Helping Mosaic by Suggesting Artists and Sets, Part Deux

[HutchFan]

1 hour ago, Larry Kart said:

I think the problem (or "problem") may be that the history of consensual connoisseurship in jazz began to slow down, even come close to grinding to a halt in the 1990s, Why that should be, if that is so, is a big question, but without such rich patterns of agreement as to what among the "recently new" is likely to be of lasting value and/or inspires strong attachments of sentiment, what is an enterprise like Mosaic supposed to do.? As to why this happened, if in fact it did, I'd point my finger at the whole ""Young Lions" episode, which in ways I can't quite quantify at the moment (I'd probably need to write a whole darn book to flesh out this intuition) may have profoundly disrupted the organic flow of the music per se, not to mention the complex of living sensibilities and deeds that have alway supported it. 

Larry - I completely agree with your assertion that there has been a breakdown in the consensus about what constitutes "important" jazz.  But I think it began well before the 1990s.  

I would argue that the end of the 1960s represent the end of consensus.  Recent Mosaic sets that collect Joe Henderson's and Freddie Hubbard's Blue Note recordings from the 1960s appeal to nearly everyone on the board.  (Whether they choose to buy them or not typically has more to do with duplication of albums that are already in their collection.)

OTOH, if we take those same two artists in the 1970s, there would NOT be the same sort of consensus among board members.  I, for one, happen to love Joe Hen's Milestone stuff and Freddie's CTI stuff from the 1970s -- but I'd bet a dollar on a dime that there are plenty of board members who have no interest in it.  

This is why it makes more sense for Mosaic to stick with recordings that pre-date the explosive diversification that took place in jazz during the 1970s.  

Or at least that's my hunch.

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by HutchFan

[Larry Kart]

Hutch Fan -- I agree that it began before the '90s, but I'll stick with my notion that the "Young Lions" episode played a  perhaps key subrosa role in curdling the pudding, both in terms of the amount of organically creative (dare I say innovative?) music that was being made and of the organically coherent interest in and appreciation of same -- if only because the degree of publicity that was inherent in the whole  "Young Lions" episode was in itself so inherently inorganic, so willed.  It was as though the music were being/had been taken out of our hands and/or the living hands of the music and  musicians and left to swim in the murky realm of "product."

[mjzee]

10 hours ago, Larry Kart said:

Hutch Fan -- I agree that it began before the '90s, but I'll stick with my notion that the "Young Lions" episode played a  perhaps key subrosa role in curdling the pudding, both in terms of the amount of organically creative (dare I say innovative?) music that was being made and of the organically coherent interest in and appreciation of same -- if only because the degree of publicity that was inherent in the whole  "Young Lions" episode was in itself so inherently inorganic, so willed.  It was as though the music were being/had been taken out of our hands and/or the living hands of the music and  musicians and left to swim in the murky realm of "product."

Not sure if by "Young Lions" you're referring to Marsalis, the Concord crowd (Scott Hamilton, etc.), or both, but that "movement" can be seen as an attempt to stop jazz's slide into irrelevance.  Other than the "old turks" who were still playing (Dexter, Johnny Griffin, etc.), smooth jazz, and jazz-rock, what was promoted as "real jazz" then was abstract music that appealed to few beyond the loft-jazz crowd and academia.  When the next big organic movement occurred in jazz, "acid jazz," publicity was all over it; it's good to publicize what people actually might want to buy.

Publicity is always going to be part of music, because it's part of commerce.  Just last night, I read the portion of the Sonny Rollins biography about his stint in California and the recording of "Way Out West."  Check out this paragraph:

At first glance, what would become Way Out West promised an East-meets-West-style showdown, but in reality the difference was more geographic than musical.  Koenig and Nesuhi Ertegun, his right-hand man, marketed artists like Shorty Rogers, Jimmy Giuffre, Barney Kessel, and Shelly Manne as part of the "West Coast" sound. "We invented it for publicity purposes," Koenig said of the term. "The truth is," Sonny said, "East and West Coast musicians all knew each other personally or by reputation, and were friends."

11 hours ago, HutchFan said:

This is why it makes more sense for Mosaic to stick with recordings that pre-date the explosive diversification that took place in jazz during the 1970s.

It's instructive to note Mosaic's releases of '70's music: Anthony Braxton and Henry Threadgill.  My impression is they sold poorly.  After all, after a hard day's work, who wants to curl up on the sofa and chill to some Braxton?

Edited April 2, 2023 by mjzee

[JSngry]

29 minutes ago, mjzee said:

After all, after a hard day's work, who wants to curl up on the sofa and chill to some Braxton?

After a hard day of being relentlessly assaulted by triviality, propaganda, and overall general misanthropy. I enjoy nothing more than an hour or two of Braxton's music, which is a cleansing antidote to all of that.

Also- where do you get your sales figures to make the claim that you make? 

[HutchFan]

1 hour ago, mjzee said:

It's instructive to note Mosaic's releases of '70's music: Anthony Braxton and Henry Threadgill.  My impression is they sold poorly.  After all, after a hard day's work, who wants to curl up on the sofa and chill to some Braxton?

Speaking for myself, I wish Mosaic would do MORE sets like Braxton and Threadgill -- and John Carter & Bobby Bradford and Liebman & Beirach.  MORE stuff from the 70s, 80s, and 90s.  

But your reaction sorta "proves my point" that jazz artists from these decades are less likely to appeal to a very high percentage of jazz listeners.  So it's riskier for Mosaic to create sets dedicated to them.

 

 

[JSngry]

A lack of "broad" appeal is hardly the same as limited appeal, never mind no appeal. 

[HutchFan]

11 hours ago, Larry Kart said:

Hutch Fan -- I agree that it began before the '90s, but I'll stick with my notion that the "Young Lions" episode played a  perhaps key subrosa role in curdling the pudding, both in terms of the amount of organically creative (dare I say innovative?) music that was being made and of the organically coherent interest in and appreciation of same -- if only because the degree of publicity that was inherent in the whole  "Young Lions" episode was in itself so inherently inorganic, so willed.  It was as though the music were being/had been taken out of our hands and/or the living hands of the music and  musicians and left to swim in the murky realm of "product."

I hear you.  The whole "let's pretend that the 70s didn't happen and jump back to the 60s... so now we've gotta wear suits and ties" schtick definitely had it's negative effects.

I suppose it's not surprising that so much of the music advanced under the "Young Lions" banner is ignored now.  A lot of it hasn't held up.

 

[HutchFan]

21 minutes ago, JSngry said:

A lack of "broad" appeal is hardly the same as limited appeal, never mind no appeal. 

I agree.

Obviously, there is a sizable number of people who love Braxton and Threadgill.  Mosaic made those sets, and they sold out.  But it's also just as true that there are fewer jazz fans of those artists.

From my perspective (as a listener), these numbers related to breadth of appeal mean nothing in terms of how important or meaningful an artists work is.  Sometimes great artists sell millions and have many, many fans (Ellington); sometimes great artists sell very little and have small but dedicated audiences (too many jazz artists to name).  There is no relationship between the quality of art and the breadth of its appeal.  None.

But I will admit that Mosaic's decision to make sets dedicated to Joe Henderson's and Freddie Hubbard's BN material sorta bummed me out.  They felt "safe." All of the music was/is readily available.  When Mosaic released Blakey's Complete 1960s Jazz Messengers set in the early 90s, most of that music was not available.  There was a sense of discovery, of pulling something "fresh from the vault."  It was different.

Most likely, Mosaic is no longer in a place where they can produce anything other than low risk sets -- and most of the stuff from the BN vaults has been presented.  I get that.  Things change.

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by HutchFan

[felser]

Mosaic can't just do what they did 30 years ago and expect the same results.  When those BN sets (Blakey, Larry Young, McLean, etc.) were coming out, that was the only way to acquire that music on CD.  Since then, just about all of the titles have been released on individual CD's.  Same with things like the Columbia Woody Shaw (and the CBS box set greatly trumped the Mosaic in material with the extra disc, price, sound quality, and to me, presentation), the RCA Desmond, etc.     

[JSngry]

Tangerine records. A good set in theory. 

I would have to think that a set selling out means that Mosaic der and met their sales projection and therefore made the money they expected to make l.

In other words, they knew the market and served it well. 

[mjzee]

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

Also- where do you get your sales figures to make the claim that you make? 

Anecdotal evidence.  I worked in a jazz record store in the late '70's - early '80's in lower Manhattan, and I saw what people bought.  Straight-ahead jazz, classic jazz, soul jazz, smooth jazz, jazz-rock all sold.  Avant-garde really didn't, and this was in lower Manhattan.  I remember when the Braxton Arista box came in, the one with four orchestras, and it didn't move; none of the Braxton titles did.  We had Sun Ra titles in the original Saturn packaging; didn't move.  And then the argument was, well, avant-garde didn't have good distribution behind it.  Then PolyGram took over distribution of Black Saint and Soul Note.  The Soul Notes sold pretty well; the Black Saint titles didn't.

35 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Obviously, there is a sizable number of people who love Braxton and Threadgill.  Mosaic made those sets, and they sold out.

I don't recall that they sold out.  

[JSngry]

There is a younger audience today that is quite at home with the so-called "avant garde". it's almost "mainstream" for them.

Ime moves on and people evolve. Sorry. 

[danasgoodstuff]

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

There is a younger audience today that is quite at home with the so-called "avant garde". it's almost "mainstream" for them.

Ime moves on and people evolve. Sorry. 

This is true, in my experience working in record stores and libraries.  It's not a huge new audience, but it's there.

[HutchFan]

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

There is a younger audience today that is quite at home with the so-called "avant garde". it's almost "mainstream" for them.

Ime moves on and people evolve. Sorry. 

 

35 minutes ago, danasgoodstuff said:

This is true, in my experience working in record stores and libraries.  It's not a huge new audience, but it's there.

That's great to hear. I'd love to see Mosaic tap into THAT audience of potential buyers.

How about John Carter's "Roots & Folklore" series on Gramavison & Black Saint?!?

 

[J.A.W.]

2 hours ago, mjzee said:

Anecdotal evidence.  I worked in a jazz record store in the late '70's - early '80's in lower Manhattan, and I saw what people bought.  Straight-ahead jazz, classic jazz, soul jazz, smooth jazz, jazz-rock all sold.  Avant-garde really didn't, and this was in lower Manhattan.  I remember when the Braxton Arista box came in, the one with four orchestras, and it didn't move; none of the Braxton titles did.  We had Sun Ra titles in the original Saturn packaging; didn't move.  And then the argument was, well, avant-garde didn't have good distribution behind it.  Then PolyGram took over distribution of Black Saint and Soul Note.  The Soul Notes sold pretty well; the Black Saint titles didn't.

I don't recall that they sold out.  

As far as I know they didn't, the licenses expired.

[danasgoodstuff]

23 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

 

That's great to hear. I'd love to see Mosaic tap into THAT audience of potential buyers.

How about John Carter's "Roots & Folklore" series on Gramavison & Black Saint?!?

 

I think that's been proposed and the two label licensing was a hang up.  Great stuff and I might buy that since I currently only have some of it (less than half).

[HutchFan]

3 minutes ago, danasgoodstuff said:

I think that's been proposed and the two label licensing was a hang up.  Great stuff and I might buy that since I currently only have some of it (less than half).

Ah, I see.  Bummer.

It deserves to be more widely available. 

[Joe]

What is the state of the Moers label material? Thinking specifically of the dates from the late 70s and early 80s. https://www.discogs.com/label/38874-Moers-Music

[HutchFan]

2 minutes ago, Joe said:

What is the state of the Moers label material? Thinking specifically of the dates from the late 70s and early 80s. https://www.discogs.com/label/38874-Moers-Music

Great idea. No idea whether it's feasible -- but I imagine there'd be some amazing music there.

[danasgoodstuff]

13 minutes ago, HutchFan said:

Ah, I see.  Bummer.

It deserves to be more widely available. 

It could change...

[Ken Dryden]

As for those pushing full releases of licensed albums as individual CDs with bonus tracks, Mosaic tried that with Mosaic Singles. Unfortunately, that series evidently didn't pay off, because like the 3 CD Mosaic Selects cube boxes, that line is history. Evidently the acquisition + production costs and sales didn't produce a sufficient profit.

Unless someone is ready to put their money with their opinion and financially back one of their suggested boxed sets, I think I will leave it to Michael and Scott to run the label. 

 

[Teasing the Korean]

26 minutes ago, Ken Dryden said:

As for those pushing full releases of licensed albums as individual CDs with bonus tracks, Mosaic tried that with Mosaic Singles. Unfortunately, that series evidently didn't pay off, because like the 3 CD Mosaic Selects cube boxes, that line is history. Evidently the acquisition + production costs and sales didn't produce a sufficient profit.

Unless someone is ready to put their money with their opinion and financially back one of their suggested boxed sets, I think I will leave it to Michael and Scott to run the label. 

I will attribute that up to poor marketing on Mosaic's part.  Obviously Numero, Light in the Attic, Real Gone Music, and a number of film score boutique labels (Intrada, La-La-Land, etc.) have made single-disc releases work.  

[JSngry]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

What is the state of the Moers label material? Thinking specifically of the dates from the late 70s and early 80s. https://www.discogs.com/label/38874-Moers-Music

Not sure if everybody got paid right the first time. Sloppy at best. 

But speaking of Gramavision... Anthony Davis and/or James Newton and/or Abdul Wadud.

Not on Mosaic though. They'd have no idea what to do with it. The music is too modern for them. Whoever they were, that was then 

But there's an amazing set to be done there by somebody with the appetite and the skills. That will not be today's Mosaic. 

Some day, somebody will do it, package the material, pimp the artists, and find the audience. We're here. 

[Ken Dryden]

44 minutes ago, Teasing the Korean said:

I will attribute that up to poor marketing on Mosaic's part.  Obviously Numero, Light in the Attic, Real Gone Music, and a number of film score boutique labels (Intrada, La-La-Land, etc.) have made single-disc releases work.  

Do any of these labels pay royalties? I have my doubts about Real Gone Music. Mosaic has to honor US royalty laws, so that is an added expense.

[Teasing the Korean]

40 minutes ago, Ken Dryden said:

Do any of these labels pay royalties? I have my doubts about Real Gone Music. Mosaic has to honor US royalty laws, so that is an added expense.

Real Gone Music is a legit US label. As are all the others that I listed above.  None of them are grey market.

https://realgonemusic.com

Edited April 2, 2023 by Teasing the Korean