Best and worst labels for reissues?
Michel Forest
worst?
A very knowledgeable friend of mine who, sadly, passed away 2 weeks ago
used to say that Verve was the worst as far as reissues are concerned.
That was based on his own, huge, 30 year-old LP collection. I reminded
him that Verve seems to have corrected the situtation recently.
As for the best, I'd say OJC but I may be wrong... anyway, what do you
think?
PS: my main criteria is how many titles are re-issued on cd. I'm not an
expert when it comes to sound quality and anyway I can't compare cd
reissues with lp's because I don't have lp's at home...
JC Martin
>Best: Fantasy. The OJC series is outstanding and stable, and while
>their boxes have slowed considerably in recent years, they pioneered the
>really high-quality complete boxes.
>
>Worst: RCA. Only now and then, with the old Vintage series (do any
>ancients remember THAT one?!), and the more recent bluebird series, has
>this oldest of all jazz labels come through. Their reissue policy is
>absolutely occult.
Sound quality is lacking though. A lot of these sessions could use the 20
to 24 bit treatment. Their vinyl releases sound much better than their CD
counterparts.
-JC
Paul Dacko
Michael Fitzgerald wrote:
>My rules (few and simple):
> >
> >Release everything you can that is relevant.
> > This means alternate takes, tracks from the same sessions,
> > etc. Don't get hung up on "original issue" status if the
> > original issuers were bone-heads that split up sessions onto 4
> > different lps
Amen...a lot of ppl screamed sacrilege when thew Miles Davis sets were issued in the boxes in their correct chronological order when, in reality, "Miles Smiles", "Nefertiti", etc.,were
nothing more than scattered sessions piecemealed for corporate product. Give me the full chronological sessions with as many outtakes as you can fit!.
> >>If you can put 2 lps on 1 cd or 3 lps on 2 cds, DO IT!!!
> > No cds under the halfway mark of 37 minutes!!!
Absolutely !!!!! One of my worst gripes. The most schizophrenic episode of this belongs to Impulse with their New Thing Series. They raised their list prices 2-3 dollars and gave us
Elvin Jones/Jimmy G.'s "Illumination-clocking in at a whopping 30:57- and then turned around in the same reissue series and put out Archie Shepp's combined "Live in S.F" and "3 for a
Quarter" with over 75 minutes for the same price!! Marketing dept????Hello !!!!
> >>Use original artwork (and extra pictures if you've got them)
Albert Ayler "Complete Greenwich Village" Gumby was cool when I was 8, but not on a jazz reissue thank you.
> >
> >Use CORRECTED discographical information and liner notes>
The Cecil Taylor correct age lottery does get old.
> >Oh, and DON'T use stupid artsy packaging. Just jewel boxes of hard plastic that can be replaced if they break. They still protect the cd better than anything else I've come across
Verve's Art Dept......are you listening ???????? I'm wrecking the CDs with the needlenose pliers I need to pull the discs out of the sleeves!!!!
> .>
> >That's it. If you build it, they will come.
What Mike said !!!!!!!!
Paul
>
>
Michael Fitzgerald
wrote:
Well, this is quite a topic and I've been fairly vocal on it here in
the past, both extolling *and* condemning at various times CBS, Verve,
Impulse, Blue Note, RCA and others. I've also done a lot of work
relating to label catalogs on my WWW site, not necessarily concerned
with what has been reissued, but more with what *was* issued on Lp, to
show just how much hasn't been reissued.
To do this right, some rules must be established. It's incredibly easy
to decide that the worst reissue label is Prescription because NO cds
exist. Raise your hand if you own *anything* on that label? But that
doesn't take into account how many records they issued and how
well-known those records are, also how long they've been out of print.
I would suppose that someone (not me) could design some sort of
mathematic formula based on:
Number of Lps originally issued
Number of years in business
Some rating to show how important these albums are to consumers (not
collectors, who are probably less interested in CD reissues)
Average number of years Lps in print
Average number of years Lps out of print
Size of current company
Number of CDs reissued (ever)
Number of CDs currently in print (or in print within 2 years or
something)
Some rating for overall sound quality
Some rating for overal presentation/packaging/reissue production
Some rating for value (bang for the buck)
Wow. I'm still probably missing some considerations.
But for a more anecdotal approach, here is some info on who we're
talking about.
We have the major labels of the past: RCA Victor, CBS Columbia, and
Decca.
The bigger jazz independents of the past: Blue Note, Atlantic, Verve,
Riverside, Savoy, Cadet/Argo, Prestige, Contemporary, Pacific Jazz,
Mercury, EmArcy, (many others could be listed)
The smaller fry: Candid, ESP, Commodore, Impulse (many, many others -
one would have to establish criteria)
The micro labels: Transition, Mode, Tampa, (many others including
personal labels like Debut)
I've tried not to list labels from later than the 1960's and don't
include non-US labels. Why not? It's confusing enough as is.
Some of these are related to each other (either historically or
through later acquisition). So we also need to examine the current
playing field:
Universal - MCA, Decca, Impulse, Chess, Argo/Cadet, Verve, EmArcy,
Mercury, MGM, Metrojazz, Limelight, Commodore, Blue Thumb, Coral, abc
paramount, MPS, Smash, Polydor, A&M, London, Philips, (and more)
EMI - Blue Note, Pacific Jazz, Roulette, Capitol, Roost, Liberty,
United Artists, Aladdin, Jazz West, (and more)
Fantasy - Riverside, Prestige, New Jazz, Jazzland, Debut,
Contemporary, Fantasy, Status, (and more)
WEA - Atlantic, Elektra, Warner Bros., Atco, Cotillion, Reprise,
Musician (and more)
Sony - CBS, Columbia, Epic, Okeh, CTI (and more)
BMG - RCA, Victor, Camden, X, Vik (and more)
We also have newer labels who have acquired catalogs or have leased
material for reissue - Koch, One Way, Rykodisc, Denon, Evidence,
32Jazz, Mosaic (a rather special case), et al.
Who's best or worst? That's a good question.
Here are my comments from about 3 years ago (at the time we were
talking about Savoy). Reissuers who follow these get my gold star
award and are eligible for the position of best in my book.
>My rules (few and simple):
>
>Release everything you can that is relevant.
> This means alternate takes, tracks from the same sessions,
> etc. Don't get hung up on "original issue" status if the
> original issuers were bone-heads that split up sessions onto 4
> different lps.
>
>If you can put 2 lps on 1 cd or 3 lps on 2 cds, DO IT!!!
> No cds under the halfway mark of 37 minutes!!!
>
>Use original artwork (and extra pictures if you've got them)
>
>Use CORRECTED discographical information and liner notes
>
>Oh, and DON'T use stupid artsy packaging. Just jewel boxes of hard plastic that can be replaced if they break. They still protect the cd better than anything else I've come across.
>
>That's it. If you build it, they will come.
All this is very much off the top of my head - corrections and
additions are welcome. Keeping track of who has what material is a
full time job for someone and the last thing I need is *another* full
time job.
Mike
Gregory Monahan
their boxes have slowed considerably in recent years, they pioneered the
really high-quality complete boxes.
Worst: RCA. Only now and then, with the old Vintage series (do any
ancients remember THAT one?!), and the more recent bluebird series, has
this oldest of all jazz labels come through. Their reissue policy is
absolutely occult.
Greg M.
gmon...@eou.edu
Charles Martin ex - Hong Kong
>> This means alternate takes, tracks from the same sessions,
>> etc. Don't get hung up on "original issue" status if the
>> original issuers were bone-heads that split up sessions onto 4
>> different lps.
>>
>>If you can put 2 lps on 1 cd or 3 lps on 2 cds, DO IT!!!
>> No cds under the halfway mark of 37 minutes!!!
>>
>>Use original artwork (and extra pictures if you've got them)
>>
>>Use CORRECTED discographical information and liner notes
Hear, hear!
To elaborate on the "original artwork" I'd suggest:
Include original liner notes notes (usually a bad essay by
some overenthusiastic DJ) for historical reasons, and a good
essay with added perspective by someone who knows what he or
she is talking about. The latter is, of course, a tall
order.
A thought: There probably are a good number of LP's that
don't need to be reissued. There are some artists who are
better represented (to the average listener) by a "best of"
collection than a Mosaic 7-CD box. That might make an
interesting thread too -- artists and LP's that companies
should leave in the vault. Anything with Larry Coryell
singing on it, for one.
o-------= Charles Martin =--o
henry schmidt
the majors
will start a series of reissues and then drop them cold, with a comment THEY
DON"T SELL, which may or may not be true. I know that over the past 30 years
one reason
for record companies to start reissuing their old masters was if they were
showing too
much profit from the pop/rock issues. The would start reissue projects to
kill of
some of the profits. If the reissue projects start to make money they kill
it. I know
that this happened several time with the BLUEBIRD reissued that RCA VICTOR
was running first on vinyl then on cd.
I guess that the same rule applies to MCA & WEA also. This is an unfortunate
but true point of fact. The only exception to the rule is EMI with their
holdings.
For my money the biggest tragity is MCA. The own so much great material from
DECCA, BRUNSWICK, CORAL, CHESS, ARGO, DAWN, SECCO, LONDON
ECT. which just sits in limbo.
Henry
Paul Craig Sanwald
:
: We also have newer labels who have acquired catalogs or have leased
: material for reissue - Koch, One Way, Rykodisc, Denon, Evidence,
: 32Jazz, Mosaic (a rather special case), et al.
I don't know about this whole best/worst thing, but 32 Jazz definitely
gets props for reissuing stuff at a good price that would never get
reissued otherwise. I think this is a great label that really has
their shit together. My one complaint is that they should have a
bigger picture of the original album cover somewhere in the booklet.
--paul
John Traynor
Paul Craig Sanwald wrote in message <79v782$d85$3...@uni00nw.unity.ncsu.edu>...
>I don't know about this whole best/worst thing, but 32 Jazz definitely
>gets props for reissuing stuff at a good price that would never get
>reissued otherwise. I think this is a great label that really has
>their shit together. My one complaint is that they should have a
>bigger picture of the original album cover somewhere in the booklet.
>
Why change the cover at all - especially for the terrible new age rubbish
they use instead. The original cover for Kenny Barron's Peruvian Blue (so
far as I can make out from the tiny reprint in the booklet) shows an
incredibly hip looking Barron smoking something that doesn't look like a
cigar. This is an important historical document - we need to see it full
size!!!
John Traynor
Bob Orr
Michel Forest wrote:
> In your opinion, which label has the best reissue policy? Which has the
> worst?
> PS: my main criteria is how many titles are re-issued on cd. I'm not an
> expert when it comes to sound quality and anyway I can't compare cd
> reissues with lp's because I don't have lp's at home...
For those interested in Classic Jazz - circa 1915-1950, the best
reconstructions I have encountered run on the Classics CD (France) label.
Tere are now over 500 titles in their catalogue, virtually all still
available through Qualiton imports. They have acquired the European (?)
rights to labels like RCA Bluebird, Columbia, Okeh, Brunswick, Decca,
Vocalion and many others. Their original goal was to chronicle American
jazz, artist by artist. Hence, there is some duplication. For example, if
you order Chu Berry 1937-1941, you will get some cuts that also appear on
some Lionel Hampton issues, Cab Calloway issues, and so forth. The sound
quality is exquisite - digitally enhanced to be sure. Liner notes are
minimal, but for every cut, you will get recording date, original label and
take number, and the personnel in about 95% of the cases. The sidemen read
like a jazz hall of fame.
Bob Orr
--
"The game's easy Harry!" -- Richie Ashburn (1927-1997)
"The less we understand a thing, the more variables we need to explain
it." - Russell Ackoff
Douglas Norwood
>For those interested in Classic Jazz - circa 1915-1950, the best
>reconstructions I have encountered run on the Classics CD (France) label.
Agreed! Another one just as good (though as yet not nearly as extensive)
is the Masters of Jazz series from Media 7. Their approach is a bit
different - they take a musician and issue EVERYTHING (Including
airchecks, private recordings, alternate takes, etc.) on which he solos
but omit material where he is buried in the section in a big band, etc..
They have already issued the complete Charlie Christian and a few others
and are in the process of issuing the complete Dizzy Gillespie, Charlie
Parker, Fats Navarro, Wardell Gray and many others. They are not
bootlegs since European copyright law allows anything 50 years old to be
in the public domain.
-
DOUGLAS NORWOOD LNB...@prodigy.com
Michel Forest
>
> Bob Orr <o...@tech.iupui.edu> wrote:
>
> >For those interested in Classic Jazz - circa 1915-1950, the best
> >reconstructions I have encountered run on the Classics CD (France) label.
>
> Agreed! Another one just as good (though as yet not nearly as extensive)
> is the Masters of Jazz series from Media 7. Their approach is a bit
> different - they take a musician and issue EVERYTHING (Including
> airchecks, private recordings, alternate takes, etc.) on which he solos
> but omit material where he is buried in the section in a big band, etc..
> They have already issued the complete Charlie Christian and a few others
> and are in the process of issuing the complete Dizzy Gillespie, Charlie
> Parker, Fats Navarro, Wardell Gray and many others.
Sadly, it seems they will not release Bird's Savoy material... Sadly
because we still have to settle for the Denon reissues...
Michel Forest
>
> Bob Orr <o...@tech.iupui.edu> wrote:
>
> >For those interested in Classic Jazz - circa 1915-1950, the best
> >reconstructions I have encountered run on the Classics CD (France) label.
>
> Agreed! Another one just as good (though as yet not nearly as extensive)
> is the Masters of Jazz series from Media 7. Their approach is a bit
> different - they take a musician and issue EVERYTHING (Including
> airchecks, private recordings, alternate takes, etc.) on which he solos
> but omit material where he is buried in the section in a big band, etc..
> They have already issued the complete Charlie Christian and a few others
> and are in the process of issuing the complete Dizzy Gillespie, Charlie
> bootlegs since European copyright law allows anything 50 years old to be
> in the public domain.
Great collection, I have a couple of Charlie Parker on Media 7 that I
picked up in Paris last summer. They are quite expensive in Montreal
though, if anybody knows a good web retailer for these, please let me
know.
Howard Peirce
> For those interested in Classic Jazz - circa 1915-1950, the best
> reconstructions
A bit off topic, but is the 1915 above a specific date? I'd always thought
1917's ODJB Livery Stable Blues was the first jazz recording. On PBS's "I'm
Gonna Make Me a World" soundtrack, they were playing some old James Reece
Europe that might qualify, but I don't know when that was recorded.
HP
george Traynor
>
>For my money the biggest tragity is MCA. The own so much great material from
>DECCA, BRUNSWICK, CORAL, CHESS, ARGO, DAWN, SECCO, LONDON
>ECT. which just sits in limbo.
Up until quite recently I would have put Atlantic in the same boat, but with
Koch and the imports comming in from Europe, they are finally starting to see
the light.
The thing is as great a label as Impulse! was, MCA seems to be neglecting the
other labels you mention above. Only in Japan is MCA making a dent in the
vaults of labels like SECCO, CORAL, DAWN, etc.. Since they aren't Kenny-G and
Spyro Gyra, I guess they feel they're just isn't any market for them over here.
But ya never know about these things. That's what makes collecting great, the
surprises that keep comming up!
And for any newbies listening in:
A great source for upcomming Japanese reissues is their monthly publication,
"Swing Journal" that gives out the lists every month of ALL jazz releases, both
on CD and vinyl. Even though the text is in japanese, they print small
facsimiles of the album covers and CD/LP catalog numbers so that one shouldn't
have any trouble keeping up with it. You can usually find them in the magazine
stands at Tower.
As far as domestic reissues (and new) go, ICE Magazine is usually the best
source and you can pretty much find them everywhere. They also have a website:
It pays to keep up with it since things go out-of-print in Japan pretty fast and
it might be a few years before you see it again.
george
p.s. - So much out there and too few $$ to spend on it all. (sigh...)
-
Michel Forest
>
> The biggest problem that I have is the inconsincity of the products. One of
> the majors
> will start a series of reissues and then drop them cold, with a comment THEY
> DON"T SELL, which may or may not be true. I know that over the past 30 years
> one reason
> for record companies to start reissuing their old masters was if they were
> showing too
> much profit from the pop/rock issues. The would start reissue projects to
> kill of
> some of the profits. If the reissue projects start to make money they kill
> it. I know
> that this happened several time with the BLUEBIRD reissued that RCA VICTOR
> was running first on vinyl then on cd.
>
> I guess that the same rule applies to MCA & WEA also. This is an unfortunate
> but true point of fact. The only exception to the rule is EMI with their
> holdings.
>
> DECCA, BRUNSWICK, CORAL, CHESS, ARGO, DAWN, SECCO, LONDON
> ECT. which just sits in limbo.
I guess for the majors, jazz is a marginal dept. It accounts for a tiny
portion of their revenues so they're not inclined to devote a lot of
money and ressources to reissuing old stuff. They'd rather spend
millions promoting the Spice Girls.
Take the big merger involving Verve and Impulse. What will happen to
reissue programs of both labels?
Scott Alexander
You can read about and listen to the music of James Reese Europe at:
http://www.redhotjazz.com/europe.html
I feel his music is still to rooted in Ragtime to be considered jazz. ODJB
still has my vote as the first jazz record.
Bob Orr
releases pre-dating the end of WWI - notably by Clarence Williams. The 1915
was sort of an opening bracket for the interval without regard to a technical
definition of the Birth of Jazz.
Bob
Howard Peirce wrote:
> Bob Orr wrote:
>
> > For those interested in Classic Jazz - circa 1915-1950, the best
> > reconstructions
>
> A bit off topic, but is the 1915 above a specific date? I'd always thought
> 1917's ODJB Livery Stable Blues was the first jazz recording. On PBS's "I'm
> Gonna Make Me a World" soundtrack, they were playing some old James Reece
> Europe that might qualify, but I don't know when that was recorded.
>
> HP
--
Howard Peirce
> Sorry if I may have confused. Did not have my cat handy and recalled a few
> releases pre-dating the end of WWI - notably by Clarence Williams. The 1915
> was sort of an opening bracket for the interval without regard to a technical
> definition of the Birth of Jazz.
Actually, I more curious about pre-1917 recordings the speak to the musical
development of jazz. I'd always accepted the 1917 date, but I'm beginning to
think it's just PR spin generated by Victor. I mean, the ODJB are *historically*
significant (from N.O., popularized the word "jazz," etc.), but I wonder if, say,
Clarence Williams or James Reece Europe sides wouldn't be more *musically*
significant, especially as they speak to early performance practice. What about
Will Marion Cook? Did he ever record the group he brought to France, the one with
Bechet on clarinet (the one that caught the attention of Ernst Ansermet)? That
was--what?--1914?
I recall listening to a Bert Williams side from c. 1911, that wasn't technically
jazz, but featured a *killer* tailgate trombone--uncredited of course.
I mean, in a way, all of this trying to define what was and wasn't jazz between
1900 and 1917 speaks to the current debate about what is and isn't jazz in 1999.
HP
Jack Woker
> Actually, I more curious about pre-1917 recordings the speak to the musical
> development of jazz. I'd always accepted the 1917 date, but I'm beginning to
> think it's just PR spin generated by Victor. I mean, the ODJB are *historically*
> significant (from N.O., popularized the word "jazz," etc.), but I wonder if, say,
> Clarence Williams or James Reece Europe sides wouldn't be more *musically*
> significant, especially as they speak to early performance practice. What about
> Will Marion Cook? Did he ever record the group he brought to France, the one with
> Bechet on clarinet (the one that caught the attention of Ernst Ansermet)? That
> was--what?--1914?
Jmaes Reese Europe recorded as early as 1913, and although the majority
of the music he played was in the style of military bands, there are
occasional ragtime/cakewalk styled pieces that definite qualify as
antecedents to jazz. Europe was not alone, however. A number of other
bands - John Philip Sousa and the Victor Military Band to name two -
recorded similar pre-jazz material in the years before World War I. The
famous Will Marion Cook orchestra of 1919 (with Bechet) did not record,
and Clarence Williams did not record until 1921.
jack
Fabien Caron
That Ansermet vs Bechet year will be 1919.
Fabien Caron
Quebec City
Howard Peirce a écrit dans le message <36C9935B...@sdrc.com>...
>Bob Orr wrote:
>
>> Sorry if I may have confused. Did not have my cat handy and recalled a
few
>> releases pre-dating the end of WWI - notably by Clarence Williams. The
1915
>> was sort of an opening bracket for the interval without regard to a
technical
>> definition of the Birth of Jazz.
>
>Actually, I more curious about pre-1917 recordings the speak to the musical
>development of jazz. I'd always accepted the 1917 date, but I'm beginning
to
>think it's just PR spin generated by Victor. I mean, the ODJB are
*historically*
>significant (from N.O., popularized the word "jazz," etc.), but I wonder
if, say,
>Clarence Williams or James Reece Europe sides wouldn't be more *musically*
>significant, especially as they speak to early performance practice. What
about
>Will Marion Cook? Did he ever record the group he brought to France, the
one with
>Bechet on clarinet (the one that caught the attention of Ernst Ansermet)?
That
>was--what?--1914?
>
Gary Milliken
I have heard a story that Freddie Keppard was offered the "first jazz
recording" date, but he refused it, fearing that if he recorded, all
other trumpeters would be stealing his stuff (he was reportedly so
paranoid about such theft that he would try to hide his fingers while
playing). So the honor eventually went to the white ODJB instead.
Does anyone know if there's any truth to that story?
GM
Douglas Norwood
That story has always been accepted as true but who's to know? It's also
said that Keppard's playing was much better than was ever represented by
recordings and, again, this is something that can't be proven either way.
-
DOUGLAS NORWOOD LNB...@prodigy.com
Howard Peirce
> I have heard a story that Freddie Keppard was offered the "first jazz
> recording" date, but he refused it, fearing that if he recorded, all
> other trumpeters would be stealing his stuff (he was reportedly so
> paranoid about such theft that he would try to hide his fingers while
> playing). So the honor eventually went to the white ODJB instead.
I've heard that story from several reputable sources, and I believe it
to be true. (Most recently, it was repeated by Gunther Schuller, I
believe, on PBS's "Gonna Make Me a World.) The irony, of course, is that
Keppard was absolutely right. Within a few months of the release of
Livery Stable Blues, trumpeters all over the country were flawlessly
recreating Nick LaRocca's every lick. Nowadays, we call it
"transcribing," and it's one of the primary means by which jazz is
learned.
HP