Good Notes from New York: HE 2004

Maybe everybody is letting you have your own thread where only non-critical things can be said, and they are afraid of saying something which you may infer as negative or "retarded".

 

That's cool. I haven't gotten around to listening to her music, yet.

Was this an industy-only show or open to the public? If that latter, it's a shame I didn't make it.

 

Would be great news if the Springsteen catalog were on SACD. I did forward it to a friend who is among the biggest Springsteen fans. It would certainly help Sony's credibility with the format given what they have released recently which is next to nothing. Hi-res has been disappointing before with things announced and then pulled back or delayed indefinitely. Both Sony and Warner are sitting on a big catalog of stuff that would be nice to have on hi-rez.

 

Lee,

Thanks so much for the update. I believe Springsteen's catalog has not even been remastered, like some Billy Joel's titles, right? If Sony is able to release Springsteen onto SACD, it will mark another milestone for the format. So any details at all?

What's the Harry Fox Agency? Do they represent every artists at Sony? I don't see Universal have such problems.

 

Sorry, I side with the song writers on this one. They need to hold their ground, especially as storage space continues to increase. With Blu-Ray, Sony could put out 5 or 6 versions of an album (doubtful, but still possible) and the writers would receive a single payment if they fold now. When Sony puts out single layer discs, the artists get royalties for the SACD as well as any redbook versions that are sold. Do you feel that just because they glue these two layers together, they should now only receive one payment?

What you didn't mention was if Sony was willing to make concessions of any kind kind instead of paying out one royalty payment per disc. I have a feeling Sony wants the current structure to stay in place since a.) SA-CD releases cost more to produce (pressing, mastering) and b.)unless prices on the discs are raised, there are generally not enough sales of most SA-CD discs to justify additional royalty payments.

It should be interesting to see how this all shakes out. I wonder if DVD-A does not have to deal with these same issues with big artists (Britney Spears and R. Kelly for example were just released), due to the on screen graphics which make this somewhat different then an audio only SACD. Artists may look at DVD-A in the same vain as a concert video, and not have similar royalties issues. Of course DVD-A to this point has nothing to do with CD technology, so new contracts may have been created specifically for this new media.


J

 

Do film score composers get extra payments for the DD2.0, DD5.1, DTS5.1, French, Spanish, etc. tracks on DVDs?

I do know that composers have successfully fought isolated scores on DVDs as they cut into CD sales, and I think that makes a lot of sense.

I could see paying the publishers/artists double for the redbook and high-res layers, but I think paying triple to add a surround mix is taking it too far.

 

Sony and most other issuers of hybrid discs are getting a price premium for hybrid Super Audio discs. Where does that money go? The publishers should get an increased portion of the revenue but apparently they have not been up to this point. Apparently, Sony Music does not want them to either. If "a publisher" over at Hoffman's is to belived, Sony has turned down 2 settlement offers thus far. It looks like Sony Music would rather play chicken with the publishers, with SACD consumers stuck in the middle, than settle amiably.

 

How is Universal getting so many major-artist discs out the door, at a reasonable price? Perhaps they are more concerned about growing a new market than getting the highest possible margin.

Then again, if Sony really did give Universal $250 million to give SACD preferential support over DVD-A, that will pay a lot of royalties.

 

No DVD-A news from the show?

 

Believe me Lee, if SONY is finally able to get Springsteen and his procrastinating management to remaster/reissue his catalog for SACD, I would be elated, but as you mentioned, it's only in the discussion phase, which doesn't mean a whole lot when it comes to the Boss; there has been 'discussion' about remastering/reissuing his catalog since 1995. I actually had my fingers crossed you'd come back from this saying Bob Ludwig is currently hard at work on them and they're on the way!

I never doubted SONY tried to get Springsteen to release his records on SACD prior to this period, in fact, I'm sure he was one of the first artists approached for the rollout of the format, but until an official announcement is made, I'm hopeful but not holding my breath. It certainly would make sense though: Bruce's catalog (particularly his older records) is in dire need of remastering anyway, and a hybrid SACD campaign (a la Dylan) could service both audiophiles and redbook listeners alike. The fact that he actually has one title out - Live in NYC - demonstrates Bruce's camp is at least aware of the format, yet I've come to temper expectations when it comes to Bruce.

As for this absurd triple royalty, it pains me to side with SONY, but it is still the same 'repertoire' on a single disc. This contention has really slowed whatever momentum the format was building; I don't listen to jazz or classical, and as a result, my own SACD purchases have essentially ceased because of it.

 

Lee, thanks for the report.

Excellent point, Justin. Although I don't have near enough information yet, I too am inclined to side with talent/the writers on this.

I'm at work now so don't have access to my collection and its liner notes to suss out/investigate a hunch--check your liner notes, folks: I bet there is a relationship between the SACDs we have seen released and Sony's ownership of the underlying publishing rights to the material. In other words, if the artist owns a significant chunk of their publishing, is repped by Harry Fox, and is unhappy about their royalty compensation for hi rez release(s), I think maybe those are SACDs from Sony artists that have gotten canceled/delayed.

But this begs many questions: Why hasn't Sony done a press release saying something about this? As far as they're concerned, it's not their fault so how much egg could end up on their coporate face by acknowledging that the talent community is in their opinion stymying their SACD format's prospects? It's not like there's a court-imposed gag order on the matter. Perhaps the proposed BMG merger (and the EU's recently-announced opposition to it) is too distracting?

And speaking of gag orders, what about Michael Jackson? Through Sony/ATV, he owns a significant chuck of his own publishing. Why only Thriller? Those "SE" redbooks have been out long enough. But MJ is probably a terrible example/point of departure, what with his strained relationship with Sony (calling Mottola "the devil"), the conclusion of his obligations to the label with Number Ones and that, um, indictment.

-p

 

A description of the agency from an EntertainmentCareers.net job listing :

The Harry Fox Agency, Inc. (HFA) is the world’s largest music rights organization, acting as licensing agent for more than 27,000 music publisher principals, who in turn represent the interests of more than 160,000 songwriters. HFA was established in 1927 to provide an information source, clearing house and monitoring service for licensing musical copyrights. In addition to the core business functions of licensing, collections and distribution of royalties, HFA conducts periodic record company and other user royalty examinations on behalf of its clients. HFA is the licensing affiliate of the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA).

-p

P.S. - Found the Website (above post edited): http://www.harryfox.com/

 

Paul, I didn't know, remember the name of the publisher's lot, so I just called them a guild. This thingy is clearing up some. If "a publisher" is to be believed, European releases always have higher royalty payments than U.S. releases. He described a two-tiered system in the U.S. where the label can force a lower rate on to certain releases. He mentioned that U.S. greatest hits CD's often are shorter than other wee-juns. If they went over a certain number of songs then the label had to pay the higher of the two tiers.

It appears to me that U.S. songwriters could be a bit underpaid. Sony seems rather vindictive here since they've canceled all their SA-CD releases presumably to minimize potential/future payments to Harry Fox and his consortium or others. They don't show much respect for their customers, cutting them off. And, it certainly looks like hardball against the Harry Foxes.

I wish there more published stories about this feud. I wish all side would aggree to binding arbitration AND GET ON WITH IT!!!

I think Sony Electronics and Sony Music better get their strategy straight. Who's serving who? Like shouldn't we symbiots!

 

This is MOST excellent; how did this slip past our forum until now? According to that link, the disc will be released in just a few weeks (6/8/04).

 

I say let the issue be decided by the people here at the "Music" section of HTF.