User talk:Gramophone Man

Victor Talking Machine Company
Please explain why the Victor Talking Machine Company, now called RCA Records, is still considered an active company called the Victor Talking Machine Company. The entity calling itself the Victor Talking Machine Company founded by Graham Alexander last year is not related in any way with the company RCA bought in 1929. Steelbeard1 (talk) 13:15, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Radio Corporation of America/RCA Corp sold to GE in 1986- but remained active in corporate status (both entities existed despite the emphasizing of RCA Corp. circa 1970 onward and were included in the sale) - However, both were dormant in GE's profile (minus most of its trademarks which had been sold mostly before 1990- including RCA Records to BMG (and later Sony) through the late 2000s. Radio Corporation of America was acquired by CEO Graham Alexander- and the company then re-acquired the Victor (Talking Machine Co.) brand at auction- reuniting the entities again from its sale to French Technicolor (Victor Talking Machine Co....which remained as a dormant division even as RCA-Victor and later RCA Records gained prominence was not included in sale initially to BMG- this action mirrors EMIs choice to maintain corporate status and trademarks for the Gramophone Co. in the UK) The company Graham Alexander took over is the same Radio Corporation of America that took over Victor in 1929...however it is minus most of its assets and trademarks. While the current Victor Talking Machine Co. division of the company has many of its assets (Metal Master Recordings, Internal Documents), most of Radio Corporation of America was incredibly strewn from GEs piecing off through the late 1980s and 90s. In the early 2000s, German BMG attempted to revive the preexisting Victor company they controlled- but it was a failure resulting in the its re-dormancy until its sale in 2014. Gramophone Man

UPDATE: In editing more, I realize I just laid an incredible amount of information on you- hahahahah.

Most of what the company has been doing has been very very very slow in progress (brand and/or corporate acquisition often takes years and lawyers, basically) In reality....the corporate structure of things isn't always as public as it could be so its often odd looking at first glance. I'm a freelance Web person- and they are clients...which means I don't often check this WIKI as much as I should....but i'm looking forward to hearing from you! You've got some great interests -! Gramophone Man

It does not matter. They are two different entities, just like the former CBS Records (now Sony Music Entertainment) and CBS Records (2006) are unrelated companies. You have been reported to WikiProject Record Labels. Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Actually, It does indeed matter. Unfortunately you are not in the position of expertise on the matter- and you may want to do some research prior to making such a decision. I highly recommend you contact Radio Corporation of America (rcacamden.com) or contact (victortalkingmachinecompany.com) and representatives of Victor before altering the article to your liking. The current Victor Talking Machine Co. is as part of Victor Talking Machine Co. as modern RCA Records is to RCA records...however it did go through a dormant but still existent and structured period.

Also, "Graham Alexander" is not the entity in charge of Victor Talking Machine Co and it was not formed by him...as it was already an existing structure...that had been held dormant. You should take some time and read on the corporate wranglings involved with the acquisition in which the CEO of Radio Corporation of America (Mr Alexander) and partners involved in the business acquired Victor Talking Machine Co. as an already existing but dormant entity.

Additionally, the comparison to CBS records and CBS records (2006) is quite misguided. CBS instituted its trademark rights - which is the same brand - however the original CBS records assets would have been absorbed by Sony..and would have nothing to do with the modern CBS records. This is simply not the case in the modern Victor revival- in that the company owns a large portion of its original internal documents, master recordings, and reproduction rights of non expired copy-written material. Gramophone Man
 * What does RCA Records, the company which evolved from the original Victor Talking Machine Company, have to say about this? RCA Records' parent, Sony Music, owns the Caruso recordings that he cut for Victor which are managed by Sony Masterworks. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:56, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Thats wonderful- however Caruso would be an example of a key artist RCA would have started re-issues of long before Sony's acquisition- updating their catalog and further updating the reproduction rights. Victor recorded 1000s of artists between 1901 and 1944- of which a significant portion of masters and reproduction rights were never re-issued by RCA Records, or BMG, or Sony......and are still owned by Victor...which is now seperate to all 3 of those entities- and is again using its full name as its identity. You very much need to enhance your research. Unfortunately, I don't have time to be battling any kind of trolling on Wikipedia Gramophone Man

I did my research and Sony DOES control the Victor recorded music catalog. See. You can reach the Library of Congress jukebox mentioned in the link at Steelbeard1 (talk) 03:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Quoting from the Library of Congress web site at : The Library of Congress presents the National Jukebox, which makes historical sound recordings available to the public free of charge. The Jukebox includes recordings from the extraordinary collections of the Library of Congress Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation and other contributing libraries and archives. Recordings in the Jukebox were issued on record labels now owned by Sony Music Entertainment, which has granted the Library of Congress a gratis license to stream acoustical recordings.

At launch, the Jukebox includes more than 10,000 recordings made by the Victor Talking Machine Company between 1901 and 1925. Jukebox content will be increased regularly, with additional Victor recordings and acoustically recorded titles made by other Sony-owned U.S. labels, including Columbia, OKeh, and others. Steelbeard1 (talk) 03:17, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Sony controls the small portion of the Victor catalog reissued by RCA Records during their ownership- however they do not own the masters which went un-reissued from that time period (which is the large majority of the back catalog)- roughly 5% of Victor's recordings were re-issued by RCA-Victor, RCA Records, BMG, and later Sony- the other 95% of the surviving masters (those that weren't discarded by corporate RCA in 1962) exist in Victor's assets. The library of congress has license to stream Sony's very small catalog of remaining or recovered masters- and their involvement has absolutely nothing to do with ownership of masters. This isn't a debate- but unfortunately I don't have the time to engage in this. Gramophone Man

Finally, one of the old Victor recordings from the National Jukebox, "Uncle Josh Buys a Victrola" from 1919 by Cal Stewart at. Steelbeard1 (talk) 03:33, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Without links proving talking points like I provide, Gramophone Man does not have a leg to stand on. Steelbeard1 (talk) 03:37, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure someone in the future will have the time to post all sorts of references and facts for you to negate- until then- what is the point? This is a rhetorical question that needs no answer- but if you do answer please provide the first or second link you find on google and declare it as fact. Gramophone Man
 * Whatever you find, remember that blogs and personal web pages cannot be used as citations. They must come from official or journalistic sources. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:59, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

ANI Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)