> I hasten to remind everyone that live albums are notoriously poor
> sellers even for bands in the stratosphere category (unless you are
> Peter Frampton).  That is why many record deals limit the number of or
> exclude live albums altogether from fulfilling the contractual
> obligation of a band.  The bottom line is that if the label doesn't
> think they'll sell that many, they aren't going to go to the effort
> and expense to put out a live album.
.
.
.
> It's not my point that counts. It's Mike's. If you have any great
> suggestions for how to put how a live CD without TVT accepting or
> promoting it, let's put 'em on the table.
 
 
I must admit I wasn't thinking about TVT being the problem.  The way the
statement was originally phrased, it made it sound (to me) as if the
BAND was unwilling to put out a live album just because it wouldn't
hasten the fulfillment of their contract with TVT.  I didn't think that
sounded right.  The above clarifications make it... well, clearer.
 
I'm going to reveal my profound ignorance of the recording industry
here:  If a live album doesn't count toward the contract with TVT, and
TVT doesn't think it would sell well and therefore doesn't want to
assume the expense, why would the label object to the live album being
produced and distributed independently?  I know of similar situations
that have occurred in the past.
 
--Steve