Jump to content
  • Sign Up
tomangoes

BBC 4 tonight...artists being short changed!

Recommended Posts

Great show tonight by Shaz Osborne highlighting the royalties got out of a successful 60s record..

1penny out of a 66 penny 45rpm single sale. With their expenses deducted from that penny!

Some pretty angry stars interviewed after they realised what they signed up to!

You can see from this how many artists went back to a day job even after a couple of hits.

No wonder many of our 'soul stars ' never enjoyed financial gain for their efforts.

Ed

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The programme makers did not cut Don Arden any slack....................obviously Shaz did not condemn him, but in conclusion he was no guardian of the artists interest alone.

The 'savvy' artists eventually got proper Lawyers to protect their cut.

One interesting fact was that when 'cd's' came out, the record companies made massive amounts of money selling reproduced album's at a 50% hike on album costs but cd's cost virually nothing to produce.

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The upcoming music documentary on RUDY LOVE goes into the rip-offs that occured to him down the years, starting when he signed with Canyon Records right on through the 70's. Makes interesting viewing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And those very early first CD's were sub standard in many cases, perishing over the years. Also many new CD compilations back then had some re-makes of popular cuts with the original artist singing with a new backing track. They were awful. 

The PRS/MCPS and PPL are fighting for writer/performer royalties constantly. The different territories are getting together with todays technology and are creating massive database of songs/recordings that they share to help everybody try and control the old and new songs/recordings. Pity the labels did not respectfully acknowledge the changes in the business and maybe remunerate with a bonus or something to those involved vocally or musically, despite what the contract said. It would be an honourable thing to do.

I released a track called 'Soul recession' by Philly group Double Exposure in 2009. The day it was released, somebody bought every mix, hacked it to pieces, added extra drums, guitars etc to the front and gave it away suggesting people should check the original out. Our song/production was bastardised by a very good re-mixer, but we do not stand a chance if that is how it works. The Philly Grooved 3 Tom Moulton remix was licensed officially from us.

Sadly digits (recording techniques/mixing and mastering) are making labels and artists re invent themselves which is not a bad thing. So you are right tomangoes, there is no financial gain at all being a song writer, producer, mixer, masterer, singer, label at my level. I do not shift much vinyl wise or digitally, but it still costs thousands to cut some of my songs. And then......there is Youtube where I guess much of it is posted illegally with the 'I do not own the copyright' bs disclaimer and the millennium digital safe harbour rubbish. On saying that, in this territory now, song writers can report th eurl and get a royalty despite the label or artists getting anything.

Edited by Carl Dixon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comment now!

Comments are members only

Sign Up

Join Soul Source - Free & easy!

Sign up now!

Sign in

Sign in here.

Sign in now!

Adverts



×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.