Jump to content

Home

the future of the music industry


Darth Jimbo

Recommended Posts

I doubt the music industry will collapse, but I expect it will go through significant changes from a business standpoint.

 

Simply put, the producers (record companies, musicians, songwriters, et al) want their money.

 

What the fans want is (A) music, and (B)reasonable prices.

 

The trouble is that people trading songs online aren't providing income.

 

What the record companies don't seem to want to acknowledge is that things can't go back to the way things were. Change or perish.

 

My idea is a new system that will give listeners access to their music of choice (without having to buy a crappy CD for one good song), while still providing money to the songwriters.

 

-Somebody needs to establish the "Average" content of a CD: How many tracks per disk? What average price per CD? etc. From this data, we can come up with a standard price for a song (say, $1.05 for a pop song, $1.60 for a ballad, etc). Longer tracks could cost more, so each track would have to be classified by length.

 

-Users could then sign up for a service (like Napster or Audiogalaxy), and pay X# of dollars for a certain number of "tokens." These tokens would be stored in a central server, and each downloaded song would cost a number in tokens. (Users could then burn their own CDs with their own mix of tracks.)

 

-Musicians could make alternate versions of songs (like demos), that could be downloaded for free as samples. The samples would probably be low-quality and short, obviously.

 

And of course, some people will buy the CDs, even if downloads are free. I'm not gonna sit here for hours and wait for 13+ tracks qeued up when I can run out and pick up the new B*Witched CD (assuming it ever gets made) in a few minutes.

 

Personally, I'd be more than willing to pay for d'loaded songs; except that prices are too high for CDs (IMHO), and I usually end up only liking one or two of the 23 songs on a given CD.

 

THe exceptions; those CDs with all (or mostly all) awesome tracks, I'd be happy to pay for.

 

------------------

"Don't f_ck with the Jedi Master, son." --Mark Hamill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Ruddster 2K1:

with programs such as Aimster, iMesh and Audoiogalxy, and to a lesser extent, Napster, surely the music industry will collapse in the next 10 years? discuss :-D

 

Someone will still have to record and promote.......so that makes me think you are WRONG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Music isn't a commodity, so it's industry can't collapse. The US steel industry collapsed because their commodity was no longer needed to the extent that the industry was producing. Music isn't anything like that. There always has and always will be music.

 

Something I like the open exchange of music that we are having right now, is that it provides quite a bit of warning as to the quality of the ENTIRE album, not just the single. My policy with mp3s is if there's less than THREE songs I'd want to hear off an album or it's classical music, then I'll download it. Otherwise, I'll grab a few songs and buy the CD soon after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone here in the industry I can report that there are changes being made, but in the long run I'm not sure if it will make any kind of lasting difference.

The short answer is: Most people out there right now can barely afford to make music. 90% or so of the professional musicians in this country are struggling to make it, and now they are being expected by fans to give thier music away for free. Record companies suck, I'll give you that, but the alternative is kind of a head scratcher for me. If everybody did like Nute does, download, then go out and buy the full CD it would be great. But if the trend of swapping every song ever recorded for no royalties to the artists and songwriters continues, then you are going to start seeing a lot of talented, but largely unrecognized musicians bow out and go back to day jobs. To me downloading every song you've ever wanted without any financial support to the creative forces behind them is a slap in the face! It's the most insulting thing you could ever do. To me it's the equivalent of walking up to your favorite artist and saying "I really love your music, and I want you to make more, but I really feel that you do not deserve to be paid for your efforts! But keep making music for me!" HUH???

Sure, recorded music is over-priced, but then recording music is insanely expensive. Not to mention time consuming. It is totally impossible to do without a source of income. If a way can be figured out that artists could distribute the music for free, but still be compensated for thier lifetime of effort to it, then I'm all for free music swapping. But until that day comes I have little love for the whole notion.

Otherwise,... Want free music? Turn on the radio, and live with the commercials. It's kind of like PBS,... we can give you great programming without any advertising, but we still have to be financed somehow, or we can't continue to do it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest garyah99

I have seen major changes myself in the last 10 years. I used to be a professional DJ, and back in the mid to late 80's and early 90's it was a real fun job. Then they stopped pressing vinyl, releasing singles, and instead of being able to go out and buy the top 40 dance tunes, all of a sudden I had to fork out $500 bucks a month for tapes and CD's. On top of that, with the explosion of Hip-Hop and Country music, it's gotten so that everybody and his pet cat is trying to make an album, and maybe 1 or 2 songs on that album are any good, yet you have buy the whole thing because they don't make singles anymore (granted, you CAN get CD singles, which cost almost as much as the whole CD anyway). The music industry has gone nuts and, no, it's not the artist's fault, at least not completely. I remember when it used to take 2 or 3 years to make an album and every song on it was a hit. Now anybody that can scream into a microphone wants to be a star. I also remember being able to pay $15 - $20 bucks to go to a concert. Now it's over a $100!! I'll do like edlib says and listen to the radio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hans The Great

Companies like Napster are here to stay, in one form or another.

 

I have little faith in an industry that charges over $100 for N'Sync concert tickets. The record producers are greedy, they charge too much for their product, flood the market with defective products like N'Sync and Brittany S. and people are fighting back the only way that is available to them.

 

I think that the recording industry must

1. Be more flexible about pricing their music, on and off line.

2. Reduce concert ticket prices and increase the availability of good seats.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, no matter how ridiculous the prices are, stealing is stealing. This is the USA (where I am anyway wink.gif) and people have the right to charge whatever people will pay. Supply and demand, baby. Supply and demand.

 

Nevertheless, music these days is getting crappier all the time, and I think that sucks. There's not much I can do about it, I suppose, and it's probably one of the reasons I hardly listen to anything but classical anymore (with a few exceptions). On the other hand, if popular music didn't get so crappy, I might never have dicovered some of my favorites pieces of music. For example, I thought opera was retarded for the longest time, but tried it out when I grew tired of everything else and needed something new to listen to. And what did I discover? That opera is not retarded0; just the really famous, Romantic operas that everyone holds up as exampes of good opera are retarded. Classical opera (the "good" kind wink.gif) is now one of my favrites kinds of music.

 

So maybe it's a mixed blessing smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really have any idea how much money it takes to put on a show like NSync??? It's ridiculous! Greed is a definite factor, but not the only one. That level of productions are so involved.

A friend of mine worked the NSync shows when they were in town. They had about 15 trucks of gear that needed to be unloaded and set up. Take 40 union stagehands at $20+ an hour for 12 or more hours on the in, 8 or so on the out another 15 guys to stay during the show each night, security staff, catering, renting all the gear (lights/ sound/ staging/ rigging/ etc...), leasing trucks and tour buses (with drivers), hotel rooms for everybody, salarys for 30+ road guys and whatever band they are using, Per Diem for same road guys, buying the venue for the night (the kinds of venues NSync play go for at least 10 grand a day, usually a lot more) and finally the guarantee for the artists (to get them to just show up) which usually starts at $50,000 for this kind of act.

This is just for one show. Most bands like this often have 2 or more full productions out (with road crews). For example: while they are playing in Boston on the "A" stage, they have another stage being assembled in Cleveland for tomorrow night's show, so that this stage can be torn down and shipped to Philly for Friday's show.

Most tours lose money. The whole point of touring is promotion; to get people to go out and buy the CD.

People insist on having these type of whizz-bang stage shows, so tickets prices keep going up. It doesn't surprise me at all. I once worked a U2 stadium show (Pop-Mart tour) for one day, and walked out of there with about $400. There were hundreds of people (perhaps a thousand or more including all the stadium staff) working there, many of them earning a lot more than I was. They had 40 trucks for this one show, and were leap-frogging with 3 stages. They lost thier shirts on that tour, and it didn't surprise me in the least.

That's why tickets cost so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it costs WAY MORE than what they take in to run a concert. Nowadays a concert is a glorified commercial for an album.

Ticket prices SHOULD be higher, but they can absorb the lost through other means. Airlines do the same thing. That's why passenger railroads went under. The airlines could afford to operate at a lost for now and hope that it pays off in the long run somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest garyah99

Hmmmmm...well, I know for a FACT that 10 years ago the Rollings Stones made $1 Million PER show, after roadies etc had been paid. What they make today is anyone's guess. In fact, if you take an average crowd of 50,000 people (most stadiums will hold MANY more people than that), charge an average of $50 per ticket, the math gives you $2.5 Million income per concert. Sure, you can decuct 100 grand or so for the roadies, stage hands and security, and about 20 grand for transportation, equipment repairs and replacements.....I don't know. It still seems like a pretty hefty profit to me. Who's losing money except for the fans??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eek.gifONE CD!!!!!! eek.gif

I have almost a thousand!!! And at least half that in cassettes and vinyl!!! And there's hundreds I wish I had that I don't (at the moment anyway).

How do you do it?

I would go nuts!

My "Desert-Island-Disks" list is over 50 titles long (kinda defeating the purpose of the exercise, I know)

Trust me, I was hit by the full impact of the size of this collection when I had to pack it and move it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have about 80 CDs, not family CD all of them are mine.

 

But of course about 75 of those CD were bought in a Russian Market and whoever says russian and cd says not really legal or original but damn cheap stuff and excellent quality...

But let's just say, for my sake, that it's all good and legal... biggrin.gif

rolleyes.gif

<font size=1>

 

 

[This message has been edited by Jem (edited September 13, 2001).]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...