Re: Tape Exchange

[haandruss@xxxxxxx (Harvey A. Andruss, III)]

>Harvey's fleshing out of my "vision" (how grand-sounding) is
>pretty much right. However, much of the material I'm seeing goes
>beyond home DAT w/syn stuff. It's often semi-pro or even
>professional regional bands that have spent money in the studio
>or on live recording to come up with an album (often a CD) of middling
>recording quality and who knows what musical quality, but with
>little distribution beyond the artist's gigs.

Yeah -- it ups the ante to what is probably needed for a gigging band to
obtain work.  But the probability of it being 'good' is a little better.
Maybe one notch below a typical indie label (I guess I proposed quite a few
notches...:( )

>Much of the discussion yesterday assumes a compilation tape, like
>the Blues-L or elusive HARP-L tape, but that's not necessarily
>the main product. Anthologies are useful and desirable, but I'm
>also talking about making full single-artist album-length tapes
>available.

Understood, but 'baby steps' first :)  Obviously this assumes that there's
enough interest and talent here, which as you stated was not the case last
time.  But it would  become the first catalog item and answers the question
'can you really do this' because you already have.  I agree that it
shouldn't limit the focus though.

>I see volunteers popping up and saying, "where do I sign up?"
>Where indeed? DO we need a central authority, or just a
>horizontal consensus, some ground rules, and cooperative activity
>starting at the beginning - with one or two individuals taking
>the first step?
>So what's the first step? Agreement among the operators, and a
>workable offering to the buying public and to contributing
>artists.

We need a plan, which starts with a proposal, which this sure sounds like
:)  You should cut yourself shaving more often :) :) ow :( :) :)

I hope this still is a gentlemens'/ladies' agreement sort of thing. I hate
contracts and lawyers (and I never hesitate to tell this to a good friend
currently in Janet Reno's Antitrust office).  I don't have much experience
in non-profit ventures, but this controlled, no-competition idea works for
me.  Maybe MBA types just call it 'channel parity'.  KISS principle is
always best, esp. when starting out.  If it becomes too much  of a time
committment, it could fold or waver.  The intellectual property issue
'probably' goes away if you erase the compensation parts to the 'artists' ,
but then you rely totally on grassroots 'exposure' as the only motivator.
Hmmm.  I don't know about the 'covering costs' part for the
operators/distributers, but perhaps if all the original writers were always
properly credited, the big music interests would leave us alone (free
advertising for the original?).

What are the qualifications for a 'regional operator'?  Initiative, time to
spend, rudimentary knowledge of harmonica,  > 2 DAT machines -- but
seriously -- what resources are needed to do this?  Not just a questions
for Winslow, but the folks who chimed in as willing participants probably
have an idea of what it takes and feel they have enough equipment or
contacts, etc., to do it.

Can't you just see it -- Headline 'USA today' (June 1995):  'Specialty
Grassroots Harmonica Music Label Started in Internet has Eye of Record
Company Executives as Sales Skyrocket, logoed T-shirt worn by John Popper
at MTV Music Awards' (OK OK, keep those tomatoes and orange peels to
yourself, turn down the propane...)


Regards,                  haandruss@xxxxxxx
Harv                      *Opinions my own*