Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

Recommended Posts

Guest Cynic
All sounding eminently sensible.

 

There are going to be some costs - pressing, booklets and cases, etc - which apply to all in equal measure. Would it be fair to include a limited release MCPS licence within this, taking away the copyright concerns? I think the maximum charge is £250* per 1000 discs. That would mean everyone involved has two bills to pay - one for their share of 1000 discs (which I roughly calculate from my limited experience to be about £70-£80 each), and one for recording/editing such as they are able to arrange themselves. Knowing what income may be achieved from selling 60 discs means participants can decide how much they are willing to spend on recording. I know that locally I can hire decent recording equipment and an hour or so's editing time within about £100, or I can have the engineer there on site for about £200.

 

My experience of shifting 60 copies of a new CD is that it really doesn't take terribly long but then again I was in the fortunate position of having 6 choral societies to sell to.

 

Shall we call forward some names first of all, then talk about programme ideas when we know how many/how long?

 

 

*Very sorry, but no - not unless the rules have changed. I once had to pay £800 for copyrights for a single CD - and that wasn't a complete copyright programme. The exact calculation I believe (others will correct me) is that anything that counts as copyright is charged for at a rate of 8% per minute of the total sum expected from sales.

 

As to names, I have plenty of outlets for my energies, so don't think I ought to lever myself onto the programme itself but I am very time-rich and provided I can get a bit of petrol money back, I would happily serve as producer/editor/compiler of booklet etc. Sounds fun. I'd also be happy to comment on anyone's proposed selections, although obviously the actual decision has to be with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
*Very sorry, but no - not unless the rules have changed. I once had to pay £800 for copyrights for a single CD - and that wasn't a complete copyright programme. The exact calculation I believe (others will correct me) is that anything that counts as copyright is charged for at a rate of 8% per minute of the total sum expected from sales.

 

As to names, I have plenty of outlets for my energies, so don't think I ought to lever myself onto the programme itself but I am very time-rich and provided I can get a bit of petrol money back, I would happily serve as producer/editor/compiler of booklet etc. Sounds fun. I'd also be happy to comment on anyone's proposed selections, although obviously the actual decision has to be with them.

 

First para - as my run was 1000, I was able to get a limited manufacture licence which has a top end cap of about £250 on it. It's quite a new product I believe.

 

Second para, first bit - what a shame. I think we need you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cynic
First para - as my run was 1000, I was able to get a limited manufacture licence which has a top end cap of about £250 on it. It's quite a new product I believe.

 

Second para, first bit - what a shame. I think we need you.

 

A new product - well!!!!

1. thanks for correcting my obvious mis-statement and

2. wonderful!!!!

 

P.

 

PS Flattery is unnecessary. I'd perform anywhere on anything remotely musical. Even so, others deserve their break, I've had mine.

If you were short, of course......

 

 

P.P.S. As to the cost of the actual run, I have a tame company near here who can produce 1000 CDs with on-disc photo, decent colour booklet, cello wrap etc. for around £800 incl. VAT. This market is competitive, so others may be able to find you an even better deal. We would be wise to go for a large booklet (maybe as many as 16 pages) - doesn't cost much more but would enable us to cover details properly. If you produce a really nice booklet it helps persuade people they want the real thing not a knock-off copy, it also helps with reviews etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In this digital age, what are the pros and cons of doing this as a "download only" project compared with the manufacture of CDs? A kind of "OurPipe" rather than "YouTube".

JC

 

Genius!

 

A very good idea indeed, methinks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cynic
Genius!

 

A very good idea indeed, methinks.

 

 

I agree.

 

Mind you, some performers might want 'hard evidence' of their good work - the answer there might be copies run off in small quantities (using PCs or similar) by folk for themselves and their own uses. If each performer received an edited and finalised master CD, these could be legitimately copied and those copies (unofficially) passed further on. NB This doesn't want to be for money if we haven't paid the copyrights, that's all.

 

Certainly the internet could use such a project and a small website could give notes, photos etc.

Up the British Organ!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa!

 

:unsure:

 

A CD sells for, say, £10 and there is a possibility of recouping the costs involved and not just doing it for the love ...

 

YouTube hosts clips free of charge and makes its money from advertising.

 

A CD is relatively simple to make (once all the recording has been done).

 

A website of the YouTube variety is relatively difficult to create and control (once all the recording has been done). Also, whilst it may be a relatively small website, it's gonna have a lot of throughput if people are going to be downloading .wavs (or even .mp3s) so that makes it relatively expensive on the bandwidth front.

 

So I think you might want to separate-out the two models and think about what you really want. And I doubt you can have both. After all, some people will eschew the CD is they can get download a free audio clip.

 

Best wishes

 

barry

 

Oh, and thinking about it, an OurPipe.com would have to be open access for all and sundry to up their Wachet Aufs and that means it would have to be policed; a) to make sure you (as the publisher) weren't infringing copyright, and b ) to make sure you weren't hosting anything criminal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A website of the YouTube variety is relatively difficult to create and control (once all the recording has been done). Also, whilst it may be a relatively small website, it's gonna have a lot of throughput if people are going to be downloading .wavs (or even .mp3s) so that makes it relatively expensive on the bandwidth front.

...

Oh, and thinking about it, an OurPipe.com would have to be open access for all and sundry to up their Wachet Aufs and that means it would have to be policed; a) to make sure you (as the publisher) weren't infringing copyright, and :unsure: to make sure you weren't hosting anything criminal.

"Download" doesn't have to mean "free"; it's not so hard, for instance, to sell downloads using a one-time password to prevent reuse. Of course, people can copy the downloads around - but they can do that from a CD anyway. In particular, the fact that downloads were being sold would not imply anything about uploading - indeed, one wouldn't want to have anything like that in the plan, because it would dilute the product being sold. But in any case, sales of downloads would capture a very different set of customers - you would want the CDs anyway for sale at concerts, for instance.

 

Paul

 

PS - OK, I admit it - I do websites as part of my work, as well as recording as a hobby; and I have a server in my loft with no outgoing traffic limit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"Download" doesn't have to mean "free"; it's not so hard, for instance, to sell downloads using a one-time password to prevent reuse. Of course, people can copy the downloads around - but they can do that from a CD anyway. In particular, the fact that downloads were being sold would not imply anything about uploading - indeed, one wouldn't want to have anything like that in the plan, because it would dilute the product being sold. But in any case, sales of downloads would capture a very different set of customers - you would want the CDs anyway for sale at concerts, for instance.

 

Paul

 

PS - OK, I admit it - I do websites as part of my work, as well as recording as a hobby; and I have a server in my loft with no outgoing traffic limit.

 

I'm with Barry. It's not only about the difficulty of creating a site; those making a recording will have to make some kind of financial committment to the project, and that ought to be properly rewarded with some sales income. Any of us can go down the road with a minidisc player and make some noises, but this conversation began with putting something permanent and worthwhile down. The financial input and the standard of performance ought not to be different whether it is going to be a free download, paid download or CD; if you take the sales away, you're left with less incentive to produce your best.

 

It seems to me that the most equitable and democratic way of divvying up the spoils remains by putting 60 or so discs in each contributor's hands. Let's face it, some contributions WILL be better than others - say for the sake of argument that Stephen Farr, Nigel Allcoat and Paul Derrett all contribute a track. If theirs receive 100 downloads each in the first month, but others receive none, then how are we to split the proceeds? All will have put the same amount into the pot on the one hand, but the 'big downloaders' will also justifiably claim that they ought to be rewarded for their work. Make it even more complicated and imagine that PD submits a track from an already extant recording, which therefore costs him nothing but gets twenty hits a day, and I spend 300 quid lovingly honing something which gets no hits at all.

 

I think we need to keep this as simple and fair as possible, and an equal share in a CD order is by far the simplest and fairest manner. A blanket limited manufacture MCPS license is pretty much the smallest cost involved in all of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm with Barry.

[etc]

Actually, I entirely agree with your conclusion, but not for Barry's reasons - I was merely pointing out that web access did not have to mean free and uploadable-to like YouTube. However, I think the sales model would be all wrong for this project (if it is one at this point).

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot of incredibly talented musicians contribute to this forum and it occurred to me that a compilation album of tracks performed by members would not just be brilliant, but might also be important.

I can go into HMV tomorrow and buy CDs by Paul Derrett, Nigel Allcoat and Stephen Farr. If we value Justadad's original proposition, surely any such project should stimulate the discovery of new talent hidden in our midst, not just provide a new business opportunity for established artists. I have a cupboard full of CDs that I wish I hadn't bothered buying, but which contain a single track that made them seem worthwhile at the time. I would personally like to have the opportunity to buy individual tracks that interest me, rather than spend £12 for five minutes within a seventy minute disc, most of which will only be heard the once.

But perhaps we should hear the views of those who have contributed to the Organs and Organists Online site, including Musing Muso and Rev. Tony Newnham, which offers free downloads.

JC

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can go into HMV tomorrow and buy CDs by Paul Derrett, Nigel Allcoat and Stephen Farr. If we value Justadad's original proposition...

 

Precisely what I was trying to do (value it, that is). By taking away the reward (sales income), we take away the incentive to produce something original, different and high quality.

 

The only way of ensuring these three qualities at least are present is by making sure contributors are on a level playing field, benefitting equally from the approximately equal amount of money and time they have committed to the project. I still think that a hard copy CD is the only way of ensuring that this happens.

 

'Talent in our midst' is, IMHO, more likely to be overlooked when contained in a download list than on a shiny piece of plastic in someone's hand.

 

But this needs to be not just a document of people in our midst, but a good chance to have some performances on village and small town instruments which wouldn't in themselves merit a full-length disc but nevertheless have something to say for themselves.

 

You may have a cupboard full of CDs you don't listen to, but in buying them how many fundraising appeals have you supported? How many times have you subsequently gone to a recital or seen music on a shelf and thought 'I've heard that'? How many composers, small-time recording companies and young/first time players have benefitted from and been encouraged by your patronage? All of these are of comparable importance to your enjoyment and what makes it a two-way street. (Thinks: I hope the 5 minutes within 70 for £12 wasn't a reference to mine!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's certainly a nice idea, but I don't think we need more organ recordings just for the sake of it. There are plenty out there!

 

What I think might be interesting would be to build up a bank of recordings on interesting, or even ordinary instruments which have never been recorded. Perhaps a website with downloadable tracks, perhaps linked to NPOR? I play a wonderful 3-manual Harrison from 1917 which is nearing the end of its life - goodness only knows if we will be able to keep it going - which has never been recorded. (http://npor.emma.cam.ac.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=N03444).

 

I also play another organ in Peterborough whichit would be good to have a record of: (http://npor.emma.cam.ac.uk/cgi-bin/Rsearch.cgi?Fn=Rsearch&rec_index=N00845)

 

Stephen Barber

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cynic

Readers of this topic under General Discussion are referred to a new posting, this morning, of a poll under Organs and Music.

If there is sufficient interest from would-be participants, there seems to be enough goodwill and experience to see this idea come to fruition.

 

I entirely take Stephen's point above - such advice/comment etc. needs to come thick and fast at this stage. By definition, those who regularly visit this forum do so because the pipe organ and its repertoire matter to them. You are not floating voters, you are fellow addicts. Please comment now if you have suggestions of any kind that could fit in with what is being proposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine CDs need a raison d’être if they are to work; either they are about specific organs, or specific organists, or specific types of music. In this instance, the unifying theme would be that the musicians are all members of and contributors to this message board. So whilst there might be arguments to be had regarding OurPipe.com (hurry, I checked and the domain is available!) or a site dedicated to historic organs, or British organs, they might be better off in other threads. This is about showcasing the people here.

 

For anything to happen in the real world I suspect someone needs to organise the ideas, and the resources. I’d like to suggest a team of three

 

Paul Hodges (who has recording expertise and hardware)

Cynic (who, apart from being a brilliant organist, knows a lot about turning recordings into ‘product’), and

David Coram (another brilliant organist and representative of a, err, younger generation)

 

Plus, they all strike me as really good and reasonable people who I trust absolutely (and therefore imagine everyone else would).

 

They would decide who and what got included in the programme and, basically, nurse the thing into life.

 

I asked them about it before posting this and they are all amenable to the idea.

 

So whilst we can continue to discuss the idea freely here, if it gets to the stage where the three sages decide it’s a goer they’ll knock it into shape. (Indeed, Cynic has put things in motion as mentioned above.)

 

Best wishes

 

J

 

(and then Organ Music – to follow Sacred Music – on BBC 4, narrated by Vox)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I’d like to suggest a team of three

Paul Hodges (who has recording expertise and hardware)

Cynic (who, apart from being a brilliant organist, knows a lot about turning recordings into ‘product’), and

David Coram (another brilliant organist and representative of a, err, younger generation)

 

Sounds good to me... :angry:

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Just back from France...... and with the effects of the hour difference and a long drive not sure whether I should be on here or the other one with the poll at the start. The members CD sounds a good idea. I would be interested in playing a short piece of my own - wherever - only depending on whether it could cope with celestes in one hand and a 4 flute plus 2-2/3 in the other.

 

AJJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d like to suggest a team of three

Paul Hodges (who has recording expertise and hardware)

Cynic (who, apart from being a brilliant organist, knows a lot about turning recordings into ‘product’), and

David Coram (another brilliant organist and representative of a, err, younger generation)

 

Sounds good to me... :angry:

Agreed. Potentially an excellent team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...