![]() | All Advertisers |
| |||||||
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Low cost RIAA preamp for vinyl transfer? | petsematary | Low End Theory | 22 | 28th December 2005 06:45 PM |
| RIAA curve plug-in? | max cooper | Music computers | 16 | 14th November 2004 05:21 PM |
| New RIAA Home Searches! | BattleAngel | So much gear, so little time! | 0 | 6th January 2004 08:46 PM |
| Gafflin' beats (RIAA preamps) | ttauri | High end | 22 | 9th October 2003 12:33 PM |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
| | #151 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,309
| Quote:
A little clarification regarding my auto industry analogy: I guess what I am trying to say, is that the music industry, by ignoring their customers 'wants' for a very long time (ex., music that can be played on any player ... no DRM to contend with ... reasonable prices, etc.), they are acting very much like the auto industry did, in the pre-Japanese invasion era, where the big three also ignored their customers 'wants' for a long time (ex., they didn't build smaller, fuel efficient cars ... what they did offer was of fairly poor build quality ... and there often long term maintenance issues, etc.). The moral of this analogy: It takes a little effort to keep your current customers satisfied, but to try and win back the ones that you already had but lost to arrogance ... well, that will cost you dearly, and is to be avoided at almost any price.
__________________ Cheers, Thom Now, when there's no longer surface noise and you actually have the ability to have the most extraordinary dynamic range, people aren't using it. T Bone Burnett The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them. Albert Einstein Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. I'm not black, but there's a whole lot of times I wish I could say I'm not white. Frank Zappa | |
| | |
| | #152 | |
| Gear addict | Quote:
If a CDR is labelled "music," a royalty is collected which goes back to the RIAA and doesn't get redistributed to copyright holders. If the CDR is labelled "data," no royalty is collected. | |
| | |
| | #153 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,365
| Quote:
I completely disagree with those who think P2P's should not be held responsible and that they are somehow being used for some great benefit of mankind and the entertainment industry. It's total BS! Shutting down P2P's tommorow would have zero effect on me. Would it effect those of you defending them? If so, how? I suspect the answer will have something to do with the content on your hard drives! | |
| | |
| | #154 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,309
| Quote:
The first quote in my sig, pretty much says it all for me.
__________________ Cheers, Thom Now, when there's no longer surface noise and you actually have the ability to have the most extraordinary dynamic range, people aren't using it. T Bone Burnett The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them. Albert Einstein Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. I'm not black, but there's a whole lot of times I wish I could say I'm not white. Frank Zappa | |
| | |
| | #155 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 647
| Quote:
Look, I hear ya, breaking the law is breaking the law. I'm just saying that their (the RIAA and the Majors) intentions are not what they appear to be, and while illegal downloading is a crime, and I certainly don't stand with piracy ( a far greater crime, IMHO - it's one thing to steal for personal use, another entirly to steal for personal profit), labels need to realize that the consumer has spoken, and a new model needs to be developed, one that increases the legal downloading to minimize the illegal downloading. The point is that the RIAA is promoting this masquerade as "we are doing something to prevent the problem". The core of the problem is supposed to be lost income. The fact is that the proliferation of alternate outlets such as file sharing HELPS to maximize profits, not curtail them. The LAW is "no downloading". The REASON FOR THE LAW is supposedly that it protects against lost profits, right? So THE ACTUAL SPIRIT OF THE PROBLEM is lost profits, right? So that's what I am addressing, not just the letter of the law, which no one is debating. How about those people that follow copyright law by making a copy for educational and professional reasons, and have 30 days free access? Gee, RIAA, I'm writing a book on hip hop, so I downloaded "The Thong Song". I've been deleting and then redownloading it every 30 days, as per the law. ![]() So while CD sales have gone down, actual profits have gone up, because more people have more access to music! Look at the success of the MySpace/YouTube paradigm - bands have gotten signed because they have built huge internet fan bases... how? By giving their music away. Is downloading illegal? Yup, and NO ONE HAS ARGUED OTHERWISE. But is " the deterrent" of a lawsuit really scaring anyone, to the point where profit is recouped? Uh, no. The RIAA has every right to do what they are doing, and again, no one is arguing that they don't. Is it the best strategy for accomplishing their stated aims? No, and the numbers are clear on that. Not just me, the numbers on the little spreadsheet don't lie. My point is that your average consumer is STILL going to spend their "music budget" regardless of how much stuff they download. People like music. People support music. They might not spent that $15 on a CD, but they'll then spend it on a hoodie at a show. Or a DVD. By giving up the $2.50 of a CD, you are able to gain more fans, who are then going to spend that money on you anyways. If you insist on controlling every aspect of delivery, you are going to limit the number of fans that have access to your product - which is the core of the problem, isn't it? It has nothing to do with CD sales, per se. It has everything to do with control and power - and the labels are losing their control of distribution, their dominance in the marketplace, the control of promotional outlets such as MTV and radio. I have as much access to the actual potential fans as many major acts, and that is NO F&KING GOOD for the Majors. THAT is what they are fighting for! They can no longer tell the masses what to like, or control the trends to maximize profits, or sign 400 Nirvana sound-a-like bands to capitalize on an indie phenomenon like they are used to. This has f*ck-all to do about legality, punishment or deterrence. These are a smoke screen for the real issue - one of market monopoly and access to consumer dollars. How can a major compete against a band willing to give away their songs for free? Certainly not by threatening lawsuits they can't win. This strategy is an attempt to regain control of the outlets of promotion and distribution, plain and simple. The Majors are going to have to realize that the people that steal music are going to anyways, and have been for decades. They have to trust that there are people who download with intent to buy. Downloading is often the new equivalent of "let me lend you my new Tom Waits CD". How about if I burn a CD for a friend? If they wouldn't otherwise have been exposed to the music, how can they spend money on it? So the elimination of this helps only those who control the mainstream outlets... you can then only find out about the music we tell you to like! They have to stop blowing smoke up our asses about "lost profits". They have to look at an artist AS a brand, and realize that people DO buy into the brand, and the easiest way to do this is to get people into the store, as it were, with a loss leader. Look at the business model for this year's Ozzfest. As a metal consumer, the business case for this has already proven to be effective - look at tape swapping in the early '80's. Metal thrives on the paradigm of making music available for free, and then fans making sure they support the bands financially. Indie music is becoming the same way. The fact is that there are more bands making a good living now than at any time in history. Yeah, the era of the blockbuster might be over (which, again, points to the singleminded approach of the RIAA as a pawn for the Majors), but the actual number of dollars spent in the industry is UP. I have no problem with the Majors making money, I just find it ironic that their strategy is COSTING them money by clinging to an outdated model. I'm truly sorry that they can no longer put together a pre-fab team of pop crap purveyors ripping off the same hit they had last year, and spend 10 million to record it with some talentless set of tits or bunch of GQ models and then force it down the throat of the mainstream and make retarded amounts of money. I really am. Sorry that we are taking gold plated back scrubbers out of the hands of spoiled self entitled coke addicts and putting it in the hands of bands and artists that actually work for a living, and sell only based on actual talent. My bad. ![]()
__________________ Screaming Monkey Studio - Seattle, WA Clips, and songs in progress! www.MySpace.com/teebes www.MySpace.com/thissoilisdiseased | |
| | |
| | #156 | |
| Lives for gear | Quote:
Something as simple as "every update of iTunes will only extract from original (not burned) CD's and won't allow anything but DRM/purchased or original-CD-extracted music in the library" could change music consumption habits, but a) Congress isn't gonna bother, and b) Apple SURE wouldn't bother, given a $1.7 BILLION 1st quarter (2007) figure for iPod sales. iPod sales are about the same as the commensurate drop in music industry $$$. Hmmm....coincidence, or not? NOTE THAT IT HAS BEEN MY FIRM BELIEF FOR YEARS THAT AN AD-DRIVEN MUSIC MARKET IS THE NEXT WAVE, but this does not take away from a discussion of intellectual property rights. Fluctuations in music sales are leveraged to the point that a minor uptick means that people get jobs, productions get budgets, and new artists get more of a "shot" -- while a downslide just forces the industry's hand. If you (as an A&R or mgr/lawyer/etc.) are likely to lose your job/livelihood if the department/firm has a couple of "down" quarters, you're not gonna try that new studio, or that new mixing engineer, or anything not resembling a "sure bet."
__________________ "We need to legitimize peer-to-peer sharing as a business model, because it's already a business. If [the P2P companies] are going to make money on us, we should have a chance to make money along with them." -- Perry Farrell on the failure of national intellectual property policy to keep up with the rapid evolution of online media "Every Internet transmission of a musical work constitutes a public performance of that work. " http://www.ascap.com/weblicense/webfaq.html | |
| | |
| | #157 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 2,582
| Quote:
Regardless, the actual answer is neither. They want money. Or a CD to sell to have money. If you want, I'll ask Carl who lives on the stoop around the corner. | |
| | |
| | #158 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 2,582
| Quote:
I don't think shutting down P2Ps would have a damaging effect, but that's not an arguement that supports shutting them down. | |
| | |
| | #159 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,365
| Quote:
I understand your points above and while relevant several years ago, they are really no longer applicable in this argument. The fact is that nowadays most popular music can be bought online. It is also a fact that the general public (especially those savvy enough to be logging on to P2P's) is now aware that music is available for purchase online. This issue has been in the public eye long enough for people to now know that when they log onto a P2P, type in 'The White Stripes' and click on 'download', they are engaging in something illegal. There is no grey area anymore and to defend illegal file 'sharing' when most albums are now availabale for $9.99 on iTunes (or CD Baby for indi acts) is rediculous. You can keep rationalizing why illegal file 'sharing' is ok but it doesn't change the fact that it is indeed illegal. Everyone knows what P2P's are mostly used for. The only people that are defending them are either those who are illegally file 'sharing' themselves, or those who do not earn their income in the entertainment industry. ![]() | |
| | |
| | #160 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,344
| Quote:
Nice! I might add that music business is facing also big competetion from other entertainment companies where the same dollar amount for kids for leasure spending is not only going to music as before but into videogames, gadgets, software etc. and about your post as well as other post where lables also function as promotion and distribution entities. they put thier "act" on top of shelves and make it sell. personally i hate it but it has a purpose and having just your music for free or cheap at myspace wont generate that much moeny. i like to compare it to the water industry where its only water in a bottle but the numbers of sales of pepsi and coke (dasani, aquafina) are far, way far highier than other water companies which serves a purpose of satisfing consumer demand, brand satisfaction and trust. but if they desapear comsumers will just buy local water and learn by themselves which is good. so to tie in things, A band like tool which i like will always put up a good product (songs/recording) and ill always like it, but without the promotion of the big labels i would not have heard of them. and to fight my own coment, the other side would be that if lables desapear then a lot of bands will be more equal and will compete only by how they sound and how many fans they can make or by going to "american idol'sk" competitions. yuk. so the questio would be, who or how will bands in the future be able to prmote themlves? some wont have time to go myspacing al the time ! cause those P2P site appear everywhere every second so thats not going to go away, (hence the reasoning behind this thread. ) same as the kids downloading iligally, and the RIAA doesnt seemed its going to fight its parent and sister companies like sony, phillips which provide burners for computers as well as other media related hardware. to find a way to safeguard artists products. why would them, the RIAA is in a smoke screen cause artist are bitching and wanna make them happy so sueing kids makes sense. but in reality selling hardware and software to make iligal copies far suparsses the loses of iligal downloads. checkin out the movie industry u can see they are even dealing with other countries goverments in a big way. hmm but maybe threatening kids out off 3k might be more rewarding. im betting in that music will be mostly attached to other meduims like movies, videogames, internet, flash comercials, comercials etc and less of the rock/rap star thing. so musicians will work with other businesses as more interactive than before where its interactivity was with A&R guy, producer and fans once ina while now it will be a 9-5 job at a studio with strong deadlines. and while this generation doesnt look up to "rock stars" that much as before there will be less musicians due to lack of motivation and promotion. I also agree that there a lot of bands and famous musicians that have too much time to do a record and gig. i think musicians nowadays have to work harder than they are used to, well at the begginging they all do m but after the second record deal , pss its the easylife for them (if its a good deal of course) | |
| | |
| | #161 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: NYC
Posts: 628
| Quote:
i dunno if giving non-drm is wise though, after all its not like getting free refills on your coke, its giving everyone in the whole world a refill on one guys coke. after all, what customers of any business don't want something for free? none i have ever encountered in any industry. to respond to the person who wants to shut P2Ps down, it will never happen. Morally it seems justifiable, but legally it seems like a scant proposition. You know what was the funniest to me though? Remember Kazaa Lite? Kazaa was basically spyware, and somebody ripped off Kazaa's code and pulled out the spyware and gave it away for free. Ironically, i don't think it lasted because no one donated to supported it. So much irony going around - ripping-off the rip-off enablers and getting no support from the stealers. There is no honor among thieves. But you always keep fighting it, the retail industry loses $10 billion on shoplifting, and $15 billion on employee theft. Spending "only" several billion per year on theft protection yeilds a good return. You don't give up on it. What EMI is doing i have no idea. I need to talk to someone at EMI and figure out how an indsutry survives essentially *promoting* free cokes to the world from one chap that buys a coke. What other participants do that in industry that expects to survive on a purchased music business model? One has to assume the numbers they crunched about how many people buy vs steal/download will completely change in a non-drm world. How can it not change, if it is essentially condoned by the labels? And don't get me wrong, i don't buy steve jobs logic - i think purchased cd's should be copy protected just like dvd's. Why doesn't every software owner demand that they get free installs on every computer they own, let alone every one in the world? At some point you have to draw the line and let the lawyers take over on property rights or you just wipe out an entire industry because of petty theft. Oh, and for my last point of IRONY: even steve jobs isn't stupid enough to remove hardware dongle protection from Logic Pro. | |
| | |
| | #162 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,365
| Quote:
My argument is that P2P's are mostly used to 'share' (and by 'share' I mean 'obtain without having to purchase') either music that was intended for sale, movies that were intended for sale, software that was intended for sale or porn. The reality is that there are plenty of tools on the internet for artists to promote and distribute their music. These tools allow the artist to decide if their music should be distributed for free or if they would like to receive money for their work. | |
| | |
| | #163 |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: NYC
Posts: 628
| OK, i hear you Mike, but nobody pays for tribal music, its free to whatever poor village of said continent. Recorded music, on the other hand, is not free and not necessary to human development. |
| | |
| | #164 | ||
| Gear nut Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Madison, WI/Seattle
Posts: 97
| Quote:
Quote:
| ||
| | |
| | #165 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,309
| Quote:
And for the record, I don't download any illegal music, don't have a P2P client installed, and don't care to waste my time with that juvenile stuff. My comments are all coming from a perspective of 'this is a problem to be solved, and here are my thoughts on what might work and what doesn't'. So please stop insinuating that I must be downloading files illegally, since you appear to believe that I am trying to defend that practice. I am not, and I don't. FYI: Both we7 and EMI are now making FREE and non-DRM encoded songs available for download (see the earlier links in this thread). So it would appear that a few industry brains are hard at work on the problems as I also see them, and by understanding the issues, they are attempting to compete with innovation. I wish them much success, especially as it will also benefit the artists. But someone should really talk to their buddy (the RIAA) lest they continue to act in a self-defeating manner. Given this context, I believe these comments are relevant in the current scenario. ![]()
__________________ Cheers, Thom Now, when there's no longer surface noise and you actually have the ability to have the most extraordinary dynamic range, people aren't using it. T Bone Burnett The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them. Albert Einstein Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. I'm not black, but there's a whole lot of times I wish I could say I'm not white. Frank Zappa | |
| | |
| | #166 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,309
| Quote:
About the DRM: that will be very interesting to see how it all plays out. we7 is doing an advert type of thing I think, while EMI is going for broke with no DRM! Either way, it's great to see the majors responding with innovation. If they can manage to level the playing field at the distribution level, then there's no way a bunch of knock-offs (who all come with potential legal liability) can compete with what they could offer, value wise.
__________________ Cheers, Thom Now, when there's no longer surface noise and you actually have the ability to have the most extraordinary dynamic range, people aren't using it. T Bone Burnett The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them. Albert Einstein Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. I'm not black, but there's a whole lot of times I wish I could say I'm not white. Frank Zappa | |
| | |
| | #167 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,365
| Quote:
Peace. ![]() | |
| | |
| | #168 |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,309
| Cool, no problem there.
__________________ Cheers, Thom Now, when there's no longer surface noise and you actually have the ability to have the most extraordinary dynamic range, people aren't using it. T Bone Burnett The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them. Albert Einstein Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. I'm not black, but there's a whole lot of times I wish I could say I'm not white. Frank Zappa |
| | |
| | #169 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: NYC
Posts: 628
| Quote:
yes, controlling distribution is valuable, and the majors would be much better off controlling it than to be controlled by one company (apple). that's not coming back, the labels have had many cracks at it with their own online services. yes its tough to control prices when you don't control distribution. what does that have to do with riaa lawsuits? labels paid to make of said stolen music and have a right to get paid. it has nothing to do with bumps or independent artists. or apple. in fact it helps apple by encouraging legal downloads. no riaa suit is going to help them get back distribution to where it was. filesharing has increased overall music purchases by exposure of new music? peoples music budgets have remained the same? overall profits are up because of filesharing? are you a market research analyst, major business consultant or equity analyst? because i've got some land in the woods you might be interested in..... i wouldn't even know where to start. please support your arguments with real information from the real world or from real business people in the industry because i disagree with each of them. | |
| | |
| | #170 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: NYC
Posts: 628
| Quote:
we7 looks cool, i wonder how the technology encryption works and how they get it onto ipods. i might try it | |
| |