The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Music should be free. If you don't want it 'stolen' then don't record it.
Old 20th June 2010
  #211
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Now we are told to adapt to a marketing and merchandising model, so that a minority of customers can take our product without payment?
I'm just saying, the world exists AS IS. The internet exists, and by nature of music being digital, means that moving data around is dead simple.

We all have to adapt to the REAL WORLD. The world changes, we adapt. That's NOT the same thing as saying don't FIGHT IT (because everyone will automatically go there). Do fight it! But just understand that things will never be the same, even IF we find a good way to prevent widespread piracy.

So yea... musicians will need to change again. And it DOES suck, and it sucks even more because musicians need to change as a result of immoral, illegal activity.

But... it is... what it is...
Old 20th June 2010
  #212
I've done so repeatedly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
the TRUTH is there are people right here in this very thread with an attitude of ENTITLEMENT, that the world OWES them a working wage just because they create music.
Not even remotely true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
It's about moral indignation, moral superiority, that people who create are expressing.
While we pretend we have the moral high ground, we don't... and as a matter of fact, we might be closer to the moral LOW ground where it really counts, environmental, economic world issues that impact people's lives every day.
What has illegal downloading got to do with environmental issues?
If anything, the average musician is green minded and the illegal taker is... well.... a taker, a consumer without limit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
I believe we'll look back in history to see a short blip where a small number of musicians got rich from their craft.
We'll look back on it as a period of time when borderline less popular artists made a decent living out of music. The middle age and high point of this financial model was the late 60's - when was there ever a more adventurous, anarchic and yet financially viable oeuvre of work created?

Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
I want to tear down the machine that has commoditized music and turned it into mass produced cookie cutter craft. I want to see a new paradigm emerge.
Like I said, you are by default supporting the financial damage done to average working musicians to support the idea that the mass produced music machine might be torn down. Current evidence suggests crass commercial music is surviving just fine. Day to day working musicians are dropping out of the industry by the thousand.
Old 20th June 2010
  #213
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Like I said, you are by default supporting the financial damage done to average working musicians to support the idea that the mass produced music machine might be torn down. Current evidence suggests crass commercial music is surviving just fine. Day to day working musicians are dropping out of the industry by the thousand.
First, your orignal assertion was I accused those who don't agree with me as having an attitude of entitlement.

Read the quote again, it was not an attack on those who disagree with me, it was an attack on... people who have an attitude of entitlement. I didn't say EVERYONE who disagreed with me had it. You have failed to prove your point. So please, just stop saying it. I've corrected you twice, it's not what I said and it's not what I meant.

Regarding the paragraph above, there is nothing new there. I already made a case for why, though it is sad, sometimes things need to change, and difficult, negative situations can bring about positive results. That doesn't mean I support the people who are creating the bad situation. It doesn't mean I want people who will experience the hardship to suffer. I do NOT.

One more example. I WANTED the banking industry to change. I knew it would mean real people, most who are innocent, would suffer, but it's still the right thing to do.

I also believe we need to simplify our tax laws. I realize that will decimate an entire industry, but I believe it's better for us.
Old 20th June 2010
  #214
Lives for gear
 
rhizomeman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Day to day working musicians are dropping out of the industry by the thousand.
If true, so what - when markets force a shift in business models, things will change - this is one of them.
Old 20th June 2010
  #215
Quote:
Originally Posted by logichead View Post
"The only way to stop downloading is for ISPs to control every bit of data that crosses the wires and i don't think anyone wants that."

No one wants this, but sooner or later it is inevitable that every keystroke will become visible. We're almost there. I give it 5-10 years before there is no anonymity on the web.

If you own a warehouse that is unlocked, folks will break in when you aren't there. If you lock it, they'll break the lock. If you hire guards, put up fences, alarms and video surveillance and buy insurance, you'll likely hang on to your inventory. That's how piracy will be stopped. The US government already has the right to seize your isp if they don't cooperate and hand over information about you and your downloading habits. One of Bush's last signings was for the creation of a "copyright czar" that could use these powers. AFAIK, this hasn't been enacted yet, but the legal framework is in place.

Will Obama's copyright czar help save the music? | Reuters

Until there is the certainty of getting caught and punished, piracy will not stop. Already there are serious levels of surveillance on the web and our phones by the UK and US governments. One story I saw briefly a year ago was that the UK had put in a £3 billion system that listened to every call and examined every email that began or ended in their country. Then there is the example of China (though they do not respect copyright) which controls web access to a high degree, enabled by western technology corporations.

There is much money at stake for copyright owners of movies, games and software, not to mention music. Our privacy will be under attack for the next few decades. It has already started as national security, it's only a matter of time before there is no privacy at all unless you live in the woods and never touch any technology.

Obviously, the possibility for abuse is high.

Thoughts?? Best...H

Best...H
I think anyone who actually thinks there's anonymity now is kidding themselves... I think you are pretty much spot on... in reality we won't be loosing anything to gain back protection of copyright - we're just waiting for the political/legislative hammer to strike... and it gets closer by the day.

whack a mole for now... but not forever...

the first decade of the 21st century was marked by the lawless "wildwest" internet, the second decade will be marked by the "sheriff" coming to town and if need be the army... and all the drama that goes along with it.
Old 20th June 2010
  #216
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicAndFilmGeek View Post
we won't be loosing anything to gain back protection of copyright - we're just waiting for the political/legislative hammer to strike...
That's an interesting perspective. I don't know what the right answer is, but there are a great deal of civil liberty proponents who would disagree with you about what we are losing.
Old 20th June 2010
  #217
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
That's an interesting perspective. I don't know what the right answer is, but there are a great deal of civil liberty proponents who would disagree with you about what we are losing.
way too late for that... freedom and protection are always a trade off... since 9/11 national security pretty much trumps everything...

like I said, anyone who actually thinks there's anonymity now is kidding themselves... the only people who have anonymity are either way off the grid or have been using counter measures for twenty years - which would include no commerical internet, no web browsers, no search engines, no email, no cell phones, etc, etc...

anyone living a "normal" consumer lifestyle is not anonymous... you know every keystroke you have ever used on google is logged on one of their servers, right?

At this point it's probably safe to say that Google knows more about you than your mother (and the nasty bits too)!
Old 20th June 2010
  #218
As has been pointed out a bazzillion times, the whole money is what destroyed the music industry argument is just BS, period. The 70s was an incredibly hedonistic period, where the big bands were rolling in money in a way that would be unheard of today, or even in the 90s at the peak of actual sales, and they were out front about it and flaunted it. But look at the huge breadth of music that was going on. Record companies had the revenues from the big sellers to take a chance on the less obvious stuff, and give it a chance to find its audience.

It's the destruction of the revenue stream by file sharing that has created the opposite situation. And anyone who believes that by being poor and never having the opportunity to actually be a professional recording artist and get the experience in the studio to create high quality music that somehow this is going to create some sort of Nirvana, or more laughably, somehow empowering musicians, are just off the reality reservation.
Old 20th June 2010
  #219
Lives for gear
 
NoVi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhizomeman View Post
If true, so what - when markets force a shift in business models, things will change - this is one of them.
Agreed. The music industry is heading to a new business model. You can enforce the law to stick to the old model and maybe it will work for some time (which I really doubt). The change in the model is that:
a. technology to create 'professional' sounding musical products has become cheap and general available
b. technology to distribute those musical products has made revolutionairy progress over the last 15 years
c. more people than any point in history are using those technologies and channels, leading to quantity growth of output.

Therefor the shift in the music industry is that for most us around these boards there is more money to be made in the input stage of the music industry (think about the sales of software, hardware) and the middle (production) stage but less to no money to be made in the final product output stage. The big companies will solve (and overcome) this problem by promoting their artist through multi-platform marketing and make deals with other industries like clothing, telco, food, beverage, fragrance.

Will these developments withold people from making or outputting music? Clearly at this point in time there never has been so much recorded music available to so many people, legal or illegal. And the piracy problem does not stop anyone from producing music (otherwise a board like Gearslutz would become quite obsolete). It is a myth that for many people who were used to make money in the music industry this won't be possible in the nearby future. But they will need a strategy to adapt to the new model (yup, it's Darwin all over again). Generally spoken they will need to go after the money to be made in the input and middle stage of music production. One example: a session musician who was used to go sessions in a studio, now offers an online service to record tracks that others will incorporate in their music productions.

So I think all in all the future of the music industry looks very promising and full of possibilities, but these possibilities are completely different than those of the previous 50 years.
Old 20th June 2010
  #220
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
First, your orignal assertion was I accused those who don't agree with me as having an attitude of entitlement.

Read the quote again, it was not an attack on those who disagree with me, it was an attack on... people who have an attitude of entitlement.
Which is no one writing in this thread as far as I can see.
Old 20th June 2010
  #221
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhizomeman View Post
If true, so what - when markets force a shift in business models, things will change - this is one of them.
Well firstly, I happen to care about the lot of ordinary musicians.
I don't think that's a failing on my part.
Secondly, it isn't 'market forces' it's widespread unlawful behaviour. No 'market' need apply. A market is where people buy and sell things.
There are laws in place that can address the problem, but musicians aren't a strong unified power (especially worldwide), they generally hate confrontation, and they are more interested in creativity than arguing for laws to be enforced.
Old 20th June 2010
  #222
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoVi View Post

Therefor the shift in the music industry is that for most us around these boards there is more money to be made in the input stage of the music industry (think about the sales of software, hardware)
I'm doing that.
Unfortunately, software piracy is even more rife. I think in many cases more software instances are stolen than legitimately paid for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoVi View Post
It is a myth that for many people who were used to make money in the music industry this won't be possible in the nearby future. But they will need a strategy to adapt to the new model (yup, it's Darwin all over again). Generally spoken they will need to go after the money to be made in the input and middle stage of music production. One example: a session musician who was used to go sessions in a studio, now offers an online service to record tracks that others will incorporate in their music productions.
But what if there is no money in selling recordings? Who pays the online session musicians?
The scenario you describe is nothing new. Studio musicians migrated online years ago. If you talk to them, or read their discussions on this forum, they can find themselves charge fees as low as $100 per song.
Actually, if you factor in recording equipment purchase to set up the home studio.
ISP fees, especially with regard to handling large data files.
Purchase and maintenance of the actual musical gear.
The money you can make online can be peanuts - unless you are very lucky.
Old 20th June 2010
  #223
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
I think the point about consumers buying the physical medium of a Vinyl Record and perceiving this medium to fully represent the Value is accurate. so it would follow that, once the content becomes totally invisible as electrical information and the container is also no longer visible then all value is perceived, to be none existent.

but, it isn't true that the cost of the record medium was only ever in the distribution. the cost represented the (whole) Medium. The whole Medium includes everything.. including the Royalties etc.

nkf's post of the "YouTube - Harlan Ellison -- Pay the Writer" was really good. <--- The Warners packaging company expecting to get a freebie for the Babylon 5 DVD. Funny if it wasn't tragic.

Between Viacom & Google & youtube we will all become burnt offerings.
It is beyond me why anyone would trust any of these outfits.

experience is king:
In their model, there is little space at all for artists to prosper. and that's not because people won't effectively be producing Art, it's because the content is only viewed as part of the vehicle for their new advertising model. That model is to connect brand loyalty beyond reason and directly to experience. The products which are physical and can be physically consumed are (so the marketeers have determined) the only thing which can carry an effective medium of exchange.

as (ant) pointed out, about the physical vinyl record itself, being the (only) thing which value was assigned to. sound on it's own is (invisible). people can not assign value to something they can only experience and can't even see.

When people dance around intoxicated to music, it is the physical drink which contains the extractable value. The Music is not what they consider they are paying for. it is the event and the experience.

type in Vodka Kick into Google and just look at the readout.. there you will see the highest level of marketing Hits which Google can offer. imagine how much money was pumped into Google for that.

you can connect to the globalbrands.co.uk site and look at their press room.
they even have their own TV channel. vktv.co.uk

if you then go to youtube and also type in Vodka Kick you will also see page after page after page.

This is what a top level Viral campaign looks like.

in light of all this, I have to disagree that Musicians and Artists should be accused of an overweening claim to entitlement.
I would rather point the finger at those at the highest levels who presume they should just forget about Music because it can't be factored in any longer as a viable, worthwhile or important Art-form. The reality really is that, the Marketeers believe they just can't make it pay any longer. It looks to them, more as those empty Cherry Vodka bottles which pepper the streets after a good night out. some even think it should sound that way too.

though, psalad imo is not using the (entitlement) in the way you think. I think psalad is basically saying, you had better do something about it but make sure you don't use the argument that you are entitled to anything just because you are an Artist. even if you (are) legally entitled, the point is the argument does not work with the public.. if you got those rights enforced the public will think you are a whiner.

The more I think about this, the more I am coming to the conclusion that the current state of affairs for Musicians and Artists is approaching one of a total existential threat.. I can totally understand the feeling.. but you have to get your arguments, in exactly the right form, and then stick to them. like GLUE!!

If Viacom win that case, will it make any difference to the new ways Marketeers are now operating.. I doubt it.
It will just allow them to get in on the action, and produce the music for the soundtrack for a generation in a society of total surveillance. The total surveillance gets you the best marketing statistics, basically. They will probably even produce a TV show about it.. oh they did already.. Big Brother.
It's sort of like Brave New World with cameras everywhere.

Warhol coined the widely used expression "15 minutes of fame."
I think this has already passed. I think in the Future the new phrase will be "15 minutes of privacy."

I think one of the better things an Artist can do is to start writing songs which militate towards your values and embed these as a message. This is one of the powers of the Art which is giving its power over to the banal messages of the very marketing paradigm which is set to reduce the Art-form to dust.

anyhow.. .. here's a picture to punctuate up the text.



Old 20th June 2010
  #224
On a purely personal level this is how I see it...

Buying good music now is like putting a down payment on more good music in the future.

It was actually a Tweet I read early today... sums it up for me though.

Hugo
Old 20th June 2010
  #225
Great. thumbsup
Old 20th June 2010
  #226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
psalad imo is not using the (entitlement) in the way you think. I think psalad is basically saying, you had better do something about it but make sure you don't use the argument that you are entitled to anything just because you are an Artist. even if you (are) legally entitled, the point is the argument does not work with the public..
Again, it's simple.
The term 'entitlement' has become derogative in recent years. It was used in such a way in this thread. It was also used incorrectly, and has been many times in this debate on several threads.
If I decide to become a drummer, I'm not entitled to make money by default. If you hire me to play drums and I make clear upfront I charge a fee, I'm entitled to be paid.
Musicians should be no different from anyone else in society, whatever the public think about it.
And I'll say again it's fine, I'm a dinosaur, I'm living in the past, don't buy my music...... err, but don't steal it either!!
The whole argument about the brave new world of free music would have much more credence with me if brave new creators were working hard at creating free music - just like film makers on Vimeo and bloggers on news sites.
But they aren't, they're simply taking other people's work.
Make me and my kind redundant by doing it yourself and this debate will be over. Keep stealing the product of the 'old' model and you'll keep pi$$ing me and my kind off.
Old 20th June 2010
  #227
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Again, it's simple.
The term 'entitlement' has become derogative in recent years. It was used in such a way in this thread. It was also used incorrectly, and has been many times in this debate on several threads.
If I decide to become a drummer, I'm not entitled to make money by default. If you hire me to play drums and I make clear upfront I charge a fee, I'm entitled to be paid.
Musicians should be no different from anyone else in society, whatever the public think about it.
And I'll say again it's fine, I'm a dinosaur, I'm living in the past, don't buy my music...... err, but don't steal it either!!
The whole argument about the brave new world of free music would have much more credence with me if brave new creators were working hard at creating free music - just like film makers on Vimeo and bloggers on news sites.
But they aren't, they're simply taking other people's work.
Make me and my kind redundant by doing it yourself and this debate will be over. Keep stealing the product of the 'old' model and you'll keep pi$$ing me and my kind off.
sure. I understand this.
you are technically, legally entitled, but I think the people at the very top are not too interested in our entitlements.. they are interested in theirs.

Marketing has always driven commodity sales. well at least since the time of the first PR company was established at least. Edward Bernays set it up. it was actually based on Freudian Psychology. you can wiki that.

when any new medium is revolutionized, the sticky stuff hits the fan.. if you know where the fan is, you can look at what might happen.

in a very real sense, and in mvho, anyone who thinks Art will be saved by berating Artists for wanting to remain Artists and survive as such, while at the same time thinking that advocating the taking away of an Artists central survival mechanism as a good idea.. has in my view, not only really not thought that much about it, they are also playing into the hands of the very specter, they think they are revolting against.
Old 20th June 2010
  #228
I agree (I think )
Old 20th June 2010
  #229
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I agree (I think )
I mean.. you get people sometimes who think they are cool and are revolting against (the Man) by attacking Artists who want to find a way to just get what they have worked for.

so they think that it will be great if everything is Free because they think it going to be like the 60s again, or some other idea. which is similar.

but they aren't reading what is really happening. The marketeers who (drive the game) are quite happy to let them do the dirty work..

so everyone attacks one another, while it's business plan as usual.

we, will both lose that way.
Old 20th June 2010
  #230
Yes, I agree.
The hitech companies and web businesses are doing very well out of filesharing. Simon Cowell has never been richer. The major labels are actually doing ok, concentrating on very commercial artists while ridding themselves of anything not easily sellable.
It seems to me we are achieving less professional diversity and less innovative music going forward into this new (piracy lives - get over it) model.
Old 20th June 2010
  #231
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
I remember when people were worried that adverts might start appearing on the Internet from large companies and corporations... look at it now... they are just about to stitch up the final part. and this free culture idea is what they are all deciding on, one way or another..

Disney won't be free.. Warners won't be Free... and Google certainly is (not) Free.. it is all at the cost of something... and Artists are starting to see what the costs are going to be.
Old 20th June 2010
  #232
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
we just need some hard core Libertarians to wade in now.. and the circle should complete.
Old 20th June 2010
  #233
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DISCERN View Post
Can I have a hug?
LOL
sure..

it will be all ok though. because when we all wake up Walt Disney will be there and tell us it was all just a bad meme.

Old 20th June 2010
  #234
@ muser - great post man.

it's not about trusting viacom or google/youtube - I don't - it's about moving the ball towards a larger working framework that balances consumer and copyright interest back into a symbiotic relationship and away from the parasitic one it has become.

one thing that get's lost in of these conversations, is in a general way, the legislation that is going to restore big media, is going to restore viability indie artists as well.

piracy is collateral damage, it effects everyone, in all points of the food chain and maybe even the indie artists more.

for everyone taking shots at the RIAA... especially people on this board, it should be noted that when the tide turns the other way it will be because of the millions of dollars invested in legal fee's by the RIAA that the guy in his bedroom won't have his music ripped off for free either.

big media has more to loose so that are investing more in the battle (and the little guy just can't). but when we come out the other side, the little guy will benefit as much if not more from the outcome.

just getting back to a baseline of anything digital can not be stolen by anyone at anytime as easy as using a search engine will be welcomed change for all.

as for "draconian" measures... as I posted earlier - anyone who thinks you have (or have had) any real degree of privacy or anonymity is kidding themselves. that ship has sailed...

any degree of privacy online is an illusion at this point.
Old 20th June 2010
  #235
Lives for gear
 
rhizomeman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoVi View Post
Therefor the shift in the music industry is that for most us around these boards there is more money to be made in the input stage of the music industry (think about the sales of software, hardware) and the middle (production) stage but less to no money to be made in the final product output stage.
So I think all in all the future of the music industry looks very promising and full of possibilities, but these possibilities are completely different than those of the previous 50 years.
Precisely.
Old 20th June 2010
  #236
Lives for gear
 
rhizomeman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Well firstly, I happen to care about the lot of ordinary musicians.
I don't think that's a failing on my part.
Secondly, it isn't 'market forces' it's widespread unlawful behaviour. No 'market' need apply. A market is where people buy and sell things.
There are laws in place that can address the problem, but musicians aren't a strong unified power (especially worldwide), they generally hate confrontation, and they are more interested in creativity than arguing for laws to be enforced.
Your ignorance is boring me...
I care about 'ordinary' musicians also, I am one. Markets exist 'as they are' - whether you like what they do is not the issue.

You need to get out more - have you ever traveled to foreign countries?? 'Laws' often do not have much to do with the way markets work.
Old 20th June 2010
  #237
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicAndFilmGeek View Post
way too late for that... freedom and protection are always a trade off... since 9/11 national security pretty much trumps everything...
You really think piracy rises to the level of national security?

You start making that argument with the public and see what happens.
Old 20th June 2010
  #238
Quote:
Originally Posted by psalad View Post
You really think piracy rises to the level of national security?

You start making that argument with the public and see what happens.
I don't have too... the same issues that effect hollywood effect the pentagon... think about it...

what I'm seeing is that there will be a commercial internet, regulated and locked down.

then, there will be the darknets - once someone crosses the line into the darknets it doesn't matter if they're trading mp3's or national security info... they walked off the grid... people who want to take that risk will have to live with the consequences...
Old 20th June 2010
  #239
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Well firstly, I happen to care about the lot of ordinary musicians.
I don't think that's a failing on my part.
Yes, I think you are the only one in this thread. /sarcasm
Old 20th June 2010
  #240
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicAndFilmGeek View Post
what I'm seeing is that there will be a commercial internet, regulated and locked down.
I'm not interested in what you "see" since that is just a bunch of wishful thinking. I'm VERY interested in the plan you think will get you there, because that is something tangible and not pie in the sky.

You keep saying over and over how the end of this is right around the corner, but I think anyone sensible doesn't believe it is at ALL cut and dry like that.

So cheerleading on either side is tiresome and boring.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump