If You’re Going To San Francisco….

…Flowers in your hair are no longer necessary (what, you don’t remember the song by Scott McKenzie?), but do make a point to check out the History of Audio exhibit in Terminal Three (mostly United Airlines gates). Word has it that it was put there to coincide with the AES convention last October, and it runs through the end of this month. So maybe I’m the last to find out about it. But if you are even remotely interested in how sounds to us over the radio, television, in movie theatres, and our homes, it’s absolutely terrific. Of course, also a trip down memory lane for the RoeDeo (Dr. Wizard dryly noted that it was a slightly more organized version of what’s lying around in the attic), with (mostly accurate) biographies and photos from the Golden Age of Hi-Fi, and earlier, including such luminaries as Lee De Forest, FM Radio inventor Edwin Armstrong, Henry Kloss, Edgar Villchur of AR fame,

Ray Dolby, and the brilliant English visionary Alan Blumlein. And the “stuff,” of course: (grabbed from the SFO website:)

One hundred and thirty years of audio inventions are on display—from Thomas Edison’s first sound recorder, to systems that produce theater-quality sound in your home and digital players that put a thousand songs in your pocket. The importance of sound in our lives is evident in the many inventions that are closely associated with the generation that enjoyed them—the Victrola, the hi-fi stereo system, the eight-track player, the Walkman, and presently, the iPod. The only constant is change, and as the development of sound technology continues, one day even the iPod will seem as quaint as a wind-up gramophone.


My favorites included a 1946 “disc cutter” for making your own home 78s (in case you thought a DVD burner was a new idea!), a vintage 8-track tape recorder, and, from 1956, an early Ampex 2″ video tape machine bought by CBS and in use for decades. The thing looks bulletproof. And the piece de resistance: An original “Highway Hi-Fi” for playing records in your brand-new 1956 Chrysler – replete with a photo of a beaming Lawrence Welk using one in his new Hemi ragtop. Priceless.

The Klassical Komeback, Pt III: Surge or Free Fall?

A couple of mainstream media outlets have picked up on the Great Classical (crossover) Comeback of 2006 lately: My old employer NPR had a story on All Things Considered The hook in the Tuesday (Mar 20) New York Times story was the just announced Classical Blowout Store from Amazon.com – a response, in the dot-com’s words, to “the disappearance of prominent brick and mortar music stores and the fact that most music retailers are scaling back their selection of classical music.” with led to the Time’s observation that “Amazon’s initiative comes at a time when classical music sales are either advancing nicely or in a free fall, depending on whom you believe and what you consider classical music.“

And that’s the problem, innit? Who do you believe? The initial trigger for all of this reporting was the Nielsen SoundScan report of classical sales being up 22.5 per cent – something I wrote about last month. And, hmm….as part of their rationale for the new service Amazon notes that their 2006 sales of classical music were up – get this – 22 per cent! Same accounting methods? Does Amazon consider Josh Groban to be as classical at Louis Moreau Gottschalk? They don’t say.

Similarly, after noting that “independent [classical] labels like Koch and Naxos report that their sales are also up”the above-referenced NPR story ends with the throwaway line, “the total number of classical albums purchased online more than doubled last year.” That’s great…but, again, what’s the definition of “classical?”

And, for that matter, what, exactly, constitutes a downloaded “album,” anyway? More on that in a future post. A more sobering assessment of the health of classical-music comes from the market-research firm NPD group, quoted in the Times article: “NPD Group’s consumer survey data, which does not include albums like these in its classical music category, shows that classical sales dropped last year by 28 percent, and have dropped by 54 percent in five years.”

Ouch! Whether the numbers are truly up or down, there does seem to be a renewed energy in retailing classical music. After all, classical music fans, traditionally older and wealthier, “actually buy, rather than steal, their music,” to quote the Times. I noticed, too, doing some focus groups in Philadelphia last year that a lot of men of, ahem, a certain age, LOVE those much-maligned “bricks and mortar” stores – us hunter-gatherer music freaks intoxicated by the ambience, being surrounded by fellow members of our tribe, poring through bins, stumbling upon old favorites or making new discoveries. Same reasons why we vinyl junkies can’t let go. For classical music fans, multiply everything I just said by two. Or five. Or ten. Mark Berry’s Naxos Blog has some interesting comments about what retailers in Philadelphia and elsewhere are doing to fill the classical void. Sample grab:

“At the same time, retailers seem to be expending more energy on classical, perhaps due to the SoundScan rise but also to fill the hole left in major market areas by the demise of Tower Records. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported earlier this month that national chain FYE has made classical music a priority in its new store in the space previously occupied by Tower, moving its 11,000 CD and DVD titles to the main floor and committing to growing the section. Of course, a part of this collection is crossover material but, as writer Peter Dobrin points out, there is still plenty for the core classical “afficianado” and fan of local classical artists.”

Snarky aside: If you didn’t know that Koch had a significant classical catalog you’d never know it by their website. Their classical listings are “below the fold” on their home page, category 13 out of 13 music categories, coming on the heels of “Dance, Electronica & New Age,” “Jazz,” “Gospel,” “Country,” “Kinks Reissues,” and “Broadway Productions and Show Recordings.”

The Empire Strikes Back

The latest positioning tag line from The Globe (the new “Green” radio format in DC I wrote about a while back) is a little closer to the mark: “Corporately Owned, Listener Monkeyed-Around With.” Bad grammar aside, I’d argue that at least half that statement is factual – and it’s the corporate owners who have been doing the messing around recently – with three big news items in the last three days that suggest that the Old Order is not going to gently into the good night.

First was, the $12.5 million – in the words of FCC Commish Ken Adelstein “The largest collective fine in the history of American Broadcasting” that the Globe’s “good guy” owners CBS Radio (along with their friends Entercom, Clear Channel and Citadel Broadcasting) ponied up to the FCC to make the payola charges go away. Not that they actually admitted to it or anything. Sample grab from the Washington Post story:

Andy Levin, Clear Channel’s executive vice president, said in a statement that his company has “devoted tremendous resources” to preventing payola at its stations. “While no violations were found,” he said, “we are pleased to announce that Clear Channel has agreed to settle this longstanding payola investigation with the FCC. We believe it is time to close the door on this ongoing inquiry and move forward.”

The other three companies declined comment or did not respond to requests for interviews.

Aside from paying the fines to the FCC, the four companies have agreed to give about 4,000 hours of air time to small record companies and local artists. “This is a new opportunity for fresher, newer artists to be heard on the radio,” Adelstein said.

Right. Clear Channel pays $3.5 million to the Feds because they are doing their part to ease the budget deficit. And just where do you suppose those 4,000 hours of air time are going to fall? Sometime between midnight and six, do you suppose?

So, taking Mr. Levin’s advice, let’s “move forward:” Second was the Copyright Royalty Board ruling on Internet radio, which is similarly mind-boggling. Today’s Wall Street Journal has the most comprehensive story in the mainstream press about what this obscure Congressionally-charted agency has wrought: nothing less than a protectionist nod to those “good guys” in the above paragraph. You can read the entire report here. And it whacks public radio’s Internet music activities as well, which previously had been negotiated under a separate deal. Great. Take one of the few areas of growth and innovation in the broadcasting biz and make sure you suffocate ’em. THAT’ll show ’em! THAT’ll keep people tuned to my Clear Channel station! You need to be a subscriber to read beyond the opening grafs; here are a couple of key lines from the rest (hey, I bought my copy in the newsstand!)

…The board’s new rates appear to be those sought by the largest industry group, the Recording Industry Association of America. But the Internet radio broadcasters say the rates hit one of the few bright spots in the moribund music busienss and thus end up shooting the labels in the foot.

The new schedule highlights an inequality that has rankled many online entrepreneurs for years. Regular radio stations don’t pay any royalities to song performers for their over-the-airwaves broadcasts, although they do pay royalities to composers and songwriters. “It’s flat out unfair,” says Jonathan Potter, executive director of the Washington-based Digital Media Association.

How unfair? Under the old system, most Internet broadcasters could be a percentage of revenue – about 12% – to a copyright collection agency called SoundExchange. But no more. In it place: a new system where each station pays .0762 per listener, per song (retroactive to 2006) – a rate that will double in the next three years. Kurt Hanson’s Radio and Internet Newsletter has become sort of the “Central Command” for the Internet broadcasters up in arms about the ruling – and he says the new royalty schedule will mean his payments for his Accuradio service will balloon from $50,000 per year to about $600,000. Check out Bill Goldsmith’s blog at Radio Paradise for a reasoned, if impassioned view of what this means for the immediate future of his excellent service. Sample Grab:

The performance royalty rates released by the Copyright Board on March 1, 2007 are not just extreme, not just burdensome. They are a death sentence for all US-based independent webcasters like Radio Paradise, SOMA-FM, Digitally Imported, and many others…

Let’s reassess that reasoning in the light of 21st-century reality. Is there, in truth, a fundamental difference in the experience of an online listener to Radio Paradise and someone who was listening to identical programming on an FM station? Every one of our listeners – indeed, anyone who has ever clicked on a webcast as background music while working – knows the answer to that question. No! There is no difference whatsoever. Radio is radio, whether it comes in digital or analog form.

Just to underscore Goldsmith’s point, there are 50 million listeners in the US to online radio services (WSJ figures); 14 million to satellite radio. And is this happening because the publishing industry is broke? That brings us to news item number three: ASCAP Reports Record Revenue, Royalties in 2006. Yes, that’s right – record revenues. Highlights:
Overall revenue: $785 million – up 5 percent
Overall royalty payments: $680 milllion – up 5.3 percent
Payments by radio: $22 million – up 11 percent

And the kicker, courtesy of Digital Music News:

Meanwhile, ASCAP also gained $13.8 million from internet-based and wireless licensing agreements, a gain of 70 percent. The group is planning aggressive moves ahead, including a recent push to extract performance royalties from paid downloads. Predictably, that has drawn the ire of online music providers, represented by trade body DiMA.

Remember, that 70 per cent gain from internet and wireless providers came before the new Copyright rates were announced. Clearly the old system wasn’t working, eh?

Last word (for today at least) that wraps all three of these subjects together goes to Jerry Del Colliano’s Inside Music Media:

Hypocrisy #5 :

If everyone was so concerned with fresh music, new artists and the health of indie labels, they’d be fighting the new Internet royalty rates that threaten to impede the growth of Internet radio by charging small operators more money than they can afford to play the music.

Who is kidding whom? 8,400 half-hours when no listeners are listening to terrestrial radio or building Internet radio as the lifeline for music diversity.

Does anyone question the pervasiveness of the Internet?

Is it that hard to believe the Internet will be on everyone’s mobile devices once WiFi becomes universal?

If you’re with me so far, can you see the hypocrisy of letting four serial offenders of music diversity off the hook for chump change and a kiss on the backside while the big crybabies in the music industry try to get blood out of the one stone that will outlive them — Internet radio.

Up off the Canvas, PT II: The Classical Comeback?

il Divo: the future of classical music?

From Slate comes an article about the surprising sales of Classical Music recordings in the last year. The lede is attention-getting:

“Is classical music—a genre that has spent a seeming eternity on the commercial skids—staging a comeback? That’s the buzz on Nielsen SoundScan’s 2006 report card, which listed classical as the year’s fastest-growing musical genre. In an otherwise dreary year, sales of classical albums—a figure that includes CDs, LPs, and downloaded albums—increased by 22.5 percent, or 3.57 million units. That put the genre way ahead of such laggards as jazz (down 8.3 percent), alternative (down 9.2 percent), and rap (down 20.7 percent).”

Holy Cow – up 22-plus-percent? What’s going on here? Are those Christopher O’Riley-plays-Radiohead CDs and New York Philharmonic iTunes downloads making that much of a difference?

Well, yes, they are…a little bit. Classical musicians and organizations have gotten a lot savvier about the Net. But the vast amount of that growth is coming from a change in what the industry counts as “classical.” For years Billboard has maintained two charts: “Classical” and “Classical Crossover” (often as related as “jazz” is to “smooth jazz”) – and in 2006 Nielsen SoundScan (the back-end data collector of Billboard and a whole bunch of other folks) simply rolled ’em together. So: Yo-Yo Ma, Emanuel Ax, and Pierre Boulez are in the same category as Andrea Bocelli, Il Divo, and Josh Groban. And the latter three, who all released albums in 2006, combined for more than 4.6 million units of sales last year – just about the same margin of overall growth in the genre. Hmmm…

But there a couple of nuggets worth paying attention to: Bocelli, Groban et al appeal most especially to women 36-50 years old – and most classical programmers aren’t realing paying attention to them as a demographic group. Two that are are Classic FM in the UK (who just happen to be the most popular classical radio station in the world), and WBKK in Albany, NY – a fascinating attempt at programming a classical public radio station a little differently. Worth a listen. (Full disclosure: WBKK PD Christopher Wienk is a colleague and RoeDeo‘s webmaster – doesn’t change the fact that it’s a fascinating experiment.)

Nugget No. 2 is the Songs from the Labryinth album by Sting
…his hyper-produced interpretations of 17th-century lute master John Dowland.
Turns out that was the biggest-selling “true” classical recording of 2006 – and tonight you can watch him do his Dowland thing on PBS. Bully for him – and if he does any Dowland during the upcoming Police reunion tour, double bully. But will that actually help fortysomethings (like that aforementioned Il Divo Demo) really discover Dowland? If only the album were better – and Sting sang “Flow My Tears” with the same conviction as he sings “King of Pain.” Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, the Guardian, the L.A. Times, etc. all loved it. I’m more in tune with Timothy Jarrett at Blogcritics.com:

Seriously, there are vocal lines that sound as though they’re sung through dentures. Worse, there’s no variation to the vocal lines: the performances are note-note-note, with little or no vocal inflection and no phrasing. Then there’s the overdubbing. Awkward as the solo lines are, they sound like sheer genius compared to the same voice in two part harmony.