Print

Print


Maybe because they sold very few. In those days, the big sellers of 
classical music were RCA victor & Columbia Masterworks. Kapp was not a 
factor in classical music.

Your search for sound & video ends here!

Jay Sonin, General Manager
Music Hunter Distributing Company
25-58 34th Street, Suite # 2
Astoria, NY 11103-4902
[log in to unmask]
718-777-1949
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger Kulp" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Decca US / was Your taxpayer dollars being given to 
the Universal Music Group.


Just out of curiosty,why did Kapp do away with classical records?

Roger




--- On Mon, 1/10/11, Music Hunter <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


From: Music Hunter <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Decca US / was Your taxpayer dollars being given to 
the Universal Music Group.
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Monday, January 10, 2011, 12:43 PM


We sold many Roger Williams recordings on the Kapp label. Maybe Dave had a 
brother as I recall doing business with a Dave Kapp. I could be wrong here, 
it was long ago...
Your search for sound & video ends here!

Jay Sonin, General Manager
Music Hunter Distributing Company
25-58 34th Street, Suite # 2
Astoria, NY 11103-4902
[log in to unmask]
718-777-1949

----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Biel" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 1:36 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Decca US / was Your taxpayer dollars being given to 
the Universal Music Group.


> On 1/10/2011 12:41 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
>> Working off memory here, fact-checking much appreciated!
>
> Your description is pretty accurate. U.S. Decca was founded by Jack Kapp 
> of Brunswick with seed money from British Decca, but were always 
> independent of each other from the very beginning. Both were mainly pop 
> labels at the time and a few masters changed hands in the 1930s -- some of 
> the American Decca masters being issued in England using the Brunswick 
> label even into the 1950s. By the end of the 30s British masters were 
> rarely seen on American Decca and the financial ties had already been 
> broken. British Decca set up a NY office after the war and started to 
> import classical pressings using the London label. As I said, American 
> Decca masters still showed up in England on British Decca pressings on the 
> Brunswick label, and British Decca even started pressing RCA Victor 
> recordings on the dogless RCA label after EMI bought Capitol in the 
> mid-50s. (Elvis started out in England on HMV but was soon shifted to 
> RCA!) So the interrelationships
 among the different labels, label names, and trademarks have been very 
complicated over the years.
>
> Mike Biel [log in to unmask]
>>
>> I think this is a stretch. What's now called Universal Music Group grew 
>> out of MCA-Universal, which was consolidated and then sold to the 
>> Japanese Matsutshita and then sold to a group that included Seagram scion 
>> Edgar Bronfman. This entity then merged with Vivendi, which had bought 
>> Polygram from Philips a few years earlier. MCA did conglomerate American 
>> Decca (and ABC-Paramount and others), but I don't think MCA the music 
>> company stems directly from American Decca.
>>
>> After Universal and Vivendi merged, Bronfman was forced out. He now runs 
>> Warner Music Group, which I think is a stand-alone company.
>>
>> As for American Decca, I think British Decca lost control of its American 
>> affiliate during the Depression. British Decca's recordings were indeed 
>> released on the London label in the USA, and in fact so were CD's that 
>> were manufactured in the USA until after the Universal-Vivendi merger. 
>> British Decca was acquired by Philips-Polygram in the 70's or 80's, 
>> forgot exactly when.
>>
>> I think the American Decca label was pretty much dormant by the end of 
>> the LP era. MCA had an active reissue program from the Decca vaults 
>> on-going by the early 1990's. MCA had conglomerated a bunch of small 
>> labels including ABC-Paramount, Chess/Argo/Checker, Westminster, Command, 
>> Impulse, Duke-Peacock, etc. MCA also reissued some of their classical 
>> material as discounted 2-fers, sometimes paring Command and Westminster 
>> material, as an example. I don't recall if any of the American Decca 
>> classical material was reissued on CD by MCA.
>>
>> Finally, there were some American Decca classical recordings in the LP 
>> era. Plus many Broadway soundtracks and jazz releases under the Cadet and 
>> Decca labels. The jazz holdings ended up under the Verve Music Group, 
>> Universal had a seprate Broadway reissue program for a while but I'm not 
>> sure where all that ended up, I think under Decca Music Group, and all of 
>> the Universal classical holdings ended up under what's called Decca 
>> Classics.
>>
>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard L. Hess" 
>> <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 11:30 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Decca US / was Your taxpayer dollars being given 
>> to the Universal Music Group.
>>
>>
>>> From the lengthy article posted a few moments ago, I find:
>>>
>>> On 2011-01-10 11:14 AM, Karl Miller wrote:
>>>> The Universal Music Group, today the largest group of labels in the 
>>>> beleaguered recording industry, began its life in 1934 as Decca 
>>>> Records, the American affiliate of the British recording company of the 
>>>> same name.
>>> I am so confused by this. If this is the case, why were all the Decca 
>>> (UK) recordings sold on the "London" label in the U.S.?
>>>
>>> Maybe everyone but me knows this, and if so, I apologize for my 
>>> ignorance.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>> -- Richard L. Hess
>