All right, this is about music so I’m putting it here.
So first I get a text from Google telling me that Herbie Hancock has a new album out. I get these every now and then, and they are always from artists/authors whose works I have bought, because Google knows everything about me. When I saw the text I thought, wow, all these old guys still putting out new stuff. By old guys I mean guys who were recording in 1963. Paul McCartney, e.g.
I put it into Google to get a track listing. All the tracks are familiar, and they’re all from his first album, so…it looks like it isn’t really a new album. But is it a new version? A new recording?I can’t figure out what’s going on here. It’s the same songs as the original album, which I had (may still have but I haven’t had the means to play vinyl in like 20 years) and I liked them, but at least one song (“Watermelon Man”) has a version I liked better. But the other thing is that it looks like it’s a digital only album* and available only from streaming sites, right now. And either there’s no price or it’s in Euros.
The original was one of my long-time favorites and I miss being able to hear it, so it would be a plus to have it in a format I could actually listen to. But if it’s just a remaster of the 1963 works, why would it have a new name?
If Dexter Gordon was listed as an artist that would be a clue, but it only says “Main artist: Herbie Hancock”
If it was released by Blue Note that would also be a clue, but it doesn’t say who released it.
So, what might be going on here? It almost looks like pirated music, but it’s all so upfront, Google alert and all.
*“Album” is in quotes because seriously, we have gotten way far away from having a bunch of songs by a certain artist or related in some other way together in one media set out in a book with individual sleeves for numerous records with one number on each side of a record. There has to be a better word. It just feels wrong to me to say it.