> Still seems to me they are working hard to low profile the original sound
> which begs the question, WHY. It's not like the CD's were horrible or
> something. Just a different sound. Are they afraid the current audience
> will find out they know how to play bluegrass and traditional country?
If that's what they're afraid of, I think they'd drop the banjer, fiddle and
dobro, eh? Maybe they will, but so far they haven't. I think it's more
accurate to say that they're not working hard to highlight the original
sound, original members, etc., which isn't, or shouldn't be, too surprising.
This isn't exactly uncommon, and it's not restricted to bands jumping to
major labels from minor ones or self-release. Rebel doesn't feature Charlie
Sizemore's pre-Rebel records, Sugar Hill doesn't highlight the Seldom
Scene's earlier albums on Rebel, Rounder doesn't make much mention of J. D.
Crowe's earlier albums on Rebel and Starday, Sugar Hill doesn't profile
Doyle Lawson's albums on Brentwood, Asylum said little or nothing about the
Cox Family's Rounder recordings (but Rounder had little to say about their
pre-Rounder recordings), etc. I know of one major bluegrass band that has
left an entire album out of all their official materials and discography.
The troublesome part of this story, as far as I'm concerned, is that a
pretty solid case can be made that posting short (30 second) clips from
earlier, out-of-print releases in the context of a "complete" history of the
act and its recordings *does* fall under the fair use provision of copyright
law.
Jon Weisberger Kenton County, KY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.fuse.net/jonweisberger/
