|
19 Mar 07 - 10:13 AM (#2001064) Subject: £6 well spent From: nutty I don't often spend money on CD's but I was at the Darlington Spring Thing at the weekend and came across some sampler CD'S put out by Waterson/Carthy. I bought the Norma Waterson Definitive Collection although I intend to follow it with Martin's and Eliza's. I have just finished listening to it --- what a joy ... 15 superb tracks and all for £6. I still have my collection of Topic Samplers from the 70's and look forward to more artists producing CD'S for the pockets of the not so well off. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 02:24 PM (#2001261) Subject: RE: £6 well spent From: The Sandman would you be kind enough to tell us the length of playing time of each cd. 15 tracks, probably 55 minutes maximium. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 02:32 PM (#2001267) Subject: RE: £6 well spent From: nutty I'm not sure what you are trying to imply Dick. Is it relevant? For me the important thing is the quality of the tracks not the length. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 03:09 PM (#2001309) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman I am not implying anything,how many minutes playing time is on the cd. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 03:14 PM (#2001318) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty My apologies ... the CD length is 62 minutes 30 seconds. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 03:22 PM (#2001333) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Borchester Echo The South American river site flogs these Definitive Collections' for far less than that. And they practically pay you to take away 'special deals' of buy one and get another for almost zilch. Very handy for those who don't believe in paying artists a market price for their work. And wowee, compared to piracy, it's legal. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 03:32 PM (#2001345) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty Can you provide a link to that site, please? |
|
19 Mar 07 - 03:48 PM (#2001364) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Bainbo I think the Countess became too used to writing on a site that frowns on advertising :-) This is the one she means. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 04:05 PM (#2001377) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Borchester Echo I had no intention of advertising a site run apparently by greedy warrior women who will rip off artists as soon as look at them. If, however, you are unable to buy direct from artists or from their own sites and HAVE to use rip-off channels, the least you can do is click through from Mudcat (or even better, from fRoots), who will thus benefit slightly from your transaction without it costing you more. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 04:46 PM (#2001408) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Tootler Regardless of what they are charging, they will still have to pay the artists and composers their royalties and as I understand it, these are pretty much fixed. So how are they ripping the artists off? |
|
19 Mar 07 - 05:20 PM (#2001418) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty Well I looked but I couldn't find Waterson Carthy anywhere or anything cheaper than £6. I did notice that some folk CD's on offer (Anne Briggs for example) were remastered tracks from vinyl LP's that are no longer generally available. In such cases they are encouraging people to become familiar with artists who stopped recording many years ago. The Norma Waterson CD for example has a terrific track of Aint No Man Worth The Salt Of My Tears not previously released. I really fail to see how the release of such material damages the artists. The Topic Samplers of the past did a similar thing very effectively. |
|
19 Mar 07 - 06:26 PM (#2001474) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Richard Bridge THere may very well be (UK) copyright issues about parallel imports - certainly CD-Wow got it in the neck from the courts again last week or the week before. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 09:01 AM (#2001991) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty I'm still not sure what all this hostility is about. There may be other Definitive Collections. The ones I'm talking about - the Waterson Carthy ones are issued under license by Topic Records so presumably all copyright issues have been dealt with. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 09:16 AM (#2002005) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump I had no intention of advertising a site run apparently by greedy warrior women who will rip off artists as soon as look at them. I can't help wondering, then, why you mentioned them at all :-) I can't see how Amazon are ripping off the artists unless they are withholding the royalties. Are you suggesting they are doing that? If you go to your local record shop and pay £10.00 for the same CD that sells for £6.00 on Amazon, you would be deluded if you thought any of the extra £4.00 goes to the artists. And Captain, I ask since you seemed keen to know - does the CD length meet with your approval? But, ah, I see it now - a CD can hold up to 80 minutes of music, and this CD only holds 62.5 minutes. Have those b*****ds at Amazon stolen the other 17.5 minutes? :-) Ye gods, a bloke gives a positive review of a folk CD and gets this! |
|
20 Mar 07 - 09:23 AM (#2002012) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: skipy The way of the cat! Skipy |
|
20 Mar 07 - 09:30 AM (#2002017) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: GMT Nutty There Ain't No Sweet Man (Who's Worth The Salt Of My Tears), appears on Norma Watersons self titled album. A wonderful collection of songs with the usual suspects as backup players. Cheers Gary |
|
20 Mar 07 - 09:37 AM (#2002022) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty GMT ... IT SAYS THIS ABOUT THE TRACK............... 'A PREVIOUSLY UNRELEASED LIVE RECORDING' I was just quoting what was written. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 09:37 AM (#2002024) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: JennyO The way of the cat! Sadly, sometimes it is - fortunately not often. It looks like nutty has had the misfortune to attract the attention of a few who have their own agenda to push. Never mind the knockers, nutty - it sounds like you have done well with this CD. Just keep on enjoying it! |
|
20 Mar 07 - 10:19 AM (#2002059) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman Scrump ,I asked a question ,I got an answer. Why are you trying to involve me in this,I have never mentioned amazon,What the hell are you on about. I have never knocked anyone. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 10:23 AM (#2002062) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad Captain Birdseye: What does that translate into Euros? Chill out Bud. You chose your prices for your product. Nobody is making comparisons. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 10:33 AM (#2002069) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump Why are you trying to involve me in this,I have never mentioned amazon,What the hell are you on about. I have never knocked anyone. There seems to have been a misunderstanding here, for which I apologise, Captain. I didn't attribute the anti-Amazon remarks to you, only the person I quoted from at the top of my posting. This was countess richard, who I didn't mention by name, which is what seems to have caused the confusion. However, I did ask whether the length of the CD met with your approval, as you had originally said this: would you be kind enough to tell us the length of playing time of each cd. 15 tracks, probably 55 minutes maximium. and the answer you got was "62 minutes 30 seconds", which is longer than your estimated maximum. Once again, apologies for the confusion caused by not mentioning countess richard's name in my previous post. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 10:49 AM (#2002087) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman JIM LAD,what the hell are you on about,Ihave never passed an opinion,I asked a question ,I got my answer, you chill out,and stop reading things into my posts that are not there. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 11:01 AM (#2002097) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Borchester Echo I didn't make an 'anti' Amazon posting, nor a pro one. I alluded to the fairly self-evident preferable course of action that CD purchases should be made, whenever possible, from the artists themselves to ensure that the maximum profit goes to them. But if the only way to get the CD you want is via the lengthy river in South America, you could at least do some good by clicking through from this site or fRoots to place your order. As for buying stuff from cut-price labels, you would imagine that any fule wood no that extreme caution ought to be exercised. I'm not aware of the details of whatever (if any) deal Highpoint has struck with Topic but this thread has alerted me sufficiently to think about asking assorted Carthys, Watersons or Engles next time I see them. Because I can't see how it does the image of their product a lot of good when it's price-slashed like so many cans of baked beans. Not long ago, people here (and elsewhere) were cock-a-hoop that Five Hand Reel recordings were reissued being on CD. I found it extraordinary how no-one stopped to question the details or to wonder why Dick Gaughan had declined to write the liner notes. Because it was oh so simple. None of the surviving musicians would get a penny out of it. It never ceases to disappoint me how so many thoughtless people in our so-called community think nothing of paying as little as possible (or preferably nothing) to listen to or watch artists who have, after all, no living expenses like the rest of the population, have they? |
|
20 Mar 07 - 11:20 AM (#2002107) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump I didn't make an 'anti' Amazon posting, nor a pro one. Apologies to you too, countess. Assume the word 'anti' should be deleted from my posting. I wrongly inferred from your remarks such as: Very handy for those who don't believe in paying artists a market price for their work. And wowee, compared to piracy, it's legal. and I had no intention of advertising a site run apparently by greedy warrior women who will rip off artists as soon as look at them. that you were in some way opposed to them. Clearly from your remark above I was wrong, and I apologise. But you raise a valid point in your last posting above. I naturally buy CDs from artists at gigs, but if I'm buying a CD otherwise (perhaps of an artist I've never seen), I'm likely to shop around and find the cheapest outlet (we CD buyers are similar to artists in that we too have living expenses), on the grounds that the artist will make as much from any outlet other than themselves, regardless as to how much I pay. The problem comes when an artist charges £12.99 + £1.50 p&p by mail order, when I can buy the same CD for £6.99 inc p&p online (yes, this is a real and recent example). I've got to really like the artist to buy it direct from them in that case. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 11:25 AM (#2002116) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty It never ceases to disappoint me how so many thoughtless people in our so-called community think nothing of paying as little as possible (or preferably nothing) to listen to or watch artists who have, after all, no living expenses like the rest of the population, have they? I take it that such remarks are directed at me Countess Richard as I had the temerity to believe that I found a bargain. However I find your remarks incredibly naive if you think that the Watersons are being ripped off. It is surely in their interest that the general public is made aware of their recordings ... not just the most recent ones but those made since the 70's. As a student in those days I was very grateful to Topic for producing its Samplers as they were tailored to the money I had to spare. As a pensioner now I feel exactly the same way. Assuming that the artists are getting their proper royalties (and I'm sure if there was a problem we would have heard of it by now) then I can't see that it matters how much a CD costs. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 11:31 AM (#2002120) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: skipy Something in the water today eh! Skipy |
|
20 Mar 07 - 11:37 AM (#2002131) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Borchester Echo As you very well know, Scrump, I was referring in generality to ANYONE lacking in scruples in how and from where they extract their 'entertainment' by whatever means and by shelling out as little as possible. And if you examine Amazon pricing and 'special offers' (special for whom?) it is immediately apparent that in some cases they are not covering costs even taking into account the tiny margin (in comparison to what they get when handling marketing and distribution themselves) which the artist receives. So who pays, when as sure as hell it won't be the entrepreneur? It is surely preferable to pay the market price directly to the artist. I think I know exactly which example you are quoting. I saw it myself on a site with a dog and gramophone. And yes, I got mine direct from the artist and I hope you did too. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 11:55 AM (#2002153) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad Well we're all in fine form this morning, aren't we? Let's start again. Nutty: You say "Subject: £6 well spent From: nutty - PM Date: 19 Mar 07 - 10:13 AM I don't often spend money on CD's but I was at the Darlington Spring Thing at the weekend and came across some sampler CD'S put out by Waterson/Carthy. I bought the Norma Waterson Definitive Collection although I intend to follow it with Martin's and Eliza's. I have just finished listening to it --- what a joy ... 15 superb tracks and all for £6. I still have my collection of Topic Samplers from the 70's and look forward to more artists producing CD'S for the pockets of the not so well off." And I say "Great! Good for you" Next........ |
|
20 Mar 07 - 12:00 PM (#2002162) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty Thanks Jim .... isn't it amazing how the most innocuous of threads can be hijacked for political purposes. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 12:07 PM (#2002167) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad Guilty, Your Honour! "Good Morning all" from The Sunny, Cool, Windy Highlands of Victoria on this, The First Day of Spring. (I think) |
|
20 Mar 07 - 12:13 PM (#2002175) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump Countess, I take your point, but I think it's unrealistic to expect most people to pay more than they have to for CDs. Consumers will just find the best price for them, and won't consider the point you make, i.e. the artist will get more money if you buy from them direct. Maybe you, and occasionally I, will buy CDs that way, if it's an artist we like and would like to help further. But you can't expect most people to even think of that aspect. Besides, if an artist isn't happy for the likes of Amazon or HMV to sell their CDs, maybe they should not allow these outlets to sell them, and only sell them from their own website or at gigs. Anyway, nutty, glad you enjoyed the CD and I hope you won't let the guilt of getting such a bargain spoil your enjoyment :-) |
|
20 Mar 07 - 12:17 PM (#2002181) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad Ooh Scrump! Give a wee twist eh? Good morning From Jim. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 12:33 PM (#2002212) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty I won't Scrump and I still intend acquiring the Definitive Collections of Martin and Eliza's work. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 12:42 PM (#2002225) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jean(eanjay) Nutty - it sounds as if you did well with the CD. You must be even more determined to get the other Definitive Collections now! |
|
20 Mar 07 - 01:21 PM (#2002262) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty As a matter of interest I thought I would look on the Waterson/Carthy official website and found that the Definitive Collections were not only there but had actually been produced in 2003. |
|
20 Mar 07 - 02:26 PM (#2002342) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: synbyn As to the length, personally I found LPs pretty good, in that my concentration begins to wane after about 20 minutes... and actually I find the length of CDs a barrier to appreciation of some artistes whose treatment of their raw material is broadly similar. But then I'm a product of the generation which lacks...er... |
|
21 Mar 07 - 04:02 AM (#2002852) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Bob Bolton G'day synbyn, I think you have touched on a good and valid point ... admittedly, one dear to my own heart. In these days of mind-bogglingly vast collections of "downloaded" music all living in a small, off-whitish tablet with some sort of minimalist control knobs and bars - I'm assailed by people who can't comprehend that I don't want to plug into a seamless stream of aural wallpaper. I try to explain that a skillfully laid out set of songs ... perhaps the recording of a well constructed concert bracket - or the definitive songs of an historical event or cause ... is far more than the sum of its parts. The two sides of an LP - separated by, at least, the time it takes to flip the record and drop the needle - could constitute a perfect 'dose' of the music of one subject ... event ... group ... whatever. Adding everything else they ever recorded (let alone everything anyone else has recorded, in the same broad slot of the download site) only subtracts from what may have been perfection. All this apart from trying to explain that the music percolating in my brain, of its own accord, is just as interesting ... perhaps more germane to my next gig ... and far better for my soul! It's nice to have "Definitive Collections" - if only for complete reference - but the "ideal" length, for me, to listen to one group or subject, is often much less than can be shoehorned onto a CD ... and I admire artists who have the guts to issue CDs that are the right length for the songs or subject ... not counted our like so many of Birdseye's Frozen Peas! Regards, Bob |
|
21 Mar 07 - 04:40 AM (#2002864) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman when I listen to cds, I very rarely listen to the cd all in one take,but click on to a particular track,this is physically much easier,than doing so with vinyl lps.[where if you are not careful you can damage the vinyl] Bob Bolton the right length for the subject, is a subjective judgement,what you might think right,another person might not. whats all this stupid stuff about frozen peas.,most people look at how many tracks are on a cd before they buy them,as well as what the tracks are. I asked the question originally,because there is a difference between 30 minutes of playing time and 60,in my opinion something thats fifteen or thirty minutes long,should not be the same price as something that is sixty two minutes long. Yes Nutty appears to have a bargain,. |
|
21 Mar 07 - 05:20 AM (#2002877) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Bob Bolton G'day Cap'n, The reference was to illustrate the "never mind the quality - feel the width" mentality that demands a well-formed opus to be padded out to assuage the hollow feelings engendered by any unused space on the media ... frequently to the detriment of the work. I needed an example of easily counted items of minimal value ... and frozen peas popped into my mind. Birdseye brand got a guernsey for its folk music connection: My black and white memories of early TV (here in Australia) were frequently punctuated by the advertising jingle chanting: "Goodness how delicious - eating Birdseye peas! (&c ... ad libitum ... or nauseam)". It was, of course, many years before I recognised this as a parody of the American Civil War Confederate soldiers' song Goober Peas - "celebrating" what was said to be the decision Confederate Supply Minister - Mr Goober - to supply peanuts as vegetables, to replace the unavailable standard legumes! (BTW: like much in folklore, perusal of the OED's citations show that the term was in used decades before this story is set!) However, I did throw it in to keep some sort of folk song link alive. Anyway ... I did note that "Definitive Collections" were very useful 'references' - unfortunately, they are not so often a good listen... or value... as the work that finds its "right" length. Regards, Bob |
|
21 Mar 07 - 07:16 AM (#2002937) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Richard Bridge Here is a link to the latest CD-WOW case judgment, for those who are interested in the legalities of importation into the EEA. a href="http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2007/533.html&query=title+(+Independiente+)&method=boolean">Judgement |
|
21 Mar 07 - 07:19 AM (#2002939) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump I haven't looked at the track listing for the Waterson-Carthy and related "Definitive Collection" CDs, but it sounds as if they are good. But if I see a CD with such a title as "Definitive Collection", I'm usually suspicious that it will be anything but that, especially if it's a budget priced CD. It's like those cheapo pop/rock CDs that claim to be "The Best of..." or "X's Greatest Hits". You often find with cheap (budget priced) CDs that they might have a few tracks from what is generally considered the 'best' of that artist's work, and the rest a lot of inconsequential filler material. I'm not saying that in this case, but this is a general comment on budget priced CDs. Worse than that, especially in the pop and rock genres (or soul, easy listening and other popular non-folk music for that matter), you get a lot of cheap CDs with re-recordings, or inferior live recordings. In folk this shouldn't be such a problem, because folk musicians are generally able to reproduce fairly faithfully live what appears on their studio recordings. Not so for most pop and rock artists, though. But I have managed to get a few bargains myself in the past, in folk music CDs as well as pop/rock or other genres. You just have to be careful to read the small print (if the CD has any on the back cover), before you buy. Are these "Definitive Collection" CDs available for other artists than those mentioned above? |
|
21 Mar 07 - 07:44 AM (#2002960) Subject: RE: �6 (pounds) well spent From: Bonnie Shaljean Richard (Bridge, not Countess) - I couldn't get that link to work, and I wanna KNOW. Can you do us a clickie or re-type it or something? Thanks! |
|
21 Mar 07 - 07:46 AM (#2002963) Subject: RE: �6 (pounds) well spent From: Bonnie Shaljean Or maybe start a new thread with it? Sounds worth scrutinising - |
|
21 Mar 07 - 08:16 AM (#2002991) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty try this Bonnie Judgement |
|
21 Mar 07 - 10:24 AM (#2003052) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Richard Bridge Funny, that was made with the blickifier - or at least I thought it was... |
|
21 Mar 07 - 10:41 AM (#2003071) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: synbyn Morning, Bob! Couldn't agree more- the Cap'n has a point re access to the tracks, certainly much easier than LP or tape, and we can all now build up compilations of our favourites and cut out the fillers... it's not the artists that I think are to blame, often they don't seem to have much control over what goes out, especially when the back catalogue is raided.. imho I enjoy the careful placing of songs to build a whole performance over shoehorning. I think of Packie Byrne, if that's how you spell him, who is a master at accentuating the tougher songs by giving his audience a cheerful ditty first... much more powerful than battering the audience over the head... and then there's the issue of 'warmer' sound on analogue recordings... and yes, countess, I do believe in where possible cutting out the middle man, because again imho that's where things often go agly... not so much nowadays where the artist can go indie, but for those whose best work is locked up in a vault somewhere... with a Gollum... Some of the best is still missing... yan tan tantethra... |
|
21 Mar 07 - 11:00 AM (#2003095) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump when I listen to cds, I very rarely listen to the cd all in one take,but click on to a particular track,this is physically much easier,than doing so with vinyl lps.[where if you are not careful you can damage the vinyl] Very true Cap'n, especially if you have had a few pints :-) ...most people look at how many tracks are on a cd before they buy them,as well as what the tracks are. True. It's worth also looking at the track lengths, if they are printed on the cover, because sometimes a seemingly short CD in terms of number of tracks can in fact be fairly long in minutes. An example of course would be a classical CD containing two symphonies, that may consist of 8 tracks but can almost fill the CD to capacity; or a CD containing two Goon Shows, which may be half an hour in length each. I asked the question originally,because there is a difference between 30 minutes of playing time and 60,in my opinion something thats fifteen or thirty minutes long,should not be the same price as something that is sixty two minutes long. Yes Nutty appears to have a bargain,. An interesting point. It's certainly true that some CDs of popular music contain not much more than half an hour's worth of material, which is poor value in terms of length alone (although as has been pointed out by others, the quality is more important to many of us than the length). But with the advent of MP3 downloading, it seems we are now able to download each individual track, and can pick and choose what we pay for, rather than buy a whole album with someone else's idea of a good selection. So on average, we will be closer to paying by the minute than we are at present. Who knows, some enterprising online retailer might do just that, and charge per minute or second of downloaded music. |
|
21 Mar 07 - 01:34 PM (#2003269) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad Nice return, Captain Birdseye. |
|
21 Mar 07 - 01:39 PM (#2003276) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty Scrump .... Definitive Collections by the bucket full here ... not all of them cheap but all interesting. CLICK |
|
21 Mar 07 - 02:17 PM (#2003320) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman my cds work out at 12 sterling,but since I am not able to charge the same appearance fees for gigs as Martin and Norma,I am not in a financial position to reduce them.http://www.dickmiles.com |
|
21 Mar 07 - 09:31 PM (#2003704) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: oggie The NAXOS catalogue of classical music retails for £5 per CD. These are new recordings, properly rehearsed, recorded and mastered with exemplary sleeve notes. The fact that something is cheap does not mean it must be an inferior product I must admit I admire Topic for once again looking at its back catalogue and finding a viable way to release parts of it (same as they did with Voice of the People some years back). The sleeve notes also promote those CDs available from Topic for people who want to explore further. As the tracks should already have covered their production costs etc this seeme a good way to go. And yes, I have several of the series. All the best Steve Ogden |
|
21 Mar 07 - 10:28 PM (#2003727) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: GUEST,Bardan The worst colection cds are the "20,000 tunes from the emerald isle" or "groovy celtic chillout" ones. I bought one ages ago cos there were a lot of tunes I didn't recognise and I thought some might be worth learning. It was literally hours of plastic leprechaun stuff played alternately by about twelve men they'd obviously pulled out of the pub at midday in the vain hope that they'd be sober enough to sing and by some sort of wannabe operatic tenor. brr! Gives me shivers just thinking about it. Cheap Waterson/Carthy CDs sound very interesting though. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 01:01 AM (#2003779) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad Ha Ha! I remember my father bought an album. "Ireland's 32" it was called. He bought it in Menzies when he had a few in him and sat in the booth through the whole album. Lord it was awful! I'll bet they were glad to see the back of him & the album. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 01:57 AM (#2003794) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Bob Bolton Aye Jim Lad, "Lord it was awful! I'll bet they were glad to see the back of him & the album" Yes ... but did it lead to them choosing at least a better line in "Best of... " collections? Regards, Bob |
|
22 Mar 07 - 07:04 AM (#2003894) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump my cds work out at 12 sterling,but since I am not able to charge the same appearance fees for gigs as Martin and Norma,I am not in a financial position to reduce them. Blimey, Cap'n, on that basis I would need to charge about 50 quid for my CDs :-) |
|
22 Mar 07 - 09:01 AM (#2003973) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty I doubt if these CD's have much to do with Martin and Norma. They are being issued by Highpoint Recordings under license from Topic Records Ltd and Rycodisc Ltd. However most CD'S today - even allowing for studio costs - don't usually cost more than a couple of pounds to produce. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 01:36 PM (#2004189) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman so a thousand copies of a cd cost 2000 sterling.most cd pressers,cost this, well that was what Iwas charged for Nautical and. if you borrow 2000 sterling from the bank you have to pay interest. on the subject of royalties the only company that ever paid me any royalties was Brewhouse music. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 01:45 PM (#2004201) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: nutty But 1,000 copies of a CD sold at £12 is £12,000, meaning that when sold the artist makes £10,000. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 02:02 PM (#2004214) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad I have no problem with free enterprise. Fix your prices wherever you choose. I will say however that the technology is available to us now, that we can manufacture our own CDs at home so there really is no need to come up with the funds for a 1.000 copy run. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 02:05 PM (#2004216) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad "a thousand copies of a cd cost 2000 sterling" For heaven's sake, Dick. EMIGRATE! You can stay with me 'til your on your feet. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 02:21 PM (#2004228) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman yes, but what you dont understand,is that with a minority interest such as folk music,it takes quite a while for lesser known artists to sell a 1000 cds,I believe I have sold 200 NAUTICAL AND in two years,as you can hear it is a good cd., you see its all to do with promotion,not necessarily how good you are,if I was crap I dont think Martin Carthy,would have played Guitar on Cheating The Tide. Because I am not fashionable like KateRusby orSethLakeman,Idont get promoted by Mike Harding etc,despite the fact that Iwas one of the people who persisted in playing traditional music in the nineteen eighties when it wasnt fashionable. |
|
22 Mar 07 - 02:28 PM (#2004230) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad The spare bedroom is downstairs from the main floor and you will have your own bathroom and living room. Let me know. Jim |
|
22 Mar 07 - 02:55 PM (#2004255) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: The Sandman let me talk aboutPeter Bellamy,shortly before Peter committed suicide,Ihad a long talk with him at Chippenham folk festival,he had hardly any gigs [one I think],and he was talking about my[then imminent move] to Ireland ,he said to me I dont think that if I [PeterBellamy]moved to Ireland it would be my salvation. Peter was an immensely talented songwriter singer player,who was not fashionable[not easy listening, middle of the road, bland squit],who wasnt finding it easy to make a living on the English folk scene and who at the time was not selling many c ds. I dont think either Nutty or Jim lad ,really understand the English folk scene and how fickle it is,and how many, many talented musicians, give up because its uneconomical,thats why I have to sell my cds for 12 sterling,. Why do you think Dick Gaughan started Perform |
|
22 Mar 07 - 03:06 PM (#2004266) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad "Why do you think Dick Gaughan started Perform?" I know the name and that he is a Scottish entertainer. Have no Idea what "Perform" is. Tell me more. The "English Folk Scene" which you describe sounds like every other folk scene. How many ways do I have to say that I have no problem with your prices, before you believe me? It's free enterprise. On any given day, the deer will come right up to your window. I can pick you up at the airport. Looking forward to meeting you and the family. Weather fine. Having a great time. Wish you were here. Jim |
|
22 Mar 07 - 04:39 PM (#2004334) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: GUEST,HW Nutty - like the sound of your 'bargain' CD, but not sure about the £2.00 each to produce maths. On a small run (say 200) I'd say it cost nearer £5.00 per CD. That's with a nice cheap duplicating arrangement and printing inserts and compiling/sealing the product at home. The big expense is the studio and even an inexpensive local studio will come to a £a few hundreds if you take enough care and time to create a product to be proud of, which is why I feel a £10/£12 tag for a new CD is perfectly reasonable. A rough guess, based on personal experience and recordings that tend to be at least 50% trad/self penned, so less royalties: Recording: up to £500 (flat fee whether making 100 or 10,000!) Duplicating: perhaps £60-80 per 100 (inc on body print) Covers (ink/paper) perhaps £50-60 per 100 Cases £10 per 100 Royalties £20-30 per 100 + assorted little bits (cellophane bags, promo copies, adverts etc) So, if you are reissuing an old recording (say remastered vinyl or cassette, or even doing a re-run of a sold out CD) you don't have to pay the studio fees again, hence £6.00 should cover all. The same maths will apply to Martin & Norma, or to Topic or to any of our superstars. So perhaps the question should be not 'how can they issue one so cheaply?' but 'why aren't all re-releases equally cheap? |
|
22 Mar 07 - 04:52 PM (#2004343) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Jim Lad Perhaps some knowledgeable soul should start a thread on how to produce CDs at a reasonable cost. (regardless of Studio expenses) |
|
23 Mar 07 - 07:24 AM (#2004816) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Anne Lister There are some more economics here, which I'm very familiar with myself. If I'm putting out a new CD there are a lot of associated costs - for the artwork and printed parts (often extremely expensive, especially if you want to include lyrics to all songs), for studio time, for other musicians and their time and for manufacturing and carriage. Then there are the CDs you won't sell but will send to reviewers and radio stations for promotional reasons (generally at least 100 of these one way or another). So you won't sell all of the 1,000 copies, even if the others shift very fast. If you use another company to distribute your albums you won't sell to them at the retail price but at a trade price, which can often be as low as £4.50. Amazon isn't ripping anyone else off, simply stripping their own profit margins. If they're selling your album at below the price you sold it to them for, it's their loss not yours. If they're selling slightly above the trade price, it's their profit margin, not yours. It does, of course, make it harder for you to sell at your price of £10 or £12, but they'll be selling to a market you won't normally reach on your own which is why you decided to sell them albums at trade price in the first place. As to samplers and "best of" albums - they're generally using stuff that's had studio costs etc covered already, and often using cheaper artwork and generally not including full lyrics. Their overheads are consequently far lower. I've started producing "greetings card CDs" which are packaged with a greetings card (surprise!) and themed, taking songs from all my albums with similar themes, and I can afford to do this pretty easily and therefore can charge less for one of these than for one of my "official" albums. It has to be said as well that buying a sampler or "best of" album will often be a quick way in to buying music from an artist you're less familiar with and can generate other sales in due course. So, as an independent performer without a label to back me financially or in terms of publicity, I can't see the problem here. In the case of Waterson/Carthy, they wouldn't have borne the costs of producing the album themselves in the first place as that would have been down to Topic, and it's really only Topic that will win or lose if they licence another company to put out "best of" albums. Anne (Lister) |
|
23 Mar 07 - 07:58 AM (#2004843) Subject: RE: £6 (pounds) well spent From: Scrump Sensible words, Anne (Tabster). It's often overlooked that it's often the record company that owns the rights to the recordings, not the artist. So W-C would probably have had no say in the reissue of the Topic recordings. They should, of course, get the royalties for the performance and any composer credits. As GUEST,HW says, the question is, why aren't all CD reissues cheaper? (sorry to paraphrase your words HW) Reissuing old stuff has much lower overhead costs so there's no reason why they couldn't be sold at around a fiver or so, with no effect on the artist. Of course if the artist sells the CDs at gigs for a tenner or £12, then they will reap the extra profit rather than a retailer. But I think most artists accept that selling CDs is just the icing on the cake to supplement the gig money. It could be that trying to get £13.99 for a CD is reducing sales, whereas a tenner might sell more. It's not exactly "pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap" but the same principle applies - reduce the price and sell more, so you make more profit on larger numbers of sales, rather than have them gathering dust because you may be (slightly) overpricing them. Yes, many people here would support an artist by buying their CDs (I often do, myself) at whatever price they are, but youyr average punter probably would opt for the best price. |