Hi -

   Here's my playlist for today, Sunday, April 22, 2007. Got to see Loreena
McKennitt live at Radio City Music Hall Friday night. What a wonderful show!
Some notes on what I played today. Played the music of Palancar, who is
Darrell Burgan of Blue Water Records. Darrell also has a weekly webcast at
www.stillstream.com, where he plays live improvisational electronic music
that he calls "ambient train wrecks". The piece I played was from his latest
work, Ambient Train Wreck Vol.3. Webcast DJ's like Darrell are in danger
due to new copyright royalty issues. Find out more at www.savenetradio.org.
Also played the music of Mark Dwane, an early innovator in electronic
music. He has a great new album out, 2012. In this case, I showcased some
of his earlier releases. I also played the music of Green House Music, a
now-defunct label which produced some wonderful ambient music in its
time. Enjoy!

Scott Raymond
WVKR-FM
16 Penn St.
Fishkill, NY 12524

newage@...




-------------- Enclosure number 1 ----------------
			 Secret Music Playlist, 4/22/07

    Artist 	 Song 	 Album

  Palancar 	 September 3, 2005 Ambient Train Wreck Vol.3

  As Lonely As Dave Bowman Pod Five  Pod
  Jim Cole & Spectral Voices Arches 2  Innertones

  Aaron Marshall 	 Prelude 	 Noir Ambience
  Loscil 		 Chinook 	 Plume
  Zoe Keating 	 Fern 	 Live At Schubas

  Ixohoxi 	 The Acolytes Invocation Sonicscapes And Sigilstones
				 And Ritual
  Erik Wollo 	 Elevation  Elevations
  Alpha Wave Movement  From The Ether  The Regions Between

  Mark Dwane 	 Pyramids Of Mars The Monuments Of Mars
  Mark Dwane 	 Angels, Aliens &  Angels, Aliens & Archetypes
				 Archetypes
  Mark Dwane 	 Splice 	 The Nefilim

  Exuviae 	 Blankets Of Quiet Convergent Evolution
  Vir Unis 	 Glide 	 Aeonian Glow
  Steve Roach/Vir Unis  In The Marrow  Blood Machine

  Khvarena 	 Khvarena  The Spirit Rises
  Arto Tuncboyaciyan  I Miss You Every Moment Every Day Is A New Life
				 My Brother
  Paul Adams 	 No Tears  Flute Meditations For
							 Dreaming Clouds
  Robert Linton 	 Autumn Moon  Whisperings At NIghtfall
  David Alstead 	 Through The Falls Pieces Of Piano

Dave Fulton was in every version of Dweller at the Threshold and also
did some side collaborations and solo work.  Giles Reaves started at the
top by defining a musical genre with his solo LP Wunjo.  Many years
later, he landed a place as the newbie member in Spacecraft.  Fast
forward to 2003 and the first Different Skies.  This week-long
electronic musician's workshop/working vacation is where these two gents
met for the very first time.  Something must have happened in the desert
north of Phoenix and Philadelphia reaped the benefit last night with a
double dose of Fulton-Reaves.

First they played at The Gatherings concert series.  Opening act Orbital
Decay (Quakertown) provided their "EM Jam Band" approach to
Berlin-School-music-on-steroids as a fabulous kick off to the evening's
festivities.  After an interval to tear down a pile of gear that almost
completely hid the Fulton-Reaves setup from view, the main public event
began.  With Jess Fry in tow to handle drumming and ambient flourishes,
Dave and Giles were able to bring a realization of their CD "The Range"
to a public forum.  Jess plays in a Progressive Rock band with Dave so
there was a good musical connection already in place, making the
threesome a natural unit.  Despite some technical difficulties at the
beginning of their set, the ensemble quickly settled in to an awe
inspiring concert.  Grabbing influences from Progressive Rock, New Age,
ambient, electronica, and spacemusic, just to name just a few, Fulton's
and Reaves' conglomeration of styles is something that most likely grew
out of their time at Different Skies, only without 14+ other people on
the stage.  The Philadelphia audience loved it.

Second, as is usually the case after a Gathering, the main act has Chuck
Van Zyl tenderly cracking the whip to get them over to WXPN in time to
play a live set on his Star's End program.  The well oiled CIMA of PA
team of Van Zyl, Jeff Towne, and Art Cohen must be cat herders in order
to, with the help of a small band of volunteers, tear down a concert,
load up vehicles, get to WXPN, unload the vehicles, and set up the
musicians' gear.  The first hour of the program goes by with the
listening audience blissfully unaware of the chaos that gives way to
musical restart.  Pizza helps!  Coffee, too.  But restart they did with
a nice ambient bed over which Chuck back announced the tracks played in
the first hour of his radio show and announced the Fulton-Reaves
Project; earthlings convinced to play for an Earth Day themed program.
This time, only a little bit of music from The Range formed the basis of
what seemed to be mostly improvised music.  Improvisation that late at
night (early in the morning?) after a full day and an exhaustive concert
is a dangerous thing.  Dave, Giles, and Jess handled the task with a
plum... er, aplomb.

Cheers,

Bill Fox

Playlist
Music from Beyond the Lakes
Produced by Jerry Nelms and Namdar Mogharreban
Sundays, 8-10 pm Central Time, USA
WDBX, 91.1 FM, Carbondale, Illinois  (www.wdbx.org)

Streamed LIVE at wdbx.scientistsuperstar.com
Listen by going to www.wdbx.org and click on "Listen"

Profile of the show:
Music from Beyond the Lakes was first aired on Easter Sunday evening, 1996.
Jerry Nelms began as the show's sole producer and host.  Namdar Mogharreban
joined as co-host that summer and began producing his first programs in the
fall.  Beyond the Lakes airs eclectic new age and contemtemplative world
music, both ambient and rhythmic; electronic and acoustic; instrumental and
vocal.  Beyond the Lakes is thematically programmed each week.  Jerry's
understanding of "new age" music: it provides a space for the imagination,
and, so, can take many different forms but always functions in that way of
allowing the listener space for the play of the imagination.

Send all promotional materials to the following:

Jerry Nelms
Beyond the Lakes
114 Magnolia Lane
Carbondale, Illinois 62903

Thanks to all musical artists for enriching our world!

This show featured music by Kevin Kendle; Libera; Amongst Myselves; K.
Leimer; Roger Eno; Vivian Khor; KevOz; John Foxx + Harold Budd; Jeff
Johnson; Dan Pound; Erik Wollo; and Liquid Mind.

April 15, 2007
“Drifting Through Twilight”  (produced by Jerry Nelms)

As I have suggested before, we are lost in a kind of twilight in this world.
This life feels like something transitional, moving between light and
shadow, shadow and light.  Yet so many people seem to move through this
twilight with determination and direction, sure of where they are going,
where they will end up—until, of course, something happens, as it inevitably
does, to jolt them off the clear path.  As 20th-Century psychologist Carl
Jung once said, “Even a happy life cannot be without a measure of darkness .
. . .”  And the thing is, acting with determination and direction is not the
same as acting meaningfully.  As another 20th-Century psychologist and
author of Man’s Search for Meaning, Viktor Frankel has stated, “Ever more
people today have the means to live, but no meaning to live for.”

The fact is, what may seem like moving with determination and direction
often is just a spinning of wheels.  In reality, we drift through twilight.
We search for meaning as we drift along.  But too often, our search for
meaning takes a backseat to our actions to fulfill other desires in order to
be happy.  And in fact, it seems that the more determined we are to control
our search for meaning, the less likely we are to actually find it.  French
existentialist philosopher Albert Camus speaks of this paradox when he
writes, “You will never be happy if you continue to search for what
happiness consists of.  You will never live if you are looking for the
meaning of life.”  Meaning, Viktor Frankel tells us, is not something
abstract, monolithic, and unchanging.  “What matters,” he writes, “is not
the meaning of life in general but rather the specific meaning of a person’s
life at a given moment.”  Or to put it even more bluntly and radically, as
author of The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell once said, “Life
is without meaning.  You bring meaning to it.  The meaning of life is
whatever you ascribe it to be.  Being alive is the meaning.”  “Each [person]
must look to [her- or] himself to teach . . . the meaning of life,” French
novelist Antoine de Saint-Exupery writes.  “It is not something discovered:
it is something molded.”  Atheist philosopher Walter Kaufman believes that
meaning is not “given from above”; life and suffering, he says, don’t “come
neatly labeled”; and it isn’t true “that nothing is worthwhile if the world
is not governed by a purpose.”

Still, this fact, that life is not inherently meaningful, that each
individual creates her or his own meaning, does not deny the search for
meaning, as Frankel calls it.  On the contrary, it is our search for meaning
that is meaningful, a search that is, in effect, always ongoing, even if we
are not fully cognizant of it, even as we drift through this twilight.  And
while we appear not to be born into a world of inherent meaningfulness, we
do bring with us a drive for meaning-making.  We are driven to learn and
that learning attaches itself to our beliefs and values, to meaning.  That
hunger, that impulse, that impellent is, perhaps, our greatest gift from
God, if there is a God.  As novelist C. S. Lewis has written, “If the whole
universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no
meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no
creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark.  Dark would be
without meaning.”  As Walker Percy writes in his novel The Moviegoer, “The
search is what anyone would undertake if he were not sunk in the
everydayness of his own life . . . .  To become aware of the possibility of
the search is to be on to something.  Not to be onto something is to be in
despair.”

So, what is meaning?  I think business leadership guru Warren Bennis makes
an important distinction when he states that “There is a profound difference
between information and meaning.”  Just knowing something is not meaningful.
Meaning is more than just knowledge; it is as poet Allen Tate once said,
knowledge carried to the heart.  It is knowledge that issues from
experience, from the challenges and suffering of this life.  It is knowledge
that, once gathered, is applied to the challenges and suffering of this
life.  It may be that for some, religion, a belief in the ultimate, gives
their lives meaning.  For others, meaning may come from holding other
values.  In the end, though, we can all agree with writer Barbara de Angelis
when she states, “What allows us, as human beings, to psychologically
survive life on earth, with all of its pain, drama, and challenges, is a
sense of purpose and meaning.”  We cannot control what happens in this life.
Every few feet, there is another corner, and around some of those corners,
there will inevitably be some surprises, good and bad.  Still, giving up on
finding meaning only sinks us further into despair.  If all that we can do
is tread water, at least we’re treading water, which is better than the
alternative.  At least, in treading water, drifting along with every swell
in this ocean, we can look for that lifeboat to drift our way.  There are no
guarantees, but there is always hope.

“In the last analysis,” poet and monk Thomas Merton has written, “the
individual person is responsible for living his own life and for ‘finding
himself.’  If he persists in shifting his responsibility to somebody else,
he fails to find out the meaning of his own existence.”

And so, this evening, let’s contemplate on finding meaningfulness in this
life as we listen to program of mostly ambient music, a program entitled
“Drifting Through Twilight.”   We begin with these warm atmospherics of
keyboardist Kevin Kendle.  Later, we’ll hear a transcendent choral
composition, performed by the South London boys choir, Libera; a twilit,
dream-inspired soundscape by Australian sound artist Steve Roberts (a.k.a.
Amongst Myselves); and dusky, swirling electronic ambience by Kerry Leimer,
who simply goes by K. Leimer.  In our second half-hour, we’ll hear four
contemplative chamber pieces by pianist/multi-instrumentalist Roger Eno;
lush, romantic piano, strings, and keyboards by Vivian Khor; and finally
rhythmic, richly textured electronic music by Chicago area
keyboardist/synthesist Kevin Osborn, who calls himself KevOz.

We’re contemplating the meaningfulness of this life on our program tonight,
even as we are “Drifting Through Twilight,” always searching for meaning and
constructing meaning through that searching, seeking through the twilight of
this world the light we hope awaits us Beyond the Lakes.

8:00-8:30pm
Kevin Kendle – Pure Dreaming – New World Music – 2001
	 “Evening Star”
Libera – Angel Voices – EMI Classics – 2006
	 “I am the Day”
Amongst Myselves – Aurburn Silhouette – Amongst Projects – 2006
	 “Bay of Dreams”
K. Leimer – Statistical Truth – Palace of Lights – 2004
	 “Dark Form”
8:30-9:00pm
Roger Eno – Between Tides – All Saints Records – 1992; re-released 2005
	 “One Gull”
	 “The Frost”
	 “Almost Dark”
	 “While The City Sleeps”
Vivian Khor – Starlight Serenade – Corelight Music – 2007
	 “Love In The Twilight”
KevOz – Return to Lakefront – Kevin R. Osborn – 2006
	 “Sunset”

Mitch Albom, the author of Tuesdays with Morrie and The Five People You Meet
in Heaven, states that “The way you get meaning into your life is to devote
yourself to loving others, devote yourself to your community around you, and
devote yourself to creating something that gives you purpose and meaning.”
It’s easy to dismiss this Pollyana-ish view of meaningfulness without
recognizing something fundamentally true about it.  Certainly, devoting
oneself to any of these things (loving others, one’s community, creating
something) will give purpose to one’s life, but the real truth here is that
meaning must come from inside, not from outside, of you.  As American
philosopher John Dewey once wrote, “Such happiness as life is capable of
comes from the full participation of all our powers in the endeavor to wrest
from each changing situation of experience its own full and unique meaning.”
And that wresting is individual, based on the individual’s separate
experience.  That is, we each live in our own, individually constructed
“worlds,” based on our individual interpretations of personal experience.
“Truth,” constructivist philosopher Nelson Goodman once said, “cannot be
defined or tested by agreement with ‘the world’; for not only do truths
differ for different worlds but the nature of agreement between a world
apart from it is notoriously nebulous.”

We are set adrift in a twilight universe, our individual paths occasionally
intersecting meaningfully in ways that allow us to glimpse another’s world,
but then, just as suddenly, that world retreats back into the shadows.  Each
of us has the responsibility to light our own way, but too often these days,
we seem unwilling or unable to do so.  As 20th-Century writer, philosopher,
and former Czechoslovakian president Vaclav Havel has said, “The tragedy of
modern man is not that he knows less and less about the meaning of his own
life, but that it bothers him less and less.”

As philosophers tell us, we’ll never really know the meaning of life—at
least, not in this existence, not in the worlds that we construct here for
ourselves.  But, as Havel is saying, the search for that meaning is,
nevertheless, meaningful in itself.  We’ll always fail to see; we’ll always
make mistakes; but to stop trying can only lead to despair, a suffocating in
everydayness that leads us nowhere.

Let’s contemplate, then, on the search for meaning in this twilight world as
we begin our second hour of music with more floating ambient and piano
atmospherics by Kevin Kendle.  We’ll continue, after this, with more
drifting ambient textures, beginning with four pensive, delicately nuanced
compositions by John Foxx and Harold Budd.  And we’ll end this half-hour
with a more shadowy keyboard and piano soundscape by Jeff Johnson.  John
Foxx and Harold Budd return to begin our final half-hour with three more
enigmatically lovely pieces; and we’ll hear two darkly visible spacemusic
compositions by Dan Pound; and cool, darkly ethereal textures by ambient
guitarist Erik Wøllo.  We’ll end this evening’s program with deeply
meditative orchestral atmospherics by Chuck Wild, who goes by the name
Liquid Mind.

“Drifting Through Twilight,” tonight on Music from Beyond the Lakes.

9:00-9:30pm
Kevin Kendle – Pure Dreaming – New World Music – 2001
	 “Nightfall”
John Foxx + Harold Budd – Translucence + Drift Music – Metamatic Records –
2003
	 “Avenue of Trees”
	 “Curtains Blowing”
	 “Coming Into Focus”
	 “Sunlit Sihouette”
Jeff Johnson – A Thin Silence – Ark Music – 2006
	 “Overcoming Lies”

9:30-10:00pm
John Foxx + Harold Budd – Translucence + Drift Music – Metamatic Records –
2003
	 “Someone Almost There”
	 “Resonant Frequency”
	 “The Other Room”
Dan Pound – Still Of The Night – Dan Pound – 2006
	 “Fading Light”
	 “Night Unfolds”
Erik Wollo – Elevations – Spotted Peccary – 2006
	 “Skyscape”
Liquid Mind – Liquid Mind VII: Reflection – Real Music – 2004
	 “Finding My Way”

Playlist
Music from Beyond the Lakes
Produced by Jerry Nelms and Namdar Mogharreban
Sundays, 8-10 pm Central Time, USA
WDBX, 91.1 FM, Carbondale, Illinois  (www.wdbx.org)

Streamed LIVE at wdbx.scientistsuperstar.com
Listen by going to www.wdbx.org and click on "Listen"

Profile of the show:
Music from Beyond the Lakes was first aired on Easter Sunday evening, 1996.
Jerry Nelms began as the show's sole producer and host.  Namdar Mogharreban
joined as co-host that summer and began producing his first programs in the
fall.  Beyond the Lakes airs eclectic new age and contemtemplative world
music, both ambient and rhythmic; electronic and acoustic; instrumental and
vocal.  Beyond the Lakes is thematically programmed each week.  Jerry's
understanding of "new age" music: it provides a space for the imagination,
and, so, can take many different forms but always functions in that way of
allowing the listener space for the play of the imagination.

Send all promotional materials to the following:

Jerry Nelms
Beyond the Lakes
114 Magnolia Lane
Carbondale, Illinois 62903

Thanks to all musical artists for enriching our world!

This show featured music by Karen Marie Garrett; Harold Budd; Robin
Spielberg; Rob Silvan; Laura Sullivan; James Todd; Michael Fitzsimmons;
AURAH; Peter Buffett; Margaret Slovak; and Harp 46.

April 22, 2007
“It’s about the Rose”  (produced by Jerry Nelms)

In the notes for her recent album, pianist/composer Karen Marie Garrett
speaks of hearing actor Matthew McConaughey quoting something his mother
used to tell him.  He’d be, as Garrett says, “a boy caught up in life’s
little dramas,” and his mother would remind him that life is not about him
but “about the rose in the vase on the table.”  That is, we so easily lose
ourselves in our own melodramas that we forget what’s truly important in
life: that we focus on what’s really important outside of our self-absorbed
individual consciousness, what’s going on in the here-and-now.

I look up from writing this little meditation and see the sunlight filtering
through the trees of the forest, deer wandering quietly through the shadows,
and I get the same message: What’s important is not me.  It’s not my
aspirations for the future, as important as they may seem to me; it’s not my
past accomplishments and failures, as important as the lessons from them may
seem to me.  What’s really important is what’s going on outside of my
self-absorbed being in the here-and-now.

The meaning of life is not something mystical and mysterious, not some prize
to be attained; it’s something we carry with us as we navigate the currents
of this existence.  As poet Carl Sandburg once said, “[T]he past is a bucket
of ashes, so live not in your yesterdays, not just for tomorrow, but in the
here and now.”  “The meaning of life,” philosopher Paul Kurtz has written,
“is not to be discovered only after death in some hidden, mysterious realm;
on the contrary, it can be found by eating the succulent fruit of the Tree
of Life and by living in the here and now as fully and creatively as we
  can.”  “We are here and it is now,” wrote journalist and social critic H.
L. Mencken.  “Further than that, all human knowledge is moonshine.”

This truth was brought home to us this week with a deadly force.  Suddenly,
we were all brought out of our own “little dramas” by the news of a shooting
spree on the Virginia Tech campus, leaving 33 dead, including the shooter
himself.  Suddenly, nothing else seemed important.  Politics became
second-page news.  Our self-absorption dissipated like a fog, and we saw the
world with a clarity that hurt.  Life, it’s about the rose in the vase on
the table.

And so, this evening, let’s contemplate on finding what’s truly important
and meaningful in the here-and-now through a program of music entitled “It’s
about the Rose.”   We begin with the premiere, title track from the CD from
which we took the title of our program tonight, Karen Marie Garrett’s It’s
About the Rose.  Later this hour, we’ll hear more lovely piano compositions
by Garrett and also by Harold Budd and Robin Spielberg; three pieces of
sacred poetry set to music by pianist Rob Silvan; and another piece by Karen
Marie Garrett.  In our next half-hour, we’ll hear variations on music by
Bach, a variation on the English ballad “Greensleeves,” and an original
composition, all by pianist Laura Sullivan; and then two pieces by cellist
James Todd.

While we would never compare the tragedy of those traumatic events at
Virginia Tech this week and the needs of our little radio station, we are in
your here-and-now this evening, and we do need your support.  We’re asking
you to participate with us here at WDBX to focus on the important
contributions that this station makes to your community and to support us in
these efforts.  Indeed, we can’t make those contributions without your help.
WDBX runs on a shoe-string budget.  We need your help to keep us going
through the summer and fall.  Please make a commitment to keep WDBX and
Beyond the Lakes on the air.  And do so by calling in your membership pledge
tonight.  We have all levels of donation: $10, $25, $100, $250.   So, please
give us a call.  Our number is 618-457-3691.  That’s 457-3691.

“It’s about the Rose,” tonight on Music from Beyond the Lakes.

8:00-8:15pm
Karen Marie Garrett – It’s About the Rose – Waterstreet Records – 2006
	 “It’s about the Rose in the Vase on the Table”
	 “The Piano Called”
Harold Budd – La Bella Vista – Shout! Factory – 2003
	 “The Rose”
Robin Spielberg – Memories of Utopia – playMountain Music – 2004
	 “Walk With Me”

8:15 – 8:30pm
Rob Silvan – The Breathing of the World – Sky Hook Music – 2006
	 “The Way I Must Enter”
	 “A Voice Through the Door”
	 “Hope is the Thing with Feathers”
Karen Marie Garrett – It’s About the Rose – Waterstreet Records – 2006
	 “Finale of the Rose”

8:30-8:45pm
Laura Sullivan – Feast of Joy and Love – Sentient Spirit Records – 2007
	 “Bouquet of Bach”
	 “Greensleeves”
	 “Shalaelah”

8:45-9:00pm
James Todd – Quiet Beauty – Scottish Fox Music – 2005
	 “New Day”
	 “I Wonder”

It’s easy to get caught up in life’s little melodramas, isn’t it?  To get
caught up in our quest to fulfill our own individual aspirations that we
lose track of what’s really important in the here-and-now.  When we step
back, it’s so easy to see what’s really important: helping others, other
humans and other creatures; doing what we can to reduce pain and suffering;
promoting creativity and art; new inventions and innovative technologies to
facilitate our good works; appreciating and taking care of our the beauty of
our world; gaining knowledge and wisdom; finding our own spiritual cores,
our souls.

In this next hour, then, we’ll hear a soundtrack for such contemplations.
Including three pieces by percussionist/sound artist Michael Fitzsimmons; a
song by the duo who go by the name AURAH; two songs by
pianist/multi-instrumentalist/now songwriter Peter Buffett; another   song
by AURAH; a guitar solo by Margaret Slovak; another lovely composition by
pianist Laura Sullivan; and one by the trio who go by Harp 46, led by
harpist April Stace; one more    composition by pianist Karen Marie Garrett;
and a final tribute to “Spring Rains” by Michael Fitzsimmons.

9:00-9:15pm
Michael Fitzsimmons – Water Flows Over Me – Dancing Man Music – 2007
	 “Gathering Clouds”
	 “Pull of the Moon”
	 “Water Flows Over Me”

9:15-9:30pm
AURAH – Etherea Borealis – Very Music – 2007
	 “You Know the Truth”
Peter Buffett – Gold Star – BisonHead Records – 2006
	 “Coming Around Again”
	 “Gold Star”

9:30-9:45pm
AURAH – Etherea Borealis – Very Music – 2007
	 “Ready To Go”
Margaret Slovak – New Wings – Slovak Music – 2005
	 “Open Hands, Open Heart”
Laura Sullivan – Feast of Joy and Love – Sentient Spirit Records – 2007
	 “Pinot Noir”

9:45-10:00pm
Harp 46 – Passage – Harp 46 – 2005
	 “In Wonder”
Karen Marie Garrett – It’s About the Rose – Waterstreet Records – 2006
	 “Café Expressions”
Michael Fitzsimmons – Water Flows Over Me – Dancing Man Music – 2007
	 “Spring Rains”

I suppose most have already heard about this but I've not seen anything
mentioned here about what is happening to Internet Radio.  I received an
email from Pandora about unfair copyright fees placed on IR and thought I
would forward this along to those who haven't heard...



Please sign the petition urging your Congressional representative to act to
save Internet radio:



http://capwiz.com/saveinternetradio/issues/alert/?alertid=9631541



<snip - Letter from Pandora Radio>

Hi, it's Tim from Pandora,



I'm writing today to ask for your help.  The survival of Pandora and all of
Internet radio is in jeopardy because of a recent decision by the Copyright
Royalty Board in Washington, DC to almost triple the licensing fees for
Internet radio sites like Pandora.  The new royalty rates are irrationally
high, more than four times what satellite radio pays and broadcast radio
doesn't pay these at all.  Left unchanged, these new royalties will kill
every Internet radio site, including Pandora.



In response to these new and unfair fees, we have formed the SaveNetRadio
Coalition, a group that includes listeners, artists, labels and webcasters.
I hope that you will consider joining us.



Please sign our petition urging your Congressional representative to act to
save Internet radio:
http://capwiz.com/saveinternetradio/issues/alert/?alertid=9631541



Please feel free to forward this link/email to your friends - the more
petitioners we can get, the better.



Understand that we are fully supportive of paying royalties to the artists
whose music we play, and have done so since our inception.  As a former
touring musician myself, I'm no stranger to the challenges facing working
musicians.  The issue we have with the recent ruling is that it puts the
cost of streaming far out of the range of ANY webcaster's business
potential.



I hope you'll take just a few minutes to sign our petition - it WILL make a
difference. As a young industry, we do not have the lobbying power of the
RIAA. You, our listeners, are by far our biggest and most influential
allies.



As always, and now more than ever, thank you for your support.





-Tim Westergren

(Pandora founder)

<snip>









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Let me add my $0.0001 worth to this as well.  I'm the owner of
StillStream.com, an all-ambient non-commercial net radio station
focused on nurturing the ambient genre.

Dennis is being generous to the industry, in my opinion, when he uses
the word 'unfair' to describe the change in SoundExchange licensing
fees that have recently come to pass.  The word I would use is
'predatory'. Put simply, the new rates are clearly designed to squash
small net radio stations like StillStream out of existence.

The changes are things like:

- More than doubling the licensing rate over the next few years

- Establishing an annual minimum that has never existed before

- Retroactively (!) jacking up the rates for 2006 and insisting all
broadcasters pay them if they want to continue to broadcast in 2007

I would also add that the ruling on these rates has already been made
and will go into effect on May 15, unless Congress intervenes.  This
means that Congress has to wake up and act decisively in the next
couple of weeks or the damage will be done.  Therefore if something is
going to be done to stop this, it will have to be done VERY FAST.

I personally believe that this change is going to spell the end of
independent net radio, and certainly the end of free net radio.  After
May 15, the only stations that will be able to afford the fees are
those that charge for listening and have the listener base to render
the annual minimums moot.  The number of stations that will be able to
survive the transition to such a model is vanishingly small, in my
opinion.

Just for the record, StillStream has already responded to this change
by switching to an RIAA-free model for netcasting.  Sometime in the
next week, we will switch to all Creative Commons music, which will
allow us to continue to broadcast freely.  Thus, this ruling has the
effect of re-energizing our focus and commitment on the independent
artist, which is a good thing I think.  I just wish the rest of the
net radio world wasn't being so utterly destroyed.

Again, my $0.00001 worth ...

Darrell
http://stillstream.com



--- In spacemusic@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Triplett" <dlt123@...> wrote:
>
> I suppose most have already heard about this but I've not seen anything
> mentioned here about what is happening to Internet Radio.  I received an
> email from Pandora about unfair copyright fees placed on IR and
thought I
> would forward this along to those who haven't heard...

I think I read something on this via somafm.com...  A story/interview with
whatever front the RIAA is now using to boost the profit margins that sag from
the overwhelming mediocrity of the "talent" that represents their causes...
"Artists" truly represent the lawyers, not the other way around.  Stating that
the lawyers of the RIAA are representing artists is laughable at best, but
mostly shameful.  All the RIAA accomplishes is funding its own existence.  And
NOTHING else.

The RIAA was already receiving fees from internet radio that were higher than
for terrestrial radio.  But they wanted MORE.  From the interview, it seemed
like the RIAA didn't like that most internet stations don't charge their
listeners and saw this as an untapped source of revenue.  And apparently,
someone couldn't sleep at night knowing that there was money that wasn't being
had.

Once again, the RIAA comes along and ruins a good thing just to make a few more
bucks for its lawyers... and in the long run, isolates and marginalizes the
public whose money it is desperately positioning for.

I commend Darrell and the StillStream crew for not bending over, and for
continuing to support artists who use Creative Commons licensing, myself
included.  As I've stated before, I'm not nearly as disappointed with Creative
Commons music as I am whenever I buy music.  Honestly, I think CC/netlabel
releases are much richer, more artistic, and of a much higher quality than most
of what I ever buy.

So, actually, I am looking forward to more CC music on the web and less
worthless valueless ooze.  Thanks Darrell et al.

be well always.
illegitimus non carborundum

j = litmus0001

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

24 April 2007

Hello friends,

FYI Stephen Philips will be doing a SUPER SPECIAL show tonight on the
Kite.  He will be doing a mini label spotlight on Hidden Shoal records!

The spotlight release tonight will be an EXTREMELY cool release from
Wes Willenbring called 'Somewhere Someone Else.'  Word is Wes and
possibly some other Hidden Shoal folks will be coming by the chat
tonight so this would be an excellent chance to hear Wes' new release
and chat about it at the same time.

The show officially starts at 10:00 pm but Stephen will likely go on
early again tonight with some pre-show material which may or may not
include
a very very strange field recording he made a few days ago ... :)

The show begins tonight, Tuesday Apr 24 at 10p ET (Wed Apr 25 at 3a
GMT) and lasts three hours.

To listen:  http://www.stillstream.com/listen.php

To chat:  http://www.stillstream.com/chat.php

See ya tonight!

Cheers,
Darrell
http://stillstream.com

> I commend Darrell and the StillStream crew for not bending over, and
for continuing to support artists who use Creative Commons licensing,
myself included.  As I've stated before, I'm not nearly as
disappointed with Creative Commons music as I am whenever I buy music.
  Honestly, I think CC/netlabel releases are much richer, more
artistic, and of a much higher quality than most of what I ever buy.

Thanks bro - let me point out, though, that Creative Commons works for
StillStream only because StillStream is non-commercial.  We don't take
in any revenue, we don't do advertising, nor do we make any money at all.

A commercial station is basically out of luck at this point, unless
they are lucky enough to have a large listener base that is willing to
pay increased fees for access to the music.

So Creative Commons is the answer for StillStream, but unfortunately
it won't help any commercial stations survive - or help commercial
artists achieve airplay, for that matter.

Sure seems like the whole 'commercial' side of ambient is in serious
trouble to me ......

>Just for the record, StillStream has already responded to this change
>by switching to an RIAA-free model for netcasting.

Maybe I don't know enough about this topic as I am not in radio, just
an artist, but I'm not sure how moving to an RIAA-free model will
change anything. The RIAA stands for Recording Industry Association
of America which is the trade group that represents the U.S.
recording industry. Now as far as I know (and maybe I am wrong here)
they do not collect fees for radio play Internet or otherwise. The
groups that do are BMI and ASCAP who represent the artists and
publishing companies who own the performance rights to the music. I
take it this RIAA-free model will still be paying fees to BMI/ASCAP?
--
Take care.

- Loren Nerell

-------------------------------------------------
http://www.lorennerell.com
http://www.soundclick.com/lorennerell
-------------------------------------------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riaa

I'll spare us all the debate on the RIAA and the recording industry.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_commons

Creative Commons (my paraphrasing) means that I grant you license to have,
listen to, enjoy, sample, trade and give freely under the conditions that you
don't sell it yourself, that you don't misrepresent it as your own and that you
don't use it for commercial purposes.  If someone does want to use it for
commercial purposes, then they have to talk to me.  Essentially, have my music
for free but don't rip me off.  I receive no royalties.  I get no pay.  I just
get really great emails from very nice and enthusiastic people from time to
time.  Since I release my music via netlabels, I don't have the costs of making
"product".  Since I'm not in debt to release the music for consumption,
personally I'm happy with the arrangement.


be well,
j








----- Original Message ----
From: Loren Nerell <lnerell@...>
To: spacemusic@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:23:24 PM
Subject: [SPACEMUSIC] Re: What is happening to Internet Radio?

>Just for the record, StillStream has already responded to this change
>by switching to an RIAA-free model for netcasting.

Maybe I don't know enough about this topic as I am not in radio, just
an artist, but I'm not sure how moving to an RIAA-free model will
change anything. The RIAA stands for Recording Industry Association
of America which is the trade group that represents the U.S.
recording industry. Now as far as I know (and maybe I am wrong here)
they do not collect fees for radio play Internet or otherwise. The
groups that do are BMI and ASCAP who represent the artists and
publishing companies who own the performance rights to the music. I
take it this RIAA-free model will still be paying fees to BMI/ASCAP?
--
Take care.

- Loren Nerell

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -
http://www.lorenner ell.com
http://www.soundcli ck.com/lorennere ll
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I take it this RIAA-free model will still be paying fees
> to BMI/ASCAP?

No, because Creative Commons explicitly grants the right to distribute
a track so long as it is for non-commercial purposes.  BMI and ASCAP
do not enter into the equation anywhere.

In case anybody's interested, I thought I'd share this information I received
from Senator Feinstein in reply to an email I sent to her regarding my concerns
with this ordeal.  I would hate to see small internet stations that specialize
in promoting the space music genre close for good.  Any publicity is a great
thing!
   Yours musically,
   Craig
   www.CraigPadilla.com - Video & Music Production
   www.youtube.com/synthwiz - interviews, concert clips, and more!


   Dear Mr. Padilla:

            Thank you for writing to me with your concerns about the Copyright
Royalty Board's recent decision on the statutory rate for music webcasting. I
understand your concerns and appreciate the opportunity to respond.

            Under the Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004,
Congress - at the behest of webcasters - created the Copyright Royalty Board
which consists of three judges. By law, the judges are a venue of last resort
and are required to periodically set rates for various statutory copyright
licenses in the event that webcasters and copyright owners are unable to reach
voluntary agreements. In the absence of an agreement, the judges set a rate
designed to approximate the fair-market value that webcasters should pay to
artists and performers for streaming their music for the years 2006-2010. The
new rate that was established is less than a 5 percent increase of the rate in
effect from 1998-2005.

            Although a few webcasters have recently claimed that the process was
unfair, it was not arbitrary and allowed representatives from all sides to make
their cases. The judges began the proceedings in 2005, and heard testimony from
dozens of witnesses and conducted a comprehensive review of tens of thousands of
pages of evidence submitted by all interested parties over an 18-month period.

            While some webcasters may choose to pay this rate, independent
negotiations between the parties are still possible and this new statutory rate
would serve as the ceiling. Additionally, if it appears that the new rate will
reduce the overall amount of webcasting - as well as the overall income from
this stream of revenue - the copyright owners may still have an incentive to
offer webcasters a rate less than the statutory rate.

            I am a strong believer in intellectual property rights and believe
that artists and performers have earned the right to be fairly compensated for
the broadcast of their works by webcasters who benefit - financially and
otherwise - from their talents. Without fair compensation, these artists would
not create their works.

            Once again, thank you for writing. Should legislation addressing this
new rate or the rate-setting process come before the Senate, I will be sure to
keep your concerns in mind. In the meantime, if you should have any additional
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, DC staff
at (202) 224-3841.


   Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riaa>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riaa
>
>I'll spare us all the debate on the RIAA and the recording industry.

I guess I'm not going to do that as I see some
contradictions here. The wikipedia page says the
"RIAA also participates in the collection,
administration and distribution of music licenses
and royalties." But no such claim is made on the
RIAA's own website. They say that:

"its mission is to foster a business and legal
climate that supports and promotes our members'
creative and financial vitality. Its members are
the record companies   . . . . In support of this
mission, the RIAA works to protect intellectual
property rights worldwide and the First Amendment
rights of artists; conduct consumer industry and
technical research; and monitor and review - -
state and federal laws, regulations and policies.
The RIAA also certifies Gold®, Platinum®,
Multi-Platinum�," etc.

No mention of them collecting any fees or royalties for anyone.

--
Take care.

- Loren Nerell

-------------------------------------------------
http://www.lorennerell.com
http://www.soundclick.com/lorennerell
-------------------------------------------------

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>  > I take it this RIAA-free model will still be paying fees
>>  to BMI/ASCAP?
>
>No, because Creative Commons explicitly grants the right to distribute
>a track so long as it is for non-commercial purposes. BMI and ASCAP
>do not enter into the equation anywhere.

So basically it's not that you don't mind paying small fees and
object to having to pay larger fees, its really you don't want to pay
anything at all, at least when it comes to compensating the artist
that made the music.

I took a look at the Creative Commons web site and I found most of
their licensing plans way to open ended for me to consider at this
time.
--
Take care.

- Loren Nerell

-------------------------------------------------
http://www.lorennerell.com
http://www.soundclick.com/lorennerell
-------------------------------------------------

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The RIAA collects it's money through an organization called Sound
Exchange and these are the fees that are currently in dispute with
the CRB (Copyright Royalty Board).  This is money that goes to record
companies and supposedly, recording artists.

BMI, ASCAP and SESAC are separate organizations that collect fees for
writers and composers.

A Creative Commons license will only operate when it is offered by
the sole owner of the sound recording as well as the composition
itself.   So if artist A is playing a song by composer  B, Artist A
can't issue a CC unless Composer B has one as well.  And if they are
members of BMI, ASCAP or SESAC, the composer can't just sign away those rights.

At 08:05 PM 4/25/2007, you wrote:

> > > I take it this RIAA-free model will still be paying fees
> >> to BMI/ASCAP?
> >
> >No, because Creative Commons explicitly grants the right to distribute
> >a track so long as it is for non-commercial purposes. BMI and ASCAP
> >do not enter into the equation anywhere.
>
>So basically it's not that you don't mind paying small fees and
>object to having to pay larger fees, its really you don't want to pay
>anything at all, at least when it comes to compensating the artist
>that made the music.
>
>I took a look at the Creative Commons web site and I found most of
>their licensing plans way to open ended for me to consider at this
>time.
>--
>Take care.
>
>- Loren Nerell
>
>-------------------------------------------------
><http://www.lorennerell.com>http://www.lorennerell.com
>http://www.soundclick.com/lorennerell
>-------------------------------------------------
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

Read the Echoes Blog-Hear Echoes 24/7-Sign up for Echoes Interview
Podcast, Join us at www.myspace.com/echoesspace
http://www.echoes.org
John Diliberto
((( (((echoes))) )))
Producer/Host
1-610-827-9600

Mail To:
Echoes
P.O. Box 256
Chester Springs, PA 19425
Ship to:
Echoes
1709 Art School Rd.
Chester Springs, PA 19425


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> So basically it's not that you don't mind paying
> small fees and object to having to pay larger fees,
> its really you don't want to pay anything at all,
> at least when it comes to compensating the artist
> that made the music.

Please don't make the issue murkier - the recording industry already
is spreading enough FUD around on this issue.  The Creative Commons
web site is actually very clear on this issue.  I strongly recommend
you read the FAQ page:

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ

Note: Creative Commons licenses apply for NON-COMMERCIAL use only.
There is NOTHING that prevents an artist from collecting licenses for
commercial use of their music, even if they have released their music
under Creative Commons.

My radio station is a non-commercial, zero-revenue station that I
created, have worked my hiney off on, and pay for every month out of
my own pocket - all for the sole reason of trying to promote the
ambient genre.  I don't get a penny out of it.  Further, I am an
ambient artist myself.  Now, if you consider me to be some kind of
greedy radio station owner, I'm sorry but you are mistaken.  And quite
honestly it's pretty offensive to me personally given the blood sweat
and tears that I've put into this effort, to suggest that I'm being
selfish by refusing the pay the ridiculous fees the industry has created.

Very simply the industry has priced itself out of the net radio
market.  Would you prefer I simply close my doors?

> And if they are members of BMI, ASCAP or SESAC, the composer
> can't just sign away those rights.

Very true, but it is also true that this is the most completely
ignored term in the PRO license agreements.  Artists at all levels
continually "give away" their music for promotion purposes, in direct
opposition to their BMI / ASCAP / SESAC agreement.  Technically,
artists cannot even give away a free download of their music if they
are a member of a PRO.  Personally, as an artist, I find this very
troubling (and is the reason I'm dropping my BMI membership).

Anyway, it's not possible for an independent station to keep track of
whether an artist is registered with a PRO and/or whether any
particular track by them is registered.  So, if an artist I've never
heard of before comes to my station and asserts a Creative Commons
license for their music, that is a legal statement that I basically
have to rely on.  If it turns out they did not have the right to give
me that CC license, it really should be between the artist and the PRO
at that point.

I totally agree with you that artists need to be informed about what
rights they have and have not signed away, otherwise they could put
themselves into a bad position.

This is exactly how I took Loren's statement as well. Darrell is
running a service that promotes the artist's work* and certainly
should be able to play anything he wants to. And the artist being
played is certainly entitled to a share of the revenue generated. OK.
By my calculation, the artist has gained promotion and their fair
share of the fees. Sorry, Loren, but this seems like a very knee-jerk
position on your part.

/clark

• I have bought several items that I'd never heard of before after
hearing them first on stillstream.com.


On Apr 25, 2007, at 9:47 PM, Darrell Burgan wrote:

> > So basically it's not that you don't mind paying
> > small fees and object to having to pay larger fees,
> > its really you don't want to pay anything at all,
> > at least when it comes to compensating the artist
> > that made the music.
>
> Please don't make the issue murkier - the recording industry already
> is spreading enough FUD around on this issue. The Creative Commons
> web site is actually very clear on this issue. I strongly recommend
> you read the FAQ page:
>
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ
>
> Note: Creative Commons licenses apply for NON-COMMERCIAL use only.
> There is NOTHING that prevents an artist from collecting licenses for
> commercial use of their music, even if they have released their music
> under Creative Commons.
>
> My radio station is a non-commercial, zero-revenue station that I
> created, have worked my hiney off on, and pay for every month out of
> my own pocket - all for the sole reason of trying to promote the
> ambient genre. I don't get a penny out of it. Further, I am an
> ambient artist myself. Now, if you consider me to be some kind of
> greedy radio station owner, I'm sorry but you are mistaken. And quite
> honestly it's pretty offensive to me personally given the blood sweat
> and tears that I've put into this effort, to suggest that I'm being
> selfish by refusing the pay the ridiculous fees the industry has
> created.
>
> Very simply the industry has priced itself out of the net radio
> market. Would you prefer I simply close my doors?
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Friends,
I hope that this e-mail finds you well.  Spring finally arrived here in
New York this week (about a month later than usual), and the trees are
covered in bright green buds.

This is a quick reminder about the Spring Sale at the Online Store
<http://www.kevinkeller.com/store.html>, where all of my CDs are only $8
each through Monday, April 30.  I'm also offering special package prices
for you, including the piano music for "Santiago's Dream".

Thanks again for your support and encouragement.  It really means a lot
to me.  I hope to see you in the store at www.kevinkeller.com
<http://www.kevinkeller.com>.

Sincerely,
Kevin Keller


P.S. Stay tuned for some exciting news coming in a couple weeks!

--
Kevin Keller
Composer/Producer
P.O. Box 1293
New York, NY 10163
*****
Hear the latest music at http://www.kevinkeller.com


--
Kevin Keller
Composer/Producer
P.O. Box 1293
New York, NY 10163
*****
Hear the latest music at http://www.kevinkeller.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In spacemusic@yahoogroups.com, Clark Wilkins <clark@...> wrote:
>
> This is exactly how I took Loren's statement as well. Darrell is
> running a service that promotes the artist's work* and certainly
> should be able to play anything he wants to. And the artist being
> played is certainly entitled to a share of the revenue generated. OK.
> By my calculation, the artist has gained promotion and their fair
> share of the fees. Sorry, Loren, but this seems like a very knee-jerk
> position on your part.

I think Loren and Clark correctly assume composers/musicians should be
paid for their work. Clark, I do not believe a PRO artist can decide
if promotion is fair compensation because they have contracted with a
PRO (and intellectual property law) to make that determination. The
artist doesn't get a say at that point. That is why there are
publishing contracts and recording contracts. This stuff is all
contractual and legal. It's not interpretive.

> > > So basically it's not that you don't mind paying
> > > small fees and object to having to pay larger fees,
> > > its really you don't want to pay anything at all,
> > > at least when it comes to compensating the artist
> > > that made the music.

I think Darrell is saying his only options are to pay the larger fees
or to abandon PRO-affiliated artists (going with CC-affiliated
artists), or stop altogether.

> > My radio station is a non-commercial, zero-revenue station that I
> > created, have worked my hiney off on, and pay for every month out of
> > my own pocket - all for the sole reason of trying to promote the
> > ambient genre. I don't get a penny out of it. Further, I am an
> > ambient artist myself. Now, if you consider me to be some kind of
> > greedy radio station owner, I'm sorry but you are mistaken. And quite
> > honestly it's pretty offensive to me personally given the blood sweat
> > and tears that I've put into this effort, to suggest that I'm being
> > selfish by refusing the pay the ridiculous fees the industry has
> > created.
> >
> > Very simply the industry has priced itself out of the net radio
> > market. Would you prefer I simply close my doors?

I do not. But for your own sanity, I think ultimately you'll need to
decide what you "pay out of your own pocket" for. Is it to promote
your own music, or promote other musicians, or program music for a
listening audience, or to geek out on and exploit internet protocol
technology, or to be in community with like-minded individuals, or
sell advertising/sponsorships, or find/develop new musical talent, or...

There are lots of ways to do the above that do not involve these
ridiculous industry fees. AND there are lots of ways to do the above
that make these ridiculous industry fees look like chump change.
Ultimately, you have to decide how much you can invest, how much it
costs, and how much you receive to determine if it is "worth it."
Starving for ones art is old hat. How often have you seen someone
starve for business?

-Jim

Darrell (and other interested parties) -

   I took a look at the decision as stated by the Copyright Royalty
Board. It's online and available for viewing at this link:

http://www.loc.gov/crb/proceedings/2005-1/rates-terms2005-1.pdf

   A very long document, but interesting reading. I was curious to see
how it would affect webcasting for stations like mine. The most
relevant part is on pages 58-61. I'm not about to direct quote a
government document, but essentially the rates for non-commercial
broadcasters (like you, and college stations like mine) are based on
number of online listeners, which are explained in detail. I'm not
sure if that helps, but at least it bears reading.

   My point about webcasting and royalties is that while I can see the
point about profit-based business ventures paying royalties, there
are those of us who make no money for our efforts, but do it as a
labor of love. Broadcast stations like WVKR and webcast stations
like Stillstream are alike in that they are non-commercial ventures.
We're not in this for the money, folks. We give of our time because
we're passionate about what we're doing, and want to help the
artists that we play. And in the end, all we really want is to be
allowed to continue. I've been doing Secret Music for nearly 20
years now, and I've had a lot of fun along the way. I'm grateful for
the chance not only to play some wonderful music, but to meet
some wonderful people along the way. My hope is that people like
Darrell have the same chances I had, to play great music, to
promote deserving artists, and above all, to have fun doing it.
Hopefully, something comes out of this that allows non-commercial
ventures a chance to keep doing what they love.

Scott Raymond
WVKR-FM
16 Penn St.
Fishkill, NY 12524

newage@...

>My point about webcasting and royalties is that while I can see the
>point about profit-based business ventures paying royalties, there
>are those of us who make no money for our efforts, but do it as a
>labor of love. Broadcast stations like WVKR and webcast stations
>like Stillstream are alike in that they are non-commercial ventures.
>We're not in this for the money, folks. We give of our time because
>we're passionate about what we're doing, and want to help the
>artists that we play. And in the end, all we really want is to be
>allowed to continue.


I think this sums it up best Scott.  People like myself and Darrell got into
this game to help PROMOTE fellow artists and share new music with people.  I
think paying a percentage of revenue is fair and if you are a zero-revenue
station you should pay nothing.  I think artists should get fairly
compensated for their work but I think an artist is MORE compensated when
someone hears their music on the radio, then goes out and buys the CD and
becomes a big fan, then the few pennies per month they might get from BMI or
ASCAP because of that airplay.

And I think with the ambient genre this whole talk of money is silly anyway
as most of us operate at a loss.  We do this because we love the music and
want to try to stimulate interested in it from other folks.

Just my 2 cents, and i guess I should pay 1 cent to ASCAP now for voicing my
opinion


Stephen Philips
Dark Duck Records
http://www.darkduck.net
Kite Radio
http://www.kite-radio.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

This issue can not be decided on this Board but the
basic problem is that the Copyright Royalty Board  is
industry controlled. The ridiculous rates set for web
broadcasts (especially back dating them to insure
bankruptcy for most stations) were not set for the
benefit of the artists (since most web casts will
disappear and therefore zero royalties for artists)
but to protect the commercial air radio industry which
feels it is under heavy attack. The majors in the
recording industry also see web casts (and the web in
general) as a direct attack on them, in that it is
giving greater exposure to independent and small label
artists not under their control and not giving them a
cut at the royalties. They both know that the market
is relatively inelastic in both available listening
hours and dollars spent on recordings. The web is
attacking them on both these fronts. Anything they can
legally do or force they will to protect their
business, no matter what you think.

  I feel that this issue will ultimately be decided in
Congress or the Supreme Court or both. The best thing
to do now is to write your Congressmen concerning this
issue and support the various Save Internet Radio
groups.

The battle will be long and costly as the majors see
it as a fight they must win or die. They have no
intention of giving up their current highly profitable
business model to a web model which gives artists far
greater control over the marketing and distribution of
their work and greatly lowers the cost at the same
time. In the end, the artists and the public will
generally get what they demand as they will vote with
“their feet” at some point to make it so. While the
majors can make life inconvenient, for a period, they
can not make you buy what you don’t want.

Iamjl@...

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

--- In spacemusic@yahoogroups.com, Jim L <iamjl@...> wrote:
> This issue can not be decided on this Board but the
> basic problem is that the Copyright Royalty Board  is
> industry controlled.

How? It is a governmental body under the Library of Congress:

On January 11, 2006, Librarian of Congress Dr. James H. Billington
appointed three copyright royalty judges—James Scott Sledge, Stanley
C. Wisniewski and William J. Roberts—who oversee the copyright law's
statutory licenses, which permit qualified parties to use multiple
copyrighted works without obtaining separate licenses from each
copyright owner.

The Judges will serve six-year terms, which are staggered. Under the
initial appointment, Sledge, who will serve as Chief Judge, will serve
six years, Wisniewski will serve four years, and Roberts will serve
two years. Each may be reappointed to subsequent six-year terms. The
Judges were appointed in accordance with the Copyright Royalty and
Distribution Reform Act of 2004, which became effective in 2005. Among
other duties, the Judges are responsible for determining and adjusting
the rates and terms of the statutory licenses and determining the
distribution of royalties from the statutory license royalty pools
that the Library of Congress administers.

Chief Judge Sledge is a retired United States Bankruptcy Judge from
Alabama. He has chaired the Judicial Division of the American Bar
Association and the National Conference of Federal Trial Judges. Chief
Judge Sledge also served for 12 years on the Alabama State Council on
the Arts, including two years as chairman. He was a director of the
Alabama Symphony Orchestra, an Alabama advocacy captain for Americans
for the Arts, and a director on the regional Southern Arts Federation.

Judge Wisniewski holds a Ph.D. in economics from Catholic University
of America and a J.D. from University of Maryland School of Law. Prior
to his appointment, he represented a variety of clients in litigation,
arbitration and administrative proceedings. He has provided expert
economic testimony in federal court, before private arbitration
panels, and before U.S. Senate and House committees. Judge Wisniewski
also served on the American Arbitration Association list of commercial
arbitrators.

Judge Roberts began his legal career in the Copyright Office in 1987.
A graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law, he served as
an attorney advisor in the Copyright General Counsel's Office and was
promoted to senior attorney for compulsory licenses. He was a
Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel attorney for the entire 12-year
history of the panel. Since the inception of the Copyright Royalty
Board, Judge Roberts has served as interim senior attorney. He is an
adjunct faculty member at the George Mason University School of Law
where he teaches copyright law.

> The ridiculous rates set for web
> broadcasts (especially back dating them to insure
> bankruptcy for most stations) were not set for the
> benefit of the artists (since most web casts will
> disappear and therefore zero royalties for artists)
> but to protect the commercial air radio industry which
> feels it is under heavy attack.

Then web casters must not be their ultimate goal. They face threats
far greater from satellite radio, iPods and other self-programmed
devices, cable tv, video games, dvds. How does this ruling affect
these other serious threats from other channels of media distribution?
And radio (like record labels) have been in decline for some time,
even prior to viable internet services. And since this will affect a
channel most radio is involved with, doesn't it cut off their nose to
spite their face? Anyone know any research or articles to support this
assumption?

> The majors in the
> recording industry also see web casts (and the web in
> general) as a direct attack on them, in that it is
> giving greater exposure to independent and small label
> artists not under their control and not giving them a
> cut at the royalties. They both know that the market
> is relatively inelastic in both available listening
> hours and dollars spent on recordings. The web is
> attacking them on both these fronts. Anything they can
> legally do or force they will to protect their
> business, no matter what you think.

Given that the RIAA is a total pit bull in these areas as demonstrated
by their prosecution of downloaders, I don't believe they would change
their tune here. I'm sure it's "go for the throat". That said, most
labels I know believe their problems stem from physical distribution
models going down the tubes and virtual distribution models unable to
replace the revenue. No one believes virtual distribution will pay the
bills and at this moment in time, there is not enough money there to
worry about killing small artists or labels or much of anything else.
It truly is a gnat on an elephant.

So the only thing that makes sense to me is a potential for some real
BIG money to be made by someone, that the RIAA want a piece of. Not
sure I can see what that is. Or it could be simply a ploy to be in a
good position for future negotiations. It's not advertising. It's not
subscription. There's really not enough plays to generate all that
much royalties (anyone put forth a calculation of the amount of
SoundExchange royalties to be generated in the new scheme?). So what
is the real issue? Artists already get less money for digital releases
than they do for CDs (which were less than LPs).

>  I feel that this issue will ultimately be decided in
> Congress or the Supreme Court or both. The best thing
> to do now is to write your Congressmen concerning this
> issue and support the various Save Internet Radio
> groups.

Hear hear! This just posted in another list:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/27/16238/9952

> The battle will be long and costly as the majors see
> it as a fight they must win or die. They have no
> intention of giving up their current highly profitable
> business model to a web model which gives artists far
> greater control over the marketing and distribution of
> their work and greatly lowers the cost at the same
> time. In the end, the artists and the public will
> generally get what they demand as they will vote with
> "their feet" at some point to make it so. While the
> majors can make life inconvenient, for a period, they
> can not make you buy what you don't want.

The majors are already dying. The profits are drying up or have
already dried up. They've never worried about independent artists and
frankly, independents aren't a threat to majors, never have been. But
consumers ARE a threat to the majors, or at least their changed
behavior. My 13-yr-old buys most of her music on iTunes and listens on
her iPod. She is bombarded by information about new music all the
time. That is 180 degrees opposite from how I was at her age thru
early adulthood. I shopped in stores and it was hard to find out about
anything other than what was on the radio.

The record business was constructed for my parents and me, not my
daughter. My daughter is killing the record business, everyday. My
daughter will not pay for their dinosaur infrastructure and outmoded
business models. They are mortally wounded.

Will the music business die? No. It will be reborn in a way that fits
my daughter's generation. But the giant is still falling, it hasn't
hit the ground yet. Try not to get underneath as it's falling. You
could get crushed for no fault of your own.

-Jim
--
Jim Combs

Buy my new Sensitive Chaos "Leak" CD at http://cdbaby.com/sensitivechaos

"I highly recommend Leak for its inventiveness, its beat-happy
effervescence, and its thorough lack of pretension, not to mention
it's just a flat out fun album from start to finish." - Bill
Binkelman, New Age Reporter

www.myspace.com/jimcombs
www.sensitivechaos.com
www.myspace.com/sensitivechaos

Let's put this thread to bed, guys.  This is the SPACEMUSIC list.  Any
further replies should be by private email.

--
Cliff Tuel . cliff@...

Subject: Tom Heasley in Concert Sun, May 6, 2007



Dear Loop-ers et al,



I will be performing in concert at the Folly Bowl in Altadena, CA on Sunday
May 5, 2007, at 4 pm.   For anyone in or around Los Angeles on that date, I
hope to see some of you in Altadena.



On Thursday, May 3, 4-4:30 PM I will be Martin Perlich's guest on KCSN-FM
88.5.  Tune in at  <http://www.kcsn.org/> www.kcsn.org.



Especially if you cannot make it to the Folly Bowl, check out Well Made
Music Podcast #17 (Scotland) which features Ground Zero from my first album,
Where the Earth Meets the Sky:   <http://wellmademusic.wordpress.com/>
http://wellmademusic.wordpress.com/  OR my Tokafi "15 Questions" Interview:
<http://www.tokafi.com/magazine/15questions/15questionstomheasley>
http://www.tokafi.com/magazine/15questions/15questionstomheasley.



Best,



Tom Heasley

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

Tom Heasley

ambienttuba@...

www.tomheasley.com <http://www.tomheasley.com/>

www.myspace.com/tomheasley







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

STAR'S END  1-6AM SatNight/SunMorning  Playlist for 29 April 2007
88.5fmWXPN Philadelphia/88.1fmWXPH HarrisburgPA/90.5fmWKHS Worton/BaltimoreMD
Host: Chuck van Zyl

ARTIST - TRACK - ALBUM (label)

1:00am
Hoffmann-Hoock & Wostheinrich - Virupaksha - Conundrum (DiN)
Thomas Fanger - Twinkling Sun - Parlez Vous Electronique?
Lisa Gerrard - Devotion - The Silver Tree (emi)
Parallel Worlds - Increasing Complexity - Obsessive Surrealism (DiN)
Markus Geuntner - Altocomulus Opacus - Pop Ambient 2007 (kompakt)
O Yuki Conjugate - Tropospheric - The Euphoria of Disobedience
Pub - track 2 - Pub Single

2:00am
Steve Roach - Electro Erotic - Fever Dreams III (timeroom)
Craig Padilla - excerpt - The Light in the Shadow
John Sheppard - In Pace In Idipsum - Music for Compline
Michale Hoenig - Hanging Garden Transfer - Departure from the Northern
Wasteland

3:00am
Rogue Element - Beyond Cerebrus - Premonition (acoustic wave)
Jeffrey Koepper - 2600AD.Sequential Meditation.Awakening - MomentiumPeter
Challoner - Drifting Fixed Point - Beneath the Ice Flow

4:00am
Numina - Waves of Reflection - Symbiotic Space (gestalt)
Jim Cole & Spectral Voices - Spectral Winds - Innertones (spectral spiral)
M Peck - tracks 1 2 3 - Glacial (gears of sand)
Steve Roach - Still (excerpt) - Immersion : Three (timeroom)

5:00am
Amongst Myselves - tracks 6 7 8 - Auburn Silhouette
Kit Watkins - tracks 1 2 3 - SkyZone
Stars of the Lid - Articulate Silences Pt2 - And Their Refinement of the
Decline
Kevin Kendle - Horsehead Nebula.Alnitak - Light from Orion (eventide)

6:00am


http://www.starsend.org

STAR'S END 1-6AM SatNite/SunMorn  88.5FM WXPN Philadelphia, PA
Top 20 For April 2007 (alphabetical)  Compiled by Chuck van Zyl

ARTIST - ALBUM - LABEL

Amongst Myselves - Auburn Silhouette - Amongst Projects
Amina - Kurr - Blaskjar
Jim Cole & Spectral Voices - Innertones - Spectral Spiral
Nelson Foltz/Tom Lynn - Still Life - Stillsounds
John Foxx - Tiny Colour Movies - Metamatic
The Fulton/Reaves Project - The Range - Binary/Hypnos
Lisa Gerrard - The Silver Tree - EMI
Hoffmann-Hoock & Wostheinrich - Conundrum - DiN
O Yuki Conjugate - The Euphoria of Disobedience - OYC
Craig Padilla - The Light in the Shadow - Spotted Peccary
Pan American - For Waiting For Chasing - Mosz
Parallel Worlds - Obsessive Surrealism - DiN
M Peck - Glacial - Gears of Sand
Radio Massacre Int'l - Lost in Space - Northern Echo
Steve Roach - Fever Dreams III - Timeroom
Steve Roach - Immersion : Three - Timeroom
Stars of the Lid - And Their Refinement of the Decline - Kranky
Kit Watkins - SkyZone - n/a
Erik Wollo - Elevations - Wanderings
Various Artists - Pop Ambient 2007 - Kompakt

http://www.starsend.org

April 2007 Top 20
Music from Beyond the Lakes - WDBX, 91.1 FM
Produced by Jerry Nelms and Namdar Mogharreban
Sundays, 8-10pm CST USA
Listen live via the web: www.wdbx.org and click on "Listen"

1.  Michael Fitzsimmons - Water Flows Over Me - Dancing Man Music
2.  Kevin Kendle - Pure Dreaming - New World Music
3.  Craig Padilla - The Light in the Shadow - Spotted Peccary Music
4.  Karen Marie Garrett - It's About the Rose - WaterStreet Records
5.  John Foxx - Translucence + Drift Music - Edsel Records
6.  Roger Eno - Between Tides - All Saints Records
7.  Riad Abdel-Gawad - Al Tarab El Aseel - Mirage Records
8.  Soulfood - Yoga Groove - SFD-Soulfood Music
9.  Rasa - Saffron Blue - New Earth Records
10.  Paul Adams - Flute Meditations for Dreaming Clouds - Lakefront
11.  Richard Bone - Saiyuji - Quirkworks Laboratory Discs
12.  Laura Sullivan - Feast of Joy & Love - Sentient Spirit Records
13.  Aureole - Celtic Grace - Airs, Dances and Ballads from Ireland - Koch
International Classics
14.  Paulo Martelli - Roots Guitar - Chaos Theory Music
15.  James Todd - Quiet Beauty: Heartsongs for Cello and Piano - Celloman
records
16.  Larry Kucharz - Electro Engravings
17.  Craig Padilla - Phantasma - Groove Unlimited
18.  Peter Kater - 10 Questions for the Dalai Lama - Silver Wave Records
19.  Dan Pound - Still Of The Night - Self Released
20.  Rob Silvan - The Breathing of the World - Sky Hook Music