The Art-Music Forum
July 07, 2020, 04:19:08 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Here you may discover hundreds of little-known composers, hear thousands of long-forgotten compositions, contribute your own rare (non-copyright) recordings, and discuss all the Arts in an erudite and decorous atmosphere full of freedom and delight. To participate, simply log in or register.
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

the dark side of YT "grandness"


Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: the dark side of YT "grandness"  (Read 1527 times)
guest140
Guest
« on: June 05, 2013, 08:44:21 pm »

Pianist Krystian Zimerman noticed the dark side...

Article in The Guardian
Report Spam   Logged

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

BrianA
Level 4
****

Times thanked: 28
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2013, 10:08:45 pm »

On a similar but different note, does ANYBODY pay attention to copyright on youtube???  Yeah, I enjoy these numerous channels that promote our cherished unsungs as much as anybody else, but I am frequently astounded by just how many of these performances, albeit of music by lrss well known composers, are nevertheless performances taken from currently available, in print, commercial recordings!  Does some pious statement about promoting the works of unknown composers really excuse or justify that?
Report Spam   Logged
guest2
Guest
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2013, 10:16:06 pm »

. . . commercial . . .

There's the key. The real problem is the corrupt system of capitalism. In an ideal society the artist would not and should not have to concern himself with "sales".

Report Spam   Logged
BrianA
Level 4
****

Times thanked: 28
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2013, 12:45:45 am »

Well, I gotta say, that's not necessarily an answer I anticipated.   Huh

I wonder if Krystian Zimerman would agree?   Wink
Report Spam   Logged
guest140
Guest
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2013, 05:25:33 am »


There's the key. The real problem is the corrupt system of capitalism. In an ideal society the artist would not and should not have to concern himself with "sales".




Sounds a bit like "If everything will be different, everything will be different"...
Report Spam   Logged
ahinton
Level 6
******

Times thanked: 27
Offline Offline

Posts: 853


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2013, 11:46:07 am »

On a similar but different note, does ANYBODY pay attention to copyright on youtube???  Yeah, I enjoy these numerous channels that promote our cherished unsungs as much as anybody else, but I am frequently astounded by just how many of these performances, albeit of music by lrss well known composers, are nevertheless performances taken from currently available, in print, commercial recordings!  Does some pious statement about promoting the works of unknown composers really excuse or justify that?
Anyone can pay attention to that if so they wish; I have done so myself, followed the correct procedures as advised by YT and had hundreds of copyright infringing items removed from YT only recently.
Report Spam   Logged
ahinton
Level 6
******

Times thanked: 27
Offline Offline

Posts: 853


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2013, 11:51:24 am »

. . . commercial . . .

There's the key. The real problem is the corrupt system of capitalism. In an ideal society the artist would not and should not have to concern himself with "sales".
Notwithstanding the corruption that burgeons within capitalism - which indeed it does on a grand scale even though it need not do so - the fact that artists might not be directly concerned with "sales" does not mean that they'd be unconcerned about theft of their work; it's not all about money, as is evident from the fact that most people who post illicit videos on YouTube don't do it for financial gain. In any event, an artist still has to make a living, so someone has to concern themselves with the sale of his/her work in order to ensure that this happens.

More composers than ever self-publish today, not least because technological advances have enabled them to do so; how many of them who do so, however, can afford to delegate the distribution of their work to someone else in order to free them from the commitment to its dissemination? We don't have the ideal society of which you write and we aren't about to get it either.
Report Spam   Logged
JimL
Level 3
***

Times thanked: 1
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2013, 03:22:28 pm »

One aspect that seems to have been forgotten here is advertising.  YT is the greatest tool available to advertise commercially available CDs of unsung composers by posting one or two of the works on it, or to enlighten potential customers about the existence of CDs from difficult-to-access sources.  This actually constitutes free advertising, which is nothing to shake a stick at.

After having read the article, there seems to be two issues at work here.  I consider YT to be no more dangerous to commercial CD sales than radio was to LP, or even 45 single sales in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s.  Same thing - broadcasting stuff to the general public for free that was available for them to own if they purchased the single or entire album.  If somebody wanted to own it for next to nothing, they could record the performance off the radio with a cassette recorder, or perhaps rig their radio to record stuff.  It was doable even back then.

Recording live concerts and posting them on YT, on the other hand can scuttle potential recording projects, and that IS damaging. 
Report Spam   Logged
ahinton
Level 6
******

Times thanked: 27
Offline Offline

Posts: 853


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2013, 04:46:39 pm »

One aspect that seems to have been forgotten here is advertising.  YT is the greatest tool available to advertise commercially available CDs of unsung composers by posting one or two of the works on it, or to enlighten potential customers about the existence of CDs from difficult-to-access sources.  This actually constitutes free advertising, which is nothing to shake a stick at.

After having read the article, there seems to be two issues at work here.  I consider YT to be no more dangerous to commercial CD sales than radio was to LP, or even 45 single sales in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s.  Same thing - broadcasting stuff to the general public for free that was available for them to own if they purchased the single or entire album.  If somebody wanted to own it for next to nothing, they could record the performance off the radio with a cassette recorder, or perhaps rig their radio to record stuff.  It was doable even back then.

Recording live concerts and posting them on YT, on the other hand can scuttle potential recording projects, and that IS damaging.
As an interested party in this issue (in general terms, not just re Zimerman), yes, the opportunities available for uploading short extracts as samples is great, in principle and could indeed sometimes result in the effect that you suggest; however, most copyright material is uploaded to YT by others without permission being sought or a care in the world about anyone else's interests. Composers, record companies et al could upload sample extracts from copyright material by agreement and this would be no problem at all as far as I'm concerned; indeed, I'd welcome it. The fact remains that uploading entire works or entire CDs has the opposite effect, as one might expect.
Report Spam   Logged
guest140
Guest
« Reply #9 on: June 06, 2013, 09:39:44 pm »

Another anecdote: I recently heard from violinist Tasmin Little that she came across a video on YT of her own playing - with more than 1 million hits and not a single word in the title or description that she is playing!
I don't know if that is right and how much it is, but I heard that someone who posts a video with that many hits gets money for it. So in that case Tasmin Little does get neither the money nor the fame.

Tobias
Report Spam   Logged
guest2
Guest
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2013, 11:17:00 pm »

. . . not a single word in the title or description that she is playing! . . .

That is as it should be. Compositions are the property of their composers. The executants are mere executants and as I see it have no rights at all. Far too much attention is accorded to performers these days. All glory should go to composers.
Report Spam   Logged
ahinton
Level 6
******

Times thanked: 27
Offline Offline

Posts: 853


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 06, 2013, 11:49:56 pm »

Another anecdote: I recently heard from violinist Tasmin Little that she came across a video on YT of her own playing - with more than 1 million hits and not a single word in the title or description that she is playing!
I don't know if that is right and how much it is, but I heard that someone who posts a video with that many hits gets money for it. So in that case Tasmin Little does get neither the money nor the fame.
I have also noticed that many people who upload material to YouTube do not credit the artist/s involved; I wonder why?
Report Spam   Logged
ahinton
Level 6
******

Times thanked: 27
Offline Offline

Posts: 853


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 06, 2013, 11:51:18 pm »

. . . not a single word in the title or description that she is playing! . . .

That is as it should be. Compositions are the property of their composers. The executants are mere executants and as I see it have no rights at all. Far too much attention is accorded to performers these days. All glory should go to composers.
As you've written elsewhere. No. Compositions are the intellectual property of their composers but to be shared with whomsoever will listen. Do not undermine executants; some of them might be the composers themselves!
Report Spam   Logged
Gauk
Level 7
*******

Times thanked: 57
Offline Offline

Posts: 1159



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2013, 07:48:48 am »

I have also noticed that many people who upload material to YouTube do not credit the artist/s involved; I wonder why?

Laziness, I imagine. I notice in some blatant cases of posting recent commercial recordings, the performers are given in detail.
Report Spam   Logged
BrianA
Level 4
****

Times thanked: 28
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2013, 04:30:17 pm »

One aspect that seems to have been forgotten here is advertising.  YT is the greatest tool available to advertise commercially available CDs of unsung composers by posting one or two of the works on it, or to enlighten potential customers about the existence of CDs from difficult-to-access sources.  This actually constitutes free advertising, which is nothing to shake a stick at.

After having read the article, there seems to be two issues at work here.  I consider YT to be no more dangerous to commercial CD sales than radio was to LP, or even 45 single sales in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s.  Same thing - broadcasting stuff to the general public for free that was available for them to own if they purchased the single or entire album.  If somebody wanted to own it for next to nothing, they could record the performance off the radio with a cassette recorder, or perhaps rig their radio to record stuff.  It was doable even back then.

Recording live concerts and posting them on YT, on the other hand can scuttle potential recording projects, and that IS damaging. 

Perhaps I'm a bit out of step with contemporary practices?  If I truly love a piece of music I will leave no stone unturned to get my hands on a professionally performed and produced commercial recording. I have discovered much wonderful music through this and similar sites (and yes, youtube as well).  But my vast collection of downloads are never more viewed by me as more than interim measures, hopefully to be eventually replaced by professionally produced recordings.

Case study: one of my great discoveries of recent years has been the music of Mikhail Nosyrev, which I initially downloaded from, yes, youtube.  At the first opportunity, however, I replaced my downloaded versions of the first two symphonies with the Arkiv reissue (of the very same original Olympia recordings), and I will do the same with the third and forth as soon as Arkiv gets around to reissuing them or I can find a decently priced used copy of the Olympia disc.

Nobody, I think, is out royalties or profits or income as a result of my downloading activities since downloading will never prevent me from purchasing the first commercially available recording to come along.
Report Spam   Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum


Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy