A Lark Ascending

Gosh, I believe that Koch & Collectables have pretty much done this already, having reissued most (all?) of the VeeJay albums by the artists in question (as well as the Morgan/Shorter material) and have by all indications legitimately leased the material! There's also a "reactivated" Vee Jay label that has put out this material. For that matter, the more "questionable" Blue Moon label has too. The latter two add a few alternates, but the first two offer straight reproductions of the LPs. Of course, buying those individual CDs won't be as cheap as whatever the "other type" of label put out (so much LESS overhead...), but if you want most (all?) of the original material w/o the alternates (or at least, fewer), the options have already been made available. Point taken. Not exactly easily available over here, though. Amazon UK has them as 4-6 week imports. No problem for the dedicated fan, perhaps.

That strikes me as totally reasonable (I'm not sure I'd go to 70 but that's nitpicking). As long as the licencing fees were reasonable it would certainly address my main concern. Allowing reasonably priced collections for the generally interested - more than a single disc but not the full academic slab. It would continue to allow the musically curious to take a chance to investigate a range of older music. But also address the concerns of the performers and those who have invested in preserving the music. I'm not arguing for a minute that Proper are squeaky clean. Some of their boxes have had some pretty disasterous fluffs (wrong tracks, botched transfers etc), clearly a result of hurried production. That they should be more upfront about their sources and make payment where due to living artists or where fresh work has clearly been done on the tapes - fine. That they somehow have a duty to produce the academic product like Bear Family or Mosaic? Definitely not. There are other markets out there embracing a wider range of people than purchase the completist editions. One of the reasons I have very few Mosaics is because of the proliferation of alternate takes. I can understand why Mosaic have no wish to put out a parallel Chambers/Kelly set with just the master takes. In a few years JSP or Proper are going to do it because there will be a demand. The sort of settlement suggested might well keep all parties reasonably content. A compromise that can ensure the fair recompense to performer/preserver within a reasonable timespan whilst also encouraging the availability of the material to listeners beyond the hardcore collector seems good to me. I'll continue to buy the JSPs and Propers in the meantime (earning further villification from our professional Brooklyn streetkid) in much the same way as I'll continue to trade in unwanted CDs (without recompense to the performer/preserver), burn the odd CD (I'm too lazy to do much of that) and record things off the radio (without payment to performer). Much as I'd like to see tidied up the muddy area of how to fairly put out out-of-copyright material I'm clearly ethically much weaker than some of you (not said in sarcasm, by the way!). The thing is, however, that although I'm a bit of a lone voice in actually admitting to it I suspect I'm very far from alone in doing it!

Not the politics of resentment, JS. The politics of...to use a word you use...fairness. I'm lucky. I have a good job. I'm comfortable. Not rich. But comfortable. But I work in a pretty deprived area. And every year I see kids who have started way behind have to pit themselves in exams against kids elsewhere who have had it on a plate...and if they fail, well, Daddy will bail them out. And I've been doing the job long enough to be teaching the kids of some of those kids. So if I don't find the idea of the perpetual right to inherited property and wealth all that savoury its not out of resentment. It's just out of an idealistic desire for a world where the kids I teach could get a start in life on a level playing field with those at Eton, Charterhouse or even the middle class estates of South Nottinghamshire. I'm no revolutionary - too much of a coward for that. The best I can do is continue to push the kids in my charge so that, against the odds, some of them get a foot onto the ladder and a chance. It's why I'm still here 25 years on and not decamped to an area where the children are less challenging and where I could bask in my brilliance at getting such amazing exam results. THAT is where I'm coming from. [incidentally, a few kids I've taught have gone on to become history teachers. I've been responsible for a Faculty for many years and seen many new teachers through their early years; and many student teachers in training. Do you think I'd have a case charging them all royalties? I'd only want them for fifty years. One of those smiley faces. (I don't use them because I don't believe they're out of copywrite yet!)]

Now how do I make my decision to buy and keep buying Proper discs (I've my eye on the T-Bone Walker and the forthcoming Benny Carter and Roy Eldridges at present)? For the prosecution * Reasoned arguments from Mr. Sngry and Nessa. * 'Passionate' arguments from Mr. Clementine (who likes to say fuck more frequently than most teenagers I know). For the defence * The fact that these are widely on sale across the length and breadth of the UK. I've yet to hear of a retailer - big or small - refusing to sell them on grounds of ethics. * The fact that a whole range of reputable labels are happy to be distributed by them - if they are the thieves and rip-off merchants claimed here then what does it say about Topic, Yazoo, Document, Sugar Hill etc who are all content to sup with the devil? Must I stop buying those too? * The fact that they don't clutter up the sets with unreleased life tracks, alternate takes etc. If I'm interested enough in a performer to want that I'll seek an appropriate label dedicated to the specialist listener. As it is Proper do with many artists just what I want where other labels, however impressive their scholarship and dedication, just provide more than I need. * And this one. From Ronnie Scotts House magazine from Jan-Feb of this year. THE PROPER THING… By Chrissie Murray - 2004 makes a good start with the news that acclaimed – but until now unsigned – multi-reeds player TONY KOFI has clinched a unique recording contract with the much-loved Proper Records label. The huge success of Proper’s amazing value, but ‘priceless’, classic box-sets, has clearly helped create a foundation for this important collaboration. MALCOLM MILLS, Managing Director of Proper Records, says: ‘Tony’s talent was first brought to my attention by our friend JOOP VISSER. He was knocked out by the musicianship of this unsigned saxophonist.’ Tony Kofi, whose eclectic approach to the music has taken him in many innovative directions, goes into the studio with star players pianist JONATHAN GEE, bassist BEN HAZLETON and drummer WINSTON CLIFFORD to record the ambitious Monk project, which caused a stir at the Ealing and London Jazz Festivals. Studio time is also set aside so Tony can record his ground-breaking organ trio featuring his own material with new Swedish Hammond star ANDERS OLINDER. ‘This is an exciting opportunity,’ says Tony. ‘I’ve been biding my time. I like Proper’s enthusiasm and that they are prepared to get behind my music and give me the freedom to express it.’ Proper is also considering projects with Nick Lowe, bluesman Jimmy Vaughan, r&b legend Bobby Charles and Memphis soul star Dan Penn. The partnership between the gifted Tony Kofi and Proper Records is a huge leap forward for jazz in the UK. We wish them both much success. Source: http://www.ronniescotts.co.uk/ronnie_scott...otts/146/10.htm So now the evil Proper are committing a further crime by supporting contemporary talent! Oh, and it might require a quick e-mail to Lowe, Vaughan, Charles and Penn to warn them that they are about to sell their soul. ++++++++++++ So, do I adopt the puritanical approach (I can do puritan well!!!), chuck out the Proper Boxes and refuse to buy more on the advise of a few reports from websites? Or do I give Proper the benefit of the doubt? In anticipation of a shower of Anglo-Saxon.... [p.s. I must own up to posting the above quote and photo without prior permission]

Hope you sought permission to quote that! One of those smiley things.

????????????????????

Clementine, I know what our alto sax player did. I can live quite happily with the outcome. But if you are following a hardline on morality then the fact remains that he recorded tunes by others unacknowledged, however much he reconstructed them. If a Hollywood film company takes a current novel, keeps the plot, changes the characters and incidents and retitles it does that mean they owe the original novelist nothing? As for how do I justify your examples. I'll say it again. Fifty years is quite enough time, in my opinion, for anyone to live off their royalties. I know you disagree but at that point our differences are not ones of intelligence but of opinion. I'm not too convinced by the argument that we have to give record companies perpetual rights over the material in their vaults or they will destroy it. I want to keep my toys forever and if you won't let me I'll break them? I'm inclined to respond 'Go ahead!' Some good headlines there!

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!