Mosaic Contemporary

[Hot Ptah]

I'm guessing they need to make a quick buck to keep their core business going... Nothing wrong with that in my opinion, but I certainly won't be buying any of the discs mentioned.

This is pretty much my thinking, too. If Mosaic needs to expand its horizons in order to keep releasing the good stuff, it's OK with me. I'm not sure I understand what people are concerned about "tarnishing the brand" unless it somehow impacts their ability to continue the boxes.

To the extent that brand identity reflects reality, my notion of Mosaic is a quality product, involving only recordings of clear artistic merit. I might not like some of them, but I respect all of them as being chosen for their merit as music. I have thought of Mosaic as the George Washington of jazz labels.

If Mosaic is going to become a hit and miss label, with Chu Berry coming out one week and the collected late 1970s works of Bob James the next, it will change the way I think of it. Instead of automatically considering all of their releases for potential purchase or gift lists, I will pause and wonder if a new release is trash or treasure, and will wonder if I have the time, patience and energy to analyze which it is, and why. I may come to think of Mosaic as the Lyndon B. Johnson of jazz labels.

[Dan Gould]

I'm guessing they need to make a quick buck to keep their core business going... Nothing wrong with that in my opinion, but I certainly won't be buying any of the discs mentioned.

This is pretty much my thinking, too. If Mosaic needs to expand its horizons in order to keep releasing the good stuff, it's OK with me. I'm not sure I understand what people are concerned about "tarnishing the brand" unless it somehow impacts their ability to continue the boxes.

To the extent that brand identity reflects reality, my notion of Mosaic is a quality product, involving only recordings of clear artistic merit. I might not like some of them, but I respect all of them as being chosen for their merit as music. I have thought of Mosaic as the George Washington of jazz labels.

If Mosaic is going to become a hit and miss label, with Chu Berry coming out one week and the collected late 1970s works of Bob James the next, it will change the way I think of it. Instead of automatically considering all of their releases for potential purchase or gift lists, I will pause and wonder if a new release is trash or treasure, and will wonder if I have the time, patience and energy to analyze which it is, and why. I may come to think of Mosaic as the Lyndon B. Johnson of jazz labels.

Fascinating analogies but unless you've had a standing order for every single Mosaic, don't you already analyze the inherent value of each new Mosaic offering?

[ghost of miles]

Resale value & collectability doesn't concern me (I'm of the "you'll-have-to-pry-this-music-from-my-cold-dead-fingers" school), but I can understand it as a concern for others. I guess what I mean about the quality of the brand, though, is somewhat related to what Hot Ptah addresses above. I just took a look at the "About Mosaic" page again:

“Remastered to the highest standards, pressed on top-quality vinyl or CD, and sumptuously packaged, these editions are designed to please the most demanding of collectors.” – Richard Cook/Brian Morton, The Penguin Guide to Jazz

Mosaic Records was launched in 1983 and was the first company devoted exclusively to reissuing jazz recordings in limited-edition boxed sets. Started by Michael Cuscuna and Charlie Lourie, it began with a proposal for the complete, definitive boxed sets of significant artists like Thelonious Monk. It took over a year to get everything in place, including rights to lease masters. Mosaic was a slow starter and the ensuing years were an emotional and financial roller coaster of good and bad times with a healthy helping of stress as a constant.

However after more than 20 years (including a Grammy Award), we are still standing and continue to be associated with the great artists and music showcased on our website. Mosaic Records had an ambitious agenda when its doors were opened and a commitment to following the principles that have guided us for the past 20 years and with your support, they will for the next 20 years.

Mosaic Records has offered Limited Edition Boxed sets since its inception. The sets are housed in a 12" x 12" box with a full-size booklet. In the last few years, we have added to our product line with Mosaic Selects and Mosaic Singles. These carry the same attention to quality, detail and service that you and we expect from this company. As jazz fanatics, we know the music deserves it.

MOSAIC RECORDS BOX SETS

Important Artists -

Not Just the Biggest Names.

The artists we choose are selected for their place in the history of American music. Music, above all, is what determines if an artist belongs on Mosaic. You won't necessarily find us going for the big commercial names. But, neither will you find us discriminating against them.

Limited Edition Pressings.

Mosaic Box sets are limited. Once they are sold out we will never make them available again. Mosaic does not own Pacific Jazz, Atlantic, Columbia, RCA, Blue Note or any other catalog. With the exception of a few sets, we lease all of our recordings from other record companies. The leases vary in detail, but in every case there's a cap on either the number of units we are allowed to manufacture or the number of years we're allowed to offer the set for sale.

Complete, Definitive Collections.

Choosing the artist is only half the battle. The other half is deciding upon a historically viable concept. We want Mosaic Records Box Sets to be as important, and as complete as we can make them. Our sets include every significant track that falls within the scope of a given project, presented in an organized, chronological manner. We go into the vaults of as many record labels as necessary to examine all the original session tapes. In addition to all previously issued material, Mosaic sets are usually rich with unreleased tracks and valid alternate takes. It's no accident we're considered the label for fans and collectors “who want it all“.

Information, Photographs and More Information.

To put everything into its proper and fascinating perspective, we commission leading authorities to write our booklets and supply collectors with all pertinent dates, personnel listings and discographical information. In the age of microsizing our Mosaic Records Box Set booklet has been kept to 12“ x 12“ which allows for easier reading and does justice to the many session photographs included.

The Best We Know How to Make.

From the quality of our pressings to the printing of our booklets - every aspect of each Mosaic set reflects our deep respect for the music. And our customers.

MOSAIC SELECT

- 3 CD Sets Crammed With Multiple Sessions.

- Separate Booklet With Original Album Notes.

- Value Priced.

- Newly Remastered.

- Limited Editions.

MOSAIC SINGLES

- Reissue Of Classic Jazz Albums.

- Original Artwork And Liner Notes.

- Many With Bonus Tracks.

- Newly Remastered.

“It’s a pity that I can’t properly convey to you the joy and gratitude I feel every time I receive a shipment, a catalogue, or even a postcard from Mosaic. It is indeed exciting and moving to know that this dedication to quality and detail still exists in our world. The album booklets alone are such a great example of the creativeness and hard work that is put into each one of your releases. Rare photos, personal and affectionate recollections of the artists, detailed session notes - nothing is missing!” -A customer, Miami, Florida

That's what they themselves put up on their website. I think Mosaic is nearly all about the brand... they pride themselves (and sell themselves) on it. They want their customers to think of their releases as nearly-magical jazz commodities. That's why seeing something like an "Ultimate Earl Klugh" collection threatens to snap the spell and makes some folks go "Huh?!"

I want to see Mosaic stay viable, because I want to be able to buy those future Chu Berry, Johnny Mercer, Bobby Hutcherson/what-have-you sets, and I know what a cold, bleak, cruel world the jazz reissue marketplace is right now... and nobody's doing it better than Mosaic, although Water and some of the boutique labels can give them a run for their money on single reissues. As I said in my earlier post, this offshoot operation certainly won't prevent me from buying the classic sets and singles that they do produce, and hell, I'd even like to hear that Freddie myself. If they ultimately "water down" the brand & alienate much of their customer base in doing so, however, it might eventually be a cause of real concern. In the long run they probably benefit somewhat from this, in terms of bottom line. But it is a modification, I think, in how they're defining themselves. Hmmm--maybe more of a message to that cover on the new Tolliver than we thought!

[Kyo]

Don't care much for those compilations but I will be buying Super Blue for sure.

[ghost of miles]

I'm guessing they need to make a quick buck to keep their core business going... Nothing wrong with that in my opinion, but I certainly won't be buying any of the discs mentioned.

This is pretty much my thinking, too. If Mosaic needs to expand its horizons in order to keep releasing the good stuff, it's OK with me. I'm not sure I understand what people are concerned about "tarnishing the brand" unless it somehow impacts their ability to continue the boxes.

To the extent that brand identity reflects reality, my notion of Mosaic is a quality product, involving only recordings of clear artistic merit. I might not like some of them, but I respect all of them as being chosen for their merit as music. I have thought of Mosaic as the George Washington of jazz labels.

If Mosaic is going to become a hit and miss label, with Chu Berry coming out one week and the collected late 1970s works of Bob James the next, it will change the way I think of it. Instead of automatically considering all of their releases for potential purchase or gift lists, I will pause and wonder if a new release is trash or treasure, and will wonder if I have the time, patience and energy to analyze which it is, and why. I may come to think of Mosaic as the Lyndon B. Johnson of jazz labels.

Fascinating analogies but unless you've had a standing order for every single Mosaic, don't you already analyze the inherent value of each new Mosaic offering?

True enough, but I think he means that the "trust" which tips some decisions might be lost... i.e., the "Mosaic put this out so it must be music of merit, music that I might really appreciate at some point even if I'm on the fence about it now" factor that might help sway some folks. Ultimately, I guess it doesn't really matter if one chooses simply to ignore the new label all together. I'll be curious to see what they do down the line, and will probably order the Hubbard.

I'm sure MC & others involved gave a lot of thought to this latest project.. they surely were aware it would strike some as an unfortunate step. I don't know the current economic state of their operation, or if that even played a role in taking this direction. I just hope that they eventually get around to the Braxton Arista Quartets...

[DMP]

Well, I like Herbie Nichols as much as the next person, but my jazz collection contains plenty of the above artists (and the albums "Super Blue" and "Afro-Classics"), so I'm happy to see some of this stuff out again. Why not? I think many jazz fans have room for all forms of the music, and my collection contains not only just about everything that Charlie Parker and John Coltrane recorded, but also almost everything that Herbie Mann did! I'm not getting rid of my Albert Ayler just because I might get an Earl Klugh compilation. Of course, I'd prefer they put out "The Ultimate Argo Recordings of Gene Shaw..."

[mikeweil]

This only confirms to me that there is a tendency among the majors - at least EMI and SONY/BMG, to whom Mosaic has a good relationship - to have the specialists handle the top level reissues.

[JSngry]

Earl Klugh on Mosaic?

Earl Klugh's first few albums were on Blue Note.

[Guest the mommy]

i agree with DUMP. i only wish that they actually had made the hubbard a mosaic rather than a single reisue. freddie hubbard had a few good 70s albums post-CTI.

[Guest the mommy]

i mean i wouldn't buy it but could anyone really say for instance a mosaic of the complete jean luc ponty atlantic sessions wouldn't be awesome?

[JSngry]

If Mosaic puts out a Chu Berry set and an Earl Klugh side, hey, what does it really mean other than that Mosaic's put out a Chu Berry set and an Earl Klugh side?

I don't understand the "fuss". Do you buy the label or the music? Sure, there's been a few labels where you feel that "if it's on Label X. it's got to be worth a listen", but c'mon... Those are inevitably indie labels ran by one or two people with a shared vision. Mosaic was never such a label, "romantic" notions to the contrary. Mosaic was/is a reissue label. Now, the whatever-it's-called division of Mosaic that's put out the Tolliver thing, that's a different story, and that is probably going to be one of "those" labels. But Mosaic proper has always been about reissuing, not producing. A reissue label needs to have something to reissue, and the pool of viable or even semi-viable reissue product is not infinite at any given time. You gotta wait for time to pass and a void to be created. Apparently, there's a void for Earl Klugh. It may not be "our" void, but hell, so what. Texas has given us Fathead Newman as well as George Bush. Mosaic can give us Chu Berry and Earl Klugh. It ain't a perfect world.

Besides, Earl Klugh can play. I'm not at all a fan of what he plays, but the man can play. There's worse things in life that can happen than people who can play being viable commercial entities.

I will say this though - Matt Pierson may or may not be a "moron", but his work at WB left me unimpressed far more often it didn't. The guy brought a "major label" agenda to a decidedly non-major label music, or so it seemed. Thank god he's just handling reissues of stuff that was originally conceived in line with what it appears is what he already knows. Again, there's worse things that could happen...

[Sundog]

i mean i wouldn't buy it but could anyone really say for instance a mosaic of the complete jean luc ponty atlantic sessions wouldn't be awesome?

I'd buy that set.

[ghost of miles]

I don't understand the "fuss". Do you buy the label or the music? Sure, there's been a few labels where you feel that "if it's on Label X. it's got to be worth a listen"

Well, sure--Blue Note for one, to make a case quite close to home. Where did most of the posters on this board come from? Of course you buy for the music, but I don't think you can deny that a # of the people who post here certainly "trust" the Blue Note label of yore. And Mosaic, IMO, has very much built upon that sort of identity/brand/label loyalty.

I agree w/most of what you're saying and don't think that ultimately this is a big deal, but I would certainly define Mosaic as a "label"--even if they do only reissues. A label in the sense of a record/business company purveying a certain brand of music. And yeah, Blue Note recorded a diversity of artists, but there are a lot of folks on this board unhappy with the current incarnation of the label for the direction they're taking and the artists they're signing.

Like I said, no big deal to me, as long as they keep putting out the classic stuff... and yeah, the timeframe inevitably stretches and has to... I mean, hell, the Tony Williams set covers recordings made after Mosaic was launched. But that doesn't have much to do with what gets defined as worthy jazz... we have yet to see a "sweet-music" band set from Mosaic, even though they do lots of early jazz. There's a lot of stuff from the 1980s and 1990s that I'd like to see Mosaic get around to putting out, but none of it emanating from the "contemporary" purview.

[Stefan Wood]

I guess Mosaic will fill in the reissue scene for some of the major labels -- a market that could be fiercely fought over between the smaller niche companies.

[sal]

I say as long as Mosaic keeps putting out the good stuff, who cares about anything else.

[Chuck Nessa]

Can Mosaic Dance be far behind?

[mailman]

It's a sign of the times and we are living in terrible times.

[Chuck Nessa]

It's a sign of the times and we are living in terrible times.

Terrible times should produce great art. No evidence of that yet unless bitching counts.

[JSngry]

I don't understand the "fuss". Do you buy the label or the music? Sure, there's been a few labels where you feel that "if it's on Label X. it's got to be worth a listen"

Well, sure--Blue Note for one, to make a case quite close to home. Where did most of the posters on this board come from? Of course you buy for the music, but I don't think you can deny that a # of the people who post here certainly "trust" the Blue Note label of yore. And Mosaic, IMO, has very much built upon that sort of identity/brand/label loyalty.

I agree w/most of what you're saying and don't think that ultimately this is a big deal, but I would certainly define Mosaic as a "label"--even if they do only reissues. A label in the sense of a record/business company purveying a certain brand of music. And yeah, Blue Note recorded a diversity of artists, but there are a lot of folks on this board unhappy with the current incarnation of the label for the direction they're taking and the artists they're signing.

Like I said, no big deal to me, as long as they keep putting out the classic stuff... and yeah, the timeframe inevitably stretches and has to... I mean, hell, the Tony Williams set covers recordings made after Mosaic was launched. But that doesn't have much to do with what gets defined as worthy jazz... we have yet to see a "sweet-music" band set from Mosaic, even though they do lots of early jazz. There's a lot of stuff from the 1980s and 1990s that I'd like to see Mosaic get around to putting out, but none of it emanating from the "contemporary" purview.

It's easy to get "sentimental" about a label & develop an emotional attachment to it. I speak from experience, believe me (in the 70s, I used to crash "jazz parties" with a stack of BNs and bully the crowd into listening to "the REAL shit". There was a reason why I had to crash those parties instead of being invited to them ). But the reality is that it's all history now, even the 70s, 80s, and, soon enough, the 90s. We're talking about companies in the here and now dealing with music and labels (even Columbia) of the then and there. There's going to be some changes.

There have to be some changes, because the selling of "old" music is a different game than the selling of new. I'm sure we'd all love to see the latest batch of RVGs, Conns, etc. be treated as exciting new releases, because to a lot of us, that's what they are. But that ain't reality...

I've reached the conclusion that the collective passion for the older music is just as high as it was when it was new. The difference is that it's a collective passion that's more concentrated now because it resides in fewer individuals. Do you know how easy it was to yawn at a new McCoy Tyner Milestone side in the 70s? Hell, wait a week and there'd be another one! Everybody "heard" it, and quite a few people bought it, but the passion was diffuse. Now, you got fewer people digging it, but those who do are into it.

Unfortunately, businesses can't sell to collective passion. They have to sell to collective unit consumers. And those are dwindling. So if Mosaic wants to say, "You know, a lot of that 70s stuff wasn't all that bad, some of it was actually ok for what it was, and we can probably lend out "prestige" to it and sell enough of the best of it to make the bottom line look better", hey, that's pragmatism at its finest if you ask me. Super Blue is not a bad album. Afro Classic does what it sets out to do very nicely. Earl Klugh can play. And apparently, somebody thinks that enough people want to buy those type things that it's a do-able proposition to reissue them on a Mosaicianish scale.

But here's the deal - none of this stuff is going to sell in quantities that would make it a viable proposition for a "regular" label. Does anybody think that Breezin' or something like that is going to be out on Mosaic Contemporary anytime soon? I don't think so. 10 years down the road, maybe, but not now.

The idea of Mosaic as some sort of "sacred" repository for classic jazz is one which held true for quite a while, and will in all liklihood continue to largely hold true into the future. But it's at least in part an illusion borught on by the peculiarities of the marketplace over the last 25 or so years, a marketplace which is rapidly evolving into a whole 'nother creature, what with the legit or otherwise Euro-PD labels, legit or otherwise downloading, all that. It's easy to build an image of "prestige" when the market forces of the time are in your favor. But when they're not, whatcha' gonna do then? Buy up all the rights to the shit you've already issued, remake the sets that are now OOP and keep them available into perpetuity? Now that's what I would call a "sacred" repository, and that's got absolutely zero chance of ever happening, and only a slightly higher chance of even being in anybody's thought process/business plan right now, or any time soon.

Don't get me wrong - I have a lot of love for Mosaic. But the "reputation" they've created over the years was one which was not too hard to cultivate in their time and place. They created an image that fit their product in the time which it was being offered, and it fit. But I learned a long time ago that taking an "image" too seriously is almost always setting one's self up for a slap in the face at some point, becuase image is ultimately a tool of marketing, and marketing is all about the business. It ain't about the "love", it's about doing what you gotta do to stay solvent, and whatever that is inevitably going to, at some point, change in a fundamental way. Those who are truly doing it just for the love will say "fuck it" and get out. Everybody else will adapt. Very useful trait, adaptation is...

If anybody thought that Mosaic was going to live on forever in a world untouched by reality, hey...

[JSngry]

Can Mosaic Dance be far behind?

What, a Felsted set? I'm in!

[Chuck Nessa]

Can Mosaic Dance be far behind?

What, a Felsted set? I'm in!

I guess you just don't get dance.

[JSngry]

this has nuttin' do w/purity of concept but as others suggested, diluting the original mission.

The original mission has largely (and arguably) been accomplished. Now it's about staying in business.

There's more Ricky Hendersons than there are Sandy Koufaxes.

[JSngry]

Can Mosaic Dance be far behind?

What, a Felsted set? I'm in!

I guess you just don't get dance.

I'd trust Mosaic to do a dance series like I'd have trusted Dance to do an Cecil box.

[Chuck Nessa]

I'd trust Mosaic to do a dance series like I'd have trusted Dance to do an Cecil box.

Depends on the kind of dance you are wedded to.

[JSngry]

I'm wedded to a Barnette, actually. Can't say that I've ever met anybody named Dance.