How Dare The BBC Introduce New Listeners To Beethoven

from the how-dare-you-not-charge!!!! dept

Never underestimate the short-sightedness of record execs -- even at classical music labels, who you'd think would be a bit more understanding about these things. Last month the BBC got some attention for releasing, for free, downloads (just for a period of time) of all nine of Beethoven's symphonies. I downloaded them, as did about a million other people apparently. It was a nice gesture, and probably introduced plenty of people to elements of classical music that they had not experienced before. In fact, since they included an introductory explanation before each symphony, even those familiar with the music could learn something as well, adding to their overall appreciation for classical music. All of that, you would think, should be applauded by the industry -- as it should only help to drive more interest in the often ignored area of the music world. Not so. GeekNewsCentral points out that classical record label execs are positively livid about such impudence. Proving just how little he's thought through this issue, the head of one label explains: "There is the obvious issue that it is devaluing the perceived value of music. You are also leading the public to think that it is fine to download and own these files for nothing." That's because it is fine. It's completely legal, and even more important, it's helping to get a lot more people interested in the music which is only likely to increase sales. As for "devaluing the perceived value of music," does he wonder why so many classical music organizations are having so much trouble staying around? It's because there aren't enough people listening to the music -- which often involves expensive tickets to fancy symphony halls. What they need is to devalue the music to make it more accessible.

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1. identicon
    Tim, Jul 12th, 2005 @ 12:11am

    No Subject Given

    You were doing OK up until:

    > What they need is to devalue the music to make it more accessible.

    Please! If I wanted devalued classical music, I'd listen to Classic FM: third-rate performances, fourth-rate presenters, and their idea of celebrating Easter, when anyone else would put on a couple of Passions, is to run up Another Blinkin' Chart(TM).

    No thanks; I'm all in favour of exactly the way the BBC have done it, enough said :)

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. icon
    Mike (profile), Jul 12th, 2005 @ 2:01am

    Re: No Subject Given

    Heh. You might be reading too much into what I was writing. What I meant, was simply that classical music often *appears* too expensive or too rich for many people, so they never bother to learn about it at all. "Devaluing" it, means making it seem less elitist.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Hoss, Jul 12th, 2005 @ 8:53am

    That's why...

    The U.S. Constitution specifies that copyright protections be for a "limited period of time". Art should go to the public domain, eventually.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    Chomper, Jul 12th, 2005 @ 8:54am

    No Subject Given

    The way the record execs were talking, you'd think they posted every classical CD out there...=P

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 12th, 2005 @ 9:09am

    Re: No Subject Given

    'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 12th, 2005 @ 9:32am

    missed it

    I only got the last one (#9). Anyone know any other good (read legal) sites to get decent clasical music?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 12th, 2005 @ 2:29pm

    Re: missed it

    Whether you class it as good or not I don't know, but magnatune has free music in plenty of genres.
    You can buy the .flacs and .wavs, or just download the .oggs and .mp3s.
    If you do decide to buy, you chose what to pay, from $8 to $20, IIRC.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8. identicon
    Spoon Gouge, Jul 14th, 2005 @ 6:26pm

    Re: That's why...

    Technically, that's true. You are, however paying for the artist's performance of the piece. The money and time that went into the recording. While I'm sure they don't pay any royalties for using such music, you, never-the-less still do... :-(

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Hide this ad »
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Hide this ad »
Techdirt Insider Chat
Hide this ad »
Recent Stories
Hide this ad »


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.