Music discussion thread

[Flem274*]

dont listen to him TC he's a filthy pirate like kim dotcom, but without the mansion or the missus.

he just wants to exploit you man.

[Top_Cat]

Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned

If you're still trying to charge upwards of $10 for a digital download then suck it up it's no wonder no-one wants to buy that ****. If I listen to a band and like them I'll chuck 'em a fiver via Bandcamp though, or more for a physical release. I've seen little to suggest that people aren't still willing to help out good musicians who they want to hear more of, but the pricing needs to get real. Fast.

Yeah. I'd virtually give them away if I could be sure my fellow band members wouldn't try to murder my ass.

Music is worthless right now and I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. No-one wants to pay for it so our label guy is getting all old man yelling at cloud about people stealing music. Why fight it? Have to find another way and no-one has it nutted yet, other than those who get big enough to sign nommy advertising deals with YT. tbh, if I could find a way to merely cover recording costs, I'd be happy but can't even do that. Not that I mind too much but balancing the budget would be great!

Maybe, possibly, there is no way to make money full-time out of music for the semi-pro types for the foreseeable future. Even the very biggest acts aren't just playing gigs any more, have to be a massive event with other performers, etc. When the Mars Volta play to a half-full theater as they did last year, anyone not all about the 4/floor money beats is clearly toast. Even Omar's band played at at a 200-person venue here when they toured. The New York Dolls couldn't sell it out either. ****, I've played there.....

Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned

Btw TC, how much to send a copy of your album further down under? Wouldn't mind splashing out for one if it's not too much.

Don't see why not. Personally I think we need to be a bit more innovative than a mere CD.

[Monk]

Neil Young's Puretone/Pono will be the way to charge $$ for music, especially for people who find digital music a ****ty replica of what recorded sound should sound like.

[wellAlbidarned]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

Yeah. I'd virtually give them away if I could be sure my fellow band members wouldn't try to murder my ass.

Music is worthless right now and I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. No-one wants to pay for it so our label guy is getting all old man yelling at cloud about people stealing music. Why fight it? Have to find another way and no-one has it nutted yet, other than those who get big enough to sign nommy advertising deals with YT. tbh, if I could find a way to merely cover recording costs, I'd be happy but can't even do that. Not that I mind too much but balancing the budget would be great!

Maybe, possibly, there is no way to make money full-time out of music for the semi-pro types for the foreseeable future. Even the very biggest acts aren't just playing gigs any more, have to be a massive event with other performers, etc. When the Mars Volta play to a half-full theater as they did last year, anyone not all about the 4/floor money beats is clearly toast. Even Omar's band played at at a 200-person venue here when they toured. The New York Dolls couldn't sell it out either. ****, I've played there.....



Don't see why not. Personally I think we need to be a bit more innovative than a mere CD.

Saw Omar's band a few months back. Was so gun. Gutted TMV are finished though, why couldn't I have been born ten years earlier?

Yeah I don't think things are very good at the moment either but we're in the middle of a massive shift in the way we think about and treat entertainment media and it simply has to happen sooner rather than later. Things will balance out within 20 years imo, people don't actually want entertainers to starve and the industry will eventually remember business 101 - don't be a ****ing dick to your potential customers

[Top_Cat]

I agree that incomes will rise but only for a small segment. The way I see it playing out will be that the idea of music as a stand-alone product will die. To be a musician or a band, you'll need to be a brand; have video, get your music integrated with ads, video games, etc. All of those cost way more than merely recording music and this will be the industry's way of saving the incomes of those with the cash and resources to do it; price those who only know how to do music out of the market.

[Spikey]

"I think records were just a little bubble through time and those who made a living from them for a while were lucky. There is no reason why anyone should have made so much money from selling records except that everything was right for this period of time. I always knew it would run out sooner or later. It couldn't last, and now it's running out. I don't particularly care that it is and like the way things are going. The record age was just a blip. It was a bit like if you had a source of whale blubber in the 1840s and it could be used as fuel. Before gas came along, if you traded in whale blubber, you were the richest man on Earth. Then gas came along and you'd be stuck with your whale blubber. Sorry mate -- history's moving along. Recorded music equals whale blubber. Eventually, something else will replace it."


eno thinks you are blubber

[Top_Cat]

Not bad coming from a bloke who last released a piece of whale blubber two months ago.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

I agree that incomes will rise but only for a small segment. The way I see it playing out will be that the idea of music as a stand-alone product will die. To be a musician or a band, you'll need to be a brand; have video, get your music integrated with ads, video games, etc. All of those cost way more than merely recording music and this will be the industry's way of saving the incomes of those with the cash and resources to do it; price those who only know how to do music out of the market.

You're probably right. Sad as hell that this is what the world has come to. Unfortunately, artists then become popular or known widely only if they can appeal to a bull**** modern disposable raunch culture with the attention span of whatever has a **** attention span.

****.

[wellAlbidarned]

For a brief second there I thought spikey wrote a post longer than one line. Neigh, but a quote.

But srsly, that is a brilliant one whoever said it

[Top_Cat]

Doesn't know who Eno is.

[Spikey]

that eno uses the word mate was the most revealing thing about that quote

[Spark]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

Doesn't know who Eno is.

Haha indeed

[Spikey]

eno referencing the modern lovers in 1974 was maybe the best thing he did

[Top_Cat]

Originally Posted by Monk

You're probably right. Sad as hell that this is what the world has come to. Unfortunately, artists then become popular or known widely only if they can appeal to a bull**** modern disposable raunch culture with the attention span of whatever has a **** attention span.

****.

I try to look at more as an artistic challenge. The best artists pretty much make you listen to what they've got to say, even if it requires more in-depth attention. The day you don't want to work hard at your craft, well, should probably consider doing something else. It should be hard to capture an audience.

Man that's hard to say, but.

[Uppercut]

Yeah you wouldn't want to become one of those musicians that chooses to play inaccessible and niche-appeal music, then acts like there's something wrong with the world for liking something else.