With the exeption of a recent Oscar winner, silent movies tend to be less acceptable, to the buying public, than talkies. True cinema lovers may still revere them but even classics like "Birth of a Nation" and "The Gold Rush" have lost their popular appeal. Classic recordings are reissued with enhanced sound and fidelity because, without those "improvements", 2012 sales would be disappointing. Until I retired, I did not have the luxury of recording, or performing, for art's sake. Thus, my views are skewed by experience. I assume, that an artist makes a recording to make money or, at least, to not lose money. Those performers, who sing for their suppers, soon learn the hard facts of what can be a hard life. Recording for purely artistic reasons is not unlike performing for "exposure". (The late blues singer, Dave Van Ronk, said, "Exposure is what a folksinger dies from while sleeping in doorways.") I do not deny that many, if not most, CDs are released for reasons that are not commercially based. I salute them but I can't serve them. My column serves the needs of artists who measure their success in units sold. This does not mean that they have gone the way of all Rock. Trad has a limited audience, for sure, but that doean't justify further limiting by less than the best recording process, possible. The CDs I reccomend must pass the gauntlet of my ear and my point of view. As a review is a dandy introduction to a new market, I would think that an artist, with a product to sell, would keep that in mind. I listen to every submission and, fortunately, I receive enough good ones to never have to print a negative review. This thread is my only mention of the less than satisfactory ones I hear. I offer it to serve the admirable artists who put their money where their mouths are.
|