It's an interesting idea, but I tend to shy away from government influence in creative areas. I just don't like the idea of any sort of authority influence in something that is very often used as a strong form of protest. Just imagine what the 60s would've been like if Bob Dylan had been getting government funding. Granted, I think that, in the US at least, the government is too concerned with saving face to attempt censoring artists this way, but I'm paranoid about freedom of speech.










Also the government is run by old people who don't like our boom boom boom techno mooziks.

___________________
My Soundcloud
My Bandcamp

More labels and producers than ever, fewer people willing to pay money for canned recordings, and a general lack of innovation and a resistance to change is what got us here. Everyone is fighting for an increasingly smaller slice of the pie. You can serve more pie but it won't help for long.

it's being done in Toronto for genres outside of EDM and electronic music in general.

hasn't helped much in terms of creative output (at least from the subsidized bands that i've heard).

er... i would shy away from this kind of solution actually. imagine if raves got government subsidies in the early 90s. it would have ruined the music, no?

the only solution is to go crazy, lose sleep, lose health, lose money and make music. ... and wasn't it always this way anyway, at least with popular music?

quote:

Originally posted by Scrittah Also the government is run by old people who don't like our boom boom boom techno mooziks.

quoted for posterity

Hmm, it seems like some of you fear the loss of music fueled by passionate idealism rather then financial gain. I do sympathize with that, as i think the scene is operating just fine that way even these days. However, consider a few of these things:

• Producers may still choose to be independent.
  
• Government funding is usually more objective and is far less likely to influence output then commercial funding is.
  
• It does not look like the nineties are coming back in the foreseeable future. The whole scene would have to die out and start from scratch again, which isn't happening either.
  

___________________
Mixes: Alaé (Conceptional ambient dub)
AOTSE (Experimental)

Listens:
http://www.last.fm/user/bierheld

i don't want my hard-earned money going to some unemployed drugged-out hippy smacking some keyboard. f that.

___________________
UnauthorizedTranceAddict Youtube Channel where I post older mixes from the TA DJ Promotion Forum

My mixes:

Still up:1:2

Down:3:4:5

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange i don't want my hard-earned money going to some unemployed drugged-out hippy smacking some keyboard. f that.

Um...

In what way is culture suffering? You say "Producers these days are apparently not making enough money." What is the evidence for this? The primary consumer complaint I see on TA is that entry costs are very low, so producers are putting out a great number of tracks, many of which are of low quality. When Beatport is flooded with too many tracks, it's hard to find the best stuff. That is not a reason to subsidize the production of music. In fact, if you want to induce quality upgrading, the easiest way to do so is to raise entry costs!

If you want to subsidize the production of high-quality music, then I look forward to legislation defining musical quality.

Evidence (Joel Waldfogel, NBER 16882):

quote:

In the decade since Napster, file-sharing has undermined the protection that copyright affords recorded music, reducing recorded music sales. What matters for consumers, however, is not sellers’ revenue but the surplus they derive from new music. The legal monopoly created by copyright is justified by its encouragement of the creation of new works, but there is little evidence on this relationship. The file-sharing era can be viewed as a large-scale experiment allowing us to check whether events since Napster have stemmed the flow of new works. We assemble a novel dataset on the number of high quality works released annually, since 1960, derived from retrospective critical assessments of music such best-of-the-decade lists. This allows a comparison of the quantity of new albums since Napster to 1) its pre-Napster level, 2) pre-Napster trends, and 3) a possible control, the volume of new songs since the iTunes Music Store’s revitalization of the single. We find no evidence that changes since Napster have affected the quantity of new recorded music or artists coming to market. We reconcile stable quantities in the face of decreased demand with reduced costs of bringing works to market and a growing role of independent labels.

Gated pdf.

___________________
D.Squared - The Groove Supremum (December 2010)
D.Squared - New Originals (mix of famous sample sources)

i think it's a pretty stupid idea tbh

we have it over here, and it always ends up going to autonomists and hippies and the best thing you can hope to get out of that is some dubstep. it's not expensive to produce dance music, and, unless you're someone like faithless or hybrid, not a very good place to make a career

i'd say low entry costs are actually a good thing. low price of entry is actually part of what gave birth to the scene in the first place.

if there's one thing i'd wish for it's for the banning of making covers. god that annoys me.

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange i don't want my hard-earned money going to some unemployed drugged-out hippy smacking some keyboard. f that.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Dingel The primary consumer complaint I see on TA is that entry costs are very low, so producers are putting out a great number of tracks, many of which are of low quality. When Beatport is flooded with too many tracks, it's hard to find the best stuff. That is not a reason to subsidize the production of music. In fact, if you want to induce quality upgrading, the easiest way to do so is to raise entry costs!

^Exactly.

Government is inefficient as it is, on top of that, you expect politicians to hire competent workers to go out there and identify talented EDM producers and pay them a stipend for their music?

And you expect millions of taxpayers to willingly pay more in taxes so that a small minority of people can enjoy the proverbial "good EDM"?

EDM, or any music for the matter, isn't a public good. Why on earth should the government get involved? Let the consumers of music decide what they want to listen to by voting with their wallets. If they vote to listen to mass commercialized music, so be it. The idea of the government subsidizing music, which is inherently subject to personal taste, is beyond ridiculous.

___________________
Progressive is not a style. It's about attitude.

Check me out on Soundcloud

Last edited by projectd on Mar-25-2011 at 02:23

quote:

Originally posted by Bierheld Government funding is usually more objective and is far less likely to influence output then commercial funding is.

How do you figure? How would the government set their standards to be objective for something as subjective as music? On top of that, do you really trust the government to not push their own propaganda through music?

quote:

Originally posted by Bierheld Still, potential gains would be a more healthy and accessible scene of original music with bedroom producers having more room to promote themselves. It's also a way of negating some of the supposed damage done by piracy. In a way it would make paying for music more like an optional donation. Not ideal by any means, but this is basically already the case.

The only things bedroom producers need to produce music are already available at their fingertips. Yet they are producing a ton of garbage. Now you want the government to come in and pay them to continue to produce garbage?

At least, now these bedroom producers are doing their best in the hopes of making it big. You have the government coming in and handing out cash like drunken sailors - and they'll start to produce an endless stream of garbage that fits in with whatever "objective" standard that the government sets.

___________________
Progressive is not a style. It's about attitude.

Check me out on Soundcloud