Why don't record companies print cds on demand?

[Popkin]

I was thinking about the recent Blue Note deletions and I got to wondering: why doesn't EMI or Concord have some sort of service where you could order CDs on demand? Maybe some companies do this, I don't know (maybe someone could fill me in). In principle it seems like it would make sense; if there isn't enough demand to warrant maintaining inventory for some particular title, why not print individual copies to order? I would have thought the technology would be there. There seems to be a fair bit of book publishing on demand . . . Surely they could make enough money on total sales of special orders to make it economically feasible (or am I missing something?). Even if these CDs cost a bit more, I'd be willing to pay the extra charge rather than get stuck with downloading a copy to my computer.

[JSngry]

Check it out: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=48143

[A Lark Ascending]

I doubt if the 'print CD on demand' idea has much economic viability. Making a catalogue available permanently for download does - and some smaller companies are already doing this in classical music. Chandos - which has a very large catalogue - now has everything, including OOP material - available. I suspect the move by Camjazz to put its music (and its recently acquired Black Saint/Soul Note acquisitions) up on e-music is a similar move.

I imagine the bigger companies are still playing the capitalist market game. Withholding music unlikely to make big sales now to wait for a day when a return of interest might generate bigger profits. At some point they will realise that this is not an option as illegal files of that catalogue circulate. Blue Note has much of its catalogue in digital form - its up there on iTunes. It remains to be seen if they pull those downloads when they delete the physical copies. An interesting indication of how awake they are to the massive change in the way music is being disseminated.

If they'd any sense they'd also licence producing physical copies to an interested other party to produce limited runs or on-demand copies (as they do for vinyl release) to satisfy those who are not yet comfortable with downloads or downloading. Though I doubt if that solution would sustain itself for long.

[CJ Shearn]

it would be nice if BN or Concord did that with CDR's, press them on demand for certain albums. But at emusic we already have the tools for just that. I remember I joined emusic when I got my first burner and d/l and burned a massive amount of titles

[mjzee]

With eMusic, the problem is with the documentation: cover, personnel, liner notes. I think this should be included as one pdf file. Then the listener has the option of printing it out or viewing on the screen.

[A Lark Ascending]

Very true. The information can be had by googling round a bit, but its good to have it all printable.

I've used Chandos, Naxos and Gimell a lot this year for classical music downloads and they provide high definition covers and pdfs of all documentation (most of which, frankly, I don't use).

I downloaded a couple of Hyperion discs today from iTunes. Although there's no cover or notes there, the Hyperion site has a high definition copy of the cover plus a pdf of the liner details, notes, any libretto etc.

Example: http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/notes/67599-B.pdf

I get the impression that there are people in the classical companies who both love the music and can see the future in downloading in a quality way. With jazz it seems that either the people in charge don't care about their assets that much or, where they do, have not clicked on to the potential of downloading as a quality route for distributing music.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Is it perhaps because of the fascination lots of jazz fans have with record companies like Blue Note? Frankly, I can't see anyone having that same sort of fascination with Angel, Melodiya, Supraphon, Lyrita or Erato. So, if the audience for classical music is different from the jazz audience in its general attitude to collecting music, one would expect those in charge of reissues to understand and relate their policies to those differences.

MG

[A Lark Ascending]

Frankly, I can't see anyone having that same sort of fascination with Angel, Melodiya, Supraphon, Lyrita or Erato.

I'm not sure that's true - I think you do find brand loyalty in classical music. Especially to smaller companies which operate in a specific field. A label like Lyrita does have a dedicated following of people who will take a chance on an unknown name on the label because of the experience of the quality and nature of the other Lyrita records they've heard. Maybe if Lyrita recordings had broken onto the dance floor (Acid-English-Cowpat?) it would be as well known as Blue Note!!!!

I'm often drawn to Hyperion recordings, for example, by the house style of the packaging. Which is as distinctive as Blue Note. The pdfs at Hyperion allow that element of the whole package to be passed on along with the music.

The one big difference between classical music and jazz is that (for copyright lifetime at least) Kind of Blue only appears on Columbia; whereas Mahler 6 turns up all over the place (though not Karajan or Bernstein's Mahler 6).

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

The one big difference between classical music and jazz is that (for copyright lifetime at least) Kind of Blue only appears on Columbia; whereas Mahler 6 turns up all over the place (though not Karajan or Bernstein's Mahler 6).

Yes, that's interesting. When I was buying classical records, there were only two pieces of which I had two versions. The Rodrigo guitar concerto, of which I greatly preferred the Narciso Yepes version to the Bream, and the Bloch violin concerto, and liked the Menuhin version a lot more than the Hyman Bress version on Supraphon. But I couldn't tell which was actually BETTER, just that the ones I preferred felt better to me. But it didn't make me a fan of HMV or Decca.

Hm, my wife's got the Yepes somewhere. Think I'll dig it out if I can.

MG

[A Lark Ascending]

The one big difference between classical music and jazz is that (for copyright lifetime at least) Kind of Blue only appears on Columbia; whereas Mahler 6 turns up all over the place (though not Karajan or Bernstein's Mahler 6).

Yes, that's interesting. When I was buying classical records, there were only two pieces of which I had two versions. The Rodrigo guitar concerto, of which I greatly preferred the Narciso Yepes version to the Bream, and the Bloch violin concerto, and liked the Menuhin version a lot more than the Hyman Bress version on Supraphon. But I couldn't tell which was actually BETTER, just that the ones I preferred felt better to me. But it didn't make me a fan of HMV or Decca.

Hm, my wife's got the Yepes somewhere. Think I'll dig it out if I can.

MG

I agree completely. I rarely buy more than one version of a classical work. Where I have (especially when moving to CD and going for a more modern version), I frequently end up seeking out the one I first heard. Very hard to hear past what I first heard as the way the music should sound. Totally subjective of course. I can understand how the perspective will be very different to a musician working from a score.

I buy more than enough records as it is without getting sucked into 'comparing Furtwangler with Norrington with Ozawa' syndome (I might turn into David Mellor*!!!!!!). I'd rather go in search of a piece or compoer I've never heard before.

[* "Since leaving politics, David Mellor has become a highly successful broadcaster and journalist. An avid record collector (his CD collection is estimated to be 30,000 plus)..."...and you thought we needed addiction therapy!]

Edited November 29, 2008 by Bev Stapleton

[Teasing the Korean]

Why don't record companies put their ENTIRE BACK CATALOGS on iTunes? They can't whine about the production costs associated with a CD. The music is sitting their on the shelf. Why not?

[marcello]

They will soon enough.

And that will be that!

[T.D.]

...I rarely buy more than one version of a classical work...

I can understand how the perspective will be very different to a musician working from a score.

I buy more than enough records as it is without getting sucked into 'comparing Furtwangler with Norrington with Ozawa' syndome...

I'd rather go in search of a piece or composer I've never heard before.

Fully agreed. Classical record collecting can be outrageously expensive (imagine collecting Ring cycles, for instance...here I've heard Levine and Solti, and prefer Solti, the one I first heard, despite some misgivings about his conducting).

Since I very rarely buy multiple recordings of classical works, I'm reluctant to recommend particular recordings (though I'll occasionally do so for contemporary music).

Also, having spent some time reading r.m.c.r. (I hardly ever look at Usenet any longer, as the trolls and kooks are too tiresome), I got the impression that collectors of multiple versions often prefer very individualistic interpretations/readings, while I, intending to stick with only one recording, am often perfectly happy with a "foursquare" or "middle-of-the-road" interpretation.

[A Lark Ascending]

Whilst respecting that there as a great deal of genuine analysis and debate going on in discussions about different versions, you also find a fair bit of posturing. 'Karajan? How can you possibly prefer Karajan to the sublime Klemperer version?' Heads into angels dancing on heads of pins country very quickly.

Though I suspect it keeps the classical record industry afloat, endlessly issuing new Beethoven cycles, reissuing old Beethoven cycles or resurrecting historic Beethoven cycles that have never been heard on disc before.

The good thing, however, for the ordinary record buyer is that there is such a glut of the standard repetoire on disc that it can now be had very cheaply. I bought a 'Ring' cycle in the early 90s - couldn't afford the ones that got the most stars but even the one I got cost an arm and a leg. Today you can get a Ring cycle for thruppence.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Bev Stapleton

[Popkin]

Here's another question: if record companies did print on demand, would they have to be CD-Rs? Is there no way to produce an extremely limited batch or proper CDs? I take it there are some issues with CD-Rs with regard to longevity. I know nothing about how proper CDs are produced, so maybe some kind person could educate me. Thanks.

[Chuck Nessa]

Here's another question: if record companies did print on demand, would they have to be CD-Rs? Is there no way to produce an extremely limited batch or proper CDs? I take it there are some issues with CD-Rs with regard to longevity. I know nothing about how proper CDs are produced, so maybe some kind person could educate me. Thanks.

Cost effective cds are in quantities of 1000. Cost effective booklets/tray cards are minimally 2500. Most issues deleted sell below 200 a year. You do the math. None of this takes into consideration the expense of warehousing, etc.

[Bluerein]

And given the fact most (if not all CD-r's nowadays) will outlive all on this board so what's the problem of CD-r's?

[marcello]

If they wanted to set up a system to produce on demand they could, but then again, this is one of the reasons they are going out of business.

[Popkin]

And given the fact most (if not all CD-r's nowadays) will outlive all on this board so what's the problem of CD-r's?

because everyone on this board is really old, or because CD-Rs last a long time nowadays?

[JSngry]

Check it out: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=48143

hel-LO!

[Bluerein]

Popkin: the last of course (although the first explanation is valid as well I'm sure......)

[Popkin]

Check it out: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=48143

hel-LO!

Yes, I saw that, thanks. I guess that means that Amazon is printing certain titles on demand, and that the technology exists to do so cost effectively. I'm mostly wondering why record companies don't offer this for most of their OOP titles. E.g. instead of simply deleting a bunch of RVGs and Conns next year, why wouldn't Blue Note print these titles on demand?

[marcello]

Because they have a 20th Century mindset.

[JSngry]

Check it out: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=48143

hel-LO!

Yes, I saw that, thanks. I guess that means that Amazon is printing certain titles on demand, and that the technology exists to do so cost effectively. I'm mostly wondering why record companies don't offer this for most of their OOP titles. E.g. instead of simply deleting a bunch of RVGs and Conns next year, why wouldn't Blue Note print these titles on demand?

If I followed that thread correctly, it's not BN proper that's doing the custom printing, it's a 3rd party.

What I'm not clear on is if said 3rd party is owned by Amazon or not.

Either way, the money of the future when it comes to hard copies of anything but "essential" catalog looks like it might be in licensing, be it the Amazon type thing, the dreaded compilations, and/or the "make your own mix CD" kiosk type thing that the brick-and-mortar stores have been promising (and are finally delivering, about a decade too late for it to be an exciting notion).

[medjuck]

IIRC The Folkways catalogue is available on demand from the Smithsonian. I got a cd with cuts by Gil Evans and Maryy-Lou Williams from them.

It was originally a compilation Lp and they include the original liner notes. I'm not home so I can't check it for info right now.