JW to make his transcriptions available for free on the web
Tommy Grand
Resist the obvious quip ("that's more than they are worth"), and
instead comment on the implications of this bold move by JW.
Quoting him from the March issue of CG magazine:
"When you publish music with music publishers, the arranger, or the
transcriber or even the composer sometimes, if a piece sells for 10
GBP for example, they might get 80 pence or something like that. But
that costs 10 GBP in today's economic circumstances, even before the
latest crisis, and for a young student in Indonesia or in Kenya or in
Nigeria, it's impossible. A lot of them get photocopies when they can
but a lot of them simply can't afford it, and don't have the music at
all. Now the least I can do, after a long time of playing concerts and
having a very nice life, thank you very much, is to provide music
which they can get hold of for nothing. If a performer, like a solo
guitarist wants to make a CD or perform it in public, the usual rules
of copyright still apply; they have to pay copyright for that sort of
reproduction, but with the sheet music, for the sake of me getting an
extra 80 pence, it gives me much more pleasure that someone in Nigeria
or Kenya or wherever, maybe here, in Wigan of Hull, if they want that
piece of music, can easily have a copy of it."
TG
Slogoin
>
> "When you publish music with music publishers, the arranger, or the
> transcriber or even the composer sometimes, if a piece sells for 10
> GBP for example, they might get 80 pence or something like that. But
> that costs 10 GBP in today's economic circumstances, even before the
> latest crisis, and for a young student in Indonesia or in Kenya or in
> Nigeria, it's impossible. A lot of them get photocopies when they can
> but a lot of them simply can't afford it, and don't have the music at
> all. Now the least I can do, after a long time of playing concerts and
> having a very nice life, thank you very much, is to provide music
> which they can get hold of for nothing. If a performer, like a solo
> guitarist wants to make a CD or perform it in public, the usual rules
> of copyright still apply; they have to pay copyright for that sort of
> reproduction, but with the sheet music, for the sake of me getting an
> extra 80 pence, it gives me much more pleasure that someone in Nigeria
> or Kenya or wherever, maybe here, in Wigan of Hull, if they want that
> piece of music, can easily have a copy of it."
JW is a liberal commie elitist and this move is going cause a collapse
in our founding fathers' capitalist system.
Tommy Grand
>
> - Show quoted text -
Trolling us again?
Slogoin
>
> Trolling us again?
I pale compared to a master baiter like you.
Matanya Ophee
This would be a lot more credible if JW would also post the entire
contents of his discography for free down load on the Internet.
Otherwise, this is a simply dishonest piece of drivel. I haven't
received my March issue yet, but I'll be sure to look this up when it
gets here.
MO.
Miguel de Maria
>
> - Show quoted text -
JW has been forced to use socialist means to save capitalism.
David Raleigh Arnold
In the case of songwriting, the issue is a bit less clear, but
the returns are proportionately even greater for performance
rights, because of the ease of acquiring a working knowledge of a song
and its lyrics.
Also, he might be surprised at the market for deluxe printed copies of
some of these works in book form. Crazy like a fox? Maybe.
There are a few rich people in the poorest countries. That's why they are
the poorest countries. :-) daveA
--
Free download of technical exercises worth a lifetime of practice:
"Dynamic Guitar Technique": http://www.openguitar.com/instruction.html
You can play the cards you're dealt, or improve your hand with DGT.
To email go to: http://www.openguitar.com/contact.html
fol...@yahoo.com
and Nigeria greater than the access to photo copy machines and music
shops?
Matanya Ophee
> I am curious. Is access to computers, printers and the web in Kenya
> and Nigeria greater than the access to photo copy machines and music
> shops?
Exactly right! One would imagine that with the aggressive activities
of IT companies, such equipment would be more accessible in third
world countries. I don't think printed music distribution, and for
that matter, the distribution of musical merchandise in general, would
be as extensive. Look at the page and scroll to the bottom of it:
http://www.digitalguitararchive.com/index.php
What you see is a picture of the location of people who have logged on
to this site in the last few months. Nobody in Nigeria or Kenya.
IOW, when JW posts his transcription on the web, I am willing to bet
that with the exception of one or two rich Nigerians or Kenyans, the
people who keep spamming you with their Nigerian scams, 99.99% of the
downloads will be by Americans and Europeans, who could bloody well
afford the printed music. This is a clear case of delusions based on
ignorance and driven by false assumptions.
MO.
Steven Bornfeld
I have to admit--that's pretty funny.
Steve
Steven Bornfeld
> I am curious. Is access to computers, printers and the web in Kenya
> and Nigeria greater than the access to photo copy machines and music
> shops?
LOL--considering recent news out of Kenya, it's comforting that there's
time and means for playing guitar.
Steve
Miguel de Maria
I certainly saw a lot more internet kiosks in Andalucia than music
shops or photocopiers.
Miguel de Maria
The definition of Puritanism: The haunting thought that somewhere, in
some third world courtry, a kid is playing a pirated copy of the
Regondi studies.
David Raleigh Arnold
MO's opinions closely follow his interest. This is a tally for
openguitar.com based
on the 1st 30 of 64 resolvable for February by country. The world is
wide. Regards, daveA
hits kb
1 4102 31.20% 2879 33.71% 117061 37.59% network (.net)
2 3427 26.06% 1462 17.12% 45665 14.66% commercial (.com)
3 2041 15.52% 1665 19.49% 41007 13.17% unresolved
4 1091 8.30% 1046 12.25% 38800 12.46% People's Republic
of China
5 291 2.21% 116 1.36% 2561 0.82% Italy
6 194 1.48% 124 1.45% 4423 1.42% Germany
7 156 1.19% 130 1.52% 3126 1.00% Russia
8 145 1.10% 129 1.51% 6638 2.13% Finland
9 137 1.04% 134 1.57% 7835 2.52% Hungary
10 123 0.94% 107 1.25% 8111 2.60% United Kingdom
11 119 0.91% 107 1.25% 3855 1.24% Brazil
12 107 0.81% 75 0.88% 1849 0.59% Canada
13 101 0.77% 87 1.02% 651 0.21% organizations
(.org)
14 83 0.63% 67 0.78% 1945 0.62% United States of
America
15 65 0.49% 56 0.66% 2327 0.75% Indonesia
16 64 0.49% 54 0.63% 1425 0.46% France
17 64 0.49% 39 0.46% 1542 0.50% Netherlands
18 61 0.46% 41 0.48% 948 0.30% Poland
19 59 0.45% 42 0.49% 2618 0.84% US educational
(.edu)
20 59 0.45% 51 0.60% 2159 0.69% Belgium
21 50 0.38% 34 0.40% 355 0.11% Japan
22 40 0.30% 33 0.39% 1443 0.46% New Zealand
23 38 0.29% 32 0.37% 474 0.15% Philippines
24 37 0.28% 25 0.29% 604 0.19% Ireland
25 36 0.27% 30 0.35% 1266 0.41% Greece
26 34 0.26% 31 0.36% 985 0.32% Denmark
27 32 0.24% 24 0.28% 1409 0.45% Australia
28 30 0.23% 27 0.32% 1699 0.55% Austria
29 28 0.21% 25 0.29% 1146 0.37% Switzerland
30 26 0.20% 22 0.26% 535 0.17% Argentina
Matanya Ophee
>
> MO's opinions closely follow his interest.
I assure you one thing: I have no interest whatsoever to publish
transcriptions, even if they are by JW.
>This is a tally for
> openguitar.com based
> on the 1st 30 of 64 resolvable for February by country. The world is
> wide.
Not as wide as the results for some other web sites. I do not see
anyone from Kenya or Nigeria, or from any other African country,
hitting your site. If I wasn't worried about wasting your bandwidth,
I'd post my results for February. At least I got one hit from
Nigeria....
MO.
JPD
Maybe John Williams would like to publish on my site: Here are figures
for February:
Country/Territory Visits
United States 7203
United Kingdom 1065
Canada 847
France 808
Australia 472
Germany 465
Spain 375
Italy 358
Indonesia 311
Turkey 262
Brazil 245
Netherlands 239
Vietnam 229
Japan 209
Thailand 193
Mexico 192
India 178
Poland 162
Greece 146
Sweden 138
Ireland 138
Belgium 135
Malaysia 128
Philippines 116
Portugal 103
Finland 103
New Zealand 103
China 99
Hong Kong 98
Norway 97
Austria 97
Singapore 96
South Africa 88
Romania 84
Denmark 84
Russia 81
Argentina 79
Hungary 75
Israel 72
Iran 71
Serbia 71
Switzerland 69
Croatia 68
South Korea 67
Czech Republic 65
Taiwan 59
Colombia 58
Egypt 47
United Arab Emirates 46
Morocco 42
Chile 40
Slovakia 37
Ukraine 35
Slovenia 32
Peru 31
Bulgaria 29
Saudi Arabia 28
Estonia 27
Puerto Rico 27
Venezuela 24
Algeria 20
Sri Lanka 20
Lithuania 19
Latvia 18
Syria 14
Jordan 12
Iraq 12
Lebanon 12
Macau SAR China 12
Cyprus 12
Dominican Republic 11
Mauritius 11
Tunisia 10
Trinidad and Tobago 10
Kuwait 10
Costa Rica 10
Guatemala 9
Bosnia and Herzegovina 9
Ecuador 8
Belarus 8
Georgia 8
Pakistan 8
Qatar 8
Iceland 8
Bahrain 8
Montenegro 7
Mongolia 7
Bolivia 6
Honduras 6
Bahamas 6
Malta 5
Moldova 5
Armenia 5
Myanmar 5
Uruguay 5
El Salvador 4
Seychelles 4
Oman 4
Ivory Coast 4
Monaco 4
Sudan 4
Barbados 4
Jersey 4
Macedonia 4
Gabon 3
Aruba 3
Netherlands Antilles 3
Saint Lucia 3
Albania 3
Bangladesh 3
Bermuda 3
Madagascar 3
Nicaragua 3
Kazakhstan 3
Jamaica 2
Kenya 2
Panama 2
Botswana 2
Isle of Man 2
Belize 2
Azerbaijan 2
Afghanistan 2
Palestinian Territory 2
Ghana 2
Nepal 2
Fiji 2
Luxembourg 2
Guernsey 2
Brunei 2
Angola 2
Libya 2
U.S. Virgin Islands 2
Maldives 1
Guam 1
(not set) 1
Martinique 1
Turks and Caicos Islands 1
Aland Islands 1
Nigeria 1
Uzbekistan 1
Samoa 1
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 1
Guadeloupe 1
Tanzania 1
French Guiana 1
Andorra 1
Northern Mariana Islands 1
Suriname 1
Bhutan 1
Namibia 1
Antigua and Barbuda 1
Laos 1
Senegal 1
Gibraltar 1
Matanya Ophee
>
> Maybe John Williams would like to publish on my site: Here are figures
> for February:
OK. I'll raise you a couple:
United States us 8655 30125 843.29 MB Pages: 8655
Hits: 30125
Bandwidth: 843.29 MB
Unknown Unknown ip 716 1782 41.52 MB Pages: 716
Hits: 1782
Bandwidth: 41.52 MB
eu European country eu 256 1158 18.64 MB Pages: 256
Hits: 1158
Bandwidth: 18.64 MB
ca Canada ca 198 413 12.67 MB Pages: 198
Hits: 413
Bandwidth: 12.67 MB
sg Singapore sg 183 200 2.76 MB Pages: 183
Hits: 200
Bandwidth: 2.76 MB
cn China cn 142 160 1.76 MB Pages: 142
Hits: 160
Bandwidth: 1.76 MB
gb Great Britain gb 105 529 11.89 MB Pages: 105
Hits: 529
Bandwidth: 11.89 MB
nl Netherlands nl 87 271 3.97 MB Pages: 87
Hits: 271
Bandwidth: 3.97 MB
es Spain es 72 274 5.29 MB Pages: 72
Hits: 274
Bandwidth: 5.29 MB
au Australia au 69 340 5.80 MB Pages: 69
Hits: 340
Bandwidth: 5.80 MB
it Italy it 58 358 11.02 MB Pages: 58
Hits: 358
Bandwidth: 11.02 MB
de Germany de 42 171 4.41 MB Pages: 42
Hits: 171
Bandwidth: 4.41 MB
at Austria at 38 193 2.71 MB Pages: 38
Hits: 193
Bandwidth: 2.71 MB
pt Portugal pt 31 133 1.60 MB Pages: 31
Hits: 133
Bandwidth: 1.60 MB
fr France fr 29 121 1.24 MB Pages: 29
Hits: 121
Bandwidth: 1.24 MB
jp Japan jp 29 60 895.46 KB Pages: 29
Hits: 60
Bandwidth: 895.46 KB
hu Hungary hu 23 79 1.41 MB Pages: 23
Hits: 79
Bandwidth: 1.41 MB
fi Finland fi 18 60 3.20 MB Pages: 18
Hits: 60
Bandwidth: 3.20 MB
ar Argentina ar 18 85 1.07 MB Pages: 18
Hits: 85
Bandwidth: 1.07 MB
kr South Korea kr 17 124 1.37 MB Pages: 17
Hits: 124
Bandwidth: 1.37 MB
pe Peru pe 14 48 1.30 MB Pages: 14
Hits: 48
Bandwidth: 1.30 MB
br Brazil br 13 55 1.09 MB Pages: 13
Hits: 55
Bandwidth: 1.09 MB
be Belgium be 12 74 2.51 MB Pages: 12
Hits: 74
Bandwidth: 2.51 MB
by Belarus by 10 10 82.08 KB Pages: 10
Hits: 10
Bandwidth: 82.08 KB
ee Estonia ee 9 61 1.22 MB Pages: 9
Hits: 61
Bandwidth: 1.22 MB
sk Slovak Republic sk 9 65 2.69 MB Pages: 9
Hits: 65
Bandwidth: 2.69 MB
hk Hong Kong hk 8 43 561.10 KB Pages: 8
Hits: 43
Bandwidth: 561.10 KB
mx Mexico mx 6 37 2.22 MB Pages: 6
Hits: 37
Bandwidth: 2.22 MB
dk Denmark dk 5 31 355.08 KB Pages: 5
Hits: 31
Bandwidth: 355.08 KB
ch Switzerland ch 5 30 311.16 KB Pages: 5
Hits: 30
Bandwidth: 311.16 KB
ru Russian Federation ru 4 39 2.84 MB Pages: 4
Hits: 39
Bandwidth: 2.84 MB
yu Yugoslavia yu 4 40 469.67 KB Pages: 4
Hits: 40
Bandwidth: 469.67 KB
pl Poland pl 4 30 1.00 MB Pages: 4
Hits: 30
Bandwidth: 1.00 MB
se Sweden se 4 30 992.12 KB Pages: 4
Hits: 30
Bandwidth: 992.12 KB
gt Guatemala gt 4 11 121.74 KB Pages: 4
Hits: 11
Bandwidth: 121.74 KB
ua Ukraine ua 3 4 446.85 KB Pages: 3
Hits: 4
Bandwidth: 446.85 KB
ph Philippines ph 3 13 182.45 KB Pages: 3
Hits: 13
Bandwidth: 182.45 KB
hr Croatia hr 3 18 819.51 KB Pages: 3
Hits: 18
Bandwidth: 819.51 KB
no Norway no 2 24 227.17 KB Pages: 2
Hits: 24
Bandwidth: 227.17 KB
ie Ireland ie 2 6 75.81 KB Pages: 2
Hits: 6
Bandwidth: 75.81 KB
za South Africa za 2 24 234.56 KB Pages: 2
Hits: 24
Bandwidth: 234.56 KB
eg Egypt eg 1 4 44.52 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 4
Bandwidth: 44.52 KB
my Malaysia my 1 5 96.23 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 5
Bandwidth: 96.23 KB
ro Romania ro 1 4 95.98 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 4
Bandwidth: 95.98 KB
th Thailand th 1 5 209.80 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 5
Bandwidth: 209.80 KB
si Slovenia si 1 4 45.35 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 4
Bandwidth: 45.35 KB
np Nepal np 1 7 115.63 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 7
Bandwidth: 115.63 KB
ni Nicaragua ni 1 5 44.52 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 5
Bandwidth: 44.52 KB
ng Nigeria ng 1 1 4.85 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 1
Bandwidth: 4.85 KB
nz New Zealand nz 1 4 73.74 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 4
Bandwidth: 73.74 KB
ae United Arab Emirates ae 1 5 55.47 KB Pages: 1
Hits: 5
Bandwidth: 55.47 KB
il Israel il 6 779.22 KB Pages: 0
Hits: 6
Bandwidth: 779.22 KB
lv Latvia lv 1 79.02 KB Pages: 0
Hits: 1
Bandwidth: 79.02 KB
in India in 4 681.51 KB Pages: 0
Hits: 4
Bandwidth: 681.51 KB
cz Czech Republic cz 1 11.13 KB Pages: 0
Hits: 1
Bandwidth: 11.13 KB
ir Iran ir 10 137.57 KB Pages: 0
Which doesn't mean a damn thing. So there is one guy in Nigeria who
has a computer? good for him.
MO.
Richard Yates
> > openguitar.com based
> > on the 1st 30 of 64 resolvable for February by country. The world is
> > wide.
>
> Not as wide as the results for some other web sites. I do not see
> anyone from Kenya or Nigeria, or from any other African country,
> hitting your site. If I wasn't worried about wasting your bandwidth,
> I'd post my results for February. At least I got one hit from
> Nigeria....
>
> MO.
Here are mine from 2008. You have to go pretty far down to find an African
country (South Africa with 676) unless some are in the unknown category.
But, hey, I've got 2 from Mongolia!
Country Pages
United States 234201
Unknown 25065
Australia 16843
China 11349
European country 9567
Japan 5260
Germany 5174
Italy 4691
Canada 3879
Brazil 3285
Spain 3238
Great Britain 3071
Hong Kong 1852
France 1836
Netherlands 1826
Singapore 1606
Austria 1348
Indonesia 1233
South Korea 1227
Russian Federation 1071
Mexico 918
Chile 680
South Africa 676
Poland 612
Belgium 612
Ukraine 518
Portugal 502
Argentina 501
Finland 455
Taiwan 448
Hungary 440
Sweden 431
Switzerland 406
Norway 367
Israel 356
Thailand 351
Greece 350
Iran 336
India 326
Slovak Republic 321
Romania 297
Turkey 254
Czech Republic 235
Vietnam 224
Philippines 194
Yugoslavia 156
New Zealand 149
Malaysia 139
Iceland 133
Luxembourg 131
Denmark 126
Trinidad and Tobago 112
Estonia 109
Croatia 102
Ireland 98
Sri Lanka 93
Costa Rica 72
Puerto Rico 72
Netherlands Antilles 71
Colombia 65
Slovenia 57
United Arab Emirates 53
Latvia 48
Bosnia-Herzegovina 45
Mozambique 40
Barbados 35
Peru 33
Lebanon 32
Paraguay 31
Cayman Islands 29
Lithuania 22
Bermuda 20
Ecuador 18
Cyprus 18
Belarus 18
Armenia 18
Bulgaria 17
Saudi Arabia 17
Bahamas 16
Malta 16
Egypt 16
Bangladesh 15
Kuwait 15
Guatemala 14
Kazakhstan 14
Moldova 14
Georgia 13
Pakistan 12
Syria 11
Macedonia 11
Azerbaidjan 10
Nepal 10
Venezuela 10
Uruguay 9
Antigua and Barbuda 8
Bolivia 8
Albania 8
Jordan 8
Uganda 6
Macau 6
Myanmar 4
Lesotho 4
El Salvador 4
Cambodia 3
Vatican City State 3
Mauritius 3
Guam (USA) 3
Zimbabwe 3
Kenya 2
Jamaica 2
Nicaragua 2
Polynesia (French) 2
Morocco 2
Ethiopia 2
Mongolia 2
Madagascar 2
Honduras 1
Libya 1
Panama 1
Brunei Darussalam 1
Algeria 1
Cameroon 1
JPD
In order to "raise" me, you'd have to show figures for unique visitors
-- not pages shown, megabytes, or hits. My pageviews for February were
well over 50,000. Hits were over 100,000. Megabytes were 150,000. And
if it didn't mean anything, I wouldn't be doing it and neither would
you. That "one guy in Nigeria" probably has a friend or three. One guy
here, one guy there, they add up. My history of discovering the beauty
of classical guitar was nothing but encountering one guy here and one
guy there. Sometimes the guy was a tramp living on Venice Beach, other
times the guy was Julian Bream. And sometimes, for others, the guy was
me. And of course, for many, the guy was Matanya Ophee. It does matter.
socrates
Does JW even own the rights? Are those pieces all common domain?
Tommy Grand
YOUR ALL A BUNCH OF PSYCHO STALKERS
JPD
Out of curiosity I looked up a few more stats. Last year I got 56
visits from Nigeria. The countries from which I got no visits were
Turkmenistan, Central African Republic, Chad, Niger, Mali, Guinea,
Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, and Western Sahara. But I'm HUGE in
Mongolia at 20!
JPD
Well, one supposes that he'll release only that to which he has the
rights. He's not talking about "pieces, " but about his transcriptions
of the pieces, and presumably only about the transcriptions to which
he (still) owns the rights. I imagine there are some transcriptions or
arrangements he's made over the years to which he no longer owns the
rights, having sold them to a publisher or some other entity.
Slogoin
>
> In order to "raise" me, you'd have to show figures for unique visitors
> -- not pages shown, megabytes, or hits.
I think you missed your own point.
> One guy
> here, one guy there, they add up. My history of discovering the beauty
> of classical guitar was nothing but encountering one guy here and one
> guy there. Sometimes the guy was a tramp living on Venice Beach, other
> times the guy was Julian Bream. And sometimes, for others, the guy was
> me. And of course, for many, the guy was Matanya Ophee. It does matter.
This point. It's about the nature of these connections in the CG
world. I'd be willing to bet that MO's connections to the CG world are
much greater than yours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_networks
MO may very well be the single most connected person in the CG
world.
Dicerous
I would hope that any guitarist worth his salt could simply transcribe
something by hearing it. Certainly, one should be able to have a
*sketch* of the piece in his or her mind, analyzed harmonically. The
business is simply a way of piggy-backing on the free exchange of
ideas. MO is a classic example. He thinks that music is more valid
when the exchange of money is in the process. He makes me sick.
Pappa when are you gonna testify instead of monetize?
David
Matanya Ophee
>
> Out of curiosity I looked up a few more stats. Last year I got 56
> visits from Nigeria. The countries from which I got no visits were
> Turkmenistan, Central African Republic, Chad, Niger, Mali, Guinea,
> Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, and Western Sahara. But I'm HUGE in
> Mongolia at 20!
No matter what the various stats are, they do reveal one basic aspect
that is common to all: most of the hits come from US and European
addresses, and very few come from third-world countries. In other
words, if JW's intention is to share his work with the less fortunate,
he will only be doing so by giving those who can well afford it, a
free gift. We may well bless him for his altruism, and at the same
time, wonder if he really understands the world as it is today.
MO.
Matt Faunce
>
> ideas. MO is a classic example. He thinks that music is more valid
> when the exchange of money is in the process. He makes me sick.
> Pappa when are you gonna testify instead of monetize?
That's why he only sells piano reductions of the top 40 pop
songs. ... ????
Matt
Matt Faunce
I bought The Russian Collection Vol. 5 for $17. 17 pieces for $17. A
buck a piece. Dude, he's practically giving this stuff away! Think of
the time the composer put in to write it, MO to publish it and the
distributor to... I can see you don't like him, but it must be for
another reason.
I also bought Sierra's Toccatta y Lamento published by MO . Editions
Orphée makes the nicest publications out there.
Damn, I thought I was as liberal/progressive as they come, but I sure
don't want the mice to bury the cat.
Matt
Matt Faunce
>
> Damn, I thought I was as liberal/progressive as they come, but I sure
> don't want the mice to bury the cat.
The Mice Bury the Cat:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34013259@N08/3323337474/
Matt
batv...@gmail.com
> On Mar 1, 7:28 am, Tommy Grand <howardj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "When you publish music with music publishers, the arranger, or the
> > transcriber or even the composer sometimes, if a piece sells for 10
> > GBP for example, they might get 80 pence or something like that. But
> > that costs 10 GBP in today's economic circumstances, even before the
> > latest crisis, and for a young student in Indonesia or in Kenya or in
> > Nigeria, it's impossible. A lot of them get photocopies when they can
> > but a lot of them simply can't afford it, and don't have the music at
> > all. Now the least I can do, after a long time of playing concerts and
> > having a very nice life, thank you very much, is to provide music
> > which they can get hold of for nothing. If a performer, like a solo
> > guitarist wants to make a CD or perform it in public, the usual rules
> > of copyright still apply; they have to pay copyright for that sort of
> > reproduction, but with the sheet music, for the sake of me getting an
> > extra 80 pence, it gives me much more pleasure that someone in Nigeria
> > or Kenya or wherever, maybe here, in Wigan of Hull, if they want that
> > piece of music, can easily have a copy of it."
>
> in our founding fathers' capitalist system.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Is going to? Your precious founding fathers f@#$%^&* capitalist system
is already in deep shit if you have not noticed...
dsi1
Interesting stats. Do you have any info on the distribution of web
browsers used? Thanks.
JPD
I do. I'll get back to you later on it.
JPD
Last year:
Browser
Internet Explorer 56.62%
Firefox 32.15%
Safari 6.96%
Opera 2.02%
Mozilla 1.02%
Chrome 0.89%
Netscape 0.08%
Camino 0.06%
Konqueror 0.05%
Last month:
Browser
Internet Explorer 51.80%
Firefox 35.53%
Safari 7.59%
Chrome 2.03%
Opera 1.98%
Mozilla 0.80%
Camino 0.07%
Netscape 0.04%
Playstation 3 0.04%
SeaMonkey 0.03%
dsi1
> Last year:
> Browser
> Internet Explorer 56.62%
> Firefox 32.15%
> Safari 6.96%
> Opera 2.02%
> Mozilla 1.02%
> Chrome 0.89%
> Netscape 0.08%
> Camino 0.06%
> Konqueror 0.05%
>
>
> Last month:
> Browser
> Internet Explorer 51.80%
> Firefox 35.53%
> Safari 7.59%
> Chrome 2.03%
> Opera 1.98%
> Mozilla 0.80%
> Camino 0.07%
> Netscape 0.04%
> Playstation 3 0.04%
> SeaMonkey 0.03%
Thanks for the info. The stats on my website had a 10% Chrome visitation
rate which startled me. My guess is that the Google spiders are reported
as Chrome users and my dinky little site has a higher percentage of bot
traffic. I have no idea why the Firefox and IE are pretty much equal at
about 35%.
Strangely enough, I use Chrome as my default browser. It's super fast
and will not run most javascripts which sadly enough, is desirable these
days. Thanks again.
Paul Magnussen
available, starting sometime in April, on:
http://www.johnwilliamsguitarnotes.com
The first piece to be posted will be "Hello Francis", from "From a Bird".
Paul Magnussen
dewach...@gmail.com
> On Mar 1, 10:28 am, Tommy Grand <howardj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Friends,
>
> > Resist the obvious quip ("that's more than they are worth"), and
> > instead comment on the implications of this bold move by JW.
>
> > Quoting him from the March issue of CG magazine:
>
> > transcriber or even the composer sometimes, if a piece sells for 10
> > GBP for example, they might get 80 pence or something like that. But
> > that costs 10 GBP in today's economic circumstances, even before the
> > latest crisis, and for a young student in Indonesia or in Kenya or in
> > Nigeria, it's impossible. A lot of them get photocopies when they can
> > but a lot of them simply can't afford it, and don't have the music at
> > all. Now the least I can do, after a long time of playing concerts and
> > having a very nice life, thank you very much, is to provide music
> > which they can get hold of for nothing. If a performer, like a solo
> > guitarist wants to make a CD or perform it in public, the usual rules
> > of copyright still apply; they have to pay copyright for that sort of
> > reproduction, but with the sheet music, for the sake of me getting an
> > extra 80 pence, it gives me much more pleasure that someone in Nigeria
> > or Kenya or wherever, maybe here, in Wigan of Hull, if they want that
> > piece of music, can easily have a copy of it."
>
> contents of his discography for free down load on the Internet.
> Otherwise, this is a simply dishonest piece of drivel. I haven't
> received my March issue yet, but I'll be sure to look this up when it
> gets here.
>
> MO.
Did someone shit in your Ovaltine? Or do you just have an aversion to
free music?
dewach...@gmail.com
> I am curious. Is access to computers, printers and the web in Kenya
> and Nigeria greater than the access to photo copy machines and music
> shops?
>
>
> > Friends,
>
> > Resist the obvious quip ("that's more than they are worth"), and
> > instead comment on the implications of this bold move by JW.
>
> > Quoting him from the March issue of CG magazine:
>
> > "When you publish music with music publishers, the arranger, or the
> > transcriber or even the composer sometimes, if a piece sells for 10
> > GBP for example, they might get 80 pence or something like that. But
> > that costs 10 GBP in today's economic circumstances, even before the
> > latest crisis, and for a young student in Indonesia or in Kenya or in
> > Nigeria, it's impossible. A lot of them get photocopies when they can
> > but a lot of them simply can't afford it, and don't have the music at
> > all. Now the least I can do, after a long time of playing concerts and
> > having a very nice life, thank you very much, is to provide music
> > which they can get hold of for nothing. If a performer, like a solo
> > guitarist wants to make a CD or perform it in public, the usual rules
> > of copyright still apply; they have to pay copyright for that sort of
> > reproduction, but with the sheet music, for the sake of me getting an
> > extra 80 pence, it gives me much more pleasure that someone in Nigeria
> > or Kenya or wherever, maybe here, in Wigan of Hull, if they want that
> > piece of music, can easily have a copy of it."
>
It would seem reasonable to first obtain the the music, then go about
photocopying it.
Matanya Ophee
>
> > This would be a lot more credible if JW would also post the entire
> > contents of his discography for free down load on the Internet.
> > Otherwise, this is a simply dishonest piece of drivel. I haven't
> > received my March issue yet, but I'll be sure to look this up when it
> > gets here.
>
> > MO.
>
> Did someone shit in your Ovaltine? Or do you just have an aversion to
> free music?
I don't do Ovaltine. And yes, I do have an aversion to free music, and
I have expressed that aversion in no uncertain terms in this forum
many times. I also wonder what would be _your_ reaction if some
altruistic good soul started giving away high quality hand made
guitars for free. I heard that JW did give away a few freebie
Smallmans to some Chinese girls, a country which certainly qualifies
as a third world country, seeing how much money they lend the US. But
all that aside, how many freebie guitars have you given away to the
needy?
MO.
Matt Faunce
> On Mar 21, 12:57 pm, dewachen1...@gmail.com wrote:
> > do you just have an aversion to free music?
>
> And yes, I do have an aversion to free music,
Detroit Edison used to give away free light bulbs but were stopped by
an anti-trust lawsuit. I'm not sure if this one is the final case but
it's all I could find. I didn't read it.:
http://supreme.justia.com/us/428/579/case.html
Matt
Matt Faunce
OK. It's different because Detroit Edison had a monopoly on electric
usage so they had an unfair advantage in business. But, just like
printing money cheapens the value of the dollar, giving away music, by
the same graphs, cheapens the value of music. It's Econ 101.
Charity is different because the goods aren't offered to those who can
afford them.
Free samples are in the gray area. I wonder what the real, not
theoretical, impact of the internet is on CD and music download sales.
I say real because the free music might wet people's appetites making
them more likely to be voracious consumers of music. Then again, maybe
not everyone is like me.
Matt
dewach...@gmail.com
> On Mar 21, 12:57 pm, dewachen1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > > This would be a lot more credible if JW would also post the entire
> > > contents of his discography for free down load on the Internet.
> > > Otherwise, this is a simply dishonest piece of drivel. I haven't
> > > received my March issue yet, but I'll be sure to look this up when it
> > > gets here.
>
> > > MO.
>
> > Did someone shit in your Ovaltine? Or do you just have an aversion to
> > free music?
> I don't do Ovaltine. And yes, I do have an aversion to free music, and
> I have expressed that aversion in no uncertain terms in this forum
> many times.
People are free to do what they want. If someone chooses to give away
their transcriptions, that is their business. It's a big world out
there MO, you can't control everyone. Personally, I find JW attitude
quite refreshing and rejoice in his generosity.
>I also wonder what would be _your_ reaction if some
> altruistic good soul started giving away high quality hand made
> guitars for free.
I'm sure many luthiers do that. However, I have long given up
concern over what other luthiers do or don't do.
I was criticized recently by another luthier here in town for
selling my guitars too cheap. I on the other hand, thought he was way
too expensive, for a flamenco. He sells his flamenco guitars for
$8000.00. His guitars may well be worth it, I don't know. I do know
he was having a hard time paying his mortgage, and almost lost his
house.
> I heard that JW did give away a few freebie
> Smallmans to some Chinese girls, a country which certainly qualifies
> as a third world country, seeing how much money they lend the US.
I'm not concerned with what JW does. If he benefited a couple
deserving Chinese girls then great. People give things away for many
different reasons. Sometimes from a good heart, and sometimes for
selfish motivations.
> But all that aside, how many freebie guitars have you given away to the
> needy?
>
> MO.
The "needy" don't need free guitars they need food, shelter,
clothing, and jobs. However, since you brought it up I was just in
India were I, along with my wife, and Lama and his other students have
sponsored 25 children's education. I find it is far more useful and
generious to give someone an education than money.
I will relate another story more on topic; Last year a very gifted
young boy's parents from Albuquerque ordered a guitar for him. They
were from Mexico and greatly valued their son's musical education,
more than most, and I was struck by how much time and effort they
spent on their kids despite their economic situation. However, between
the time they ordered the guitar, and the time it was finished they
were unable to pay for it.
I told them to just come and try the new guitar anyway. They came
up and played it, and I just give him the guitar. On the way back down
to Albuq the father called me and said his son couldn't stop crying
all the way home.
I'm sure some greedy guitar maker was shorted by an act of
generosity somewhere in the world, but like I said that's not my
concern, and it shouldn't be yours.
Matanya Ophee
>
> People are free to do what they want. If someone chooses to give away
> their transcriptions, that is their business. It's a big world out
> there MO, you can't control everyone. Personally, I find JW attitude
> quite refreshing and rejoice in his generosity.
I like that. People are free to do what they want. JW is free to post
his transcriptions on line as an act of generosity to poor guitarists
in Kenya and Nigeria, and it does not matter to him that by doing so
he will actually make the transcriptions easily available to thousands
of guitarists in the US, UK and Europe. Great generosity. At the same
time, I am free to express the notion that free music on the Internet
is killing not only the music publishing business, on which the
livelihood of many depend, but also removes the one over-riding
motivation for composers to create new music. You, at the same time,
are free to congratulate JW, and also to shit on my Ovaltine. Your
freedom of shitting on other people's Ovaltine leads me to suggest
that perhaps a little less magnesium in your diet will provide you
with better verbal sphincter control.
MO.
JPD
> ...free music on the Internet
> is killing not only the music publishing business, on which the
> livelihood of many depend, but also removes the one over-riding
> motivation for composers to create new music.
Good. We've already got enough music that sounds like some poor shnook
trying to make a living.
Matanya Ophee
Any particular shnook you have in mind? let me know who. I might even
agree with you. But I am not worried about the shnooks, but about
those talented creators who live among us.
MO.
Matanya Ophee
> their transcriptions, that is their business. It's a big world out
> there MO, you can't control everyone. Personally, I find JW attitude
> quite refreshing and rejoice in his generosity.
Obviously, Michael, you have not read the post which started this
thread. So to make it easy for you, I will quote one part of it (this
comes, via the courtesy of TG, from a news item in CG magazine):
"(JW speaking): ...Now the least I can do, after a long time of
playing concerts and having a very nice life, thank you very much, is
to provide music
which they can get hold of for nothing. If a performer, like a solo
guitarist wants to make a CD or perform it in public, the usual rules
of copyright still apply; they have to pay copyright for that sort of
reproduction..."
Let me translate this for you in a language you can understand:
1. The JW arrangements will be posted on a web site for free download
by anyone with Internet access,
2. The justification for doing so is to enable poor guitarists in
third-world countries to have music which they cannot buy. (That's the
generosity part....)
3. Anyone who will record and perform these arrangements, will have to
pay JW the usual mechanical royalties, regardless of where they got
the music from. (That's the business part.)
Now, there are some inescapable conclusions here. Since the majority
of downloaders will be, necessarily, American and European guitarists,
chances are that _they_ are the ones who will have a chance of
actually performing and recording these arrangements. So far, I am not
aware of any guitarist from Kenya, Nigeria and Zimbabwe who is close
enough to the top of the pyramid and is susceptible of appearing in a
mechanical royalty generating venue. So the business end of this will
be driven by Western guitarists, who will provide the financial cover
for what is claimed to be an altruistic good will venture.
Coming to think of it, this is really a clever business plan. Since
there will be no print publisher, JW will not have to share his
royalty income, usually 50%-50%, with such a publisher, and will have
only to deal with with any copyright owners, if any, directly.
Actually brilliant, IISSSM.
MO.
dewach...@gmail.com
Yes, I'm sure the motivating factor of composers to write new music
is purely for financial profit.... pretty pathetic reasoning if you
ask me, surely MO you can do better than that.
BTW, I noticed Stanley Yates also has free arrangements offered on
his website, I also used to have a number of free arrangements on
mine, and will offer them again once I finish my new website.
Perhaps if you offered a few morsels for free, you might be born a
rich man in your next life. While your still alive you have a chance
to change your evil ways....... there is hope! Otherwise I, and
everyone else have heard your miserly logic to no end. I can teach
you a different song if you'd like!
Can't buy me Love..........
fol...@yahoo.com
is the cost for the ink and paper. There is extra cost if you have it
bound. If you learn it from the computer screen that's another
thing... does anyone do that?
Personally. I like printed editions with cover illustrations and
notes that tie in to the total work of art, printed on good paper. I
am always happy to pay for a good edition that I really want.
Mark
dsi1
> Of course the music is not completely free. If you print it out, there
> is the cost for the ink and paper. There is extra cost if you have it
> bound. If you learn it from the computer screen that's another
> thing... does anyone do that?
> Personally. I like printed editions with cover illustrations and
> notes that tie in to the total work of art, printed on good paper. I
> am always happy to pay for a good edition that I really want.
> Mark
Releasing music through the internet is a ridiculously efficient and
fast method of distribution compared to ink and paper. Committing to the
high cost of printing and distributing music is probably a dicey
proposition in our world where we're able to access a whole crapload of
docs while sitting at the desktop. Factors will probably make smaller
printing runs of higher quality publications targeting nitch users such
as you a logical way to go.
agil
"Matanya Ophee" <mata...@gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:9053c61e-c314-4c09...@z9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> Let me translate this for you in a language you can understand:
>
> 1. The JW arrangements will be posted on a web site for free download
> by anyone with Internet access,
>
> 2. The justification for doing so is to enable poor guitarists in
> third-world countries to have music which they cannot buy. (That's the
> generosity part....)
>
> 3. Anyone who will record and perform these arrangements, will have to
> pay JW the usual mechanical royalties, regardless of where they got
> the music from. (That's the business part.)
>
> Now, there are some inescapable conclusions here. Since the majority
> of downloaders will be, necessarily, American and European guitarists,
> chances are that _they_ are the ones who will have a chance of
> actually performing and recording these arrangements. So far, I am not
> aware of any guitarist from Kenya, Nigeria and Zimbabwe who is close
> enough to the top of the pyramid and is susceptible of appearing in a
> mechanical royalty generating venue. So the business end of this will
> be driven by Western guitarists, who will provide the financial cover
> for what is claimed to be an altruistic good will venture.
>
> Coming to think of it, this is really a clever business plan. Since
> there will be no print publisher, JW will not have to share his
> royalty income, usually 50%-50%, with such a publisher, and will have
> only to deal with with any copyright owners, if any, directly.
> Actually brilliant, IISSSM.
>
> MO.
Composers do not make any assignement on the incomes coming from the sell of
the printed scores of their work. This is a very minor part of their
budgets, if any.
The only true source of incomes for composers are the royalties coming from
public performances and recordings of their pieces and from commission fees.
A current policy - adopted since longtime by many composers - is converting
their share of the publisher's incomes for paper sell in copies of their
scores to be sent complimentarily to those performers who are supposed being
able to read music and maybe interested to feature them in their concerts.
Offering them for free in internet is just - and a perfectly legal - a way
to earn attention from potential performers in the quickest and simplest
way. Not in the finest one: a beatifully produced publication is something
that a composer - who is not a business man, but an artist, hopefully - may
follow preferring. Incidentally, and curiously: I have given for free on
Internet the score of one of my works, which I had written under commission
(and for which I had been payed), but the Publisher did not withdraw it from
his catalogue. The edition has sold as many copies as it had not been made
available for free in internet. This shows that we have people who want
photocopies - and if not obtaining them for free in Internet, they would not
hesitate to photocopy the publication; and people who prefer publications,
and who would not photocopy them. Additionally: I use to give copies of my
published works to people who ask for them, with claiming they cannot afford
their cost, or to friends whom I like to be updated with my output.
Publishers whom I deal with have always been very generous toward this habit
of mine: not only they did not charge me the extra copies I asked for, but
they also payed the shipping expenses for delivering the parcel posts to
their recipients. Specifically, the rude Matanya is one of the most generous
publishers whom I dealt with.
agil
dewach...@gmail.com
Yes Mark me too! I really don't think MO has anything to worry
about. As an example, I bought the Wiess London and Dresden MS by
Douglas Anton Smith, costing me $800.00, even though I had downloaded
all this stuff for free on the web. I got very tired of cheap paper,
and the disorganization of downloaded music. Like you I prefer nice
editions.
Tashi
dewach...@gmail.com
Also I forgot to add. Having free access to lets say your music would
enable many more people to play through your stuff, and then perhaps
include it in their concert programs, and recordings, which in the
long run I assume would be of far more benefit to your career as a
composer.
Tashi
dewach...@gmail.com
I think you are the poor shnook JDP is talking about, since you seem
to be the only one here complaining about free music.
dewach...@gmail.com
> "Matanya Ophee" <matan...@gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggionews:9053c61e-c314-4c09...@z9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
AG you sound like a generous man, you did send me a piece of yours...
thank you! However, "Mr. most generous" never gave me anything, but
that's OK I would be afraid of the high price MO's generosity would
take on my psychic nervous system.
Tashi
Matanya Ophee
> rich man in your next life.
Good news. try this:
http://www.guitarandluteissues.com/music.htm
MO.
Matanya Ophee
>
> Releasing music through the internet is a ridiculously efficient and
> fast method of distribution compared to ink and paper.
Efficient yes, But entirely useless. I made this point here several
years ago:
None of the works for guitar, original and transcriptions, published
on the Internet for download, free or otherwise, has ever made it into
the repertoire. They are not performed or recorded by any one. Period.
I have yet to see any evidence that this statement, made some years
ago in a discussion with Richard Yates, was factually wrong. If you
can show me such evidence, I'll be happy to change my mind.
MO.
dewach...@gmail.com
So then what the F%$# are you complaining about? If you do it it's
OK, and when someone else does it it's bad? Do you see your
hypocrisy?
Tashi
Matanya Ophee
Your attention span is much too narrow to tell the difference. All the
works I posted for free download on my site are public domain material
on which there is no way for any one to collect royalties for
performance and recordings. No even for those on which I claim
copyright as an editor. Some of these pieces are available for free
download elsewhere as well. JW's intended postings is clearly
calculated to generate royalty income, and is masked by this
pretension to altruism.
MO.
Matanya Ophee
>
> thank you! However, "Mr. most generous" never gave me anything,
Considering your boorish and uncouth attitude towards me and my work,
there was no reason for me to reward you with anything for free. Still
there isn't.
MO.
Richard Yates
>on the Internet for download, free or otherwise, has ever made it into
>the repertoire. They are not performed or recorded by any one. Period.
>
>I have yet to see any evidence that this statement, made some years
>ago in a discussion with Richard Yates, was factually wrong. If you
>can show me such evidence, I'll be happy to change my mind. MO.
I categorically deny that I ever said any such thing, unless I did, in which
case I stand behind it 100 percent, whatever it was. RY
Matanya Ophee
Ditto...
Andrew Schulman
> case I stand behind it 100 percent, whatever it was.
>
>
Andrew
dsi1
Give it a few years.
>
> MO.
>
>
dewach...@gmail.com
> On Mar 22, 11:08 am, dewachen1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 22, 8:47 am, Matanya Ophee <matan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 21, 9:42 pm, dewachen1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > Perhaps if you offered a few morsels for free, you might be born a
> > > > rich man in your next life.
>
> > > Good news. try this:
>
> > >http://www.guitarandluteissues.com/music.htm
>
> > > MO.
>
> > So then what the F%$# are you complaining about? If you do it it's
> > OK, and when someone else does it it's bad? Do you see your
> > hypocrisy?
>
> Your attention span is much too narrow to tell the difference. All the
> works I posted for free download on my site are public domain material
> on which there is no way for any one to collect royalties for
> performance and recordings. No even for those on which I claim
> copyright as an editor. Some of these pieces are available for free
> download elsewhere as well.
Attention span hell! I didn't even look at your stuff. I assumed that
you stayed on topic, and supplied links that were such, but that was
my wishful thinking. BTW, my attention span varies according to the
subject of interest, and the person I'm talking to, while I'll admit
your breasts are probably a double D, I still have a short attention
span with you because I tend to project that you really are a bore.
On the other hand if Charro wants to discuss the highly boring subject
of copyright law, I could talk endlessly for weeks.
>JW's intended postings is clearly calculated to generate royalty
income, and is masked by this
> pretension to altruism.
Yes, I'm sure that's the case MO, at this point in JW career, he's
counting every penny and he watches where it goes. JW protested the
Vietnam war for years by not playing very lucrative concerts in the
USA, he gives his guitars away to gifted students, but according to
you he is squeezing oil from stone amougst the poorest people on the
planet.
I wonder if that's not in fact your personal projection, and way of
doing things? A fox always smells his own hole: if you wear shoe
leather the whole world is covered in leather, and when your a greedy
music publisher, free music is " a false pretension to altruism".
Matanya Ophee
>
> Attention span hell! I didn't even look at your stuff.
No need to underline the obvious.
MO.
fol...@yahoo.com
You know, I have thought about offering free music on the net but I
decided upon putting music in Soundboard magazine.Coming up will be a
set of variations on Sor's opus 24 #1(menuett in c minor) I have 5
variations so far and will continue till I run out of steam.
This allows for me put a piece forth as a work in progress in pre-net
technology: a magazine.
Keeping the music contained to a magazine allows me to make changes
later and publish a final version some time in the future, either on
the net or traditionally.
best,
Mark
fol...@yahoo.com
I get to hear some of his compositions for the first time.
I remember reading programs notes on an old LP (I think the Dodgson
concerto) where Williams is quoted as saying (about himself) that he
composes very bad music, or that he is a bad composer. I will soon
find out if he acquired new technique or if the world simply changed!
Carlos Barrientos
>when your a greedy music publisher, free music is " a false pretension to altruism".
Wow...
As a consumer of the editions orphee products I always felt I got my
money's work and even more!
As a translator for editions orphee, I was recompensed handsomely.
As a composer for editions orphee I have a very good deal, input at
EVERY step in the process of the publication of my work adn satisfaction
with the output.
As precarious as my living effort at being a composer/guitarist is, I am
wont to endorse ANYTHING that would eventually take money from coming to
me from my very hard work. And that includes my publisher.
Greed? Perhaps in your resentment for having to pay for the works of
living composers. Play the LONG DEAD ones, they are FREE and leave, us,
the living composers alone with the notion of making our work available
for free.
--
Carlos Barrientos
"mailto:carlosgu...@gmail.com"
Phone: (229) 594-6374
Matanya Ophee
> you he is squeezing oil from stone amougst the poorest people on the
> planet.
That's a false accusation. Please read what I actually wrote. Coming
to think of it, please do not bother. It won't make a difference.
Actually, I think you'd better call RMCG Mental Health Facility. This
is their recording message:
Please select from the following options menu:
If you are obsessive-compulsive, press 1 repeatedly.
If you are co-dependent, please ask someone to press 2 for you.
If you have multiple personalities, press 3, 4, 5 and 6.
If you are paranoid, we know who you are and what you want,
stay on the line so we can trace your call.
If you are delusional, press 7 and your call will be forwarded to the
Mother Ship.
If you are schizophrenic, listen carefully
and a little voice will tell You which number to press.
If you are manic-depressive, hang up.
It doesn't matter which number you press, nothing will make you happy
anyway.
If you are dyslexic, press 9-6-9-6.
If you are bipolar, please leave a message after the beep,
or before the beep or after the beep.
But please wait for the beep.
If you have short-term memory loss, press 9.
If you have short-term memory loss, press 9.
If you have short-term memory loss, press 9.
If you have low self-esteem, please hang up.
Our operators are too busy to talk with you.
If you are menopausal, put the gun down, hang up, turn on the fan, lie
down and cry.
You won't be crazy forever.
If you are blonde, don't press any buttons.
You'll just mess it up.
Hope this helps a bit for today,
Matanya Ophee
>
> Greed? Perhaps in your resentment for having to pay for the works of
> living composers. Play the LONG DEAD ones, they are FREE and leave, us,
> the living composers alone with the notion of making our work available
> for free.
What's so astounding here is the sheer hypocrisy of accusing composers
and their publishers of being greedy for expecting to be paid for
their investment in time and money and inspiration, by an instrument
maker who expects, and rightfully so, to be paid for his work and
talents and materials. It is clearly obvious that Michael Thames the
luthier, is not the same person as Michael Thames the polemicist, or
Michael Thames the Buddhist, or Michael Thames the guitarist-lutenist.
What category this condition pertains to, is explained in the joke I
posted above. Here is another one, courtesy of Elias:
¿Por qué los guitarreros de Santa Fe compran dos boletos cuando viajan
a India?
...porque creen que su estupidez es pasajera.
MO.
Miguel de Maria
> I wonder if that's not in fact your personal projection, and way of
> doing things? A fox always smells his own hole: if you wear shoe
> leather the whole world is covered in leather, and when your a greedy
>
Michael,
I can't believe you would intimate that Matanya could possibly be
projecting! Certainly we should all assume that his opinions are
based upon ethics and morality, not financial self-interest.
Obviously, you have far to go from enlightenment, and your trip to
India didn't do the job! On the other hand, there is this:
"There is another point which I think is very important, and that is
that the piece gives the appearance of being disinterested while in
fact Mr. Ophee has serious financial interests in competing
commercially with the firm Tecla Editions of which I am the owner. He
is the editor of an edition of the didactic works of Sor which was
launched to compete directly in the student market with my edition of
The Complete Studies, Lessons, and Exercises of Sor (Tecla 101). In
Great Britain, because these works are prescribed for examinations, a
serious amount of money is involved. It is as though someone were to
write a review of something and savagely attack its maker in personal
terms, pretending to be disinterested, while hiding the fact that he
is the recipient of income from a competing item whose sales he wishes
to maximize. Do readers of this piece think that that is acceptable? I
don’t."
Carlos Barrientos
Wasn't there, about a year ago, something going on about Michael sending
me a guitar for free?
Apparently I quit waiting for it...
Nonetheless...
mmm...
dewach...@gmail.com
> dewachen1...@gmail.com wrote:
> >when your a greedy music publisher, free music is " a false pretension to altruism".
>
> Wow...
>
> As a consumer of the editions orphee products I always felt I got my
> money's work and even more!
No argument with you there!
> As a translator for editions orphee, I was recompensed handsomely.
Good for you!
> As a composer for editions orphee I have a very good deal, input at
> EVERY step in the process of the publication of my work adn satisfaction
> with the output.
Wonderful! I'm glad MO didn't tinker with the harmony!
> As precarious as my living effort at being a composer/guitarist is, I am
> wont to endorse ANYTHING that would eventually take money from coming to
> me from my very hard work. And that includes my publisher.
Good! I would imagine that's a very small amount of your income,
at least based on my other friends who publish their music take.
>
> Greed? Perhaps in your resentment for having to pay for the works of
> living composers. Play the LONG DEAD ones, they are FREE and leave, us,
> the living composers alone with the notion of making our work available
> for free.
I gladly pay for music editions from composers both dead and alive,
that is not the point.
The point is, Mo said; "JW's intended postings were clearly calculated
to generate royalty income, and is masked by this pretension to
altruism", despite the fact that JW's acts of generosity are well
known. There are many people on this chatline that offer free music.
Given MO's hallucinatory projections they are all equally
disingenuous. I think in this regard MO is a sick man.
Carlos, do you agree with the above statement from MO?
Not only does MO have an inside scoop on the motivation of JW's
generosity, he has offered his view of my psychological make as
well.
Tashi
> Carlos Barrientos
> "mailto:carlosguitar2...@gmail.com"
> Phone: (229) 594-6374
dewach...@gmail.com
wrote:
> > I wonder if that's not in fact your personal projection, and way of
> > doing things? A fox always smells his own hole: if you wear shoe
> > leather the whole world is covered in leather, and when your a greedy
> > music publisher, free music is " a false pretension to altruism".- Hide quoted text -
>
> Michael,
> I can't believe you would intimate that Matanya could possibly be
> projecting! Certainly we should all assume that his opinions are
> based upon ethics and morality, not financial self-interest.
> Obviously, you have far to go from enlightenment, and your trip to
> India didn't do the job! On the other hand, there is this:
Yes, unfortunately I failed in my quest for enlightenment to obtain
pith instructions in the practice of copy write laws. I did recieve
some teachings on morals and ethics, but for obvious reasons such as
the quote provided below they don't apply to BO.
Miguel glad to see you posting I was about to leave this chatline
for good until I saw your post. There is hope!
Tashi
Matanya Ophee
wrote:
> On the other hand, there is this:
>
> "There is another point which I think is very important, and that is
> that the piece gives the appearance of being disinterested while in
> fact Mr. Ophee has serious financial interests in competing
> commercially with the firm Tecla Editions of which I am the owner. He
> is the editor of an edition of the didactic works of Sor which was
> launched to compete directly in the student market with my edition of
> The Complete Studies, Lessons, and Exercises of Sor (Tecla 101). In
> Great Britain, because these works are prescribed for examinations, a
> serious amount of money is involved. It is as though someone were to
> write a review of something and savagely attack its maker in personal
> terms, pretending to be disinterested, while hiding the fact that he
> is the recipient of income from a competing item whose sales he wishes
> to maximize. Do readers of this piece think that that is acceptable? I
> don’t."
It is amazing, Miguel, that you would bring this quotation as a
counter argument, completely irrelevant to the subject of this thread,
without even trying to ascertain if the facts are alleged in this
piece of propaganda are even true. I have no commercial interests in
the success or failure of the Chanterelle edition of Sor studies. I
was contracted to write the historical introduction to the volume in
question, and I was paid in full for my services. Beyond that, it
makes no difference to me if Chanterelle sells one copy of thousands.
Also, the piece is a reaction to a review of the Tecla edition of Sor
studies which appeared here.
http://www.guitarandluteissues.com/sor-etud.htm
You can make up your own mind of this is a "savage attack in personal
terms" or an objective review.
MO.
Miguel de Maria
>
> - Show quoted text -
Matanya,
Surely you hyperbolize, I have done far worse like, impugn the
character of Rush Limbaugh or call bankers parasites (before the
recent proof emerged).
My posting, although partially in fun, did address the issue. You
attacked JW's actions as blatantly self-serving, using convoluted
argumentation. Jeffrey's diatribe attributed your criticism of his
edition to but two bare facts: He offers an edition for sale, and you
offer an edition for sale. It's not my place to judge his shot across
the bow, but it is surely an easier case to make than the one you sent
JW's way!
Matanya Ophee
wrote:
>
> My posting, although partially in fun, did address the issue. You
> attacked JW's actions as blatantly self-serving, using convoluted
> argumentation.
Not at all. JW's announcement in CG magazine clearly spells out the
conditions of his posting. The downloads will be for free, and full
copyright protections, which necessarily involves payment of
mechanical royalties for recordings and performances, would still
apply. No need to read between the lines.
> Jeffrey's diatribe attributed your criticism of his
> edition to but two bare facts: He offers an edition for sale, and you
> offer an edition for sale. It's not my place to judge his shot across
> the bow, but it is surely an easier case to make than the one you sent
> JW's way!
Except the the basic premise is wrong. I did not offer any competing
edition for sale. Chanterelle did.
MO.
Carlos Barrientos
This fact is patently clear, from MO's assessment and anyone that has
read a bit of copyright law:
"JW's announcement in CG magazine clearly spells out the
conditions of his posting. The downloads will be for free, and full
copyright protections, which necessarily involves payment of
mechanical royalties for recordings and performances, would still
apply. No need to read between the lines."
Seeding unseen performers and potential mechanicals by offering your
music for free while keeping an eye on potential earnings is certainly a
commercial venture. Kinda slick, too...
Tashi, we may differ... I hope we can be good enough friends to allow
that between us...
Now, where's my free Dresden? :)
You know you would sell many more if it became my guitar of choice!
C
Matt Faunce
> "JW's announcement in CG magazine clearly spells out the
> conditions of his posting. The downloads will be for free, and full
> copyright protections, which necessarily involves payment of
> mechanical royalties for recordings and performances, would still
> apply. No need to read between the lines."
>
> Seeding unseen performers and potential mechanicals by offering your
> music for free while keeping an eye on potential earnings is certainly a
> commercial venture. Kinda slick, too...
I'm still assuming JW's motive was altruistic. He doesn't strike me as
the greedy type.
Matt
Carlos Barrientos
If you know me at all, you know I tend to believe the best in people...
but the facts as seen above are still there. Capitalism at work. As
Gekko would say: "greed is good."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpoNFs&feature=related
Matt Faunce
What about Lorenzo de Medici and his father and grandfather? What
about Sweden? Do you think Cuba would be so poor if their neighbors to
the north weren't such assholes toward them?
How much does JW stand to make on this adventure compared with how
much if he goes through a reputable publisher? I think he'd make the
most money if he'd partner with some young up and coming guitarist/
artist with a computer and agreed on a 75-25% split. Seems to me if he
were greedy he'd do it differently. Am I wrong?
Matt
Carlos Barrientos
> On Mar 24, 11:14 pm, Carlos Barrientos <ca...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>> Matt Faunce wrote:
>>> On Mar 24, 10:41 pm, Carlos Barrientos <ca...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>>>> "JW's announcement in CG magazine clearly spells out the
>>>> conditions of his posting. The downloads will be for free, and full
>>>> copyright protections, which necessarily involves payment of
>>>> mechanical royalties for recordings and performances, would still
>>>> apply. No need to read between the lines."
>>>> Seeding unseen performers and potential mechanicals by offering your
>>>> music for free while keeping an eye on potential earnings is certainly a
>>>> commercial venture. Kinda slick, too...
>>> I'm still assuming JW's motive was altruistic. He doesn't strike me as
>>> the greedy type.
>>> Matt
>> If you know me at all, you know I tend to believe the best in people...
>> but the facts as seen above are still there. Capitalism at work. As
>> Gekko would say: "greed is good."
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpoNFs&feature=related
>
> What about Lorenzo de Medici and his father and grandfather?
That's a very big question, and one which I am not qualified to answer.
What
> about Sweden?
Again.
Do you think Cuba would be so poor if their neighbors to
> the north weren't such assholes toward them?
Dunno, the rest of Central and South America, as a generality and for
the most part, continues to be poor.
>
> How much does JW stand to make on this adventure compared with how
> much if he goes through a reputable publisher?
Dunno, MO?
I think he'd make the
> most money if he'd partner with some young up and coming guitarist/
> artist with a computer and agreed on a 75-25% split. Seems to me if he
> were greedy he'd do it differently. Am I wrong?
>
> Matt
Dunno...
Matt Faunce
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpoNFs&feature=related
Sometimes I wonder if most of the oppressed just want to be
oppressors. I think this is the assumption that Freidman is making. If
that's the case then capitalism is the way to go. I've read a little
about Amartya Sen (1998 Nobel Prize in Econ.) He's got a new article
out. I'll read it and see if it offers a good response to Milton
Freidman. I expect it to. But here's the link for anybody who is
interested.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22490
Matt
Miguel de Maria
unseen performers would record or perform it! And then he wouldn't
make any money off it! But he's too smart for that--so he offers it--
for free--and then (greedy diabolical laugh) all the cheap virtuosi
will learn it and have to pay him in the end anyway...muahahahha...
Matt Faunce
>
> Dunno, the rest of Central and South America, as a generality and for
> the most part, continues to be poor.
I really don't know *for sure* the answer to any of those questions
either. But, concerning poor countries, I read this book called
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins. If there is one
cause to Latin America's poverty that stands above the rest it's
probably the one explained in the contents of this book. Here's an
interview from DemocracyNow.org
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/11/9/confessions_of_an_economic_hit_man
Matt
Slogoin
Thanks for this Matt. Much better than the video. Nice to see someone
talking about the behavioral psychology of economics.
Matt Faunce
> Thanks for this Matt. Much better than the video. Nice to see someone
> talking about the behavioral psychology of economics.
Wikipedia on Amartya Sen:
"Welfare economics seeks to evaluate economic policies in terms of
their effects on the well-being of the community. Sen, who devoted his
career to such issues, was called the 'conscience of his profession.'"
In the video link Milton Freidman asked "Is there some society you
know that doesn't run on greed?"
From Sens article http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22490
All affluent countries in the world—those in Europe,
as well as the US, Canada, Japan, Singapore, South
Korea, Australia, and others—have, for quite some
time now, depended partly on transactions and other
payments that occur largely outside markets. These
include unemployment benefits, public pensions, other
features of social security, and the provision of
education, health care, and a variety of other services
distributed through nonmarket arrangements. The
economic entitlements connected with such services
are not based on private ownership and property rights.
Smith viewed markets and capital as doing good work
within their own sphere, but first, they required
support from other institutions—including public
services such as schools—and values other than pure
profit seeking, and second, they needed restraint
and correction by still other institutions—e.g.,
well-devised financial regulations and state assistance
to the poor—for preventing instability, inequity,
and injustice.
A sample of Sen on the current economic crisis, in light of the real
Adam Smith:
Smith called the promoters of excessive risk in
search of profits "prodigals and projectors"—which
is quite a good description of issuers of subprime
mortgages over the past few years. Discussing laws
against usury, for example, Smith wanted state
regulation to protect citizens from the "prodigals
and projectors" who promoted unsound loans:
"A great part of the capital of the country would
thus be kept out of the hands which were most likely
to make a profitable and advantageous use of it, and
thrown into those which were most likely to waste
and destroy it."[4]
The implicit faith in the ability of the market
economy to correct itself, which is largely
responsible for the removal of established
regulations in the United States, tended to ignore
the activities of prodigals and projectors in a
way that would have shocked Adam Smith.
Matt
dewach...@gmail.com
> "JW's announcement in CG magazine clearly spells out the
> conditions of his posting. The downloads will be for free, and full
> copyright protections, which necessarily involves payment of
> mechanical royalties for recordings and performances, would still
> apply. No need to read between the lines."
>
> Seeding unseen performers and potential mechanicals by offering your
> music for free while keeping an eye on potential earnings is certainly a
> commercial venture. Kinda slick, too...
John Williams is perhaps the most famous classical guitarist in
the world. Many young guitarists want to sound like him. The
opportunity to download some of his arrangements offers a glimpse into
how Williams thinks and solves problems in transcriptions etc. This
in my mind is where the value is, and where his generosity is
apparent.
Like Che said in another recent post, if you want to play a Bach
prelude get as many arrangements of the piece as possible, and see
what works for you, perhaps take a little bit from every arrangement,
and come up with your own. Is there a law against that?
Hypothetically, if I made a recording of Cordoba by Albeniz arranged
by John Williams, by merely listening to my performance could you tell
and prove it was note for note, the same fingerings of Williams
arrangement? What if I used JW arrangement as a blueprint and changed
a few things?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but really there is no way to enforce the
copyright law in the real world. Williams would have to rely on the
integrity of the guitarist who performs his arrangements to give him
credit. It's really not a very lucrative deal for Williams, I think
he has bigger fish to fry.
I would (if I were a guitarist) love to_BUY_ an edition of his
arrangement's. That's a more lucrative deal for Williams.
> Tashi, we may differ... I hope we can be good enough friends to allow
> that between us...
Carlos, no problem! You didn't psycho analyze me Like Pandy, MO,
Larry, Clinger, Jackson, and their Ilk, and call me a loony. Yes, the
basis of a friendship is there.
>
> Now, where's my free Dresden? :)
I shipped it overnight you should receive it tomorrow!
> You know you would sell many more if it became my guitar of choice!
> C
I'm counting on that.
Tashi
> --
Carlos Barrientos
> On Mar 24, 8:41 pm, Carlos Barrientos <ca...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>> dewachen1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> "JW's announcement in CG magazine clearly spells out the
>> conditions of his posting. The downloads will be for free, and full
>> copyright protections, which necessarily involves payment of
>> mechanical royalties for recordings and performances, would still
>> apply. No need to read between the lines."
>>
>> Seeding unseen performers and potential mechanicals by offering your
>> music for free while keeping an eye on potential earnings is certainly a
>> commercial venture. Kinda slick, too...
>
> John Williams is perhaps the most famous classical guitarist in
> the world. Many young guitarists want to sound like him. The
> opportunity to download some of his arrangements offers a glimpse into
> how Williams thinks and solves problems in transcriptions etc. This
> in my mind is where the value is, and where his generosity is
> apparent.
Tashi, I am not above generosity and in my recent production of
Cristiano Porqueddu's concert I ran into generosity from many quarters
that had not an eye to immediate profit. Nonetheless, profit we did in
many ways, seen and unseen.
I do not mean to demean JW's gesture just to point out that in addition
to good will, there is a palpable pecuniary profit that is present. (Say
that three times! Sorry)
> Like Che said in another recent post, if you want to play a Bach
> prelude get as many arrangements of the piece as possible, and see
> what works for you, perhaps take a little bit from every arrangement,
> and come up with your own. Is there a law against that?
Apparently there is for some music that is not in public domain... but
for copyrighted works I can't do anything with MANY arrangements that I
possess and I'd like to share, sell, whatever...
I learned a lot by transcribing, with an original score in hand his
version of Handel's Harmonius Blacksmith (in E), I disliked it and came
up with mine on my own in A. And , yes, , his was not the only one I
used. Would it have been easier to have his arrangement, yes... but
lemons make lemonade.
> Hypothetically, if I made a recording of Cordoba by Albeniz arranged
> by John Williams, by merely listening to my performance could you tell
> and prove it was note for note, the same fingerings of Williams
> arrangement?
Dunno.
What if I used JW arrangement as a blueprint and changed
> a few things?
Happens all the time, gets published and is called A NEW ARRANGEMENT and
a bigger fish publisher gets away with it, ask , MO!
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but really there is no way to enforce the
> copyright law in the real world. Williams would have to rely on the
> integrity of the guitarist who performs his arrangements to give him
> credit. It's really not a very lucrative deal for Williams, I think
> he has bigger fish to fry.
Dunno his money or his business...
>
> I would (if I were a guitarist) love to_BUY_ an edition of his
> arrangement's. That's a more lucrative deal for Williams.
Probably...
>
>> Tashi, we may differ... I hope we can be good enough friends to allow
>> that between us...
>
> Carlos, no problem! You didn't psycho analyze me Like Pandy, MO,
> Larry, Clinger, Jackson, and their Ilk, and call me a loony. Yes, the
> basis of a friendship is there.
Don't do what I'm not qualified to do. I'm not a shrink, barely a
Classical Guitar player/composer.
>> Now, where's my free Dresden? :)
>
> I shipped it overnight you should receive it tomorrow!
Now, if that shows up, God knows what you'll be called, and the profit
from it, oy , maybe you'd be called a Mensh.
>> You know you would sell many more if it became my guitar of choice!
> I'm counting on that.
The amount of e-mail I might get on that subject alone would be SOO
daunting..
>
> Tashi
Take care!
Carlos Barrientos
Well, I'm glad you found it entertaining...
Slogoin
>
> The implicit faith in the ability of the market
> economy to correct itself, which is largely
> responsible for the removal of established
> regulations in the United States, tended to ignore
> the activities of prodigals and projectors in a
> way that would have shocked Adam Smith.
There's the rub. It seems that Adam Smith has been used by the Ayn
Rand crowd to justify their approach to the "invisible hand" while
ignoring the rest of his writings.
Matanya Ophee
>
> I'm still assuming JW's motive was altruistic. He doesn't strike me as
> the greedy type.
I would agree with this assessment if not for that little remark that
copyright laws would still apply. If he was truly altruistic, and
truly wanted to help poor guitarists in Kenya and Nigeria and Zimbabwe
who are too poor to buy sheet music but still have money for computers
and Internet access, he would send them the music by mail. Personally.
Would be a lot cheaper than running a web site. Since we already have
established here that the majority of down loaders would be rich
American, English and Europeans, the altruism pretense is too
transparent to be taken at face value. Now, would JW would really go
one further and put his entire discography on line for free download?
MO.
Matanya Ophee
>
> How much does JW stand to make on this adventure compared with how
> much if he goes through a reputable publisher?
JW is right about one thing: no one makes money on the sales of
printed paper, Not the composer, not the arranger and definitely not
the publisher. The only way to make money in this business, as Angelo
already posted here, is from mechanical royalties for performance and
recordings. There are even publishers today, Boosey & Hawkes,
Universal and others, who stopped altogether issuing printed versions
of _original_ music by living composers. The only thing they sell are
POD editions, Print On Demand, produced one copy at a time. They
expect to make their money from performances and recordings. To do
this POD properly, a publisher needs to invest in heavy duty equipment
such as a Xerox Igen3 printer, and have the personal to run it. I have
neither the financial resources nor the personnel for POD, so I still
publish the old fashioned way.
JW's chances of making money from paper sales by a reputed publisher
are minimal. Obviously, he expects to make money from mechanical
royalties. Smart fellow, I say.
MO.
Matanya Ophee
>
> Apparently there is for some music that is not in public domain...
If you examine JW's repertoire of the last 10-20 years, you will see
that in fact it does contain a great deal of arrangements of
copyrighted music. Assuming these arrangements were made under
contract with the copyright owners, obviously they cannot be
disseminated for free without their agreement. If they granted their
agreement to JW, which would be the only legal condition that will
allow him to post them for free download, mechanicals would still
pertain for public performances and recordings of these arrangements,
the money being shared between copyright owner and arranger according
to whatever contractual arrangements they have. Hence the remark that
copyright laws still apply.
> Happens all the time, gets published and is called A NEW ARRANGEMENT and
> a bigger fish publisher gets away with it, ask , MO!
Indeed. If the arrangement is good, it will be stolen by performers, a
few notes changed and they put their name on it. My transcription of
the Franck Prelude Fugue and Variations, for example. Even if I could
prove that they used my transcription and not the original, there is
nothing much I could do about it. This why I do not publish
transcriptions by others. I do not believe JW expects to make money on
his transcription of Cordoba. he has to be smarter than that.
MO.
Miguel de Maria
Yep, as I mentioned quite awhile ago, he was against absentee
ownership (ie, corporations). So the irony of his being a patron
saint of theirs...
dewach...@gmail.com
> On Mar 25, 9:27 am, Carlos Barrientos <ca...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Apparently there is for some music that is not in public domain...
>
> If you examine JW's repertoire of the last 10-20 years, you will see
> that in fact it does contain a great deal of arrangements of
> copyrighted music. Assuming these arrangements were made under
> contract with the copyright owners, obviously they cannot be
> disseminated for free without their agreement. If they granted their
> agreement to JW, which would be the only legal condition that will
> allow him to post them for free download, mechanicals would still
> pertain for public performances and recordings of these arrangements,
> the money being shared between copyright owner and arranger according
> to whatever contractual arrangements they have. Hence the remark that
> copyright laws still apply.
Amazing BO! you just admitted that the copy write laws that Williams
spoke of are beyond his control. JW is looking better all the time.
Why don't you just admit your a dick and that will be the end of it?
Tashi
Matanya Ophee
Just a short reminder:
If you are schizophrenic, listen carefully
and a little voice will tell You which number to press.
If you are manic-depressive, hang up.
It doesn't matter which number you press, nothing will make you happy
anyway.
If you are dyslexic, press 9-6-9-6.