Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:44:44 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
David Cozy wrote:
>And Karl replied:
>
>>It got shot down by the AFM (American Federation of Musicians).
>
>Karl, I guess this is old news to you and others on the list, but would
>you mind explaining how the AFM shot down American orchestral innovation?
The AFM has basically shot down the recording of any major US orchestra.
Each local can vote to decide for itself if it wants to support the fee
structure set up by the AFM. Some orchestras will record for the same
rate as a single service, but most won't. Recording rates are higher
than those for a normal service (concert or rehearsal). The AFM is not
as strong as it probably was some 60 years ago when, in part, for fear
of recordings reducing the frequency of live performances, it imposed a
short lived ban on recordings by orchestras in the US.
But the bottom line remains the bottom line. Minimum rates for a US
orchestra cost about $40,000 plus for a single CD. Most of the major
orchestras cost much more. You just can't take a chance with repertoire
at those prices, and, quite frankly, you can't even take a chance with
Beethoven at those prices.
There are options but most orchestras, understandably, aren't interested.
Players have to pay the bills, however, it seems to me that if orchestras
could consider payments to pension funds, or whatever, instead of cash
up front...then we could have some innovation in the recording of
repertoire.
Hope this helps...at least when it comes to understanding my perspective.
Karl
|
|
|