BlahBlahCafe - Jean-Michel Jarre forum

Let it go to court..........

Dreyfus cannot prove anything,nor can anyone accuse Jarre of Lying ..Because simple fact is no-one was there when he did the act whether it was the act of Rerecording or not..


only Jarre knows the source of this remaster,which he can claim is rerecorded,he has compositional rights so can present the music in a newly recorded form be it with the existing original instruments or newer instruments and Dreyfus can do sweet FA about it
there is no way of being able to trace that he used the Master Analog tapes for this new recording, If Jarre recorded it into Protools digitally,how can Dreyfus prove anything...He could have simply recorded those individual Tracks from tapes into Protools as seperate tracks and say he recorded them into the computer reusing the the instruments,simply destroy those Tapes and there is no speculation that he could have simply not rerecorded it because Mix wise and edit wise the remaster is different


I dare say Jarre is not stupid enough to have not thought this through before proceeding with it,he's certainly stuck with the same ideology of rerecording with the promotion he done,which is either a rehearsed story or he's telling some truth about the way it has been done.

Where I come from your Innocent until proven Guilty..So let Dreyfus and Jarre battle it out in court...He most certainly won't go to Jail over it,even if he's found Guilty FFS some people should get a reality check..this is Jarre were talking not some serial Murderer...Worst he'd encouter was a Huge Fine which could damage him financially and a Bruised reputation...He's hardly gonna be doing ten in the Pen..

Personally I couldn't give a fook How or what he recorded it with even if he admitted it to be fradulently recorded..I've got over 20 or so copies of Oxygene in various formats I'm not gonna get be peeed about an iffy rerecorded source even if he told a white Lie about it.. most of us are not naive enough to beleive he rerecorded it anyway... ...

If everyone is bothered about it take back your New master CD and demand a refund..

A few of us here said at the time of it's release it's the same recording but with added FX. But as Andro pointed out, we took what the cover captions of "New Master Recording" and "re-recorded" for granted and thought nothing less of it.

But, who's at fault here. Not us, so that leaves Jarre or EMI and as it was EMI who had the covers made and not Jarre; although he would have had to proof them at some time. It's EMI being greedy and boosting sales for their newly signed artist and to hell with any backlash that's to follow. It's all down to money at the end of the day.

Equinoxe wrote:Where I come from your Innocent until proven Guilty

The same applies here. I won't believe it until I see the evidence with my own eyes, (or should that be ears?) .

Mr. Tung wrote:A few of us here said at the time of it's release it's the same recording but with added FX.

If it sounds different, from a master point of view, it IS different.

An example are the remasters I did of CiC 1981, the originals are mono, and lets call'em "masters", which were the only thing I used, one track of audio.

The end result is a stereo'phied realistic master that is hard to believe came from those sources, it's at my site (URL after the signature at the end).

Let's say the masters were Jarre's, and he would decide to sue me because the new remasters are his also... well, indeed the author rights would be his, but the mechanical and sountrack rights of the remasters would be mine because the "audio" is not equal to the one of the original master, therefore, it's not the same master, even if I sampled the whole thing... it's now different.

BTW, I did officially and in public (well, it's at the site) granted Jarre with full rights over my remasters, which we're not a re-recording, but in fact, perhaps one could think of it that way... I upsampled it all from crappy mono mp3 sources, and then did a lot of frequency dividing and FFT crops to get multitrack data to work with... with a lot of inteligent "upscaling" algorythms... then effected it all according to some Geiss inputs about the location and audio setup...

... and there you go, a re-mastered, re-memix, and perhaps correctly called "re-recorded" (onto the computer - eh eh eh) CiC 1981 Original Live Opening Beijing Concert - a gem in need of polish, which I did.

Kind Regards,
AMR
http://www.alvaromrocha.com

Let's say the masters were Jarre's, and he would decide to sue me because the new remasters are his also... well, indeed the author rights would be his, but the mechanical and sountrack rights of the remasters would be mine because the "audio" is not equal to the one of the original master, therefore, it's not the same master, even if I sampled the whole thing... it's now different.

And this is exactly the same scenario that Jarre has done with Oxygene remaster,Does anyone beleive that Jarre would not know his rights and responsibilities to this before releasing it...

Its unlikely that Dreyfus can do anything without solid evidence

Equinoxe wrote:Does anyone beleive that Jarre would not know his rights and responsibilities to this before releasing it...

That's exactly what I believe. JMJ and EMI would not risk a lawsuit without doing their research.

Dreyfus will indeed need some good evindence to into court with this. If what you are saying is a part of the copyright law in this case, JMJ seems able to sweep away whatever Dreyfus will say. Let's see how this will end and what conclusions the Dreyfus team will draw from this.

Whatever happens, JMJ will win.

You got to consider this... Dreyfus probably know what he's doing too.

Kanta wrote:Whatever happens, JMJ will win.

The thing is... EMI, no matter who is right or not, now has an excuse to demand three quarters of a million euros from Jarre, and if you only would imagine how much they need that, you would not be worried about the law suit.

Dreyfus did a tremendously smart political move, that can destroy Jarre (Jarre leaving EMI with a huge financial rumble), and in that process, they avoid EMI and Jarre from doing the same with Jarre's remaining catalog (remastering and leaving Dreyfus to dust)... so they, Dreyfus, whatever the outcome of the law suit, already wan.

JMJ is in deep trouble, and it really doesn't matter if he is right or not.
EMI needs the money, Dreyfus needs JMJ out of job because it means money to them... and JMJ... well, I guess he needs money too and the only way to fight back is...

... well, I get payed to give such advices, but there is a way out.

Kind Regards,
AMR
http://www.alvaromrocha.com

I rarely hear about Dreyfus, hasn't he cashed in most of his fortune and rich living from JMJ's music?

Jarre has had a lot of musical set backs of recent. And this latest development could be a devestating blow to Jarre. Jarre is not a new comer or a young muscian, he's at that age where many retire. And with the disaster last year that was T&T and now this, it could send him over the edge and throw the towel in once and for all and walk away from the music scene altogether.

It's one knock back after the other.

I don't really think you can compare JMJ to other musicians in that way. I always feelt that JMJ had another vision or view on music than all usual hitbands. He often see himself as a painter using sounds instead. I don't think the painter ever retire as it's their hobby and life.

I know what your saying, he is indeed unique, but he's also struggling in this ever changing music field. What I'm saying is, Jarre is at that age, be it a painter or musicain, where set-back after set-back has bound to have had some knock-on effect with him. He must think at times "it's getting too much, about time I looked at retiring". It has to happen some day and with this Dreyfus issue looming a dark shadow above Jarre's head, that thought of retiring must look promising.

I hope he doesn't, but it has to come some day.

I don't want him to retire and as Musician I don't think you can ever switch off from that emotional connection enough to retire from what you do,its not a 9-5 job that you switch off when you return from the office Music is part of your soul and no matter what you've done you'll always want to improve on it no matter what age you are after a while its not about the Money that just part of the bonus of making it.there is so much more you wish to do,the Music is spiritual which although he may not be physically able to do things he could 30 years ago the Mind works differently and never suffers fatigue in the same way...


Here's a Quote from Jarre to sum up what I mean about him never being able to retire

What challenges are still facing you?

Do you realize what question you've made? You ask an artist "you have already been so successful, what can you still do?" Now, you don't make music to be successful. We are not bankers, that's the main problem - mixing music and creation with the financial result. Of course we work to get a salary, though music is now perceived to be free, as free as the air we breathe. It's a scandal. There were things that resulted well and guaranteed my material comfort but that does not block my desire to compose