the enforcement? Just like corresponding laws are enforced over here (not 100% but enough to deter many). THAT is where you have to start asking questions. Because even if you cannot catch them all, one mega-big clampdown would no doubt go a long way to deter a lot of importers. Or is it that you'd rather not want to be tempted at all and would therefore prefer the product not to exist (even in those parts of the world where it is legal)?

And even if you look well beyond the Fantasy catalog, where do you often end up in the case of FS, for example? Does ANYBODY actually think that big bucks are to be made by reissuing the "Bob Graf sessions", the Bob Davis LP on the Zephyr (whazzatt??) label, the "Westchester Workshop", the Don Bagley LPs, etc.? If it really was only about making as many bucks (relatively speaking) as could be made even in this tiny niche market, then wouldn't there be lots of "name" artists out there who'd be the prime "targets" any time because they'd attract lots (relatively speaking again) of prospective buyers who'd even buy any previously unreleased or long OOP lo-fi CD of those name artists practising in their closets. Realizing that there IS a shady area by some yardsticks (but not shadier than with any other PD reissue projects) I'd really, really hate to use the used and abused term of a "labor of love" to describe these reissues but I'd still say a fair amount of idealism has to go into resurrecting THAT kind of obscure music and not the more obvious names.

So it seems like there really are those who feel sorry about not being able to take control (or to see control being taken by somebody they would feel comfortable with) on something that they've lost control of (because these items have gone PD elsewhere) so they now start acting like "if I cannot ensure control is being taken by those who I'd like to take control then I'll see to it that these things are distributed freely so nobody takes control." The bottom line? Sour grapes, that's all. Now I'll call GIGA-bullshit on that. Because it's not about any MORAL "triumph" at all. It's only about availability of marketable goods in a package that suits the buyers' expectations and pocketbooks. You pay what you are prepared to pay. If you are not prepared to pay - fine. But others decide differently and that's only THEIR VERY OWN decision and judgment, not yours. Because nobody forces them to pay. Just like some would even want to shell out double or triple the normal amount of money for Mosaics though fidelity or packaging cannot be possibly three or four times better than on other, more "mundane" reissues (PD or not). Tastes and expectations vary, and the legal situation being the way it is, there is room for everybody within that legal framework.

Which is what I meant when I spoke above about "being afraid of losing control".

Indeed. Thanks for summing this up so very much to the point. Your reference to Japan and its PD laws, in particular, deserves to be recalled indeed. PD laws anywhere (INCLUDING Japan) first of all do not compel that material to be BOUGHT. Each and everyone is free NOT to buy it. But passing judgment on those who do buy them, well ... BTW, if I wanted a free yet ethical download of P.D. recordings, I'd look here, for example: http://westernswing78.blogspot.com/ Please note the fine print about "physical product" reissues. Do the download sites that you advocate follow the same principle?

Of course I do. Among friends, in particular. But today's world being the way it is, if I expected my business associates and clients NEVER to lie to me on business matters I'd be utterly naive and probably unfit for business. Be that on alleged business deadline constraints, alleged money constraints, input to be provided from business associates or clients but being withheld for reasons that clearly are just excuses, etc. etc. (Note I have been self-employed in a freelance job for a very long time now so I've had some dealings here and there too and have come to take more than one business statement with a grain of salt and YET had to accept them at face value, despite the fact that I knew better . Knowing darn well you are being lied to right in your face sometimes is just part of the game.) And just to repeat my question (and sorry for being quite to the point now), and may I - with all due respect - please ask you not to be evasive: What would your guess be what OTHER P.D. reissue labels would say if they were asked the same question about the legitimacy of those products being sold in the US (where the P.D. laws differ from those in other parts of the world)? And please don't tell me they had not been asked and that this question is therefore beside the point. Because it is not (as the underlying problem exists with those "other" labels too and we all know it) but in this case I would have to assume that you prefer not to know and not to find out. Which in the end would put us all very close together in how we prefer to deal (or should I say "cope") with "the world being the way it is today".

Today's world being the way it is, it tells me that he is arranging details of his dealings to suit his own frame of reference (and possibly peace of mind - stating it often enough until one believes it oneself, maybe ) - just like I guess many, many others in every realm of the business world do too on a daily basis. And it also tells me he had the good fortune of being able to clarify a few points of what he did in this interview as well as the MISFORTUNE of being the #1 reissue producer being singled out for critical scrutiny in this P.D. reissue market niche. Would you like to take a guess about what the producers of certain U.K. (P.D.) boxes would have to say about the legality of their product as being marketed in the US (where AFAIK it is being marketed) when so questioned? Or the producers from other non-Spanish P.D. reissue labels? The more this debate about the legitimacy of those P.D. labels appears to be all about singling out specific labels for criticism, the more it reeks of "being afraid of losing control" to me, and the Spanish seem to have struck a nerve there with those who seem to dread losing control. In short, blaming P.D. reissue labels that circumvent the USA P.D. laws? Fine - go ahead, blame them. No doubt there are valid reasons to do so from the U.S. angle. But then blame them ALL. Or else it will have to be assumed that there are entirely different agendas behind this.

Again one of those "Which was first? The chicken or the egg"-type questions ... With all due respect, but to me this really is like a HUGE lot of sales transactions involving exporting (and therefore importing) goods from around the world into another country that may be subject to different laws of what is allowed to be sold in the respective destination (importing) country. Such as radar warning devices mnarketed legally in the USA and strictly illegal in Germany, or pharmaceutical goods and medical products legally on sale in the USA and exported wholesale by US peddlers (or should I say "dealers" to stick with a term used on that other Pujol thread? ) to destinations around the world, and in some countries in Europe they are strictly illegal and anybody caught importing them (even for private end use) there will be fined heavily. No notion anywhere in the destination countries of putting the blame on the sellers, though. See the parallelity? Now tell me, if you will, please - where are the U.S. enforcement bodies that will curtail importing these goods (CD) if they are so illegal there? Sleeping on the job? Too indifferent to care? See where the blame definitely lies too (or even primarily)? IMHO putting the blame on the seller and exporter (who is only satisfying a demand the legality of which is for the importer to clarify and regulate in their specific destination countries as this is where IMPORT rules are applicable) is irrelevant as long as in the abovementioned examples (and many more, against the total gross transaction volume of which this CD businiess really pales) the exporters aren't just a much taken to task.

True, Larry, but I have severe doubts that the "ethical" aspect has ever been so much at the forefront of purchaser's motivations to purchase. I have a feeling that it rather was and is a matter of availability and convenience and (due to the lack of activity elsehere) a sort of "last resort" approach if one was keen enough to obtain those goods at all. As for lying in the public's faces, oh well ... I'd rather not think about how many out there who claim all sorts of noble motivations are lying in our faces in even bigger ways day in day out (no, of course I am NOT talking about persons like Messrs. Lion or Nessa!), and no doubt at least a sizable portion of all us here should be aware of a lot of that but it seems we prefer not to be reminded of it too much, lest our own actions in that field (including buying records, simple as that ...) become too much of a quandary because we wouldn't know anymore where to turn without having to feel some sort of guilt if we REALLY wanted to keep up our high moral principles all the time. Just one example: That extension of European P.D. coypright laws from 50 to 70 years which was pushed hard by musician moguls such as Cliff R. and Paul McC., and this at a time when the music of the one had only just begun to fall into PD and the music of the other was about to enter PD. Coincidence? So do we actually pretend we believe this entire initiative was only launched for the PRIME reason of giving those poor, semi-anonymous session musicians some long-merited royalty bucks that they had not received in the past or were threatened to receive no longer? Or wouldn't this rather be only an incidental and occasional side effect whereas the BIG royalty money is to be made elsewhere? Who are they trying to kid ... As if the royalties from relatively successful 60s pop hits where it is a historically known fact that the band members in whose name the record charted did NOT ACTUALLY play their instruments on those records would now all of a sudden and automatically go to those session musicians who'd been called in to do the chores back then but who were never credited for this publicly at the timne the records were released. People who know much more about the insides of the music business than simple collectors like me have strongly doubted this alleged motivation ever since that law project was put on the agenda, and by all accounts these doubts do not seem totally unfounded. And YET we are being fed that blurb. Talk about lying ...

In BIG business I am afraid there are a lot like that who cover up in a big way (so I am not really surprised that niche markets have their shady niches too). It is not a matter of trusting them - it is a matter of buying goods for purely practical reasons in a world that is the way it is - not least of all due to the nonfeasance of those who COULD do better. That said (and please bear with me for my candor - I am indeed aware of your credentials), would you have trusted Jack Kapp from Decca if you had been one of his contemporaries, and even though you are not but are knowledgeable anyway, has this kept you from buying pressings of the recordings that Count Basie did for Decca in past decades? (No doubt you know what I am getting at, right?) So much for the ways of the world ... And as for those "other" Spanish labels (not FS) doing re-reissues of previously reissues - unethical this looks indeed, right (and I avoid the more blatant cases too), but is this ILLEGAL as long as the copyright Public Domain limits of those countries where the goods are manufactured are respected? And that said, would you protest against tose "Proper" products in the same manner? I've named relatively blatant cases of them re-reissuing stuff that had been reissued not that long before too, and STRANGELY ENOUGH hardly anybody has seen fit to comnent on that, whereas as soon as the trigger word "Andorra" or "Barcelona" comes up they are all over the place like the proverbial Pavlovian dogs. Strictly speaking, of course those British re-reissues are just as legal as others that comply with P.D. laws but home come hardly anybody finds much to say about ethics there? Treasured convenience, maybe? Or sensitivity vs LP-era reissues whereas 78-rpm era reissues are of no concern? Strange ....

Oh come on, King Ubu, really ... The "most" of course is an exaggeration but when it comes to covering almost the ENTIRE spectrum of what was released then in at least a passably representative manner you kow better than that .... Just take a look at what the "majors" reissue and how they mess up whatever they have in their vaults (do I need to go into details of how the once so great entire OJC catalog fell by the wayside through sheer couldn't-care-less-ism? And this one only had covered a handful of labels from the outset). Of course, if one's perception of 50s jazz is limited to BN and a scant few other "cult" labels and "cult" artists, then yes, there are reissues aplenty. But is this one-eyed tunnel vision really doing the subject matter justice? Somehow I have a feeling some of the beefs against FS reissues (where in the vast majority of cases you really cannot speak of blatant direct re-reissues - u.e. "lifting" - of material that had been reissued only very, very recently elsewhere) boil down to the fact that certain records aren't that exclusive anymore. Well, should I feel sore because some of my original LPs (Bob Enevoldsen on Liberty - see Jazzwax article, Bob Davis LPs, Westchester Workshop, etc.) are now available as reissues that easily via FS? I don't, except that I regret that a lot of their 2 LPs on one CD type reissues combine one I already have with one I don't have (and am not likely to find anywhere else at an affordable price). But that's another matter. Oh, and please don't nobody mention Japan to me. As long as their reissues are as hard to get as they are from over here and are priced the way they are, and tend to vanish as fast as they do they are no REASONABLE yardstick of how to keep things in print and available. At least not in each and every case for me anyway. And are there really no needledrops in there among those Jap reissues? Not even among those they did and do - for ever so brief runs of availability - of European jazz stuff (stuff that has been obscure ever since its original release and where probably most remaining original copies are now with Asian "investors" )? So ... yes, IMHO Jazzwax makes some fairly reasonable points. What's been said here a zillion times. But fell on deaf ears with those who prefer to cuddle their beefs. "And let's not forget that if it weren't for Pujol and Fresh Sound, we'd never know how most of the jazz albums recorded in the 1950s sound." "If you harbor a beef, it really should be directed at American record companies that have steadfastly refused to release these albums, granting Pujol a smart business niche." "You don't like that these CDs from Spain are sold here or that Pujol operates under another continent's set of copyright laws? Don't buy them." "Frankly, I can't think of a single jazz musician who has ever complained to me about their earlier works being re-issued by Fresh Sound. Most have told me they're happy that the label has kept their names and music alive when American record labels have failed to do so." Yet I for one would be interested to hear from anyone who has tangible proof that musicians actually DID complain and tried to enforce withdrawal of the reissues etc. (Speaking of which and seeing how certain estates are kept in firm stranglehold by the heirs/families etc., is there any conclusive evidence that Sue Mingues has sternly objected (and threatened lawsuits) to the reissue of Charles Mingus' "Jazzical Moods" LP on Period and "Mingus Three" LP on Jubilee by Fresh Sound on vinyl in the 80s and still in print on CD in their current catalog today, along with several others?)