George Liebling (1865-1946) - Reminiscences from Operas by Johann Strauss II

Подписаться 3,7 тыс.

50% 1

George Liebling and his brother Salomon (Sally/Saul) Liebling both studied in Liszt's masterclasses in the 1880s. Neither left many recordings, and neither pianist is altogether top-drawer, though they were both noted in their time. I thought it would be nice to hear George in a few of his rather populist roll recordings for Welte Mignon. This roll was made in 1927, and was optimised for Disklavier by Ian Williamson from a pneumatic scan made by Peter Phillips. This potpourri of opera tunes by Strauss is listed as the 1st of the set of "Reminiscences" he put onto roll.
If anyone wants to name each melody in order, feel free to try. I recognise some of them, but they do flit by quite quickly!
Rather astoundingly..... RU-vid flagged this video as containing a fragment of a copyrighted melody from the Morgenblätter waltz, which apparently somehow was claimed to belong to Warner-Chappell! How can this possibly be serious? I disputed it....
"Good news! After reviewing your dispute, Warner Chappell has decided to release their copyright claim on your RU-vid video."
I'm just trying to share great art here. Why is the world like this?

Видеоклипы

Опубликовано:

5 май 2020

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 6

@jamesmiller4184 7 месяцев назад

Utterly delightful! I believe there was very much of worth to George Liebling! Liebling recorded for Welte (Licensee) quite late, and the results benefit greatly on this account. For that one he recorded much! One being as I recall, a theme and variations on a Chopin Prelude. His original! I consider Liebling (like Reisenauer) to have been an 'underdog' and so feel strongly as needing to champion the fellow.

@j.vonhogen9650 4 года назад

I'm shocked that RU-vid has flagged this video for copyright infringement. Clearly, these melodies are in the public domain, so there really is no basis for any legal claim. Couldn't they do a manual review on your request? By the way, thank you very much for uploading this video! Very interesting Welte roll! I'm sure they sold quite a few of these rolls to people who could afford a Welte grand in the 1920s. I wish we had some insight in the sales figures of popular piano rolls from that period. All I know is that Welte artists got paid quite handsomely in the early 1900s, which is obviously an indication of the success of the product, I would say.

@d60944 4 года назад

It's not really worth the bother - I don't monetise any of this stuff anyway! I was just amazed at the system.

@j.vonhogen9650 4 года назад

@@d60944 - It's basically a fully automated detection system with very little room for manual review and corrections. Sadly, the process has been used (exploited) by Google-RU-vid to silence lots of users whose political views don't correspond with the views of the people running these big tech companies. Regardless of their political preference, this is an abuse of power that is unfair to potentially every content creator on the platform. Copyright law should never be used to restrict free speech or for social engineering. Anyway, since you are not monetizing any of your videos, you probably won't face any serious legal claim, but the odd thing is that in your case, the alleged copyright holders (i.e. Warner-Chappell) may be offered the option to monetize your video without your consent, which means they would be able to place ads before, during, or right after your video if they wish to do so. This is of course in the interest of RU-vid, since they are selling their ads for profit. The only benefit for you would be that your video would be more visible in the search engine and the YT recommendations. It all depends of course on the size of your audience, but if I would have >1k subscribers and I would like to make my channel grow, I would probably chose to monetize my videos just to increase the visibility of my channel. Thanks again for your video!

@d60944 4 года назад

@@j.vonhogen9650 Well, I got another automated claim on another video today (Scharwenka!). Two was too much , so I have now disputed both! Warner Chappell can't just claim anything vaguely like this.

@j.vonhogen9650 4 года назад

@@d60944 - Very good! They should do a manual review of the alleged copyright issues. This is obviously public domain material. Good luck!