Unissued, Alternate Takes

[paul secor]

I just ordered a number of BN RVGs, all of which I had on King Japanese vinyl, to get the alternate or unreleased takes. (This at a time when I tell myself that I want to cut down on the "stuff" in my life!) I'm getting the CDs because I'm something of a completist, though not a complete one. I kinda hate the idea that I might miss out on something, even though I know in the big picture of my life it may not matter all that much.

Anyway, I'm wondering what people here think about buying recordings that you already have to get alternate/unissued material. Don't want to do a poll - I'm interested in thoughts and ideas.

[Christiern]

With some exceptions, I find alternate takes to be a producer's filler, all too often. There is usually a good reason why these takes were not released in the first place. I would be very upset if a publisher got a hold of, and printed, written pages that I had discarded and replaced.

Besides, artists usually have not been paid for the unreleased material, so they or their estates become double victims.

[marcello]

I agree with Chris.

In the vast majority of cases, the alternate and unissued takes should have been left on the shelf.

In a related matter, some projects like Mingus' Epitaph, should have been left in the trunk.

[DMP]

Good point. On the other hand, I do enjoy an alternate take of something that I'm familiar with - Milestones, Moanin', This Here, Tunji - fun to hear different solos in there. But another version of some routine hard bop number? There was a reason it was left out to begin with.

[Ted O'Reilly]

Certainly a part of it is the customer, too: when CDs with 74 mins of space came along, many purchasers felt they were getting ripped off somehow when they got only 40 minutes of music.

Into the void came Record Labels bumping up the time with unreleased tracks, some of which were good enough to release, but got bumped for time reasons, or had been issued on compilation albums and then returned to the original session. Alternative takes followed, perhaps enjoyed by real fans, but often blotted what had been a perfectly balanced original LP. False starts, incomplete takes and studio chatter were added to the sweepings, to be listened to once.

I often take the bloated CDs, and recreate the original release on a CDR... I'd rather hear 40 minutes of GOOD music than what is often on offer.

[RDK]

I don't mind alternate takes added to a disc (preferably at the end), but I rarely find them essential and won't buy another copy of something I already own just to get them. Previously unreleased material (new tunes left off an album due to length) is another thing entirely.

[poetrylover3]

I prefer releases with alternate takes and unissued tracks so I can hear the artist's evolving conception of a tune. I don't include breakdowns and false starts as being of interest.

[Dan Gould]

More than a handful of unissued takes have been worth hearing, IMHO.

And its foolish to say that artists or their estates are "double victims" if they weren't paid for the alternate recording. We're talking about reissues in the first place. If the companies are doing right by their artists, then the artists or their estates are seeing new royalties they wouldn't see otherwise. If padding the reissue with releasable alternate takes makes people like us buy them again, then surely there are royalties being paid that wouldn't be paid otherwise.

[Chuck Nessa]

More than a handful of unissued takes have been worth hearing, IMHO.

And its foolish to say that artists or their estates are "double victims" if they weren't paid for the alternate recording. We're talking about reissues in the first place. If the companies are doing right by their artists, then the artists or their estates are seeing new royalties they wouldn't see otherwise. If padding the reissue with releasable alternate takes makes people like us buy them again, then surely there are royalties being paid that wouldn't be paid otherwise.

If the alternates are "originals" the artist/estate gets extra royalties.

[sal]

One of the best things about getting an iPod was being able to rip my box sets while excluding alternate takes.

[Teasing the Korean]

In the alternate take of this thread, Paul Secor wrote "What Sayest Thou." I wish that was the version that was issued. "What Say You" sounds like the producers deliberately wanted to dumb it down, against the artist's intent.

[GA Russell]

Three years ago Fantasy issued CDs of recordings left off of live albums by Cal Tjader, Groove Holmes, Jaki Byard and perhaps others.

I have all three of those CDs, and they are good. The only original LP I have is one that I grew up with, Groove Holmes' Living Soul. The CD was called On Basie's Bandstand. Although that CD is enjoyable, I agree with the original selection; all of the tracks on Living Soul are better than all of the tracks on Basie's Bandstand.

So when material was left off the LP for time considerations, I am in favor of releasing it on CD.

[Dave James]

We've got some folks right here on this thread who have produced their fair share of recordings. I'd be curious to know how alternate takes come about. Do you go into a session with the idea of doing a certain number of takes and then choosing the best one? If not, then someone has to make the decision that an alternate is necessary. Who does that and why? When and how do you know when you're finished or do you simply run out of studio time?

With regard to alternate takes themselves, rather than just throw the baby in with the bath water, those who are responsible for remastering/producing a reissue ought to be able to tell when an alternate has enough value to warrant inclusion. I'm guessing if this was the norm, not many would be selected. The reason for this is that the musicians in a recording session aren't attempting to do something that different. If they're playing from written music, isn't the idea each and every time to ace the chart? It doesn't seem to me that this would create much of an atmosphere for differentiation. Even if they're are working from a head arrangement, I wouldn't think they'd tend to stray very far from the "basics", as that would be the recipe for a blown take.

Up over and out.

[Dan Gould]

Dave,

Some takes are rejected because of ragged ensembles but I think what we're mostly talking about is differences in the solos. I seem to recall that Cuscuna has said on more than one occasion that an alternate was rejected because one player's solo wasn't up to snuff, but included now because another solo was equal or even better than the issued take.

[Christiern]

I'd be curious to know how alternate takes come about. Do you go into a session with the idea of doing a certain number of takes and then choosing the best one? If not, then someone has to make the decision that an alternate is necessary. Who does that and why? When and how do you know when you're finished or do you simply run out of studio time?

In the 78 rpm pre-tape era the audio signal was cut into a groove on a disc made of a waxy compound. It was not possible to play these disc back more than once without ruining them. Consequently, it behooved record companies to record safeties. Any number of things could have gone wrong (erratic pitch, foreign matter in the wax substance, etc.) so alternates were made to give the producer/artist/label an alternate if needed. Of course, selections were also recorded over if there was a musical glitch or someone with a say-so thought a performance could be improved upon.

Sometimes, but only after acetate discs replaced the waxy kind, a performance was too long to fit on a 78. That was the case with a Billie/Prez take I found on an acetate and included on a Columbia album—it was perfectly good, except for the length.

Unless union rules have changed, a "session" is either 15 minutes of acceptable/releasable performance or 3 hours in the studio. Anything beyond those measurements is regarded as overtime (or another session). Since one would need more than 15 minutes for an LP, one session did not suffice. Actually (remember, the rules dated back to pre-LP days) 2 sessions would only give you a half hour, which mades for a short LP, so one really needed 3 sessions to give the customer his/her money's worth. Most producers I know did two discretely stretched sessions and most musicians went along with it, because that ws probably the only way they were going to get a record date, and the end product was most important.

Dan: And its foolish to say that artists or their estates are "double victims" if they weren't paid for the alternate recording. We're talking about reissues in the first place.

Well, first of all, alternate takes are only "reissues" if they have been released previously. That is usually not the case, so they are, in fact, original issues. And if the musicians worked for scale (which is common in jazz) the fee they received only covered the originally issued material. Scale for leaders is double that of sidemen and performance royalties are rare unless the player is a very marketable artist. I should point out that even when there is a royalty agreement, an artist is fortunate if it is fully honored. So, the artist or estate is a "victim" if proper payment is not made. The performer is a victim again if the released "alternate" does not meet his/her standards. That's why I say they may be "double" victims.

There is a common misconception that artist royalties are a given—they are not. Composer royalties stand a better chance of getting into the right pocket, but there, too, short-changing is rampant.

Chuck: If the alternates are "originals" the artist/estate gets extra royalties.

Chuck, why don't we make that should get extra royalties?

I think the rusty Bill Evans box is very good example of "alternates" being used for the wrong reason (i.e. for padding) and without regard for the artist's integrity. Yes, Bill was gone, but that is no excuse, imo.

[Chuck Nessa]

Chuck: If the alternates are "originals" the artist/estate gets extra royalties.

Chuck, why don't we make that should get extra royalties?

Talking about publishing in this instance. Getting paid for 8 minutes is better than getting paid for 4.

I have never issued alternates without the (living) artist's consent. Never was turned down either.

[Dan Gould]

Chris, we are talking about reissues in the first place. Whether included or not, they wouldn't be put out as separate recordings. They are part of the original session, which if it did not exist, there would be no vehicle for putting out the "alternate" in the first place. And I fail to see the financial harm since the musicians were typically paid for two "stretched" sessions. Its a given that those sessions contained time spent on unreleasable breakdowns or poor performances all around. In short, they got paid for their time, which is how these things were done.

Furthermore, I specifically stated

If the companies are doing right by their artists, then the artists or their estates are seeing new royalties they wouldn't see otherwise.

[Christiern]

Ah, yes....that big "if."

Dan, I'm afraid you don't really understand "how these things were done." I'm not saying that as a criticism of you—most people have a somewhat blurry picture of how things go in the studio. I certainly did until I was actually there and had to learn fast.

BTW, previously unissued discards are often released outside of the context (session) in which they were created. I have to confess that I produced a whole 2-disc album that fit this description: Stars of the Apollo.

[mjzee]

As a listener, I'm in agreement that alternate takes are usually unnecessary, often distracting and disappointing. Bird excluded, of course.

The one broad exception I'd make is for artists who don't have a large recorded legacy. In those cases, it can be surprising and pleasurable to hear their voice again. But only if it shows them vibrant, not sick and ragged.

[JohnS]

I just ordered a number of BN RVGs, all of which I had on King Japanese vinyl, to get the alternate or unreleased takes. (This at a time when I tell myself that I want to cut down on the "stuff" in my life!) I'm getting the CDs because I'm something of a completist, though not a complete one. I kinda hate the idea that I might miss out on something, even though I know in the big picture of my life it may not matter all that much.

Anyway, I'm wondering what people here think about buying recordings that you already have to get alternate/unissued material. Don't want to do a poll - I'm interested in thoughts and ideas.

I'm with you entirely here. If's on Blue Note and it has alternates then I usually want it. Like you I'm something of a completist. So over the years a lot of my vinyl has gone. But then I'm still completely happy with the remaining vinyl.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Three years ago Fantasy issued CDs of recordings left off of live albums by Cal Tjader, Groove Holmes, Jaki Byard and perhaps others.

(Also Mongo Santamaria and Milt Jackson) (And it was a lot more than three years ago - 2002 and 2003)

I have all three of those CDs, and they are good. The only original LP I have is one that I grew up with, Groove Holmes' Living Soul. The CD was called On Basie's Bandstand. Although that CD is enjoyable, I agree with the original selection; all of the tracks on Living Soul are better than all of the tracks on Basie's Bandstand.

So when material was left off the LP for time considerations, I am in favor of releasing it on CD.

I don't agree, but do agree. I GREATLY prefer "On Basie's bandstand" to "Livin' soul". I don't know the Tjader or Byard albums, but Mongo's "Montreux heat" is just marginlly better than "Summertime" and Milt's "Centerpiece at the Kosei Nenkin" is every bit as good as the original double LP. So I am also greatly in favour of releasing it.

MG

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I'm not a great one for alternative takes, but they have their place. And sometimes they're essential for an understanding of what's going on or the way a musician approaches material.

Reading, for example, the sleeve notes of Grant Green's "Idle moments", you've just got to wonder what the original take of "Jean de fleur" was like, and then, years later, to actually have all that material on one CD - and to find that it wasn't just "Jean de fleur" that had to be redone because of the length of the title track, but "Django" as well - is simply great.

I've just bought the complete Keynote recordings of Lester Young. I usually find it quite difficult to identify differences between alternative takes in recordings I don't already know very well (and I try to avoid memorising music), but in this case the differences in some of Prez' solos was so great that they just hit me on the first listen. Effectively, these are not different tries at the same performance but completely newly created performances.

MG

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

From a record company point of view, isn't there some advantage to issuing new material (whether alternative takes or previously unreleased tunes) from a copyright angle? The previously unreleased material will be copyrighted not from the date of the original release but from the reissue date. This makes it impossible for European companies to issue legally "complete" anythings before 50 years after the reissue date.

MG

[ejp626]

From a record company point of view, isn't there some advantage to issuing new material (whether alternative takes or previously unreleased tunes) from a copyright angle? The previously unreleased material will be copyrighted not from the date of the original release but from the reissue date. This makes it impossible for European companies to issue legally "complete" anythings before 50 years after the reissue date.

MG

No, I think generally it is from the recording date. Again these things vary by country, and you never know when the politicians will try to change the law.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Three years ago Fantasy issued CDs of recordings left off of live albums by Cal Tjader, Groove Holmes, Jaki Byard and perhaps others.

I have all three of those CDs, and they are good. The only original LP I have is one that I grew up with, Groove Holmes' Living Soul. The CD was called On Basie's Bandstand. Although that CD is enjoyable, I agree with the original selection; all of the tracks on Living Soul are better than all of the tracks on Basie's Bandstand.

So when material was left off the LP for time considerations, I am in favor of releasing it on CD.

I just checked back on an exchange of e-mails I had four years ago with Stuart Kremsky (originally about Charles Earland's "Funk fantastique", but I derailed the thread) onto "On Basie's bandstand". Stuart produced that CD and said

as it happens, i'm not a huge fan of organ jazz, and i tend to like the faster stuff. that's why there are no ballads on the disc. the unissued slow tunes are really dull.

Perhaps you'd have liked the album better had it not been all burners?

MG