New US garage comp

[The Swyne]

I didn't think there would be a problem, seeing as it's been posted before here on this thread: http://www.g45central.com/forum/ind...-edn-300-60s-garage-lp.449/page-14#post-11458

But again, (my) apologies.

 

[M.T. Wallet]

According to prices asked by pressing plants, I wonder if people really make money out of that kind of comp?
Even if I go with Lee about licensing, I can't see no use in releasing songs available on YT or anywhere else for free...

 

[jeffs11375]

Reading this thread I am struck with a couple of thoughts:

1) Releasing vinyl/CD comps that use mp3's as their source is despicable. MP3's sound OK on my computer and my Ipod. But when I play them on my stereo they sound like crap. So if I really like something, "owning" it on mp3 ultimately isn't going to satisfy me. Back when the music industry first woke up and decided that mp3's were costing them sales, I think they made a big mistake by not exploiting the fact that the sound quality on the "real thing" is so superior, and maybe even tied marketing that in with some stereo equipment manufacturers. But no, they decided that suing their customers was the smart way to go.

2) As far as the questionable legitimacy and ethical considerations of releasing other people's material without their consent or knowledge, it's a double-edge sword there. I can definitely understand the artists point of view but as an unemployed hungry collector who can not afford to buy original 45s too often, to me they are a godsend. If they're any good. But I can definitely see the arguments on both sides. Ultimately (unfortunately) there is little or no real money to be made putting out a garage comp these days so other than the hurt feelings on the side of the artist (which again, I can certainly understand) there is not much more at stake.

3) Someone made a reference earlier that seemed to say that anything but the original 45s were worthless. Unfortunately, I can not afford many hundreds of dollars for all of the records I love. So comps and repros will have to do. And at this point, if anyone is stupid enough to think that the BFTG classic that he is getting on a 45 for $15 is the original, he deserves what he gets.

Just my own personal opinions here.

 

[bosshoss]

Thanks Swyne, no fault on your part. But that guy is blatantly ripping off several members of this forum, among others. Plus he's not a nice guy, and I can personally vouch for that.

 

[The Swyne]

Thanks Mark

I respect the forum here, so it'll never happen again. And yeah, that guy - I'm aware who he is. He's real creepy!

 

[pfft]

OK, here's another upcoming comp:

http://www.shinybeast.nl/catalog/view.php?item_id=0381006&mailing=0002o5&type=PM

I have no idea who's behind it or how it sounds. All I know is it's bound to be slagged off by a lot of you guys

 

[pfft]

It would be funny if someone actually bought it, I mean, the tracks are on YouTube (FOR FREE). It's like wasting $15 bucks on the LP cover. Not the music:confused:

Well, I bought it. And I like it, it's a solid compilation of songs. The sound quality is descent, MP3 sourced or not. And the 'it's available on YouTube' argument is a bit silly (no offense). Just because it's available on YouTube doesn't mean I don't want to have it on a physical format.
I agree, the MP3 sourcing is definitely not OK, but calling them scumbags is a bit harsh. I doubt the compilers are in it for the money. There are lots more efficient and easier ways to make some money.

 

[Frantic]

Well, I bought it. And I like it, it's a solid compilation of songs. The sound quality is descent, MP3 sourced or not. And the 'it's available on YouTube' argument is a bit silly (no offense). Just because it's available on YouTube doesn't mean I don't want to have it on a physical format.
I agree, the MP3 sourcing is definitely not OK, but calling them scumbags is a bit harsh. I doubt the compilers are in it for the money. There are lots more efficient and easier ways to make some money.

they are in it for the glory, which is worse

 

[greenfuzz]

I doubt the compilers are in it for the money. There are lots more efficient and easier ways to make some money.

If they're not in it for the money then they should track down and pay the bands and also pay songwriting royalties (like many of us on this Forum have done), and settle for a sure financial loss.

 

[sylvain]

If they're not in it for the money then they should track down and pay the bands and also pay songwriting royalties (like many of us on this Forum have done), and settle for a sure financial loss.

listening to this "Turn To Stone vol.2 " comp LP right now, killer selection, love it. One of the very best of 2012.

now, i picked up at the same time the great Skeptics LP release on Distortions. Another nugget and must-have IMO. But the content of the liners as well as the thanks mentioned make me doubt this release was actually licensed from the band. It's mentioned as licensed from Gear Fab (=responsible of the CD release), but as there's from what I can read no implication of the band in this release (otherwise liners would have been much more in-depth, and at least some of the band members would have probably been mentioned in the "thanks" section), + the fact that this collection was assembled from the singles, all this makes me wonder in which conditions this Skeptics collection was actually issued.

Maybe is it fully legit, and maybe am I hence all wrong. But as I've been spinning and inspecting both LPs at the same time I was reading Frantic's and Greenfuzz's comments above, I've been wondering what's the difference in your own mind between those 2 releases, which both look as boots at first sight, as I've not read any complaints towards this GearFab/Distortion release on the board.

 

[MopTopMike]

The Skeptics release came about when the supposed manager of the group approached the label. He claimed to have the master tapes, as he owned them outright. The band members still alive were approached but no one ever responded to multiple contacts. The manager agreed to a contract plus advance royalties. However he sent a poor cassette dub instead of properly transferred masters. Royalties have been set aside in escrow for the members.

 

[sylvain]

The Skeptics release came about when the supposed manager of the group approached the label. He claimed to have the master tapes, as he owned them outright. The band members still alive were approached but no one ever responded to multiple contacts. The manager agreed to a contract plus advance royalties. However he sent a poor cassette dub instead of properly transferred masters. Royalties have been set aside in escrow for the members.

Thanks for the infos. This "supposed" manager looks weird. Incredible that so many years after the mid-60s, those kind of guys are still acting that way, screwing people whenever possible. They were probably already doin so during the heydays of the band.
Too bad this collection couldn't be assembled outta the masters, would have loved to be finally able to listen to "Turn it on" with a perfect sound quality.