|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
100.35.228.251
In Reply to: RE: What record deals are major classical labels offering these days? posted by andy evans on August 11, 2016 at 02:25:47
Artists that are "successful" and get gigs as soloists must have support like agents/lawyers etc. capable of setting up digital sales. Seems to me they would be better off just selling their self-produced recordings on their own label at concerts and on-line at vendors like Amazon. Cd/digital sales are not money makers whether thru a label like DG or the musician's own independent label. So what's the big benefit DG offers (if what you posted is accurate)?
Edits: 08/11/16Follow Ups:
Just for the record, all the releases on my JMR label were funded by me, and zero by the artists.
The "benefit" DG offers is that THEIR name is on the CD, too. DG is not setting up shop to start putting out recordings by anyone who can scrape up the money to get a master file recorded and mastered. (Florence Foster Jenkins, Part 2,134)
One presumes and one presumes that the potential customers will assume that because an artist is being put before the public by the legendary label DG, that there has been a "gatekeeper" function, and that the artist has to be top-drawer, top-shelf, or at least top-something.
If that gatekeeper function breaks down (or is in effect non-existent), then, we can expect two things:
(1) Critics and listeners will eventually catch on; and
(2) Norman Lebrecht will dance the hornpipe nude, on DG's grave.
ATB,
JM
If that is what DG is thinking they are wrong or are just selling proverbial swamp land. I can't imagine any legit classical artist falling for this scam. and it is a scam. All the money in classical music is in playing concerts. Why would any legitimate soloist pay DG 10% of their concert money? There is no way this deal pays off for any artist on any level in the business. No artist sells enough CDs to make it worth them fronting production costs and giving up 10% of their real source of income. And any artist that will sell a substantial number of CDs won't be settling for this deal. I'd say DG is acting like predatory lenders leading up to the housing market collapse.
I doubt DG would be able to convince anyone to both front production or marketing costs AND pay out a portion of concert revenue. As you say, the money is in performing. The recording is mostly a marketing and promotion tool. But if DG sinks production and marketing money into a classical recording, they need to make it back somehow.
Most classical recordings today are very much vanity projects. Our last CD cost us about 60K. Taken at a live performance, this was paid to the recording engineers (Sound Mirror), venue, our union orchestra, artists, and the label itself.
We may sell enough CDs by 2216 to cover our costs but it is important for the image of the company and also helps in other fundraising efforts.
"[I]t is important for the image of the company and also helps in other fundraising efforts." So it isn't just vanity, is it? ;-)
Indeed. One would think that the model would be to make their money back by selling CDs and now days LPs and downloads. If they can't do it that way they will eventually go out of business or at least stop new production. But this new model aint going to hunt. They may sucker a few artists into it but I am sure it will be seen by most for what it is, a very very very bad deal.
Who are these artists paying to work?
But the original post claims DG is getting 10% of their new artists' fees for live performances. And *that dog* won't wont hunt. Any soloists or conductors paying that to DG or Naxos made a dumb ass deal.
Next time, don't bother asking. I'm sure not going to bother to respond.
So why ask me to go on some easter egg hunt when I ask about the actual relevance of something you brought into the discussion? If you have relevant information relating to something you brought into the conversation please free to fill us in. I'm not going looking for it. This dog won't hunt either.
A record label can be a negative for an aspiring artist. DG orchestral recordings have long been on my "do not buy" list because of their multiple microphone mixed down style of recording. Their solo and chamber recordings are OK.
If DG went out of business tomorrow, I'd be delighted.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
SFS recordings are Multi-Mic'd, and sound great, esp recent ones.
The Tempest by Paul Chihara, on Reference Recordings, one of Keith Johnson's first.
Modified Stereo Mic and RtoR recorder.
It came out on CD on 45 RPM LP.
Probably not available anymore.
This would be a mistake in the case of the Shostakovich recordings in Boston.
The former major labels are really only brand names now, cashing in on their past glories. These days, even very small labels can be excellent "gatekeepers", putting out a high quality product even if the musicians are lesser-known.
And I think the "major" labels will have less and less significance, even as brands, in the coming years.
John, with utmost respect, your label seems more a labor of love than a money-generating big business. But there is a tradition for that, too -- as with Everest and Vanguard.
Major labels like DG (or Bluenote in jazz) have been putting out plenty of mediocre or worse recordings for decades, and independent labels have released plenty of excellent music for decades. I guess some people still buy recordings released on particular labels due to a consistent and specific type of music/sound (a la ECM). But assuming what's in the OP is true, even labels' characteristic sound would no longer be in evidence - which of course could be an improvement in some cases.
The advantage big labels had was distribution. But since record/cd stores are damn near non-existent that advantage has been greatly diminished. Anybody can set up digital sales now at various vendors as well as their own sites, and if "classical" is anything like other idioms independent labels can also get their releases reviewed. Doesn't really matter much, since hardly anybody except rock/pop stars make a dime from recordings, especially if self-produced.
Even a hallowed brand name like Deutsche Grammophon is fast losing its impact.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: