|
|
16-09-2009, 00:05
|
#1 |
|
Registered User
 
|
Lily has something to say ... and so does Steve ... and now Matt.
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...ogId=510114316
Lily Allen has some thoughts on File Sharing, what do you think ? Steve Albini has a good point too - "if my band was going to put a song up on the Internet...we would get nothing (if it were free) which is not that much worse than a penny...and the great advantage to the customer would be that they wouldn't have to pay a dollar in order for me to get nothing... " http://www.massenburg.com/c/gml/naras_panel.html?open=
__________________
"Almost always, the creative dedicated minority has made the world better." Martin Luther King, Jr. Last edited by PaulBrewer; 17-09-2009 at 18:22. |
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
To remove these adverts, please create an account, or log in! You must have an account to post anyway :-) |
|
16-09-2009, 00:25
|
#3 |
|
Registered User
|
Down with British music!!!
So happy to see Lily on Porter Wagoner. I kind of fancy Lily Allen but I do think the video for "it's not fair" is really fake. Cause with that suit in the real world you would have probably seen some camels toe action. What were you doing on Lily's myspace anyway paul? Last edited by studiorat; 16-09-2009 at 00:30. |
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 00:37
|
#4 | |
|
Registered User
|
Quote:
1.Theres no 'kind of' about it 2. She has a point about Radiohead yappin on 'Take our music for free, donate if you like, we have already made millions we don't want to be greedy' as if Tom Yorke would be giving away 'Creep' when he started off as a youngfella. |
|
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 06:58
|
#5 |
|
Registered User
|
Meh..to be honest..people might as well get used to it..With the advances of modern technology the youth of today expect music to be free..and are they that wrong?..In reality how much does the artist get as opposed to the record company..and the PR company..Should an artist be in it to make money?..should it not be about the art?..Its getting a lot cheaper to produce music these days..the record industry is dying slowly..The artist can still make money if they can go out and play a gig that people will go to..End of rant
ps...Lily Allens hot...and the new album is quite good too.. And Pink Floyd are the greatest band in the history of everything..
__________________
All technology is in a constant state of being phased out. |
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 11:57
|
#6 |
|
Registered User
|
i tend to agree. I was talking to Rat Scabies a while back about this same idea and he couldnt get his head around the idea of giving stuff away for free, or making music available for free as part of promotion. In his head - and in a lof of heads involved in the business - its still 'that album cost me money to make and you arent getting it for free'.
I think there has to be a new way of doing things, which will have to involve musicians giving away free music. thats just the way it is, right or wrong. give away music for free and then its no longer pirating. Sell little amounts of a lot of songs, rather than sell a large amounts of one song (and you do that by giving away even more songs). The long curve I think its called. Granted, it does mean musicians have to be able to actually write songs and it will kill off the management/label manufactered 'i only have 10 songs' bands, but in my book thats a good idea. Plus it might also mean that there'll be no more bands as rich as led zepplin got ... but then again, these days bands arent making money anyway, moreso than the labels. Then think of the other options - bands running themselves, selling music for themselves by giving away other good music. No middle men, no cuts for labels etc etc ... bound to make the musician more profitable rather than make the hangers on more richer.
__________________
See first, think later, then test. But always see first. Otherwise you will only see what you were expecting. Most scientists forget that. - Douglas Adams Last edited by iamhunted; 16-09-2009 at 12:04. |
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 12:09
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
|
CDQ and Iamhunted -
I think you both have points. But I also think Lily's core point is also valid, namely without investment Music will probably retreat into an amateur 'parlour' activity with everything being small and intimate. No 'bands like Zep or U2 or Queen or Muses in the future would be a pity I think. The reason you could see Artic Monkeys or whoever in Whelans for a 10er isn't because the gig generated enough money to cover that - it's because someone subsidised their tour on the hope of future return. I agree the old model is entirely broke - but unless there is a way for new bands to generate proper money it might be singersongwriters in the back of the pub from here on in!
__________________
"Almost always, the creative dedicated minority has made the world better." Martin Luther King, Jr. Last edited by PaulBrewer; 16-09-2009 at 12:12. |
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 12:21
|
#8 |
|
Registered User
|
i agree the old model is broke but i dont think file sharing broke it - plus though it did bring through bands, the likes of Zep or U2 or Queen or Muses all broke through years back when there really was investment going on.
Where has the investment been in the past decade? in been in Cowell esq 'Britinas/AMericas get talent etc etc which we all know is really just a cheap and cheerful way for the music majors to road test some sellable acts all while trying to find them. I think the music industry fcuked this up on their own, have been too interested in lining their pockets and not interested enough in finding quality, original talent. We end up with hardly any decent bands making it due to label investment and label confidence. Instead we see bands like Director and FLAs taking their own routes - which lets be honest, is probably the best thing. To be honest, I dont think theres a need for labels as we know them anymore. They used to finance recordings, tours, finance manufacture and look after distribution. Most labels no longer look after financing tours anymore, and bands can do the rest of it themselves these days - so why have a 'music industry'?
__________________
See first, think later, then test. But always see first. Otherwise you will only see what you were expecting. Most scientists forget that. - Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
| Thanks from: |
|
16-09-2009, 12:27
|
#9 |
|
Registered User
|
i dont think theres going ot be any easy answers to this over the next few years. But. look on the brightside. This is an opportunity for bands and musicians - its a brave new world where we no longer know whats possible and what isnt. Its the punk revolution of our time if you ask me.
__________________
See first, think later, then test. But always see first. Otherwise you will only see what you were expecting. Most scientists forget that. - Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 12:53
|
#10 | ||
|
Registered User
 
|
Quote:
I disagree that it's "getting a lot cheaper to make music these days"... it's always been possible to make music cheaply... likewise it's always been possible to spend a fortune making it too. The Beatles recorded their first few albums in a matter of hours (not even days!). They didn't exactly rake up the studio bills. U2 effectively recorded their last album twice – once with Rick Ruben, once with Eno/Lanois & co… they doubled their costs before ever releasing the album. I don't think the cost of making the music is relevant anyway. Music is only "worth" what people are prepared to pay for it. In reality, the real change in the music industry has nothing to do with what it costs to make the music itself... it's about how the music gets distributed/marketed to the consumer. For years it was all about getting a physical product (cassette, vinyl, CDs, DVDs etc) to a point of sale so the consumer could buy the music. So, you have manufacturing costs (to produce the CDs etc). Then you have the cost of packaging, artwork etc. Then there’s shipping costs (from factory to wholesaler to the retailer). Then there’s overheads (to buy/store the product). I’m no expert, but I’d say the average €15 CD in your local record shop has a least €3-4 tied up in the costs above. Today, those distribution costs are effectively gone. It’s now possible to sell without any physical product. The middle man/distributor (who in many cases are the same as/or are affiliated to the record companies) now has less obvious value/purpose in the whole chain. So, while the business model of distribution/marketing of music will continue to change, it doesn’t change the fact that artists are perfectly entitled to make money from their music – if they don’t, then why would they bother? What remains to be seen is how that changes over time. Seems to me a more direct relationship between buyer & seller is likely, but then there’s the “monthly subscription model”, or the “pay your internet provider” option. Interesting times ahead… Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 18:54
|
#11 |
|
Registered User
|
I like the bandcamp model of music distribution. Sell at the price you are happy with and give away at the sound quality of your choosing.
How about this for an idea. Radiohead, or whoever, release their new album digitally and you pay your normal price. but Radiohead include 2 tracks (not on their own album but as a seperate download) from an up and coming artist/band that they like or artists who have them on tour. You get free music, the new band get the chance to be heard by a massive audience. The music biz gets a way to support new talent without having to spend millions. I have just saved the music industry again. |
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 18:56
|
#12 |
|
Registered User
|
What if you put lots of bands on it ?
Maybe call it something like 'A Compilation' ? 
__________________
"Almost always, the creative dedicated minority has made the world better." Martin Luther King, Jr. |
|
|
|
|
16-09-2009, 19:02
|
#13 | |
|
Registered User
|
Quote:
The important thing though would be that band allowing the piggyback, would have to be really into the band/artist and think them worthy of the free ride. It wouldn't look good having Kajagoogoo's comeback album associated with Radioheads latest opus 
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-09-2009, 14:48
|
#14 |
|
Registered User
|
And now Matty Muse chimes in ...
Matty Speaks
Matt Bellamy from Muse (who are supporting U2 in the US) has chimed in with his comments on File Sharing.
__________________
"Almost always, the creative dedicated minority has made the world better." Martin Luther King, Jr. |
|
|
|
|
17-09-2009, 15:38
|
#15 |
|
Subscriber
 
|
Hmm he has the right idea about taxing the ISPs, how they would go about implementing this would be interesting.
Another thing that really annoys me is the amount of DJs up and down the country using filesharing to get tracks played in clubs etc, thats really taking the pish, be good to see a crack down on that sorta carry on too. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
