Talk:Record label

message: A few of things spring to mind when I looked through this:
Firstly, almost every record contract is looked over and negotiated with solicitors, as opposed to it being an infrequent occurance as suggested by "Entertainment lawyers are used by some to look over any contract before it is signed." The solicitors will almost always be music laywers, rather than more general entertainments lawyers, and they will generally work for an indepedant soliciting company which may be employed by the Business Affairs departments of the record label.
Second big mistake I noticed is that it saids that some artists gave away their rights.
Almost all artists sign away the rights to their music, that's what Music Publishing is, probably the second biggest pillar of the music industry.
Thirdly: "A contract either provides for the artist to deliver completed recordings to the label, or for the label to undertake the recording with the artist."
I think it needs to specified that there are a few different types of contract. When the artist makes the recordings independantly then gives the label mechanical license to manufacture and distribute records that's a licensing deal. However, if the label says "bring us a completed recording" that's not a licensing deal, that's a record deal. It's just that normally a record deal will look more like "here's some money - bring us a completed recording".
Also I think recouperation needs to be explained.
Sebbi 01:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A couple of points

message: This subject deserves a better article, as it stands it's full of generalisations, assumptions and waffle. Hopefully someone more clued in than I can do this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.228.7 (talk • contribs)  23 April 2006
:I've rewritten the intro and added info about music groups and record groups. The rest of the article is still pretty much garbage.—mjb 05:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem, as I'm trying to point out in that section, is that people apply the term 'indie' very broadly and inconsistently, because they have different standards by which they measure the 'indieness' of things, thus making 'indie label' rather difficult to define. It would be inappropriate to have Wikipedia make a definitive statement on what an indie label is, unless you phrase it like "source X says an indie label is… while source Y says…". If you have suggestions for better phrasing, though, in the meantime, please offer them. —mjb 23:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tag for cleanup

message: A Record lable is the business entity which produces and oversees the production of recorded music. It does the front line work of making the physical product which you see in your stores. Frequently a lable is simply the name on the CD itself. There may be nothing more than the members of the band or the artist themselves who do allt he work. Loreena McKennet for instance, recorded her own CD's, designed or oversaw the design of the cover are, had the CD's pressed all herself. For the first decade of her career she distributed her CD's either at her concerts or by mail order from her home. That is the most basic kind of lable.
In the classical world it can work the same way. Skylark Records originaly existed to produce Canadian Pianist jane Coop's recordings. Her husband George Lavrock is both the recording engineer and producer. Skylark Records now has more artists than just Jane Coop. But thats how it started. Skylark, however does not do their own distribution.
Another more interesting example is Netwerk Recrods. When the Vancouver Band Skinny Puppy wanted to release a CD, they did so under a lable they created called Netwerk Records. It had only one reason for being, that was the prodcution of Skinny Puppy CD's. Since one of the band members was intersted in doing more than just one CD for one band, eventually they produced recorddings for other artists. Careful business dealings, concienceous artists and lots of hard work ended up with a sucessful record lable with more than just one artist. Eventually there was some arrangements with EMI (I am unsure of what those were) and more recentely are no longer associated with EMI, but what you see now as the Netwerk started as just a band that wanted to make a CD.
Here is another way a lable is created; Distribution Fussion is a small Canadian distributor in Montreal who imports and distributes independent lables from Europe and other places in the world. The owner is also a Jazz afficiando. He has sstarted his own lable to record some Jazz artists who he though were good, Justin Time has quite a number of sucessful arists. JustinTime was Dianna Kralls first lable. 
It was this lable that solicited the small chain where i did some purchasing. The initial order we placed for Diana Krall was very samll. This was at the beginnning of her career. Her careeer advanced so fast that Distrubution Fussion new that they could not handle the amount of business thsi artist would generate. GRP Records signed an distribution deal with Distributiosn Fussion for American Distribution. Shortly after that, GRP was bought by Verve Records. Very shortly after that, GRP (itself an American independant lable) was purchased by Verve. notice how this story is rapidly becoming extremely complex? This is not uncommon in the music industry. This is the point where Universal purchases PolyGram and then you know about the purchase of Universal by Vivendi.
I have outlined as slimply as it is possible to how a record lable begins. Disorganized isn't the right term for it. Independant recording lables are simply small businesses that produce recordings. They are as infinite in variety as you can imagine, but this is where the creative impetus for the music industry comes from. The major players in this industry do not cerate much new, they purchase it. Loreena McKennet is an instructive example because she was savvy enough at business to know that she should not sign a deal with a major distributor until she could do it on her own terms. In theh end, she signed a deal with Warner, but it was the deal she wanted adn she dictated the terms.
I worked in the music reatil business for 10 years, and i had been following the industry as a consumer of classical music for 15 years before that. This is not an easy business to understand and its even more difficult to do without bias or without using words that depict the  players in terms which are neutral. My facts are bascaly all correct, though its been a while since i've been active in the industry. but this does give you an idea of how the processes work.
Please ask for clarification of anything I have written here,  this is not publishable in this form, it is only for discussion purposes at this time.
David
--88Fingers 09:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two basic categories the best deinition is the simplest 

message: While commenting on another artcle I was reminded of another type of lable. That is a private society or organization which produces special recordings for its membership. Ordinarily these never enter into the discussion except for two exeptions; Societies who's membership is made up of those  people interested in a certain kind of recordings and who are willing to produce them  on their own. Such a label is the classical label Connoisseur Society. It produces select recordings of classical pianists for its members. The recordings are never available in ordinary music retail outlets. If they are available at all to the general public it is through mail order. This label became well enough known amongst audiophiles and classical music collectors that it was frequently reviewed in magazines like the Gramophone and as well, got radio play on the BBC and in Canada on the CBC Radio Networks.
Let me try to tie this all up for everyone. There is no "business" model for a recording label. No one invests money in a recording label expecting to make money. They are risky ventures at best, frequently fail and the return on investment is uncertain at best. Bankruptcies are a common occurrence. However, if a label manages to establish itself with some degree of notoriety, they will likely be bought by a larger distributor or one of the conglomerates. Delve back if you will into the history of teh Nonesuch label. It was begun in the 1960's by Terresa Sterns, who ran the label herself for many years. The label was dedicated to Ethnic (now called world music ) twentieth century composers, and some baroque music. This lable is noteworthy because it was one of the survivors over the decades. However about 20 years ago the lable was sold to Warner who has carried the label on in the same manner which the founder did.
Musicians start labels because they wish to maintain control of their own music and livelihoods. This frequently backfires unless they have savvy and trustworthy financial management. Other people start or invest in labels because they love the music. Sound financial investment is an all  but unknown reason for starting a recording label. 
--88Fingers 08:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet anoher way record labels come into being 

message: Someone is creating categories for Record label established in xxxx for different years.  This seems to me an excessive categorisation.  What do others think ? -- Beardo 21:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Record label categories 

message: This line:
The name, "record label", refers to the usually papered and cut center area of a vinyl recording that prominently displays the manufacturer's name, along with other pertinent information. Many 7" vinyl singles were pressed with a relief in lieu of the paper label, particularly in Great Britain.
The word "relief" is unclear. Perhaps it should be expanded to "...silk-screened or embossed graphics in lieu of the paper label"? K8 fan (talk) 22:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternatives to paper labels on LPs and 45s 

message: The timeline of major labels purports to have Sony Music and BMG Music emerge as major labels in the late 1980s, with no apparent predecessors. But wasn't Sony Music just the former CBS Records (which included labels such as Columbia and Epic) after being acquired by Sony Corporation? And I don't know what BMG's predecessors in Europe had owned before that, but I'm pretty sure that BMG became known as a major label in the U.S. after acquiring RCA Records at that time. Since other labels' predecessor companies are shown in the timeline, surely CBS and RCA should be included as predecessors to Sony and BMG. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Major labels timeline

message: This section should be removed, because it doesn't cite a reliable source. It's just an article some guy wrote on About.com that listed four record labels in a numerical list. 
99.163.22.236 (talk) 20:44, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for "Major vs. independent record labels" section is worthless 

message: I have run into a small problem on a page that described a director as owning a film label.  There is no page on Wiki that I can find to help explain what a film label is and the closest I can find is this page record label.  If you want to earn some points in the great internet award game creating a page Film Label  that lists labels like Disney, Pixar, Dreamworks etc.  would behelpful  The page I had the problem on was Chi Chi LaRue who is said to own a film label.Pbmaise (talk) 07:32, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Call for new page..Film Label

message: Under the relationships with artists section:
"as small as two cups of coffee a day"
This just seems like someone was trying to advertise the website modlife or whatever it is (why the quotes?).  I suggest that the entire part about modlife be removed as it doesn't actually add any content and has no citations.  It doesn't explain at all any relevant connection between artists and labels.  It doesn't even explain what it means for fans to "get in touch with thier favorite artists and bands".  This just sounds like an online fanclub or something like that.  I'd bet that the person who added this part of the section works for that website.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.214.14.21 (talk) 14:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising should be removed in section Relationship with artists 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Record label. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140328020555/https://www.apple.com/fr/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/ to https://www.apple.com/fr/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:22, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello everyone,
I am working on trying to improve this article for a class assignment, and I had a couple of ideas that I thought I would run past you guys. I would very much appreciate any personal input any of you guys would have.
1. I feel that the article could use reorganization in some areas, in particular introducing the information about major labels earlier in the article, possibly alongside the "Independent" section.
2. Expanding on the "History" section; the part describing the industry consolidation could use some more information.
Let me know if you guys have any thoughts or input, and thank you. Jhc2675 (talk) 01:01, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Couple of Ideas 

message: Why not just have it start in 1929, since there's nothing before then?
74.101.202.221 (talk) 13:45, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major labels chart