Quote: Originally Posted by grawk Exactly. The people who insist that the world go back to 1985 are the same people that hate that Amanda Palmer is successful. I haven't seen that. It's looked more to me so far that it's the new agers who are complaining about it more than the old timers, acting like she's sitting around doing coke by her Hollywood home because she raised some money. The gotcha a lot of people have been bringing up, and this part of it does bother me, is that it's still not actually about music. It's better than selling t-shirts or perfume or something like that. But it's still not nearly as clean a system as it used to be, where you made your music and you put it out there. If people accepted your music you were successful, if not you weren't. It was clean and (sans a little manipulation sometimes) it was clear who was making it and who wasn't. This type of thing, though it does clearly require that you get commitment from your fans, is a lot tricker, as this and related threads have shown. Before, they only paid after the fact, now they are paying before the fact, and it leaves you open for a lot more second guessing and accusations. And of course, in the old days, it was the 'evil record company' who lost money if the work ended up not being good. Now it's the fans who invested.