Recordings That You Are Considering

[Ken B]

This review of an Ormandy set from the Membran/Documents label written by our old friend Discophage provides interesting information:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R5KC20VE2UVI5/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B000057O6M&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=5174&store=music

So let's take it as a given that these are the same transfers. How does that prove piracy? People licence or buy old recordings, right? Isn't that what Brilliant is mostly about?

[jlaurson]

So let's take it as a given that these are the same transfers. How does that prove piracy? People licence or buy old recordings, right? Isn't that what Brilliant is mostly about?

It's not the recording as such, but the transfer/remastering (and all the work involved in that) that is the illegitimate bit.

Brilliant is totally different. They license the whole kaboodle and pay money for that to those who created the files/recordings/transfers.

[Ken B]

It's not the recording as such, but the transfer/remastering (and all the work involved in that) that is the illegitimate bit.

Brilliant is totally different. They license the whole kaboodle and pay money for that to those who created the files/recordings/transfers.

You are assuming what I asked you to prove. How do you know Membran has not made a deal with those companies?

[Todd]

It might be interesting to hear if Juan Carlos Rodriguez can compete with Esteban Sanchez in this repertoire.

[jlaurson]

You are assuming what I asked you to prove. How do you know Membran has not made a deal with those companies?

Oh, right. Because these companies (some, not all... but I take the liberty of deducing) have told me.
But the far more obvious sign: They are not credited! That's, after all, what one does, when licensing material.

[prémont]

This review of an Ormandy set from the Membran/Documents label written by our old friend Discophage provides interesting information:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R5KC20VE2UVI5/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B000057O6M&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=5174&store=music

Well, I agree that this information raises suspicions, but it doesn´t prove anything.

On the other hand it should be easy to reveal piracy by means of analysis of the sound-spectre of the release. Any remastering will certainly have some characteristics which the original LP hasn't.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I don't know if this adds anything to the discussion on Membran but Presto Classical has a page for the label offering many of their recordings.  Would they do this if Membran was selling unlicensed music?  It could be that their catalog is a mix of legitimate and non-licensed recordings.

Retailers unfortunately have been selling pirates for many moons, not because they like to indulge the unscrupulous but because the business of pirates is to shroud their activity in secrecy. Not all countries - Italy in particular - are particularly interested in enforcing copyright laws so all a pirate label has to do is make Italy their "home" and from there they can distribute globally without reprisals. So the thinking is if it comes from Italy it's "legal", in a certain sense, and it's "okay" to offer the product for sale.

This can thrive since many labels have barely the funds to keep afloat and challenging every pirate - as well as the above business model - with litigation would literally break the bank. Options are limited. 

Record labels (perhaps Membran?) who aren't exactly in the business of piracy can nevertheless still take advantage of these lax Italian laws and distribute recordings of their own choosing without fear of reprisals. The gray area of the business mode once again gives them wriggle room. 

[jlaurson]

I don't know if this adds anything to the discussion on Membran but Presto Classical has a page for the label offering many of their recordings.  Would they do this if Membran was selling unlicensed music?  It could be that their catalog is a mix of legitimate and non-licensed recordings.

Again: Membran isn't selling unlicensed music but releases sets (presumably not all of them, but certainly many) in which they take other company's remasterings, rather than bothering to make their own... and that they do without a license. They're not a 'pirate' label in the sense that other, more notorious labels were (and are?), they're a touch more subtle about it. The main thing, though, is that while it isn't hard to prove in private or to satisfy one's personal curiosity (or even in court, I reckon), it is simply isn't worth it for the companies that are affected to bother litigation, because it would cost manifold that what they are effectively losing or Membran is gaining. Still, I wish they once got together and filed a suit.

TD

Alexander Scriabin (1872-1915)

Complete Piano Sonatas
Marc-André Hamelin (piano)

YES YES YES! This is hot stuff.

[Sadko]

Again: Membran isn't selling unlicensed music but releases sets (presumably not all of them, but certainly many) in which they take other company's remasterings, rather than bothering to make their own... and that they do without a license. They're not a 'pirate' label in the sense that other, more notorious labels were (and are?), they're a touch more subtle about it. The main thing, though, is that while it isn't hard to prove in private or to satisfy one's personal curiosity (or even in court, I reckon), it is simply isn't worth it for the companies that are affected to bother litigation, because it would cost manifold that what they are effectively losing or Membran is gaining. Still, I wish they once got together and filed a suit.

YES YES YES! This is hot stuff.

I can't imagine a big company, let's say Warner, is afraid of the costs of a law suit. On the contrary, if they won they could ruin the pirate without endangering themselves. If some companies buy competitors for billions just to get rid of the competition surely now and then they would find it worthwile to take a pirate to court?

And this sounds paradox to me:

... isn't selling unlicensed music but releases sets (presumably not all of them, but certainly many) in which they take other company's remasterings, rather than bothering to make their own... and that they do without a license.

If they take without a license (what is still copyrighted), then they are selling unlicensed, be it a remastering or the original sound recording, I would say.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I can't simply dismiss Jens' information but am having a hard time reconciling it with other information.

Okay, I did a little researching. What I found seems to fit with what I described in my post above.

Step one: The lone Membran release I have is a 10-CD box dedicated to Michelangeli.

Step two: The origins of the recordings themselves are attributed to either Italian Radio or taken from live recitals in various venues.

Step three: Dates and venues are listed, with dates ranging from the 1940s to 1990.

Step four: Copyright information gives either 1999 or 2002 as the year of publication.

Step five: The owner of the copyrights is one Aura Music.

Step six: Who exactly is "Aura Music"?

Step seven: A Google check reveals hardly any information at all in regards to "Aura Music".

Step eight: However, the physical address of "Aura Music" is listed on this page. (The "Aura Music" logo on the right side of the page is the same logo Membran blazons on the back of my Michelangeli box with additional Aura logos printed on every CD sleeve).

Step nine: From the web page above we find that "Aura Music" is based in, no surprise, Italy.

Step ten: An Amazon check reveals (well I already knew this) that "Aura" is - or WAS anyway - in the business of releasing CDs.

Step eleven: It could be that "Aura" has legitimately licensed all this material from someone. But who? 

Step twelve: But then it wouldn't make any sense for "Aura" to then turn around and license their material out to another label (Membran) after incurring the pain and expenditure of their OWN licensing. Not to mention the point of licensing is to make money off what you've just licensed. So moving licensed material on down the food chain to yet another "label in waiting" wouldn't seem to lend itself to making any profit at all. For anyone.

To me all this seems to corroborate what I mentioned in my earlier post. "Aura Music" is basically a facade. They're a "label" who surreptitiously obtains recordings of various provenance and releases them for general consumption. They "base their activities" in Italy to take advantage of Italy's lax copyright laws. They run their operation with no fear of reprisals.

This is straight out of the "Piracy 101" playbook. "Aura Music" is a pirate label.

In the case of this Michelangeli box "Aura" doesn't seem to have stolen any other labels' transfers but their objective here - to pilfer and release recordings without consideration to anyone but themselves - isn't any less underhanded.   

Enter Membran. So Membran does business with "Aura" and obtains "rights" to these recordings through "licensing". Or do they?

Since the recordings taken from the Italian Radio broadcasts would naturally be the property of Italian Radio, any licensing would have to come from them. Yet according to the packaging that's not the case. Pretty big red flag. And as far as the live recital recordings, again no information is given as to their provenance. Another red flag. In fact, nowhere on the packaging is ANY acknowledgement given to the rightful owners of the recordings. Just "copyright" mumbo jumbo. If "Aura" is the original beneficiary of these recordings, licensed from whoever, then why the cloak of silence as to recording origins? Where's the transparency? No open door policy? No surprise. (Not to mention, as already noted, the business model of licensing the licensed is straight out of science fiction).

So, in the case of Membran, did they make a pact with the devil, here? The smoking gun would seem to indicate that they did, which puts them in a very unfavorable light.   

This looks all the world to me like Membran entered into an agreement of some sort with a pirate label, and guilt by association is still guilt. At least as far as this Michelangeli box is concerned.

[king ubu]

I can't simply dismiss Jens' information but am having a hard time reconciling it with other information.

The writing is all over the wall, don't be afraid to read it! 

Seriously, Membran *does* some licenced reissues, yes. But in Europe, up to 2013 (I think), recordings older than 50 years are in public domain, so you and me and anyone can release them, licensing is not necessary (though obviously it would be illegal to sell such items in countries with longer-lasting copyrights such as the US ... there seem to be things amazon.com doesn't list, but in general they're rather slack about it, it seems).

It is my understanding however, that you're only allowed to copy from releases older than 50 years, too - so it is not legal to take previous CD reissues and run them through some filters to alter (often: ruin) sonic specifics (not sure if that prevents from identifying sources with technical checks or not, but I couldn't be bothered, the mere fact that pirates like spanish jazz label Definitive/Jazz Factory and Membran will use MP3 to put onto CDs is enough of a sign to me that they're not straight up).

But of course - and mind me, I'm not attacking you sanantonio, this is just a general observation I've made in various places and with people (including clerks at music stores and music journalists, alas!) - it is much easier to say: so-and-so is selling this, so it must be okay. As I said, the writing is all over the wall ... and even though they might steal transfers, basically releasing PD material is allowed - however, the point of interest to me is: can I get something that's source from original tapes or close-by copies? Or is the pirate doing proper work and really showing love and care for their subject (which too rarely is the case, but again: they have become proficient in pretending to care, offering new liner notes by nobodies with lots of words that say nothing but look good on the outside, same for design, in jazz there are labels that put IDIS and Urania and other such cheapo-crappers to shame. I guess on the other hand Frémeaux, to name another example from jazz, is not paying any royalties for their Django or Satchmo or Bird "intégrales", but they're doing a brilliant job ... so is "Chant du Monde", an affiliated label of Harmonia Mundi France).

[Jo498]

I am actually pretty sure that the Italian (and also Svizzera Italiana) radio recordings are legit. They have been available for 15-20 years on a bunch of labels as "Ermitage", "Aura" (and never on a "big" label") they sound relatively good for live/radio recordings and in their earlier incarnations they had longish blurbs in the booklet from an Italian critic or music journalist.

Those earlier Ermitage and similar CDs in the late 90s/early 2000s had almost only such radio stuff, nothing that could have been pirated from Pearl or so. And they were cheap but not always super-duper-dirt-cheap. So I think back then they were legitimate outlets for those radio recordings. Also, in Italy copyright protection of recordings is or used to be much shorter and it might not apply to radio broadcasts anyway.
Now it's 50 years in Europe and it's hard to prove whether someone transferred an old LP himself or stole Ward Marston's remastering from the 1990s.

However, I still think that the amazon review has very good points and that the Ormandy and many other recordings might be pirated.

I think membran and its labels offer a mix of pirated and licensed recordings therefore they are probably very hard to sue even if some lable wanted to take legal action.

[king ubu]

(and also Svizzera Italiana)

Which labels would be Swiss? I am aware of (again) some jazz bootleg labels but they stopped their activities many years ago (early 1990s, I think - about the same time Italian laws seem to have gotten somewhat stricter).

Membran is German, but mostly these labels seem to be Italian (classical) and Spanish (some Andorran) (jazz).

There are some operating out of the UK as well (not sure for instance what the operating model of Proper is, they also do their own new productions, they license stuff but the sell lots of PD stuff and their sonics usually aren't great, they might be another case of "steal and filter", while Avid seems to be straight up and do their own needle drops, which aren't of great quality but are mostly listenable if you want a cheap fix).

[Jo498]

Sorry, I was imprecise.
I did not mean Swiss labels but that some/most of those Aura/Ermitage radio broadcasts are from Lugano and were made by the Swiss Italian Radio. They have been around for ages and it was always clearly stated on th discs that they were from live performances in Lugano, Ascona and other venues and connected to Swiss or Italian Radio. So much information does not seem likely for pirated recordings.

[king ubu]

Oh yes, that I did notice! Some of the Michelangeli material is from Swiss recordings/locations as well, I think? I've got two of his Aura/Membran boxes ... I don't completely refrain from buying these, but I don't really propagate doing so, and wherever there's a valid alternative, I prefer going that way.

[Jo498]

As I said, for those radio recordings there really is no "valid alternative". There are some earlier single discs with better notes, some on "Ermitage", some on "AURA". But there is for me no indication that these older issues were more legit than the newer Membran stuff. *In the case of those radio recordings and similar things.*

I am not at all sure with some other offerings of Membran (like the Maestro piratico boxes). But there is also some stuff, stemming from smaller or traditional cheapo labels like VOX, Intercord or from the German Radio that could have been "officially licensed". E.g. the "Concerto Royale" series of a few years ago.

There are some recordings, like Christiane Jaccottet's Bach (which is pretty good) that have been floating around on different cheapo labels for more than 20 years. I am not even sure if all of those ever had an "official" CD incarnation (I have about 3 of them on Intercord). Jaccottet died in 1999, Intercord has been owned by EMI since 1994, I am not even sure who holds the right for those recordings. Very probably nobody really cares.

[king ubu]

I've seen Membran releases (actually TIM or whatever it was called around 2000 or so) where the licensing info was clearly displayed (those, again, were jazz reissues, namely Candid releases).

As has been stated above: if they license something, it would surely be stated clearly on the backcover (just as is the case with all those Brilliant sets). That's the whole point of it. It's just some ink, but it does make a difference because it would usually mean they have access to some okay sources or they were allowed to just recycle previous, official reissues.

But yeah, the Michelangeli material is different. I'd prefer getting FLAC for such things, but I've not found any really good resources for non-commercial/bootleg/pirate-only classical DLs (I use dimeadozen, but the classical corner there is fairly small - they have a policy that really appeals to me, all in all, allowing nothing that was ever commercially released ... so if you're hunting for long OOP stuff you need to look someplace else, but that's fine with me).

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I did not mean to question your earlier post, but was just adding yet more to consider.

Oh, sorry, I might have quoted your post out of context. I was just using it as a sort of jumping off point.

[Mandryka]

Scott Ross plays Frescobaldi

[prémont]

Scott Ross plays Frescobaldi

The Frescobaldi works are played with elegant flow.

The GV are quite good, but I like his live recording (Erato) better. It feels more organic and integrated, while the Virgin compared to the Erato rather feels like a series of variations.