Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
yes, but i'm talking about performance royalties. that is mechanical (distribution) rights. although of course in some languages royalties means essentially rights without specifications as to WHAT rights and would have to be clarified in context. Ah, but your question spoke to late 18th, early 19th century practices. The terms you're now using are all 20th century. quite possibly, yes probably; i meant i am interested in the payments to composers for the performance of their works. any reference to the topic would be appreciated, but based on literature around the varying topics of patronage and development of the public concert it would seem that this practice - paying composers for individual performances of individual works - would have only begun in the time of mozart through beethoven because of changing modes of social structures and the shift from direct to indirect patronage to public concerts. in most cases in this transition period (and later to some extent) the payments to the composer (the more significant ones anyways) would have come directly from the extended royalty, the ennobled class until the development of the true public concert in the early-mid 1800s. i read that the first concert hall explicitly built for music was 1830 in vienna... [...] And of course those terms would have absolutely nothing to do with Royalty. that's what confuses me, and the OED hasn't really shed any light on the situation. -- shirling neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
i read that the first concert hall explicitly built for music was 1830 in vienna... it is possible that this may have been specific to the germanic lands, i'm not sure. -- shirling neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
in most cases in this transition period (and later to some extent) the payments to the composer (the more significant ones anyways) would have come directly from the extended royalty i meant the more significant payments, not the more significant composers, would have come... since middle-class establishments typically paid the composers less than could be expected by the aristocracy. -- shirling neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
At 4:11 PM +0100 2/6/07, shirling neueweise wrote: yes, but i'm talking about performance royalties. that is mechanical (distribution) rights. although of course in some languages royalties means essentially rights without specifications as to WHAT rights and would have to be clarified in context. Ah, but your question spoke to late 18th, early 19th century practices. The terms you're now using are all 20th century. quite possibly, yes probably; i meant i am interested in the payments to composers for the performance of their works. any reference to the topic would be appreciated, but based on literature around the varying topics of patronage and development of the public concert it would seem that this practice - paying composers for individual performances of individual works - would have only begun in the time of mozart through beethoven because of changing modes of social structures and the shift from direct to indirect patronage to public concerts. OK, thanks for that. I'm getting a better feel for what you're after. But I have trouble equating concert admission fees, whether for an individual concert or for a subscription series, with royalty payments. The former do not, after all, apply to individual works, but rather to whatever is presented in that concert. The latter, as I mentioned, did not exist in the law (in the U.S.) until the copyright revision of 1909. Yes, we know that Mozart promoted his own concerts during his last 10 years in Vienna, and that certainly qualifies, but what about the case where a promoter or producer put on concerts and would have used music by several composers, some newly commissioned, some existing, with no copyright protection for the existing music? And of course Beethoven is known for soliciting patronage for his works AFTER composing them. in most cases in this transition period (and later to some extent) the payments to the composer (the more significant ones anyways) would have come directly from the extended royalty, the ennobled class until the development of the true public concert in the early-mid 1800s. i read that the first concert hall explicitly built for music was 1830 in vienna... Hmm. I thought that the Gewandhaus Orchestra was founded around 1781. Was there no Gewandhaus then? Or perhaps was it privately organized and owned by the aristocracy? Very interesting questions, for sure. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
At 03:04 PM 2/5/2007 +0100, shirling neueweise wrote: anyone know where the word originates? i'm wondering if it has to do with the private and quasi-private public concerts held in aristocractic-supported subscription series common in the late 18th and early 19th c. where collections would be made for the composer from the audience members. Your time guess on current usage appears to be close. The Online Etymological Dictionary is a pretty good place for this stuff: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=royalty royalty 1398, office or position of a sovereign, from O.Fr. roialte, from V.L. *regalitatem (nom. *regalitas), from L. regalis (see royal). Sense of prerogatives or rights granted by a sovereign to an individual or corporation is from 1483. From that evolved more general senses, such as payment to a landowner for use of a mine (1839), and ultimately payment to an author, composer, etc. for sale or use of his or her work (1857). ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
At 3:04 PM +0100 2/5/07, shirling neueweise wrote: anyone know where the word originates? i'm wondering if it has to do with the private and quasi-private public concerts held in aristocractic-supported subscription series common in the late 18th and early 19th c. where collections would be made for the composer from the audience members. or am i way off mark? david? andrew? i'm sure you guys have some info on this... I've never thought about this, actually, but isn't it more likely to go back to royal privileges (i.e. monopolies) and the bribes necessary to secure same? The O.E.D. would probably go into the etymology. What are such payments called in other countries? John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
I've never thought about this, actually, but isn't it more likely to go back to royal privileges (i.e. monopolies) and the bribes necessary to secure same? yeah, i thought there should be some connection to the court, but so far nothing backs it up. interesting, if what you suggest were the case, then the first payment originally went in the other direction (!), to secure the rights of exclusive exploitation for the rights holder for a defined time period. this was certainly typical for objects, inventions, but doesn't quite apply to music, at least it wouldn't seem so. in any case, according to others' definitions and the little i've found on the web (specific to the word itself), there seems to be a gap between the royal connection of such rights and its recorded use to mean payments made to rights holder. What are such payments called in other countries? F redevances (to owe back in a sense) D entries include: Patentgebühr (patent fee); Tantiem; Abgaben (? from babelfish...) I diritti d'autore (author rights) E derechos (rights) are these all correct? are there other words in these languages? yeah english is the only language where the possible connection to the court is apparent in the word. -- shirling neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
At 7:49 PM +0100 2/5/07, shirling neueweise wrote: interesting, if what you suggest were the case, then the first payment originally went in the other direction (!), to secure the rights of exclusive exploitation for the rights holder for a defined time period. this was certainly typical for objects, inventions, but doesn't quite apply to music, at least it wouldn't seem so. Au contraire! Petrucci, in Venice, held a monopoly lasting 20 years on the printing of part music and lute tablature, with his first print (Odhecaton A) appearing in 1501. And I think it was Tallis and his student, Byrd, who had Liz's monopoly on the printing of music and music paper, later passed on to Byrd and HIS student Morley. in any case, according to others' definitions and the little i've found on the web (specific to the word itself), there seems to be a gap between the royal connection of such rights and its recorded use to mean payments made to rights holder. Not exactly the same, no, but similar in guaranteeing a profit to the holder. Of course I'm making all this up!! John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
Au contraire! Petrucci, in Venice, held a monopoly lasting 20 years on the printing of part music and lute tablature, with his first print (Odhecaton A) appearing in 1501. And I think it was Tallis and his student, Byrd, who had Liz's monopoly on the printing of music and music paper, later passed on to Byrd and HIS student Morley. yes, but i'm talking about performance royalties. that is mechanical (distribution) rights. although of course in some languages royalties means essentially rights without specifications as to WHAT rights and would have to be clarified in context. -- shirling neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] etymological origin of royalties?
At 12:34 AM +0100 2/6/07, shirling neueweise wrote: Au contraire! Petrucci, in Venice, held a monopoly lasting 20 years on the printing of part music and lute tablature, with his first print (Odhecaton A) appearing in 1501. And I think it was Tallis and his student, Byrd, who had Liz's monopoly on the printing of music and music paper, later passed on to Byrd and HIS student Morley. yes, but i'm talking about performance royalties. that is mechanical (distribution) rights. although of course in some languages royalties means essentially rights without specifications as to WHAT rights and would have to be clarified in context. Ah, but your question spoke to late 18th, early 19th century practices. The terms you're now using are all 20th century. Under U.S. law, performance royalties didn't exist until 1909, and mechanical rights refer strictly to recordings, and have nothing to do with distribution of sheet music. Three separate things, treated three separate ways in the law. Yeah, it's complicated! And of course those terms would have absolutely nothing to do with Royalty. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
