Recordings That You Are Considering

[DavidW]

Best Recordings of 2009 (#9)

Oh that's why it's a 2 cd set, to have both old and new recordings for comparison!  Very cool!!   Guess I'll pick that up.

[Todd]

A dud if you ask me.

[DavidW]

A dud if you ask me.

Yup, it looks half way to crossover.

[Coopmv]

A dud if you ask me.

I certainly would not spend money on this CD ...

[kishnevi]

Re: the Perlman-Ax-Ma CD--other than the celebrity of the performers, there's nothing actually outstanding about it;  Better off, if you need these trios, with the Leonidas Kavakos disc, which throws in the Violin Concerto on a second disc for about the same price; or Trio Wanderer on Harmonia Mundi.

the Hahn Bach disc--well, Bach recitals built around a theme seem to be rather popular these days.  This one's theme is "important violin solos".  So the question to ask is, do you need another disc full of isolated movements from Bach cantatas?

[Coopmv]

the Hahn Bach disc--well, Bach recitals built around a theme seem to be rather popular these days.  This one's theme is "important violin solos".  So the question to ask is, do you need another disc full of isolated movements from Bach cantatas?

Excellent point you made there.  I already have many Bach violin solos by the likes of Henryk Szeryng, Arthur Grumiaux, Nathan Milstein, Viktoria Mullova, Rachel Podger and Julia Fischer, spanning three generations of violin virtuosi.  There is no reason for me to add this CD to my collection.  While Hilary Hahn is a good violinist, she is certainly not on the same level as the above names IMO ...

[Que]

the Hahn Bach disc--well, Bach recitals built around a theme seem to be rather popular these days.  This one's theme is "important violin solos". So the question to ask is, do you need another disc full of isolated movements from Bach cantatas?

Obviously not! Why all this Bach rehash (like the previously posted "Bach on the oboe")? Why don't Schäfer and Goerner go record some proper cantatas instead of fooling around with this?

If Universal keeps this up, they are going nowhere, absolutely nowhere... It seems they're aiming for the "casual classical music listener". I'm wondering if they exist?  Or rather, these classic FM listeners do exist but in my experience they have about ten classical CDs, of which most came from their now deceased aunt... Those are not the kind of people that going to keep the classical CD market afloat - the real buying power is HERE, with US!

Q

[The new erato]

Excellent point you made there.  I already have many Bach violin solos by the likes of Henryk Szeryng, Arthur Grumiaux, Nathan Milstein, Viktoria Mullova, Rachel Podger and Julia Fischer, spanning three generations of violin virtuosi.  There is no reason for me to add this CD to my collection.  While Hilary Hahn is a good violinist, she is certainly not on the same level as the above names IMO ...

This disc - and many others released by the ex-majors - is built on three marketing angles:

1) Pandering down to the general public by giving them an easy introduction (whatever that is) to a composer they may have heard of.

2) Playing up to the premise that people have a short attention span and only can take in snippets of  music, and those chunks needs melodic hooks that make people want to hear them. Of course it all assumes that music is a background entertainment and thus subsumes music from art to entertainment.

3) Marketing to the fans of the artist that will buy virtually anything by him/her as long as it doesn't include to much distractions from other musicians.

It looks to me like 1/3 of DGs issues are (and have been for a while) built around these assumptions. Me; I'm not touching these discs even by a ten foot pole! Thankfully Hahn has the qualities and guts also to release real discs of real music; hope the DG publicity machine doesn't crush her.

[The new erato]

Obviously not! Why all this Bach rehash (like the previously posted "Bach on the oboe")? Why don't Schäfer and Goerner go record some proper cantatas instead of fooling around with this?

If Universal keeps this up, they are going nowhere, absolutely nowhere... It seems they're aiming for the "casual classical music listener". I'm wondering if they exist?  Or rather, these classic FM listeners do exist but in my experience they have about ten classical CDs, of which most came from their now deceased aunt... Those are not the kind of people that going to keep the classical CD market afloat - the real buying power is HERE, with US!

Q

See my nearly simultaneous post, which indirectly makes the same points as you. I guess some tarted up prostitution is needed to make us recognize real beauty!

[Que]

See my nearly simultaneous post, which indirectly makes the same points as you. I guess some tarted up prostitution is needed to make us recognize real beauty!

Absolutely.  I think they (the major rec.companies) indeed try to cater for the short-attention-span-listener. And it won't work, because those people aren't interested in buying large quantaties of CDs over a long period of time. But I think all the marketing worries are unfounded: the proliferation of Classical music has been expanded hugely by the new information technology age, both inside Westen societies and in other countries. I see for instance on the internet a growing interest in Classical music from Asia. These developments can give new impetus to the market. I think what Universal should do is work on their huge overhead costs and take example from the thriving small labels - do certainly don't need the goofs that come up with these silly ideas!

Q

[jlaurson]

I don't understand the hoopla here. As if a CD, the intended or incidental target audience of which did not include Que, erato, or jlaurson, was somehow by definition not a good CD.

And if it was ratio of 1/3 to 2/3 of products aimed at different markets, that would seem perfectly reasonable. In any case, we don't know the numbers on the CDs we're talking about--and consequently don't know what we're talking about. If DG was run as you guys wished, it wouldn't exist anymore. At least not in the form it does. Which is to say: as a label that actually pays its artists as opposed to leeching off tax payer subsidies or simply asking for pro-bono work.

[The new erato]

I don't understand the hoopla here. As if a CD, the intended or incidental target audience of which did not include Que, erato, or jlaurson, was somehow by definition not a good CD.

And if it was ratio of 1/3 to 2/3 of products aimed at different markets, that would seem perfectly reasonable. In any case, we don't know the numbers on the CDs we're talking about--and consequently don't know what we're talking about. If DG was run as you guys wished, it wouldn't exist anymore. At least not in the form it does. Which is to say: as a label that actually pays its artists as opposed to leeching off tax payer subsidies or simply asking for pro-bono work.

Well, I would posit that it doesn't actually any longer exist as a label of any cultural or musical importance. If they pay their artists - and executives - well, good for them. But the reality is that a musical world without DG would be just the same as with DG, which to me says that they have squandered their once enormously valuable position and label.

[Drasko]

[DavidW]

Well, I would posit that it doesn't actually any longer exist as a label of any cultural or musical importance. If they pay their artists - and executives - well, good for them. But the reality is that a musical world without DG would be just the same as with DG, which to me says that they have squandered their once enormously valuable position and label.

Yup.  What makes it worse is that there have been so many mergers that the major labels are few, like three (sony, universal, emi did I miss any?)!   And for each of them they have so few new releases (and not simply reissues) that you could count the releases over several months on one hand.  The problem is that they simply don't have the money they used to from pop hits (the sales have declined by a huge amount over the past several years), and without all of that extra profit they can't afford to invest in classical like they used to.

So what they will do-- nothing adventurous, just crossover or semi-crossover to guarantee that money is made.  Same way that networks with failing profits turn to reality tv to fill their schedule, short term easy profit, long term... well...

[Scarpia]

Yup.  What makes it worse is that there have been so many mergers that the major labels are few, like three (sony, universal, emi did I miss any?)!   And for each of them they have so few new releases (and not simply reissues) that you could count the releases over several months on one hand.  The problem is that they simply don't have the money they used to from pop hits (the sales have declined by a huge amount over the past several years), and without all of that extra profit they can't afford to invest in classical like they used to.

So what they will do-- nothing adventurous, just crossover or semi-crossover to guarantee that money is made.  Same way that networks with failing profits turn to reality tv to fill their schedule, short term easy profit, long term... well...

From what I have learned from people in the industry, your basic premise is incorrect, classical was never subsidized in any substantial way by profits from popular music, the classical divisions traditionally made their modest profits, which may have been minuscule compared what a successful pop record would bring in.   It is silly to blame the major labels for doing what they have to do to survive in transformed economic conditions.   

The market is much more fragmented by the appearance of many small labels, and the technology has changed so that the major labels no longer have a technical advantage over the minors.  They prospered in the days when the quality of recordings was determined by extremely unwieldy, expensive and sometimes custom-made recording equipment and the ability to maintain plants for pressing audiophile vinyl.  People who wanted a Culshaw recording on one of those beautiful Decca pressings had no other choice but to pay top dollar.  Now anyone with a laptop computer and a few top-line microphones can make an audiophile recording and master a CD (and they do). 

Despite that, it appears to me that the majors are the main purveyors of mainstream classical music.   If you want to hear the Berlin Philharmonic play Brahms you have to buy from a major label.  There certainly are less new releases than there used to be but they are still made (Boulez, Mutter, Pollini at DG, Chailly at Decca, Rattle on EMI, etc), and they may not be music that you deem interesting, but the people who run these labels look at sales numbers and make more of what sells.  If you want to blame someone, it would be the customers.

[DavidW]

It is silly to blame the major labels for doing what they have to do to survive in transformed economic conditions.   

I stand corrected on everything else... but not this.  I will blame the labels because the economy is not the major factor for their decline.  It was their inability to get onboard with inexpensive drm-free digital downloads, and lowering prices of cds to a point that people would buy.  They made stupid decision after stupid decision, and frankly they got what they deserved.  If people can dump hundreds of dollars on iphones and ipods and accessories for them, they can spend money on music.  The majority of them choose not to and choose piracy instead.  Major artists have been moving away from labels to deal straight with either itunes or walmart, and sign with companies that schedule tours putting all of their profit into concerts.  This is a world in which we don't need record labels because it's just like you said it doesn't take expensive equipment anymore to make recordings, and the industry made almost no attempt to adjust to the new era until it was too late.  Do you know that only now (as in this very month) has universal said that they would drop cd prices to $6-10?  That should have happened a decade ago.

There is a point where change is going to happen, and a company will either embrace it or stick with the old model.  Those that do the latter die, those that do the former succeed.  When cd came to be the industry went the right way, when mp3 became popular for online sharing, they went the wrong way.

[Coopmv]

I stand corrected on everything else... but not this.  I will blame the labels because the economy is not the major factor for their decline.  It was their inability to get onboard with inexpensive drm-free digital downloads, and lowering prices of cds to a point that people would buy.  They made stupid decision after stupid decision, and frankly they got what they deserved.  If people can dump hundreds of dollars on iphones and ipods and accessories for them, they can spend money on music.  The majority of them choose not to and choose piracy instead.  Major artists have been moving away from labels to deal straight with either itunes or walmart, and sign with companies that schedule tours putting all of their profit into concerts.  This is a world in which we don't need record labels because it's just like you said it doesn't take expensive equipment anymore to make recordings, and the industry made almost no attempt to adjust to the new era until it was too late.  Do you know that only now (as in this very month) has universal said that they would drop cd prices to $6-10?  That should have happened a decade ago.

There is a point where change is going to happen, and a company will either embrace it or stick with the old model.  Those that do the latter die, those that do the former succeed.  When cd came to be the industry went the right way, when mp3 became popular for online sharing, they went the wrong way.

UniversalMusic has just announced lower list price for its CD's.  This should render the iTune business model much less profitable since it will cost as much to download as to own the physical CD's.  Apple has had too good a deal for way too long ...

[Scarpia]

UniversalMusic has just announced lower list price for its CD's.  This should render the iTune business model much less profitable since it will cost as much to download as to own the physical CD's.  Apple has had too good a deal for way too long ...

You don't get it.  People don't download because they want it cheaper.  They download because they want it on their ipod and don't even have a cd player anymore.  I suspect it will have no effect on the iTunes store.

[DavidW]

UniversalMusic has just announced lower list price for its CD's.  This should render the iTune business model much less profitable since it will cost as much to download as to own the physical CD's.  Apple has had too good a deal for way too long ...

Yeah it took them long enough, I can't wait to see the prices.   The record companies had been kicking themselves for signing up with that itunes model for awhile now.  They wouldn't have been stuck with such a shitty deal if they had jumped on selling downloads a few years earlier.

[DavidW]

You don't get it.  People don't download because they want it cheaper.  They download because they want it on their ipod and don't even have a cd player anymore.  I suspect it will have no effect on the iTunes store.

To +1 on that, this is the "I want it now" generation and on the touch and iphone you can actually buy music straight on there without needing the pc, that makes it even easier for those to lazy to plug their player in, let alone drive to a store or god forbid wait for a cd to arrive by mail or ups!