TWM thank you for taking the time to write such long posts. Even though somehow I lost your opinion on this matter, (I guess you don't have a problem with it) it is still good that the reactions were well heard. I believe if I was to impose a question like this to the execs of Sony, I would get the usual "don't like don't buy" reply. Of course this reply is a dead end street one, since the results are one sided. Think: if many people don't buy, the remaining stock will end up in the stock bin at ridiculous price and there won't be any follow ups. But the reason for this would be the original no-sense (in reality only for fast profit) pricing.
I don't and can't buy the logic of high risk - high profit, especially for the music business, because if I do their whole argument for buying the "product" at such high prices in order to fund new promising acts, just can't hold. You either do it to profit, signing bands that will bring in money with the very first release mined for hits, or for the sake of good music, taking into account that you should make something out of it (rarely for both but this is all down to good luck and the hard working band-artist). But I haven't seen any new quality acts for a long long time.
The story of Biograph is known, and I believe that Columbia had done the research target group consumer statistics data control (whatever it is called
) to avoid such unpleasant surprises. Orders in advance, special radio shows and gifts to the producers, TV advertising, and a booming generation (baby boomer) that was raised with Dylan and could afford such an album. So it was not such a big risk, as they try to present it, or let's say it was a calculated risk.
As for the bootleg series, the unreleased material for such a prolific and long time composer as Dylan is hardly astounding. The B-sides of the singles, compiled would take a 5 CD collection to hold and since he is such a great composer, they would all be of the highest standards. It was customary for the artists (less so nowadays) to provide a special (many times throw away) B-side as a gift to the devoted fans who would buy the single. Let's not forget that the single is a relic of the late 50ies mid 60ies, and since the 70ies has become nothing but a promotional device for the money maker LP. So by using the term Bootleg, one would expect only recordings that have been released as bootlegs or would be probable targets for future bootlegers. That includes the live recordings and the GWW or unearthed demos. The b-sides are a completely different thing. Usually groups with a wide fan base gather them all together and give them to their audience as a treat. Again I point out that the name of the game is not music, but profit. And I also note that the easy answer is "don't like, don't buy". But I can't help but wonder for the wide audience releases as well. Many artists, including MK, release the first edition (?) of each album in a limited number with a bonus disc of material, to cover the fan base. This edition, is usually very pricey, but offers something additional and hard to find, (also in digipack or in a card envelope) which make the "product" more desirable and less likely to lose it's value. And since the exact amount of such editions are hard to know (actually known only by the execs) it is a matter of fabricated collectibles. Even numbered editions are a laugh with the price tag they have. A collectible is collectible for different reasons and not just a promotional well advertised stand. But the standard editions that cost dearly when first published lose almost entirely their value after 6 months. They flood the market with cheap CDs after 6 months. Why not do it right from the start? Makes you wonder. Anybody can see that the terms used are financial and not musical. Somewhere there the music is lost.
The words to look out for are: fans, desire, consumer, money, product, collector. No music in that. And all in all, they are forcing the consumer to dislike the whole situation and unfortunately reflect these feelings to the artist. Ultimately it would be the death of the recorded music as we know it. Maybe it is a good thing, houses will have more space if all the music files are stored in a PC, and not having the spacey vinyl or CD collections, but somehow i believe the soul of music, the special bonds between the art and the audience and the human contact that was possible through the whole record experience will die. After all it is 2011. For the European consumer this means that he can enjoy free of charge all the recordings made from 1961 backwards. Have they though of that?
I got carried away, but it is a topic that interests me greatly. If it interests more people and would like to contribute with their ideas, it might be better to be a separate topic.
