Re: [ARSCLIST] RCA Music Service

[Mark Jenkins <MJenkins@xxxxxxxxxx>]

That should be the case today with music club CDs.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Fine
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 3:47 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] RCA Music Service

So are you saying quality should be no different from a commercial
retail CD?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Jenkins" <MJenkins@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] RCA Music Service


As BMG (or any of the other major label groups) tend NOT to let the
control of manufacturing out of their grasp (in the US and Canada in
particular--they're slightly more liberal in Europe with licensing to
third parties for manufacture there), and in particular where the
margins they are making with the record clubs are slimmer than usual, it
is to their benefit to provide the manufacturing themselves to the
record clubs, and would therefore be subject to the same criteria they
use with their own CDs.

Mark Jenkins 

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Fine
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 6:37 PM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] RCA Music Service

Speaking of the BMG Music Service ...

I believe they own or part-own yourmusic.com

So when I get my monthly CD from yourmusic.com, sometimes it says under
the UPC "manufactured under 
license by BMG Music Service" or something to that effect. Is there any
science that would say this 
is somehow "worse" than a retail-store version of the same CD? I realize
different CD plants have 
different equipment but don't they all meet the same ISO parameters and
aren't all the major ones 
ISO certified? I ask this because I do remember that Columbia and RCA
"record club" pressings were 
sometimes terrible, made from bad (non) masters or just badly pressed.
But in the CD age, I figure 
BMG is just using the clone of the regular digital master, no?

For what it's worth, to my ears (which I would argue are not made of
tin), the yourmusic CD's sound 
just fine and are a very good value.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Ramm" <Stevramm@xxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] RCA Music Service


>
> In a message dated 3/22/2008 5:40:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> sternth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> Very  much like a 'special products' release.
> First time I've seen this  label.  Would appreciate any information
about
> this series, what was  included, how/where marketed, how long was it
> available,
> what era???  (This release is dated (c)1976 RCA Records).
>
>
> My assumption is it was an RCA Record Club pressing. RCA Music Service
is
> now Called BMG Music Service and when you buy their CDs and they are a
BMG
> product, it says BMG MUSIC SERVICE where the UPC code usually appears.
>
> Probably same recording as normal issue - especially in 1976.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> **************Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on
AOL
> Home.
>
(http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15?ncid=aol
hom00030000000001)
> 
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally
privileged.
Access to this email by anyone other than the addressee is unauthorized.

************************************************************************
****
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
Access to this email by anyone other than the addressee is unauthorized.

****************************************************************************