Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Roger the Skiffler
Date: 20 Apr 12 - 07:12 AM

I see from the Spring 2012 issue of the MU journal The Musician (I read it for the centerfold) that Celtic Music/CM Distribution are on their watchlist (ie check with MU before having any dealings with them).

RtS

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: mikecardenas
Date: 20 Jul 10 - 01:46 AM

Tradition does not require technology, it will exist with or without. The same white guy who felt he was hip "gifting" the world with race records is no different than the modern white guy who feels he's doing the world a delusional favor of hipness by alerting everyone to allegedly hidden Blues.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Reinhard
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 02:35 PM

There is another site on blogspot.com which has just ripped about 20 Steeleye Span CDs up the the most current one. I can't imagine that musicians and label will be happy about theit loss of income.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Phil Edwards
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 03:30 PM

And if you haven't got any digital photos, back up your documents!

Just over a year ago I accidentally moved my 'Tunes' folder to my 'Tunes' folder. OS X didn't like that, and I ended up with an empty 'Tunes' folder. Won't do that again, I thought. Must do a full system backup some time, I thought. Two months later, I accidentally moved my 'Documents' folder to my 'Documents' folder. Three years of letters, articles, essays, and god knows what, up in smoke.

I now use a version of OS X which backs up automatically several times a day. I recommend it.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Chairman Miao
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 11:59 AM

For Howard's son, the backup for his music collection is in the cloud. :-) (And on the hard disks of his friends.)

For older people: backup, backup, backup!!!   Even if you aren't downloading music files: back up your digital photograph directories!!!

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Goose Gander
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 10:23 AM

Fitting end to this discussion, Howard.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Howard Jones
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 05:13 AM

Just to add a postscript, my son's hard disk has crashed and he's lost his entire music collection. Just one of the reasons I prefer CDs.

Of course, he's not too bothered since he hadn't paid for most of it...

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 08:01 PM

Cap'n,
The revival I knew was built on the desire to share - MacColl, Seeger, Tawney, McGinn, Ed Pickford, John Pole, Leon Rossleson, Pete Smith........
I don't begrudge a penny of the money due to songwriters where there is money to be made - more power to their elbows; but all too often the (c) mark is a barrier to the songs being sung.
Place the dead hand of 'ownership' on the songs and they never will become folk in a thousand years - if that's what you want!
Jim Carroll.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 01:23 PM

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:02 PM

"freedom to starve."
Tsk-tsk - please don't overstate Cap'n.
I respect your position as a professional - but without somebody having shared something with you, you wouldn't have anything to be professional with.
Jim Carroll
no Jim, you miss the point, some of these rare old albums contain modern songs written by the singers, its not just about source singers or revival singers singing traditional material.
so there are professionals who do not sing any traditional material,they sing modern materialwritten in a traditional style[using certain modes etc] there are also professionals who do a mixture,they have a right to have a say abou ttheir own material.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 10:25 AM

Mmmmm, don't forget that you have just over 7 days to submit your tax return to your hideous labour government! With all this pontification going on, you might just forget, and you don;t want the £100 late filing penalty now do you???

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Howard Jones
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 10:07 AM

Ralphie's right, it's probably time to put this one to bed. I'm pleasantly surprised this has managed to reach well over 300 posts, on a controversial topic, without degenerating into the usual fight. It just shows it can be done!

Actually, my opinion has changed, or at least shifted a bit. I'm now a bit more open-minded to some of the potential benefits, although I remain sceptical that small-scale record producers will see much of these, in particular the part-timers (who make up an important part of the UK folk scene, especially among the dance bands). They mainly rely on selling CDs at gigs and don't have the margins to absorb too many downloads.

However, this brave new world isn't going to go away and we have to adapt to it. Time will tell.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 04:30 AM

Of course dear fellow!
As I've said, I'll wait til the 3 CD set comes out first. So, probably later in the year.
(Will probably re-jig the whole bloody thing before then anyway!).
Atrists? never satisfied Pah!

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: the Folk Police
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 04:16 AM

Are you going to let us know the wheres and the whens and the how muches of it when you know, Ralphie?

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 03:04 AM

For once Jim No you're not....(Joke Joke!)
It's always interesting to hear about your activities in Ireland. It's not a tradition that I play, or know much about. Loved the story about the singer thinking he had to pay you to record him!
(I do have some connection with Irish music though. I did a short tour with Packie Byrne in his home county of Donegal many moons ago.
I'm sure you'll be pleased to know that he's still with us. Remember going for an Indian meal with him once. He insisted on bacon and eggs....and got it!)
Serious thread drift here, sorry.
But, maybe it's time to let this topic (no pun!) go to the great Mudcat archive in the sky.
I very much doubt if anyone will change their opinions. But, it's been an interesting journey. (and didn't turn into a full blown war for once!)
Ralphie
(You can buy my CD when it comes out if you want to.)

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 08:46 AM

"You know, Jim, I really appreciate all these stories you have to illustrate your points."
Thanks T.I.P. and I appreciate being given the opportunity to pass them on.
Nice to know I'm not boring the pants off everyone.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: kendall
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 08:36 AM

I see these free downloads as something like stealing an apple from an outdoor fruit stand.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: brezhnev
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 08:00 AM

Good heavens, SO'P! You're Sedayne, who does that great version of Harp Song of the Dane Women on YouTube. Well I never.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,BoB_Nhjk
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 07:49 AM

I guess that ther must be some distinction between various forms of copywrited material. recordings are sacred. But it is OK to publish my copywrited lyrics on DT even though they can be purchased in book stores. No need to buy the sheet music. You can get it here for free..

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 05:33 AM

I've recently done a 'Folk' album which is only available on Myspace; ten tracks with lots of notes & graphics to contextualise the overall concept of the thing. There is no hard copy, and it doesn't cost anything to listen to it, other than a little time. This album is called Jesus at the Zoo.

My main Myspace page (see HERE) is where I feature my basic CV and other details with a view to general networking rather than self-promotion as such. Here you can listen to tracks in full which are part of my ongoing exploration of music. Right now - amongst other things - you can hear my post-revival take on The Rolling of the Stones, an improvisation on the Black Sea Fiddle field-recorded in a remote medieval Cornish church last summer, a recitation of a Middle-English poem about the Hare self-accompanied on a medieval harp, and the singing of the ballad King Orfeo self-accompanied on a Tibetan Singing Bowl. I doubt this music will ever be available as part of a album - thus it operates simply as document, glimpses & snatches of an ongoing and constantly evolving process.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Stuart
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 05:28 AM

The slowly developing www.raretunes.org resource is an attempt to address some of the challenges of a facility to share Scottish music through the web. Developed, funded (costs are very low) and maintained by a small group of individuals it demonstrates what can be done. See FAQ pages for technical information. The system is easily reproduceable and is scaleable. It archives material in the highest quality possible but allows output at lower MP3 for the popular portable players. As work is voluntary and unfunded the archive is developing slowly as time allows. There is a considerable amount of digitised material awaiting upload and even more still in various analogue forms from 78 rpm to compact cassette. The slow pace allows research in parallel with the addition of new material and users have now become a major source of recordings and information.

Many musicians here in Scotland have "shoebox" archives of personal recordings made throughout their musical lives (sessions, rehearsals, house ceilidhs etc), others have "out of print" recordings which they want out there for one reason or another.

It's not the answer to everyone's dreams but points some ways forward for those who wish to offer otherwise hidden music assuming matters of agreement or legitimacy are addressed. Are there other similar initiatives?

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 04:25 AM

T.I.P Thank you appreciate your thoughts!
There are a couple of clips on "ONMVoice"...Actually I think theres a blue clicky nearer the top of this thread!
I'm holding back on releasing the CD until later in the year, because there is going to be a 3 CD boxed set called Duet International coming out in the summer. (at the last look there are possibly 43 different artists on it!),
Which brings us neatly full circle. It is the third in a series featuring all 3 types of concertina, Anglo, English and now Duet.
Lavish book to go with it, with lots of details about the musicians.
God knows what it cost to make. And I've no idea if they have made a profit. (seems rather unlikely!)
And the Duet one is even less likely!
Anyway, I'm holding back, so that they can get as much money as possible.
Maybe when I do release it, I'll do a My Space or similar, with some sound snippets on...But not the whole thing!
(Mind you, I'll have to get some youngster to set it up. I can only just about type!)
I'm happy for people to hear the odd 30 seconds to see if they like it.
If they do, then they can buy it...
Maybe you're right, and theres a whole collection of Duet players in Russia, just waiting for it...Who knows.
But, that sounds like a fair compromise!
And. I agree with thoughts re busking. I'm happy to play for anyone, but, on my terms. I regularly share my playing in sessions for no money at all. But releasing a CD is a big thing when you're on a pension.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,T.I.P.
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:45 PM

You know, Jim, I really appreciate all these stories you have to illustrate your points. It brings in fresh perspectives to the discussion. I also appreciate hearing about your situation Ralphie, and it gives me pause for thought. It also makes me want to hear some of your squeezebox playing, which is another thing I've only begun to appreciate since finding folk music blogs. But I also think its very limiting to define your niche so narrowly. The whole point in blogs is that specialized music gets distributed to many more people. So you may only have 1000 people in England who would go for it, but as has been pointed out, Lizardson is Japanese, other contributors to the blog are from Italy, France, Holland, and the other British Folk blog that I know of is run by a Russian and receives mostly Russian visitors. So you may in fact have quite a larger market than you think, and if you embrace the potential that the internet offers, it could be a larger market still. Bluegrass was mostly an old-folks thing for a long time. Than the Cohen brothers got a whiff of it, used it in a movie, and now there's loads of performers, fans, festival-goers, and yes: album-buyers in the younger generation. If you want to target younger people and expand your audience, the internet is a pretty great way to do it.

As for the response to my 'control vs freedom' comment, I'm intrigued by how much anger it has drawn. Of course I threw it in there to provoke a bit of unorthodox thought. But interesting that so many equate releasing control with starving. So far in my life, the times when I've given up control over my life-situation or gone into situations in which I had little control have been the times when I was most happy, learned the most, and was given the most opportunities. In short, the times in which I was most alive. And when I was doing what was right for me, the money always came. I never had to go grabbing after it. Bit of an esoteric principle for a folk forum, I suppose, but let me give an example to illustrate:

When you walk down a pedestrian mall or somewhere, and there's people on the streets trying to make money, who do you give to: the beggar who's shaking their cup of change at you, or the busker who's freely giving away their talent (music, mime, whathaveyou)? When you give without expecting anything in return (in other words, when you release control), people are warmed, and they tend to give in return. In my own experience busking, I've found that when I was playing because I really wanted or needed the money, I would get next-to-nothing. When I was playing just for the love of it and really trying to share my love for the music with whoever was walking by, people would take note, and stop and listen, and leave me a fiver or more. Neediness pushes people away, love and trust draw them in. Just like in any relationship. If you try to control it you kill the magic. But that's just my personal experience, and maybe it's a bunch of '60s hogwash' (wouldn't know, wasn't alive then!).

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 03:54 AM

As I said back there, many people now favour the loss-less FLAC format for file sharing & downloads.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 02:38 AM

Just a sad tecchie point Howard.
As we are discussing "archive" recordings.
You're quite right to say that having converted to MP3 format, you can't put the bits back again.
But, I think that it is unlikely that anyone would notice the fact that "wav" files had been converted to "MP3" files (considering the original source might be anything, cassette, 78, or even a wax cylinder!)
That doesn't alter the discussion as to how and when they should be released or uploaded, I just put my BBC hat on there for a second! Now, back to the subject in hand, (which has been illuminating).

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:02 PM

"freedom to starve."
Tsk-tsk - please don't overstate Cap'n.
I respect your position as a professional - but without somebody having shared something with you, you wouldn't have anything to be professional with.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: The Sandman
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:19 PM

But letting go of control is always a hard thing. Until you realize that it actually sets you free.[QUOTE][thats a real piece of 1960s hogwash]
What a load of donkeys plonkers, freedom, freedom to starve.
oh and apropos of the music industry , I sincerely wish people like Dave Bulmer had never got involved in the folk scene.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:18 PM

Sorry Howard, maybe I am misreading you - I thought we had moven on to voluntarily sharing recordings on line.
My mistake
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Howard Jones
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:00 PM

Goodness, Jim, you seem determined to take issue with everything I say! By "naively" I meant precisely those situations where some collectors did take advantage, and particularly those where singers may have been persuaded to sign away their own rights in the recordings. I have only anecdotal evidence that this happened, you are far more knowledgeable than me.

I think I was agreeing with you. However I simply thought that this issue is a distraction from the subjects in question - particularly as it seemed to be offered by SOP as a justification for ignoring copyright in commercial recordings.

As for "possessiveness", I fully respect your own approach to the field recordings which you made. However I don't think there is anything wrong in making commercial recordings, neither do I think it unreasonable that someone who invests money in a commercial product should hope to recover it from sales. No one would think it surprising that someone who makes cars or furniture or who fixes a leaking pipe should expect to get paid - why should it be be any different for musicians and record producers?

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:26 AM

"The point I was making was that there is a difference between them voluntarily (if perhaps naively)"
Why naively, for god's sake? The songs were freely given to them, and they placed no monetary value on them whatever; nor were they in any way possessive about them. A certain degree of pride when they heard them sung by somebody else, yes, but no more than that.
As Walter Pardon said when he heard of two folkie superstars squabbling over which of them would record one of his songs; "They're not my songs, they're everybody's". The ones you mentioned that were paid, received remuneration for their labour, time and inconvenience - they weren't selling their music (even the ones that composed).
The fact that (a tiny few) collectors marketed the recordings deliberately to make money was down to their predatory nature alone.
One of the great sea-changes in the revival (a fairly recent one, in my experience) is this deadening possessiveness. I honestly cannot remember it being a feature even up to twenty years ago - strange, and very sad!!! If it had been around when the revival kicked off half a century ago we wouldn't have had a pit to hiss in - and wouldn't be communicating with each other now.
I have never encountered the slightest difficulty in passing on our recordings to whoever we wished to - we took, and were given the songs totally on trust, on the understanding that they wouldn't die out, and passing them on was an essential part of that - that was the only 'binding contract' as far as we, and the singers were concerned.
I think the legal position is (never had the occasion to consult it fully) that the collectors own the recordings they made, but we have always treated them as the property of the singers.
Some time in the late seventies we were recording a singer named Martin Howley, here in Clare. We arrived here to learn that he was ill, so we drove up to see him.
We were chatting and he asked, "Do you have your tape recorder with you?"
Pat protested that we had heard he was ill and had come to see how he was and spend a little time with him.
His reply still brings a lump to the throat; "I'm a poor man; I have nothing to leave but my songs; I want you to have them".
He gave us another ten songs and died of cancer of the eye later that year.
Naive country-man or what?
Martin Reidy, an old bachelor living on his own not far from where we now live, said to us once, "I'm pleased that you started taking down my songs. I was so worried that they would die along with me that I started to try and teach them to Topsy" (his mongrel dog).
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:03 AM

Many downloads these days are in FLAC format, which is described as lossless. I don't find MP3s too different from WAVs - but I also like the natural warmth of acoustic wind-up gramophones...

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: zozimus
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 10:46 AM

Many thanks for that Howard. I'm not sure if my ears can tell the difference, but I'll do some tests. I had bought some Martin Carthy MP3s and later got a present of his boxed collection, so there are some tracks I have in both formats. I also buy CDs and just added Harry Cox's double Cd to my collection and again can do a comparison there. However, as I am interested in learning songs rather than having a state of the art sound system, I think the quality is O'K.
Regardless of what format I use, herself stills says" Can you not turn that Down"
                                     Zozimus

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Howard Jones
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 10:22 AM

Zozimus, the quick answer to your question is "no". MP3s are compressed files, they reduce file size by losing a lot of the data. Downloaded MP3s are usually at 128 kbps, compared with an audio CD at 1.4 Mbps they are losing about 90% of the original data. Hopefully this is the less important data, but it still affects the quality - "near CD" as opposed to "CD quality". It's good enough to play back on PC speakers or ipod headphones, but makes a difference on good equipment.

Burning an MP3 to CD won't put back the missing data.

Another reason why I prefer to buy CDs.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 10:09 AM

Hi Zozimus.
I didn't know that Topic were flogging the booklets seperately.
Good for Topic.
So, (postage apart, depending on where in the world you live) The CD set costs the same-ish as the downloads (plus posted booklets).
Why not save all those hours of downloading every CD?
If you want it, buy it!
Saves you the hassle of buying the strange shaped CD boxes to fit the books in. (if you can find them)
My set sits neatly on my shelf. I can pick one to listen to, and the book comes in the box. Convenient, methinks.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Howard Jones
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 10:04 AM

Jim, I was not deriding the "lack of effort" from source singers, nor their creative input. The point I was making was that there is a difference between them voluntarily (if perhaps naively) offering their songs to a collector who then exploits them financially without sharing the benefit, and a modern musician who has invested thousands of pounds to create a musical product which others are then offering for nothing.

As you say, the motivation for most source singers was to preserve the music. However, I believe I'm correct in thinking that they (or their estates) will own the copyright in their performances, and the collectors own the copyright in the recording. I suspect that these are obstacles to making these as freely available as we might like.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: zozimus
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 09:33 AM

A number of people have mentioned the inferior quality of MP3s as compared to CD. However, it is possible to "burn" MP3s to CD. My question is does this process really give the same quality as a purchased CD ? I cited way up this tread the relative cost fo buying Voice of the People set by download as compared to the CD package. What was not factored in was the cost of postage, which can be excessive. Meanwhile, the kind people in Topic have sold be a full set of Booklets for £10.
                                     Zozimus

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 08:33 AM

"a bit different from making other people's creations available without their consent."
Was anybody proposing this as an ongoing project? I can't see any objection to people who wish to do so donating their material voluntarily on a site.
"it seems hypocritical to complain on the one hand how badly source singers were exploited by some collectors, and yet on the other to want free access to recordings of those singers."
Having arrived at the present situation it seems the logical step to make those recordings freely available rather than leave them in private hands. Virtually all the singers are now dead, so the benificiaries to the ripped off material are the present 'owners'.
In our experience, the driving force behind ALL of the source singers we recorded was that the songs should not die with them; financial rewards NEVER entered into the equasion.
The fact that it wasn't too far up this thread that you were pointing out the 'lack of effort' on the part of source singers compared to the hard work and expense put in by today's folkies, seems more than a little hypocritical to me.
".....far lower quality"
Don't see this; certainly not with song anyway. Present-day technology has put a far higher standard of reproduced sound at our disposal with far less effort, than we were ever able to achieve. Personally, I have always avoided studio-based performances like the plague - people can decided for themselves on the end result based on the recordings we have issued. I think we are talking here about making material available in order to increase access to it for other performers/potential audiences rather than swish, professionally produced packages.
"but they knew their worth and generated significant income from music".
A few did, but that certainly didn't stop them from passing their music on freely. I never once met a singer who refused to sing unless he/she was paid.
The Travellers sang in the streets and pubs, sold 'ballads' (songsheets) at the fairs and markets, and yet, quite seperate from the 'business' side of their activities, were an essential part of our oral traditions. Without them we would have lost a sizeable chunk of our ballad repertoire.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 06:14 AM

Howard.
Couldn't have put it better myself. And I'm not offended in the least! In fact I'm quite flattered that you think 1000 people would want to buy my little offering, or indeed download it. (I can only afford to press 250 copies anyway!)
As for transferring archive stuff to the Web...I stated earlier that to do it properly takes an enourmous amount of time, energy, and money, even if you can find decent machines left for the initial transfer,Re-Equing,Noise cancellation,Editing,Digitising, etc.
And it all has to be documented as well, with atributions as to where and when it was recorded otherwise there is no point in doing it at all.
And before that, you acually have to get the trust of all the various owners in the first place. Most of whom are very protective.
I would love to see a subscription download site with everything from wax cylinders onwards available for all. Wonderful idea.
And the big question, having done all that. How many people would subscribe? 100? 1000? Certainly not in the numbers that would download the latest X Factor single thats for sure.
And as a member of the senior generation. I can't abide downloads. I would much rather buy a CD, with interesting background notes on the artists, either from the artist themselves, or, if it's an archive recording, from a reputable company such as Topic, or Musical Traditions, or Veteran.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Howard Jones
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 05:24 AM

A lot of what TIP says is attractive, at first reading. But when you go into it in more detail, it's less straightforward.

Comparison with Wikipedia is misleading. There, people are creating new writing, and choosing to make it freely available. That's great. However it's a bit different from making other people's creations available without their consent.

It's easy to talk about "just making archives available". The reality is that these are held by many different institutions and on a variety of recording media, some of them obsolete and many of them fragile. Many of them will require specialist equipment, and expert handling and processing, to convert them to digital media. Hardly a job for bloggers. Web hosting is the least of the problems, and the cost.

I agree that more could be done to widen access to archives which have already been digitised. However, it seems hypocritical to complain on the one hand how badly source singers were exploited by some collectors, and yet on the other to want free access to recordings of those singers.

As for CDs - many of these have limited appeal to a small niche market. With respect to Ralphie, the number of people interested in his recordings of McCann Duet Concertina playing, even by someone with his reputation, is likely to be limited. If the potential total market for a CD is 1000 buyers, then 1000 downloads is going to eat into that significantly, even if a good number of them would never have bought the physical album.

The downloading culture is creating a two-tier market for music - those who understand it and have access to it (mostly the younger generation) and those (mostly older) who don't understand it and don't know how to access it, and who both rely on buying CDs and actually prefer that medium. The problem for folk music is that most of its market currently is in the second group. So far I don't see a vast upsurge of interest from the younger group.

It seems to me we're going to end up with far more music of far lower quality. More recordings are being made without professional equipment and without professional expertise, and without the editorial filtering by a record company that weeds out the total dross. It's then published as low-quality MP3s. Ironically, there's now so much music out there that finding the good stuff is harder than ever.

Finally, I think TIP has a romantic view of the "olde days". Plenty of traditional musicians were professionals - perhaps not full-time, but they knew their worth and generated significant income from music, whether in cash or kind. Musicians like the Bulwers, Scan Tester and Billy Bennington were busy most weekends playing around their local areas, usually for cash or at least for beer.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 05:04 AM

Why do folkies so loathe people who only want to make a small living out of a rare skill that they've worked hard to learn, to give pleasure to others?

Who are you on about there, 'Nacious? Social Workers? Teachers? Prostitutes? Plummers? Nurses? Heating engineers? Nuclear Physicists? Research Scientists? Librarians? Lap dancers? I do not loathe any of these people, nor yet begrudge them remuneration for the essential service they provide to society as a whole. Same goes for Musicians, even Folk Musicians, although there the avenues of qualification & payment are less structured - something perhaps the Folk Degree Course will put an end to, making sure only those suitably qualified might be considered eligible for Professional Status. Otherwise - I'm sure even the odd Nuclear Physicist or Prostitute might retire to their DAW at the end of their working day to lay down another track for that forthcoming CD-R album which they'll sell at their up & coming club and festival bookings. And who knows - if people take it to their hearts (shock horror) it might find itself on a blog available for free-download by those who would never have heard it anyway, and who, if they feel moved to do so, might be moved to buy the official product, or not, in which case - no harm done. So, who is being loathed here I wonder? And loathed by whom? Unless it's you, 'Nacious - loathing yourself, which would seem very likely judging from the bitterness of your recent posts here.

Might I suggest you read what is being said (especially by TIP) and commune with the general spirit of celebration with which I began this thread. Celebration is the heart & soul of music anyway; it is this that moves people to listen, to buy, to download, and for the whole thing to take such a vibrant life of its own. Nothing on this earth can kill music - just upset a few malcontents who have misunderstood the truly folkloric nature of the download-culture and see every free download a loss of potential earnings rather than evidence of someone actually wanting to listen to what they do.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:34 AM

Interesting to compare the attitudes of the last two posters with those of the people we got our repertoire of folk songs from - it's why some songs became folk and others never shall be.
In the 1970s somebody gathered together and published a book of political songs without asking the writers' permission. I was one of the people who protested at what I considered the editor's bad manners in doing so, but was told by MacColl (the bogey-man of folk song), "It would have been nice to have been asked, but there is no point in writing new songs if to don't want them circulated and sung".
Thanks for a most thoughtful and painstaking contribution Guest T.I.P. - a great deal to think about.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,Greame
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:43 AM

As a musician I think thus:

It's interesting, all these learned people saying how good it is for musicians that there music is given away free, yet it feels SO bad and it's felt bad for years.

If it's so good for us musicians, when is it going to feel good? Or look positive? Or even ambivalent?

I suspect it's not really good at all for musicians, but instead good for people who want their music for free. People, who it seems, are extremely good at deluding themselves over their real motives.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Folknacious
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 08:23 PM

letting go of control is always a hard thing. Until you realize that it actually sets you free.

Free to live in a cardboard box in a doorway on the Strand on a cold winter's night. That's what these money-grubbing musicians deserve, ay?

Why do folkies so loathe people who only want to make a small living out of a rare skill that they've worked hard to learn, to give pleasure to others?

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST,TIP
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 06:40 PM

"So you really think a site like Max Hunter can be put up and kept running for 'next to nothing'? What an insult the people who make that site available to you and me and anyone else who wants to dive in and test the waters. Do you think those songs transcribed themselves? Fact is, there are thousands and thousands of songs, ballads, etc. collected from traditional American musicians available on Max Hunter as well as the Wolf Folkore Collection, American Memory (Library of Congress). This music is 'freely available' as you say thanks to the time and money contributed by public and private sources. But I have a hard time believing that the 'everything should be free' types will be willing to pay for something they would rather have for, well, free."

"My motive in raising the question was to suggest that cash needs to be raised to preserve and make available the songs and music of people most of whom are now dead."

You would think that to make the most comprehensive encyclopedia in the world, with entries on every conceivable public figure and relevant event in history, in a multitude of different languages, would take a hellofalotofmoney too. But Wikipedia happened. How? A mission to make things free and a lot of people who were prepared to give a little bit of their time and energy away for free because they believed in the cause and because they had access to work with material that was 'creative commons', in other words, copyright-free. Now, they do have to raise some money from time to time, which as far as I've seen has been entirely donation-based. But the great bulk of the work that's done to create the content of the thing is done on a donation-basis. If the huge archives of field recordings were just made available, then you wouldn't need to pay any transcribers, because everyone who's interested in traditional music could go to the site, listen to some bits, do some transcribing, maybe correct someone else's transcription, etc. Costs of webhosting are pretty small, and since they would only need to increase when the user-base increased, it probably would not be too difficult to get lots of small donations to cover the cost, or to get a grant. The FolkWikiArchive. Or something. Think about it.

The point I already made is, "who would do all this work of digitizing, transcribing, categorizing, reviewing, and uploading for free?" - the people who already are: bloggers. Just give them the tools and the raw materials and their love of the music will be more than enough to suffice for payment. Like the old man and the bullock.

The whole problem of the locked up archives is that they're run in a top-down fashion, with tightly controlled access, totally contrary to the spirit of folk music, which is democratic and center-less. But I think we all agree that those locked archives are a travesty. I'm just proposing that the solution may not require as much cash, or expenditure of any one person's energy, and in fact it would be more in the folk spirit if it was a Wiki-project to which every interested and informed person could contribute.

As for the issue of "I already shelled out lots of cash for my 500 cds, now who's going to buy them"

Well, one thing that I would like to point out is that often in any sort of media industry (be it music, book publishing, etc.), as much or more money is spent on advertising and marketing the product than on the physical product. It doesn't matter if you're in a niche market; it can be marketed. "Esoteric Blues-Raga-Fingerpicking Guitar-Soli" is a pretty niche market too, but it's grown explosively in the past few years, largely thanks to new media and forward-thinking labels (ok, it's still small but the good musicians are making a solid living and the fans are passionately into it. what more could you want?).

Sharity blogs have created niche audiences, visit daily, and the bloggers do the marketing for free. That's a hell of an opportunity, don't you think?

Also, with downloads the whole idea is that the physical product isn't changing hands. So right now you have your 500 cds. If 1000 people download your album for free from a blog, you still have those 500 cds, which you can continue to sell at gigs (those who go to your gigs now aren't going because of the blog, so they'll still buy your stuff, and those who found out about you from the blog may not buy that cd, but they may buy others (or that one, out of guilt if nothing else! yes, it does happen...), or at least you've attracted more paying audience members to your gigs, and earned more fans who will continue to watch you and listen to you and be potential future customers. And you got all that second group for free.

So yes, there is 'potential sales loss' in downloads. But there's also 'potential sales gain'. And yes, in a morally just, ordered, world you should be able to decide whether the gains outweigh the losses. But the world is not ordered according to morals. It's constantly evolving, and we must evolve with it.

And look. I know it hurts when you've shelled out money and time for something to sell and then can't make back your money. My dad is a recording engineer. Since the recession, his clients have almost totally dried up. It's happening to all the recording studios. We know that people are still recording music and buying music, but they're going to the studios less and less. Because they're setting up their own home-recording setups. And I'm not talking about just bedroom amateurs. Professional musicians are too.

Apple distributes Garageband for free on all it's computers. No one has questioned their right to do that even though it's driving many competent, highly-qualified professionals who have invested TENS of THOUSANDS of dollars on their recording setup, out-of business. So my dad's business has fallen out from under him. Is he mad? No. Frustrated? Perhaps, but mostly he's looking into other avenues: live sound, narration, etc. to apply his talents. It may be that he becomes principally an audio consultant: people shift from paying him for his technology to paying him for his experience with acoustics and his impeccable ear. The cultural landscape is changing: technology and reproduceable objects are becoming more and more widespread and accessible, so the premium is shifting to other areas: expertise, appeal, and the-art-of-getting-noticed.

Like the article said, victorian candle-makers must have been pretty pissed at Edison. But technology changed the world, without asking anyone or apologizing, like it always does, and everyone had to adapt if they wanted to survive. Did the candle-making industry die out? No, it just changed. Folk music (as an oral tradition) almost died out because of the recording industry. Composers almost died out because of the recording industry. 100 years ago, 90% of Americans played an instrument. Today, 10% do. Conversely, the advent of recording shifted the importance of music from the composer to the performer, and in the process created the profession of the virtuoso. Being the best in the world does no good if you can only be heard by the people in your district, or wherever you happen to travel. The recording industry, merely by existing, has changed us from being mostly-musicians to being mostly-audiences, which in a sense is completely contrary to the spirit of folk music.

And if you look at folk music, in the olde days, very rarely did people try to make a profession at it. They entertained themselves, and continued the traditions because of what the music gave them, rather than the money they got from it. And no, I'm not trying to paint a picture of money-grubbing folkies; I know you're not in it for the money. But the music is totally rooted in the daily lives and culture of the people (usually farming), and when one becomes a professional musician, you're no longer living that daily life that you sing about. And while that doesn't disqualify you from the profession of folksinger, it does create a disconnect that must be reconciled.

Of course, going back still further, there's the tradition of the bards. They had very little wealth in terms of possessions but lived a good life, had plenty of power and influence, and were well-received and taken care of. But to be qualified as a bard, in olde Ireland at least, you had to spend 19 years of study first, which included memorizing and recounting the epic myths word-for-word, and spending an entire year in silence so that you could earn the right to use words for your people, and to exert the power and influence you'd have. So there weren't that many, and the ones that did qualify were justly looked after by their society, because they were recognized as being vitally valuable.

And that here, is the essence of my point. If folk music is relevant for people today (and I hope it is), it needs to be seen to be relevant and necessary (and enjoyable and entertaining and profound etc). Once it has that, it will be supported. So the question is not, "how can I prevent people from downloading my music so that I can sell some cds to raise some money" or "how can we get a bunch of money to do this archive thingy", but rather "how can we make traditional music and musicians valued by a culture which is becoming increasingly saturated with technology and instant-gratification-culture, and is evermore amnesiac and disconnected from the land and traditional culture" because once that's achieved the money issue will take care of itself: when people value something and then that thing is struggling to exist, they'll support it. Or, on a simpler, more immediate basis you might just say "woah, the marketplace is changing. I'd better figure out how I can be a part of the boom rather than being swept aside, and quick!"

And if you can't do that... then, well, I suggest you take up gardening, plant some fruit trees and get involved creating local resilience, because what with the climate and economy and technology and everything, there's beginning to be loads of unexpected changes, affecting everyone in society, and the more resilient you are the more prepared to take those changes you'll be. And play music on the side, to enrich your and others' lives as it always has (at which point people downloading your music, causing 'potential sales loss' but no actual physical loss to you will become totally inconsequential, and in fact preferable, because more people will be enjoying it). Besides, I just think working on the land and folk music go hand in hand, don't you?

But letting go of control is always a hard thing. Until you realize that it actually sets you free.

-T.I.P.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 03:29 PM

"no one is asking how we make up for not paying Joseph Taylor, Harry Cox et al are they?"
I agree entirely, but faced with the situation as it stands at present the question at hand is what do we do about it now.
We were never in a position to pay our singers and we made that clear from day 1. What we agreed with them was that any money arising from the recordings we made should be theirs by right, and as far as this was possible we stuck to that.
We also agreed with them - in writing - that in the case of us not being able to contact them, ( particularly the situation with the Travellers) the money should be ploughed back into the music somehow.
We have honoured this agreement by donating all proceeds to The National Sound Archive in London or The Irish Traditional Music Archive in Dublin.
In some ways it is an academic point as any money arising from the use of recordings has been so pitifully small that it didn't really matter - I think you'll find that the avarage punter would be more inclined to buy Martin Carthy singing The Barley Straw rather than Harry Cox - the same goes for Christie Moore's Well Below The Valley rather than John Reilly's.
My motive in raising the question was to suggest that cash needs to be raised to preserve and make available the songs and music of people most of whom are now dead.
None of the singers we ever recorded ever raised the question of payment; we had to do that.
The attitude of singers we met was summed up by Irish broadcaster Cairán MacMathúna's story of recording an old Kerry fiddle player for one of his programmes.
After the session, MacMathúna said, "There will be a recording fee for this".
The old man thought for a minute and said, "I don't have any money in the house at the moment, but I'm taking a bullock to the mart in the morning, so if you come back tomorow I should be able to pay you then".
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 03:21 PM

no one is asking how we make up for not paying Joseph Taylor, Harry Cox et al are they?

Quite a few of us are actually, but a very valid point that can't be made too often.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 03:05 PM

All this pious talk of copyright and robbing poor folk musicians is fine...no one is asking how we make up for not paying Joseph Taylor, Harry Cox et al are they?

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Goose Gander
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 03:04 PM

So you really think a site like Max Hunter can be put up and kept running for 'next to nothing'? What an insult the people who make that site available to you and me and anyone else who wants to dive in and test the waters. Do you think those songs transcribed themselves? Fact is, there are thousands and thousands of songs, ballads, etc. collected from traditional American musicians available on Max Hunter as well as the Wolf Folkore Collection, American Memory (Library of Congress). This music is 'freely available' as you say thanks to the time and money contributed by public and private sources. But I have a hard time believing that the 'everything should be free' types will be willing to pay for something they would rather have for, well, free.

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Folknacious
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 03:04 PM

Meanwhile, awaiting the boiler man before I can put the heating on...

Did you pay him for his work?

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 02:49 PM

Woven Wheat Whispers that is!

Subject: RE: Free Rare Old Folk Album Downloads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 02:48 PM

There is a word of difference between 'freely available' and 'available free' - some form of payment will be essential, either per download or via subscription to keep the thing running & up to speed. But the archives should be 'freely available' to ANYONE, not just for purposes of academic research and other elite access.

Woven Wheat Whispers was a perfect example of a Folk Orientated download site that worked until the person running it got bored with doing it, which was his privilege, but it left a huge gap in a potentially prosperous marketplace which served both obscure artists (such as myself) and more mainstream artists (such as Jez Lowe). Anyone who knew WWW will know there is a sound precedent for folk orientated download site.

However, this isn't what we are talking about here - we are taking abiut an on-line archive of Traditional Folk Music Documents, not Revival Folk Products.

*

It remains to be seen whether smug and feckless 'everything should be free' downloaders will be willing to pay for something they feel is a privilege.

It is this sort of talk that is smug & feckless. You say running a download site costs money - if I so chose could run an archival blog on the scale of the Max Hunter for next to nothing. This isn't what I'm proposing of course, but all of us here who love music invest much time, money & energy into music. That is the nature of music, musicians and lovers of music. Stuart Maconie has some interesting things to say on the matter in his column in the new Radio Times which reveals just who the smug & feckless are in the download culture.