Napster Not To Blame 620
enjo13 writes "Slate is running an article on the music industries recent troubles. It articulates exactly what Slashdot has preached all along.. that the Music industry is suffering at its own hands and has no one to blame but itself. All I have to say is... finally." There's actually been a number of pieces like this, but I think this one says it best.
the RIAA themselves said it! (Score:3, Interesting)
So. Music today basically blows. The major component of the music market are less likely to buy a ton of CDs from one artist and are instead more likely to just hop the bandwagon for a short time...
It's not the pirates... (Score:3, Interesting)
Britney Spears' latest album has moved 4 million copies--a big number, but less than half what its predecessor did.
That's one statement that sums it all up: music industry's slumping sales are not because of the pirates, it's because of the crappier cookie-cutting kind of music that's being rewarmed over and over and over.
I won't believe that Britney's albums are not selling as well as they used to because everyone wants to get them for free.
(aside from the obvious, why would anyone listen to it, not mentioning OWNING a cd with her music???)
A somewhat similar article, (Score:5, Interesting)
The online version is still up here [usatoday.com].
Re:I feel that this article is in error (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the "easier" part is the crux of the issue. If record companies make it easy to download and pay (a reasonable price mind you) for your music then a majority of folks would. The key is to make it easy and cheap and this will destroy any blackmarket or free file sharing communities. Make so easy and cheap that it is not even worth saving it your disk in most cases.
The video rental market is a great analogy. There was a lot of concern that when video rentals people would just copy video's and share them with their friend and sales would plummet. The opposite is true because it is just not worth the hassle and space.
I wouldn't be so sure (Score:5, Interesting)
The main reasons are:
1) Very often I want to listen to just something very particular, and I believe it is silly to pay (and ask) $15 for just one song.
2) Convenience. Using file-sharing programs, I can get anything I want in a minute or two, in a convenient format that I can copy to my laptop and listen in my car or whatever. Buying a CD will never give me that. And yes, I know that there are ways to buy single songs online etc but the choice tends to be crappy, (the late) Napster and its clones have always had a better and more interesting choice.
I believe that there are many people who share these reasons and there's going to be more and more every day. Now, the point is that the music industry could definitely do a better job here by making it cheaper and more convenient to get what I want but it is also wrong to say that online music sharing has no effect on their revenue.
Even the Once-Cool Now Sucks (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't get me started on the dogshit that passes for Aerosmith music as of late.
The point is, it's not just new artists targetted at the 18-25 market...all of music is sucking ass lately. Sometimes, I think that there was more to the move to ban Napster and other P2P systems than just the "loss of sales" argument. I found some real gems on Napster -- stuff I'd never listen to before, Napster started me on a blues kick that continues to this day, for example. God forbid that the record companies should have to start dropping their NuMetal Poserbands and Bling-Bling Flash-in-the-Pan Rap Acts in favor of signing some bands with real musical talent, because real musical acts are harder to sell than a prepackaged pseudo-lifestyle.
I guess part of why music sucks is that the idiots in the RIAA know they have a losing formula, but stick to it because it's all they know.
Hold on. (Score:3, Interesting)
You CAN'T. You need a study that shows what happened when Napster came around. We have plenty of those. Now you need a study that shows what happened, in the exact same time period as napster, without napster. Anyone got a time machine?
Napster (and other file sharing programs/piracy) MAY OF done the music industry bad. Napster (and other file sharing programs/piracy) MAY OF done the music industry good.
But there is no possible way you can say it is one way for sure. File sharing still exists and is still widely used (KaZaA and Morpheus come to mind), so there is no possible way we can look at stats and compare.
So take this article with a grain of salt, not with absolute conviction.
I think it's finally just time to stop... (Score:3, Interesting)
Boycotts ahoy (Score:1, Interesting)
Don't know about anyone else, but I've boycotted the recording industry for over 2 years now. Haven't bought an album since late 1999. There's albums I want, I'm a music junkie, and it's been like qutting heroin, but I flat out will NOT part with one single cent to the bastards anymore until they get a clue and stop publishing LIES.
For the record, no, I haven't pirated albums I would otherwise have bought. I've simply gone without, which given how much into music I've always been has bee REALLY hard at times, but I just can't, in good conscience, finance this insanity.
Re:It's not the pirates... (Score:3, Interesting)
Take, for example, my neighbors kid. She's 14 and can't afford a $20 CD so she asked her mom. Her mom says something like: "All her music sounds the same. Just listen to the radio." She asked my son if she could download it at my house.
I told her I was doing her a favor, and gave her 3 phish CDs.
The good news... now she wants to download phish cds.
The point? Well she wasn't buying CDs to begin with - this is not lost sales. Downloading the legally traded phish stuff does build word of mouth fan base for phish. Maybe it will generate sales for them in the future.
Sounds like my daughter (Score:2, Interesting)
Napster not to Blame (Score:2, Interesting)
Innovation is still out there... (Score:5, Interesting)
She even does things like put *full* sample tracks on her website. *gasp*
And her sales and profits climb...
And her music continues to be her own...
And her music continues to kick ass.
Are you reading, RIAA?
Things change (Score:2, Interesting)
Now, instead of instruments, all the kids I hang out with are buying mixing decks. They all want to be club DJs.
They play four hour sets of techno. House, trance, bass&drums, whatever. It's got no lyrics. It's got no melody. It's got a GREAT groove. And without a melody, or lyrics, it's REALLY HARD to copyright. I like a lot of it.
They've done it again. Rock, punk, whatever it takes to take the music back from the corporations. The kids are alright.
Fuck the RIAA. Just wait, they WILL try to copyright 120 beats per minute.
Re:i don't believe the RIAA is so clueless.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Reminds me of Futurama with the commercials shoved into your dreams... Would the Music Industry throw you in jail if you hummed a song to work? Or dreamed about music?
As far as "loss of sales" last year.. give me a break. It was a recession. Some companies actually lost REAL sales. Not some made up, "wish we made 9 billion" dollar sales.
And believe it or not, some companies go out of business when their services are too expensive or simply suck ass. The music industry as a business shouldn't be immune to this.
RIAA is their own worst enemy. (Score:3, Interesting)
Recent events have changed all that. I had put my CD collection on my hard drive so I could listen to them while I worked. But, through a series of events, I had to rebuild my entire system. Unfortunatly, I couldn't reinstall my purchased copy of RealPlayer/RealOne/Real and didn't want the new one because of their stupid subscription based service.
I dumped Real and bought MusicMatch at a real store, intending to dump my CDs to my new 40GB hard drive. In the box was an offer for MusicMatch radio. I had done Winamp before, but again, the quality just wasn't there. To my surprise, I discovered that for $4 a month, I can get crisp, clear music delivered over my broadband, and was able to create my own 'stations' based on the music I liked. I could skip tracks too if I wanted. The best part was I could click on the playlist and create lists of CDs to buy later, or buy them right on the spot. Wow
Then, a few days ago, RIAA announced their legal action regarding list4ever.com. Curiosity got the best of me, so I fired up Google and started looking around. Know what I discovered?? Hundreds of sites where I can download music and videos, sites I never knew about before. I still haven't downloaded anything, but now I know where to go if I want to, all thanks to RIAA.
I never did dump my CDs to the new hard drive.....
If songs were a quarter... (Score:3, Interesting)
What I'd like to know is, if they did start selling tracks at a quarter apiece, how much more music would people have to buy to make up for the drop in price? (Not taking production or bandwidth costs into account, it people would need to download about 60 songs for every CD they purchase now). Is it plausiable that you'd buy five times as much music if it were a fifth the price? I probably would myself, but I very rarely buy CDs.
Re:the RIAA themselves said it! (Score:5, Interesting)
These two sources are probably the best way to experience artists in their element.
Just seems like people would rather rape and pilage the P2P networks instead.
Solution to lame commercial music: (Score:5, Interesting)
- Expand your taste to include a wider range of musical forms through exploration.
- Seek out new local acts by attending live performances at small clubs, bars, and concert halls.
- Purchase CDs directly from those performers and bands whom you have enjoyed seeing live.
Not only does buying CDs directly from the artist provide them better compensation, but since you've already heard his/her music you know you'll enjoy much of what's on the CD. And to top it off the music cartels don't get a dime of your money. SCORE!This is primarily how I buy music now. I haven't purchased a big label pop disc in well over a year -- because the music sucks. I don't "steal" music across the net; I don't tape or burn CDs to trade with friends; I don't tape off the radio. I go to shows and if I like the act I buy some music. Fuck the RIAA and all their noise about "piracy".
--Maynard
Music Suggestions (Score:5, Interesting)
If you want a political bend to go along with your new music, a good place to start is with Radiohead. Another one is Mos Def and Blackstar (which is Mos and Talib Kwali) who are this generation's Public Enemy, and they are incredible.
As far as I know, the punk scene has degenerated politically, but Joe Strummer (of the Clash) is putting out incredible new stuff with his new band The Mescaleros. There's a band I happened to catch live at a music festival called The International Noise Conspiracy, who are a really fun act to see (communist/socialst propaganda from Sweden, how can you not love a song named "Capitalism Stole My Virginity"?)
Also, if you've looked at the American radioscape lately, a lot of the Nu-Metal junk has faded away. The focus these days is on more standard rock, with bands like Jimmy Eat World, the Strokes, the White Stripes, and the Hives all doing a great job kicking the crap out of Fred Durst and his various imitators. Some of the stuff (particularly The White Stripes) is really outstanding work. There's still a lot of pop out there, but that's never going to change (hence the name). There's a lot of good non-political music out there too, that I didn't mention, that is just off to the side of mainstream, but is actually very good. As for the political/social stuff, I don't think there's a whole lot right now, but who knows? The new Rage Against the Machine album should be out soon.
Re:Innovation is still out there... (Score:3, Interesting)
curiouser and curiouser...
These articles make me sick (Score:5, Interesting)
The assorted and supposed failures of the music industry and the presumed decline in quality of today's music - even if true - can NOT be taken as evidence that file-sharing isn't hurting the industry, just like declining record sales can't necessarily be attributed to the accompanying rise in file-sharing.
BOTH types of 'evidence' marshalled by both sides are correlational and don't really say anything about what the proponents are arguing about, namely the root of the problem. Maybe file-sharing is going up because today's music sucks, or because people want this method of distribution. Or maybe file-sharing is on the rise because people just like grabbing things they don't have to pay for.
You've heard it a million times: Correlation is NOT causation. Once we get past the stupid "X is happening, and Y is/isn't happening, therefore X does/doesn't cause Y", we'll be able to really and fairly consider the issue instead of looking through these blinders that seem to get narrower and narrower as time goes on, and hearing the tautologies flogged like yesterday's dead horse - by BOTH sides.
Musical innovation is across the pond in Europe (Score:5, Interesting)
With the one hit wonders we have now, you can't even name the vocalist for the bands.
Skip across to the pond and see what the 'peans are up to. Let's see, progressive metal bands like Stratovarius, Blind Guardian, Avantasia, Edguy, Theatre of Tragedy, etc are HUGE stars. They play arena concerts, like GNR, VH, Selloutica and others did in the 80's and 90's. Members are usually classically trained musicians and have technical abilities that most US musicians only dream of. Many of the band members collaborate with other bands for entire albums (ex. Demons & Wizards).
Granted, this music may not be to everyone's tastes, but looks at the techno scene overseas. People like DJ Tiesto, Oakenfold, Van Dyk, etc are huge....yet unless you go to a trance club in the US, you are unlikely to ever hear them.
The US labels are failing for the same reason the US carmakers failed late last century:
Lack of innovation.
This is an easy question to answer (Score:3, Interesting)
I have neither these numbers available to me nor the interest to properly evaluate them (properly meaning statisticly... not just scanning them with the naked eye.) But the numbers are there and any interested party could resolve this.
If concert ticket sales have declined it would be very difficult for the industry to say that this is the fault of filesharing. But at the same time if it is found that Britney Spears concerts are still selling out then it is also very hard for consumers to say there is less interest in listening to her.
Perhaps by stating their claims so heavily, both sides have too much to lose if they are found to be wrong.
BS Fan and Proud to Admit it (Score:5, Interesting)
And it has nothing to do with the latest trend or whatever. Eminem's also one of the latest trends, and I hate what he has to offer.
So, why do I like her? Well, simply put, because her music is fun to listen to. And its fun to watch her videos. I'm not saying its intellectually rich music, but I really don't care. If I want intellectually enriched music, I'll go someplace else (like Ernesto Cortazar, Beethoven, John Williams).
That said, I can understand why this style of music means a slump for the music industry. Its not something I want to listen to all the time. In fact, there's very few artists I'd like to listen to all the time. The only musician who's music I've been able to listen to repeatedly over and over again is Beethoven.
So, what's the problem? Well, the problem is the zillion Britney-alikes that pop up (you know what I'm talking about, Pink, etc). And its not even so much them. I like some of Pink's music. I like alot of the stuff by Pink, No Doubt, Shakira, Aquilera, Spears, etc. Its not that the music's that bad. It's that it gets OVER -PLAYED.
This, my friends, is the fault of the music industry and the radio stations. Hearing the same song 500 times in one day is going to make me sick of it (i.e., anyone remember "I Saw The Sign" -- they played that song to death).
That's part of the reason I love the 80's stations, because they have a large selection to choose from, and I probably won't hear the same song twice in one day. That's also part of the appeal of P2P -- you get to mix it up.
So, ultimately, the current slump in the music business is completely the fault of the RIAA and music companies, along with the radio stations. Start mixing it up more, and people will be more interested. But really, who wants to buy that latest Britney Spears album when the songs in it have been played on the radio 500 times a day? If I listened to the radio more, I probably wouldn't buy CD's, but since I don't, I don't get so sick of songs that I want to puke when I hear them, like most people do.
So, the take home message to the RIAA? Well, lets say it like this. I like ice cream. I really like ice cream. I really really like ice cream. But if I've been eating nothing but ice cream for a week straight, I'm going to puke the next time I see it and I never want to see it again.
Re:Innovation is still out there... (Score:2, Interesting)
They're Doomed (Score:3, Interesting)
All we lose is the saturation media bombing to promote the latest 15-minute megastar. Well, darn.
The movie industry is in a stronger position - at least for the time being. You can't get some friends together and make The Lord of the Rings, no matter how much creative talent you have. And I still enjoy going to the movies with my friends and munching popcorn and seeing it all on the big screen.
The MPAA still needs to be clubbed senseless, though. Maybe we can get some out-of-work seal trappers on the case.
An insider's theory on falling CD sales (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:They fell behind the technology (Score:3, Interesting)
The music subscription idea is right on the mark. Funny enough, there was a Canadian company in the late 80's that had a whole system ready to go into Sam Goody stores to make custom CD's like you mentioned. Not quite coin-op, but you filled out a slip, gave it to the clerk, and went to do some shopping. $1.50 a song, IIRC. In an hour your disc would be ready. I was lead to believe the recording labels backed out at the last minute. I forgot about it until you mentioned it, but that might have been the next big thing that they missed out on. It would have likely forstalled the whole Napster thing because it filled a need and made the customers happy. I wish I knew what was going through their minds at the time. Probably the same issue, they think they'll buy all 10 albums if they're not allowed to get a compilation.
Their fatal flaw is probably plain-old greed.
Re:An insider's theory on falling CD sales (Score:3, Interesting)
When I was younger (back in the days before CDs up until the point where albums still outnumbered CDs in the record stores), you could buy '45s of your favorate song.
Later, while in high school, the 45s dissapeared, but you could still buy cassette singles in record stores.
Today, I don't see anyone using this. Occasionally I'll find an extended singles 'remix' CD with 4-5 different mixes of the same song, but typically at a price point I'm not willing to spend at.
So why don't the record companies, in earnest, try to revive the singles? (I do vaguely recall a few attempts at CD singles, but nothing that ever took off).
There are very few big name modern music songs I'd like to buy, but even when I do hear a catchy tune on the radio that I'd like to listen to more, I'm not going to run out and buy the record. I've been burned too many times with those seven tracks of 'filler'.
I duspute the theory your friend has too, but I can't help to think that the record companies could squeeze a few bucks more out of their artists if they sold the popular singles for $1.99 a CD.
Re:Hold on. (Score:2, Interesting)
The music industry summed up ... (Score:1, Interesting)
However, I maintain that this has little to do with the downturn in sales. Some defendants of the peer-to-peer filesharing networks claim that the general downturn in the market is sufficient explanation. I, however, maintain that this, too, is incorrect.
There was once a time when, if you heard a song on the radio, it meant that you could buy it in the shops. No longer is this the case. Tracks are released to radio stations months before they are released to the general public. It is admittedly possible to obtain promotional copies of tracks in some record shops before general release, but I do not call this making the track accessible to the public.
This is the problem: when a track is first heard on the radio, people think "I want that track". So they download it off the internet, because this is the only way they can obtain it that day. In the fierce competition between record labels to get their artists to obtain the most consecutive number ones, they do not realise that they have created a totally artificial structure; it worked for a while, it doesn't any more. People have, consciously or otherwise, realised that the media is over-hyping, over-playing and selling out every new and old artist on the block, and they're just not buying it any more.
To the record companies, I say this: Cry me a river, I still won't listen. You created this mess for yourselves, now find your own way out.
Some artists are true artists; they support anything which gives their music a wider audience. Some artists, like Janis Ian (www.janisian.com) have spoken out on this front. It is nice to see some genuine thought go into what the artists are saying: too many of them are saying "They're stealing our money". Given that "the most significant cost of a CD today is the marketing and promotion of that music" (www.riaa.org) but "the most important component of a CD is the artist's effort in developing that music" (www.riaa.org), I would dispute that. The artists are being heavily exploited by the recording industry.
It's time to stop that. It's time to move away from big-time capitalism controlled by a few big bosses. It's time to move towards a system where artists have more freedom - where an artist gains listenership through true brilliance, not through promotion; it's time to move to a system dominated by 'listening post' sites like mp3.com, where you can download mp3 tracks for free, then buy the rest of the album if you like what you hear. The artists will gain, because they will get more as a proportion of the total cost to the consumer of the CD. Smaller artists will get a greater chance to be heard, because radio stations will be able to take their pick of what they can play, and be unrestricted by royalty payments.
I live in the real world, so I know this will never happen. It's what the world needs, in order to greater appreciate music, and the wealth of talent that exists out there but is obscured by boy and girl bands.
Another issue that has been brought up lately is that of DVDs being copied. I'm not going to pretend that I know about how to copy a DVD. I do know that devices are being made available which make it easier to copy DVDs, albeit to inferior formats. The MPAA claims that this is reducing sales of DVDs. Yet, somehow, DVD sales are higher than ever before.
Once again, the finger can be squarely and solely pointed at the industry. DVDs are region-coded, which limits the playback of DVDs to players bought in the corresponding region. Some region-free players are available, however I believe these have been outlawed in America. Availability varies from country to country, and availability of import DVDs varies too. This is a feeble attempt by the MPAA to control the release of films, releasing films in the USA first, then across Europe. I know of several people who download films over the internet, because they are not yet available in the UK.
So, if the films were available in the UK at the same time as in the USA, this would cut down on the number of pirate downloads that would be going on. Everyone wants to be the first to see a film, and there is a lot of satisfaction to be gained by watching a film before it is released at the cinema. But this is the problem: if the only way to do this were in the cinema, you would have more people going to the cinemas. Not that too few people going to the cinemas is causing difficulties: record numbers of people went to the cinema in the UK in the last year.
What does this tell you? That the media are complaining about nothing, really. Rather than complaining, they need to reinvent the industry if they are having problems. I don't see, even if the number of downloads were to steadily increase year on year, that the record and film companies would be going out of business any time soon. It's the small companies, like FilmFour, not the big ones, like Warner Bros, Bertelsmann etc, who are having problems.
The Larger Picture... (Score:2, Interesting)