Taylor Swift is re-recording her first 6 albums – why?

Taylor Swift has re-recorded and re-released her first six albums. why?

follow on

Taylor Swift re-recorded and released two of her first six albums: Fearless and Red. The other four, ‘Taylor Swift’, ‘Speak Now’, ‘1989’ and ‘Reputation’ will be treated in the same way soon. It is important for her that masters do not take advantage of them on these six album releases.

Well… let’s start from the beginning…

“Afraid” in the version published in 2008…Photo: wikicommons

First of all: here goes Not About song rights. Songwriting Credits, rights and income generated from the respective national copyright managers in each country (eg in Switzerland die SUISA), refers to the configuration itself and not to any registry. These will be dealt with separately when published. Example: When Miley Cyrus records “Jolene”, songwriter Dolly Parton earns money from her song’s proceeds (= her intellectual property) via copyright distribution companies. Miley earns her name from sales and streaming recording Miley’s version of the song, and gentlemen, Moreover.

gentlemen – These are related recordings, versions of a recorded song selected to be in an album. The version from which all copies will be made. Any demos of Swift’s song “Love Story” that you might have taped on the couch at home are not master class. But the version you know from the album, this recording, with this track – that’s the master. These masters are often given to the label in the contract: the label and artist earn money from the recordings (percentages are a matter of negotiation here), but the label guarantees exclusive rights to use. Often “forever”, forever and ever. Which means: in 30 years, Ms. Swift will continue to make money from her debut album, and so will her album. Even if the two of them had long ago gone their separate ways.

…and “Fearless – Taylor’s Version,” published in 2021.Photo: wikicommons

There are artists who believe in the rights of masters themselves. Then maybe go one licensing deal With a label, that is, the exclusive rights of the Master are “rented” for a limited period – say 5 years – with the label, so to speak. For a brand, this is of course a little less attractive and often only profitable if it is an already well-established artist. But if the artist is at the beginning of her artistic career, then the motto is: Like you, like me, like me, you. The artist is interested in receiving an advance payment to finance the recordings and to invest in further promotion; The rating company is interested in seeing the return of these investments.

Taylor Swift has her first 6 albums Big Machine Records chest. She has been released from this contract since 2018 and has had songs and albums on Universal since then Republic Chronicles released (in her new decade, Swift took ownership of the future Masters). The masters of the first six albums still belong to the Big Machine. As noted above, Taylor still deserves his share of it, and so does the label. So far, very normal.

BUT: Big Machine transferred to private equity group Ithaca Holdings Sold to a company owned by a music management tycoon Brown Scooter he heard. Swift Masters sold to another company in 2019, Shamrock Holdings300 million dollars. Swift’s master recordings earn money when songs are streamed or purchased – earnings that will from now on go to Shamrock. Ithaca no longer earns from it, but is 300 million richer. Work, stop.

Scooter Brown.Photo: wikicommons

She hasn’t played the violin on a personal level, because Swift claims Brown, who also manages stars like Kanye West and Ariana Grande, has repeatedly teased her: “Not in my worst nightmare I would have imagined that a scooter would be the buyer”, Swift. «[…] Basically, my musical heritage is in the hands of someone who tried to destroy it.”

Taylor Swift’s original plan to buy back Brown’s albums gradually failed because his legal team insisted on signing a nondisclosure agreement stating that she could no longer speak negatively of him. In addition, as part of the agreement, he would indirectly benefit from Music Benefits.

Plan B: Re-record all of the Big Machine albums. Again, the copyright to a song – a piece of music – is not the same as the copyright to a recording – Mr. These new enrollments, New Masters, are subject to Swift’s current contract in which you hold your Master’s degree.

Swift hopes to have her SwiftiesThe legions of hardcore fans shouldn’t be underestimated in terms of numbers and influence, from now on just stream the new releases in order to put it on top of Spotify and Co. Anyone who now glimpses an old version of Swift’s early songs pays Brown Bank.

Ultimately, Swift does this (also) out of technical considerations. “Artists should own their own work for many reasons.”She writes in an Instagram post, “But the most obvious reason is that the artist is the only one who *really* knows* their work.»

There are quite a few artists rubbing contracts with their old record companies (Kanye West, for example, has publicly complained about his contractual obligations). But few bother to re-record and republish old works. Swift had this opportunity – and time to do it (lockdown, kännsch). In addition, she is used to having a very intimate dialogue with her fans, and then the latter thank her with loyalty and activity. Fans streaming old Swift music know their intentions and will stick to their wishes. Thus, Swift is in a rare situation where it would like to overturn the system and already has the ability to do so.

And what’s the difference in old Taylor Swift songs being re-recorded? Not much; Her re-recordings remain very close to the originals – with subtle production updates and a certain maturity in her sound that brings with it a decade of musical activity. The really “new” thing is the intent behind it. And the developments that led to Swift now owning the Masters themselves. She understands that artists – even those with such blatant success and a strong brand like her – are vulnerable to exploitation, and is doing something about it. 99% of all artists are not in a similar position of strength, which is why their reality will not change. However, Swift’s work is not unwelcome…and the fight continues.

You may also be interested in: