Women and Mosaic Records

[Dmitry]

Just now, Teasing the Korean said:

A couple of points:

1. Create physical space

2. Make money off of the physical object.

While keeping the music.

Now I see two points.

I should have said: "For me it's not applicable." Were I faced with a choice of losing my cds and records (which may happen), I'd rather listen to internet radio than spend time ripping, labeling, saving, etc. Or just ask Stompin at the Savoy really nicely to make me a copy of his flash card. 

[Stompin at the Savoy]

You don't actually have to do too much labeling - the track titles and artists and other information is derived from online databases when you import a cd.  Nevertheless there is a considerable amount of curating required to keep it all organized and so on.  Hence not for everybody.

[Dmitry]

10 minutes ago, Stompin at the Savoy said:

You don't actually have to do too much labeling - the track titles and artists and other information is derived from online databases when you import a cd.  Nevertheless there is a considerable amount of curating required to keep it all organized and so on.  Hence not for everybody.

I applaud your effort! I've ripped a couple of LPs, and realised this is not for me. Just too much work involved (not that I'd rather spend my allocated lifetime creating something worthwhile instead. Far from it...).

[Teasing the Korean]

17 minutes ago, Dmitry said:

I applaud your effort! I've ripped a couple of LPs, and realised this is not for me. Just too much work involved (not that I'd rather spend my allocated lifetime creating something worthwhile instead. Far from it...).

If you have a large accumulation of CDs, it is very helpful for things like seeing how many versions of a certain tune you have, or finding a tune when you can't remember which album it is on.  A lot easier than going through a zillion CDs.

Also great if you like to program you own playlists.  You can do things like get rid of alternate takes that are foolishly placed directly beside the respective master takes.

Not saying it's for everyone, but there are advantages.  

[Stompin at the Savoy]

28 minutes ago, Teasing the Korean said:

If you have a large accumulation of CDs, it is very helpful for things like seeing how many versions of a certain tune you have, or finding a tune when you can't remember which album it is on.  A lot easier than going through a zillion CDs.

Also great if you like to program you own playlists.  You can do things like get rid of alternate takes that are foolishly placed directly beside the respective master takes.

Not saying it's for everyone, but there are advantages.  

Yes precisely.   Sometimes when I am learning a tune I like to check all the examples of how people have arranged that, soloed on that, etc.  Not to mention I can be somewhere like an auto dealership waiting for my car to be finished and on a device smaller than an iphone I can pick and choose music from most of my collection.  It's a thing.  Not everybody is interested in it and I get that.

On these big Mosaic sets or any box set it's great to separate out the various albums into playlists, so you can click on the title of a particular album.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Stompin at the Savoy

[JSngry]

All this talk about "hard drives" is sexist.

No wonder women hate Mosaicjazz. 

[Teasing the Korean]

2 hours ago, JSngry said:

All this talk about "hard drives" is sexist.

No wonder women hate Mosaicjazz. 

I think you can get furry leopard-print coverings to make them soft drives. 

[JSngry]

More RAM!!!! 

[Face of the Bass]

On 5/11/2023 at 7:42 PM, Stompin at the Savoy said:

Take a look at the sets currently in print:

    
    Classic Jazz At The Philharmonic Jam Sessions 1950-1957
    The Complete Freddie Hubbard Blue Note & Impulse Studio Sessions
    Classic Black & White Jazz Sessions
    Lennie Tristano Personal Recordings
    The Complete Joe Henderson Blue Note Studio Sessions
    The Savory Collection 1935-1940
    The Complete Louis Armstrong Columbia & RCA Victor Studio Sessions 1946-66

and recently out of print sets:

    #260 The Complete Dial Modern Jazz Sessions (9 CDs)
    #261 The Complete Bee Hive Sessions (12 CDs)
    #262 Classic James P. Johnson Sessions (6 CDs)
    #263 Classic Columbia, OKeh and Vocalion Lester Young With Count Basie 1936-1947 (8     CDs)
    #264 Classic Savoy Be-Bop Sessions 1945-49 (10 CDs)
    #265 Classic Brunswick & Columbia Teddy Wilson Sessions 1934-1942 (7 CDs)
    #267 The Complete Woody Herman Decca, Mars and MGM Sessions (1943-1954) (7 CDs)
    #268 The Complete Hank Mobley Blue Note Sessions 1963-70 (7 CDs)
    #269 Paul Desmond: The Complete 1975 Toronto Recordings (7 CDs)

 

This is by no means bad stuff.  That Lester Young set was pretty important to me.

I guess part of my issue is that none of the currently available sets are interesting to me. I've never liked the JATP concept; the musicians who played in it are obviously great, but the vibe of the recordings is kind of monochromatic. 

Those Dial and Bee Hive recordings disappeared many years ago. Their rate of putting out sets has definitely decreased significantly. 

[Face of the Bass]

On 5/11/2023 at 6:34 PM, Stompin at the Savoy said:

I was kind of mystified about this thread and the Mosaic bashing.  There were some attempts to vilify the external designs of the packaging, some vague claims that the sets weren't good, that they are too expensive, that box sets are too big or too expensive, that the focus was too narrow (whatever the heck that actually means) and finally that the company was sexist.  These objections all seem half-hearted and I kept trying to figure out why go after Mosaic.  After all no one is forcing anyone to buy these things.

The one feller mentioned that he didn't like two recent sets he bought and sold them at a loss.  It strikes me that that may be the underlying explanation for these attempts to counter the supposed "deification" of Mosaic: this is a disgruntled customer!  If you are sore about some purchases that you didn't like and lost money when selling them off, this is a way to hit back, I think.  It has me scratching my head because if you buy a new Mosaic you don't like all you have to do is wait till shortly after it goes out of print and then you can probably sell it for at least the original price.

No. What I was trying to do was to address the historic underrepresentation of female instrumentalists by the label. I wasn't the one who complained about the price (Mosaic prices are very reasonable and honestly I would pay more for the sets if they would upgrade their packaging). The point of the thread is to start a conversation about the gender bias in jazz and in how it is understood historically and documented (or not) by Mosaic. I am not a "disgruntled customer." I only mentioned selling the two recent sets when someone pointed to them as examples of Mosaic still doing good work. 

It is amazing to me how resistant people here are to analyzing the politics of this music in any way, shape, or form. 

One thing I have taken away from this discussion is that putting it on Mosaic is pointless. The label is what it is and honestly it would be better if other labels did the sets that we need, like the Dorothy Ashby set coming out next month. I imagine this would have been a more fruitful discussion somewhere else, perhaps a forum that isn't crawling with Mosaic fans who just want to document the growth of their collections as consumers rather than think about the music more deeply. There also seems to be a general resistance here to talking about the politics of representation in jazz, as this is now seen as "woke," which I don't think anyone who uses that term would be able to define. 

Whatever. 

[Dub Modal]

12 minutes ago, Face of the Bass said:

. I imagine this would have been a more fruitful discussion somewhere else, perhaps a forum that isn't crawling with Mosaic fans who just want to document the growth of their collections as consumers rather than think about the music more deeply.

This seems off the mark for this forum. First, there's definitely not enough forum members for it to be crawling with anything. Its barely a scamper here.

And if there's deeper jazz convos going on elsewhere online I'd love to know. The jazz nerd-ery going on here is the most informative I've found because a decent representation of posters here have lived in that very world in various roles to varying degrees. That kind of experience and knowledge isn't easy to come by on a regular basis. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. 

I would also say the collector tag/avoidance of politics suits the Hoffman boards way better than here. If you've spent any time there in the jazz corners you know what I'm talking about. 

This forum isn't perfect. Reactionary political views are unfortunately well represented even within this small-ish membership. But if evidence is offered with a coherent and thoughtful editorial, you'll get better results. 

[Dan Gould]

27 minutes ago, Face of the Bass said:

No. What I was trying to do was to address the historic underrepresentation of female instrumentalists by the label. I wasn't the one who complained about the price (Mosaic prices are very reasonable and honestly I would pay more for the sets if they would upgrade their packaging). The point of the thread is to start a conversation about the gender bias in jazz and in how it is understood historically and documented (or not) by Mosaic. I am not a "disgruntled customer." I only mentioned selling the two recent sets when someone pointed to them as examples of Mosaic still doing good work. 

It is amazing to me how resistant people here are to analyzing the politics of this music in any way, shape, or form. 

One thing I have taken away from this discussion is that putting it on Mosaic is pointless. The label is what it is and honestly it would be better if other labels did the sets that we need, like the Dorothy Ashby set coming out next month. I imagine this would have been a more fruitful discussion somewhere else, perhaps a forum that isn't crawling with Mosaic fans who just want to document the growth of their collections as consumers rather than think about the music more deeply. There also seems to be a general resistance here to talking about the politics of representation in jazz, as this is now seen as "woke," which I don't think anyone who uses that term would be able to define. 

Whatever. 

You're the only person who brought up "Woke", not to mention the Governor of the state of Florida.

My recommendation:

When you have a hissy fit and delete all your own comments on a thread, you forfeit the right to come back and start adding new, idiotic comments.

You said you don't belong here. So stay away.

[Brad]

54 minutes ago, Face of the Bass said:

I guess part of my issue is that none of the currently available sets are interesting to me. 
 

That gets to the heart of this thread. You don’t like what Mosaic is issuing so you’re going to complain. That’s in a nutshell. Other companies are out there doing things that probably appeal to you, such as the Dorothy Ashby set (which you noted). A company — any company — can’t be all things to all people.  That’s why we buy things from different merchants.

To paraphrase a line from Hemingway’s Hills Like White Elephants, would you please please please please please please please stop.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Brad

[Teasing the Korean]

Just a friendly reminder:  If you participate in a conversation, you may be exposed to opinions that you don't agree with. 

[jazzbo]

I think part of the problem is . . .the rule here is also no discussion of politics. That's a factor delineating the boundaries of the conversation for many participants.

[Dub Modal]

40 minutes ago, Teasing the Korean said:

Just a friendly reminder:  If you participate in a conversation, you may be exposed to opinions that you don't agree with. 

100%

[Teasing the Korean]

6 minutes ago, jazzbo said:

I think part of the problem is . . .the rule here is also no discussion of politics. That's a factor delineating the boundaries of the conversation for many participants.

Fair enough, but for some participants, the rules seem to be no religion, no politics, and no negative opinions about Mosaic.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Teasing the Korean

[jazzbo]

I don't think so. Negative opinions are rampant everywhere here, can't be avoided. Negative against negative is a natural reaction.

[Teasing the Korean]

1 minute ago, jazzbo said:

I don't think so. Negative opinions are rampant everywhere here, can't be avoided. Negative against negative is a natural reaction.

We just had a few participants asking the OP to leave and/or to stop posting.  The OP is free to express an opinion, just as we all are free to either join in or ignore the conversation. 

[JSngry]

The history of women in the jazz business is a matter of history.

Mosaic's alleged sexism in documenting that history is potentially political when allegations are made that are not documented with actual proof of same.

Proceed accordingly. 

[Dan Gould]

The shit-stirrer deleted his posts and announced his departure - then came back for more.

I am only asking him to have the integrity to do what he promised. He wants to continue to shit-stir, have at it. 

 

[mjazzg]

One person's shit stirring is another's giving an opinion or offering rebuttal.

Personally I've not really read the OP's posts (certainly before their stated "departure") as being deliberately provocative but no more than offering a contrary opinion to the majority expressed one. Yes, the use of some terms read like getting a defence in first before the onslaught that they predicted would follow (and for the most part actually did).

I do agree that having said they were leaving the thread it doesn't do their case any good coming back but as pointed out already that is their prerogative. If that diminishes their integrity in your, and other's eyes, then so be it, they'll have to live with it.

 

2 hours ago, Face of the Bass said:

It is amazing to me how resistant people here are to analyzing the politics of this music in any way, shape, or form. 
 

And herein lies your problem - it's a forum rule that political discussions are not allowed. Quite how anyone's expected to analyse the politics of anything without that being political is a circle I don't see being squared so your wish, with which I have no issue, can't be fulfilled in this space.

Edited May 15, 2023 by mjazzg

[Dan Gould]

He not only wants a political discussion but is the one who mentions "woke" and accuses people of being supporters of the current governor of Florida.

 

[Stompin at the Savoy]

I'm not asking anyone to leave.  I disagreed with some opinions from Face of the Bass and probably a few others and made my own reactions clear.  When you post something and get blowback and disagreement - that's normal.  Nobody gets to post with impunity.  Getting back to the original topic - the problem is it's silly.  I think we all agree that there has long been sexism and discouragement of female participation in music and most other professions.  Mosaic isn't sexist.  They publish what they can and what's out there. 

13 minutes ago, mjazzg said:

Yes, but with respect that is an assumption, probably a correct one. 

We do not know that Mosaic haven't made conscious decisions not to issue releases based solely on gender or been subconciously affected by that "sexism and discouragement of female participation in music" that you identify to do the same.  I think that possibility has to be allowed consideration. As much as we might applaud and value what they do we do not know their thought processes.

Oh give me a break!  They've published numerous female vocalists.  They're output is probably quite proportional to the jazz of the periods they cover.  I don't buy the charge of sexism at all.  Where's the evidence? None.  I regard it as bullshit. Unfair and unwarranted innuendo.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Stompin at the Savoy

[Dmitry]

 

1 hour ago, Teasing the Korean said:

Just a friendly reminder:  If you participate in a conversation, you may be exposed to opinions that you don't agree with. 

People get increasingly upset with that inconvenient fact. That's when the name-calling starts. Has been like that since the first argument documented in history of arguments.