Nelson Sanders on Rambler repro 45

[Stompingsevens]

I understand I am coming 'under fire' again for doing a repro 45 of the mighty Nelson Sanders 45 on Rambler. Just for the record (no pun intended) this is a(nother) legally licensed reproduction 45.

Jesse

[Premium Stuff]

Great - thank you- could you please post some of the most relevant the details of the licence - e.g. the parties involved and main terms?

How much money does the other party get?

Could you explain why would you copy such a superb and pretty rare record?

Happy to put my tin hat on now ...

[Stompingsevens]

I am sorry but that is a private arrangement and I'm not sure the owners would be too happy if I were to discuss the legal details and monies involved in a public forum. 

The reasons I would copy such a superb and rare record are because A. It is a superb record and B. because it is very rare.

Why do you need a tin hat?

[Premium Stuff]

Based on what you have said Jesse, I think most people would conclude, as they seem to be doing, that it's a bootleg.

If it's not a bootleg, I think you need to put up some kind of evidence to support your claim that it is a legally licensed.reproduction.

 

[Stompingsevens]

What 'most people' would conclude is not my problem. I do not need to need to produce any evidence but I will say this, do you honestly think that if it was a bootleg I would go on a public forum and claim otherwise or even admit that it was me who pressed it?

 

 

[Premium Stuff]

Well, why wouldn't you do that - if it was a bootleg - to try and give it legitimacy or fend off the criticism you mentioned in your opening post?

Plus, people don't know who "Stompingsevens" or "Jesse" is, as many won't, then you admitting it on here wouldn't matter at all.

[Stompingsevens]

The reason I wouldn't admit to it if it was a bootleg pressing is obvious as it is a declaration to the music owners who are very likely to have links with this website that I have pressed the 45. This is not about who I am but about whether or not the Nelson Sanders 45 is a legal re-issue. I know for a fact it is, you do not know for a fact that it isn't.

I think you are just a bit miffed about repro and re-issue 45's, I notice you use the image of the Rambler 45 as your 'moniker'. I wonder if you have permission for that?

[Pete S]

 

I think you are just a bit miffed about repro and re-issue 45's

People who paid a lot of money for the originals always are miffed about that - understandably - but they don't "own" the record, they paid no royalties when they paid £1000 for their original, and why shouldn't other people get the chance to hear and play it?  

[Tlscapital]

People who paid a lot of money for the originals always are miffed about that - understandably - but they don't "own" the record, they paid no royalties when they paid £1000 for their original, and why shouldn't other people get the chance to hear and play it?  

IMO it's not so much about paying big dosh then feeling upset when it's readily available at a fraction of the price when boxes of NOS are found for example. That is just how it goes as it did always. sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.

No, it's about how I get my music on that I can praise it home and out ! I always loved the fact that it was with tenacity, curiosity and through time that you still would and could discover new sounds and sharpen your taste after venturing through stax of records in warehouses, collections and stores... listening to tapes and going to clubs . Now to see ALL those TOO MANIES & ALL OVER THE PLACES rare and not so rare 45 getting reissued because someone paid royalties to do so, to "satisfy" a market just KILLS the spirit for me. Sometimes LESS is MORE !

This royalty argument is legitimate in the way that an artist could still get financial recognition for his past work (of artistry sometimes) but it doesn't mean that I want to support the business of the royalties "borrowers". Buying royalties and selling them is a business on it's own. Since it's business, expect some praise as some criticism at the same time. There's good business and bad business and we all are going to agree and disagree on some or most bits. I always loved the old Kent compilations for example.

I barely never paid money to get my records. I struggled, traded and sold some to be able to afford mines. It's not about money for me. I hate to think that my beloved record collection is an "investment". Even though in the long run I wonder which costed me more; the pub or the 45's ? That bit of "it's not easy to get the stuff" is part of that "rare soul" scene like it is for all those other music based "underground" scenes.

Everybody has a chance to hear anything or about with a computer ! If they want to play it the same. Some DJ's do play mp3 and they are the same to me when it comes to re-issues. It doesn't look good nor sounds good IMHO. And about creativity for a home spot or a nighter, sorry but it's not working for me.

OK, I never liked those 45 bootlegs and reissues, even before being into the soul vine, when I was into 6T's-7T's Jamaican music, so maybe I'm partial here. But I'm sure that I'm not the only one that feels that way. Just check eVil Bay and see how many of those things are out about... Then imagine how many shops and private dealers on record fairs carry them... That is an "overground" scene if it is at all.

[Stompingsevens]

So by this logic we should not re-issue anything on vinyl?. This 45 should only be for the 'exclusive' set who can afford the original or are lucky enough to find a cheap copy and by this way of thinking keep the 25x or so people who own the original happy but deny the 500x people who might want to buy the licensed repro 45 at a fraction of the price? The repro 45 does not make the original copies any less original and it does not make them sound any different it also does not generally effect the price of the original copies (if present price rises are taken into consideration it seems to make the originals worth more!), if the only reason you are buying records is because other people don't (or shouldn't be able to) own them then I think you need to have a long hard think about your record collecting habit and the reasons you are interested in collecting 45's. I buy USA original 45's and do not give a monkeys if they are re-issued, if anything it is a good thing as it widens the audience and hopefully opens these wonderful recordings to a new generation of collectors and enthusiasts. I am also sure that the Nelson Sanders estate are happy that the music is available and the $'s are coming in.

[Soulhawk]

oh good. another pointless repro to clog up the online bins

 

[solidhit]

SI am also sure that the Nelson Sanders estate are happy that the music is available and the $'s are coming in.

Estate?  Last I heard he was alive and well.  Hope he gets something out of this.  Unfortunately, as is the case with many reissues, the artists themselves do not necessarily benefit much.  Usually because whoever licensed the record to the reissuer cannot or will not send payments to all the parties involved. 

[Pete S]

oh good. another pointless repro to clog up the online bins

 

Why is it pointless though?  I'd buy it.  I'd never consider buying an original.

[Soulhawk]

it's already on a Grapevine CD

 

[Pete S]

it's already on a Grapevine CD

 

They don't play on my record player though :-)

 

[Tlscapital]

Long story short; if it is not for the money, what is it for ? Pleasure ? Share that ! Just that ! Them record we love are rare and sometimes not hopefully. I'm not personally pointing you down man, but look and see all around, when you re-issue something (which I never did), you do try to dig out above the most  that I should believe. Or... The excitement is always about music. Why not making a great LP compilation about Nelson Sanders and Co. if it was about ? Ever heard of anyone complaining about those with rarities issued on 'em ? Real 45's are what they are, others... vinyl is OK BTW !

[Pete S]

If this is a properly licensed product with the paperwork to back it up, some of you ought to be careful what you say as there's no reason why you couldn't be sued for libel.

If Jesse has done the deal it's between him and the copyright owner and he doesn't have to show you or me anything.

[pow wow mik]

legal or not, its a pointless piece of tat, and letting 500 more people play it in their shit DJ sets really is a problem that didn't need solving. 

If you make the things, don't pretend that it's some democratisation of the music, the music is out there on multiple formats already. It's simply exploiting the desire of lazy people to be trendy djs without committing much to it. 

In summary: the only market for your product is crappy DJs who play bootlegs. That's it; must give you a lot of pride.

 

 

[Stompingsevens]

Yes it does but not for the reasons you have mentioned but thanks anyway. Now where are some more 45's I can repro.....................

[Weingarden]

Curious about the "estate" remark above. Has Nelson Sanders died?

[Pomonkey]

Most probably happened when he saw this useless piece of tat with his name on Matt, but if not then will be an interesting conversation to ask him about the rights to his music, know you've seen him multiple times when you've been back home, wish had taken up your suggestion to see him at his long-term residency there.