I don't pay enough attention to alternate takes...

[JSngry]

All the more reason to not pay for unreleased material then. Material that was not paid for on the assembly end should not be paid for on the consumer end.

So - everybody compile all the alternate takes you've gotten over the years (as well as any material that runs over 30 minutes of an album), and let's all upload it for universal sharing.

It's the only just way to stop the rip-off!

And let's file a class-action lawsuit against the recording industry to pay everybody who's either been recorded under such circumstances or else everybody who's ever bought product produced under such circumstances.

Even better, both!

[Chuck Nessa]

The 2 sessions per lp deal was mostly a New York indie thing. All the sessions I was aware of in Chicago pretty much went by the book on pay.

[JSngry]

Then Chicago-based sessions are exempt from The Uploading Correction & The Lawsuit Revolt.

[clifford_thornton]

I enjoy hearing the alternates but don't obsess over them; if I was a musician or a musicologist analyzing the solos of Player X across versions of "Stardust" they naturally might have a little more bearing. I'll admit to having a hard time with the inclusion of false starts or truncated cuts on discs and those being counted as "alternates."

[Christiern]

[Chuck Nessa]

[Chas]

Is this from some parallel universe where people say things like, "Nessa be the mother of invention" ?

[Christiern]

Perhaps, but it ain't Nessasserily so.

[rostasi]

I like 'em. Knowledge is good.

Yes, they were originally rejected by the artist or producer,

but not always for quality (or even necessarily good) reasons.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

There are rip-offs all over the music business. All over every business. Sorry.

The alternative takes that really meant something to me were the ones for "Idle moments". Not just the 13 minute version of "Django" and the longer version of "Jean de fleur". I should have liked to have heard the failed shorter version(s) of the title track, to see what they made of it.

There have been a few other alterative takes that I've found interesting in that they do show the musician recomposing his/her solos, but generally I can only identify this happening if I already know the original pretty well.

Otherwise, well...

MG

[Christiern]

When I found—tucked away at Columbia—a 16" acetate of the session that included Benny Goodman's Breakfast Feud, there were several successive takes on which Charlie Christian's solo was in each case different. It was a great opportunity to study how he progressed, so I decided to splice them all together in the order of performance. It made sense, because there is not a lot of Christian around and his improvisations were an influence on many. Larry Hiller, my engineer at Columbia, did an excellent job of making it seamless, and there was not a single complaint, that I know of.

I also used an alternate take of a Billie Holiday side (from another acetate), because Lester took an extra chorus. This take was rejected only because it was too long for a 10" 78rpm side.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

A little gloss on "Idle moments".

Records are made under constraints - financial, time and technical. In order to get their music out there (and to get paid), musicians consent to be fettered and agree to work within that discipline. Thus, the originally issued take of "Idle moments" was a failure because the musicians accidentally freed themselves from the constraints.

If it's a professional failure, the musicians ought to have objected to their poorly-disciplined music being issued.

?

MG

[A Lark Ascending]

Somebody start an 'Alternate takes you should really listen to' thread. With a few lines as to what captivates the proposer it could be really interesting and send us back to those tracks with fresh ears. The examples mentioned here are likely to get lost as this thread dies.

[papsrus]

Somebody start an 'Alternate takes you should really listen to' thread. With a few lines as to what captivates the proposer it could be really interesting and send us back to those tracks with fresh ears. The examples mentioned here are likely to get lost as this thread dies.

You mean, an alternate thread?

[Jazzmoose]

I picked "ignore", though I don't really. Let's just say it ticks me off to have the alternate tracks mixed in with the original mix. I'll listen to them, but not very often. Except Bird, of course. Hell, I wouldn't know which was which...

[Christiern]

I agree that alternate takes, if we must have them, should be a separate set of tracks, a coda of sorts. To me, recording sessions are generally a bore, especially if I am present as a no-function visitor. I find myself anxious to get on with it and hear the next selection. Being there as the producer/A&R man is quite a different matter.

As for the which is which aspect, I see absolutely no excuse for including alternates that aren't readily identifiable as a different performance. That sort of thing is for completists like Schaap, who won't omit a single cough or the squeak of a chair. We all know how ludicrous his Benedetti tapes boxed set was—the Mosaic people should have put their foot down and not allowed him to include, say, a 23 second track of nothing, compounding the idiocy by such identification as "possibly Lover Man."

Keep the superfluous stuff out and charge the customer less, I say. Of course, the music is truly secondary to the bottom line, which may be why the recording industry is in such bad shape and—I suspect—on its way out. Need proof? Run a recent Grammy show.

[A Lark Ascending]

Somebody start an 'Alternate takes you should really listen to' thread. With a few lines as to what captivates the proposer it could be really interesting and send us back to those tracks with fresh ears. The examples mentioned here are likely to get lost as this thread dies.

You mean, an alternate thread?

Only if the originator of this thread is properly compensated.