Are decisions to release albums always unanimous?
DD: There are albums that need to come out, for the greater good, even if what you’re doing individually maybe isn’t quite as good as it should be. I can think of a record or two where I wasn’t real happy with my playing, but overall the record’s good. JS: Certain records came out where Don said, oh no, I don’t know why we put that out, and with time they grow on you a little bit more and you realise that there were things in there that were important. Live in Allentown’s a good example, of something that came out on cassette in 1985 but it never had a chance to reach a broader audience and it was really significant. Soon it’ll have a chance to reach an audience it didn’t reach when it first came out. On other labels things come and go, but at least on Agaric we can put things back into circulation if we feel it’s timely or appropriate to do so. Ideally, I guess we’d like to have something new coming out every year. DM: The idea is that we never put out things that sound the same. When
Related Questions
- How are release decisions being made right now? Are youth completing the program (A4B4C4) or are they just released automatically when their minimum lengths of stay are complete?
- Why have the last three albums been released everywhere else six months to a year before the U.S. release?
- Which jurisdictions require jurors to reach unanimous decisions in criminal cases?
