Quote:
Originally Posted by minipoodle  Obviously I'm listening and paying attention...I started this thread. Perhaps the title i gave the thread was somewhat inflammatory but here we are discussing this. I am all for innovation. |
MP, my apologies for the implication. Was not meant personally. I understand your frustration, but yes, i did find the title inflammatory. And i have found your approach to be counter-productive.
Quote:
|
Both Radiohead and Trent Reznor have stated specifically that their moves are not meant as/would not work for the general industry and especially new artists.
|
Whether they meant it to be a new model or not is not the issue. They have tried something new that has garnered the attentions of many, because it
may have some viability. If not viability, it at the very least has some relevance.
Quote:
|
When the world is flooded with yet to be successful artists giving away millions of mp3's then in the public's mind it becomes an honor for the artist just to have them listened to at all, never mind paid for.
|
see my response to No.1 below.
Quote:
|
At root though you and I fundamentally disagree on a number of issues as as I believe that:
|
we happen to agree on all three points. I just have an extended spin on them.
Quote:
|
1) An artist should be able to sell recorded work.
|
Yes, an artist should be able to sell recorded work.
This does not however automatically guarantee them the right to be paid for it. If you put something up for sale in any other industry, if your customers don't feel it has value, they won't pay you for it.
The obvious uniqueness to our industry is the fact that, due to technology, the product can still be copied. Which would be difficult to do with, say, a Ferrari 599.
Quote:
|
2) Not all music is equal
|
Absolutely True!
Quote:
|
3) Access to high quality recording is important, though not most important
|
True