Decca Classics or Deutsche Grammophon

[Fafner]

I wonder if there is any difference between the two labels when it comes to new releases now that they both belong to the Universal group. Are they still two separate companies each with its own management or are they just meaningless stickers?  I find their marketing activities to be very much alike and their websites are identical, just with a different styling applied.  I know the difference is non-existent with regard to reissues of the back catalogs -- the big Verdi box was released under Decca, but it contains recordings originally issued by Decca, DG, Philips and even EMI.

Does it even matter if an artist gets signed by one or the other?

[Todd]

Since UMG owns both, I don't think it matters much for disc buyers.  I thought DG was the flagship classical label under the new arrangement, and Decca a subsidiary label, though that may be wrong.  Philips, of course, is gone.  And now there's this, though I'm not sure what the outcome will be or is supposed to be. 

[kishnevi]

Since UMG owns both, I don't think it matters much for disc buyers.  I thought DG was the flagship classical label under the new arrangement, and Decca a subsidiary label, though that may be wrong.  Philips, of course, is gone.  And now there's this, though I'm not sure what the outcome will be or is supposed to be.

I think Lebrecht cut and paste without actually reading what he posted which includes this:

Formerly known as Decca Label Group, the new Universal Music Classics (UMC) aims to "re-imagine classics," with a new focus on U.S. based A&R signings, while remaining the American home of the prestigious Decca, Deutsche Grammophon, Mercury Classics and Panorama imprints, and continuing its long-standing relationship with the esteemed ECM label.

IOW, a reshuffle of the marketing and financial departments which doesn't affect the label named plopped on the cover of the CD.  Of course, there is no obstacle I know of to UMG simply starting to use the DG name on all CDs it issues any point in time it wishes.  And it's not as if Decca was some sort of great tradition in the world of music:  much of its back catalog, after all, was originally issued under the London label, which has long since disappeared into the corporate void.

[Todd]

And it's not as if Decca was some sort of great tradition in the world of music:  much of its back catalog, after all, was originally issued under the London label, which has long since disappeared into the corporate void.

I believe the history was more convoluted than that.  London was the US label name for British Decca classical recordings, hence the same two tone logo for both London and Decca.  American Decca was a different label, though it also recorded classical music for a while. 

I like how the press release includes Panorama as a label unto itself.  Decca will be used for as long as it is deemed valuable, and then it won't be used anymore, and maybe even sold.

[Superhorn]

    The Philips label  went under  dust some time ago unfortunately, but Decca has bee re-releasing much of its  catalogue , which is welcome .
But there are still lots of great Philips recordings which have yet to appear on Decca , for example, the classic  Michael Tippett recordings
by the late , great Sir Colin Davis .  We need  the recordings of  the Tippett operas  The Midsummer Marriage and  The Knot Garden in particular . Or possibly they will show up on another label .

[Mirror Image]

The name on the label doesn't make much a difference these days since they're both under the umbrella of UMG.

[Brian]

Decca no longer has independent production facilities, so there is no distinctive "Decca Sound" anymore.

Does DG? I've noticed quite a few DG albums nowadays have fine print stating that the copyright belongs to the performer and the recording is "under exclusive license" to DG. This is true of Barenboim's recent Warsaw recitals, for example. I'm under the impression that they (meaning the artist? maybe?) use an independent team of engineers, although possibly engineers who were formerly on the DG payroll.

(BIS engineers also spun off into an independent company which BIS now hires to produce their CDs.)

[kishnevi]

I think Brian may be right.  I grabbed four CDs released in the last year or so:
Rafal Blechacz (Szymanowski, Debussy)--recorded and mastered by Emil Berliner Studios, copyright belongs to DG
Jan Lisiecki (Chopin Etudes)--recorded and mastered by Musicom, copyright belongs to DG
Janine Jansen (Bach Concertos)--recorded and mastered by individuals whose corporate affiliation is not given; copyright belongs to Decca/DG
Pappano/Academy of Santa Cecilia (Verdi Sacred Pieces)--recorded in association with RAI; copyright belongs to the Academy of Santa Cecilia with exclusive license to Warner

ETA: inspecting the just released Saint Saens CD featuring the Capucon brothers, the engineers are listed as individuals with no corporate affiliation given, but two copyright listings are give:  one for Radio France under exclusive license to Erato/Warner, the other Erato/Warner.   The CD was released under the newly revived Erato label.

[Brian]

Janine Jansen (Bach Concertos)--recorded and mastered by individuals whose corporate affiliation is not given; copyright belongs to Decca/DG

Emil Berliner Studios' website advertises their services as recording engineers. And more relevantly to Scarpia's point, their history page clearly states:

"The Emil Berliner Studios used to be the in-house recording department of the renowned classical record label Deutsche Grammophon. ... In May of 2008, due to a management buy-out, the independent company "EBS Productions GmbH & Co. KG" was founded. This company continues the name "Emil Berliner Studios" and has emerged as an independent production studio for acoustic music of the most contrasting styles."

They even moved from the old DG studios to a new location.

I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that an engineer or producer not being listed specifically as an affiliate means that they do not work for a company, though. If you look at the back of a Naxos guitar album, Norbert Kraft and Bonnie Silver have done all the work, but I have no idea whether they are official Naxos employees or independent producers with close ties to the label. (Kraft has been producing Naxos' guitar albums for 19 years.)

By the way, how is that Verdi Sacred Pieces album?

[kishnevi]

By the way, how is that Verdi Sacred Pieces album?

Interesting in that it contains works that don't get much press,  and nice to have them in modern sound.  It also fills out one's view of the Requiem to find that the great Dies Irae theme was actually integral to the Libera Me Verdi wrote for the projected Rossini Requiem--in which of course it would not have been a "flashback" to the Dies Irae as we now hear it--before he went on to use it in the full Requiem.  The Rossini version of the Libera Me is included, as well an Ave Maria for soprano and strings  he published in 1880.  Which reveals at least one flaw, since the CD does not include the Paternoster for large unaccompanied chorus (210 voices) published as a companion piece to the Ave Maria, which is referred to in the liner notes but no reason given why Pappano didn't record it.  (Maybe he couldn't arrange for a large enough chorus?)   

As to the performances themselves--I was not overwhelmed by them;  but I wasn't particularly overwhelmed by my other recording of the Four Pieces,  Reiner's,  so perhaps the music and not the musicians is the flaw.

[Fafner]

A little history.  Polygram, the parent company of DG, took over Decca (called London in the US) and Philips in 1978, I think.  The three have been a single company since then.  (Notice that DG, Philips and Decca CDs are numbered using the same system.)  For a while they allowed all three labels to operate more or less independently and kept a strict firewall between the labels (no mixed label reissues, etc).  In 1999 (I think) they closed the independent offices of Philips and consolidated with Decca.  (The people who ran Philips founded the label Pentatone).  A few years ago (maybe 2008?) the independent offices of Decca were closed and consolidated with DG.  Two years ago their license to use the Philips trademark expired, although Philips had ceased to have any independent existance years before, and they re-branded Philips recordings as Decca.

Another quirk is that American Decca split from British Decca in 1942 (hence the use of the "London" trademark for British Decca in the US) but after UMG and MCA merged around 2000 the two Decca came under the same management again and British Decca could again be called "Decca" in the US.

At this point, I think there is little distinction between any of the UMG labels.  They still preserve the DG vs Decca distinction in reissues and for artists on their roster, but I think they are essentially under unified management now.  Decca no longer has independent production facilities, so there is no distinctive "Decca Sound" anymore.

Thank you. That was very informative.

[Mirror Image]

Looking at my purchases, I was a little surprised to see how few current Decca recordings I have.

I'm not surprised Decca has hardly done anything worthwhile in years.