Slashdot Mirror


Orchestra To Turn Copyright-Free Classical Scores Into Copyright-Free Music

destinyland writes "An online music site has raised over $13,000 to hire a full orchestra to record royalty-free classical music. ('"Although the actual symphonies are long out of copyright, there is separate protection for every individual performance by an orchestra," notes one technology site.') MusOpen has reached their fundraising goal for both the orchestra and a recording facility, and will now record the complete symphonies of Beethoven, Brahms, Sibelius and Tchaikovsky. And because their fundraising deadline doesn't end until Tuesday, they've promised to add additional recordings for every additional $1,000 raised."

7 of 327 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Great! by Kjella · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's what I was thinking too, in the comments it was asked but the answers are fuzzy:

    1. What orchestra(s) are you planning on using
    2. Who is conducting?
    3. Who is mixing the recording?

    1. orchestra depends on total raised. I'm hoping for a mixture of conservatories + professional orchestra to lower cost and increase total music, but it depends on what we can negotiate and the total raised. Some orchestras we are considering include London Symphony, Czech Philharmonic and several others that regularly record movie soundtracks.
    2. I have several contacts who would conduct for free, I'd also like to try contacting some well known conductors to see if they would be interested. My backup would be a for hire's conductor that orchestras use to record with
    3. Several orchestras we've spoken to include those kinds of services as they regularly record for movie soundtracks

    I read that as "might possibly be considering it for one of them if we exceed our budget, I doubt you'll get the London Symphony to record it for $500/symphony...

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  2. Re:First by RDW · · Score: 4, Informative

    Great effort in a noble cause. However, they note in the original article that:

    'Right now, if you were to buy a CD of Beethoven's 9th symphony, you would not be legally allowed to do anything but listen to it. You wouldn't be able to share it, upload it, or use it as a soundtrack to your indie film- yet Beethoven has been dead for 183 years and his music is no longer copyrighted. There is a lifetime of music out there, legally in the public domain, but it has yet to be recorded and released to the public.'

    Here in the UK, the copyright term on recorded music is currently only 50 years. This means that most of the core classical repertoire is already available in this form, often as very high quality recordings (they knew what they were doing by the 50s!) of great performances. Now that the cash cows of the 60s are about to fall into the public domain, the record industry has lobbied for an extension, and draft EU legislation aims to push back the term to 70 years:

    http://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/music-copyright-divisive-despite-meps-backing/article-181703

    There are still some great performances of that Beethoven symphony from the 1930s, of course, but the 60s recordings in near-modern sound will be off limits for another couple of decades.

  3. Re:Yawn . . . by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Informative

    For everyone here, content is supposed to be free for the taking, yet no one wants to pay for the "creating" of it. Interesting.

    Actually, 363 people want to pay for creating it. At least when I checked... More now I am sure.

  4. Re:Open your wallets by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you're for releasing to the public domain then why do you care if the RIAA survives? Think about it.

    I can not find the link, but a bar was fined almost out of business for allowing a musician to play his own music (written by him) without paying a performance royalty to ASCAP. So that is why I want them gone. I actually would not mind paying for music, as long as none of the money goes to those marauding bastards.

  5. Re:First by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 4, Informative

    As for the "point" of copyright, it is to give authors a temporary monopoly as incentive to create art that will eventually fall into the possession of all the People & enrich everybody.

    It seems some in the US Congress and EU Parliament have forgotten that.

    I'm not sure that's true outside of the US. Here that is the purpose ("to promote the progress of science and the useful arts"), but I think originally it was supposed to help by replacing previous stronger but more ad-hoc monopoly rights.

    That page also has an interesting (anonymous) quote from when the first copyrights started to expire in 1735: "I see no reason for granting a further term now, which will not hold as well for granting it again and again, as often as the old ones expire... it will in effect be establishing a perpetual monopoly, a thing deservedly odious in the eye of the law; it will be a great cramp to trade, a discouragement to learning, no benefit to authors, but a general tax on the public; and all this only to increase the private gain of booksellers.".

  6. Re:Open your wallets by gizmonic · · Score: 4, Informative

    I had never actually heard of this before, but man, what complete bullshit. And a single google search provides tons of examples, if not that specific case:

    http://www.boston.com/ae/music/articles/2010/06/09/pay_to_play/
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100518/2341299481.shtml
    http://www.woodpecker.com/writing/essays/phillips.html

    At least Bruce seems to have some common sense (make sure you read the update):

    http://gothamist.com/2010/02/04/the_boss_sues_midtown_pub.php

    That pretty much represents the final straw on the camel's back for me. From this point forward, I will only ever pay for independent music. If your band is a member of any of those organizations, I will be performing civil disobedience against unwarranted extortion, and just pirate your shit if I want to have it. If you don't like it, leave those groups, and I'll buy it. And for the record, this is coming from someone who legally owns nearly 1000 CDs, and a good couple thousand iTunes songs (where the 99 cents was worth more than buying a full cd for one or two songs). But fuck it. I went to a lot of trouble (and expense, over the years) to do what I thought was the right thing. Apparently, I was wrong, since I was merely funding the absurdities of this kind of bullshit. My apologies to everyone else for helping promote this situation with my purchases. It won't happen again.

    --
    WWJD?
    JWRTFM!
  7. Double the funding by voting by jensend · · Score: 4, Informative

    The donations are now nearly up to $25000- that could be doubled if people vote for Musopen in Pepsi's "Refresh Project."