BlahBlahCafe - Jean-Michel Jarre forum

Since Dreyfus Revords released Les Granges Brulees, do they also own the rights to La Cage, Deserted Palace & Music For Supermatkets?

If so, wouldn't they be inclined to release it just like they did with Les Granges Brulees?



Why did Jarre have a falling out with Francis. Once again, like with Michel Geiss it seems he had better distribution with Dreyfus Records and of course Francis believed in Jarre at the time he had two commercial failed albums--Deserted Palace & Les Granges Brulees. Obviously Francis saw Jarre's talent early on and took a chance while others did not...

:~D

Allow me if you will-

moviemaker wrote:Since Dreyfus Revords released Les Granges Brulees, do they also own the rights to La Cage, Deserted Palace & Music For Supermatkets?

If so, wouldn't they be inclined to release it just like they did with Les Granges Brulees?

Not sure who owns the rights to these records now but La Cage was an Pathe/EMI release and Desrted Palaces was Sam Fox with Francis Dreyfus. If EMI still own the rights to La Cage a commercial release is unlikely. The singles market has been in decline for years and I can't see any record company wanting to release something with such limited appeal. The Les Grange Brulees CD release wasn't a great success and I doubt Deserted Palaces would do any better. Albums with such limited appeal just aren't commercially viable. Perhaps it'll get a release on iTunes where costs are lower.

As for MFS, the whole point of this album was that it was released as a one off and as such it shouldn't have a commercial release; and lets face it if you had just spent £10,000 on such an exclusive record would you be pleased if it then had a commercial release?

moviemaker wrote:of course Francis believed in Jarre at the time he had two commercial failed albums--Deserted Palace & Les Granges Brulees. Obviously Francis saw Jarre's talent early on and took a chance while others did not...:~D

Deserted Palace was not a failed album. It never had a commercial release. It was simply a music library record.

amiga1 wrote:As for MFS, the whole point of this album was that it was released as a one off and as such it shouldn't have a commercial release; and lets face it if you had just spent £10,000 on such an exclusive record would you be pleased if it then had a commercial release?

Doesn't matter... you would still be the owner of the one and only original vinyl release.

AnDrOiD wrote:

amiga1 wrote:As for MFS, the whole point of this album was that it was released as a one off and as such it shouldn't have a commercial release; and lets face it if you had just spent £10,000 on such an exclusive record would you be pleased if it then had a commercial release?

Doesn't matter... you would still be the owner of the one and only original vinyl release.

To me it would matter. Part of it's appeal is to have a unique piece music that nobody else has got.

Part of it's appeal is to have a unique piece music that nobody else has got.

Well, what I gather from people here (I'm not a collector myself), it's not about the music as long as the cover is different, or even just a different catalogue number. Imagine owning three albums with the exact same music, just because they got three different catalogue numbers. Well, I guess I'll just never ever understand that.

Regardless... I see nothing wrong in Jarre re-recording the album and release it with a different cover-art.

I don't know about La Cage and Deserted Palace, but MFS was never released commercially, so the situation about rights may be a little bit tricky here. Although it seems very unlikely JMJ will re-release this anyway.