http://www.spectropop.com
________________________________________________________________________
______________ ______________
______________ ______________
______________ S P E C T R O P O P ______________
______________ ______________
________________________________________________________________________
America's First Family of Fine Recordings
________________________________________________________________________
There are 3 messages in this issue #31.
Topics in this digest:
1. The In Crowd" - recorded at Gold Star?
From: "WASE RADIO"
2. Various
From: Carol Kaye
3. Ronnie sings Spector (or not) - Redux
From: LePageWeb
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 07:21:49 -0400
From: "WASE RADIO"
Subject: The In Crowd" - recorded at Gold Star?
To Carol Kaye:
You mentioned in one of your posts that you worked with
Dobie Gray on his 1965 hit "The In Crowd". The song
likes it was recorded at Gold Star, because it has that
distinctive echo. I wonder if it was done there? thanks.
Michael G. Marvin
WASE radio.
--------------------[ archived by Spectropop ]--------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 17:51:11 -0700
From: Carol Kaye
Subject: Various
I apologize for my writing some very personal things
inre: the funeral for Jack Nitzsche...I was in somewhat
of a shock and wasn't writing very well and shouldn't
have written in such depth.
Also, yes, Billy Strange did play very loud at Gold Star
on the track of Zip-a-dee-doo-dah"...as usual. Both he
and Glen Campbell usually kept their amp volumes
extremely high during their solos, great rock solos tho'
>from both of them.
Carol Kaye
http://www.carolkaye.com/
--------------------[ archived by Spectropop ]--------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 15:03:14 +0900
From: LePageWeb
Subject: Ronnie sings Spector (or not) - Redux
At the beginning of August David Young wrote:
>I'm confused about...the alleged injunction Spector has
>against Ronnie's singing his songs in public. It seems
>like I remember that the ban did not apply to her live
>concerts, only to appearances in broadcast media.
To which I replied...
> I cannot think of a single reason or
> circumstance that would persuade a judge to grant such a
> ruling.
> ...defining to what extent an "author" may control use of
> its works...clearly does not extend to control over
> who can record or publicly perform those [songs]...
This is an excerpt from an article in Billboard (July 01, 2000)
> The decision...ruled that despite the girl group's request,
> it was not entitled to the masters of its recordings.
>
> Without ownership of the masters, the victory is not as
> sweet, admits Robert Donnelly, Ronnie Spector's music
> attorney. "The thing that a lot of people don't realize is
> because Phil Spector refuses to license "Walking In The
> Rain' or "Be My Baby,' Ronnie can't perform these songs in
> television or film. There's a whole part of her career
> that has been obliterated."
No wonder everyone got confused. The statement attorney
Robert Donnelly made was designed to draw public sympathy
for the Ronettes and disdain for Phil Spector. Clever, yes,
but the statement is misleading and the logic is flawed.
Mother Bertha declining requests for synch licenses is not
a legal issue. It has nothing to do with the Ronettes case,
and the fact the Ronettes were not given control of the
Phil Spector masters has NOTHING to do with the right of a
songwriter to decide how his or her copyrights are used in
TV and film.
You gotta wonder about Robert Donnelly stating this
publicly. It's propaganda Without careful examination of
Donnelly's statement, any reader would believe that Phil
("the villian") is preventing Ronnie ("the victim") from
singing her songs because the judge didn't give the
Ronettes ownership of Phil's masters. Well it just ain't
so, folks. It doesn't matter who owns the masters. It
matters who owns the songs. As co-writer and co-publisher
of nearly all his hits, Phil is entitled by law to approve
or decline proposed synch uses. It doesn't make him the bad
guy. It makes him a songwriter allowing use of his songs
the way he deems appropriate.
We might view Phil's licensing policy as overprotective.
We might regret that Mother Bertha songs are not
frequently used in film etc., or more to the point, that
Ronnie can't perform these songs in television or film.
Nevertheless, I think it's a very good thing that
copyright law provides for creators or owners of
copyrights to govern the way their copyrighted works are
used, and I find Donnelly's character assasination of
Spector for doing just that despicable. "There's a whole
part of her career that has been obliterated."??? How so?
Ronnie can perform Phil's songs in public performances,
and she is free to re-record them for commercial release
too. That puts Ronnie in virtually the same position as any
other singer of other people's songs. Despite any
inference by Donnelly to the contrary, it has nothing to
do with who owns the master rights to Be My Baby.
Jamie
--------------------[ archived by Spectropop ]--------------------
End
Spectropop text contents & copy; copyright Spectropop unless
stated otherwise.
All rights in and to the contents of these documents, including each element embodied therein, is subject to copyright
protection under international copyright law. Any use, reuse, reproduction and/or adaptation without written permission of the owners is a violation of copyright law and is strictly prohibited. All rights reserved.
