From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush,rec.audio
Subject: Re: Life after CDs
Date: 31 Jul 92 15:22:47 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL

In article <EeRkks600WB9QAXHMX@andrew.cmu.edu> Chinarut Ruangchotvit <cr2p+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>To know that CDs can be mastered even a few minutes over the 74 minute
>is a little annoying to those who have CDs with songs excluded because
>of this.  I own 'Exit Stage Left' and 'All thw World's a Stage,' which
>are both by Rush, and both albums leave out a song because the
>original length was only a few minutes over 74.  It seems as if the
>standard should have been agreed upon to be able to remaster present
>albums on LPs and Cassettes.
>  

There is more than just length to consider when re-mastering,
and often it comes down to dollar$.

The spec calls for 74 minutes.  The spec also calls for a
standard 'groove' spacing with a plus/minus tolerance.
Being exacting and mastering to the limits of the minus
tolerance is what allows the extra time.

Now then, there are royalties that are paid on all commercial
releases, whether they be LP, CD, Cassettes, or whatever.

As far as the finished product goes these are called
'mechanical royalties'.  That is a percentage of the sale goes
to the publisher/author of the selection, and a percentage goes
to the performer (but not in all cases).  I have never seen a
situtation where the publishers royalties are not paid, but
perfomers may or may not get royalties depeding on the
contracts.

The publishing royalties are based on a per-song basis.   When
the songs started getting longer they were based on a time
basis.

The more songs and the longer the package the more money that
gets paid to the publishers.   This is pretty much fixed.

If you want to record something another person has released,
and their publisher says 'no', you can get a 'compulsory
license' which permits you to record that song, and pay a fixed
rate to the Fox Agency. This was set in place many many years
ago so that a record company could not have a 'monopoly' on any
song.   

I saw the time when the standard LP was changed from 6
songs/side to 5 songs per side.  This is why selections were
left off of many European or British imports.  The most visible
examples are the American Beatle pressings compared to the
original English pressings.

To cut an album from 12 cuts to 10 cuts saved from 10 to 20
cents per album.   No matter what the record business said this
was strictly a business decision and a way to make more money
per release.     In the early days musicians ran the business.
When the lawyers and accountants took over too much (IMO)
emphasis was placed on maximizing profits, and too little,
sometimes none, was placed on the music side.

Companies used to release product that gave them an image but
made no money.  That is seldom done.

The excuse that a song was left out of a CD release because it
would make it over 74 minutes, may be just that, and excuse.

In reality it could easily be that "If we leave these 2 songs
out, we can make 25 cents more per CD, and we can say that we
HAD to do it because we couldn't fit it all in".

There are mnay CD's I have in a 2 CD set where neither CD is an
hour long.

But if they didn't balance it that way consumers would scream.

A 90 minute set could be on one 75 minute CD and one 15 minute
CD.    I think a great many buyers would feel 'ripped-off' at
that.

We are at the mercy of the money-managers in most instances,
not technological barriers..
m
>--
>Chinarut Ruangchotvit
><cr2p+@andrew.cmu.edu>
><chinman+@cmu.edu>
>
>	"Learning that we're only immortal - for a limited time"
>							-Rush, Dreamline


-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|ge-dab|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush,alt.rock-n-roll.metal.progressive