monkboughtlunch Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 (edited) Does anyone know if Bock edited solos out of the multitrack tapes or just the stereo mixdown masters? Just curious because he was very liberal with editing out music to fit the confines of Lp running time. So with CD reissues of Pacific Jazz material, is it often a case of multitracks are missing so edited masters are used? Or did Bock actually chop up the multitracks instead--so that even if they remix from the multitracks they still contain edits? Edited August 20, 2006 by monkboughtlunch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felser Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 Does anyone know if Bock edited solos out of the multitrack tapes or just the stereo mixdown masters? Just curious because he was very liberal with editing out music to fit the confines of Lp running time. So with CD reissues of Pacific Jazz material, is it often a case of multitracks are missing so edited masters are used? Or did Bock actually chop up the multitracks instead--so that even if they remix from the multitracks they still contain edits? I know that several of the Pacific Jazz CD releases contain restored full-length performances, so I guess that would indicate the editing was done on the masters. I'm sure you'll get a much more complete and precise answer from others on the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 hmm that is intersting but i wouldn't dock Dick Bock too much- i have the most extreme, utmost respect for Pacific Jazz and World pacific and just today i got some of those albums. look at the gerald wilson orch. sax section on almost every album: Curtis Amy, Teddy Edwards, Harold Land, Bud Shank and Jack Nimitz. that is like a perfect sax section. pacific jazz sold out a little w/ all the chetty-chet-chet. i dont like my "chet baker sings" lp all too much, despite arrangements by bud shank and bobby cooper. FLUTE n OBOE on the other hand: I LOVE. anyone who criticizes it is out of their gourd. there is even a "flute n oboe w/ strings" one they also later released a lot of world music, eg. ravi shankar they recorded many pop-jazz albums, wayyyyyyyyyyyy b4 CTI n shit: im talking the mid 60s here. admitilly ive never heard most of those later bud shank pop albums but i am interested in the jazz arrangements, eg. michelle, w/ the sax section, girl in love, etc et al ----the only one i have like that is WINDMILLS OF YOUR MIND: THE MUSIC OF MICHAEL LEGRAND, which is a FANTASTIC lp. do any of you have that one? that is a must of jazz record. the only big problem with it is they do like 5 songs from 2 catherine deneuve pictures yet she is not naked on the cover, they got some budget model instead: for shame. OH by the way i am happy that 99% of my pac. jazz collection is all on vinyl. yes i only i have i think 2 or 3 pac jazz cds- everything else is on vinyl- i like that. its not like oh so holy blue note where you only see a TRUE BLUE once every haleys comet anorther good shank lp is BRAZIL BRAZIL BRAZIL- bud w/ strings doin bossas-- very cool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkboughtlunch Posted August 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 Yeah - I like Pacific Jazz too. Just curious if some of the CDs could possibly be restored to full length. For example, the Groove Holmes / Les McCann "Somethin Special" contains edits on the title track, plus a tape stretch at the very beginning of the song. Great music, but would love to hear it the way it was performed. Looks like some of those edits are lost to history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeweil Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 The Jim Hall Trio session tapes were ruined, likewise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 Pacific Jazz on cd has been few and far between--- the catalogue as been completely mishandled by blue note/capitol/emi in the greatest sense of the term. a few reissues here, a few there, but if i were to walk it would be a hard up case to find ONE pac jazz title if i had to tmw. thankfully here on the west coast Pacific jazz lps are still abundant and many titles pop up. are they more rare back east? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkboughtlunch Posted August 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 I guess the Jazz Crusaders are selling, since that seems to be the only material Cuscuna is now reissuing on CD from the Pacific catalog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 Keep an eye on that Mighty Quinn label. They seem to be hitting the PJ vaults, although there's been a decidedly non "West Coast" slant to what they've pulled so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 Keep an eye on that Mighty Quinn label. They seem to be hitting the PJ vaults, although there's been a decidedly non "West Coast" slant to what they've pulled so far. Never heard of Mighty Quinn records. Do they have a website? Googling for a name like this is likely to be unprofitable. MG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMP Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 I don't know, there seems to be a fair amount of PJ material on CD - From the later period, Curtis Amy, Carmell Jones, Gerald Wilson, Jazz Crusaders, Groove Holmes, Joe Pass - I think almost their entire catalogs are available. (The earlier stuff is a little more sketchy, but there's plenty of Chet Baker, Mulligan, Chico Hamilton, Gil Evans, and some Bud Shank, Wes, Art Pepper, Les McCann, the "Mosaic Select" of the piano trios...) (And don't forget the Mariachi Brass.) So it's not completely barren, although we could use "Les McCann Plays the Shampoo at the Village Gate"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 Keep an eye on that Mighty Quinn label. They seem to be hitting the PJ vaults, although there's been a decidedly non "West Coast" slant to what they've pulled so far. Never heard of Mighty Quinn records. Do they have a website? Googling for a name like this is likely to be unprofitable. MG http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20141 http://www.mighty-quinn.net/Home.html It's an EMI subsiary of some sort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereojack Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 It's an EMI subsiary of some sort. As has been stated in a previous thread, Mighty Quinn is in fact operated by Jerry Roche, who works at Mosaic. Apparently he was able to capitalize on Mosaic's relationship with EMI to license a number of titles owned by EMI, but to my knowledge Mighty Quinn is not a subsidiary of EMI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 The Don Ellis side on Mighty Quinn that I bought has an EMI logo on the spine & is copyright 2005 by EMI Special Markets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 The Don Ellis side on Mighty Quinn that I bought has an EMI logo on the spine & is copyright 2005 by EMI Special Markets. Thanks,I'll try and follow that through. Seems a bit like Koch reissues of Columbia material, which say Sony Music Special Products, though. MG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereojack Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 The Don Ellis side on Mighty Quinn that I bought has an EMI logo on the spine & is copyright 2005 by EMI Special Markets. This means that the disc was manufactured by EMI for Mighty Quinn. Mighty Quinn pays the manufacturing bill, and takes care of the distribution. The copyright on the material belongs to EMI. Several major labels maintain control of their master tapes (and hopefully, quality control) by manufacturing these "Special Markets" releases themselves, and delivering the inventory to the company that is licensing the material. Also, this way EMI is able to control the number of pieces manufactured. Usually these kind of deals involve some kind of minimum order. You will find that EMI-owned material issued on other specialty labels such as Collectables, Rounder, et al will also carry an EMI logo. Columbia Special Products operated for years under a similar structure. Any release that was on the CSP label was not distributed by Columbia, but by a third party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 I was about to type what Jack said. He's a smart guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 (edited) Thanks for clearing that up, Jack. And Chuck (by proxy ). The logo on the spine seems a bit of of heavy-handed product placement for a non-subsisiary affiliation (it seems to suggest subsidiarydom to me), but I guess it's a sign (literally) of the times. Although, all those Firestone Christmas records (now there's a Mosaic just waiting to happen ) had the CSP logo prominently displayed, so I guess not. If you'll indulge me, I need to ask this for my own edjumacation - what then is a true subsidiary? If EMI manufactures the product for Mighty Quinn, recieves revenue from it, and has discretion over what may or may not be issued, what's they added layer that makes a label a "subsidy"? I'm guessing that the main differences are that a true subsidy receives its capital from the parent company, right? And that the revenue to the parent comapny from an outfit like MQ stops at licensing fee/manufacturing costs? MQ, not EMI, gets all profits and pays all royalties, right? Just trying to sort this all out. Edited August 20, 2006 by JSngry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 (edited) The project was initiated by MQ, MQ owns the inventory and MQ makes the profit from the sales. Edit to add the entire financial risk is property of MQ. The royalites for EMI (and any artist's rights) are added to the manufacturing cost paid by MQ. MQ is responsible for publishing royalties. Edited August 20, 2006 by Chuck Nessa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 The project was initiated by MQ, MQ owns the inventory and MQ makes the profit from the sales. Edit to add the entire financial risk is property of MQ. The royalites for EMI (and any artist's rights) are added to the manufacturing cost paid by MQ. MQ is responsible for publishing royalties. Thanks Chuck and Jack. What I've never really GOT is, granted the licensee bears the risk, but there seems to be money in it. So why don't the majors go for themselves rather than allow these small firms to issue the material? Or am I wrong? Perhaps these little firms are all owned by eccentric millionaires who don't mind losing money on their hobby (and taking a tax loss). MG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereojack Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 What I've never really GOT is, granted the licensee bears the risk, but there seems to be money in it. So why don't the majors go for themselves rather than allow these small firms to issue the material? Or am I wrong? Perhaps these little firms are all owned by eccentric millionaires who don't mind losing money on their hobby (and taking a tax loss). I'm sure Chuck can shed some light on this. Small companies like Mighty Quinn have low overhead, compared to a major label with a large staff and a distribution network to support. Sales of 1000-2000 pieces just isn't profitable for them, but it can be for a small company which may be little more than a one man operation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 guess what i heard at the record store after work 2day u wont believe it: Bud Shank: MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR (world pacific)-- chet baker on tpt PLUS another flugelhrn. are the other horns. victor feldman on perc. i think maybe joe pass too. anyways the 1st side is all beatles covers: they do I AM THE WALRUS to start it off. although the arrangements are more straight than later jazz-rock covers, it is nonetheless a very early example of a pop-jazz fusion record. now just cause i didnt want to plunk down 13.99 for it, doesnt mean i didnt like it- it was pretty neat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 oHOhoihoiaHoh also saw this record by Teddy Charles and one side had shorty rodgers and jimmy guiuffre other said at quintet w/ jr montrose. that was 12.99 but i was pissed cause it still had its 8.98 OJC suggested retail price sticker on it too. chewy likes suggested retail price Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 Chu E. also has a job, apparently? Where ya' workin'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Kart Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 From the late Bill Perkins's fascinating Nov. 1995 Cadence interview: "...when I got off the road in 1968 with Stan Kenton, [Dick Bock] hired me. I was remarried, acquired two children, and one more on the way, and I worked for Dick as sort of a go-fer, and he taught me how to edit, which is a great thing because he was, god bless his soul, a terrible tape editor. (Laughs)." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllenLowe Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 Bock was in the film industry prior to this, I think - he wasn't, by any chance, a film editor, was he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.