James is right. I think things get expensive when an artist has 50 musicians and vocalists, mixing and matching different lineups for different songs.
I know in some cases there's a certain "voice" they want for solos (Bob Mintzer on tenor or Kirk Whalum?), or maybe Vinnie Colaiuta isn't available to do an entire album, so Steve Ferrone, Lil' John Roberts and Josh Dion have to do a few tracks. But sometimes it gets crazy looking at these lineups. I'm not sure changing the arrangement of backup vocalists makes a difference in sound - the presence of Michael McDonald notwithstanding.
An instrumentalist who is not a businessman so to speak might need a label's help in marketing and distribution, but as far as the cost of producing, they can accomplish a lot today even with limited resources.

Honestly you hear the difference. I miss the wow-effect on the low-cost productions.

Honestly, I don't.
I mean, sure, if one song has all-females and another has all-males, that's an obvious difference. But where there's 2 or 3 backing vocalists, and there's a different mix on every song, I'm not hearing a distinction.
Maybe that's because my focus is on the instruments and the background vocalists are just that - background. Maybe it's because the songs are inherently different, and therefore a fair comparison of the contributing voices cannot be made. Either way, I'm not listening that closely to background voices on an otherwise instrumental recording to appreciate any individual vocal distinctions - save for the aforementioned Michael McDonald.

I would not call them "low cost productions" but rather "low quality productions". The wow effect comes from great writing, great playing, great production and then properly recording and mixing it all. And when it comes to jazz recording, big budgets have historically almost never been the issue except as regards using a ton of musicians as Woody pointed out. Personally, I think a unified band concept will almost always make a better jazz record than 50 players recorded in half a dozen studios by 10 different people.

James and Tony said "the big labels seem to be just about distribution" and I agree. Of course there are no big labels that are interested in jazz any more.

What makes anyone think a big label can (or is willing to) make a better recording than an independent artist? Heck ,look what Ken did with "Grace..? Just excellent.

I think there is just a trend in the public consciousness that extreme compression (lack of headroom and complete absence of dynamics) is what sounds good. I even think that for 3 minutes of listening, this method could almost sound more appealing....Radio certainly thinks so, but then jazz is not on the radio. Doh!! The problem is that music is not about consistant loudness, but is instead about creating an emotional response. This emotional response is achieved through many many many things, one of which is peaks and dips in the dynamics of a recording.
The exaggeration of highs in present recordings is due to the fact that bass is so exaggerated in present systems that the treble needs to bleed through a little more.

I am new to this forum, but I would like to hear this artists' music. Would you please give me his URL - Thanks

James

Hi James - I'm talking about Ken Navarro's latest release "Grace of Summer Light." There's a few threads on it on the forum lists. Also, Ken joins in on some of the threads on occasion.

I was really into shredder guitar material back in the 80's and early 90's and I was in love with Shrapnel Records. I thought the owner (Mike Varney) had a tremendous eye & ear for talent, and I gobbled up everything he put out (and genuinely liked it!)

Now, I could care less. If it sounds good to me...I like it, regardless of the label.

Thanks for the info, SH.

Peace
James

Ken Navarro's Meeting Place and Grace of.. are both exceptional efforts, and the sound quality is superb, stunning even. SH, hallelujah for someone who uses very very little compression, right?

However, I think Ken is a rare bird in that respect; he's very meticulous, very picky, and takes complete responsibility for all the control that he has over his music...in other words, it's the only way he CAN do it that would please him. Now, a big label, like Verve, could do it too, but it'd cost a ton, require ten people at least, and probably wouldn't get to market much faster except that since Ken does it all, it will naturally take him longer than a team of sound engineers etc.

The problem with a lot of the indies that I've heard is the lower quality of talent AND production. Not everyone can be a Ken, there's a lot of talented musicians that have no clue how to run a business, and for them a major label may be the only way. Which means a lot of the borderline artists won't get signed, and therefore won't make a living at it. But that's ok in a lot of ways, would cut out a lot of the wannabes and clutter.

Since we're in an imperfect world there are no perfect systems for each style of music to get out there, so I will continue to rely on places like this BBS to find new music. As I said before, not many big labels I would trust to give me my money's worth anymore, and not many indie labels that aren't too narrowly focused, where it all ends up sounding alike too.

It's a challenge these days.
Rather than wade through CD Baby, I usually go to iTunes first, or to the artists' website, like Ken's.

Later
TonyY