The state of the music world

Going to a gig, going to another festival, or want to tell people about the awesome riff that you just worked out.
User avatar
Blackwater
Posts: 1528
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:49 pm
Location: Russia

The state of the music world

Postby Blackwater » Fri Jan 24, 2014 6:11 pm

Thought this would be a good thread to see people's views and what they know or heard!

The music industry is kind of crumbling at the moment and maybe because it's people downloading illegally or maybe it's because people can't afford to go to gigs/buy merchandise that bands aren't receiving as much money. Maybe we have got to a point where there are so many artists/bands around that there's just not enough money to around in the music industry.

I can't be the only one to have seen bands that are pretty high profile saying it's extremely hard to make money these days! I'd like people to share what they know and what they think about what's going on in the music world as music is a big part of our life right?
ImageImage

BABYMETAL to headline Sonisphere 2015

hybrid theorist
Posts: 15851
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:37 pm
Location: Leeds, YORKSHIRE

Re: The state of the music world

Postby hybrid theorist » Fri Jan 24, 2014 6:23 pm

I think we've seen the end of huge bands dominating, there's never going to be another Metallica/U2/Rolling Stones/Bon Jovi .

There's too many bands around now for one to get right to the top. Who's the biggest band in the world right now? Coldplay?

There's not really anyone I can think of under maybe 20 years old who can sell out stadiums around the world, Muse can do it here but they're nowhere near that size in other places. Maybe I'm missing someone, I dunno.

I think its much easier to get into smaller bands, so to get one off the ground isn't too difficult compared to the past (except that you're up against every other band in the world, not just your local part) but that means its harder to dominate.
Image
:animals-cow:

User avatar
billytheweed
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 10:45 pm
Location: rossendale valley lancashire

Re: The state of the music world

Postby billytheweed » Fri Jan 24, 2014 6:35 pm

the music industry is instant now , that started in the 80's and has continued ever since, no band is given the time to grow and build up a following its is down to a few executives who decide who to push , what genre of music is 'coo'l and then signing bands that fit that genre and then making as much money as they can out of them for the corporate label, remember its called the music business or industry, its about supply and demand and who can make money for the record company, why do you think artists like price and george michael tried to take a stand in the 90's also just look at some of the bands that have huge exposure and look at the size of venues they play live , then look at rock music and look at the bands playing those same venues without the same ammount of exposure on radio tv etc. rock is pretty healthy its just not mainstream as in, on the voice or x factor because that doesnt get people watching tv on a saturday night
ImageImage
' hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way'
FMC code1k910248

User avatar
kipper64
Posts: 18552
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Re: The state of the music world

Postby kipper64 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 6:45 pm

Accessibility is a big part of it, I wrote a massive thing about this a while back somewhere on the internet, I'll try and paraphrase it.

Back in the 80's or earlier, or I guess to some extent the early 90's, the only way you could be exposed to bands was via magazines, TV, radio, or I guess word of mouth. You couldn't try out music as easily as you can now by going on Youtube, Spotify etc.., so if you were buying music it was something you knew already you liked for the most part, so if you liked one album by a band, you'd probably buy every release as it'd be a safe bet in not wasting money. Another factor would be a lot of the music people would listen to back in the day would probably be stuffed passed down by their older brother or sister, or mother or father or whoever and again while that still happens today, people back then probably had little choice and just stuck with that stuff rather than being able to easily look about for their own music they like. I guess that has a knock off effect and any of the bands who had been around making quality music or bands who were leading the current trend promoted by TV, Radio or press tended to explode massively on a stadium level, even in alternative music.

Another point would be back in the day if you were say into punk in the late 70's/80's you'd probably just go to pubs or clubs where bands would play all the time, so you'd be exposed to so much music you'd had no chance to pre-vet, where as now there's not really any kinds of scenes or movements to that extent, bands are based all over the place and people tend to just pick and choose to go to what ones they like rather than going to X venue every couple of days and just seeing whoever is playing. So gigs probably have less people turning up just because they always go there, but turning up because they want to go there, but to get people to do that amongst the millions of bands that you can access now is undoubtedly going to be tougher.
Image

hybrid theorist
Posts: 15851
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:37 pm
Location: Leeds, YORKSHIRE

Re: The state of the music world

Postby hybrid theorist » Fri Jan 24, 2014 7:18 pm

Yeah, I mean most of my friends were into rock music, but not metal when I was younger. frakk knows what I'd have done without the internet.

Not just for "I've heard of this Pantera band, I wonder if they're any good" (which literally happened, the first time I ever heard a Pantera song was downloading frakking Hostile) to internet forums going "band x is amazing, everyone should listen to them!", then checking out whoever it was.
Image
:animals-cow:

User avatar
Rick
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:01 am
Location: Preston

Re: The state of the music world

Postby Rick » Sat Jan 25, 2014 10:21 am

Personally I tend to download all of my music from various torrent sites and whilst I would agree this isn't supporting the industry its an issue that will never be resolved, and I don't feel bad about as I will support bands at gigs & fests. I would say that the internet has had a huge impact on the music industry that gets worse as the years go by, but it my opinion its not just because the internet has become more popular, its down to costs, the fact that bands have a much easier time getting known now, and that internet speeds have dramatically increased.

Like many others I can remember back to around 98 when I started properly getting into music at the age of 15 /16 and at the time the place I visited was a small music shop near college. Back then when I bought a CD in the shops they cost around £6.99 and there was nowhere near as much choice as they only really stocked the really big and successful bands as it was something they were guaranteed to shift, and like Kip said after buying 1 album you would often buy another by the same band as there was a fair chance you would like it which just led to certain bands (GnR, Maiden) growing bigger and bigger.

Now whilst the internet did exist it was still at the point where a lot of people used it at college / school but was only just becoming the common place site in your average home. At that time even tho illegal downloading was not as prevelant it was still their you just had to look slightly harder, the main issue was that you could download an album but on an 512k modem it took bloody hours and it was easier to just go out and spend the money on the album.

Fast forward many years and there are so many more names gracing the music scene, and now I am a homeowner with a 75mb line hooked up to the pc, I could go out and buy albums from HMV or likewise in Preston and would end up spending £11.99 and using up over an hour of my time. I could go on Amazon and order the album for delivery and get it fractionally cheaper but wait 4-5 days. In both these situations I am going to rip the album to my HDD and then never use it again. So I could pay for the digital download but its gotten to the point that its not that much different in price than buying the hard copy, and hell I may still not like it.

Which then leads to the final option which is that instead I can set the torrents off and 30 minutes later have the entire back catalogue of a band to see if I like them or not, In the case of fests with a bit of work I can get all the stuff from every band there and check them out before wanting to see them, without trying to get music from all the bands and still afford my mortgage. All in all it comes down to a lot of little things that have simply made it easier, cheaper and more convenient for the end user to pirate, and whilst the consumer is at fault imo the industry hardly helps itself.
Camp Bitchfist: Ozzfest 2002, Download 2004, Download 2005, Download 2006, Download 2007, Download 2008, Download 2009, Sonisphere 2010, Sonisphere 2011, Download 2012, Download 2013, Sonisphere 2014, Download 2016!

User avatar
ThornDavis
Posts: 1351
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: The state of the music world

Postby ThornDavis » Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:46 am

hybrid theorist wrote:Yeah, I mean most of my friends were into rock music, but not metal when I was younger. frakk knows what I'd have done without the internet.

Not just for "I've heard of this Pantera band, I wonder if they're any good" (which literally happened, the first time I ever heard a Pantera song was downloading frakking Hostile) to internet forums going "band x is amazing, everyone should listen to them!", then checking out whoever it was.


I used to borrow tapes from the libraries (remember those?) around Dorset, go through the 'thanks' list and then keep an eye out for those bands on my next trip and borrow their tapes (remember those?) and so on. They had some pretty niche stuff in the four or five libraries that I could reach on my bike. Once I'd discovered a band I liked, I'd keep an eye out for their stuff in all the local record shops (remeber those?).

Anyway, yeah. Obviously piracy has basically killed music now and it's getting to the point where it's no longer sustainable. People have this idea that music is something you shouldn't have to pay for and that's obviously a problem if music is your livelihood. Especailly when you consider up and coming bands often lose money on tour. How are we expecting them to survive if we steal their albums and also expect them to front the bulk of the costs when the come to play our towns?

Even when I hear a band like Five Finger Death Punch say something like "O we don't care about piracy because we make all our money on tour" I find myself wondering how much their record company would invest in promoting tours if there wasn't any revenue being generated from album sales. For those bands that don't have such great record company backing, music "fans" (ie, people who place no value on music whatsoever) have created a situation where being a musician is basically frakking yourself in the arse and the mouth at the same time.

hybrid theorist
Posts: 15851
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:37 pm
Location: Leeds, YORKSHIRE

Re: The state of the music world

Postby hybrid theorist » Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:42 pm

I think its interesting that music has been dealing with the problem of the internet for 15 years and its only the last few its started to affect tv and film in the same way (and even books) due to increased speeds and hard drive capacity. People are downloading/streaming entire series, without the makers of say, Game of Thrones making any money from advertising or subscribers.
It's starting to seriously affect live sports as well with enough bandwidth to stream decent pictures from some dodgy site.

Obviously there's big differences between any of those and musicians, but the situation is going to suck in more and more media, till its pretty much all involved.
Image
:animals-cow:

User avatar
kipper64
Posts: 18552
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Re: The state of the music world

Postby kipper64 » Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:00 pm

At the same time though services like Spotify for music, and Netflix for TV are also on the rise. If a legitimate, fairly priced, and easy to use alternative is made available people will use it, and are happy to pay for a good service. Why it's taken so long to start getting to that point is a complete cock-up from media in general who tried so desperately to cling to old media rather than embracing the new and embracing the internet.

There's still bands and record labels somewhat arguing against services like these or refuse to take part "because it'll effect CD sales" which are dwindling anyways and it's just mind-boggling. I know some artists have legit concerns with how much Spotify pays them, but you'd think surely trying to improve it (and the money improves the more people that use the service for bands/labels) is more constructive than pulling music from streaming services or from iTunes or whatever because CD sales are falling, because they are falling regardless.
Image

User avatar
Rick
Posts: 580
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:01 am
Location: Preston

Re: The state of the music world

Postby Rick » Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:36 am

kipper64 wrote:At the same time though services like Spotify for music, and Netflix for TV are also on the rise. If a legitimate, fairly priced, and easy to use alternative is made available people will use it, and are happy to pay for a good service. Why it's taken so long to start getting to that point is a complete cock-up from media in general who tried so desperately to cling to old media rather than embracing the new and embracing the internet


We use Netflix and your spot on, its about £6 a month and my list of things to watch far outstrips the time I have to watch it all and grows continuously. For that reason I am more than happy to pay for it as its a great way to access full seasons. I do still download a decent amount of films as having a smart TV hooked up to a NAS is a fantastic system, but in those cases its just the really old niche films that my misses is obsessed with, or series that simply are only available via their own stupid streaming service.

kipper64 wrote:There's still bands and record labels somewhat arguing against services like these or refuse to take part "because it'll effect CD sales" which are dwindling anyways and it's just mind-boggling. I know some artists have legit concerns with how much Spotify pays them, but you'd think surely trying to improve it (and the money improves the more people that use the service for bands/labels) is more constructive than pulling music from streaming services or from iTunes or whatever because CD sales are falling, because they are falling regardless.


The other thing that always annoys me about this situation is bands that speak out about the "legit concerns" and they are normally out of touch with the rest of society about finances which only serves to inflame people and take it even less seriously. It always makes me laugh when you see someone in expensive clothing get out of their expensive car, walk up the their very expensive house and claim they don't get paid enough for their work, as Joe Bloggs sits at home thinking "yeah, your so unlucky" with a 180k mortgage, a car needing urgent repair and 2 kids who are grumpy as they ain't been on holiday in two years.

Not to mention that as long as You Tube exists their is always a way to access the music for free anyway.
Camp Bitchfist: Ozzfest 2002, Download 2004, Download 2005, Download 2006, Download 2007, Download 2008, Download 2009, Sonisphere 2010, Sonisphere 2011, Download 2012, Download 2013, Sonisphere 2014, Download 2016!

User avatar
ThornDavis
Posts: 1351
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: The state of the music world

Postby ThornDavis » Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:01 am

I think people need to let go of this idea that musicians are super-rich. It's a tiny, tiny percentage who are raking it in. The majority of bands you see at a festival are probably struggling harder than you, have worse prospects then you, and are legitimately annoyed at having you take their hard work and scoffing at the prospect of paying for it just because in your head they spend all their time partying on yachts with supermodels, rather than sleeping in the back of a nicotine-stained van, living off Ginsters pasties and wondering how the hell they're going to pay back the £500 they borrowed from their girlfriends' parents just to pay for petrol for this tour.
Last edited by ThornDavis on Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

hybrid theorist
Posts: 15851
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:37 pm
Location: Leeds, YORKSHIRE

Re: The state of the music world

Postby hybrid theorist » Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:23 am

I read a while back that bands make roughly £1 per album sale. If a band sells a million albums, divided by 5 (200k each), divided by a ten year career, that's £20k. Hell, even if its double that, 40k a year isn't private jet money, I personally know people who earn about that.

Obviously that's not their only source of income, but you'd imagine a band is raking it in if they've released a few albums that have sold 100,000 units.
Image
:animals-cow:

User avatar
billytheweed
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 10:45 pm
Location: rossendale valley lancashire

Re: The state of the music world

Postby billytheweed » Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:49 pm

i saw an interesting article on the BBC about prince suing people for posting bootleg footage on you tube (see link below) , its divide people on his fans forum , some saying it will drive fans away others saying why should he allow it , i am in the latter camp , he has a product and wants to sell it , for people to record his shows illegally then post it for everyone to see is wrong , he should be allowed to manage this , it will take someone like him to take this stand so the smaller artists benefit. i don't think its a problem that's easily solved but theft is theft no matter how you dress it up , and if the terms and conditions of a show are no recording then people shouldn't record , i know this is not realistic but imagine that prince is successful , the next time you go see a band and record your favorite song then upload it to you tube can you really complain if the artist take you to court and seeks damages as you have 'stolen' their product.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25927363

that said on a separate note i also saw this, about time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/25881520
ImageImage
' hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way'
FMC code1k910248

User avatar
ThornDavis
Posts: 1351
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: The state of the music world

Postby ThornDavis » Thu Jan 30, 2014 11:44 am

YouTube is a weird one, I guess, because I find it hard to believe that anyone uses it for dedicated listening. It doesn't really replace music purchasing in the same way that torrents, or Spotify do. It's also great at making stuff discoverable - much better than Spotify, for example - so it seems like more of an opportunity than a threat. Personally, I could not count the number of times I've looked a band up on YouTube, listened to a few things and then gone across to amazon to buy the album.

All that said, I agree with Prince. I don't see any reason why the artist (or their representative) shouldn't be in control of the way that their music appears on that channel. If they want to make whole albums available that's great. If they want to keep it hidden, that's their prerogative. At the moment, the only counter argument seems to be "we have the ability to upload as much of your work as we like, therefore we have the right to upload as much of your work as we like", and that doesn't make sense to me.

hybrid theorist
Posts: 15851
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:37 pm
Location: Leeds, YORKSHIRE

Re: The state of the music world

Postby hybrid theorist » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:16 pm

Yeah, the argument seems to be "you can't stop us, so why try?" or "why pick on that one particular individual ignoring copyright, big bad music company picking on the little guy"
Image
:animals-cow:

User avatar
JAMEZ!
Posts: 1435
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: The state of the music world

Postby JAMEZ! » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:04 pm

In terms of torrenting, the way i see it is that one checks out a band by downloading their album. If they like it, they'll go to a few shows, buy a shirt and the album (in my case, normally on vinyl, meaning even more money). I know not everybody does the same, and i think thats where the problem is. Torrenting music is not always a bad thing, as long as people have some morals about it. Its the people who download album after album, and claim "why would i buy music, when i can get it for free" who are the problem.

It may be idealistic of me, but i think if record companies stopped fighting torrenting, more people would do it, and meaning more people would treat like above, meaning ultimately more album sales, and there wouldn't be as many these people who try to 'fight' record companies by not buying albums at all. Yes, a lot of record companies aren't the nicest people to work with, but by not buying the music you like, its only going to get worse.

As for 'theres no new super massive bands', the way i see it is it just comes round in phases. At the moment, the biggest 'alternitive' acts are within the indie or hip-hop / RnB relm (coldplay, arctic monkeys, kanye and beyonce), but remember when My Chemical Romance, Linking Park and Green Day were the biggest new thing? In 15 years time, Muse could be the equivilent of Metallica, and Metallica the equivilent of AC/DC. Also, in a few years, i reckon theres gonna be another resurgance in rock, i mean Skindred and You Me At Six are looking at top 10 albums this week, and Biffy Clyro are now definitely a headline sized band so it could already be happening. Not that they're the best rock has to offer, but Coldplay and Arctic Monkeys aren't the best indie bands in the world, and kanye is (debatably) not the best hip-hop artist.

tl;dr: Torrenting can be good, just some people frakk it up by trying to be political about it, or just being shitballs. And there prolly will still be massive rock bands in years to come, rock just needs to come back in fashion, and we need to give it some time.
Image

User avatar
mrpaul
Posts: 13143
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 1:21 am
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Re: The state of the music world

Postby mrpaul » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:09 pm

JAMEZ! wrote:'alternitive' acts


JAMEZ! wrote:beyonce


Huh?
:animals-cow: Moocrab Paul
FMC Code - 1K910196
Image

User avatar
JAMEZ!
Posts: 1435
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Nottingham, England

Re: The state of the music world

Postby JAMEZ! » Thu Jan 30, 2014 3:22 pm

mrpaul wrote:
JAMEZ! wrote:'alternitive' acts


JAMEZ! wrote:beyonce


Huh?


... meant to take the alternitive bit out...
Image

User avatar
billytheweed
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 10:45 pm
Location: rossendale valley lancashire

Re: The state of the music world

Postby billytheweed » Thu Jan 30, 2014 7:09 pm

but thats the problem people do take the attitude "if its free why should i pay for it" but if someone countered that by saying , "well food is free at tesco if you dont pay for it !!!" but nobody does , its only free because you are stealing it , and thats called theft!!!
if you get prosecuted for it dont whinge and moan about it. i fully support artists taking people to court to protect their product more should do it
ImageImage
' hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way'
FMC code1k910248

User avatar
kipper64
Posts: 18552
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Re: The state of the music world

Postby kipper64 » Thu Jan 30, 2014 7:33 pm

I don't think it's as clear cut as that though, if you steal something from a shop, it's gone, they lose that item of food, where as if you download something the original still remains with whoever published it, I think you can also go down the route of not every download is necessarily a lost sale, because whoever downloaded something might not have bothered at all with the music if that option wasn't available and missed out on that band completely., so there is an upside to it which some bands capitalise on where others don't. Not saying either of those examples makes it okay mind you, just that it's not as clear and directly related to stealing something from a shop to me anyways.
Image

hash pipe
Posts: 1716
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 6:55 pm

Re: The state of the music world

Postby hash pipe » Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:55 pm

kipper64 wrote:I don't think it's as clear cut as that though, if you steal something from a shop, it's gone, they lose that item of food, where as if you download something the original still remains with whoever published it, I think you can also go down the route of not every download is necessarily a lost sale, because whoever downloaded something might not have bothered at all with the music if that option wasn't available and missed out on that band completely., so there is an upside to it which some bands capitalise on where others don't. Not saying either of those examples makes it okay mind you, just that it's not as clear and directly related to stealing something from a shop to me anyways.



100% right there. Not every illegal download is a lost sale.
Image

User avatar
billytheweed
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 10:45 pm
Location: rossendale valley lancashire

Re: The state of the music world

Postby billytheweed » Fri Jan 31, 2014 6:40 pm

hash pipe wrote:
kipper64 wrote:I don't think it's as clear cut as that though, if you steal something from a shop, it's gone, they lose that item of food, where as if you download something the original still remains with whoever published it, I think you can also go down the route of not every download is necessarily a lost sale, because whoever downloaded something might not have bothered at all with the music if that option wasn't available and missed out on that band completely., so there is an upside to it which some bands capitalise on where others don't. Not saying either of those examples makes it okay mind you, just that it's not as clear and directly related to stealing something from a shop to me anyways.



100% right there. Not every illegal download is a lost sale.



yeah suppose , but let me put it in this context , if i buy a book or borow it and then copy it and give it away for free then maybe not everyone who take my copy would have bought it but some may have and they are lost sales ,
also if you stole say a tin of beans from tesco got caught and they gave the tin back to tesco they could still sell it and you would still get done for theft , you dont necessarily have to keep the item you stole to be prosecuted , lots of people get caught stealing stuff that gets returned and they still get prosecuted.
ImageImage
' hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way'
FMC code1k910248

User avatar
ThornDavis
Posts: 1351
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: The state of the music world

Postby ThornDavis » Sat Feb 01, 2014 10:29 am

The idea that 'piracy is not theft' because it doesn't involve the removal of a physical item from the wronged party is a false premise circulated by the pro-piracy brigade. Of course 'theft' can encompass abstract items. If I steal your idea, and make a million off it, it's still theft and if you can prove I stole it, you'd be entitled to redress. I wouldn't be able to argue 'well, technically you still have that idea in your head'.

That the pro-piracy argument has to fall back on such logical fallacies (this one being core to the argument) shows you just how impossible it is to justify; you have to fall back on rationalisations rather than arguments.

I mean, how many of us make our living by selling non-material items such as skills and knowledge and time? Kipper - you work in Maplin right? I'm sure if they didn't pay you for a week you'd have something to say about it. And I'm sure if they said "Well, although we benefited from your skills and expertise for a week, we didn't actually take them from you - you still have them to sell to someone else", you would say "that's a load of frakking horseshit and you know it." And if they responded "it's not as clear-cut as that" you would reply "No, it really isn't."

User avatar
kipper64
Posts: 18552
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:30 pm
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Re: The state of the music world

Postby kipper64 » Sat Feb 01, 2014 6:12 pm

As of last week not any more but aye I did work there :P Nah I get your point but it doesn't really address the fact that if I downloaded an album from a band and like it, maybe I'll buy it, or buy their next album, or go see them on tour and become a proper fan. If I'm a thief and steal something from a shop, there's not really any upside like that, I suppose I might really love the baked beans I've never tried before and go buy them next time but chances are that isn't going to be the case, and that's why I don't really find them directly relate-able.

As I said any music downloaded isn't necessarily a lost sale because if the option wasn't available then you might not have bothered listening to that band at all, or may have missed out becoming a fan and supporting them in the future. So it's that positive side - which some bands do capitalize on - that makes the difference. It doesn't make it right, and that choice to take something shouldn't really be mines to make, it should be down to the publisher, but it's what happens unfortunately.
Image

OneZeroOneUK
Posts: 4757
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:46 am
Location: NW1

Re: The state of the music world

Postby OneZeroOneUK » Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:55 am

Illegal downloading contravenes the conventional and accepted way of obtaining intellectual property. It's wrong and not really defensible and I think everyone who does it, or has done it, knows it. I certainly do (know it - I'm not here to implicate myself).

But, it is also symptomatic of a system that refuses to change and move with the times - 15 years after napster and the lack of movement (or in some cases, backwards movements) by distributors and publishers is looking a lot like a big bullet lodged in an old and festering wound between the third and fourth metatarsal of the record industry.

Reasons people (and by some accounts, more people than ever) are downloading illegally?:

Expense

Convenience

Copy protection


There are a shitload of ways to 'embrace' new music in the modern world. Youtube, Spotify, Soundcloud, etc. Try these before you download a torrent, they all give something to artists and they all offer smaller, signed artists a record of plays. You never know, that time you click play on some unknown gem could contribute to them making it big later down the line; if you torrent it, that may never happen. Yes these services (read: businesses), aren't fantastic for new artists and they'll never replace actual sales, but they're accessible and legal.

And if you like what you hear, go see them live. That really is the best thing you can do for any artist.


Return to “Music”