RE: [microsound] mix cd's pt 2

[Jonathan Simpson-Bint <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I like the place that Kim is coming from. I know that place well. 

Back at the end of the 90's I was involved in an attempt to produce a
mass market dance music magazine. One of the devices we used to try and
push the thing over ground was the concept of a monthly cover mounted
mix CD. Obviously, UK music magazines have been doing this for years and
many, many artists are involved intimately in recording special tracks,
covers and so on to help maintain what they must all agree is a
generally valuable music magazine eco-system. We hoped something similar
might be able to be fostered here in the US. It seemed simple enough. In
return for the waiving of licencing fees on songs and tracks we'd
duplicate and distribute a monthly mix or sample CD of our Editor's
favorite tunes to some 300-400,000 people via the newsstands. 

We actually believed that labels and artists might pick up on this as a
potential watershed moment when their music might get to be sampled by a
hitherto uninitiated mass of people and they might appreciate the
opportunity that represented. At the time 'dance' or 'electronic' music
was in the ascendant and yet most of the artists that we featured were
still selling relatively few records. Often times this amounted to
<10,000 albums - if they even had an album deal and many did not. 

Sadly, few artists and few managers went for it. Most wanted 400,000
people worth of royalties and few would ever budge from that. To this
day, you will all, I'm sure notice, that US music magazines remain
remarkably disc- free despite the proliferation of discs on music
magazines in just about every other market. 

To be fair, artists are paid magazine disc royalties in many countries
but at reduced rates. It's impractical in the US where magazine sales
efficiencies are typically only about 30-35% compared to 70-80% in say
Europe. Still, it was quite staggering to come face to face with the
cold hard fact of music industry intransigence - even when presented
with logical and reasonable arguments and also to see that the industry
itself has almost no capacity to innovate or even tolerate any kind of
innovative thinking. Even reduced royalties (in lieu of low magazine
sell throughs and poor magazine economics) were flatly refused. 

But what was truly scary... 

I'm talking about major labels and smaller independents here. They were
both easily as bad as one another and, in fact, I'd happily argue that
the smaller labels were by far the most difficult, narrow minded and
greedy of the lot. And while I'm sure that they and their apologists (if
there are any) on this list might argue that it is in the very nature of
independent labels to have to fight their corner and defend themselves
against 'The Man' I would argue that this is no more than a well honed
smoke screen employed to cover a niche of the business that is every bit
as morally bankrupt as the establishment that they would like to see
themselves as diametrically opposed to. 

For the most part the majors were simply too badly run to steal our
money, cheat us on things, lie about agreements, go back on their word
and be deliberately and magnificently rude. 

There were a handful of people who were genuinely enthusiastic, warm,
helpful, honest and a pleasure to deal with and these people clearly saw
the world through a community lense where a more holistic approach was
appropriate but there were plenty - believe me, plenty - of people who
would have sold their Grandmother's in a heartbeat and did not give a
f*** about community or, when you really got down to it, music very much
either. 

That's my $0.02. 


-----Original Message-----
From: michael trommer [mailto:trommer@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 1:23 PM
To: microsound
Subject: Re: [microsound] mix cd's pt 2

> protecting your IP is good (FYI: Silent vigorously protected their
> trademark/logo -- we had to by law) but working as a community (i.e.,
> sharing) can open up new ways of doing business/co-evolving through
> cooperation...rather they made enemies of us and alienated a potential
> promotional ally...

agreed. as long as no presumptions/shortcuts are made and everyone has
given
consent, which seems to more or less be your point.

i guess i'm sensitive to the semantics of the issue because i've been
misled
or downright screwed by failing to heed such semantical
nitpicking...believed in the spirit of an idea only to be screwed by the
legalese once any $ becomes involved.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org