But a computer doesn't know good music from bad music.

A computer will take all the inputs, without actually listening.

It is silly in my opinion to think AI will destroy all humans.

If they emerge as our children...how could they be any more dangerous than our own children?

Algorithms - just figure them out or talk to someone who knows... it levels the playing field - plenty of opportunities IMO better than the man in the suit sayin no...

An algorithm is just a fancy wood for a program.

[/YOUTUBE]

Programs don't make decisions, their programmers do.

You got it!!!!

Mostly yes, but with some types of AI & Machine Learning, the programmers don't always know what the result is going to be, or how to work backwards to discern how that result was generated.

Yes, but in all my research, true AI is on an ant level.

Meaning that the intelligence of an ant is where we are at when it comes to true AI.

Perhaps quantm computers?...

Anyways I didn't mean to change the subject...

Let's get back to why there are no more investors in the music market.

Exactly. What the streaming AI identifies is 'instant gratification'. What music is getting a lot of streams and quickly. Something which is moulding the way music is made, changing creativity.
All of this is BAD for music fans by the way.

Uh? OK, I think you're in a different context to the conversation I replied to..

But if we do move over to recommendations (not what we were talking about before).. then a stranger recommending something is probably less relevent that some AI learning from all your play data. But as I say, that's changing the subject.

If we move back to what channels are open for promotion - automated vs a human gatekeeper choosing who get's thier work on a label or radio play, the human easily shuts anyone out who doesn't please them or pay them a bribe.

Not listening to the music you make is a positive! That no-one is deciding whether your style of music is going to be popular or "fits in" means new styles can find their way into the public realm more easily, as long as you know how the promotional algorythms work.

Nah.. That's wrong. 75% of all CD sales came from 1% of artists. 77% of streaming revenue comes from 1% of artists.

Nothing has changed.. but you see what you focus on.

But arguably that 1% for streaming represents a larger number of artists.

AI in streaming recommendation form is designed to keep you interested in the service by finding you new music you like, based on finding similar aspects to the tracks you play a lot. Feeding you a list of mainstream hits isn't AI doing it's work at all.

If it has no data on you, sure it will show you what is popular at the moment.. Just like you see the main menu at a restaurant and the waiter may say "oh, this is very popular"

totally disagree with this.

some AI generated music videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRowlPIXPFo

^^
and my wife is an art teacher in high school. this stuff is miles better than what 99.9% of her doped out students do.

Platform AI can pick out infringement pretty fast...

s wave, I'm curious where you see the next evolution of music distribution based on your experience in the industry. I'm assuming you're using some of that same OTB thinking to take advantage of the algorithms, but what are your thoughts on NFTs & blockchain as it relates to music? I mentioned this several pages ago but no one seemed interested in discussing, despite many signs this technology will play a huge role in the music industry. Do you have any opinions on RISE (Raised in Space Enterprises) or Bitfury Surround?

Why does a bird sing? Because they can’t help it. Its in their nature.
A true musician is no different. Money is not the reason they make music.

When record companies were the sole outlet for buying music, they went through the trouble of finding the truly gifted musicians and left the average behind. This caused unhappiness with those who were left behind and they blamed the record company instead of their own fate.

So when the internet was born, all the average and below average musicians finally found a way to drop their crummy music on the masses. It was a very short party however, when the same gate that let them through let in everyone else as well and they drowned in a sea of mediocrity.

Their fate remained unchanged. All the marketing strategies, think groups, and sure determinism will not change your fate. Either you will or will not have monetary success and fame with your music. It is a condition that depends on the times and your destiny.

Pat-O

It's the way you buy and maintain gear. Eat food while making your album. Pay your electricity bill. You can't even load your music to the internet without a computer and broadband contract.

It boggles my mind that no other creator is expected to create on thin air, with no food or roof over their head.

Well you wanted to create. No one asked you to. You don’t get paid because you want to do something. I’d like to get paid for scribbling on the wall with a pencil.
I’m not holding my breath though...

This guy might be, I’m not quite sure. He does look a little pale.

Pat-O

i would like to get paid for drinking beer all day. i also happen to think i am an expert beer drinker and should be paid at least $100K per month for my efforts. After all, they don't make beer drinkers like me anymore.

where's the tail gate party!!??

I don't think it's absurd to envision a future where this conversation turns into something like, "Oh, you studied to be a doctor, lawyer, accountant, financial analyst, professor, data scientist, programmer, etc., that's cute - stop complaining about not making any money, no one asked you to be X. So sorry the tech barons created AI, robots and smart contracts, eliminating millions of jobs across every industry, but stop complaining and get a job grouch!"

IMO NFT and blockchaining is the new world. It is anything but stagnant. The future is here. Oh you could talk for HOURS about the opportunities. Imagine if Epstein marketed albums with the left over hair from simple haircuts? Look at Nipsey Hussle! 1000s exclusive mixtapes/copies for $100 each equals 100k. This has loooong gone on in other markets, auctions and more specifically painters. Pure licensing is rapidly crossing a myriad of industries. Add in crypto and more exclusivity - and you have a worldwide phenomena.

A simple autograph only goes so far and only resonates with a section of a market.

Many bright possibilities faded when majors companies swallowed up great upcoming platforms. (Spotify/Media Chain and the like acquisitions) So we get to a point where science meets art meets AI and mass data crunching meets jurisdictional law! LOL. (one of the permutations that is not taken into effect on many of these proposal companies is previous public exposure or public domain) which will be the thorn in the side but not for the financial structures as they sit. And yes if you own a pc the writes and sings/performs a song - (for now) the pc owner owns the copytright ... blahblahblah. Russians are hot on securing billions of songs copyrights for a long time now though AI permutations etc.

Scooter and these shakers are on point. Why invent in mutual funds - when you can actually own a piece of a lucrative and IP... and or an IPO. Tech funds are starting to pour into art and especially music. RISE and BF S have great braintrusts and think tanks... these people will determine the future of music and pay and revenue... not only are they smart - and risk takers and clear thinkers - money and position have major clout. Reminds me of the early 70s future shock with Punk... but with real money and possibly gigantic rewards and residuals. Sorry I had to write this fast... My whole life I have thought of these things... now the time has come... wish I had a piece of it... but I have positioned with what I have where I can... that is in specific 'influence' spaces. Bravo to these guys... Spotify and the giants are going at it... there are literally boatloads of opportunities and the near future looks bright too. UNTIL they become so big they are out of reach of any anti-trust. Then there may be cut throat corporate warfare - and the ones who set up an 'advance guard' (avant garde) will be the big and final victors. IMO - does not matter anyway - it is a runaway horse? I will reply back on this... tc ~

Do your scribbles have any artistic merit? If so, then you should be paid, just like Banksy is paid.

Seems like I have to reply to this BS myth over and over and over again...

No one asked Joe to become a doctor, no one asked Josephine to become a flower arranger - and yet they expect to be paid when their work is consumed.

No one, even in the crazy thread, is suggesting Robert De Niro should've spent his life working for nothing because he enjoyed acting and no one asked him to do it.

Serena Williams - Lebron James - they enjoy what they do, no one asked them to do it, but we ALL accept they should be paid multiple millions and all musicians are asking for is sustainable pay.
It's unbelievable hypocrisy that people in this thread keep accepting everyone else creative can be paid millions, but musicians shouldn't even be allowed minimum wage.

If De Nero enjoys acting - no he shouldn't just get paid because he acts.

Should he be the only paid actor in an amateur dramatic society just because he's good? No.

He sets out to sell his acting skills, he has an agent who negotiates pay on his behalf and then he signs a contract that gurantees he gets paid for the work he does.

He is paid because others see he will make *them* more money than they pay him.


So If you're a musician, go and seek payment for your work! Get an agent etc etc.


You're suggesting that musicians should be paid just because they play in an amateur musician society and then decide to release their work. It doesn't matter how many people like the music or come to watch the am-dram play, no-one will be "expecting' pay.

You have to set out to monetise your work or skills. If you choose ways that dont work err... then maybe you're not monetisable or those methods dont work.


The equivalent is a doctor going around giving people medical advice in the community and then complaining that he's not receiving any cash in the post.. because his advice is being consumed.

What you've said in the post just doesn't match reality.

So how or when does Banksy get paid? He certainly doesn't get paid for the work he decides to put out into the public realm, no matter how many people look at, I mean "consume" each piece.

Serena Williams did not get paid for playing. She got paid for winning prize money. Now she gets paid for sponsorship for her image.

That's another example where your understanding of the world falls short... well, at least the image of the world you present here - I'm sure you're not stupid, just not sure why you claim equivalence with these completely different examples.

Oh and I know some "flower arrangers".. and they also dont get paid for flower arranging and putting in a public place to be consumed. They essentially find private commisions. Or they do per-hour work to someone else's critieria.

Their truely creative work is used for promotion - instagram etc. it is not paid . Yet anyone and everyone can " consume" their work on Instagram and Instagram get advertising revenue for this free content .

Try to find an equivalence for a musician - a private, bespoke composition, like sync work. Is that really what you're complaining doesn't get paid for?

Spotify (for example) is the way people show off their work. That can lead to being asked to do jobs like palying live or sales of a product they're selling. Yet spotify *also* pays out. Many people's problem is just that they dont think it pays enough.. whilst I say their judgement of how many plays should earn a living is plucked out of thin air, based on unrelated and irrelevent comparisons (to physical sale numbers for example). I think it pays fine - just that most folks aren't getting enough plays - but it shouldn't be seen as the only way to monetise as many people see it.

I think the following two threads summed it up nicely so I am not going to reiterate their message.

I told you in the first post that whether you make money and have fame in the music biz is a combination of the times we live in and your destiny.

What you are needing is acceptance. You are powerless over people, places and things. You can’t put expectations on the outside world either, that is a recipe for disaster.

The whole point of living is to enjoy your life. Don’t worry about tomorrow or who you will be then. Tomorrow takes care of itself. Stay in the moment.

To play music and demand money is contrived. It isn’t of a pure and easy nature. Success only finds you when you stop caring if you achieve it or not and practice non contrived action.

Pat-O

@ Space1999 @ chrisso speaks from the place that he experienced which is being a working pro which is a rarity for those who know/knew of music as a noble profession.

just finished reading the Forbes article on how Rundgren is doing his shows. basically, is a piece on what nocap shows. so for some artists if you are established you can still earn from performance. the article goes into detail on the advantages of doing it via streaming.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimryan...-virtual-tour/

more on nocap shows.

https://nocapshows.com/

https://www.prweb.com/releases/nocap...eb17692057.htm

Nooooo.
First, I've been paid and achieved plenty of success.
I dont make music to make money and I don't 'demand' money.
But I put a value on my time and a value on my skill - just like any professional sports person, painter, poet, author, film maker. They all put a monetary value on their skills and time spent on the work - and you rarely see anyone accuse them of being mercenary.
So I'm sorry, you are 100% wrong headed on this.

I'm not looking for fame, never have. I respect myself enough to value myself. One's destiny is determined by respecting yourself enough to value your skills and time. If you don't value yourself, no one else will, so sure people will take advantage of you and you'll never be paid for your hard work.

Cutting to the chase...
This could be good news:
https://variety.com/2021/digital/new...234918901/amp/

You know, I agree totally that NO one deserves to get paid. It is contrived thinking. Man is very self centered and generally does not understand 'as above... so below'. Yes from a man's point of view and an ego point of view - yea that man/woman should have got paid. You hear it all the time. Just about everyone I know at one point has not got paid for a job. THIS is the big lesson IMO. (purpose/faith) Just because you are great at something doesn't mean you will make money. In art/music my greatest rewards have almost always 'come out of the blue' so to speak. When I did something out of the goodness of my heart for a 'right' purpose some how I am always paid... not necessarily in money... but in wisdom and lessons and joy! James and Serena are not the 'best athletes in their field... and never will be... only a tainted human can say they were the best... there is always something or better. Does Banksy deserve to get paid... no but he gets paid because he does stuff people WANT to buy. Many artists do things with an agenda or just for the sheer Godly joy of it. Does Ringo deserve to get paid no... but he is in demand too. Deserving vs demand are 2 different things. Having expectations that a flawed person can come up with a perfect system is frugal thinking.

The belief that no one deserves to get paid is loser talk. IMO.

In this biz, if you're not concerned with your money, someone will gladly take it from you. You better feel you deserve to get paid, or you never will. I've come to the conclusion the only people you can have a conversation about the music biz with are your peers in the business. Guys who only have a theory with no skin in the game may be cool to have water cooler convo with, but if it comes to having to defend your desire to be paid, you're wasting your breath with that person. This discussion on the philosophy of not deserving to get paid is the exact opposite of professionalism IMO.

But, to each his own. I did get into the music business to make money. I didn't get into music for money. There's a distinction.

It's one thing to not get paid because your material doesn't have value (ie people don't want it). It's an entirely different matter when your industry is devalued and someone else is raking in the profits. You should be able to discuss the industry's state without having to engage in a philosophical dissertation on why a professional should be paid. If not, you're probably talking to the wrong chrowd.