Haydn's Haus

[Parsifal]

No, I don't think that I have my economics backwards... at least I'd like to think that I know a thing or two about how the recording industry works.

Limited runs sell out... and then it needs a certain minimum demand to justify a second pressing, especially for box sets. There are ways to keep the cost down (using jewel cases with the original releases in a flimsy slip-box --- as opposed to those rather expensive whatshammacallit-paper-wallet cases... but it still costs money that, at low retail prices, is hard to get back if you don't know if you'll sell 100 copies or 1000. Although I'd like to think that Naive knows that re-issuing the Mosaiques should be viable.

It seems to me that the economics are not complex  For the first release they recorded the music, which means the rented a performance space or studio, paid a highly skilled producer/engineer who owns or rented rather expensive equipment to record and edit the recording.  Add to that the fee paid to the musicians themselves.  Then they paid for a glass master to be made.  That would run into several thousand dollars.  After that it is 50 cents per CD if they do a run of at least several hundred, maybe a buck including a jewel case and booklet.  If their stock runs out, the up-front costs are already paid and all they have to do is spend another $1 to produce each CD that they subsequently sell for $10. 

If the first run really sold out, it is hard to see why it wouldn't be worth their while to pay the very small incremental cost to press more discs from the existing glass master.  Virtually every other small classical record label manages to keep its recordings in the catalog more or less indefinitely.  However, it is also possible they failed to sell their initial pressing, were losing money on the storage cost, and had to pay someone to haul the remaining stock of Quatuor Mosaïques recordings away and bury them in a landfill.  That is entirely possible, and in that case there would be no incentive to press more.

[Que]

If the first run really sold out, it is hard to see why it wouldn't be worth their while to pay the very small incremental cost to press more discs from the existing glass master.  Virtually every other small classical record label manages to keep its recordings in the catalog more or less indefinitely.  However, it is also possible they failed to sell their initial pressing, were losing money on the storage cost, and had to pay someone to haul the remaining stock of Quatuor Mosaïques recordings away and bury them in a landfill.  That is entirely possible, and in that case there would be no incentive to press more.

I'm also doubting that economics is the issue here. If Brilliant can do reissues at give-away prices, so could Naïve.
Even at a higher price level - mid price would be fine by me. But they have just the worst back catalogue policy ever...

Still, I'm grateful for the QM haydn set.

Q

[Opus106]

I'm also doubting that economics is the issue here. If Brilliant can do reissues at give-away prices, so could Naïve.

Q

I don't think that's a valid comparison, as Brilliant is not involved in making new recordings (at least not as much as Naïve is, even considering their recent foray in creating original recordings).

[Que]

I don't think that's a valid comparison, as Brilliant is not involved in making new recordings.

But wouldn't a company that reissues its own recordings be at least in an equal position, when those recordings already have had their initial run and no separate fee for acquiring the rights is necessary?

My guess is that people at Brilliant, Out-there and Newton are just better at economics... I would beg Naïve to license their back catalogue to them...

Q

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I'm also doubting that economics is the issue here. If Brilliant can do reissues at give-away prices, so could Naïve.
Even at a higher price level - mid price would be fine by me. But they have just the worst back catalogue policy ever...

Agreed, especially as it wasn't even Naïve who originally recorded a large portion of the QM's Haydn. It was Astrée (parent company Auvidis). Naïve simply inherited Auvidis's catalogue after they bought them out so a large part of the process had already been completed. So just get with the reissuing already! (Especially the Arditti's Schoenberg quartets).

Still, I'm grateful for the QM haydn set.

I have them all already but another lease on life is definitely welcome.

[Opus106]

But wouldn't a company that reissues its own recordings be at least in an equal position, when those recordings already have had their initial run and no separate fee for acquiring the rights is necessary?

Q

Agreed, especially as it wasn't even Naïve who originally recorded a large portion of the QM's Haydn. It was Astrée (parent company Auvidis). Naïve simply inherited Auvidis's catalogue after they bought them out so a large part of the process had already been completed.

I hadn't realised that these were acquired. This probably puts them on an equal footing, more or less.

[Que]

I have them all already but another lease on life is definitely welcome.

I occupied myself with the Festetics Qt first.. (another availability nightmare BTW till the ARCANA back catalogue was reissued).

So, now quite ready for the QM. 

Q

[jlaurson]

It seems to me that the economics are not complex  For the first release they recorded the music, which means the rented a performance space or studio, paid a highly skilled producer/engineer who owns or rented rather expensive equipment to record and edit the recording.  Add to that the fee paid to the musicians themselves.  Then they paid for a glass master to be made.  That would run into several thousand dollars.  After that it is 50 cents per CD if they do a run of at least several hundred, maybe a buck including a jewel case and booklet.  If their stock runs out, the up-front costs are already paid and all they have to do is spend another $1 to produce each CD that they subsequently sell for $10. 

If the first run really sold out, it is hard to see why it wouldn't be worth their while to pay the very small incremental cost to press more discs from the existing glass master.  Virtually every other small classical record label manages to keep its recordings in the catalog more or less indefinitely.  However, it is also possible they failed to sell their initial pressing, were losing money on the storage cost, and had to pay someone to haul the remaining stock of Quatuor Mosaïques recordings away and bury them in a landfill.  That is entirely possible, and in that case there would be no incentive to press more.

I think you rather underestimate the cost of re-issuing CDs (50 ct per CD isn't it---given the hike in raw material prices, the raw CD alone costs that much), and even a reasonable cost, depending on how you re-issue, you need to print a whole lot (again, depends on the effort and presentation, but starting at a run of 1000+ --- which is already more than most CDs will ever sell in their first lifetime) to make it viable. And then we don't know what contractual obligations there may be to the performers and producers. Nowadays, performers wave rights and pay for the production... but I don't think that's how the Mosaiques produced their Mozart CDs.

Some producers---can't speak for naive, admittedly---then like to wait to see how the second hand market develops in order to feel reassured that they can throw a new edition on the market without too much risk involved. And FYI: A small classical label that sells at high-midprice, calculated that they make 46 pence on each disc sold. Just to get an idea for the margins.

[Karl Henning]

I think you rather underestimate the cost of re-issuing CDs (50 ct per CD isn't it---given the hike in raw material prices, the raw CD alone costs that much), and even a reasonable cost, depending on how you re-issue, you need to print a whole lot (again, depends on the effort and presentation, but starting at a run of 1000+ --- which is already more than most CDs will ever sell in their first lifetime) to make it viable. And then we don't know what contractual obligations there may be to the performers and producers. Nowadays, performers wave rights and pay for the production... but I don't think that's how the Mosaiques produced their Mozart CDs.

Some producers---can't speak for naive, admittedly---then like to wait to see how the second hand market develops in order to feel reassured that they can throw a new edition on the market without too much risk involved. And FYI: A small classical label that sells at high-midprice, calculated that they make 46 pence on each disc sold. Just to get an idea for the margins.

Not that it materially alters your point, but to clarify: do you mean 46 pence UK or US 46¢?

(In any event = chicken feed, bien sûr.)

[Parsifal]

I don't think that's a valid comparison, as Brilliant is not involved in making new recordings (at least not as much as Naïve is, even considering their recent foray in creating original recordings).

The point is, after they have made the recording and sold out the first print run, for the purpose of the second print run they are in the same economic position as Brilliant.  The recording has already been made, and all they have to do is pay the incremental cost of pressing more.  Maybe they pay royalties to the artists, but that is paid per disc sold, not per disc printed. 

[DavidW]

I can't find the link for the QM box set, could someone please repost it?

[Parsifal]

I think you rather underestimate the cost of re-issuing CDs (50 ct per CD isn't it---given the hike in raw material prices, the raw CD alone costs that much), and even a reasonable cost, depending on how you re-issue, you need to print a whole lot (again, depends on the effort and presentation, but starting at a run of 1000+ --- which is already more than most CDs will ever sell in their first lifetime) to make it viable. And then we don't know what contractual obligations there may be to the performers and producers. Nowadays, performers wave rights and pay for the production... but I don't think that's how the Mosaiques produced their Mozart CDs.

http://www.cdpressing.com/prices.htm

This web site advertises 1000 CDs, ready for the consumer, including assignment of a bar code, for $719.   The price for discs themselves (no jewel cases and booklets) is $379 for 1000, or thirty eight cents each.  This service includes making the glass master.  Making more of a disc that had already been mastered would presumably be cheaper.  I have a relative who operates a small classical record label, he has told me that this is what he pays for small production runs of CDs.

[Parsifal]

I can't find the link for the QM box set, could someone please repost it?

http://www.amazon.fr/Haydn-Quatuor-Mosaiques/dp/B00EO7XPPC/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1379593811&sr=8-2&keywords=haydn+mosaiques

[North Star]

I can't find the link for the QM box set, could someone please repost it?

http://www.amazon.fr/Haydn-Quatuor-Mosaiques/dp/B00EO7XPPC/

[mc ukrneal]

And FYI: A small classical label that sells at high-midprice, calculated that they make 46 pence on each disc sold. Just to get an idea for the margins.

Is that the net profit on each (or something else)? If this is a net profit number, it doesn't really show the right picture.

[DavidW]

Thanks Scarpia, North Star.  Great price, I've preordered.

[Parsifal]

Isn't their Mozart on youtube? I mean, it won't take much just to go to youtube and confirm or deny your previous judgement.

I normally don't listen to music on youtube, but I did find one of their Mozart recordings and listened to a bit.  The recordings struck me as okay, but not particularly remarkable, and I'm remembering why I sold them.  I got the recordings with very high expectations after reading that the quartet members had worked with Harnoncourt in the Concentus Musicus Wien.  The recordings were not bad, but had none of the magic I've come to expect from Harnoncourt and there was little to distinguish them from the many other recordings I have of this music.  I sold them based on that disappointment (although I kept one disc, with the Mozart clarinet quintet).  I probably should not have sold them, but I don't particularly care to buy them again.  Based on what little I've heard, the original instrument quartet I prefer is the Festetics, whose recordings are also out-of-print.  But original instruments string quartet recordings are not a high priority, for me, since it is mainly the sound of the wind instruments that draws me to original instrument recordings.

[kishnevi]

And, btw, exactly that recording of the Clarinet Quintet (and Kegelstatt Trio) is the one Naive chose to reissue on their new group of budget re-issues (LA Collection Naive).

[Daverz]

http://www.amazon.fr/Haydn-Quatuor-Mosaiques/dp/B00EO7XPPC/

i love the Mosaiques Haydn, and this looks like a great bargain.  I don't know their Mozart.  Why are we talking about Mozart?

A Festetics box would be nice, too.

[Octave]

i love the Mosaiques Haydn, and this looks like a great bargain.  I don't know their Mozart.  Why are we talking about Mozart?

A Festetics box would be nice, too.

I am hoping the nice price on the Badura-Skoda Schubert box was a test case for Arcana back catalog.  An affordable Festetics set would be an automatic acquisition for me.
I too am psyched about the Mosaiques/Naive collection.  Good times!