+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Capitol Records contract

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Beautiful Oregon..
    Posts
    4,524

    Capitol Records contract

    Ok, I freely admit that I know NOTHING about recording contracts. That is why I going to ask a question here.

    Long ago, Garth signed with Capitol Records and last November he gave us "Scarecrow" and then told everyone that he was through. He has also stated that he would love to do a duet album with Trisha, but because she was on a different label, it was nearly impossible to do.

    So, since Garth is through with Capitol, why doesn't he drop his contract and then do the duet with Trisha? I am sure there is some "legalese" and professional standards which would make it look bad if Garth changed his label. Since he is not going to deliver any more albums, why not?

    Can somebody shed some light on this?

    Muchas gracias!

    --spud--

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Music City, USA
    Posts
    7,039
    Ooooooooohhhhh Good question Spud!

    I don't know all the ins and outs of his contract, but I do believe he has fufilled his album obligation to Capitol. HOWEVER...

    I do know Garth has said as long as he makes music he hopes to be making it under the Capitol umbrella. His mom recorded for Capitol, and he's always spoke highly of how they treated her.

    However... he said he'd never step foot in the Ryman too... things change. VERY interesting thought! Maybe you should suggest it to the Gman?
    J.

  3. #3
    Well all I can tell you is what they teach us in Class about recording contracts. Technically Garth has fulfilled his obligation to Capitol records with the release of Scarecrow.

    When he was still under contract It made it a bit of a hassel to do a duet album with Trisha since she is with MCA. In most contracts their is a "front man"clause in which the artist is not allowed to perform in a front man capacity on another album ( which includes a duet) without expressed authority from the label. My guess is there was a clause that restricted the number of "Front man's" they would authorize. Thats why they could do IAE and SMI. Basically In order for them to have done a whole ablbum, MCA and Capitol would have to negotiate till the end of time to work it out (money,packaging,responsibilities,etc).

    Now that Garth is not under contract with a label technically all he would have to do is negotiate a deal with MCA for this one album ( or however many they plan on)as a vocal event or duo. Since he doesn't plan on recording on his own right now, there most likely isn't any concern about him going and recording elsewhere. I am sure Garth has Amazing attorney's so there could be a million ways to negotiate it.

    gotta love recording company operations class!

    <3 ber

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    66

    recording families

    I read this thread the other day and as I was cleaning up, it popped into my head it is like Romeo and Juliet. The Capulets ... Capitol and Montagues ... MGM. LOL.

    In the 70's there was this great disco album called Romeo and Juliet and it put the story of R&J to music. Few of my friends had ever heard of it and I think I wore the album out. It was a great way to learn Shakespeare while dancing

    Anyway, I hope the recording families sort it out. Anything else would be an excellent and lamentable tragedy for the fans who would love it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    in a bown of alphabet soup, you ry and put the letters together
    Posts
    329
    you know, i dont know much about recording contracts or anything like that. I wonder though how extensive the contract is as to who heres the voices of their artest!

    can garth record for his personal use?
    can garth record a album with trish on his own?
    if they build a studeo, and produced an album on their own, could they give it to their friends?
    if they could do that, than could they press (turn out millions of coppys) and distribute, market,sell premote ect, THEMSELVS
    couold they record under their OWN company?

    dont wory we will here a duet album before we know it! garth doesn't seem to let anything stop him

    I think we might even here a garth and trisa duet album before we here the american pledge of alegance in the schools again!

    hey what do you know, the demecrats did what the soviots could not
    Just some timeless ramblings frome an insain poet

  6. #6
    Well IF Garth were under contract...unless specifically negotiated in the contract he could not record an album for anyone else due to the exclusivity clause without permission from the label. He could go and record 50 songs but the label would have rights to them if he were under contract. Regardless of whether the company was his own or another label. And if the press distributed without the right to do so they would be infringin on the copyrights of the songs.

    As for the pledge....please please please read the actual rulling which only applies to states under the 9th courts juridiction. Not to mention that the problem is a clause that was not in the original pledge in the begining. This has been blown severly out of proportion by the media.

    And I definitely agree...we will hear a duet album in no time



    <3 ber

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    6,893
    Just a reminder...please keep the thread on the original topic. Minor detouring is okay, but ongoing discussion on a detour is not.

    Paula
    Listen not to the critics
    Who put their own dreams on the shelf
    ~ How You Ever Gonna Know ~
    Kent Blazy/Garth Brooks

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts