Is filesharing the death of music; Trent Reznors model

[garyb]

Heaven forbid that you are not able to propagate your gene pool and contribute to global warming. Maybe you need to lower your standard of living instead of bitching all the time.

well, i could just say F#^& you, and then hunt you down with one of my non existant guns, or say "i know you are, but what am i" or just wish misfortune on you, the way that you wish it on me(you have NO idea how i live, as far as i can tell, you spend FAR more on crap than i do, i live rather simply indeed. my wife gathers junk, it's true, but it's junk after all, old stuff for the most part).

instead, i'll just understand that you were intellectually overmatched and so you hads to resort to childishness, because, you're not adult enough to have an actual discussion and modify your veiw, when you point of veiw becomes indefensable.

I BEVER SAID I WAS AGAINST FILESHARING OR WEB SALES, IN FACT, I SAID EXPLICITLY THAT I WOULD HAPPILY ACCEPT SUCH SALES. WHAT I SAID WAS, THAT IT'S HARDER FOR A MUSICIAN TO MAKE A LIVING(as a musician) UNDER THE CURRENT CONDITIONS.

oh and in the spirit of towlie, YOU'RE a towel....

[Mr Arkadin]

Heaven forbid that you are not able to propagate your gene pool and contribute to global warming.

If you're that bothered kill yourself and do us all a favour (more oxygen for me).

[Fluxpod]

ARRRRBLARGUHHÄÄÄÄRRKKSSSAAAHHHHRRGGGGGG

[dawman]

Nobody Jacks Off Braincell better than GaryB ....
Except for the Bumblebee below.

[capacitor]

[capacitor]

Man - I know it is not cheap nor easy, but I'd love the wholesale re-adoption of physical & analog records.

If there was a more modern & evironmentally friendly substitute for vinyl - well, we probably would have better sounding music in the long term.

I can think of one such substitute...

[valis]

Vinyl used to be cheap, it's actually quite costly these days to use for pressing as it's second fiddle to almost every other industry that wants to use the same substrate materials for their stuff (tires for instance).

Also vinyl has been whole-sale adopted by certain musical subcultures, which is (imo) largely responsible for its increase in the last decade. Dance music is one but the punk & 'independant' rock scene (including emo) have made 7"s very popular again as well. At least in the US...

[dawman]

You know what lasted longer than the vinyl ???
The jackets they came in.
When my little boy was 6 he saw the 600 + covers in a big pile in the basement.
I lived next to a used record store years ago and bought the covers for 25 cents apiece,and everytime I shopped there I would buy 30 or so and tack them up on the wall of my studio. It actually helped deaden the sound a little.
When he said he wanted to wallpaper his room we used them again, and they have been there for 6 1/2 years still. The entire ceiling and walls are covered with them. Also about 14 copper mirrored tiles to fill in some spaces.
He won't let me take them down so they stay. His little buddies love hanging out there too.

You wouldn't believe some of the artists. Of course all of the Beatles, Doors, Hendrix, Joplin & Carole King. But even Stan Kenton, Davis Hasselhof ( pre cheeseburger on the floor days ) and remember Illya Kuryakin from the Man From Uncle series....David McCallum, and even the Butler Sebastien Cabbott...... A strange but versatile collection.

At any rate it was long before the introduction of retreads.
When he was still young and full of joy he claimed if he looked at an LP he could hear the music.....
At any rate I never throw anything away and have a couple houses full of junk.
But those jacket covers should last a lifetime.
They don't make anything like they use to anymore...

[valis]

Yes album art was a huge part of the package, and drove sales in its own right as well.

As for the vinyl again, most of the people I know that release vinyl do it specifically *despite* the opportunity to recoup their costs. Both in Dance music & 'indie rawk' / emo / punk it's seen a as a sign of...well probably many things. Respecting the culture, a sign of getting respect for your own work (some ego-bias in there perhaps), a sign that the published work on vinyl is somehow 'more real' than putting a few mp3's on a webpage somewhere, more lasting/collectible/valuable. Probably as many takes on that as there are labels pressing & buyers collecting.

I've got quite vinyl a collection myself as well (4-5000 dance/dnb/downtempo/electronic vinyls collected over about 14 years). Most of this stuff is deeper pressings with only 1 track per side of vinyl, and much of it isn't available for longer than a few weeks, if you can find it at all from resources available where you live. Mp3's have not in any way contributed to the 'death' of my other collection. Rather they've given me avenues to explore I otherwise wouldn't have had available and led to me making more careful choices that are more informed by the ability to actually soak up a piece before buying.

CD purchases were always solely for the purpose of casual listening. Anything I took "seriously" I would seek out on vinyl (even if it was a full LP) just for the sake of it (often having both cd & vinyl). CD's were just a way to acquire music to listen to, whether purchased at a band's show, a retail store, a college-town 'indie' shop or used record/CD shop. Casual listening, bits of music I was into but not enough to want to acquire on vinyl, mix-cd's replacing mixtapes, band-cd's etc. In part I would say this is where mp3's are replacing CD's (at least for me) and if anything I'm even more inclined to pick stuff up if I can pick & choose from tracks or only spend a few bucks on an impulse purchase (versus $10-20 for a full CD).

In fact I'd even go so far as to say tracking my mp3 purchases as my CD purchases dwindled the mp3's not only picked up the slack but accellerated the intake of music. The convenience is hard to understate, and when I want something for the sake of not just convenience alone, there's always vinyl...

[next to nothing]

I BEVER SAID I WAS AGAINST FILESHARING OR WEB SALES, IN FACT, I SAID EXPLICITLY THAT I WOULD HAPPILY ACCEPT SUCH SALES. WHAT I SAID WAS, THAT IT'S HARDER FOR A MUSICIAN TO MAKE A LIVING(as a musician) UNDER THE CURRENT CONDITIONS.

I dont believe you.

My claim is that you are more able now to get a contract for supporting a live act, or be a main act yourself.

I claim that it is easier now to get something through to the "puplic" that gives them a reason to see your gigs than it ever was


And I even claim that it is more easy now than ever to have commercial success without backing from a major.

please correct me if im wrong.

[next to nothing]

Yes album art was a huge part of the package, and drove sales in its own right as well.

As for the vinyl again, most of the people I know that release vinyl do it specifically *despite* the opportunity to recoup their costs. Both in Dance music & 'indie rawk' / emo / punk it's seen a as a sign of...well probably many things. Respecting the culture, a sign of getting respect for your own work (some ego-bias in there perhaps), a sign that the published work on vinyl is somehow 'more real' than putting a few mp3's on a webpage somewhere, more lasting/collectible/valuable. Probably as many takes on that as there are labels pressing & buyers collecting.

I've got quite vinyl a collection myself as well (4-5000 dance/dnb/downtempo/electronic vinyls collected over about 14 years). Most of this stuff is deeper pressings with only 1 track per side of vinyl, and much of it isn't available for longer than a few weeks, if you can find it at all from resources available where you live. Mp3's have not in any way contributed to the 'death' of my other collection. Rather they've given me avenues to explore I otherwise wouldn't have had available and led to me making more careful choices that are more informed by the ability to actually soak up a piece before buying.

CD purchases were always solely for the purpose of casual listening. Anything I took "seriously" I would seek out on vinyl (even if it was a full LP) just for the sake of it (often having both cd & vinyl). CD's were just a way to acquire music to listen to, whether purchased at a band's show, a retail store, a college-town 'indie' shop or used record/CD shop. Casual listening, bits of music I was into but not enough to want to acquire on vinyl, mix-cd's replacing mixtapes, band-cd's etc. In part I would say this is where mp3's are replacing CD's (at least for me) and if anything I'm even more inclined to pick stuff up if I can pick & choose from tracks or only spend a few bucks on an impulse purchase (versus $10-20 for a full CD).

In fact I'd even go so far as to say tracking my mp3 purchases as my CD purchases dwindled the mp3's not only picked up the slack but accellerated the intake of music. The convenience is hard to understate, and when I want something for the sake of not just convenience alone, there's always vinyl...

as stated in the video, give people a reason to buy, and they will.

[ReD_MuZe]

basically this is the time musicians are getting sober from the "idol" craze, that pumped allot of good money into bad music.

musicians have finally come to realize that targeting the zap culture basically means you get a disloyal crowd that doesn't care about your music, but rather about the latest fad, and can zap away from your station as easily as they zapped to you.

the real business here is targeting music lovers. not the masses and the mainstream.
and you know what?

its about time!

[valis]

I agree with that Red, especially since a cultural change that shifts the focus to more live performances can't be a bad thing!

I also agree with the point that the acts doing these 'highly successful experiments' already have established profiles in our culture. NIN, Radiohead etc, these are already VERY well known acts. That isn't to say you couldn't put time into your own ventures to see how they go, but I do doubt you'll show 250k in sales in your first day/week right off the bat.

[braincell]

i'll just understand that you were intellectually overmatched and so you hads to resort to childishness, because, you're not adult enough to have an actual discussion and modify your veiw, when you point of veiw becomes indefensable.

It is so nice of you to remind me of how superior you are to me. I will have to remember that *snicker*.

[capacitor]

It is so nice for you to remind me of how superior you are to me. I will have to remember that *snicker*.

Isn't this something you could have just left unsaid?

Edit: flimkien ma 'kull ħaġa oħra

[braincell]

Touché!

[garyb]

I BEVER SAID I WAS AGAINST FILESHARING OR WEB SALES, IN FACT, I SAID EXPLICITLY THAT I WOULD HAPPILY ACCEPT SUCH SALES. WHAT I SAID WAS, THAT IT'S HARDER FOR A MUSICIAN TO MAKE A LIVING(as a musician) UNDER THE CURRENT CONDITIONS.

I dont believe you.

My claim is that you are more able now to get a contract for supporting a live act, or be a main act yourself.

I claim that it is easier now to get something through to the "puplic" that gives them a reason to see your gigs than it ever was


And I even claim that it is more easy now than ever to have commercial success without backing from a major.

please correct me if im wrong.

that may be so in Europe. live gigs are sparse and pay poorly here(but not necessarily in Las Vegas and similar places, as Jimmy said), and noone pays for music much...

sure, i'd love to do a European tour!

i know many old timers, i work in a music store and service clients from Joe Walsh and Michael Jackson(or their reps anyway ) and the kid who's just getting started, and as i keep saying, 35 years ago and before, it was MUCH easier to make a living. the owner of the store was in a cover band playing top 40 in the 70's out of high school and he made as much money as his friends with "real" jobs. i know so many people who made a living touring in the 70's who took corporate jobs in the 80's and 90's because all the work had dried up, that it's not funny.

a real tour, even a modest one, with merchandise to sell(that's how the money's made) and contacs made and followed up on to assure local support and turnout takes a considerable investment. someone with deep pockets must fit the bill. artists are always looking for patrons to make it all possible. it's not just a matter of doing the work, it's also about fitting the agenda, which of course is nothing new. i'm not impressed with 4 smelly guys living in a van and pulling a trailer, starving and hoping to meet someone helpful in the next city. i don't need to be in the lap of luxury, i just want to make a living and pay my bills. i'm not seeing that as any easier these days. what do you do for a living?

still, trends are what they are(or seem to be), but there are still plenty of success stories. i'm not trying to say that there are none. if we were all sane, we probably wouldn't play music anyway. we'd just become bankers or lawyers or real estate sales people(although most of us have to do such things anyway )...

[garyb]

basically this is the time musicians are getting sober from the "idol" craze, that pumped allot of good money into bad music.

musicians have finally come to realize that targeting the zap culture basically means you get a disloyal crowd that doesn't care about your music, but rather about the latest fad, and can zap away from your station as easily as they zapped to you.

the real business here is targeting music lovers. not the masses and the mainstream.
and you know what?

its about time!

i'm cool with that.

[Mr Arkadin]

that may be so in Europe. live gigs are sparse and pay poorly here(but not necessarily in Las Vegas and similar places, as Jimmy said), and noone pays for music much...

sure, i'd love to do a European tour!

Don't be thinking of that as a retirement plan. In the UK anyway (not sure about Europe) gigs are poorly paid. Also the download model seems to be based on touring bands - what if you're a studio-based musician, where's your income if your downloads are free? Sure if you're Prince you can give your latest album away in a newspaper, do 21 nights at the O2 (20,000 seater venue) and you're quids in. There's a band i follow who have had moderate success, have supported Gary Numan on two tours and recently did a local London gig and earned the mighty sum of £50 even though they packed the place out. How is this a model for the future?

[braincell]

There are a lot of musicians earning enough money to survive through the internet. Playing live was never an easy way to make money. I think sales are down for major industry labels not so much because of piracy but because there are just a huge amount of entertainment choices. Music competes with videos, games, web surfing, television. The list goes on and on so they focus on piracy as the cause of slow sales because this is the only thing they can try to stop. It won't solve the industry problem even if music piracy totally disappears.

It is interesting to me that the same people who say piracy is bad are frequently posting youtube videos which are full of video and music copyright infringements. They don't see streaming as being the same kind of infringement as downloading but it is. It's illegal. So why is there a double standard for youtube versus pirate bay?