Harmony Central Forums
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vinyl record sales hit $416 million, the highest since 1988.

Collapse



X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vinyl record sales hit $416 million, the highest since 1988.

    Yep, another article on the resurgence of vinyl in the music industry. There was a couple of interesting items in this article I had not seen mentioned before. That includes:
    • 72% of the folks buying vinyl are younger than 36
    • Almost half of those buying records don't listen to them
    • Urban Outfitters is one of vinyls biggest sellers
    • Urban Outfitters is also one of the biggest accounts for Crosley Radio, arguably the leading maker of entry-level turntables
    • Crosley sold 1 million turntables last year
    The rest of the article can be found at https://www.cnet.com/news/vinyl-reco...o-millennials/

    The Mandolin Picker

    "Bless your hearts... and all your vital organs" - John Duffy

    "Got time to breath, got time for music!"- Briscoe Darling, Jr.

  • #2
    My ex was lamenting last week about missing looking at albums. I suggested they were pretty cheap used. She told be she didn't have a turntable. Hadn't occurred to her that you can just look at them while playing the CD/MP3 version - and that scratched up copies are close to free .

    Comment


    • #3
      Have you been to a large urban record store lately? They don't look the same as they did a few years ago. Instead of thousands of different CD titles and perhaps a small section of used vinyl, now half of the floor space is devoted to new vinyl releases. I don't have a problem with anyone selling or buying old records, it's the new records and reissues on vinyl that piss me off. What annoys me is that the vinyl fad is based on elitism and misinformation. Misinformation that has convinced far too many people to pay twice as much for a vinyl record than for the CD. That higher price for vinyl provides higher profit margins for sellers and incentivizes giving more space to vinyl in the stores.
      This trend is not harmless. The popularity of vinyl is harmful to the cause of getting more good music to the masses, because it reduces opportunities for musicians to get their records into stores. The few remaining record stores now have half (or fewer) of the number of titles in their stores because new vinyl releases takes up so much space. This results in less variety and choice for consumers. I used to be able to find most of the titles I was seeking during a trip to a record store, now the odds of finding the title I want is slim. As a result, I have to buy online, taking the money out of our local economy and helping strengthen the bigger internet retailers. I am also concerned that in the long run the vinyl record fad will kill off what is left of the brick and mortar record business... continued at http://www.oranjproductions.com/vinyl.htm
      "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."- George Orwell

      My music: http://www.oranjproductions.com

      The first website dedicated to the the baritone guitar: http://www.thebaritoneguitar.com

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm sceptical that there's anything dire in the vinyl comeback. It's a niche market still, grow as it will, there's no way it will make a dent in the overall market. Speaking of the overall market, where music is priced one hemi-demi-millimeter over zero.

        The long article cited gets really exercised over people's misguided motivations making new vinyl purchases. Jeez Louise, let people indulge themselves a bit. Car lovers buy showy cars - book lovers buy the occasional first edition or leatherbound copy - cat lovers buy $200 cat beds - art and photography lovers buy big expensive coffee-table books - cooking enthusiasts buy overpriced super-knife sets and $300 fry pans. And musicians - what other group makes more of a fetish over vintage or over-the-top amperage or fancy inlays or signed-by-GuitarGod, or Real Analog, etc etc.

        My son buys a bit of vinyl - and I totally get it. It makes an event out of listening, and a conversation piece out of the covers, which get handed around (no dirty fingers, please!) for admiration. And the artist hopefully gets a bit of a premium - has to be more than a few streams on Spotify.

        There's a touch of reverence for music in the vinyl resurge - I'll applaud that anytime, and let the people who think vinyl is some sort of status symbol have their reward as long as the artist gets hers/his.

        nat whilk ii






        Comment


        • #5
          Well I've got 300+ vinyl albums, dating from 1959...Am I sitting on a Gold Mine?..

          Sorry........Not for Sale.

          I like looking at the covers.

          Last edited by AlamoJoe; 11-28-2016, 11:42 PM.
          http://thebasement.createaforum.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mandolin Picker View Post
            Yep, another article on the resurgence of vinyl in the music industry. There was a couple of interesting items in this article I had not seen mentioned before. That includes:
            • 72% of the folks buying vinyl are younger than 36
            • Almost half of those buying records don't listen to them
            • Urban Outfitters is one of vinyls biggest sellers
            • Urban Outfitters is also one of the biggest accounts for Crosley Radio, arguably the leading maker of entry-level turntables
            • Crosley sold 1 million turntables last year
            The rest of the article can be found at https://www.cnet.com/news/vinyl-reco...o-millennials/


            Thing is, sales are different than units. The reason why sales are impressive is because the regular retail price of a vinyl LP today is 3x the price of the regular retail price of an LP in 1988!

            I buy vinyl, but only at used record stores or thrift stores/garage sales/flea markets. Period albums from the 60s-70s-80s for the nostalgia experience. I will not pay $22 for a brand new LP, sorry.
            Last edited by elsongs; 11-29-2016, 01:34 AM.
            Elson TrinidadSinger, Songwriter, Keyboardist, BassistElson and the Soul BarkadaWeb: www.elsongs.comMySpace: www.myspace.com/elsongsFacebook: Facebook PageTwitter: twitter.com/elsongs

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by elsongs View Post

              I buy vinyl, but only at used record stores or thrift stores/garage sales/flea markets. Period albums from the 60s-70s-80s for the nostalgia experience. I will not pay $22 for a brand new LP, sorry.
              You should be apologizing to the artists on those used records you buy. They aren't getting a share of your money as a royalty payment like they would have if you had bought the records new. You could argue:

              - They already got their money out of that record. My fifty cents wouldn't buy them a cup of coffee
              or
              - Artists today get practically no royalties because everything is streamed (but some actually do)

              I there may be some legal wrinkle that allows the original buyer to do whatever he wants with the tangible product - sell it to a used record store, sell it on eBay, or give it to a friend. But that doesn't mean you have inherited the right to listen to it.

              --
              "Today's production equipment is IT-based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson, Resolution Magazine, October 2006
              Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MikeRivers View Post

                I there may be some legal wrinkle that allows the original buyer to do whatever he wants with the tangible product - sell it to a used record store, sell it on eBay, or give it to a friend. But that doesn't mean you have inherited the right to listen to it.
                Actually, you do. In the US it is a legal principle known as the "First Sale Doctrine"

                From Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

                Copyright law grants a copyright owner an exclusive right "to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending." This is called "distribution right" and differs from the copyright owner's "reproduction right" which involves making copies of the copyrighted works. Rather than the right to copy, the distribution right involves the right to transfer physical copies or phonorecords (i.e., recorded music) of the copyrighted work. For example, the distribution right could be infringed when a retailer acquires and sells to public unlawfully made audio or video tapes. Although the retailer may not have copied the work in any way and may not have known that the tapes were made unlawfully, he nevertheless infringes the distribution right by the sale. The distribution right allows the copyright owner to seek redress from any member in the chain of distribution.

                The first-sale doctrine creates a basic exception to the copyright holder's distribution right. Once the work is lawfully sold or even transferred gratuitously, the copyright owner's interest in the material object in which the copyrighted work is embodied is exhausted. The owner of the material object can then dispose of it as he sees fit. Thus, one who buys a copy of a book is entitled to resell it, rent it, give it away, or destroy it. However, the owner of the copy of the book will not be able to make new copies of the book because the first-sale doctrine does not limit copyright owner's reproduction right. The rationale of the doctrine is to prevent the copyright owner from restraining the free alienability of goods. Without the doctrine, a possessor of a copy of a copyrighted work would have to negotiate with the copyright owner every time he wished to dispose of his copy. After the initial transfer of ownership of a legal copy of a copyrighted work, the first-sale doctrine exhausts copyright holder's right to control how ownership of that copy can be disposed of. For this reason, this doctrine is also referred to as the "exhaustion rule."

                The doctrine was first recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1908 (see Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus) and subsequently codified in the Copyright Act of 1976. In the Bobbs-Merrill case, the publisher, Bobbs-Merrill, had inserted a notice in its books that any retail sale at a price under $1.00 would constitute an infringement of its copyright. The defendants, who owned Macy's department store, disregarded the notice and sold the books at a lower price without Bobbs-Merrill's consent. The Supreme Court held that the exclusive statutory right to "vend" applied only to the first sale of the copyrighted work.

                Section 109(a) provides: "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 (3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord." The elements of the first sale doctrine can be summarized as follows: (1) the copy was lawfully made with the authorization of the copyright owner; (2) ownership of the copy was initially transferred under the copyright owner's authority; (3) the defendant is a lawful owner of the copy in question; and (4) the defendant's use implicates the distribution right only; not the reproduction or some other right given to the copyright owner.


                Last edited by Mandolin Picker; 11-29-2016, 10:45 AM.
                The Mandolin Picker

                "Bless your hearts... and all your vital organs" - John Duffy

                "Got time to breath, got time for music!"- Briscoe Darling, Jr.

                Comment


                • #9
                  OK, so you can sell your old records without violating copyright. But you're listening to the work of an artist that you care enough about to buy his record second-hand (maybe because you can't buy it first-hand any more), and he isn't getting any money from you. Like I say, your fifty cents is probably not going to help him keep up the payments on his boat, but it's the principle of the thing.

                  Part of me believes that an artist should be able to sell his work once for the amount that a publisher is willing to pay for it, and that would be the all the money he gets from it (other than performances of course). But those on the receiving end don't think that's fair because you never know how much a song is worth until people actually buy it.
                  --
                  "Today's production equipment is IT-based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson, Resolution Magazine, October 2006
                  Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MikeRivers View Post

                    You should be apologizing to the artists on those used records you buy. They aren't getting a share of your money as a royalty payment like they would have if you had bought the records new. You could argue:

                    - They already got their money out of that record. My fifty cents wouldn't buy them a cup of coffee
                    or
                    - Artists today get practically no royalties because everything is streamed (but some actually do)

                    I there may be some legal wrinkle that allows the original buyer to do whatever he wants with the tangible product - sell it to a used record store, sell it on eBay, or give it to a friend. But that doesn't mean you have inherited the right to listen to it.

                    Okay, how about this - I give you a list of vinyl LPs, and you buy them for me? That way all parties will be happy. Deal? :P
                    Elson TrinidadSinger, Songwriter, Keyboardist, BassistElson and the Soul BarkadaWeb: www.elsongs.comMySpace: www.myspace.com/elsongsFacebook: Facebook PageTwitter: twitter.com/elsongs

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by elsongs View Post


                      Okay, how about this - I give you a list of vinyl LPs, and you buy them for me? That way all parties will be happy. Deal? :P
                      How about for every used LP you buy, you locate the artist and send him a dollar and a thank you note? At least he can buy a coffee at McDonald's for that.
                      Last edited by MikeRivers; 11-29-2016, 02:24 PM.
                      --
                      "Today's production equipment is IT-based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson, Resolution Magazine, October 2006
                      Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I have at least 1500 LP's that I bought as a kid in the 70's. Most are in really nice shape too.

                        70's vinyl is not really that good in weight. So none of it's that nice 180 gram stuff.

                        I was a a club show and this band had CD's, vinyl and cassette tapes for sale. Yep you read that right, cassette tapes.
                        _____________________________________
                        Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.

                        Join Date: Aug 2001
                        Location: N. Adams, MA USA
                        Posts as of Jan 10th 2013: 82,617

                        Comment


                        • #13

                          Along with the vinyl resurgence, is the resurgence of multi-channel surround sound.

                          Quadrophonic sound was all the rage for 4 or 5 years in the 1970s. Now multi-channel sound is back with SACD, DVD-A, and Blu-Ray Audio media instead of SQ, QS, and CD-4 vinyl.

                          Today's multi-channel can be remastered quad mixes from the 1970s (4.0), newly remixed classic albums in 5.1 surround sound, or new releases with a 5.1 surround sound mix available.


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            News to me...are you really seeing that much surround? If so, is it at a friend's house, at a retailer, online, or...?

                            As to vinyl, I hate to go against the grain but I feel the same way about vinyl as I do about tape - good riddance. It's environmentally unsound, heavy, deteriorates over time, requires massive amounts of EQ, and the surface noise/crackles/pops drive me nuts.

                            But do I miss the artwork? Absolutely. Maybe this is a merch opportunity waiting to happen: Bands selling album covers at concerts, with a link to their web site
                            N E W S O N G ! To Say 'No' Would Be a Crime (Remix) is now streamable from my YouTube channel.

                            Subscribe, like, and share the links!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Anderton View Post
                              But do I miss the artwork? Absolutely. Maybe this is a merch opportunity waiting to happen: Bands selling album covers at concerts, with a link to their web site
                              That's actually a brilliant idea. Square-foot download cards.

                              Comment













                              Working...
                              X