CD prices - particularly Naxos

[karlhenning]

Well, at least they've learnt that reissues are not full-price CDs ; )

[Scarpia]

I think that's a case where we as consumers are benefiting from other firms adoption of the Naxos model . . . .

The price may be similar but the model almost exactly the opposite.  Naxos pays relatively obscure artists a fee to make new recordings, the major labels go down in the basement, find a tape of the Berlin Philharmonic which has already paid for itself, and reissue it.   Naxos pays production costs but no royalties, the major label reissue generates royalties, but has no production cost.

[karlhenning]

Well observed. "Adoption" warn't the right word.

[DavidW]

If only "adoption of the Naxos model" meant "keeping them in print rather than reissuing them with different cover art every 5 years."

I wish they would reissue their recordings every five years. I can't how many PI recordings are simply lost to time because they were on small labels that do limited runs only.  Never look down on reissues, they allow people access to the recordings that missed it the first time around and keep the amazon marketplace gougers at bay.

[karlhenning]

Paging paulb . . . .

[some guy]

You all do know, don't you, that if you don't buy any CDs at all, you save even MORE money.

Short of illegal downloads and a few legal free ones, if you want music, you have to pay.

[George]

If only "adoption of the Naxos model" meant "keeping them in print rather than reissuing them with different cover art every 5 years."

...in poorer mastering.

[Grazioso]

You all do know, don't you, that if you don't buy any CDs at all, you save even MORE money.

Short of illegal downloads and a few legal free ones, if you want music, you have to pay.

Of course. Yet the question is, how much are people willing to pay, and to what extent do the labels condition expectations? Naxos made their name as the "super-budget" label. Their price point for new releases was unprecedented and drew lots of attention--and recall this was back before the major-label implosion, when new releases and overpriced (by today's standards) reissues by Decca, DG, EMI, etc. were still flooding into stores every month. Reviews of Naxos discs frequently mentioned the cheap price, to the effect of "only a mediocre performance, but hey, it's only $5.99" or "awesome disc, and even better at that super-budget price".

For years, everyone expected Naxos discs to be substantially cheaper than the competition's. I buy fewer and fewer Naxos CD's as they keep jacking the prices up, yet other labels keep new release prices approximately what they've been for decades, about $15/16. Similarly, with labels like Brilliant, the constant stream of ultra-inexpensive reissues from other labels, and the proliferation of cheap Internet deals, it feels to me utterly ridiculous to pay "full price" for any CD.

The labels have essentially taught us what to expect for a dollar and have, for better and for worse, failed to meet those expectations.

[Grazioso]

Speaking of Naxos policies, Herr Heymann used to emphasize how, unlike his competitors, Naxos wasn't in the business of re-recording the same core repertoire over and over. Yet now, the label has been increasingly re-recording the old warhorses instead of focusing on rare and unrecorded music, which would be a much more useful and welcome use of their resources. Now we get things like repeated Shostakovich, Brahms, Dvorak, Mahler, and Sibelius symphonies (looks like they're on their third go-round with Sibelius). A shame.

[Daverz]

Speaking of Naxos policies, Herr Heymann used to emphasize how, unlike his competitors, Naxos wasn't in the business of re-recording the same core repertoire over and over. Yet now, the label has been increasingly re-recording the old warhorses instead of focusing on rare and unrecorded music, which would be a much more useful and welcome use of their resources. Now we get things like repeated Shostakovich, Brahms, Dvorak, Mahler, and Sibelius symphonies (looks like they're on their third go-round with Sibelius). A shame.

I also don't see the point of the new Brahms and Dvorak recordings, but from what I've read,  the new Shostakovich series is at the least much better played than the old Slovak recordings (I'm still waiting for the Petrenko 10th to arrive).  If the Brahms and Dvorak sells to Alsop fans or whomever, then perhaps it can finance more obscure recordings.

[Brian]

The new Shostakovich is definitely worth it (and in my opinion Petrenko ought to be entrusted with Rach and Tchaik cycles) but much of the new wave of rerecordings bothers me. Next month, yet another Brahms First Symphony is coming out with Jonathan somebody. The best that can be said is that they are still embarking on lots of obscurities: the romantic violin series, Italian and Greek Classics series, Rossini opera series, Weiss lute sonata series, Stockhausen electronic music, Messiaen organ music...

[Scarpia]

Speaking of Naxos policies, Herr Heymann used to emphasize how, unlike his competitors, Naxos wasn't in the business of re-recording the same core repertoire over and over. Yet now, the label has been increasingly re-recording the old warhorses instead of focusing on rare and unrecorded music, which would be a much more useful and welcome use of their resources. Now we get things like repeated Shostakovich, Brahms, Dvorak, Mahler, and Sibelius symphonies (looks like they're on their third go-round with Sibelius). A shame.

Maybe you should start your own record label, since you seem to think you understand the business better than the people who actually do it.   

[DavidW]

Speaking of Naxos policies, Herr Heymann used to emphasize how, unlike his competitors, Naxos wasn't in the business of re-recording the same core repertoire over and over. Yet now, the label has been increasingly re-recording the old warhorses instead of focusing on rare and unrecorded music, which would be a much more useful and welcome use of their resources. Now we get things like repeated Shostakovich, Brahms, Dvorak, Mahler, and Sibelius symphonies (looks like they're on their third go-round with Sibelius). A shame.

Actually if you take the time to look at the scheduled releases from the link Brian posted on another thread you will see that you are quite wrong.  For every repeated DSCH symphony there are 10x as many esoteric recordings.  You simply underestimate Naxos.  They can do both warhorses and expanding the catalog, they are doing both.

[some guy]

Yet the question is, how much are people willing to pay, and to what extent do the labels condition expectations?

I was questioning this question. Do we acquire CDs by cost or by the music they contain? Certainly one might hesitate at a CD that cost 40 or 50USD, but if that were the only way to get the music on it, and it's music you want?

It just seems an odd kind of conversation for music lovers to engage in, at least without someone (and this time that happened to me) calling attention to the music rather than the price. (You see, I just made this conversation less odd, pretty much by myself. )

[Brian]

In interviews, Klaus Heymann has stated that the vast majority of Naxos CDs lose money. In fact, if a disc breaks even it's referred to as a good seller and a success. I think in that light, an LSO Mahler Fifth and a new Brahms cycle and Chopin concertos every so often is an understandable thing.

[jimmosk]

More empirical data: since the mostly-obscure used CDs that I offer are auctions, the amount paid is determined by how much listeners (excuse me, The Market) thinks is a reasonable price for them. The type of CDs that I list hasn't changed noticeably in the eight years I've been doing this, and the average final bid has risen in that time from around $9 to around $11. So people seem willing to pay more.

(If you're interested in seeing my CD lists, feel free to message me)

-J

[snyprrr]

I was questioning this question. Do we acquire CDs by cost or by the music they contain? Certainly one might hesitate at a CD that cost 40 or 50USD, but if that were the only way to get the music on it, and it's music you want?

It just seems an odd kind of conversation for music lovers to engage in, at least without someone (and this time that happened to me) calling attention to the music rather than the price. (You see, I just made this conversation less odd, pretty much by myself. )

But, with Naxos, isn't the ultimate collectivist rationale that ALL music will eventually be recorded by Naxos, so, then, it IS (or will be) about price?!?!! The State will own Naxos, much like that National BIS catalog is now part of Naxos! Welcome to the NewWorldOrderOneStop&Save!

[The new erato]

The State will own Naxos, much like that National BIS catalog is now part of Naxos!

Distribute, not own.

[Grazioso]

Maybe you should start your own record label, since you seem to think you understand the business better than the people who actually do it.   

I don't think I understand it better; I'm wondering aloud why they've changed what was once portrayed as a core element of their business plan and label identity.

In interviews, Klaus Heymann has stated that the vast majority of Naxos CDs lose money. In fact, if a disc breaks even it's referred to as a good seller and a success. I think in that light, an LSO Mahler Fifth and a new Brahms cycle and Chopin concertos every so often is an understandable thing.

If that's the case, one wonders if there's an added temptation to focus more on those warhorse money-winners than on more obscure repertoire. (And that's working under the questionable assumption that it's the warhorses earning the profits for Naxos.)

I was questioning this question. Do we acquire CDs by cost or by the music they contain? Certainly one might hesitate at a CD that cost 40 or 50USD, but if that were the only way to get the music on it, and it's music you want?

It just seems an odd kind of conversation for music lovers to engage in, at least without someone (and this time that happened to me) calling attention to the music rather than the price. (You see, I just made this conversation less odd, pretty much by myself. )

Like just about everything in our world, music has been very effectively commodified. It becomes hard to disassociate it from physical media, tickets, monetary transactions, etc. Music isn't something you enjoy, it's something you buy

[Brian]

If that's the case, one wonders if there's an added temptation to focus more on those warhorse money-winners than on more obscure repertoire. (And that's working under the questionable assumption that it's the warhorses earning the profits for Naxos.)

Truth be told, the real profit-earners for Naxos are Naxos.com subscriptions, Naxos Music Library (and Jazz Library and Video Library), and ClassicsOnline, the Naxos MP3 download site. And, for the consumers forking over $250/year for an NML subscription which covers Naxos CDs whose expenses have already been paid (ie no royalties), interest in repertoire is as varied as it is in the real world. The Naxos business plan going forward is, I think, three-fold; (1) produce a few Big Hit albums that finance the other projects; (2) dominate the Blu-Ray audio market; (3) generate ever-increasing content for NML and MP3 services.