right, you shoot someone because they are getting YOURS instead of you, and it actually has value... it's not that hard to understand mike, artists got paid royalties and they are valuable.

no more interesting than any other old label artists who had millions of dollars spent on turning the band into a brand like radiohead, nin, and amanda palmer... still an experiment and they're late to the party... so what?

none of these experiments work without first having had the millions spent on marketing and promotions anyway... if CC was doing this today, without the benefit of those millions invested, the only people who'd care about that new album is their mothers and girlfriends (maybe).

fair enough... but finding that funding is more difficult than ever because labels are not going to get an ROI to make that investment, and there are few other opportunities that would provide that funding, especially to a high risk developing artist... eventually the corp partners become a label out of necessity, like Red Bull Records... how long do you think they take a net loss on the label before they realize there are more fun ways to lose money?

when I was consulting for a beverage company last year, they literally said that... we'll lose money on something if it's fun... if artists are a PITA we'll just spend it shooting a commercial with a go-pro on a jet pack and water ski's...

these are not music people, and they do not care, do not kid yourself.

the "new" model you seek doesn't exist. it's the old model without album revenue.

There was a great article (in french) about it, that states that artitsts may not gain money from public sales (subscription based services aren't the solution), and that uses from pro (companies that use music) may provide higher incomes : Forum Dogmazic.net, musique libre - Economie de la musique -> La valeur marchande de la musique
(also Jamendo tried this with their pro service)

After having tried agregators (25$ to go to iTunes and 5$ royalties :-)) I tried to bring back the classic model, using fair pricing, higher quality, fair ranking and community based approach, through the new emotuned platform.

Another solution would be to use kickstarter to fund music projects, as it seems to work for this computer game (150 000$ in a few days) :
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...s-of-space-que

Finally promoting still is required, and real label work is required (using social services only would't work for all artists). There is too many people making music, then fair rating and ranking is what I thought about :-)

Music is very different from computer games.

I agree, and this game/its creators were very famous, so it wouldn't work that way for another game/people and music. However from 150 000 to a few hundred of dollars there is probably room.

At time when I provided dozens of free creative commons songs at dogmazic, some users said they would like to help me with funds (however they didn't, even for a single album available at iTunes). Using higher audio quality and in progress songs (with free access to later versions and aditional songs) then seemed the right idea to me.

I've not read the entire post, but...

In my humble opinion, I think the answer is not to find a way to stop piracy (that seems like an impossible task) but to make piracy irrelevant - a non issue. Now doing that may not be so simple but I think in attacking it this way there is a more realistic chance of everyone benefiting in the long run.

What are you talking about?
Emotionally? Sentimentally?
Sure, maybe there's a difference with the attachement ppl have towards each.

But if your job is to sell things for a living you see them both as entertainment products that are bought, sold and (sadly) pirated.
No different when it comes to the $$$.

don't drink the kool-aid, that's just what lessig wants you to believe, and he's wrong...

I can't talk about here, but this may help you...

Larry Lessig is Wrong, and should “Get Over It” | The Trichordist

EFF’s John Perry Barlow is Wrong, says Google’s Chief Economist | The Trichordist

You do understand that to many, if not most non-hobbyist creatives the mention of Creative Commons is pure poison, don't you?

If you release something under CC you give up rights that are impossible to get back if you change your mind in the future because there is no practical legal way to rescind the license.

Financially and in the way the two business work. We've been through this enough before so that I realize that you simply don't understand this and I don't feel like going into it again but it's like comparing a horse to a sailboat. Sure, they're both methods of transportation but that's where the resemblance begins and ends.

This is right.
Yes, I said it before, but these sponsors are selling a product other than music.
If an artist is a pain, or controversial, a music company will likely stand by them if they are selling records. If they aren't selling jeans or cola they'll have their sponsorship cut in an instant.
We plainly see this weekly.
Sponsors are the first to jump ship if a sports star or tv personality make a misstep that goes down badly with the public.

This thread has so much stupidity in it.

If anybody watched the video, the headline was just a way to grab people's attention. I think most of the people responding did not even watch the video. Billy simply stated that people need to give up on the idea of making money in the music business. Then he followed up to say that money can and will be made in the grand scheme of things, meaning reaching out to other businesses and using different types of ways to make money. Video games, TV shows, commercials, endoresements, merchandise (beyond t shirts). Then he went on to say, create your own world so that these different ideas can fit into it. He mentioned Lady Gaga who is smart, and put marketing dollars into Beats by Dre and things of that nature, to boost her income. So, what he was really saying is as a musician, and as an industry, it needs to expand and flourish , when its just been beating itself up.

So most of the people arguing here are actually arguing about nothing. And most of you dont know anything about what goes on in the music industry. The industry is a mess, and unfortunately hasn't caught up.

What's also funny, is Billy even made statements that a lot of people arguing would agree with. The music industry keeps trying to push the standard that they have had for years, and it is not working. His statement is really as simple as that, and its nothing people haven't been saying for years. He may have a personal bias though because his music (lets be honest) has not been of the same quality for years, and he's had a hard time maintaining a fan base because of that (IMO, this is coming from a HUGE pumpkins fan!).

All that said. There are people making a living doing this, but not many . . . and there never has been many making a living from it. I think a lof people on this board are very upset about the industry because a lot here work in it . . . and the idea of studio, engineer, producer, masterer, record label, etc etc etc, are in a huge state of flux and this really hits home for those people. This is gearslutz, and in my experience most people who post here are more on the tech side and work as engineers in the field. (hence why its gearslutz for audio equipment, and and not songwriterhookers).

For me as a final thought, just for myself . . . we need to learn how to make music important again, and put the egos aside. People love music. No matter what you people think . .. people STILL love music. They may not love it like you did when you were a kid, buying records and putting them on, and looking at the liner notes, but they truly still love it and are connected to it. However, there are MUCH more passive listeners today because the culture of music as a lifestyle or a huge investment is gone. What I think Billy was saying, is we need to tap into that. Kids these days are more into video games and facebook. How does the music business integrate, so that it can become a part of peoples lives again?

How do musicians and the industry and artists, make music part of people's lives again? Because right now its the soundtrack, but not the focus. And it simply will NOT be the focus anymore, because music (like movies, like books, etc) is NOT the focus anymore. Other things have replaced it , and other things will replace those things in the future. So how do you thrive in this climate? First thing to do is put the ego aside . . . Rock Stars may actually be a thing of the past . . .

I think many of us fully understood what he was saying, we just don't agree with some of his ideas.

it's not about rock stars, it's about whether or not, as a society, we value having a professional creative class... and that's the point.

And that extends into people who do more than write songs and play music. Engineers, studio staffs, producers, people who promote music, live sound people, concert promoters, etc. The current state of music "consumerism" impacts a whole lot more people than the Billy Corgans of the world.

People justify a lot of their current behavior by hating on record labels or record execs and claiming that the artists always got screwed by the label anyway (which isn't true, but whatever). But they forget about all the good people who just loved music and wanted to be a part of it in some related way.

I did music professionally for about 8 years and during that time I had the good fortune to meet several of these people. I remember a guy named Ricky Keller. He was an engineer who worked on some big projects from the late 80s until he died of a heart attack sometime in the early 2000s. Bruce Springsteen, Black Crowes, Stone Temple Pilots, etc. I barely knew the guy, but he would let me borrow an expensive vocal mic to record vocals at home with because he knew I couldn't pay for studio time and he just wanted to help out a fellow creative. I could have taken it straight to the nearest pawn shop...I honestly am not even sure the guy knew my last name or how to get in touch with me if I disappeared with the mic.

Anyway, there was definitely a community back then. The current state of consumerism hurts guys like Ricky just like it hurts Billy and the label "fat cats." But somehow no one thinks of people like that when defending "the new model."

+1000

A lot of ordinary people, but great humans inside the industry.

The problem as I see it is majorly that there are "flaws" and "shortcuts" and "wormholes" built into the very structure of life in a world with an internet, and then ontop of that there's a general sleaziness and escapism and downright galling bastardry that's become standard issue behavior in today's world.

Asking people to be as respectful as they should be... yeah, rotsa ruck with that.

Out on the road late last night, I had the strangest dream: I thought, "there is no reason for anyone to ever get a speeding ticket from now on. If everyone just decided, in a unique moment of social solidarity, that they were just not going to exceed the speed limit anymore, well then that would be that." Of course moments later, I see someone come racing up behind me, careen around me, and zoom off to his destiny.

It may be a grand tragedy, but we are stuck with human nature, now and forever. Pity, pity, a shame.

i'm with joel, if we let human nature run it's course with no checks and balances, bloody screeching anarchy would have done us all in long ago.

and that's why there are laws, agreements, sanctions and embargoes, and cops, judges, diplomats, and armies that enforce them.

stop speeding? yup the highway patrol does it a thousand times a day. they don't get 'em all, but they get lots, and we all think twice about putting the pedal to the metal because of the consequences associated with the behavior.

the internet hasn't exactly embraced that concept yet.

the big tech monopolies have made damn sure of it... and they're laughing all the way to the bank... and i'm pretty damn sure that bank is guarded by cops, judges, diplomats, and armies... :cop:

yeah, that's why we have laws and consequences... asking nicely does not seem to have worked, ever. not for parking violations, speeding, assault, shop lifting, anything... in a society we make laws, which if broken lead to consequences, and consequences change behavior.

its just that simple, no matter what it is.

of course someone who get's a speeding ticket, may want to repeal the law because getting caught speeding is "censoring their right to speed" but we all know that's nonsense. No one has "the right to speed." Once you are one the road, you must obey the rules of the road. I suppose people who are bad drivers or disrespectful of other drives may not like following the law, but eventually either they will, or face the consequences for not doing so.

fantastic post, thank you. there are a lot of people here who have never had those types of professional experiences and just don't know any better.

yup.

Did I just read that as "Smashing Bumpkins"?

music sales down 64% down since 1999.

and there are 45% less professional musicians from 2002 - 2011

jus sayin... if the internet is working so well for musicians, why are there so many less musicians working professionally?

here's 1973 - 2008...

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/attac...ormcorrect.jpg

the years correspond to excel row numbers, the graph represents 36 years of data 1973 - 2008.

Excel graphed the years as follows:

1973 is plot point "1"

1979 is plot point "7"

1999 is plot point "27"

2008 is plot point "36"

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/attac...ormcorrect.jpg

data source: http://musicbusinessresearch.files.w...obal-sales.jpg

so it looks like the economy and consumer competition really isn't that big of a factor after all, again, looking at 36 years of data...

each decade saw it's own added consumer competition...

the 70s saw the initial release of VCRs and Video Cassettes as well as video game consoles and cartridges,

the 80s saw home video boom as VHS matured, cable tv boomed, new types of youth sports took hold,

the 90s saw the introduction of DVDs, home computers became household items, people started paying for internet service, and cell phones began to be common place...

and yet through each one of those decades (without rampant online piracy) sales grew steadily until broadband reaches ubiquity at the turn of the century...

then, the sales plummet.

you can choose to ignore this like you can choose to ignore a train crossing or a stop sign, but it's foolish and irrational to do so.

and then there's this...

Digital Music News - Broadband Penetration vs. Album Sales, 2000-2010...

and of course this...

the promise of the internet is size and scale

this is what the proponents of micro economics and internet flat tax surcharges promote and it should have worked for recorded music.

alot of people have pointed to the transition from albums to individual songs as being the cause of reduced revenue for the record industry

I understand where on the surface one could make this argument, however... it should follow the argument made by the pricing proponents

in 1999 in the USA there were probably 10 thousand retail points of sale for physical music, tower, sam goody, target, walmart, etc.

at the time they were selling $20 dollar physical discs - much of the overhead due to physical packaging, manufacturing, shipping and stocking fees.

these physical retail locations had all the problems of supply side inventory management - a band would be on tour, and no stock would be in that market, a song would be played on the radio and the album would quickly be out of stock, etc. a tv show or commercial features a song and suddenly there is demand, but no availability.

these supply side inventory issues combined with limited points of sale were a massive problem for the record industry.

digital distribution has none of these problems

today someone can walk from their living room to their computer (or it may be on their lap) to order the latest hot song, featured in Gossip Girl.

so today in 2010 there are an estimated 500 million* retail points of sale for prerecorded music via itunes alone.
*500 Million_Active_Itunes_Users

just stop and think about this for a second... we went from 10 thousand points of sale to 500 Million points of sale in less than a decade and removed all of the supply side inventory issues... wow.

the promise, size and scale of the internet should have seen sales of pre-recorded music increase, massively...

there is frequent argument made that if music cost less, it would sell more... well, we now have 99 cent songs and 9.99 albums and sales have dropped by half in a decade...

so the industry adapted by:
1) removing inventory problems
2) making music instantly available
3) allowing for songs to be sold individually at a price never before possible and...
4) dropped the price of the album by half of the retail list price of a decade ago

it's NOT the economy...

That's nonsense. Traditionally, entertainment in general and music in particular has been recession proof. The only difference now it the internet and <redacted>. And the decline started YEARS BEFORE the recession. Claims to the contrary are simply tech industry and <redacted> propaganda. As a matter of fact, the decline started during the boom years of the tech bubble.

unlikely... when looking at REALITY... :facepalm:

Ted Cohen: Breaking Through The Noise | | midemblogmidemblog

there's also this...

Business Matters: 75,000 Albums Released In U.S. In 2010 -- Down 22% From 2009 | Billboard.biz

The truth is, if the new paradigm is working for musicians, why aren't more musicians working professionally?

...

no argument there, but what you are failing to understand is that your odds of having that success are reducing daily, and have already been reduced by 50% in the past 13 years... don't you want to have better odds of success? Don't you want more opportunities at a successful creative career, and not less?

Wouldn't you rather have a modestly successful career as a middle class musician than as a cubical jockey or middle management who makes double?

I don't understand the inability to recognize the simple math of the situation, with every day that passes YOU are less likely to have any kind of professional creative career.

Why accept that as your fate?

Look, I like you Rack, but you love to come on here and tell us all we'll never make it.

That just smacks of supreme arrogance.

We (on an individual level) can't stop what's happening with the world, all we can do is be the best ****ing artists we can be and let the chips fall where they may.