Mister Matt - I have to disagree with you. When a revival is mounted of a show that hasn't played Broadway in decades its cast often brings something new to the production that would make recording it seem like it's a fresh score. Also, if the show is doing well, or has a huge advance, getting the new cast recording made is a useful marketing tool to keep the ticket sales up.
For example, you mentioned Gypsy. Peters, Merman, Daly, and Lansbury were all so completely different in the role of Rose -- and the productions of Gypsy in which they starred so thoroughly unique -- that the recordings each held their own weight.
Other examples: Kiss Me, Kate hadn't been recorded in decades when Brian Stokes Mitchell and Marin Mazzie opened the revival. Listening to Alred Drake and Patrica Morrison was great, but the recording sounded old. It's still a great album, but the producers quite rightly felt that the new intrpretation and fresh sound of the leads would lure an audience -- and it did.
In the 1980's when Oklahoma! was revived, the original album was some 40 years old! There was a business need and an artistic need for the revival to be preserved.
I'd be willing to buy a new La Cage recording, because I collect show music. But at the same time, sentimental reasons not withstanding, I'd never give the okay to make the album if I were an investor in the show. It's lost too much money, and it's just sinking deeper -- in spite of, or perhaps because of -- the addition of quasi-star Robert Goulet.
Updated On: 6/2/05 at 10:24 AM
