|
|
||
Dave's Top Eight
1. Jerry Reed...Revisited by Darrell Toney (reviewed 6/07) (5 Stars) Click title to purchase at CBD.com...click artist name to read Dave's Review. A CD will automatically fall out of the Top Eight after twelve months if no CD surpasses it before then.
|
Most Recent Articles
Why blog? (Three years and counting)
| ||
-----------July 30, 2007Don't Want No Gospel MusicSome guy with a blog sez: I know that some people like the worship music and the singing before the service, but frankly to me it seems like all fluff. Just get on with it, for crying out loud. I came to here the Word of God preached, not to hear 400 year old hymns and music that makes me think I turned 85 yesterday and forgot my own birthday because I am so old. Now, I don’t think there is anything wrong with this type of music or worship style, it simply isn’t for me. If it works for you, then great. But give me some loud rock-n-roll worship music and see how many more lost people you will reach because they don’t wanna listen to the tired Baptist Hymnal songs, no matter how many times you re-write them over and over again. To which I replied... That's pretty harsh. I believe history would indicate that God uses many various tools to draw people, including music. Music and preaching definitely shouldn't be viewed as being at odds...nor should one style over another. We're on the same side. As long as the message of the Gospel isn't diluted, I applaud the efforts of those with a traditional music background as well as those who take a more up-to-date approach. I'm a stickler for quality in the music I like, but at the same time, I realize it's about more than just my personal taste. It's not a great idea to assume everyone shares your tastes, particularly when you're talking about lost people's tastes and the main topic at hand is music. Besides, I've never been entirely convinced the primary purpose of Christian music is evangelism. We may like to pretend that's the case, but in practice, the primary purpose of Christian music seems to be more about giving praise to God (which is laudable) and entertaining existing Christians (which is worthwhile as well). Labels: Other Blogs July 26, 2007Are All Hearts And Minds In Agreement?I just discovered a blog that interests me. The author doesn't give his name, but his byline is "TheGodFearingFiddler." He used to play fiddle in a Southern Gospel group. His favorite musical genres are "sacred/traditional chant (especially Eastern/Byzantine) and southern gospel/bluegrass." It gets more interesting... His uncle is a professional in "one of the most well known Southern Gospel groups." Which one? He's a recent convert to Catholicism. He "can quote the entire gospel of Mark in the NIV from start to finish (takes about 2 hours)." He's translating a Jarai/English dictionary for a people group indigenous to Vietnam. This is not your stereotypical Southern Gospel fan...or is it? I just learned enough about him to realize he's not at all like me, but I'd sure like to know what group he played for and his uncle's name. When you attend a Southern Gospel concert, do you assume the rest of the audience is a lot like you? I do to a certain degree. Sure, I realize there's variations in denominations and probably some "minor issues," but we're all obviously Christians who enjoy the same type of music. At least, those are the first thoughts that pop into my mind. I'm a Southern Baptist, for example. I know various other denominations are represented at any concert I attend, but I naturally assume most of them are Southern Baptists like me...or if the crowd gets lively and someone takes a running fit, I assume most of them are some pentecostal variant. The truth is, they may be 90% Southern Baptist or 10% Southern Baptist regardless of the situation. I really have no way of knowing for sure, short of a poll being taken. I think I'd enjoy finding out how everyone around me compares and contrasts on various issues, but it just isn't possible given the number of people who are randomly in a room on any given night and the limited time I have to speak with each of them. At least, I can never know what they think in the same sense that God does. Come to think of it, maybe it's better if I don't know too many details. Many lengthy and tiresome discussions are probably avoided when we don't realize a disagreement exists. This reminds me of a joke: Two guys meet on a bridge and start comparing their similarities. They discover, to their pleasant surprise, that they are the same faith, the same denomination, the same creed, and the same constitution. However, when one man learns the other subscribes to conclusions of a church council that met in 1879 rather than the council that met in 1856, he exclaims, "Heretic!" and pushes him into the raging river far below. Isn't that the way it is most of the time? People who align themselves with various groups usually don't even agree with everything the group as a whole claims to represent. When we all meet "in one accord," whether it's at a public concert or at a worship service in our own church, I believe most of us tend to project our own religion, values, morality, ethics, and doctrines on to those around us. That is, unless you're rubbed the wrong way, in which case you leap to the opposite conclusion, that everyone there disagrees with you on everything...which is equally wrong. The truth must lie somewhere in between. Labels: Observations, Other Blogs July 20, 2007Undercut Artists Or Bold Marketing Approach?SGBlognew sez: Looks like Crossroads Music has a new website where they are featuring their newest recordings for only $9.99. Also for a limited time with every purchase, you will receive Crossroads Chartbusters Vol.1 at no charge. Looks like a great deal, but it sure undercuts their own artists (clients). No, not really. Customers who only buy music direct from their favorite artists aren't very likely to change those buying habits as a result of this. Besides, fans who are in the habit of shopping online and actively seeking out the best price are ALREADY getting their music from companies like CBD, Amazon, Springside, and others. It won't matter to the artist if they go to Crossroads Direct rather than one of those outlets. In fact, it may actually help if the lower price point causes an increase in the overall volume of sales. Let's do a simple comparison to illustrate this point. Before Crossroads Direct launched, the Inspirations latest CD, Things Are Different Now, could be bought online directly from the Inspirations site for $17, from Springside.com for $15.95, from Amazon.com for $18.98, and from CBD.com for 11.99. (The Amazon price is out of character for Amazon, which is usually more competitive. They also list it as a "pre-order," for some reason.) By selling directly to individual customers, Crossroads is simply passing part of the discount they give to those companies along. It's called "cutting out the middle man," and it's been tried by manufacturers with varying degrees of success for many years. Whether or not it's successful in this case will depend on how many additional customer service issues arise from dealing with individual buyers vs. those who buy in bulk. All they're selling is pieces of plastic and some paper with color printing on it, so the main issue will be breakage as long as they're capable of putting the right CD in each package. The artist isn't hurt, and in fact, could be affected positively. There's a theoretical point in almost every recording contract where labels recoup their investment and the artist starts getting a cut of all future sales. Due to low volume of sales, many Southern Gospel products never reach that point, so the artist sees nothing in the way of profit other than from the units they sell directly to customers themselves. If Crossroads increases volume while taking no hit on profit per unit (they're avoiding giving discounts to third-party distributors), they will reach the "break even" recoup point more frequently. Crossroads is taking a bold approach by underpricing their nearest competitor (CBD.com) by $2 per unit. Only time will tell if it was bold enough to pay off. The actual downside is they're risking their business relationships with companies like CBD, Amazon, Springside and others. It's their job to sell as many pieces of product as possible, because doing so makes the artist more popular. Selling direct rather than allowing companies like CBD, Amazon, and Springside to get a cut could cause those companies to say, "Fine. Sell all your music direct if you don't need us anymore and see how well you do without any access to our established customer base." I haven't mentioned digital downloads, but these are increasingly playing a factor. Few artists currently offer this as an option for customers who shop their websites. Some are finally beginning to explore this area. To me, it makes perfect sense for the label website to be the point where digital downloads of individual songs are sold directly to customers. In fact, it really makes NO sense why they aren't already doing this. Hopefully, that will be on the agenda for this new venture by Crossroads. If you could buy an entire CD as a download for $9.99 or the physical CD for $9.99 plus shipping costs, that would go a long way towards convincing customers to buy more product and it should attract new customers who currently feel that $15 is much more than any CD is worth. Labels: Observations, Other Blogs July 16, 2007BSafe (and Stupid) OnlineDaniel Mount has been telling me for some time that he couldn't leave comments on my blog due to his American Family Association approved internet filter, BSafeOnline. This internet filter has also been endorsed by such well known heavyweights as Dave Ramsey, Chuck Swindoll, and Michael Medved. Daniel got a little more concerned when the filter blocked him from viewing his OWN blog. Now it won't let him look at Sogospelnews.com either. I took a look at BSafe's website. It appears Daniel must have paid $49.95 for the privilege of being blocked from such potentially harmful content as "news." In BSafe's FAQ, one question reads: Under what criteria does your filter block sites? A number of categories are listed, including: News Sites that are dedicated to the distribution of news, current events and headlines. This would also include news commentaries, and news blogs. Daniel says Musicscribe and his own blog were both blocked under the category of "news cult." The FAQ at BSafe's website doesn't list the two words as a combined category, but the "cult" category is listed separately: Cults (blocked by default) Sites that encourage cult lifestyles, such as female enslavement, body mutilation, etc. Musicscribe has NEVER been used to encourage anything remotely related to a cult. I'm a SOUTHERN BAPTIST, for crying out loud (and a conservative one at that). This site is mainly an outlet for CD reviews and personal observations about the Southern Gospel music industry. The only thing that ever stands a risk of being hurt around here is a recording artist's ego, and hey, they willingly volunteer for my critiques. Could it be that BSafe mistakes Southern Gospel music fans for a "cult?" I have no idea. Hmm...I wonder if BSafe is familiar with the legal term "defamation of character." Any pro-bono lawyers out there want to take a crack at this? I could sure use the cash from a nice hefty settlement. At the very least, Daniel should get a refund for whatever he paid them. He clearly didn't expect to be blocked from his own site when he paid for this so-called "service." I will be writing separate letters to all the major companies, talk show hosts, and radio broadcasters who endorse this ridiculous, overreaching product. If your goal is to be blissfully ignorant of such potentially damaging sites as those who publish news...the nerve..., then go ahead and send BSafe $49.95. If not, I join Daniel in encouraging you to save your cash. Seriously, if you have children who access the internet, the best policy I can suggest is giving them personal supervision rather than relying on any sort of software "net nanny" to do the job of parenting on your behalf. If you're afraid there's something out there that YOU might run across by accident, you're probably correct. Rather than shelling out cash, though, I would submit that clicking the little X in the upper right corner of your browser is a lot cheaper and less of a hassle. Labels: Observations, Other Blogs July 12, 2007Canaan Records - A Lot Of Hot Air?Daniel Mount spoke with a Word music rep today regarding the immediate future of Canaan Records. The responses he received weren't very encouraging. Let's take it thought by thought... Daniel says, I talked with a representative of Word Entertainment about the future of their Canaan Records label. He said that other than the Hoppers’ The Ride project, Southern Gospel fans can be looking for compilations of songs from popular groups in Canaan’s old days. So far, so good. What other artists will Canaan be signing? Will we be able to buy these great old performances on iTunes? Read on... Daniel sez: I decided to go out on a limb and ask whether they were in talks with any other artist. They said that they were not–that they would just focus on promoting The Ride and their old compilations. I guess I'm just missing the whole point of why Canaan Records was revived. Word brought back this old revered label in order to just release compilations and, oh yeah, one current CD which will be over a year old by the time they finally get it into stores. And this requires a label head of Dave Clark's stature to pull off? I really don't get it. Daniel follows up with another pertinent question: I also asked whether there was any chance they could release some of their back catalog as digital downloads. The Word/Canaan representative said that it was quite unlikely, though not necessarily impossible–but definitely not a priority for them. "Quite unlikely." I'm telling you, Canaan is really missing the boat. Pumping out compilations with low profit margins, carrying a few established names and failing to devote any sort of energy to developing decent new talent was the business model that drove Benson Records into bankruptcy a decade ago. It's not encouraging at all to learn that Canaan is starting out this way, as opposed to being driven to it. A la carte digital delivery of music is no longer the wave of the future. It's the way more and more people every day are buying music right NOW. I'm totally baffled that a company such as Word would go to all this effort, yet completely ignore current buying trends. I'm hoping and praying that the Word rep Daniel spoke with simply didn't know what he was talking about. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your perspective), it wouldn't be the first time. (I speak from personal experience.) Labels: Observations, Other Blogs June 9, 2007Spring Hill-Oak Ridge BoysDoug Harrison just mentioned an implosion at Spring Hill Records. Presumably, the label leadership has fired most or all of their staff. Doug was unable to find the details on the Oak Ridge Boys site where this story originally broke. I did a little digging and came up with this post from Duane Allen, dated yesterday at 10:24 AM. (Sorry about the all caps, but that's the way Duane types.) LAST NIGHT AS I WAS GETTING READY TO GO SEE CHRIS GOLDEN AND ALL OF THE FRIENDS THAT WERE ATTENDING HIS SHOW, I STARTED GETTING E-MAILS AND PHONE CALLS THAT I DID NOT EXPECT......LONG STORY SHORT.......ALL OF THE STAFF AT SPRING HILL HAS BEEN FIRED.......NEEDLESS TO SAY, MY PHONE STARTED RINGING AND DID NOT STOP UNTIL AFTER 10PM.......I DID NOT GET TO GO SEE CHRIS, OR DO MUCH MORE THAN TALK ON THE PHONE.......SO, I'M SORRY TO MISS SEEING SO MANY OF YOU, AND TO SHOW MY SUPPORT FOR CHRIS......I THINK CHRIS' NEW PROJECT IS HIS VERY BEST TO DATE...... NOW, TO SPRING HILL......I DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN THERE......I HAVE ALREADY BEEN TALKING TO THEM AND LOTS OF OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE VERY INTERESTED IN THE OAK RIDGE BOYS....... ONCE AGAIN, WE ARE FACED WITH SOME CHANGES......MY HEART IS HEAVY FOR ALL OF OUR GOOD FRIENDS AT SPRING HILL WHO LOST THEIR JOBS YESTERDAY, HOWEVER, THEY ARE QUALITY PEOPLE, AND, I'M QUITE SURE THAT THEY WILL ALL BE OK....... THERE IS NO CLEAR PICTURE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO OUR NEW SINGLE, "CLOSER TO HOME", OR, FOR THAT MATTER, ALL OF OUR SEVEN ALBUM CATALOG.......AS THE DAY PROGRESSES, I WILL KNOW MORE, BUT, AS FOR RIGHT NOW, I WILL JUST SAY, HANG ON, EVERYONE, WE ARE IN FOR ANOTHER INTERESTING RIDE.......DUANE Later in the thread, Joe Bonsall added an upbeat to the news: I will ad that ALL of the BOYS as well as Michael are very upbeat and optimistic. Lots of DOORS out there right now gang. It will all work out just fine!!! Blessings, Ban-Joey A couple of hours after his initial post, Duane added: YES, GANG, THIS ALL STARTED COMING DOWN ABOUT 6PM, AND I DID NOT GET OFF THE PHONE UNTIL AFTER 10PM.......I WAS TALKING WITH MICHAEL, JOE, AND I FOUND RICHARD, AS WELL AS CALLING ALL OF THE SPRING HILL STAFF PERSONALLY TO THANK EACH ONE OF THEM.......BEFORE MY CONVERSATIONS ENDED WITH JIM HALSEY, WE COUNTED FIVE COMPANIES WHO WOULD LIKE TO SIGN THE OAK RIDGE BOYS.......SO, WE ARE GONNA BE JUST FINE, GANG.......IT MAY WIND UP BEING A HUGE BLESSING, AND THAT IS EXACTLY THE WAY I LOOK AT IT.......SPRING HILL AND ALL OF THEIR WONDERFUL EMPLOYEES HAVE GIVEN US 110% OF THEIR BEST EFFORTS FOR OVER SIX YEARS, AND SEVEN ALBUMS.......THEY HAVE HELPED US TAKE OUR RECORDING CAREER TO ANOTHER LEVEL OF SUCCESS, AND I AM VERY GRATEFUL FOR THEIR DEVOTION TO THE MUSIC OF THE OAKS....... TODAY IS A DAY OF LETTING THE DUST SETTLE......MEETINGS ARE GOING ON AS I TYPE, AND I'M SURE I WILL KNOW MORE ANY TIME......I'M GETTING READY TO GO ROCK RIVERSTAGES.......DUANE And then a few hours later, it may not be so serious as it first seemed to be...at least as far as the Oaks are concerned: THINGS ARE CHANGING VERY QUICKLY TODAY......LOTS OF CALLS, E-MAILS, AND PERSONAL VISITS.......SO, THE BEST I CAN SAY IS THIS......LOOKS LIKE SPRING HILL WILL BE UP AND RUNNING MONDAY MORNING, AND THE OAK RIDGE BOYS ARE THEIR MAIN CONCERN......SO, ALL OF THIS IS GOOD.......WHEN THE ACTUAL FACTS ARE KNOWN TO ME, THEN I WILL SHARE AS I KNOW THEM......THE CHANGES MAY BE VERY GOOD FOR US.....DUANE Analysis: The main issue for the Oaks is whether or not they'll be able to continue working with Michael Sykes as their producer. The Oaks obviously sell enough product to demand what they want. If they're as smart as I think they are, they'll demand Michael Sykes, since they owe much of their success in the past several years to his touch in the studio. It's the rest of the Spring Hill roster that's going to suffer from an upheaval like this. I feel sorry for guys like Carl Cartee and others on the worship label. Any transition like this is going to be tough, even if it's better for the company and their artists in the long run. UPDATE: On June 11, Duane put a comma in the Spring Hill sentence. Regardless of whether the Oaks stay with Spring Hill or move to another label, he's giving this situation a positive spin. It seems it came at a time when the Oaks had no further obligations to Spring Hill, so the ball is in Spring Hill's court right now. In the coming months, they can either prove to the Oaks that they want to keep them by pushing their material, or the Oaks can go to one of the five labels currently vying for them. Posted June 11, 2007 09:11 PM Hide Post THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR CONCERN......BUT, MOST OF ALL, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS FOR THOSE WHO LOST THEIR JOBS......THEY WERE ALL GOOD FRIENDS OF THE OAKS...... NOW, THE COMPANY IS ALREADY ON TRACK AGAIN, AND, WE SHOULD ONLY SEE A LITTLE GLITCH IN THE ROAD.......THE BOYS WILL BE FINE, EITHER WAY.......OUR DATES ARE WHERE WE MAKE A LIVING.......OUR RECORDS, OR CD'S, ARE JUST A WAY TO GROW WITH OUR MUSIC, AND CREATE NEW SONGS FOR OUR SHOWS AND TELEVISION SHOWS......OUR PRODUCTS HAVE ALL SOLD REALLY WELL ON SPRING HILL.......I LOOK FOR POSITIVE THINGS TO HAPPEN.......AND, IF PLANS SHOULD GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, WE HAVE ALREADY FULFILLED OUR CONTRACT OBLIGATIONS......SO, IN REALITY, WE ARE OUT OF CONTRACT.......JUST THINK FOR ONE MOMENT.......WE ARE IN A GREAT POSITION!!!!!! IF THE RECORD LABEL WANTS TO KEEP US, THEN, THEY WILL MAKE A STRONG EFFORT TO PROMOTE OUR RECORDS, ESPECIALLY "FRONT ROW SEATS"........THAT IS WHAT WE REALLY WANT FROM A RECORD LABEL.......IF THE NEW ADMINISTRATION THAT COMES INTO SPRING HILL REALLY "KICKS IT INTO GEAR" THEN, WE ARE ALREADY WITH THEM......IF THEY DON'T, WE HAVE FIVE RECORD LABELS THAT ARE INTERESTED IN SIGNING US RIGHT NOW.......WE ARE GONNA BE JUST FINE, GANG.......SO, THIS WEEK, I AM JUST PRACTICING AS MUCH PATIENCE AS I HAVE, WAITING FOR THE NEW THINGS TO TAKE SHAPE.......I AM SMILING AS I TYPE......DUANE Labels: Observations, Other Blogs May 5, 2007Top SG Albums Of The DecadeToday, Daniel Mount lists his top choices from Southern Gospel CDs released during the current aughts decade. ("Aughts" sounds so 20th century. Does "Os" sound better?) Anywho, Daniel has challenged others to come up with their own lists. Sounds like fun. Here's my thought process in putting a list like this together: I give serious consideration to the unique "standout" qualities of each CD first. Next, I try to give equal, objective weight to vocals (including performance, arrangements, and complexity), songwriting, and production quality. Of course, there's some personal preference involved in the final decision as well. To match Daniel's format as closely as possible, I'll list my Top 10 and then make a few honorable mentions. I'm sure I'll refer to my Vault page of past reviews more than a few times before completing this list. 1. Everything Good - Gaither Vocal Band (2002) 2. Walk The Talk - Gold City (2003) 3. It's So God - Brian Free & Assurance (2006) 4. From The Heart - Oak Ridge Boys (2001) 5. Quartets - Greater Vision (2003) 6. Rock Of Ages...Hymns & Faith - Amy Grant (2005) 7. The Blind Man Saw It All - Booth Brothers (2005) 8. Home Free - Integrity Quartet (now Triumphant Quartet) (2004) 9. Anything But Ordinary, Everything But Typical - Dove Brothers Quartet (2005) 10. Ordinary Day - Jeff & Sheri Easter (2000) Also worthy of consideration: Sweet Forever - The Ruppes (2005) Power - The Hoppers (2000) Sounds Like Sunday - Janet Paschal (2007) Great Day - Signature Sound Quartet (now Ernie Haase & Signature Sound) (2004) What It Took - Valor (2006) Hymns - Mercy's Well (2006) Everyday - Mark Bishop (2006) Perfect Candidate - Greater Vision (2000) Labels: Observations, Other Blogs May 2, 2007Grade: FDid you know that the Gaither Brothers is one of the more popular groups in Southern Gospel? Did you know that Lowell Mason was the originator of shape note singing? Did you know shape notes were used because people couldn't read and there wasn't enough money to print multiple copies of music? The blog entry at this link appears to have been a Music Appreciation assignment of some sort. I just hope their teacher is a lot more lenient than me. Labels: Other Blogs April 12, 2007My Take on "Quality" RadioAveryfineline recently posted his thoughts on "Quality" in radio programming. (I am starting to enjoy reading the reader's comments just as much as I do Avery himself). A comment by Tim was posted, to which I had to respond. Here's what Tim said: I program music across three formats and chart nationally for SG and AC. I find that SG music can me the easiest or the most difficult music to program. Boy, I resonate with what Tim had to say. I agree that if you really have an ear for the "entertainment factor," then you can take more risks in that direction and break molds, get creative and do some really incredible things for your station. However, If you don't have that ear of discernment, it would be best to stick to the stuff that will give you the brand identity and become a "top 40" SG station as opposed to another cheap sounding station. Bottom line is to play better music, which is subjective I know. But at the most basic level, even if you aren't a good judge at what "good" is, then follow the known success stories in SG. In time, you should recognize the patterns that create successful songs and you can recognize it in other, new, up-and-coming artists too. Don't try to scout out talent if you really aren't a good judge to begin with. (And I realize we all think we know best... this is where it's also very important to look at retail, the marketplace, and at solid research). We certainly need more of a Simon mentality in what we allow on the air. Too many of us are sweet and insipid when it comes to giving unknowns a chance. Everything these days is so watered down, everybody wins, everybody does a good job and nobody is a loser. And I've been so guilty of letting stuff slide through myself.... I repent. It has been said that SG audiences are a weird bunch. I agree. The audiences demand a lot of low quality stuff at times. It boggles the mind at what people will buy and go crazy over. But what's the cause of that mentality? Could it be that if you're spoon fed stale rice cakes all your life, you may learn to love it so much to a fault where you become turned off and repulsed by the smell of prime rib and roasted potatoes? Radio needs to lock up the rice cakes and save it for the times of famine and pestilence. (And in the words of Chuck Peters, let me know if I can help, too!) -Daniel Britt Labels: Advice, Observations, Other Blogs March 26, 2007Piracy, Copyrights, and Fair UseDaniel Mount posted an excellent article on the topic of audio piracy and how it affects Southern Gospel artists a couple of days ago. Click HERE for the full article. Since then, Adam Edwards has posted a response on his blog that's well worth reading. Mount interviewed Scott Fowler of Legacy Five, Gerald Wolfe of Greater Vision, and Daniel Ball of the Ball Brothers. A couple of quotes in Mount's article caught my attention. One of his questions was whether or not the artists were bothered when a portion of one of their songs was posted on the internet...a short clip, in other words. Here are their responses quoted directly from the article: Scott Fowler said that sharing “a clip of a song or video” didn’t personally bother him, though “sharing a song in its entirety is wrong.” Daniel Ball actually encouraged it, provided the person asked permission first: “If someone asks permission to post clips, we always say ‘yes.’ It’s free advertisement.” Gerald Wolfe, however, took a somewhat different approach. In response to a question asking if it made any difference to him if fans shared a clip of a video or song, he said: “The short answer to that question is ‘yes,’ but the entire answer is that my opinion of it doesn’t matter. It is a question of whether or not Christians follow the guidelines of Federal Copyright Law concerning transmitting material that is protected by the Copyright Law. Christians are admonished by scripture to obey and follow the laws of the land.” Wolfe's answer might be construed as "preachy," but I didn't take it that way. I actually agree with his logic. However, I don't agree with his interpretation of the law. I think Fowler's response was the most correct. You see, the problem with copyright law is that it isn't exactly concrete. Too many issues have been left up to the courts to decide and every time Congress re-writes the law, they make it more convoluted. There are fuzzy areas in Chapter 1, Section 107 of the code where "fair use" is defined. Let's look at that portion of the law for a moment... Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include — (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. These "factors" to "consider" serve to make a relatively simple portion of the law more difficult to understand. Why doesn't the law simply stipulate a percentage? What does "the nature of the copyrighted work" have to do with fair use? If it wasn't legal to share a portion of a song, it wouldn't be legal for me to quote a portion of Mount's article above for the purpose of commenting on it. Fair use provisions stipulate that I can, though. I can even quote otherwise copyrighted material BEFORE it's published. In his article, Mount pointed out that Ball's answer mentioned he preferred that fans ask permission before sharing a clip, but if it's fair use, then permission isn't required. Fowler said it didn't bother him, which, in my opinion is the correct response, because I understand the law to say it's "fair use" to share an insubstantial portion of a copyrighted work as long as I'm doing it for one of the reasons listed. Another point that is significant: Music publishers, broadcasters, artists, etc. are in the business of protecting their copyrights, as well they should. However, they sometimes to word the law as they'd LIKE for it to be rather than the way it actually is. Example 1a: If you are an artist attempting to record a song held by Gaither's copyright management company and you request a mechanical license, they will charge you a nominal "processing fee" that is over and above the royalties you actually owe. The law does not provide for publishers to collect any extra fees. In fact, mechanical royalties are typically set up so that the publisher splits all income with songwriters. Gaither's company believes it's fine to charge honest artists $10 more than the law requires on every mech license they issue. Most independent artists, not knowing their rights under the law, go along. The last time I dealt with Gaither's company in this capacity, I exercised a compulsory license so they couldn't do this. We were only running one short run of CDs (300 or so), and so I paid them in full and declared the CD "out of print" at that point so I wouldn't have to go through the hassle of sending them installments on the number of CDs we "distributed." All this could have been avoided if they hadn't tried to soak me with an added fee. Example 1b: If you are an artist attempting to record a song held by Word Music and you request a mechanical license, they will direct you to use the Harry Fox Agency. The Harry Fox Agency, in turn, will not deal with royalties on projects with small runs. They only license projects of 500 or more, so you have to pay a minimum if you use Harry Fox. The law does not provide for publishers to require a minimum. In fact, the law stipulates that you have the right to demand a compulsory license at the current statutory royalty rate and you can't be refused. Example 2: If you want to post a short clip on a website, your own or otherwise, the fair use section of copyright law CLEARLY gives you the right to do this as long as it is for "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research." However, when a person recently posted a 45 second clip of the Super Bowl copyright notice on YouTube where the ONLY purpose is for users to see it and leave comments, the NFL found it and demanded that it be removed. The game was more than two hours in length. The problem is that the general public doesn't know the law, or only know a version that's far from the truth. On one side of the coin, you have pirates who either don't care or will justify their actions due to poorly written copyright law. On the other side of the coin, you have "sheep" who blindly respect anyone who speaks with an air of authority and end up assuming some things are illegal that are in fact, legal. An official "notice" from a huge organization like the NFL carries the weight of authority to the point that YouTube sides with the NFL and removes what was a perfectly legal clip. By the way, that clip was posted to make a point that the NFL copyright notice is over-reaching the language of the law. Getting back to Mount's article, Scott Fowler was quoted in another area as saying: "I don’t know how prevalent audio piracy is in our business, but I assume it will only get more pervasive as our audience embraces current technology. With the advent of mp3 players, iTunes and computer technology, it is certainly easy to do." This is another comment with which I agree...but (you knew that was coming didn't you?)...I think it's incorrect for Fowler to include iTunes in his reply. iTunes does NOT make it easy to share music. iTunes doesn't make it particularly easy for legal users to do as they please with the music they purchase from iTunes. If I want to buy a song using iTunes and listen to it on my iRiver, for example, I can't simply copy it to my iRiver. I have to burn it to a CD, rip that CD as an MP3 file, and only THEN can I listen to the music I purchased as I choose. If I had a proprietary iPod, this wouldn't be a problem with iTunes, but then I'd have the same issue with any music I purchased in WMA format from Walmart's music download service. Of course, the pirates find ways around this...obtaining files illegally via a peer-to-peer (P2P) network or otherwise. Digital Rights Management (DRM) serves only to make life more difficult for LEGAL users. As soon as the music industry wises up and stops making life more difficult for people who are willing to pay for their products, the better off they will be. Also, MP3 players themselves don't really make it easier to abuse the law. MP3 players may be the reason why so many people choose to abuse the law, but the player is just a player. It doesn't provide the technology for grabbing illegal files...lay that blame at computers, P2P networks, and whoever first digitized a song. --------------- Required reading: Brad Templeton's Ten Big Myths About Copyright Also recommended: Visit the Electronic Frontier Foundation Labels: Advice, Other Blogs March 20, 2007Two New SG BlogsAdam Edwards and Kyle (no last name) have started Southern Gospel blogs titled Southern Gospel Critique and Southern Gospel View respectively. I'm already familiar with Edwards. He has contributed some significant content to my SGHistory site in the past few months and is a regular poster on various SG message boards. From the initial posts made by both men, it appears they are sincere fans of Southern Gospel with critical eyes...two characteristics that make for good SG blogging. I look forward to reading what they have to say in coming months. Labels: Observations, Other Blogs March 16, 2007The Risks of CreativityAt SouthernGospelBlog.com, the topic of Table Sales came up. Throughout the comments on that post, the topic shifted somewhat to "custom projects" versus "record label projects." One poster said that the custom, table-projects are often great projects in their own right, once the artist is free from following the wishes of a label executive. I replied with my thoughts on the subject: You have a point, Ron. I thought about this some during the conference at Crossroads. Because I’ve often heard the complaint from artists that record companies dictate what you record and, in their opinion, stifle the artist’s own creativity (which is probably what attracted the record deal in the first place). How often has one heard the complaint that “I liked them better before they ‘made it big’ and were signed? They were producing better, more original creativity on their custom/table projects.” HOWEVER, I tend to agree with how the record companies think, too. IF you have an artist who really is a creative genius and innovative with his music, then the record company probably is smart enough to let that artist run their own show. Realistically, though, how many artists are good talents, so-so at creativity, but still need a bit of seasoned help from the record company with whom they are signed? I think this may be the case for the majority. So, just as remixes are popular, I’d like to see both angles and, from a fan’s standpoint, choose for myself: “do I like the record company version of the artist or the artist’s version of the artist?” For the sake of good business, you’d probably have to side with the record company. For the sake of variety and possibly a surprise-success, you’d look forward to see what the artist can do on their own. Risk is risky which is why we don’t see more of it. -Daniel Britt Labels: Observations, Other Blogs March 15, 2007Retail vs. Table SalesDaniel Mount raises an issue we discussed at the blogger summit: table sales vs. retail. I suspect some other genres face the same problem, though off the top of my head, I can't think of another genre where artists routinely turn out two or more recordings per year. I suppose one jaded answer might be that other genres don't have a built-in guilt complex among the fans driving them to "encourage" well meaning groups that don't have the skill to sing their way out of a wet paper bag. This takes away money that might otherwise be spent on a really good group, leveling the playing field and encouraging anyone and everyone to participate. This notion also extends to what radio is willing to play on the air. In other genres lacking this "we must support our brothers" mentality, people will buy and play your music only if they like it. The question comes down to whether more harm is done than good by false praise. I submit that it is. It's a vicious cycle. One point I tried to raise at the meeting is that until a group reaches a "critical mass" of popularity...meaning their recordings regularly recoup expanses and they see significant benefits from sales at retail...they aren't going to see the value of retail. Who can blame them? If an artist makes an average profit of less than $1 per unit on say, 12000 units per title sold at retail, and $10 per unit on 3000 units per title sold at their table, the question is a no brainer. Often, that average profit on retail is zero, because the CD never recouped production expenses. What the artist fails to see, and what recording labels ought to emphasize to their artists, is that more retail sales should open more doors for concerts and higher flats. You aren't going to get many large scale concert promoters interested in you if you aren't moving product at retail. FYI, we have very few large scale concert promoters in SG. We have a few who think they're big, but when you compare them to CCM concert promoters like Premier Productions and others, the scale is much different. Labels: Observations, Other Blogs February 12, 2007Statesmen As Puppets...Too FunnyAlan Kendall found this clip on You Tube and linked to it from his blog. I don't think there's too much in the way of explanation required. Just watch it. Labels: audio, Humor, Other Blogs, You Tube January 24, 2007College Student Admits He Likes Southern GospelAdam Winters is 23 and he likes Southern Gospel. Read his article HERE. Labels: Other Blogs 
| |||
Who's Blogging?
Contributors
Blog Search
Talk Back
Useful Links
Discuss SG
Quicklinks
Advice, Audio, Audio, Audiobooks, biography, CCM, CD Reviews, Concert Reviews, Discographies, Dove Awards, DVD Reviews, Fan Awards, History, Housekeeping, Humor, In The News, Interviews, Limericks, Group Members, Movies, NQC, Obituary, Observations, Odds And Ends, Old Clips, Other Blogs, Other Forums, Podcasts, Praise And Worship, Sad But True, Shopping Tales, Singing News, Song Clips, TV Shows, XM News, YouTube,
Archives
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
Copyright
- All textual content posted at Musicscribe.com and subfolders is owned and copyrighted by David Bruce Murray unless otherwise indicated. No reprints may be made without the permission of the author, except as provided by US Copyright law. Permission is granted to reprint articles on other non-commercial websites only as long as the following conditions are met:
1) All articles must be reprinted in full with no editing or additions
2) The words "by David Bruce Murray" must be displayed prominently with each reprinted article.
3) A link to the original article at Musicscribe.com must accompany all reprints. If your site meets these requirements, you may reprint articles without requesting additional permission from the author.The copyright of all content posted by Musicscribe.com contributors other than David Bruce Murray is retained by the original authors.