Search

Discussion

Problems in the Metronome labels

dany

New Editor
Posts: 4518

dany @ 2020-01-13 14:53:01 UTC

It seems that the definition of these labels is not clear enough


Metronome Records

Metronome [DE]


I have submitted several possible corrections based strictly on the logos.

If the corrections don't come, I apologize.

If anyone has studied these labels in depth it could help clarify this issue.

Last edit: 2020-01-13 15:03:37 UTC by dany

dany

New Editor
Posts: 4518

dany @ 2020-01-13 21:12:26 UTC

I have carefully examined all the series of these two hypothetical labels.

I've come to the next conclusion:


1. It is a unique label, that is, the two current labels would have to be merged.

2. This unique label released records in several countries.

3. During 1961, the owners of the label decided to change the logo.


If you examine any disc prior to 1961 you will see a logo similar to this:

Metronome Records See: Attachments (the image on the right)


If you examine any post-1961 disc you will see a logo similar to this:

Metronome [DE]

Last edit: 2020-01-14 12:58:49 UTC by dany

dany

New Editor
Posts: 4518

dany @ 2020-01-14 07:50:43 UTC

DISCOGS' current approach to this label of Swedish origin

coincides with what I set out in the previous post.

Metronome (also Metronome Records) is a multinational record label founded in 1949 in Sweden (...)

In DISCOGS, we can also see the two logo variants.


https://www.discogs.com/es/label/5870-Metronome

CarlDennis

Retired Editor
Posts: 2752

CarlDennis @ 2020-01-14 23:24:50 UTC

José Manuel , I have followed your odyssey into the Metronome mess close by and I totally agree: we should merge the two labels thus getting rid of the Metronome [DE] one.

Let us wait for some more reactions and if they do not come I am willing to do the deed.............

walt

Editor
Posts: 5612

walt @ 2020-01-16 12:17:36 UTC

I remember Erik had a large take in this, sending reply request.

CarlDennis

Retired Editor
Posts: 2752

CarlDennis @ 2020-01-16 14:56:09 UTC

I remember Erik had a large take in this, sending reply request.

Did not know that: good call, Walt.

camembert electrique

Editor
Posts: 6112

camembert electrique @ 2020-01-17 03:09:24 UTC

Thanks, walt, for the reply request and dany for pointing to this thread.

Trying to be short (which will not be possible...): Here, we have a similar situation as for Columbia and quite some others, though on a much smaller scale:

Already some days ago, I in answer to an error report by dany had pointed out "You can't only judge by the logo. That was used from mid-1961 on by all Metronome branches after the early/original one shown for Metronome" had been changed.

Now: Once, there was a Metronome company/label (Sweden), which soon opened a Danish branch. Next was a German one. However, that, though still owned by the Swedes, from the mid/late 1960s on became an independentely operating company/label - probably the most important point, here.

Eventually, that German sub-company was sold to PolyGram - who had already been a handling/strategic partner and kept the(ir) label going for nearly 20 more years. Later WEA Scandinavia bought the original company - and, after a break, actually still release on the(ir) label.

Looking at Columbia, we'll see that for quite some time, practically identical logos were in parallel use by CBS and EMI companies. The same (partly) goes for derivates of His Master's Voice, Decca and other labels in which more than one company has/had rights.

So, if we merged the still comparably easy to overview two Metronomes, we, with the same and mainly logo based logic, would need to merge nearly all Columbias (no matter if CBS/Sony, EMI related or spin-offs), all Odeons (no matter where) and so on.

Last edit: 2020-01-17 03:23:21 UTC by camembert electrique

CarlDennis

Retired Editor
Posts: 2752

CarlDennis @ 2020-01-17 05:54:01 UTC

So what do you suggest, Erik? José Manuel is the CC who takes so much time to keep us on our toes when it comes to labels and tries to get us to move releases from the one Metronome label to the other and vice versa. And I find it hard to decide which one is which.

Does the difference between the two Metronomes have to be based on the period of release? Or do Swedish artists automatically go to the mother label and German artists to the [DE]?

dany

New Editor
Posts: 4518

dany @ 2020-01-17 10:45:02 UTC

I'm studying records from the '70s onwards, trying to detect some data that can help us.

I've started by Metronome Records

Advances for now:

During 1978, in the same serie (MLP 15xxx), keeping the same name (Metronome) and logo, the Warner group entered in the scene. The company called WEA-Metronome Records is formed and it added that: it is a part of the Warner group.

This situation is maintained on the most recent disc (2016). It is said: Metronome Records, a Warner Group company.

That is, Metronome Records (Swedish, initially an independent label) was acquired in 1978 by Warner, but still retains its name, to this day.


(continued)

dany

New Editor
Posts: 4518

dany @ 2020-01-17 11:36:17 UTC

On 1977, something important happens in Germany:

a new company is created: Metronome Musik (with the same logo)

(first: Metronome and in the same year: Metronome Musik)

(Before it was Metronome Records, like the Swedish one)


I think until 1977, Metronome was a unique label.

That year the German side became independent and a new label was created, also called Metronome (same short name, same logo) and that we could call Metronome Music.


(Continued)

camembert electrique

Editor
Posts: 6112

camembert electrique @ 2020-01-18 04:56:19 UTC

So what do you suggest?

José Manuel is the CC who takes so much time to keep us on our toes when it comes to labels and tries to get us to move releases from the one Metronome label to the other and vice versa. And I find it hard to decide which one is which.

Does the difference between the two Metronomes have to be based on the period of release? Or do Swedish artists automatically go to the mother label and German artists to the [DE]?

I'd suggest to stay with the two Metronomes we already have. I wouldn't really mind renaming Metronome [DE] in Metronome Musik, though/if that helps, but that's the name of the German (sub-)company, not of the label.

Where to attribute releases depends on the details. Very basic rules of thumb might be to first look at the language of songs included on releases (but not necessarily of label printings - which sometimes appear according to the country of pressing)

- if in Swedish, Danish or Norwegian, they were surely released by Metronome Records (except for compilations)

- if in German and by Scandinavian artists also marketed in the German speaking countries, Metronome [DE] is mostly right.

Releases of songs in English by Scandinavian artsist will need a closer look. They may have been originally released in Scandinavia as well as recorded for an international market.

Non-Scandinavian (mainly German) acts were mostly signed to/released by Metronome [DE]. This even more after the German sub-company in the late 1960s started working independently, signed artists themselves and also established sublabels like Brain.

Does this help?

camembert electrique

Editor
Posts: 6112

camembert electrique @ 2020-01-18 05:31:16 UTC

(...) I think until 1977, Metronome was a unique label (...)

If simply considering logo = label = company (and/or vice versa), that, in principle, wouldn't be wrong, but is, both generally seen and in this specific case, far from right...

See also (but not only...) just posted comment on Thom's latest according post.

camembert electrique

Editor
Posts: 6112

camembert electrique @ 2020-01-18 05:50:53 UTC

(...) That is, Metronome Records (Swedish, initially an independent label) was acquired in 1978 by Warner, but still retains its name, to this day.

That's one of the things I already pointed out in earlier posts and is also included in the label comment for Metronome Records and elsewhere.

mduval32323

Retired Editor
Posts: 965

mduval32323 @ 2020-01-19 00:19:10 UTC

Sounds like Dany has figured out who he needs to directly confer with privately. His meticulousness is impressive, but it's countered by Erik's meticulousness. Maybe they should confer privately and see if they can come to a meeting of the minds. But Erik does need to spin this in the end as it's fantastic that Dany undertakes this thankless effort to improve our site, as we don't want him frustrated to the point he abstains.

______
Mark

camembert electrique

Editor
Posts: 6112

camembert electrique @ 2020-01-19 07:04:58 UTC

Sounds like Dany has figured out who he needs to directly confer with (....)

Mark, thanks for your comment and suggestion to sort out the matter privately.

I don't at all want to demotivate Juan Manuel(?) or decrease his ambitions. But it's interesting that most of what he is saying is based on attempting to turn data and comments mainly (and for distinguishing reasons) added by myself to both Metronome label/company pages and also in answers to his 'error' reports in favour of his aspiration (but without referencing).

Apart from that, I guess I've already said what mainly needs to be said, here. Also, considering both Dany's 'error' reports comments for Metronome releases and his starting this thread, I regret having to say that it seems he prefers attempting to get the community to overrule me over discussing the matter between the two of us.

CarlDennis

Retired Editor
Posts: 2752

CarlDennis @ 2020-01-20 10:43:01 UTC

Dany = José Manuel .................

And Dany does not want to overrule anybody: that is why he started the thread in the first place!

But the question remains what to do or do we just accept that sometimes release get into the wrong Metronome box?

CarlDennis = thom

dany

New Editor
Posts: 4518

dany @ 2020-01-20 14:08:54 UTC

Hello again.

Progress in knowledge is difficult, slow, and sometimes painful.

I started this topic on the 13th and a day later (the 14th), Thom asked me:

Would all problems about Metronome be solved if we just merged the two labels? What do you think?

I didn't say: Yes -- I answered him with another question:

... what would you say is the difference between the two labels?

https://secondhandsongs.com/error-report/35595


In that question is the key: if they are two different labels... what is the difference?

That difference should be clearly set out in the heading of the respective pages of those labels.

That difference is the one I started researching on the 17th.


Now, I'll explain how best I can what my opinion is on this matter:


Metronome Records was a unique label until 1977. Why?

Founded in Sweden in 1949, it expanded (becoming multinational) to Denmark (in 1950) and Germany (in 1954).

Since its creation the logo shows a guitar and a saxophone and the words "Metronome Records", in all the releases, in all the countries.

In 1961, the owner company decided to change the logo that now appears with the word "Metronome" and something like "MO", in all the releases and in all the countries.

This could be regarded as proof that at that time the label was a single entity.


By 1977 there was a critical fact (for me, this is the difference): on records produced in Germany, the name "Metronome Records" disappears and instead we see: "Metronome Musik".

It is from this moment (from 1977), when synchronous releases edited by different companies (Metronome Records versus Metronome Musik) begin to appear...

and it is from that moment (from 1977) that we could assign releases to two different labels, which for historical reasons share the same name (short: Metronome) and the same logo.

Last edit: 2020-01-20 15:45:31 UTC by dany

camembert electrique

Editor
Posts: 6112

camembert electrique @ 2020-01-21 01:20:32 UTC

One of the main criteria when defining (real) labels is their authority to sign artists and release productions on their own, also independently from possibly existing mother companies. Another one is the authority to, being a combined label and company, (at least) on a territorial basis, represent third party labels/companies and license releases. Both facts are given for Metronome [DE], at least/already from the mid 1960s on.

Also therefore we, like we usually do for country branches, sub-companies and labels acting in their own rights, in terms of Metronome DE should strive to fix their according releases to the label/company they were signed to and issued by = them.

Once again: This is not only a matter of maybe nearly logo(s). Internationally acting companies often use the same logos all over the world...

As José Carlos/dany requested, I in the meantime, in order to distinguish them better and also according to our effords at SHS being work in progress, added even more info to both Metronome labels' descriptions (making both some of the longest we have...).

This also included attaching additional logos to the Swedish mother company entry (Dany: such are not visible publically, but there to internally support facts stated publically...).

I hope this all and the other long comments already posted, here, helps to understand the difference asked for. And why releases by Metronome [DE] shouldn't be limited to after 1977.

CarlDennis

Retired Editor
Posts: 2752

CarlDennis @ 2020-01-27 15:43:23 UTC

Erik, it is all a long and tedious discussion and frankly: it does not help me very much.

When you look at a record label like RCA or RCA Victor at SHS nobody seems to have a problem that all the various subsidiaries have their niche series under the general mother company umbrella. On the other hand for a label like Odeon we seem to have twenty or so country sublabels. I have no idea why this is.

Jose-Manuel and myself ask the simple question: why not have one Metronome mother label instead of this difficult schizis, which leads nowhere: obvious German releases end up under the general label and vice versa.

I know we can discuss endlessly about the history of which label did what in which year, but for normal Dutch dumbos like me, it is a nightmare.

So please, do you mind it very much if - instead of your wonderful requisitoir a merger takes place?

Lots of love from Holland, we do funny compromises all the time according to our polder model

Thom

camembert electrique

Editor
Posts: 6112

camembert electrique @ 2020-01-28 04:16:07 UTC

Thom, you admirably great diplomat...! I'll probably be more straightforward (again)...

Yes, this matter is unfortunately turning into yet another long discussion...

However, some 70 % of the releases added to the various Metronomes are shared between you and me and Michael/Hounddogman (with the two lost Norwegians, Tim, Jon and Wayne probably standing for another 20 %).

We all seem(ed) to know what we are/were doing and being capable of reading 'the signs', which is why, except for a few cases, so far no big problems attributing Metronome releases appeared. Ergo, if José Manuel out of some kind of dogmatism hadn't started this thread, we would't have this discussion at all...

Btw., I partly have a problem with RCA and RCA Victor. This a. o. if other editors in the afterhand change releases I added to the other one of them someone invented a 'label series' for (although the numbering system was shared) - which might be turned 'against me' as the same, for a certain period, also goes for Metronome Records and Metronome [DE] ... The main difference between RCA/Victor and Metronome/DE, though, is that RCA and RCA Victor were 'always' parallel labels on a worldwide scale, but Metronome just split between Sweden/Scandinavia and Germany.

As far as I remember, the multiple Odeons were created to narrow down releases to their original country of release and to dewarp Odeon - and if looking at Odeon [SE] (managed by yourself), it once more seems you and me (this time + Frode) stand for the vast majority of attributed releases - again with no problematic issues...

I didn't intend this to be that extensive, but...

Hartelijke groeten uit (pragmatische) Berlijn!

Erik