Fresh Sounds

[Jazz_Fellow]

Hi all. Not sure if this is the right place (please move if not) but I was querying whether anyone knew about the Fresh Sounds label, and how good their remastering/re-releases are, in terms of the quality of the music and the packaging. I am looking at getting A Date With Jimmy Smith from them, as they have doubled up Vol. 1 and Vol. 2 onto the same CD. I have found the Japanese BN releases of the two volumes individually, but they are over double the price than what I would have to pay for the Fresh Sounds release. If anyone has any info that would be great, but if their remastering is shoddy than I may have to put the Japanese BN versions on the more expensive wish list!

[HutchFan]

Jazz Fellow,

I've only got a couple Fresh Sound releases. But, in my experience, the sound quality/remastering was fine. No problems at all.

Same with the packaging. It's good, not at all shoddy.

[Tenorman]

I have a few "Fresh Sounds" albums, and have no complaints so far, unlike Membran and the European manufacturer of OJC CDs

[Jackie P]

I only have two titles on Fresh Sounds and am very happy with the sound on both of them.

The Sun Ra compilation is very attractively packaged too.



New Horizons - Sun Ra & His Arkestra





Iron Man - Eric Dolphy (Douglas/Fresh Sounds)

[JETman]

I am guilty of owning more than a few Fresh Sounds releases. Often, this is the only way to obtain jazz recordings that the majors refuse to release.

However, everyone here should be made aware (if not aware already) that these are "black market" releases where the artist is usually NOT properly compensated. These have been known to be "needledrops" (since the masters are not in the possession of Mr. Pujol), and have sometimes been proven to be straight copies of mp3 downloads. Granted, their packaging and presentation has greatly improved over the last 20 or so years, but they still do what they've always done to nick the recordings in the first place. There are many labels in the EU -- Spain, France, wherever -- that do this.

Caveat Emptor!

[flat5]

Sure wish they would do Dick Grove - Little Bird Suite

[Tenorman]

Originally Posted by JETman

I am guilty of owning more than a few Fresh Sounds releases. Often, this is the only way to obtain jazz recordings that the majors refuse to release.

However, everyone here should be made aware (if not aware already) that these are "black market" releases where the artist is usually NOT properly compensated. These have been known to be "needledrops" (since the masters are not in the possession of Mr. Pujol), and have sometimes been proven to be straight copies of mp3 downloads. Granted, their packaging and presentation has greatly improved over the last 20 or so years, but they still do what they've always done to nick the recordings in the first place. There are many labels in the EU -- Spain, France, wherever -- that do this.

Caveat Emptor!

Fresh Sounds is a Spanish company and operates to European copyright which was 50 years but is now changing to 70 or 75 years. There were a fair number of recordings that were legal in Europe, but illegal in the US.

[JETman]

Originally Posted by Tenorman

Fresh Sounds is a Spanish company and operates to European copyright which was 50 years but is now changing to 70 or 75 years. There were a fair number of recordings that were legal in Europe, but illegal in the US.

They may be legal in Europe, but you're still getting needledrops. That's the bottom line. And if the record companies here thought it was worth it, they'd sue AND win. As I said, I buy these too, so I'm not gonna get all "holier than thou" on you. However, let's be honest and call a spade a spade. On top of this, many of these companies sell bootlegs which are easily obtainable for free on the internet.

[Tenorman]

'fraid not. As the law stands (certainly in Europe), as soon as copyright is out, you can use whatever source you have to produce copies. You are under no obligation to go back to an original master. It was a source of some friction that in Europe, 50 years after the initial release of a tune, you could use any available copy of that to re-issue that tune. It was a source of much annoyance that if you spent time and money cleaning up a master and issued an inproved version a couple of years before copyright ran out, the copiers could lift your cleaned up copy, because you didn't extend the copyright by cleaning up the master

[JETman]

Originally Posted by Tenorman

'fraid not. As the law stands (certainly in Europe), as soon as copyright is out, you can use whatever source you have to produce copies. You are under no obligation to go back to an original master. It was a source of some friction that in Europe, 50 years after the initial release of a tune, you could use any available copy of that to re-issue that tune. It was a source of much annoyance that if you spent time and money cleaning up a master and issued an inproved version a couple of years before copyright ran out, the copiers could lift your cleaned up copy, because you didn't extend the copyright by cleaning up the master

That was not my point.

These are US recordings. US law applies, I'm afraid. If a huge conglomerate in the US decided that it would be worth its while to put an end to this nonsense, it would be over. Pujol and his merry band of pirates are profiting from recordings that they do not own, Euro public domain or not. How he (they) reproduces them is not even close to being the issue. That's only the issue for the consumer who decides that he/she will settle for less.

How do you think a company like Mosaic feels when a company like JSP comes along and lifts some of their transfers wholesale after Mosaic PAID to license the recordings?

Where they are released has no bearing on the issue at hand. Failure to pay licensing fees is illegal, copyright law or not.

[Tenorman]

Again, I'm afraid not.

US law does not apply outside of the US.

[Tom 1960]

I happen to think this is an excellent release:

[Vaughan]

It's odd when someone thinks US law supersedes local national law. How about it worked the other way?

US law isn't relevant to other countries, no matter how many drones there are.

[JETman]

Originally Posted by Tenorman

Again, I'm afraid not.

US law does not apply outside of the US.

It does if it's argued in a US court.

[JETman]

Originally Posted by Vaughan

It's odd when someone thinks US law supersedes local national law. How about it worked the other way?

US law isn't relevant to other countries, no matter how many drones there are.

I think it's equally odd (and hypocritical) when the same people who think illegal needledrops are acceptable can't stop bitching and moaning when the rightful owners of a recording release said recording with a mastering glitch, or God forbid, as a needledrop.

Ask yourself if you'd accept an official Sony/Columbia release of let's say "Mingus Ah Um" if they charged you full price for a needledrop all the while claiming that they had misplaced the master tapes.