The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Billy Corgan - No Money In Music Now
Old 14th March 2012
  #181
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doorknocker View Post



NOBODY feels sorry for major labels going down..

Some will hopefully contemplate a little more on how the business model provided for venture capital to be applied in a positive way . Capitalism obviously causes many philosophical debates about how fair income distribution is or isn't , but it shouldn't be debatable after the defeat of the "Evil Empire" ( which was the one thing Ronnie Ray gun got right ) that capitalism and the label model , no matter it's many warts , did somewhat better that attempting to find a golden needle or two by searching through a New York sized population of needles!!


In short ; while it's great fun to dance and dance on the old systems grave , maybe the question of whether the new boss is substantively better than the old needs to asked!!!



Quote:
Originally Posted by doorknocker View Post

Of course, it's a fact that most non-major label musicians are affected by the sorry way the music business didn't react to technical and cultural changes..

That was a pretty diverse group; and they also didn't have the crystal ball ability to have put digital distribution clauses into contracts that existed......so maybe they could not have become of one singularly decisive hive mind on the turn of a dime .....


Quote:
Originally Posted by doorknocker View Post
But it's also a fact that many non-bondtrading and non-bonuscollecting workers are affected by the irresponsible actions of a gang of greedy bankers.


Yup , and the economic downturn is going to make for more frustrated youths who question capitalism and think free and automatic for the people socialism might be looking like an decent alternative .... starting with free music , then free bread and circuses.......
Old 14th March 2012
  #182
Everybody go out and buy a re-release of Smashing Pumkins to help Billy out. Those residuals are drying up and he needs the cash.

Lesson:

Mothers, don't let your kids grow up to be rock stars...
Old 14th March 2012
  #183
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
Actually, it's more like *innovation* generally happens at the bottom. But, if you want to move from innovation to implementation, you generally need money, and the labels provide that. There's nothing at all unusual about that equation. It's how the business work works for the most part. Individual entrepreneurs come up with ideas, but ideas don't assemble and sell themselves. That requires money. So they go to VCs or they find a larger company to buy their idea or their smaller company.
But we're talking about music, not some kind of product that requires engineering and manufacturing. Innovations that begin in the underground don't require any funding to be realized. Take something like hip hop for example. When Grand Wizzard Theodore invented scratching it helped launch a whole art form that any kid can practice with a turntable and a record. Then later the industry comes to exploit that financially, but "venture capital" isn't required just for the form of expression to exist.

Something like Bjork's Biophilia app is an interesting idea that could lead to albums that are more immersive and an experience that's more difficult to pirate. But it's not a model that a kid with no money can follow. And that's how I took Corgan's point about artists "building their own world." Somebody is going to come along and do something that creates a whole new paradigm in a cheap and easy way that anybody can copy.
Old 14th March 2012
  #184
Lives for gear
 

re: the internet's culture of negativity
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFi Yeah View Post
You can see that in action right now.
Absolutely. It was crazy to reflect on what he said and then come back to find this thread underway that perfectly illustrates his point.
Old 14th March 2012
  #185
Lives for gear
 
doorknocker's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
But we're talking about music, not some kind of product that requires engineering and manufacturing. Innovations that begin in the underground don't require any funding to be realized. Take something like hip hop for example. When Grand Wizzard Theodore invented scratching it helped launch a whole art form that any kid can practice with a turntable and a record. Then later the industry comes to exploit that financially, but "venture capital" isn't required just for the form of expression to exist.

Something like Bjork's Biophilia app is an interesting idea that could lead to albums that are more immersive and an experience that's more difficult to pirate. But it's not a model that a kid with no money can follow. And that's how I took Corgan's point about artists "building their own world." Somebody is going to come along and do something that creates a whole new paradigm in a cheap and easy way that anybody can copy.
Well said!
Old 14th March 2012
  #186
Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Robertshaw, you're an odd one and out of hundreds of responses to my GS posting, yours is one of the most lost and clueless I can remember. You seem to have a very limited one dimensional line of thought. Your main thrust on this thread is "no one has the right to make a dime in the music industry," as you say ad nauseam. The only problem with your big point is that essentially no one on earth disagrees with you, so you're like at dog barking at a ghost.

So, what are you going on about? Lawyers don't have a right to make money, no one has a right to make money and most everyone on earth agrees with your viewpoint I think. Your whole repetitive schtick is a bit bizarre. Why not talk about "milk jugs floating in space" over and over? Nearly as random as your singular focus. Who says anyone has a right to make money at anything? People are talking about the many dimensions of the music business and art but you keep going on about "no one has the right to make a dime in the music industry."

Again, the more experienced people on this thread know that to really excel to the very top at your art in fully developed form, whatever it is, the vast majority of super-talents find it impossible do it as a hobby ten hours a week. Yes, some super-talents can overcome and succeed in their work with only ten ours a week put into it, but usually those are poets, singer songwriters and other areas where in certain cases it is possible to work quickly. Some art forms by nature demand a lot more elbow grease and time. If your art is sonically perfect music that can only be attained with the help of big recording studios, and a large team of super-talents and/or and orchestras, then 10 hours a week will never cut it to match those who are rich and/or paid at their profession. If you're a super-talent and your art form is building gothic cathedrals or making film like Avatar, it would be most interesting to see if you can succeed at those tasks while having to work at Burger King at the same time.

To respond to your main point, yes, you are certainly correct, no one has a right to make a dime in music. To agree further with what I think your gist is, no one has a right to get as much free time as they need to achieve whatever they want in life. That's a privilege that only the right combinations of smarts, riches, talent, hard work and blessings get you. That said, if you release protected work and someone sees value in it and wishes to possess it but steals it instead, you do have a right to seek compensation if you released the protected work solely to be sold and not given away. That is your legal right.

Now, if you respond to this, are you going to get your X-acto razor blade out again to take all of my sentences out of context like you did when you responded to me previously or are you going to deal with the gist of what we are saying and come up with a response outside of "no one has the right to make a dime in the music industry." A response that agrees with or disagrees with my paragraphs 3 and 4?
I think he actually means that no one has the right to be guaranteed to make money rather than guaranteed to have the opportunity.
Old 14th March 2012
  #187
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Do you have a graphic of that? Or even verifiable proof?
That was my point in asking for a list of the other ways to make money in the music business.

I think most people's definition of the music business is what I'd define as the record business - selling records and taking a piece of those profits.

If someone makes a film score or a jingle, are they in the music business? I'd say yes, but in this context I'd full accept the argument that they are not, if people want to limit it to the band/artist business.

We know about Kerch, and touring and licensing, but if you want me to try to supply numbers, I need to know parameters.

If someone puts out an album for free as an artist, tours a few months a year and is hired to produce recordings are they making money in the music business?

When Dylan not only had a song in a TV commercial, but appeared in it, does that count or not? What about all of the people in John Varvatos ads? Does that count?

I'm sure that will be dismissed as only major bands get to do that. Have you heard of The Bad Rabbits? I'm guessing no, but they have a similar relationship with Karma Loop that been going on for a couple of years and their first album isn't even out yet.

So I need a list of what streams of income can be included. What about income from YouTube views? That's a source that didn't exist years ago, so that's one new stream to add.

Also what years are we comparing and do we take into consideration that there are years with artificially high CD sales that are due to people replacing formats?

Also, define what you'd consider proof and what sources are acceptable. Can I take stats published by Rolling Stone, or does it have to be the Wall St Journal or is all print media unacceptable?

What about verbatim quotes from band members or managers? If I find someone who says they're set for life after a three album career, or even one album career and they never got a royalty check from their label for their points on sales, or they say that the money they did get was so little that it was their smallest revenue source and that not having it would not affect their lifestyle at all, does that count? What if I find more than one?

I'm happy to try to find the things I've seen and get you the same information I've been given, but only if there's a point, so you've got to be specific on what you consider acceptable.


As I write this I'm kind of wondering what the point is. I don't think either of us care about winning an argument, I think we're both trying to see the bigger picture as accurately as possible to figure out the way to move forward tying income to art.

My question to you is, if I showed you indisputable proof that what I claim is accurate, does it make any difference to you? I guess for whatever reason, I've been thinking that it would make a difference and that you might change the way you, or anyone here, would try to generate income, but I haven't been on gearsluts in year or two and nothing has changed. So is there a point in me doing the work? Would it be helpful to you and would you do things differently, I don't mean posts, I mean in your life. If taking the time to find this information in a form that's acceptable to you isn't going to change things for you, what's the point in doing the work? I don't care about winning an argument, I believe that it empowers people to really understand where the money comes from and where it goes and when you don't understand that it's really hard to make a living at this, if not impossible.
Old 14th March 2012
  #188
Lives for gear
 
doorknocker's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatfinger View Post
Some will hopefully contemplate a little more on how the business model provided for venture capital to be applied in a positive way .
When I said 'nobody feels sorry for major labels going down' this was directly related to the fact that the 'record industry' tries to make people feel guilty for their behaviour. I'm not saying that record companies are/were bad and that's besides the point anyway.

Fact is that here in Switzerland at least - downloading music is NOT illegeal. There are efforts to change that but so far it's NOT against the law to do it. So that is obviously very different indeed from stealing food from the corner store.

And FWIW: it might be legal here but I don't do it. I like albums/CDs and I pay for them just like I pay for software. That's no saintly thing to do either but I'd LIKE to see albums (in whatever format) be around for years because it is a great format and always has been.
Old 14th March 2012
  #189
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
yours is one of the most lost and clueless I can
maybe you glanced over it too quickly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
remember. You seem to have a very limited one dimensional line of thought. Your main thrust on this thread is "no one has the right to make a dime in the music industry," as you say. The only problem with your big point is that essentially no one on earth disagrees with you, so you're like at dog barking at a ghost.
so we are in agreement

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
So, what are you going on about? Lawyers don't have a right to make money, no one has a right to make money and most everyone on earth agrees with your viewpoint I think. Your whole repetitive schtick is a bit bizarre.
I only said it two times I think? repetitive? I believe you keep going on an on an on about lawyers and doctors and who knows what else
that have nothing to do with this topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Why not talk about "milk jugs floating in space" over and over?
because we are talking about the music biz here, not milk jugs or lawyers or doctors like you seem to be confused about


Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Nearly as random as your singular focus. Who says anyone has a right to make money at anything? People are talking about the many dimensions of the music business and art but you keep going on about "no one has the right to make a dime in the music industry."
there is one dimension to what the corgan article pertains, which is record sales

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Again, the more experienced people on this thread know that to really excel
I love when people are condescending it makes me feel not as guilty about my failure.......

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
to the very top at your art in fully developed form, whatever it is,
if you only knew...well then again you do know what my art form is, you keep playing right into it , don't you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
the vast majority of super-talents find it impossible do it as a hobby ten hours a week. Yes, some super-talents can overcome and succeed in their work with only ten ours a week put into it, but usually those are poets, singer songwriters and other areas where in certain cases it is possible to work quickly.
But the first Sabbath record was cut in a day

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Some art forms by nature demand a lot more elbow grease and time. If your art is sonically perfect music that can only be attained with the help of big recording studios
If you need a big recording studio to capture your talents then you are not very talented. If you need a a big recording studio to capture sonically perfect music then your music is not perfect to begin with. Perfection emits from the source my friend.

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
and a large team of super-talents and/or and orchestras, then 10 hours a week will never cut it to match those who are rich and/or paid at their profession.
I would hardly call anyone who reads charts like in an orchestra, "super-talents" but sure I get your point although it has little to do with the topic here. Who needs an orchestra when you have VI........

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
If you're a super-talent and your art form is building gothic cathedrals or making film like Avatar, it would be most interesting to see if you can succeed at those tasks while having to work at Burger King at the same time.
you obviously have never worked on a film. Maybe the top 5% involved make any real money including actors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
To respond to your main point, yes, you are certainly correct, no one has a right to make a dime in music.
that settles it

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
To agree further with what I think your gist is, no one has a right to get as much free time as they need to achieve whatever they want in life. That's a privilege that only the right combinations of smarts, riches, talent, hard work and blessings get you. That said, if you release protected work and someone sees value in it and wishes to possess it but steals it instead, you do have a right to seek compensation if you released the protected work solely to be sold and not given away. That is your legal right.
you are so dramatic

Quote:
Originally Posted by relaxo View Post
Now, if you respond to this, are you going to get your X-acto razor blade out again to take all of my sentences out of context like you did when you responded to me previously or are you going to deal with the gist of what we are saying and come up with a response outside of "no one has the right to make a dime in the music industry." A response that agrees with or disagrees with my paragraphs 3 and 4?
I didn't take anything you said out of context
Old 14th March 2012
  #190
Lives for gear
 
JSt0rm's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
you obviously have never worked on a film. Maybe the top 5% involved make any real money including actors.
You can make a nice upper middle class living working in the film world. If by real money you mean millions then yes you need to develop a product as opposed to providing a service but you can make a good amount of money providing that service.
Old 14th March 2012
  #191
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_B_C View Post
Who in the world treasures a recording of a song anymore?
Anyone who appreciates great music, well recorded of course.
Old 14th March 2012
  #192
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorknocker View Post

Yes but you'd also had the option of NOT buying music which is something that actually happened in the 80s when quality went really downhill. People basically stopped buying music and IMO it's much the same these days.
Where is the evidence for your 80's claim. And talking about 'quality' is extremely subjective. Many people who are 30 years old see the 80's as the golden era of music.
The quality argument is just tosh, pure and simple.

Quote:
NOBODY feels sorry for major labels going down.
Really you should just speak for yourself.
Of course many people are sorry to see labels go down.
Just as you can't say all restaurants are bad, and all chefs are bad, you can't say all major labels are bad and all their employees are bad.
Surely after so many years we can move beyond these simplistic and generalized comments?
Old 14th March 2012
  #193
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatfinger View Post

In short ; while it's great fun to dance and dance on the old systems grave , maybe the question of whether the new boss is substantively better than the old needs to asked!!!
One of the best posts in the entire debate.
Old 14th March 2012
  #194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
I think he actually means that no one has the right to be guaranteed to make money
And as Relaxo correctly pointed out.... we know that. All the professionals in this debate know that, as well as anyone who's had a modicum of experience in the industry. Relaxo is right, Robert Shaw is stating the obvious and claiming it's a revelation.
Old 14th March 2012
  #195
Lives for gear
 

I'm more offended that he is referred to as a legend. Didn't the Pumpkins only have 2 albums of any significance and nothing revolutionary at that. What's next, Justin Beiber, "the legend" ???
Old 14th March 2012
  #196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
My question to you is, if I showed you indisputable proof that what I claim is accurate, does it make any difference to you?
Yes.
Of course people who write music for ads are in the music business.
Make tutorial videos about Pro Tools, design soft synths, license tracks to movies, sell t-shirts of their band and sign perfume contracts.
The evidence I'm getting from everyone I know in the business is that the majority of artists are hurting very much despite all that.
The top echelon are making more money than ever. Achieving more record sales than ever, as well as taking advantage of sell out tours, licensing, sponsorship, sell out tours, acting roles etc....
Most artists below that aren't making up the difference from lost record sales from playing more shows, or sponsorship etc. Except for the artists who can almost exclusively work from home and tour alone with a laptop.
I don't much care for the most commercial music. I've always enjoyed the middle to lower tiers of music, and it's those I'm seeing who are struggling to sign meaningful sponsorship contracts, sell out more shows, license more tracks.
So in my experience the trend outside record sales is almost static, if not dropping...... unless you include the GaGa's and Adele's, where you are right, the trend is shooting skywards.
Old 14th March 2012
  #197
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
But we're talking about music, not some kind of product that requires engineering and manufacturing. Innovations that begin in the underground don't require any funding to be realized. Take something like hip hop for example. When Grand Wizzard Theodore invented scratching it helped launch a whole art form that any kid can practice with a turntable and a record. Then later the industry comes to exploit that financially, but "venture capital" isn't required just for the form of expression to exist.
He came up with an idea. He didn't launch the art form. How did all those kids in the broader audience learn about scratching? It wasn't because they were all hanging around in the clubs where he were performing or the house parties he was at. How many kids learned about scratching that way, as compared to learning it from the fact that a (label) band like Run DMC became hugely popular in the mainstream? And how many kids were actually doing it before affordable and flexible turntable kits were available vs. afterwards, etc...?

Not that he didn't do a good thing, but it's always so easy to act like the idea is the thing, when it seldom ever is. In some cases, where just the idea is important, more in the realm of politics and philosophy, the idea can be the thing in and of itself. But even then it's typically not widely propogated except in the form of a book, or a movie, or a magazine article or TV show or whatever.

It has to be gotten to the masses, and the masses almost never come to you. You gotta push it to them, and the evil money people know how to do that. And you aren't going to do it for cheap.

Quote:
Something like Bjork's Biophilia app is an interesting idea that could lead to albums that are more immersive and an experience that's more difficult to pirate. But it's not a model that a kid with no money can follow. And that's how I took Corgan's point about artists "building their own world." Somebody is going to come along and do something that creates a whole new paradigm in a cheap and easy way that anybody can copy.
I doubt it. Because, if it's cheap and easy, then who gives a crap if you can do it? It's cheap and easy to pick up a piece of paper and make some marks on it with a pencil, but no one is going to pay you for it unless you are very good at it. The reason being that I can make some marks on a piece of paper without spending the years to develop a skill for it just as easily as anyone else can. And so the value of mine is completely negated by the sea of mediocre output from other people with my same minimal talent.

The only reason my marks are going to be more interesting than someone else's is if I spend years learning how to make really good marks, and then find some way to get a lot of people aware of my marks on paper and why it's more interesting than your marks on paper.

And so we are back to the same point again. Unless you have money, it's a pipe dream to think you are going to make something cheaply and easily and then the world is going to flock to your door just because you created it. It won't happen.
Old 14th March 2012
  #198
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
He came up with an idea. He didn't launch the art form. How did all those kids in the broader audience learn about scratching? It wasn't because they were all hanging around in the clubs where he were performing or the house parties he was at.
I learned about it like most everybody else my age when Grandmixer DST was featured in the Herbie Hancock hit Rockit. So what? That doesn't change the fact that it was something easy and cheap that anybody can do and which was created entirely on the streets of the Bronx without needing any corporate funding. Today the process would be greatly accelerated because the originator would probably just post a youtube video and everyone would pass it around.

I remember learning about sampling around the same time and it was a fascinating idea to me. But not surprisingly that didn't blow up into a widespread underground phenomenon in the early '80s, because kids couldn't afford Synclaviers.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
Not that he didn't do a good thing, but it's always so easy to act like the idea is the thing, when it seldom ever is.
I'm not talking about "the idea" but the actual execution. Those guys in the Bronx didn't just think about scratching and wait around until they could find a major label to allow them to execute their ideas. They just did it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
It has to be gotten to the masses, and the masses almost never come to you. You gotta push it to them, and the evil money people know how to do that. And you aren't going to do it for cheap.
You're talking about something entirely different.

Quote:
I doubt it. Because, if it's cheap and easy, then who gives a crap if you can do it? It's cheap and easy to pick up a piece of paper and make some marks on it with a pencil, but no one is going to pay you for it unless you are very good at it.
I love how you debunk your own silly claim in the very next sentence. Most great art is cheap and accessible (easy in the sense that it requires minimal equipment, capital, or technical resources). Drawing, painting, literature, etc. Yeah, who gives a crap if you can do those things.

Quote:
And so we are back to the same point again. Unless you have money, it's a pipe dream to think you are going to make something cheaply and easily and then the world is going to flock to your door just because you created it. It won't happen.
You're changing the subject again. Where did I ever mention "the world flocking to your door"? Let alone "just because you created it" as though I'm stupid enough to think the work doesn't have to be great or you don't have to do anything to promote it. But we're never going to see eye to eye on this issue because you seem to believe that you can market a bad product, that people are sheep who simply consume what they are told, and that marketing is some kind of mysterious force that has to cost vast amounts of money.
Old 14th March 2012
  #199
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Most artists below that aren't making up the difference
How much of that is due to the current state of affairs in the world economy? everything is going up except salaries. It cost a lot more to do shows now and business in general. Everyone is getting squeezed including musicians.

Back in the early 80s we played clubs and every guy made $150 a night. How much do bar bands make in 2012? they make $150 ea a night. But expenses have gone up. Musicians are like everyone else they are getting pinched.

There seems to be some disconnect here. I know plenty of guys in my area who have multiple gold records and always scraped by. Some of them have always carried a part time job. So I don't know where you guys are getting your stats but in the music biz it has always been the top 5-10% making a good living and everyone else is scraping by.

We all know guys who toured for years and made less than a guy back home working banging nails. So I don't see anything different now. What was the percentage of artists making good dough on record sales royalties? it was never that high. You made money touring you made money on publishing from airplay and you would secretly hope your song would make it to muzac and you'd hear it in an elevator so you'd make more money.

People on this thread making a big deal out of nothing. Profits are down not just because of piracy it also has to do with the world economy getting pinched, and let's face it....... new music out now is lame. As far as money touring goes you don't see bands like Iron maiden or AC/DC starving. they still sell out 200,000 seat stadiums. Billy Corgon on his best day could maybe sell out a hockey arena in the Chicago area. He couldn't even fill a club now. No artists these days can cut it on their own. Not because of any other reason than they don't have the massive appeal like the bands from back in the day

It is what it is, stop this mp3 pity party. If a band put out a record like Zeppelin IV or Black in Black today, consumers would line up at itunes to pay for it out of respect, and nothing more. But instead we are shoveled crap like wasting lite and whatever else lameoid music is shoved down our throats from the powers that be.

Fact of the matter is, if you don't make money in 2012 it's because you don't deserve to. Join the club everyone in the economies around the world are making less money at the end of the day except the powers that be. I make less money now than I did 10 years ago. I'm getting job offers from recruiters and the salary is what I made in 1988. No lie. Its a tough world out there not just for "fulltime" "real" artists

but make no mistake the labels are at fault for this. Abolish the mp3, itunes and all that nonsense. Come out with a tangible high def format and do everyone a favor. And pleeeeeease sign some bands with talent. The labels have no clue what they are doing from any aspect.

Lastly no one in 2012 would buy a smashing pumpkins record. That would be like someone buying a 3 dog night record or a grandfunk railroad cd. It's all so dated, it is stuck in the decade it was released. Smashing pumpkins are no different than Poison or Flock of Seagulls.
No one cares about billy corgon. It's not like he's Ozzy or Elvis or some other timeless artist. You'll never see ozzy crying about Mp3 sales. Sharon Osbourne should run a label. Sure she would steal from the artists like all executives, but she would still sign some good bands.
what executives don't steal from artists? it's like that in every industry. The guy that actually creates something always makes the least money. It's always been the marketing people who cash in on the creations and dreams of others........ it's called life! welcome to it
Old 14th March 2012
  #200
Here for the gear
 
JimRyser's Avatar
I was lucky enough to have had a record deal in 1988 with a 1990 release with Arista. Had one flash in the pan minor hit. Used all that cash to go to school and get my degrees. Created a niche career completely outside of music and now make music for fun again. Make surprisingly decent coin as well! I would not trade any of the experience for anything. I also would not go back to the "business" of music for anything! My hat is off to each and every one of you who found joy in music as a career. I could not. But I thankfully love music again.
Old 14th March 2012
  #201
Lives for gear
 

Billy Corgan - No Money In Music Now...

He talks about diversification of skills beyond music, and he's doing it himself by getting paid as speaker at seminars, apparently.

The whole "Marry music to a larger product" sounds suspiciously like working as an advertising agent though... an advertising agent for something other than the music it'self.

Jingles, anyone? Yeah, let's all just sell out.

Unfortunately there were some truth in his words though.
Old 15th March 2012
  #202
Lives for gear
 
Beat Poet's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Well I agree.
I'm not sure on the 'alternative' aspect. But this debate surely needs more stakeholders to speak up and make their opinions known.
Alternative was just the first word I could think of, though yeah, alternative and Billy Corgan/Pumpkins don't sit particularly well! I think of him as the American Noel Gallagher, someone who just tells it like it is, with regards to music.
Old 15th March 2012
  #203
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
if you only knew...well then again you do know what my art form is, you keep playing right into it , don't you?
What is your art form?
Old 15th March 2012
  #204
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFi Yeah View Post
What is your art form?
Yeah, this would be a cool experiment. What can you do besides music?
Old 15th March 2012
  #205
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFi Yeah View Post
What is your art form?
??

pushing buttons of course
Old 15th March 2012
  #206
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid360 View Post
Yeah, this would be a cool experiment. What can you do besides music?
pretty much most musicians are multifaceted
computer savvy, lyricists etc....

that's what cool about music you have to be well rounded I suppose there are a few that can only...play drums or
only play gtr. In some ways though those type of musicians are probably the happiest. They don' have to deal with all the aspects of
music and recording that can be frustrating at times, they can simply enjoy their instrument and put their trust in other musicians and the producers


If I could play like Bonham or say Jeff Beck there would be no need to do anything else. But 99.9% of musicians are not so
naturally skilled like them
Old 15th March 2012
  #207
Lives for gear
 
spaceman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post

People on this thread making a big deal out of nothing. Profits are down not just because of piracy it also has to do with the world economy getting pinched, .
And yet, despite the world economy :
- expensive game consoles have been selling like crazy ( like the 800$ ps 3 when it came out)
- an 80$ playstation game that came out two or three years ago ( can't remember the name) sold and made more money than the biggest grossing movie of that time.
- the iPad is the fastest and biggest selling electronic device ever.
- expensive smartphones selling like hotcakes, along with their expensive operator bills. Over here i even see 14 year old kids with iphone 4's
- some companies like Facebook and Apple are reaching stratospheric valuations.
- etc..

I find it odd that all this is happening in a time of crisis. Why would only ( the easily piratable ) music go down , while the more expensive stuff like entertainment hardware or the less easily piratable console games see their sales reach historical heights ?
Old 15th March 2012
  #208
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
pretty much most musicians are multifaceted
computer savvy, lyricists etc....

that's what cool about music you have to be well rounded I suppose there are a few that can only...play drums or
only play gtr. In some ways though those type of musicians are probably the happiest. They don' have to deal with all the aspects of
music and recording that can be frustrating at times, they can simply enjoy their instrument and put their trust in other musicians and the producers


If I could play like Bonham or say Jeff Beck there would be no need to do anything else. But 99.9% of musicians are not so
naturally skilled like them
Thanks Shaw. Anyone else like to share what you can do besides music?
Old 15th March 2012
  #209
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman View Post
And yet, despite the world economy :
- expensive game consoles have been selling like crazy ( like the 800$ ps 3 when it came out)
- an 80$ playstation game that came out two or three years ago ( can't remember the name) sold and made more money than the biggest grossing movie of that time.
- the iPad is the fastest and biggest selling electronic device ever.
- expensive smartphones selling like hotcakes, along with their expensive operator bills. Over here i even see 14 year old kids with iphone 4's
- some companies like Facebook and Apple are reaching stratospheric valuations.
- etc..

I find it odd that all this is happening in a time of crisis. Why would only ( the easily piratable ) music go down , while the more expensive stuff like entertainment hardware or the less easily piratable console games see their sales reach historical heights ?
not sure where you live but the economy where I am is in poor shape. Unemployment has gotten better but still at 7-8% the real estate market is decimated in the north east. Good paying jobs are still kinda scarce. they are out there but still people fighting for them.

do you have data to back up your statements, anyway you would need to compare how many games and ipads would sell if the economy was normal.
Old 15th March 2012
  #210
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
I love how you debunk your own silly claim in the very next sentence. Most great art is cheap and accessible (easy in the sense that it requires minimal equipment, capital, or technical resources). Drawing, painting, literature, etc. Yeah, who gives a crap if you can do those things.
You completely missed the point. Yes, it's very cheap to pick up a piece of paper and draw on it, but that doesn't mean anything if you don't put in the time to become very good at it, and if you don't have the means to get what you have drawn into the public consciousness. So, if someone comes up with some cheap and easy scheme that you were discussing, it won't make any difference. It'll be just as cheap and easily available to a bazillion other people, and the art world has already proven that this doesn't create millions of Picassos or make the lives of artists any better.

Look, the deal is, either you are very good at what you do, in which case it probably doesn't matter if it's cheap and easy to do, because you will be able to get the funding you need, or you are not, in which case it doesn't matter if it's cheap and easy since no one is going to give a crap what you create using this scheme.

That's the point I was trying to make. It's just like now really. It's already cheap and easy to record music. But that really hasn't change the fact that if you aren't really good at it that you probably have zero chance of ever doing anything but muddying the waters for those who are. And if you are really good at it, then most likely you both don't need it to be cheap and easy since you can get the funding, but you don't want it to be cheap and easy since that just means that a million wannabees are going to be out givin away their music and creating massive over-staturating and musical ennui and contibuting the belief that music is of no value because it's trivial to make.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump