Forgive me for being out of the loop for awhile...

[Chris L.]

...but at what point did Warner Classics take over or buy out EMI Classics? I've noticed lots of recordings and box sets that formerly had the EMI logo are now wearing the Warner one.

I must say, from an aesthetic point of view I don't like it, but if it results in more and cheaper product with at least the same quality I'm all for it.

[Chris L.]

No one knows? No one cares?

[ZauberdrachenNr.7]

...but at what point did Warner Classics take over or buy out EMI Classics? I've noticed lots of recordings and box sets that formerly had the EMI logo are now wearing the Warner one.

I must say, from an aesthetic point of view I don't like it, but if it results in more and cheaper product with at least the same quality I'm all for it.

EMI was one of my favorite labels, but despite my many purchases!, had been in trouble for some time. Warner acquired it along with Parlophone, Chrysalis Records, EMI Classics, Virgin Classics and some of EMI's regional labels across Europe in Feb. 2013, for $765 million and regulatory approval came several months after. 

http://www.classicfm.com/music-news/latest-news/emi-classics-and-virgin-classics-join-warners/

[Chris L.]

EMI was one of my favorite labels, but despite my many purchases!, had been in trouble for some time. Warner acquired it along with Parlophone, Chrysalis Records, EMI Classics, Virgin Classics and some of EMI's regional labels across Europe in Feb. 2013, for $765 million and regulatory approval came several months after. 

http://www.classicfm.com/music-news/latest-news/emi-classics-and-virgin-classics-join-warners/

Thanks Zauberdrachen. I don't know how one of the oldest and most prestigious labels that had The Beatles and all those great artists and labels under it's wing could be in such trouble. If Warner bought them, why can't they use their logo? This is not the case with DG, Decca, and RCA with their respective owners.

So now we're down to three or four big conglomerations as far as major labels are concerned, Warner, Sony/BMG and Universal?

[Pat B]

Thanks Zauberdrachen. I don't know how one of the oldest and most prestigious labels that had The Beatles and all those great artists and labels under it's wing could be in such trouble. If Warner bought them, why can't they use their logo? This is not the case with DG, Decca, and RCA with their respective owners.

My understanding: Warner didn't buy all of EMI, just a few divisions. The rest, including the EMI name and mark, went to Universal.

[Brian]

Thanks Zauberdrachen. I don't know how one of the oldest and most prestigious labels that had The Beatles and all those great artists and labels under it's wing could be in such trouble. If Warner bought them, why can't they use their logo? This is not the case with DG, Decca, and RCA with their respective owners.

So now we're down to three or four big conglomerations as far as major labels are concerned, Warner, Sony/BMG and Universal?

EMI had been mismanaged for a very long time.

You're right about the former majors: Warner, Sony/BMG, and Universal. However, they're hardly majors anymore; they do put out quite a few new releases (Warner and DG mostly re-record warhorses, while Sony has been surprisingly adventurous of late) and even sign talented young players, but the two biggest labels in today's world are probably Naxos and Harmonia Mundi. Naxos for sure (#1 by number of new releases and volume of sales); somebody can correct me on HM. Naxos actually has a distributing arm which does digital and physical distribution for the Warner group in many countries.

If I remember correctly, Deutsche Grammophon no longer employs full-time engineers. Many new DG CDs are produced and copyrighted by the artist, then licensed to the label.

[Chris L.]

EMI had been mismanaged for a very long time.

You're right about the former majors: Warner, Sony/BMG, and Universal. However, they're hardly majors anymore; they do put out quite a few new releases (Warner and DG mostly re-record warhorses, while Sony has been surprisingly adventurous of late) and even sign talented young players, but the two biggest labels in today's world are probably Naxos and Harmonia Mundi. Naxos for sure (#1 by number of new releases and volume of sales); somebody can correct me on HM. Naxos actually has a distributing arm which does digital and physical distribution for the Warner group in many countries.

If I remember correctly, Deutsche Grammophon no longer employs full-time engineers. Many new DG CDs are produced and copyrighted by the artist, then licensed to the label.

HM has always been one of my favorite labels. Glad to see they are still doing well. I hope they remain forever independent.

[amw]

Someone I know who worked for Sony Classical told me they were essentially a dead label that didn't know it yet, and opined that they were a few years away from being bought out by Universal. Hasn't happened yet, but might still.

As far as classical music goes, the major label (there's only one) is the Naxos-Chandos-BIS-Harmonia Mundi quadrifecta, which seems to have been forming increasingly closer ties recently. They're not a single unified label yet, but as far as business practices go, they may as well be, with a comparison possible to the different 'brands' of tomato sauce offered at Trader Joe's. The major 'independents' appear to be Hyperion, MD&G and Outhere (which seems to be trying to get a slice of the Naxos pie as well). ECM likes to act like an independent label but is basically a Universal sockpuppet.

[Chris L.]

Someone I know who worked for Sony Classical told me they were essentially a dead label that didn't know it yet, and opined that they were a few years away from being bought out by Universal. Hasn't happened yet, but might still.

As far as classical music goes, the major label (there's only one) is the Naxos-Chandos-BIS-Harmonia Mundi quadrifecta, which seems to have been forming increasingly closer ties recently. They're not a single unified label yet, but as far as business practices go, they may as well be, with a comparison possible to the different 'brands' of tomato sauce offered at Trader Joe's. The major 'independents' appear to be Hyperion, MD&G and Outhere (which seems to be trying to get a slice of the Naxos pie as well). ECM likes to act like an independent label but is basically a Universal sockpuppet.

Naxos-Chandos-BIS-Harmonia Mundi a quadrifecta? That seems odd to me, as they don't feel even remotely related to each other save for the overall genres of music they do. I noticed no "sameness" between any of those labels, such as is totally obvious with Decca, DG and Philips.

[Brian]

The relationship between Naxos, Chandos, BIS, Harmonia Mundi, and a bunch of other labels is very complicated. To start with, all those labels, and literally hundreds of smaller ones, are part of Naxos's online distribution services: the streaming sites at Naxos Music Library and ClassicsOnline Lossless, and the MP3/FLAC download store at ClassicsOnline. Many of them are distributed by Naxos' physical commerce arm, in some or all regions. (Chandos and BIS are distributed by Naxos in the USA, but Harmonia Mundi runs the other major American distribution company, which is a direct rival and which markets Alia Vox, Hyperion, and the record labels run by the San Francisco and London Symphonies. Alia Vox and Hyperion do no business whatsoever with the Naxos group.)

As for ownership, none are owned or part-owned by the others, that I know of. However, Klaus Heymann, the CEO of Naxos, is a sucker for these labels, and will purchase them if they go broke. He has recently done this with Ondine and Dynamic.

Because Naxos is the largest label and the largest distributor, and because the sales market is so tiny and difficult (Naxos turns profit on distribution and streaming, but loses money on CDs; they consider recordings a publicity expense), Heymann coordinates with other record labels on releases. For example, if Chandos has a new Vivaldi Four Seasons CD this month, and Ondine does too, Heymann will persuade one of them to postpone the CD for a few months so they won't compete against each other, split the market, and reduce sales. This doesn't always work, and you can tell because sometimes in interviews Heymann will cluck with disapproval. Most notably so far, Naxos and Chandos agreed to "split" the Mieczyslaw Weinberg symphonies: Chandos will record most of them with Chandos contract artists, and Naxos will record the others with their contract artists.

The other big trend is artist-operated labels, like the recordings orchestras put out themselves, or Alia Vox (Jordi Savall), Ivory Classics (the late Earl Wild), or Onyx (which I think is a sort of co-op, and is distributed by Naxos).

[Chris L.]

The relationship between Naxos, Chandos, BIS, Harmonia Mundi, and a bunch of other labels is very complicated. To start with, all those labels, and literally hundreds of smaller ones, are part of Naxos's online distribution services: the streaming sites at Naxos Music Library and ClassicsOnline Lossless, and the MP3/FLAC download store at ClassicsOnline. Many of them are distributed by Naxos' physical commerce arm, in some or all regions. (Chandos and BIS are distributed by Naxos in the USA, but Harmonia Mundi runs the other major American distribution company, which is a direct rival and which markets Alia Vox, Hyperion, and the record labels run by the San Francisco and London Symphonies. Alia Vox and Hyperion do no business whatsoever with the Naxos group.)

As for ownership, none are owned or part-owned by the others, that I know of. However, Klaus Heymann, the CEO of Naxos, is a sucker for these labels, and will purchase them if they go broke. He has recently done this with Ondine and Dynamic.

Because Naxos is the largest label and the largest distributor, and because the sales market is so tiny and difficult (Naxos turns profit on distribution and streaming, but loses money on CDs; they consider recordings a publicity expense), Heymann coordinates with other record labels on releases. For example, if Chandos has a new Vivaldi Four Seasons CD this month, and Ondine does too, Heymann will persuade one of them to postpone the CD for a few months so they won't compete against each other, split the market, and reduce sales. This doesn't always work, and you can tell because sometimes in interviews Heymann will cluck with disapproval. Most notably so far, Naxos and Chandos agreed to "split" the Mieczyslaw Weinberg symphonies: Chandos will record most of them with Chandos contract artists, and Naxos will record the others with their contract artists.

The other big trend is artist-operated labels, like the recordings orchestras put out themselves, or Alia Vox (Jordi Savall), Ivory Classics (the late Earl Wild), or Onyx (which I think is a sort of co-op, and is distributed by Naxos).

Your very knowledgeable about the ins and outs of the classical music industry. That's good, as I'm very interested in the aspects of all that. I have heard it been said before that the larger conglomerations, e.g. Universal, Sony/BMG, Warner, etc. are satisfied just to break even on their classical CD sales, and if they actually turn a profit on some years they are ecstatic. The only reason they can keep offering us their product is because of all the profit from they make off all the popular stuff.

I suppose we should all be grateful for their continued commitment to the higher arts, but it's sad and pathetic at the same time that an industry that was once much healthier, with prestigious labels that were once independent and in control of their own destiny, are now reduced to this, all because the vast majority of people today would rather fill their heads with garbage, fluff and frivolous nonsense rather then with things that are truly good.

[Cato]

I suppose we should all be grateful for their continued commitment to the higher arts, but it's sad and pathetic at the same time that an industry that was once much healthier, with prestigious labels that were once independent and in control of their own destiny, are now reduced to this, all because the vast majority of people today would rather fill their heads with garbage, fluff and frivolous nonsense rather then with things that are truly good.

When I taught History, I showed several full-page magazine ads from the 1930's and 1940's put out by RCA, which offered a set of Classical 78 records and a record player.  In general, the ads showed a man talking to a woman at a symphony concert, and the man says e.g.: "A few weeks ago, I didn't know Beethoven from Brahms.  But thanks to the RCA History of Classical Music, I'm becoming an expert!"

Note that the company assumed that average people in America wanted to know Beethoven from Brahms, wanted to become at least somewhat expert in classical music.   And it paid for full-page ads in national magazines that were not "elitist" by any means (e.g. Life, National Geographic, etc.) to convince people that knowing classical music is something that the average person should want to do!

Tell RCA today that they should pay for a 30-second ad on television to push CD's with the "History of Classical Music" plus a "free CD player," and the reaction you would receive, I suspect, would be to keep you calm, and then to call for an ambulance and some boys in white jackets.   

[jochanaan]

There used to be some sense of noblesse oblige among corporate executives.

[Ken B]

There used to be some sense of noblesse oblige among corporate executives.

I believe this is true. Still is for many, but it's not admired much anymore either, which probably matters.