Hyperion Label

[Madiel]

Hurwitz looks for the positive. https://youtube.com/watch?v=wHkrkMGvibc&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE

[Todd]

The best "major" labels at curating old catalogs are Warner and Universal specifically if Cyrus Meher-Homji gets involved.

Sony has produced quite a few significant complete editions, as well. 

Looks like Hyperion kind of screwed artists over.  That rather tarnishes the brand a bit, but it makes it easy to understand why UMG bought.  As long as some of the better stuff gets reissued at a discount, it will be fine.  The only bad news is that the nascent Morales Edition will probably die, unless the artists get picked up by another label.  If it dies, I will have to find something else to listen to among the hundreds of thousands of classical recordings I have not yet heard. 

First world problems are serious.

[Madiel]

First world problems are serious.

Indeed, working out where your next Beethoven sonata cycle fix is going to come from can be a full-time occupation.

Honestly, Todd, you are the most cynical wanker it has been my displeasure to encounter for many years.

[Brian]

Looks like Hyperion kind of screwed artists over.

Perhaps but I'm not fully certain. They could pay a nice upfront flat fee. Naxos pays a miserable fee ($1000 or less, even for whole orchestras combined). Maybe Hyperion is more generous with a lump sum?

Indeed, working out where your next Beethoven sonata cycle fix is going to come from can be a full-time occupation.

Honestly, Todd, you are the most cynical wanker it has been my displeasure to encounter for many years.

This seems totally uncalled for. His remark was not an attack on anyone, just an acknowledgement that he has the privilege to acquire or borrow a huge recording library. I know his cynicism in other conversations makes it very easy to presume it in new contexts.

[Spotted Horses]

The fact that they didn't pay royalties is not really shameful. It means they were more like Naxos than they were like the traditional labels. Presumably the artists were paid recording fees and benefited from the higher profile of recording for Hyperion.

We're not privy to their financials, but perhaps they were on the brink of going into receivership. I would think another option would be to discontinue production of new recordings, and just run their web site as a download site for their catalog. Almost nonexistent overhead and whatever they sell is basically pure profit (since they don't pay royalties). Unless they have debt, of course.

[Todd]

Maybe Hyperion is more generous with a lump sum?

Perhaps Hyperion artists can spill the beans on what they earned.  Any discrepancies would be moot now since the owner cashed out.  I'm sure some artists got paid more than others - eg, Angela Hewitt probably earned more than Lawrence Power. Hey, and Ms Hewitt may return to the Yellow Label.  Score one for giant transnational corporations.  They need a win.

[Madiel]

This seems totally uncalled for. His remark was not an attack on anyone, just an acknowledgement that he has the privilege to acquire or borrow a huge recording library. I know his cynicism in other conversations makes it very easy to presume it in new contexts.

It is not just that one remark, even in THIS conversation (we've already established how silly other people are for having an attachment to luxury goods). It is the constant, constant mocking tone. The relentless superiority to both other posters here and the world at large.

I no longer read the vast majority of his posts, actually. But even in threads as mundane as WAYLTN you're liable not to get outright praise for something, but a remark that conveys it managed not to disappoint him.

So yes, I interpret that remark in light of all the other remarks. If you interpret it in isolation, then I think you're being a touch naive.

[SimonNZ]

This seems totally uncalled for. His remark was not an attack on anyone,

[...] but it is just pathetic to hold fast to the past, succumbing to false nostalgia.  Streaming is the here and now and has been for nearly a decade. [...] Much thinking on this forum is antiquated.[...]

To which I seriously wanted to reply "Fuck you, I'll listen however I choose to listen", but at that moment resisted.

[Madiel]

In addition, if streaming is the here and now, why do I see Todd in the purchases thread? And why does he care about cheap box sets? Buying music is so old-fashioned.

[DavidW]

Hurwitz looks for the positive. https://youtube.com/watch?v=wHkrkMGvibc&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE

That is one Hurwitz video I will watch.  As a professional critic he probably works closely with these record labels and should have insights us casual collectors would not have.

[DavidW]

In addition, if streaming is the here and now, why do I see Todd in the purchases thread? And why does he care about cheap box sets? Buying music is so old-fashioned.

One of the nice things about this forum was convincing me that owning a music library has value that streaming can't fully replace.  That old fashioned wisdom has shown me that a healthier approach is to do both.  Whether we own digital downloads, cds, vinyl, tapes... just not being dependent on a monthly subscription where titles can come and go is nice.  But I certainly wouldn't want to return to a time in which I need to blind buy music just to listen to (as I'm about to do anyway with Simpson's string quartets).

[Roasted Swan]

I hadn't heard of this sale until I saw there was a Hurwitz video adressing it.  Hurwitz makes some fair points - Hyperion's choice not to embrace streaming and the repackaging of back catalogue into "big boxes" seems to to ignore two areas of the anyway small CM field where there is activity - they seem to have ignored SACD/Hi-res as well (not that I'm trying to say they are "better" - just another alternative).  As it happens I don't stream and I don't buy big boxes but I can see that there is some degree of income to be had there.  Since I enjoy British music which has been a strong part of the Hyperion catalogue I wonder whether they will continue to exist as a commissioning label with a discrete identity or whether Universal are buying them up simply to monetise specific parts of their back-catalogue.  I don't have any issue with them (as a label) not payng royalties any more - that was an old/halcyon days 'benefit' for artists.  I guess one or two Classical Artists in the world might still be on a royalty deal but my guess is 99.9% of even the greatest are simply on a flat/buy-out fee.  I'm still getting payments from the BBC for some Top of the Pops programmes I did in the 80's - nice to get but mad really!  I can see that if you are a writer of pop songs and your music is getting millions of streams/plays then you deserve some piece of that income pie but CM is dwarfed by any comparison.

I hope that the label is able to retain artists and a separate identity - my guess is not and it will disappear into the interchangeable melange that is Universal/Decca/Phillips/DG etc etc

[Madiel]

One of the nice things about this forum was convincing me that owning a music library has value that streaming can't fully replace.  That old fashioned wisdom has shown me that a healthier approach is to do both.  Whether we own digital downloads, cds, vinyl, tapes... just not being dependent on a monthly subscription where titles can come and go is nice.  But I certainly wouldn't want to return to a time in which I need to blind buy music just to listen to (as I'm about to do anyway with Simpson's string quartets).

I share your sentiment. But I'm not the one who was telling people how antiquated their thinking was.

I'm not actually listening to much classical at the moment because I've fallen down a Taylor Swift rabbit hole. I was streaming everything of hers. Then I was buying new CDs because this is stuff I want to own. Then I was loading those CDs onto iTunes and putting them on my iPhone... and still making use of streaming when I hadn't got around to that step yet. Now I have 2 particular editions of older albums en route to me after buying them on eBay. I've basically done the whole life cycle in... three to four months.

And I know what I'm doing. Not least because Taylor has pulled her catalogue from Spotify in the past, and has slightly edited at least 2 songs in the past (in fact I'm buying the edited versions but it's not a huge deal)... and because none of those issues are specific to her. I've had years and years to think about what different options for listening offer me.

And I certainly don't need some fool who unthinkingly tells me that "new" means "better" and doesn't even follow his own advice properly.

[Todd]

just not being dependent on a monthly subscription where titles can come and go is nice.

I've reached a point where the prospect of recordings appearing and disappearing doesn't really mean anything.  Say recording X by artist Y gets removed from a streaming service.  I can immediately find tens of thousands of substitutes, and I will still achieve utility maximization, or something so close to it that it is practically the same.  I still collect some things, typically centered around artists, but even there, if I don't act quickly enough and a recording or box disappears or becomes too dear to justify buying, I move on.  Recordings are to be enjoyed, not fretted over.  It's OK if I miss something.  I mean, it's classical music.  I can count on one hand, using zero fingers, the number of recordings I've listened to more than one hundred times.  I doubt I've listened to any more than fifty times.  Most get between two and five airings, and special favorites maybe twenty to thirty.  There's too much good stuff out there to fixate on anything.

[Brian]

they seem to have ignored SACD/Hi-res as well (not that I'm trying to say they are "better" - just another alternative).

I think they released a few SACDs but gave up rather quickly because the demand was not there.

I can count on one hand, using zero fingers, the number of recordings I've listened to more than one hundred times.  I doubt I've listened to any more than fifty times.

Hmm, this is different for me since I got into classical music around age 15 when I didn't have a lot of expendable income for a CD collection, and when streaming was in its infancy. (I didn't use Napster. Such a bad millennial!) I have probably listened to things like the Kleiber Brahms 4, Karajan 60s Beethoven cycle, Moravec Chopin on Vox, and Szell Haydn 92 more than 50 times each.

[Spotted Horses]

I hadn't heard of this sale until I saw there was a Hurwitz video adressing it.  Hurwitz makes some fair points - Hyperion's choice not to embrace streaming and the repackaging of back catalogue into "big boxes" seems to to ignore two areas of the anyway small CM field where there is activity - they seem to have ignored SACD/Hi-res as well (not that I'm trying to say they are "better" - just another alternative).  As it happens I don't stream and I don't buy big boxes but I can see that there is some degree of income to be had there.  Since I enjoy British music which has been a strong part of the Hyperion catalogue I wonder whether they will continue to exist as a commissioning label with a discrete identity or whether Universal are buying them up simply to monetise specific parts of their back-catalogue.  I don't have any issue with them (as a label) not payng royalties any more - that was an old/halcyon days 'benefit' for artists.  I guess one or two Classical Artists in the world might still be on a royalty deal but my guess is 99.9% of even the greatest are simply on a flat/buy-out fee.  I'm still getting payments from the BBC for some Top of the Pops programmes I did in the 80's - nice to get but mad really!  I can see that if you are a writer of pop songs and your music is getting millions of streams/plays then you deserve some piece of that income pie but CM is dwarfed by any comparison.

I hope that the label is able to retain artists and a separate identity - my guess is not and it will disappear into the interchangeable melange that is Universal/Decca/Phillips/DG etc etc

Some of that is just not true. They did release SACD for a while, until it because obvious that the format is dead. They continue to sell hi-rez downloads on their web site. Maybe they left revenue on the table by not doing streaming or so many box sets. Easy to second guess their situation without knowing the numbers.

I suspect the issue may be that after the founder went out of the picture the passion to go forward wasn't there.

[Todd]

Hmm, this is different for me since I got into classical music around age 15 when I didn't have a lot of expendable income for a CD collection

That would explain part of the difference.  When I finally got into classical music I was underway in my career, making some dough, and I started buying discs four to twenty at a time, and then more.  Then I discovered BRO, and I bought hundreds or thousands of discs from them.  I've never had time to listen to classical recordings with great frequency.  Now, go back in time and switch over to Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd or Guns N' Roses or Frank Zappa, and that's a different story.  I'd guess that I have listened to Shut Up 'N Play Yer Guitar hundreds of times.  I wouldn't be surprised if I've listened to it over a thousand times.  Right now, even Volodos or Schuch are unlikely to earn more than a couple dozen spins per title.

[Roasted Swan]

Some of that is just not true. They did release SACD for a while, until it because obvious that the format is dead. They continue to sell hi-rez downloads on their web site. Maybe they left revenue on the table by not doing streaming or so many box sets. Easy to second guess their situation without knowing the numbers.

I suspect the issue may be that after the founder went out of the picture the passion to go forward wasn't there.

I had a quick look at their website and indeed you are completely right (I prefer to think I was "wrong" not "not true" since to my mind the latter implies a sense of being deliberately misleading!). 

I can't actually remember any Hyperion SACD's and the fact that I am not aware of their "studio master" downloads suggests to me (as I do occasionally buy them for example when BIS do a "hi-res for the price of a standard download" offer) that again this is a failure of Hyperion to market their product in a way that will maximise their exposure in the marketplace.  If you look at any other comparable site - BIS/Chandos immediately spring to mind - there are frequent eye-catching offers.  Hyperion DO have a "bargain" page but its hidden away under the "current offers" tab - easy to miss.  In fact their whole website is pretty basic.  Not that I particularly love sites with lots of banners and videos and sounds but Hyperion sticks at the level of just above functional.

[Spotted Horses]

I had a quick look at their website and indeed you are completely right (I prefer to think I was "wrong" not "not true" since to my mind the latter implies a sense of being deliberately misleading!). 

I can't actually remember any Hyperion SACD's and the fact that I am not aware of their "studio master" downloads suggests to me (as I do occasionally buy them for example when BIS do a "hi-res for the price of a standard download" offer) that again this is a failure of Hyperion to market their product in a way that will maximise their exposure in the marketplace.  If you look at any other comparable site - BIS/Chandos immediately spring to mind - there are frequent eye-catching offers.  Hyperion DO have a "bargain" page but its hidden away under the "current offers" tab - easy to miss.  In fact their whole website is pretty basic.  Not that I particularly love sites with lots of banners and videos and sounds but Hyperion sticks at the level of just above functional.

I do like their site a lot, perhaps because it is functional and not flashy. And by having things in my shopping card I do see prices occasionally drop due to promotions (which they don't publicize very well). Maybe it's time to look at that shopping cart and order stuff while it is still available.

[Maestro267]

They should box together the Robert Simpson string quartets.