live recording distribution question

[9000]

do matador bands have the contractual rights to independently record, package, and sell their live performances? are bands required to release such recordings through matador? inquiring minds.

[johansen smith]

I know Mogwai, the Jicks and Cat Power allow free taping of their shows, so I doubt the need for an offical "Live Album" has arisen. besides, selling live shows is evil.

[9000]

would it be "evil" if you could easily locate nicely packaged, high quality copies of your favorite artists' live shows? oh, and financially support those same artists at the same time?

[johansen smith]

um, was I unclear? yes, it is.

[9000]

yeah, you were pretty clear, but i just wanted to confirm how limited your thinking is.

[earl grey]

if it's supported by the artists and done their way, what's bad about it?

i'm not at all a phish fan and my pearl jam days are long gone, but i think it's cool that both have gone to great lengths to make their live shows easily available. the overproduced "live" album goes too far - radiohead suffered from this - but when done right, a live album can't be beat. and i can think of a ton of bands that i'd love to see do one.

[johansen smith]

as Jimmy James might have said, "Why milk the cow when you've got a fridge full of steaks?"

[9000]

i hear you. the web is making it overwhelming clear that the current model is broken. there is a better way though. give it time.

[9000]

i wanted to revisit my initial question. can anyone provide an answer?

[einzack]

apparently mogwai do want to release a live album at one stage...
but they've just got a few issues associated with them...they say that every gig they've recorded themselves has sounded crap cause they don't record to super fancy equipment.....
and then they say that it can take only 1 small thing - like a guitar out of tune - to fuck it up....

just shows thart they're perfectionists.....

cause there is some fucking good mogwai live shows out there.

[jt. r]

clear channel are pursuing this currently. they hope to be able to sell the music as you walk out the door at some exorbitant price (not unlike their ticket sales). it seems to me that this would abuse the artists since it's an arrangement based on the venue licensing and little else.
i prefer amateur recordings (of course a little SBD ain't bad) because they have a great feel to them. this was an acquired taste, but it's very rewarding to trade these cd-rs, and have relationships fostered through trading.

[9000]

yeah, i've heard of a few companies trying this, but i don't think any of them have it right. i potentially like the idea of buying a CD on the way out of the door of a show, but i can't see many artists being too comfortable with the lack of artistic editorial control, especially if clear channel is running things. this gets back to my question about who owns the rights to the live shows. is it the venue, is the record label, is it the artist, all of the above?