Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
Date:         Thu, 16 Apr 1992 17:24:24 EDT
From:         "Michael H. Bloom" <MHB@MITVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Governor William Weld (Mass.) paid zero income tax

Tom <TBUCK@KNOX.BITNET> speaks Re: Lou Reed Box Set (also Songs For Drella)
>        ... I do remember reading that "Heroin" was a live performance from 76
> or 78, was about 20 minutes long and featured Don Cherry on trumpet (probably
> pocket trumpet), but that's all I can remember.

That's a good one; Cherry's been a junkie for years.

dave <SOEDAVE@VM.UOGUELPH.CA> complains Re:  CD COSTS

> Why do I keep hearing Michael Jackson used as the yard stick for everthing
> south of the border. Is this what Americans consider sucess? Who cares what he
> does or doesn't do, gets or can't get?

Because _Thriller_ is the largest selling record in the history of the planet
at 40 gazillion sold; because when he resigned with Sony his publicity machine
repeatedly referred to it as a billion dollar contract; because he's so rich
he can almost change his genetic code (certainly he's trying).

> To: HUH
> Music is more than sleazy economics.

In the best of all possible worlds, maybe. And in fact economics is irrelevant
to any discussion of the actual notes or what have you.

But sleazy economics has an awful lot to do with what you actually get to hear.
Remember the recent discussion of music by a group called It's a Beautiful Day,
a charming relic of the psychedelic era? The group's first album sold decently
until CBS cut it out of their catalog, then for most of the '70s you could get
it as a Dutch import. In the '80s the major labels got a measure through the US
Congress that dealt with a doctrine called "parallel copyright," which stated
that CBS retained all rights to material like It's A Beautiful Day, and even
though they weren't willing to act on those rights by keeping the record in
print, they had the right to forbid anyone else to sell it in America, even
legitimate copies imported from CBS in other countries. The effect of this was
that importers and alternative-type distributors, who had a steady cash flow
from these sorts of albums, didn't have it any more, and that curtailed their
ability to sell the more off the wall stuff. Big distributors went bankrupt,
including JEM Importers, New Music Distribution Service, Rough Trade, et al.
Their collapse in turn hurt the labels, both in terms of money lost (JEM owed
SST almost a million dollars, and SST's survival was in doubt for some time)
and also nobody else had the market penetration to get those records in the
stores. Now you can go to any record shop in Christendom and get the Nirvana
record with "Smells Like Teen Spirit" on it, but how many shops have copies of
their previous record _Bleach_ in stock? SubPop needs an indie distributor to
get that record on the shelves, and there simply isn't an indie distributor in
the world with the clout to get even an obviously desirable title like that in
the mom&pop stores and the shopping mall outlets. The major labels simply take
up too much shelf space. And that's an example of how economics affects music.

I could also talk about how much money it takes to get music on record, but I
won't. I will, however, refer you to _The Real Frank Zappa Book_, the chapter
where Frank talks about his experiences hiring orchestras to try to play his
more abstract compositions. He spent piles of money, and never got a faithful
performance of anything-- a very sad story.

Periodically there are people that get up and declare that you should never
buy anything on a major label again, that you should support the independents
exclusively, not only because they release "better" or more vital music, but
to try to balance out the huge economic advantage the majors have. I have some
sympathy for that view, but I think the music should come first: you should
buy and listen to music you like. One of the wonderful things about buying
records is that you become a patron of the arts; some (possibly minuscule)
percentage of the money you spend goes directly to the artists that made it,
and your example encourages that artist to make more, and the label to print
more, and the shop to sell more. All I'm saying is that you should make sure
the music you get to hear really is the music you want to hear-- and not to
imagine that the mass media are showing you everything there is. If you're not
being satisfied by the mainstream, find out about the many real alternatives
that exist, and see whether you like some of that stuff better. I know I do.