|
Illegal music downloading (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Crazy Serb |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cosmic Fur
You say,
"It costs A LOT of money to pay for rights, distribution, shelf space, video production, album art etc etc."
Here's what I propose: get rid of all that crap.
Nobody (except RIAA of course) needs it. Get rid of RIAA (a lot of good it's doing everybody - only thing they're concerned with is getting rich). Get rid of record stores and their retarded markups. Eliminate all but the most basic things needed by the labels to produce CDs, and sell them strictly online and ship them to customers. The whole music industry needs restructuring. If they laxed all these restrictions on selling your own music, actual CDs would become affordable to buy. |
word up.
a little reinvention never hurt anyone ;)
plus what good is paying for all the rights, trademarks, legal mumbo jumbo when your track will ultimately end up on internet in digital format and a whole bunch of people will download/share it for free anyway? why not cut those costs as well?
what was that online store where you had 3 pricing options for EVERY SONG/ALBUM on the site - free, the store's set price, and your own custom set price (whatever you thought the song/album was worth).
I thought that was goddamn genius! And they sure made enough money too... ;) |
|
|
| Shade |
| Edit: Double post, sorry. |
|
|
| Shade |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
not always true. Albums are very expensive as are hiring a remixer. If you are just going to drop a single without a music video then yes it gets cheaper. But the artist still makes very very little as compared to the past. |
I repeat generally. And remixers on average cost between 300-800 euro (unless you're going for one of the larger names or someone who's completely in over his head, 800 is the height for the more accomplished producers). Albums? An album in electronic music tends not to work (again tends) in the same fashion as mainstream music. How many electronic tracks these days bother getting music videos? It's limited because budget is limited, and outside of the more commercial electronic music it tends not to be very affordable.
In electronic music - yet again unless you're looking at the commercial side of it all (just because you seemed to skip the word generally the first time around) - the producer is the artist. And if the artist has no clue about producing, then I'm pretty damn sure they shouldn't be getting any credit for it. Yes I know the mainstream industry works in a completely different fashion, but I'm not talking about the mainstream industry for that exact reason. P.S. In the end of it all depending on how big it is, chances are the absolute MAXIMUM an artist will make off a track these days lies in and around 2000 euro - and that's a very, very big rarity.
| quote: | | For example, a song on a small label that would get a 5000 record/cd press in the past might press 500-1000 today. Even on digital downloads the spread is not as good. Now factor in the fact that 3/4 of downloads are illegal and you get the picture. |
Here you're more or less correct. Except more and more labels are stopping vinyl services because either vinyl distributors are shutting down or it's simply no longer affordable for them - this is largely a result of technology.
I'm not disagreeing with you in the large spectrum of it all - artists do deserve support, I see this first hand. However I'm trying to clarify the rather disturbing but blurry image you're placing on the music industry in general when it comes to a specific genre (i.e. electronic music). Support the artists? Yes, I agree more of that needs to be done. I don't agree with the talk about facts and figures that apply mostly to the mainstream industry and claim it applies to everything? Sorry, I'm not out to fool anyone.
For the mainstream industry, I agree with some of you that their pockets are inflated even with the losses. In the electronic industry money is lacking, but it's your choice in the end. I hate preaching to people about what they should/shouldn't do. |
|
|
| zokissima |
MHO: Spending $1 dollar on a track...I'd be happier with the dollar, and a downloaded song that I'll probably listen for all of 10 times before I completely forget about it. I don't redistribute, and don't keep much of what I dl.
For buying albums...price is just way too high for what you get. Some are definitely worth it, and I've purchased, simply for the novelty of owning an original legitimate copy, but there are few albums, IMO, that are worth they money that is being asked for them. |
|
|
| Revival160 |
After seeing the various opinions on this thread, I thought I'd chime in as someone that works in the music industry and has access to hard statistics.
Overall sales in Canada are currently down approximately 5% from last year. Digital sales, on the other hand, are up approximately 90% over 2005. That being said, a 5% decline in physical sales is a very big decline. A 90% increase in the digital format is great, but the market was very small last year, so that doesn't make up for even a fraction of the 5% decline in overall sales.
The biggest portion of digital sales is in single tracks. Tracks are outselling whole albums by a landslide, and that's not really good for the industry. People cherry pick 0.99 tracks, and that gives no profit to the digital retailer or the artist. The only place making money on those tracks is the record label. This doesn't really make much sense, because to deliver a digital album to a digital retailer is fairly inexpensive. There is no shipping, no merchandising, and no physical product. So you think that the wholesale cost to a digital retailer should be much less than it would be to a physical retailer right? That's not the case. They are almost equal - and that stems from the fact that the record industry is reluctant to change it's current physical model (and dependency).
Personally, I don't think a 0.99 track is a great deal at all. It's an even worse deal when you consider that it's a track wrapped in either Windows-based or Apple-based digital rights management. It's a valid point that digital and physical retailers are competing against 'free' with the rampant MP3 availability on P2P networks. If that's the case, does it really sound like the best course of action is to keep prices high and limit the usage of digital files that customers purchase legally? I know people here on this forum are fairly well versed in file type and conversion, but the average customer is not as technically savvy as most people here.
If we really want to see artists get paid for music, the record labels need to drastically reduce prices, get rid of the DRM that restricts users from doing what they want to with their files, and allow digital retailers to sell files in the MP3 format. I bet most of you would be swayed to pay for your tracks if they were 0.19 or 0.39 cents each, instead of 0.99 or 1.19. The simple math shows that selling a large quantity of low priced, user friendly tracks will make everyone more money than selling a small quantity of high priced tracks. |
|
|
| locodawg |
Just curious to all those people who are bitching about downloading is stealing music ... Do you have any illegal software on you computer? Maybe windows or office even games? did you modify you ps2 or xbox?
I bet there are people who bitch about downloading is stealing, but would take a illegal copy of windows in a heart beat ... |
|
|
| Orko |
| quote: | Originally posted by Revival160
Personally, I don't think a 0.99 track is a great deal at all. It's an even worse deal when you consider that it's a track wrapped in either Windows-based or Apple-based digital rights management. It's a valid point that digital and physical retailers are competing against 'free' with the rampant MP3 availability on P2P networks. If that's the case, does it really sound like the best course of action is to keep prices high and limit the usage of digital files that customers purchase legally? I know people here on this forum are fairly well versed in file type and conversion, but the average customer is not as technically savvy as most people here.
|
This is my biggest problem with the digital download scene.
1) you buy something and cannot play it anywhere you want.
2) you buy a low quality version of what you would get in the stores.
Beatport has a good model, where you can buy it in mp3 @320Kbps, or in WAV for an extra $1. In every case I would be willing to pay the extra dollar, unless I was buying a full album. |
|
|
| Spin Laden |
Anyone care to comment on our Canadian copyright laws, etc? Or whatever laws that encompass this issue? Last I read, Canada is a few steps away from having laws that allow companies to send fines to downloaders, much like the US. There was a landmark ruling I think that favoured the record companies, and that it was just a matter of time before you could have a fine sent to your address.
EDIT: I just read this article .. this may add some 'base' to what I'm seeing as one or two baseless posts in here :p
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/i...ding_music.html |
|
|
| Elendil |
Honestly, and I'm a published musician who has been in the industry for 8 years, music is just too expensive for me to purchase (for the most part). I enjoy a track for days, at the most. I cannot justify the purchase of a CD, at 35 dollars, when I'll be tired of it in 3. Thats the MTV generation. We don't have the same attention spans as we used to. Back in 91, Nevermind didn't leave my CD player for 3 years. Hell, even 5 years ago, things were different. However, in the last 3 years, I've legally purchase maybe 5 CD's - at the most.
However, and this is the significant part, I have gone to see FAR more artists than I ever did before. Even in the last year, I've seen at least 20 live DJs - double the year before that, and quadrouple the year before that. Why? Because of downloading, and experiencing their tracks.
THIS is the significant change happening in the industry. Decreasing record sales (which were NEVER a large source of income for the artist in the first place, unless you're shania twain), but Increasing tour revenue. Its a paradigm shift in the industry. And you know what? Its better for the artists. They can have 100,000 hits on myspace, and acctually make some money on the road, entirely independant.
Look at it this way: I illegally download Sander Van Doorn's track. I love it. I illegally download 6 more. Jesus, he's incredible! He comes to town, and I purchase a ticket for his concert. However, I don't just purchase one ticket. I bring 10 friends. Thats hundreds of dollars in ticket revenue, from ONE person, based on one track that cost him nothing but time to create. THIS is the way success will come for the artist of the future. Their music is free. However, their concerts, merchandise, and subsequent ADVERTISING value are HUGELY increased. Its the obvious evolution. No one seems to get it, however.
Hell, my band had a platinum album, followed by a gold, and we made less money then than you can make now. All you have to do is be SMART, and use the tools available to you.
Record sales are dying. Fine - they were too expensive anyways. However, now you have to look at songs as free advertising to draw people to concerts. If I didn't illegally download, I would have never heard any Tiesto, SVD, Randy Katana, etc... and would never have paid hundreds to see them in concert - where they make acctual money! |
|
|
| Spin Laden |
| yes, interesting shift. How many ppl are going to Resolution NYE in Montreal who have free Tiesto downloads on their computers? Pretty much all of us, including many of the Tjis haters. But then we have to fork out $80-100 to see the superstar dj.. one dude by himself spinning records electronically. Hell, Tiesto could take a bathroom break during his set and read the sports section. Hmmmmm. |
|
|
| Shade |
| quote: | Originally posted by Elendil
Honestly, and I'm a published musician who has been in the industry for 8 years, music is just too expensive for me to purchase (for the most part). I enjoy a track for days, at the most. I cannot justify the purchase of a CD, at 35 dollars, when I'll be tired of it in 3. Thats the MTV generation. We don't have the same attention spans as we used to. Back in 91, Nevermind didn't leave my CD player for 3 years. Hell, even 5 years ago, things were different. However, in the last 3 years, I've legally purchase maybe 5 CD's - at the most.
However, and this is the significant part, I have gone to see FAR more artists than I ever did before. Even in the last year, I've seen at least 20 live DJs - double the year before that, and quadrouple the year before that. Why? Because of downloading, and experiencing their tracks.
THIS is the significant change happening in the industry. Decreasing record sales (which were NEVER a large source of income for the artist in the first place, unless you're shania twain), but Increasing tour revenue. Its a paradigm shift in the industry. And you know what? Its better for the artists. They can have 100,000 hits on myspace, and acctually make some money on the road, entirely independant.
Look at it this way: I illegally download Sander Van Doorn's track. I love it. I illegally download 6 more. Jesus, he's incredible! He comes to town, and I purchase a ticket for his concert. However, I don't just purchase one ticket. I bring 10 friends. Thats hundreds of dollars in ticket revenue, from ONE person, based on one track that cost him nothing but time to create. THIS is the way success will come for the artist of the future. Their music is free. However, their concerts, merchandise, and subsequent ADVERTISING value are HUGELY increased. Its the obvious evolution. No one seems to get it, however.
Hell, my band had a platinum album, followed by a gold, and we made less money then than you can make now. All you have to do is be SMART, and use the tools available to you.
Record sales are dying. Fine - they were too expensive anyways. However, now you have to look at songs as free advertising to draw people to concerts. If I didn't illegally download, I would have never heard any Tiesto, SVD, Randy Katana, etc... and would never have paid hundreds to see them in concert - where they make acctual money! |
My only issue with this is that not all producers do any form of live act (i.e. DJing) - what of them? |
|
|
|
|
