Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.)
Dear Jerzy, I can't remember if you did ever get a reply from the List about the Castelfranco discovery. I don't know how easy it would be to get hold of, but there was a Festschrift published a few years ago, with information about it all: _Trent' Anni di Ricerche Musicologiche - Studi in onore di F. Alberto Gallo_ edited by Patrizia Dalla Vecchia and Donatella Restani (Rome: Edizioni Torre d'Orfeo, 1996). One of the articles is by Franco Rossi, Pacolini da Borgotaro _versus_ Pacalone da Padova. Francesco da Milano nell' Antologia Manoscritta di Castelfranco Veneto. The article is in Italian. Rossi provides a list of contents of the manuscript, and the music (transcribed into staff notation) of a lute duet by Francesco da Milano. Best wishes, Stewart. - Original Message - From: Jerzy ZAK [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:14 PM Subject: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.) Dear Matanya, I feel a little uncomfortable sending my question to the List - and that way obviously to you as well - again. Some time ago, when I joined the List, I was mainly expecting fresh news and knowledge in small bits shared by people dealing with all aspects of lute and it's music. But time showed that some people prefer wasting time - ours, mine, on personal quarrels. Lets to the point, then. May I ask you again (you could just overlooked my small posting, but you were present on the list in the meantime): What are the discoveries of Francesco Castelfranco, and other recent discoveries? Best regards, Jerzy On Thursday, Dec 4, 2003, at 01:42 Europe/Warsaw, Jerzy ZAK wrote: On Wednesday, Dec 3, 2003, at 23:04 Europe/Warsaw, Matanya Ophee wrote: But should new material come to light, there is no chance it will enter into general circulation any time soon. Viz. the availability to the Francesco Castelfranco new discoveries. And this is only one of the more recent discoveries that will be a long time in hiding from the lute community. What are the new discoveries of Francesco Castelfranco? What are the other more recent discoveries?? Jerzy
Re: Facsimeles etc.
I am doomed to Hell, I promised myself to stay out of this thread forever. But I must reply to Eugene. There is legality and there is equity. The US copyright law is different from most of the European, admittedly. But both consider fair use. My harp ensemble (a group of from 6 to 10, depending on the season and the committments) routinely violates the copyright law. We shamelessly copy arrangements from current books written by fellow harpists who need the money from their publications. My folio of arrangements is mainly xerox copies. But at the same time we also routinely hire those same harpist as workshop teachers when they come to our area. The ensemble is amateur, we donate our music to nursing homes and such. The arranger/publishers have no objection as the promulgation of their music means more sales in the long run. But that may be possible as the harp community in the US is quite united and has nothing to argue about. There are more differences between harps than there are between Thorbos and Lutes, but we consider ourselves a community. The point is this, as a community we support each other, but we also steal from each other in a technical sense. My ensemble is in New Jersey, and once a year the harp community descends on Somerset, NJ from all of North America. The arrangers/publishers gain from the interest created by groups such as ours, and we gain by having them there. The openness of the Harp Society should be a model for the Lute Societies, if we want to promote the music and sound. Fifteen years ago the harp was rare in the world (not counting the orchestral pedal harps) except in Ireland. Now we get five thousand visitor at the local Somerset festival, and many buy harps and music. I have no commercial axe to grind, I help out for the joy of it. But even a lutenist should want to see the understanding of his music expanded, if only for his own ego at being at the center of it. It is a delicate balance between the fair use and promulgation, and the rights of the arranger/publisher. But I have little sympathy with one who might say It's mine, cause I found it and then demand an exhorbitant price. No skin off my ass, it will be years before I'm interested in the more esoteric facsimiles, if ever. I have to learn to play this beatie first. Best, Jon
Re: Facsimeles etc.
James: I am not offended, I am in fact amused, but to a greater degree I am saddened. I know there is a healthy serving of ego around here seasoned with testosterone and good old fashioned hard headed I'm right and you're wrong. The Lute community is too small to harbor this kind of thing among individuals who, from what I can see are making, or have made, significant contributions to the world of the Lute. Making instruments and publishing facsimiles are both important engines that fuel this tiny universe of Early Music. I would hate for any of these individuals to get so pissed off that they discontinue contributing to this site, in particular, and abandon the Lute world, in general. By now it is quite obvious that no one is going to agree with the other and the debate can only get more ugly. Or as some of our local news anchors, aka talking heads, would say More uglier. (Yes they get paid to be that dense) Vance Wood. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 9:58 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. To all, Am I the only one who finds the name calling, and tone of some of these e-mail exchanges offensive? It's great to be passionate and have strong feelings about a subject, but how about a modicum of civility? I know, if you don't like it, don't read it; but the subject matter is interesting, so, I read. Sincerely, James --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Hello Jon, At 01:17 AM 12/6/03 -0500, Jon Murphy wrote: There is legality and there is equity. The US copyright law is different from most of the European, admittedly. But both consider fair use. My harp ensemble (a group of from 6 to 10, depending on the season and the committments) routinely violates the copyright law. We shamelessly copy arrangements from current books written by fellow harpists who need the money from their publications. My folio of arrangements is mainly xerox copies. But at the same time we also routinely hire those same harpist as workshop teachers when they come to our area. The ensemble is amateur, we donate our music to nursing homes and such. The arranger/publishers have no objection as the promulgation of their music means more sales in the long run. But that may be possible as the harp community in the US is quite united and has nothing to argue about. There are more differences between harps than there are between Thorbos and Lutes, but we consider ourselves a community. I'm not certain of the legality here, but I believe if someone amongst your players has bought the arrangement, making some copies to assist his/her performance qualifies as fair use and is legal. Is there somebody out there who knows? But even a lutenist should want to see the understanding of his music expanded, if only for his own ego at being at the center of it. I don't have enough skill with any instrument to justify any ego, but I would like understanding of the music for any of my instruments expanded, of course. Fortunately, the bulk of the lute repertoire, almost all of it, is in public domain. This is where one's personal sense of ethics dictates xerographic practices. It is a delicate balance between the fair use and promulgation, and the rights of the arranger/publisher. But I have little sympathy with one who might say It's mine, cause I found it and then demand an exhorbitant price. No skin off my ass, it will be years before I'm interested in the more esoteric facsimiles, if ever. I have to learn to play this beatie first. Even when you do decide to pursue esoteric facsimiles, be aware that nobody can claim It's mine, 'cause I found it with material in the public domain, only the physical manifestations of that material can be owned. The facsimiles cannot be copyrighted in the US, only new material surrounding publication of a PD facsimile can be copyrighted. For example, if I find the lost Santiago de Murcia manuscript of Greater Hooplah at a garage sale and purchase it for US$4.37, that physical book is mine, I can restrict access to it as I see fit, but I cannot own the music it contains. de Murcia wrote it a great long time ago and the world at large owns it. If such a thing ever happened to me, I would probably make a copy for my personal use, allow a publishing co. that generates product I like (e.g., Editions Orphee) to copy it because such a firm has a greater ability than I to disseminate this material to the world at large, and then donate the manuscript to a public collection. Any publisher to print my find could copyright any supportive text to come of his/her modern research, new cover art, etc. associated with a publication, but not the facsimiles themselves. If you must have that material, you could either decide to buy the handsomely-bound modern printing of the facsimile with its historic text and new cover art or pursue it through the public collection where it was donated (or write to me before I part company with it and I'd be happy to swap for other copies of PD stuff not originating in a modern publication). Here is where the personal ethic thing comes in: I would not condone xeroxing the facsimile pages from the modern edition, even if legal, because that diminishes the publisher's ability to recoup expenses associated with publishing such a work. I don't believe that's right. You can decide for yourself. Sincerest wishes of luck to you and your harpers, Eugene
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Not meaning to get in to the fray and continue the hemorrhaging , but what effect does an apology in the first part of the attached message have, if you conclude in the end with another insult? Does that make the previous apology null and void? Is this not just a parting shot across the bow? Vance Wood. The apology wasn't mine. Michael's mail-client doesn't insert ** before quotations, so it gets hard to distinguish who whore what. Thames: To all, Your all right, I have been stupid to call MO these these names, and I apologies the the list. I'm actually am quite surprised at my self, although it felt really good a couple of times. It seems this is my coming of age on the list and a lost of innocence, that a least according to allot of private email to me, most people have gone through at some point or another. I think I will do what Thomas does. Anything from MO will be directly cycled into my Trash bin. Or is it possible to just have an email blocker for one individual on the list? Turovsky: Actually YES. That is why I get only secondary winds [pun intended] of MO exploits. RT RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
The apology wasn't mine. Michael's mail-client doesn't insert ** before quotations, so it gets hard to distinguish who whore what Actually I got sucked back into it. What can I say, Now that I've followed this thing to the end, I retract my apologies, He is an Ape! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 9:29 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Not meaning to get in to the fray and continue the hemorrhaging , but what effect does an apology in the first part of the attached message have, if you conclude in the end with another insult? Does that make the previous apology null and void? Is this not just a parting shot across the bow? Vance Wood. The apology wasn't mine. Michael's mail-client doesn't insert ** before quotations, so it gets hard to distinguish who whore what. Thames: To all, Your all right, I have been stupid to call MO these these names, and I apologies the the list. I'm actually am quite surprised at my self, although it felt really good a couple of times. It seems this is my coming of age on the list and a lost of innocence, that a least according to allot of private email to me, most people have gone through at some point or another. I think I will do what Thomas does. Anything from MO will be directly cycled into my Trash bin. Or is it possible to just have an email blocker for one individual on the list? Turovsky: Actually YES. That is why I get only secondary winds [pun intended] of MO exploits. RT RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 11:20 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: As we have witnessed, a moral case could be made either way. I for one, am in favor of all facsimiles in the public domain to be copyright free. As far as everything else is concerned I really don't care. As I understand it, at least in the US, all facsimiles in the public domain _are_ copyright free. They may be protected by contractual agreement with the holder of the original, but the holder of the original cannot hold a US-registered copyright on them. If somebody has a richer understanding of copyright law, I'm happy to receive correction. Even if legal, I believe copying such stuff from a modern publication is wrong, so I don't do it, and I don't like that it's sometimes done. That's my decision to make. Eugene
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Barring obvious cases of tyranny, law should reflect the social norms of a society. Since when tyranny does not reflect the social norms of a society??? There is a maxim: Every people deserves its government. If you feel they do not, strive to change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite enough to justify a label of tyranny. Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD material by repackaging it. IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that holds the manuscript. PERIOD. Lute tabulatures are no different. RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:20 AM 12/5/03 -0500, Roman Turovsky wrote: If you feel they do not, strive to change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite enough to justify a label of tyranny. Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD material by repackaging it. There are many publishers. Some charge more than less. None hold a monopoly on PD lute tablatures. As I understand it, if a publisher does risk reproduction of a facsimile, repackage it, and sell it, I can xerox a friend's bought copy it and use it in the US if I don't reproduce introductory text, cover art...anything that may be copyrighted. Personally, I don't do this because I believe I should not. Again, I am happy to receive correction from those who really know something about copyright law. IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that holds the manuscript. PERIOD. Lute tabulatures are no different. I don't think this is in doubt. By definition, public domain material is not protected by copyright. If anybody lays hands to the material, he/she can disseminate it at will assuming he/she hasn't willingly agreed to legally binding restrictions in obtaining the material. If I own a rare and beautiful thing, I have the right to restrict access to it, to share it with friends and hide it from local street toughs, etc. In general, I'm pretty liberal about sharing my scant stash of music and ephemera with the world at large. Unlike many of the world's libraries, I am fortunate that my sustained existence doesn't depend upon such things. I have been pretty successful in accessing public collections without exorbitant fees...but I have done so to satiate my own curiosity, not with the intent to publish...and, I must say, I am a rather charming character. I understand your argument; I am just a little more sympathetic to the institutions that protect the physical manifestations of this material to the benefit of future users and, when faced with ever-diminishing public funds, must survive to the benefit of all.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 11:20 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: As we have witnessed, a moral case could be made either way. I for one, am in favor of all facsimiles in the public domain to be copyright free. As far as everything else is concerned I really don't care. As I understand it, at least in the US, all facsimiles in the public domain _are_ copyright free. They may be protected by contractual agreement with the holder of the original, but the holder of the original cannot hold a US-registered copyright on them. If somebody has a richer understanding of copyright law, I'm happy to receive correction. Even if legal, I believe copying such stuff from a modern publication is wrong, so I don't do it, and I don't like that it's sometimes done. That's my decision to make. Eugene Dear Eugene, If some lute manuscript were past down to me in my family lineage, I own it legally. Or if I went to an action and bought it. I own it. I have nothing to say about that. However, if a museum owns it they have a moral obligation to free it to the public domain, as I guess is reflected in the copyright laws in the US, as you say. Maybe this is true, I don't know. based on my own experience from copying both the Yale Jauck and The Boston Berr, I can say that both museums were extremely generous with me, in both there time, and support. Not once did I hear anything about copyright issues, nor did I at any point sign a legal document with them restricting me in anyway from releasing the plans I made. Now, that I've obtained the plans, it is then my choice whether I sell them for profit or not, isn't it? I've chosen not to, regardless of the expence involved, but others have chosen to make money That's the moral issue involved here. I don't see the world so black and white. Why is it that in poorer countries they don't have these kinds of restriction and in richer ones they do. The morals you proclaim have no solid base, because from one place to an other they change. You can't condem everyone, who lives outside the US or Europe criminals because they have a different take on things. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Euge [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 5:55 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 11:20 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: As we have witnessed, a moral case could be made either way. I for one, am in favor of all facsimiles in the public domain to be copyright free. As far as everything else is concerned I really don't care. As I understand it, at least in the US, all facsimiles in the public domain _are_ copyright free. They may be protected by contractual agreement with the holder of the original, but the holder of the original cannot hold a US-registered copyright on them. If somebody has a richer understanding of copyright law, I'm happy to receive correction. Even if legal, I believe copying such stuff from a modern publication is wrong, so I don't do it, and I don't like that it's sometimes done. That's my decision to make. Eugene
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:20 AM 12/5/03 -0500, Roman Turovsky wrote: If you feel they do not, strive to change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite enough to justify a label of tyranny. Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD material by repackaging it. There are many publishers. Some charge more than less. Some are supported by grants from the Ministry of Culture, in the lucky countries that have such entities. None hold a monopoly on PD lute tablatures. Certainly. It's just that some local vested interests are trying to trick us into limiting our liberty to share PD material, in favor of having us pay for their versions of the same. As I understand it, if a publisher does risk reproduction of a facsimile, repackage it, and sell it, I can xerox a friend's bought copy it and use it in the US if I don't reproduce introductory text, cover art...anything that may be copyrighted. Personally, I don't do this because I believe I should not. I do it IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that holds the manuscript. PERIOD. Lute tabulatures are no different. I don't think this is in doubt. By definition, public domain material is not protected by copyright. If anybody lays hands to the material, he/she can disseminate it at will assuming he/she hasn't willingly agreed to legally binding restrictions in obtaining the material. If I own a rare and beautiful thing, I have the right to restrict access to it, to share it with friends and hide it from local street toughs, etc. In general, I'm pretty liberal about sharing my scant stash of music and ephemera with the world at large. Unlike many of the world's libraries, I am fortunate that my sustained existence doesn't depend upon such things. I have been pretty successful in accessing public collections without exorbitant fees...but I have done so to satiate my own curiosity, not with the intent to publish...and, I must say, I am a rather charming character. You also have some academic credentials. My wife thinks I'm extremely charming, but my access to the goodies has not been that smooth, with the exception of NYPL. I understand your argument; I am just a little more sympathetic to the institutions that protect the physical manifestations of this material to the benefit of future users and, when faced with ever-diminishing public funds, must survive to the benefit of all. I support these institutions too, as long as they don't cross into gentrification of knowledge. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
I contributed what little I know of this topic very early on and in very short order grew mighty tired of all the scatological nonsense and inappropriate misidentification of hominids to follow (as a professional biologist, this latter offense was particularly troubling). Actually I took an exception (as a simian of impeccable pedigree) to calling MO a monkey because it is painfully insulting to see him perceived as of same kind as myself. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.)
I'll ask Sasha Batov about this. RT http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02059.html lute -- Chronological -- Find -- Thread -- Re: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.) For example, many years ago, I photographed in Leningrad., when it was still Leningrad, a lute manuscript in one library. ... One of these days, when I am in a better mood and when I can deal with lute music and lutenists directly, without regard to my so-called reputation, I may investigate this further. Don't cry Mataniy, don't wait for a better mood - lutenists are all the same as guitarists, flutists, programers and bankers. Find a distance, don't get involved in particulars... Good idea. You see, not all lutenists on this listare of the same mindset as Messrs. Abramovich, Thames and Turovsky. Obviously, there are some reasonable people here who understand that the issue of the survival of the lute is not one of instant gratification by free downloading, but one of study and research. I even have some friends in this list. I fully understand why they choose to encourage me in private messages, and not expose themselves to the kind of scatological (Yes, Jon Murphy, scatological. Just check out Turovsky's first post in this thread!) character assassination that goes on in here. People who have done so publicly in other forums, have been accused by Roman of being MO sycophants, among other expletives. Tell us what's on the film and either publish it (perhaps not in USA or Switzerland, if you don't want to complain about sales) or leave to someone for a Ph.D. elaboration, if that's better destination. Don't hide, we are looking forward. I know where it is, but I assure you, I have more urgent issues on the front burner, some even have to do with the lute. They will be announced as soon as they are ready for publication.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matanya Ophee wrote: Quite the contrary. Sky writing, ..., have a very secure business model where the I simply meant (with some poetic license required, perhaps) that you can't sell tickets to a sky-writing show. ... the street beggars in the swampy slums of Bangladesh are not part of this new fangled accessibility to music, yet they constitute a considerable portion of this thing you call mankind. Anyone who reads National Geographic knows that very few people in the world are unaffected by modern electronic entertainment. If file swapping kills Columbia Records, RIAA, and MGM Studios, I think that mankind as a whole will indeed benefit, including the half-starved rat-hunters, whether or not they are part of the kill mechanism. What we are really talking about is the replacement of commerciality with You're twisting my subject, and then implying that I was confused about what the subject was. ???
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:20 AM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you feel they do not, strive to change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite enough to justify a label of tyranny. Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD material by repackaging it. That is a weak argument that does not reflect the realities of the market place. Repackaging a facsimile is not a monopoly. The Mudarra book is published in facsimile by both Chanterelle and Minkoff. The Sanz book is published in facsimile By Minkoff, Abrines and Rodrigo de Zayas, the Moscow Weiss Manuscript is published in facsimile by Zen-On (Manabe) and Orphee (Crawford). There is nothing to prevent anyone from re-publishing any manuscript in facsimile, as long as they obtain it from the original source. IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that holds the manuscript. PERIOD. Lute tabulatures are no different. They are different. The proper analogy here would be the re-publication of the _music_ contained in the tablature, not the image of the tablature itself. If I want to re-publish the complete works of Shakespeare, I have two choices. Take any of the available sources, off the shelf at Barnes Noble if need be, re-typeset it and publish it. No problem. The other choice is to do a facsimile, let's say, of the first edition. In that case, I need to obtain the permission of the holder of that source, if there is only one. If there are many such sources, I may try to obtain one myself (Sotheby's for example) or negotiate with any of the known holders. Once I published this facsimile, anyone who wishes to throw good money after bad is welcome to repeat the process. All I am asking is that if you want to produce a facsimile of something I published, please retrace my steps and invest the same kind of time and money I did. Don't rip me off. The reprint industry is far more extensive than just the manufacturers of lute tablature facsimiles. Minkoff is one of the smaller operators in the field. Other well known ones are Dover Publications of New York, Da Capo Press, Olms verlag in Hildesheim, Slatkine Reprints (also in Geneva) and many others. What RT is insinuating is that by publishing a facsimile, the _intent_ of the publisher is to monopolize the market. That is utter nonsense since he has no way of knowing if this is in fact the case, particularly when the market place reality is indicates no such monopoly exists. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.)
At 12:24 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll ask Sasha Batov about this. RT http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02059.html Good idea. I hope you have better luck getting hold of him than I did last August. Batov was working in the Leningrad Museum of Musical Instruments at the time. That's when I met him. The Manuscript in question was in another library. But as an active lutenist in Leningrad at the same time, he should know of this manuscript and what it was. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 11:43 AM 12/5/2003 -0600, Herbert Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matanya Ophee wrote: Quite the contrary. Sky writing, ..., have a very secure business model where the I simply meant (with some poetic license required, perhaps) that you can't sell tickets to a sky-writing show. They buy the tickets to the football game, placing thousands of potential buyers in one location, which gives advertisers the venue to sell their product. Sky writers, like banner draggers, have a secure income form that, weather permitting of course. ... the street beggars in the swampy slums of Bangladesh are not part of this new fangled accessibility to music, yet they constitute a considerable portion of this thing you call mankind. Anyone who reads National Geographic knows that very few people in the world are unaffected by modern electronic entertainment. Yes of course. They all own computers and CD burners. If file swapping kills Columbia Records, RIAA, and MGM Studios, I think that mankind as a whole will indeed benefit, including the half-starved rat-hunters, whether or not they are part of the kill mechanism. Be careful what you wish for. You may get it. What we are really talking about is the replacement of commerciality with You're twisting my subject, and then implying that I was confused about what the subject was. Not at all. we are talking about the same thing. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Roland, you asked: I am tired of deleting all the messages on this subject. Why don't you who wish to pursue it go off line? Well the same with me! I sincerely wish that the theoretical copyright thinkers choose to change to private e-mail communication! All the best... ;-) Arto
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear James, I understand your frustration. I've been on this list for two = years and have up to now, managed to stay clear of this tyrannical = monster. If you follow this thread to the beginning, you'll notice I = asked a question. The basic instinct and wholesome wish to see these = precious manuscripts in TRUE PUBLIC DOMAIN was lurking in the hearts = and minds of everyone of us on this lis,. whether we admit it or not. MO = said I was stupid for bringing this up, maybe, but it struck a cord in = everyone including MO. I've been witness to Roman and MO's exchanges on this list over the = past 2 years, and have to say I've slowly gained a great deal of = respect for Romans convictions and for what he stands for. At the same = time I respect anyone who has put the time and effort into editions, = worthy of buying. I have always bought nice editions and will continue = to. When I felt I was wrong about something, I apologized, is this not = being civil? Dealing with MO is like being in the movie The = Terminator'' He doesn't stop but keeps coming at you, the only way to = survive is to fight back. As far as name calling goes, As soon as MO rises into the upper = realm of human beings, and starts showing respect for others, and some = civility, I will confer on him the title of Human. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message -=20 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 11:58 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. To all, Am I the only one who finds the name calling, and tone of some of = these e-mail exchanges offensive? It's great to be passionate and have = strong feelings about a subject, but how about a modicum of civility? I = know, if you don't like it, don't read it; but the subject matter is = interesting, so, I read. Sincerely, James --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Am 4 Dec 2003 um 0:55 hat Michael Thames geschrieben: As far as name calling goes, As soon as MO rises into the upper = realm of human beings, and starts showing respect for others, and some = civility, I will confer on him the title of Human. Michael Thames Dear Michael, it should have occurred to you that namecalling is not the kind of communication which grounds on respect either. Best wishes, Stephan
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Stewart and James-- Well stated. Thank you. - Original Message - From: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:38 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Dear James, No, you are not alone. I suppose people forget that, when we send messages addressed to particular individuals, we are also sending that same message to everyone else on the list. If you aim a bucket of water at someone, everyone else gets soaked in the process. There have been two kinds of name-calling in the last few days: a) Using an offensive word like monkey or ape; b) Altering someone's name into some sort of sarcastic nickname, e.g. MO for Matanya Ophee, Uncle Albert for Albert Reyerman, and St. McCoy for me. Calling someone by a name other than their correct name is puerile, and has the opposite effect from the one intended. Name-calling is designed to hurt someone by making fun of them, but it is inevitably the name-caller who ends up looking foolish, because it reflects the paucity of his thought. It is all very tiresome, and I do wish it would stop. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:58 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. To all, Am I the only one who finds the name calling, and tone of some of these e-mail exchanges offensive? It's great to be passionate and have strong feelings about a subject, but how about a modicum of civility? I know, if you don't like it, don't read it; but the subject matter is interesting, so, I read. Sincerely, James
Re: Facsimeles etc.
James et al, Well stated. This tendency towards ad hominem attacks, and general incivility, is offensive, destructive and unfitting of an otherwise erudite and sophisticated community. Gregs - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 12:58 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. To all, Am I the only one who finds the name calling, and tone of some of these e-mail exchanges offensive? It's great to be passionate and have strong feelings about a subject, but how about a modicum of civility? I know, if you don't like it, don't read it; but the subject matter is interesting, so, I read. Sincerely, James --
Respuesta: RE: RV: Facsimeles etc.
Querido Hernán, I wish I could write you in Spanish, but wouldn't be reasonable. I'm not blaming composers for publishing abroad. They publish where they can. I blame myself for not supporting local companies, or even foreign companies, by not buying what I would be able to buy. Does Warner own more than Editorial Lagos? I must confess I know nothing about that. The failure of our local and international companies has nothing to do with how much we support them. It is a bit more complex than that, and a logical explanation would necessary take us into an off-topic sub. (not again). Seems to be that most of us we do efforts to buy what we can buy (talking always about what were talking). What doesnt seem to be so easy to understand for some of the respectable members of the list, is that therere many different realities and perceptions of one same reality, depending of where you are and what you do. Muchos saludos, y a tu disposición para cualquier ayuda (viajo a Baires en febrero, si hiciera falta algo). Ariel. There are no lutenists around here. There should be half a dozen around metropolitan Buenos Aires, right? And at least one in Mar del Plata. Yes, and that's why Hoppy comes to Argentina every now and then, we're all very grateful to him for that. What I meant was, I'm not asking for donations for my Conservatory's library or for me, there are no lutenists in Bahia Blanca (700km away from Buenos Aires, 400km away from Mar del Plata). I wish there were. But if you want to make any donationsI won't stop you. :-) Roman, you're doing enough already by making available music for download. Thanks. I have the music, I'm sorry it's not possible to download a lute. :-) Well, I'll just keep playing this stuff on the guitar, then (sorry). Regards, Hernán.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
No, you are not alone. I suppose people forget that, when we send messages addressed to particular individuals, we are also sending that same message to everyone else on the list. If you aim a bucket of water at someone, everyone else gets soaked in the process. There have been two kinds of name-calling in the last few days: a) Using an offensive word like monkey or ape; b) Altering someone's name into some sort of sarcastic nickname, e.g. MO for Matanya Ophee, Uncle Albert for Albert Reyerman, and St. McCoy for me. I personally find the use of initials a term of endearment, even for such a sklochnik as MO (there is also an added analogy here with an American acronym BO). St.McCoy on the other hand is designed to convey the saintliness of the subject. I'd have thouhgt that Stewart is a Mr.Rogers of the lutenists' neighborhood, if I didn't know what he looked like. RT Calling someone by a name other than their correct name is puerile, and has the opposite effect from the one intended. Name-calling is designed to hurt someone by making fun of them, but it is inevitably the name-caller who ends up looking foolish, because it reflects the paucity of his thought. It is all very tiresome, and I do wish it would stop. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy.
Re: Respuesta: Re: Facsimeles etc.
We'll keep doing what we think is fair, and that's it. We should keep the explanations and questions for receptive individuals, and avoid any nonsense confrontation. Dear Ariel, your point is well taken, and I will sign off on this thread, hopefully we can all get back to the love of music and the lute again. Sorry for causing anyone to feel uncomfortable. Just an idea. Saludos, Ariel. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Ariel Abramovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 3:45 AM Subject: Respuesta: Re: Facsimeles etc. Dear Michael, I've learned the lesson too late (no one warned me), but seriously: this doesn't make any sense. It is not about an exchange, as it wasn't the last time we had a similar episode... Many of us would agree with many of your points, as you had the chance to see. We'll keep doing what we think is fair, and that's it. We should keep the explanations and questions for receptive individuals, and avoid any nonsense confrontation. Just an idea. Saludos, Ariel.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear James, No, you are not alone. I suppose people forget that, when we send messages addressed to particular individuals, we are also sending that same message to everyone else on the list. If you aim a bucket of water at someone, everyone else gets soaked in the process. There have been two kinds of name-calling in the last few days: a) Using an offensive word like monkey or ape; b) Altering someone's name into some sort of sarcastic nickname, e.g. MO for Matanya Ophee, Uncle Albert for Albert Reyerman, and St. McCoy for me. Calling someone by a name other than their correct name is puerile, and has the opposite effect from the one intended. Name-calling is designed to hurt someone by making fun of them, but it is inevitably the name-caller who ends up looking foolish, because it reflects the paucity of his thought. It is all very tiresome, and I do wish it would stop. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:58 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. To all, Am I the only one who finds the name calling, and tone of some of these e-mail exchanges offensive? It's great to be passionate and have strong feelings about a subject, but how about a modicum of civility? I know, if you don't like it, don't read it; but the subject matter is interesting, so, I read. Sincerely, James
Re: Facsimeles etc.
As far as name calling goes, As soon as MO rises into the upper = realm of human beings, and starts showing respect for others, and some = civility, I will confer on him the title of Human. Michael Thames Dear Michael, it should have occurred to you that namecalling is not the kind of communication which grounds on respect either. Best wishes, Stephan Indeed, that particular monopoly can be happily left to MO. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: RV: Facsimeles etc.
Yes, and that's why Hoppy comes to Argentina every now and then, we're all very grateful to him for that. What I meant was, I'm not asking for donations for my Conservatory's library or for me, there are no lutenists in Bahia Blanca (700km away from Buenos Aires, 400km away from Mar del Plata). I wish there were. But if you want to make any donations I won't stop you. :-) Roman, you're doing enough already by making available music for download. Thanks. I have the music, I'm sorry it's not possible to download a lute. :-) Well, I'll just keep playing this stuff on the guitar, then (sorry). I believe there will be contributions of plans, if you find a sympathetic luthier. Just ask. However, even if you have difficulties finding lutes, you still have morcillas, bife de chorizo, chimichurri and Carlos Gardel.. RT (green with envy...)
Re: Facsimeles etc.
To all, Your all right, I have been stupid to call MO these these names, and I apologies the the list. I'm actually am quite surprised at my self, although it felt really good a couple of times. It seems this is my coming of age on the list and a lost of innocence, that a least according to allot of private email to me, most people have gone through at some point or another. I think I will do what Thomas does. Anything from MO will be directly cycled into my Trash bin. Or is it possible to just have an email blocker for one individual on the list? again sorry to all! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 8:20 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. As far as name calling goes, As soon as MO rises into the upper = realm of human beings, and starts showing respect for others, and some = civility, I will confer on him the title of Human. Michael Thames Dear Michael, it should have occurred to you that namecalling is not the kind of communication which grounds on respect either. Best wishes, Stephan Indeed, that particular monopoly can be happily left to MO. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
acronym BO). St.McCoy on the other hand is designed to convey the saintliness of the subject. I'd have thouhgt that Stewart is a Mr.Rogers of the lutenists' neighborhood, if I didn't know what he looked like. RT Calling someone by a name other than their correct name is puerile, and has the opposite effect from the one intended. Name-calling is designed to hurt someone by making fun of them, but it is inevitably the name-caller who ends up looking foolish, because it reflects the paucity of his thought. It is all very tiresome, and I do wish it would stop. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy Stewart, I haven't had any real correspondence with you other than this occasion, but I do find your take on all this rather haughty and holier than thou. I guess there two ways to insult people. One is flat out in your face and obvious, and the other in my humble opinion, a little more insidious, attack there character, motivation, intelligence, etc. resulting in the purist form of un just discrimination, simply because one has a different view on something. This slowly starts to build up and take root producing cancerous result. As I said, I was a bit over the top, I think once or twice calling him an ape would have done the trick just fine, and I should have left it at that. I'm really amassed at how people read the words and only see the obvious, however the intent and essence seems to go unnoticed. Everyone in the end who had a problem with the way I handled it, had little to say while the exchange was taking place. The sign of a true critic. I am rather direct and obvious in all matters in my life, for good or bad, and have little patience for this kind of character assassination, while at the same time I do enjoy an intelligent exchange of ideas, but to have that happen you need two or more reasonable people. All the best, Michael Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: LUTE-LIST [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:02 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. No, you are not alone. I suppose people forget that, when we send messages addressed to particular individuals, we are also sending that same message to everyone else on the list. If you aim a bucket of water at someone, everyone else gets soaked in the process. There have been two kinds of name-calling in the last few days: a) Using an offensive word like monkey or ape; b) Altering someone's name into some sort of sarcastic nickname, e.g. MO for Matanya Ophee, Uncle Albert for Albert Reyerman, and St. McCoy for me. I personally find the use of initials a term of endearment, even for such a sklochnik as MO (there is also an added analogy here with an American acronym BO). St.McCoy on the other hand is designed to convey the saintliness of the subject. I'd have thouhgt that Stewart is a Mr.Rogers of the lutenists' neighborhood, if I didn't know what he looked like. RT Calling someone by a name other than their correct name is puerile, and has the opposite effect from the one intended. Name-calling is designed to hurt someone by making fun of them, but it is inevitably the name-caller who ends up looking foolish, because it reflects the paucity of his thought. It is all very tiresome, and I do wish it would stop. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy.
Respuesta: Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Michael, I've learned the lesson too late (no one warned me), but seriously: this doesn't make any sense. It is not about an exchange, as it wasn't the last time we had a similar episode... Many of us would agree with many of your points, as you had the chance to see. We'll keep doing what we think is fair, and that's it. We should keep the explanations and questions for receptive individuals, and avoid any nonsense confrontation. Just an idea. Saludos, Ariel.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Here is a little wrench to throw in to the collective works. For arguments sake let us assume that I was to purchase, or otherwise obtain a copy of Mr. Reyerman's publication. Over time, if Iwere to hand copy each piece in the book, what would the collective reaction be if I then put the hand copied collection on the net? How would this scenario stand in the ongoing debate? Vance Wood. - Original Message - From: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:32 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it Hey fellow, First of all I stated my intentions were to post the facsimiles, and ask people what they thought, I then said I'd take the matter to heart. Incase you don't have a heart, I'll translate that into, I will listen to what everyone said. I then made a decision that the right thing to do was to contact Albert and propose an idea, which is not to far different than Thomas Schell's site. Then all hell broke loose! No where did I publicly declare that I intend to rip him off Those are you words. At no time did I say I would post the facsimiles regardless of Albert's wishes, and quite frankly I won't, based not so much on legality, but to respect his wishes. In the end I don't want to piss off anymore human beings,than I have to, except you! I asked some alarming questions again out of my naivety which you seem to enjoy pointing out. Also, concerning young guitars students, I have noticed that hardly any of them play baroque or ren music these, it's mostly modern. In one local private high school in Albuq. there are 70 guitar students. Being that I only play Baroque lute, that does alarm me, in a selfish kind of way. So I don't know what planet your from, but as you claim to be in tune with the guitar world you obviously are not. This without a dought is what these young kids are into. wake up and smell the coffee! my friend. Also, concerning my website and posting Facsimiles. I could care less about another Bach version of a lute suite for guitar, I just like seeing the facsimile, and if it draws guitarists to my site all the better for me. But I do want to help these kids as well Believe me or not. In the end, I don;t give a rats ass if you ever heard of me or not. I conceder that to be a blessing. Go and get some help my friend! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 09:56 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Relax Montana, That can work both ways, distorting people's names intentionally. But I will resist the urge to engage in this juvenile silliness. I see you have quite alot of baggage with this issue, to go after me with your well known guile, and considering remarks. You truly take the prize for vileness, your reputation precedes you. Glad you noticed. Again, glad to be the scapegoat for you Publishing kind of guys, but as you say this is getting old, isn't it. If I were your mother I'd take you over my knee and give a good whacking! But since this is your only source of income I'll forgive you! That's bullshit number one. Publishing is not my source of income at all. It is only the source of my _losses_ over the years. If had to live the way I do from music publishing, this business would have gone down the drain decades ago. Do check my biography more carefully. Lets put all exchanges of pleasantries aside, Please tell me the crime I'm guilty of, what have I done other than ask a few uncomfortable questions. I've already admitted I'm stupid, and you've pointed that out again just in case everyone forgot. Is WANTING to post a facsimile a crime? No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it. As I
Re: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.)
Dear Matanya, Thank you for your answer. On Thursday, Dec 4, 2003, at 19:43 Europe/Warsaw, Matanya Ophee wrote: At 06:14 PM 12/4/2003 +0100, Jerzy ZAK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Matanya, ... But time showed that some people prefer wasting time - ours, mine, on personal quarrels. This last quarrel was not personal. I avoided the thread until Albert Reyerman had a chance to defend himself ... The rest of this ugly affair is in no need of being mentioned. I understand your point and am the last to continue in that spirit. ... What are the discoveries of Francesco Castelfranco, and other recent discoveries? ... The subject has been mentioned here before, mostly by Arthur Ness who will be better informed about this than I am. As for other discoveries, it is only a simple postulate that argues that we have no way of knowing what it is we do not know. New things come up for air all the time. This is obvious. I was personally a wittness of more then one ''discovery'' or ''rediscovery'' of a lute MS in Poland and all this happend outside of RISM (Repertoire International des Sources Musicales) network and operations - I'll reftrain from commenting on that organization. All this happens by chance or through someones often ''controversial'' activity... For example, many years ago, I photographed in Leningrad., when it was still Leningrad, a lute manuscript in one library. ... One of these days, when I am in a better mood and when I can deal with lute music and lutenists directly, without regard to my so-called reputation, I may investigate this further. Don't cry Mataniy, don't wait for a better mood - lutenists are all the same as guitarists, flutists, programers and bankers. Find a distance, don't get involved in particulars... Tell us what's on the film and either publish it (perhaps not in USA or Switzerland, if you don't want to complain about sales) or leave to someone for a Ph.D. elaboration, if that's better destination. Don't hide, we are looking forward. As to the situation in either Mascow or St Petersburg archives, it's a mine of new or forgotten things - I asure you! I can publically say only so, I'm not of the power of Christoph Wolff who could have done a mega-move of the whole one of the old Berlin archives from Kijev back to Berlin - few years ago! Does anybody know if the catalogue, as promised, is already available? Ears up, Matanya (as we say here), find that film! Yours, Jerzy
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Vance Wood wrote: ... what would the collective reaction be if I then put the hand copied collection on the net? How would this scenario stand in the ongoing debate? Some industries just naturally have an insecure business model. Examples include artistic sky writing, emergency-room medical care, sheet-music publishing (in the era of xerox/internet), and the marketing of CDs (in the era of Napster and its recent more-advanced offshoots). Solutions are few and far between. A recent article in the Washington Post said that the war between RIAA and the internet music swappers is basically over, and that the swappers won -- there is no real way to stop them. One solution is the benevolent dictatorship, which many historians think is the best form of government. For example, the famous historian Edward Gibbons (Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire) thought that the era when human happiness was greatest was definitely the Pax Romana. I hope that Napster et. al. will have the effect of reducing the overall commerciality of music, to mankind's great benefit. But, as our publisher friend pointed out, collapse of the tree in which facsimile publishing is perched may not be beneficial.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Here is a little wrench to throw in to the collective works. For arguments sake let us assume that I was to purchase, or otherwise obtain a copy of Mr. Reyerman's publication. Over time, if Iwere to hand copy each piece in the book, what would the collective reaction be if I then put the hand copied collection on the net? How would this scenario stand in the ongoing debate? Vance Wood Vance that is an excellent idea, and one that seems to be well within historical practice. While one writes the tablature down, you could imagine you were a visiting lute player to a household and left behind a token of goodwill and enjoyment for all future generations. Actually if you don't do it I will. One could find a good copyist blow up the originals so it's easier to copy, it and then reduce it back down to it's original size, with all the ink stains copy perfectly. No one could tell the difference. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Vance Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:41 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Here is a little wrench to throw in to the collective works. For arguments sake let us assume that I was to purchase, or otherwise obtain a copy of Mr. Reyerman's publication. Over time, if Iwere to hand copy each piece in the book, what would the collective reaction be if I then put the hand copied collection on the net? How would this scenario stand in the ongoing debate? Vance Wood. - Original Message - From: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:32 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it Hey fellow, First of all I stated my intentions were to post the facsimiles, and ask people what they thought, I then said I'd take the matter to heart. Incase you don't have a heart, I'll translate that into, I will listen to what everyone said. I then made a decision that the right thing to do was to contact Albert and propose an idea, which is not to far different than Thomas Schell's site. Then all hell broke loose! No where did I publicly declare that I intend to rip him off Those are you words. At no time did I say I would post the facsimiles regardless of Albert's wishes, and quite frankly I won't, based not so much on legality, but to respect his wishes. In the end I don't want to piss off anymore human beings,than I have to, except you! I asked some alarming questions again out of my naivety which you seem to enjoy pointing out. Also, concerning young guitars students, I have noticed that hardly any of them play baroque or ren music these, it's mostly modern. In one local private high school in Albuq. there are 70 guitar students. Being that I only play Baroque lute, that does alarm me, in a selfish kind of way. So I don't know what planet your from, but as you claim to be in tune with the guitar world you obviously are not. This without a dought is what these young kids are into. wake up and smell the coffee! my friend. Also, concerning my website and posting Facsimiles. I could care less about another Bach version of a lute suite for guitar, I just like seeing the facsimile, and if it draws guitarists to my site all the better for me. But I do want to help these kids as well Believe me or not. In the end, I don;t give a rats ass if you ever heard of me or not. I conceder that to be a blessing. Go and get some help my friend! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 09:56 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Relax Montana, That can work both ways, distorting people's names intentionally. But I will resist the urge to engage in this juvenile silliness. I see you have quite alot of baggage with this issue, to go after me with your well known guile, and considering remarks. You truly take the prize for vileness, your reputation precedes you. Glad you noticed. Again, glad to be the scapegoat for you Publishing kind of guys, but as you say
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Here is a little wrench to throw in to the collective works. For arguments sake let us assume that I was to purchase, or otherwise obtain a copy of Mr. Reyerman's publication. Over time, if Iwere to hand copy each piece in the book, what would the collective reaction be if I then put the hand copied collection on the net? How would this scenario stand in the ongoing debate? There would be no debate, except MO would probably criticize you for unscholarly handwriting and other types of hypocritical anti-capitalist behavior. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org Vance Wood Vance that is an excellent idea, and one that seems to be well within historical practice. While one writes the tablature down, you could imagine you were a visiting lute player to a household and left behind a token of goodwill and enjoyment for all future generations. Actually if you don't do it I will. One could find a good copyist blow up the originals so it's easier to copy, it and then reduce it back down to it's original size, with all the ink stains copy perfectly. No one could tell the difference. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Vance Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:41 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Here is a little wrench to throw in to the collective works. For arguments sake let us assume that I was to purchase, or otherwise obtain a copy of Mr. Reyerman's publication. Over time, if Iwere to hand copy each piece in the book, what would the collective reaction be if I then put the hand copied collection on the net? How would this scenario stand in the ongoing debate? Vance Wood. - Original Message - From: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:32 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it Hey fellow, First of all I stated my intentions were to post the facsimiles, and ask people what they thought, I then said I'd take the matter to heart. Incase you don't have a heart, I'll translate that into, I will listen to what everyone said. I then made a decision that the right thing to do was to contact Albert and propose an idea, which is not to far different than Thomas Schell's site. Then all hell broke loose! No where did I publicly declare that I intend to rip him off Those are you words. At no time did I say I would post the facsimiles regardless of Albert's wishes, and quite frankly I won't, based not so much on legality, but to respect his wishes. In the end I don't want to piss off anymore human beings,than I have to, except you! I asked some alarming questions again out of my naivety which you seem to enjoy pointing out. Also, concerning young guitars students, I have noticed that hardly any of them play baroque or ren music these, it's mostly modern. In one local private high school in Albuq. there are 70 guitar students. Being that I only play Baroque lute, that does alarm me, in a selfish kind of way. So I don't know what planet your from, but as you claim to be in tune with the guitar world you obviously are not. This without a dought is what these young kids are into. wake up and smell the coffee! my friend. Also, concerning my website and posting Facsimiles. I could care less about another Bach version of a lute suite for guitar, I just like seeing the facsimile, and if it draws guitarists to my site all the better for me. But I do want to help these kids as well Believe me or not. In the end, I don;t give a rats ass if you ever heard of me or not. I conceder that to be a blessing. Go and get some help my friend! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 09:56 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Relax Montana, That can work both ways, distorting people's names intentionally. But I will resist the urge to engage in this juvenile silliness. I see you have quite alot of baggage with this issue, to go after me with your well known guile, and considering remarks. You truly take
Re: Facsimeles etc.
hope that Napster et. al. will have the effect of reducing the overall commerciality of music, to mankind's great benefit. But, as our publisher friend pointed out, collapse of the tree in which facsimile publishing is perched may not be beneficial If He doesn't do it, believe me there are a hindered others who will. And maybe they'll do it with a spirit of generosity, and quit complaining if they can't make a profit. Maybe if there's a void...God forbid!... it might occur to some to set up foundations, not much different than the Dowland MS. project... or what Dr. Candice Mager offered as a possible solution. Before this storm it, I was ambivalent about the whole thing. But now thanks to you know who... I can say with absolute resolve, that anyone who is stupid enough to publish a facsimile of an original manuscript and expect to make a profit, should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. That being said, If they were to put the copies into a well thought out informative beautiful edition, and make it appealing for consumers of music, people would buy it, that's how it works. An example is Frank Koonces's editions of Bach, and anything that is added onto and edited. How many lute players, out there, at the age of 18 decided to give up business collage and choose a career in lute because there's more money in playing the lute instead? How many lutemakers got into lute making as a profitable business in the beginning? The point is don't quit your day job,just yet. Look at Douglas Anton Smith '' A history of the Lute'' for god's sake, a lifetime of work. Do you think he will ever be compensated for his time and energy? Do you think his motivation was to get rich? Or for that matter break even? NO it was because he probably couldn't do anything else because of his passion for the lute. You publishing types, seem to represent the most extreme swing of capitalism, thinking the only time anyone does anything is for money, shame on you, and the stupid sheep that follow them. These publishers are very smart, it's the ones that follow them that are stupid! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Herbert Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:04 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Vance Wood wrote: ... what would the collective reaction be if I then put the hand copied collection on the net? How would this scenario stand in the ongoing debate? Some industries just naturally have an insecure business model. Examples include artistic sky writing, emergency-room medical care, sheet-music publishing (in the era of xerox/internet), and the marketing of CDs (in the era of Napster and its recent more-advanced offshoots). Solutions are few and far between. A recent article in the Washington Post said that the war between RIAA and the internet music swappers is basically over, and that the swappers won -- there is no real way to stop them. One solution is the benevolent dictatorship, which many historians think is the best form of government. For example, the famous historian Edward Gibbons (Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire) thought that the era when human happiness was greatest was definitely the Pax Romana. I hope that Napster et. al. will have the effect of reducing the overall commerciality of music, to mankind's great benefit. But, as our publisher friend pointed out, collapse of the tree in which facsimile publishing is perched may not be beneficial.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
I contributed what little I know of this topic very early on and in very short order grew mighty tired of all the scatological nonsense and inappropriate misidentification of hominids to follow (as a professional biologist, this latter offense was particularly troubling). I said this the last too-recent time this same debate raged through the list: if an activity is legal, feel free to do it; if its morality is suspect, you're old enough to decide for yourself whether or not you should feel guilty afterwards. Barring obvious cases of tyranny, law should reflect the social norms of a society. If you feel they do not, strive to change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite enough to justify a label of tyranny. Too black and white, passionless, oblivious to the beauty of the art: maybe, but that's who I am in such debates. Distributing xerographic copies of published facsimiles may often be perfectly legal in the US in many cases, but I personally feel doing so is unethical in increasing the risk inherent in publishing facsimiles...so I don't...and I do engage in plenty of swapping for PD material, both old publications that are no longer in print and, occasionally, manuscript facsimiles that did not originate in a modern publication. At 08:26 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: If He doesn't do it, believe me there are a hindered others who will. And maybe they'll do it with a spirit of generosity, and quit complaining if they can't make a profit. I believe this spirit is amply demonstrated by almost every publisher who has endeavored to bring a facsimile to print. If you don't like a particular publisher, voice your dissent with your dollars and buy something else. Cold and passionless again, but my money simply goes to products I like. Before this storm it, I was ambivalent about the whole thing. But now thanks to you know who... I can say with absolute resolve, that anyone who is stupid enough to publish a facsimile of an original manuscript and expect to make a profit, should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. I don't believe this describes anybody who has ever published a facsimile edition. That being said, If they were to put the copies into a well thought out informative beautiful edition, and make it appealing for consumers of music, people would buy it, that's how it works. An example is Frank Koonces's editions of Bach, and anything that is added onto and edited. Even so, as I have--as we all have--read here very frequently over the past week, beautifully bound facsimile editions of lute music--even those well-endowed with well-researched, supportive, informative text and informed corrections--_still_ can't be expected to turn profit. Perhaps these especially cannot be expected to generate profit given the amount of work and scholarship they require to produce. You publishing types, seem to represent the most extreme swing of capitalism, thinking the only time anyone does anything is for money, shame on you, and the stupid sheep that follow them. These publishers are very smart, it's the ones that follow them that are stupid! Again, I have yet to hear of any modern publication of lute tablature generating massive profit and universal fame for its publisher. The highest aspiration such a publication can realistically have is to generously disseminate valuable information to a buying public and, in so doing, hope to reclaim a portion of the expense of production. Excessive copying of such stuff, even if legal, increases the risk inherent in their publication making it less likely to occur in the future to the detriment of all. I happily either buy or properly borrow from libraries those such publications that contain material I would like to access. Maybe I am naive, idealistic (these are my ideals, not necessarily anybody else's and do not dictate anybody else's behavior), Mr. Rogers-like, I'd like to imagine that I'm not quite to a level of stupid even though I am buying into the schemes of smart publishers...I am almost certainly not saintly (I often keep my library books longer than I should). I feel obliged to say this again: if an activity is legal, feel free to do it; if its morality is suspect, you're old enough to decide for yourself whether or not you should feel guilty afterwards...but don't expect everybody else around you to like what you've done. I might not be a fan of what you've done, but I won't take offense unless it is illegal. As I wrote some time ago, what little I know relevant to the topic at hand was offered at that time and gleaned from a casual conversation I had with a friend in the US Library of Congress's Copyright Office. I really have no more to say on this topic unless I am specifically addressed, but please don't confuse me with excrement or simians.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Stewart, I both agree and disagree. It is a matter of the intent. b) Altering someone's name into some sort of sarcastic nickname, e.g. MO for Matanya Ophee, Uncle Albert for Albert Reyerman, and St. McCoy for me. Calling someone by a name other than their correct name is puerile, and has the opposite effect from the one intended. Name-calling is designed to hurt someone by making fun of them, but it is inevitably the name-caller who ends up looking foolish, because it reflects the paucity of his thought. It is all very tiresome, and I do wish it would stop. I referred to you as Stew one time, and you corrected me. Point well taken. But my name is Jonathan and I prefer to be called Jon (or Murph by those I know well - in fact I sign differently to close friends and those who are friends but less close). I wrote Matthias and addressed him as Mat, before I was aware that Europeans don't take the familiar as easily as Americans do. But his reaction was I rather enjoy that. It is an individual thing, and the individual desires should be respected. So I agree that it is puerile to use a name other than the accepted one, but the accepted one may be a nickname rather than the correct one if the purpose is well intended. There is no rule except manners, and the form of address should be dictated by the desire of the addressee. If you want to call me Uncle Murph with a tongue in cheek reference to my avuncular pontification I would find it amusing, but if you do it with spite then I will be annoyed. A classic line from western movies is When you say that Mister, smile. It is a misquote of a fine and definitive novel of the difference of the culture of the American West and the older East Coast. The Virginian (Owen Wister, last edition 1902), a story of an Easterner being escorted west for his health by a cowboy originally from Virginia. That line came during a poker game where the Virginian was challenged - Trampas spoke You bet, you son of a bitch. The Virginian lays his pistol on the table and says When you call me that, smile. The amazement of the Easterner comes because just a while before an old friend had called the Virginian You old son of a bitch and he was surprised there was no reaction to these fighting words. OK, too much exposition, but I recommend the original book. It is an exercise in naivite and has to be read as a creature of its time, but many of the cliches of modern life come from it - and the author's effort to explain the culture of the American west to the American east is a first (the predecessors were the penny dreadfuls glorifying Buffalo Bill and other, the Buntlines). The point is that there is no insult if there is no intent, and that even the most mannerly language can convey insult if the intent is there. Best, Jon, (Murph), (Jonathan W. Murphy), (or anything else meant with good will).
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Eugene, I appreciate the tone and view point of your letter, it seems then to be an issue of morels and legalities. The moral question I guess is in the eye of the beholder, and laws often don't reflect the common good of the majority, but the special interest of a few. As we have witnessed, a moral case could be made either way. I for one, am in favor of all facsimiles in the public domain to be copyright free. As far as everything else is concerned I really don't care. During my lifetime, I have NEVER copied anyone else's music or arrangements or editing of editions of facsimiles. And I don't intend to. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Euge [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 11:06 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. I contributed what little I know of this topic very early on and in very short order grew mighty tired of all the scatological nonsense and inappropriate misidentification of hominids to follow (as a professional biologist, this latter offense was particularly troubling). I said this the last too-recent time this same debate raged through the list: if an activity is legal, feel free to do it; if its morality is suspect, you're old enough to decide for yourself whether or not you should feel guilty afterwards. Barring obvious cases of tyranny, law should reflect the social norms of a society. If you feel they do not, strive to change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite enough to justify a label of tyranny. Too black and white, passionless, oblivious to the beauty of the art: maybe, but that's who I am in such debates. Distributing xerographic copies of published facsimiles may often be perfectly legal in the US in many cases, but I personally feel doing so is unethical in increasing the risk inherent in publishing facsimiles...so I don't...and I do engage in plenty of swapping for PD material, both old publications that are no longer in print and, occasionally, manuscript facsimiles that did not originate in a modern publication. At 08:26 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: If He doesn't do it, believe me there are a hindered others who will. And maybe they'll do it with a spirit of generosity, and quit complaining if they can't make a profit. I believe this spirit is amply demonstrated by almost every publisher who has endeavored to bring a facsimile to print. If you don't like a particular publisher, voice your dissent with your dollars and buy something else. Cold and passionless again, but my money simply goes to products I like. Before this storm it, I was ambivalent about the whole thing. But now thanks to you know who... I can say with absolute resolve, that anyone who is stupid enough to publish a facsimile of an original manuscript and expect to make a profit, should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. I don't believe this describes anybody who has ever published a facsimile edition. That being said, If they were to put the copies into a well thought out informative beautiful edition, and make it appealing for consumers of music, people would buy it, that's how it works. An example is Frank Koonces's editions of Bach, and anything that is added onto and edited. Even so, as I have--as we all have--read here very frequently over the past week, beautifully bound facsimile editions of lute music--even those well-endowed with well-researched, supportive, informative text and informed corrections--_still_ can't be expected to turn profit. Perhaps these especially cannot be expected to generate profit given the amount of work and scholarship they require to produce. You publishing types, seem to represent the most extreme swing of capitalism, thinking the only time anyone does anything is for money, shame on you, and the stupid sheep that follow them. These publishers are very smart, it's the ones that follow them that are stupid! Again, I have yet to hear of any modern publication of lute tablature generating massive profit and universal fame for its publisher. The highest aspiration such a publication can realistically have is to generously disseminate valuable information to a buying public and, in so doing, hope to reclaim a portion of the expense of production. Excessive copying of such stuff, even if legal, increases the risk inherent in their publication making it less likely to occur in the future to the detriment of all. I happily either buy or properly borrow from libraries those such publications that contain material I would like to access. Maybe I am naive, idealistic (these are my ideals, not necessarily anybody else's and do not dictate anybody else's behavior), Mr. Rogers-like, I'd like to imagine
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Jon Murphy wrote to Stewart, The point is that there is no insult if there is no intent, and that even the most mannerly language can convey insult if the intent is there Dear Stewart, Calling some an Ape or Monkey really doesn't convey much other than a general insult which really doesn't describe a particular fault or flaw. I just economized a little on the amount of flowery words needed to get the point across.. unlike you who worked far to hard to lower me in status below you. Your words were directed at me to describe in great detail my character flaws. Next time I would prefer if you simply called me an Ape! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Jon Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 11:17 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Stewart, I both agree and disagree. It is a matter of the intent. b) Altering someone's name into some sort of sarcastic nickname, e.g. MO for Matanya Ophee, Uncle Albert for Albert Reyerman, and St. McCoy for me. Calling someone by a name other than their correct name is puerile, and has the opposite effect from the one intended. Name-calling is designed to hurt someone by making fun of them, but it is inevitably the name-caller who ends up looking foolish, because it reflects the paucity of his thought. It is all very tiresome, and I do wish it would stop. I referred to you as Stew one time, and you corrected me. Point well taken. But my name is Jonathan and I prefer to be called Jon (or Murph by those I know well - in fact I sign differently to close friends and those who are friends but less close). I wrote Matthias and addressed him as Mat, before I was aware that Europeans don't take the familiar as easily as Americans do. But his reaction was I rather enjoy that. It is an individual thing, and the individual desires should be respected. So I agree that it is puerile to use a name other than the accepted one, but the accepted one may be a nickname rather than the correct one if the purpose is well intended. There is no rule except manners, and the form of address should be dictated by the desire of the addressee. If you want to call me Uncle Murph with a tongue in cheek reference to my avuncular pontification I would find it amusing, but if you do it with spite then I will be annoyed. A classic line from western movies is When you say that Mister, smile. It is a misquote of a fine and definitive novel of the difference of the culture of the American West and the older East Coast. The Virginian (Owen Wister, last edition 1902), a story of an Easterner being escorted west for his health by a cowboy originally from Virginia. That line came during a poker game where the Virginian was challenged - Trampas spoke You bet, you son of a bitch. The Virginian lays his pistol on the table and says When you call me that, smile. The amazement of the Easterner comes because just a while before an old friend had called the Virginian You old son of a bitch and he was surprised there was no reaction to these fighting words. OK, too much exposition, but I recommend the original book. It is an exercise in naivite and has to be read as a creature of its time, but many of the cliches of modern life come from it - and the author's effort to explain the culture of the American west to the American east is a first (the predecessors were the penny dreadfuls glorifying Buffalo Bill and other, the Buntlines). The point is that there is no insult if there is no intent, and that even the most mannerly language can convey insult if the intent is there. Best, Jon, (Murph), (Jonathan W. Murphy), (or anything else meant with good will).
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 07:32 PM, Michael Thames wrote: After this experience, You can bet I will do everything in my power to access these works of Bach, and free them to the world. God forbid you come across any Weiss, then I'll really get mad! I'm curious? Do you support the practice of downloading audio files off the internet for free, thus freeing the music of recording artists to the world? If not the latest John Williams CD, how about an important historical recording of, say, Segovia or Toscanini? All EMI or RCA did was set up a microphone or two. All the latest company did was to transfer them to CD... Brian
Re: Facsimeles etc.
No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it Hey fellow, First of all I stated my intentions were to post the facsimiles, and ask people what they thought, I then said I'd take the matter to heart. Incase you don't have a heart, I'll translate that into, I will listen to what everyone said. I then made a decision that the right thing to do was to contact Albert and propose an idea, which is not to far different than Thomas Schell's site. Then all hell broke loose! No where did I publicly declare that I intend to rip him off Those are you words. At no time did I say I would post the facsimiles regardless of Albert's wishes, and quite frankly I won't, based not so much on legality, but to respect his wishes. In the end I don't want to piss off anymore human beings,than I have to, except you! I asked some alarming questions again out of my naivety which you seem to enjoy pointing out. Also, concerning young guitars students, I have noticed that hardly any of them play baroque or ren music these, it's mostly modern. In one local private high school in Albuq. there are 70 guitar students. Being that I only play Baroque lute, that does alarm me, in a selfish kind of way. So I don't know what planet your from, but as you claim to be in tune with the guitar world you obviously are not. This without a dought is what these young kids are into. wake up and smell the coffee! my friend. Also, concerning my website and posting Facsimiles. I could care less about another Bach version of a lute suite for guitar, I just like seeing the facsimile, and if it draws guitarists to my site all the better for me. But I do want to help these kids as well Believe me or not. In the end, I don;t give a rats ass if you ever heard of me or not. I conceder that to be a blessing. Go and get some help my friend! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:53 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 09:56 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Relax Montana, That can work both ways, distorting people's names intentionally. But I will resist the urge to engage in this juvenile silliness. I see you have quite alot of baggage with this issue, to go after me with your well known guile, and considering remarks. You truly take the prize for vileness, your reputation precedes you. Glad you noticed. Again, glad to be the scapegoat for you Publishing kind of guys, but as you say this is getting old, isn't it. If I were your mother I'd take you over my knee and give a good whacking! But since this is your only source of income I'll forgive you! That's bullshit number one. Publishing is not my source of income at all. It is only the source of my _losses_ over the years. If had to live the way I do from music publishing, this business would have gone down the drain decades ago. Do check my biography more carefully. Lets put all exchanges of pleasantries aside, Please tell me the crime I'm guilty of, what have I done other than ask a few uncomfortable questions. I've already admitted I'm stupid, and you've pointed that out again just in case everyone forgot. Is WANTING to post a facsimile a crime? No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it. As I stated, I asked Albert's permission. Wrong person to ask. He does not own the manuscript. He paid money for the permission to publish it, and this is exactly what you should do: apply to the library and ask for permission, and pay the fee. Then you do whatever you want to do. Albert even gave you the address and the name of the person to write to. So instead of sniffling about legalities, do what all of us are doing: get it DIRECTLY from the source. But come to think of it, as of yet I haven't heard his answer. Just between you and me Montana what do you think He'll say? He already said it. Loud and clear. Montana, if there are 50 or so editions of the Bach
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Good Lord, what am I to say. (And for the politically correct, I do not use the phrase Good Lord for any establishment of religion, merely as a gentle expletive). I do hope the lack of civility in this discussion thread isn't characteristic of the Lute List. I have gotten so much help here in my staggering efforts to come into the community. Let's look at the issues clearly. There is a difference between the downloading of audio files of performances by artists (although most of the files downloaded these days may be from those I wouldn't consider to be artists), and the downloading of the facsimile of the notation of early music, or even recent music. The former is a downloading in order to listen without paying for the performance. The latter may, or may not, be the search for pieces in public domain that one intends to play and interpret for oneself (and perhaps share that possibility with others by passing on the notation). And we accept that they are different? The download of a performance for personal use may be wrong, or just may be a way of sampling the artist's work in order to decide whether to buy the CD. That is a matter of personal honor and choice. The downloading of original material is another thing. Scribner's (or whoever now owns that venerable store) has the rights to the sheet music of Cole Porter, but that is long past copyright, it is used for commercial jingles now. It is public domain. Then we come to the fine line. The music that is public domain, but not generally available. To take it to an extreme suppose I discover a form of music made by Tibetan bells, and spend my money to go to Tibet and find the bell ringer's notation. Then I bring it to the western world, and there is a demand for it. I would think that I would deserve a copyright, or some other compensation, for my discovery and expense when the music is promulgated. But at the other extreme I can't see that there are rights to music that was generally sold years ago just because one has found a copy in a museum. I'll close this with an example. The great and prolific Irish harpist Turlough O'Carolan left hundred of pieces in the repertoire of whistlers, pipers and harpists. But none were written down as he was blind. A Planxty anything is probably an O'Carolan written of an evening in honor of his host of the night. (My favorite is Planxty George Brabazon, but his most famous is Eleanor Plunkett). So none of his music can retain rights, even the host's heirs can't say they have the original text as there is none. Enough, this is a tempest in a teapot. A thread that is neither warp nor woof, but is too warped by some, and has too much woofing by others. Let civility and good will reign, and give a bit of trust to your fellow lutenists. Best, Jon
Re: Facsimeles etc.
But again: place YOURS and not MINE. That is grossly untrue: It is Bach's and Weyrauch's (i.e. belonging to the World), and you [Albert Reyermann] merely BORROWED it. And your noble purpose has no bearing on this matter. RT Now, now, it is Mr. Reyermanns FACSIMILE EDITION that he speaks of, and also of Mr. Thames non-existant one. He doesn't claim ownership of the actual music and you know it. And if you miss his arguement, go back and read his email... Brian Uncle Albert owns the paper and the ink, but not the arrangement of ink on paper. So he can only say facsimile I produced but not my facsimile. This is linguistics, and has nothing to do with either economics or ethics. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello Albert, Thanks, that was very clear. I agree with you. Allan Alexander Back in the old country there is a saying: Crows never peck each other's eyes. RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
From: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dear Roman, I have every sympathy with what you say. Those of us who own good instruments and expensive music are most fortunate, whether it came by luck, by hard work, or because we happen to live in affluent societies. Of course, I would love to own more instruments, better instruments, more music (particularly lute facsimiles), but even though I cannot afford these things, what I have already is far more than many others may have. Stewart, I have never doubted that you were a man with a heart. Both of us have had first-hand experience of seeing the difficulties faced by musicians in other countries, where the local currency may (or may not) be sufficient to buy things produced locally, but certainly cannot match the hard currency needed to buy books and instruments from abroad. It is a serious issue, and I think you are absolutely right to mention it, thinking and caring for others, as you do. Where we disagree is what should be done about it. I don't think putting Albert Reyerman's facsimile editions on a website is the answer. That would be unfair to Albert, because it would be giving away his work without his permission. My idea is that facsimile business MUST be made to function similarly to the Metropolitan Museum admissions: Pay what you wish (what is is worth to you, what you honestly can afford), minimum is a mere penny. I have done this a few times with my paintings and it generated no abuse. Besides, making his facsimiles available on a website would be giving his work to everyone, rich and poor alike, wherever they happened to live on this world. Albert would get nothing, and that can't be right. He owns an AGFA-scanner, doedn't he? Others reading this e-mail may care to remember your e-mail to the list dated 3rd March 2003, Re: Off Topic, but, in which you give the names and addresses of musicians in Russia and the Ukraine, who would appreciate help in the form of music and CD's. It is an extremely important issue, and I would be very interested to hear what you and others may think, and what practical steps might be taken. In recent months I have mailed more than a 100 CD, only 15 of them pirated to the old country. Ukraine now has half a dozen lutenists, and one luthier of some competence. Adopt-a-lutenist may sound condescending, but in reality is a good thing. I know for certain that a box of books I sent to St.Petersburg 15 years ago brought 2 people into the fold. An organization may have legitimate reservations about sending copied materials, but individuals have no reason to feel constrained. Anyone actually interested in helping, ask me off the list. I am compiling a russophone lutenists' directory (53 worldwide) and while it is hard to find contact information, there are a dozen or so lads worth helping. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org - Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 4:16 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Why stop at facsimiles? Why not make all their published music available for free downloading? This would be such a great service to everyone, wouldn't it, because then we wouldn't have the trouble and expense of actually acquiring the books legitimately ourselves. A good and noble idea, actually (limited to dead composers, of course). When we use words like ourselves we invariably limit the notion to more or less prosperous European and American middle class types who actually are able to afford said trouble and expense. This, however, is a rather callous worldview of a petit bourgeois, and it is expected, as the lute microcosm is a scaled down version of the larger world, and there is no added reason to expect any altruism from it any more than from the larger one. The lute microcosm is nowhere near the idyll that uncle Albert, MO, or St.McCoy imagine it to be. There are GREAT MANY lutenists that are UNABLE to undertake the trouble of both access and affordability of lute music, the reasons being their isolation of faraway places AND/OR places in which a price of an item from even such moderate and reasonable publisher as uncle Albert buys a week's worth of food. They have computers that they largely build themselves, they share modems between half a dozen friends when they can buy internet access cards, they sometimes have decent lutes strung with unimaginable things, and they love music in general, as well as lute music in particular. I also have reasons to believe that hardship is not limited to the part of the world associated with RT's birthplace. Thing are not much better in South America (which has produced some of the finest lute-players to date). So I consider it my sacred duty to make everything lutenistically relevant available
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Matanya Ophee wrote: At 09:20 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: St. Michael the Liberator! I notice you don't give your guitars away. Don't you think the world should be given free access to such fine instruments? ;-) DR This is not an analogy, he MAKES them from scratch. RT Roman, thanks. I just didn't know what to say to someone like that. It's easy to grab at the straws RT supplies you with when your hypocrisy is staring you in the face. But Roman is wrong. The analogy is perfect. The issue is not the music, but the object you hold in your hand when you put it on the copy machine. That is a book, and it was made from scratch by one person who invested a great deal of time and money in creating it. What a load of crap! Making a book is a manufacturing operation and, per se, does not involve any creativity. There may be creativity in the content... but not when the content consists of facsimiles. There is no copyright in operating a copying machine no matter how inconvenient or expensive it was to obtain the source manuscript. -- Rough-edged songs from a dark place in the soul: http://DoctorOakroot.com
Re: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Tony, If you wanted, you could probably track down an address for Broude Bros via the Internet. I'm afraid I don't know what the legal situation is in America. We usually rely on Howard Posner's expertise when it comes to legal matters. If I remember right, his last e-mail on this subject seemed to suggest that the situation wasn't absolutely clear. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: Tony Chalkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 1:08 PM Subject: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc. I think the same was true of the Quarto editions of Shakespeare. Where do Broude Performers' facsimiles fit in to this? I have their Lachrimae table book (price in ink on the inside cover). Neither the publisher's name nor a copyright mark appear anywhere in the book. I do not have any intention of publishing any part of it on Internet - (it's mine 'cos I paid for it), but if I had, and wanted to ask their permission, I would find it very difficult as I can't imagine a letter to 'Performers' Facsimiles, New York' would get there easily. Is this a question of US law, or is there a fundamental difference in policy? Tony
Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc.
I think the same was true of the Quarto editions of Shakespeare. Where do Broude Performers' facsimiles fit in to this? I have their Lachrimae table book (price in ink on the inside cover). Neither the publisher's name nor a copyright mark appear anywhere in the book. I do not have any intention of publishing any part of it on Internet - (it's mine 'cos I paid for it), but if I had, and wanted to ask their permission, I would find it very difficult as I can't imagine a letter to 'Performers' Facsimiles, New York' would get there easily. Is this a question of US law, or is there a fundamental difference in policy? Tony - Original Message - From: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 12:49 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Dear Herbert, Our medium of computers may be new, but the matter under discussion most certainly is not. There were various pirate editions of music in the 16th century, with characters like Pierre Phalese dipping into other people's books for inspiration. For example, music by Valderrabano was borrowed by Phalese, and presumably Valderrabano didn't get a bean for it. Funny that you should mention John Dowland. He was furious that people published his music without his permission, introducing mistakes in the process. This is what he had to say in the introduction to _The First Booke of Songes_ (London, 1597): There have bin divers Lute lessons of mine printed without my knowledge, falce and unperfect ... He was certainly not impressed by people stealing his music for publication. It is thought that Dowland might have had William Barley in mind, who had published a version of Dowland's Lachrimae Pavan in 1596. We know about improper practices with regard to the printing and selling of Dowland's _Second Booke of Songs or Ayres_ (London, 1600), because it resulted in a court case. Information on all of this may be found in Diana Poulton's _John Dowland_ (London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1972). Maybe William Barley thought Lachrimae was in the public domain. Maybe the printers who sold extra copies of Dowland's _Second Booke_ on the sly thought they were helping the lute-playing world by spreading Dowland's music to a wider audience. Who knows? The fact remains that the plague of plagiarism is not new. If there be any crassness, it belongs to those who underestimate the significance of it all. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: Herbert Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:11 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Would, say, Dowland have been surprised at 21st century culture, where 99% of music is commercial and a ready source of litigation? Has there always been music of such aggressive crassness as is heard (in abundant volume) on any city street corner? I'm not anti-Tree, but I do wonder whether this is related.
Re: Facsimeles, etc
PLEASE, LET'S SPEAK ABOUT THOSE TOPICS WE KNOW WELL ! Actually I do know a few things about this, having published a book written by my father, and having worked in the industry. It is a real shame that Albert Reyerman had to explain with full details how much work it means publishing (= making public) something, in this case lute manuscripts. It is a shame because he had to, out of the feeling that his work was being neglected. Besides, it is for me totally clear that Albert Reyerman is doing it not for the financial profit, -which is negligible, or even inexistent if he counts his own time- but because of other compensations. The right of uncle Albert to bublish his Bach facsimile has never been questioned. The interesting thing is Albert has no rights to control what happens to these images after he publishes them, because they are common property, like Goethe or Shakespeare. I also would like to ask you for a favor, dear Michael Thames: please stop using that sentence in which photography is considered only a matter of pressing a button. Manolo, I felt your pain, but both of us know that there is photography, and there is Photography, just like there are painting and Painting, and we know which category yours belongs to (Those who don't know should at least try to find out). RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles, etc
Hello Albert, Thanks, that was very clear. I agree with you. Allan Alexander Back in the old country there is a saying: Crows never peck each other's eyes. RT Are you suggesting that I am a publisher of facsimiles? I have no interest in this business. I think that if Albert publishes the book, people should respect his publication and not copy and distribute it. If they want to go get their own information, let them do it. No, but you are believed to be a publisher of commercial ARRANGEMENTS. I do not wish to open a second can of worms, but earlier I have expressed an opinion that an arrangement, although it is not a facsimile, should carry only a minimal price tag, because it is basically someone else's music, usually from public domain. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org Allan PLEASE, LET'S SPEAK ABOUT THOSE TOPICS WE KNOW WELL ! Actually I do know a few things about this, having published a book written by my father, and having worked in the industry. It is a real shame that Albert Reyerman had to explain with full details how much work it means publishing (= making public) something, in this case lute manuscripts. It is a shame because he had to, out of the feeling that his work was being neglected. Besides, it is for me totally clear that Albert Reyerman is doing it not for the financial profit, -which is negligible, or even inexistent if he counts his own time- but because of other compensations. The right of uncle Albert to bublish his Bach facsimile has never been questioned. The interesting thing is Albert has no rights to control what happens to these images after he publishes them, because they are common property, like Goethe or Shakespeare. I also would like to ask you for a favor, dear Michael Thames: please stop using that sentence in which photography is considered only a matter of pressing a button. Manolo, I felt your pain, but both of us know that there is photography, and there is Photography, just like there are painting and Painting, and we know which category yours belongs to (Those who don't know should at least try to find out). RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org www.fluteandguitar.com www.guitarandlute.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Stewart McCoy wrote: Our medium of computers may be new, but the matter under discussion most certainly is not. There were various pirate editions of music in the 16th century, Would, say, Dowland have been surprised at 21st century culture, where 99% of music is commercial and a ready source of litigation? Has there always been music of such aggressive crassness as is heard (in abundant volume) on any city street corner? I'm not anti-Tree, but I do wonder whether this is related.
Re: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc.
Here are the Broude Bros contacts: Broude Brothers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Broude Brothers Limited 141 White Oaks Road Williamstown, MA 01267 Dr. Ronald Broude, Dr. Gwen Broude Phone: (413) 458-8131 (800) 225 3197 Fax: (413) 458-5242 GJC Date sent: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:24:38 - To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc. Dear Tony, If you wanted, you could probably track down an address for Broude Bros via the Internet. I'm afraid I don't know what the legal situation is in America. We usually rely on Howard Posner's expertise when it comes to legal matters. If I remember right, his last e-mail on this subject seemed to suggest that the situation wasn't absolutely clear. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: Tony Chalkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 1:08 PM Subject: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc. I think the same was true of the Quarto editions of Shakespeare. Where do Broude Performers' facsimiles fit in to this? I have their Lachrimae table book (price in ink on the inside cover). Neither the publisher's name nor a copyright mark appear anywhere in the book. I do not have any intention of publishing any part of it on Internet - (it's mine 'cos I paid for it), but if I had, and wanted to ask their permission, I would find it very difficult as I can't imagine a letter to 'Performers' Facsimiles, New York' would get there easily. Is this a question of US law, or is there a fundamental difference in policy? Tony
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:18 AM 12/3/2003 -0500, Doctor Oakroot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is a book, and it was made from scratch by one person who invested a great deal of time and money in creating it. What a load of crap! Making a book is a manufacturing operation and, per se, does not involve any creativity. So is making a lute. Incidentally, if Michael does not seem to understand the degree of mendacity involved in his stance on this issue, perhaps he ought to look at his own web page where he sells, for good money, plans of historical instruments. He went to museums, obtained official permission from curators, spent many hours in drawing these plans, and perhaps not a small amount of money in travel and lodging expenses. He charges $40.- per plan which is not a large amount of money, but certainly not one a poor lute maker in the Ukraine or Zimbabwe can afford. So what will be Michael's reaction if someone bought the plans from him and proceeded to post them on the WEB for free download by indigenous lute makers? Surely Michael Thames cannot possibly claim copyright or patent protection of the design of a Venere lute? Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 12:32 AM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: where did I publicly declare that I intend to rip him off Those are you words. They are indeed. Considering your proposal, a rip-off operation is actually a mild and forgiving expletive. At no time did I say I would post the facsimiles regardless of Albert's wishes, and quite frankly I won't, based not so much on legality, but to respect his wishes. You still do not seem to understand that Albert's wishes in this point are entirely besides the point. Many of us, scholars, publishers, performers, teachers, who have had occasion in the past to request permission from libraries, always had to accept a condition imposed by the library that the material will be used specifically for the purpose for which it was obtained, and under no circumstances one could make copies for other people, without the library's permission and agreement. This is not a legal condition, but a practical one. Those who defy the library's wishes, shoot themselves in the foot as they will surely black listed for any future material. Besides, each time this happens, the fee for bona fide researchers goes up. years ago I used to get copies from the British Library for a couple of shillings a page. Now the fee is 25 GBP per page. Albert cannot possibly give you permission to do what you want to do, since this would be a violation of his agreement with the library. Neither can Frank Koonce give you permission to copy _his_ facsimile of the same manuscript. The only person who can give you such permission is the librarian. What's so difficult about writing a letter and asking for it? In the end I don't want to piss off anymore human beings,than I have to, except you! I asked some alarming questions again out of my naivety which you seem to enjoy pointing out. Your questions were not alarming. They were plain stupid because they implied scavenging the work of someone else. Let me give you a taste of what this sounds like: Would you mind if I bought from you a set of plans for the Venere lute and posted it on my web site for free download by indigenous poor lute makers world wide? Also, concerning young guitars students, I have noticed that hardly any of them play baroque or ren music these, it's mostly modern. Thank you for stating the obvious. I have been in this business for 48 years by now and I am acutely aware of this. But this is not the forum to discuss this issue. I suggest you log on to rec.music.classical.guitar and check out their archives (on Google Groups) for the last ten years, and see how many times I, and many others, have discussed this issue. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Incidentally, if Michael does not seem to understand the degree of mendacity involved in his stance on this issue, perhaps he ought to look at his own web page where he sells, for good money, plans of historical instruments I Agree, Monkey, they cost me $20.00 to Xerox, buy a tube and ship worldwide, not mention the cost of travel, expertise involved, in drawing them up. But the shocking part Mr. Monkey is there's NO COPYRIGHT ...written anywhere on those plans. You buy one set, and that's all you pay, I don;to charge people 10% every they make a lute. So that means you are free to make copies and give them to your friends. So you see I am being true to my ideals, And if you would like a set I will send them to you free of charge. And for the record, there kind of like baseball cards I trade them for other lute plans, I've never sold a set to anyone, as a matter of fact I've given both the Boston Museum of Fine arts and Yale copies to sell as a donation to their foundations. I've also given them to 4 or 5 other lutemakers, so as not to hold a monopoly on them, like you. I call on you to do the same! you hypocrite! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 10:35 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 09:18 AM 12/3/2003 -0500, Doctor Oakroot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is a book, and it was made from scratch by one person who invested a great deal of time and money in creating it. What a load of crap! Making a book is a manufacturing operation and, per se, does not involve any creativity. So is making a lute. Incidentally, if Michael does not seem to understand the degree of mendacity involved in his stance on this issue, perhaps he ought to look at his own web page where he sells, for good money, plans of historical instruments. He went to museums, obtained official permission from curators, spent many hours in drawing these plans, and perhaps not a small amount of money in travel and lodging expenses. He charges $40.- per plan which is not a large amount of money, but certainly not one a poor lute maker in the Ukraine or Zimbabwe can afford. So what will be Michael's reaction if someone bought the plans from him and proceeded to post them on the WEB for free download by indigenous lute makers? Surely Michael Thames cannot possibly claim copyright or patent protection of the design of a Venere lute? Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc.
Thanks, but it wasn't really point - as I said, I don't intend distributing what I've got, with or without permission. It just struck me as odd that the edition was so completely anonymous, and I wondered why. Tony - Original Message - From: Dr. Gordon J. Callon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:34 PM Subject: Re: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc. Here are the Broude Bros contacts: Broude Brothers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Broude Brothers Limited 141 White Oaks Road Williamstown, MA 01267 Dr. Ronald Broude, Dr. Gwen Broude Phone: (413) 458-8131 (800) 225 3197 Fax: (413) 458-5242 GJC Date sent: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:24:38 - To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc. Dear Tony, If you wanted, you could probably track down an address for Broude Bros via the Internet. I'm afraid I don't know what the legal situation is in America. We usually rely on Howard Posner's expertise when it comes to legal matters. If I remember right, his last e-mail on this subject seemed to suggest that the situation wasn't absolutely clear. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: Tony Chalkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 1:08 PM Subject: Falce and unperfect: was: Facsimeles etc. I think the same was true of the Quarto editions of Shakespeare. Where do Broude Performers' facsimiles fit in to this? I have their Lachrimae table book (price in ink on the inside cover). Neither the publisher's name nor a copyright mark appear anywhere in the book. I do not have any intention of publishing any part of it on Internet - (it's mine 'cos I paid for it), but if I had, and wanted to ask their permission, I would find it very difficult as I can't imagine a letter to 'Performers' Facsimiles, New York' would get there easily. Is this a question of US law, or is there a fundamental difference in policy? Tony
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 10:53 AM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I Agree, Monkey, they cost me $20.00 to Xerox, buy a tube and ship worldwide, not mention the cost of travel, expertise involved, in drawing them up. But the shocking part Mr. Monkey is there's NO COPYRIGHT written anywhere on those plans. You buy one set, and that's all you pay, I don;to charge people 10% every they make a lute. So that means you are free to make copies and give them to your friends. So you see I am being true to my ideals, And if you would like a set I will send them to you free of charge. That's very noble of you. Let me suggest that if indeed you are true to your ideals, you post them for free on _your_ web site. You don't know how to fit them on standard printer paper? I'll be happy to help you there. And for the record, there kind of like baseball cards I trade them for other lute plans, I've never sold a set to anyone, as a matter of fact I've given both the Boston Museum of Fine arts and Yale copies to sell as a donation to their foundations. I've also given them to 4 or 5 other lutemakers, so as not to hold a monopoly on them, like you. I call on you to do the same! you hypocrite! Sorry, I have no idea what baseball cards are. Outside my frame of reference. In 38 years in this US of A, I still do not understand what's happening on a baseball field and what's involved around that game. And what monopoly do I hold that you are referring to? Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles, etc
No, but you are believed to be a publisher of commercial ARRANGEMENTS. Not exactly. I self publish a few things for the lute that I WROTE and some that I arranged, melodies that I harmonized and added variations to. There is little market for such material from lutenists. Not the same as selling facsililes. I mostly license my pieces to a publisher and they sell them. This is what I do for a living. I'm a full time composer and arranger. I have many downloads of lute pieces on my site where there is no charge. Good! I do not wish to open a second can of worms, but earlier I have expressed an opinion that an arrangement, although it is not a facsimile, should carry only a minimal price tag, because it is basically someone else's music, usually from public domain. RT Then make arrangements and sell them for a minimal price or give them away. Simple And that' what I have been doing for years, no fee. RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Matanya Ophee wrote: ... always had to accept a condition imposed by the library that the material will be used specifically for the purpose for which it was obtained, What is the library's motivation for this? I would have thought that a non-profit library would be happy to promote the spread of non-copyright material.
RV: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Stewart, Roman, and all, Poor countries and access to resources: It is a difficult matter indeed. What to do about it? I'm in the other end of the spectrum, the one benefited from the free online resources or the donations. And the one doing most illegal actions. I'll tell you what happens down here (Argentina): we freely exchange sheet music in any form, especially by photocopies, but also--and by those of us who are lucky enough to have a computer--by pdf files, by sharing links to web sites we found with sheet music, etc. That's the only way we're able to access material to produce guitarists, lutenists, and musicians in general. Some of us fortunate to have money to make copies or connect to the Internet: many students don't, and we have to donate photocopies for them, they're that poor. Fortunately, they don't have to pay for lessons, the Conservatory is free and paid by the government. But sometimes, at the beginning of the year, you can find students (9 or 10 year old) who go to the small kitchen in the Conservatory, hoping to get some food, food they don't get at home. Yes, it's that bad. BUT, some of us would be able to afford to buy a few items a year. We don't do it, because we're caught in this photocopying frenzy. And that's why you won't see any new editions coming from Argentina: we made publishers die, publishers like Ricordi Americana, who once had a incredible catalog of works. Composers in Argentina know this situation well, and give away copies of their works to anyone who shows interest in them without thinking it twice. And publish their works in foreign countries. About donations: I'm thankful to persons who are willing to donate items. But I don't think we would be receiving the amounts we need. And I'm sure anything you donate would be copied a thousand times, so keep it in mind, it would surely end up as more illegal copies in the world, not less. Of course, I'm speaking about musicians in general and guitarists in particular. There are no lutenists around here. So, I don't know what should be done. I appreciate the time anyone takes to think about this. Hernan Mouro. Conservatorio de Musica de Bahia Blanca, Argentina. PS: I wish libraries had online facsimiles with free access themselves. No one could complain about that. Dear Roman, I have every sympathy with what you say. Those of us who own good instruments and expensive music are most fortunate, whether it came by luck, by hard work, or because we happen to live in affluent societies. Of course, I would love to own more instruments, better instruments, more music (particularly lute facsimiles), but even though I cannot afford these things, what I have already is far more than many others may have.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
That's very noble of you. Let me suggest that if indeed you are true to your ideals, you post them for free on _your_ web site. You don't know how to fit them on standard printer paper? I'll be happy to help you there That is a most generous offer! I will take you up on that. Just the other day I was wondering if that was possible. You have my word, I will do it, and offer them for free. However, no offence but I think you and I won't make a good match as far as a teacher/student relationship, maybe someone else can help me with that. I keeping in the same spirit, may I call on you to have a free download of a facsimile of the Bach/Weyrauch tablatures, and don't give me that crap that you don't own the rights, If you can sell them you certainly can give them away. Sorry, I have no idea what baseball cards are. Outside my frame of reference. In 38 years in this US of A, I still do not understand what's happening on a baseball field and what's involved around that game. And what monopoly do I hold that you are referring to I would simply define monopoly, as one person having all the cookies. And maybe someone else can help you with baseball cards, that's really over my head. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 12:10 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 10:53 AM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I Agree, Monkey, they cost me $20.00 to Xerox, buy a tube and ship worldwide, not mention the cost of travel, expertise involved, in drawing them up. But the shocking part Mr. Monkey is there's NO COPYRIGHT written anywhere on those plans. You buy one set, and that's all you pay, I don;to charge people 10% every they make a lute. So that means you are free to make copies and give them to your friends. So you see I am being true to my ideals, And if you would like a set I will send them to you free of charge. That's very noble of you. Let me suggest that if indeed you are true to your ideals, you post them for free on _your_ web site. You don't know how to fit them on standard printer paper? I'll be happy to help you there. And for the record, there kind of like baseball cards I trade them for other lute plans, I've never sold a set to anyone, as a matter of fact I've given both the Boston Museum of Fine arts and Yale copies to sell as a donation to their foundations. I've also given them to 4 or 5 other lutemakers, so as not to hold a monopoly on them, like you. I call on you to do the same! you hypocrite! Sorry, I have no idea what baseball cards are. Outside my frame of reference. In 38 years in this US of A, I still do not understand what's happening on a baseball field and what's involved around that game. And what monopoly do I hold that you are referring to? Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
I Agree, Monkey, they cost me $20.00 to Xerox, Michael, MO is neither hominid nor a simian. He is not a marsupial either [unlike Michael Stitt]. Considering that his cultural sensitivity is that of a rhinocerotide he is suspected to be of that genus. I personally believe that from biochemical viewpoint MO is simply a mixture of fecal matter and yeast. That is the actual method for obtaining MO in laboratory conditions. I am not joking, that what we as children did to the outhouses of reviled neighbors. RT Roman, I finally had a laugh of a lifetime, and I'm on the floor, thanks I couldn't have said it better. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 12:48 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. I Agree, Monkey, they cost me $20.00 to Xerox, Michael, MO is neither hominid nor a simian. He is not a marsupial either [unlike Michael Stitt]. Considering that his cultural sensitivity is that of a rhinocerotide he is suspected to be of that genus. I personally believe that from biochemical viewpoint MO is simply a mixture of fecal matter and yeast. That is the actual method for obtaining MO in laboratory conditions. I am not joking, that what we as children did to the outhouses of reviled neighbors. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
I have a good friend who runs a major library nearby and hear these same concerns all of the time. My concern is where the need to make lute music available and this funding crisis intersect. Some of the prices I've been quoted to obtain a license from these libraries is really outrageous. To the point that I don't see how any publisher can make money or break even paying these fees. So, this licensing practice discourages lute music from being published, especially obscure sources. --- Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 12:24 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Herbert Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Matanya Ophee wrote: ... always had to accept a condition imposed by the library that the material will be used specifically for the purpose for which it was obtained, What is the library's motivation for this? I would have thought that a non-profit library would be happy to promote the spread of non-copyright material. I would have thought so too, but in the real world, there are two forces at work. Some librarians think that just because they own the keys to the library, they own culture. You run into types like this every so often. But the real motivation is that no matter what country, no matter what political systems, libraries are under funded and they need to generate income so they can pay the overhead. That's the case with public libraries such as the BL, BN, LoC, etc. In the case of privately endowed libraries, the motivation is even stronger. That's the Golden Rule: He who owns the Gold, makes the Rules. The gold in our case are the manuscripts and old editions we seek. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com = web: http://www.christopherschaub.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 01:00 PM 12/3/2003 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a good friend who runs a major library nearby and hear these same concerns all of the time. My concern is where the need to make lute music available and this funding crisis intersect. Some of the prices I've been quoted to obtain a license from these libraries is really outrageous. To the point that I don't see how any publisher can make money or break even paying these fees. So, this licensing practice discourages lute music from being published, especially obscure sources. Thank you for understanding the issue. This is a vicious circle. Lutenists balk at having to pay for books, preferring free photocopies ripped off publishers editions. Libraries are thus deprived of money they consider is due to them, so they raise the fee for making their material available, to the point that publishers no longer can afford it, thus cease publishing. No more lute music. All this is fine when the entire repertoire is known and exists in some form that can be exchanged for free. But should new material come to light, there is no chance it will enter into general circulation any time soon. Viz. the availability to the Francesco Castelfranco new discoveries. And this is only one of the more recent discoveries that will be a long time in hiding from the lute community. Hernan Mouro just gave us a perfect picture how this cycle killed the entire Argentine publishing industry. It will happen here too. Just give it time and enough phoney altruists. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
What a load of crap! Making a book is a manufacturing operation and, per se, does not involve any creativity. So is making a lute. Well Monkey, you certainly put your tail in your mouth this time, I wonder how many people would agree with.that! Stick to what you know best, how to revel in the creativity of others, and then stiff the rest of us! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 10:35 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 09:18 AM 12/3/2003 -0500, Doctor Oakroot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is a book, and it was made from scratch by one person who invested a great deal of time and money in creating it. What a load of crap! Making a book is a manufacturing operation and, per se, does not involve any creativity. So is making a lute. Incidentally, if Michael does not seem to understand the degree of mendacity involved in his stance on this issue, perhaps he ought to look at his own web page where he sells, for good money, plans of historical instruments. He went to museums, obtained official permission from curators, spent many hours in drawing these plans, and perhaps not a small amount of money in travel and lodging expenses. He charges $40.- per plan which is not a large amount of money, but certainly not one a poor lute maker in the Ukraine or Zimbabwe can afford. So what will be Michael's reaction if someone bought the plans from him and proceeded to post them on the WEB for free download by indigenous lute makers? Surely Michael Thames cannot possibly claim copyright or patent protection of the design of a Venere lute? Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 3:19 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 01:43 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's very noble of you. Let me suggest that if indeed you are true to your ideals, you post them for free on _your_ web site. You don't know how to fit them on standard printer paper? I'll be happy to help you there That is a most generous offer! I will take you up on that. Just the other day I was wondering if that was possible. You have my word, I will do it, and offer them for free. However, no offence but I think you and I won't make a good match as far as a teacher/student relationship, maybe someone else can help me with that. I am sure there are many who can do this. The idea is very simple: you divide the plan drawing to segments that can fit a standard printer page size, bearing in mind the difference between the US and the European standards sizes. Pick the smaller of the two. The segments have to be a bit smaller than the selected paper size, since no printers can print a bleed, i.e., to the edge of the paper and beyond. Then you save the scans as PDF files, and some kind of an index which will tell the downloader in what sequence they make up the plan. All they have to do when they downloaded the bunch, is trim out the margins and paste the individual pages together. Rube Goldbergish, no doubt, but simple. I keeping in the same spirit, may I call on you to have a free download of a facsimile of the Bach/Weyrauch tablatures, and don't give me that crap that you don't own the rights, If you can sell them you certainly can give them away. I sell nothing of the kind. You must be confusing me with somebody else. I already told you that there are no Lute Suites in my catalogue, and I have never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. I suggest you apply to the Neil Kjos Publishing Company in San Diego, those who published Frank Koonce edition. Just one little friendly advise: this is a very large company, much larger than my own little one man operation. Don't take them for granted. Sorry, I have no idea what baseball cards are. Outside my frame of reference. In 38 years in this US of A, I still do not understand what's happening on a baseball field and what's involved around that game. And what monopoly do I hold that you are referring to I would simply define monopoly, as one person having all the cookies. And what cookies might these be? Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Wednesday, Dec 3, 2003, at 23:04 Europe/Warsaw, Matanya Ophee wrote: But should new material come to light, there is no chance it will enter into general circulation any time soon. Viz. the availability to the Francesco Castelfranco new discoveries. And this is only one of the more recent discoveries that will be a long time in hiding from the lute community. What are the new discoveries of Francesco Castelfranco? What are the other more recent discoveries?? Jerzy
Re: RV: Facsimeles etc.
Poor countries and access to resources: It is a difficult matter indeed. What to do about it? I'm in the other end of the spectrum, the one benefited from the free online resources or the donations. And the one doing most illegal actions. I'll tell you what happens down here (Argentina): we freely exchange sheet music in any form, especially by photocopies, but also--and by those of us who are lucky enough to have a computer--by pdf files, by sharing links to web sites we found with sheet music, etc. That's the only way we're able to access material to produce guitarists, lutenists, and musicians in general. Some of us fortunate to have money to make copies or connect to the Internet: many students don't, and we have to donate photocopies for them, they're that poor. Fortunately, they don't have to pay for lessons, the Conservatory is free and paid by the government. But sometimes, at the beginning of the year, you can find students (9 or 10 year old) who go to the small kitchen in the Conservatory, hoping to get some food, food they don't get at home. Yes, it's that bad. BUT, some of us would be able to afford to buy a few items a year. We don't do it, because we're caught in this photocopying frenzy. And that's why you won't see any new editions coming from Argentina: we made publishers die, publishers like Ricordi Americana, who once had a incredible catalog of works. Composers in Argentina know this situation well, and give away copies of their works to anyone who shows interest in them without thinking it twice. And publish their works in foreign countries. Somehow I don't believe that the musicians are to blame for this. It seemed that A LOT of music down there was being put out by Warner Brothers South American division. So I'm sure they contributed to the demise of local houses. About donations: I'm thankful to persons who are willing to donate items. But I don't think we would be receiving the amounts we need. And I'm sure anything you donate would be copied a thousand times, so keep it in mind, it would surely end up as more illegal copies in the world, not less. Of course, I'm speaking about musicians in general and guitarists in particular. There are no lutenists around here. There should be half a dozen around metropolitan Buenos Aires, right? And at least one in M __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org ar del Plata. RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 05:12 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. You don't need me for that. You can buy this book from all the usual sources. In case of difficulty, you can buy it directly from the publisher at: http://www.kjos.com/ Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 05:12 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. You don't need me for that. You can buy this book from all the usual sources. In case of difficulty, you can buy it directly from the publisher I thought we were exchanging free downloads, yours for mine. YOU HYPOCRITE!!! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 7:29 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 05:12 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. You don't need me for that. You can buy this book from all the usual sources. In case of difficulty, you can buy it directly from the publisher at: http://www.kjos.com/ Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 07:53 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 05:12 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. You don't need me for that. You can buy this book from all the usual sources. In case of difficulty, you can buy it directly from the publisher I thought we were exchanging free downloads, yours for mine. YOU HYPOCRITE!!! Better watch it fellow, your scatological delusions are getting ahead of you. You cannot possibly expect me to commit what I consider a crime, by photocopying a page from a book published by a friend of mine, who happens to be a member of this here list, and send it to you in exchange for a download that does not exist yet on your web site and for which I have absolutely no need whatsoever. I am not a lute maker, and I am not even a guitar maker. I am a guitar collector. I buy my guitars from people like you. Just got a new one a couple of weeks ago from a young man in Quebec for whom I predict a great future. Name is Jean Rompré. Care to hear what it sounds like? go to my web site and look in GALI for Articles with Music. So I guess if you want a copy of the the Bach-Weybrauch manuscript, and you care to tangle with a large American corporation, you'll just have to pay up front $24.95. You can afford it. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
RE: RV: Facsimeles etc.
Somehow I don't believe that the musicians are to blame for this. It seemed that A LOT of music down there was being put out by Warner Brothers South American division. So I'm sure they contributed to the demise of local houses. I'm not blaming composers for publishing abroad. They publish where they can. I blame myself for not supporting local companies, or even foreign companies, by not buying what I would be able to buy. Does Warner own more than Editorial Lagos? I must confess I know nothing about that. There are no lutenists around here. There should be half a dozen around metropolitan Buenos Aires, right? And at least one in Mar del Plata. Yes, and that's why Hoppy comes to Argentina every now and then, we're all very grateful to him for that. What I meant was, I'm not asking for donations for my Conservatory's library or for me, there are no lutenists in Bahia Blanca (700km away from Buenos Aires, 400km away from Mar del Plata). I wish there were. But if you want to make any donations I won't stop you. :-) Roman, you're doing enough already by making available music for download. Thanks. I have the music, I'm sorry it's not possible to download a lute. :-) Well, I'll just keep playing this stuff on the guitar, then (sorry). Regards, Hernán.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Better watch it fellow, your scatological delusions are getting ahead of you. You cannot possibly expect me to commit what I consider a crime, by photocopying a page from a book published by a friend of mine never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. So which is it Ape, first you say you have them, now someone else has them. I don't want to exchange my plans for your music, have you been drinking agian? You called me a hypocrite for not downloading my plans for free, which I said I'd do. I challenged you do do the same with the Bach, and your weaseling your way out of it. HYPOCRITE! I buy my guitars from people like you. Just got a new one a couple of weeks ago from a young man in Quebec for whom I predict a great future. Name is Jean Rompré. Care to hear what it sounds like? Now you've done it! I'm crushed, and speechless, you went out a bought someone else's guitar, I thought we had a deal Dam it! And now your rubbing my face in it, more than I can bear. With you as his guiding light I'm sure he'll go far, No offence to your innocent victim, but I've heard enough guitar for today, thanks. How about it Ape, Free YOUR/HIS Bach, to the world! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 9:08 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 07:53 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 05:12 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. You don't need me for that. You can buy this book from all the usual sources. In case of difficulty, you can buy it directly from the publisher I thought we were exchanging free downloads, yours for mine. YOU HYPOCRITE!!! Better watch it fellow, your scatological delusions are getting ahead of you. You cannot possibly expect me to commit what I consider a crime, by photocopying a page from a book published by a friend of mine, who happens to be a member of this here list, and send it to you in exchange for a download that does not exist yet on your web site and for which I have absolutely no need whatsoever. I am not a lute maker, and I am not even a guitar maker. I am a guitar collector. I buy my guitars from people like you. Just got a new one a couple of weeks ago from a young man in Quebec for whom I predict a great future. Name is Jean Rompré. Care to hear what it sounds like? go to my web site and look in GALI for Articles with Music. So I guess if you want a copy of the the Bach-Weybrauch manuscript, and you care to tangle with a large American corporation, you'll just have to pay up front $24.95. You can afford it. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
To all, Am I the only one who finds the name calling, and tone of some of these e-mail exchanges offensive? It's great to be passionate and have strong feelings about a subject, but how about a modicum of civility? I know, if you don't like it, don't read it; but the subject matter is interesting, so, I read. Sincerely, James --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Michael, That is well said. If someone adds value to an object then they deserve to be paid for that. Value could be as simple as going to various sites (physical) and collecting them, or as complete as making an edition with fingering hints and historical notes added. As to the purchase of rights, for that to happen someone must have owned the rights. Only the composer can be the original owner, and only his heirs or assigns can own them now. If someone, somehow, had cornered all the copies of Dowland's works some time ago, and then claimed them as personal property and sold them to someone else then there might be a right involved. But only to the facsimiles, not to the melodies. After all, someone may have passed that melody, public in its time, from father to son for generations. I see no problem with any antique music unless there is value added in the version you use. Best, Jon
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Open letter to Michael Thames who announced to place a TREE facsimile edition to the wwweb. from Albert Reyerman, TREE EDITION Dear Mr. Thames, first of all I would like to correct you: in the BACH/Weyrauch facsimile edition the copyright notice is printed on the very first page (in 24 point Times Roman, big enough not to be overlooked). It reads: Copyright 1999, TREE EDITION, Albert Reyerman Now to your plan, to place a Bach/Weyrauch facsimile edition on the Internet: I have nothing to say against that, as long as you place YOUR facsimile edition and not MINE. To make your own facsimile edition I´ll give you some information: fly/drive to Leipzig (from my hometown Leipzig was 400 miles away), go to Städtische Bibliotheken Leipzig Musikbibliothek Leuschnerplatz 10-11 D-04107 Leipzig Ask the head of the library (Dr. Brigitte Geyer) for permission to make a facsimile of the Bach edition and to publish it. If you are of good reputation and experienced in making facsimiles of sources of such value, she possibly agrees. In my case she did. Bring your own computer, software and scanner ( I brought my big AGFA T2000XL scanner, cause the original manuscript is so big in size that it does not fit to an A4 or legal format scanner. The street price of the Agfa scanner is about 10,000.- US $. Hopefully you have something good as this). Than scan the ms. Cause the ms. has few pages, It will take you only about one day or two, if you are an experienced operator (the ms. has light brown ink on a yellowish paper. Difficult to scan). At home, with your publishing software ( I use Adobe Pagemaker and Adobe Acrobat Professional) you can layout the book on your PC/Mac system and make a proper edition of it. You can avoid going to the printer, have the book printed. You can avoid, going to the book binder, to have the edition binded. You can avoid, to make some advertising around the world. You can avoid all these things I had to do, cause: you place YOUR facsimile edition to the internet. But again: place YOURS and not MINE. About fairness: I know very well that we both are living on different parts of this world. But I have been to the United States often enough (about 20 times or so within the last 25 years) to know that the American people as well as the European people are exactly aware of the difference between YOURS and MINE. No discussion about. If I misunderstood you and you are not talking about fairness, but on applicable laws: my lawyers on copyright matters are Zipse Habersack Dipl. Ing. Joerg Habersack Patentanwalt Kemnatenstr. 15 80687 Munich Germany They are highly approved and can answer all your questions. But I would like to count on your fairness. Thank you in advance. Please excuse my poor english. Albert Albert Reyerman TREE EDITION Finkenberg 89 D-23558 Luebeck Germany TREE EDITION is registered trade mark European Patent Register No. 1 038 427 By the way: I drove to Leipzig exactly 40 times in the past 9 years. They have 40 lute mss/prints and the gave me only one source at a time. (The biggest source was the DLUGORAI lute book. It has 600 pages. I worked on that book for 4 weeks fulltime). Now I have scanned all Leipzig lute sources. The 40 facsimiles are not all yet published in print. But they will be, one after another. I promise. Albert Michael Thames wrote: Let me state my intentions, and I will take all viewpoints to heart in = the matter. I would like to put these unedited facsimiles That I bought = from Tree publishing on my website for free downloading, as well = transcribe a version for guitar. Nowhere in the edition does it say = anything about copyrights etc.and there is absolutely no editing, just = Xerox copies of the original Tablature, period. In the Dowland MS manuscript project, ( see link ) they state, = they bought the rights to publish the manuscripts, and now they are = public domain, and are free to download. They got together 25 people to = chip in and buy the rights. Now, in theory is it not the same thing Tree = did? They most likely paid money, to get the rights to publish and SELL = the facsimiles. If I bought the Facsimiles for $25,00 could one assume = that I've fulfilled my part to Tree publishing by chipping in and = helping them to obtain rights to make these public domain, as well as = assisting them in there ability to sell them. In a way, it seems like = capitalism at it's best and worst. =20 Like many of you I download lots of music, But I also love to buy = nice editions, of the very pieces I've downloaded, and will continue to = buy nice editions, whenever I come across them. Last week, I bought the = complete lute works of John Dowland, even though I could download 90% of = that for free. The challenge for publishers, is to take this music = which is basically available to all, and arrange it in a nice, = informative fingered edition, then, they can make some money. Not to = continue to stiff us on unedited
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Hello Albert, Thanks, that was very clear. I agree with you. Allan Alexander 188 1st St Troy, NY 12180-4436 Open letter to Michael Thames who announced to place a TREE facsimile edition to the wwweb. from Albert Reyerman, TREE EDITION Dear Mr. Thames, first of all I would like to correct you: in the BACH/Weyrauch facsimile edition the copyright notice is printed on the very first page (in 24 point Times Roman, big enough not to be overlooked). It reads: Copyright 1999, TREE EDITION, Albert Reyerman Now to your plan, to place a Bach/Weyrauch facsimile edition on the Internet: I have nothing to say against that, as long as you place YOUR facsimile edition and not MINE. To make your own facsimile edition I´ll give you some information: fly/drive to Leipzig (from my hometown Leipzig was 400 miles away), go to Städtische Bibliotheken Leipzig Musikbibliothek Leuschnerplatz 10-11 D-04107 Leipzig Ask the head of the library (Dr. Brigitte Geyer) for permission to make a facsimile of the Bach edition and to publish it. If you are of good reputation and experienced in making facsimiles of sources of such value, she possibly agrees. In my case she did. Bring your own computer, software and scanner ( I brought my big AGFA T2000XL scanner, cause the original manuscript is so big in size that it does not fit to an A4 or legal format scanner. The street price of the Agfa scanner is about 10,000.- US $. Hopefully you have something good as this). Than scan the ms. Cause the ms. has few pages, It will take you only about one day or two, if you are an experienced operator (the ms. has light brown ink on a yellowish paper. Difficult to scan). At home, with your publishing software ( I use Adobe Pagemaker and Adobe Acrobat Professional) you can layout the book on your PC/Mac system and make a proper edition of it. You can avoid going to the printer, have the book printed. You can avoid, going to the book binder, to have the edition binded. You can avoid, to make some advertising around the world. You can avoid all these things I had to do, cause: you place YOUR facsimile edition to the internet. But again: place YOURS and not MINE. About fairness: I know very well that we both are living on different parts of this world. But I have been to the United States often enough (about 20 times or so within the last 25 years) to know that the American people as well as the European people are exactly aware of the difference between YOURS and MINE. No discussion about. If I misunderstood you and you are not talking about fairness, but on applicable laws: my lawyers on copyright matters are Zipse Habersack Dipl. Ing. Joerg Habersack Patentanwalt Kemnatenstr. 15 80687 Munich Germany They are highly approved and can answer all your questions. But I would like to count on your fairness. Thank you in advance. Please excuse my poor english. Albert Albert Reyerman TREE EDITION Finkenberg 89 D-23558 Luebeck Germany TREE EDITION is registered trade mark European Patent Register No. 1 038 427 By the way: I drove to Leipzig exactly 40 times in the past 9 years. They have 40 lute mss/prints and the gave me only one source at a time. (The biggest source was the DLUGORAI lute book. It has 600 pages. I worked on that book for 4 weeks fulltime). Now I have scanned all Leipzig lute sources. The 40 facsimiles are not all yet published in print. But they will be, one after another. I promise. Albert Michael Thames wrote: Let me state my intentions, and I will take all viewpoints to heart in = the matter. I would like to put these unedited facsimiles That I bought = from Tree publishing on my website for free downloading, as well = transcribe a version for guitar. Nowhere in the edition does it say = anything about copyrights etc.and there is absolutely no editing, just = Xerox copies of the original Tablature, period. In the Dowland MS manuscript project, ( see link ) they state, = they bought the rights to publish the manuscripts, and now they are = public domain, and are free to download. They got together 25 people to = chip in and buy the rights. Now, in theory is it not the same thing Tree = did? They most likely paid money, to get the rights to publish and SELL = the facsimiles. If I bought the Facsimiles for $25,00 could one assume = that I've fulfilled my part to Tree publishing by chipping in and = helping them to obtain rights to make these public domain, as well as = assisting them in there ability to sell them. In a way, it seems like = capitalism at it's best and worst. =20 Like many of you I download lots of music, But I also love to buy = nice editions, of the very pieces I've downloaded, and will continue to = buy nice editions, whenever I come across them. Last week, I bought the = complete lute works of John Dowland, even though I
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Bravo! It is good to hear from someone who can remind other musicians and scholars how much time, work, and expense is involved in producing a good edition! GJC Date sent: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 17:16:59 +0100 To: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copies to: Lute Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: albertreyerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Facsimeles etc. Open letter to Michael Thames who announced to place a TREE facsimile edition to the wwweb. from Albert Reyerman, TREE EDITION Dear Mr. Thames, first of all I would like to correct you: in the BACH/Weyrauch facsimile edition the copyright notice is printed on the very first page (in 24 point Times Roman, big enough not to be overlooked). It reads: Copyright 1999, TREE EDITION, Albert Reyerman Now to your plan, to place a Bach/Weyrauch facsimile edition on the Internet: I have nothing to say against that, as long as you place YOUR facsimile edition and not MINE. To make your own facsimile edition I´ll give you some information: fly/drive to Leipzig (from my hometown Leipzig was 400 miles away), go to Städtische Bibliotheken Leipzig Musikbibliothek Leuschnerplatz 10-11 D-04107 Leipzig Ask the head of the library (Dr. Brigitte Geyer) for permission to make a facsimile of the Bach edition and to publish it. If you are of good reputation and experienced in making facsimiles of sources of such value, she possibly agrees. In my case she did. Bring your own computer, software and scanner ( I brought my big AGFA T2000XL scanner, cause the original manuscript is so big in size that it does not fit to an A4 or legal format scanner. The street price of the Agfa scanner is about 10,000.- US $. Hopefully you have something good as this). Than scan the ms. Cause the ms. has few pages, It will take you only about one day or two, if you are an experienced operator (the ms. has light brown ink on a yellowish paper. Difficult to scan). At home, with your publishing software ( I use Adobe Pagemaker and Adobe Acrobat Professional) you can layout the book on your PC/Mac system and make a proper edition of it. You can avoid going to the printer, have the book printed. You can avoid, going to the book binder, to have the edition binded. You can avoid, to make some advertising around the world. You can avoid all these things I had to do, cause: you place YOUR facsimile edition to the internet. But again: place YOURS and not MINE. About fairness: I know very well that we both are living on different parts of this world. But I have been to the United States often enough (about 20 times or so within the last 25 years) to know that the American people as well as the European people are exactly aware of the difference between YOURS and MINE. No discussion about. If I misunderstood you and you are not talking about fairness, but on applicable laws: my lawyers on copyright matters are Zipse Habersack Dipl. Ing. Joerg Habersack Patentanwalt Kemnatenstr. 15 80687 Munich Germany They are highly approved and can answer all your questions. But I would like to count on your fairness. Thank you in advance. Please excuse my poor english. Albert Albert Reyerman TREE EDITION Finkenberg 89 D-23558 Luebeck Germany TREE EDITION is registered trade mark European Patent Register No. 1 038 427 By the way: I drove to Leipzig exactly 40 times in the past 9 years. They have 40 lute mss/prints and the gave me only one source at a time. (The biggest source was the DLUGORAI lute book. It has 600 pages. I worked on that book for 4 weeks fulltime). Now I have scanned all Leipzig lute sources. The 40 facsimiles are not all yet published in print. But they will be, one after another. I promise. Albert Michael Thames wrote: Let me state my intentions, and I will take all viewpoints to heart in = the matter. I would like to put these unedited facsimiles That I bought = from Tree publishing on my website for free downloading, as well = transcribe a version for guitar. Nowhere in the edition does it say = anything about copyrights etc.and there is absolutely no editing, just = Xerox copies of the original Tablature, period. In the Dowland MS manuscript project, ( see link ) they state, = they bought the rights to publish the manuscripts, and now they are = public domain, and are free to download. They got together 25 people to = chip in and buy the rights. Now, in theory is it not the same thing Tree = did? They most likely paid money, to get the rights to publish and SELL = the facsimiles. If I bought the Facsimiles for $25,00 could one assume = that I've fulfilled my part to Tree publishing by chipping in and = helping them to obtain rights to make these public domain, as well as = assisting them in there ability to sell them. In a way, it seems like = capitalism at it's best
RE: Facsimeles etc.
..And so, on a personal note, the grand celestial question remains, does TREE EDITION (European Patent Register No. 1 038 427) control _all rights toward ANY form of reproduction of the information found upon the pages of mss_, or simply the _ visible images of the pages_ that they worked so diligently to reproduce and make available to a grateful lute community? If Mr. Thames' intention is to scan images from the TREE EDITION (European Patent Register No. 1 038 427), and make these images available for download as .jpg images, or in .pdf format [or whatever other format that one may utilize (is my lack of computer savvy showing?)], it's quite easy to see a conflict. However, if Mr. Thames wishes to construct his own authentic version of the mss based on his personal copy of the TREE EDITION (European Patent Register No. 1 038 427), using his own copy work and possibly offering his own editorial changes, then make this version available via the net, any prohibition is totally unclear. Curiously, Fred Bone -Original Message- From: albertreyerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:17 AM To: Michael Thames Cc: Lute Mailing List Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Open letter to Michael Thames who announced to place a TREE facsimile edition to the wwweb. from Albert Reyerman, TREE EDITION Dear Mr. Thames, first of all I would like to correct you: in the BACH/Weyrauch facsimile edition the copyright notice is printed on the very first page (in 24 point Times Roman, big enough not to be overlooked). It reads: Copyright 1999, TREE EDITION, Albert Reyerman Now to your plan, to place a Bach/Weyrauch facsimile edition on the Internet: I have nothing to say against that, as long as you place YOUR facsimile edition and not MINE. To make your own facsimile edition I´ll give you some information: fly/drive to Leipzig (from my hometown Leipzig was 400 miles away), go to Städtische Bibliotheken Leipzig Musikbibliothek Leuschnerplatz 10-11 D-04107 Leipzig Ask the head of the library (Dr. Brigitte Geyer) for permission to make a facsimile of the Bach edition and to publish it. If you are of good reputation and experienced in making facsimiles of sources of such value, she possibly agrees. In my case she did. Bring your own computer, software and scanner ( I brought my big AGFA T2000XL scanner, cause the original manuscript is so big in size that it does not fit to an A4 or legal format scanner. The street price of the Agfa scanner is about 10,000.- US $. Hopefully you have something good as this). Than scan the ms. Cause the ms. has few pages, It will take you only about one day or two, if you are an experienced operator (the ms. has light brown ink on a yellowish paper. Difficult to scan). At home, with your publishing software ( I use Adobe Pagemaker and Adobe Acrobat Professional) you can layout the book on your PC/Mac system and make a proper edition of it. You can avoid going to the printer, have the book printed. You can avoid, going to the book binder, to have the edition binded. You can avoid, to make some advertising around the world. You can avoid all these things I had to do, cause: you place YOUR facsimile edition to the internet. But again: place YOURS and not MINE. About fairness: I know very well that we both are living on different parts of this world. But I have been to the United States often enough (about 20 times or so within the last 25 years) to know that the American people as well as the European people are exactly aware of the difference between YOURS and MINE. No discussion about. If I misunderstood you and you are not talking about fairness, but on applicable laws: my lawyers on copyright matters are Zipse Habersack Dipl. Ing. Joerg Habersack Patentanwalt Kemnatenstr. 15 80687 Munich Germany They are highly approved and can answer all your questions. But I would like to count on your fairness. Thank you in advance. Please excuse my poor english. Albert Albert Reyerman TREE EDITION Finkenberg 89 D-23558 Luebeck Germany TREE EDITION is registered trade mark European Patent Register No. 1 038 427 By the way: I drove to Leipzig exactly 40 times in the past 9 years. They have 40 lute mss/prints and the gave me only one source at a time. (The biggest source was the DLUGORAI lute book. It has 600 pages. I worked on that book for 4 weeks fulltime). Now I have scanned all Leipzig lute sources. The 40 facsimiles are not all yet published in print. But they will be, one after another. I promise. Albert Michael Thames wrote: Let me state my intentions, and I will take all viewpoints to heart in = the matter. I would like to put these unedited facsimiles That I bought = from Tree publishing on my website for free downloading, as well = transcribe a version for guitar. Nowhere in the edition does it say = anything about copyrights etc.and there is absolutely no editing, just = Xerox copies of the original Tablature, period
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Michael, I'm sure your heart is in the right place with this, but I suspect that you have not really thought it through. Setting aside the legalities for a moment, which I am sure others on the list will tell you about, why not try going through the motions of being a publisher yourself? Contact a major library that holds original lute books (don't forget to pay yourself for the time spent phoning and e mailing) and find out how much they will charge to allow you to publish an edition of one of the the items from their collection. Check out the cost of obtaining photographs of a publishable standard (the British Library charged about £25 a page last time I asked). Then find a printer and check out the cost of producing the book - that involves scanning the pages, transferring to litho film, printing, binding and packaging (it's not cheap). Don't forget the designers fee for the odd bits of graphics you will need. Then add it all up, not forgetting a modest profit for the trouble, and see if Tree Edition are really ripping anyone off in the price of their books. I don't think they are. Particularly when you consider that it may take several years to sell enough copies to realise any profit at all. Good quality printed facsimlies are essential to anyone who wants to study lute music in depth. If pirated copies of even a few went on the net, IMHO publishers would lose the will to produce them, to our extreme detriment. Sorry Michael, I think this is a bad idea. Best wishes, Denys - Original Message - From: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:29 PM Subject: Facsimeles etc. Let me state my intentions, and I will take all viewpoints to heart in = the matter. I would like to put these unedited facsimiles That I bought = from Tree publishing on my website for free downloading, as well = transcribe a version for guitar. Nowhere in the edition does it say = anything about copyrights etc.and there is absolutely no editing, just = Xerox copies of the original Tablature, period. In the Dowland MS manuscript project, ( see link ) they state, = they bought the rights to publish the manuscripts, and now they are = public domain, and are free to download. They got together 25 people to = chip in and buy the rights. Now, in theory is it not the same thing Tree = did? They most likely paid money, to get the rights to publish and SELL = the facsimiles. If I bought the Facsimiles for $25,00 could one assume = that I've fulfilled my part to Tree publishing by chipping in and = helping them to obtain rights to make these public domain, as well as = assisting them in there ability to sell them. In a way, it seems like = capitalism at it's best and worst. =20 Like many of you I download lots of music, But I also love to buy = nice editions, of the very pieces I've downloaded, and will continue to = buy nice editions, whenever I come across them. Last week, I bought the = complete lute works of John Dowland, even though I could download 90% of = that for free. The challenge for publishers, is to take this music = which is basically available to all, and arrange it in a nice, = informative fingered edition, then, they can make some money. Not to = continue to stiff us on unedited facsimiles that require no more skill = and expertise than to press a button on a camera. I recently = bought...Lessons for the lute, by Anthony Balies Anne van Royen = because there's a well thought out, gradual approach to playing thumb = under, and lots of info. on the pieces etc. I very much appreciate what = Tree does, don't get me wrong, and will continue to buy their editions, = but on facsimiles? =20 http://cbsr26.ucr.edu//wlkfiles/Folger/DowlandMS.html Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Michael, You make many points, so I shall scatter my comments amongst yours. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:29 PM Subject: Facsimeles etc. Let me state my intentions, and I will take all viewpoints to heart in = the matter. I would like to put these unedited facsimiles That I bought = from Tree publishing on my website for free downloading, as well = transcribe a version for guitar. Nowhere in the edition does it say = anything about copyrights etc.and there is absolutely no editing, just = Xerox copies of the original Tablature, period. Why stop at facsimiles? Why not make all their published music available for free downloading? This would be such a great service to everyone, wouldn't it, because then we wouldn't have the trouble and expense of actually acquiring the books legitimately ourselves. In the Dowland MS manuscript project, ( see link ) they state, = they bought the rights to publish the manuscripts, and now they are = public domain, and are free to download. They got together 25 people to = chip in and buy the rights. Now, in theory is it not the same thing Tree = did? They most likely paid money, to get the rights to publish and SELL = the facsimiles. If I bought the Facsimiles for $25,00 could one assume = that I've fulfilled my part to Tree publishing by chipping in and = helping them to obtain rights to make these public domain, as well as = assisting them in there ability to sell them. In a way, it seems like = capitalism at it's best and worst. =20 You seem to be saying that, if you have bought a copy of a facsimile, it will entitle you to make as many copies as you like, which you can sell or give away to your friends. By using the internet you could make the music in all these books free for everyone in the world. It won't matter that the publishers miss out on all their greedy, capitalist profits, because you have honestly paid your $25, and that's all the publishers should be entitled to. Like many of you I download lots of music, But I also love to buy = nice editions, of the very pieces I've downloaded, and will continue to = buy nice editions, whenever I come across them. Last week, I bought the = complete lute works of John Dowland, even though I could download 90% of = that for free. The challenge for publishers, is to take this music = which is basically available to all, and arrange it in a nice, = informative fingered edition, then, they can make some money. Not to = continue to stiff us on unedited facsimiles that require no more skill = and expertise than to press a button on a camera. Why make a distinction between facsimiles and modern editions with added fingering? As long as you pay your $25 for one of their nice, informative editions, you could use your own skill and expertise with your computer mouse or photocopy machine to make all that music available to the rest of us for free too. I recently = bought...Lessons for the lute, by Anthony Balies Anne van Royen = because there's a well thought out, gradual approach to playing thumb = under, and lots of info. on the pieces etc. I very much appreciate what = Tree does, don't get me wrong, and will continue to buy their editions, = but on facsimiles? It is a pity you didn't already know someone who had a copy of Mr and Mrs Bailes' duet collection, because then you could have photocopied it instead of buying it, and saved a bit of extra expense. Nothing like a good bargain. =20 http://cbsr26.ucr.edu//wlkfiles/Folger/DowlandMS.html Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames -- We have discussed the matter of photocopying facsimiles many times on this list. There are many points of view, based on people's own interpretation of the law or on their own moral sense of what is right and wrong. You may be surprised to know that the preparation of a fascimile edition involves more than sticking an old book on a photocopying machine. I speak with some knowledge, since I am at present involved with the Lute Society's project of making available a facsimile edition of the Welde Lute Book. These are the sorts of jobs we have to do: 1) We discuss and plan the project. 2) We contact Lord and Lady Forester, the owners of the book, and ask permission to photocopy and publish the manuscript. 3) John Robinson and Ian Harwood come from different parts of the country to stay at my house, where we rehearse the photographing process to save time on the day. 4) We travel together to Shropshire. 5) We spend a day photographing the book: Ian takes the photos (not as simple as a few holiday snaps), I turn the pages (handling original sources needs special care), and John constantly wipes the glass plate to be put over the book to keep it flat. (Dust and odd specks appear
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Fred Bone at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ..And so, on a personal note, the grand celestial question remains, does TREE EDITION (European Patent Register No. 1 038 427) control _all rights toward ANY form of reproduction of the information found upon the pages of mss_, or simply the _ visible images of the pages_ that they worked so diligently to reproduce and make available to a grateful lute community? Probably neither, in the United States, because U.S. copyright protects only original works, and a facsimile is by definition not an original work. The question has been decided in a published federal trial court decision, but not by a federal court of appeal. I'm told the law is different in some European countries, and putting something on the Web might constitute publication in those countries. Questions of jurisdiction over the Web are far from settled. Howard Posner
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Would, say, Dowland have been surprised at 21st century culture, where 99% of music is commercial and a ready source of litigation? Has there always been music of such aggressive crassness as is heard (in abundant volume) on any city street corner? I'm not anti-Tree, but I do wonder whether this is related.
Re: Facsimeles, etc
This whole discussion remains me of that beatiful sentence with which Wittgenstein finished his Tractatus, written back in 1918: Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen. About those things one can not speak, it is necessary to remain silent. Wittgenstein said this in a much more metaphysical context, but nevertheless it is a good advice... PLEASE, LET'S SPEAK ABOUT THOSE TOPICS WE KNOW WELL ! It is a real shame that Albert Reyerman had to explain with full details how much work it means publishing (= making public) something, in this case lute manuscripts. It is a shame because he had to, out of the feeling that his work was being neglected. Besides, it is for me totally clear that Albert Reyerman is doing it not for the financial profit, -which is negligible, or even inexistent if he counts his own time- but because of other compensations. I also would like to ask you for a favor, dear Michael Thames: please stop using that sentence in which photography is considered only a matter of pressing a button. It sounds the same as if somebody would say the following: I can't understand why you as a luthier charges that much for a lute. You are only cutting pieces of wood with a knife, and then putting them together. I'm sure you understand what I mean... Kind regards, Manolo Laguillo, Professor of Photography University of Barcelona Barcelona --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear colleagues, This thread has been very interesting to me because of my own research. Mr Thames brought up a logical question with legal, moral, and practical questions. The replies to his query have been thought-provoking. I am grateful to Mr Reyerman for sharing his expertise. I like the brilliant idea of a corporate sharing of costs involved in publishing by print or web of documents, such as LSA did with the Dowland. This is apparently what some Friends of composer groups have done. Good 'outside the box' thinking to solve the problem of honoring the conservators -- libraries or individuals -- of our music while making it available to those who wish to know it better. Just today I was forwarded a request from the MLA (music library association) list, asking for information, a facsimile or microfilm on a 1638 book I had looked for several years ago. Even in articles where it was mentioned, there was no complete citation. Someone sometime must have seen it but apparently everyone was quoting from the seminal researcher, who did not include full information. In fact, years later when asked personally about it she wasn't sure of the full bibliographic info. It had taken me a surprising amount of time, including finally looking in person at the Italian libraries where I expected it might be, to locate it. When I included it in my bibliographies, I listed the full 'formal' citation of author, title, and publisher, and gave the call-number assigned it by the holding library. No point in everyone reinventing the wheel since I knew the call number! Apparently the faculty member who asked her librarian to go to the trouble of posting her query on the MLA-list had not looked at my website about the composer she was researching, where the info resides. The moral question I asked myself, as I wrote to the MLA librarian, was what to do with all the information I have. Though I didn't say so, I indeed own a microfilm of this work. I went to a great deal of trouble for it, paid a bunch, went through the usual hassle and then some (since to pay for something in Italy from abroad is no easy feat), and feel I have an obligation to use this in the manner I told the library - for my own personal research use. It seems a pity to make anyone jump through all the hoops, but the 'commercial' value of the book would be quite limited. Perhaps I also feel protective of the book because I went to much time and money to find it, and felt clever for finally succeeding. Nonetheless, someone else could glean important ideas from this work that I have so far neglected to find. It's an old ethical dilemma. Though it may have been discussed in the past, I am still interested in other people's experiences. Best wishes, Dr. Candace A. Magner University of New Mexico - Los Alamos Dept of Fine Arts/Music [EMAIL PROTECTED] homepage http://clik.to/candace
Re: Facsimeles etc.
But again: place YOURS and not MINE. That is grossly untrue: It is Bach's and Weyrauch's (i.e. belonging to the World), and you [Albert Reyermann] merely BORROWED it. And your noble purpose has no bearing on this matter. RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Uncle Albert, Calm down my good man! I deeply apologies for not seeing your copyright, I think by the time I got to the bottom of the page I went a little cross-eyed from all the German and mistook the copyright for a trade mark. Again I'm sorry! I'm totally naive when it comes to this stuff, it didn't even dawn on me there was microfilm, instead of originals. That's how stupid I am! I love old things. When I make a replica of a lute I like to go to the museum, if possible, to see it. If that's not possible, I would at least like to see a photo of the original lute, which through the kindness of many people, are featured free of charge on my website. And Albert, you have my permission to download those if you'd like!Even though.. Some of those lutes and photos I flew 3000 miles to get, made a special measuring device, Had to build a woodshop and buy all the tools to make the lutes, then a computer so I could have a website to sell the lutes. Then drove 150 more miles, then, and only then, if the curator thought I was qualified, she let me in, but you know Albert, what the worst part wasI didn't get to eat breakfast But just another typical day in the life of a luthier, I'm not complaining, it could be worst! My interest in old things also applies to Facsimiles of lute music. My only crime has been my naivety in wanting to share this wonderful experience with others, some of whom, it may not have occurred to them to even look for such a thing. Young guitarists, who Albert, are the future lute players you will be selling your editions to someday. Albert, if you had the patience to follow the thread that was being sown, we were all trying to figure out different scenarios to different problems concerning copyrights, ethics etc. Quite frankly, I'm not threaded by your lawyers. And it seems by most accounts, you wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on if I decided to post Bach's facsimiles. I am, on the other hand, concerned about the wishes of other human beings. That is why I wrote you asking your permission to post a facsimile with a guitar transcription, in exchange for full advertisement and download of your catalogue on my website. A very fair exchange I think, as many young guitarists would be turned on to your catalogue, that might otherwise not be. However, I see no mention of that part of my inquire, in your letter to the lute world, instead you chose to represent me as a criminal to be! .You wouldn't let one drop of your precious water out of your hand The Tibetans have a sayingWhen a man is greedy, he even tries to sell water. In future copyright disputes, my advice to you is, try tickling the intellect with a feather, rather than hitting someone over the head with a hammer. Albert, you know full and well, that I, and most people would not be granted access to the manuscripts. The museum needs to protect these things from being over handed and abused,for good reason, as you pointed out, one needs experience, cameras, computers, a car, Oh and did I mention a monopoly on the business! Albert since your so free and open with your information, can you tell me who else has made copies of Bach's music? For a profit, and that trickle down effect that just keeps on giving! I do respect your work, and now have a further understanding of the publishing world. Knowing that this problem must come up allot for someone in your business. I'm also happy to be the object of your aggression, and frustration, I hope you got it all out of your system. But next time apply it to someone who deservers it. After this experience, You can bet I will do everything in my power to access these works of Bach, and free them to the world. God forbid you come across any Weiss, then I'll really get mad! All the best, Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: albertreyerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Lute Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:16 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. Open letter to Michael Thames who announced to place a TREE facsimile edition to the wwweb. from Albert Reyerman, TREE EDITION Dear Mr. Thames, first of all I would like to correct you: in the BACH/Weyrauch facsimile edition the copyright notice is printed on the very first page (in 24 point Times Roman, big enough not to be overlooked). It reads: Copyright 1999, TREE EDITION, Albert Reyerman Now to your plan, to place a Bach/Weyrauch facsimile edition on the Internet: I have nothing to say against that, as long as you place YOUR facsimile edition and not MINE. To make your own facsimile edition I´ll give you some information: fly/drive to Leipzig (from my hometown Leipzig was 400 miles away), go to Städtische Bibliotheken Leipzig Musikbibliothek Leuschnerplatz
Re: Facsimeles, etc
Manolo, It is a real shame that Albert Reyerman had to explain with full details how much work it means publishing (= making public) something, in this case lute manuscripts. It is a shame because he had to, out of the feeling that his work was being neglected On the contrary, Manolo, I have a saying, let me see if I can translate...Oh yea!.. here it comes KNOWLEDGE IS LIBERATION ! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Manolo Laguillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lute Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 6:03 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles, etc This whole discussion remains me of that beatiful sentence with which Wittgenstein finished his Tractatus, written back in 1918: Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen. About those things one can not speak, it is necessary to remain silent. Wittgenstein said this in a much more metaphysical context, but nevertheless it is a good advice... PLEASE, LET'S SPEAK ABOUT THOSE TOPICS WE KNOW WELL ! It is a real shame that Albert Reyerman had to explain with full details how much work it means publishing (= making public) something, in this case lute manuscripts. It is a shame because he had to, out of the feeling that his work was being neglected. Besides, it is for me totally clear that Albert Reyerman is doing it not for the financial profit, -which is negligible, or even inexistent if he counts his own time- but because of other compensations. I also would like to ask you for a favor, dear Michael Thames: please stop using that sentence in which photography is considered only a matter of pressing a button. It sounds the same as if somebody would say the following: I can't understand why you as a luthier charges that much for a lute. You are only cutting pieces of wood with a knife, and then putting them together. I'm sure you understand what I mean... Kind regards, Manolo Laguillo, Professor of Photography University of Barcelona Barcelona --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 06:32 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My interest in old things also applies to Facsimiles of lute music. My only crime has been my naivety in wanting to share this wonderful experience with others, some of whom, it may not have occurred to them to even look for such a thing. That's nonsense. Of course there are people who may not have occurred to them top look for such a thing. And then there are so many others who have already. Albert Reyerman is not the first, and certainly not the last person to publish this manuscript. Old hat. Young guitarists, who Albert, are the future lute players you will be selling your editions to someday. Your naivete is far more extensive than that. There are at least 40-50 editions of guitar transcriptions of the Bach Lute suites on the market today, many of which, like the well known edition by Frank Koonce, include a facsimile of the Bach-Weyrauch manuscript, as well as many other relevant facsimiles. IOW, you are not going to be doing young guitarists any favor of which they or their teachers do not have more than enough already. I assure you, young guitarists have no need for your bumbling incursions into a field you know nothing about. Quite frankly, I'm not threaded by your lawyers. And it seems by most accounts, you wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on if I decided to post Bach's facsimiles. That's paranoia speaking now. Albert did not threaten you with his lawyers. He simple provided you the address of the German lawyers who give _him_ the copyright advise he needs to run his business. Relax. There is no chance that a German lawyer will sue you in the US. Not enough money in it... Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles, etc
On Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 07:03 PM, Manolo Laguillo wrote: It sounds the same as if somebody would say the following: I can't understand why you as a luthier charges that much for a lute. You are only cutting pieces of wood with a knife, and then putting them together. I'm sure you understand what I mean... Interesting sideline: what you say reminds me of a conversation I had this last summer with a lutenist who referred with great admiration to Michael Lowe as the world's greatest carpenter. DR
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Why stop at facsimiles? Why not make all their published music available for free downloading? This would be such a great service to everyone, wouldn't it, because then we wouldn't have the trouble and expense of actually acquiring the books legitimately ourselves. A good and noble idea, actually (limited to dead composers, of course). When we use words like ourselves we invariably limit the notion to more or less prosperous European and American middle class types who actually are able to afford said trouble and expense. This, however, is a rather callous worldview of a petit bourgeois, and it is expected, as the lute microcosm is a scaled down version of the larger world, and there is no added reason to expect any altruism from it any more than from the larger one. The lute microcosm is nowhere near the idyll that uncle Albert, MO, or St.McCoy imagine it to be. There are GREAT MANY lutenists that are UNABLE to undertake the trouble of both access and affordability of lute music, the reasons being their isolation of faraway places AND/OR places in which a price of an item from even such moderate and reasonable publisher as uncle Albert buys a week's worth of food. They have computers that they largely build themselves, they share modems between half a dozen friends when they can buy internet access cards, they sometimes have decent lutes strung with unimaginable things, and they love music in general, as well as lute music in particular. I also have reasons to believe that hardship is not limited to the part of the world associated with RT's birthplace. Thing are not much better in South America (which has produced some of the finest lute-players to date). So I consider it my sacred duty to make everything lutenistically relevant available to these individuals, CD's copied and recopied, the same with editions, and if you ask me if I ever have any qualms about turning the blind eye on uncle Albert's copyright notices on the materials he borrowed from dead composers, the answer is simple NO. Moreover I do it not only lightheartedly, but also with a sense of profound satisfaction. RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Well said Howard, I have been reading a copy of Grout's History of Western Music given my by my daughter in law in my attempt to return to proper music and remind myself of the theory. There are many facsimiles of ancient originals in that book. Under U.S. law I'd have no problem scanning them for distribution on my web site, but I would have a problem if I included his explanatory text (or a paraphrase of it). But I could cover that if I credited him. The book as a whole is copyrighted, and it would be improper to profit from making the book available for download on the web (particularly if it were for profit, which could be as indirect as using the hits on the site to gain paid advertisers). But making segments available, properly credited, would probably fall under personal use. I can't understand why any publisher wouldn't want his works better known. Perhaps I'm unique (but I don't think so). If I see something I like as a download I'll end up buying the book if I want the entirety of it. But I'd not buy a book for one small part, so if I don't get to see it I won't buy it. And Howard, the Web is a maze of jurisditions (pun intended). They won't be settled for years, if ever. Best, Jon
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 07:32 PM, Michael Thames wrote: After this experience, You can bet I will do everything in my power to access these works of Bach, and free them to the world. God forbid you come across any Weiss, then I'll really get mad! St. Michael the Liberator! I notice you don't give your guitars away. Don't you think the world should be given free access to such fine instruments? ;-) DR This is not an analogy, he MAKES them from scratch. RT Roman, thanks. I just didn't know what to say to someone like that. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: albertreyerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:21 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. On Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 07:32 PM, Michael Thames wrote: After this experience, You can bet I will do everything in my power to access these works of Bach, and free them to the world. God forbid you come across any Weiss, then I'll really get mad! St. Michael the Liberator! I notice you don't give your guitars away. Don't you think the world should be given free access to such fine instruments? ;-) DR This is not an analogy, he MAKES them from scratch. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Relax Montana, I see you have quite alot of baggage with this issue, to go after me with your well known guile, and considering remarks. You truly take the prize for vileness, your reputation precedes you. Again, glad to be the scapegoat for you Publishing kind of guys, but as you say this is getting old, isn't it. If I were your mother I'd take you over my knee and give a good whacking! But since this is your only source of income I'll forgive you! Lets put all exchanges of pleasantries aside, Please tell me the crime I'm guilty of, what have I done other than ask a few uncomfortable questions. I've already admitted I'm stupid, and you've pointed that out again just in case everyone forgot. Is WANTING to post a facsimile a crime? Do you own a copyright to my thoughts too? If you don't, I bet your trying to apply for one, come on tell the truth you are aren't aren't you? As I stated, I asked Albert's permission. But come to think of it, as of yet I haven't heard his answer. Just between you and me Montana what do you think He'll say? Montana, if there are 50 or so editions of the Bach lute suites why are you uncomfortable with one more? And please, don't be so pretentious as to know with whom I'm well connected with in the guitar world. And above all , you can have Bach, but keep your greedy hands off of Weiss. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 8:38 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 06:32 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My interest in old things also applies to Facsimiles of lute music. My only crime has been my naivety in wanting to share this wonderful experience with others, some of whom, it may not have occurred to them to even look for such a thing. That's nonsense. Of course there are people who may not have occurred to them top look for such a thing. And then there are so many others who have already. Albert Reyerman is not the first, and certainly not the last person to publish this manuscript. Old hat. Young guitarists, who Albert, are the future lute players you will be selling your editions to someday. Your naivete is far more extensive than that. There are at least 40-50 editions of guitar transcriptions of the Bach Lute suites on the market today, many of which, like the well known edition by Frank Koonce, include a facsimile of the Bach-Weyrauch manuscript, as well as many other relevant facsimiles. IOW, you are not going to be doing young guitarists any favor of which they or their teachers do not have more than enough already. I assure you, young guitarists have no need for your bumbling incursions into a field you know nothing about. Quite frankly, I'm not threaded by your lawyers. And it seems by most accounts, you wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on if I decided to post Bach's facsimiles. That's paranoia speaking now. Albert did not threaten you with his lawyers. He simple provided you the address of the German lawyers who give _him_ the copyright advise he needs to run his business. Relax. There is no chance that a German lawyer will sue you in the US. Not enough money in it... Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
St. Michael the Liberator! Come to think of it I kind of like that name! it seems to fit doesn't it. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: albertreyerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 9:29 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. On Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 07:32 PM, Michael Thames wrote: After this experience, You can bet I will do everything in my power to access these works of Bach, and free them to the world. God forbid you come across any Weiss, then I'll really get mad! St. Michael the Liberator! I notice you don't give your guitars away. Don't you think the world should be given free access to such fine instruments? ;-) DR
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Mantana, I'm surprised that you know me so well, after having just met tonight, and full to the brim of nasty condescending observations, about my character too. Why don't you use some of that sparkling intellect of yours, and simply answer my question. What is my crime? Asking few Questions? having a few evil thoughts? And maybe you can do it for once without attacking someone's character. Come on you can do it. If your nice I'll take you out for a beer next time I'm in Columbus. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:09 PM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. At 09:20 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: St. Michael the Liberator! I notice you don't give your guitars away. Don't you think the world should be given free access to such fine instruments? ;-) DR This is not an analogy, he MAKES them from scratch. RT Roman, thanks. I just didn't know what to say to someone like that. It's easy to grab at the straws RT supplies you with when your hypocrisy is staring you in the face. But Roman is wrong. The analogy is perfect. The issue is not the music, but the object you hold in your hand when you put it on the copy machine. That is a book, and it was made from scratch by one person who invested a great deal of time and money in creating it. And if it was not created by Albert, you would have had to find another such object made by someone else, like Frank Koonce, that contains the same image you want. BTW, regarding your intentions to make a guitar transcriptions: besides the many editions of this music on the market, by such editors/transcribers as Frederick Zigante, Josef Eotvoes, Jerry Willard, Tillmann Hopstock, to mention the better known ones, there is quite a bit of free, downloadable editions of this music available on the net. This is one remarkable example: http://icking-music-archive.org/scores/bach/bwv995/bwv995cg.pdf Clearly, there is nothing you can possibly contribute here that has not been done zillions of times before, in print and on the web. You are wasting your time. Try and come up with more creative ideas. I am sure brother Roman will be happy to supply with them. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:56 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Relax Montana, That can work both ways, distorting people's names intentionally. But I will resist the urge to engage in this juvenile silliness. I see you have quite alot of baggage with this issue, to go after me with your well known guile, and considering remarks. You truly take the prize for vileness, your reputation precedes you. Glad you noticed. Again, glad to be the scapegoat for you Publishing kind of guys, but as you say this is getting old, isn't it. If I were your mother I'd take you over my knee and give a good whacking! But since this is your only source of income I'll forgive you! That's bullshit number one. Publishing is not my source of income at all. It is only the source of my _losses_ over the years. If had to live the way I do from music publishing, this business would have gone down the drain decades ago. Do check my biography more carefully. Lets put all exchanges of pleasantries aside, Please tell me the crime I'm guilty of, what have I done other than ask a few uncomfortable questions. I've already admitted I'm stupid, and you've pointed that out again just in case everyone forgot. Is WANTING to post a facsimile a crime? No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it. As I stated, I asked Albert's permission. Wrong person to ask. He does not own the manuscript. He paid money for the permission to publish it, and this is exactly what you should do: apply to the library and ask for permission, and pay the fee. Then you do whatever you want to do. Albert even gave you the address and the name of the person to write to. So instead of sniffling about legalities, do what all of us are doing: get it DIRECTLY from the source. But come to think of it, as of yet I haven't heard his answer. Just between you and me Montana what do you think He'll say? He already said it. Loud and clear. Montana, if there are 50 or so editions of the Bach lute suites why are you uncomfortable with one more? I am not uncomfortable at all. Even Albert clearly stated that he has nothing against your doing another edition. The only time I am uncomfortable with this, is when someone asks me to publish _his_ edition of the Lute Suites. I have rejected more than one such project in the past. You want to do a new edition of the lute suites? be my guest. It is your time and money. But let's do it on a plain level field. Just like everybody else. And please, don't be so pretentious as to know with whom I'm well connected with in the guitar world. Huh? I know nothing about you and I have no idea who you are connected with. Never heard your name before this thread. You make guitars? lutes? I don't recall ever hearing about your instruments from any one, and I do get around. And above all , you can have Bach, but keep your greedy hands off of Weiss. Too late. I published the Moscow Weiss manuscript years before I even heard your name. As for Bach, you can check my on-line catalogue for my Bach transcriptions. You will not find the lute suites there. Look here fellow: the issue is not me, and the issue is not Albert Reyerman. the issue is that the lute world is way too small. No instrumental discipline ever survived without publishers, and it does not matter if the publisher is a private person who is doing this for the love of the lute, or the lute society or large commercial publishers who can support the losing proposition of publishing lute music by publishing a lot of other commercial fodder. You want to join the crowd and become a publisher yourself? That's commendable and I will be happy to assist you in any way I can, and so would Albert. But one thing you must understand: anytime you benefit by scavenging the work of others, the stench goes sky high. And don't give me this bullshit about posting this music on your web site as an altruistic service to the young. Your purpose is to attract surfers to your web site, where they can also view the instruments you have for sale. All you want is another advertising tool. Nothing wrong with that and we all do it. But please do it on your own nickel, not Albert's. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
