5 Ways Internet Companies Are Screwing over Music

Discussions related to music in general.

Moderators: Mexicola, 2020k, Fredd-E, Aesthetics

User avatar
Eagle Minded
Status: Offline
Posts: 355
Joined: 29 Apr 2013
re-phaelam-ed wrote:This conversation goes the same way every time. I was happier discovering, rather than getting prompted where to go. I enjoyed having to go to the record store Tuesday midnight to get a record that was coming out, then getting home and fully taking it in.

The internet is laziness incarnate.


Dude, it's not like the Internet is collectively forbidding you from doing the things you like. Yes, things may be changing a little bit, but then again, they have always changed. When phonograph records were first introducing, people were also complaining that they "devalue" music, and that in order to "properly" enjoy music, you actually have to go to the concerts, and that records are making people lazy. The thing is, people like to make comparisons between today and an idealised, artificially perfect, non-existent past. I mean, isn't that the whole thing BoC explores with their music?

But that's okay. I mean, your experiences are all your, and you're free to say what you like and what you don't about the recent changes in music. But don't go around sticking labels on people and criticising them for not following your methods and your tastes. I also say my musical experience gets constantly better thanks to the digital technology and the Internet, and I will not allow you to tag me as a "cop-out" just because you think so. The Internet gives me a wealth of diversity that I would never, ever, ever even dream of accessing without it. And if I miss the physical hunt for records and the human contact, you know what I will do? I will go out and do it. But don't try to vilify the actions of people like me, as if we need to burn our hard drives to, as Daft Punk would say, "give life back to music" or some bullshit like that. Music is alive.
My music: ferniecanto.com.br
YouTube: youtube.com/user/FernieCanto
Bandcamp: ferniecanto.bandcamp.com

Latest album: "Builders of Worlds", released on February 2015: http://www.ferniecanto.com.br/bow/

User avatar
Dayvan Cowboy
Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Location: Canadian trapped in USA
FernieCanto wrote:
re-phaelam-ed wrote:This conversation goes the same way every time. I was happier discovering, rather than getting prompted where to go. I enjoyed having to go to the record store Tuesday midnight to get a record that was coming out, then getting home and fully taking it in.

The internet is laziness incarnate.


Dude, it's not like the Internet is collectively forbidding you from doing the things you like. Yes, things may be changing a little bit, but then again, they have always changed. When phonograph records were first introducing, people were also complaining that they "devalue" music, and that in order to "properly" enjoy music, you actually have to go to the concerts, and that records are making people lazy. The thing is, people like to make comparisons between today and an idealised, artificially perfect, non-existent past. I mean, isn't that the whole thing BoC explores with their music?

But that's okay. I mean, your experiences are all your, and you're free to say what you like and what you don't about the recent changes in music. But don't go around sticking labels on people and criticising them for not following your methods and your tastes. I also say my musical experience gets constantly better thanks to the digital technology and the Internet, and I will not allow you to tag me as a "cop-out" just because you think so. The Internet gives me a wealth of diversity that I would never, ever, ever even dream of accessing without it. And if I miss the physical hunt for records and the human contact, you know what I will do? I will go out and do it. But don't try to vilify the actions of people like me, as if we need to burn our hard drives to, as Daft Punk would say, "give life back to music" or some bullshit like that. Music is alive.


i hear ya....music is alive for sure. im just ranting about the quality of releases in the pop field of music. sure there will ALWAYS be sick shit out there.

but the net IS making people fucking home bound.
i have a buddy who has a little start up biz...he was doing his research re: shipping and started losing his mind over the fact that it would be X amount of dollars to ship to the UK lets say....

i asked, have you gone to the post office and seen how much it would cost to ship. the answer was no, i filled out the forms online and this is what it told me. TWO WEEKS of this argument, and having to listing to the rantings over the price.

i FINALLY convinced him to go to the physical office to see what they told him...i was 1/4th the price.

i have countless stories of people not willing to take the time to actually to the werk to get things done, and just take what the internet tells them at face value.

anyways....spend your time in front the the screen....youll regret it once its all passed you by.
you can only learn that from experience.

and you can have your britneys, your 311s, your bastilles and kid inks ha ha ha. A L I V E !

User avatar
Happy Cycler
Status: Offline
Posts: 3418
Joined: 25 Mar 2011
Location: BPR. OG
re-phaelam-ed wrote:
Internet makes us lazy. I liked getting out and discovery music. You met people to. Rather than being a shut-in. 'Hunting' on the net devalues the music. So many skip through a track to preview it...then dl the album to only partially listen, then archive it. Everyone has everything. Or lots of it.

The argument, 'I get to experience more cuz of the internet' is the weakest fucking cop-out of all time. Sure you may miss some stuff...but you don't need to hear it all.

This conversation goes the same way every time. I was happier discovering, rather than getting prompted where to go. I enjoyed having to go to the record store Tuesday midnight to get a record that was coming out, then getting home and fully taking it in.

The internet is laziness incarnate.

Re: who uses recs anymore? Ya dj's. Fucking cd decks now...so lame or freaking traktor. Hip hop dj battles keep it alive.


Well, I completely disagree but you're entitled to your opinion.

I'm just stating the truth, it isn't a cop out of anything because the internet doesn't inherently make a person lazy. It might make people YOU KNOW lazy, but that's their own damn fault.

Your world also sounds fascinating. I've lived in Phoenix suburbs most of my life. There is nobody around here that I'm going to meet who I can tolerate here, let alone shares my taste in music, for more than about five fucking minutes without a long process of finding someone online and then meeting up with them in person which is how I have 80% of my local friends...so while that may be applicable or more enjoyable to a particular person who is from an artist community perhaps and whatnot, if the incentive is purely and simply to find music, it's a totally long and irrelevant practice for a lot of people. It's not a cop out.

Regarding DJs - I would agree that it's lame if someone who was a DJ that frequently worked in a more traditional fashion as opposed to being one of those people who just play music for a group of people (that are for whatever reason also classified as DJs by pop culture) were to then switch to CDs and give up most of what constitutes his/her art. If they weren't that kind of DJ to begin with I don't see that much of a difference.
Okay...now...wait for fog machine.

User avatar
Moderator
Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
Joined: 26 Jan 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
re-phaelam-ed wrote:just to play D/A...isn't streaming music kinda like refined radio?

This is an interesting point.

Techboy wrote:I think this stuff is weird. The record industry is barely 100 years old and every 2 years the major players bleat about how the latest fad is killing the industry and how that hurts the artists.

I agree with this and to a point, it almost seems like a gimmick to the major labels. I understand how unsigned and independent artists have the right to complain, but every time the major labels bring it up, it's met with an eye roll six months later. That being said, I wanted to focus this thread on the independent and unsigned musicians rather than the big ones. How are they making a living in this world that's completely crumbling?

Especially when...

IanRedpoint wrote:Dunno about the rest of the world but it's really not that easy to get gigs in the UK playing anything that falls outside a tidy popular genre. Certainly not if you don't already have a reputation based on Internet buzz or record sales.

This. And when you do get gigs, 9/10 the venue doesn't pay. Anyone who's played live has experienced this over and over and over again.

Techboy wrote:Why is it revolutionary when Netflix does it and a scourge on the industry when spotify does it?

I'm particularly interested in how much a movie makes per Netflix stream. Have these figures been released?

For a while, I was wondering how the movie industry is still thriving in the digital age, verses music downloading and I came to the conclusion that the movie industry still has one very important old-world thing going for it that the music industry doesn't have. People still flock in mass numbers to see a movie at a traditional movie theater. The theaters themselves suffer and often go bankrupt multiple times over, but the movie industry gets their money in the end. Even if the movie doesn't fair well at the box office, a movie production company will most likely have another movie come out eventually that will recoup those cost. Then, of course, all of the movies get released on physical and digital formats and we all flock to purchasing them again. We could argue that live shows are the equivalent in music to going to the theater in film, I suppose. But, then it begs the question of how independent film seems to get by just fine.

So, why do we still buy movies in mass but not music? Sure, there's movie pirates, but they're not as bad. Or are they, and the film industry doesn't give a shit? I'm not versed in film. I don't know. Is there anyone that can shed some light?

Rodheh wrote:News flash: artists sell records.

The bulk of people buy music.

The bulk of people are not even technically minded enough to do something as simple as learn how to torrent things.

Is it fair to say the "bulk of people" you speak of are the ones that are supporting major label artists because they don't dig into the indie & unsigned world? Also, this could hold true for independent record stores as well. How can we make it better for the indie & unsigned? Major retailers push major artists. Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy have downsized their stock by so much that even they don't carry all of the newest major label releases anymore.
PLEASE LISTEN TO MY QUEER ELECTRONIC POP MUSIC: 2020k.Bandcamp |Twenty20k.com

User avatar
Dayvan Cowboy
Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Location: Canadian trapped in USA
2020k wrote:
IanRedpoint wrote:Dunno about the rest of the world but it's really not that easy to get gigs in the UK playing anything that falls outside a tidy popular genre. Certainly not if you don't already have a reputation based on Internet buzz or record sales.

This. And when you do get gigs, 9/10 the venue doesn't pay. Anyone who's played live has experienced this over and over and over again.


its always been that way...thats why you sell t-shirts, cd's and stickers. you play for free booze. you make money selling merch.

wanna be a rock star? you gotta travel the hard road. and the chances of getting where you wanna go are pretty slim. do it for fun...

Telepath
Status: Offline
Posts: 9999
Joined: 19 Nov 2005
2020k wrote:
IanRedpoint wrote:Dunno about the rest of the world but it's really not that easy to get gigs in the UK playing anything that falls outside a tidy popular genre. Certainly not if you don't already have a reputation based on Internet buzz or record sales.

This. And when you do get gigs, 9/10 the venue doesn't pay. Anyone who's played live has experienced this over and over and over again.


I dont play unless my expenses (including smokes) are covered and I can get all the free liquer I can drink that night + some pocket change. You should demand the same. Bands performing for free is exactly why so many venues think they can get away with it and we should stand together as musicians and not play at those. If they truly love music, they can spare a few bucks for it. Unless its for charity or something of course in which case you can just ask for liquer.

Meanwhile, normal non-VIP party-going is ruined :(

User avatar
Moderator
Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
Joined: 26 Jan 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
re-phaelam-ed wrote:its always been that way...thats why you sell t-shirts, cd's and stickers. you play for free booze. you make money selling merch.
Which all cost money to make, right? Free booze isn't going to fund printing for any of that. And honestly, how many people are buying the T-shirts, stickers, and CDs of every artist they see? Concert goers have limited funds too, so why are they going to spend their money on merchandise from a band that's just starting out, when they can go to the Lady Gaga store and buy a cool T-shirt there and everyone already understands its message? They paid the door price to get in, isn't that enough? I'm not saying every concert goer does this, by all means I'm moreso asking the tougher questions & playing devil's advocate.

More conscious music fans do support the indies/unsigned. Other indies/unsigned artists support other indies/unsigned artists. And if someone really likes the set, of course they'll buy something if they have the cash, but not everyone is conscious of this - especially the casual listener of music.

Also..

Cupz wrote:I dont play unless my expenses (including smokes) are covered and I can get all the free liquer I can drink that night + some pocket change. You should demand the same. Bands performing for free is exactly why so many venues think they can get away with it and we should stand together as musicians and not play at those. If they truly love music, they can spare a few bucks for it. Unless its for charity or something of course in which case you can just ask for liquer.
I agree with this. Playing for free for no reason is stupid unless it's for charity or some sort of favor or something (And don't get me started on "pay to play"). However, sometimes, especially if the crowd is insanely small, like 0-10 people or so (which is very possible with an artist just starting out), and the artist isn't the headliner for that night, the venue has to make money too.

INTERESTING DEVELOPMENT:
Over 700 indie labels join forces to launch new initiative to ensure fair digital revenues for artists. http://www.factmag.com/2014/07/16/over- ... r-artists/. Steps have to be taken and they have been. Bravo? discuss.
PLEASE LISTEN TO MY QUEER ELECTRONIC POP MUSIC: 2020k.Bandcamp |Twenty20k.com

Telepath
Status: Offline
Posts: 9999
Joined: 19 Nov 2005
Yeah, I dont think selling stickers, cd's etc. is the right way of doing things, though I haven't printed anything in such a long time (as I fail in life and have no idea how to get rid of them).I remember going through allot of trouble getting some merch together for a big gig (...big in my eyes, aka rather small) and went home with the exact same stuff I brought. Total buzzkill.
And I also remember being a bit annoyed by some musician passing out stickers like a business card. The music was fine, but that sticker ruined it a bit for me. I'm probably not "most people" though, in the sense that I'm a bit of a hypocritical bastard. I still really want to believe people will find out about music if they want to, without having it shoved in their face. Its allot more special accidentally stumbling on something...and who still plays cd's this day and age anyway, right?

Making money with music is total shit. An illusion. I think the best way to make money on music is just making good music, having fun and die a happy man! Free booze is great though and should be the very least as, in my case it is actually vital to the show (im fixing that though). If I get to play for nothing, fine, but at the very least I make damn sure they get what they payed for, with hilarious consequences.

I like that initiatives sentiment, but its not going to make allot of difference. The world will still be swarming with terrible music and good music will still be hard to find in between all those thick layers of shit. Maybe some venues have given up and just accepted to bring on the shitstorm and not care anymore.

User avatar
Eagle Minded
Status: Offline
Posts: 355
Joined: 29 Apr 2013
2020k wrote:INTERESTING DEVELOPMENT:[/b] Over 700 indie labels join forces to launch new initiative to ensure fair digital revenues for artists. http://www.factmag.com/2014/07/16/over- ... r-artists/. Steps have to be taken and they have been. Bravo? discuss.


That is cool. And that is the kind of thing that comes to mind when us, mere mortals, discuss questions about the market and its changes: how can we know if we are not inside the business? The music industry has found a way around every hurdle and obstacle, it has been "killed" dozens of times, it has passed through "the worst decade ever" about five or six times, and how? Because those people know the market.

The question about the movie industry is deeper than it seems. You can't just say "oh, they still have the old world aspect of people going to movie theatres", because, well, so does music! People still buy CDs, people still buy merchandise and still go to gigs and flock at concerts. Oh, so people buys less CDs in the digital age? Well, then it's fair to say that people go less to the theatre as well, but this hasn't killed movies. Hell, the gaming industry is bigger than movies, and it has had problems with piracy virtually since the day it started! And I'm not only talking about major players, because indie films and indie games exist just as much as indie music. Okay, maybe a little less, but still.

I admit I would be much more concerned if I made a living out of my music. But if I did, I'd try to ask these questions to those who've been in the business for decades, or those who are coming in with fresh ideas collected from other areas.
My music: ferniecanto.com.br
YouTube: youtube.com/user/FernieCanto
Bandcamp: ferniecanto.bandcamp.com

Latest album: "Builders of Worlds", released on February 2015: http://www.ferniecanto.com.br/bow/

User avatar
Dayvan Cowboy
Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Location: Canadian trapped in USA
2020k wrote:
re-phaelam-ed wrote:its always been that way...thats why you sell t-shirts, cd's and stickers. you play for free booze. you make money selling merch.
Which all cost money to make, right? Free booze isn't going to fund printing for any of that. And honestly, how many people are buying the T-shirts, stickers, and CDs of every artist they see? Concert goers have limited funds too, so why are they going to spend their money on merchandise from a band that's just starting out, when they can go to the Lady Gaga store and buy a cool T-shirt there and everyone already understands its message? They paid the door price to get in, isn't that enough? I'm not saying every concert goer does this, by all means I'm moreso asking the tougher questions & playing devil's advocate.

More conscious music fans do support the indies/unsigned. Other indies/unsigned artists support other indies/unsigned artists. And if someone really likes the set, of course they'll buy something if they have the cash, but not everyone is conscious of this - especially the casual listener of music.

Also..

Cupz wrote:I dont play unless my expenses (including smokes) are covered and I can get all the free liquer I can drink that night + some pocket change. You should demand the same. Bands performing for free is exactly why so many venues think they can get away with it and we should stand together as musicians and not play at those. If they truly love music, they can spare a few bucks for it. Unless its for charity or something of course in which case you can just ask for liquer.
I agree with this. Playing for free for no reason is stupid unless it's for charity or some sort of favor or something (And don't get me started on "pay to play"). However, sometimes, especially if the crowd is insanely small, like 0-10 people or so (which is very possible with an artist just starting out), and the artist isn't the headliner for that night, the venue has to make money too.

INTERESTING DEVELOPMENT:
Over 700 indie labels join forces to launch new initiative to ensure fair digital revenues for artists. http://www.factmag.com/2014/07/16/over- ... r-artists/. Steps have to be taken and they have been. Bravo? discuss.


you ever buy a concert t dude? $45? they cost about $8 - $11 to make. ya you make money doing that and selling CDRs. the booze comment was facetious.

Telepath
Status: Offline
Posts: 9999
Joined: 19 Nov 2005
re-phaelam-ed wrote:you ever buy a concert t dude?


No.

User avatar
Happy Cycler
Status: Offline
Posts: 3418
Joined: 25 Mar 2011
Location: BPR. OG
Is it fair to say the "bulk of people" you speak of are the ones that are supporting major label artists because they don't dig into the indie & unsigned world? Also, this could hold true for independent record stores as well. How can we make it better for the indie & unsigned? Major retailers push major artists. Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy have downsized their stock by so much that even they don't carry all of the newest major label releases anymore.


Not just them. Smaller artists often have their music on Amazon or iTunes and both still sell music at persistent frequency. I've not noticed any decline.

It could be thought that the people more into indie music and not major and mainstream "just for cash" shit are more knowledgeable that they know how to get something for free. However, I still see a lot of those records sell online so people are buying them. Perhaps people would buy them more if shit like Spotify didn't exist and they couldn't stream the full album in good quality through some sort of service like that.

As for physical places, Wal-Mart and Best Buy obviously aren't going to carry as much as a record store does but my main point was they continue to get things in and sell them. I tend to find the largest selection of new or old releases in (other than record stores) places like Bookmans (or whatever the equivalent might be in another state). However, due to the nature of those kinds of places I don't know what amount of revenue - if any - the artist gets, even if it's a new album and not a used one. Same goes for record stores and I would assume they'd have to get some amount.

I think the whole point is when it comes to things screwing over artists, I look at something like Spotify and see it as a big issue, which is where the "might as well take all the steps and just torrent the record" thing comes in. It's this shit:

Image

We need services that allow people to hear what they're considering buying that doesn't just give them unlimited charged access like Spotify. There was this thing back when the Zune came out many years ago that allowed you to send songs to another person who had one, and you could send normal 320kbps mp3s. The other person just couldn't listen to them more than four times or so - I feel like that's a good idea. I think you'll probably get the idea of whether or not you want to buy a record after four listens even if you don't understand every little subtle detail of the record completely yet.

At least that's how I look at it. As someone who wants music to be his career and is in the process of trying to make that happen, I expect and would be happy with a modest income. It wouldn't feel right if people couldn't listen to and digest anything I made for free first to me. Music is an art form, and although we do this, I don't think you can really put a price tag on art. It's sort of an artificial construct.
Okay...now...wait for fog machine.

User avatar
Dayvan Cowboy
Status: Offline
Posts: 1399
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Location: London, England
Isn't the biggest problem simply that music is no longer the major cultural force it once was?

In my lifetime I've seen it go from a situation that the only entertainment media you could buy and own being books and music, to where we are now with everything available to buy and everything monetised in some way. Our disposable income is fought over by games, films, technology etc. Music has a lot of competition now and it's only those of us who choose to make it important to ourselves who buy it, when other media offers more obvious and instant gratification.

As much as music had an artistic and aesthetic value, it was also about tribes and identity, and a cultural way to distance ourselves from our parents generation. That's no longer the case. Rock and pop music is old now, and the parents listen to the same stuff as their kids. The newness of music, in the mainstream, has gone. The entire history of pop music is collapsed into the present. Nobody wants or needs the new when there's 50+ years of music available everywhere all the time.

And music is everywhere now, even if it isn't the music you would choose to listen to. Every shop and cafe has piped music. There's a constant soundtrack to everything on TV. Unless you really love it and want to hear something different there's no need to seek out and buy music.

I would love to think that if Spotify didn't exist then everyone would be forced to go out and buy records. Sadly, I don't think that would be the case. I don't think it would direct more of anyone's disposable income towards music.

I despair of the other members of the band I play in - all their music listening is via YouTube. These are affluent middle-class middle-aged people who would never think of buying a record now... and they're bloody musicians FFS! Even they don't consider that recorded music has a monetary value. The damage has already been done and music has been devalued by over-saturation, major label greed and legalised piracy (YouTube, Spotify etc.).

I'm sad to say that the thing I love above all else is now essentially worthless to 90% of the population.

User avatar
Moderator
Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
Joined: 26 Jan 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
re-phaelam-ed wrote:you ever buy a concert t dude? $45? they cost about $8 - $11 to make. ya you make money doing that and selling CDRs. the booze comment was facetious.

Nothing was facetious. I'm being realistic.

No one is going to buy a $45 concert T-shirt from an unsigned band just starting out.

No band is going to bulk buy $11 t-shirts to up-sell if they're being paid in booze. Booze doesn't buy t-shirts.

Do you have experience playing live? This question isn't ill-meaning either. I'm wondering what you've done.

Rodheh wrote:
We need services that allow people to hear what they're considering buying that doesn't just give them unlimited charged access like Spotify. There was this thing back when the Zune came out many years ago that allowed you to send songs to another person who had one, and you could send normal 320kbps mp3s. The other person just couldn't listen to them more than four times or so - I feel like that's a good idea. I think you'll probably get the idea of whether or not you want to buy a record after four listens even if you don't understand every little subtle detail of the record completely yet.

At least that's how I look at it. As someone who wants music to be his career and is in the process of trying to make that happen, I expect and would be happy with a modest income. It wouldn't feel right if people couldn't listen to and digest anything I made for free first to me. Music is an art form, and although we do this, I don't think you can really put a price tag on art. It's sort of an artificial construct.

Those charts you posted are really interesting to me, no matter how many times I look at them. The Zune idea is also interesting, but in a world where we have Hulu and Netflix, which are unlimited, sadly I don't think the general public would accept such a service for music.

Your last paragraph gets an e-hi-five from me & I agree that Amazon and iTunes are still really nice places for indie artists to thrive in terms of record sales. :)
PLEASE LISTEN TO MY QUEER ELECTRONIC POP MUSIC: 2020k.Bandcamp |Twenty20k.com

Previous

Return to This Random Sound

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests