pow wow mik

Think the problem with records like this is that they're actually rare but dont really have much value, so people who have copies, like me in this case, dont want to sell them for what you could get. Probably get it for £75 if it came up on ebay but it only comes up once a year if that

I think maybe you dont get it because you're focussing only on a small detail - whether a single record played at a do is original or not, which of course is not the point. the point isnt that we insist that djs play originals - dont remember ever doing such a thing - but that we only want to hear djs who play originals. Because if they have the originals, it is likely that they are a collector and therefore more likely to have something interesting to play than someone who gets their spins spoon fed them by juno's release schedule. It's not fail-safe, but it works, and as far as I know, we're not missing out on a great deal by setting this standard. simply ensures, or attempts to ensure, that the djs are those most qualified to be doing it. And that is all in order to hear new stuff. I concede, if your club plays only tried and tested classics, then yes, format is irrelevent. As for devaluing originals: I guess eventually total overkill can kill interest in anything but the value of these records is of absolutely no interest to me, shame that the whole thing be over run by chancers at one end and investors at the other.

I'm sure that's true, and I'm sure it applies to quality re-issue product like Ace CDs and remastered or previously unreleased 45s even, but it's not that market buying lookalike 45s of big club tracks is it? I love the music and desire hearing new things in lots of genres - my first stop is youtube not juno

expect a letter from my solicitor. :-)

Fair point, I do get that, but I dont have much respect for that kind of dj either, sounds like vacuous nathan barley stuff to me - and I know cos I've dabbled in them circles. And none of it explains the vinyl bit - they should save money and petro-chemicals by playing mp3s instead, except I guess that vinyl looks cooler if you're a dj culture vulture type. and you're analogy doesnt work, cos humans dont observe laws or morals about not killing birds, unless they're endangered birds or pets or some thing, in which case we wouldnt try the guilty cat, we might just kill it, or somehow prevent it from access to the birds a better analogy would be cats figuring out a way to open tins of cat food and then running off and forming cat-only communities with a stock of tins, saying 'who needs humans' and thinking that they had got it made! :-)

yes, you've fairly accurately described the situation!

The problem with arguments like yours', is that they only apply retrospecively; that is: once every decent 45 has been replicated, then yes, original vinyl does lose a lot of its importance, but go back 10, 20 years and original vinyl is a lot more important - the collecting of it being the predominant source of new music being unearthed - the very material that eventually gets re-issued. So when asking whether original vinyl is important, think about how many of these booted tracks would even be known if some people, at least, weren't willing to make a bit more effort and sacrifice a bit more of their time and money to buy originals. sometimes seems like the re-issue makers and buyers believe that they would exist without the existence of other people collecting originals, then scenes raising the music's profile - they wouldn't. So logically, the bootleg types ignore a rule that they depend on others observing, either now or in the past. In ethics, its called 'free riding'.

Flaw in your argument is that, in the youth of anyone over 40, vinyl will have been the normal format to buy music on, so re-issues and boots were excusable because necesary, even for home use . Now, the only possible reason for them is to dj with, pretending to be a real collector. I'm sure that this was always a reason for their existence, but now its the only reason.

Why should I be careful of who I accuse and of what? What will happen? And, for the record, I accused you of making r&b boots, and you do! Anyhoo, generally, you're missing the point. I couldn't give a f*ck about the law; i'm not a policeman and we're not in court. If I object to something, then that is never an objection on legal grounds. If the law decides that after some arbitrary period, someone else's work is anyone's to sell then so be it. But that still doesn't make it anyone's to sell. But that's not the point either. Even if you paid Young Jessie, for example, ALL the money you made from selling his music, and then went and mowed his lawn, the fact is: you're producing superfluous fake tat that has no purpose. Oh sorry, except for providing a service for those who "enjoy the simple process of spinning a few 45's" , but, oddly, dont enjoy it so much that they want to go to much effort or spend much money in order to do it. Your nostalgia about buying boots in your youth and therefore somehow keeping this glorious tradition alive doesn't add any weight either unfortunately, as while vinyl might have been the normal format used for listening to music then, it isn't now; I listen to all my music on MP3s. Working on the assumption that i'm not superior nor inferior to anyone else yet probably as big a music lover as anyone, what's good enough for me must be good enough for everyone else. I guess where you and I conflict on this issue is that I dont see pretending to be a record collector as an important part of our culture, or a part that needs an entire industry to cater for it. I'm just not into pretending full stop really. My last point, you'll be glad to hear, is this, and it might explain why I come across as angry, resentful and confrontational: I've been into this music for 20 years, constantly active and doing things to either discover new music or expose neglected music to the world. I'm not 'lucky', I've just spent my money on records instead of holidays, cars, scooters, houses and all the things other 'lucky' people spend their money on. All that time, i've worked, and spent the money i've earned on records. If there weren't people doing that, and promoting the music, there would be no market for your pressings and you wouldn't know what tracks to press. No, don't thank me, I enjoy it. So I do all this, plug away for years, facing mostly disinterest. Never ask for, or got, a f*cking bean out of it. Why? because I love it. I love the people who made the music, I love the music and I love the people who love the music. It's culture - grass roots folk culture. One of the last examples of it, that is driven from the bottom up, not the top (commerce) down. What it isn't, is business. People do it cos they love it, it exists before re-issues therefore re-issues are by their very nature parasitic. I'm rambling, so I'll put it in the most simple terms: it's folk culture. It's voluntary. there's no money to be earned from it, no angles, no margins, no markets. Cheap tacky cash-in parasitic commerce takes over everything in life, cheapens it, markets it and sucks the soul out of it. Having said that, I appreciate your honesty and respect yours and everyone's right to do exactly what you want My advice? Make and sell something useful instead. Or make your own music and sell it.

'Dragged through the mud' ? I just said that you made the r&b boots, and you do. so what you're 'being accused of' is making the r&b boots, which you do. Nothing more or less. With regards to whether youre doing right and wrong: that's meaningless to me really, as I'm not an arbiter of any objective standard or law, only my own; and to me its wrong; and here's why: 1. The primary aspect of your product - the music - isnt yours to sell. 2. The end product is so pointless its mind boggling. The only value to a collectable is in its intrinsic qualities that make it a collectable. So I dont understand how a fake collectable is even a logical actuality. Just more mindless tat using up the world's resources. So that's my explanation - some fact and some opinion

You still got it ezzie?

I'd love that yes. I like relentlessly going on about it. My only power is counter-propoganda; enough people going on about things enough and the parasites might at lease feel a bit uncomfortable. Its a start anyway, until I get round to full on insurgency

yeah ok, so now we know who's making them, well, one of them... sort of... lets wrap it up and continue to let them get on with it.

Not really right though is it? Records all might have been made to sell, but some were made to sell to a minority or niche audience, so had artistic integrity. And like all art forms, some was made because the artist wanted to make it, then hoped or found it could be sold, some was made purely for the purpose of selling, some was a combination of both motivations. To claim that everything ever done was done for commercial reasons is wrong and a depressing product of capitalist indoctrination. music pre dated its commercial exploitation.

I do agree with that, and it's a fair description of how things are, but I don't have to like it! I don't like that people want to be reminded of their youth to such an extent - live now, move on. I don't like that this badass music should become the unthreatening soundtrack to folks talking about bloody kids and haemorrhoids. Wasn't pop music made for people who aren't very cool and don't really care?

If Charles Dickens books were neglected cultural artefacts, and the reading of Charles Dickens books was a meaningful social activity and folk culture, and if those most dedicated to Charles Dickens books were regularly finding and reading previously forgotten or unknown Charles Dickens manuscripts....then it would be a sensible analogy. And if those things were the case, I'd be rooting for the Charles Dickens enthusiasts who were responsible for a deep and thorough understanding of Charles Dickens, not the tool who watched Oliver and then wrote about it on Facebook

I agree with all that, but we always see this argument dragged out its simply irrelevent. When comparing two sets, you can only compare the best of one set with the best of another. What is proved by comparing the worst ovo djs with the best re'issue djs? Neither should be djing. Of course ovo is only one factor to making a dj. The trophy djs may be just as unimaginative as djs, but that doesn't elevate re-issue rockers any.

Maybe Pete, but what you're saying is 'just accept things the way they are'. But why? Doesn't giving up on standards just lead to a general degeneration of culture - as we're witnessing now. In most respects in life, I am one of the 90% of casual people, who do nothing to improve or maintain standards in anything, but just drift along not caring much. But in every field there are others who care and are passionate, whether it's about gardening, architecture, ancient Egyptian relics, quantum mechanics or whatever, and I'm glad there are people in each field like that. In the field of the preservation and presentation of vintage black music, I am one of those who care and are passionate. Should I just give up, play a load of boots and piss around like it's all some silly trivial birthday party? You can't say passion and commitment mattered to the scene in the 70s but doesn't now. It always does. It's like any entertainment. TV for example. People want to watch TV - you give them shite TV, they'll watch it. You don't give the shite TV, they'll watch good TV. They're not all discerning so the choice is actually being made at the product end.

You've touched a nerve comparing me to police yes, as you have comparing me to a judge and jury. All those institutions have authority over others and exercise that authority by controlling and punishing people. Yet, strangely, I expect that that doesn't offend you. If I am judge and jury then I am only arresting, trying and convicting people in my own mind, as is anyone expressing a critical opinion of anything. Are you not acting as police, judge and jury by criticising me? Why is your objection to my opinion ok, but mine to bootlegs somehow an act of authority? I object to re-issues and bootlegs because I think that whole market simply enables people who don't have the requisite passion, commitment and resources to represent the music in a manner that it deserves. It is an industry dedicated to short cut DJing - is that really a useful service to culture? From my experience of such DJs, they let others do the hard work - finding and playing records first - and then jump on the bandwagon to fullfill some very personal ego trip. I don't like that sort of free-riding in any field, it dilutes the total level of quality. Am I allowed to express that opinion or what? Funny how you seem more offended by my objecting to lazy DJs then by people making and selling products that involve a theft of other peoples' work. I think the argument that 'people are enjoying themselves', or 'not harming others', as a blanket defence of anything, is a moribund one. People might be enjoying themselves and not harming others on 'The Voice', but it's still undoubtedly a big steaming pile of soul-destroying shit-steam. I never said how much I care about this subject either - you've assumed that. The site is dedicated to Soul music though, so within that realm, it's as serious as anything else. If you disagree with me, present an argument in defence of laying fake records but don't a) question my freedom to have an opinion or b) suggest that by having an opinion I am somehow bullying or oppressing people. If the majority of people who currently do anything creative or imaginative in the world of soul music agree with me then I'd seriously consider that there might be some value in it.

strange advice. He's posted his opinion on a public forum, we've responded on that same forum and you say it's got nothing to do with us. Something illogical in that don't you think? I think the argument that Soul is somehow under-exposed in the UK isn't that convincing to be honest. In the early 90s maybe but not now. You only have to look at the escalating market in originals, or the club listings on here, to see how many DJs are competing for attention. You say that you're 'not the type' to pay £200 for a record. If that's the case then I just don't think you've got the resources or commitment that it takes to be a good representative of soul music. It's not all about expensive records, but I've never yet known of a good soul DJ who can get away without buying the odd expensive one. Lots of great records simply are £200 or more, even as newies, what have you done for 20 years about such records? Only two options as far as I can see - not play them, in which case your audience are missing out on them, and could be hearing them at other nights, or wait for them to be booted, in which case you're playing them too late. You've basically admitted that you don't really have the depth of collection to sustain a residency, so there you go - you just don't have the records - plenty who do - leave it to them. I'm not saying that they're all good DJs because they've got rare originals, but I'm not saying you are either. Or don't. The difference between me and the real police - as some people seem confused on this - is that I have no authority over you or any other person, have no means or will to enforce my views in any way or exact punishment. All I do, and have ever done, is state opinions on the internet as I respect others' freedom to. As a general point - if the soul scene has really got to the point where there's no musical difference between a bootleg DJ and a real DJ, because every track that anyone might want to hear is available on re-issue, then it really is pretty much over and I guess there is no point to the OVO rule. My point of view comes from the scene I DJ on, where there's still a mass of stuff that isn't available on re-issue, despite the best efforts of the bootleggers and re-issuers. I can see it getting to that point though, as there seem to be a few tracks booted every week. When it does, it'll be over as far as I can predict, cos there will be nowhere to progress to and barely anything to distinguish between DJs - the two main pillars of these scenes.

sad

IMO you're wrong to say it though. The scene, the audience, and music in general, doesn't benefit from having infinite amounts of DJs; it benefits from having very good DJs playing in very good clubs. I.e. quality control. The scene, any scene, would be best with 6 clubs with 500 at each instead of 30 clubs with 100 at each. The former sort of nights are the sort that have real influence and impact on peoples' lives and wider culture, and therefore also the sort that promote the music in the most credible and appropriate way. Re-issues are only a resource for DJs. If you can give an explanation of how anything is gained in this culture from another person DJing, then go ahead

maybe your punters would be elsewhere, hearing DJs who have more stuff than you, if you weren't running a club with a play anything policy, did you ever consider that? Not being mean, but why do YOU have to be the DJ? You sound like you don't quite have enough resources

you'd be lucky to get a tommy bush for 4 too I think

It does Brav, cheers. It all just adds up to one massive con trick enabling them to tax the untaxable. My £60 fee went to a private company, no doubt registered in the Cayman Islands or somewhere!