A Very Good Read

Musical artists and their stuff...
---Hosted by Scott DeVarenne & Matt Benoit

A Very Good Read

Postby macrae11 » Thu Sep 09, 2010 2:32 pm

User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:12 pm

That was a great read, if if I didn't like U2.
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Postby Crimson Chameleon » Thu Sep 09, 2010 5:54 pm

I'm trying to gather together my thoughts on the topic. I'd be interested in what others on the forum think of this.

I don't mind the idea of "sharing;" I think people need to share more often. For example, "I just bought a new kick-ass record; anyone want to stop by and borrow it to give it a listen?"

But as for sharing musical computer files, I understand the record industry is upset 'cause they're losing money, but perhaps they should sell vinyl instead if they want money.

I'm old fashioned in some senses, so I guess I'm just not hip to the whole idea of carrying around my entire music collection in mp3 format on some iPod contraption.

Basically, I'm still undecided about what needs to be done . . .
User avatar
Crimson Chameleon
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:29 am
Location: Norton

Postby macrae11 » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:39 pm

The issue is is that the industry has been trying to sell vinyl, but only a miniscule number of people are buying. The main problem is that most people of the younger generations have come to the conclusion that music should be free, and that they are entitled to it. I think Paul was clear that he doesn't necessarily want to return to the old ways, but that we need to come up with a sustainable paradigm that works for everyone in the future. I think(hope) we are getting close to a turning point in that regards.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Greg H. » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:09 pm

I don't have a record player, but I think they should really try to advertise it a bit more. It just makes you feel better when you have to put the needle on the disc, as opposed to clicking a song on iTunes. On the other hand, time moves forward, not backwards, so something new definitely will have to be found. I like the idea of subscription sites
Make Awkward Sexual Advances, Not War.
User avatar
Greg H.
Silver Member
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:26 am
Location: Quispamsis, N.B

Postby macrae11 » Fri Sep 10, 2010 7:43 am

I'm all about subscription too. If there was somewhere I could get a the music that I love, relatively lossless, for $20/month, I'd be all over it.

A big problem with records, is due to the shortage of quality lathes still left, it's very expensive to press, and your market of people to sell to is tiny. So you've got to run on slimmer margins, and make every sale count. Only works for a very small number of bands.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Christian LeBlanc » Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:59 am

I find that the record companies aren't really trying hard enough to make money, in terms of mp3 sales. Maybe it has to do with international trade laws, but I'm not learned enough to know for sure.

One example: Death Cab for Cutie puts out a single from a movie soundtrack, "Meet Me on the Equinox." Not their greatest tune, but as a fan, I'd gladly pay $1 for it. I go to Amazon.com, try to buy the download, and get told I can't do this because of international law. So I try it at Amazon.ca instead, to find out that I can't buy any downloads from there at all.

I don't like iTunes because I don't have an i-anything, I have a Sony mp3 player, which (as far as I know) can't play downloads from iTunes.

Another example: there's a band that's fairly big in Germany, Polarkreis 18. I can either pay $30 for an import cd, or...that's it, actually. Amazon.com doesn't even have their 2009 album for download.

Now, I know the onus is on me to find a Canadian site that will sell me mp3's. However, I don't see why I should go out of my way to support a music industry* that's poormouthing, but hasn't figured out how to make their music available on Amazon, one of the world's largest e-retailers.

*this doesn't mean I illegally download. If I can't buy the music, I don't listen to it. The only exception I made was when I found out there was a "cd-only" bonus track (a hidden track) that wasn't given to me when I downloaded an album I paid for. I figure that's up for grabs.

I tried having this conversation once on another forum; I stopped contributing when someone tried arguing that purchasing cd's from a store hurts the artists. :roll:

And lastly, I wouldn't use a subscription-based model. I like the idea of paying for a song once, and owning it forever. However, I don't think my preference will ever go away, and I think that the model should be tried for a while, just to see how it works.
User avatar
Christian LeBlanc
Silver Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:05 pm

Postby Cryptowen » Fri Sep 10, 2010 12:15 pm

Nowadays I just listen to music being given away for free by the creators. Sometimes if I like it I'll give them money somehow, but usually if they start going on about deserving compensation for expressing themselves I'll just go make some of my own tracks instead. I'm not saying I'm right (in fact I'm probably wrong), but that's how I work. Won't buy bread when I can make my own, but if someone offered some exceptionally good grain products I might reimburse them.

If I can't buy the music, I don't listen to it.


:-(
User avatar
Cryptowen
Active Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:07 am

Postby Crimson Chameleon » Fri Sep 10, 2010 12:19 pm

Interesting points everyone.

Here are a few more of my thoughts. And, I would like to emphasize that these ideas only pertain to me; I certainly do not intend for any of this to "save" the record/music industry. My personal opinion is that I do not like the idea of paying for an mp3 file that I download onto a computer. An mp3 should be a free gift from an artist to fans. The only music I will buy is a physical copy of some sort, be it vinyl, cassette, or compact disc/dvd.

I do agree with Andrew that a big problem is that a lot of young people today, in our society, feel entitled to free music. But they are going to have to get their shit together, because there won't be anymore music if they are unwilling to pay or subsidize the artists, engineers, etc.

As for supposed "illegal file sharing," I think the idea of sharing files is great if used as a means of sharing bootlegs of live performances kinda like the whole Dead-Head bootleg sharing. The problem, in my view, is that people have decided to share studio-recorded commercial releases, hence the loss of revenue.
User avatar
Crimson Chameleon
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:29 am
Location: Norton

Postby Christian LeBlanc » Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:09 pm

Crimson Chameleon wrote:My personal opinion is that I do not like the idea of paying for an mp3 file that I download onto a computer...The only music I will buy is a physical copy of some sort, be it vinyl, cassette, or compact disc/dvd.

This was a huge paradigm shift for me to get over; it only happened when I got a portable mp3 player I could play in bed, walking around, etc. Actually, I still prefer to buy the cd, rip it myself, and then store the cd and packaging in my collection while listening to its ghostly form on my portable little player. It's usually a rare case when I'll strictly buy just the mp3 itself, without a physical 'shell' of any kind (it does save a lot on shipping, for something I know can't be brought in locally).

Now that I think of it? I think paying for downloadable content in the Rock Band games actually desensitized me to the idea of paying for mp3s. I am cool 8-)

Crimson Chameleon wrote:As for supposed "illegal file sharing," I think the idea of sharing files is great if used as a means of sharing bootlegs of live performances kinda like the whole Dead-Head bootleg sharing.


I also like the idea of "try before you buy." As much as artists are getting ripped off these days, I still remember when $20 was a huuuge amount of money, and how it felt to spend that much on one good song and 11 unrelated filler tracks. Nowadays, I generally just preview the 30-second streaming clips on Amazon, or even preview an album via Youtube.
User avatar
Christian LeBlanc
Silver Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:05 pm

Postby Christian LeBlanc » Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:12 pm

Cryptowen wrote:
If I can't buy the music, I don't listen to it.


:-(


Sunshine! Let me rephrase that.

If I can't obtain the music legally, I don't listen to it. So yes, I'll listen to free streams, torrents or downloads, or even pay for some songs with iCoke points.
User avatar
Christian LeBlanc
Silver Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:05 pm

Postby macrae11 » Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:56 pm

Some great points all around, and I think one of the big things in moving forward is simply having these conversations.



Christian LeBlanc wrote:I find that the record companies aren't really trying hard enough to make money, in terms of mp3 sales. Maybe it has to do with international trade laws, but I'm not learned enough to know for sure.

One example: Death Cab for Cutie puts out a single from a movie soundtrack, "Meet Me on the Equinox." Not their greatest tune, but as a fan, I'd gladly pay $1 for it. I go to Amazon.com, try to buy the download, and get told I can't do this because of international law. So I try it at Amazon.ca instead, to find out that I can't buy any downloads from there at all.


This is largely an issue of international copyright laws, and though they may be necessary, they certainly are often a pain in the ass for us Canadians. A lot of American labels, distributors, broadcasters etc, won't bother putting their content on Canadian sites because it's such a small(comparatively) market. The fact that Amazon.ca doesn't have downloads is lame on their part.
Christian LeBlanc wrote:I don't like iTunes because I don't have an i-anything, I have a Sony mp3 player, which (as far as I know) can't play downloads from iTunes.


I believe that iTunes changed their DRM scheme so that their songs can be played anywhere. Don't quote me on that though. There are ways around the old DRM scheme as well.

Christian LeBlanc wrote:*this doesn't mean I illegally download. If I can't buy the music, I don't listen to it. The only exception I made was when I found out there was a "cd-only" bonus track (a hidden track) that wasn't given to me when I downloaded an album I paid for. I figure that's up for grabs.


Again I think this is the key, and kudos to you for your integrity.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby macrae11 » Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:58 pm

Crimson Chameleon wrote:Interesting points everyone.

Here are a few more of my thoughts. And, I would like to emphasize that these ideas only pertain to me; I certainly do not intend for any of this to "save" the record/music industry. My personal opinion is that I do not like the idea of paying for an mp3 file that I download onto a computer. An mp3 should be a free gift from an artist to fans. The only music I will buy is a physical copy of some sort, be it vinyl, cassette, or compact disc/dvd.


I'm with you there. I won't pay for an mp3. If people regularly start offering uncompressed, or lossless files, or better yet, hi def files, that might get me to change my tune.

Crimson Chameleon wrote:I do agree with Andrew that a big problem is that a lot of young people today, in our society, feel entitled to free music. But they are going to have to get their shit together, because there won't be anymore music if they are unwilling to pay or subsidize the artists, engineers, etc.


And they won't get off my lawn!!
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Fri Sep 10, 2010 3:11 pm

macrae11 wrote:And they won't get off my lawn!!

Image
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Postby Cryptowen » Fri Sep 10, 2010 3:17 pm

Crimson Chameleon wrote: there won't be anymore music if they are unwilling to pay or subsidize the artists, engineers, etc.


Yes there will be. Maybe it won't be as well-produced sounding, & maybe no extravagant world tours will come out of it, but people who like making music will still find a way. It's getting simpler all the time, what with open source production software & home recording.
User avatar
Cryptowen
Active Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:07 am

Postby Christian LeBlanc » Fri Sep 10, 2010 3:53 pm

Cryptowen wrote:...people who like making music will still find a way. It's getting simpler all the time, what with open source production software & home recording.

There is a growing recognition of the division between "professionals" and "hobbyists," with a very grey area in between. I would love to see what deviantart is for graphic artists, be applied to musical hobbyists as well. I guess Myspace comes the closest, but again, it's difficult to tell the difference between the two sets of users on there (ie, hobbyists representing themselves as professionals).

I predict it will be a long time coming, simply because most musicians' egos (or, aspirations) are too big to 'degrade' themselves with a "hobbyist" web environment.

There are several musical web communities online that serve a similar purpose (ilike, soundcloud, etc), but nothing's really come out on top yet.

Howevs, I'm getting pretty off-topic here, I think :-|
User avatar
Christian LeBlanc
Silver Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:05 pm

Postby macrae11 » Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:51 pm

Cryptowen wrote:
Crimson Chameleon wrote: there won't be anymore music if they are unwilling to pay or subsidize the artists, engineers, etc.


Yes there will be. Maybe it won't be as well-produced sounding, & maybe no extravagant world tours will come out of it, but people who like making music will still find a way. It's getting simpler all the time, what with open source production software & home recording.


I think you're right, but I think this is a problem. The vast majority of music that has influenced my life and music has been created by professional musicians. Professional meaning they don't have another major revenue stream other than music related endeavors. From Bach to Miles Davis to Jimi Hendrix to U2 to whomever, most great artists have been professional musicians. Not to say anything against hobbyists, as there have been some great musical achievements from part timers, but they are harder to come by I think.

The main reason for this I think is a divided attention. Someone who is a professional musician will have more time for rehearsal and study to be able to expand their craft. Generally when I get home from working for 10 hours, it saps a lot of creative energy, even when I'm doing creative things with other peoples material. I find personally my own creative juices flow the most on long weekends, or at least time that I have to myself without many other pressing concerns.

Even more strain is put on hobbyists musicians who want to have their material archived or promoted, they must put on a several other caps, which requires completely different skill sets. Not that any half intelligent musician can't learn to record, promote and sell, their music, or run their own website, shoot their own videos, and design and sell their own merch, but these things take time and effort and aren't something that's learned overnight. It takes many hours, weeks, months, or often years to even become competent at many of these tasks. That's all time away from what they're meant to do which is to create.

For me the most productive sessions I've worked on is usually when each person has an assigned task, and that's what they're best at. A producer, who calls the shots, and engineer who engineers, musicians who play, executive producer/manager/agent/spouse who handles the business stuff. Even if I'm the one producing and engineering, it inevitably goes better when I've at least got a co-producer to bounce some ideas off of. Motown I think was the perfect example of that. The best songwriters, arrangers, producers, engineers, musicians, managers and artists all came together to create IMO the greatest musical output in modern musical history. This would be impossible with today's typical hobbyist musician.

Yes music will still be created. Humans have been doing it for thousands of years, and they aren't going to stop, nor do I want them to. However the quality and availability of music will suffer from the standards we've become accustomed to if something doesn't change. I don't want to see that happen.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Cryptowen » Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:41 pm

Good point. I'm personally trying to reduce my reliance on money to the bare minimum so that, in theory, I don't need to work much & can spend most of the year on musical things. Living out in the hills with solar panels & such. But I can see how that solution might not be achievable/realistic for most.
User avatar
Cryptowen
Active Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:07 am

Postby Crimson Chameleon » Mon Sep 13, 2010 11:27 am

A friend of mine used to say that the only music he would download "illegally" (i.e. bit torrent file sharing) was the music of bands who are no longer together or of musicians who are no longer alive. He, therefore, felt no guilty conscience about downloading an album by The Sex Pistols or the discography of Buddy Holly, for example. If, on the other hand, he wanted to hear something by active musicians, he would purchase it legally.

I am also reminded of something I once read by Maynard James Keenan (of Tool) about people who download illegally: he said these same people do not walk into a Wal-Mart, grab an item, and then leave without paying for it.
User avatar
Crimson Chameleon
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:29 am
Location: Norton

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Mon Sep 13, 2010 11:32 am

Crimson Chameleon wrote:I am also reminded of something I once read by Maynard James Keenan (of Tool) about people who download illegally: he said these same people do not walk into a Wal-Mart, grab an item, and then leave without paying for it.


Of course not, that would be theft. You could be charged for that...
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Postby Cryptowen » Mon Sep 13, 2010 11:55 am

Wait, I just thought of something. Most of the albums that have influenced me over the last several years were made by people doing it on the side by themselves while working other jobs. Geinoh Yamashirogumi was made up of mostly non-musicians getting together on their time off (and I believe the main composer works as a mathematician or something like that). Boris Blank (of Yello) was a truck driver for at least the first couple of years of the band's existence. Aphex Twin was a student working part-time jobs when he did his early ambient tracks. Trent Reznor was a janitor while recording his first album. And most electronic musicians (even the bigger name ones) do commissioned audio work because the stuff they've become known for isn't enough to support them financially. So I guess I can't really use macrae11's argument myself.
User avatar
Cryptowen
Active Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:07 am

Postby macrae11 » Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:41 pm

The electronic genre is definitely a bit of an aside to this conversation. I'm not so much into the genre as you appear to be, but would you have heard of Aphex Twin and Trent Reznor had they not made it big, and become full time musicians? I know I wouldn't have.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Cryptowen » Wed Sep 15, 2010 4:56 pm

Probably not. However, had the internet been in it's current form back in the late 80s/early 90s & they had decided to upload music to it, I very well might have.

But, like you said, electronic & lofi experimental music are rather different than band music, & a lot of what I listen to falls in those first two groups (well, Geinoh Yamashirogumi was an elaborate collective project produced by hundreds of people, but they're sort of an exception to the rules (and Japanese)).
User avatar
Cryptowen
Active Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:07 am


Return to Music and Musicians

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests

cron