The value of music?

[Kramerguy]

So in other threads in the past, we've discussed recorded music having little to no value, as teens today would just as easily go online and illegally download music vs. actually buying it legit. Many artists today can't sell enough albums and have had to "change with the times" to accommodate the need to make money, be it merch, touring or whatever.

 

In these discussions, I had taken the role that yes, recorded music HAS lost it's value.

 

But then the other night I was at the bar, playing an acoustic gig as a special guest to the main performer.. and there was one of those electronic jukeboxes..

 

People were practically lined up to shove dollars into it. Even 2 minutes before our start time, people couldn't shove enough money into it fast enough.

 

I got to thinking..."people ARE willing to pay for it!!"

 

So I don't know exactly what to conclude or how to turn it into something useful, but just thought I would share my experience and ask your thoughts...

[Vito Corleone]

They are willing to pay for it. That really isn't the issue. The issue is one of availability, convenience, and supply/demand.

 

They put money in the jukebox because there was no other way to hear the song they wanted. But had a free jukebox been set up across the room, guess which one would have had the biggest line?

 

People gladly pay pretty good money to hear a song they like when there's no other option available. Problem is there is this FREE and EASY option available because of the internet and sadly, there just doesn't seem to be anything anyone can do about it.

[Kramerguy]

so the simple solution seems to be that if you take away the "free", people are willing to pay...

 

hmm

[Vito Corleone]

 

so the simple solution seems to be that if you take away the "free", people are willing to pay... hmm

 

 

Yeah. Problem is the "simple" solution ain't all that simple to achieve. There IS no way to take away the 'free' in this case.

 

So the only option is to find other sources of revenue that can't be stolen or given away for free.

[TrickyBoy]

 

so the simple solution seems to be that if you take away the "free", people are willing to pay... hmm

 

 

Kinda, BUT there's a huge rub. It's impossible to stop the free flow of music in a way that is both deemed legal (you know that pesky constitution and whatnot) AND manitains a reasonable public perception for the artist. Are you really going to start arresting 13 year olds that download your music illegally? C'mon that would be a PR nightmare. They tried that once and it blew up.

 

IDK what the answer is, but it obviously involves the industry needs to adapt to the fact that they don't have a monopoly on their own music (I'm not saying this is right, but it is reality).

[Kramerguy]

yeah lol, why I said "simple" cause the actual effort to achieve such a lofty goal is immeasurable.

[Lee Flier]

Well, it's not just illegal downloading. Attendance at live shows is way down too. Music in general just isn't valued as much as it was for most of the 20th century.

 

There are a lot of different things that contribute to this, but certain people are trying to blame it all on illegal downloading. I honestly think the deregulation of radio and the downfall of small local music venues has a lot more to do with it. There is also a glut of "product" on the market with anybody and their brother being able to make a recording and "release" it on CD or ReverbNation or wherever... and a lot of it sucks... and there are no real "filters" anymore, so people are understandably overwhelmed.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Well, it's not just illegal downloading. Attendance at live shows is way down too. Music in general just isn't valued as much as it was for most of the 20th century. There are a lot of different things that contribute to this, but certain people are trying to blame it all on illegal downloading. I honestly think the deregulation of radio and the downfall of small local music venues has a lot more to do with it. There is also a glut of "product" on the market with anybody and their brother being able to make a recording and "release" it on CD or ReverbNation or wherever... and a lot of it sucks... and there are no real "filters" anymore, so people are understandably overwhelmed.

 

 

+1. Especially on de-regulation of radio. Used to be you could drive across the country and hear all sorts of different music on different stations. Songs would often start out as regional hits and then spread across the country. Now everything is programmed by some yahoo at Clear Channel and every station in every city sounds exactly the same.

 

Also the advent of the CD and later MP3s has made the album virtually obsolete as an art form. The record industry hailed the invention of the CD as a savior because so many boomers rushed out to re-purchase their favorite old albums on the new 'better sounding' format, but I really believe that all those little 5" discs with tiny packaging ultimately made the art form itself smaller as well. The LP was something that had to be stored on a shelf, taken out and handled with a degree of care, and required attention to listen to--you couldn't play them just anywhere. Even pre-recorded cassette version were always viewed as 2nd class versions of the album.

 

Once the album became solely limited to a format that could be lost underneath the car seat or used as a coaster, it kind of cheapened the whole experience.

[Kramerguy]

Agree about the radio dilemma

 

Disagree about the CD. LP's got used as coasters too. That was one helluva big gulp back then

[Vito Corleone]

 

Agree about the radio dilemma Disagree about the CD. LP's got used as coasters too. That was one helluva big gulp back then

 

 

Well, maybe it's just old-guy nostalgia on my part, but I think the album as an 'event' and even an art form started going downhill once CDs took over which, from a packaging standpoint, were little more than glorified cassettes.

 

Once the packaging took such a huge backseat, the album became about NOTHING more than the recorded music contained within which, now that it was digitized, was just one step removed by being transferred over the internet. Of course nobody could have forseen this when CDs were invented, but it happened nonetheless.

 

There was no way to illegally download that giant poster or iron-on transfer that came with the LP. To their credit, the record companies worked hard to make CD packaging 'cool', but it just never seemed to really click like they wanted it too.

 

I do have a Prince "Batcan" I'll let go for pretty cheap, though...

[TrickyBoy]

 

I do have a Prince "Batcan" I'll let go for pretty cheap, though...

 

 

I have that too!!!! But I ain't selling mine!

 

And in hindsight, you may have a point that the "inconvenience" of the LP made it more special. I can remember sitting around and listening to music as a child with my parents. Now its something that's everywhere - in the car, in the store, etc. etc.

 

However, I totally disagree with the "music is less popular" or "music is less important to people" today argument. I'll go so far as to say that I bet people listen to music more today than they ever have. That's the beauty of the convenience. And go to any casino, bar or live event and music is an integral part of it. Bands in tents before every pro football game, etc. etc.

 

However, with all those choices comes dilution. Its just like TV. People watch more TV than ever before, yet ratings are down. Why??? Because there's 4 trillion stations. The three networks that used to get 100% of the viewers now get 30% and the rest are scattered over the others. Same with music. Lee says there's no filter. THANK GOD I don't have some corporate douche deciding for me what I get to hear. Let me tool around MySpace accounts and find stuff that moves me. Yeah, I get to weed through a lot of {censored}, but the gems you find are worth it. I love that aspect of music today.

 

The other thing that makes going to live events (be it sports or music or whatever) less appealing is that they can now capture 80% of the live experience and stream it directly to your 65" TV in HD with amazing surround sound quality. All without the hassle of driving there, parking, paying way too much for a ticket, overpriced crappy food and beer, etc. etc. Hell, everyone's shocked when I say I've never been to an LSU game. I'd rather watch at a bar that has $5 pitchers or at my house with a few friends.

[Lee Flier]

 

However, I totally disagree with the "music is less popular" or "music is less important to people" today argument. I'll go so far as to say that I bet people listen to music more today than they ever have.

 

 

I agree, but it doesn't seem to mean as much to them. Most people don't intently listen to music anymore like they used to. An album release isn't a special event, and seeing a live band only slightly moreso (assuming you can get people to go out at all). Music is just something that's always "there" as background noise for doing other stuff.

 

Again, there are a lot of things contributing to that, but musicians aren't entirely blameless.

 

 

However, with all those choices comes dilution. Its just like TV. People watch more TV than ever before, yet ratings are down. Why??? Because there's 4 trillion stations. The three networks that used to get 100% of the viewers now get 30% and the rest are scattered over the others.

 

 

Yep.

 

 

Lee says there's no filter. THANK GOD I don't have some corporate douche deciding for me what I get to hear. Let me tool around MySpace accounts and find stuff that moves me. Yeah, I get to weed through a lot of {censored}, but the gems you find are worth it. I love that aspect of music today.

 

 

Me too, believe me. I thought it was great when it first happened, and I've found lots of music I love that way.

 

Trouble is, I'm lucky if I can ever see any of those bands live unless they're local, because they can't likely afford to tour. And there's not much room for an act to really reach their potential, because they're competing with so many other bands that doing it full time and making any kind of living as a touring independent act (or even small label act) is near impossible. And I maintain that if you can't play full time for at least a few years, you'll never be as good as if you did.

 

I don't think that's a good thing, and I don't know how to reconcile "I love not having a corporate douchebag telling everyone what to like" with "but no indie bands can make a sustainable living that way."

[TrickyBoy]

I agree, but it doesn't seem to mean as much to them. Most people don't intently listen to music anymore like they used to. An album release isn't a special event, and seeing a live band only slightly moreso (assuming you can get people to go out at all). Music is just something that's always "there" as background noise for doing other stuff.

 

I agree with that to a point. As for the album release thing, when the record company intentionally "leaks" the album two weeks before the release date, who's fault is it really??

 

I don't think that's a good thing, and I don't know how to reconcile "I love not having a corporate douchebag telling everyone what to like" with "but no indie bands can make a sustainable living that way."

 

 

Yeah, I don't know how you reconcile this one. The shame is that I'm sure there's just as much money as there always was in the music industry. It's just these days less and less of it flows to the artist. Not sure how you solve that one.

[rhat]

I dont agree that there isnt a filter ,,, You chart one up there on clear channel and you got a real money making hit. you slam on up the roots chart and you can have a hit but not much in the way of money. the filter basically if the big players are playing your stuff. Today anyone can cut a CD ,, not just anyone can have it smack in the middle of the heavy commercial FM play.

[Hegmatronicon]

 

Kinda, BUT there's a huge rub. It's impossible to stop the free flow of music in a way that is both deemed legal (you know that pesky constitution and whatnot) AND manitains a reasonable public perception for the artist. Are you really going to start arresting 13 year olds that download your music illegally? C'mon that would be a PR nightmare. They tried that once and it blew up. IDK what the answer is, but it obviously involves the industry needs to adapt to the fact that they don't have a monopoly on their own music (I'm not saying this is right, but it is reality).

 

 

You're looking at it backwards.....you dont arrest the person downloading it.....you arrest the people UPLOADING it in vast amounts.

DOnt cut the demand, cut the supply.

It's easier said than done of course.

[cooterbrown]

 

Well, it's not just illegal downloading. Attendance at live shows is way down too. Music in general just isn't valued as much as it was for most of the 20th century. There are a lot of different things that contribute to this, but certain people are trying to blame it all on illegal downloading. I honestly think the deregulation of radio and the downfall of small local music venues has a lot more to do with it. There is also a glut of "product" on the market with anybody and their brother being able to make a recording and "release" it on CD or ReverbNation or wherever... and a lot of it sucks... and there are no real "filters" anymore, so people are understandably overwhelmed.

 

 

I agree with Lee, and I also catch a lot of flak for my point of view, but I stand by it...

Digital technology destroyed the aura and "magic" of making music.

[Lee Flier]

 

Yeah, I don't know how you reconcile this one. The shame is that I'm sure there's just as much money as there always was in the music industry.

 

 

No, there isn't actually. The entire biz is legitimately hurting. Of course, they used to waste colossal amounts of money, and the artist rarely saw a penny of it (though at least they got other perks that they don't now). Those days are definitely gone.

[3shiftgtr]

Ya know, what if the medium is the message? What if the delivery system, not only defines the perception of the music, but also defines the value of the music?

 

In the day of the gatefold album, as guido said, listening was an experience that INCLUDED the album. You listened to the record, AND read the lyrics, AND checked out the wicked art on the front, inside, backside, and sleeve. All real damn BIG. And today, there is nothing to go along with the song.

 

But you put out catchy stuff and saturate the media with "attention shoppers", you'll have a chance. And it is because of the media. JUST the song won't do it anymore. So you have a delivery system, and a sales system. The sales system defines the perception of the quality and drives folks to the product. The product doesn't have to deliver as much, since it's

positioned so strongly before it is ever heard.

 

I can't think of anyone....is there evidence of anyone selling numbers with ONLY a musical release....no produced vids etc.....

 

And radio. At one time radio was considered kinda cool (60's and early 70's) and helped to define rock culture. Now it is soooooo not defining ANYTHING. But the ipod....well that is just the coolest thing. Remember when every kid just HAD to have one? Hell, every one has one now. They are the transistor radios of the new millennium. Hip, and you can watch Family Guy on it.....

 

 

Mashall McLuen (sp?) had it right. The perceived value of the music is directly related to it's most common delivery method in a society.

[stevesherbert]

you guys seem to be talking more about the value of packaging than the value of music.

[Kramerguy]

 

No, there isn't actually. The entire biz is legitimately hurting. Of course, they used to waste colossal amounts of money, and the artist rarely saw a penny of it (though at least they got other perks that they don't now). Those days are definitely gone.

 

 

I think a good portion of that hurt is caused by overinflated ranks and offices, etc.. from the overpricing of the CD's and tapes when they were in control- they spent so much on waste that when it came time to tighten the belt, they realized that more than 50% of their overhead was probably waste.

 

So yeah, there's less money coming in, but at the same time, after they eliminated the waste, I think that it evens out somewhere- It's not the first time an industry cried poor all the way to the bank-

 

If there really was no money in it, no indie label would.. or could succeed by that comparison.

 

The problem is still greed, just as much from the labels, artists, and fans alike.

[rhat]

 

Ya know, what if the medium is the message? What if the delivery system, not only defines the perception of the music, but also defines the value of the music? In the day of the gatefold album, as guido said, listening was an experience that INCLUDED the album. You listened to the record, AND read the lyrics, AND checked out the wicked art on the front, inside, backside, and sleeve. All real damn BIG. And today, there is nothing to go along with the song. But you put out catchy stuff and saturate the media with "attention shoppers", you'll have a chance. And it is because of the media. JUST the song won't do it anymore. So you have a delivery system, and a sales system. The sales system defines the perception of the quality and drives folks to the product. The product doesn't have to deliver as much, since it's positioned so strongly before it is ever heard. I can't think of anyone....is there evidence of anyone selling numbers with ONLY a musical release....no produced vids etc..... And radio. At one time radio was considered kinda cool (60's and early 70's) and helped to define rock culture. Now it is soooooo not defining ANYTHING. But the ipod....well that is just the coolest thing. Remember when every kid just HAD to have one? Hell, every one has one now. They are the transistor radios of the new millennium. Hip, and you can watch Family Guy on it..... Mashall McLuen (sp?) had it right. The perceived value of the music is directly related to it's most common delivery method in a society.

 

 

I still think most hits and megga star artists are made over the car and home FM radio. The ipod may be a big impact on the younger generations , but the big sales tend to be in re issue of old rock and modern country. That market tends to spin up their favorite genre on the car and home radio. while things are indeed changing ,,, demographics still lean toward the kids of the 60s

[Vito Corleone]

 

you guys seem to be talking more about the value of packaging than the value of music.

 

 

Packaging helps define the value of EVERYTHING. That's what sales is all about. "How do you package it?"

 

Digitization of music is a big, big reason why it has so little value today, IMO.

[TrickyBoy]

 

It's easier said than done of course.

 

 

Yeah, especially when the server holding all that music is sitting in the Caribbean somewhere.

[Vito Corleone]

I hate to sound fatalistic, but I think the paradigm of recorded music as existed throughout the 20th Century is done. Technology comes along an blows up existing paradigms every so often and the entire industry has to be re-invented. We're going through that transistion right now.

 

Music DOES have value: it's something everybody likes and not everybody can produce. Writing a great song is still a rare commodity. How you translate that into money for the producers of the commodity has yet to be developed. Unfortunately the laws of supply and demand pretty much dictate that that new paradigm won't be developed until the old one completely dies. When the record companies stop releasing recorded music by major artists on digital formats because there is no longer any money to be made by doing so--only THEN will something else step in to take its place.

 

People are not going to stop writing songs, performing them, recording them. But this giving them away for free thing has to end at some point.

[Kramerguy]

...But when I see people shoveling money into the jukebox... it blows the "it's dead" thoery out of the water. And there's still the royalties and licensing for tv and film, which right now is a booming business for composers and songwriters / bands.

 

I agree that the model for bars, teen rock, pop, whatever is suffering, but certainly not dead, nor dying, I think it might have to evolve to avoid death vs. evolving after the fact