Phonograph Monthly Review, Vol. 5, No. 9 (1931-06)

258 The Phonograph Monthly Review Some Phonographic Ills By R. D. DARRELL F OR the last year it has been apparent that all was not well in the phonographic world. That convenient scape- goat—general depression—has been saddled with the bur- den of responsibility, but discerning observers have realized that the world business crisis merely brought a fundamental unsoundness to the light. The Phonograph Monthly Review, like so many publications in other fields, has radiated an op- timism gradually abandoning a cheery tone for one more desperate. But when conditions reach something of an im- passe, as they seem to have done in our little sphere, they must be frankly faced without the spectacles of either optim- ism or pessimism. Just what is wrong that the popular recordings obtain scan- tier and scantier sales, that celebrity releases are restricted more and more to re-pressings of European recordings, that two of the three leading companies feel forced to withdraw ad- vertising support from the only independently published maga- zine devoted entirely to their cause? Granting that the prac- tically complete abandonment of celebrity record advertising— even in so vital a medium as the P. M. R.—is necessitated by the decrease in business, isn’t the cart being put before the horse somewhere? Is such stringent retrenchment likely to lead to any speed increase in celebrity record sales? Popular disc sales have been cruelly pared by a combina- tion of two factors: impaired buying ability on the part of the public, and the hamstringing of the standard 75c record by the unrestricted broadcast of these discs, morning noon and night, until both the tunes and the performances become a weariness even to the flesh of the enormous public whose musical needs are restricted to jazz alone. One class of popular discs still enjoys lively sales: the cheap records retailing around 25 or 30c—Melotone (put out by Brunswick), Harmony (by Columbia), Clarion, Banner, Crown, Diva, etc. These records are seldom broadcast. The drop in instrument sales, perhaps the principal source of revenue in good times to the manufacturers, is usually at- tributed exclusively to the public’s weakened buying power. But I wonder how much extravagant claims, and the constant succession of “perfect” machines rendered obsolete within a year by a super-perfection, have discouraged the public from the purchase of the larger models. The last season has seen a sudden reversal of this policy and the issue of a varied series of small, comparatively reasonably priced instruments. Yet the manufacturers have not yet faced the facts. Even the less expensive machines are not likely to sell in quantity for some time. With the principal source of income restricted to records, why not concentrate all efforts on their sale? Put out a turntable pickup outfit for plugging into a radio at a retail price of less than $20. Sell them at bare cost if necessary, but get them out to musically minded people, and thus create the larger market for discs. (Standard Oil’s old method in getting out stoves in China at less than cost in order to create a market for their oil might well be taken to heart.) With celebrity records the conditions are quite different. Naturally their sale has been reduced by depression, but they have resisted with far greater tenacity than instruments of popular records. In this field alone is there a clear opportunity for the reestablishment of phonographic profits. Yet from the very beginning little or nothing has been done to promote it The records-have been brought out to be sure, but only reluc- tantly, and Europe has consistently led the way. The majority of the splendid recordings issued in this country have come out unheralded and have subsided quickly into the oblivion of cata- logue lists. A few enterprising dealers, a few magazines and newspapers have endeavored to give them the publicity they need, but without the backing of a vigorous advertising cam- paign, the promotion of musically-equipped dealers, and phono- graphic concerts in halls and over the radio, only a portion of the public could possibly be reached. For nearly five years the P. M. R. has been hammering away at one point: there is a musical public in America; it supports opera, concerts, and recitals. Radio has succeeded to some ex- tent despite the modicum of genuine musical entertainment it furnishes because it embarked on a lively campaign of public education, it appealed to the public’s imagination, it sold it- self. Television—with its exceedingly limited field—is already beginning to do the same thing. The phonograph has never attempted to reestablish itself in the public imagination. The majority of people still believe that the phonograph and records died with the coming of radio. We know that this was only its second birth; that it has only begun to come into its own. But the proselyting of a few enthusiasts cannot work miracles; it is astonishing that it has done as much as it has. In short, the present ills are fully as much a result of ap- proaching vital phonographic problems from the wrong angle— or dodging them entirely—as it is of unfavorable business con- ditions. Too many records have been put out; too few have been sold. Suppose another Lambert had applied his Lister- ine promotion campaign to records, would conditions in the phonograph industry be what they are today? The phono- graph itself has kept up with the times, but its promotors have not. Even now that the futility of their policies has been convincingly demonstrated, means and courage—prin- cipally the latter—seem lacking to launch a more intelligently planned attack. Retrenchment is the only order. The in- terest in major recordings is offered the convenient sop of European repressings which are reasonably sure to cover at least their cost of issue and distribution. Once released they are left to their own resources. Publicity, the modern miracle worker, is abandoned. One of the repercussions of this policy is that this magazine which has depended exclusively on the phonograph is left with the support of only one of the three leading manufacturers. Without additional support from the public the magazine’s future is very problematical. We still have faith in our present public’s interest and energy, and now we turn to it for some Expression of its ideas and suggestions. We believe with it that radio has buried itself almost hopelessly in commercialism, after having given the death blow to widespread amateur music making. We believe the phonograph to be the one remaining medium for musical enjoyment and culture in the home, the supreme medium for selective music. We believe that outside our own compact group of record conscious readers there is a vast public eager for the best in music and needing only to be approached properly to share our interest in the phonograph. If we are right in these beliefs, there is a very genuine need for the continued existence of The Phonograph Monthly Review. The present policies of some of the manufacturers and the lack of private subsidy such as maintains symphony orchestras, opera houses, and other musical and literary en- deavors, have placed that existence in jeopardy. Assurances of interest and support will enable us to go on with the work of phono-musical publicity that is so badly needed by re- corded music today.