Will EC sell live tracks from REVOLVER tour via his website?

[cwr]

Elvis needs money, we are told. In many of the interviews to promote NR, he emphasized that he has to keep working by necessity, and that he might not make any more studio albums because they don't sell enough to make money for him.

SO I ASK: WHY DOESN'T HE RECORD THE SHOWS ON THE UPCOMING "REVOLVER" TOUR AND SELL SOME OF THE CHOICE PERFORMANCES ONLINE AND AT THE VENUES?

If he busts out a rare version of this song or that, some obscure cover or some awesome rarity-- even a kickass new interpretation of an old classic of his, what harm could there be in asking the hundreds of thousands of EC fans all over the country (or millions all over the world) if they want to pay a dollar to download a copy of that song?

You could also sell these things at the merch stand, where plenty of fans buy mugs and t-shirts that they don't really need. I know I've done it. I'm at the concert, I'm excited, and in my enthusiasm, I shell out for some bit of memorabilia just because it's there. How much better would it be if there was a way to buy new MUSIC at these stands. How many more people would be tempted by that-- I'll bet a lot.

Costello clearly no longer has any hesitancy about releasing live material, having put out at least a half dozen live discs in the past decade. And, at a minimum, all this would require is taking the soundboard recordings, picking the tracks he wants to sell, and making them available using the same system that is already in place on his website for NRansom and NRansack. He's already selling music through his website-- why not sell some more? Fans are happy, EC makes money-- it seems like a win-win situation.

Whatever the 2011 equivalent of EC & The Attractions performing "American Girl" is (EC & The Imposters performing, I dunno, "Paparazzi"? I can imagine that...), wouldn't it be amazing if we could all buy a perfect-sounding recording of it the day after? If the original Spinning Songbook tour made waves by Costello doing multiple-night stands with two bands and a solo show, it would seem to me that this year's model might want to do more with less. Start spreading around clips of some of the coolest live tracks, and who knows, maybe one of them will go viral, and boom: Costello would probably sell more copies of a live mp3 of "Paparazzi" than he did of any of his "CD singles" in the 90s.

The simple fact is this: a lot of these shows are gonna get recorded (badly) and uploaded to the net, where diehard fans are gonna get them for free. And I'll bet the majority of those fans would happily shell out some cash to have better quality recordings. I know that I would love to vote with my dollars to let Elvis know that he can use the Internet as a direct line to his fanbase, the people who have been buying his records all these years. He's taken a baby step with the twittering and facebook messaging lately, I don't know why he wouldn't want to use those same methods to offer fans a way to Pay For His Music.

Radiohead made waves this week by putting out a short album with little advance warning and THEN releasing it a day early. It was just unusual enough to get people excited, even though the music itself is fairly uncommercial, even for Radiohead. Costello isn't in the same position as Radiohead-- he put out one of the finest, most accessible albums of his career and the pulse of most music critics barely even quickened, so bored are they of his almost universal excellence (to quote "My Science Fiction Twin"). He has to work a little harder to get noticed these days. But allowing people to hear how much fun is being had on the Revolver tour, and allowing people to buy little pieces of it, even if they live in Alaska or Brazil, is exactly the kind of move that could get people talking and give Costello the kind of buzz that didn't attach itself to the release of National Ransom.

Sell us some music, Elvis. We wanna buy it.

[krm]

I don´t get the point of waiting until the revolver tour. There is already 16 shows to perform before he hits US shores. Utilise it now!

[cwr]

I was only using the REVOLVER tour as a jumping off point, since it's probably going to get a little more attention than a standard Costello tour (the Spinning Songbook being one of the more memorable icons of Costello's entire live career).

Obviously, he has 30+ years' worth of live recordings that he could start selling via his website. But I'd bet he'd garner more attention at first if he was making it a feature of the return of the Spinning Songbook, since it's a gimmick that draws attention...

The key thing is to make new performances available relatively soon after they're performed. And yes, he could do that starting with his very next concert, if he wanted to. Why wouldn't he want to?? I honestly can't think of a reason why he wouldn't do this.

[bronxapostle]

will he??? NOOOOO! i think he collects poor sounding bootlegs in his spare time..in fact, I KNOW HE DOES!!!

[jardine]

it really is too bad that he can't place himself properly in the comfort of where his work belongs. he hangs out with megas and former megas like u2, springsteen, elton, and w. mccartney, bacharach, at the white house, etc., but his own work has never been up in that rarefied air of either sales or popularity. what's more, his work itself is EASILY up in that atmosphere quality-wise, but the reflection he sees of himself and his sales and popularity in this company he keeps makes him seem lessened, i think. and he ends up making bad decisions and silly pronouncements because once again he didn't sell a million like his friends.

lots of bands, now, survive quite well, partly because they don't, as elvis seems to have done, "overshoot" their own popularity with the company they keep and the expectations that come with it.

so i'm all for it. this small surrounding of fans will buy. imagine two or three performances per concert available right away! or even one!

[Top balcony]

Think selling off his back catalogue several times over the last few years may impede this great idea?

Unless he owns all his own songs again I can't see this happening.

Colin Top Balcony

[sulky lad]

BA says

will he??? NOOOOO! i think he collects poor sounding bootlegs in his spare time..in fact, I KNOW HE DOES!!!

He's never asked me for a copies of the shows I've recorded.
Since 2005 I've seen the soundman at the UK shows (Dave I think he's called, a little Welsh chap) MOOT knows him better than I) removing a CDr from the mixing desk and I'm sure that at least since then Elvis has kept copies of all these shows. Again, I'm sure I've mentioned this but my wife went to see Deacon Blue a few years ago and a copy of the show was available 30 minutes after it ended as a souvenir double CD for about £9 ! As cwr said, it's a no-brainer really and technology is now up to it and it negates needing a record company and all the associated hoo-ha that Elvis appears to object to so strongly !

[cwr]

Unless he owns all his own songs again I can't see this happening.

Someone who knows more about these things can chime in here, please.

As I understand it, he's out of contract now, and he owns all his songs, but not the records themselves, right? (Although I assume that eventually the first ten years will revert back to him, unless he sold those records to UMG forever. But the rights have reverted to him several times now-- when he went to Ryko, then again when he went to Rhino, then a third time when he sold them to UMG for the Hip-O reissues. Warners still owns from SPIKE to ATUB, will those records ever revert to him? And what is his deal with PFM and onward? Does anyone know if EC eventually gets to own his whole back catalog? And how do these arrangements affect ownership of, say, live concerts recorded while he was under one contract or another? Does he have the freedom to release his live back catalog, or is it tied up with other deals?)

The one thing I feel somewhat confident about is that he is now free to play his own songs in concert and then sell a live recording of ANY of those in any way he wants to. Right? If he records a cover version he has to pay royalties, but he can play "Alison" or "Veronica" or "Toledo" or "Stella Hurt" in concert, sell the recording in any form he chooses and he doesn't owe anything to any record company. Do I have that right?

[Top balcony]

[

The one thing I feel somewhat confident about is that he is now free to play his own songs in concert and then sell a live recording of ANY of those in any way he wants to. Right? If he records a cover version he has to pay royalties, but he can play "Alison" or "Veronica" or "Toledo" or "Stella Hurt" in concert, sell the recording in any form he chooses and he doesn't owe anything to any record company. Do I have that right?

(NB I'm not a lawyer) Yes as long as he owns the copywrite to these songs, but if eg Alison is owned by, say Simon Cowell, then in effect EC would have to pay royalties to SC for putting out his own songs, the way he would if he put out "Psycho" or some other much loved cover.

Colin Top Balcony

[verbal gymnastics]

I know I've said this before but I'm sure there are different royalty issues when an artist puts out a live recording.

I've seen a few bands that make recordings available on the night. Elvis could do it if he desired.

But I can't see him doing it somehow.

[cwr]

I'm almost 100% sure that EC owns the publishing to all of his own songs (except the co-writes, as with McCartney, Bacharach, O'Riordan, etc.-- which he co-owns). He's been pretty savvy about that from the beginning...

Someone correct me if I'm mistaken!

[Man out of Time]

VG wrote:

I've seen a few bands that make recordings available on the night. Elvis could do it if he desired.

But I can't see him doing it somehow.

As the last night of the Revolver tour approaches, it turns out that VG was right. Once again, all we have (it seems) are the unofficial recordings circulating on DIME and the like.

MOOT

[cwr]

And not only is EC missing the opportunity to sell live recordings, I find it odd that he doesn't even sell his own CDs at the merch stand! The Beacon was-- I can guarantee it-- filled with EC "fans" who don't own Momofuku or National Ransom, and who might well be inclined to buy them based on hearing his showstopping performance of "Slow Drag with Josephine" or the thunderous father/daughter drum performance of "Turpentine."

[Harry Worth]

As things go with almost any band/artiste these days there is something up on DIME within a few days of almost any gig. But, going by tales told to me by someone who has uploaded a number of his boots (none EC by the way!) to DIME, the downloads figures are not that high and often the majority are made by completists. So I don't think there is that much scope for 'Official Recordings' through the EC web site. I maybe wrong though! I do remember Pixies having some success selling recordings of their reunion shows a few years back.

I've always been surprised that Costello hasn't put out a major live album (a 3 to 5 CD set?) rather than yet another repackaging of 'Greatest Hits'. Live almost every song has a different nuance to the recorded version. Sometimes it is sublime! (e.g. the TKO Horns playing on the Get Happy stuff).

[cwr]

I don't think too many people would buy full concerts, but I'll bet if he put 99 cent single tracks like "Hoover Factory" or "And Your Bird Can Sing" on elviscostello.com, they would sell pretty well...

[verbal gymnastics]

He could sell it as Costello Sings Again...Again! in homage to his 1986 UK tour.

If at least one live version of each song was available from the tour then it would sell as some people would not necessarily wish to have multiple versions of the same song although I would also like to see him release CDs of each show.

If only Elvis could reference such as source...

[wardo68]

I e-mailed Robyn Hitchcock's webmaster about releasing the recent "Hunky Dory" (David Bowie album, covered by Robyn) show on the Interwebs, and he basically said it would be impossible, due to what they'd have to pay to license the songs compared to what they'd be able to seel them for (read: 99 cents). So if it didn't happen in '86, it's not going to happen now. Elvis makes more money when people come to see him, not when they listen to songs he's played live. I don't like it, but it's true.

[verbal gymnastics]

With respect wardo I think that what's being suggested on this site is different.

There will be different copyright issues for releasing a studio album of someone else's material to releasing a live version.

The problem is that whilst I'm happy this is the case, I can't find anything to prove me right or wrong.

I've asked the question before. Maybe this latest plea will be taken up!