Thoughts on cheap, multi CD re-issues

[duaneiac]

I HATE these sets. They are ruining the few remaining record stores with a sizeable jazz department.

If you absolutely need to hear music that is otherwise unavailable, why not use bittorrent as a temporary stopgap?

Where are these remaining record stores with a sizable jazz department? Seriously, I would like to know. I have recently visited some of the big name stores of the past and noticed that they do not have a very large selection any more.

I don't know of any "big name" record stores still around. From my experience, here in the SF Bay Area, the main stores are used/new stores like Amoeba, Rasputin's and Streetlight. Each of them has a sizable jazz section -- at least sizable in relation to jazz's popularity in the market. I have noticed that these multi-disc sets often appear in the bins of these stores, seemingly taking away available bin space from new, single disc versions of say, Blue Note, Fantasy or Columbia reissues.

It's kind of shame. For one, the artists are clearly getting no money for their product. (Although nowadays with the catalogs of the various record companies having been sold and resold to different companies over the years until now there is just the one or two huge conglomerates which "own" huge stockpiles of recorded music in which they have absolutely no financial interest or incentive to reissue, it's pretty doubtful to me that any of the performers covered by these out of European copyright reissues are getting anywhere near the money they might be due. One would need the services of a good law firm and accounting firm to keep watch on the records of the conglomerates, and how many musicians or their estates can afford that?)

But also there is the lack of liner notes in these sets, notes which often provided an informative perspective or historical context about the recordings. It's good, I suppose that folks can get their hands on the music, but I think most jazz fans have a curious nature and want to learn about a musician's background or some particular details about a specific recording session. Jazz is very much a music with a history, but also music of history, reflecting the everyday lives and times and joys and struggles of the people who made it and enjoyed it in any given era.

I admit I do have some of these sets. Some are beyond jazz, such as Chet Atkins, Les Baxter, Yma Sumac and Bill Hailey & His Comets. Not too much historical context is needed in those cases. I have quite a few Proper boxed sets, everything from George Shearing to Bob Wills to Dinah Washington to Tubby Hayes. The Tubby Hayes set was actually my first real introduction to his music. JSP put out some fine sets of Django Reinhardt music. The Real Gone sets can be hit and miss. I have one Carmen McRae set which had had one album which was truly unlistenable the mastering was so harsh. The rest of the set seemed okay. I recently bought a Tony Scott set, but haven't listened to it yet.

Edited May 6, 2015 by duaneiac

[Big Beat Steve]

So why do you have these sets, either "beyond jazz" or from Proper?

Let me guess ... because they did not figure high enough on your priority list as far as presentation etc. was concerned so that you would necessarily have been willing to buy full price sets/individual CDs, as opposed (maybe - I am taking a wild shot again ) to hard bop or other areas of modern jazz where you'd value presentation (and other content that represents value) much higher. Fine enough and fair enough ... but don't you think there are others to whom music from the 78 rpm era or music from the fringes of jazz (at least fringes of jazz in a HARD BOP sense) woud matter higher and the'yd rather go for the "real deal" there and frown upon box sets like those on Proper whereas they'd be curious enough to listen into hard bop or other areas of jazz covered by those typical P.D. box sets or individual discs but would not be that keen to shell out big money there?

Case in point: Why should anybody drool about the Wynonie Harris box set on Proper when all his recordings have been reissued "properly" on Ace and why should it be OK for them to drool about such sets while they condemn Lone Hill reissues (naming just one example) of material from the hard bop segment of jazz at the same time? How likely is it that major, groundbreaking remastering has gone into that Proper set after Harris' recordings had been prepared for reissue in the typical painstaking Ace fashion? (I am mentioning him because he was named among those Proper box sets bought by forumists - probably "as an introduction" - who otherwise leaned towards hard bop etc. in a much earlier discussion of this topic here where the Spanish/Andorran labels came under constant heavy fire whereas some UK labels were cut a surprising LOT of slack).

You see, as long as we are talking about music which just happens to be in the Public Domain, in the end it boils down to which area of music you just want 100% perfect in every respect of presentation and which music you just prefer to limit yourself to some bare-bones package, maybe as an introduction, maybe as an "essential listening" package without digging as deeply into it as you would in your CORE area of interest.

This entire subject is one where the door swings both ways, really ...

BTW, there ARE people out there to whom the music by Chet Atkins and Bill Haley is music with a history (and therefore worthy of liner notes) too. No need to be that condescending, then - that is, unless you acept that there are others (maybe from the Chet Atkins fan field?) to whom "themed" cheapo jazz box sets without liner notes beyond the lineup and recording dates will do perfectly well as an introduction or "essentials collection" too.

One man's meat, another man's poison, you know ...

Edited May 6, 2015 by Big Beat Steve

[jcam_44]

By that logic, music should not be purchased second-hand if still available.

[Big Beat Steve]

On the contrary. Music will be bought secondhand if you want the music but not badly or perfectly enough to pay full price for a new item that is guaranteed to have no ticks, props, crackles, blemishes, sleeve/box/jewel case wear, nothing, never. If you can do with a record/disc that visibly (and in the case of vinyl) audibly has been "enjoyed before" then you will take advantage of the lower price of a secondhand item. Just like with every other kind of goods where the choice betwen these options exists (or between any option of "OK and cheaper" vs "better but more expensive").

Actually, IMHO buying secondhand music illustrates the question of why those cheapo box sets (or individual discs) have a market at all: Just like you might be satisfied with an affordable (or downright cheap) secondhand copy in decent but not perfect condition you might be satisfied with a new (but cheaply produced and cheaply sold) copy in listenable OK fidelity but not ultra-super new re-remastering that would be (sometimes disproportionately) more expensive. Always assuming those cheaper discs relate to material that is in the public domain and we are not talking about a blatant ripoff copy of something that has just been reissued immediately before.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Big Beat Steve

[erwbol]

I HATE these sets. They are ruining the few remaining record stores with a sizeable jazz department.

If you absolutely need to hear music that is otherwise unavailable, why not use bittorrent as a temporary stopgap?

Where are these remaining record stores with a sizable jazz department? Seriously, I would like to know. I have recently visited some of the big name stores of the past and noticed that they do not have a very large selection any more.

In Amsterdam there is Concerto, good for the whole spectrum from classical to jazz to rock. They also have a good second hand section. Basically, it's four or five interconnected stores in the Utrechtsestraat near Rembrandt Square.

In The Hague there is the Jazz Center, just jazz like the names says.

Concerto has been selling more low quality PD releases of classic albums over the past decade, but they are still pretty good, though not as good as they used to be, but perhaps that is also a reflection of the dwindling number of worthwhile new releases by reputable record labels and discs going OOP.

Edited May 6, 2015 by erwbol

[Daniel A]

No need to be that condescending, then

The post did not appear condescending to me.

[duaneiac]

So why do you have these sets, either "beyond jazz" or from Proper?

Let me guess ... because they did not figure high enough on your priority list as far as presentation etc. was concerned so that you would necessarily have been willing to buy full price sets/individual CDs, as opposed (maybe - I am taking a wild shot again ) to hard bop or other areas of modern jazz where you'd value presentation (and other content that represents value) much higher. Fine enough and fair enough ... but don't you think there are others to whom music from the 78 rpm era or music from the fringes of jazz (at least fringes of jazz in a HARD BOP sense) woud matter higher and the'yd rather go for the "real deal" there and frown upon box sets like those on Proper whereas they'd be curious enough to listen into hard bop or other areas of jazz covered by those typical P.D. box sets or individual discs but would not be that keen to shell out big money there?

Case in point: Why should anybody drool about the Wynonie Harris box set on Proper when all his recordings have been reissued "properly" on Ace and why should it be OK for them to drool about such sets while they condemn Lone Hill reissues (naming just one example) of material from the hard bop segment of jazz at the same time? How likely is it that major, groundbreaking remastering has gone into that Proper set after Harris' recordings had been prepared for reissue in the typical painstaking Ace fashion? (I am mentioning him because he was named among those Proper box sets bought by forumists - probably "as an introduction" - who otherwise leaned towards hard bop etc. in a much earlier discussion of this topic here where the Spanish/Andorran labels came under constant heavy fire whereas some UK labels were cut a surprising LOT of slack).

You see, as long as we are talking about music which just happens to be in the Public Domain, in the end it boils down to which area of music you just want 100% perfect in every respect of presentation and which music you just prefer to limit yourself to some bare-bones package, maybe as an introduction, maybe as an "essential listening" package without digging as deeply into it as you would in your CORE area of interest.

This entire subject is one where the door swings both ways, really ...

BTW, there ARE people out there to whom the music by Chet Atkins and Bill Haley is music with a history (and therefore worthy of liner notes) too. No need to be that condescending, then - that is, unless you acept that there are others (maybe from the Chet Atkins fan field?) to whom "themed" cheapo jazz box sets without liner notes beyond the lineup and recording dates will do perfectly well as an introduction or "essentials collection" too.

One man's meat, another man's poison, you know ...

First, there was no intention of being condescending on my part. I'm sure there must be some die hard Chet Atkins or Les Baxter fans out there who want and need to know every detail about every recording those gentlemen ever made. I have no problem with their passion. For me, the music can be enjoyed (or not) on its own merits. Sure, a lot of jazz can be enjoyed (or not) on its own merits, but there is often a backstory behind the music/musicians that is interesting to learn, like Horace Silver's inspiration for "Song For My Father" or the stories of the longstanding members of the Duke Ellington bands. On the Real Gone set of Bill Haley, for example, I can appreciate the music for what it is without a lot of context. I actually kind of wish there were liner notes, at least some personnel listings (I mean the guy in the band photo on the cover who is rockin' the accordion -- what was that about?), giving some details about the recordings, but for me, this was the first real exposure I had to Bill Haley beyond the basic hits. It served its purpose.

By the same token, some one who had never heard Duke Ellington's music beyond the basic hits, might be introduced to his music through one of the cheap sets. Maybe that will be enough to satisfy their musical curiosity. In that case, good for them; at least they gave his music a listen and know a tad more about it than they did before. Maybe it will inspire them to want to learn more, to dig deeper and buy some of the original recordings which have informative liner notes. In that case, it's a shame if they go to their local record store (the few which remain) and can find little more than these cheap boxed sets to choose from.

For the average music fan, it's about an interest in music or a musical performer. I don't think the average person when shopping for CDs knows if there is much difference between a CD reissued by Ace (which you state are "properly" done) or one reissued by Lone Hill or Fresh Sound or any of the other labels which rely upon the European PD laws. I doubt if they recognize much of a difference between an "Original Album Classics" boxed set by Sony and a Proper boxed set. I doubt if the thought occurs to them, "The performer (or his/her estate will receive royalties from the former but not the latter". In an ideal world, the performers included on these European PD sets would receive royalties for each unit sold in the USA, where their work still falls under copyright protections, at least. But we don't live in an ideal world.

As to why I own these sets, I was simply admitting that I have them and cannot condemn them out of hand. They are what they are. The Carmen McRae set had several of her Bethlehem albums which are now OOP on CD. Sure I could track them down and buy them individually as used CDs (and some of them, if I were to find them at a good price, I surely would), but then the singer's estate receives no royalties from used CD sales either. And when might the Bethlehem CDs be reissued again in the current music market? What multinational conglomerate even owns the rights to the Bethlehem catalog nowadays?

Edited May 6, 2015 by duaneiac

[Big Beat Steve]

First, there was no intention of being condescending on my part. I'm sure there must be some die hard Chet Atkins or Les Baxter fans out there who want and need to know every detail about every recording those gentlemen ever made. I have no problem with their passion. For me, the music can be enjoyed (or not) on its own merits. Sure, a lot of jazz can be enjoyed (or not) on its own merits, but there is often a backstory behind the music/musicians that is interesting to learn, like Horace Silver's inspiration for "Song For My Father" or the stories of the longstanding members of the Duke Ellington bands. On the Real Gone set of Bill Haley, for example, I can appreciate the music for what it is without a lot of context. I actually kind of wish there were liner notes, at least some personnel listings (I mean the guy in the band photo on the cover who is rockin' the accordion -- what was that about?), giving some details about the recordings, but for me, this was the first real exposure I had to Bill Haley beyond the basic hits. It served its purpose.

As to why I own these sets, I was simply admitting that I have them and cannot condemn them out of hand. They are what they are. The Carmen McRae set had several of her Bethlehem albums which are now OOP on CD. Sure I could track them down and buy them individually as used CDs (and some of them, if I were to find them at a good price, I surely would), but then the singer's estate receives no royalties from used CD sales either. And when might the Bethlehem CDs be reissued again in the current music market? What multinational conglomerate even owns the rights to the Bethlehem catalog nowadays?

Thanks - your first paragraph answered what I awas about to reply to Daniel. it just is so that indeed I hapen to have quite a few friends and diehard collectors in the hillbilly/country/Western Swing field and know how much they cherish THEIR favorite music and its history and devour the accompanying liner notes, booklets, discographical details etc. with just as much fervor as we jazz fans do (yes, in a way I see myself in both of these camps so I am a bit partisan about this).

If they, in turn, wanted to get an introduction to this or that style of jazz, then, as you say, some of the cheap jazz box sets with skimpy packaging might see them a long way through for a starter. And if jazz is just a minor interest among their entire musical spectrum they might be satisfied with remaining there. Just like many jazz fans are satisfied with more superficial box sets covering THEIR side interests. Still better than not listening in and getting familiarized at all IMO. In the long run you cannot absorb everything with the same kind of intensity.

I agree with your final paragraph. Aside from financial aspects where you just are not willing to pay big/full price for what is a musical "side interest" to you (see my earlier post), this ... "The Carmen McRae set had several of her Bethlehem albums which are now OOP on CD. Sure I could track them down and buy them individually as used CDs, but then the singer's estate receives no royalties from used CD sales either. And when might the Bethlehem CDs be reissued again in the current music market?"

is exactly the core of the problem. You have no other way of finding the music you are interested in in any other reasonable way or with reasonable outlay so you take this option which is about the only feasible one remaining.

And at this point I must add one thing (not aimed at you, mind you ... ): When this "no other way of finding the music you are interested in" argument comes up, somehow some of the retorts that are bound to come up in response sound very much like "Too bad for you if you weren't around to buy that record new in a record shop at $2.98 in 1959" or "Too bad for you if you cannot outbid the Japanese/Korean/whatever pay-any-price-for-any-record speculators on the auction sites" or "Too bad if you haven't subscribed to all the Japanese reissues that go OOP after 4 weeks"... Not statements to be taken seriously, these ... honestly ... Going by the laws applicable HERE, Public Domain is Public Domain and that's that if a P.D. product does exist. The rest is just a matter of whether the price/packaging/fidelity tradeoff suits you or not.

BTW, that Bill Haley accordeonist who had you intrigued was Johnny Grande. A nice chap who died not long ago. Saw him a couple of times on stage with the revived Bill Haley band of the past 2 decades featuring the surviving original band members plus a Haley soundalike lead vocalist, and including guitarist Frannie Beecher who will be found as guitarist Francis Beecher in the discographies of some of Benny Goodman's c.1947-49 big band recordings.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Big Beat Steve

[JSngry]

I agree with your final paragraph. Aside from financial aspects where you just are not willing to pay big/full price for what is a musical "side interest" to you (see my earlier post), this ... "The Carmen McRae set had several of her Bethlehem albums which are now OOP on CD. Sure I could track them down and buy them individually as used CDs, but then the singer's estate receives no royalties from used CD sales either. And when might the Bethlehem CDs be reissued again in the current music market?"

is exactly the core of the problem. You have no other way of finding the music you are interested in in any other reasonable way or with reasonable outlay so you take this option which is about the only feasible one remaining.

And at this point I must add one thing (not aimed at you, mind you ... ): When this "no other way of finding the music you are interested in" argument comes up, somehow some of the retorts that are bound to come up in response sound very much like "Too bad for you if you weren't around to buy that record new in a record shop at $2.98 in 1959" or "Too bad for you if you cannot outbid the Japanese/Korean/whatever pay-any-price-for-any-record speculators on the auction sites" or "Too bad if you haven't subscribed to all the Japanese reissues that go OOP after 4 weeks"...

Not me, I'm kinda like, "too bad for you if you can't even find some teenaged nephew/niece to steal it off of a bit-torrent site instead of paying some stranger to do it for you". Because when you go off into these deeply nasty EuroMusiPornbox collections, that's pretty much all you're doing and that's pretty much all you're getting.

Ace, btw, rocks. Totally.

[jazzbo]

What multinational conglomerate even owns the rights to the Bethlehem catalog nowadays?

http://versemusicgroup.com/bethlehem-records

[Teasing the Korean]

I have exactly one of these sets: The Arthur Lyman set.

It sounds like it is professionally mastered from a tape source, not vinyl.

My impetus for buying it was that I already had all 8 LPs, and I wanted to burn the money cuts from a digital source onto a single CD. So I bought it for cheap and it was worth it.

My main reasons for not buying more of these sets are packaging/aesthetics and, with some collections, sound quality. (Some are most certainly lifted from vinyl.)

As for the philosophical arguments, in most cases, the artists are dead and the sessions are long since paid for. It doesn't break my heart when perfectly legal reissues may be depriving giant corporations from royalties on recordings they don't even know they own.

As I wrote in a similar thread, the majors saw the European public domain law coming down the pike, and they could have either preemptively reissued recordings, or worked with the independent labels on producing high quality reissues. I saw some of the former and barely any of the latter.

So, in summary, while I do not love these sets, I can certainly understand why they exist, in light of the realities of the major labels.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Teasing the Korean

[AllenLowe]

let me add that I feel no guilt in buying any of this stuff because I have supported this industry with a LOT of my semi-hard-earned dollars since 1968. The record/cd business received more of my cash than anything, other than my kids.

[jlhoots]

let me add that I feel no guilt in buying any of this stuff because I have supported this industry with a LOT of my semi-hard-earned dollars since 1968. The record/cd business received more of my cash than anything, other than my kids.

I agree.

[Big Beat Steve]

Not me, I'm kinda like, "too bad for you if you can't even find some teenaged nephew/niece to steal it off of a bit-torrent site instead of paying some stranger to do it for you". Because when you go off into these deeply nasty EuroMusiPornbox collections, that's pretty much all you're doing and that's pretty much all you're getting.

Your stance is known. It has been regurgitated often enough. Yet there are people out there who prefer a tangible product (where the price/quality balance appears OK to THEM) instead of some audio files lurking on one's hard drive. Not to mention that enough reissues by the majors could be named where fidelity and presentation (or lack of latter) don't look any better than those of many of those PD sets, so ...

Your EuroPorn insinuations won't make anybody feel guilty about these sets anymore anyway because - exaggerating only a little - for every PD set that you call that way there is bound to be a JapPorn set (remember: "Not for sale outside Japan" ) and a YankMajorConglomerate deadbeat. So a niche is being filled (that is left stupidly unattended by others) and that's all there is to it.

TTK put it well:

It doesn't break my heart when perfectly legal reissues may be depriving giant corporations from royalties on recordings they don't even know they own.

As I wrote in a similar thread, the majors saw the European public domain law coming down the pike, and they could have either preemptively reissued recordings, or worked with the independent labels on producing high quality reissues. I saw some of the former and barely any of the latter.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Big Beat Steve

[erwbol]

I agree with your final paragraph. Aside from financial aspects where you just are not willing to pay big/full price for what is a musical "side interest" to you (see my earlier post), this ... "The Carmen McRae set had several of her Bethlehem albums which are now OOP on CD. Sure I could track them down and buy them individually as used CDs, but then the singer's estate receives no royalties from used CD sales either. And when might the Bethlehem CDs be reissued again in the current music market?"

is exactly the core of the problem. You have no other way of finding the music you are interested in in any other reasonable way or with reasonable outlay so you take this option which is about the only feasible one remaining.

And at this point I must add one thing (not aimed at you, mind you ... ): When this "no other way of finding the music you are interested in" argument comes up, somehow some of the retorts that are bound to come up in response sound very much like "Too bad for you if you weren't around to buy that record new in a record shop at $2.98 in 1959" or "Too bad for you if you cannot outbid the Japanese/Korean/whatever pay-any-price-for-any-record speculators on the auction sites" or "Too bad if you haven't subscribed to all the Japanese reissues that go OOP after 4 weeks"...

Not me, I'm kinda like, "too bad for you if you can't even find some teenaged nephew/niece to steal it off of a bit-torrent site instead of paying some stranger to do it for you". Because when you go off into these deeply nasty EuroMusiPornbox collections, that's pretty much all you're doing and that's pretty much all you're getting.

Ace, btw, rocks. Totally.

You do not need a minor to do your dirty work for you. You need a VPN that supports bittorrent traffic and does not keep logs.

[David Ayers]

On top of all of this, let's add that the "owners" of music that is PD in Europe or elsewhere no longer "own" it, so if you imagine that the majors are fulfilling contracts that have expired by paying artists on material they sell in Europe you can be sure you are wrong.

EMI, as was, did start to issue 4 cd sets to rival avid etc and some are still around, but they seem to have stopped for now and my suspicion is that there is no money in it for them according to their models. It isn't even worth reprinting most of the RVGs, apparently, which sold for much less than any Fresh Sounds rarity.

[king ubu]

They no longer "own" it, alright ... but in some cases they still own master tapes or other copies close to the source.

And it's still not legal for any of these enterprises top rip other product than the one that's been 50 years of age up to ... 2012 or 2013 - what's the threshold anyway, has the entire thing been settled at all? (Fegh ya, Paul!)

Two more thoughts though (the above doesn't count):

1) if they would only "rip-off" (they don't, it's legal as long as they use the right sources) majors that give a flying poop about their own catalogues - fine with me. Still would prefer official series of course, and I do occasionally go places (reach into my pockets) in order to get the real thing, but I certainly don't expect all others to behave the same way ... again, too often though, they rip off smaller labels and that really pisses me off in all ways ... no matter if what they do is "legal" or what, there it's me that doesn't give a poop: copying "Town Hall 1945" or that Charles "Baron" Mingus set (and mind me, in both cases they quite certainly stole straight from the original CD ... not sure what the legal situation is there, the Diz/Bird was PD as it was never issued within the 50 years timespan, BUT there was still no legally okay source available to them ... and I don't think copying the Uptown CD, which I assume was the only source available, is legal).

2) that "it's the only way to lay hands on it" argument is one that is very much of its (our current) times - where the heck does that idea come from that we're entitled to have it all, at any given time?

afterthought to 2): I'm 35 now (actually not true, but I guess I might just stop counting anyways, don't get *that* concept of time), and I rarely, if ever, meet younger people in jazz hangouts (be it online, be it at concerts) - so, eat this: you all were around in time to buy all those official Blue Note, Fantasy, Verve/PolyGram/whatever reissues! Okay, of course you may have not had enough money at hand back then (I never did ... at least I could always have used plenty more ), you may have had other, more important business to tend to ... but that "it's the only way" thingie, no, me no buy that unless you're a kid of 20 or 25 or only discovered jazz 5 years ago.

[David Ayers]

Well...

Works published in 1962 or before are now PD. Works published in 1963 or later benefit from an extra 20 years of protection. So if there were any truth in the idea that PD is undermining the remastering programs of the majors we would see an absence of titles from 1962 and before but a continuing orgy of re-releases from 1963 onwards. That's not what we are seeing, is it?

Correct me if I am wrong on the year that the change took hold, but that is basically it, isn't it?

Illegal downloads are the villain, but people here who admit to illegal downloading and copying prefer to focus on Andorra and Yurop. It's called scapegoating.

[king ubu]

well, of course not ... in my view, music business has destroyed itself quite efficiently in the past 20 or so years, as we were watching from the sidelines ... actually, look at the current flood of classical boxes - that market, compared to jazz, seems to be pretty large, so all the more they could still try and make some money there, but no, they've started selling stuff way cheaper than they could/should have some years ago, it's like watching them doing a very slow yet efficient hara-kiri there - they make sure there will be hardly a drop of blood left in the venes once they're done

[David Ayers]

Those cheap box sets are not what they appear. Really they have got people used to spending quite a lot on CDs. Each purchase costs maybe 50 or 100 euros. Actually quite expensive. And while the majors do fewer significant new issues than ever before, the independents still churn out more new stuff than anyone can keep up with, as do the orchestra own labels. It looks different now than ten years ago, but healthy enough, I'd say.

[JSngry]

Not me, I'm kinda like, "too bad for you if you can't even find some teenaged nephew/niece to steal it off of a bit-torrent site instead of paying some stranger to do it for you". Because when you go off into these deeply nasty EuroMusiPornbox collections, that's pretty much all you're doing and that's pretty much all you're getting.

Your stance is known. It has been regurgitated often enough. Yet there are people out there who prefer a tangible product (where the price/quality balance appears OK to THEM) instead of some audio files lurking on one's hard drive. Not to mention that enough reissues by the majors could be named where fidelity and presentation (or lack of latter) don't look any better than those of many of those PD sets, so ...

Your EuroPorn insinuations won't make anybody feel guilty about these sets anymore anyway because - exaggerating only a little - for every PD set that you call that way there is bound to be a JapPorn set (remember: "Not for sale outside Japan" ) and a YankMajorConglomerate deadbeat. So a niche is being filled (that is left stupidly unattended by others) and that's all there is to it.

TTK put it well:

It doesn't break my heart when perfectly legal reissues may be depriving giant corporations from royalties on recordings they don't even know they own.

As I wrote in a similar thread, the majors saw the European public domain law coming down the pike, and they could have either preemptively reissued recordings, or worked with the independent labels on producing high quality reissues. I saw some of the former and barely any of the latter.

I was merely ensuring that the full scope of the "too bad for you if..." litany was accounted for (it was not, go back and re-read your list), lest one got the impression that it really WAS "Difficult" to get this stuff without resorting to EuroMusiPornboxes..or if you don't mind the pixilation, that JapaMusiPornsingldiscs.

It's not.

Now, if you "need" to have an "object", well, sure, you get a picture of a picture of some pictures, and I suppose that's....pretty could, uh, sure.

No need for guilt but maybe some fiscal direction wouldn't hurt. Then again, we all throw money away in some kind of way on something. For me, it's those little boxes of raisins.

You do not need a minor to do your dirty work for you. You need a VPN that supports bittorrent traffic and does not keep logs.

I find that young people take to lowered expectations a lot easier than do old people, so I encourage them, to see that their faith in a lesser tomorrow does not go unrewarded.

Plus, they dig the raisins.

[JSngry]

Seriously, I don't care what people buy, or,really, why they buy it. But when the justification is blatantly and patently false (which I can't get this ANYWHERE else!!!!! is, then ooops, sorry, that's simple misinformation, now do you have a reason/rationalization that can be supported by reality? A simple "ah, it's cheap, it's right here in front of me, and I'm too lazy to go digging on the bit-torrent sites, or to bug my collector friends, and besides, it comes in its own box" is perfectly acceptable, but...is nobody that honest? No. It's always well if so and so wouldn't have done this or oif so and so WOULD have done this, then I wouldn't HAVE to buy this, and, hey, take responsibility for your own actions, don't be looking for misdirected absoltuion.

First person that says straight-up "Yes, there are other ways to get this material, to say otherwise is a fat-faced lie" gets a BIG box of raisins, one of the ones I buy for myself, and then we can all get back to going about our business.

[mjzee]

Seriously, I don't care what people buy, or,really, why they buy it. But when the justification is blatantly and patently false (which I can't get this ANYWHERE else!!!!! is, then ooops, sorry, that's simple misinformation, now do you have a reason/rationalization that can be supported by reality? A simple "ah, it's cheap, it's right here in front of me, and I'm too lazy to go digging on the bit-torrent sites, or to bug my collector friends, and besides, it comes in its own box" is perfectly acceptable, but...is nobody that honest? No. It's always well if so and so wouldn't have done this or oif so and so WOULD have done this, then I wouldn't HAVE to buy this, and, hey, take responsibility for your own actions, don't be looking for misdirected absoltuion.

First person that says straight-up "Yes, there are other ways to get this material, to say otherwise is a fat-faced lie" gets a BIG box of raisins, one of the ones I buy for myself, and then we can all get back to going about our business.

But one of the big problems with these Real Gone titles is that they look respectable and legit. A jazz consumer who's not in the know (who, say, doesn't read this BB) could reason that Amazon is selling these, I see them in Half Price Books and other stores, so they're probably OK (similar to those Doxy LPs). Someone who does BitTorrent knows exactly what he's doing and why it's wrong.

A good comparison would be those Applause LPs from the '80's that reissued some Blue Note titles. They were cheap and they looked like boots, so the average consumer wouldn't know they were actually licensed from BN. They were in record stores, so the average consumer figured they're probably legit. In the case of Applause, they'd be correct; in the case of Real Gone or Doxy, not so.

To the average consumer, I'll bet these look a lot alike:

[David Ayers]

Aesthetics also come into it with issues properly licensed for the US - I *hate* the look of Collectables and the two-LP-on-one-cd format. I would never go near them!

Same for Applause. Yuk.

[jazzbo]

It's a really interesting topic. I mean all the people I liked in the small Ohio town I ended up in in the 'seventies were doing one sort of illegal drug or another. I knew they were illegal. I chose to do some of them myself, knowing full well I was breaking the law and was a criminal. Did I think the laws were right? For the most part no. But I did know I was in danger of prosecution and punishment. I couldn't go to the only drug store or the only grocer or the only convenience store in town and buy them. I had to rely on criminals to obtain them. There was a thrill involved, but also a paranoia developing that didn't add any joy or excitement.

Here in the US these releases in question are supposed to be illegal. But I can click a selection on line and buy one from the biggest of retailers. And I can walk into a store and buy one. And I don't feel in danger or under surveillance or an illicit tingle of dangerous excitement.

And there are some stores that won't carry them. And there are some that the big stores don't carry because perhaps the estate of the artist or the artist are vigilant and vocal and litigious.

A weird blend! Pychicemotus!