Andorran (label) Census

[Big Beat Steve]

Thanks for all the information. Lots of gray out there. For me, jazzshrink hit it:

IMO, the only gray area is in our conscience. Do I buy something that violates existing laws in my country, or not? It's up to the individual to decide. Some of us choose to disregard this consideration and instead base our decision solely on our own personal needs.

I'm going to think about what I buy, how it stacks up against copyright laws in its locale, the the locale where it's licensed... Of course, I'm going to be buying the clearly legit issue, when I can, and will pass on anything that offends my sensibilities.

Does PROPER offend your sensibilities too, BeBop, or do the rock-bottom prices of their CD compilations make any guilty consciences go away at once?

It may of course be debatable if complying with the European 50-year Public Domain rule (as it still stands now) is reason enough to okay ALL those reissue labels, but it keeps baffling me on THIS forum how many labels from Continental Europe are being bashed here every now and then yet everybody (especially from the US of A) seems to drool about Proper. Are they really THAT more legitimate than those others? Anybody ever notice how they re-reissue previous reissue packagings with duplications with (slightly) previous reissue projects that are bound to drive you up the wall?? And I have yet to see any conclusive proof that their staying just beyond the 50-year cutoff date in their reissues is just coincidence and proof of obtaining all authorizations, etc. and NOT the same policy that other reissue labels also follow, i.e. take advantage of those recordings falling into the public domain after 50 years.

Edited September 29, 2008 by Big Beat Steve

[AllenLowe]

Proper offends me (as does JSP on occasion) by introducing digital distortion to so much of their remastering - audible, probably from CEDAR - plus bad de-hissing that leaves the telltale gargling underwater sound - a pity - John R.T. was using CEDAR in his last years, but without digital artifacts -

Edited September 29, 2008 by AllenLowe

[jazzbo]

Does PROPER offend your sensibilities too, BeBop, or do the rock-bottom prices of their CD compilations make any guilty consciences go away at once?

I'm no fan of Proper. I think the sets I have heard sound inferior to similar products. And they had this habit of reissuing incomplete sessions. . . ARGH!

Edited September 29, 2008 by jazzbo

[JohnS]

I'm no fan of Proper. I think the sets I have heard sound inferior to similar products. And they had this habit of reissuing incomplete sessions. . . ARGH!

That has been my experience too, but I haven't heard that many.

[Daniel A]

FWIW, Andorra signed the Berne Convention a few years ago, so the 50 year limit is in effect there, too.

[Claude]

I'm not an expert, but AFAIK the Berne Convention only concerns copyright, i.e. the right of composers/authors. Neigbouring rights (rights of performers) are regulated by the Rome convention, which Andorra also is member of, but which provides for a much shorter minimum duration of protection (20 years):

http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/summary_rome.html

I don't know what the term of performer protection in the andorran legislation is, if they only respect the minimum duration to comply with Rome rules or if they aligned it with the EU rules (which I doubt).

Andorra is not member of the Geneva convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonograms Against Unauthorized Duplication of Their Phonograms

http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/phonograms/

Andorra is also not yet member of the WTO, whose IP rules are stricter than the WIPO treaties.

They are slowly catching up with introducing and modernizing their IP laws, but it could be that if those bootleg labels are important companies they will try not to harm them with EU- or US-style laws.

But it's also clear that if the rightholders really cared about protecting their rights on 1960's and later jazz recordings, they could bust Gambit, Lonehill & Co and make those CDs disapper from stores in the EU, just as Hollywood film studios do with (non-counterfeited but illegally imported) Region 1 DVDs sold in Europe. The Andorran labels cannot survive by selling their stuff in Andorra only.

[John L]

Lonehill is bad. The company often pirates releases with misleading (as in the far from "Complete" Ayler Slugs CD) or erroneous info (claims that Lalo Schifrin is playing on a Eric Dolphy live date actually recorded halfway across the globe from where it was claimed to be).

JSP has released some great John Davies remasterings of Louis Armstrong and Jelly Roll Morton, among others. But did I once read about a shady side to the label on this board once?

JSP was once a great legit label that did superior remasterings of classic recordings, and also made new recordings. Now they are pirate label, and one of the worst. They ripped off the remasters of the Mosaic Bunny Berigan set and Revenant Charlie Patton set only months after they were released. Those sets required significant investments by Mosaic and Revenant, which were, in effect, stolen by JSP.

Lonehill may be a bad label, but they sure have made available a good number of long lost older recordings that the companies with copyright never had any plans to release. So I have mixed feelings about Lonehill.

[BillF]

Lonehill may be a bad label, but they sure have made available a good number of long lost older recordings that the companies with copyright never had any plans to release.

Wise words!

[BeBop]

Does PROPER offend your sensibilities too, BeBop, or do the rock-bottom prices of their CD compilations make any guilty consciences go away at once?

Yes, Proper offends my sensibilities. I'm a lucky boy, I suppose. I have enough recordings that I'm not desparate to buy anything in particular. And I have enough money to buy what I feel I REALLY want...even if it costs four times what Proper asks.

I do have one Proper set - purchased before I understood their reissue program, and retained because I'm a completist for the artist featured.

[Big Beat Steve]

Seems like we are more or less in agreement here.

I admit I have a couple of Proper sets too (and there seem to be reissue projets where more effort and research of their own are invested so I gues nt all of their reissues fall into this category), but there are cases that make me shudder and which more or less echo the feelings stated above about current JSP practices.

Is it really coincidence that there is a "Complete" Milton Brown box set released AFTER such a box set was issued in the USA (forgot the label but it was a real collector's label), or how about that "Accordeon Jazz" box set that had an OUTRAGEOUS number of duplications and overlaps with a set issued by Fremeaux Associés a good many years ago (but still in catalog)? Is that really a coincidence (with there being SO MANY other accordeon jazz recordings worthy of being reissued) or is it just a case of somebody going the easy reissue route by taking advantage of previous reissues?

To me this duplicating policy looks very much like what happend with the Bird & Diz "1945 Town Hall Concert" release on the Uptown label, with 3 or 4 identical releases on other labels all of a sudden competing with the "original" on Uptown.

[Ted O'Reilly]

I'm not an expert, but AFAIK the Berne Convention..///////...labels cannot survive by selling their stuff in Andorra only.

Claude, thanks for this. One of the best overviews of the whole reissue scene, explaing all the differing rights involved, and adding even more shades of gray. Maybe even pinstripes!

[RDK]

Does PROPER offend your sensibilities too, BeBop, or do the rock-bottom prices of their CD compilations make any guilty consciences go away at once?

Yes, Proper offends my sensibilities. I'm a lucky boy, I suppose. I have enough recordings that I'm not desparate to buy anything in particular. And I have enough money to buy what I feel I REALLY want...even if it costs four times what Proper asks.

I do have one Proper set - purchased before I understood their reissue program, and retained because I'm a completist for the artist featured.

I'm no great fan of Proper for several reasons (fidelity, in some cases, being one of them), but it seems to me that a lot of people seem to hate Proper not for what they are or are trying to do but for what they're not. It's not fair to compare Proper to, say, Mosaic, and claim that they issue incomplete sessions. The function of the boxes isn't to be complete but instead to offer an artist compilation that goes beyond a single disk. They're also a budget label, so expecting perfect sound, researched notes, and a detailed discography is foolish, imo, though I will add that I've been very impressed by the notes and discographical details on the few boxes that I've seen. I can't necessairly vouch for the accuracy of the notes, but overall I very much like the packaging and price of the boxes. Their Texas Tenors box is exceptional and contains tracks that I haven't seen elsewhere, so even if they "steal" some of their stuff they don't steal all of it. Obviously I can't condone what they did with the Mildred Bailey set (which I believe they ripped off from Mosaic), but at the same time I can see it as an affordable alternative for someone looking for some - but not all - of Bailey's recordings. Few casual jazz fans looking for an introduction to a specific artist's work is going to spring for a Mosaic box - that's not even Mosaic's intention - but for someone looking for more than just a single disc compilation I think Proper is an affordable alternative to get one's feet wet.

[Big Beat Steve]

Of course, but what you say holds true for most of those "Public Domain reissuers", and if those Andorran (and other Continental) labels get all that bashing (justified or not) then this one deserves its share of bashing too. I realize many who have blanks in their collections go for those boxes, and they ARE tempting adn good value for what they are supposed to be, and strictly speaking there is nothing illegal about reissuing those P.D. recordings.

But IMHO there most certainly is something immoral about following and duplicating other reissues by other labels that have done all the painstaking work to come up with those reissues in the first place (to remain within the U.K., the ACE label is another one that DOES pay its dues and does not deserve to have its sales being pulled from under its feet).

As for the liner notes and artist credits on those Proper boxes, some of them really are screwed up good. Take a SEALED copy of the jazz guitar box "Hittin' on All six" and see if you can identify what all of those recordings actually are just by looking at the artist credits on the BOX (and on the website too, BTW) and not in the booklet. This is extremely misleading to many potential buyers!

At any rate, with those "grey area" labels my appreciation goes to those labels (no need to mention names) that resurrect recordings that NOBODY (least of all the - actual or reputed - rights holders) has EVER bothered to reissue before.

[Chas]

IMO, the only gray area is in our conscience. Do I buy something that violates existing laws in my country, or not? It's up to the individual to decide. Some of us choose to disregard this consideration and instead base our decision solely on our own personal needs.

What tosh - as if the disregard for considerations of illegality could only ever be a function of self-interest rather than simply a recognition that the normative authority of law derives entirely from extra-legal moral considerations . In the case at hand , many intellectually curious people , having completed a good faith assessment of those considerations , feel themselves in no way morally obligated to abide by the current intellectual property regime as it applies to music . Your comment , in denying the possible legitimacy of such a stance , reflects an absurd legal absolutism ( not that the comment's ad hominem nature isn't reason enough to dismiss it ) .

[shaft]

Hi,

I sometimes buy from Lonehill and FreshSound. I have some Proper but I find the SQ lacking.

Are the Lonehills/FreshSounds needle drops (sourced from LPs) or do they ever use Master Tapes?

Also is there any example where they steal someone elses mastering??? I don't like that in that case.

They do sound very fine.An example would be:

http://www.amazon.com/Birdland-Dream-Band-...ref=pd_sim_m_48

/Shaft

[ejp626]

Lonehill is bad. The company often pirates releases with misleading (as in the far from "Complete" Ayler Slugs CD) or erroneous info (claims that Lalo Schifrin is playing on a Eric Dolphy live date actually recorded halfway across the globe from where it was claimed to be).

JSP has released some great John Davies remasterings of Louis Armstrong and Jelly Roll Morton, among others. But did I once read about a shady side to the label on this board once?

JSP was once a great legit label that did superior remasterings of classic recordings, and also made new recordings. Now they are pirate label, and one of the worst. They ripped off the remasters of the Mosaic Bunny Berigan set and Revenant Charlie Patton set only months after they were released. Those sets required significant investments by Mosaic and Revenant, which were, in effect, stolen by JSP.

Lonehill may be a bad label, but they sure have made available a good number of long lost older recordings that the companies with copyright never had any plans to release. So I have mixed feelings about Lonehill.

And yet, I think that they (JSP) are still putting out good product mixed with bad. I'm thinking specifically of Django on the Radio from 2008 and their truly massive Fats Waller set (scheduled to be 24 discs).

[jazzbo]

It's an awful situation for someone who wants to be morally rigid from a US standpoint. Lonehill for example has been putting out some very interesting releases lately, for example the John La Porta complete Debut recordings which contain a few selections ont on the EPs, and a host of alternates, and less than 20 percent of the tracks have been on cd before. Also they just released the excellent lp "Pee Wee Russell Plays" which has a great band with Clayton, Freeman and Dickerson playing all Russell compositions, never on cd before (but coupled with the "Portrait of Pee Wee" lp that has been on cd several times). This is material I don't really expect to see reissued by the legitimate holders of the material. I wish I could buy it from them, and will if I ever can.

I've been buying Chronogical(sic) Classics for years and they've been a tremendous boon to collectors of early and swing and now bop jazz recordings. If we were waiting for the legitimate releases. . .we'd be waiting iand waiting and waiting.

This is just a facet of the existence and experience of a collector; bootlegs have always been with us, loved and hated.

[RDK]

Hi,

I sometimes buy from Lonehill and FreshSound. I have some Proper but I find the SQ lacking.

Are the Lonehills/FreshSounds needle drops (sourced from LPs) or do they ever use Master Tapes?

Also is there any example where they steal someone elses mastering??? I don't like that in that case.

They do sound very fine.An example would be:

http://www.amazon.com/Birdland-Dream-Band-...ref=pd_sim_m_48

/Shaft

I actually don't have a problem with a company "stealing" another mastering provided they choose a good one, don't muck it up, and don't simply pirate it outright (like what was done to the Uptown Mingus set). If a company is going to release a comp of, say, Mildred Bailey, I'd prefer they took it from a well-crafted Mosaic than release more subpar needledrops on the public. If one puts the music ahead of the commerce, i'd rather the music be out there in the best form available than suffer just because the master tapes are withheld by some corporation that doesn't really give a shit anyway. And then there's the problem that Chuck and a few others complain about anytime a vinyl release or remaster is done: the overuse of the master tapes. One can't bitch about them not going back to the masters and then criticize them for using the masters too often.

[Aggie87]

I actually don't have a problem with a company "stealing" another mastering provided they choose a good one, don't muck it up, and don't simply pirate it outright (like what was done to the Uptown Mingus set).

I'm curious - can you say the same about the industry you're in? Would it be ok to do the same thing with film?

[RDK]

I actually don't have a problem with a company "stealing" another mastering provided they choose a good one, don't muck it up, and don't simply pirate it outright (like what was done to the Uptown Mingus set).

I'm curious - can you say the same about the industry you're in? Would it be ok to do the same thing with film?

Good question. It's hard to make a perfect comparison between media, but without putting too much thought into it, I'd say "yes." Yes, I would object if a new release (say Dark Knight) were bootlegged and sold on street corners - much as i do object to whatever company it was who ripped off the Uptown Mingus. I'd object much less, though, if it were a 50+ year old catalog title that the legit owners were reluctant to release in the first place. In regards the "stealing" of mastering, if someone is going to "bootleg" an old, oop, and possibly PD film that was only released for a brief time in Japan and now fetches big dollars on the secondary market, then yes, I'd rather that a "bootleg" copy of it - if it were even made - came from a quality DVD source than from a shitty VHS copy source. I'm not necessarily condoning that such a practice be done in the first place, but if it is done - and it obviously is done, whether we like it or not - why should the artwork itself suffer from the spreading of inferior copies? Just thought of a film example: Disney's Song of the South. Disney refuses to officially release it (at least domestically; a LD was released in Japan and PAL VHS tapes in England), but if some less scrupulous company took it upon themselves to do so I'd rather they use/steal the best copy/mastering possible.

Edited September 30, 2008 by RDK