For Download: Berg Violin Concerto - Julia Fischer
Peter Greenstein
bisr...@compuserve.com
> Berg Violin Concerto; Julia Fischer, Ingo Metzmacher/Rotterdam Philharmonic
>
>
> Two flac files for the two parts of the concerto.
>
> Beautiful playing. Not sure about the conducting. In Part I, more sections than I remember sounded like mellow dream world stuff. That impression is not helped by the dynamic range which is a bit squeezed in typical FM/Internet fashion. However, I've heard worse.
>
> I got some feedback that the performance dates from Jan 30 or Feb 2, 2004. I recorded this off of "Live at the Concertgebouw" which is playing around the world on radio stations right now.
>
> --
> peter in oakland,ca.www.wakefieldjazz.com
And, needless to say, you have cleared this upload with Edition
Universal in Vienna, with Ms. Fischer herself, as well as the
Rotterdam Phil and Maestro Metzmacher?????
Oh, you have? OK, then everything's all right...
Best - Robert
CharlesSmith
The basic information about the broadcasts is available here:
http://www.radionetherlands.nl/music/concertgebouw/
Recovered Reviewer
news:05baa543-ddb8-4429...@r22g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
A very attractive series! But a careful reading of the website
fails to reveal (to me, anyhow) a blanket permission to download.
--
John Wiser
Jicotea Used Books
Howells NY 10932 0136 USA
cee...@gmail.com
http://www.amazon.com/shops/ceeclef
CharlesSmith
wrote:
> "CharlesSmith" <sigma.onl...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
It's not 100% clear to me either, but I thought it was of interest
regardless. At first sight RNW appear to grant broadcasting rights to
all and sundry with little control, so it's difficult to see how they
can control subsequent recording and uploading. And if Rob is
concerned about whether the publishers and artists have agreed to this
situation he should probably contact RNW. A listener recording a
broadcast can't be expected to check the terms of the artists'
contracts for the original performance.
Recovered Reviewer
It probably falls into the "fair use" category in the USA, which would make
the broadcast download OK for an organization-to-individual
transaction with no subsequent copying or reselling. What Ray is doing with
his Carl Vine Concerto is much, much iffier.
--
John Wiser
Jicotea Used Books
Howells NY 10932 0136 USA
Matthew B. Tepper
be typed in
news:457df5b5-6a23-4578...@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com:
> On 22 Feb, 19:42, "Peter Greenstein" <pgree...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Berg Violin Concerto; Julia Fischer, Ingo Metzmacher/Rotterdam
>> Philharmonic
>>
>> http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=6eeb5bbfd8743bba4012e8015643d9c84b...
>>
>> Two flac files for the two parts of the concerto.
>>
>> Beautiful playing. Not sure about the conducting. In Part I, more sections
>> than I remember sounded like mellow dream world stuff. That impression is
>> not helped by the dynamic range which is a bit squeezed in typical
>> FM/Internet fashion. However, I've heard worse.
>>
>> I got some feedback that the performance dates from Jan 30 or Feb 2,
>> 2004. I recorded this off of "Live at the Concertgebouw" which is playing
>> around the world on radio stations right now.
>
> And, needless to say, you have cleared this upload with Edition
> Universal in Vienna, with Ms. Fischer herself, as well as the
> Rotterdam Phil and Maestro Metzmacher?????
>
> Oh, you have? OK, then everything's all right...
For that matter, distribution of this broadcast would be unfair competition
to the commercial recording of the Berg concerto that we all know Decca is
going make with Ms. Fischer.
(Yes, that's sarcasm.)
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
bisr...@compuserve.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
No, I don't have that much time available. But - again, I might add -
Mr. Smith fails to address the real point. Noone, except the right-
holder, has the right to UPLOAD this for general use. That is taking
someone else's property and dispose of it. Maybe the radio station is
happy abut it, maybe the artists, but, then again, maybe not. The
point is that noone can usurp that right!
Best - Robert
J.Martin
> And, needless to say, you have cleared this upload with Edition
> Universal in Vienna, with Ms. Fischer herself, as well as the
> Rotterdam Phil and Maestro Metzmacher?????
>
> Oh, you have? OK, then everything's all right...
>
> Best - Robert
Strange to see someone complain about uploading a broadcast when
others here repeatedly upload currently available commercial
recordings with no apparent gripes.
I would be surprised if artists and record companies did not realize
when they sign off on a broadcast that the performance will be
recorded and circulated, and I would imagine most see it as a positive
when the widest possible audience hears these approved broadcasts.
JM
Peter Greenstein
<bisr...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:457df5b5-6a23-4578...@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>And, needless to say, you have cleared this upload with Edition
>Universal in Vienna, with Ms. Fischer herself, as well as the
>Rotterdam Phil and Maestro Metzmacher?????
>Oh, you have? OK, then everything's all right...
>Best - Robert
Hello Robert,
I really didn't think about this as an issue with a radio broadcast. It is
an interesting question. I am not unaware of intellectual property rights
issues. I like to think that I have SOME scrupples.
Here in the US, NFL football broadcasts always begin with a warning that
"This broadcast is the property of the NFL and cannot be...." But we don't
hear this kind of warning with Symphony broadcasts on the radio. Should we?
Or do you think it's inherent in all radio broadcasting?
This concert program is being broadcast by "Live at the Concertgebouw" radio
stations all over the world right now. Within a week or two it will be gone.
My upload could be looked as a sort of an un-official rebroadcast into the
digital domain. What about all the people that weren't able to hear the
broadcast?
Now as to the commercial issues, the sound quality of my upload is way below
the quality of a CD issue that someday might come from Julia Fischer.
Actually, by comparison it's terrible! I see it is as just a stop-gap till
she makes a recording. If she heard what radio stations do to her
performance I'll bet she would agree. This is just not comparable to sharing
mp3's of commercial recordings.
So this must fall into some kind of grey area.
Lastly, does it help my defense any to say that I just received a very nice
note of thanks from the husband of the second cellist in the Rotterdam
Orchestra?
bisr...@compuserve.com
> <bisrob...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
Dear Peter,
of course your case has many more mitigating circumstances than many
others here, but it is the old adage: he who pays the piper calls the
tune.
My point is that intellectual property is just that - property. It
may be that the Radio station and all the artists are deliriously
happy that you help them spread their message, but, on the other and,
maybe they are not. In whichever case, THEY are the ones who put up
the money for the recording, and THEY are the ones who should be able
to decide when, where and how to air it. Not you, not me, not anyone
else. IF they wanted it generally available for downloading, then why
time-limit it? Possibly because they want to attract lots of
listeners to their station, possibly to attract advertisers, possibly
anything. But for someone else, uninvited and without permission,
with possibly the best of intentions, to take the law in his own hands
and second-guess what the owner wants to have done to the recording,
no, Peter, sorry, not unless you cleared it with them first.
Best - Robert
her...@yahoo.com
>
> I would be surprised if artists and record companies did not realize
> when they sign off on a broadcast that the performance will be
> recorded and circulated, and I would imagine most see it as a positive
> when the widest possible audience hears these approved broadcasts.
>
> JM
Why are people always thinking creative people are happy to give away
their stuff for free, while this line of thinking doesn't seem to
apply t any other profession?
Herman
jrsnfld
> <bisrob...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
>
> news:457df5b5-6a23-4578...@l16g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>
> >And, needless to say, you have cleared this upload with Edition
> >Universal in Vienna, with Ms. Fischer herself, as well as the
> >Rotterdam Phil and Maestro Metzmacher?????
> >Oh, you have? OK, then everything's all right...
> >Best - Robert
>
> Now as to the commercial issues, the sound quality of my upload is way below
> the quality of a CD issue that someday might come from Julia Fischer.
> Actually, by comparison it's terrible! I see it is as just a stop-gap till
> she makes a recording. If she heard what radio stations do to her
> performance I'll bet she would agree. This is just not comparable to sharing
> mp3's of commercial recordings.
Robert is often touting the engineering quality (particularly the
dynamic range) of his CD releases. If he considers different
performances in lesser sound to be unfair competition, then one has to
wonder whether the sound on his CDs is all that good, or maybe wonder
whether he understands why some of his customers actually are
interested in hearing multiple, imperfect and poorly recorded
performances of the same piece.
>
> So this must fall into some kind of grey area.
>
> Lastly, does it help my defense any to say that I just received a very nice
> note of thanks from the husband of the second cellist in the Rotterdam
> Orchestra?
I am not surprised you received such a note. I occasionally see email
requests from performers who want to know if anyone could share with
them recordings of their broadcasts. In most cases, you would think
they would already have better sources for such things.
The question about legalities, though, does not hinge on any of the
issues above, which favor the service you have done for fellow
listeners and for the artists themselves (not just for members of the
orchestra--on balance you are probably stirring up demand for a
recording by Fischer, and stirring up interest in music that not
everyone actually knows). Your scruples are not in question!
--Jeff
J.Martin
> Why are people always thinking creative people are happy to give away
> their stuff for free
I don't know what people are always thinking. But I think it's
apparent in this particular case that some creative people decided to
make their stuff available for free.
JM
jrsnfld
People are not always thinking that about creative arts. Most people
do not assume that novelists like to give away their work for free.
No, the assumption seems more common about performing artists. And in
any case, we all know they are not happy to give away "their stuff"
for free, either, when we're talking about commercially available
discs. The "stuff" in Peter's case is a concert broadcast.
Historically, almost none of these ever gets released commercially.
Theoretically such work is recompensed by the sale of tickets, the
payment of salaries, and I'm willing to bet very little of that hinges
on the syndication of broadcast rights.
There are some performers who, for artistic reasons, definitely do not
like the idea of broadcasts being preserved, but they paradoxically
feel such concerts were perfectly acceptable for public consumption at
least once. This is probably the lunatic fringe of perfectionists--ie,
the Carlos Kleibers and Sergiu Celibidaches.
Most performing artists are not upset that people copy and share
broadcasts, in part because this is the only way they get to hear such
things. But also because they happen to like the idea of having
adoring, enthusiastic fans who will then want to hear concerts or buy
commercial discs. The artists I know see their work as being repeated
endlessly in so many permutations at different concerts and they don't
think much about any one concert after it's over.
(However....this does not mean the artists want anyone else
*profiting* from their work.)
This culture of sharing after the concert probably thrives more widely
in the folk and jazz communities, where subtle variations from one
concert to the next are prized and studied and openly swapped by rabid
enthusiasts even beyond anything imagined in our little classical
corner of the music world.
--Jeff
Paige Turner
> This culture of sharing after the concert probably thrives more widely
> in the folk and jazz communities, where subtle variations from one
> concert to the next are prized and studied and openly swapped by rabid
> enthusiasts even beyond anything imagined in our little classical
> corner of the music world.
>
The practical aspect of this is that any broadcast can be recorded
easily. This was as true in the era of the cassette as it is now. In
fact, people are dusting off old cassettes of radio recordings and
digitizing them. I don' see much of a difference, conceptually,
between listening to a broadcast and listening to a recording that
somebody made of a broadcast. We are not talking about guys who _sell_
pirated concert recordings, that's a different story, they're
profiting from somebody's work. I think John was on the right track
about fair use. In this case, given that RMCR is the reference group
worldwide for classical recordings, this is very close to "academic
purposes". And let's not fool ourselves... the number of people who
are interested in such a broadcast is likely very small. Even most
Berg fans or fans of the artist won't bother downloading it. Or they
download it and then don't even listen to it. For now, I will consider
this as the equivalent of listening to the broadcast, with possible
"scholarly and academic use" thrown in.
Best,
pt
Gerard
> In this case, given that RMCR is the reference group
> worldwide for classical recordings,
What does this actually mean, "the reference group worldwide for classical
recordings"?
I did not make statistics, but I guess that most of the posts in this newsgroup
come from around 30 people who tell about their likings and opinions about the
recordings they have heard. Most of these participants live in the USA.
This hardly can be a "reference group", let alone "worldwide".
Paige Turner
Some statistics have estimated the number of readers at more than one
hundred thousand. Way more readers than posters, obviously, like any
other group. I don't think the readership is mainly from the US,
though many posters are. There is nothing else like it anywhere, so I
call it the worldwide reference group. Over the years, I have received
enough email and stuff (I am sure other veteran posters have had
similar experiences) to know that people pay attention to what is
discussed here. If you don't like "reference" or "worldwide" you can
call it the main Usenet discussion group for classical recordings and
"international". No matter what you call it, it's a major group with a
large readership.
Best,
pt
Peter Greenstein
>"jrsnfld" <jrs...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:15488d99-88f3-4735...@m40g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>The question about legalities, though, does not hinge on any of the
>issues above, which favor the service you have done for fellow
>listeners and for the artists themselves (not just for members of the
>orchestra--on balance you are probably stirring up demand for a
>recording by Fischer, and stirring up interest in music that not
>everyone actually knows). Your scruples are not in question!
>--Jeff
Jeff,
Thanks for the defense of my scruples, but you are an interested party, you
know!
My, what a kerfuffle my post has caused! It's like the whole Napster thing
all over again.
I think Robert is absolutely legally (and even ethically) correct according
to my Intellectual Property Rights lawyer friend. I must admit that I was
under the impression that once something goes out over the airwaves it was
free for non-commercial use and/or sharing - a "re-broadcast" into the
digital realm as I called it.
My lawyer, Richard Lyons, is also the jazz guitarist in my quartet, The
Wakefield Jazz Quartet and we are performing at the Berkeley Jazz School
(Berkeley, Califonia) this April 25 (shameless plug).
Dick has asked me to please not get arrested before the gig.
M forever
> >"jrsnfld" <jrsn...@aol.com> wrote in message
You will probably get arrested *at* the gig, now that the FBI knows
when and where to find you!
You have been a very naughty boy.
Brendan R. Wehrung
> On 22 Feb, 19:42, "Peter Greenstein" <pgree...@comcast.net> wrote:
> ic
>>
>> http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=3D6eeb5bbfd8743bba4012e8015643d9c84b..=
> .
>>
>> Two flac files for the two parts of the concerto.
>>
> s than I remember sounded like mellow dream world stuff. That impression is=
> not helped by the dynamic range which is a bit squeezed in typical FM/Inte=
> rnet fashion. However, I've heard worse.
>>
> . I recorded this off of "Live at the Concertgebouw" which is playing aroun=
> d the world on radio stations right now.
>>
>> --
>> peter in oakland,ca.www.wakefieldjazz.com
>
> And, needless to say, you have cleared this upload with Edition
> Universal in Vienna, with Ms. Fischer herself, as well as the
> Rotterdam Phil and Maestro Metzmacher?????
>
> Oh, you have? OK, then everything's all right...
>
> Best - Robert
>
From a hard-core commerical standpoint you may be right, but the
Concertgebouw did pay for performance rights and from a listener's
standpoint it's a shading of their intent that the perfornace be heard
worldwide to obtain it by this channel. Otherwise we'd have a Holland
with classical music lovers scurring around, wearing bulky headphones into
which they deposited Euros every 15 minutes to keep the music playing, so
that Edition Universal was deprived of not one fraction of a guilder (or
whatever a fractional Euro is).
Brendan
Brendan R. Wehrung
> On 23 Feb, 12:44, "Recovered Reviewer" <ceec...@frontiernet.net>
> wrote:
>> "CharlesSmith" <sigma.onl...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:05baa543-ddb8-4429...@r22g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>> On 23 Feb, 11:24, bisrob...@compuserve.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 22 Feb, 19:42, "Peter Greenstein" <pgree...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > Berg Violin Concerto; Julia Fischer, Ingo Metzmacher/Rotterdam
>> > > Philharmonic
>>
> b...
>>
>> > > Two flac files for the two parts of the concerto.
>>
>> > > Beautiful playing. Not sure about the conducting. In Part I, more
>> > > sections than I remember sounded like mellow dream world stuff. That
> in
>> > > typical FM/Internet fashion. However, I've heard worse.
>>
>> > > I got some feedback that the performance dates from Jan 30 or Feb 2,
>> > > 2004. I recorded this off of "Live at the Concertgebouw" which is
>> > > playing around the world on radio stations right now.
>>
>> > > --
>> > > peter in oakland,ca.www.wakefieldjazz.com
>>
>> > And, needless to say, you have cleared this upload with Edition
>> > Universal in Vienna, with Ms. Fischer herself, as well as the
>> > Rotterdam Phil and Maestro Metzmacher?????
>>
>> > Oh, you have? OK, then everything's all right...
>>
>> > > Best - Robert
>> > The basic information about the broadcasts is available here:
>>
>> A very attractive series! But a careful reading of the website
>> fails to reveal (to me, anyhow) a blanket permission to download.
>> --
>> John Wiser
>> Jicotea Used Books
>> Howells NY 10932 0136 USA
>> ceec...@gmail.comhttp://www.amazon.com/shops/ceeclef
>
> It's not 100% clear to me either, but I thought it was of interest
> regardless. At first sight RNW appear to grant broadcasting rights to
> all and sundry with little control, so it's difficult to see how they
> can control subsequent recording and uploading. And if Rob is
> concerned about whether the publishers and artists have agreed to this
> situation he should probably contact RNW. A listener recording a
> broadcast can't be expected to check the terms of the artists'
> contracts for the original performance.
And in the US at least, if he can actually hear it via radio (WFMT Radio
Network) he may freely copy it for his perosnla use under Fiar Use.
Surely we aren't the only country with a similar doctrine?
Brendan
M forever
wrote:
> (bisrob...@compuserve.com) writes:
> > On 22 Feb, 19:42, "Peter Greenstein" <pgree...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Berg Violin Concerto; Julia Fischer, Ingo Metzmacher/Rotterdam Philharmon=
> > ic
>
It's called a Cent! Like in America, only it's worth much more.
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in
> Some statistics have estimated the number of readers [of this newsgroup]
> at more than one hundred thousand.
Gleep! And here I thought it was closer to three hundred.
Uh.... would everybody out there send me an Amazon.com gift certificate,
please? Or just buy me something off my Wishlist. ;--)
bisr...@compuserve.com
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Absolutely. Same anywhere. However, what I am going on about is not
the downloading, it is the UPloading. The owner of the property
(recording) is the only one that has the right (accoring to his
contracts, of course, contracts he usually has paid for!!) to upload
it for downloading - or decide not to. I am pleased to read above
that Peter in Oakland has now understood this - now it's only the rest
to try to convince.
Best - Robert
Gerard
> On Feb 23, 5:55 pm, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_drik...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Paige Turner wrote:
> > > In this case, given that RMCR is the reference group
> > > worldwide for classical recordings,
> >
> > What does this actually mean, "the reference group worldwide for
> > classical recordings"?
> > I did not make statistics, but I guess that most of the posts in
> > this newsgroup come from around 30 people who tell about their
> > likings and opinions about the recordings they have heard. Most of
> > these participants live in the USA.
> > This hardly can be a "reference group", let alone "worldwide".
>
> Some statistics have estimated the number of readers at more than one
> hundred thousand.
This is not very likely. Is this all the readers who have once (or more often)
read in this newsgroup?
> Way more readers than posters, obviously, like any
> other group. I don't think the readership is mainly from the US,
> though many posters are. There is nothing else like it anywhere, so I
> call it the worldwide reference group. Over the years, I have received
> enough email and stuff (I am sure other veteran posters have had
> similar experiences) to know that people pay attention to what is
> discussed here. If you don't like "reference" or "worldwide" you can
> call it the main Usenet discussion group for classical recordings and
> "international". No matter what you call it, it's a major group with a
> large readership.
>
> Best,
>
> pt
Probably that last description is right ("major group with a large readership").
But no more.
Just a platform for the opinions of around 30 (mostly American) participants.
Hardly "international". Some of those opinions have worth.
I would never call this a "reference" group. Usually I call it an American
newsgroup about (recordings of) classical music, in which however most posts are
about American politics (and also many about Israel, cars, beers, audio
equipment, etcetera).
I think that you're exaggerating the importance of this newsgroup a lot.
fmfi...@googlemail.com
I had the opportunity (with all appropriate approvals!) to publish
many tracks even from released classical CDs. Some of the with all
imaginable awards and recommendations. The typical total number of
downloads worldwide per published track amounts to something around 10
(ten). And never more than 50. Now take these numbers into account and
free up your mind: the internet is no US enterprise and clearly - as
we are free to choose onto which server where to load our file - in
reality "the minimum legal restrictions" rule applies. What is legal
somewhere has to be legal anywhere in the internet. Or do we want to
get Grenadas, Vietnams or Iraqs in the internet? Most lawyers in
Kansas have no clue about legal situation not even in Mass. not
talking about Brasil, Malaysia or Liechtenstein. But these are some of
the countries you publish to when publishing in the internet. So we
couldn't care less what the lawyer or prosecutor from Kansas has to
say, otherwise the whole internet would turn into a ridiculous place.
On top of it: Whatever is broadcast is released to the (private)
public. Non-commercially the public can do what it wants, even record
or - how terrible! - delete the recording. Making money out if it
other than covering own recording and distribution cost, would be
another question, morally.
How absurd this artificial rights discussion is, shows the following
case:
You listen to a tune in the radio and love. it You go into the shower
and sing these tune (without paying the publisher). Now you raise your
voice, so neighbour enjoys the tune and invites you for a drink later
on. Let's value the drink like 4$ worth. Now you made 4$ on singing a
song without proper rights, you will not declare the 4$ to IRS and the
publisher does not get even sip from the bottle. Are you a criminal
now?
FMF
Paige Turner
> This is not very likely. Is this all the readers who have once (or more often)
> read in this newsgroup?
>
It's followed by a lot of people.
> > Way more readers than posters, obviously, like any
> > other group. I don't think the readership is mainly from the US,
> > though many posters are. There is nothing else like it anywhere, so I
> > call it the worldwide reference group. Over the years, I have received
> > enough email and stuff (I am sure other veteran posters have had
> > similar experiences) to know that people pay attention to what is
> > discussed here. If you don't like "reference" or "worldwide" you can
> > call it the main Usenet discussion group for classical recordings and
> > "international". No matter what you call it, it's a major group with a
> > large readership.
>
> > Best,
>
> > pt
>
> Probably that last description is right ("major group with a large readership").
> But no more.
> Just a platform for the opinions of around 30 (mostly American) participants.
> Hardly "international". Some of those opinions have worth.
>
> I would never call this a "reference" group. Usually I call it an American
> newsgroup about (recordings of) classical music, in which however most posts are
> about American politics (and also many about Israel, cars, beers, audio
> equipment, etcetera).
>
> I think that you're exaggerating the importance of this newsgroup a lot.
I didn't say it was important, just that it has a large audience all
over the world and that it is used by people as a reference. I am not
going to say anything about its "importance" because opinions are
opinions, and this group is mainly about opinions (also about facts,
straight information, but mosts posts are opinions).
Best,
pt
Bob Lombard
>
> I didn't say it was important, just that it has a large audience all
> over the world and that it is used by people as a reference. I am not
> going to say anything about its "importance" because opinions are
> opinions, and this group is mainly about opinions (also about facts,
> straight information, but mosts posts are opinions).
>
messages here are important.
bl
Paige Turner
I did not say it was important... as to what people think of
themselves and their opinions, some, a few, think their opinions are
hot shit. The majority of posters just express enthusiasm or lack
thereof and let it go at that. There are relatively few fanatics...
Best,
pt
Gerard
>
> I didn't say it was important,
I'm glad you did not say so ;-)
> just that it has a large audience all
> over the world
I have serious doubts about this.
Sure, among the posters there are people from all over the world. Maybe 1 or 2
from China. How many from India? Or Japan (where so many cd's have been issued -
and sold, I presume)? I think zero from Africa and Russia. 2 or 3 from
Australia, and maybe a few from South-America.
All very small numbers.
>
> and that it is used by people as a reference.
I'm not sure about the meaning of the English word 'reference'.
But I thought it could be something important.