[REMOVE ADS]




Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 62
  1. #1

    My self-made Mock-Up-Albums and Expanded Editions

    Hi everyone,


    Iím a big Motown fan (Especially Diana Ross and the Supremes - and especially after 1966) but like most of other fans Iím a bit upset with Universal who releases less and less of Motown Rarities and if, mostly only digitally.
    Donít get me wrong, Iím happy with everything we get, but I wish it would be a bit more.
    But anyway, instead of waiting for something that will never come, I thought I made some designs for myself.


    Though I love to have all music from one timeline on one or two CDs I created also some Kim Weston Fantasy albums as well as the two unreleased Brenda LPs with my favorite songs as Ąoriginal LPď and the rest from the timeline as bonus tracks. Like a real expanded edition.
    I also created lots of Diana Ross/Supremes designs and started with doing expanded edition for the Marvelettes Albums. I love the the two sets, but I donít like that most of the tracks are distributed on different CDs on the sets. Thatís why I have doing my own Expanded editions with all tracks that belongs to the album.
    Today I wanted to show you some of the designs I have done.


    All of them are made in beautiful digipacks - I found a printer that also printed small editions - so I created them for printing. BUT I havenít print them yet.


    Maybe you also have some dream albums you loved to have as physical CDs and you always would loved to have :-)


    If anyone is interested I can also post the tracklists I have done for these albums :-)


    Name:  CCRides.jpg
Views: 753
Size:  89.1 KB
    Name:  Copa.jpg
Views: 742
Size:  93.0 KB
    Name:  Copenhagen.jpg
Views: 746
Size:  89.4 KB
    Name:  Hurtin.jpg
Views: 732
Size:  93.2 KB
    Name:  Magic.jpg
Views: 711
Size:  25.0 KB
    Name:  KimLittle.jpg
Views: 707
Size:  23.4 KB
    Name:  KimArms.jpg
Views: 717
Size:  26.0 KB
    Name:  Marvelettes.jpg
Views: 721
Size:  89.4 KB
    Name:  Nittygritty.jpg
Views: 718
Size:  88.2 KB
    Name:  Boss2019.jpg
Views: 719
Size:  90.0 KB

  2. #2
    Niiiiiiiiice work mrbfly

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by TomatoTom123 View Post
    Niiiiiiiiice work mrbfly
    I agree also. Some rare and unseen pictures were used. How about one for Jimmy Ruffin? Keep on plugging.

  4. #4
    Very nice work. Are you on Instagram, by any chance?

  5. #5
    Hi, thanks. Glad you like them
    No, I'm not on Instagram, sorry. But you can contact me here if you want

  6. #6
    Very, Very Nice work! They look so authentic. Have you done any more of these? Thanks for sharing Mrbfly.

  7. #7
    I've taken it upon myself to create my own "deluxe" or "expanded" editions of albums (digitally, of course, I don't really have the time or creativity to make physical mock-ups). With pretty much any artist I have, Motown or Non-Motown, usually involving adding relevant single edits / versions / mixes as well as era-appropriate bonus tracks.

  8. #8
    MrBfly_new,

    Very clever. "I've made this," "I can print these... but haven't yet." You've mentioned everything but selling these items, which will happen when someone privately asks you for one. But we've done this dance before. Surely, by now you know that selling bootlegs is illegal. It really doesn’t matter that the masters belong to Universal, or that they’ve not released the product that you want out. What matters is that this is yet another attempt to sell and profit off the backs of others under the guise of doing something nice or creative for the artists or fans. Want to help? Start a third party label and license the music legally. Put out the packages that you want to see. Do you know what happens then? The writers, producers, musicians and artists get paid. Chris Clark, Brenda Holloway, Kim Weston, The Marvelettes, The Supremes, etc. Everyone gets their royalty check. Until then, I call bullshit.

    Violating international copyright laws, isn’t ok, and it will land you in prison. More importantly, these laws were designed to protect everyone and their art. We all want these expanded editions. But when you do it like this, everyone loses, but you. The artists lose because they get nothing. The fans lose because they get substandard, wrong and low-res masters you compress and lay a thin layer of reverb over, if anything at all. Are you really that selfish, greedy and stupid?

    My plea to every fan, I hope you will continue to report him each and every time he tries yet another way to sell his bootlegs. Every time he solicits you for unreleased material, or photographs, or money call him out on it. Report it to leaks@umusic.com

    Ben/Brian/Bfly, and yes we know your real identity too, authorities will continue to monitor you, and eventually show up to your door time and time again until you finally get it. Love the artists? Stop screwing them over for your own personal gain. All eyes are on you. Apply for a third party license, or continue to prove me right. Your move…

  9. #9
    Yes they are very beautifully done, but I'm with Motown Andy on this.

    It is very easy for folks to copy and print out the images you have posted above. Why not share here all faces of the CD covers you've designed so that forum members can copy them and create their own versions albeit in standard jewel cases, using your tracklists as far as they are able to from their own (paid for) collections. For their own private use that should be allowable but not for re-sale.

    If it really is not your intention to make money on the backs of the artists and recorded work owners - why not put your artwork where your mouth is?

  10. #10
    Thank you Motown Andy. There are a lot of things I would like Universal to release from their vaults and it gets frustrating that they won't. But I would rather do without then participate in black market karma that rips off the artists, writers etc. the sellers claim to love.

  11. #11
    I didn’t know that it is illegal to do mock-up album covers and new ideas for possible LPs that could have been done in the 60s. All of the mock-ups I have done I are filled with songs that were released on several CDs, compilations and digital released, so everyone can, of course, print these designs for their own and burn the tracks on a CDR.


    I don’t know any unreleased songs from the vaults or have any. I just put together songs that already exist on several compilations.


    But I don’t need to explain the fact that I’m only doing Mock-Up covers.


    All these allegations and accusations here…
    This was the last time I showed some mock-up covers….

  12. #12
    That's a shame, you could have posted covers for an expanded "Every Little Bit Hurts" from Brenda Holloway or a Supremes "Remote Control" Lost and Found. Plus all the Vandellas albums as expanded versions too as you are well capable. Too bad.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    869
    Sorry, but I ain’t worried or crying for multi multi millionaires who might lose a few cents of royalties because a fan remix something and then sold it. There are bigger problems in the world for me to be concerned about.

  14. #14
    Awesome artwork. And lets be real hear, it looks like the well has run dry on official Motown releases. If UM won't even release the Reflections Expanded Edition what hope is there for any other official releases?

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Circa 1824 View Post
    Sorry, but I ain’t worried or crying for multi multi millionaires who might lose a few cents of royalties because a fan remix something and then sold it. There are bigger problems in the world for me to be concerned about.
    Brenda Holloway and Kim Weston are multi multi millionaires?

    The bigger problem is ... it's illegal even in Germany.
    Last edited by mysterysinger; 05-26-2020 at 08:48 PM.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Motown Andy View Post
    MrBfly_new,

    Very clever. "I've made this," "I can print these... but haven't yet." You've mentioned everything but selling these items, which will happen when someone privately asks you for one. But we've done this dance before. Surely, by now you know that selling bootlegs is illegal. It really doesn’t matter that the masters belong to Universal, or that they’ve not released the product that you want out. What matters is that this is yet another attempt to sell and profit off the backs of others under the guise of doing something nice or creative for the artists or fans. Want to help? Start a third party label and license the music legally. Put out the packages that you want to see. Do you know what happens then? The writers, producers, musicians and artists get paid. Chris Clark, Brenda Holloway, Kim Weston, The Marvelettes, The Supremes, etc. Everyone gets their royalty check. Until then, I call bullshit.

    Violating international copyright laws, isn’t ok, and it will land you in prison. More importantly, these laws were designed to protect everyone and their art. We all want these expanded editions. But when you do it like this, everyone loses, but you. The artists lose because they get nothing. The fans lose because they get substandard, wrong and low-res masters you compress and lay a thin layer of reverb over, if anything at all. Are you really that selfish, greedy and stupid?

    My plea to every fan, I hope you will continue to report him each and every time he tries yet another way to sell his bootlegs. Every time he solicits you for unreleased material, or photographs, or money call him out on it. Report it to leaks@umusic.com

    Ben/Brian/Bfly, and yes we know your real identity too, authorities will continue to monitor you, and eventually show up to your door time and time again until you finally get it. Love the artists? Stop screwing them over for your own personal gain. All eyes are on you. Apply for a third party license, or continue to prove me right. Your move…
    Motown Andy- I understand your position but in fairness the original poster only did what others in the past on this board has done and that's made mock up album covers. He never made mention of selling any of these mock up. It's unfair to this poster to make unsubstantiated accusations saying that he's selling any of these. It's unfair to blame him/her for what others have done in the past.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Motown Andy View Post
    MrBfly_new,

    Very clever. "I've made this," "I can print these... but haven't yet." You've mentioned everything but selling these items, which will happen when someone privately asks you for one. But we've done this dance before. Surely, by now you know that selling bootlegs is illegal. It really doesn’t matter that the masters belong to Universal, or that they’ve not released the product that you want out. What matters is that this is yet another attempt to sell and profit off the backs of others under the guise of doing something nice or creative for the artists or fans. Want to help? Start a third party label and license the music legally. Put out the packages that you want to see. Do you know what happens then? The writers, producers, musicians and artists get paid. Chris Clark, Brenda Holloway, Kim Weston, The Marvelettes, The Supremes, etc. Everyone gets their royalty check. Until then, I call bullshit.

    Violating international copyright laws, isn’t ok, and it will land you in prison. More importantly, these laws were designed to protect everyone and their art. We all want these expanded editions. But when you do it like this, everyone loses, but you. The artists lose because they get nothing. The fans lose because they get substandard, wrong and low-res masters you compress and lay a thin layer of reverb over, if anything at all. Are you really that selfish, greedy and stupid?

    My plea to every fan, I hope you will continue to report him each and every time he tries yet another way to sell his bootlegs. Every time he solicits you for unreleased material, or photographs, or money call him out on it. Report it to leaks@umusic.com

    Ben/Brian/Bfly, and yes we know your real identity too, authorities will continue to monitor you, and eventually show up to your door time and time again until you finally get it. Love the artists? Stop screwing them over for your own personal gain. All eyes are on you. Apply for a third party license, or continue to prove me right. Your move…
    Can't be screwing over these artists/performers/writers/producers ( the living ones ) any worse than the lawyers and accountants that control/limit/ hoard and feed off this work of yesteryear of which they had nothing to do with .

  18. #18
    Whoever it is, I don't see what the big deal is. First off, Motown, the most legendary record label probably in the world and Universal can't get this product out and even when they do it's another edition of What's Going On for gods sake. I've personally given up on anymore Expanded Supremes. I mean, every 5 years or more? They could have completed this years ago easily. They have The Motown Musical, various shows on The Temptations and Marvin Gaye. The Supremes were Motown's biggest act yet there is no movie, no documentary and no physical CDs past Sing HDH. Yet you want to vilify someone for making mock up album covers??? I've done them myself. Agreed, they're not to be sold but at this point you clearly (Andy/Universal), cannot provide what the older fans want even in limited editions is inexcusable. And once they're out of print or sold out.....LOOK OUT EBAY!!! Those are the price gougers you should be bitching about. It's insane how THEY try to screw people over. For me it's "put up or shut up". No offense but frankly I'm sick of it.

  19. #19
    From the original poster

    "All of them are made in beautiful digipacks - I found a printer that also printed small editions - so I created them for printing. BUT I haven’t print them yet."

    He says they're made in digipacks but then says not printed yet - so which is it?. But if he's not planning to sell why would he need to print small editions - are they being given away free?

  20. #20
    Could anybody tell me if the artists actually do receive royalty cheques each time a re release is issued.From what I know about the US. record companies, rip offs were very common. Read the books of Al Kent and Al Cleveland.

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Polhill View Post
    Could anybody tell me if the artists actually do receive royalty cheques each time a re release is issued.From what I know about the US. record companies, rip offs were very common. Read the books of Al Kent and Al Cleveland.
    It's for sure they don't get royalties from the bootlegs.

  22. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Polhill View Post
    Could anybody tell me if the artists actually do receive royalty cheques each time a re release is issued.From what I know about the US. record companies, rip offs were very common. Read the books of Al Kent and Al Cleveland.
    Most likely it varies from artist to artist.

  23. #23
    You guys will find this interesting. There's information on Ben and an email address for him if you want it oh and there's MrBfly in a previous guise, amazing. And who is Mr Bauer? It's a very good money maker seemingly and all the money goes to him.

    https://soulfuldetroit.com/showthrea...s-and-Supremes

  24. #24
    When bootlegs flood the market it only accomplishes negative things for the artists. They donít get royalties on what is sold and it further depresses the market for legitimate releases, thus denying artists who are often struggling any share of the profitsof their legitimate product. For instance, there were a series of bootleg releases in the 1970s that contained rare and alternate takes of Benny Goodmanís work on 58 Lps that nearly destroyed the market for his legitimate recordings at the time. He complained bitterly about the effect and he was relatively wealthy at the time. The only one who benefits is the bootlegger. The quality of the product is almost always inferior. Iíd rather have legitimate digital only releases at this point. Iím as frustrated as everyone else at the slow pace of Universal releases. Donít take it out on the artists by denying them their royalties.

  25. #25
    Still no proof.I`m not defending bootleggers but I would like to know if artists get all their dues from legitimate releases. The two Als might differ.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by Roger Polhill View Post
    Still no proof.I`m not defending bootleggers but I would like to know if artists get all their dues from legitimate releases. The two Als might differ.
    Put it this way: a slim chance of an artist getting those royalties on a legit release beats a ZERO chance of getting those royalties on a bootleg release.
    OR
    Two wrongs don't make a right.

  27. #27
    I still want to know!

  28. Quote Originally Posted by Boogiedown View Post
    Can't be screwing over these artists/performers/writers/producers ( the living ones ) any worse than the lawyers and accountants that control/limit/ hoard and feed off this work of yesteryear of which they had nothing to do with .
    That's like saying you'd rather have your paycheck stolen by an anonymous , fly-by-night opportunist rather than a proper crook.

  29. Quote Originally Posted by Roger Polhill View Post
    I still want to know!
    That's one of those things where you would have to play detective and do some serious research. Google, old magazine and newspaper articles, interviews. One book will never give the complete story. I recall, and maybe it was here, that some time ago there was a guy who was helping artists get back royalties. Many of the artists had no idea that they were due these payments. Sometimes it was as simple as an incorrect mailing address or it may have been the artists didn't even realize there were channels that would monitor this sort of thing and track down payments for them.

    In many cases, the artists were flat out cheated because many had no concept of hiring proper attorneys before signing contracts. Still, artists like Ronnie Spector still were able to right some of those wrongs years later with the help of legal assistance.

    I don't think you'll get a blanket answer to your question without putting in some time...all over the internet.

  30. #30
    Thanks WWLFAC. I just know that some songwriters when they received their royalty cheques for a major hit, after all deductions- studio, mics etc. there wasn`t enough left to pay their taxes.

  31. Quote Originally Posted by Roger Polhill View Post
    Thanks WWLFAC. I just know that some songwriters when they received their royalty cheques for a major hit, after all deductions- studio, mics etc. there wasn`t enough left to pay their taxes.
    Thanks for not taking that in a negative way. I was afraid I was coming off kinda harsh. I'm fascinated by issues like this. When the Beatles hired Allen Klein as part of their management team, I believe he found that even they had money from sales and other areas even they didn't know about. So that alone tells you nearly everybody got ripped off as far as royalties. (But later, I think there were charges by the Rolling $tones and Beatle$ that Klein ended up ripping THEM off. I gotta go back and read my Beatles books)

    So this thing with royalties is really wide ranging. Unfortunately, many 60s artists will tell you they went into it for the pure love of music. They generally weren't as savvy about the business part of it as they might have been. However, if they did get smart, record companies could easily replace many of them with someone else just waiting for a chance. I know Frankie Lyman was well cheated out of royalties for singing as well as songwriting.

  32. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Polhill View Post
    Still no proof.I`m not defending bootleggers but I would like to know if artists get all their dues from legitimate releases. The two Als might differ.
    No of course they don't. But at least it is possible they will and recourse if they don't. Neither is true of bootlegs/bootleggers.

  33. #33
    Let's say that someone like Ms. Kim Weston still gets a 2% royalty on the sales of her catalog (and using a rate of 2% is likely much higher than the real royalty rate), if the record company makes/sells 2,000 copies and generates $20 per sold copy of pure profit (also doubtful it would be that high), she would likely get $800. Now, this is me simply responding to the part of the discussion about royalties. Here's hoping she, and all of the Motown artists, still do get royalties or re-negotiated better deals over the years. These days artists make much more money, royalty-wise, on streaming and downloads, since the quantity being consumed via those platforms, for some of these legacy artists, is much higher, versus physical media. Hence, the reason Ms. Mary Wilson and others had been advocating to get their royalties, which resulted in the recent signing of the respective bill into law. It takes a lot more plays on streaming for an artist to generate any direct revenue for themselves. Apparently on Spotify, 1,000 plays is equivalent to 1 unit sold (ie. 1 CD). Yes, record companies have been ripping artists off for decades, but that is why they are a business. Capitalism is a pyramid scheme, at the end of the day. Someone is always making more money at the top, than the others at the bottom. However, with bootlegs, no one gets paid.

    It's interesting though to think about some of those bootleg Marginal releases that came out back in the day, or those multi-generational fan cassettes that used to be copied from one fan to another, all of which contained unreleased material that had not yet been released for many years to come. I'm sure all of us owned one of those, at one time or another. I wonder if they helped or hurted potential future sales? As it seems to some degree that they did generate more interest with fans wanting to have this material released in better quality. I know speaking for myself, it made me want more, or to have it in better quality. I myself would consider rare/unreleased tracks and the bootlegs thereof to be an extremely niche sector of any fan base. I would think that those who are willing to pay for it in an unofficial form would still be the same ones to return to the fountain, so to speak, and would pay for it again, once it is released officially. This is me just playing devil's advocate.

    I do agree though that the bottom line is that someone is making 100% of the profit off of material that they don't own or have the rights to. I would also argue that because these bootleg releases look so professional, that they have the potential to create confusion on the market, as they are easily passable as being something official. That in itself can create problems with future sales. I once accidentally bought a CD by the girl group, The Flirtations, on Ebay, which was being sold as an official release. When it arrived, it looked almost like the real thing, but I soon realized I got ripped off and it was a bootleg. Thankfully I got my money back. I've seen this happen time and time again. If we as people aren't honest in business and don't try to uphold the underlying laws and principles to protect what we perceive as "honest business", then there is no recourse for the consumer or protection for the manufacturer (ie. the artist, the company, etc) and everything falls apart. People deserved to be compensated for their art. Sadly, right now, during the pandemic, very few artists are getting paid at all, due to lack of gigs and due to lack of means to distribute and create music. If everyone was perpetually bootlegging these artists' life works, with no consequences, no one would get ever get paid.
    Last edited by carlo; 05-28-2020 at 09:12 AM.

  34. #34
    On a completely different note, it seems Universal has stopped releasing these expanded editions altogether. We have seen other labels like Reel Music, Ace and Real Gone put out a handful of titles over time, but clearly they also have their own agendas to release music by other artists, and therefore the quantity of Motown titles coming out is still much slower than we'd all like. This is understandable, since they too are a business and need to diversify their product to survive, as I'm sure some titles tend to be a hit or miss. With that being said, I wonder why no one has yet gone the route of a "pledge campaign"? I have only seen this done once for the Motown in Paris 2 CD set that came out, but have seen this done for many other releases via other labels. The idea is that fans commit to putting down a specified amount of money in advance for a specific release, such as $20 for a CD. Once the pledge campaign reaches a specific monetary level from its supporters, the release is considered fully funded and can then be licensed and manufactured. I would think that this type of campaign would eliminate all of the up-front risk on the record label's part, since it would guarantee that they would get the return on their up-front investment, with a certain amount of people/money guaranteed. I guess for a company like Universal, this type of initiative would be small fish in the pond. However, it would be great if someone else could step up to do something like this. It could be worthwhile? The fully funded campaign could be used toward securing licensing, art/design and manufacturing. In essence, a project resulting from such an initiative would be considered an official product.
    Last edited by carlo; 05-28-2020 at 09:35 AM.

  35. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by mysterysinger View Post
    From the original poster
    But if he's not planning to sell why would he need to print small editions - are they being given away free?
    Maybe you could have asked that question first.

  36. #36
    I wonder if anyone can tell us how the highly anticipated Blinky Williams compilation has sold? After a decades long campaign for its release, how many consumers actually bought it?

    Who is the audience for music from Motown vaults, whether bootleg or official? Also, not clear what artist royalties are paid particularly if they are still subject to their historic Motown deals.

  37. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy View Post
    I wonder if anyone can tell us how the highly anticipated Blinky Williams compilation has sold? After a decades long campaign for its release, how many consumers actually bought it?

    Who is the audience for music from Motown vaults, whether bootleg or official?
    Good questions. It's funny because there are fans who complain on here about wanting more releases but I've also seen posts in the past from fans who have stated that they haven't yet bought a certain release that's being discussed and/or have no plans to. Therefore, if you're not supporting the product being put out, then how can anyone expect there to be more of it released? Perhaps there are just too many fans who are aging and now set in their ways, very generally speaking. Priorities change and it becomes, "Well, how many versions of this song do I need?" I've always bought the different compilations that have come out in recent years but I know there are others who are no longer interested in collecting that sort of thing. It's a trait that can be attributed to the primary demographic of this specific fan base. Having baby boomers in my family, they're starting to simplify their lives, get rid of excess possessions...so how many of them are running to buy the latest Supremes reissue on CD? How many of them know how to buy a CD, or where to find one, when most of the music stores have disappeared? (To anyone reading this post: Clearly you are an exception to the rule since you know how to use a computer well enough)! Some of our society is also becoming more environmentally conscious and hence the movement to digital. The music industry has changed so much because of all of these factors, and add the threat of bootlegs to the mix and it becomes even more complicated. No wonder we haven't seen any reissues lately. The music industry is still trying to figure things out.

    Physical product is not selling like it used to, but reissues are still being put out on the market by the big labels, for legacy artists. I am an ABBA fan and they've had their albums reissued in every possible form, hundreds of times over. Mind you, most, if not all of it, in recent years, has been on vinyl. I can't remember the last time Universal put out a CD on them, outside of the useless compilations. It's been quite a few years. We ended up getting the mono version of Reflections on vinyl recently, but no CD. So I guess that explains where the money/priority is these days for the bigger labels, especially since they tend to charge an inflated premium on vinyl. I wonder if Universal would ever consider releasing something like "Diana Ross & the Supremes Live at the Hollywood Bowl", if it meant only being able to release it exclusively on vinyl? I guess only they would know how well it would sell, based on historical sales.

    I am a fan of Petula Clark and they recently made an unreleased concert from 1974 at Royal Albert Hall, available on CD in deluxe packaging, with a limited run of 2,000. In addition to this, within that run of 2,000 numbered copies, 100 of them are signed by Ms. Petula Clark herself. More than two months have passed and sadly not even the initial 100 signed copies have sold out. If that isn't an indication of where the music industry at large is at with the sales of these special CD projects, than I don't know...

    Here's hoping the upcoming Diana remix project release sells well on CD and vinyl. Perhaps it will help serve as an indication that there's still sufficient interest in purchasing Diana Ross/Supremes music in a physical format.
    Last edited by carlo; 05-28-2020 at 02:07 PM.

  38. #38
    Yet if Universal music released new music we would not looking for these unofficial versions

  39. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by daviddh View Post
    Yet if Universal music released new music we would not looking for these unofficial versions

    Yes and if Universal is so concerned about the artists , the musicians , the producers etc. etc. etc.
    getting their fair share,
    they should have released all this stuff they're are hoarding YEARS ago , back when it really mattered , back when more copies would've sold and therefore these artists and producers and musicans etc. that they are SUPPOSEDLY so concerned about could have really financially benefited over a longer period of time. ( within their lifetime!!!!)
    Last edited by Boogiedown; 05-28-2020 at 02:56 PM.

  40. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy View Post
    I wonder if anyone can tell us how the highly anticipated Blinky Williams compilation has sold? After a decades long campaign for its release, how many consumers actually bought it?
    I sure as hell did. I show my love for Motown and its music by buying everything I can, whether it's CD or digital-only I don't care. I support the music and these releases with my wallet. It's the only way to guarantee future releases, honestly.

  41. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by carlo View Post

    I would also argue that because these bootleg releases look so professional, that they have the potential to create confusion on the market, as they are easily passable as being something official. That in itself can create problems with future sales. I once accidentally bought a CD by the girl group, The Flirtations, on Ebay, which was being sold as an official release. When it arrived, it looked almost like the real thing, but I soon realized I got ripped off and it was a bootleg. Thankfully I got my money back. I've seen this happen time and time again. If we as people aren't honest in business and don't try to uphold the underlying laws and principles to protect what we perceive as "honest business", then there is no recourse for the consumer or protection for the manufacturer (ie. the artist, the company, etc) and everything falls apart. Peo.
    This is an excellent point. I certainly want everything I buy to be upfront, properly labeled, and the real thing , not a cheap knock-off that's pretending to be something it isn't, no matter what it is.

  42. Quote Originally Posted by carlo View Post
    Let's say that someone like Ms. Kim Weston still gets a 2% royalty on the sales of her catalog (and using a rate of 2% is likely much higher than the real royalty rate), if the record company makes/sells 2,000 copies and generates $20 per sold copy of pure profit (also doubtful it would be that high), she would likely get $800. Now, this is me simply responding to the part of the discussion about royalties. Here's hoping she, and all of the Motown artists, still do get royalties or re-negotiated better deals over the years. These days artists make much more money, royalty-wise, on streaming and downloads, since the quantity being consumed via those platforms, for some of these legacy artists, is much higher, versus physical media. Hence, the reason Ms. Mary Wilson and others had been advocating to get their royalties, which resulted in the recent signing of the respective bill into law. It takes a lot more plays on streaming for an artist to generate any direct revenue for themselves. Apparently on Spotify, 1,000 plays is equivalent to 1 unit sold (ie. 1 CD). Yes, record companies have been ripping artists off for decades, but that is why they are a business. Capitalism is a pyramid scheme, at the end of the day. Someone is always making more money at the top, than the others at the bottom. However, with bootlegs, no one gets paid.

    It's interesting though to think about some of those bootleg Marginal releases that came out back in the day, or those multi-generational fan cassettes that used to be copied from one fan to another, all of which contained unreleased material that had not yet been released for many years to come. I'm sure all of us owned one of those, at one time or another. I wonder if they helped or hurted potential future sales? As it seems to some degree that they did generate more interest with fans wanting to have this material released in better quality. I know speaking for myself, it made me want more, or to have it in better quality. I myself would consider rare/unreleased tracks and the bootlegs thereof to be an extremely niche sector of any fan base. I would think that those who are willing to pay for it in an unofficial form would still be the same ones to return to the fountain, so to speak, and would pay for it again, once it is released officially. This is me just playing devil's advocate.

    I do agree though that the bottom line is that someone is making 100% of the profit off of material that they don't own or have the rights to. I would also argue that because these bootleg releases look so professional, that they have the potential to create confusion on the market, as they are easily passable as being something official. That in itself can create problems with future sales. I once accidentally bought a CD by the girl group, The Flirtations, on Ebay, which was being sold as an official release. When it arrived, it looked almost like the real thing, but I soon realized I got ripped off and it was a bootleg. Thankfully I got my money back. I've seen this happen time and time again. If we as people aren't honest in business and don't try to uphold the underlying laws and principles to protect what we perceive as "honest business", then there is no recourse for the consumer or protection for the manufacturer (ie. the artist, the company, etc) and everything falls apart. People deserved to be compensated for their art. Sadly, right now, during the pandemic, very few artists are getting paid at all, due to lack of gigs and due to lack of means to distribute and create music. If everyone was perpetually bootlegging these artists' life works, with no consequences, no one would get ever get paid.
    No matter how well you think you cover something, there is always someone who says it better. You said it better. You really hit every single nail on the head with this.

  43. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by WaitingWatchingLookingForAChance View Post
    No matter how well you think you cover something, there is always someone who says it better. You said it better. You really hit every single nail on the head with this.
    Thanks WWLFAC (hope it's ok I used an acronym instead of your full alias)

  44. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by DJMoch View Post
    I sure as hell did. I show my love for Motown and its music by buying everything I can, whether it's CD or digital-only I don't care. I support the music and these releases with my wallet. It's the only way to guarantee future releases, honestly.
    Many of us feel the same. I do not hesitate to buy official releases, even if I already have bootlegs. Only as a matter of principle. I understand that it's a question of revenue and possibly royalties to the artists, songwriters and musicians who created the product.

    However, many media conglomerates, and sometimes individual owners, will withhold music until it is outside of copyright protection. That can mean that the artists, musicians, songwriters -- and the audience -- are dead before it sees the light of day. It is a deliberate strategy to reduce the need for consent or attribution, or the number of potential claims to sale and licensing proceeds.

    I will take my music however I can get it. And then I will purchase official commercial releases whenever I can.

  45. #45
    Guy, obviously I don't know what Blinky's 'Heart Full of Soul' sales were but for a couple of weeks it was in Amazon UK's Top 10 soul/funk best sellers so that's not too shabby. It was in the best sellers list for a couple months. It's now out of stock on Amazon UK and is only available via import.

  46. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,794
    These label art depts should hire you. IMPRESSIVE!!!!

  47. #47
    First, I want to say thank you to the folks at Universal (Andy, Harry, George, et al), for every release they painstakingly put together for the fans. Every release was a labor of love and they’ve put out an impressive body of work over the years despite the lackluster interest from corporate. Indeed, they have kept the legacy alive. I LOVE what they did with The Supremes, and what they did worked - at least for this group of fans, we hunger for MORE MUSIC.

    I appreciate the music and would never want to “knowingly” support a bootlegger for the simple reason that the artists and others associated with the music don’t get paid. That simply is wrong on many levels. However, this guy (whoever he is), is like any other business. He sees an inefficiency (or inconsistency) in the market and fills the gap. That being said, he makes money knowing the fans will likely support him because of the disinterest at Universal about being consistent with the releases. Again, it’s wrong, but I certainly understand it.

    What I don’t understand, which has been voiced by several posters in this thread, is exactly why Universal isn’t interested. I have supported every release whether I was interested or not (including the many definitive versions of WGO on both CD and vinyl), in some cases like that of The Supremes and others, buying more than one copy - NOT to sell on eBay - but simply to support the official release and because if something should happen to one copy, then I have another and not have to endure the price gouging on online second hand marketplaces. There have been many CD’s that have sold out - Motown Complete Singles 1966, This Is The Story, WDOLG expanded, and others so clearly the interest is there.

    This is where I get confused however: the company that puts out Beatles releases over time do such a fine job with their mono albums box set, and their stereo albums box set, and other notable releases both on CD AND vinyl, that one can only wonder why Motown isn’t held in the same class as that of The Beatles (I don’t even understand why original Motown albums - classic period - are valued considerably less than those of the Beatles, yet at one time they were - but that’s another conversation). Are we a different “caliber” of fans? One can only guess. Motown in it’s own right is every bit as popular and iconic as The Beatles and yet I find Universal’s disinterest appalling.

    I would bet my last $5 that most of us on this board would probably max out their credit cards to buy all of the expanded CD’s at once by the Supremes or even other artists rather than wait 5 years in between sets just to buy the latest ONE. If Universal was putting out, for example, some limited edition collection of albums or such, THEN it would make sense for a 5 year gap. Hell, I’d even buy a complete mono albums box in vinyl if they’d put it out. Even a remastered Diana Ross Jazz and Blues blu ray (hope springs eternal).

    Universal is clearly missing the mark here. And I agree with the poster who spoke of missed opportunities with anniversaries and musicals and such - even with the Hitsville documentary that has YET to be released for sale on DVD or blu ray (maybe it’s me, but I don’t want to subscribe to Showtime just to see the doc anytime I want).

    And yet, another poster was right - it’s not just the fans that’s getting older. So are the surviving artists Universal claims to want to support. On one hand, the bootlegger(s) are keeping money from product for the fan’s sake that should go to the artists, and on the other hand, Universal is holding back from active releases for the serious fans and collectors that would generate the income artists and others surely need. An aggravating situation to be sure.

    To me, Motown is more than just a greatest hits package with Baby Love, My Girl and I Heard It Through The Grapevine. Bootleggers be damned, but all I know is had it not been for the guys in Belgium with their Marginal CD’s, I, and most of us, never would have known what type of treasure trove existed/exists in the Motown vaults.
    Last edited by justanothermotownfan; 05-29-2020 at 04:30 AM.

  48. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by justanothermotownfan View Post
    First, I want to say thank you to the folks at Universal (Andy, Harry, George, et al), for every release they painstakingly put together for the fans. Every release was a labor of love and theyíve put out an impressive body of work over the years despite the lackluster interest from corporate. Indeed, they have kept the legacy alive.

    I appreciate the music and would never want to ďknowinglyĒ support a bootlegger for the simple reason that the artists and others associated with the music donít get paid. That simply is wrong on many levels. However, this guy (whoever he is) is like any other business. He sees an inefficiency (or inconsistency) in the market and fills the gap. That being said, he makes money knowing the fans will likely support him because of the disinterest at Universal being consistent with the releases. Again, itís wrong, but I certainly understand it.

    What I donít understand, which has been voiced by several posters in this thread, is exactly why Universal isnít interested. I have supported every release whether I was interested or not (including the many definitive versions of WGO on both CD and vinyl), in some cases like that of The Supremes and others, buying more than one copy - NOT to sell on eBay - but simply to support the official release and because if something should happen to one copy, then I have another and not have to endure the price gouging on online second hand marketplaces. There have been many CDís that have sold out - Motown Complete Singles 1966, This Is The Story, WDOLG expanded, and others so clearly the interest is there.

    This is where I get confused however: the company that puts out Beatles releases over time do such a fine job with their mono albums box set, and their stereo albums box set, and others, both on CD AND vinyl that one can only wonder why Motown isnít held in the same class as that of The Beatles. Are we a different ďcaliberĒ of fans? One can only guess. Motown in itís own right is every bit as popular and iconic as The Beatles and yet Universalís disinterest I find appalling.

    I would bet my last $5 that most of us on this board would probably max out their credit cards to buy all of the expanded CDís at once by other artists even (Temptations, Jr Walker, etc, including The remaining Supremesí), rather than wait 5 years in between sets just to buy the latest one. Hell, Iíd even buy a complete mono albums box in vinyl if theyíd put it out. Even a remastered Diana Ross Jazz and Blues blu ray (hope springs eternal).

    Universal is clearly missing the mark here. And I agree with the poster who spoke of missed opportunities with anniversaries and musicals and such - even with the Hitsville documentary that has YET to be released for sale on DVD or blu ray (maybe itís me, but I donít want to subscribe to Showtime just to see the doc anytime I want).

    And yet, another poster was right - itís not just the fans thatís getting older. So are the surviving artists they claim to want to support. On one hand, the bootleggers are keeping money from product for the fanís sake that should go to the artists, and on the other hand, Universal is holding back from active releases for the fans that would generate the money artists and others surely need. An aggravating situation to be sure.

    Bootleggers be damned, but all I know is had it not been for the guys in Belgium with their Marginal CDís, I, and most of us, never would have known what treasure trove existed in the Motown vaults.
    There is a further concern and that is when 'fakes' enter the market on top of all the damage they do financially to the repertoire owners and the artists they also gum up the history of the label. Even down to designing 'could have been LP and 45 covers' can be a problem. I've seen these picked up and used in the not so recent past as examples of Motown picture sleeves. Imagine if you will the market suddenly got flooded with 'what if' painting by Rembrandt - Gainsborough or Constable..to the casual art fan they could easily be taken as genuine and go down in history as being the real thing or used in the classroom or lecture theatre as examples of an artists work. The Motown history is as important as any other and to lay claim by inference has been officially available is just so wrong. If you want to sell fake covers and fake picture sleeves then they should be clearly marked as counterfeit for that's what they are or be stickered non - genuine release for in twenty or thirty years time when we are all gone the current Motown historians will believe these to be real.
    Secondly our friends at the Belgium label - you were marginally correct - they did stir up a hornets nest BUT the material they put onto their CD's was in the main released - maybe hard to find and maybe new to CD BUT released. It was the tape sharing bootleggers that opened up the Motown vaults fully in the 1990's when the first Volume of Cellarful Of Motown was released and with the full backing of Universal was dubbed the 'bootleg buster' and what followed was a Tsunami of unreleased tracks in the early 2000's - the problem becomes that the audience becomes so greedy as soon as one release comes along another is demanded immediately - business and record companies cannot just work like that.
    When I see the 'well if they don't release it they deserve what they get' attitude it really makes my blood boil, so if your neighbour want to borrow your lawnmower but he doesn't want to let you have if for whatever his reason - you believe you can get somebody to go in his yard and take it? Madness....

  49. #49
    Paul, you make very valid points especially about the artwork mistakenly becoming "official" over time. I never thought about that. Well received...
    Last edited by justanothermotownfan; 05-29-2020 at 06:14 AM.

  50. #50
    Just chiming in on the business side of things -

    Yes, artists get paid on legitimate releases. How much they are paid is decided by their individual contracts, as well as their advance / expense / recoup status with the label.

    An even more enthusiastic yes for songwriters. With CDs, Vinyl, and Cassettes, Songwriting and Publishing royalties are paid based on the amount of copies physically pressed, not the amount sold. So, if a label presses up 1,500 copies of a record, the songwriters are paid their due for every single copy, regardless of whether that copy sells or not. For digital, it is calculated in real time based on the number of downloads and streams, but there is a court mandated rate paid per physical pressing of every song to songwriters/publishers.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

[REMOVE ADS]

Ralph Terrana
MODERATOR

Welcome to Soulful Detroit! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
Soulful Detroit is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to Soulful Detroit. [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.