Doesn’t remastering also hurt the studio musicians who recorded the originals? Or do they only get a session fee and no residual at all from future sales? Coul

Doesn’t remastering also hurt the studio musicians who recorded the originals? Or do they only get a session fee and no residual at all from future sales? Couldn’t the new owners continue to sell the original masters through iTunes and whatnot, just at a discount to remaster? Personally, I don’t like re-recorded music as I think the authenticity of the original recording is of some value to me. It’s good the author prefers the new version, but that’s a different album that what I originally heard. I would love to know how the deal was projected and how each side calculated present value. Also interesting to know what Swift offered and why BigMachine turned down her deal. I think this business stuff of music is a distraction and it’s sad to hear about artists spending time and attention re-recording original stuff rather than working on new art. There’s a response tweet about how Mick Jagger and Keith Richards re-record sync requests so they can get more money. It’s a shame because they could be doing more productive things rather than trying to maximize their millions. Although it’s understandable because most people give the choice of “money” or “more money” choose more.