Off the market for too long?

I was thinking about how, when the Dave Clark Five finally had that Hollywood CD anthology. issued in the mid'90s - had, effectively anyhow, had no recording in print for more or less 20 years in the S - by the time I stated seriously going to recordstores in '1976/77 they we're, effectively anyway, out of the racks!
Dave Cark is often praised for his business acumen in owning his masters - But I am inclined to think that he rather played himself by keeping his recordings out of the stores for so long, taking anticipation/" make 'em want it " well past the point of diminishing returns! Thus contributing to the relative obscurity the DC5 occupy now
I'll point to t

 

And here I thought you were soliciting yourself.....

 

......I'll point to the Cameo-Parkway Records catalog (Rooted in an earlier era, but overlapping into the DC5's time.) as a perhaps even stronger example of this - Those masters never came into the CD era until it was practically over, well into this century!

 

The DC5 fan base is slowly dying off.

 

..." more or less 20 years in the US " I meant to write.

 

Yes, too long... marketed into reduced demand.

 

My friend has run a CD store since the 80s and he told me that he had sold dozens of DC5 bootlegs but very few of the legit one when it was released. People who wanted the music already had it and the average person can't tell the difference between tape sources or needle drops.

 

Yeah, confusing title. When I saw it's about The DC5, it's kind of current for me since I was jonesing to hear "Bits and Pieces" in late October and, lo and behold, I found their catalog on Google Play Music. I did the Greatest Hits and I was very impressed! But the fact is since their catalog was unavailable, you can't make a prospective market aware of a band if there's nothing in the racks. The fact that The Beatles and Stones have kept their titles out their with remasters and box sets, The Beatles Mono Box is tremendous, has kept them in the public eye. DC5 has been hurt by that void.

 

On the other hand, I think a certain off-presence on the market can also help gaining interest. Take Kate Bush as an example: she went into hiatus in '94 or something and apart from the EMI 100th anniversary CD of Hounds of Love, all her albums went OOP until she reappeared in 2005 with the rumours about a new album which eventually got released in November '05 and had tremendous first-week sales for an artist who simply wasn't there for over a decade. So I think this can prove helpful in a way, especially since Kate Bush seemed to fade into obscurity by the release of The Red Shoes - she wasn't at the peak of her creativity and her omnipresence in the media made her visibly uncomfortable. In 2005, everyone knew she was at it again with a wonderful album.

20 years of 'nothing' like in case of the DC5 of course seems really risky because from a sociologic point of view, 20 years marks a whole generation (here something from the Baby Boomers to Gen Y) and as a musician you have to ask yourself if the former fans still buy music and if they buy music, will they buy yours? The potential new listeners are likely to have either bought bootlegs or simply not be interested in that old stuff. So to answer your question, yes I think staying out of the market for 20 years is much too long

 

I've wondered along the same lines. I don't know how you make money or help your band's legacy by doing that. He might well have been better off if the record company had owned the masters and done what record companies do.

 

Abkco really missed the boat with the Cameo/Parkway material, not only by delaying CD releases of the material, but also by refusing to license the material for soundtracks and compilations. Heck, it was also mostly out of print on vinyl by the 80's as well.

Most of their catalog/roster of artists completely dropped off everyone's radar by the 80's (minus Chubby Checker and perhaps ? And The Mysterians), at a time when 60's nostalgia was peaking.

Speaking of....I'd imagine Chubby Checker and ? and the Mysterians may have made more from licensing their respective re-recordings than they ever made from the originals.