Can someone point me to a video clip where the basses are actually shown through the entire bass variation instead of cutting to the accompanying woodwinds and obligatory tambourine closeup?
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Maybe this?
Then they should have made the video private. That is an option.Uhhh. . . that video is not meant to be shared, unless you are intending to get someone in trouble . . . .
And why would I even think of doing this, out of interest? ;-) Thanks!Uhhh. . . that video is not meant to be shared, unless you are intending to get someone in trouble . . . .
True. And they probably shouldn't have made the video in the first place, also. But, that mistake and that bad decision doesn't make it OK for someone else to spread their mistake around.Then they should have made the video private. That is an option.
OK, you probably didn't intend to get someone into trouble, because you simply don't know about how seriously the musicians' union will come down on a union musician for unauthorized recording.And why would I even think of doing this, out of interest? ;-) Thanks!
Relax, friend. You might be right about the union, but sharing a 4-year-old public YouTube link with over 9,000 views is a perfectly normal thing to do. At some point it is the uploader's responsibility to remove the video, and that's only assuming there's a real problem to begin with.OK, you probably didn't intend to get someone into trouble, because you simply don't know about how seriously the musicians' union will come down on a union musician for unauthorized recording.
I'm sure the musicians in the video appreciate your interest, but for their sake, please erase the link.
I'm the president of an AFM local. Couldn't give a crap about two knuckleheads making a recording like this, even if, technically, it's not legal. It's not as if they're making bank on it, and how would anyone posting the link know if the video was illicitly made or not?OK, you probably didn't intend to get someone into trouble, because you simply don't know about how seriously the musicians' union will come down on a union musician for unauthorized recording.
Maybe the fact that the principal adjusted and activated the camera would indicate who made the video and if he was trying to conceal that fact. Tempest, meet teapot.and how would anyone posting the link know if the video was illicitly made or not?
I'm not sure what your point is. I don't know these players, let alone who is the principal. I wouldn't automatically assume anyone's trying to conceal anything.Maybe the fact that the principal adjusted and activated the camera would indicate who made the video and if he was trying to conceal that fact. Tempest, meet teapot.
I have almost 50 years in AFM, btw.
There is zero risk in sharing the link. The video being public on Youtube is the problem - if at all. I doubt any Union has the resources to police yt. That is like shutting the barn door after the horse is gone.True. And they probably shouldn't have made the video in the first place, also. But, that mistake and that bad decision doesn't make it OK for someone else to spread their mistake around.
OK, you probably didn't intend to get someone into trouble, because you simply don't know about how seriously the musicians' union will come down on a union musician for unauthorized recording.
I'm sure the musicians in the video appreciate your interest, but for their sake, please erase the link.
Not entirely. We musicians should be vigilant in protecting our intellectual property. If you are recording people without their knowledge or permission, that's improper and possibly illegal, especially if you are somehow monetizing the content. It happens all the time. The question is, where do you draw the line? A minute of two knuckleheads recording the bass section is one thing. An audience member posting a much longer clip of a full piece, taken with their cell phone, is another.I think this has gotten kinda silly.
The RPO could be the Rochester Philharmonic Orchestra, based in Rochester, NY. Great orchestra. I don't know the bassists in the pic, so I'm not sure; there's probably a bunch of other "RPOs" across the country.I'm the president of an AFM local. Couldn't give a crap about two knuckleheads making a recording like this, even if, technically, it's not legal. It's not as if they're making bank on it, and how would anyone posting the link know if the video was illicitly made or not?
If it were my orchestra, I might have a word with them, but certainly not going to make a huge issue about it.
If you're concerned, contact the RPO, whoever that is, and tell them of the video. They can force Youtube to remove it.
If it's a union gig you should report it to them. If not, you could still get together and insist that the employer stop. Platforms like Youtube will remove content if you make the case that it's illegally posted. Having said that, the musician's union is fairly generous with writing contracts for promotional use, although content is limited in regards to length and where it can be posted. If the content falls within certain parameters, it can often be used for free, depending on the contract.A somewhat related issue that comes up more and more for me is when a concert I've played for is posted online for the purpose of fundraising for a community arts organization. The musician participants are not paid but the arts group makes money. We are not asked if we agree to the posting. It's just assumed, since this practice is so common now. It's considered community service. I'm not really surprised any more when someone tells me they've seen a cellphone video from a casual gig I've done. It's a part of a performing life in whatever context, public or private.