To Thread - Forum Home

The Mudcat Café TM
76 messages

Bright Phoebus reissued

31 May 17 - 06:41 AM (#3858058)
Subject: Today, Bright Phoebus...

Bright Phoebus

Reissued at last.

31 May 17 - 07:48 AM (#3858076)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: Steve Shaw

Does it mean that the Nic Jones albums and the countless other gems sat on by Bulmer are going to see the light of day at last?

As I've said before, anyone who has pristine vinyl of any of them should guard them with their lives!

31 May 17 - 07:53 AM (#3858079)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...

I have pristine vinyls - incl. Leader's.

31 May 17 - 07:57 AM (#3858080)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: Steve Shaw

God knows what state the original tapes are in. You may be valuable!

31 May 17 - 08:40 AM (#3858090)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: GUEST,nickp

Hardly ever played my old LP copy because the hole was slightly offset. A bit of wow (or flutter?) made it had work to listen to. I shall re-invest.

31 May 17 - 10:14 AM (#3858108)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...

Penguin Eggs is available from Nic Jones' website:

31 May 17 - 10:39 AM (#3858112)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: Steve Shaw

Penguin Eggs has always been available. It was the albums released before that one that are "missing."

31 May 17 - 04:22 PM (#3858177)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: GUEST,Ed

Can someone with more knowledge than me, explain the release history of the album?

According to this Guardian article only 2000 copies were pressed with half having off centre holes (presumably what nickp refers to).

However, as this page mentions, there was a second pressing sometime. Indeed I have a copy of the later Trailer Highway version that I bought in the late '90s.

I can't remember how much I paid for it, but it was whatever the going rate for new LPs was then, no more than that. I bought it from Decoy Records in Manchester, a now defunct specialist Jazz, Folk, Blues place with very knowledgeable staff, so if ALL vinyl versions were incredibly valuable, I'm sure they'd have noticed.

Can anyone enlighten me? Thanks,


31 May 17 - 04:43 PM (#3858185)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...

The Beeb did a tribute programme about the album.

Bright Phoebus


01 Jun 17 - 04:10 AM (#3858253)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: GUEST,Ed

Thanks for that, CJB. Very interesting

06 Jun 17 - 04:11 AM (#3859168)
Subject: Bright Phoebus to be reissued
From: GUEST,Rigby

Apparently Domino Records are to re-release Mike and Lal Waterson's Bright Phoebus album, along with some previously unreleased demos.

Interesting, and very welcome. I wonder if this means that other albums from the Leader/Trailer stable will finally become available again?

06 Jun 17 - 06:09 AM (#3859182)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus to be reissued

Here's the press release:

06 Jun 17 - 06:19 AM (#3859184)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus to be reissued

Quote: "Domino are pleased to reissue Bright Phoebus – Songs By Lal And Mike Waterson on 4th August, this will be the first time since its release the album will be widely available. Additionally under the supervision of David Suff (Topic/Fledging) and Marry Waterson (daughter of Lal), the album has been remastered from the original tapes."

Hmm - maybe the tapes held by the Bulmer family are still OK?

06 Jun 17 - 09:45 AM (#3859220)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: punkfolkrocker

At present Amazon are preordering, stating release date for the deluxe double CD is 16 July...???

07 Jun 17 - 08:49 AM (#3859415)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: GUEST,Rigby

Tape is quite a resilient medium, for the most part. There's no reason why tapes recorded 40 or 50 years ago shouldn't be perfectly playable as long as they haven't got wet or otherwise been mistreated.

07 Jun 17 - 10:10 AM (#3859437)
Subject: RE: Today, Bright Phoebus...
From: punkfolkrocker

...and also how many first or second generation 'safety copies' may have existed under beds in various locations..????

14 Jul 17 - 07:26 AM (#3866021)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued

According to Mike Waterson in the BBC radio doc, Bulmer didn't have the tapes. He wouldn't say who did but gave the impression he knew and wouldn't say.

Just received my copy today 😀

14 Jul 17 - 08:04 AM (#3866024)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

Here's a test for good quality headphones....

I was suckered into buying the Bulmer CD off Amazon several years ago; it wasn't a CDR, but a real factory pressed silver disc.

On the most beautiful lines of Lal's singing there is obvious distracting distortion,
like a bad poorly recorded needle drop..
Perhaps worn vinyl, or inept amateurish observance of recording peak levels....???

I've ordered this new 'official' release and have even better headphones nowadays..

So let's see.... fingers crossed...

14 Jul 17 - 05:26 PM (#3866145)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued

I have an unplayed vinyl original. Must look it out.

15 Jul 17 - 06:53 AM (#3866213)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued

why does an unplayed LP become more valuable when a CD of it is released- I have had a bootleg CD for years but don't see the logic?

15 Jul 17 - 10:03 AM (#3866223)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

Ok.. disregarding the hyped up speculative profiteering of vintage LP collecting for investment...

A mint 1st generation pressing of an LP is invaluable for archival and re-release purposes
if the original master tapes are lost, destroyed, or damaged beyond listenable repair.

Also, vintage tapes that have had a fair working life over 30 to 60 years
may well have become dulled in higher frequencies, losing Hi Fi audio detail,
which may still be apparent and salvagable on an unplayed 1st generation LP pressing.

But there are no guarantees that an immaculate mint looking LP is actually a good quality pressing.
It might well be from near the end of a run when the metal stamping plates were getting worn out.
Or pressed in lower grade noisier vinyl....

15 Jul 17 - 01:54 PM (#3866270)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued

Who said anything about selling a rare unplayed vinyl. I didn't. Mine is not for sale. But if folks want to borrow it freely for remastering then I have no probs. Same goes for all of my Leader vinyls.

15 Jul 17 - 03:00 PM (#3866278)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Thomas Stern

looking at Amazon UK and US -
The US site says 1 CD. Is that an error, or is the double CD
only offered from the UK ??

10 Aug 17 - 06:17 PM (#3870927)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Thomas Stern

anyone know if US is 2 or 1 CD ????

11 Aug 17 - 02:37 PM (#3871056)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Thomas Stern

I e-mailed DOMINO, their reply:

There are 2 editions of the record. One is the deluxe which has 2 CDs and one is the normal which is 1 CD.

11 Sep 17 - 03:59 PM (#3876584)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Frank Scott

The U.S. release is a single CD and the Deluxe edition is only available as an English import. Right now all the sources I've checked are out of stock of the Deluxe version which indicates that they probably underestimated the demand and have sold out.

21 Sep 17 - 01:23 AM (#3877920)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Rod

I just received the deluxe version a couple of days ago, ordered direct from Domino records in the US. The sound is immaculate.

21 Sep 17 - 06:54 AM (#3877959)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Roger the Skiffler

Amazon appears to have run out already.

24 Sep 17 - 02:19 PM (#3878531)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued


25 Sep 17 - 09:27 AM (#3878632)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Guest

The link is to a radio programme and not the actual album.

11 Apr 18 - 03:25 PM (#3916623)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: FScott

Does anyone know what the situation is regarding all the rest of the material that Dave Bulmer had acquired the rights to?
Did Domino acquire the rights (and original tapes) from the Bulmer estate?
There was so much wonderful music issued on Leader and Trailer and I'm sure there would be sufficient interest for a reissue program to be financially viable. With all the interest in Nic Jones I would think a box set of all his Trailer recordings - including possible unissued material would do well.
I remember years ago when I used to deal with Mr. Bulmer (a story in itself)he told me that he had lots of live recordings of folk artists - that could be very interesting if it were possible to get access to this material.
He also had rights to the Rubber and Black Crow labels which also housed some very fine music as did his own Celtic Music label.
Does anyone know who runs the Bulmer estate? His wife, his former partner?
From a purely selfish point of view I would hate to shuffle off this mortal coil without having the chance to hear some unissued Dick Gaughan, Nic Jones, etc. but that may very well be the case. At least I have most of the Leader/ Trailer LPs that I want but would prefer well documented, beautifully remastered CDs.

30 Nov 18 - 10:45 AM (#3964018)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,21st Century Primitive

Just heard from a reliable source that Domino Records have been issued with a cease and desist order to stop them selling any further copies of the reissue - despite it being fully supported by Lal and Mike Waterson’s family. Wonder who might be behind this? As if we need to ask.

30 Nov 18 - 11:52 AM (#3964033)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: graham_t

Yes, Celtic Records have successfully sued Domino.
Go to the Froots Facebook for the full press release (I don't know how to copy and paste)

30 Nov 18 - 04:45 PM (#3964073)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Vic Smith

Yorkshire record label wins copyright battle against indie giant
Celtic Music successfully sue The Domino Recording Company for copyright infringement of the 'Bright Phoebus' album.

A Yorkshire record label has won its copyright battle against a major London indie company over the re-release of a classic folk album.
Celtic Music, an independent folk label based in Harrogate, North Yorkshire, took The Domino Recording Company Ltd to court over the rights to 'Bright Phoebus'.
The record was originally released in 1972 by Leader Sound on its Trailer Records label, and Celtic has owned the copyright since purchasing the rights to the Leader record labels in 1990. It authorised the re-release of 'Bright Phoebus' on CD in 2000, and this recording has been available ever since,
Celtic has now successfully sued the indie label for copyright infringement also obtaining Injunctions against the company.
Domino gave wide publicity to its August 2017 re-issue of 'Bright Phoebus' Songs by Lal & Mike Waterson' - and proceeded despite Celtic repeatedly asserting its copyright prior to the infringing release.
The indie label, which boasts artists including The Arctic Monkeys and Franz Ferdinand on its roster, were found by the Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court ((PEC) to have infringed copyrights belonging to Celtic on a number of counts.
Domino was found to have no prospect of a defence, and the matter was summarily decided in Celtic's favour by Deputy Judge David Stone QC on October 23. Celtic Music's partners appeared in court as litigants in person, facing Domino's intellectual property specialist legal representatives,
Speaking after the judgement, Calum Bulmer, of Celtic, said: "It was an obvious decision in light of the facts.
"I was surprised at the assumption by the directors of Domino that they could ignore Celtic's rights and flout the law. It is especially surprising given that Harry Martin of Domino is on the board of AIM (Association of independent Music), whose own mission statement is to support the UK's independent music companies,
"Clearly, questions should be asked about motives. I mean, Lawrence Bell of Domino even ordered a copy of our 'Bright Phoebus' CD release from us in 2014.'
Since the death of its joint founding partner Dave Bulmer in August 2013 Celtic Music has been retrenching and reviewing the development of its large and varied back catalogue of recordings, and is currently planning a programme of re-releases to cast new light on valuable folk music performances from the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

30 Nov 18 - 06:07 PM (#3964081)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

So Celtic could never get their hands on the Bright Phoebus master tapes,
hence the crappy needledrop inferior CD release some of us were duped into buying....

What's to legally stop them now ripping the Domino CD & artwork for their next round of dodgy rip off CDs...!!!???

Now they can bypass the need for the tapes...

Basically plundering Domino and Waterson's hard work remastering their tapes
for what we agree was the real legit 'official' CD & LP rerelease.

01 Dec 18 - 06:33 PM (#3964224)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Fokeman

FFS How disgusting!

03 Dec 18 - 06:45 AM (#3964454)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Howard Jones

This is hardly surprising. Let's face it, if any other small folk label had its copyright infringed like this we would all be outraged on its behalf. It is only the back story which makes this different but that doesn't alter the fact that, like it or not, Celtic Music own the copyright, and while Domino may have the moral high ground legally they don't have a leg to stand on.

The good news buried in here is that Celtic Music is apparently reviewing its back catalogue and planning a programme of re-releases. Let's hope they do it properly this time. We should at least give them the benefit of the doubt until we see what this means.

It might also be helpful if they could offer an explanation for Dave Bulmer's behaviour. Perhaps it was a response to some real or imagined slight by the folk scene, or perhaps he genuinely believed it was not economic to release these commercially (and in the days of vinyl he may well have been right, but CDs are now cheap to produce, and albums can be distributed digitally for very little cost). His response to criticism was apparently to turn inwards rather than challenge it, and intentionally or not this came across as putting up two fingers to the folk scene and to the original artists. He apparently was well-regarded as a musician and for his contributions to Irish music in particular, and his acquisition of the Leader catalogue possible saved this from being lost forever, but his reputation is badly tarnished by the way he subsequently managed it. Properly handled, an explanation and perhaps an apology could go some way to restoring his reputation. What would really help would be to find a way to share the financial proceeds with the artists, although legally they probably don't have to do that.

03 Dec 18 - 08:27 AM (#3964474)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,21st Century Primitive

You say ‘record label’ but CM has effectively been defunct in all but name for over a decade. Their website is down, they are not selling on any of the usual online retailers, they have no distribution and no tangible presence. Their ‘reissues’ have been woeful - poorly produced needledrop CDrs with shoddy artwork, no sleevenotes, no promotion or publicity - and I suspect no royalties for the artists.

I think Domino would have known a cease and desist would happen - they didn’t even properly contest it. And yet, for a couple of years, fans have been able to buy a professionally remastered (no doubt from the copies of the masters kept from CM), beautifully presented copy of the album with comprehensive sleevenotes: exactly the sort of reissue an album of this status deserved. And all this with the blessing of the artists’ family and royalties being paid. It may be copyright infringement, but it’s also a public service.

Finally, there is nothing intrinsically noble about the small, independent record label. Some are very honourable enterprises, some are incredibly dodgy. In this case, CM May have won the legal argument, but continue to lose the moral one they have been losing for years.

If CM actually do a tiny percentage of the catalogue they own anything approaching justice, I’ll fall off my chair.

03 Dec 18 - 08:56 AM (#3964478)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

Howard Jones - you are right, this is a time for truce and a new positive beginning...

Here's to trying to be optimistic......

..and hoping Celtic still has viable master tapes that can be properly optimised for digital release...

From my point of view as a CD/digital download consumer, this is mostly an archive of music I have never had the opportunity to hear.

Like many other folkies who enjoy spending too much cash on folkie music,
I was too young the first time round,
and it was all long gone, hidden and gathering dust and mould.. perishing away..
by the time I joined mudcat and discovered that this extensive chaper of UK folk
had ever existed and been valued by an older generation...

If Celtic does it righ in the future I look forward to catching up on lost heritage,
if only to find out what was great and what was over rated...

I've been curious and just spent a few quid too many on "The Village Thing" and "Talking Elephant"
CDs, exploring rereleases of fairly obscure 1970s and early 80s LPs.

stuff I'd completely missed during my punk and new wave agit-pop years...
Some tracks are brilliant, others duff dated duds..

Other older folkies nostalgia is all new to my ears...

But at leat I have a chance to hear them for the first time in well preserved and properly presented clear audio quality.

Celtic should now recognise this potentially relatively profitable niche market that music enthusiasts like us represent...

03 Dec 18 - 09:00 AM (#3964479)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Howard Jones

I couldn't agree more, but the fact remains that the law is on CM's side. They own the copyright and are entitled to stop someone else releasing it. Domino's release may have been a public service, and as I said in my previous post they hold the moral high ground, but that counts for nothing against the simple legal fact that CM's copyright has been infringed.

I could never understand Dave Bulmer's refusal to release any of the albums properly. Certainly a great deal of the catalogue was not commercial, but a number of them, including Bright Phoebus and Nic Jones's albums, would surely have have been commercially viable, even in the days of vinyl LPs which were quite costly to manufacture. It is now quite cheap to professionally reproduce CDs, and for those not expected to sell enough even to justify this, digital downloads cost very little to make available for sale, you no longer need a physical product.

CM is now apparently in the hands of Dave's son, who I believe is also a musician, and as a younger person hopefully has a better understanding of how to deal with the catalogue in the digital age. Done properly, I beleive it could be a commercially viable enterprise to make many of these important recordings available to the public, and to go some way to repairing the damage to his father's reputation. But we'll have to see.

Whether the artists will see anything is another matter. This has been gone over at length in the many previous threads. Legally, I believe the position is that the artists assigned their copyright to Leader (later acquired by CM) and may have no further claim.

03 Dec 18 - 09:01 AM (#3964481)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Howard Jones

My post above was directed at GUEST,21st Century Primitive

03 Dec 18 - 11:00 AM (#3964497)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Jack Campin

From what I can google, there seem to be both a Calum Bulmer and a Callum Bulmer - they are not the same and both can be spelt wrong. The PHP programmer probably isn't a selfish arsehole.

03 Dec 18 - 03:59 PM (#3964555)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: graham_t

On Amazon, which seems to be the only place Celtic Music cds are sold, the seller is given as Music by Mail. According to the Amazon storefront this is owned by Insideout Supplies Ltd of which Calum Bulmer is a director. He is also given as a director of a company called Useful Information Ltd

04 Dec 18 - 09:39 PM (#3964809)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Anonymous

I may be wrong.... but after reading about this for years and taking it all in, I find the fact that no one has ever approached Celtic Music or for that matter Dave Bulmer or his successors for an interview in relation to their side of the story nothing other than... amazing.

There is surely more to this story than meets the eye, and, there also seems to be an amazing amount of hatred and disdain towards the Celtic/Bulmer camp with little fact to base anything on. We have all heard the effects of fake news, misinformation, and propaganda in the media in recent years and the effects it can have on major events like elections.

I am not for one second suggesting that some of the issues raised with the Celtic/Bulmer camp have no substance whatsoever but I am of the mindset that, due to the public have nothing but the posts containing the hatred and disdain to base their opinion on the whole thing has a high probability of turning into a giant melting pot of hatred and disdain.

The more I look at it like this the more it makes me question if such low public regard for the Celtic/Bulmer camp has actually affected their ability to release albums effectively. For instance... I have seen in recent days that a key player in a major magazine publication has publically refused to feature any Celtic Music release in the magazine and this seems to have incited others to follow suit. I have also seen others launching public boycotts on any future release by the Celtic/Bulmer camp. How can the Celtic/Bulmer camp even attempt to produce commercially viable releases if they are being treated like this both by industry professionals and the paying public???

It also leads me to believe that they are being pushed into a no-win situation, ie. The public chastises them for not releasing material and, at the same time, they actively boycott them while being supported and incited to do so by other industry professionals.

I have actually managed to track down a copy of the recent Celtic Music press release and I have to say that the images of it that are flying around the web do not contain the full content, the last page is missing. The last page contains contact details for Celtic Music and some comments to the editor. Whilst this is not massively important I find it interesting that whoever first released the images of it online, and to the public, failed to include these details. Could they have done so deliberately? to add to the already boiling over melting pot by making Celtic Music seem uncontactable. To be fair though if this was the intention it probably has had little effect as the Celtic Music website holding page seems to have a contact telephone number and email address on there.

Now this brings me to my final point in this post....... The fallout from the recent court case between Celtic Music and Domino.

I find it concerning, to say the least, that the public still seems to hail Domino and the Waterson family, and the other players involved as heroes, for their part in the 2017 Domino release of Bright Phoebus. Let alone people still claiming the Domino release to be Official/legitimate and the 2000 Celtic Music authorized release to be, dodgy/a bootleg.

From the information disseminated in the Celtic Music Press Release, it seems that the IPEC Division of the High Court in the UK has ruled in Celtic Music's favor and found Domino to be liable for copyright infringement (seemingly on more than one type of copyright). It also states that "the matter was summarily
decided in Celtic’s favour" which initially confused me but.... after some research I now basically understand it to mean that the court assessed the paperwork Celtic Music produced and found it to be so solid that there was no chance of Domino defending the case at a trial no matter what the evidence they produced. This surely puts to bed all the public opinion and posts regarding lack of contracts. I have no reason to disbelieve this information and I am sure that there is a way of corroborating this information with the courts if someone wished to do so, besides which if the information issued by Celtic Music had been false then surely a label such as Domino would have been fast to respond by publically attacking the story and presumably instructing their legal team.

Taking this into account how can the 2017 Domino release of Bright Phoebus still be seen to be Official/legitimate and the Celtic version a dodgy/Unofficial bootleg? Surely the Domino 2017 release is now the illegal illegitimate one and the Celtic release a legal and official copy. This leads on to the issues raised with sound quality on the Celtic release...

I understand that public opinion is that Celtic copied the 2000 release from a vinyl record due to them not having an original master tape for the release an that Domino had access to an original tape or tapes as photographed in the 2017 Domino release sleeve notes and used in the Domino publicity material. It does seem to me however that Domino only had access to copy masters so this raises two questions in my mind. Does the public actually have anything to base their opinion regarding Celtic copying off a vinyl record? I am not sure this matters at this point in my assessment though as the public seem to be of the opinion that the audio quality of the 2000 Celtic release is inferior to the 2017 Domino release despite its original source. I am however intrigued by my second question as to how Domino got hold of what appears (from the Domino images) to be Leader Sound copy masters?
I know that in the BBC Radio 4 Lost Album Series Radio Program (which I believe was first broadcast in 2007, later repeated, and uploded to youtube) on Bright Phoebus (incidentally presented by Peter Paphides who is credited as writing the 2017 Domino release sleeve notes) Mike Waterson is interviewed and states that Celtic have no tapes, and he alludes to that fact that he knows this because he knows where the tapes are. This may answer my first question but in light of the fact that the tapes which have come to light are seemingly copy masters, also may not. There is also the fact that in this program Dave Bulmer is actually interviewed and states he does have master tapes so you can mke of this what you will. Many people on here would say not to trust Bulmer and, they may be right but on the other hand the BBC and Peter Paphides must have felt it fit to broadcast, so Bulmer must have at the very leaset given them some re-assurance he was trustworthy and held the rights to the album as stated in the broadcast.

I am trying to give a balanced and fair analysis of the situation and am trying my best to see things from all sides, but again taking the data in front of me and analyzing it more questions seem to arise. If Mike Waterson was not happy with his belief that Celtic apparently took the audio from a vinyl record and knew where the tapes were all along, why did he with hold the location of the tapes from the Celtic/Bulmer camp? Is it a possibility that the Waterson camp deliberately withheld the fact that they knew where the tapes were from Celtic, as they bore some sort of grudge against them? Did this, and therefore the Waterson camp, actually fuel the 'Lost Album' claim by making it impossible for Celtic to do the album justice in a release? After all the album has apparently been available on CD since its release in 2000, whether this is true is another question but I certinly ordered my copy of the 2000 release (I am sure it is a pressed CD) after a quick google search following hearing the program on the radio. My point is that if I was able to order a copy it can't have been a 'Lost Album' and I have always found this an odd claim to make ever since. The answers to many of these questions are mostlikely something we will never know, but, it certainly raises some questions in my mind as to who first claimed the album was 'Lost' and why?.

I feel I must also bring to light that the advancements in technology between 2000 and 2017 must have been vast in terms of audio restoration, not that I am in any way an expert. If this is the case it would be only be fair to say that even if the 2000 release and the 2017 release had been re-mastered from the same source tape then surely the 2017 Domino release would be enhanced in some way compared to the 2000 Celtic release due to the technology available. This is however only an observation and really an aside except to say that... is every record company that releases an album expected to remaster it periodically to make it "better" following advancements in technology? Surely this could have an entire thread dedicated to it though.

In conclusion (for now)..... It appears to me that there may be no truly innocent party in this story. The Celtic/Bulmer camp could probably have stood up for themselves more in the public eye, although they may have tried and been effectively censored by the industry press. An explanation as to their side of the story and is probably needed and would certainly be of interest. Domino (and I suppose all those involved and connected to the 2017 Release) are certainly not innocent as stated by the Courts. It also seems to me that The Waterson camp may not be telling the full story either and that they may have used the fact that they knew the location of, or possessed, master tapes to Bright Phoebus to their advantage over the years to fuel the bad public opinion of the 2000 Celtic release and its legitimacy.

The legal facts regarding the album and presumably the Leader/Trailer Labels now seem to be clear and Domino (and presumably those involved and connected to the 2017 Release including the Waterson camp) have been found to have committed acts of copyright infringement which, again from my research, I understand to be seen as criminal acts in certain circumstances. It seems wrong that they are still being hailed as heroes in this situation when in effect they are at the very least lawbreakers and have possibly committed criminal acts.

But what does all this mean??? I certainly don't know but I feel that there is certainly more to this than meets the eye and that there is a possibility that the Celtic/Bulmer camp may not be the people they have been made out to be in the public eye. I could, of course, be wrong.

Now I feel that due to my honest and balanced view of the facts to hand and the information digested I would be a fool to post this in any other way than as an anonymous post. I certainly do not want to receive calls from any legal teams of the parties involved or be slated on this forum and tracked down on companies house or facebook etc.. (as it seems is common practice in this forum) and given grief for my analysis of the situation. I am merely stating that things are not always as they seem and that the public are quick to attack and slow to forget even if they do not know why or who they are attacking.

04 Dec 18 - 11:40 PM (#3964819)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

You and I so far seem to be the only ones who have acknowledged the Bright Phoebus CDs
purchased days after the initial Lost Album radio show
were actually factory pressed discs, not CDrs...

But it still sounded crap, and the packaging cheap and shoddy
considering the cash in premium price charged by Celtic via Amazon.

It sounded like an amateurish LP to computer digitisation
using cheap equipment and entry level software..
Something some old uncle might knock up in his shed.

Bright Phoebus is only one of these 'Lost Albums' gathering dust and mould in Bulmer's 'archive'.
Maybe it's the highest profile serving a purpose as a test case...???

Whatever, the letter of the law,
hold enough of these letters and they can often be exploited to cunningly spell 'injustice'...

how's that for a game of scrabble...

Now let's see if this newer version of Celtic can show positivity and do a better job
of making this disputed catalogue of lost british folk music somehow available at reasonable price,
in at least non muffled and undistorted sound quality...
Before the potential market of older folkies with disposable cash
all drop dead waiting..

I like many others am a music fan and HI FI audio enthusiast,
and want to hear what I've been missing...

05 Dec 18 - 04:02 AM (#3964848)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Jack Campin

There was no need to make an effort to contact Dave Bulmer when he was alive. If you said anything negative about him in a public forum and he could find your number, you got an outraged phone call. He must have spent many, many hours putting his side of the story (probably with no more effect on anyone else than it had on me).

05 Dec 18 - 09:22 AM (#3964886)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Howard Jones

What was his side of the story?

05 Dec 18 - 10:10 AM (#3964902)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Jack Campin

"Nobody loves me, everybody hates me, think I'll go and eat worms", basically. He said the reason he hadn't done much with the revival material was that his real commitment was to the source/traditional stuff.

05 Dec 18 - 11:19 AM (#3964925)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Vic Smith

Jack Campin wrote:-
"He said the reason he hadn't done much with the revival material was that his real commitment was to the source/traditional stuff."

Fair enough! So is my commitment. But surely that was mainly, but not exclusively the printed-on-grey-card releases on the Leader label, the majority of which are on my vinyl shelves. My list would include:-
Jack Elliott, Jack Elliott of Birtley, LP, Leader LEA 4001, 1969
Séamus Ennis, Masters of Irish Music, LP, Leader LEA 2003, 1969
Martin Byrnes, Masters of Irish Music, LP, Leader LEA 2004, 1969
Séamus Tansey, Masters of Irish Music, LP, Leader LEA 2005, 1970
Billy Pigg, The Border Minstrel, LP, Leader LEA 4006, 1971
Various Artists, Blue Ridge Mountain Field Trip, LP, Leader LEA 4012, 1970
Tex Isley, Gray Craig and The New North Carolina Ramblers, North Carolina Boys, LP, Leader LEA 4040, 1972
Charlie Wills, Charlie Wills, LP, Leader LEA 4041, 1972
George Dunn, George Dunn, LP, Leader LEE 4042, 1973
John Doonan, Flute for the Feis, LP, Leader LEA 2043, 1972
The Coleman Country Traditional Society, Music from the Coleman Country, LP, Leader LEA 2044, 1972
Lonnie Austin, Norman Woodlieff, Lonnie Austin & Norman Woodlieff, LP, Leader LEE 4045, 1975
The Copper Family, A Song for Every Season, 4 LP, Leader LEAB 404 (LEA 4046-4049), 1971
Joseph Taylor et. al., Unto Brigg Fair, LP, Leader LEA 4050, 1972
Jimmy Power & Tony Ledwith, Irish Music from The Favourite, LP, Leader LED 2051, 1975
Da Forty Fiddlers, The Cullivoe Traditional Players, Tom Anderson and Aly Bain, Shetland Fiddlers, LP, Leader LED 2052, 1973
Kyle Creek, Bobby Patterson and the Camp Creek Boys, Virginia Reel: Fiddle and Banjo Tunes, LP, Leader LED 2053, 1974
Cecilia Costello, Cecilia Costello, LP, Leader LEE 4054, 1975
Various Artists, Folk Ballads from Donegal and Derry, LP, Leader LEA 4055, 1975
The Holme Valley Beagles, A Fine Hunting Day, LP, Leader LEE 4056, 1975
Various Artists, Far Canadian Fields, LP, Leader LEE 4057, 1974
John J. Kimmel, Early Recordings of Irish Traditional Dance Music, LP, Leader LED 2060, 1977
John Maguire, Come Day, Go Day, God Send Sunday, LP, Leader LEE 4062, 1973
Walter Pardon, A Proper Sort, LP, Leader LED 2063, 1972
Various Artists, A People's Carol: A Christmas Singing Tradition Recorded in South Yorkshire Pubs, LP, Leader LEE 4065, 1974
The Copper Family, A Song for Every Season, LP, Leader LED 2067, 1971
Stephen Baldwin, English Village Fiddler, LP, Leader LED 2068, 1976
The Beresford Band, Yorkshire Dales Dance Night, LP, Leader LEA 2069, 1977
Eddie Butcher, Shamrock, Rose & Thistle, LP, Leader LED 2070, 1976
The Rakes, The Rakes, LP, Leader LED 2071, 1976
Walter Pardon, Our Side of the Baulk, LP, Leader LED 2111, 1977

Did Dave Bulmer ever make a move to re-release any of these items in any format? To be fair there is not a huge market for "the source/traditional stuff". Bill Leader once told me that he thought that the Cecilia Costello vinyl album was a contender for the poorest selling item on any recognised label (and yet I think she is a great singer and that hers is a lovely album).
Four more things that I would like to add.
1] In the 1990s the Leader catalogue was sold to another record company Highway which later went into receivership. It was subsequently sold to the Celtic Music record label so it is possible that there was no contact on the subject between Bill Leader and Dave Bulmer. Can anyone add any more information on this?
2] To my mind, much as I love the band - The Rakes, The Rakes, LP, Leader LED 2071, 1976 were a revival band and their album might have been better placed on Trailer.
3] Did The Copper Family, A Song for Every Season, LP, Leader LED 2067, 1971 ever see the light of day? In an interview with Bob Copper in 1971, he told me that after the 4-LP boxed set of A Song for Every Season the plan was - once the initial sales level of the boxed set that died down - that each album would be released singly - but that this never happened.
and finally :-
4] Is there anyone that can add to my list of Leader releases?

05 Dec 18 - 12:08 PM (#3964938)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Reynard

In 1993 The Whisky Priests, with the support of the MU sued Bulmer for not adequately promoting their work, and for failing to pay them royalties. Bulmer settled out of court giving the band back the rights to their recordings and paying their costs.

Given this precedent, does anyone know why other artists have not been able to try this route? The success of the Whiskey Priests seems to suggest that the failure to properly release an artist's work may lead to the rights somehow becoming invalid. Or was there something different in this case as compared to other artists?

05 Dec 18 - 12:26 PM (#3964942)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Brian Peters

I've not checked very thoroughly for omissions, Vic, but here is Mainly Norfolk's Leader / Trailer discography

05 Dec 18 - 01:00 PM (#3964951)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,matt milton

"CM is now apparently in the hands of Dave's son, who I believe is also a musician, and as a younger person hopefully has a better understanding of how to deal with the catalogue in the digital age. Done properly, I beleive it could be a commercially viable enterprise to make many of these important recordings available to the public, and to go some way to repairing the damage to his father's reputation. But we'll have to see."

It's good to hear that Bulmer Jnr is a musician: that might make a difference to his perspective on albums lying unheard and artists going unpaid.

What I want to know is what happens to the money generated by Domino from sales? Presumably a lot - maybe all - will have gone to court costs, but it still must have made a fair bit for the Watersons. Which is nice. Are court costs tax deductible? Maybe it'll end up being a tax-loss for Domino? A kind of not totally unhappy ending.

05 Dec 18 - 01:34 PM (#3964961)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

According to a Financial Times review I read yesterday, Domino had bought the rights to Bright Phoebus...???????

Sorry about the long copy n paste,
but the review may or may not be hidden under a pay wall...
sometimes the link works, sometimes it don't...

Relevant bit near the end highlighted in BOLD...

"Bright Phoebus: rebirth of a magical vision of Britain
A classic folk-rock album is finally being re-released after decades in limbo

From left, Lal Waterson, John Harrison, Mike and Norma Waterson in Hull in 1966 “It’s illuminating, like the sun,” says singer-songwriter Richard Hawley about Bright Phoebus, the 1972 album by Lal and Mike Waterson. They instinctively knew, says Hawley, that “simplicity is where the magic is”.

Bright Phoebus has been compared to Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band for its originality, variety, cast of strange imaginary characters and evocation of a magical Britain. It features a supporting cast of the biggest names in British folk, including Norma Waterson, Martin Carthy, Richard Thompson, Ashley Hutchings and Maddy Prior — yet it has never been widely available. Lal died in 1998 and Mike in 2011. But now, with renewed interest from a new generation of music fans, Bright Phoebus is at last being reissued.

Yorkshire siblings Elaine (“Lal”), Mike and Norma Waterson, along with their cousin John Harrison, made up The Watersons, who were celebrated in 1960s folk circles for their close-harmony singing, often unaccompanied, of traditional songs. But Bright Phoebus was a radical departure for the group. These were original compositions rather than their previous fare of traditional songs, and they were accompanied by a backing band. There was also a broad range of styles: “Rubber Band” is a raucous singalong; the title track has a country feel; “Danny Rose” is a rockabilly shuffle; even musique concrète, with siren sounds closing “Winifer Odd”.

“They listened to all sorts of things,” says Lal’s daughter, Marry Waterson. “They weren’t just drawing on traditional music. My mum had all the Rolling Stones albums. There’s classical in there, all sorts of stuff.”

The Watersons had ceased performing in 1968, but Lal and Mike continued making music for their own enjoyment. “It was a house full of music,” says Marry of her childhood home. “They’d sit in front of the fire with their ciggies and their cups of tea, just singing and playing.” Lal and Mike had also begun writing their own songs, which drew on the rituals, tragedies and mysteries of everyday life that The Watersons had sung about on albums such as Frost and Fire. “Winifer Odd” was named after Mike’s daughter Sarah’s imaginary friend; “The Scarecrow” was a chilling tale of human sacrifice; and the stillbirth of one of Lal’s twins inspired “Child Among the Weeds”.

In 1971, Lal played her songs to guitarist Martin Carthy. “I was really intrigued,” he says. Carthy alerted bassist Ashley Hutchings, his then-bandmate in Steeleye Span, who immediately began organising sessions for an album. While Hutchings recruited guitarist Richard Thompson, drummer Dave Mattacks and producer Bill Leader, Carthy was painstakingly learning Lal’s songs. She did not understand musical theory and did not play recognisable guitar chords. “Lal had a very odd way of playing the guitar,” says Carthy. “What she played made no sense. I was really picking my way through this jungle of what she was playing. But she had a really clear idea of what she wanted.”

Bright Phoebus was recorded in just a week in a makeshift studio at Cecil Sharp House, the folk arts centre in Camden, north London. “They made it on a shoestring,” says Hawley. “The scope of their ideas was far beyond the recording techniques or the budget that they had to make the record on.”

“‘Child Among the Weeds’ was one of the highlights for me,” says Carthy. “We only did one take. We got to the end of it, and we just looked at each other. And everybody knew that this was an extraordinary moment.” The sessions were alive with experimentation, he says. “This bloke turned up to deliver something. We said, just join in with this song. And he stood there with us and he sang. He forgot to leave his name, left his parcel and disappeared. So there’s a mystery person on the album!” But, he adds: “There was tremendous discipline in the studio. It could easily have descended into chaos, but it never did.”

Norma Waterson sings “Red Wine Promises”, Lal’s tale of a drunken night out. Her return to the UK after working in Montserrat heightened the joyous atmosphere of the sessions — especially for her and Carthy. “We got married about three weeks afterwards,” says Carthy. “It was a special week in every possible sense.”

However, Bright Phoebus was greeted with dismay from many Watersons fans. “It really upset people,” says Carthy. “Because The Watersons had been off the road for four years and their first comeback record was this stuff, people were furious. They just did not get it.”

“It was a bit like that Bob Dylan electric thing,” says Marry. “The fans had got used to Frost and Fire and all that, and that’s what they wanted to hear.” She says The Watersons found the purists’ reaction “utterly dismaying”. “It was ridiculous, what they did. Hull folk club museum even formed a committee to ‘protect The Watersons’ legacy’.”

Carthy says the Watersons themselves were never folk “diehards”. “Tradition isn’t an edifice, it’s a process,” he says. “They understood that better than anybody.” But they were still shaken by the negative reaction. “I think the way it was received is probably the reason that Mike never sang any of his songs,” says Carthy.

Just 2,000 copies were manufactured in 1972, half of them unplayable because the hole was pressed off-centre. With lukewarm support from fans, the album went out of print. Financial problems forced Leader to sell his record labels. The new owner, Highway, sold the rights to a third company, Celtic Music, which focused on Leader’s recordings of Irish traditional music. Bright Phoebus remained unreleased.

But its reputation grew. In 2013 the Bright Phoebus Revisited Tour, featuring a band that included Marry, Carthy and Hawley with Jarvis Cocker, along with a BBC Radio 4 documentary, provided clear evidence of strong interest in the album. “It was ahead of its time,” says Marry. With demand for its release from a growing number of fervent fans unswayed by arcane arguments about folk music purity, Domino Records has bought the rights and remastered it. “It feels bloody great,” says Marry.

Hawley says he continues to be inspired by the integrity of Bright Phoebus. “One of the hardest things is to be yourself when you’re getting pushed and pulled and marketed,” he says. “It’s a great success if you can manage to achieve that lofty high.”

‘Bright Phoebus’ is released on August 4,

05 Dec 18 - 01:52 PM (#3964970)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Tony Rees

RE Vic Smith's question:
>Is there anyone that can add to my list of Leader releases?

You should consult the Musical Traditions discography here:

Just bear in mind that the leading number in each catalogue number is set not to display (visually), for better flow, such that e.g. LEA 4001 displays without the "4", and so on (however if you do a copy-and paste the full numbers come through).

My understanding is that this is a complete list, although I also know that sometimes Musical Traditions omits releases it considers "contemporary" or "revival" - but not sure it does in this case - hope it helps. Regards - Tony

05 Dec 18 - 01:55 PM (#3964971)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Tony Rees

Also note that in the list above, the Leader releases ("LEA") are interspersed with Trailer "LER") and perhaps others, so you will have to subset them out...

Cheers - Tony

05 Dec 18 - 01:59 PM (#3964972)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Tony Rees

And some prefixes are given as LEE not LEA, e.g. "LEE 4054 Cecilia Costello" - not sure whether this is correct or an error (someone with the original releases can confirm either way).

05 Dec 18 - 02:53 PM (#3964977)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Reinhard

Yes Tony, there were different prefixes, for the the “traditional” Leader label: LEA, LED, LEE; and for the “revival” Trailer label: LER, LES (Bright Phoebus only), LETSAM (Our Folk Music Heritage only). The first digit was a price category, followed by a three-digit consecutive number. I do believe Rod Stradling's discography on Musical Traditions and mine on Mainly Norfolk (which is based on Rod's) as linked above are complete.

05 Dec 18 - 03:42 PM (#3964990)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: graham_t

What other labels did Bulmer acquire? Black Crow for one, I think. Rubber?

05 Dec 18 - 05:22 PM (#3965014)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Tony Rees

Back in 2016, when I was compiling information for the Wikipedia entry "Celtic Music (record label)", I researched this question and the list of labels acquired by CM which I came up with was Leader, Trailer, Rubber Records, Black Crow, Dambuster, Highway, Sweet Folk and Country, Greenwich Village, Mulligan, Broadside, Folk Heritage, and Making Waves. This list may of course contain errors or be incomplete, and I would be happy to be advised if either of these is the case.

I found the information from a range of mostly internet sources but cannot remember exactly which piece of information came from where...

Regards - Tony

05 Dec 18 - 06:47 PM (#3965032)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,21st Century Primitive

In response to GUEST,Anonymous Date: 04 Dec 18 - 09:39 PM.

I’ll come back to some of your other points later. For now, let’s clear up the issue of the masters. It’s quite feasible that CM do have a copy of the masters, although past discussions of this issue would indicate that they have been stored in far from optimal circumstances, which might explain why the poor quality CM reissue sounds like a needle drop bootleg from vinyl. However, there will also have been reference copies of masters of Leader releases made, which will have not necessarily ended up in the CM stash and which will have been taken far better care of (in fact, I have it on good authority from various reliable sources that this is the case). It is not beyond the realms of possibility that the Domino remaster was from a reference copy.

05 Dec 18 - 09:15 PM (#3965043)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

My only interest in all this is as a music addict,
who wants to hear this lost music hoard presented affordably in as best quality audio as possible.

So from my relatively objective and rational perspective;
it seems to me CM would have more to gain by co-operating
and sharing resources / costs / profits, etc, with the likes of Domino.
Negotiating and engaging in collaborative re-issue programs making best use of each other's areas of expertise..
Rather than setting lawyers loose on them, and withdrawing a high quality product from sale...???

Since when has there ever been any sense in denying potential customers
the opportunity to buy good products that they want to pay for,
for so many decades...?????

Hands up any potential customers who have gone deaf from old age
or dropped dead whilst waiting for good sense to prevail...

06 Dec 18 - 03:08 AM (#3965056)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Cj

Absolutely pfr.

Remember Honest Jon’s put out that licensed compilation of Bulmer acquired stuff, so it Is possible.

Who knows how Bulmer the Younger will proceed. Their Amazon shop sells tat and 2nd Hand CDs. Maybe they’re using this business model to fund a digital release system for their hoardes of Leader etc material.

I doubt it, but, well, we’ll see. I hope I am proved wrong.

07 Dec 18 - 01:13 AM (#3965189)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,giovanni

I just wonder whether Domino tried to buy the rights from Celtic - if so how hard did they try?

And when they found their "best offer" wasn't enough, did they think it was OK to just go ahead anyway, hoping nobody would make a fuss.

Which makes me think that - long before Domino - if it was so important to get these albums released, why didn't someone offer Celtic enough money to obtain the rights - even if they knew it wasn't commercially viable, as presumably Celtic believed.

That all tells me that, in theory, lots of people were in high dudgeon about the situation, but nobody tried to get enough people to put their hands in their pocket to correct it. Instead they just railed over Celtic refusing to invest in a project that would be sure to lose money.

All very folkie........

07 Dec 18 - 05:35 AM (#3965205)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Vic Smith

Tony Rees wrote:-
"You should consult the Musical Traditions discography here"

That was my first port of call, Tony. Actually, I did quite a bit of work with Rod when he was compiling it.

07 Dec 18 - 08:12 AM (#3965236)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Howard Jones

Giovanni, I suggest you take a look at some of the other threads on this topic, which start with this one:

Sorry I don't seem to be able to make blue clicky for this. If you can't find it, look for "The 'Celtic Music/Dave Bulmer' saga"

Bulmer appears to have been a very stubborn man, whose response to criticism was to turn his back rather than engage. One of the many tragedies of this sorry matter is that he could have been a hero - he holds the rights to many important recordings and under different circumstances more of these could have seen the light of day, and both Bulmer and the artists could have made some money. I very much hope his son will see the value, both artistic and monetary, in the catalogue and will be more flexible and, dare I say, business-like, in dealing with it.

07 Dec 18 - 01:34 PM (#3965293)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Tony Rees

Hi Vic Smith,

I hope my "you should consult..." did not come across as an admonition. It was meant as a pointer/guide in case you had not seen it... Anyway it appears that the received wisdom out there is that this is the most complete list available, unless anyone knows otherwise.

My own listing of releases on the Celtic Music label, compiled on wikipedia, is possibly less thorough and still has a few holes, which I am tending to believe represent items never released, but maybe additional information may turn up. Best - Tony

07 Dec 18 - 06:32 PM (#3965343)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Cj


Honest Jon's licensed a (short) album's worth of tracks from him for their compilation 'Never the Same'. By all accounts I have heard, Bulmer was both extremely tricky to deal with and prohibitively expensive to license from.

08 Dec 18 - 11:59 AM (#3965473)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,giovanni

"tricky to deal with and prohibitively expensive to license from"

- sounds like a lot of business people I've had to deal with in my time.

The point I tried to make is that everything has its price. Was the price to high - or was it just that the offer was too low? How much of the commitment of the wishful purchaser was vocal rather than monetary?

I certainly wouldn't ever let a loud rant from a bunch of folkies with no money tell me how to do business.


08 Dec 18 - 01:00 PM (#3965483)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: punkfolkrocker

As one of the younger mudcatters - I'm only just turning 60...!!!???
it seems to me that where the old guard have failed to get on and work out a sensible solution with CM;
maybe now the time is right for a new generation to try to achieve an equitable resolution.

Past arguements, grudges, bitterness, insults, etc, have only exacerbated problems,
and left this hoard of folk music heritage rotting away into oblivion.....

08 Dec 18 - 01:33 PM (#3965486)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Tony Rees

Honest Jon's Trailer compilation (released a mere 13 years ago) details here:

- Tony

08 Dec 18 - 08:27 PM (#3965541)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Steve Shaw

If I win a couple of million on the lottery I'll make Bulmer Jr an offer he can't refuse. Mind you, there'll have to be enough left for my villa in Tuscany and an unlimited lifetime supply of prosecco...

17 Feb 19 - 12:45 PM (#3977373)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Cj

With music so devalued at the moment, the only real value with the Bulmer haul is cultural, but the Bulmer family seem to see it as a goldmine. In a way, Bright Phoebus may be confusing things, its notoriety falsely inflating, perhaps, the view of the potential value of the rest of it.

18 Feb 19 - 05:38 AM (#3977519)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Howard Jones

It's only a goldmine if it's made available for sale. There are certainly albums in the catalogue which would surely sell very well, Bright Phoebus among them. The problem up to now is that Bulmer wouldn't release them. If you were able to track him down (no easy thing) you might be able to purchase a one-off burned copy on CD-R but that is not the same thing.

There are two issues with Bulmer's stewardship of this catalogue. One is cultural - the fact that a large number of important recordings have for practical purposes been made unavailable to the majority of people who might be interested in them.

The other is the claim that as a result of his refusal to publish the original artists may have lost royalties, which in some cases (Nic Jones among them) might have made a significant difference to them. That will depend on the terms of the contracts they originally signed with Bill Leader, and without sight of these it is not clear whether they would be entitled to anything.

Either way, this has been a sorry affair which has damaged folk music and the late Mr Bulmer's own reputation. I still hope that his beneficiaries, who now hold the rights to the catalogue, will take a more enlightened view. They have been keen to protect their rights, which is fair enough, but what are they now going to do with them?

18 Feb 19 - 03:45 PM (#3977636)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: GUEST,Guest - CJB

"I very much hope his son will see the value, both artistic and monetary, in the catalogue and will be more flexible and, dare I say, business-like, in dealing with it."

Not much point if the masters have deteriorated to non-playing mush.

Second best is a dub from a pristine vinyl copy.

Publish and be damned. Let's get the stuff out there in the public domain where it belongs.

18 Feb 19 - 07:39 PM (#3977655)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Howard Jones

Publish and be sued, more like.

CM's press release which Vic Smith quoted a while back suggests they are considering some releases, which can only be a good thing.

10 Feb 21 - 03:16 PM (#4092505)
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus reissued
From: Cool Hand Uke

If there's anyone out there interested in an original vinyl copy of Bright Phoebus on Trailer, St Luke's Hospice, Sheffield currently has one for sale on their eBay site. I'd love it, but it's a bit out of my price range!