Music Downloading not Entirely to Blame 538
Outlyer writes "A recent article in The Economist discusses the proximate causes for the decline in music sales. Of some note is this quote in the article:
"According to an internal study done by one of the majors, between two-thirds and three-quarters of the drop in sales in America had nothing to do with internet piracy. [...] Other explanations: rising physical CD piracy, shrinking retail space, competition from other media, and the quality of the music itself. But creativity doubtless plays an important part." The article discusses in some depth the short-term viewpoint of the majors and why that is likely to be the dominant problem, not the internet bogeyman."
fp (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:fp (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:fp (Score:5, Interesting)
BTW. when I buy blank CDs I am forced to pay a tax on it to 'help the artists'. Shit, I don't even care about any artists anymore, why am I forced to help them?
Re:fp (Score:5, Insightful)
The sad part is the consumers are being blamed, when the record company execs steal the most. They don't need a promotion everytime an artist successfully go mainstream. If anything they should be fired for the lack of promotion of new artists. So many good artists out there are invisible under the radar unless you sample on iTunes or something.
Re:fp (Score:5, Insightful)
It could also suggest that you no longer are interested in stuff that you don't like right away. Looking back at all my CDs, I find that it is very common for my favorite tracks to be ones that I initially did not think much of. They grew on my after many listens, as I came to appreciate things I hadn't noticed on the first listen.
Re:fp (Score:4, Insightful)
That's very true with me. I will buy a CD for one or two songs, then over the course of listening to it, I will grow to love other tracks on the CD that I didn't pay much attention to at first.
That's why when I hear something new that I like, I will download a few tracks by the artist, and if I like him/her, I will buy their CD. I will first look at my used store for it though. I'd happily buy it new from Streetside if the RIAA weren't being such assholes about suing people who share music. If the RIAA would just leave file sharers alone they'd see their sales increase [harvard.edu] rather than decrease.
Re:fp (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe I'm missing it, but it seems like more and more albums are just a collection of random songs -not a group of songs that were made to go together.
OTOH, I wonder how many here are old enough to remember buying music before the LP? The music industry seems to have forgotten that they used to sell just singles in the form of the '45. Yes, it had a "B" side, but everyone understood you were basically buying singles. Now the music industry in a tizzy because people only want to buy singles and they couldn't possibly survive if people only bought singles.
Just wait, in another 10 years the album will be back in style.
I usually prefer albums (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know what sort of music you listen to, but I like a lot of albums as a whole, as they've been produced by the artists and the producers. The promoted singles sometimes get my attention, but I usually prefer to play the album completely.
After all, would you be satisfied watching a 10 minute slot out of a movie or half an act in a play? Those
Re:fp (Score:4, Interesting)
"Why I am forced to pay taxes into healthcare even though I don't get sick very often?"
"Why do people have to pay taxes into the public school system, even if they send their children to private school?"
Because that is the way things are spun in this country. Social responsibility and social subsidising are facts of the way the country has chosen to run itself. It's a facet of the way Canada works and it has its advantages and disadvantages. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better with what many other nations put up with.
Re:fp (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you telling me that this makes any sort of sense? If it does, I am off to my accountant, I am going to register a few corporations as a musician, then I am going to produce some crap I will call music (noone has to like it, or buy it even,) and then I will be waiting for my check from the government, who is collecting those taxes for me.
Now how does that sound?
Re:fp (Score:4, Insightful)
And as long as I am paying for it, I might as well reap the legal benefits. - and I am not going to do that because again, I don't listen to music anymore. Too bad for me, I guess, I see no benefit from these subsidies whatsoever ever in any shape or form.
As to your plan of creating a 'fake' music corporation, that's abuse of the system and it doesn't count as an example. - oh, the harsh words - 'abuse'. I feel abused by the system already, this just maybe my way of getting back at the system and taking away the money they take away from me. Sure sure, two wrongs don't a right make
Re:fp (Score:5, Interesting)
No, music is pretty much for shit these days. My kids are entering their teen years and have found that they really like music. But the irony is the type of music that they really like.
1960-1980 Rock. Any current bands (eg: Blink 182) they only like a couple of songs and those preferences quickly fad away.
But they both keep coming back and listening to the older music that's on the Classic Rock music stations.
Current music sucks. It's an excellent example of monitization of art. That is to say, they practice of Art has been so heavily influenced by the monitary potential of art that all art is viewed not on it's artistic content, but on it's monitary potential. This started with the manufactured Boy Bands like Back Street Boys and N'SYNC. Even SouthPark figured this one out years ago.
Take some star like Britney Spears. Her first three songs showed some style and some actual singing talent. Now about the only thing that helps her revenue stream are her boobs. Her singing is much lower quality and poorer content than it ever was, second only to her ever decreasing investment on clothing.
I've been hearing about the RIAA bitching for decades and everyone has consistently replies, "But your music sucks so bad, why should be pay money for it?"
Now the interesting thing will be if this will be applied to the MPAA and the problems that they have with movies. After all, re-releasing Apocolypse Now and The Godfather are a sure sign that they can't do anything right anymore. Not all movies suck, but the percentage of good movies has dropped well below what it used to be.
Re:fp (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:fp (Score:5, Insightful)
Now there's a surprise
No, music is pretty much for shit these days.
And this is different from when my parents told me the same thing 15 years ago how? Adults never like the popular stuff of the time, but then they're not the target market.
I don't like much "pop" these days either, but then to be fair I never did. But it's a huge mistake to infer from this that there's no good music being made right now. There's loads. Music is a huge part of my life and there's plenty of good stuff around...you just have to look beyond your local "all hits, all the time" radio station.
people like me quit buying altogether (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe the RIAA will rape their artists every which way they possibly can, and cheat them out of their royalties at every chance. Given this, I find it more than a little ironic that the RIAA campaigns against piracy by boldly proclaiming that downloaders are cheating the artists.
Here's to hoping that sales continue to decline until the RIAA crumbles entirely out of the picture.
insightful? good god! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:fp (Score:4, Interesting)
I would disagree. This was how it was for me a few years ago anyways.. I wasnt out to "collect" as many CD's as I can... my music tastes would change, and over the time I'd trade in less listened to CD's for something new.
Yes, the artist would "sell more" if everyone only bought new, but then I would have offset my used-cd purchases by buying fewer. Fewer people buying used CD's helps deflate the price you would get trading in music, making the whole thing less attractive.
Gray markets do have a positive impact on sales - it's just not as obvious an impact.
Except... (Score:4, Insightful)
In such a scenario, that copy has already benefitted the artist as much as it was designed to.
Re:fp (Score:4, Interesting)
While the levy paid on music players may or may not make downloading legal, that does not change the fact that downloading music from P2P is 100% legal in Canada [www.cbc.ca]. If you are confused about your rights, please see the CBC's music download FAQ [www.cbc.ca].
Re:fp (Score:5, Interesting)
oh yeah, I have also purchased a dozen or so random songs on iTMS. IIRC, legal digital downloads aren't counted are album sales, so they can bitch about how cd's don't sell, but millions of albums a week are selling on iTMS.
Its time for the record companies to stop fighting the future and adopt a new business model.
Re:fp (Score:5, Interesting)
Is it time for the traditional Heinlein "Life Line" quote?
Re:fp (Score:5, Interesting)
Simple, supply and demand. In may cases, the only place you are going to find a particular album is in a used record store. (At least retail.) What was a second hand market is starting to evolve into a collector's market.
It's like the surge in "upscale" thrift stores. It turns out there is a market for retro clothing that is apart from the market for inexpensive clothing.
Heck, lobster used to be a low-cost offering for sea food. (There was once a prison riot in Maine over being served lobster.) Over time it grew into a luxury item.
Re:fp (Score:3, Interesting)
http://hamptonroads.atevo.com/guides/focus/arch i ve
"Maine lobster, which is also caught off the coasts of Massachusetts and Canada's Atlantic provinces, is perhaps the most famous and sought-after seafood dish in the world. But if the Pilgrims were to visit New England today, they would be perplexed with the esteem in which the lobster is held. The colonists regarded the meat of the lobst
Re:fp (Score:3, Informative)
Even better (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:fp (Score:5, Informative)
Geez...where do you people live?? New CD's (unless the special sacd or limited editions etc)...are in the $12-$15 range. I live in New Orleans...
I don't think I've ever seen a new single CD for as much as ya'll are talking about...
That being said...how about finding and promoting bands that can actually play their instruments well...sing without electronic tone control....can move around on stage while still really performing, and not lip synching...
And most of all...not letting physical appearance be the deciding factor. Often..people with lots of talent aren't the best looking in the world. Hell, back in the day..that's why many of those guys got into bands...they were so ugly, that if they weren't musicians...they'd have NEVER gotten laid...
That might help the sagging sales of the music industry..get some real talent out there.
Re:fp (Score:5, Interesting)
Challenge (Score:3, Funny)
Re:fp (Score:5, Informative)
If someone buys a copy of a CD from a copyright holder, and then sells that CD to some third party without making a copy of it, the copyright holder has received everything he is entitled to under the law. Neither the buyer nor the third party need permission from the copyright holder in order to transact their business; this is known as the Right of First Sale.
If a copy has been made, then the buyer has committed copyright infringement, but the third party has not, whereas in your example of downloading it from Kazaa, both parties have committed copyright infringement.
Those terms are not equivalent. "Unauthorized distribution" implies (in cases where it does not expressly mean) "distribution of a copy without the legal right to do so." Since you are not creating a new copy and distributing it, but are merely distributing the same copy that was already purchased from the copyright holder, it is entirely legal.Whether it's against the will of the copyright holder is irrelevant, so long as it's not against the law.
And, as others have noted, you're also supporting a business by buying used, especially since most used music stores are independently owned. And you're also encouraging the primary market, since people are more likely to buy goods like CDs if they know that they can resell the good later once they've gotten some use out of it.
Re:fp (Score:5, Insightful)
You're not actually serious, are you?
Yes, I did get a copy without directly compensating the copyright holder. Someone else no longer has the copy for which they already paid the copyright holder.
There originally existed one copy, for which royalties were duly paid. There still remains one and only one copy. Unauthorized file sharing, on the other hand, can produce an unlimited number of copies without payment of royalties.
How can you equate the two? And did you study economics at an RIAA-sponsored institution?
Does Ford deserve a royalty payment if someone sells a used car? No, because the original owner no longer has the use of the property. Sheesh.
When The Economist slams a huge industry... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:When The Economist slams a huge industry... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Economist just blew away their views on how their little corner of the world works.
I have a feeling that the music industry will claim that this article is nothing more than a conglomoration of Internet forum non-sense and that their business-model is acceptable and will continue. Afterall, they can claim whatever they want, the media/controlled-radio will distribute it, and the public is stupid.
Re:When The Economist slams a huge industry... (Score:5, Insightful)
However, the labels will take notice. Now the people in the recording industry who have wanted to alter the course of industry have something big to point to. They will slowly attract the attention of the executives to alternatives, and eventually, the recording industry will be prepared to handle the current state of technology and science.
Right before the world changes out from under them again.
Not in Korea (Score:5, Interesting)
Retailers are in bad shape in S. Korea.
Re:Not in Korea (Score:5, Funny)
Heck, I remember that some of the stuff was so good that I actually went to the music store to buy the album. (Which was subsequently copied and distributed to friends...)
Re:Not in Korea (Score:4, Insightful)
The whole concept of copyrighting a recording is very recent (1910's or so.) Before then, you would copyright the sheet music, which was published like any other printed work. The whole idea of controlling the playback of music was originally laughed out of court. (The early litigation centered around the mechanical playback of music by player pianos.) What came out of those legal cases was the concept that merely transposing the musical notation into another form (in this case from sheet music to the punch cards for the piano) was considered copyright infringement.
Not because you copied the music, per se. Because you were selling a copy of the music. After a bit of wrangling congress passed laws dealing with "mechanical recordings" which paved the way later for wave-form playback devices that captured sound directly and played it back.
Then came the radio.
With radio (and recorded playback at public events), we had a dilemma. Radio wasn't technically "selling" a recording of the music. They were selling a performance of the music. After a lot of wrangling the music industry and broadcasters came up with a compromise: compulsery licensing. You purchase a license to play back music in public. The proceeds from the license are redistributed back to the artists and publishers. (The RIAA doesn't make a dime off of Radio, that's ASCAP's bailywick.)
With the Internet we have elements of both case law. On one hand we are publishing "machine recordings" of music. On the other, the mechanism to transfer the files is essentially that of a radio broadcaster.
In the end, we should have to pay for the recording. But do we make the check out to the RIAA (ala record sales) or to ASCAP (ala performance licenses). The RIAA, of course, is hoping that the money comes back to them. In the end though, it will probably be an ASCAP type of organization that deals with distributing music over the internet.
Re:Not in Korea (Score:3, Interesting)
Second, your terminology is wrong. Compulsory licensing is not licensing a performance. It is licensing the rights to make your -own- recording of a musical composition that has already been recorded and published by someone else
Re:Not in Korea (Score:3, Interesting)
Even in the base exchange, their choice of music makes Wal-Mart look like iTunes. I'm going to go nuts if I hear Usher's "yeah" or one of Metallica's white trash anthems again.
This definitely puts me far outside the market in offline music purchasing.
Re:Not in Korea (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if I can find the artist I'm looking for, all they have is their "Greatest Hits" album. Now, If I'm looking for a (c)Rap album, I can find 8 different mixes of the same album. But trying to find Devo, The Beloved, or even The Beatles and the Doors is a futile ef
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
I don't buy music (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I don't buy music (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't buy music (Score:4, Interesting)
If they don't scratch your particular itch, trying some of the small-time indyish stations that have webstreams - you can find music of just about any genre being streamed over the net, and a small or academic radio operation is more likely to weight musicianship in its playlist building than it is to weight billboard chart position.
This just in... (Score:5, Funny)
(The boardroom of a major record label)
"Guys, we have a major problem. Sales are at an all-time low, and if you all want to be able to pay for your BMWs and 2-million dollar mansions, we need a new strategy!"
"Now, our attorneys and marketing boys have been hard at work, attempting to pass th blame for this dilemma for months on such things as piracy of all kinds. However, these conclusions just haven't explained the numbers, and we have just recently uncovered a shocking statistic that cannot be ignored. Please consult the chart on the wall to see how the numbers break down."
Internet piracy: 9%
Media piracy: 7%
Any other kind of piracy that we couldn't pull out of our asses: 2%
We sign crummy bands and try to pass their music off on people who actually have taste, despite all of our really expensive research: 80%
What a shock?! (Score:3, Funny)
OMG, like I am..sooo SHOCKED to hear that!
These people will never "get it"....
Did they ever think their current business process and ATTITUDE towards its customers could be the problem????
Well obviously... (Score:4, Funny)
Obviously "Tainted Love" was the pinnacle of musical creativity in the world, and CD sales were bound to decline.
"Tainted Love ... oh, oh, oh, don't touch me please"
Make a difference? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not a real shocker but nice to be higher profile.
Brick and mortar stores don't serve me (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly, the best way for a business to thrive is not to have a radical change of the business model. Instead, incremental changes and continual improvement (hitting singles instead of homers) will get the job done. One incremental change can be to make sure that downloadable music isn't just for young listerners.
How come.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How come.. (Score:4, Informative)
They a good CD a couple years back with some strong tracks on it and it was one of those CDs that I could listen to all the way through and not want to change the song.
The same with their new release. Sure, that song is a bit cheesy but it's got a catchy beat to it. Have you listened to the rest of the album? It's again, very solid. Every song almost builds on another telling a story throughout the entire album.
And as for what they've done since...um, that CD just came out recently. You want them to pound another one off within 6 months? I think you expect a bit too much there.
Re:How come.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Now it's tough to find their good old albums because the stores only stock the sucky one-hit wonder album. Seems that the older stuff just doesn't fit the band's image anymore.
Irony is lost in the free market.
But... (Score:4, Insightful)
So, one-quarter to one-third of the sales drop is due to internet piracy? I can see why companies might be worried about this. (And everyone who votes me down because I won't subscribe to their "waaa waaa waaa! I want my music for free!" is a wanker.)
Re:But... (Score:3, Informative)
"$500 million lost due to the Internet!" (they won't mention that this is in a $multi-billion industry).
Re:But... (Score:5, Insightful)
The point you're missing here is that, apparently, file-sharing isn't the major cause of the downtrend in sales. If the recording companies would focus on the real causes, and embrace the Internet in the way in which their customers demonstrably want it fashioned (as shown by the popularity of the old Napster and other peer-to-peer technologies), then they could stabilize the sales numbers and see a huge profit from opening up a new revenue stream.
The current download facilities, while popular, still fail to address the real issues presented by peer-to-peer. The RIAA already imposes a "CD Tax", why couldn't it have imposed a "Napster Tax"? The issue isn't really about free music, but rather about unfettered access to a wide variety.
Of course, the record companies fear decentralized distribution because it removes some of their current complete power over the industry, which is what this issue is REALLY all about.
Re:But... (Score:3, Interesting)
Interesting, but even by your numbers the single biggest contributor to a drop in sales is decreased interest by the consuming public (45%). Shrinking retail space occurs because end-sellers have seen a shrinking demand for Product X and want to give Product Y (with more public demand) more shelf space. Competition from other media, again, points to decreased consumer demand; if the consumers wanted this particular product, it would squash the competition. Quality of music is, then, either the nexus or t
Its the... (Score:5, Interesting)
hmmm, food or the new Britny Spears CD... tough call
The War on Piracy. (Score:5, Insightful)
NEWSFLASH!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
The drop in sales has fuck all to do with filesharing, and everything to do with the witless commercial pop that saturates the market; everybody except the RIAA knows it!
Innovationless... (Score:5, Interesting)
In every decade you had technical innovation - whether it was 4 track recording in the 60's, the emergence of prog rock and sophisticated recording techniques in the 70's, synthesizers in the 80's, or rap/rock fusion in the 90's.
Question: What has the 2000's offered that previous decades have not? Answer: Not too much. For the first time, there's no real innovation in the sound itself - there's simply nothing that hasn't already been done, no tech that a generation can call their own.
If the music seems lame, it's because it is - it's all been done before.
Wonder no longer! (Score:3, Insightful)
It can be argued that music is continually evolving and I agree with that except that the previous few decades have shown far more music innovation that has arguably happened for thousands of years. The presentation of recorded music
Let's get one thing clear though... (Score:4, Insightful)
no harm != legitimate in many people's opinions.
Music Distribution with large retailers (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Music Distribution with large retailers (Score:5, Insightful)
But at a much higher cost. Not only do you have to pay for the burner machine, but you also have to deal with issues like what to do about inserts, cases, etc. Also, a listen/burn machine is a serial use item, while shelving is parallel use. Finally maintenance, content updating, etc., all raise the cost even more.
Anyway, it's non-viable when I can just sub in another rack of DVD's at a higher margin. If we end up where DVD's are the only thing available, who cares. People will generally spend their entertainment income on what's promoted and available. Which bits happen to be on the plastic doesn't matter to the retailers. Nor does it matter to the conglomerates who are just as happy (if not more so) to sell a crappy DVD as opposed to a crapy CD.
Lets separate fact and fiction (Score:3, Informative)
The fact of the matter is that unless we can relive history and remove music piracy, we will never know for sure if it was 'the cause' of the decline or not.
This is another study and should be treated just like the ones that 'say piracy is the reason for the decline' are.
Re:Lets separate fact and fiction (Score:4, Insightful)
It wasn't just any study. It was made by one of the major music publishers. Not by an pro-consumer group or the lobbying arm of the consumer electronics manufacturers, but by the VERY people, who have been claiming Napster killed the CD star.
The cell phone killed the CD star (Score:5, Insightful)
Which is true (that the OST CD is worth almost as much as the full DVD is puzzling at best), but missed a more important point.
Two words: Cell phones.
Here in Europe most basic plans cost EUR 40 a month. That's a sizeable share of a teenager's allowance. That's at least 3 CDs a month they won't buy.
Alternatives (Score:5, Informative)
Nectarine Radio [scenemusic.net] - streaming C64, Atari ST, Adlib, etc. music
OC Remix [ocremix.org] - huge repository of submitted video game remixes
Streaming radio of above [ormgas.org]
Metroid Metal [metroidmetal.com] - Surprisingly well done
Price did it for me. (Score:5, Interesting)
I vote poor quality (Score:5, Insightful)
H-H is horrid imo - endless, short, electronic loops of intensely annoying sounds, weak and/or stupid lyrics, bad singing (if they even sing at all), it's overly produced, etc. etc.
Any new CDs I buy now are established artists who've been around for a while and have a new CD out; or I'll just buy some 'classic' stuff.
Once uninventive, regurgitated hip-hop took over, the industry pretty much lost me.
Re:I vote poor quality (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I vote poor quality (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I vote poor quality (Score:5, Informative)
I listen to hip hop and I agree. But 90% of music I hear on the radio is garbage and that's probably where you're hearing your hip hop.
H-H is horrid imo - endless, short, electronic loops of intensely annoying sounds, weak and/or stupid lyrics, bad singing (if they even sing at all), it's overly produced, etc. etc.
If the hip hop you know is "endless, short electronic loops" then - in my opinion - you're not listening to hip hop. The definitions get nit-picky, but in my mind if the MC (the guy with the microphone) doesn't have a DJ backing him up doing the music, it's not hip hop. It could be called rap, though. (Hip hop as a genre, to me, would have to embody more than one of the aspects of hip hop culture - MCing, DJing, breakdancing, and graffiti.) So music with a DJ is what you're looking for. The music should be as good as the lyrics.
Now, beyond the instrumentals - if the music you know has weak and/or stupid lyrics, we have to find you new music. The reason I listen to hip hop is because of the lyrics, not in spite of. Because the lyrics are smart, because the rhymes are rhymes I've never heard, etc.
Without rambling on for days, let me list a few albums or artists you might like to check out. Jurassic 5 - any album. Blackalicious - any album, but check out the newest one Blazing Arrow. Lyrics Born - Later That Day. Maroons - Ambush. Zion I - any album. Dilated Peoples - any album. Mos Def. The Roots. Talib Kweli. All of these groups have smart, generally positive lyrics. If you find someone you like, visit www.allmusic.com [allmusic.com] and see who they've worked with on other songs, and check out those artists too.
If you're interested in turntablism (creating music with other records as the primary source) check out some of the great turntablists - The X-ecutioners, Rob Swift, Cut Chemist, DJ Z-Trip, DJ Shadow. (Rob Swift is in the X-ecutioners, but he has a few solo albums.)
It will be different music than what you're used to, probably, but it'll also be different than the overproduced "blazin' hip hop & R&B" trash they play on the radio. Give it a chance, and listen to the lyrics and pay attention to what the DJs are doing - maybe you'll find something you like.
Good news (Score:4, Interesting)
The economist reaches a very broad audience of VERY intelligent people, and also people who tend to have a lot of money, or be in positions of power. Hopefully they can recongize the situation for what it is, and I think the economist will give the position some credibility.
We have to start somewhere with educating the people in charge, and I'd say the Economist is a hell of a source to have touting this position.
How do you count the effect of quality? (Score:4, Insightful)
Music tastes are extremely subjective. If anything, the objective measures would tend to suggest that the music is getting better, in the sense that it's been focus-grouped to death. Somebody out there is saying, "Yes, we like it. We like it so much we want to copy it off the Internet or from a friend's CD."
It seems likely that in fact the focus-grouping and hit-promoting have lowered the quality of the music to a least common denominator, but I'd love to know how this industry report went about measuring that. In the end that measurement will describe how the music changes from here. The executives who make the decisions aren't artists and don't use artistic judgment to decide what to produce. They look at numbers and poll likely group members to see what will sell. They know that people will only buy what they like, so I'd love to know what measure of "like" they're using for this study that's different from the ones they're already using.
Concert attendance is down, too. (Score:5, Informative)
The music industry has a hard time accepting that they sell an elastic good - when prices go up, sales go down. That's really happened to concert tickets. $60 tickets for second-tier bands went unsold all summer. Several major tours were cancelled. Lollapalooza was cancelled due to slow ticket sales.
The endless reissue of "oldies" is self-limiting. By now, everybody who wants any Beatles/Stones/Doors CD presumably has it.
But the fundamental problem is much simpler. The outlets that sell audio CDs don't just sell music. They also sell movie DVDs, which provide more entertainment content at a lower price. Audio CDs ought to sell for about $3.99 to $5.99. There's no excuse for audio CDs by mediocre bands costing more than DVDs of major, big-budget films.
my beef with corporations (Score:3, Interesting)
It's the exact same thing with the pharma companies withholding the results of studies that are damaging to them. Ditto for the tobacco companies. I wish there was something that forced big companies to tell the truth when they have it.
No more Boomers (Score:3, Insightful)
Music Sales Decline As People Get Older (Score:3, Interesting)
Are there studies that bear on this?
Is it all relative? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure there are re-releases today still but the numbers dwarf in comparison to the beginning to 90's. This was a point brought up during PBS Frontline "The Way the Music Died" [pbs.org] documentary on the troubles of the music industry. I seem to remember that Frontline pointed out that sales relative to new albums have actually gone up. But the overall sales have gone down because older albums sales have decline greatly. This Economist report doesn't address this point.
Quality (Score:3, Insightful)
I like that old time a-rock 'n' roll
MPAA / RIAA biggest fear (Score:5, Insightful)
it's not p2p or theft or piracy or even used CD/DVD sales.
their biggest fear is that you tune out and stop watching/listening altogether. that would mean not only no sales, but no advertising revenue either.
if this happens on any scale, i expect the mpaa/riaa to push through 1984/maxheadroom style legislation requiring a TV in every house turned on 24/7, and make it illegal to turn them off.
Home Taping is Killing Music ! (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, wow, what am I doing here !
Last thing I remembered, I was reading the inner sleeve of my Madness 7 album which said "Home Taping is Killing Music" while recording it to cassette tape for my buddy.
Now it's 20 years later and Music isn't dead !
Arghgh ! - what's going on !
Satellite radio effects (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't know what the net effect of growth is. As a one-year XM subscriber, I listen to CDs less, but have purchased a couple a CDs from artists I never would have discovered without satellite radio.
It's getting better. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
We are experiencing a Renaissance of locally-produced music, from street performers to small bands. Music is no longer the exclusive domain of a handful of mega-conglomerates, but is being taken back and revitalized on the micro scale. Seattle/Portland (near me) support a thriving community of small indepenent musicans producing truly excellent music. It's like the 60's all over again. Not so much "new" sounds, but new takes on the folk/rock/celtic traditions and a resurgence of interest in vocals and acoustic instrumentation rather than synthesized, reprocessed top-40. Complex, muti-layered arrangements that depend on real musicians, not 20 year old pinups with digitally-enhanced vocals supporting their silicon-enhanced figures.
Personnally, I'm excited by the trend, and am actively building a large and varied CD collection with very little help from the RIAA.
The Way Music Died (Score:3, Informative)
Record labels were once small and not very profitable. However during the 80's and early 90's the music industry saw the introduction of CDs, which compelled people to purchase many of their older albums again, as well as the introduction of new genres of pop music ( HipHop, Rap, Grundge, etc). The combination of these events brought a LOT of money to record labels, and that compelled larger corporations to start investing in the music industry. Unfortunately, CDs and new genres of music became mainstream, and now we have corporate labels who are concerned about quarterly profits... not long term investments. All in all, it's a recipe for disaster... and crappy music.
But... any who... watch the Frontline piece to see what happens.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/m
Evil Economics (Score:3, Insightful)
http://www.summerblue.net/missives/copyright.ht
The major distributors are now in a situation where their product is having to compete with a free rival (P2P). It's hard to compete with free. In fact, all the major distributors have to offer are ease of access, breadth of catalogue and guaranteed quality. This is not worth 15 UKP a CD and 25 UKP a DVD! this painful adjustment is currently what the major distributors are in denial about, and have attempted to perform a minimum-effort resolution, lawsuits, and via DRM.
Our culture is accustomed to copying, because of the VCR, and it is not possible, a la prohibition, to legislate out of existance an act which is widely culturally accepted.
DRM is a brittle solution, since the P2P networks provide immediate and universal distribution of material; if a DRMed product is broken *just once*, then it's gone - it goes public, and that's that. Since DRM is a major investment, and since these companies have a long habit of choosing proprietory security implimentations, I think they're on a burning plane with no parachutes.
All in all, I think the heyday of the major distributors is over.
--
Toby
New music (Score:3, Insightful)
music that doesn't suck (Score:5, Informative)
I know, I know... most of the people on Slashdot are probably thinking I've started smoking crack or something, but I can honestly say I can't remember the last time I bought a new rock album. Try bands like Cross Canadian Ragweed or Reckless Kelly, they are more southern rock than country. Pat Green is the godfather of the Texas music scene, although I think he's starting sound more and more "Nashville", check out his older albums. There are too many other names to mention here but i'll put a link on the bottom of the page.
Of all current styles of music this seems to be the only one that doesn't have completely innane lyrics, i.e. the lyrics aren't about how much their life sucks like most current rock songs, doing drugs and having sex like most current rap songs(remind you of 80's metal?, hehe), and finally the lyrics aren't some lame patriotic theme or a corny love song like "Nashville country". Not to mention that the artists actually write their own songs, which can't be said about alot of forms of music popular these days. If you still doubt me, then by all means check out some of these bands. I don't think anyone outside of Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana even knows they exist. At the universities here in Texas I don't think I know a single person who hasn't at least heard of these guys. I hope I helped you find alternatives to the RIAA's list of crap....
-Joe
Links:
http://www.texasmusicguide.com/ [texasmusicguide.com]
http://www.lonestarmusic.com/ [lonestarmusic.com]
http://www.patgreen.com/ [patgreen.com]
http://www.crosscanadianragweed.com/ [crosscanadianragweed.com]
http://www.texasmusicmovement.com/ [texasmusicmovement.com]
MTV and Radio (Score:3, Funny)
Nothing new here? (Score:5, Insightful)
He talked about how at some point the tone and attitude of big music changed from being supportive and developing of young talent for the long term to being adverserial and short term profit minded.
I think this economist article is the conclusion and proof of what he was talking about, his thoughts were mostly anecdotal without concrete evidence. From the interview:
"When it all started, record companies -- and there were many of them, and this was a good thing -- were run by people who loved records," he says. "Now record companies are run by lawyers and accountants.
SRC: PBS Frontline [pbs.org]
The result of this commercialization and 'selling out' resulted in companies the likes of Sony, BMG, EMI, etc. run by lawyers and accountants. Of course, their first instinct when faced with new technology and a threat is to sue the pants of grandmas and 12 year olds. Way to go corporate America!!!
I'm gonna apologize for my attitude, for this next part but... I got karma to burn.
Evidently, having some lawyer or accountant run a business may just well run it into the ground. There is apparently no substitute, no matter how ivy or expensive your degree may be, for heart and really appreciating the business you work with or work in. Being in it for money will eventually sink the ship. It's love of music that brings out the great music, and brings it to the people, not lawsuits, not cheap thrills turned into overnight successes with the help of Payola (to radio stations -- ahem Clear Channel), over promotion and slick advertising (ahem -- MTV).
I hope Elliot Spitzer rips these companies and the lawyers who run them a new one with his Payola investigation.
M
Re:Reason why I don't buy cds (Score:3, Informative)
The world is full of people, and it doesn't seem wrong to have less than 10% of music aimed at me.
Re:Reason why I don't buy cds (Score:3, Insightful)
i never bought this argument. i'm pretty sure in the 90s, we blasted the 90s music as being crappy compared to the 80s. and in the 80s, we blasted the 80s music as being crappy compared to the 70s. and so on.
you may think music now is crappy compared to what you grew up with. what makes this generation so special that the entire consumer base thinks the music is crappy at the same time?
Re:Reason why I don't buy cds (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Reason why I don't buy cds (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, I think the early 90s were a great era for mainstream music, with artists from Dre and Snoop Dogg to Nirvana that produced not only commercial success but also lasting music with merit (whether or not it's all to your tastes). The late 9
Re:MP3 players (Score:3, Interesting)
No not playing it, but recording at concerts. there is a LARGE number of bands that allow taping at a concert. I end up with live albums of my favorites and not so favorites that is usually massively better than the junk the RIAA tries to sell.
I got sick of crap music a long time ago. the only NEW album I have bought in over 2 years was the new CAKE album, and I bought that off the band's website to ensure they get the money from it.
Now I collec
Re:Physical CD Pirates? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Physical CD Pirates? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Physical CD Pirates? (Score:4, Informative)
Physical CD piracy is the selling of unlicensed duplicated CDs... like the guy selling CDs from a table on the street for $5.
Re:Um, duh? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's one thing to run your mouth on a tech related web site claiming something. It's
Re:Um, duh? (Score:3, Interesting)