We need a Quad First/Surround First reissue label

[fredblue]

The challenge for Multichannel is the added production costs to make such releases without a matching increase in sales when that feature is added.

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of Quads all done and dusted (and gathering dust!) all mixed in Surround and ready to be utilised, with no further costs required for remixing etc.

The main overhead (beyond licensing) would seemingly be tape transfer of the 4-ch masters and remastering the Quad.

You then stick the Quad on a Hybrid SACD, together with the lucrative Stereo in Redbook and Hi-Res/DSD.. Ta-da!

This is not anything special, taking a Single Layer and "upgrading" it to a pricier Hybrid, its a Hybrid by definition, so can't be any added expenditure to the label there - can there?

Is the cost for the transfer and mastering process of the Quad tapes so onerous it makes including the Quads (as with the BS&T Hits, Weather Report & Return To Forever AF Stereo-only SACDs) a non-sequitur?

 

[Simon A]

Not that I wouldn't like for such a label to exist, but I'm actually hoping that Sony Japan will wake up and release more Quad SACDs like the two Jeff Beck titles we got a few months ago. I may wish that they'd given us a regular jewel case or super jewel case instead of the fancy over sized packaging as it's probably a reason why it was more expensive to buy. Nonetheless, I did pay thousands of Yens for it and I don't regret it a bit. Yes I could have gotten two discs from Audio Fidelity for that much money, but I wanted the title I bought and I wanted to let Sony Japan know that this crazy Canadian appreciates them releasing that SACD. If they do decide to release more of these great sounding Quads, I'll say "Yes please" and "Thank you very much".

I'd really like to know how many copies were sold of these two discs and whether Sony Japan feels that sales were strong enough to warrant releasing more titles.

 

[fredblue]

Assuming that the Aerosmith albums were made available for reissue in the future (not the case today from what I hear), you'd need more than £25,000 to cover the license guarantees for artist and recording label.
Transfer, mastering, manufacture, shipping, warehousing of SACDs, marketing, etc. would be extra costs above that.

As always, if you have enough money....

Ok, thanks for the info.

So, what about roughly double that gross turnover (£50k) from one title, say, if you did a print run of 1,500 copies at £35 a pop?

 

[fredblue]

Not that I wouldn't like for such a label to exist, but I'm actually hoping that Sony Japan will wake up and release more Quad SACDs like the two Jeff Beck titles we got a few months ago. I may wish that they'd given us a regular jewel case or super jewel case instead of the fancy over sized packaging as it's probably a reason why it was more expensive to buy. Nonetheless, I did pay thousands of Yens for it and I don't regret it a bit. Yes I could have gotten two discs from Audio Fidelity for that much money, but I wanted the title I bought and I wanted to let Sony Japan know that this crazy Canadian appreciates them releasing that SACD. If they do decide to release more of these great sounding Quads, I'll say "Yes please" and "Thank you very much".

I'd really like to know how many copies were sold of these two discs and whether Sony Japan feels that sales were strong enough to warrant releasing more titles.

Sales can't have been too shabby, Simon, they've done 3 Quad titles in that series now, after all..
..and fancy, they've got that dirty word "QUADRAPHONIC" emblazoned all over them and it hasn't put people off..!!! :yikes

Hopefully Sony Japan will do many more such Quad reissues.. though if they only ever get around to the Rough & Ready and Wired Quads,
I'll be happy.. how the heck nobody has managed to do reissues of those two Quads in some shape or form and yet we've had;
Blow By Blow Quad 3 times,
Jeff Beck Group Quad twice
and Beck Bogert Appice Quad twice now too..
I'll never fathom it out..!!! :ugham:

 

[Simon A]

Beck Bogert Appice Quad twice now too..

Yes but that one was a major upgrade the second time around with twelve to fifteen years separating these two releases.

 

[fredblue]

Yes but that one was a major upgrade the second time around with twelve to fifteen years separating these two releases.

Indeed.. of that I am aware in the interim we've had no reissues of two Jeff Beck Quads (Wired & Rough and Ready) I consider superior not only as albums but as surround mixes to two of those other Jeff Beck Quads that have had not one but two Quad reissues apiece, tis all.. lets not get bogged down in all that anyway, do you have any suggestions for how to get the rest of the 1,098 Quads out of the vaults, Simon? H-E-L-P..!!!

 

[Eclectic]

I don't know about Aerosmith, but I suspect that QQ members alone would kick in more that $100K to get the ES 5.1 of Pretzel Logic (in the original LPCM, with no DRM). I'd certainly thrown in my share. I don't know why the rights-owners don't use Kickstarter for this sort of thing. That would allow them to secure funding before they spend a dime.

 

[quicksrt]

With Aerosmith I believe it's simply a matter of the band wanting too high a fee for licensing their prime albums out.

What is worrisome to me are the QQ members missing in action here. Does this represent a decline in interest, or a decline in the size of the fan base? I'm not sure.

Are there fans of quad surround younger than 35 or 39?

 

[Eclectic]

My son Tim, who is 22, is a big fan of surround sound.

 

[bmoura]

I don't know about Aerosmith, but I suspect that QQ members alone would kick in more that $100K to get the ES 5.1 of Pretzel Logic (in the original LPCM, with no DRM). I'd certainly thrown in my share. I don't know why the rights-owners don't use Kickstarter for this sort of thing. That would allow them to secure funding before they spend a dime.

That assumes you could get the duo to agree to reissue licensing. Something that isn't the case today.

 

[Eclectic]

That assumes you could get the duo to agree to reissue licensing. Something that isn't the case today.

Sigh. Nothing I can do about that. "Does anyone here know Becker or Fagen," he says, expecting the answer "No."

 

[rtbluray]

- The inference is no label has ever turned a profit out of a Multichannel title.
Why do some labels (such as the guys behind the King Crimson/Yes/XTC 5.1's) persevere with surround on all their titles if its such a non-starter?
Have DGM/Panegyric been losing money hand over fist all these years? Surely they'd have gone bust by now if that was the case..!?

I'm too tired to say everything I want to say about this tonight, but I will start by saying that you cannot compare labels like DGM, Panegyric, and APE House to Audio Fidelity and similar labels like them.
All of the first three labels mentioned are ones that are largely centered around one specific artist (King Crimson in the case of DGM/Panegyric and XTC in the case of APE House), therefore those labels have a much more clearly defined target audience than generic reissue labels (like AF, MOFI, etc.)

More on this tomorrow!

 

[Quadwreck]

It would be more profitable (solvent) to license the more popular songs available in quad or 5.1, a vast majority of quad albums have a lot of filler with one or two killer tracks.

 

[rtbluray]

It would be more profitable (solvent) to license the more popular songs available in quad or 5.1, a vast majority of quad albums have a lot of filler with one or two killer tracks.

Then you would end up with something like "The Collection", and from what I gather, that was not a particularly successful venture for Audio Fidelity, both commercially and critically…

 

[ubertrout]

Of course, you have the sad tale of Silverline to consider...they made a big push in surround for years, had some great titles and some terrible ones, and failed to sell any real volume: https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...ctuary-for-50-Million-Over-Dual-Disc-Material. It's clearly incredibly complicated to do licenses for pop vocal music with the complicated copyright issues involved - the labels that have been doing this successfully have all been in the classical realm (notably Pentatone), or licensing instrumental titles with essentially zero popular demand (Vocalion).

I think one way to do this might be as a kickstarter, and it could be done with added incentives (say if you pay $500 you get to come to the mastering session for the day). But I'll caution that the best way to make a small fortune with a venture such as this is to start with a large fortune.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Then you would end up with something like "The Collection", and from what I gather, that was not a particularly successful venture for Audio Fidelity, both commercially and critically…

Ashame, since The Collection involved a lot of sluething through piles of tapes and finding what AF thought was the right balance. With the time invested in this compilation, they probably could've released 3 OTHER QUAD titles which, IMO, could've potentially done better financially for the company.

Coupled with the fact that they duplicated already released QUAD tracks (was it 6?) was considered by many to be a turn~off.

But yet, AF's two stereo ONLY SACD compilations: Legends: Crank It Up and Legends: Get It On were supposedly great sellers for the company and ironically, a LOT of cuts from these two compilations are either available already on Stereo SACD or multichannel SACD/DVD~A, so......Go Figure.

 

[fredblue]

I'm too tired to say everything I want to say about this tonight, but I will start by saying that you cannot compare labels like DGM, Panegyric, and APE House to Audio Fidelity and similar labels like them.
All of the first three labels mentioned are ones that are largely centered around one specific artist (King Crimson in the case of DGM/Panegyric and XTC in the case of APE House), therefore those labels have a much more clearly defined target audience than generic reissue labels (like AF, MOFI, etc.)

More on this tomorrow!

I wasn't comparing them, just citing them as an example of a label (or labels) that can and do make a go of it with surround music.. surround is not a dismal failure for every label, that's all.

 

[fredblue]

With Aerosmith I believe it's simply a matter of the band wanting too high a fee for licensing their prime albums out.

What is worrisome to me are the QQ members missing in action here. Does this represent a decline in interest, or a decline in the size of the fan base? I'm not sure.

Are there fans of quad surround younger than 35 or 39?

Make it a more premium product then., in order to recoup the licensing.. stick the Quads in a ("dreaded") box set if needs be, in order to appeal to a wider audience, as the majors do.

Rocks 40th Anniversary Super Deluxe Box Set, including the Quad.. plus a bag of BALLS.
The moments passed anyway, 2016's on its way out.. it was never going to happen, all involved are myopic and greedy. Fuck em, I'll just enjoy the conversions, they don't get a penny with their attitude, which if they stopped to thibk might realise is better than NOTHING.

 

[fredblue]

My son Tim, who is 22, is a big fan of surround sound.

There are surely people under 40 who are into surround, which is a very good thing, they are the future of our hobby.

However there are still plenty of people 40+ into surround who love the music of the 70's, including many albums and artists from the Quad era.

The 40+ demographic has more leisure time on its hands, is more inclined towards collecting and listening to surround music (I would say) and has more disposable income to spend on it all.

There is a market for this stuff, I feel though that a new approach from the ground up is required in order to make it viable, imho.

 

[fredblue]

I note this figure (of 10%-15% of sales being MultiCh relative to 85%-90% being Stereo) being mentioned.. what is this specifically please?

Are we talking 10-15% market share of something?

If so, what?

Is it global annual music sales combined on all formats/all countries? U.S.A. only? What is it?

Let's get to the nitty gritty before anyone just dismisses surround as "only a 10-15% thing".

That said, by any reckoning, whatever the figure relates to, 10-15% need still not be peanuts. You sell a million of a record; 100,000-150,000 of the buyers are surround people. If you're referring to an AF SACD, sales in the thousands then a few hundred people does suddenly become slightly less impressive but it's all relative surely.. hence why I was talking about how many copies would you need to press up to cater to the inbuilt market.. if it's 10-15% of 10,000? 10-15% of 2,000..??