Jump to content
Stefani Tee
Sign in to follow this  
question

How will Taylor re-record her masters?

Featured Posts

Magneto

So as you all probably know Taylor will be re-recording her music so she can own all her masters again. I was just thinking:

1. Will she able to get the music to sound exactly the same as before? I don't know that much about recording and production so I was curious if it's possible to get the exact same song

2. If it's possible, will she actually do it? Speak Now and Fearless have such good songs on them, but some of the country production is a tad copy-paste imo, so this could be the ultimate chance to modernize some of the songs. This however could piss off the fans

What are your thoughts on this?

Edited by Magneto
Free my mind

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faysalaaa

JoJo did the same thing and re recorded all her old albums, im not sure if she changed it or kept it the exact same.

  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bio

I feel like her country albums will sound mostly the same but a bit more refined and mature. 1989 and Reputation will probably sound the same with very few differences.

  • Like 3

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phlop

I’m looking forward to it actually, her voice is a lot different after hearing her old material again.

BYE
  • Like 2

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Infinity Wave

I really don't get how this is even plausibile.

It's like, you sell the rights to a book you wrote, but than you write it again just changing the names and publish by your own.

Those two people I don't even remember their names bought the rights to her music. How can she be legally able to record her songs again if all of the rights don't belong to her?

It would be the same as me or you or anyone else recording those song and selling them, we would be fined or we should pay the rights to the owner of the songs.

I really don't see how this can happen, legally. Everytime one of her songs is played or performed profits goes to the owner of them, which is not Taylor anymore. 

I don't even know if she still has the author rights on her songs, in which case she really couldn't record them.

If she still has those rights, she could but she should pay the owners nontheless :shrug:

Colourful
  • Like 2

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Magneto
3 minutes ago, Infinity Wave said:

I really don't get how this is even plausibile.

It's like, you sell the rights to a book you wrote, but than you write it again just changing the names and publish by your own.

Those two people I don't even remember their names bought the rights to her music. How can she be legally able to record her songs again if all of the rights don't belong to her?

It would be the same as me or you or anyone else recording those song and selling them, we would be fined or we should pay the rights to the owner of the songs.

I really don't see how this can happen, legally. Everytime one of her songs is played or performed profits goes to the owner of them, which is not Taylor anymore. 

I don't even know if she still has the author rights on her songs, in which case she really couldn't record them.

If she still has those rights, she could but she should pay the owners nontheless :shrug:

They own the master recordings. If you were to compare it to a painting: Taylor thought of what she wanted to paint. It was her idea and she painted it, but the actual painting which took a lot of hours to make was sold to someone else so they can hang it in a museum and earn money from it.

Free my mind
  • Thanks 2

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Magneto
8 minutes ago, Bio said:

I feel like her country albums will sound mostly the same but a bit more refined and mature. 1989 and Reputation will probably sound the same with very few differences.

This is what I'm hoping for. The songs of SN/Fearless are amazing, but I'd love if she dialed down the country just a little bit 

Free my mind

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Hybrid

I hope she changes a bit so I have an excuse to listen to Reputation again :huntyga:

No family’s safe when I sashay

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
geishababe
9 minutes ago, Infinity Wave said:

I really don't get how this is even plausibile.

It's like, you sell the rights to a book you wrote, but than you write it again just changing the names and publish by your own.

Those two people I don't even remember their names bought the rights to her music. How can she be legally able to record her songs again if all of the rights don't belong to her?

It would be the same as me or you or anyone else recording those song and selling them, we would be fined or we should pay the rights to the owner of the songs.

I really don't see how this can happen, legally. Everytime one of her songs is played or performed profits goes to the owner of them, which is not Taylor anymore. 

I don't even know if she still has the author rights on her songs, in which case she really couldn't record them.

If she still has those rights, she could but she should pay the owners nontheless :shrug:

Record labels own all their artists recordings because they paid for the production of it (studio, sound engineers, producers, etc) and the marketing/promotion of the records. That’s what you give up when you sign a record deal. 

Edited by geishababe
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
crisTEAne

all of her albums sound great and as they are, but imagine speak now with her current, highly imporved vocals. CANNOT WAIT :nooo: 

if you hurt taylor swift, i'll hurt you back

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan123

Is she really going to do all of that? I thought they’d have settled something by now. 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
LaLa
2 minutes ago, Infinity Wave said:

I really don't get how this is even plausibile.

It's like, you sell the rights to a book you wrote, but than you write it again just changing the names and publish by your own.

Those two people I don't even remember their names bought the rights to her music. How can she be legally able to record her songs again if all of the rights don't belong to her?

It would be the same as me or you or anyone else recording those song and selling them, we would be fined or we should pay the rights to the owner of the songs.

I really don't see how this can happen, legally. Everytime one of her songs is played or performed profits goes to the owner of them, which is not Taylor anymore. 

I don't even know if she still has the author rights on her songs, in which case she really couldn't record them.

If she still has those rights, she could but she should pay the owners nontheless :shrug:

From what I understand Taylor still owns her publishing (the author rights) and will continue to make money from that even with her masters owned by Scooter. This is the root of that "she owes me X Millions! No HE owes ME X Millions!" dispute between them recently. 

The contract they have apparently allows her to re-record her songs after one year, which I believe will be in November 2020. At that point it's completely legal and she can do what she likes. 

  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
FfFfFfFF

I doubt she is able to re-create them exactly the same.  There are certain traits that depend on the instruments so differences in a re-recording are bound to happen. I even expect her to do some changes and actually improve the songs so fans would be inclined to buy them more. :enigma:

►► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ►► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ►► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ►► ► ► ► ► ► ► ► ►
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
MetalGaga
1 hour ago, Infinity Wave said:

I really don't get how this is even plausibile.

It's like, you sell the rights to a book you wrote, but than you write it again just changing the names and publish by your own.

Those two people I don't even remember their names bought the rights to her music. How can she be legally able to record her songs again if all of the rights don't belong to her?

It would be the same as me or you or anyone else recording those song and selling them, we would be fined or we should pay the rights to the owner of the songs.

I really don't see how this can happen, legally. Everytime one of her songs is played or performed profits goes to the owner of them, which is not Taylor anymore. 

I don't even know if she still has the author rights on her songs, in which case she really couldn't record them.

If she still has those rights, she could but she should pay the owners nontheless :shrug:

There is a reason that this is 100% legal:

Taylor Swift wrote every single song in her discography. The co-writers don’t matter in this instance. Taylor is the owner of the lyrics and melodies. What she doesn’t own is the original recordings of albums 1-6. 

The label was always going to screw her, because that’s what labels do. 

  • Like 3

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
ice bear

idk i just want the AMAs version of I Knew You Were Trouble :vegas:

but i wouldn't be mad if she "completed" the post-chorus of King of My Heart, it bugs me that it's all in pieces

Edited by ice bear
ice bear coolest bear // adopt a kitty

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...