What's wrong with the music business....

I'd comment if I could access the web site without having to subscribe :-(
Even if it's free, I'm afraid as a British UK resident, I can't really be bothered.......
Sorry......

Computers are supposed to work on 1's and 0's - in other words "Yes" or "No" - why does mine frequently say "Maybe"?......

Oops...

Here's the text. NY Times editorial from Monday February 23:

quote:

---

Norah Jones is a lovely young woman with a lovely young voice who sings jazz-inflected songs of romance in a manner that can only be called consoling. Her first album, "Come Away With Me," earned her a double armful of Grammys last year and the attention of the entire music industry. Her second album, "Feels Like Home," has just been released. It made its debut at No. 1 and sold more than a million copies in its first week, proving that politeness does have its rewards. The sound of Ms. Jones's piano is amiability itself, and in her voice there lurks a plaintive contentment. It feels churlish to speak even that critically of a woman whose music is so palpably pleasing. Who knew so many people needed so much consolation?

As it happens, Ms. Jones's big week coincided with a big week for music sales in general. But then any week when a newly released album sells a million copies is going to look good by recent industry standards, especially if it also happens to overlap with Valentine's Day. Ms. Jones's numbers — and the fact that she's selling mainly to grown-ups — make record executives hopeful that a recovery in their troubled business is just around the corner. They are going to need to keep hoping. Their business seems to be structured against steady, long-term success. The psychology of the recording industry, like that of book publishing, is now so dependent on blockbuster sales that the idea of profitability based on modest sales across a diverse catalog has nearly vanished. The business depends on the hundred-year flood, not a steady rain.

There is no begrudging Ms. Jones her success. Part of her attraction is that she seems to be pursuing the art as it appeals to her, without pandering to her audience. But what's curious about her career so far is that she is essentially a midlist artist who broke into the big time. Her first album was rolled out in a way that suggested modest expectations — and on such modest, artful expectations, once upon a time, a gratifying career might have been based. But her niche is now the whole world. The industry will no longer be talking about Norah Jones; it will be talking about "a Norah Jones" or "the next Norah Jones," who comes out of nowhere to rescue the bottom line once again.

---

Cheers,

John Schmidt
"90% of everything is crud" - Theodore Sturgeon

Well I agree with a lot of the thrust of that editorial. In the UK sales of singles are slumping, but when you look at where the record companies are putting their money its no suprise. A part of me likes to think that these truly are the end times of the music industry as we know it. Soon we will be buying our music direct from the artist, either by download, or a physical copy by mail order, for about £5. Well, perhaps...

Plus the copy controlled discs that I will not buy!!! It's ridiculous all the titles that are copy controlled are still available as downloads (illegal, of course). So why bother with copy control ?

Peter

User34 at Laposte dot net

Worrying times indeed

So much of current big label music seems to come from pretty, manufactured individuals or bands.

Watch clips of 'Top Of The Pops' from the seventies. Thre were ugly people there then (who had talent!)

Not any more - it's all about image.

I was taping records that I couldn't afford to buy in the seventies, along with everyone else and yet the market seemed pretty bouyant.

What has changed?

Sony have announced that if an artiste on their label is not making money; they're out.

Investment is needed to fund embryonic artistes with talent.

Will more and more idie stuff be self produced and sold direct, as someone else here suggested?

And from a Hi-Fi freak perspective, these indie offerings can sound very good, on a relatively small budget.

We are told of of a future where anything can be downloaded on demand. No good for us whacko humanoids - we like to collect and display our music/DVD's/books etc:

quote:

---

Soon we will be buying our music direct from the artist, either by download, or a physical copy by mail order, for about £5. Well, perhaps...

---

That could be sooner than you think. On this site www.magnatune.com you are encouraged to download and distribute full length MP3s to sample the goods. You can then buy the full CD if you want, with 50% of the take going to the artist.

Cheers,

John Schmidt
"90% of everything is crud" - Theodore Sturgeon

Magnatune looks promising, especially since they offer full fidelity 44.1 WAV files. Gotta love the 50/50 revenue split, too.

Without shining my own torch too much (I'm on some of the albums on the label, but I'm not part of the business) Burning Shed (www.burningshed.com) have been selling on-demand, on-line, CDR and net based conventional CD for some time now. The artists get around 80% of the profits.

However, this kind of marketing is only good for established artists. Burning Shed works because thet featured musicians (Porcupine Tree, No-Man, Roger Eno, Theo Travis etc.) already have a largish listener base.

What record companies have always been good at (from small to large) is making new talent known to the wider public. If all music is downloadable from the artist, how will we know who is good or bad? If it's downloadable from record companies, what will change?

Just a few random thoughts

Regards

Stephen

quote:

---

Originally posted by J.N.:
_Worrying times indeed_

Watch clips of 'Top Of The Pops' from the seventies. Thre were ugly people there then (who had talent!)

:

---

It's the same today. The Darkness (car crash causing evil band). I rest my case.

And Les Grey (RIP) looked like Mike Reid.....



Stephen

"If all music is downloadable from the artist, how will we know who is good or bad?"

Erm, by downloading it?

And all the other means that currently exist from advertising, to reviews and media coverage to word of mouth.

BTW Unlimited DRM-free downloads of any music with generous levels of artist and label payment would cost $6 a month.

Fred -- Re your point on sound quality: full bandwidth downloads could well be an option in the future. And it's much more the sort of thing hte record companies should be differentially pricing as well.

Matthew

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matthew Robinson:
"If all music is downloadable from the artist, how will we know who is good or bad?"

Erm, by downloading it?

And all the other means that currently exist from advertising, to reviews and media coverage to word of mouth.


Matthew

---

Matthew, not everyone has the time to download stuff that may or may not be what they want to hear. Reviews and media coverage depend on music being 'the latest thing', usually from promotion by record companies (who may be large or small, net based or real).

I agree that word of mouth is always a factor. I get some great tips from the geekpeople of this forum.



My point is, that for good or ill, record companies exist as a filter (weather we like it or not). In the unexpurgated rush that is the internet, I can imagine a lot of people just saying 'It's too much, I can't be bothered'.

I personally feel, that record companies, love them or hate them, do perform some positive functions. They are not all the evil that people think. I'm glad there was/is a Charisma, Virgin (early days!), 4AD, Factory, Island, Mowtown, One Little Indian, Stiff, Rough Trade, Recommended Records, Cuniform and Warp.

Take this scenereo: Someone releases a great album and places it for download on a web site. What happens next? Can they get it reviewed in a daily or national? No. Can they get it on any radio station anyone listens to? No. Can they tour in major venus to promote the album? Not without a lot of cash. How would these media start to select what they review? They would have to listen to thousands of chaff to select their nice organic loaf. I know, I know, they should be doing that anyhow, but I can't see it happening except in very limited amounts.

OK, the musician may sell a few hundred or even thousand copies of the album by word of naim forum, but make a living from music? Forget it.

Intested in opinions as always.

Regards

Stephen

Imagine if there were no TV companies and you had to search the web for programmes. No, wait, that can't be worse than ITV........

[This message was edited by Stephen Bennett on WEDNESDAY 25 February 2004 at 11:23.]

Stephen,

You make some good points but I think a lot of them will still apply even after the inevitable changes in the way music is distributed.

Fundamentally though we are talking about the means and mechanics of distribution and renumeration and many of the other aspects remain the same. It's my impression that this will be good for listeners and for artists (it will be easier to get people to listen to your music without requiring a distribution deal or access to airplay or reviews).

For record companies it will be bad in the sense that their current rampant profiteering and cartel like operations will stop. But overall it will be good for the better ones like those you mention as they will have to do something good for listeners (find good music) and artists (get them publicised, reviewed, etc) in order to succeed rather than the current system which often seems designed to drown us in a small selection of average to bad music in order to maximise profits.

Matthew

It will be a disaster for high street shops who will have to adapt or disappear.

It's true that record companies are in a spin. They have no idea what it is that the public want at the moment. If you look, a lot of majors are releasing low cost work as 'sniffers' to see what sticks and what doesn't.

One thing that does piss me off. A lot of major releases are done in low budget studios these days - but the artists doesn't often profit from these savings, or see an increase in advertising of their work.

I hope you are right though Matthew. I would love to see an egalitarian artistic future for music. However, I'm pessimistically expecting it to be harder to detect quality in the morass of on-line pap.

I will, of course continue to frequent this forum for recommendations!



Stephen

PS I haven't been in a high street music shop for over a year. I can't say I'm bothered. On-line I can listen to the music and get it cheaper. And there are no irritating teenagers (of which I used to be one) singing at the listening booth or hogging the heavy metal section. Not that I ever liked metal....