gypsy tail windChris, great that you’re offering this opportunity to us here!
This is „king ubu“ from you know where else…
We’ve been discussing the yesterday that many labels in the 50s and 60s recorded their artists in much shorter intervals than they could possibly (and economically feasible) release the recordings.
This applies, for instance, to Coltrane or Jackie McLean on Prestige, or musicians such as Grant Green and Andrew Hill on Blue Note.The legends go that McLean often just needed a fix so the summoned up some guys at RVG’s in order to get him some cash… I guess that’s another of those half-truths?
Can you shed some light? How much of this was to document music, how much of it to make sure the label would still have future releases to come, once the artists would have moved on?
Prestige and Atlantic, for instance, continued to release Coltrane albums way into the 60s, and while it was probably very hard for „Coltrane’s Sound“ to stand opposite of, say „Live at Birdland“ or „Crescent“ (which I assume came out around ’64 as well or were then rather recent releases), in hindsight, „Coltrane’s Sound“, restored to its proper place in fall 1960, is a marvellous album!
So we fans are, I guess, mostly very happy about this practice, but I guess there was more to it than just a producer who knew something important was being captured, so he took chances to document as much of it as possible?Sorry, this got a bit lengthy, but if you can shed some light on these questions or some aspects of it, that would be much appreciated!
Not long after Bill Grauer’s death, Riverside went out of business. Orrin Keepnews tried to keep it going, but the financial/marketing end of the business was not his expertise. At one point, after I left Riverside and after Bill’s death, Orrin had a computer (possibly just a terminal) installed (I recall it taking up a whole room). This system was fed sales data and was programmed to project sales so that the label knew how many albums to manufacture. The problem was that Orrin didn’t trust the machine’s recommendations so, essentially, this computer did little more than add to the already slender budget. I might add that RCA had a similar computer that told them which recordings to delete from the catalog and which to keep or order more pressings. Brad McKuen of Victor told me that the machine regularly suggested deleting a 45rpm release of that national anthem („Star Spangled Banner“), because it wasn’t selling. However, RCA thought this item belonged in the catalog, so they restored it each time.
Getting back to Bill Grauer, one of the ways in which he kept the company going was underhanded. For one thing, far too many albums were produced and that number was compounded by the fact that separate mono and stereo releases were issued, so there were two of each, to begin with. One reason for issuing so many albums was that Riverside shipped to distributors before receiving actual orders. This resulted in many albums being returned (a right distributors had), but before that happened, Riverside had papers that showed large shipments to the distributors. These, although they represented false numbers, were used to impress banks and obtain loans. The returned albums were then dumped to bargain stores where, with a small hole drilled through the label, they were sold for something like a dollar.
Bob Weinstock, who had a very good ear for the music, recognized early on the potential of Miles Davis being picked up by major label, so he recorded many more Miles sessions than the market called for and held on to these recordings until Columbia signed Miles and spent a lot of money promoting him. Then, with Miles firmly established by Columbia, Bob started issuing the material from his vault. He spent a little more money than usual on color covers, gave the albums salable titles (Miles Plays for Lovers, etc.), and rode on the coattails of Columbia. Bob’s profit margin was high. because he had recorded Miles for scale (i.e. the minimum required by the Musician’s Union).
I know this happen regarding Miles, because Bob specifically told me about him, but I’m sure the same approach was applied to other artists.
As for documenting the music, that’s a lofty raison d’etre, but sessions were mostly made for the profit they might generate. Of course much great music was documented in the process, but that was mostly an inevitable byproduct, as it were. Sure, many producers and musicians saw the need to preserve aspects of the music, to capture for posterity groups and individuals who stood out from the rest, but, basically, the record business is a business. Of course it behooved the record makers to produce music of lasting value. Jazz was known as a good catalog item, something that did not sell in overwhelming number upon release, but something that was somewhat timeless and could stay in the catalog for years. Many jazz recordings have quietly become million sellers by simply continuing to sell in various forms and under various names.
Sorry to go on for so long, but I hope I have made some sense of it for you.
--