Tweet
If that press release is real, what is significant to these eyes is that this album is being released through Warner Bros.
If that's so, it is maybe the beginning of a longer process of working the old catalogue - which VH have not done (if you compare them to any other band of their stature) since they split with Warners. But then again, if the remasters are not expanded versions of the albums, then it doesn't make a lot of sense to issue another remaster.
Prince went back to Warners last year and, in return, they handed over rights to his masters. They didn't need to do that - not with every album - because it is only albums that are 35-years old THAT HAVE BEEN RELEASED SINCE 1978 that an artist is now able to try and reclaim the rights to. The rights don't automatically revert to the artists - the artist has to file a suit with the US Copyright Office.
But, with big acts, it is also arguably in the interest of labels to come to new arrangements with the artist, so that they continue to make at least something from the legacy catalogue. And the artist also benefits from better financial deals, even if they don't 100% take control of the masters - they don't have to worry about storing and managing and marketing their catalogue, which apparently can involve fairly substantial continuing costs.
As of late 2012, when that story in Billboard was published, very few artists had filed to recover the rights to their master recordings. VH wasn't mentioned in the story - and because the suits are filed publicly it would have been known - which might suggest they have inked a new deal with Warners.
Maybe the special project is a series of re-issues (and let's hope they have at least a goddam booklet or something), with this live album coming at the time of the first two reissues of VH1 and 1984.
If that's so, it is maybe the beginning of a longer process of working the old catalogue - which VH have not done (if you compare them to any other band of their stature) since they split with Warners. But then again, if the remasters are not expanded versions of the albums, then it doesn't make a lot of sense to issue another remaster.
Prince went back to Warners last year and, in return, they handed over rights to his masters. They didn't need to do that - not with every album - because it is only albums that are 35-years old THAT HAVE BEEN RELEASED SINCE 1978 that an artist is now able to try and reclaim the rights to. The rights don't automatically revert to the artists - the artist has to file a suit with the US Copyright Office.
But, with big acts, it is also arguably in the interest of labels to come to new arrangements with the artist, so that they continue to make at least something from the legacy catalogue. And the artist also benefits from better financial deals, even if they don't 100% take control of the masters - they don't have to worry about storing and managing and marketing their catalogue, which apparently can involve fairly substantial continuing costs.
As of late 2012, when that story in Billboard was published, very few artists had filed to recover the rights to their master recordings. VH wasn't mentioned in the story - and because the suits are filed publicly it would have been known - which might suggest they have inked a new deal with Warners.
Maybe the special project is a series of re-issues (and let's hope they have at least a goddam booklet or something), with this live album coming at the time of the first two reissues of VH1 and 1984.
Comment