The unfortunate truth is a lot of the branded commodities people discuss have been overtaken by technological events anyhow. Unless we are talking about streaming services, there is no species of branding that will substantially increase classical music sales. I’m 41, so not exactly ancient but not at all young either. Nevertheless, most people my age and certainly those younger would never think to purchase CDs and own no devices that can play them. Even the LP boom popular among millennials is starting to bust; vinyl sales were down 24% as consumers get sick of preposterous costs that vastly outpace inflation. Overproduction is leading to a decline in record quality, too. Perhaps the violist/comedienne Isabel Hagen has the best advice: people should stop trying to save classical music. Let classical music save you instead.
i think they could brand on youtube these classical people could, you know. Isn't that something this channel does already, and pretty well, I would add?
Capitalism is also why we have fewer major labels. They merge into bigger corporations and swallow up the smaller labels. So fewer brands. I worked for Decca when it was independent, then when it became part of Polygram. Now it's Universal. Our big rivals HMV/EMI are now part of Warner.
Yet it is capitalism that allows you to go out and start your own label, make your own recordings and sell them. If your product is good enough it will attract buyers. And then eventually get swallowed up by Universal or Warner!
They were absorbed because those other brands which were absorbed stop caring and didn't broaden their marketing. Snobbery, apathy and elitism hurt many labels. I saw it first hand.
As a kid I got an insert from the CBS Great Performances series, and I went through the whole catalog with my dad, who knew classical music well. The ones he recommended I would check out from the library, and later, buy. Their "Great Performances" marketing worked splendidly on us.
Record collectors are a thing of the past (as are CD collectors like Dave). I can't remember when the last time I bought a classical CD was, and I am nearly 70 years old. All my old LPs went the way of garage sales years ago. Most people these days subscribe to streaming services and have a chance to "try before they buy".. if they buy at all. Artists get paid per hit on the services just like youtubers do. The artists must become the "branded commodity" to make money, not necessarily the label or company that produced the recording. Big name composers like Beethoven will always be a branded commodity of their own.
The brand I miss is Philips. More low-key than DG, less star-fixated, and with more chamber music. Decca was about Solti and opera and the Decca sound. DG of course overwhelmingly about Karajan and then Bernstein. Philips was for civilised folk who just liked music.
Philips was also where you had to go to hear the Haydn operas, early Verdi, and a lot of rare Berlioz. And I remember how they promoted those eagerly awaited releases. Our classical music FM station played ads for them.
I have single-word descriptors to characterize many of the classical labels of the 1960s thru 1980s (the era when I grew up on classical). This single word, in my own mind, anyway, seemed often to characterize the approach of an entire label to artists, sonics, repetoire and marketing. My one word for Philips of that era is "elegant." For Decca it was "vivid." For Columbia, "intense." For DG, "monumental." I think "elegant" for Philips still holds up--in terms of the sound and in terms of the artists: Brendel, the Beaux Arts Trio, I Musici, Arthur Grumiaux, Quartetto Italiano, Colin Davis, Bernard Haitink, etc, etc. If you bought a Philips CD, you could expect elegance.
When I was first learning about classical music in my 20's (1975ish) I used to pick up recordings issued in the "London Treasury Series", a well-curated budget series. It was a relatively cheap way to get all the basic repertoire, in often very good performances, and on well pressed records. That was a brand I responded to and would look for them in the shops. When I was still making my way figuring out what the "standard" orchestral repertoire even was - that series gave me more confidence that I'd be getting the piece of music I was after in a great performance by the London Symphony, or the Vienna Philharmonic, with a great conductor, or at least one who knew what they were doing. The product identification was, for me, just shorthand. I had a sense of what I was getting if I purchased an album or two. That may or may not have been misplaced, but I found it rather helpful back in the day.
The very first releases in genuine stereo of some Decca classics first appeared of Stereo Treasury. The Bohm Frau ohne Schatten or the 1955 Bayreuth Dutchman. Not to mention Dorati's first ever complete Haydn symphonies were those midprice STS sets.
This is a fascinating discussion. Recently, as a Roon user, I discovered all sorts of new (to me) obscurities by listening to works by the PRODUCERS (not the composers or artists) of recordings that I enjoy. Wow., what do you know: the talented producers have exciting ideas of what to record and who to work with. Your remark about how the labels used to do this (Mercury) by selling their catalog rather than selling just a recording reminded me of this. Perhaps labels used to treat their talented producers and recording engineers better in this golden age, too, when the skills there were harder to come by, but I’ll guess they move around a lot more now or are completely independent these days. It’s tough for a label to brand itself if there’s nothing about it that’s different.
Hi Dave, fyi: your video coincides with the presentation of Berlin government's 2025 budget, now under debate in the citystate's Legislature and perhaps already approved as I write, which aims to cut 3 billion Euros and contains a 130 million cut across the cultural sector (Berlin Phil gets 2 million less ). Needless to say the entire scene, among it some groups that do important work in underserved communities which stand to lose all funding, are up in arms. Never a dull moment in the "Kulturmetropole Berlin"...
If I may veer off classical to highlight branding, my efforts to expand my knowledge of Jazz was made easier when I concentrated on buying from the Verve catalog. Their promoting of the artists and consistent cover art was well done.
Some good points, and artists need promotional support from their labels...but I think the big problem is classical artists do not have the national exposure they once had. Arthur Fiedler nolonger has a television show, the variety shows are gone, except late night talk and I never see any of them there. People have to have name recognition.
I agree with this completely. When I started collecting classical records in the 1970s, the brands of a the various labels played a large role in shaping my experience. For example, I tended towards Philips LPs because their "brand" included nice cover art, intelligent liner notes, excellent artists, outstanding sound, and very quiet LP surfaces. I could thus buy a Philips record with some level of confidence that I was getting a quality product, which helped when I didn't know the repertoire and artists so well. Giving up their brands is one reason most of the labels went under.
When it comes to branding, a label that I think is worth mentioning is Alpha Classics. Even tho they aren't without their couple bad recordings, I can always immediately tell a CD was released by them just by looking at the cover.
Fully agree. DG is the top of classical music branding, when I was young its golden label was synonymous of art in music. But today I do not like the concept they are using to brand their major artists. On the opposite side, the worst example of non branding is EMI: horrible covers and no visual identity whatsoever. Maybe they do not care because they are big. Nice branding has always been the tool for small companies to survive.
Capitalism does not treat the arts well, but that where the money is. If you could convince Elon to spend money on arts instead of politics, then the people that go to live on mars might have something decent to listen to. You’re “rant” is spot on.
When CBS released the first LP with Nathan Milstein, this was a major game changer for the recording industry. The trick of course, was to convince consumers they needed or wanted the product. The benefit was that people got more music on one disc, superior sound quality and a disc that was lighter in weight compared to the old 78's. There was a hitch, however. You had to buy a phonograph that could play a 33 1/3 rpm record. Despite the cost, people purchased the new players, because they knew their investment had lasting value. And as Dave pointed out, as a result labels had to perfect their branding. I like eye-catching album covers and music by lesser known composers. Cool album cover, great performance, well recorded, reasonable price and I am sold.
Columbia was smart enough to sell the idea of LP with a very inexpensive Philco unit with 33rpm turntable and a suitibly light cartridge that you could easily plug into your existing setup.
I really look forward to Dave's chats. These "think pieces" get you thinking and bring up issues we don't hear talked about that much and seldom with that precious commodity, Common Sense. Capitalism is the worst economic system--except for all the others. I remember when you couldn't pick up a music magazine or a concert program without seeing scads of ads from the record companies promoting new releases or artists, and reminding consumers of older releases in their catalogs by an artist. It was a beautiful symbiotic relationship: good for the company, good for the artist and good for the consumer. As a neophyte, I sometimes bought a disc or a complete opera based on the label itself. RCA was the opera label. If you wanted a recording of Il Whatever, you couldn't go far wrong with their version, even if it wasn't really the best. Now with the internet, streaming, the lesser emphasis on physical product, I can't think what the best way to promote the product is, but promoted it should be! There are nonmusical products where manufacturers are also missing a good bet. Only chefs and gourmands know how great and useful fish sauce or Japanese kewpie mayo can be. Properly marketed, it would fly off the shelves. Similarly, new releases and box sets seem to be stealth products, noticed only if you happen to read a review. Even great musical artists often have to rely on their own websites to garner attention.
Love fish sauce--there's a wonderful (but usually very expensive) Italian equivalent: colatura. Both give a flavor boost to just about anything savory. Sadly, I detest mayo in all of its forms.
Hey Dave, where does the case of conductor Klaus play into this for you? He’s probably one of the biggest brand names in the industry today, despite how his recordings speak for themselves… genuinely curious, and thanks for all of your entertaining and insightful content.
Hyperion and Naxos immediately come to mind. Two amazing labels with two very specific marketing points of view. Every time I hear "Hyperion" I generally think of a few pillars - piano music, choral music, and Lieder. Those three are pretty much the bread and butter of their image. That was a great image for them for the forty-plus years they were an independent label. Hopefully that continues. Naxos has built an empire on the back of the "budget" release that certainly didn't sell itself short. And in the process Naxos became a serious competitor to the major labels. They serve a valuable purpose, and their endeavors in early music have become personal favorites.
Yes I agree, branded commodities are very useful guides for beginners and do no harm to veterans, they only have up sides. Unless the person who brought up the term "branded commodities" meant some heavily marketed but bad orchestras or conductors.
BINGO!!!!! ...I couldn't put a finger on it before, but this is right. In a kind of way, the great orchestras of the world each have a "brand": The Cleveland Orchestra, The Boston Symphony, The Philadelphia Orchestra, The Chicago Symphony, The London Symphony, The Vienna Philharmonic... perhaps that is what remains of anything close to classical "branding" today. Hopefully that will last. Nowadays, every orchestra has a roster of concert violinists, pianists, conductors, etc. introduced every season where you really don't know who these people are or what to make of them. Back when RCA Victor would, say, for example, 'Introducing: Tedd Joselson,' even if you've never heard of the guy, you would at least look up! It truly is a confusing mess nowadays. (Although, there are incredible musicians all over the place -- it's just very difficult to know who they are or where/how to find them. That's just another reason why I love this series of videos so very much!)
Excellent rant, David! The problem with money, morality, integrity, honour, and self-confidence is a strange one. As you say, all it takes is a focus group with the wrong (or even the right) idea, and, businesses can shoot themselves in the foot. The logo creates the brand, which is a set of associations and memories in the potential purchaser. If the brains trust report any of the dangers of capitalist defeat - negative brand association, especially - the jitters that can run through and destroy corporate intelligence are immense. And what companies say today, joe public picks up tomorrow. So, if they try conspicuously to downplay their identity, joe public thinks it must be clever to repeat their reasoning. Most internal departments, in striving to be completist, reason like four-year-olds and expect most of the public to.
This...I agree with every single word. Unfortunately, there is no saving classical music in terms of funding new recordings. It remains too niche, and existing recordings can always be found somewhere on the interet. Young people do not care about the quality of their audio, and so the CD is dead. I haven't bought a new CD for 10 years, and I am a classical nut. So why should young people? And without CD sales, or royalties because you can find music anywhere, where is an income stream coming from? As the older audience dies off, that's it, I am afraid.
I think you would be surprised to hear the perspectives of young people on the quality of their audio, and how common it is to hear amongst younger people about their love of physical media. Even if there is no saving classical music, the folks releasing it don't seem to be doing themselves any favours with regards to marketability. Although the market has shrunk for physical media in every genre, people who have a passion for this kind of music will always want to acquire it, if it is accessible and available to them. Even young people.
I don't understand what you are talking about. Classical music does not need to be "saved." There is more performance and recording going on, from more artist, in more media, in more venues, than ever before. And yet some people insist that there is a "crisis." Ridiculous!
I wish the major labels, whatever they are nowadays, would find a way to put their new releases in bookstores, music shops and other suitable locations. People today don't even know what's out there since newspapers never cover classical releases. Who knows? Maybe someone will see a new release of Klaus Makela doing the Beethoven 5th and pick it up. Wishful thinking, I know.
Berlin Phil's Digital Concert Hall has branded itself very successfully with their pentagonal logo. I kive in Boston and enjoy great online BPh concerts for less than 15 bucks a month. My hometiwn band, the Biston Symphony, has thus far not developed anything remotely comparable. Is suspect it's a New England/Boston Brahmin issue...😉 Regarding BPh's "branding" of their CD product line - well, that's a matter of its own, and I don't mean this as a compliment.
And yet, isn't the 'devolution' of classical music also due to capitalism; i.e., the waning ability to convert commodity to cash, due in no small measure to the 'cheapening' effect technology advances has in the market place. For me, the 'value problem' is cultural rather than economic. That is, how do you entice a substantial and always growing public to a 'product' that is aesthetically both challenging and satisfying. Something which the aristocracy from the previous economic era understood.
Yes, good point. I believe most artists make their money doing live concerts nowadays, and the recording is only an enticement to buy a ticket to the live concert.
What an individual thinks about capitalism has nothing to do with whether or not people should be able to participate in it. There's nothing wrong with selling a product! This is a case of "hate the game, not the player." Edit: in full disclosure, I would describe myself as a socialist, but I would also summarize my ideology as also being pro-consumerist as well. People should be able to buy stuff to entertain themselves! Ideally, the government would provide for basic needs, and leave people with money left over for fun.
YT, Spotify et al go one further - why charge the customer at all, let 'em have it all for free. Just charge advertisers & pay artists (next to) nothing. Use it just as a come on for the live concerts. It astonishes me how much people will pay to see someone live, when they prefer to pay nothing at all to hear them recorded.
To the starving artist: do what Charles Ives did -- get a day job. Philip Glass was driving a cab when EINSTEIN premiered. It doesn't seem to have hindered him. As far as the branding: boy, you nailed that one. And DG was the right example. I remember when that was a BIG thing. Now you never know what sort of triteness they'll release. AND -- they need to STOP TITLING ALBUMS with ridiculous names like "Belief" or "Perpendicular" and shimmery, out of focus photos of the performer holding a rose or a blowtorch or something. Put the contents of the album on the cover, so you can see them without an electron microscope, not in microprint on the back. I don't know how many albums I bought from the GREAT PERFORMANCES series, or the Nonesuch modern music series, and the contents and performing forces were practically ALL you saw on the cover.
Oh man this really gets me… Non-artists absolutely love telling artists to get a day job. You don’t get it. Charles Ives was living in a completely different world. He’s also the only prominent composer to have done the particular thing he did business-wise and his body of work is relatively small because of it. Fine for him, not for everybody. Yes, Philip Glass (also coming of age in a different time) drove cab for a while when he was young. Great. He also inherited an NYC parking garage which prob helped a little bit as well. It’s one thing to work all day and compose all night when you’re in your late teens and 20s. Gets a whole lot more difficult once you hit your 30s and beyond. Throw a kid or two in the mix and you’re really stretching it. As far as labels being cooler back in the day, they were. They could afford to be. Streaming has decimated the industry and barring some unforeseen sea change it will never be what it was. The silly naming of albums etc is a desperate attempt by labels to generate interest and remain solvent. Some labels are doing ok but it ain’t from album sales. It’s from product/film/tv placements and maybe having a big artist or two that tours non-stop. If labels could slap an artist/composer name and a simple pic on an album cover and sell like they used to, I bet they would! Got me all worked up!
"Lefty" Europe has always been pretty good at branding cultural products. That's the hypocrisy at the heart of it. It was a joke among my colleagues in academia that the Marxist historians always demanded the highest speaking fees.
The unfortunate truth is a lot of the branded commodities people discuss have been overtaken by technological events anyhow. Unless we are talking about streaming services, there is no species of branding that will substantially increase classical music sales. I’m 41, so not exactly ancient but not at all young either. Nevertheless, most people my age and certainly those younger would never think to purchase CDs and own no devices that can play them. Even the LP boom popular among millennials is starting to bust; vinyl sales were down 24% as consumers get sick of preposterous costs that vastly outpace inflation. Overproduction is leading to a decline in record quality, too. Perhaps the violist/comedienne Isabel Hagen has the best advice: people should stop trying to save classical music. Let classical music save you instead.
i think they could brand on youtube these classical people could, you know. Isn't that something this channel does already, and pretty well, I would add?
Capitalism is also why we have fewer major labels. They merge into bigger corporations and swallow up the smaller labels. So fewer brands. I worked for Decca when it was independent, then when it became part of Polygram. Now it's Universal. Our big rivals HMV/EMI are now part of Warner.
Yet it is capitalism that allows you to go out and start your own label, make your own recordings and sell them. If your product is good enough it will attract buyers. And then eventually get swallowed up by Universal or Warner!
They were absorbed because those other brands which were absorbed stop caring and didn't broaden their marketing.
Snobbery, apathy and elitism hurt many labels. I saw it first hand.
As a kid I got an insert from the CBS Great Performances series, and I went through the whole catalog with my dad, who knew classical music well. The ones he recommended I would check out from the library, and later, buy. Their "Great Performances" marketing worked splendidly on us.
Record collectors are a thing of the past (as are CD collectors like Dave). I can't remember when the last time I bought a classical CD was, and I am nearly 70 years old. All my old LPs went the way of garage sales years ago. Most people these days subscribe to streaming services and have a chance to "try before they buy".. if they buy at all. Artists get paid per hit on the services just like youtubers do. The artists must become the "branded commodity" to make money, not necessarily the label or company that produced the recording. Big name composers like Beethoven will always be a branded commodity of their own.
With all due respect, I don't think you are quite in a position to say what "most people" are doing based largely on what you do.
The brand I miss is Philips. More low-key than DG, less star-fixated, and with more chamber music. Decca was about Solti and opera and the Decca sound. DG of course overwhelmingly about Karajan and then Bernstein. Philips was for civilised folk who just liked music.
No, Philips was a local Dutch label (originally) with less clout and a smaller pool of artists from which to draw.
Philips was also where you had to go to hear the Haydn operas, early Verdi, and a lot of rare Berlioz. And I remember how they promoted those eagerly awaited releases. Our classical music FM station played ads for them.
Back in the days of LPs, Philips was one of my favorite labels because they championed baroque music.
I have single-word descriptors to characterize many of the classical labels of the 1960s thru 1980s (the era when I grew up on classical). This single word, in my own mind, anyway, seemed often to characterize the approach of an entire label to artists, sonics, repetoire and marketing. My one word for Philips of that era is "elegant." For Decca it was "vivid." For Columbia, "intense." For DG, "monumental." I think "elegant" for Philips still holds up--in terms of the sound and in terms of the artists: Brendel, the Beaux Arts Trio, I Musici, Arthur Grumiaux, Quartetto Italiano, Colin Davis, Bernard Haitink, etc, etc. If you bought a Philips CD, you could expect elegance.
When I was first learning about classical music in my 20's (1975ish) I used to pick up recordings issued in the "London Treasury Series", a well-curated budget series. It was a relatively cheap way to get all the basic repertoire, in often very good performances, and on well pressed records. That was a brand I responded to and would look for them in the shops. When I was still making my way figuring out what the "standard" orchestral repertoire even was - that series gave me more confidence that I'd be getting the piece of music I was after in a great performance by the London Symphony, or the Vienna Philharmonic, with a great conductor, or at least one who knew what they were doing. The product identification was, for me, just shorthand. I had a sense of what I was getting if I purchased an album or two. That may or may not have been misplaced, but I found it rather helpful back in the day.
The very first releases in genuine stereo of some Decca classics first appeared of Stereo Treasury. The Bohm Frau ohne Schatten or the 1955 Bayreuth Dutchman. Not to mention Dorati's first ever complete Haydn symphonies were those midprice STS sets.
On sale, they were $1.98-2.98.
This is a fascinating discussion. Recently, as a Roon user, I discovered all sorts of new (to me) obscurities by listening to works by the PRODUCERS (not the composers or artists) of recordings that I enjoy. Wow., what do you know: the talented producers have exciting ideas of what to record and who to work with. Your remark about how the labels used to do this (Mercury) by selling their catalog rather than selling just a recording reminded me of this. Perhaps labels used to treat their talented producers and recording engineers better in this golden age, too, when the skills there were harder to come by, but I’ll guess they move around a lot more now or are completely independent these days. It’s tough for a label to brand itself if there’s nothing about it that’s different.
Hi Dave, fyi: your video coincides with the presentation of Berlin government's 2025 budget, now under debate in the citystate's Legislature and perhaps already approved as I write, which aims to cut 3 billion Euros and contains a 130 million cut across the cultural sector (Berlin Phil gets 2 million less ). Needless to say the entire scene, among it some groups that do important work in underserved communities which stand to lose all funding, are up in arms. Never a dull moment in the "Kulturmetropole Berlin"...
If I may veer off classical to highlight branding, my efforts to expand my knowledge of Jazz was made easier when I concentrated on buying from the Verve catalog. Their promoting of the artists and consistent cover art was well done.
Such advertisements weren't just ballyhoo, they were also educational.
Some good points, and artists need promotional support from their labels...but I think the big problem is classical artists do not have the national exposure they once had. Arthur Fiedler nolonger has a television show, the variety shows are gone, except late night talk and I never see any of them there. People have to have name recognition.
I agree with this completely. When I started collecting classical records in the 1970s, the brands of a the various labels played a large role in shaping my experience. For example, I tended towards Philips LPs because their "brand" included nice cover art, intelligent liner notes, excellent artists, outstanding sound, and very quiet LP surfaces. I could thus buy a Philips record with some level of confidence that I was getting a quality product, which helped when I didn't know the repertoire and artists so well. Giving up their brands is one reason most of the labels went under.
When it comes to branding, a label that I think is worth mentioning is Alpha Classics. Even tho they aren't without their couple bad recordings, I can always immediately tell a CD was released by them just by looking at the cover.
Fully agree. DG is the top of classical music branding, when I was young its golden label was synonymous of art in music. But today I do not like the concept they are using to brand their major artists. On the opposite side, the worst example of non branding is EMI: horrible covers and no visual identity whatsoever. Maybe they do not care because they are big. Nice branding has always been the tool for small companies to survive.
ABSOLUTELY
ONE OF YOUR
VERY BEST CHATS❣️❣️❣️
Capitalism does not treat the arts well, but that where the money is. If you could convince Elon to spend money on arts instead of politics, then the people that go to live on mars might have something decent to listen to. You’re “rant” is spot on.
When CBS released the first LP with Nathan Milstein, this was a major game changer for the recording industry. The trick of course, was to convince consumers they needed or wanted the product. The benefit was that people got more music on one disc, superior sound quality and a disc that was lighter in weight compared to the old 78's. There was a hitch, however. You had to buy a phonograph that could play a 33 1/3 rpm record. Despite the cost, people purchased the new players, because they knew their investment had lasting value. And as Dave pointed out, as a result labels had to perfect their branding. I like eye-catching album covers and music by lesser known composers. Cool album cover, great performance, well recorded, reasonable price and I am sold.
Columbia was smart enough to sell the idea of LP with a very inexpensive Philco unit with 33rpm turntable and a suitibly light cartridge that you could easily plug into your existing setup.
Wow, more pearls of wisdom. 100%!
I really look forward to Dave's chats. These "think pieces" get you thinking and bring up issues we don't hear talked about that much and seldom with that precious commodity, Common Sense.
Capitalism is the worst economic system--except for all the others.
I remember when you couldn't pick up a music magazine or a concert program without seeing scads of ads from the record companies promoting new releases or artists, and reminding consumers of older releases in their catalogs by an artist. It was a beautiful symbiotic relationship: good for the company, good for the artist and good for the consumer.
As a neophyte, I sometimes bought a disc or a complete opera based on the label itself. RCA was the opera label. If you wanted a recording of Il Whatever, you couldn't go far wrong with their version, even if it wasn't really the best.
Now with the internet, streaming, the lesser emphasis on physical product, I can't think what the best way to promote the product is, but promoted it should be!
There are nonmusical products where manufacturers are also missing a good bet. Only chefs and gourmands know how great and useful fish sauce or Japanese kewpie mayo can be. Properly marketed, it would fly off the shelves. Similarly, new releases and box sets seem to be stealth products, noticed only if you happen to read a review.
Even great musical artists often have to rely on their own websites to garner attention.
Love fish sauce--there's a wonderful (but usually very expensive) Italian equivalent: colatura. Both give a flavor boost to just about anything savory. Sadly, I detest mayo in all of its forms.
Hey Dave, where does the case of conductor Klaus play into this for you? He’s probably one of the biggest brand names in the industry today, despite how his recordings speak for themselves… genuinely curious, and thanks for all of your entertaining and insightful content.
Not all brands offer quality.
Hyperion and Naxos immediately come to mind. Two amazing labels with two very specific marketing points of view.
Every time I hear "Hyperion" I generally think of a few pillars - piano music, choral music, and Lieder. Those three are pretty much the bread and butter of their image. That was a great image for them for the forty-plus years they were an independent label. Hopefully that continues.
Naxos has built an empire on the back of the "budget" release that certainly didn't sell itself short. And in the process Naxos became a serious competitor to the major labels. They serve a valuable purpose, and their endeavors in early music have become personal favorites.
Yes I agree, branded commodities are very useful guides for beginners and do no harm to veterans, they only have up sides. Unless the person who brought up the term "branded commodities" meant some heavily marketed but bad orchestras or conductors.
You brand or you're bland. The Unidomal Law of Identification.
BINGO!!!!! ...I couldn't put a finger on it before, but this is right. In a kind of way, the great orchestras of the world each have a "brand": The Cleveland Orchestra, The Boston Symphony, The Philadelphia Orchestra, The Chicago Symphony, The London Symphony, The Vienna Philharmonic... perhaps that is what remains of anything close to classical "branding" today. Hopefully that will last. Nowadays, every orchestra has a roster of concert violinists, pianists, conductors, etc. introduced every season where you really don't know who these people are or what to make of them. Back when RCA Victor would, say, for example, 'Introducing: Tedd Joselson,' even if you've never heard of the guy, you would at least look up! It truly is a confusing mess nowadays. (Although, there are incredible musicians all over the place -- it's just very difficult to know who they are or where/how to find them. That's just another reason why I love this series of videos so very much!)
Excellent rant, David! The problem with money, morality, integrity, honour, and self-confidence is a strange one. As you say, all it takes is a focus group with the wrong (or even the right) idea, and, businesses can shoot themselves in the foot. The logo creates the brand, which is a set of associations and memories in the potential purchaser. If the brains trust report any of the dangers of capitalist defeat - negative brand association, especially - the jitters that can run through and destroy corporate intelligence are immense. And what companies say today, joe public picks up tomorrow. So, if they try conspicuously to downplay their identity, joe public thinks it must be clever to repeat their reasoning. Most internal departments, in striving to be completist, reason like four-year-olds and expect most of the public to.
Famously, Ford came up with the disastrous Edsel because of a focus group.
This...I agree with every single word.
Unfortunately, there is no saving classical music in terms of funding new recordings. It remains too niche, and existing recordings can always be found somewhere on the interet. Young people do not care about the quality of their audio, and so the CD is dead. I haven't bought a new CD for 10 years, and I am a classical nut. So why should young people? And without CD sales, or royalties because you can find music anywhere, where is an income stream coming from?
As the older audience dies off, that's it, I am afraid.
I think you would be surprised to hear the perspectives of young people on the quality of their audio, and how common it is to hear amongst younger people about their love of physical media.
Even if there is no saving classical music, the folks releasing it don't seem to be doing themselves any favours with regards to marketability. Although the market has shrunk for physical media in every genre, people who have a passion for this kind of music will always want to acquire it, if it is accessible and available to them. Even young people.
I don't understand what you are talking about. Classical music does not need to be "saved." There is more performance and recording going on, from more artist, in more media, in more venues, than ever before. And yet some people insist that there is a "crisis." Ridiculous!
Some young people do though most may not. There are different downloading formats.
I wish the major labels, whatever they are nowadays, would find a way to put their new releases in bookstores, music shops and other suitable locations. People today don't even know what's out there since newspapers never cover classical releases. Who knows? Maybe someone will see a new release of Klaus Makela doing the Beethoven 5th and pick it up. Wishful thinking, I know.
Thank you, Dave.
Great video. I would imagine that talking with Wilma Cozart Fine was, well,, a 'fine' time. Sorry. Best I have. I'd love to hear her thoughts.
That is so well put!
YES YES YES
Absolutely brilliant Dave
(And I’m an artist married to another artist. We bust our asses so our work has value - we don’t expect to be subsidized!)
Berlin Phil's Digital Concert Hall has branded itself very successfully with their pentagonal logo. I kive in Boston and enjoy great online BPh concerts for less than 15 bucks a month. My hometiwn band, the Biston Symphony, has thus far not developed anything remotely comparable. Is suspect it's a New England/Boston Brahmin issue...😉 Regarding BPh's "branding" of their CD product line - well, that's a matter of its own, and I don't mean this as a compliment.
The Boston Symphony has the largest endowment in the world. They don't need to do anything.
For me, Beethoven's music will always be the best there ever was
Until you started listening to Mozart more seriously of course..
Dave, you are a surprise a minute, pleasant that is. I was an economics/history major in college and you were…………..I give up.
And yet, isn't the 'devolution' of classical music also due to capitalism; i.e., the waning ability to convert commodity to cash, due in no small measure to the 'cheapening' effect technology advances has in the market place. For me, the 'value problem' is cultural rather than economic. That is, how do you entice a substantial and always growing public to a 'product' that is aesthetically both challenging and satisfying. Something which the aristocracy from the previous economic era understood.
No. It's not that at all.
Yes, good point. I believe most artists make their money doing live concerts nowadays, and the recording is only an enticement to buy a ticket to the live concert.
What an individual thinks about capitalism has nothing to do with whether or not people should be able to participate in it. There's nothing wrong with selling a product! This is a case of "hate the game, not the player."
Edit: in full disclosure, I would describe myself as a socialist, but I would also summarize my ideology as also being pro-consumerist as well. People should be able to buy stuff to entertain themselves! Ideally, the government would provide for basic needs, and leave people with money left over for fun.
YT, Spotify et al go one further - why charge the customer at all, let 'em have it all for free. Just charge advertisers & pay artists (next to) nothing. Use it just as a come on for the live concerts. It astonishes me how much people will pay to see someone live, when they prefer to pay nothing at all to hear them recorded.
One of your best. A wake up call to put it mildly.
To the starving artist: do what Charles Ives did -- get a day job. Philip Glass was driving a cab when EINSTEIN premiered. It doesn't seem to have hindered him. As far as the branding: boy, you nailed that one. And DG was the right example. I remember when that was a BIG thing. Now you never know what sort of triteness they'll release.
AND -- they need to STOP TITLING ALBUMS with ridiculous names like "Belief" or "Perpendicular" and shimmery, out of focus photos of the performer holding a rose or a blowtorch or something. Put the contents of the album on the cover, so you can see them without an electron microscope, not in microprint on the back. I don't know how many albums I bought from the GREAT PERFORMANCES series, or the Nonesuch modern music series, and the contents and performing forces were practically ALL you saw on the cover.
Oh man this really gets me… Non-artists absolutely love telling artists to get a day job. You don’t get it. Charles Ives was living in a completely different world. He’s also the only prominent composer to have done the particular thing he did business-wise and his body of work is relatively small because of it. Fine for him, not for everybody. Yes, Philip Glass (also coming of age in a different time) drove cab for a while when he was young. Great. He also inherited an NYC parking garage which prob helped a little bit as well. It’s one thing to work all day and compose all night when you’re in your late teens and 20s. Gets a whole lot more difficult once you hit your 30s and beyond. Throw a kid or two in the mix and you’re really stretching it. As far as labels being cooler back in the day, they were. They could afford to be. Streaming has decimated the industry and barring some unforeseen sea change it will never be what it was. The silly naming of albums etc is a desperate attempt by labels to generate interest and remain solvent. Some labels are doing ok but it ain’t from album sales. It’s from product/film/tv placements and maybe having a big artist or two that tours non-stop. If labels could slap an artist/composer name and a simple pic on an album cover and sell like they used to, I bet they would! Got me all worked up!
Really one of the smartest videos I've seen from anyone in a long time. I appreciate the practical & sensible discussion of capitalism.
I've never agreed more on every single word you said 😊. This is just great and should be divulged in Lefty Europe.
"Lefty" Europe has always been pretty good at branding cultural products. That's the hypocrisy at the heart of it. It was a joke among my colleagues in academia that the Marxist historians always demanded the highest speaking fees.
@roberthanff4354. What on earth are you on about? What the heck is 'Lefty Europe?' Please define.