If you collect jazz LPs from the 50s and 60s, you have surely noticed the flood of new reissues by labels like DOL, Doxy, Jazz Wax, Green Corner, Jazz Images, Jazz Time, and many more. In the past ten years or so, these new EU labels have begun offering repressings of often hard-to-find classic jazz albums at bargain prices. They offer hundreds of brand new LPs originally issued on Blue Note, Prestige, Riverside, Columbia, Verve, and many other labels, pressed on 180-gram vinyl with nicely reproduced jackets, all for around $15.
In a previous post I talked about a trip to Spain where I bought a few of these EU repressings. My preliminary reaction was that they look great and sound pretty good, especially for the price. But there has been so much debate about these releases in the various online music and vinyl discussion groups, I thought it might be useful to take a closer look.
But alas, no. After intense lobbying from the US recording industry, record labels, artists, and other rights holders (and because everyone realized with a shock that the first Beatles recordings were about to enter the public domain), in September of 2011 the EU parliament in Brussels voted to amend the law to increase copyright protection to 70 years. But the decision was not retroactive and only applied to sound recordings originally released after January 1, 1963. As a result, any sound recording originally released by the end of 1962 is in now in the public domain in Europe. The Beatles' first hit single, "Love Me Do," which was released in October, 1962, is now in the public domain. The Beatles' first album, Please Please Me, released in March, 1963, was saved for the time being.
Despite the fact that these new public domain vinyl releases are completely legal, a number of online commentators have opposed them on moral grounds, comparing them to bootlegs because artists and their heirs will not benefit from sales. However, it is worth noting that only a relatively small percentage of artists own the rights to their albums. The vast majority of rights holders are record labels, licensees, or other corporations. And as this article in the UK's Guardian newspaper from 2011 reveals, the EU decision to extend copyrights will actually harm some artists. The reason is that a lot of artists who signed away their rights in one-sided contracts in the 50s and 60s (and never made a penny from album sales) could have repackaged their recordings and sold them themselves if the albums had become public domain. Now, only the license holder continues to profit. But I digress.
While these new public domain pressings are legal in Europe, I wasn't able to find an explanation for how they can be sold in the US, where sound recordings are protected by copyright for 95 years. Nevertheless, they are readily available at countless brick-and-mortar stores and online sellers in the US, including the likes of Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Not being an international copyright lawyer, I can only speculate that there is some sort of legal loophole (first sale doctrine?) or a trade arrangement that allows them on the US market. Otherwise, I would have expected to see lawsuits and injunctions filed by the US rights holders, which does not seem to be the case.
In my search for EU labels that are repressing vinyl copies of public domain jazz recordings, I came up with a list of ten different labels. They are listed below. Following the name of each label is the country of origin, and in parentheses are the year the label first began releasing vinyl albums and the number of albums they have released to date, as compiled by Discogs. I didn't include any labels where I couldn't find at least one public domain jazz reissue, which I define as an LP originally released before 1963 that does not list the copyright holder or other licensing information on the jacket or label. I also did not include labels that produce only compilations or best of collections. Here you go:
Jazz Workshop |
but Russian owned]
-Jazz Images, Spain (2016, 139)
-Pan Am Records, Spain (2011, 71)
-Vinyl Passion, Holland (2007, 279)
Elemental Music |
I will mention one more label, Elemental Music, that occasionally appears (erroneously) in lists of public domain producers. Based in Spain, Elemental Music's releases include licensing and copyright information on their jackets and labels. They have reissued nearly 50 classic Blue Note titles in Europe, as well a growing list of "new archival discoveries" -- live jazz recordings of (mostly) European radio and concert dates that they have unearthed. One of the co-founders of Elemental, the American producer Zev Feldman, was recently hired by Blue Note as a consulting producer to dig through the archives for unreleased materials from their vaults.
Online opinions are decidedly mixed about the sound quality of public domain reissues. Some posters dismiss all of them out of hand as junk sourced from MP3s. Since the public domain labels are notoriously tight-lipped about their sources, I'm doubtful that anyone knows for sure. (The only on-the-record information about sourcing I could find is an interview with Jordi Pujol by noted jazz writer Marc Myers, which you can read here. Pujol, founder of Fresh Sounds Records, also several public domain labels, including Jazz Workshop.) And while it's probably a safe bet that EU reissue labels don't have access to the original master tapes, claiming that they use MP3s as a source begs the question of why a label that presumably wants to sell more records wouldn't bother to at least use an easily obtainable commercial CD or high-resolution digital file as its source.
Regardless of the source, the proof is in the listening. I obtained at least one LP from all ten of the reissue labels listed above. For each title, I have a fully licensed CD, digital download, or SACD with which to compare them. I did A/B comparisons of the two different copies with levels matched. I don't claim to have golden ears, and I wasn't trying to identify every minute difference. I just wanted to get a feel for the quality of the public domain releases and see how they measure up to licensed copies. And I wanted to see if there is any justification for the many online suggestions to avoid public domain releases because they sound "horrible." Of course this is a limited sample, and it may well be that the quality level of the releases is uneven. No doubt if you were to do similar comparisons using your system and your ears, your mileage would vary. But we have to start somewhere.
Each label is followed by the catalog number, the LP title, the original pressing info in parentheses, and my listening notes:
Jazz Images 37053 |
Vinyl Passion 807823 |
Jazz Workshop JW-081, Gigi Gryce And The Jazz Lab Quintet (Riverside RLP 1110)
I compared this to OJC CD-1774-2, which was remastered in 1991 by Phil De Lancie at Fantasy. The CD is cleaner with more energy in the mids and high end. However, the LP has better bass definition and better overall balance. Switching back and forth, the difference between the two versions is easy to hear. It's really the difference between a more digital sound and a more analog sound. They are both excellent but I'll take the analog LP every time.
General Notes
All of the ten public domain LPs are pressed on 180-gram vinyl. All are flat and extremely quiet. None of the records is off-center or has a warp. There are a few ticks across the 18 sides, but nothing out of the ordinary, and all of them are as quiet as the average audiophile US pressing. Except for the Pan Am release, which comes in a plain white paper dust sleeve, all the albums have white, poly-lined dust sleeves. All of the jackets are printed on medium to heavy stock. Seven of the ten labels reproduce the original jackets. All of the jacket images are clear and sharp, and the type is clear and legible on all of the releases. Eight of the ten disks were pressed at gzvinyl in the Czech Republic. The Jazz Workshop disk was pressed at MPO in France, and The Vinyl Passion disk was pressed at Record Industry in Holland. Six of the ten (Green Corner, Jazz Wax, Pan Am, Vinyl Lovers, Wax Time and Vinyl Passion) say they were made using Direct Metal Mastering (DMM).
Conclusions
This is a limited comparison with a lot of different sources. I'm not sure that I was always comparing apples to apples. But my experience with these public domain releases is overall pretty positive. One was not so hot, three were meh, and six were excellent. I wouldn't describe any of them as terrible, although the Jazz Wax reissue of Duke Pearson's Hush! is not going into heavy rotation.
Are public domain reissues worth buying? Well, I paid an average of $15 each for the public domain titles (and two of them were two-fers). As long as you know what you are buying and realize it's a little bit of a crap shoot, then they can be a very good value. With a lot of searching and some luck, you might find a US or Japanese reissue of some of these titles for $15. But not in mint condition.
You can probably buy a licensed CD of any of these titles for less than $15. But then you won't get the same tactile experience of playing vinyl and enjoying the album art while reading the liner notes.
My advice? Don't overthink it. These are very nicely packaged, affordable pressings, including many classic jazz albums that are almost impossible to find at a reasonable price. Buy one and see what you think. If you like it, buy more. If you don't, don't.
Enjoy the music!