(Forbes) Once Upon a Time in Shaolin to be sold at Paddle-8 auction

Ringz, Once this LP has been sold and locked away in somebodies vault to appreciate in value over the next millennium.

Do You have any plans on releasing new material?

We need some Wu music that sounds legit.. I can't be listening to that Rza produced sparkly bullshit no more.

Rza just cannot do Wu music no more, he's ascended to another realm, one that is not dusty and raw.

I ain't interested in no white sparkly cloud happy production shit for Wu music..

RZA is capable of doing pretty much anything, it's just a matter of choices.

As for me, this album has been intense. So I will probably take some time off, but I would like to do a Rae & Ghost album together. Even got a title for it already, but that would be like a final thing I think. We'll see, time will tell.

If the album gets to $500k at auction, what's plan B

The Shaolin business model is great if you are a well known established artist. I can't really see it crossing over or being adapted by upcoming indie artists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilvaringz

As for me, this album has been intense. So I will probably take some time off, but I would like to do a Rae & Ghost album together. Even got a title for it already, but that would be like a final thing I think. We'll see, time will tell.

---

Thanks for the warning, we'll learn not to get hyped up for that one this time LOL

I have to say that the notion that this album will be a return to music being art is about as pretentious as it gets. A Lou Reed album, a Cormac Mcarthy novel, a Stanley Kubrick film, these things aren't art because they're mass produced?

The conversation about this album has been mainly about its delivery system, but what isn't getting talked about is the artistic merit of the music itself. Without that conversation this whole thing sounds like a gimmick to make money.
No disrespect Ringz, I've always thought this was an intriguing idea, especially the museum tour, but all this talk about 'returning music to art' sounds like an after-the-fact justification, especially since no one will be able to judge the artistic merit of the music alone.

^best point I have read since this album was conceived

Almost thinking out loud here - but if I bought it I think I'd release it via mp3 to the world.

I'd still have the ONLY original copy [and I'd go a long way to get that verified down tight]. It's got the potential to be classic Wu and if it's good it will garner a buzz. and like, I'd have the ONLY copy!!

Otherwise, wouldn't owning this be a bit like owning the Mona Lisa and not letting anyone ever see it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punch

The conversation about this album has been mainly about its delivery system, but what isn't getting talked about is the artistic merit of the music itself. Without that conversation this whole thing sounds like a gimmick to make money.
No disrespect Ringz, I've always thought this was an intriguing idea, especially the museum tour, but all this talk about 'returning music to art' sounds like an after-the-fact justification, especially since no one will be able to judge the artistic merit of the music alone.

---

I pretty much agree.

"Cilvaringz...explained that Wu-Tang wanted to reverse the devaluation of music and help it regain the fine art status it enjoyed during the Renaissance."

The problem with this comparison is that you could not purchase recorded music during the Renaissance, so the value of composed music was monetized through live performance, which it still is today.

If an established artist of the Renaissance period would have held a composition up for auction...let's say they auctioned a single, private performance of the piece...it would certainly pique the interest of many affluent people, but the final price for the private concert would not be an indication of the composition's artistic merit. The composition would not become better or worse depending on how much somebody pays, especially when there are so many variables involved in determining how much one pays.

While art is truly in the eye (or ear) of the beholder, to be considered "art" on a large level requires a consensus among the masses. Let's take the Mona Lisa or statue of David...countless people from all walks of life from around the globe have seen and studied these pieces. Some have seen the one-of-a-kind original pieces and others have seen replicas or photos. Regardless of medium, the artistic relevance is dictated by mass evaluation and consensus among those masses. Note I did not reference sale(s) volume or revenue.

I mention this bc the same holds true for recorded music. The one-of-a-kind original is, for all intents and purposes, the Master copy. The compositions on this master can be distributed through a variety of mediums...compact disc, cassette, vinyl record, a flashdrive, digital streaming, digital download, as a score to a film, in a Boombotix speaker, etc. There may even be a variety of limited editions among these distribution formats. For example, there may be a version limited to 1,000 units that bundles together a compact disc, vinyl record and bound lyric book. Perhaps there's even a more limited version of this bundle - restricted to a single copy - that includes the actual handwritten lyrics rather than a facsimile! That one will be much more sought after and more valuable than the run of 1,000 units, but it's no more artistic. This is because the value of each distribution format will be determined through supply and demand.

The value of art does not rest in its distribution format and cannot be determined by such a limited segment of the population with no "credentials" other than wealth. Artistic merit is derived from a consensus of critical acclaim by peers, professionals and common people alike.

The value of the medium used to distribute the art may be determined by supply and demand in conjunction with the artistic relevance noted above.

At the end of the day, what Cilvaringz and RZA have produced here looks to be an exquisite housing for a compact disc that features (mostly) unheard sound recordings. Its market value will be determined among a market extremely limited in scope based upon some of the following variables:

• Wu-Tang fan and collector that simply can't live without it
• Makes a great conversation piece in the home
• Own something nobody else has
• Invest in the speculative secondhand value of the piece in the future

If someone pays $1 Billion and never lets anyone hear it or someone pays $1 and lets everyone hear it, it does not become any more or less an artistic masterpiece bc that's not tied to volume or revenue.


Also, when I read that the buyer can do whatever they want with it, including distributing it online for free, that really validated what I'm saying. The ART (good or bad) is the recorded music and it doesn't matter what format it's on or how limited it is.


Personally, I love the idea of this one-of-a-kind item, even if I hate that I won't be the one to own it! But all the talk of devaluation of music and restoration of status as it pertains to this release is either misguided or smart marketing.


The artistic value of the music will for some people be a very personal experience, while as a whole will depend on mass consensus of its merit. The commercial value of the formats featuring the recorded music CAN be devalued in several ways. The commercial value of the recorded music itself can be monetized through sales, live performance, licensing, etc., even if some of the sales suffer compared to what they once were.



Bottom line though, the commercial endeavor of selling a single unit of OUATIS has little (or nothing) do with the artistic merit of OUATIS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Origin™

It's just ego and greed, the album was hyped up massively. all news and media outlets were talking about it.

The offers of $4-$5M were not enough? apparently not..

I bet once Rza was involved with this album he wanted what? 70-75% of the sale price?

All in the name of art as well.. yes... ofcourse it was..

The greed out did the hype.

Unlucky Ringz.

---

only ppl unlucky are fans who were led to believe we'd get this album for like years

and then a cash grab ended that


hopefully for whoever profits it gets a nice sale price


only thing unlucky for ringz is he may have blown a chance at universal recognition as a wu element for a paycheck

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by logitrax

I pretty much agree.

"Cilvaringz...explained that Wu-Tang wanted to reverse the devaluation of music and help it regain the fine art status it enjoyed during the Renaissance."

The problem with this comparison is that you could not purchase recorded music during the Renaissance, so the value of composed music was monetized through live performance, which it still is today.

If an established artist of the Renaissance period would have held a composition up for auction...let's say they auctioned a single, private performance of the piece...it would certainly pique the interest of many affluent people, but the final price for the private concert would not be an indication of the composition's artistic merit. The composition would not become better or worse depending on how much somebody pays, especially when there are so many variables involved in determining how much one pays.

While art is truly in the eye (or ear) of the beholder, to be considered "art" on a large level requires a consensus among the masses. Let's take the Mona Lisa or statue of David...countless people from all walks of life from around the globe have seen and studied these pieces. Some have seen the one-of-a-kind original pieces and others have seen replicas or photos. Regardless of medium, the artistic relevance is dictated by mass evaluation and consensus among those masses. Note I did not reference sale(s) volume or revenue.

I mention this bc the same holds true for recorded music. The one-of-a-kind original is, for all intents and purposes, the Master copy. The compositions on this master can be distributed through a variety of mediums...compact disc, cassette, vinyl record, a flashdrive, digital streaming, digital download, as a score to a film, in a Boombotix speaker, etc. There may even be a variety of limited editions among these distribution formats. For example, there may be a version limited to 1,000 units that bundles together a compact disc, vinyl record and bound lyric book. Perhaps there's even a more limited version of this bundle - restricted to a single copy - that includes the actual handwritten lyrics rather than a facsimile! That one will be much more sought after and more valuable than the run of 1,000 units, but it's no more artistic. This is because the value of each distribution format will be determined through supply and demand.

The value of art does not rest in its distribution format and cannot be determined by such a limited segment of the population with no "credentials" other than wealth. Artistic merit is derived from a consensus of critical acclaim by peers, professionals and common people alike.

The value of the medium used to distribute the art may be determined by supply and demand in conjunction with the artistic relevance noted above.

At the end of the day, what Cilvaringz and RZA have produced here looks to be an exquisite housing for a compact disc that features (mostly) unheard sound recordings. Its market value will be determined among a market extremely limited in scope based upon some of the following variables:

• Wu-Tang fan and collector that simply can't live without it
• Makes a great conversation piece in the home
• Own something nobody else has
• Invest in the speculative secondhand value of the piece in the future

If someone pays $1 Billion and never lets anyone hear it or someone pays $1 and lets everyone hear it, it does not become any more or less an artistic masterpiece bc that's not tied to volume or revenue.


Also, when I read that the buyer can do whatever they want with it, including distributing it online for free, that really validated what I'm saying. The ART (good or bad) is the recorded music and it doesn't matter what format it's on or how limited it is.


Personally, I love the idea of this one-of-a-kind item, even if I hate that I won't be the one to own it! But all the talk of devaluation of music and restoration of status as it pertains to this release is either misguided or smart marketing.


The artistic value of the music will for some people be a very personal experience, while as a whole will depend on mass consensus of its merit. The commercial value of the formats featuring the recorded music CAN be devalued in several ways. The commercial value of the recorded music itself can be monetized through sales, live performance, licensing, etc., even if some of the sales suffer compared to what they once were.



Bottom line though, the commercial endeavor of selling a single unit of OUATIS has little (or nothing) do with the artistic merit of OUATIS.

---

Repped for writing the most intelligent post i've ever read on this forum, hell probably any forum..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by logitrax

I pretty much agree.

"Cilvaringz...explained that Wu-Tang wanted to reverse the devaluation of music and help it regain the fine art status it enjoyed during the Renaissance."

The problem with this comparison is that you could not purchase recorded music during the Renaissance, so the value of composed music was monetized through live performance, which it still is today.

If an established artist of the Renaissance period would have held a composition up for auction...let's say they auctioned a single, private performance of the piece...it would certainly pique the interest of many affluent people, but the final price for the private concert would not be an indication of the composition's artistic merit. The composition would not become better or worse depending on how much somebody pays, especially when there are so many variables involved in determining how much one pays.

While art is truly in the eye (or ear) of the beholder, to be considered "art" on a large level requires a consensus among the masses. Let's take the Mona Lisa or statue of David...countless people from all walks of life from around the globe have seen and studied these pieces. Some have seen the one-of-a-kind original pieces and others have seen replicas or photos. Regardless of medium, the artistic relevance is dictated by mass evaluation and consensus among those masses. Note I did not reference sale(s) volume or revenue.

I mention this bc the same holds true for recorded music. The one-of-a-kind original is, for all intents and purposes, the Master copy. The compositions on this master can be distributed through a variety of mediums...compact disc, cassette, vinyl record, a flashdrive, digital streaming, digital download, as a score to a film, in a Boombotix speaker, etc. There may even be a variety of limited editions among these distribution formats. For example, there may be a version limited to 1,000 units that bundles together a compact disc, vinyl record and bound lyric book. Perhaps there's even a more limited version of this bundle - restricted to a single copy - that includes the actual handwritten lyrics rather than a facsimile! That one will be much more sought after and more valuable than the run of 1,000 units, but it's no more artistic. This is because the value of each distribution format will be determined through supply and demand.

The value of art does not rest in its distribution format and cannot be determined by such a limited segment of the population with no "credentials" other than wealth. Artistic merit is derived from a consensus of critical acclaim by peers, professionals and common people alike.

The value of the medium used to distribute the art may be determined by supply and demand in conjunction with the artistic relevance noted above.

At the end of the day, what Cilvaringz and RZA have produced here looks to be an exquisite housing for a compact disc that features (mostly) unheard sound recordings. Its market value will be determined among a market extremely limited in scope based upon some of the following variables:

• Wu-Tang fan and collector that simply can't live without it
• Makes a great conversation piece in the home
• Own something nobody else has
• Invest in the speculative secondhand value of the piece in the future

If someone pays $1 Billion and never lets anyone hear it or someone pays $1 and lets everyone hear it, it does not become any more or less an artistic masterpiece bc that's not tied to volume or revenue.


Also, when I read that the buyer can do whatever they want with it, including distributing it online for free, that really validated what I'm saying. The ART (good or bad) is the recorded music and it doesn't matter what format it's on or how limited it is.


Personally, I love the idea of this one-of-a-kind item, even if I hate that I won't be the one to own it! But all the talk of devaluation of music and restoration of status as it pertains to this release is either misguided or smart marketing.


The artistic value of the music will for some people be a very personal experience, while as a whole will depend on mass consensus of its merit. The commercial value of the formats featuring the recorded music CAN be devalued in several ways. The commercial value of the recorded music itself can be monetized through sales, live performance, licensing, etc., even if some of the sales suffer compared to what they once were.



Bottom line though, the commercial endeavor of selling a single unit of OUATIS has little (or nothing) do with the artistic merit of OUATIS.

---

Brother said something there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by New Hills 36

Almost thinking out loud here - but if I bought it I think I'd release it via mp3 to the world.

I'd still have the ONLY original copy [and I'd go a long way to get that verified down tight]. It's got the potential to be classic Wu and if it's good it will garner a buzz. and like, I'd have the ONLY copy!!

Otherwise, wouldn't owning this be a bit like owning the Mona Lisa and not letting anyone ever see it?

---

^ good point here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punch

I have to say that the notion that this album will be a return to music being art is about as pretentious as it gets. A Lou Reed album, a Cormac Mcarthy novel, a Stanley Kubrick film, these things aren't art because they're mass produced?

The conversation about this album has been mainly about its delivery system, but what isn't getting talked about is the artistic merit of the music itself. Without that conversation this whole thing sounds like a gimmick to make money.
No disrespect Ringz, I've always thought this was an intriguing idea, especially the museum tour, but all this talk about 'returning music to art' sounds like an after-the-fact justification, especially since no one will be able to judge the artistic merit of the music alone.

---

^ agreed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilvaringz

I would like to do a Rae & Ghost album together.

---

Would be great man, Ghost needs some Guerilla Hood type shit to spit on. One of my favorite Ghost tracks.:spin: