Guy Marchais of Suffocation
Suffocation is a seriously-heavy metal group for seriously-heavy metal fans. But despite a core following, this is a group struggling against theft and content devaluation. Just like everyone else.
Which is why group guitarist Guy Marchais decided to go to the mall, buy his own CD, and film it. Just to make a point.
There’s a lot to like about this. First off it’s gotten over 50,000 views, but even more impressive as of tonight it has ten times more thumbs up and very few negative comments.
It begs the question are the fans open to hear musicians simply ask for fan support without getting creamed? We think so and after all aren’t musicians and filmmakers just working people trying to earn a living?
Yeah it works if you don’t call your fans criminals and act like a douche like some people (for instance, you) who comment here like to do.
He correctly identified the people who download his music for free and being fans of his music, and instead of shitting all over them for five minutes, he main thing was to ask them to pay for it. He said that by paying for it, he can continue to tour and make more music, someone is clearly a fan of his music has an interest in. (ie. He answered the question, “what do I get out of it, if I pay for your music?”) He appealed to the fact that they actually need the money, they aren’t “rich like Metallica” (so this kind of appeal probably doesn’t work for super mainstream bands who’s members live in mansions, but who gives a shit about them? Waaah I want a new house).
So yeah, not suprising that this worked.
you must be confusing me with someone else you don’t agree with here. I’ve never gone the users are criminals route and in fact have challenged the RIAA in their fining of fans.
But, I do believe that those who operate sites that sell advertising based on the traffic they derive by offering illegal downloading are criminals.
There, feel better now?
Yeah I read you going on about “da freehadists ruining our industry”, even using that word makes you sound like a giant douche.
LOL. The endless war against “Al-copia”
Suffocation rules. Guilt tripping their fans, no matter how heartfelt, ain’t gonna get them the support they’re looking for though.
Redirect the drones to Google HQ.
Realizing nothing I say will slate your contempt. When we refer to the “Freehadists” we are referring to those who are spokespeople for unauthorized downloading.
Granted, those may or may not be music fans.
no one that steals music is a music fan but a cheap person that feels owed. ain’t that the truth! 😉
Enough with your third person talk. You are a random nobody who figured out how to create a Facebook group page, not the Dear Leader of the creative community.
“not the Dear Leader”
Oh, I forgot you guys moved to North Korea! 🙂
https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-moves-to-north-korea-gets-virtual-asylum-130304/
Let’s face it, nobody else wants you anymore.
You’re a fucking douchebag AND full of shit, moron
VOR
No you.
The traditional model is a dinosaur.
The entire industry needs a reset button.
Yeah dinosaur of course … meanwhile you and your little friends run around using P2P technology to not have to pay for a movie, music, book, game … but whine about the poor artist or the bad recording labels.
You make me sick.
Amen brother.
Yeah.
First off, you’re an idiot. P2P has been outdated for the past five years. I don’t know ANYONE in the 20 – 40’s age bracket who still uses Bearshare, Limewire (R.I.P.), Kazzaa (R.I.P.), or any of the other programs that were the inventors of P2P.
You want to know where the music comes from? Torrents and program websites. But you want to know what’s funny? The music leaks due to labels. Not due to fans. Think about it.
When Sony throwing viruses on their DVD’s for those who pirated, that was a stupid move, but if you make something completely unpiratable – like an unreadable computer readable compact disc. Imagine how much the sells would go up. Oh, no wait, they wouldn’t go up. Only a fraction of them would. And yes, there’s the technology to do that.
You know why? Because half of the music that comes out today SUCKS. Half of the albums that come out these days are chocked full of filler and one hit single. Before piracy, people had to buy an album and subject themselves to a bunch of half assed songs minus the songs they liked. Now, they can just pick and choose.
Another reason, music gets pirated so easily, is because iTunes/Amazon dates don’t come later than the physical CD dates. I bet you people forget what KOCH/E1 did to Joell Ortiz or what happened with Lil Wayne’s “Rock” album.
Furthermore, instead of whining that fans don’t pay, they do. They pay to buy the shitty overvalued PS3’s and XBox’s that aren’t worth half of their trade in value. Fans will buy a CD if they actually like it or support the artist. Movies too, or they can use Netflix. However, the only ones really losing money are the music industry.
This has been proven. With movies, no one can really bitch especially Viacom considering they were caught uploading their OWN material to Youtube and Torrent websites. Video games, still profitable and not many people mod their game systems to play pirated games. For books, that’s entirely irrelevant. Honestly.
So, why is the music industry losing money? A.) Not adapting with the times B.) Half assed music C.) Lack of REAL radio promotion and D.) A bunch of asshats inside the majors who don’t know how to work records.
The music industry model DOES need to be updated. Simple as that.
Interesting Fact: 50 Cent’s “Get Rich or Die Trying” was leaked/pirated TWO WEEKS before it came out in retail stores. And how many units did that urban album move?
Hold on a second.
Firstly, Torrents ARE P2P. In fact even more so than Limewire.
Secondly, Sony threw rootkits on CD’s, not viruses. There is a big difference.
Thirdly, there is no such technology that can prevent copying music. If you can hear it, it can be dupilcated.
“music gets pirated so easily, is because iTunes/Amazon dates don’t come later than the physical CD dates”
That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Finally, if music is so shitty, why are people bothering to steal it at all? The music is shitty argument holds no value. If it was bad, you wouldn’t bother trying to acquire it via legal or illegal means. Same for every type of entertainment.
“Finally, if music is so shitty, why are people bothering to steal it at all? The music is shitty argument holds no value. If it was bad, you wouldn’t bother trying to acquire it via legal or illegal means. Same for every type of entertainment.”
Exactamente! Well put Casey…
“The traditional model is a dinosaur”
Indeed, the free ride is over! Nobody likes pirates anymore!
Here are some the first initiatives from the new war on IP-theft:
Blocked piracy sites all over Europe… 6 Strikes in the US… fines and prison sentences in Japan… fines in New Zealand… fines and confiscation in Russia… huge fines to illegal file-sharing site admins… new measures on their way in France & elsewhere… lots of lockers & torrent sites shut down after the fall of MegaUpload… growing pressure on credit card companies, Google and others to completely cut off criminal sites… Pirate Bay has been kicked out of two countries in one week and is now moving to North Korea, lol
So here’s the new music business model:
Pay or go away!
“It begs the question are the fans open to hear musicians simply ask for fan support without getting creamed?”
That is exactly what every indie artist has been doing for the last decade or so. And it accomplished nothing.
People grab for free whatever they can grab for free as long as no one stops them, this is what brought us here today.
A couple thoughts on his video effort:
1.It’s a little behind in time. Who has a CD player still (seriously I do and if you’re into music much and born before 1997 or so you MIGHT also have one (or not), but that’s not the big picture. Who cares about physical product nowadays?
2. Who cares about even downloading the stuff these days? Or owning? It’s being STREAMED FOR FREE OFF YOU TUBE.
So yeah, honest video effort of a struggling musician. The overall situation though is, sadly, much worse..
Then how do we deal with sustainability? Those who are unwilling to contribute and support artists at any level are insuring that the quality of art will diminish and the young jackals will be forced to eat from dumpsters.
As Paul says: “Verify your humanity”.
The people who don’t want to contribute to art either.
1) Don’t care about it. Stop worrying about these people! It’s like the person who doesn’t tip the busker on the street. He’s simply not interested in supporting the busker’s work, even though it might have benefited him. And we need to stop acting like there is anything fundamentally wrong with this, because that’s were the douchy anti-piracy behavior comes from. And that makes people hate the music industry and really start to like the idea of destroying it.
2) Aren’t sure that illegal downloading is harming art. You got to covince them otherwise. Show people objectively that illegal downloading is harming your ability to make music. Show your car, your house. Make people feel bad for you that geninuely like your music, and ASK them to help you. This might not work for Madonna (and the record industry needs to stop using mainstream artists as anti-piracy spokespeople, it doesn’t work), but it works for 99% of musicians.
3) Let people do what they want. If millions of people want to download/access tens of million tracks, it should be possible. We can’t use the old business models anymore. People without the means to purchase this music (like 99.99% of the population) using the old systems are not happy of having the livestyle they are used to changed because the music industry isn’t creative enough to figure out how to make the new system work. Support Spotify/YouTube and all these other services that are giving pirate-like access in legal manners. This will slowly bring back the market that the music industry lost over the last decade.
See, this guy above me. He gets it! KUDOS!
The times are changing dude, nobody wants all that old school pirate speak anymore…
Did you see the price of the physical product? $16.99 + tax! Find me a digital CD on iTunes for that much. So either the record store is making a killing or the label is making a killing vs digital music.
Actually, most physical CDs don’t go higher than $11. That’s the standard “expensive CD” these days. Vast majority of CDs are in the $5 and $8 price point. A lot of not newish music, but still very good CDs are $5 at Wal-Mart. Consquently I remember that $5 is what enterprising kids in high school charged their classmates for a bootleg CD a decade ago. So legal prices have dropped to bootleg prices, if you don’t factor inflation. And the record industry propaganda about piracy at the time was that if the bootlegging won’t stop, the price of music will increase. Nobody believed that of course. Heh.
I can understand why you went there, but the real conversation is not about cd purchases, but rather some guy saying help me out here.
The part that I find so great is toward the end when Guy says, “And this goes for my friends to, I can’t just give everything away for free”.
Pretty sure he said it was a CD+DVD combo pack
One commentor made a very good point ‘many don’t even download anything either; they only stream when they want something’.
In other words, the problem is even bigger and more complex than it appears:
Not only do new generations not consume music the same as before, but they also don’t listen to/percieve/understand\use it in the say way either.
Kids may still listen to Pink Floyd, but their interpretation is tempered by another paradigm; they don’t hear it the same way.
The new generation’s ears are not wired to digest the same amount of bredth and depth or weight.
The Solution is this: ????????????????
The solution is to: Stand up; FINALLY. As ONE.
Like the people defending their right to bear arms. Odd comparison? Why? It’s just as much a right being taken away. They make signs, organize rallies. Some gun manufacturers are even leaving states in protest.
The Constitution of the United States of America,
Article I, Section 8:
“To promote the progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
But we do not unite, do we? Most musicians held their silence and even now are afraid to speak up. If you don’t defend your right, well soemone’s gonna show up and is gonna take it away from you..
“To promote the progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
Life + 70 years is not a limited time. If we are to follow the constitution, then lets actually follow it. 20-25 years and copyright expires sounds fair.
I think this is interesting.
The internet is being built by and for my generation, the “millenial cusp,” so to speak (late 20’s, early 30’s). We have interests & passions that are carried over from the 20th century, & the internet qualifies & enriches those interests. I can use the internet like a library on steroids, & I can dig into, say… Shelter Records, which is my big thing right now. And I can read up on all of the artists & the history & listen to the songs & see live videos & then I can go to my vinyl dealer & say, “Give me all of the Shelter releases you’ve got.” And I can sit down & turn everything else off & consume it in a way that’s as close to the original generation as has ever been possible. In some ways I might even have more context for a given record than someone would’ve had in the 70’s.
But when you grow up with the internet, and aggregated content feeds, & you’re in your teens or early 20s & you’re digesting unreal amounts of content & communication all day every day, it may be more difficult to latch onto something & be passionate about it, or maybe what you do latch onto might not be as universal as Pink Floyd. But you do see it happening, & I think that’s what creates these dichotomies like youtube versus vinyl records. Somewhere in the middle of that there are kids who “get it” & are less subjugated to the breadth of content that technology feeds us, but are more empowered by the depths to which technology allows us to explore content.
And this should be required middle school/early high school curriculum, how to deal with technology & navigate content in a world where everything is accessible. Because this is a tool that my generation takes for granted, & is not accounting for in the techonology we design. This type of stuff is going to be essential going forward.
this guy is trying to guilt an anonymous user base into buying an outdated relic using an outdated purchasing method vs simply pressing play over at youtube.
the solution is to force google, spotify and other content services to pay more per stream to everyone. that’s it. nothing else.
has anyone looked into the rates the major labels get from streaming? they’ve negotiated different deals from everyone else with upfront advance licenses and preferential rates. we should be crying fucking foul over not knowing what major labels are making from streaming. we know they’re making more, i wouldn’t be surprised if it’s MUCH more. they are usurping the new model just like the old model and privately calling a truce with big content.
wouldn’t surprise me if big labels were making 2-6 cents a stream from spotify/google plus upfronts, leaving the rest of the world to make a paltry 1/2 cent if lucky and spotify/google to cry they have no operating budget left to pay everyone fairly… no shit you have no money left, you’re giving it to all the major labels and fucking over everyone else for using the same exact platform!!!!!!
this is where the real story is at. if you expose the big labels’ connections to these services and shitty deals they’ve in effect negotiated for everyone else besides themselves, you get to the root of the payment problem. haven’t heard a peep about the labels running away with all the cash… CMON aren’t you a journalist, this is the sensational story.
headline might read something like “content services pay major labels 12x the average indie/unsigned artist”
you want to start a conversation that’s how to do it.
A better headline would be: “BREAKING: Content that is more valuable and desirable commands higher royalities.”
I know there is a hipster self-masterbation about “indie music”. But the fact is, indies can’t compete with the product that major labels put out. Their music is amaetur by definition.
It should be noted that the major labels are what they are because they bought any indie label who was competing with them. Motown was an indie. Elektra was an indie. Stax was an indie. Just the same, Big Machine is an indie & so is Glassnote & so is Jagjaguwar.
You’re deluded if you actually believe that there is something special that major labels can do during the recording process that indie labels can’t.
JW, at this point the battle is about making the best of a bad situation. I must admit it was hard to believe they were charging $16 for a cd, but we can all agree that the cd will continue to decline and vinyl will continue to make small advances.
It is unfortunate that the streaming services have set their price points unrealistically low for both the artists and their businesses. It is always difficult to move higher when you set your price points unrealistically low to gain market share. This my friend is where we disagree.
It’s not a battle, it’s a transition.
That is where we disagree.
Piracy is a biproduct of the transition. There was only ever widespread digital piracy because there wasn’t a legal way for fans to consume music in this manner. Now there is. Look at Sweden. Look at Sweden. Look at Sweden. Sweden is NOT an isolated case. It’s just an exaggerated timeline.
If you consider this a battle, you’re distracted from the real issues. And that’s why you’re wrong.
JW. this sounds hauntingly like an endorsement for Spotify. The difference between Sweden and the US is that all this music being consumed at fire sale prices is made in the USA. So I would imagine there is very little push back from musicians in that country.
If Spotify wants to create a viable business, if possible, I would recommend they use their resources to bring the issue of US advertisers on pirate rates, so they could significantly increase their own advertising revenue. Now there’s a solution that would make operating pirate sites less attractive i.e. cutdown their competition and gain more subscribers. Now that would “accelerate their timeline” in a far more lucrative market.
It is an endorsement for Spotify. It shouldn’t be read as anything else. And Rdio & Deezer & any other streaming service. It’s insane that this is news to you, but streaming is the future of music. (I literally laughed out loud writing that.) Music ownership is on it’s way out, & the quicker we make the transition, the better.
If $10/mo is “firesale prices” to you, you’re either completely out of touch with the average consumer or you don’t know how to multiply. Either one makes you unqualified to comment on this matter.
$10/mo isn’t “unrealistically low,” what’s offsetting that is the free streaming. Ad supported music isn’t a viable model, & is being subsidized by premium streaming. And the free streaming users can be upstreamed without losing any revenue. You seem to not understand the business model.
And I take umbrage with your categorization of “pirate sites,” I think you’re mostly talking about utility sites that are being abused by pirates against what’s outlined in their TOS, & I don’t think it’s Spotify’s place to weigh in on who should & shouldn’t be advertising on these sites. However, I think that the transition away from the ownership mentality will dramatically impact how much copyrighted material is being posted to these sites, this has actually already begun to happen. What would really impact behavior, though, which you would probably take issue with, is Spotify advertising on these sites. Again, this is a sideshow, a biproduct of the real issue, which is the transition, which you’re unable to recognize because you’re emotional invested in this “battle.”
You’ve proven yourself to be woefully unaware of the Swedish music industry, I’m not sure that your conjecture is really worth entertaining. You have no idea what’s being streamed over there, & your assumption that everyone all over the world only listens to Beyonce & Kesha & other American artists (who’s hits are all being written & produced by Swedish producers) kind of makes you look like an ass. Just google “Swedish Top 40” if you’re really interested in what’s popular there.
Oh and since this is a metal thread, I spent most of my high school/college years listening to mostly Swedish & Finnish bands like In Flames, Dark Tranquility, Meshuggah, & Children of Bodom, & swedish influenced bands like Killswitch Engage. Actually far more Scandanavian metal than American metal. I dunno if you can understate Sweden’s impact on heavy music over the past couple of decades.
The more I think about it, the more “all this music being consumed at fire sale prices is made in the USA” just comes across as, not only ignorant, but nationalist in the worst way. It’s the type of redneck sentiment that it’s internationally offensive, & you’d do well to broaden your horizons a little before making those kind of statements publically.
To see FarePlay’s response to JW, please scroll to the bottom, at least for now, of the comments.
Vistor likes to talk in the third person too. It makes Vistor feel more authoritative.
You make Americans look bad. Thanks a lot.
There’s a scene in the Pirate Bay documentary where Per E. Samuelsson, who is an attorney for one of the defendents, is discussing the news coverage with Peter & he quotes “a young girl” who says, “This is not about young people wanting to commit crimes. They just have a different consumption pattern. They just want to consume movies and records that way. It’s horrible to hunt them. The market must adjust instead.” And I thought that was illuminating, particularly given the statistics we now have on music sales in Sweden, & how premium streaming has met these consumers’ needs & the industry is growing again. Everyone in the U.S. should have their eyes on Sweden, because where that nets out (whether Sweden reaches, does not reach, or surpasses pre-Napster sales) is a preview of where we’re headed. That’s the gospel truth, & anyone who doesn’t at least acknowledge it has no place in the industry going forward.
I don’t think the question is, “What can we do to realign consumption habits with our legacy model?” There’s just nothing that makes sense about telling someone with modern consumption habits that they should go to a fucking shopping mall & pay $18.50 for a compact disc. It’s only a matter of time before FYE finds itself on Wikipedia’s list of defunct music & video stores, along with Turtle’s & Camelot & Blockbuster Music & Virgin & Tower & HMV (which actually isn’t on the list, for some reason) & everyone else.
The real question, if your interest is making money & staying in business, is, “How can we both serve & monetize consumers with traditional consumption habits, modern consumption habits, & transitional consumption habits, with a goal of ultimately transitioning all consumers to modern habits.” (And hopefully before every record store in America closes its doors.)
Arguments like “You should buy music in THIS format” or “You should buy music from THIS retailer” or “You should pay THIS MUCH for music” are all counterproductive, & are only well received by the proverbial choir.
People who will respond positively to this video are still buying music, whether it’s at FYE or Amazon or iTunes. What would really make a difference is if this guy made a video & said something like this…
“Did you download our record illegally? Are you generally skeptical about music, & do you prefer to listen to it before you pay for it? But do you listen to more music than you could possibly afford at a shop like FYE? Does going & buying a compact disc at a shopping mall sound more like an episode of the Simpsons than something someone would actually do? Are you even old enough to remember when the Simpsons were culturally relevant? (It was the witty, boundry-pushing cartoon before South Park made boundry-pushing passe. It may or may not still air on Fox. No, not Fox News, there’s a tv station called Fox.) Well we have something just for you!! Let me show you how to sign up for Spotify Premium. For the price of our cd (almost $20), you can get 2 months (at $9.99 per month) of all the music you want, including ours (but not David Rawlings’, unfortunately), legally, & with all of these benefits that make it better & more convenient than illegally downloading music…”
The difference would be incremental, of course, but what’s essential here is that a round peg is being pushed through a round hole, whereas this video is a clear & in some ways comical example of trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. Over time the dividends for this sort of effort are going to far outweigh the dividends of efforts to realign modern consumers with the legacy model.
These are all things that you can sarcastically dismiss if you’d like, but you can’t argue. This just reality.
The fact is there is more music available now than today’s music listeners have the time to listen to.
There is an ocean of “good enough” music being made.
Everyday people don’t care about “great art”. They never did. They just want some ear candy for awhile.
Pathetic.
Not saying I like it.
But that’s the reality I see, now that recording and distribution technology is out there.
Kinda sad
LOOK:
I teach guitar to about 34 students. Age range: from 10-early twenties. So that is pretty much the people that you would like to sell (your) music too, right? Pretty much the kinda folks that (we) try to convince to use legal music subscription services.
So What I gotta tell you about them is this:
None of them has an iPod. They all have cell phones with unltd internet. What do they do with it? Text, use whats app to text even more and they sure as hell don’t use a music subscription service that is legal -even though it doesn’t pay a fair rate to the artist- etc.
They use this app called “SONGS”. It pulls the music off YouTube. Its surface/skin on the phone looks just like the ipod’s. One click is the song, two clocks is the video. STREAMING. Makes playlists, too. That is what they all use.
Cause:
“Music is free, right?”
🙁
I have seen the development since about 2007. Back then I convinced them to buy CD’s, then I convinced them to buy the downloads instead of illegally taking them. Now tehy don’t have iPods, and they don’t want to even own the music they steal anymore.
Another sad and scary thing is (I keep hearing this more and more): Parents telling me that their kids just don’t listen to any music anymore…when I have a motivational talk with them regarding the lacking performnace and motivation of their kids during the lessons.
That’s where we’re at folks. And what do most people do? They STILL discuss IF piracy hurts music.
The app may not be in the store any longer. A search for “songs” and “youtube songs” did not result in the app showing up in the first 20 app listed.
Maybe not, but there are dozens of others.
I get the impression that hiding the video is against the YouTube API TOS, I actually think they have a minimum display size. So while there may be other music video apps, there isn’t dozens of audio-only apps that leverage youtube. Or if they are, they’ll eventually be removed from the store.
But what these apps do is develop consumer expectations that are met, legally & reliably, by apps like Spotify. At some point, users are going to want a service that’s more reliable, assumedly, that is going to maintain their playlists from phone to phone, & so on, which makes for a smooth transition to premium streaming.
Headline should read:
Guy convincing people to buy his CD in a store, inadvertently ends up showing why most people don’t.
If he truly wanted to show support for the industry and help keep a struggling industry alive he would have said yes to the loyalty card at the end of the sale to show support to the place where he actually can pick up physical product and help keep record storea alive. He is telling everyone in the video how they should keep his job alive but the clerk behind the cash who makes probably minimum wage wants to keep his job too. He should practice what he preaches.
Is it possible that he didn’t want to give out his e-mail address on a live video? And now you’ll say he could have edited it out, but this was taking place in real time, so perhaps he didn’t think it through.
You guys are really too much, you’re so concerned with discrediting this guy who is just trying to survive, you’ll glom onto any semi-related detail to make a point.
Why don’t you just get to the point and ask him why he should get paid when you can get his stuff for free. Suck it up buddy, adapt.
It really begs the question, “If free downloads hurt artists, then why do artists who release their content for free do so well?”
Some examples:
Jonathan Coulton – Releases all his songs under Creative Commons. You can legally download all his content for free. No Charge. Zero De Niro! Torrents distributed by the artist himself.
Nine Inch Nails – Trent Reznor pirates his own music. Pay what you want album pricing.
Radiohead – Pay what you want pricing.
The Promo Bay – Run by The Pirate Bay. Artists upload their content to TPB for free downloads. Often see an increase in sales and fans immediately afterward.
Guy has part of the idea right. “Download it, if you like it, buy it” The problem is the label aspect. Labels just get in the way of the artists and their money these days. Many of the more successful artists who’ve embraced free content have seen more profit from a DIY approach. Protest the Hero is a great example of this. They made a ton of money through Kickstarter.
Perhaps it’s not the fans that are broken, but the system. The fans evolve with technology, the system does not.
Evolving with technology is using your cell phone to listen to music instead of a walkman, discman or ipod. NOT paying for it even though it is not free is ABUSE of such technology.
Any which way you put it it’s only a lame excuse for “feeling owed”. Not more and not less.
You need to stop living in the past.
The Radiohead experiment was a total failure:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/4/4054634/musics-pay-what-you-want-pioneers-sour-on-giving-away-song
I read that Trent went back to a label recently since he could not effectively make it financially as an independent.
http://www.reverbnation.com/GlennGalen
Oh and:
“Nine Inch Nails – Trent Reznor pirates his own music. Pay what you want album pricing.”
– NIN, a MAJOR ARTIST created by a LABEL. Oh yeah and look at good ole Trent…after a few years of “independence”, he juuuust signed with a major label again…well I wonder why that is???? #duh!
“Radiohead – Pay what you want pricing.”
– Another major artist that can do whatever they want, because they are a MAJOR ARTIST. Just like Amanda Palmer, is NOT the future of music. ->
People that made it in the “old model” with a label and the big marketing machine, are not, in any way, a representation of the “future of music” for independent artists. Only a fool would believe that.
But like someone said, look at all the TALK and 13 years later, we still discuss if piracy hurts music….and Lars Ulrich? He hugs the Napster guy 😮
Good luck with all that, only it worked really NOT well for ANY new up and coming bands/artists in the last years. I wonder why?????? *shakes head*
I am not JW. I actually hadn’t even read any of the comments in this thread at all before I posted mine, but the back and forth between the two of you is fascinating.
I’m more inclined to side with his point of view simply because I am an incredibly happy Spotify Premium subscriber who is spending more money on music than I ever have before in my life. This includes probably a 600% increase in concert attendance since I subscribed in the middle of last year just because I’m discovering so many new artists that I love.
Managing files (let alone buying a physical CD!) is a total waste of time. Streaming is flat-out better than piracy because it is far more convenient. People are going to pay for it simply because it’s a better product. The fact that it’s also legal is just icing.
As an aside, it would be nice if Digital Music News implemented a comment system that allowed people to create accounts and establish history. The fact that I could reply to you, Will, as “FarePlay” is just silly. Sort it out, Paul!
Opps, apologies “champion”.
You don’t sound like a musician or someone in the business, yet a consistent visitor to this blog.
Nice to meet you.
This was a cute video, but it reminded me of what an inconvenient process buying a CD was.
I just listened to a few of their songs on Spotify. This isn’t my style of music at all, but way to go for spreading the word against illegal downloading.
JW, Why are you here and what’s your motivation?
I’m here because I love music and feel a responsibility to musicians.
What I’ve noted in your comments is an overzealous defense of Spotify. Now maybe you do this because you love the service and see it as some kind of pirate site killer and awesome opportunity for artists. Or perhaps it is just inevitable evolution and we dinosaurs should adapt. Or perhaps your relationship is more official.
Either way, there is something off balance here.
JW, here are some excerpts from your earlier posts on this thread. I’ve included complete paragraphs to minimalize any issues with context:
“Let me show you how to sign up for Spotify Premium. For the price of our cd (almost $20), you can get 2 months (at $9.99 per month) of all the music you want, including ours (but not David Rawlings’, unfortunately), legally, & with all of these benefits that make it better & more convenient than illegally downloading music…”
“There was only ever widespread digital piracy because there wasn’t a legal way for fans to consume music in this manner. Now there is. Look at Sweden. Look at Sweden. Look at Sweden. Sweden is NOT an isolated case. It’s just an exaggerated timeline.”
“Oh and since this is a metal thread, I spent most of my high school/college years listening to mostly Swedish & Finnish bands like In Flames, Dark Tranquility, Meshuggah, & Children of Bodom, & swedish influenced bands like Killswitch Engage. Actually far more Scandanavian metal than American metal. I dunno if you can understate Sweden’s impact on heavy music over the past couple of decades.”
“The more I think about it, the more ‘all this music being consumed at fire sale prices is made in the USA’ * just comes across as, not only ignorant, but nationalist in the worst way. It’s the type of redneck sentiment that it’s internationally offensive, & you’d do well to broaden your horizons a little before making those kind of statements publically.”
* Will Buckley, FarePlay
And you’re right, I’m not aware of the Swedish Music Scene, but you seem to be very knowledgeable, almost as if you’re from Sweden. And don’t get me wrong, Sweden is an awesome country and if you feel slighted by comments about US music being a dominate force in global music, I don’t mean to come off as a red neck, but rather as a realist. More music is sold/pirated and consumed globally from the US than any other country.
So yes, all these things, including Spotify, have created a greater burden financially on US artists, simply because there are of them.
I never said the “best” music came from this country, but we are credited with creating blues and jazz. And yes, it is a problem for musicians all over the world.
If we do away with all the verbose bluster, there is really only one thing that we disagree on and you refuse to go there. The current compensation model for musicians from Spotify and other streaming services coupled with the loss of download sales will destroy the music business and destroy a musicians ability to earn a living.
JW: “If $10/mo is “firesale prices” to you, you’re either completely out of touch with the average consumer or you don’t know how to multiply. Either one makes you unqualified to comment on this matter.”
“$10/mo isn’t “unrealistically low,” what’s offsetting that is the free streaming. Ad supported music isn’t a viable model, & is being subsidized by premium streaming. And the free streaming users can be upstreamed without losing any revenue. You seem to not understand the business model.”
Actually, JW, I understand it quite well and I do find it telling that you are primarily concerned with the listener and not the artist, which I think is symptomatic of the attitude held by Spotify and other streaming services.
“As Music Streaming Grows, Royalties Slow to a Trickle” Ben Sisario, New York Times January 28, 2013
“In the new economics of streaming music, however, the river of nickels looks more like a torrent of micropennies.
Spotify, Pandora and others like them pay fractions of a cent to record companies and publishers each time a song is played, some portion of which goes to performers and songwriters as royalties. Unlike the royalties from a sale, these payments accrue every time a listener clicks on a song, year after year.
The question dogging the music industry is whether these micropayments can add up to anything substantial.
‘No artist will be able to survive to be professionals except those who have a significant live business, and that’s very few,’ said Hartwig Masuch, chief executive of BMG Rights Management.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/29/business/media/streaming-shakes-up-music-industrys-model-for-royalties.html?hpw&_r=3&
Other than that, I agree that people are moving away from ownership, so you don’t need to play that card anymore. Now we just need to make streaming work for everyone, not just listeners, employees and future stockholders.
While were at it, perhaps you would like to share with us who you are and why you’re here.
Will Buckley, founder, FarePlay
$120 per year is more than anyone is currently spending on iTunes on average. It’s more than anyone under 30 has ever spent on music. If you disagree with these statements, please back it up with evidence.
If the majority of consumers start spending $120 per year on music, which I think is an attainable goal over the next few years, and Spotfiy continues to pay out 70% back to the labels (which is what iTunes, Amazon, et al. are currently paying too) then how is this not sustainable? I genuinely want to understand.
If you’re arguing that the labels aren’t currently playing fair and that they’re screwing the artists, I agree. If you’re arguing that Spotify and other streaming services need to make it easier for an individual artist to get their music on the service without going through a label and the label’s accounting shennanigans, I agree. But if you’re arguing that getting people to spend more money than they ever have before on music is somehow going to mean the death of all music? Uh, no, I can’t agree with that.
Now you really have my curiosity peaked. Sounds like a press release for Spotify.
And yes “champion” I agree that greater transparency from the commentors would be valuable.
That’s why I identify myself and have a website and facebook page under FarePlay. where can I find more information on you my friend?
As you guessed, I am neither a musician, nor am I involved in the industry at all. I am a computer programmer, technology aficionado, and music fan. I stumbled onto this site during the whole David Lowery/NPR Intern affair which I originally read about on Slashdot. I found it interesting, and now I check in from time to time.
Champion you are a class act. Till we meet again.
Will Buckey,
Have you honestly USED Spotify before, or are you just regurgating criticisms you read online?
Spotify is a fucking amazing service, no if ands or buts. That’s why people promote it, it’s not like everyone who likes Spotify is a shill.
It might not bring tons of dough for musicians at this point, but it’s 1000x better than iTunes for someone wants to listen to music casually and easily. I can go right now on Spotify and listen to pretty much any album recorded in the past 50 years in seconds. It’s one of the few services out there objectively better than piracy in just about every way even if you ignore that piracy is illegal. Unless you are an crazy audiophile, but nobody caters to audiophiles via digital music except piracy (maybe something that needs to be fixed).
Visitor. I have tried the service and I agree, it has a great interface.
I’ve been working in this space for 2 years, pretty much full time for free. I started out primarily focussed on piracy and still spend most of my time focussed on piracy.
I got heavily invested in this thread because of the musician who made the video, because I believe that videos like his are the best way to get the fans to understand that music is work and just because you can download something it doesn’t make it value less.
One of the other posters moved the conversation over to Spotify and I was off to the races.
My issues with Spotify are numerous, but I will focus on the heart of the matter. While the service is great for subscribers, it does so at the expense of artists. In the simplest of analogies imagine if your boss came to you and said I’m only going to pay you 20% of what you used to make. Not only would you be upset, but you probably couldn’t pay your bills.
And if your entire industry did the same, you would probably say f this I’m going to do something else. So basically that’s where we are today.
Now I’m not a musician, but I managed bands and owned a small, very small indie record label long ago. And the good news for you and Spotify is that creative people tend to be passionate about what they do. So everybody isn’t going to quit, but because of this, working class musicians will have to work more part time menial jobs, so they can pay to play. They’ll pratice less, rehearse less, have less time to write songs and will never walk into a recording studio again.
So were going to end up just like the rest of this country. A very few, very rich successful guys, like the guys at Spotify when they float their IPO, no middle class and basically a paycheck to paycheck population.
And less great music. If Spotify could figure out a way to compensate artists at a REASONABLE rate we wouldn’t be having this conversation, but they’re not. When they started here they told artists to hang in there and they would pay more, now they’re asking to pay less.
So here’s my deal. I love great music and that my friend is in serious jeopardy.
Wow. This just shows how much you don’t get it.
Your work analogy is completely off. It’s more like your boss comes to you & says, “Hey, look. Uh… we’ve been mismanaging the company for a while. No, don’t ask me about my salary. But yeah, we’ve been mismanaging the company for ten years or so but the good news is that some technologists in Sweden are going to bail us out. But we’ve gotta transition consumer behavior on a massive scale. What’s great is that we’ve seen it done successfully in, you guessed it, Sweden. So there’s something to look forward to. The bad news is that we’re going to take a hit during this transitional period. Well, you’re going to take a hit, at least. But if you’re willing to take a pay cut in the interim, consumer spending could potentially tripple on the upside of all of this. Yeah, you’ll be taking a pretty heavy hit, but don’t worry about me… I negotiated equity in the technology company & some hefty up front payments, so I’ll be alright. Which is great for the economy, if you think about it, because I’ve gotta keep groundskeepers at all 3 of my houses employed. But yeah, keep your head up. We’ve got a bright future to look towards.”
Which sucks, but it’s better than…
“So uh… yeah, we ran all of the streaming services out of business so that people would have to buy CDs at FYE. Until FYE went out of business. And now some people are buying from iTunes but most people are just pirating. The good news is that you won’t find any Land Rover ads on those pirate sites. Because we had some folks picket them. But somehow the pirate sites are still there. Kind of boggles my mind, but that’s besides the point. What I’m really here to tell you is that every year you’re making less money & that doesn’t look to be changing any time soon because our anti-piracy efforts have proven ineffective & we’ve completely lost touch with who consumers are & what they want. And we’ve pretty much rejected every proposed solution that involved ‘technology.’ So… it looks like we’ll be closing up shop soon. It was nice working with you. Hope you have a backup plan.”
“THIS guy knows a little bit too much about Sweden… I think something FISHY is going on here… and I’m going to get to the BOTTOM of it.”
You realize how much you sound like Joseph McCarthy, right? And that this is exactly what I’m talking about, in terms of you being emotionally invested in the “battle?” You really ought to take a step back & reevaluate things at the point when knowledge becomes a liability & ignorance is upheld as a virtue. The fact that your mind even goes into conspiracy mode & suggests that I post comments here in some official capacity representing Spotify is… well, it’s pretty hilarious.
Your “I’m not a red neck, I’m a realist” comment is pretty hilarious, too, &… honestly, it’s poetic. Your use of broad statistics to glorify your own nationality & belittle another is priceless. I’m not from Sweden, I grew up in the American south, & I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard racism justified in the EXACT same way. “Hey man, I ain’t racist, I’m just a realist. How many more black folks in jails? How many more black teen pregnancies? It’s just statistical, man. They’d all be sittin’ in the dirt in Africa if it weren’t for us, anyhow. They owe us.” It’s ignorance, man. You can’t say “all the music being consumed in Sweden on Spotify is made in the USA” & THEN say, “Oh, I’m just a realist.” Because that’s the opposite of a realist. That’s actually what we would call “unrealistic.” Your ignorant of the facts, & you’re married to your yankee exceptionalism & you do not see the bigger picture.
You can invoke the third person & the royal “we” all you want (as if anyone but you is really concerned with who I am or where I’m from), but that doesn’t put me on the defensive because, like I said, it’s a transition, not a battle. And the transition will happen will happen whether anyone likes it or not, least of all you, it’s just a matter of how long it will take.
This is why I’m here. This is why I post comments on DMN.
“There’s no one in the record company that’s a technologist,” (Doug) Morris explains. “That’s a misconception writers make all the time, that the record industry missed this. They didn’t. They just didn’t know what to do. It’s like if you were suddenly asked to operate on your dog to remove his kidney. What would you do?”
Personally, I would hire a vet. But to Morris, even that wasn’t an option. “We didn’t know who to hire,” he says, becoming more agitated.
“I wouldn’t be able to recognize a good technology person — anyone with a good bullshit story would have gotten past me.” Morris’ almost willful cluelessness is telling. “He wasn’t prepared for a business that was going to be so totally disrupted by technology,” says a longtime industry insider who has worked with Morris. “He just doesn’t have that kind of mind.”
That’s why. Because I love music. And there’s a pervasive & oftentimes wilful ignorance that is sinking the ship. It’s right there in black & white, the most powerful man in the music industry lays it out clearly. And your war on piracy is a product of this ignorance. And it’s not just a resistance to technology, it’s an opposition to technology… that’s the problem. And this is the 21st century and an industry cannot survive on those principles. And we’re seeing that. Day in & day out. But it doesn’t have to be that way.
JW
So your asking us to trust technology companies that when and if things are profitable for their them they will share the wealth and increase payments to artists?
JW
Sorry, what I should have said is any company, not just tech companies.
And yes, in the beginning I would have purchased Napster and figured out a way to make it work as opposed to crushing them.
And no seeing technology as the enemy would be insanely ineffective and counter-productive, but that doesn’t mean as a distribution model there are not problems.
Lastly, this site is about opinions, not personalities.
This is what I’m saying in the simplest terms.
The Swedish music industry is on an upswing. Which is where the US music industry wants to be. And instead of saying, “Wow, this is great news! What can we learn from this?” Instead of that, you resent it. You’re wilfully ignorant of consumer behavior in Sweden. You’re wilfully ignorant of the artists in Sweden, & what their opinions are. And you even marginalize the industry, despite the fact that they probably have a bigger influence on music in the US than any other country in the world.
And yet you handle yourself like you’re an authority on the matter. Like you’re some kind of Abraham Lincoln. Like you actually have a clue about these things.
You take for granted that the streaming model can’t be profitable for the music industry or fair for artists, but look at Sweden, where the music industry is growing. Any reasonable person can look at the Spotify model & extrapolate what changes in consumer behavior are going to have to take place in order to generate profits for arists here in America, and, assuming that “the cloud” is the future of entertainment consumption anyhow (which I think is safe to assume), we could all be helping to accellerate those changes (which are inevitable, anyhow). But some people would rather fight idealistic “battles” because they’re more interested in satisfying their own ego than actually making money for aritsts.
There’s no dollar signs for American artists on the other side of this war against advertisters on file storage sites. There’s no reason to believe that, just like file sharing has gone from newsgroups & irc to centralized peer-to-peer to decentralized peer-to-peer to torrenting to file storage sites… this is ever evolving. It’s not something you can fight. And yet, again, you’re wilfully ignorant of that.
Why isn’t Sweden, which was hit hardest by changes in consumer behavior, & has recovered the best, a model that we can learn from going forward?
You don’t have the answers for any of this.
JW, this should answer most of your questions.
http://thetrichordist.com/2012/04/15/meet-the-new-boss-worse-than-the-old-boss-full-post/
This article has nothing to do with what I’m arguing. In fact, in the caption to slide five, it says the following…
“Also the Spotify question deserves it’s own post cause I’m not sure if artists getting too little money is necessarily Spotify’s fault.”
That pretty much agrees with what I’ve been saying. So… what’s your response, again?
this should do the trick.
Now while were at, if you could send me a business plan outlining how their business works, their financials only including COGs, we’d really be getting somewhere.
Its’ not important that spotify is WAY under their US paying subscription projections, I don’t need that, just where they hit profitablity and what their timeline is for increasing payouts to artists and what they are.
If those numbers are realistic, you win.
http://thetrichordist.com/2012/04/30/spotify-is-not-good-for-you-complete-post/
What if there are just too many musicians wanting to write songs and perform for a living?
What if the existing audience has all the music it really wants right now? And musicians will give their stuff to Spotify for free, basivally, just to find any audience at all.
How many songs were written, recorded, and posted for free to the Internet last year? A few million, I believe I read.
Next year there will be another couple of million new songs released.
Not to mention the entire back catalogs of all the music recorded since recording started. Most of *that* is now available, too.
When what he consumer consumers is not rare, then the price goes to zero.
Bottom line: if music listeners would *only accept great songs*, then the price would skyrocket…because most musicians cannot write great songs, and there would be a huge DEMAND for them at very high prices.
Meant to say: “When what consumers CONSUME is not rare, then prices drop”.
Remember when CDs were introduced and they were going to “save the industry”?
Little did they know it was disc of digital files that can easily be shared or copied. Oops…
JW, I think I’m done with this conversation. As I mentioned earlier I was really posting about the video, but you chose to take the conversations elsewhere. Other than awaiting your US spotify financials, I’m sure we’ll meet again.
I must say I don’t appreciate the personal attacks and name calling, but clearly you are as passionate about your vision of the future of music as am I, we just see things differently.
“Growth of the music business? I think not. Daniel Ek means growth of his company, i.e., its capitalization. Which is the closest I can come to understanding the fundamental change I’ve witnessed in the music industry, from my first LP in 1988 to the one I am working on now. In between, the sale of recorded music has become irrelevant to the dominant business models I have to contend with as a working musician. Indeed, music itself seems to be irrelevant to these businesses– it is just another form of information, the same as any other that might entice us to click a link or a buy button on a stock exchange.
As businesses, Pandora and Spotify are divorced from music. To me, it’s a short logical step to observe that they are doing nothing for the business of music– except undermining the simple cottage industry of pressing ideas onto vinyl, and selling them for more than they cost to manufacture. I am no Luddite– I am not smashing iPhones or sabotaging software. In fact, I subscribe to Spotify for $9.99 a month (the equivalent of 680,462 annual plays of “Tugboat”) because I love music, and the access it gives me to music of all kinds is incredible.
But I have simply stopped looking to these business models to do anything for me financially as a musician. As for sharing our music without a business model of any kind, that’s exactly how I got into this– we called it punk rock. Which is why we are streaming all of our recordings, completely free, on the Bandcamp sites we set up for Galaxie 500 and Damon & Naomi. Enjoy.”
http://pitchfork.com/features/articles/8993-the-cloud/
Well that’s one perspective on it. But let’s take a step back & try to see the whole picture.
This is a graph of the revenue of the Swedish music industry (in Swedish Kronor… that’s their money, like how we have dollars). The purple is revenue from streaming. Now… I’m just ballparking this, but, converted to USD, we’re currently looking at ~$85m in revenue & rapidly growing. That’s out of an industry that was ~$250m in total back in 2002. At the current rate of growth, it looks like streaming will be worth the entirety of the 2002 recorded music industry by 2017. Of course, that’s a very optimistic estimation. But I dunno. Let’s call it an even 2020.
Now, it’s possible that the industry could plateau between now & then, given that it’s not a huge country (9.5m population). But the data point we really need to pay attention to is this… did the average consumer spend more than $186.24 per year on recorded music in Sweden in 2002? (99,00 kr/mo = $15.52 usd/mo) And I’m betting they didn’t, because that would mean there was less than 2m music fans in a country of 9.5m where music education is world class, & the country has more influence on the U.S. music industry than any other country. Sweden is nothing if not a musical country… in high school I had a friend who spent a year in Sweden in an exchange program just studying music. So what I extrapolate from that is that the potential for growing the pie is huge. I see the Swedish music industry eclipsing $250m in revenue & then some.
Now you won’t get any arguments from me about Spotify’s current payouts to U.S. indie artists. And there’s huge problems that I have with the payout structure, but that’s getting the weeds. And I understand Mr. Krukowski’s perspective. But that’s exactly what it is, it’s a perspective. It’s not the whole picture.
So let’s take a step back & ask ourselves the big question… why is streaming so attractive in Sweden & so unattractive in the U.S.?
Well I see a few variables, namely rate of premium conversions (1), total adoption (2), & deal structures with labels (3).
Now I’m not doing this to confuse you, but I’m going to approach these things in reverse numerical order. So let’s start with #3.
It’s pretty common for the anti-piracy nuts to say, “Daniel Ek is all about his own pockets & Spotify was created to make money for the owners, employees, & investors at the expense of artists.” I get the impression that you believe this. But I actually haven’t seen anything that supports that. If it were true, the revenue in Sweden would look much different than it does. Doesn’t that stand to reason? If Elk were really about profits, wouldn’t he be bleeding Sweden dry, where adoption is highest? Wouldn’t artists & labels be revolting? And wouldn’t that be the same all across Europe? Of course it would. But it’s not.
So when we look at rates in the U.S., doesn’t that raise questions about the years that Spotify was engaged in negotiations with the labels to launch in the U.S.? Isn’t 18% equity unusual? I’ll posit this… if Spotify had continued to negotiate until they got a fair deal from the labels, they would’ve been stuck with it for a long time. I get the impression that Spotify took the deal that they took in order to be first to market so that they would gain leverage to renegotiate. Does rdio have leverage? Nope. Did Mog? Nope. But Spotify is, according to DMN, already renegotiating these deals.
Now, because Spotify was kept out of the U.S.A. for so long, adoption is not where it should be. This affects total revenue, obviously. But it also affects rate of conversion. To this point, however anecdotal, I sent a facebook message to a friend just yesterday & got a Spotify alert today, “Your friend has just joined Spotify.” This surprised me because he’s a developer & a tech nut. When I asked him about it he said, “Yeah, not paid or anything yet, but I’m finally trying it out.” What surprised me was a) his opennes to the premium subscription (he’s a regular Grooveshark user) & b) that he hadn’t even tried it yet.
So how are these 3 problems solved? Well, the payout structure is a function of adoption & conversion. The more folks adopt & convert, the more leverage they have to renegotiate the deals with the labels. And don’t fool yourself, the labels had Spotify bent over the table with their pants down around their ankles. The revenue is going to the labels. (I’m saying this based on the Sweden data.)
So that’s the real problem here… artists don’t want adoption while payout rates are low, but Spotify has no leverage to renegotiate without adoption. That’s what makes for a painful transition. But as far as the subscription rate… Joey Flores said it on DMN just yesterday, “Subscription fees for streaming music services cost consumers three times what they used to spend annually on recorded music.” There’s room for really big up side.
The alternative to this is what? The war on piracy? Take a cue from the war on drugs & the war on terrorism, bro. Unwinnable. Where are people going to buy CDs when stores stop selling them all together? And what about when people no longer want to deal with the hassle & poor quality of mp3s? Apple & Google are already eyeing streaming. The transition is inevitable. I think we can all agree on that. So let’s try to shape it & expedite the whole thing so that the painful transition is no more painful than it has to be. These last 10 years have been bad enough.
So in short, yeah… payouts are low right now. And artists aren’t happy about it. And they’re complaining, but their complaints don’t reflect the bigger picture, or the potential upside to streaming.
Additionally, if you’ve ever used Spotify, it’s clear that those engineers love to listen to music, & are about building the best digital music listening experience possible. So when you question their motives, & try to make them out to be leeches, it falls on deaf ears to anyone who uses & loves the service.
Also, if you don’t appreciate personal attacks, don’t say ignorant things like “[A]ll this music being consumed [in Sweden] at fire sale prices is made in the USA,” when you obviously have no clue about what’s being consumed in Sweden or where anything is made.
He needs to watch this:
If your asking me, Will, if I seen the Amanda Palmer video, yes, I posted it on my site(s) a few days ago.
I think its’ fantastic and while I don’t agree with everything, I believe her cd debut in the top ten of Billboard, whatever that means, the premise that artists’ should feel comfortable about connecting with fans and asking for support is right on.
Amanda has proven herself a provacative, and usually savvy communicator, so some of the things she says don’t surprise me. After all she is determined to be hip and cutting edge, like Trent Reznor, and it can get tricky out there. For both of them……
$18.46… really… need I say more?
Not to mention that for $18.46 I could probably see your band play a show, in real life, that is IF you guys are good enough…
AGH another one, digital music news? really?
Another artist upset about illegal downloads, piracy, etc… HOW ABOUT DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT – CAPITALIZE ON THE REST OF YOUR ARTISTS VALUE, it’s about so much more than ‘recorded music’ now!
Not to mention, that if it’s not selling extremely well (i.e. enough for you to cover expenses and maybe make a tiny profit) then don’t manufacture a shitload of records and put them in stores! In other words, don’t make silly decisions that cut your profit margin considerably just because it’s “how it’s been done” or because YOU still WANT other people to buy records!
This is a game of push-and-pull; give-and-take; there are a vast amount of trade-offs in today’s industry.
Recording and distributing music has never been easier than it is now.
Work smart.
I don’t see the point being made here.
I just don’t.
This is non-sensical.
THINGS ARE DIFFERENT NOW! Most artists are putting out records to support tours, NOT the other way around…
Why do so many of you act like the crazy ex-girlfriend to recorded music? We’ve been in denial for years…
c∆ve-b
Get a haircut and a real job, like everyone else. Musicans record one performance and sell it over and over again on CD. What if I was a plumber and I sent you a DVD of me bending pipes?