The more this story morphs, the more I think of the scene in Woody Allen’s Love and Death when his character needs to travel to Minsk.  When his carriage is leaving, the village idiot hitches a ride.  When they get to Minsk, there’s a big banner “Welcome Village Idiots”.  Those already there are wearing dunce caps and dancing in the town square.

This is a perfect metaphor for the preposterous kerfuffle on Taylor and the sale of Big Machine’s masters (yes, people, she never owned them).

As one of your oldest readers, I feel the onus of reminding your readers that the consolidation of the record business from hundreds of labels to two and a half majors means that HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of artist masters have been sold to third parties.  Can any of your readers (or Taylor Swift fans) name one artist who complained that selling their CREATIVE work caused them a hysterical and public nervous breakdown?

I haven’t seen one comment mention that screenwriters have to transfer ownership of their creative work in perpetuity to movie studios, including sequels, remakes, merchandising, AND the rights to all the characters in the script.

Remember that Taylor had three ways to get back her masters: 1. resigning with Big Machine, 2.  buying Big Machine and 3.  exercising her termination rights under copyright law.

The narrative by Taylor has been disingenuous, malicious, and at odds with industry practice since the late 1800’s.

I am reminded of the schmuck with earlaps, Donald Trump, who lost the election and simply created a false narrative that it had been stolen from him.

Of course, Trump’s lies are a lot more consequential than Taylor’s but hers still trouble me.  Hey, Tay, the underdog role doesn’t fit well and, oh, by the way, your new record company is now 20% owned by a hedge fund but you haven’t mentioned that.

Lance Grode

__________________________________________

Hi Bob – Long time listener, first time caller. I have enjoyed your newsletter for several years and have often resisted the urge to reply. For context – I am a 45 yr old white male who is not a long-time Taylor fan. I do however appreciate that she is extremely talented. Like many others, Folklore touched me and I thought the songwriting was deeply compelling. It was absolutely the right album at the right time for me.

The amount of negativity that your original post has generated is truly sad. Of all the terrible things in the world today, this is what we have time to rail against? Despite the massive talent of those who replied, much of the rhetoric came off as extremely tone deaf. I get this may be Marketing, but she could certainly be using influence and time in much worse ways. Maybe this is what Taylor has been fighting against all along?

Feel free to ignore. I am just a “nobody” who thinks it’s disturbing how much our society continues to be threatened by a young woman with power…

Tim Hussey

__________________________________________

I just listened to the new Taylor Swift recording with my 16 year old daughter who is a big fan. I think the new versions sound great and they are not exactly the same as the originals. You can hear the confidence of a more mature artist who is much more comfortable with herself and is making these recordings with joy. I applaud her efforts to take control of her material and as an early skeptic of her music I have come to appreciate what she does and how much she has grown. That’s what being an artist is, the freedom to grow, change, and express your unique vision of the world. I believe we should celebrate any artist having more control on how their music is presented.

Joe Fletcher

__________________________________________

Wow, Bob. I can not believe that all these old white guys feel authorized to express their opinions, which nobody cares about but other old white guys, about a young artist who has proved her exceptional talent again and again and has the balls go to up against Scooter and the other robber barons who expected her to give up after they gleefully fucked her over.  Any man who had his music stolen by an arrogant dick at a record company would come out guns blazing—why do men disparage a female artist for trying to get hers? And what have any of these guys ever done that was even close to comparable to Taylor’s achievements? Not a thing, guaranteed.
Honestly, I’m not a Taylor fan, but the comments in this column made me so mad that now I’m going to buy the rerelease.

Bonnie Hayes

__________________________________________

A few mentioned catching lightening in a bottle with the originals and it’s so true.  The re-recordings are done in spite and not for artistry. Imagine if Springsteen had re-recorded the first 3 LPs after settling with Mike Appel. Would never had been the same…especially on Born To Run. I believe Max Weinberg said he still can’t match Ernest Boom Carter’s drums on the title track.  And what did El Jefe do at his RRHOF induction? He invited Appel to the soirée since he knows without Appel’s guerilla management he would not be where he is now.

T-Swiz’s deal seems to be about ownership and licensing with her fans a lower priority. Yeah she will says it’s all about her fans but it’s all about the wallet. I fear now we will have her songs shoved down our throats in commercials and films. Lastly i do hope the producers and original studio musicians get their due cut on this. They made that original so-called lightening in a bottle.

Brian Helgesen
Philly PA

__________________________________________

I’ve read through the many comments about TS’s re-records and feel compelled to say how disappointing it is that the business of music has become more important than the music itself. It degrades us.

There’s always a deal to be made and there is no “standard deal”. We are in the information age. No reason exists why TS couldn’t have participated in the capital liquidation of her BM master recordings and/or been granted an administrative right over their ongoing use.

This binary all or nothing, I either own or don’t own my masters bullshit, belies the enormous hard work of many people whose participation matters in creation of any real success and reiterates the historical lack of vision by industry executives.  This entire shit show is about juvenile egos and their continued focus which diminishes our entire industry.

-Tony Gottlieb

__________________________________________

re-interpretations are the norm in classical and jazz. Are the ‘original’ versions of pop songs inherently better because of a listener’s emotional attachment to them?

Taylor notwithstanding, maybe an artist has something further to contribute a few years down the line. Consider Kate Bush re-recording ‘Wuthering Heights’

And if you don’t like it, fine. Don’t listen!

sofu_gan

__________________________________________

I have no dog in this fight, but out of sheer curiosity I listened and compared. Yuk. Just yuk. The re-recordings remind me of those science fiction movies, where a human is cloned but has no soul inside them….and in just the same way as Frankenstein’s monster, it’s actually kind of grotesque, in terms of artistry. I understand why she’s doing it, but come on.. it’s totally nuts as far as the fans are concerned. The fans don’t benefit, they lose, because Taylor is now about to go about recording and selling a huge body of music with no soul, because as you rightly point out Bob: ‘you cannot capture lightning twice’. And now on YouTube there are lyric versions entitled ‘Taylor’s Version’, but the real truth is that these aren’t purely ‘Taylor’s versions’…they’re actually a Xerox of ‘Taylor AND Nathan’s’ version (her co-producer on the originals). So if this is all about ‘intellectual property’, I sure hope Nathan Chapman is being looked after, and receiving producer royalties, because the original ‘lightning in a bottle’ that was captured and made her a global and rich mega star, is actually half Nathan’s. And if I were him, I would be really saddened by this, because the two of them really did capture some magic and record it. I can’t respect Taylor for doing this, because the art should always come before the money… which she already has plenty of. Ok, so she’s pissed off at a record company… WHO ISN’T?!?!

Simon Hosford.

__________________________________________

Might be time to issue a retraction or apologize.  It doesn’t even matter if she’s worth 400 million. The money has nothing to do with it although it means most of the world disagrees with you. Listen to Fearless (Taylor’s version) and then rethink everything you thought you knew. She was young. And raw. I’m a singer and when you can’t hear yourself on stage it makes for what you heard at the grammys. But now is 31. And clearly been working on her voice since your words took hold of her. As a fan of hers I might even give you credit for changing her. But whatever you think of her voice she is a talented soprano with a low range that most sopranos do not have. And a talent for writing that even you wish you had. So no, you aren’t an asshole. Mean.. maybe or just honest. 16 year old Taylor doesn’t exist anymore. That Taylor is dead. This one is a woman with a voice…maybe one that deserves you giving her another listen.

Steve Brown

__________________________________________

I completely agree with Thomas Flood’s statement that this is a canny business maneuver and not particularly about the art. Taylor will own new versions of her earlier works that will “compete“ with the previous versions for commercial use, streams, etc. devaluing the earlier catalog. I suspect that fact was considered by Scooter and it may have motivated him to move the catalog quickly to a private equity owner. Taylor Swift is first and foremost an astute businessperson.

Bob Cavalieri

__________________________________________

It’s about licensing and owning your own material.

It’s good business.

Ron Stone

__________________________________________

The letters reminded me of Richard Hell’s multiple efforts to revise his second album, Destiny Street. Unhappy with the original engineering (as well as his drug-impaired musical contributions), and with the masters thought to be lost, he used a cassette of the rhythm tracks and re-recorded everything else for Destiny Street Repaired. The results might not satisfy those who internalized the original, but given the market in which the album operates, it was clearly an artist revising for art’s sake, rather than for cash. Many years later, three of the four multitrack master reels were found, and Hell remixed them into Destiny Street Remixed, and released the results alongside the original and the Repaired edition as Destiny Street Complete, along with added demos. The package is interestingly satisfying as an artist’s aural essay of his early work and later maturity.

hyperbolium

__________________________________________

I’m not familiar with any of Taylor Swift’s output, so I googled up this youtube comparison of Love Story

2008 and 2021.

Immediate impression.

I only had to listen to a few seconds, the 2021 intro switching to 2008 – it was a switch from nothing-special-par-for-the-course-2021-sonic clarity to an instance groove, feel and atmosphere.

The creatively honest course of action would be to write a Love Story 2 reflecting her current “maturity”.

Overly focusing on separation and clarity of instruments/vocals as most reviewers tend to do, is a red herring. In fact most reviews I’ve read are strong on the surrounding non-musical narrative and weak on actually listening to what’s in front of them – but as Lee Abrams and others know know all to well,  it’s targeted narratives that sell.

antgimel

__________________________________________

Taylor has expended how much energy, lost time and needless struggle over her battles with Big Red Machine, resorting to (attempted and ultimately failed) cannibalism.  A word that truly irks me but it applies.

Anyone remember the 70s?  The acts would put out 3 studio LPs, tour and build a fan base – and clean up with a live LP.  There was little cannibalism and instead the fans had two versions of one song, that was like 1+ 1 = 3, multiplied by the tracks put on the live LP

Because when you tired of one version, you flipped back to the other.

I don’t have all night to list all the records that come to my mind but let’s just say Kiss Alive and Frampton Comes Alive and Live Silver Bullet and Cheap Trick in Budokan and One More From the Road, while immensely sparking catalog sales, independently served as the amongst the respective biggest albums, fan favorites, in the repertoire.

True true true, that was when owning records was the only means of on demand and we had nothing but time, to marinate in catalogues and go back and pick up early studio albums after the live LP blew new breath on them, and nowadays another LP is pinched for space in our day, but the point is still applicable – rather than try to cleave listeners from a studio track by trying to take that track in a studio, bust out the best live version you have and run with it.

You don’t do this, why? It’s not about the music or the fans. Oh, my, it’s your ego.  You just can’t let it go.  Believe me – you’re doing so will get across more becoming.

Dennis Pelowski

__________________________________________

She’s doesn’t care what we think and it’s working!

She in person is one of the nicest people we’ve met and last minute she’s asked Echosmith to be her musical surprise and it sometimes was only 2-3 hours before a stadium show and we never sent our rider yet everything on our rider was there plus a bottle of finest champagne and a hand written letter.

She’s brilliant and kind and writing her own story!

We get one life so do what you want!

Jeffery David

__________________________________________

I like the new Fearless, and even better… I LOVE THAT WE ARE ALL TALKING ABOUT IT.  It feels more current, more fresh, more NOW.  And we are talking about it!

Lizzz Kritzer

__________________________________________

Her generation and fans respect her fight and independence to stand up to the “Rank & File”.

This is bigger than the music. She is leading and does not care what the Old Farts in the industry say.

Duff Rice

__________________________________________

So interesting to hear what Philip Paul Adam Steve Colin Anders Matt Don Bob Andrew Rick Rich etc etc etc all had to say about one of the premier living female musicians!

Paula Franceschi

__________________________________________

Hi Bob – through 80 percent of this and really have no issue with it.  I actually would have not  pulled it up on Deezer ( yes – you should discuss the other streaming services) if you had not mentioned it.  Not a bad soundtrack to Saturday night in Canada….

Thanks,

John Hayes

__________________________________________

In a 2004 interview with the New York Times, Stephen Hawking was asked what his IQ was.

He said: “I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers.”

Jim Carroll

__________________________________________

I’m sure you’ve noticed a correlation between the stupidity of the comments and the grammatical tragedies. Ok, the tempo’s are the same, with all do respect.

By the way, my IQ was measured at 168 and I’m stupid as fuck.

Eric Bazilian

“More than 100 corporate executives hold call to discuss halting donations and investments to fight controversial voting bills”: https://wapo.st/3wRNWFw

“Will Smith’s production pulls out of Georgia, citing the state’s voting law.”: https://nyti.ms/3wOJmYG

And Live Nation and AEG? Spotify? And even the Grammy organization?

For far too long the corporations, the entities behind the acts, have chosen to remain faceless and out of the fray, letting the acts make the moves and take the heat. But no act today has the power of a corporation, especially economically. Solidarity yields results. But the enterprise with the most mindshare, that is rooted in the Black experience, stays silent. Why?

Yes, music affects hearts and minds more than any other entertainment enterprise. It’s directly from the act to the public without interference. Well, this century the heavy hand of the label is too often involved, interfering in the artistic enterprise, talking about the cost of marketing and… If it’s about business, why can’t these same companies look outward and aid the public at large?

Yes, a look at the chart tells you that hip-hop, a Black-originated and dominated musical format, rules. Yet, once again, the white-run companies refuse to stand up for these musicians and what they represent as they rake in the dough. They’ll take their money, they just won’t stand behind their causes, they won’t defend them. The perspective is the acts are independent contractors. But is that really the case when the label owns the recording? Yes, the labels treat the performers like slaves on a plantation, but when push comes to shove they say the musicians don’t work for them. How exactly do you explain this? And I’d say the labels should provide health care, which they should, but really the government should provide health care for all.

Oh, the right doesn’t agree with that. But isn’t music inherently about taking a stand? I mean Coke is inert, not music. But Coke is taking a stand, and it’s based in Atlanta!

And Atlanta is an epicenter of hip-hop music.

Now Stacey Abrams is against boycotts, saying it hurts the people who live there, who it is trying to save, but every situation and every state is different, and it turns out the only thing these legislators promulgating these heinous voting laws seem to understand is economics and publicity. And the music industry spends and generates dollars, and has light years more publicity value than the corporations trying to move the needle on voting rights.

At least the music industry titans could get together and ponder this, like the “straight” companies above.

An act goes on a stadium tour, any tour, they can’t play every market. How about a list of markets to go unplayed because of voter right legislation?

How about no festivals in these states? Or pulling the festivals and placing them in a new location? Come on, this is not forever, couldn’t SXSW and ACL announce they’re leaving Austin for a year?

And record companies could say they’re not footing the bill for any studio time in these states, never mind not investing in infrastructure.

The rank and file will howl! And this gets to legislators, they’re operating under the illusion that the public is behind them, when oftentimes it is not.

Spotify, where the rubber meets the road, the retail point, could have a promo/info splash on their home page EVERY DAY! It doesn’t have to be music free. Maybe it can be passed from the three major labels to the indies on a rotating basis, but the content has to address the anti-voter legislation. The wheels of the Fortune 500 move slowly, as does the impact, whereas music can turn on a dime and start impacting people next week! Also, this will demonstrate the power and economic impact of music, delivering the respect it never gets.

Let’s start with ads in every major newspaper, at least the ones that still exist and have an audience. Wherein not only the companies but also the stars who agree put their names down in ink, stating their position. And TV too.

Then conversation about pulling live gigs. This will get more coverage than anything Coca-Cola does. And time is of the essence, this isn’t forever.

Sure, people knew who Tommy Mottola was, but that was the nineties, today’s execs are happily faceless, and that is good, but they’re also hiding behind their titles as they make millions, and when we’re fighting for the soul of our country that is unconscionable.

And music when done right has an edge, so no bland publicity. And if music has an edge, why can’t the political position?

And if someone comes around to our viewpoint, that we want to make it easier to vote, not harder, WE MUST EMBRACE THEM! This is what is wrong with the Morgan Wallen situation, cancel culture, if someone realizes the error of their ways we should not ostracize them forever, we must include them and then use them as poster people for our position. Come on, if we told Morgan Wallen we’d reinstate all his canceled gigs, his position on radio playlists, he’d do ANYTHING! Even if we promised nothing he’d do anything. But no, he must pay forever as the music industry sits self-satisfied accomplishing little.

It is time. And it must be led by the corporations, not the individuals. Individuals have less power than ever before, especially in a music world where the goal is to sell out to a brand. If the goal is to get involved with the corporation, why not put the corporation first? And the corporations the acts want to attach themselves to first are record labels and touring enterprises… Not to mention agencies, the multi-headed behemoths WME, CAA and UTA are not just talent brokers anymore, they’ve taken private equity money, they can have impact too. No UFC in states impinging on voting rights…you get the picture.

It’s your responsibility, not someone else’s. How about being on the right side of history, doing what is right for both your business and your country. Come on, music has the best spokespeople in the world, how about pulling them into the conversation as opposed to lying steadfast in the weeds?

This is very doable, very quickly. With impact.

Dude, you’re missing it.

This isn’t about art, it’s about business and spite. And she’s somehow savvy enough that she’s winning on both fronts.

Thomas Flood

___________________________________________

Right the fuck on. Solipsism personified. She and Fogerty should do a duets album. Which would mean fuck all alongside Miley Cyrus doing it with him. Or anyone else. Because Cyrus is SO much more authentic and interesting.

Hugo Burnham

P.S. ANYone who writes, “I have an IQ of…” is a cunt.
Rich Nisbet just proved it.

___________________________________________

“Two shots is pussy”
— The Deerhunter

Tom Lehr

We tried to re-cut the vocals on The Fray’s first hit Over My Head (Cable Car) once they got their deal with Epic, as a demo this song was garnering them much unsigned success already at radio in a few markets, just because of word of mouth and buzz.  No matter how hard we tried we could never beat the vocal I recorded under the gun in 30 minutes for the demo, so we kept the demo vocal and put it on the album, went on to be a smash.  You can’t predict when lightning is going to strike, capturing lightning in a bottle is impossible unless it just happens.  That is the beauty and the mystery of recorded music and the magic of a moment captured in the studio.

Aaron Johnson

___________________________________________

The Taylor Swift email took me back to your podcast with Steven Wilson, where he said these re-masters/re-records should only be for the fans and as part of box sets.  David Gilmour distanced himself from Pink Floyd’s 1980’s “comeback” album A momentary Lapse of reason because it was “too 80’s”

In the recent Later Years box set they released a significantly new remix version, took out much of the synth drums and replaced them with real drums, less processed vocals etc.  But didn’t do it as a separate money making exercise, they included it in a bigger money making box set, but one bought only by the fans.  they also released it on spotify

over time I was not a big fan of the original, for the same reasons, but having both and having listened to the original non stop when it first came out, it is still my go to.  the “new” version is an interesting tchotchke, but as Steven Wilson said, its the ones you grew up with that remain in your memory

Richard wilberforce

___________________________________________

I agree with the majority of your opinion. That said, the algorithms work for playlists they serve. However, the consumer gets the choice on their personal playlists. Hence, the algorithms will send it to fans.

I believe most fans will listen to the new version and in most cases keep the version they have. The misnomer is that playlists are where the money is. However, personal playlists become the soundtrack to people’s live. That is where the money is and should be every labels, artists, and managers end game.

Allen Kovac

___________________________________________

on a related note, I find it quite annoying that Apple music has so many re-recordings.  Many 50’s and 60’s artists re-recorded their hits, and I have yet to find one that is better than the original.  Does anybody want to hear the re-recordings? Some of the re-recordings are marked, but some are not, and always bums me out when I find re-recordings on playlists.

Keith Cahoon

___________________________________________

I like the comment referencing the quote from Quincy, which I’d not heard before – it applies way beyond just music, doesn’t it —- when money enters the room, God leaves the room.

R. Lowenstein

___________________________________________

Hi Bob,  I’m probably late weighing in on this, seeing the re: mailbag, but two other examples not brought up yet:

1) Rick Derringer “Rock and Roll Hoochie Koo”.  I once bought a compilation album of his specifically for that song. The voice and all the parts were identical but lacking the spark, spunk and magic of the original. It wasn’t hard to draw one’s own conclusions and figure that a contractual issue left him void of the rights to put the original on the album. I won’t question anyone’s right to attempt an identical studio recreation of their own music but in that case, there should have at least been a disclaimer for the true fan, the non-music biz insider.

2) Ozzy Osbourne – His beloved first two albums were victims of an unthinkable evil worse than the subject matter in Osbourne’s lyrics – an uprooting and excavation, with the bass and drums re-recorded because of a contractual dispute with the original musicians. Although the players, Robert Trujillo (now of Metallica) and Mike Bordin (Faith No More) are tremendous, it was a terrible let down to hear scab tracks. Bordin has diplomatically expressed regret https://loudwire.com/mike-bordin-re-recording-drums-ozzy-osbourne-albums-f-ked-up/ without naming culprits even thought it’s quite obvious (a certain spouse/manager who recently lost her daytime talk show after showing her – let’s call it “racial insensitivity”).

Don’t f—k with the original music.

 

Alex Skolnick,

Brooklyn

___________________________________________

I am a Taylor fan all the way and a rock and metal guy, the rest of the way, with Taylor she can Play her own instruments, write,  Sing, she’s the entire package, I haven’t heard the whole version but what I heard of it is a matured voice, the instruments sound muffled on some tracks like today was a fairytale, the riff seems to be in the background where as on the Valentine’s Day soundtrack it’s very in your ears. I’m not going to completely crucify her for this, she gave us bonus content which I feel holds up and just aren’t throw away songs. She sent my record store autographed cds of folklore, I was allowed to buy two,  I’m going to get the cd version today and listen that way and we will see, but so far the instruments just sound buried to me.

Philip Brooks

___________________________________________

Dead right Bob.

You do it once, and move on. Like The Edge says, U2 records are never finished, they’re released. Tay Tay’s revisionist exercise is hubris writ large.

Brandon Gallagher

___________________________________________

The past is the past, and that’s where it belongs. “Re-visiting” makes no sense to me. Don’t look back, look ahead.

Craig Anderton

___________________________________________

Bob, I have to call attention to this ignorant, sexist, elitist quote from your reader Randy Scott:

First, Taylor‘s fans are not hard-core audio files. A 22-year-old girl, listening to an Swift album on computer speakers or earbuds, genuinely cannot tell the difference between the original album and the re-recording. And a large percentage of music listeners today, especially Taylor’s fans, are exactly the same. They are not listening to her music on vinyl, through expensive sound systems to catch every bit of fidelity in the recordings. They just aren’t.

A 22-year-old WOMAN (a 22-year-old is NOT a girl…..)can’t tell the difference between the two recordings, but an aged male boomer can?? And someone can only truly appreciate music if they listen on vinyl……give me a break!!! This type of attitude makes me want to PUKE!

Signed,

Emily Dalton Delisi

A 34 year old woman who has listened to and appreciated ALL music in ANY format since age 7

___________________________________________

“A 22-year-old girl, listening to an (sic) Swift album on computer speakers or earbuds, genuinely cannot tell the difference between the original album and the re-recording.”

Oh, thanks, Randy, for letting us all know what girls aren’t capable of.

I could have at that age, no question in my mind.

I’d like to close with every profane version of “bugger off” and “STFU” ever uttered, but I’m trying to have better manners than that.

Ugh.

CK Barlow

___________________________________________

My big two on Fifteen are the title track and You Belong With Me.  I get goose bumps and a little verklempt when the hooks to Fifteen come in and the bridge of You Belong With Me totally breaks me up.

The new versions not so much.

The urgency and plaintiveness are just not there.  Too smooth, too polished, no angst. Her voice doesn’t break or warble where it’s supposed to.

They are good and I’m quite sure nobody but us music heads could tell the difference but I can hear it.

Even though I went looking for them I can say with high confidence that if I heard either tune randomly I’d notice it.

Now can’t wait to hear what she does with your song Bob!

Don’t quit your day dream!

Dan Millen

___________________________________________

I mostly agree with your comments. I’m of the opinion some classics probably could be improved on. Whether this should be attempted or not is something you could  argue until the cows come home.

One album that immediately came to mind is Metallica’s And Justice For All. While it’s a classic and captured a moment in time for the band I’m sure there’s more than one person that would like to hear that album with the bass added back in. Of course you’re going to have people that love it exactly as it is and who believe it should not be messed with but i think it would be an intersting experiment.

Chris Xynos

___________________________________________

Did you read The New York Times’ critics round table “Fearless” discussion/dissection today? I said to myself, “This is ripe for parody” but then I realized it was without changing a word.

As for the 134 IQ Nesbit Trump voter. Okay, he’s smart. Therefore something else is wrong with him.

Michael Fremer

___________________________________________

Re: Rich Nisbet. For someone who clearly thinks he is one smart cookie, his command of the English language is lacking. Bob Lefsetz did not say “Everyone” who voted for Trump is ignorant.  As you quoted  “no different from the ignorant following Trump”.  Big difference.

Rick Klufas

___________________________________________

“A song I wrote is on a Grammy nominated album, my band backed Alice Cooper years ago, I know how to build a house, I’ve owned and operated a Life Coaching practice for 40 years, I have a wife, 3 kids and an IQ of 134. AND I voted for Trump. “

Life coach? I hope this douche is coaching an incredibly tiny team. Who brags about their IQ?

Ike Marr

___________________________________________

Rich Nisbet is a nitwit

Justin Gray

___________________________________________

Bob, it’s not just the recuts that shortchange and mislead fans, it’s also the faulty digital remasters of analog classics.  It took three or four iterations to achieve faithful CD remastering of Motown singles.  Until those were finally done right, people were buying junk.  I don’t know if Capitol EVER got the Beatles right.

I’ve shipped over 100 Discogs LP orders since I set up shop on that site last October.  Practically no one buys CDs there.  It’s all vinyl.

Paul Lanning

___________________________________________

What’s wrong with me that I find this the blandest possible pop music and find them both equally unlistenable?
The adoration of Taylor makes as much sense to me as Alec Baldwin’s fawning over Barry Gibb on a recent podcast.
There’s a certain amount of talent there but really it’s boring as fuck.
Reminds me of my early days in the record store world, listening to managers talk about how exciting the new David Sanborn record was.  Who gives a fuck? That was garbage.

catmonster

___________________________________________

Spot on Bob. I’m glad you took a stand on this. And it also brings up another huge piece of music industry B.S., and that’s the underlying issue here as to whyTaylor Swift did this… she cried like a baby that she didn’t own her own masters. Even one of the responders here referred to Taylor’s “plight”…. LOL! Taylor Swift is rich, famous and successful, in no small part because of her original label, money spent on marketing, branding, touring, major distribution and recording. She signed away her rights to the masters. There’s no “plight”. The only people to blame here are herself and maybe her manager if she thinks she signed a bad deal. She gave away ownership of her masters in return for a shot at the bigtime and all the aforementioned major expenditures and systems that she could not have achieved on her own. Then, once she got fame and fortune she started to cry because she didn’t own it. We’ve seen this with a number of other big artists over the years. Many of whom I’m a huge fan of… Prince, Don Henley, etc. The list goes on. And the artists convince their fans it’s the evil record companies because the contracts are one-sided. What they mean is they had to give up a lot to get a shot at the big time, then once they get it they cry foul. It’s ridiculous.

Tony Shore

___________________________________________

“And I don’t mean to criticize just Swift here, but people like the Weeknd too, who start off as individuals and then buy into the system to have hits”

Spot on! Well done.

Gregg Watermann

___________________________________________

Money aside, Bob, which is probably a good reason for the existence of my example, think of the original Chuck Berry sides on Chess and the later ones on Mercury. They’re all good, but the originals resonate, at least to me, as great. It is, as you say, lightning in a bottle.

Mark Daterman

___________________________________________

Bob!
But what if it’s better? Because it kind of is. Really excited for the rest of the new old albums that will follow.

Christian Hanson

___________________________________________

Two words:  Copyright terminations.

Songwriters and artists need to learn about them and use them. See how much more willing their record labels and music publishers will be to negotiate once those are put into play.

Sam Jones

___________________________________________

Agree with Jeff Garlin – classic Bob. Spot on and thank you, it made my day. And I could fucking care less about Taylor Swift. I think the early stuff sucks too haha

Zach Steel

___________________________________________

Bob, I love your thoughts on artists re-recording their old works.

I don’t know if you are a classical fan but there is an absolutely jaw-dropping example when, in 1982, piano virtuoso Glenn Gould went back and revisited a Bach piece he originally recorded in 1955, The Goldberg Variations.

Bach composed a three minute melody and then challenged himself to write 30 different variations of that melody. When Gould recorded this originally he took the classical community by storm.

You just have to listen to the first minute of each recording to hear the stark difference in interpretation.

1955, technically precise, meticulously performed, the recording that announced Gould as a major talent.

1982, so much more raw emotionally, more thoughtful, more mature. What a transformation.

This is a perfect example of an artist revisiting a previous work because they have something new to say about it. Not a money grab, not trying to restart a career, but an artist who has lived life and evolved and feels compelled to reimagine an earlier recording in a new, breathtaking way.

Thanks for the stimulating conversation and, being a musical obsessive, I hope this resonates with you.

Chuck Woodford

Denver

___________________________________________

You’re absolutely right that no one can recreate their original recordings, but there’s a completely different way to look at it.  My wife and I grew up in The Beatles era, and then the 70’s with CSN&Y, JT, Eagles, and Tom Petty. We never paid attention to Taylor Swift when she became popular.  Then one night we were watching Netflix and a Bruce Springsteen special that bored us.  We decided to watch the Taylor Swift Reputation concert.  We were blown away by her talent.  It wasn’t so much the production numbers, but the solo songs with just a guitar or piano.  We found out she’s basically a singer-songwriter.  That led us to purchase her Folklore and Evermore albums as they were released.  They’re excellent. Taylor Swift is a truly gifted songwriter, and at times her clever lyrics reminded us of Joni Mitchell.

So, hearing her Fearless album for the first time, when she’s a better singer, is a bonus for us.  Also, for a money grab, she sure packed on the value.  Twenty-six songs, including half-an-album of new recordings, was a great deal for the $13.99 we paid.

Even Folklore and Evermore’s total of 35 songs is really three album’s worth of material for almost any other artist.  The volume of her output is more like Neil Young’s than her contemporaries.

Enjoy your writing, even when we just disagree.

Phil Bausch

___________________________________________

The only thing more dependable than “being screwed by big corporations” is doing something bold as a woman and knowing there will be endless men who will happily criticize you for it.

(with all due respect because I’m a big fan of lots you have to say)…my tolerance for old white dudes chiming in on women’s careers and creative directions is dwindling. I’d say: less men weighing in on women’s choices and more women just doing what they want in regards to reclaiming their power after being fucked over by the music industry time and time again. I am not a Taylor swift fan, but hell- my first reaction to when I read the article about her redoing those songs was feeling hopeful seeing a woman taking the power back. THAT is something to applaud. Because why not? Sure she is rich and doesn’t need more money or whatever- but she is a woman who grew up in an industry run and dominated by men. As we see clearly every day, rich and famous (as a woman) doesn’t get you far anyways. The shit she has gone through/swallowed to get to where she is….good for her. For me, it’s less about the content of the album and more about the action behind it.

-Amelia Davis
Tacoma, WA

___________________________________________

I have to heavily disagree with you on this. As a young woman trying to pursue a career in the music industry, it’s incredibly tiring and disheartening to read such an anger driven response. I don’t think Swift’s recordings are a matter of money, but rather sending a really important message to millions of young girls. You can argue that she signed that deal and knew full well what she was getting into, but I don’t think that would be fair considering she was a teenager and most would say yes to a middle aged man offering their dreams on a silver platter. I would argue that it hurt even more because she was blindsided by a man she built an empire with. Now to you, this might just be a “moral scuffle” (which is not yours to/to not accept) and the entire industry is “caveat emptor,” but I think it’s that attitude that allows for these things to continue. If you’re not actively fighting against it, you’re enabling it. Rather than put the blame on 16 year old Swift and say that she should’ve been more careful, why are we not calling out the middle aged man who took advantage of her? I would like to assume you know that this practice of labels owning masters is not right. I would also like to assume you are aware that this practice is slowly starting to change. Do you really think it would’ve happened if big artists, like Swift, weren’t speaking out about it? If she just accepted defeat, this would be a tireless cycle. Regardless of the nitty gritty and the personal issues, I go back to the argument that this is a really important message for young girls, especially those with aspirations of making it in the music industry. I know you think of this as nothing more than a money move, and maybe money does play a part, but she’s still reclaiming her life’s work.  Accepting defeat isn’t an option if equality is to ever be achieved in the industry.

And that leads me to this: with all do respect, I don’t think this is something you will ever understand because you are a white man in a male dominated industry. You are not targeted, you are not undermined, and you are not taken advantage of because of your gender. If young girls see the most powerful woman in the industry reclaiming what is her’s, do you not think this will have a ripple effect? Do you not think this will encourage women to speak louder? Demand better? Be braver?

As much as you are trying to pass this off as a defense of the art that is supposedly being ruined, I think you are just showing an incredibly biased opinion about Swift. Are you upset that you don’t like the rerecordings as much or that you have to hear her name be praised in the media for a week?

You can have your opinions, of course. But why validate them by discrediting others? Why can’t lifelong fans enjoy this process of watching their favorite artist regain ownership? Why does that make you so angry?

Swift once said there is a different language that we use for women. Men can react and women can only overreact. If you see this re-recording process as merely an overreaction to a bad deal, then I think you are part of the problem.

Best,

Gabby Romano

___________________________________________

There is something just plain wrong about a bunch of men of a certain age weighing in on anything Taylor Swift does. Read her room. Move along.

Donna Westmoreland

___________________________________________

So… I always hated her. But now that these retakes are showing up on Release Radar on Spotify I am listening to her old stuff which I was so disdainful of and realizing (again) that I was wrong and that I am judgmental, self righteous old prick. So for whatever reason she did it. I am happy. And if it makes her feel good, she is the artist, not me, not you. Lighten up Francis.

Michael Becker

___________________________________________

Spot on Bob. I’m glad you took a stand on this. And it also brings up another huge piece of music industry B.S., and that’s the underlying issue here as to whyTaylor Swift did this… she cried like a baby that she didn’t own her own masters. Even one of the responders here referred to Taylor’s “plight”…. LOL! Taylor Swift is rich, famous and successful, in no small part because of her original label, money spent on marketing, branding, touring, major distribution and recording. She signed away her rights to the masters. There’s no “plight”. The only people to blame here are herself and maybe her manager if she thinks she signed a bad deal. She gave away ownership of her masters in return for a shot at the bigtime and all the aforementioned major expenditures and systems that she could not have achieved on her own. Then, once she got fame and fortune she started to cry because she didn’t own it. We’ve seen this with a number of other big artists over the years. Many of whom I’m a huge fan of… Prince, Don Henley, etc. The list goes on. And the artists convince their fans it’s the evil record companies because the contracts are one-sided. What they mean is they had to give up a lot to get a shot at the big time, then once they get it they cry foul. It’s ridiculous.

Tony Shore

___________________________________________

Couldn’t disagree more. The tempo’s are the same, the instrumentation’s the same, she even made sure her vocal inflections are the same. I’m a MASSIVE fan and I can only just tell in a very few parts (unless you literally play them back-to-back). The only other re-records I’ve heard are Def Leppard’s which are SO obvious. Taylor’s approached this on a totally different level.

‘Anybody can make a hit with Max Martin or Jack Antonoff’, Really, Bob? This is amongst the craziest things you’ve ever written. I can’t believe you really think that.

And you’re missing the point in why she’s doing it. It has nothing to do with $. She feels incredibly fucked over by Borchetta. This is one of music’s biggest ‘FUCK YOU’s of all time! And it’s beautiful to see! (Yes Borchetta didn’t do anything illegal – but that’s not the point – he could have sold the masters to her and he didn’t out of spite, then sold it to one of her biggest enemies!)

Swift won! She’s got the world focused on her without even having to write new songs! She dominated last year and now she’s going to dominate at least the next 18 months while she re-releases the next five re-records.

I love your writing and I often wonder if it really is because of the ‘mean’ issue that you have such a blind spot for the greatest artist and music marketer of this generation. It’s not too late to get back on team Swift – history will only keep proving her right.

All the best,

John Paterson

___________________________________________

Bob, I gotta weigh in on this. I haven’t listened to this, but my understanding is that, besides the bonus material, the majority of the re released songs are very similar to the originals, correct? What about the producer of the original record, Nathan Chapman? Does he receive any credit?

I played on one song on the original, You’re Not Sorry. Nathan came to my studio and wanted a different sound and feel for the guitars on that song. But I really just re played his ideas with a slightly different sound. He or anyone else could have easily done the part, i think he just wanted to get out of his head for a minute and hear someone else play. I also played slide one other song, I don’t remember the title, but my part (as usual) was “too bluesy” and he didn’t use it.

So, I was around a bit while Nathan was making that record, and I’m friends with the other musicians that played on it, all wonderful and talented people.

Here’s my point, Nathan deserve a lot of credit for making those first two records, he helped her find her sound and direction, and was smart enough to let it be about her voice and the songs. I know he put a lot of blood sweat and tears into getting that record right, and he’s a great arranger.

So, if Taylor is re creating the original arrangements, man, I hope Nathan is being taken care of. Maybe he is, but in this era of very little credits available on itunes or Spotify, I can only hope so.

Best,

Kenny Greenberg

___________________________________________

Dear Bob,

I know you know this, but I co-produced Taylor Swift’s debut album, and the EP that followed.

When I saw the title of your email “Fearless-Taylor’s Version” I thought, as a longtime reader, (and even with your early TS criticism) that you would come out on the side of the artist, the side of the creator. The woman that wants to own, publish and license her Masters for the rest of her life.

What if you’re focusing on the wrong things?  Just because the majority of the press gets to focus on the “new version vs. the old” (who cares?), how it’s “is it exactly the same” (and it isn’t, but so what?) and the money (the fans don’t care), you Bob, do not! Because you see all sides. You know how many people listen to you! That’s what you do. Take another look. (And btw, please do not ever mention again “trump” in an essay about an artist, ok?)

“Fearless-Taylor’s Version” is great.  And it would be, even if there was never a first TS album called “Fearless”.
It’s great because the songs are great, the musicianship is great, the vocals are great. But the press focus has been comparing it to another album from a different time.

I’m not saying it is worse or even better (Daily Beast: “while different from its original, the difference is still clear and the passion behind it palpable”), regardless it’s a pure

Yes this record is going to be huge.  And that will continue when she re-records the rest, including her debut album. And my producer points (and my co-producer as well) fade away. So what?

The important thing is that she has control over what she created.
There are no italics in emails so I’ll say it again: She has control over what she created. She CREATED it.

She doesn’t need to file a lawsuit because she doesn’t need to. She took matters into her own hands.

There are billions made off the minds of others. There are countless companies (who employ countless people in countless buildings) who profit from some thing that comes from the mind of one person who knows how to take a whisper and turn it into gold.

Swift is one of those alchemists who deserve a second thought, and you are a thinker.

Best always,

Robert Ellis Orrall

So completely spot on Bob!  All of it!

And yes, you can tell from the very first note!!!  Hell, I’m barely a fan and I can tell.

Philip McDonald

_____________________________________________

It’s impossible to perfectly re-create a master… a fools errand

Paul Layton

_____________________________________________

Great as always

Adam Shacknai

_____________________________________________

Kinda like Sinatra when he re-recorded all the Capitol hits on his own Reprise label, eh pally?

Cheers,

Steve Weisberg

_____________________________________________

Fuck-in-a right Bob.
Colin Dutton

_____________________________________________

So true. Like Quincy said, “When money enters the room, God leaves the room.” But I guess if you don’t really care about art, it won’t matter to you. But it matters to these 64-year-old-musical bones and it sounds like it does to yours too. Screw these re-mixes and re-recordings.

Shepherd Stevenson

_____________________________________________

Amen!

Anders Hansson

_____________________________________________

I was originally sort of on board with Taylor’s plight. Then, right around the same time the new version of “Love Story” dropped, Dave Chappelle did his thing where he asked people not to stream Chappelle’s Show because he wasn’t getting paid. It worked. Comedy Central acquiesced. Taylor should have done the same thing. Her fans would absolutely have boycotted streaming her songs until the negotiations opened back up.

Matt O’Donnell

_____________________________________________

Nails

– Don Pedigo

_____________________________________________

Spot on. The only artist I can think of who did a total remake of some of his classic music that I have respect for is Jeff Lynne. He was not playing some kind of a game to try to get more money or screw his old label. He simply believed that he had improved as an engineer over the years, and he wanted to go back and redo the songs so that they would sound better to HIM!

Of course a lot of ELO fans like me bought it anyway…

“Mr. Blue Sky: The Very Best of Electric Light Orchestra.”

– Bob Crain

_____________________________________________

I can’t bear to listen to Jeff Lynne’s ELO rerecorded work. Truly disrespectful to the original recordings. As you mention, you can tell from the very first note. Shameful.

Andrew Paciocco

_____________________________________________

I listen to a lot of music from the 50s and 60s, and I’ve never heard a remake that was indistinguishable from the original. The original is lightning in a bottle – it’s a confluence of musicians, instruments, engineers, producers, studios, equipment, and the times. It can’t ever be reproduced. Alternate takes from the same session can get close, but even those don’t capture the ephemeral magic of the master or the hit. And as you suggest, the worst part is that the distinction between the original and the remake blurs over time – particularly for those who haven’t indelibly marked the original in their musical consciousness.

hyperbolium

_____________________________________________

I think you’re wrong on this.

I’m sitting here going back and forth between the old and new versions of Fifteen and the new version sounds so much better. Her voice has matured, there’s more low end in the mix… it’s superior in every way. This might not be the case with every song, but FUCK IT — I’d rather she made the money, so I hope these become the standards. Fuck the business side of things, they’re all vampires.

Jeff Neely

_____________________________________________

Bravo. The fans are usually ythe ones who get it in the ass, especially with big big acts.

Rik Shafer

_____________________________________________

Nice post.Thanks Bob.Hope you’re well.Have a great day,Ted Keane

_____________________________________________

Bob,
This piece is why I read you.
Thank You,
Jeff Garlin

_____________________________________________

This happens way too often. I was really enjoying your article on people taking original recordings and making money off bad re-masters that do actually, right-off-the-bat, sound different, which takes away from the song you loved. It’s disheartening.

And then you inject “no different from the ignorant following Trump”.

A song I wrote is on a Grammy nominated album, my band backed Alice Cooper years ago, I know how to build a house, I’ve owned and operated a Life Coaching practice for 40 years, I have a wife, 3 kids and an IQ of 134. AND I voted for Trump.

Just like hearing a bad remaster of a song, your bigoted, generalized, condescending and hateful remarks unfortunately take away from the original point your were communicating.

When you do that, I just “lift the needle off your blog” and don’t listen to it anymore.

Rich Nisbet

_____________________________________________

Hi Bob, my eldest daughter is 20 and has gone through love-hate career moments with Taylor. She hated the new Taylor up until Folk-More, and is now thrilled again with what she’s doing. Thought you’d like to see her response when I just asked her if she likes Fearless (Taylor’s Version):

Hi dad so im having a listening party over zoom in a few hours with my friends so I haven’t heard it YET but we’re all dressing as different Taylor swifts. For example, Isabel is dressing as Taylor from the You Belong With Me music video and I’m dressing as “gold rush” Taylor (I am wearing all gold helloooo) and Rehana (yes the boss of Overachiever who is a huge swift) is dressing up as Taylor from the Blank Space music video, etc. We are making it an EVENT it is not simply a listen on your own type deal 🙂

The love is there. Drum roll on the new recordings…

Colin Drummond

_____________________________________________

It’s extremely difficult to capture the original magic and excitement in a re-record. I’ve been asked many times to re-record hits for artists for licensing purposes etc.
9 times out of 10 the person asking for the license doesn’t want the re-record.
Have you heard the dreadful Def Leppard re-records? Who’s going to recreate Mutt Lange and Mike Shipley? Absolutely no one.

For example, Whitesnake’s “Slide it In”. The 1984 US version was masterfully mixed and augmented by Keith Olsen from the original UK version. It still sounds amazing, especially on big studio speakers.
David Coverdale decided to remix it recently. Sucked the soul right out of it. It’s dry and over-compressed and lost the “air”.
I won’t blame the mixer here, he was just doing what he was asked i’m sure.

On the other hand, Mark Lewis remixed Megadeth’s “Killing is my Business” and it’s miles better.

Genesis strangely remixed all their classic hits for the “Platinum Collection”. They totally lost the magic. Who remixes Hugh Padgham???

Jay Ruston

_____________________________________________

I agree with a lot of what you said. And I wouldn’t want my favourite artists to re-record their most classic albums either. But there’s a difference. I’m a lot older than a Taylor Swift fan.

First, Taylor‘s fans are not hard-core audio files. A 22-year-old girl, listening to an Swift album on computer speakers or earbuds, genuinely cannot tell the difference between the original album and the re-recording. And a large percentage of music listeners today, especially Taylor’s fans, are exactly the same. They are not listening to her music on vinyl, through expensive sound systems to catch every bit of fidelity in the recordings. They just aren’t.

Second, like you said, Taylor’s fans are incredibly aware of everything that is going on in her life. They know exactly why she is re-recording everything, and they will be loyal to her and listen only to the re-recorded versions…to support her. Whether the versions are actually “better” is irrelevant. Taylor believes that they are, therefore her fans will believe that also. Plus I’m sure they are enjoying all the extra music.  And if some hard-core fans are that attached to the original versions of the songs, they can go back and listen to them. They aren’t going anywhere. Most of them own the physical albums anyway, and can listen to them whenever they want. Plus, how exactly are the fans getting “screwed”? They are streaming everything on Spotify or Apple Music anyway. What is the new out-of-pocket expense for a Taylor Swift fan, just because she re-recorded an album?

Third, I’m not sure how much it’s “all about the money“. Taylor is rich enough to live five lifetimes without worrying. What she’ll make off these re-recordings won’t amount to much in terms of her overall wealth. Sure, it WOULD be all about the money for a “normal” person….but not for one of the biggest and most successful artists on the planet Earth.

Just a thought. All the best!!

Randy Scott

P.S. Loving the podcast.

_____________________________________________

Hey Bob. NAME FUCKING NAMES PLEASE! Back it up. One egregious example is Foreigner. Mick Jones who you interviewed. Call that fucker out for it. Jeff Lynne. Def Leppard etc supposedly. I hate this shit also. Drives me nuts when encountered. The streaming services need to curate and monitor this? Or they are perpetuating the fraud.

Derek Morris

_____________________________________________

You are correct, of course.  And I am not as well-read as you are… and I was trying to get a sense of the positive writing.  (I’ve yet to see anyone else write so-called negative on the topic.)

Seems to me there’s an anti-establishment cheer in the writing.  That is the lone artist doing it her way… And is she in fact doing something (re-record) in a way that isn’t completely lame?

I’m not invested, but I do sense she’s tapping into a larger “Age of Aquarius” vibe… That is, integrity matters and cannot be bought or sold.  And if she’s proving a point to an old establishment, perhaps we are seeing the ongoing development of new standards.  (Which will always be abused by some, but the sentiment of being fair is what accountability is all about; something you write about often as needed in the industry.)

Maybe my thoughts are disjointed, but I sense a cultural difference from a simple artist re-recording for a cash grab.  Again, not that your point that the re-recording cannot re-capture the magic of the original is wrong.  But people perhaps don’t care about recordings (you say music doesn’t drive the culture anymore), as much as seeing a single person beat what they perceive as Goliath.

I dunno; but I enjoy your Letter greatly!

Joshua Hall

_____________________________________________

“one of best albums of the century”? Who hurt you in Jr High Bob? While there are differences, this is a damn close facsimile. Some of the tones are a bit off, snare pitch overall eq and mix balance. But all tempos, grooves, parts are the exact same. I’m sure she got the same players back in. Even the tracks are the same length.

In my opinion the biggest change is in the sound of the vocals, but the cadences and phrasing are the same. It just sounds like a singer aged 12 years down the road.

This is not a record by a band or people playing together with one mind looking for magic (see Dan Penn!) This was a record made on the grid in parts, and there’s nothing wrong with that. So trying to capture lightning in a bottle is a lot less important or relevant. In re-recording I’m sure they used the same grid, and every effort was made to replicate it within an inch of its life. What we have here is the ultimate “spite house” and as you said I’m sure her fans will be very happy to support her. I don’t know

Ms. Swift but hats off to her for going through what to me seems like a tedious effort of trying to recreate it down to a T.  Would she have been better served spending time making new music, absolutely. (Give me a ring Taylor) Anyhow I feel you should adopt the Zen wisdom of Don Corleone rregarding this release. “But anyway, Signora Swift, my no is final, and I wish to congratulate you on your new business, and I know you’ll do very well. Good luck to you as best as your interests don’t conflict with mine.” Now if in 1976 Led Zepplin tried to release thier “own” version of their second album I’d tell them go fuck themselves.

George Drakoulias

_____________________________________________

Okay, I feel you, but my son, Eric, plays drums on two of the cuts and it was a pretty big deal in our family.
Robin Slick