I grew up in the sixties believing that DG was the pinnacle of
classical music recording -- for their artists, for their sound, and for
their repertoire.  Yet, as I look over my collection of LPs and CDs, DG
represents less than fifteen percent of my collection.  The other Polygram
agencies, London (Decca) and Philips, are about the same percentage.  RCA
and Sony are even less stocked.  What I've discovered is the number of
EMI recordings is very great, almost 40%, and Naxos is about 35%.  This
shouldn't surprise us.  Naxos, by far, issues more recordings each month
than any other vendor.  EMI, though not as prolific, far exceeds Polygram.
Plus, EMI has a venerable collection of older recordings of substantial
interest still today.

How things invert over the course of thirty years.  Back then DG was
the sine qua non.  Today, it's commonplace for it to release only one or
two recordings per month -- in many cases, from its historical collection.
New artists seem vagaries, and old orchestras appear uncommitted.  Perhaps
it's time to write DG's obituary, but with little sadness.  The label has
disappeared into empty space with little to ingratiate.  In its stead, we
have newer, more vibrant, and more expansive recording labels.  Naxos has
shown us that good classical music is within the reach of the proletariat,
and that many ignored or neglected artists have found a niche where DG
should have been.

Like all bygones, I wish DG had taken more initiative in the business of
recording classical music.  The re-release of "DG Originals" was hardly
worth the effort -- which, of course, was practically nil.  The fact that
it hasn't is more of an indictment against DG/Polygram management, not
the consumer of classical music.  RAP, for them at least, seems a more
propitious, even if ephemeral, product line.  So, as sad as it may seem
to see DGs devolution into non-existence, I am joyfully prepared to give
Naxos and EMI my business.

One final comment: The financial aspects of recording classical music
that has done in most of the traditional labels is absent from the burden
on the newer labels.  It is financially prohibitive to pay the costs of
recording a superior orchestra, conductor, and artists demanded by American
and European entities.  The partial success of Naxos is that it pays far
less to lesser-known entities to accomplish almost the same excellence
as, say, the Cleveland Orchestra or the Berlin Philharmonic.  Compensation
for some of this country's orchestras is exorbitant, essentially
undermining their viability to recording labels.  It was Heyman's
circumvention of these outrageous costs that enabled the rest of us to
enjoy a larger repertoire of classical music.  The Cleveland Orchestra
may be world class, but unless it adopts more reasonable remuneration,
it will be largely unheard outside of Ohio.

D. Stephen Heersink
San Francisco, California
[log in to unmask]