Print

Print


Good point here. It may be impossible to get into vaults or to get to master tapes, but if you're going to put out a cheesy bootleg, it's like the food in a bad restaurant: every foodie I know agrees that it's just as easy to do it better. 

Donald Clarke

On Oct 1, 2013, at 11:20 AM, Jamie Howarth wrote:

Agreed w Tom on most points. If we could get a couple grand to do a Duane Eddy it would be done.It doesn't cost much more to do it right than do it wrong. 

The labels will license-out for vinyl physical product, but not digital physical product. If they did the rich hedgie would be backing a new custom label done by us. 

You guys should be making the adamant case that there's a quality floor, and to repackage an existing set of 44/16s as new is sketchy, and certainly that repackaging mp3s is caused for flaming brooms and pitchforks. It is imperative that you guys speak up, and realize that your reissue market may be mispriced - you're Red Seal/Shaded Dog, not Roulette records w ground up labels in the vinyl. And even back then there was honor among some of the thieves. Morris mandated re-used vinyl, Berry mandated against it. 



Please pardon the misspellings and occassional insane word substitution I'm on an iPhone

On Oct 1, 2013, at 9:01 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I'm assuming Jamie was referring to a filthy-rich hedgefund guy who's also an audiophile. His point was, the guy was willing to pay extra for better audio quality. We already see in the LP market that a healthy niche can exist for people willing to pay more for perceived "better" quality. In the LP niche, I would argue it's as much for the cachet and the nice packaging (a real artifact, as opposed to a cheap-looking commodity product) as for the allegedly "better" sound quality.
> 
> There does seem to be an emerging niche for higher-quality digital audio, but most of the excitement is in the now-tiny download niche. For the mainstream market, despite wishes by some of us for things to be otherwise, there simply is not the production budget or profit margin to "do things great", at almost any stage of the process. This is especially true with reissue material, which has a limited end market. Comparing the market for a deluxe Grateful Dead reissue to the market for less-popular (with today's buyers) Duane Eddy is comparing apples and oranges. No reissue producer in his right mind is going to spend very much money putting together a Duane Eddy greatest hits single-CD. He will likely make a very slim margin on it, as is.
> 
> That said, it's inexcusable to over-use digital "cleanup" software or use a low-resolution source. My bet is, the source material for the CD that Rhett got is old singles and/or LPs. Some "engineer" decided to go overboard with DSP to "clean up" the surface noise and ticks and pops, used a heavy hand, and ended up with garbage that sounds like bad Napster-era MP3. Most people would probably be surprised how many master tapes are lost or are now unplayable without costly restoration measures (for which there is no budget), so many old-time pop and rock retrospectives are coming off singles and LPs.
> 
> I can tell you from personal experience that it is very hard to make the numbers work on a per-disc basis spending more than a handful of thousands of dollars, soup to nuts (transfer to finished authored Red Book disc, hopefully with processed high-rez and Mastered for iTunes download files also). That's a very, very constrained budget. Given that the transfer takes place in real-time, and careful listening must be done before and after, and especially if any DSP is performed, you get to very low wages quickly. So very few projects have the time or budget to go to anything approaching extraordinary strides toward high quality. I don't like it either, but that's the simple reality of today. Ask yourselves, how many of you are willing to pay $25 for a single CD. Adjusted for inflation since 1984, that's the low end of what one should cost today. Given that they tend to sell for under $10, you get what you are willing to pay for. Not enough "hedgies" out there to bend the curve.
> 
> -- Tom Fine
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donald Clarke" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 8:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Compact Discs with lossy compression
> 
> 
>> I'm using this list to improve my vocabulary. Please, sir, what's a hedgie?
>> 
>> Donald Clarke
>> 
>> On Oct 1, 2013, at 12:23 AM, Jamie Howarth wrote:
>> 
>> Here's a brain teaser: I asked a wealthy hedgie what is favorite album is. Ok U2 War... Alright what would you pay for an HD download ... 29.95$.. Ok how much would you pay for a mirror copy of the master tape... 500bucks!!! In a heartbeat.
>>