> can you give us any info about that volume 2 you have?
> i never heard about it, and the title sounds interesting...
> so, what's on it, actually?
>
> Johan
>
>
> It has 24 songs. The only recording I am familar with is Anna Karina's
>(Jean-Luc Godard's ex-wife and actress) "Roller Girl." This is a
>Gainsbourg piece. The other's I don't know about. There are no
>songwriting credits.
The listings:
ANOUK Jimmy est parti
MICKY AMLINE Look
GILLIAN HILLS Maintenant il telephone
DANI Le chpoum
ARIANE Tu voudrais que j'oublie
ALINE Censure
ANNA KARINA Roller Girl
STONE C'est ma vie
PUSSYCAT Ba Ba Ba..Boof
ELSA Ecoutez
CLOTHILDE jE T'AI VOULU ET JE T'AI BIEN EU
RIA BARTOK Un mauvais quart d'heure a passer
ALICE DONA Une voiture rouge
PATRICIA CARLI Le lion
CLEO Parti-pris
GERALDINE Les chattes
PUSSY CAT La La La
JOCELYNE La La La La
EILEEN Ces bottes sont faites pour marcher
JOANNA Hold-up Inusite
BELISAMA Belisama (2e partie)
CHRISTINE PILZER Mon p'tit homme spatial
LOUISE CORDET Que m'a-t'il fait?
MARIA-Cinta Allez, tapez, dans les mains
So that's the track listing. I suspect this is a bootleg, because there is
no name of the label, no info about the tracks, etc. Also it was
domestically priced (US)
So if anyone can give me information about vol. 1 or some background on the
above artists that would be great.
- -----------------
Tosh Berman
TamTam Books
- ----------------
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:47:50 -0700
From: LeAnn & Dave Davidson <davidson@serv.net>
Subject: Re: (exotica) The poor poor record industry
At 10:31 AM 6/12/98 EDT, you wrote:
><< Why would anyone ever choose vinyl over CD?
>
> Because it sounds better, its more tactile, its a link to the past, it
> looks good, it has memories attached and its cooler. Reject the CD.
> >>
>Vinyl is cool, I collect vinyl, I love vinyl. But the durability of CD is
>just too hard to beat. I think we take it for granted but do remember the
>convinience we expeirenced when we could first plop a CD in and hit Track 7?
>Wow.
I fully realize I will be in the vast minority on this opinion, but thought
I'd share my sure-to-be-unpopular point of view. I prefer cd's. I agree,
they are more durable. Why? They can have all kinds of scratches, and
play like new. Minimal care will provide a lifetime of listening enjoyment
- - the same could be said of vinyl, but with a bit more than minimal care.
And (I know I'm alone on this, no need to flame) I prefer the sound quality
of a cd that has been properly remastered. Not to mention the absence of
surface noise, pops and pings, etc. I've heard all the arguments - warmer
noise, blah blah - which can be true if the cd was digitally mastered with
no thought - but when a digital mastering engineer does the job right, my
opinion is the sound quality can't be beat.
I do have vinyl, but usually only because it's not on cd yet, or it's
priced too low to pass up.
Of course, this is all a matter of personal taste - if you prefer the sound
of vinyl, more power to you - but you'll never convince me you're right.
Dave
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:21:48 -0400
From: cheryl <cheryls@dsuper.net>
Subject: Re: (exotica) The poor poor record industry
Rcbrooksod@aol.com wrote:
> Vinyl is cool, I collect vinyl, I love vinyl. But the durability of CD is just too hard to beat. I think we take it for granted but do remember the > convinience we expeirenced when we could first plop a CD in and hit Track 7?
> Wow.
Okay, that's a given - but as I'm discovering now, the convenience of
playing CDs does come at a price. If I want to listen to vinyl, I just
put an LP on my turntable. It works, period. However, to listen to
CDs, you need a functioning CD player. If the player starts to act up,
you can't play anything! So you either get it repaired, or toss it out
and replace it. It's sort of like typewriters vs. computers - yes, one
is way more convenient, and once you have one you don't know how you
ever managed without it - until it breaks!!!
cheryl (currently using my CD-Rom to listen to CDs, which is a bit of a
pain...With my luck, the computer will crash next...
)
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:29:27 EDT
From: <Rcbrooksod@aol.com>
Subject: (exotica) Syndicated Radio Stations
In a message dated 98-06-12 11:50:01 EDT, you write:
<< I think if you play an EZ Listening station, you're probably alright!!
(this was in ref to royalities if I played it in my office. ed.)
br cleve
>>
actually I do -- there is this great syndicated radio station that plays her.
they never mention the time of day or weather. the main DJ in the morning is
Jeff Rollins. i'm curious, does anybody on the list familiar with this
"station".
there was another syndicated station on the same frequency for a while and
there was a guy who ran a show named "Hubbard's Cupboard" but that station was
replaced with the previous one. any comments on either?
robert
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 12:12:44 +0000
From: Ron Grandia <rgrandia@earthlink.net>
Subject: (exotica) CD and (NOT VS.) Vinyl
cheryl wrote:
> It's sort of like typewriters vs. computers - yes, one
> is way more convenient, and once you have one you don't know how you
> ever managed without it - until it breaks!!!
Turntable and typewriters break too, y'know.
I prefer a REAAALLLYY nice piece of vinyl, but since collectible
vinyl in good condition is WAY spendy, I have grown to appreciate
CD reissues and copies lovingly made by friends.
I foresee the only way I am going to be able to keep up my habit
is to buy records, copy them to CD and sell the vinyl (sniff.)
This has been my plan for some time, but I JUST CAN"T PART
WITH THESE RECORDS.
Both formats have their allure, though. CD's are much more convenient -
especially for DJing. I do prefer handling records when I am not rushed.
Cleaning a cueing a record is a beautiful ritual, and since it takes a
moment
for the turntable to get up to speed, segueing tracks precisely takes
more skill
and practice.
>
Ron
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 12:49:24 +0000
From: Ron Grandia <rgrandia@earthlink.net>
Subject: (exotica) Vinyl ---> digital: a new wrinkle
I thought I would share this with youse,
since it is somewhat topical.
A friend just called and wanted me to put some
78's onto CD for him. "No can do." I replied,
not having a 78 rpm turntable - then it came to me:
Record them at 45 rpm and speed 'em um digitally.
Most digital recording software will adjust pitch and tempo..
Now I just gotta sit down with the calculator
and figger what percentage I need to increase, which
leads me to wonder WHY 16, 331/3, 78 RPM? They seem
somewhat arbitrary.
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:46:17 +0200
From: Sevo Stille <sevo@inm.de>
Subject: Re: (exotica) Vinyl ---> digital: a new wrinkle
Ron Grandia wrote:
> A friend just called and wanted me to put some
> 78's onto CD for him. "No can do." I replied,
> not having a 78 rpm turntable - then it came to me:
> Record them at 45 rpm and speed 'em um digitally.
> Most digital recording software will adjust pitch and tempo..
Things are more complicated than that - 78's use a different equalization than
the RIAA curve of 33's and 45's, and, worse than that, there were numerous
different eq settings for 78's across time, countries and manufacturers. For
perfect results, you would have to de-RIAA the recordings (I've seen a RIAA eq
curve for Cooledit available somewhere on the net), pitch them up, and put them
through eq curves selected to fit the date and label. At the very least, you'll
have to do some equalisation based on subjective criteria.
> Now I just gotta sit down with the calculator
> and figger what percentage I need to increase, which
> leads me to wonder WHY 16, 331/3, 78 RPM? They seem
> somewhat arbitrary.
Originally, the speed on records was nominal 78 - with quite considerable
variations. Apart from a wide tolerance margin due to often hand-cranked or
non-synchronised recorders, record companies would often improve on record
length or dynamics by adjusting the recording speed, assuming that the
listeners would adjust the speed of their player accordingly (players were
vari-speed, usually doing about 50 to 90 rpm).
45 and 33 1/3 came up as part of a huge format battle in the fourties, when
Columbia (LP, 33 1/3) and RCA (Single, 45) settled for two different systems
for the microgroove successor of the 78rpm record. At least 33.3 was already in
use in professional recording technology prior to that.
Sevo
- --
Sevo Stille - Radio X
sevo@inm.de
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 12:30:26 -0400
From: "m.ace" <ecam@voicenet.com>
Subject: (exotica) "Jewels From Cartier"
I don't recall seeing this mentioned here before, so I'll throw it in for
discussion. Anyone know more about these people?
"Jewels From Cartier" (RCA LPM-1305)
Compositions by Louis Alter, performed by Claude Yvoire and the Radio Geneva
Orchestra.
Sedate, soundtracky orchestral instrumentals. Mostly in a 40's Hollywood
romanticism vein, with some Baxter-like exotic moments here and there. Mainly
in the exotic-titled tracks: "Pearl Of The Orient", "Topaz Tango", "Black Pearl
of Tahiti", "Lady Of Jade", you get the idea. "Cat's Eye In The Night" includes
a woman making meow noises, along with (quoting the notes), "a jaunty interlude
that suggests a playful kitten scampering around the room." I thought the
maracas representing the litter box were a bit much though (imaginary sentence!
only joking!).
The notes also mention another Alter suite: "Manhattan Serenade". Quoting more
of their breathless prose: "As connoisseurs of American popular music know,
Louis Alter is a composer unusually sensitive to the world of beauty around
him. Thus it was he who saw and heard the spell of Manhattan -- its towering
skyscrapers, its various moods, its Great White Way and its Central Park --
and, dipping his pen deep in melody, etched an unforgettable portrait of tones
and harmonies and rhythms in his unique 'Manhattan Serenade'."
m.ace ecam@voicenet.com
OOK http://www.voicenet.com/~ecam/
New: "Zounds!" A rotating collection of sound recordings (RealAudio format)
Actually nothing near exotica in this "Extra-Noisy Edition", but there is a
genuine moog piece.
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:03:51
From: Jay Schwartz <jschwart@voicenet.com>
Subject: (exotica) BMI et al
On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:27:50 -0400, "Br. Cleve" <bcleve@pop.tiac.net> wrote:
>Publishing royalties (controlled by ASCAP, BMI,
SECAM) will never change.
These are performing rights societies, who are not involved with collecting
monies from labels, but from broadcasters and live music venues. They
should have no impact on the cost of reissuing records.
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:27:47
From: Jay Schwartz <jschwart@voicenet.com>
Subject: (exotica) The rich rich record industry
On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 22:01:26 -0400, Lang Thompson <wlt4@mindspring.com> wrote:
>How in the world does an item that cost $ 2.00 to make end up costing $ 17.00
>or $ 18.00?
>Because you're not paying for the physical materials but for the music and
for the people who bring it to you from the musicians to the record store
clerk. Even with self-manufactured CDs the artist might charge $10 to $12
if they're trying to undercut the standard price; not only does a good bit
of that markup go to administrative costs but the simple desire to be paid
for their work. The real shame of current pricing is that so little of it
goes to the musicians.
The point all of these arguments are missing is: CDs are now substantially
cheaper than a vinyl record cost to manufacture 10-15 years ago, yet sell
for substantially more. Of course there are administrative costs, shipping
costs, etc., but that does not explain or justify the imbalance. Vinyl
records TODAY cost MUCH more to make than CDs (especially in small
numbers), yet small labels sell them cheaper than CDs, because they can.
That means everyone COULD sell CDs for less if they wanted to.
On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:38:09 +0000, "mighty recording corp."
<mighty65@pacbell.net> wrote:or poor record industry
>>CD's sell for $16 and more yet cost well under a dollar to press, even for
>a small label. The labels keep the lion's share of that $16
>donkey doo. first of all, a front line cd wholesales for around $11.25, on
average.
So you don't think $11.25 is the lion's share of $16? Well, is it the
lion's share of the $12.99 price that stores sell hot titles for to keep up
with the competition? You don't think in both cases the retailer is making
a small to pitifully small markup compared to how most retail stores in
other fields work?
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:28:48
From: Jay Schwartz <jschwart@voicenet.com>
Subject: (exotica) Poor Laserlight
On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:08:10 -0400, "Br. Cleve" <bcleve@pop.tiac.net> wrote:
Subject: Re: (exotica) The poor poor record industry
>Laserlight does not pay royalties. There is some weird loophole they use -
their records are legally not allowed to be sold in record stores
(although, in many cases, they are). They are supposed to be sold only at
other types of venues, like drug stores or restaurants.
Recording artists only have to be paid royalties if their contractual
agreements say that they get them. No weird loophole is required for a
musician to be paid for "work for hire," leaving the label as the owner of
the copyright. I don't think it would matter where they get sold.
>Classical recording royalties go to the orchestra that does the
performance, but contain fewer 'tracks' than your average pop music
release.
Classical royalties work on a completely different system, measuring music
in minutes rather than tracks.
>Plus, as Paul Moshay correctly pointed out, Beethoven and Mozart
were not members of ASCAP and don't get mechanical royalties.
Mechanical royalties are paid by labels to composers. ASCAP collects public
performance fees and theoretically allocates them in proportion to the
number of plays a composer's song got (though in fact the music is
distributed to the most successful artists, since only random sampling is
practical to measure airplay and the fringe artists usually don't register
on the radar). So again, whether Beethoven or Martin Denny or whoever is a
member of ASCAP (and much classical music is still under copyright), it is
irrelevant to the label, who does not deal with ASCAP. Mechanical
royalties, on the other hand, are very relevant.
# Need help using (or leaving) this mailing list?
# Send the command "info exotica" to majordomo@lists.xmission.com.
# To post, email exotica@lists.xmission.com; replies go to original sender.
