How Taylor Swift is making bank

Also read: Taylor's Version: As the Eras Tour film hits the silver screen, here's how Swift is fueling the economy

Taylor Swift: songwriter

Swift’s antagonistic relationship with her former label Big Machine Records and subsequent archnemesis Scooter Braun, and her quest to retrieve the rights to her masters is well-documented. Artist versus music label is a rivalry as old as good versus evil, Lars Ulrich versus Napster or MiniDisc versus DCC. What’s unique here, however, is that Swift has writing credits (and performance rights) on all her songs across six albums, which is unusual for a pop artist from her generation. This meant that once the restriction on re-recording material expired in November 2020, she could do whatever she wanted with the material, since she owned the Musical Composition copyright. The action-plan? Re-record and release six of her albums featuring previously released and unreleased songs.

Let’s take it from the top.

Musicians re-recording their work is not new. It has been common practice for decades—in the pre-Beatles era, artists would re-record their work when changing labels, recording compilations or greatest-hits records. Artists, however, were mere performers, and performance came above all else. The idea of music production, marketing and distribution was an intimidating prospect—something the people in suits did, and above the musician’s paygrade. Retaining both artistic and financial control over an artist’s work was an abstract concept and it wasn’t until later, that it was a luxury afforded to famous stars, such as Frank Sinatra, who re-recorded his hits for his own label.

But has any individual artist enjoyed this level of commercial success re-recording and serial-releasing three albums of their previous works (two of which were possibly recorded mid-tour) with the promise of three more to come? Nope, not in the streaming era, at least. Ms Swift is riding solo here.

Two point perfect?

In addition to serving hot justice (the third time around) and cold revenge, the goal with the masterfully branded “Taylor’s Version” albums appears to be the reconstruction of original material in as faithful a manner as possible with the added textures of world-weariness and inescapable artistic evolution. Not a perfect version of the material, just a version that reflects the moment.

Also read: Taylor Swift’s The Eras Tour film is as exhilarating as anything you might see in a cinema this year

1989 (Taylor’s Version) certainly exudes the essence of the original 1989, which some would argue was the perfect pop album (it did feature three number ones and seven hit singles), with the addition of unreleased “From the Vault” tracks complimenting the old material and taking the song count to a whopping 22.

It is hard to re-record and re-release your old songs. Potentially harder than recording the original material, despite an artist’s familiarity with it. Doing it all over again poses technical (merely identifying the same studio equipment, replicating arrangements) and logistical challenges (getting the old gang back together to make magic—the original was also co-produced by the legendary Max Martin and Shellback duo). There is also the challenge of capturing a performance.

It’s not hard to critique the slightly lacklustre vocal delivery, or if you’re a music nerd, the “can we get away with this?” production quality in 1989 (Taylor’s Version) compared to the original, but ultimately, it doesn’t matter, since its success speaks for itself, and it’s a very deliberate product of Swift’s intentions. That’s three down, let’s look forward to number four.