Paul McCartney On Music In the Digital World 276
Rachhpal writes "Former Beatle Sir Paul McCartney will release his new album today — it's called 'Memory Almost Full.' In an interview with the L.A. Times, he talked about ending his long-time relationship with EMI and making the new album fully downloadable through his new relationship with Starbucks' Hear Music label. Some of his comments on the music industry: 'I was bored with the old record company's jaded view,' McCartney says... 'They're very confused, and they will admit it themselves: that this is a new world, and they're a little bit at a loss as to what to do. So they've got millions of dollars and X budget... for them to come up with boring ways — because they've been at it for so long — to what they call "market" it. And I find that all a bit disturbing.'"
Bug Me Not (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.bugmenot.com/view/www.latimes.com [bugmenot.com]
It has a list of account logins and passwords that you can use for this article.
Re:Bug Me Not (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bug Me Not (Score:4, Interesting)
Seems like poor security to me - if they had their heads screwed on right, corporate security would not want their employees to be easily trackable on the internet, never know what sorts of sensitive information my leak out around the edges that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparantly it doesn't like "www.latimes.com".
Re: (Score:2)
You jest, but that actually is the case where I work. I'm just a lowly support critter here, separate from the network group. They have our filter set up to catch anything with .EXE in the address, meaning when I'm simply trying to do my job [palmone.com]* the filter kicks me out. I've tried explaining that they can restrict ".EXE" while still allowing ".EXE?" (I know, I'm familiar with the filter they use), but it falls on deaf ears.
* - http://kb.palmone.com/SRVS/CGI-BIN/WEBCGI.EXE?New, Kb=PalmSupportKB,ts=Palm_Externa [palmone.com]
Re:Bug Me Not (Score:4, Informative)
http://roachfiend.com/archives/2005/02/07/bugmeno
10 minute mail (Score:2)
Stop posting links to password-ridden sites (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stop posting links to password-ridden sites (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh the irony! While we are talking about one industry where the deadness goes up to eleven, this article is posted on the site of another industry that is beginning to pine for the fjords.
This log-in business for newspaper sites is an example of how they do not understand their new customers, nor how their business has changed. If you listen really closely when you are on the LA Times site you can hear the slow heavy footfalls of the grim reaper approaching.
Anyway, I vote we change the expression "deader than vaudeville" to "deader than the RIAA". You must, surely, realize your business is in trouble when an wholly unrelated one like Starbucks is wiping the floor with your tried and tested artists. Especially since Starbucks is also a big corporation and likely just as bureaucratic as any RIAA dinosaur, I woud guess the business processes to launch a new idea in Starbucks is comparable to that in any record company.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
'Beginning'? The fjord-pining began at least a decade ago.
Almost every newspaper company missed the boat, and failed to ride the New Media wave as they should. Classifieds departments took tentative steps into online listings, but continued to pander to their traditional customer base (employment agencies, real estate brokers, and auto dealerships) instead of paying attention to what the actual audience wants,
At least copy and paste the texts! (Score:5, Informative)
Paul McCartney is a man on the run
He has a new album, a new record label, new living arrangements and even a new plan about putting the Beatles' music catalog online this year.
By Kim Murphy, Times Staff Writer
June 3, 2007
What's in a name?
What's in a name?
click to enlarge
Winchelsea, England -- HE noticed it when his cellphone, stuffed with too many text messages, voicemails and phone numbers, started flashing at him: "Memory almost full." It was remarkably like his own brain, weighted down with half-written songs, daughter Bea's schedule, the lyrics to old Beatles B-sides, the blurring faces of long-buried loves and friends.
Delete? Re-record? Which parts go, and which -- the carpets of bluebells outside Liverpool in spring, sitting on twin beds in a hotel room with John Lennon writing "She Loves You" -- stay locked in the hard drive of time?
"Your memory is always almost full these days. There's so much going on, so I thought it was a poetic way to sum up modern life. Just overload, information overload," Paul McCartney says of his 21st solo album, "Memory Almost Full," which explores the persistence of memory, preparing for the settling of scores and a life too full to hold it all.
"It's been pointed out to me that since the album is heavy on retrospective stuff, there's a sort of finality about it. 'Memory almost full,' any second now it will be full, and, 'Goodbye cruel world.' It's not what I meant about it at all, but I can see that meaning, and I like, you know, people to have different interpretations. "Abbey Road" to us was a crossing outside the studio. I'm sure to some people, it meant Monastery Lane, and we liked that sort of quasi-religious feel of it too."
The album (out Tuesday) marks the 64-year-old McCartney's plunge into another kind of digital age. Ending his relationship with Capitol Records/EMI that began in 1962, McCartney has hooked up with Starbucks' new Hear Music Label and unlocks the new album (along with the rest of his solo catalog) for online downloads. McCartney also says the Beatles catalog is on deck for online release near the end of the year, although EMI has not announced a date.
The video for "Dance Tonight," the party-tune, mandolin-laced foot-tapper that opens the record, made its world premiere on YouTube, in a bid to charm a third generation with the kind of winsome songs their grandmother should know.
"I was bored with the old record company's jaded view," McCartney says, plopped on a sofa in the large, comfortable farmhouse that doubles as a rehearsal studio here in the rolling, tree-studded hills of rural East Sussex. Outside, there is an old windmill, and in the near distance, the hazy blue carpet of the English Channel.
"They're very confused, and they will admit it themselves: that this is a new world, and they're a little bit at a loss as to what to do. So they've got millions of dollars and X budget
"I write it, I play it, I record it, and that's all fun. And you go to the record company, and it gets very boring. You sit around in rooms with people, and you're almost falling asleep" -- he rolls his head down midchest --"and they're almost falling asleep.
"My record producer [David Kahne] said the major record labels these days are like dinosaurs sitting around discussing the asteroid. They know it's going to hit. They don't know when, they don't know where it's coming from. But it's sort of hit already. With iTunes, and all of that."
McCartney heard that Starbucks' content development guy, Alan Mintz, loved his music; better, he was a bass player. They arranged to meet in New York, along with Howard Schultz, the chief executive who turned Starbucks from
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Non-Registration Link (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Never in a million years.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Never in a million years.... (Score:5, Interesting)
It felt like that moment when the police tell you she was in fact 15...
Re:Never in a million years.... (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, it's a great song - fantastic in fact. Like all the brilliant songs I've written it was based on a moments inspiration. I had a few friends around and as I was telling them how bloody amazing I was just tapping this fabulous beat out on the kitchen table and this little kid was just loving it and dancing to it and we all danced around and sang and it was the beat I was doing, it was amazing - a stroke of pure genius. So I made the record, it'll certainly be number 1 and is an amazing record. Of course the whole album is just awe inspiringly brilliant, without doubt I'd say it's certainly my and greatest work and therefore definitely much better than anything else anyone else has done but it's because I have such a great life you know, so great and totally deserved. A lot of people say I'm smug but I'm not, I just know I'm greater than they will ever be.
I thought the song was rubbish too.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Just curious...why would you feel like that? Just because he is a bit old now...a former Beatle? Why would you feel bad enjoying a new song of his?
Just curious...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
ob Alan Partridge (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
how about:
band on the run, ebony & ivory, my brave face, here today (ode to john lennon), junior's farm.
nothing like presenting a lop-sided argument. while i love lennon's music, mccartney made a LOT of great music.
he also made at least 4 classic albums: Ram, Band on the Run, Tug of War, and Flaming Pie. They're all albums of depth, quality, and craftsmanship.
harrison is another one you short changed, but we'll leave it at that.
Re: (Score:2)
What is your beef with him? (Score:2)
So what is exactly wrong with him?
Re: (Score:2)
At one time, oh about 40 years ago, he was an "important figure" in popular music.
Now? Pretty much completely irrelevant.
What's wrong with him? He's still deluding himself that he's relevant.
Hell, Mick fucking Jagger is a more relevant figure in pop music, and Mick's completely irrelevant....If those old fucks weren't so pathetic, they would almost be funny!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh c'mon...you at least gotta be rooting for Keith Richards...I mean, just the mere fact that the 'human-riff' is still breathing, and inspiring pirate characters, and banging out open-G chords on a 5 string telecaster....
Well...at least you gotta root for one of the last of the rock and rollers...I doubt we'll see the likes of that cr
If I had 800 million in the bank (Score:5, Insightful)
Try 1.5 billion (Score:2)
Not $800 million.
He's pretty much the richest entertainer alive to my knowledge - I think richer than Oprah (who I wouldn't really consider an entertainer anyway).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree (Score:4, Interesting)
If one took all the money that the Beatles made from their work (collectively and individually as solo artists) and stacked it in a nice neat pile I'm sure that pile would fit easily inside the shadow cast by the mountain of money that other people have made off of their work.
Re: (Score:2)
in spite of said system (Score:2)
I find it interesting that the Beatles, or at least the royalties on their music, may well be one of the driving forces for copyright extension/abomination in the UK.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
More to the fact. He started his career BEFORE there was really a system. This was early in modern music, there had never been anything like the Beatles before...no one had seen that kind of fame and money on a worldwide basis before. No one had seen longevity like they had at the time. Not only that...at that time very few artists wrote their own music, and got the publishing $$'s off it.
He started before th
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Logical fallacy: kill the messanger. (Score:2)
Your ad hominem does not address the valid points he is making.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's my solution to the whole msuic industry. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Paul McCartney on people being in music too long? (Score:4, Insightful)
Is Mr McCartney trying to be ironic?
Translation: (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Starbucks had a little get together called 'bowling for Israel', to raise funds for Israel.
you'd never guess who the Israeli side of things was organised by, yes the very same person who organises fund raising for Israel's troops.
maybe not a megacorp that sells weapons but certainly one that supports oppressive regimes.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"The antiboycott laws were adopted to encourage, and in specified cases, require U.S. firms to refuse to participate in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy."
If that isn't as interventionist as it gets, I don't know what is. That's
Re:Translation: (Score:4, Funny)
And in the end....
The mug you take....
Is equal to the mug.....
You break.
All I need is a grande a day...
all the best,
drew
Re:Translation (continued): (Score:5, Informative)
Sir Paul (continued): I'm really excited about the energy and commitment involved in making new music, and hate all these guys who try to hang onto the past. That's why I'm supporting the extension of copyright on music recordings in the UK.
Paul McCartney supports a call for copyright on music recordings to be extended from 50 years to 95 or even 'life plus 70 years' [newstatesman.com]
Available on emusic (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.emusic.com/album/11044/11044254.html [emusic.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad the DRM free music is not in a Windows playable format and requires a software install and EULA agreement.
Re: (Score:2)
I bought the album as part of my monthly eMusic subscription, downloaded it as I always do using the eMusic downloader and played both the preview and the files without a problem. Never a whiff of that annoying iTunes software on m
Re: (Score:2)
Then they made everyone use their own custom download manager, which now only exists for Win and Mac.
I no longer use emusic, no matter how much good music they have.
Linux Download Managers (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1. Sign in
2. Click "Your account"
3. Click "Change download manager" [emusic.com] on the left side
4. Click "Disable eMusic Download Manager"
5. ???
6. Profit!
From him to you (Score:2)
if there's anything I can do (with music):
just call your ISP
and it'll send it along
with love from me to you!
(And your money from you to me)
Interesting comment... (Score:5, Interesting)
Now Howard is one of those dinosaurs when it comes to distributing music; he constantly rails against YouTube, thinks file sharing is ruining the music business, etc etc.
Anyway, Howard said to Levine (and I won't have these quotes quite right): "I feel really bad for you guys, it's tough to make it in the music business because people won't pay for music anymore, they want to get it for free"
And Levine said something interesting "Don't feel bad for the musicians. The music industry is screwed up, but musicians have so many ways to make money from the internet. We couldn't have made it without the internet".
Levine didn't stop there, he said what other musicians have confirmed... "Of all he ways we made money, despite selling 10 million records [might've heard this wrong], we made *no money from CD sales*. All of our money came from touring and merchandising"
Unfortunately, Howard can be quite insightful on when to follow up, but he ignore this little exchange, probably because it doesn't fit his opinions, but maybe because he was bored with it. But to sell so many CD's and not make any money from it. I just wish somebody would take these quote from successful musicians and play them in front of Congress so that somebody will say "Well gee, who are we protecting with these draconian copyright and copyright extension laws? It doesn't appear to be the musicians at all!"
Re:Interesting comment... (Score:5, Interesting)
The Producers and Labels would invest money in getting the album put together, but it was all contractually recouped if anything came of it. Very rarely do the labels actually lose money on an artist. They at least make enough to cover their investment, and they do a great deal of free/low cost research about how the music will be accepted. A lot of producers own radio stations or other music related businesses that gives them easy access to the target market.
They also charge pretty huge for "studio time", which is almost all profit since the equipment has all long since been paid for and with the number of recording studios in LA the rental rates really should be next to nothing.
Very rarely does an unknown band get to keep their own copyright. The studio will push for changes to the music and changes to the words in order to achieve at least "collaborative" standing in the unlikely event of a dispute.
I've watched as guys got bullied into contracts. It's brutal to the extreme (mentally, not physically). I remember an incident where a mother got involved. She was pretty tough, but all she really got in negotiation was a guaranteed video production. They passed the video project off to a student with a minuscule budget - basically the lead singer on the roof with a brief scene coming out of a studio limo.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It wont cost them much, they can use p2p so they have very little bandwidth costs. Each download will serve as an advert for their merchandise, live shows etc. Artists wouldnt lose out, because they make no money anyway. Not to mention all the new fans it would attract:
A lot of people would never download pirated music, and wouldnt want to waste their money buying a CD from a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Contracts - existing contracts prevent popular acts from doing it. All of the one-hit wonders are under contract for future albums. Those that have sustained success through the 3-6 album contracts end up with other issues. That's the reason why Prince is now "The artist formerly known as Prince" - he doesn't own his own name anymore.
2) Marketing - small acts have a tough time getting their name out there. Even bands that enjoy extreme local popularity can't go national without
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad he did not get back the drive he had up to and including the album Come [wikipedia.org]. It's been mostly downhill from there.
Re: (Score:2)
The artists don't 'make no money'. They make minimal money that barely covers costs, but they also gain world-wide advertising and promotion. How many bands do you know that have figured out how to promote themselves locally, let alone world-wide? They all have agents for that, so they can concentrate on the music.
Don't get me wrong... The RIAA is raping everyone. But the artists don't get 'nothing' from it. If they did, they wouldn't have signed that cont
Re:Interesting comment... (Score:4, Informative)
Bob
Re:Interesting comment... (Score:4, Interesting)
- Get a good music lawyer before signing anything. If the record company refuses to deal with you once you've "lawyered up" then walk away
- Try distributing and marketing your stuff yourself. Internet. Radio. CD's. Whatever. Do the hard yards yourself. If you are good enough it will be heard yeah?
- Accept the deal. Make no money, but get famous/chicks/To tour.
Seems like most bands/musicians prefer option 3.
And worse it seems most listeners don't care which of the 3 options the muso chooses in the first place.
And the saddest thing of all? There are so many bands and musicians out there that the marketing *IS* 99% of the costs. Why else is do we mainly download and P2P top 40 crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But how much of that tour money was really generated from CD sales? You see, this band (not knowing them) would have probably ended up in the small club tour circuit had it not been for the label promoting and backing them. While they may have not made mo
Re: (Score:2)
How about the Arctic Monkeys [wikipedia.org]?
Bob
Re: (Score:2)
It's a fairly unconvincing example, IMHO.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Labels try to dictate what artists can do, what their music should sound like--not to make the music "better" but to conform to what already sells. They keep about 90% of revenues. Artists receive royalties only AFTER paying the label for the costs of studio time, so break-even is about half a million units sold.
Ani DiFranco is in th
Re: (Score:2)
Do they do anything for you besides advertising? (Deals with radio stations and such.)
Well, I think its a start... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm sorry, I didn't follow your argument at all.
Sir Paul changed the company who market his music. He didn't like the way that EMI were too hide-bound and stuck in their traditional ways. He thinks that his new company is more forward looking and he is, for the time being, content with his choice. Where is the problem?
If you expect all musicians to simply decide to do their own marketing then you are dreaming. Some will not have the first clue how to go about it. Others will not wish to do it - they
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the industry is an ex-parrot - everyone agrees (Score:2)
Its tricky (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Judging by itunes I'd say there is a market for people buying tunes online. That would put less pressure on making CDs and ultimately increase their profit margins since it costs le
Re: (Score:2)
actually it was released a week ago... (Score:2, Informative)
The old generation breaking the mould too? (Score:5, Insightful)
Say what you like about McCartney's music (particularly his solo career). One thing that sets him apart from Elvis, Lennon, Cliff Richard or even Mick Jagger is his pure songwriting output. He's penned most material on his 21 albums, he was a key catalyst in getting the best out of Lennon/McCartney collaboration and some books even go so far as to make him the "number one" Beatle.
His music has been commercially successful over four decades, so he spans a longer career than Elton John, Billy Joel or Jimmy Buffett. He's been with a major label - EMI - and been through vinyl, cassette, CD and now MP3/AAC digital formats. He is a songwriter as well as a musician, and he has a big catalogue.
So, it's refreshing to hear him state that the music business is out of marketing ideas and out of tune with possibilities. Even if you don't like him...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now, I'm sure that a bunch of people will come over and say they really don't like anything he wrote, just to make a point. But, heck, a guy that was part of the duo with 25 platinum singles on the Beatles alone ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Beatles_hit_s ingles#Singles_sales_figures [wikipedia.org] ) prob
Re: (Score:2)
Music = no | Industry = yes (Score:2, Insightful)
Doonesbury foresaw this! (Score:2)
http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.h
Re: (Score:2)
A bit rich (Score:2, Insightful)
It's almost like Saul being converted on the way to Damascus.
Really? (Score:2)
Oddly enough Sir Paul didn't find it disturbing when he was sucking off the teat of the industry and wasn't disturbed when the brokering of the rights to "his" music was making him the richest musician in history.
Oh please, don't be puerile. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I'll bite. Whose music was it, if it wasn't his? And after all those millions of people bought it, who should have got the money?
DRM (Score:2)
From the summary:
At that point, I thought that he was disappointed that EMI would be publishing music without draconian DRM, and that this was the reason why he ended his relationship with them.
Turned out to be slightly different. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe it was because EMI is now dead [scena.org].
From the article: (Score:2)
Or this being Slashdot, perhaps a backup strategy relying on a Beowulf cluster of somethings.
Good old Paul... (Score:3, Funny)