Comet records

[brownie]

Another clone label has showed up recently in Paris stores. An Italian label with CDs made in the EU.

CDs from them I saw include:

Lester Young with the Oscar Peterson, this seems to have all the original Norgran/Verve titles plus the additional material that came out on Verve reissues,

Thelonious Monk The Complete 47-52 Blue Note sessions,

T-Bone Walker Stormy Monday The Complete 1949 Black&White sessions.

Nicely packaged. No idea what they sound like. Won't bother to check.

To view their jazz CDs, click on Birdland on the homepage (which obviously has not been updated):

http://www.cometrecords.com/

Saw also jazz CDs from a label which goes by the name of Blue Nite. Some old Miles Davis stuff among several releases.

[Eric]

Nice ...

I know this has been discussed on another thread, but I simply think their is no moral basis for only letting a copyright run 50 years, as is the case in Europe.

The arguement has been set forth "50 years is enough time for an artist to earn their money".

Says who??? Why not 40? or 60?

Plus, what about the heirs?

I hate to make harsh, judgemental statements, but IMHO, anyone who buys this crap is not making a very wise decision ...

Eric

[brownie]

Eric, I have read the discussion on the Proper boxes on the board and found very interesting views from both sides of the trenches. But I see this as out of touch with reality. More and more of this stuff is being put in record stores. And it's all very legal in the EU.

Like it or not, this is now a fact of live and a lot of companies will have to make hard decisions on what they want to reissue from the material they recorded more than 50 years ago. The stuff is coming out.

I'm a bit out on this issue since I bought most of the material from the original labels a long time ago and - with very few exceptions - keeping away from these clone labels.

In the meantime, here is a link to the Comet Lester Young CD:

http://www.cometrecords.com/robo10/robo.ex...Prodotto+UV-108

[king ubu]

...

I'm a bit out on this issue since I bought most of the material from the original labels a long time ago and - with very few exceptions - keeping away from these clone labels.

...

That's a valid point, brownie!

I am far too young to be in that same comfortable position, and the reissue practise of lots of labels is getting on my nerves (Columbia, Blue Note, Verve you name it). If they're only in it for the money, it's not too bad that others make some money, too.

Of course, as far as small labels doing good work with old recordings (such as the Uptown Mingus) - the 50 year thing is really problematic.

Now if there were clone labels really doing serious reissues, including complete sessions (unlike Proper, unlike Definitive), I would not hesitate too long and buy, but with things as they are now, I rather buy other music, on legitimate releases - which has the effect that my collection on pre-bebop music is pretty thin...

ubu

[RDK]

The arguement has been set forth "50 years is enough time for an artist to earn their money".

Says who??? Why not 40? or 60?

Hey Eric, I know this has just been rehashed and I don't mean to single you out, but you just raised part of the issue that's most intriguing to me. What is the proper (no pun intended) amount of time until such material enters the public domain? I can actually understand and support the argument that such artistic properties *never* become P.D. (though I don't think that's good policy overall), but I always find it amusing how the number keeps changing each time the issue is raised. For people (fans or companies) who want to release obscure material with minimal commercial prospects, the 50 (or 75) year term is way too long; for Disney and such companies with valuable properties (Mickey, Tarzan, etc.) it's way too short. Why would, for example, 100 years be better than 50/75? If you're looking at only the artist or artist heirs argument, you would never get a number that was reasonable - hence the "in perpetuity" argument. The number of years - 50, 75, or whatever - has always seemed a compromise and it's usually "good enough" until that sliding legal timeline finally catches up to the era of music that we personally love and suddenly it's "not long enough."

[mikeweil]

I will prefer a release by the company who owns the rights in the US - unless it's done carelessly. And if It's released at all. I'd rather buy some European release than never hear some rare stuff at all.

BTW: In the case of Igor Stravinskij, it was the other way round: He re-wrote all of his compositions after his arrival in the US and had them published in the new versions to collect royalties from the performances, as the royalty transfer between the Soviet Union and USA did not work or his rights registered in the Soviet Union were not acknowledged in the USA, one of the two ...

[Pete C]

Here's a hypothetical:

Let's say Herman Lubinsky were still alive, and still owned Savoy Records. He sees that Jimmy Scott, whom he screwed out of royalties and otherwise screwed big time in many ways is now a hot property. So he issues a CD of Jimmy Scott sides, and based on his old contracts has no intention of paying Scott any royalties.

Over in Europe a label issues the same Savoy sides, and the CD is half the price.

In both cases Scott will not see a cent.

Which CD is the more "moral" purchase: the one from the original label that's been screwing the artist for years, or the one from the label that's only starting to screw the artist?

It's really just a food for thought rhetorical question.

[Chuck Nessa]

Please see my recent message in the "Blue Harlem" thread. AND thank god for Herman.

[JSngry]

Easy - buying the Lubinsky, because sooner or later SOMEBODY will come after his ass (or his estate's ass) and win SOMETHING. The more you fatten him up, the riper he is for the pickin'. CRuel and manipulative, yeah, but that's showbiz baybeeeeee.

Failing that, it's still buying the Lubinsky, because that demonstrates that the profitability on the part of the original label is not being devalued by the knockoffs, which means that said label is more likely to be swallowed up by somebody, which may or may not lead to Scott getting a belated but deserved (morally, not legally) piece of the pie through a variety of "collateral" methods.

Failing THAT - it's STILL buying the Lubinsky, because the image of an artist like Scott is not well served by countless LITTLE JIMMY SCOTT'S GREATEST ROMANTIC SLOWDANCEFLOOR CLASSICHITS compilation CDs on Butterpimple Records cluttering up every damn clearance bin in the know world for the low price of 25 cents, or some such. Having a product available on a "real" label, hower, is an opportunity for profile in the marketplace, so if Lubinksky were to pimp his Scott shit like he SHOULD have done in the first place, Scott might get no money, but he gets profile, which can be translated into $$$$ easier than not if you don't fuck yourself over by signing up w/another anusdrizzle like Lubinsky.

Fortunately, this is just a hypothetical scenario!

[RDK]

AND thank god for Herman.

Now I'm confused. Are you and JSngry talking about the same Herman? Or are you making a funny that's flying high over my head?

[Chuck Nessa]

Not sure what Jim is saying.

I'm saying I'm thankful for the stuff Lubinsky recorded. Nobody else was doing this at the time and as a result he was able to make deals "very much in his favor" with artists no one else cared about. BUT the artists made the deal and as a result you have all those Savoy reissues. I might have done things different, but.....

Like I said..................

[JSngry]

Same cat. God bless him for capturing/preserving what he did. God damn him for how he did it.

You're in "the business" Ray, surely you're no stranger to unambiguous ambiguity?

[RDK]

You're in "the business" Ray, surely you're no stranger to unambiguous ambiguity?

I'll have to get back to you on that one...

[king ubu]

I will prefer a release by the company who owns the rights in the US - unless it's done carelessly. And if It's released at all. I'd rather buy some European release than never hear some rare stuff at all.

And now let's consider the darn Cactus CDs "carelessly" - they obviously don't care about their customers in europe, anymore. Or they hope their customers are just plain stupid...

It's been over one and a half years that I picked up some new BNs on or shortly after their release date - consider that frustrating!

No problem at all in getting that stuff on CDR, I'm afraid! If they were NOT copy protected, I'd NOT, NEVER get them on CDR, but as things are now...

ubu