Slashdot Mirror


Instant Concert CDs?

NickRipley writes "Clear Channel (owner of every radio station in America) is purporting to offer a new service, whereby concertgoers can receive an official recording of the concert they just attended, within moments after the final note. How will the RIAA react to this, seeing as this is legitimizing one of the oldest forms of music pirating? Also, what kind of equipment will have to be used to produce these so fast? Will the recording process suffer due to the hurry?"

8 of 682 comments (clear)

  1. Technology gives - and technology takes away by mickwd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's only thanks to technology that there is a "recording" industry in the first place. Before performances could be recorded, musicians had to make money through performing their works. Technology, and the ability to record music, created the recording industry.

    Is it too surprising, then, if technology might take it away again ?

    In my personal opinion, music is about many things.......creation, art, emotion, enjoyment, life. If there is one word which doesn't belong next to the word "music", it's the word "business".

  2. Duplication... by mackd · · Score: 5, Informative

    I worked on a production requiring this kind of speed. However, we were using audio cassettes, and the material involved was a spoken presentation that we had permission to duplicate and sell.

    This is how it worked: we created a master tape on the fly during the program. At the conclusion of the program, the master was carried down to a workroom with tape duplication machines. We could have 16 tapes created within 4 minutes of the end of the presentation--with more coming. If it was this simple with analog equipment, I'd imagine a digital method for distributing these recordings would be a piece of cake.

  3. Given that live music is the best music... by dWhisper · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, most of the time anyway.

    I can only imagine that the RIAA would squash this one, since traditionally, there would be all sorts of copyright issues here. Royalties go to the Label, Producer, Studio, Artists, RIAA, and who knows who else. Beyond that, a lot of the great artists play cover songs and unreleased material, which they'd have to cover royalties or permissions for that.

    However, I would say that I'd pay for concerts of a lot of bands. People like BNL, Dave Matthews, etc. that throw some of the best live shows on earth would be worth it. Of course, since this article implies that you have to attend the concert, and the RIAA has little sway there, this is something that benefits the artists (and Clear Channel).

    This would be great, if you can afford a ticket or get a chance. But what about the people in South Dakota that never see anyone, or people overseas who can't make a concert?

    If this is something that the artists support, it would be easy to have the recordings ready. Fast burners and digital recording equipment tied into the sound system would make it easy to get these discs out minutes after a concert ends. What would be sad is that most likely, encores and bonus sets would be lost if they cut the recording early.

    However, since this looks like something they're going to start in club shows, I'd imagine it's meant to boost new and smaller artists, which is great. I've seen enough small bands that never even crossed the radar of most radio, and it would have been great to hear their sets again.

    1. Re:Given that live music is the best music... by thesupermikey · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Fast burners and digital recording equipment tied into the sound system would make it easy to get these discs out minutes after a concert ends. What would be sad is that most likely, encores and bonus sets would be lost if they cut the recording early"

      www.livephish.com

      --
      Mikey
      I've always been the kinda guy to fall for the girl dressed like an eskimo.
  4. sounds like livephish by somebaudy · · Score: 5, Informative

    as described in this article this is not unlike livephish nearly-instant Concert selling website.

    --
    http://www.somebaudy.com
  5. Quality by nautical9 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The speed at which they burn their CDs won't have any effect on quality. The real issue is the amount and care of their prep work before each concert, to make sure the feeds they're capturing are of a high quality. And they should be if they're patched into the same feeds that the concert speakers are getting, since they then get the benefits of the same volume levels and mixing that the concert guys put together.

    Obviously, there will be no post-production editing or enhancing, so you're basically just buying a fancy bootleg, not a CD you'd buy from a store of a live performance. But it shouldn't suck too bad, and it'd sure beat holding up a mini-recorder in the crowd.

    (probably a moot point, as I can't see the RIAA letting this happen - unless they're getting a healthy chunk out of the pie.)

  6. This is not piracy by afidel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the instant selling of a live album. Recording a live concert was never piracy as long as you got permission (ignoring that the band may not have the proper rights to the songs, those might belong to the label or songwriter)

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  7. The Clearcast plan is is Out-and-out EVIL by The_Laughing_God · · Score: 5, Interesting
    First off, as has been documented many times here on Slashdot, with links to business and musician articles, first hand accounts of musician readers, etc., only a handful (a *few* of the top 50 bands in only the most most populat genres) derive substantial income from recording sales. The rest -the vast bulk of musicians- make their living on concert performances. In fact, the studios have successfully pushed through laws (also reported here) stating that the artists who produce music -singers and musicians- are presumptively "work for hire" and are not entitled to residuals or royalties at all, unless their contracts happen to award them. For example, any public performance of a song has long generated a a residual or royalty for the composer (or owner of the lyric copyright) but not one cent for the band. Period.


    The actual accounting (also reported in countless previous links) means that after the studio's self-declared expenses are deducted, the band not only rarely makes much beyond the initial advance, but often ends up owing the studio money on paper. This can lock them in, forcing them to sign for additional albums (to have the debt forgiven) and making it hard to switch labels.


    I could enumerate many more abuses, but I'm sure others will -- if they're not sick of doing so.


    NOW COMES THE EVIL PART

    The studios (or RIAA) don't have any right to the music the musicians play in concert, unless there is a specific concert recording clause. This was the meat on the musician's table. but now the largest promoter in the nation will be making it a term of their contracts that bands must surrender most rights to the music in their precious live performances. Note: Clear Channel never said a word about paying artists. It's be a condition of the concert: "If you don't sign over the rights, you don't play in this town". [We've also seen plenty of articles on the strong-arm methods Clear Channel has used to build and enforce precisely this sort of monopoly.


    This won't improve anything for most bands. It only applies to the known successes where Clear Channel expects to make a profit; the ones where CC is already profiting as the concert promoter. If Clear Channel didn't book you for a concert or performance, don't expect their audio truck.


    In short: they are reaching deeper into the artist's pockets -- and removing (coopting) a potential source of revenue for the band itself. The recording industry was a historical artifact, like buggy whip makers. It gained its stranglehold because 100 years ago, musicians could not afford studio equipment. Now they can, so the strangle hold much be maintained in other ways.


    This is a coerced corporate seizure of the band's rights to the proceeds of their own live *performances* (concerts, shows, etc.) which had been the last bastion of the musician. They are doing this preemptively, because it's now a small step from the club/concert audio feed to a burned CD -- and right now sales of such CDs could well belong to the musician, if the corporations are not careful!