|
Reasons not to pay for music (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Benno de Goeij |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
Nono, that's the whole point. They didn't sell one car less because the guy who copied it wasn't gonna buy one anyways. |
But as soon as he starts copying he wants to! Its all about priorities.
| quote: |
Not a single person I know has thousands of dollars to spend on music. |
But as soon as he starts copying he wants to! Its all about priorities. |
|
|
| Benno de Goeij |
| quote: | Originally posted by paranoik0
I guess this means there's a huge void that could be filled. If someone credible within the electronic scene comes up with a MP3 selling site plus taking care of the promotion of the tracks it could eventually have some success. But this would be just another kind of record label, it would still be an intermediary. |
My A&R understands me, guides me and has his hart for music, and is not after the big bucks in the first place. That's worth very much for me.
Same goes for my publisher.
I hate the i-am-gonna-quickly-fill-mypockets-with-cash loosers in the industry just as you guys. But not everybody is a bad guy! |
|
|
| paranoik0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Benno de Goeij
My A&R understands me, guides me and has his hart for music, and is not after the big bucks in the first place. That's worth very much for me.
Same goes for my publisher.
I hate the i-am-gonna-quickly-fill-mypockets-with-cash loosers in the industry just as you guys. But not everybody is a bad guy! |
ok, but my point wasn't so much "lets keep cash out of intermediaries as much as possible" but more like "this system would give more money to the artists". currently we're leading to this:
mp3 shop <---------> record label <---------> artist
that system would be:
mp3 shop/label <--------> artist
in theory it'd be more profitable? of course nowadays there's still a lot of physical releases being sold, which kinda defeats this point, but in the future i think it'd be more benefitial. the possible disadvantages are the mp3shop/label getting too much of a monopoly, and the artists not being promoted effectively due to the shop/label not focusing on them, having too many artists signed with them. |
|
|
| Benno de Goeij |
| quote: | Originally posted by paranoik0
ok, but my point wasn't so much "lets keep cash out of intermediaries as much as possible" but more like "this system would give more money to the artists". currently we're leading to this:
mp3 shop <---------> record label <---------> artist
that system would be:
mp3 shop/label <--------> artist
in theory it'd be more profitable? of course nowadays there's still a lot of physical releases being sold, which kinda defeats this point, but in the future i think it'd be more benefitial. the possible disadvantages are the mp3shop/label getting too much of a monopoly, and the artists not being promoted effectively due to the shop/label not focusing on them, having too many artists signed with them. |
Exaclty :D
Sometimes good things just cost something extra. |
|
|
| KilldaDJ |
| thats right, benno. |
|
|
| Ian^ |
I think we owe benno here for actually inadvertantly restoring some good debate back on the forums, for those who've only been here for a year or two, you'd have missed it when we used to be able to have these debates that don't go too off topic :) good stuff on that sense.
to the debate, I have always spent every spare penny I have had on music, i've got probably a thousand tapes, and about 200 cds and a small selection of vinyl I bought (I don't even have tt's) and I think i've done my bit for the industry, I download tracks to try and i'm also sent a lot of promo ones, which I never share. By downloading the tracks & albums, I can help decide where my small spare change goes, as I can't afford to buy everything that's out (nor everything i wish i could) so mp3s help that way obviously. I also endorse Ste's post near the start, and those of grim, aj & ishkur. We need to support our artists, but to bring system j into it here, I get a slight feeling that you resent those who've not spent as much on music as you, I can understand that but then it comes down to how much we have, maybe we should measure the percentage of peoples money spent on music, as not all have the spare funds to make a lot.
Onto DC-'s post.
well, money USED to be there for trance hits, but now I honestly think the market is overpopulated with a lot of poor stuff in a trance perspective. There are us people, mainly non-asot esque people who've been buying music since we were 8 or 9 years old by saving pocket money etc, and we do contribute wherever possible, only we dont pay for the stuff available in trance as often due to the lack of quality in it |
|
|
| Benno de Goeij |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ian^
I think we owe benno here for actually inadvertantly restoring some good debate back on the forums, for those who've only been here for a year or two, you'd have missed it when we used to be able to have these debates that don't go too off topic :) good stuff on that sense.
|
LOL, well I am just very interested in what people here think about this matter. I am not pointing fingers, everybody needs to do what they think is right.
But perhaps it can give you some insights and thoughts from someone who is on the other side :D |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by paranoik0
ok, but my point wasn't so much "lets keep cash out of intermediaries as much as possible" but more like "this system would give more money to the artists". currently we're leading to this:
mp3 shop <---------> record label <---------> artist
that system would be:
mp3 shop/label <--------> artist
in theory it'd be more profitable? of course nowadays there's still a lot of physical releases being sold, which kinda defeats this point, but in the future i think it'd be more benefitial. the possible disadvantages are the mp3shop/label getting too much of a monopoly, and the artists not being promoted effectively due to the shop/label not focusing on them, having too many artists signed with them. |
I doubt that it'll work in reality. Considering the way the industry works, there will always be a ton of other people involved demanding their piece of the pie whenever someone decides to spend money on an artist's work. And among those people, you will always find the kind of people Benno referred to who only want to make a quick buck, and then we're back to square one.
To restore buyers' faith in this matter, the whole copyright/promotion system needs to be revamped, ensuring in some way that the artist gets the money the buyer feels he/she deserves. Unfortunately, I doubt this will happen, since there are always people in the industry with the only intent to exploit it for their own financial gain. |
|
|
| DC- |
| quote: | Originally posted by Benno de Goeij
My A&R understands me, guides me and has his hart for music, and is not after the big bucks in the first place. That's worth very much for me.
Same goes for my publisher.
I hate the i-am-gonna-quickly-fill-mypockets-with-cash loosers in the industry just as you guys. But not everybody is a bad guy! |
I can actually atest to this because when Somatic Sense tried to comission Rank-1 to do a remix, they didn't simply accept becuase of the *extremely* high fees involved, but they actually wanted to know that they can do something good with the track prior to accepting the remix job which shows a lot about this great duo. Needless to say they did not accept the remix because they didn't think they could do justice to it. Had this been any other artist, they would have surely accepted the gig simply becuase it paid a lot. |
|
|
| DC- |
Despite what a lot of you may think you know about the way this particular part of the industry works, there is no "shady middle men" involved. No guys in big black suits that take all the money away. This is an artist driven industry, with a lot of labels being run by artists themselves.
You can't compare the pop industry to edm. It's apples and oranges, just becuase they both grow on trees doesn't make them the same.
Think of any significant trance label and you'll find an established artist/dj running it. When the profits for a release are in, the share is split amongst the artist and the label. There are no agents, managers, this and that that take the money away.
I have to reitterate again, trance producers make money SOLEY on vinyl sales, not performing, not publishing, not CD compilations, vinyl sales and vinyl sales alone. |
|
|
| GrimReaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sand Leaper
I doubt that it'll work in reality. Considering the way the industry works, there will always be a ton of other people involved demanding their piece of the pie whenever someone decides to spend money on an artist's work. And among those people, you will always find the kind of people Benno referred to who only want to make a quick buck, and then we're back to square one.
To restore buyers' faith in this matter, the whole copyright/promotion system needs to be revamped, ensuring in some way that the artists gets the money the buyer feels he deserves. Unfortunately, I doubt this will happen, since there are always people in the industry with the only intent to exploit it for their own financial gain. |
I agree and doubt these things will happen, at least in full scale but we shouldn't stop tryin to decrease the amount of exploiters and get the money where it belongs. |
|
|
| DC- |
| quote: | Originally posted by GrimReaper
I agree and doubt these things will happen, at least in full scale but we shouldn't stop tryin to decrease the amount of exploiters and get the money where it belongs. |
The money IS going where it belongs, there just isn't a whole lot of it. |
|
|
|
|
