New president for Blue Note Records

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Ian Thumwood
    Full Member
    • Dec 2010
    • 4084

    New president for Blue Note Records

    Wondered if anyone else had picked up on this?
    I felt that this article makes interesting reading....


    Don Was: The Music Is Paramount article by R.J. DeLuke, published on February 17, 2014 at All About Jazz. Find more Interview articles


    The curious thing about Blue Note is that is must have been re-activated for 30 years which means half it's existence has been given over to newer / contemporary jazz artists. Despite this, the label seems bogged down by it's cultish back catalogue which seems increasingly to sound epoch making even when old recordings which were shelved at the time they were recorded eventually resurface. Some interest points are made about how some contemporary jazz musician mirror the old Blue Note tradition yet relatively few recordings made since 1985 seem to enjoy the reputation of their earlier counterparts even when you take in to account the brilliant albums made in that time by the likes of Cassandra Wilson, Don Grolnick, Greg Osby or Jason Moran. I also like the fact that major contemporary talents like the sensational trumpeter Ambrose Akinmusire is signed to the label and that the great Wayne Shorter will release a second label later this year since his return to the label where he made so many defining records.

    That said, I think Blue Note has had an identity crisis. There is too much fringe music on the label and it is a disgrace that the likes of Suzanne Vega have released music on Blue Note as opposed to more suitable labels. I'm not fan of Vega but the issue for me is that country / pop acts on a jazz label does detract from the quality control aspect. Why have Blue Note diversified outside of jazz. I suppose this was first noticeable with the signing of Norah Jones . Overall, I'm left with the impression that Blue Note has delivered some great albums since it's re-birth but it has prostituted it's identity somewhat. I'm wondering if the emergence of more independent labels has threatened Blue Notes reputation as the jazz label par excellence and that a more genuine jazz performance might be found on self-produced labels like Dave Douglas' Greenleaf? For me, Blue Note is starting to become a bit slicker and over-produced albeit I hope it doesn't quite go the way of Concord where some jazz musicians have now ended up. I was sad to see Dianne Reeves depart for Concord even if her last effort is probably as about as good as a pop record can be. I've been playing this constantly since Christmas.

    In summary, I'm really starting to think that the classic bop element of Blue Note is now better served by Criss Cross (probably the most ideal match for the old 50's / 60's blue Note) whereas the more cutting edge side of things seems to be released either on the wonderful Delmark label or Cuneiform whose delights I am just exploring.
  • BLUESNIK'S REVOX
    Full Member
    • Dec 2010
    • 4250

    #2
    "The corporate history of Blue Note
    embodies simultaneously the very
    best and the very worst of America.
    From an entrepreneurial company
    with a single-tier management of
    founders and outstanding product
    quality, through a thirty
    year progressive decline in the
    hands of corporations of accounting-
    focussed executives with little
    understanding of audio production
    technology, matched by institutional
    investors with even less
    understanding of what they owned."

    London Jazz Collector ~ Jan 2014. Part of a much longer piece on the quality and history etc. Worth reading in full.

    BN.

    Comment

    • Ian Thumwood
      Full Member
      • Dec 2010
      • 4084

      #3
      Bluesnik

      I don't think that there has been an overall decline with Blue Note as it has produced some very fine jazz records since the mid 1980's, many of which will endure as much as the celebrated releases from the 1950's/60's. The passage of time has led to Blue Note being regarded with misty eyes and I would suggest that the label had a propensity to release a lot of very similar and undemanding materials whilst retaining some very good recordings in their vaults. For me, the issue was that the quality of what they were recording meant that it became problematic with releasing records in a fashion that retained their marketability. It you have 5 or 6 great Andrew Hill sessions, how do you release them all if the recording sessions took part over about 18 months? In it's heyday, it did put out some pretty lazy releases yet the overall quality was remarkably high whilst broadly managing to cover Hard Bop / Soul jazz / avant garde jazz with equal enthusiasm.

      Fast forward 50 years and jazz is no longer so simple. jazz has become more diverse and the record buying public more sophisticated. What might have seemed commercial in 1962 (say Big John Patton) can be mirrored by the likes of Robert Glasper nowadays even if the music is very different. I posted the link to the article as some good points were made within the interview but some bad points were over-looked, the main one being that there is no longer a "house" style on Blue Note. I would argue strongly against any suggestion that the likes of Osby, Moran, Grolnick, Dianne Reeves or Cassandra Wilson are in any way inferior to their counterparts fifty years ago. The issue is that Don Was is not exactly known for his interest in jazz and I wonder if the label is in good hands. My argument is that other labels have now filled the void left by Blue Note and are continuing in the same spirit. The output of a label like Criss Cross certainly offers a contemporary (and long running) manifestation of the old Blue Note ethos.

      Thought that the article was worth reading and would have provoked more response......

      Comment

      Working...
      X