The death of the Record Industry

moxham123 · Post by **moxham123** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:07 pm

The death of the Record Industry

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/01/opini ... .html?_r=3

riksylvania · Post by **riksylvania** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:17 pm

Good riddance.

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:53 pm

riksylvania wrote:Good riddance.

+1

RobTheDrummer · Post by **RobTheDrummer** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:07 pm

I find it kind of sad.

Dark Soul · Post by **Dark Soul** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:36 pm

The record industry as we know it needs to die and be reborn as something better that actually cares about the musicians who make it all possible instead of the almighty dollar. Remember back in the 80s when CDs first came out, and they said the price would go down over time as the medium became widespread? Well, it never happened, and we're still paying through the nose for CDs. I can understand why musicians feel ripped off when people download their music for free, but at the same time I can't blame music fans for doing so, and though I have no way of knowing how often other people actually do this, but when I find music online that I think is truly great, I go out and buy the CD even if I can get all the tracks for free online. I feel the band deserves the money. They list tons of reasons for the impending death of the music industry except the most obvious one: that the very music they try to cram down the public's collective throats is mostly CRAP.

The funny part is that I really believe if the music industry actually nurtured true talent and worked with musicians instead of treating music like a product to be cranked out and stopped dropping like a hot potato any artist who doesn't rake in the cash right from the start, they would actually make the money they crave in the long run. Quality speaks for itself.

~Max

Colton · Post by **Colton** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:46 pm

OH NOES. Bands might have to make their money playing out! FFS!

Seriously tho, If the hawks were to record an album, i would want it to be a live album. I've always enjoyed live recordings more than any studio work, and live albums reflect the bands talent a little better. You can be the worst band in the world, and someone like Keith could make you sound like professionals, but then when you play out, its missing all those superficial changes that were done in the studio and you sound like a band trying to cover your own material.

Also, I think live albums make people more interested in going to see these bands perform live.

I dunno, maybe its just me...

Dark Soul · Post by **Dark Soul** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:13 pm

I understand what you're saying Colton. I like live and studio recordings, but don't prefer one over the other. I think it's just a different experience. I don't see anything wrong with musicians using studio tools to polish their sound or overcome technical shortcomings to make their music sound the way they want it to, but I also appreciate a band who can go live and still sound great. Live music is a different experience with group energy and the possibility for improvisation that you can't get with a studio recording.

~Max

slackin@dabass · Post by **slackin@dabass** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:45 am

Colton wrote:OH NOES. Bands might have to make their money playing out! FFS!

Seriously tho, If the hawks were to record an album, i would want it to be a live album. I've always enjoyed live recordings more than any studio work, and live albums reflect the bands talent a little better. You can be the worst band in the world, and someone like Keith could make you sound like professionals, but then when you play out, its missing all those superficial changes that were done in the studio and you sound like a band trying to cover your own material.

Also, I think live albums make people more interested in going to see these bands perform live.

I dunno, maybe its just me...

that's why i'm glad slacker theory doesn't record stuff we can't do live. i actually record all the bass tracks in a very simple pattern so i have more leeway live. that and i hate live recordings. live albums to me sound like garbage 90% of the time. the other 10% is dream theater

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:17 pm

Maybe the artist will get more than two cents for every cd sold?

20.00 for a cd. The label gets 19.00 and the artist gets .02 cents and the rest goes for marketing it. What a bunch of bs. The artist should get over at least 2/3 of that.

shredder138 · Post by **shredder138** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:21 pm

Dinosaurs will die

bassist_25 · Post by **bassist_25** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:32 pm

Dark Soul wrote:The record industry as we know it needs to die and be reborn as something better that actually cares about the musicians who make it all possible instead of the almighty dollar. Remember back in the 80s when CDs first came out, and they said the price would go down over time as the medium became widespread? Well, it never happened, and we're still paying through the nose for CDs. I can understand why musicians feel ripped off when people download their music for free, but at the same time I can't blame music fans for doing so, and though I have no way of knowing how often other people actually do this, but when I find music online that I think is truly great, I go out and buy the CD even if I can get all the tracks for free online. I feel the band deserves the money. They list tons of reasons for the impending death of the music industry except the most obvious one: that the very music they try to cram down the public's collective throats is mostly CRAP.

The funny part is that I really believe if the music industry actually nurtured true talent and worked with musicians instead of treating music like a product to be cranked out and stopped dropping like a hot potato any artist who doesn't rake in the cash right from the start, they would actually make the money they crave in the long run. Quality speaks for itself.

~Max

This.

bassist_25 · Post by **bassist_25** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:38 pm

BTW, I also agree with the live thing. I respect bands that can bring it live. Some of the production over the past ten years has become so out of hand. I don't know how these bands pull some of their studio stuff off live in a four piece situation when there are 80 guitar overdubs per track and a Southern gospel choir signing harmonies on just about every song (when only two band members are listed as singing backups on the record). Either these bands can't reproduce their own material live, there are hired musicians on tour (some even backstage, playing), or there's a lot of prerecorded overdubbing going on.

Flaw · Post by **Flaw** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:44 pm

Colton wrote: Seriously tho, If the hawks were to record an album, i would want it to be a live album. I've always enjoyed live recordings more than any studio work, and live albums reflect the bands talent a little better. You can be the worst band in the world, and someone like Keith could make you sound like professionals, but then when you play out, its missing all those superficial changes that were done in the studio and you sound like a band trying to cover your own material.

Also, I think live albums make people more interested in going to see these bands perform live.

I dunno, maybe its just me...

well the side effects were just figured out.

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:35 pm

We give away as many CD's as we sell, maybe more. We sell the studio stuff, and I hand out show bootlegs as much as I can. People seem to like those, it makes good fans. It's easier for bluegrassers, lots of the songs are public domain, but the BG culture has allowed taping and trading for 40 years.
I say to hell with the record companies and come see me play, where we can be face-to-face. Everything we do is to drive people to our shows, that's where the magic is.--->JMS

Tegamal · Post by **Tegamal** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 10:49 am

slackin@dabass wrote:live albums to me sound like garbage 90% of the time. the other 10% is dream theater

This.

I do like live albums, as long as the quality is top notch, but not the ones that take 2 or 3 nights & mix the best parts together (Van Halen's Live: Right Here, Right Now video, anyone?)

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:00 pm

Tegamal wrote:
slackin@dabass wrote:live albums to me sound like garbage 90% of the time. the other 10% is dream theater
This.

I do like live albums, as long as the quality is top notch, but not the ones that take 2 or 3 nights & mix the best parts together (Van Halen's Live: Right Here, Right Now video, anyone?)

Pink FLoyd's live albums were the best ..

DirtySanchez · Post by **DirtySanchez** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 1:27 pm

Tegamal wrote: I do like live albums, as long as the quality is top notch, but not the ones that take 2 or 3 nights & mix the best parts together (Van Halen's Live: Right Here, Right Now video, anyone?)

NOFX does this and I love both of their live albums. But they tell you how many nights it took right up front, plus they leave some fuckups in there anyways.

slackin@dabass · Post by **slackin@dabass** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:51 pm

f.sciarrillo wrote:
Tegamal wrote:
slackin@dabass wrote:live albums to me sound like garbage 90% of the time. the other 10% is dream theater
This.

I do like live albums, as long as the quality is top notch, but not the ones that take 2 or 3 nights & mix the best parts together (Van Halen's Live: Right Here, Right Now video, anyone?)
Pink FLoyd's live albums were the best ..

agreed! rush always sounds good live, as well... unless you don't like bass with distortion... which i, and most self respecting bassists, do...

KeithReynolds · Post by **KeithReynolds** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 2:03 am

Colton wrote: You can be the worst band in the world, and someone like Keith could make you sound like professionals

Thanks! I try to make the recordings sound the best i can.

Killjingle · Post by **Killjingle** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:22 pm

Remember back in the 80s when CDs first came out, and they said the price would go down over time as the medium became widespread? Well, it never happened, and we're still paying through the nose for CDs

I agree with this 1000%.

I really believe the reason that digital downloading took over is the fact that CD's bought in a store are/were just too expensive as well.

I will guarantee u a label searched for the cheapest way to produce a disc to maximize their profit potential; but not once was the idea of producing cheaper to sell cheaper to increase unit sales ever thought of. I suppose thats not a business model that would get a whole lot of love from investors until a real swing in sales substantiated or dictated that it was possible.

I kind of miss the old days when the internet wasnt destroying all different kinds of businesses.

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 4:15 pm

Killjingle wrote: I kind of miss the old days when the internet wasnt destroying all different kinds of businesses.

I have to admit, as a media mega-consumer, I really like that there is access to so much more music. Live bootlegs used to be a rare thing, and you dealt with poor quality because it was all you could get in Central PA... enter Napster, and hell, I have a copy somewhere of the last notes SRV ever played (Sweet Home Chicago, with Clapton, BB King, Buddy Guy, and a bunch of others onstage at once), recorded by some random guy in the audience. If artists got a bigger cut of recording profits, I'd lament the passing of the industry, but they don't, and I don't. The internet levelled the playing field so that art isn't controlled by investors. It used to be that record co's, promoters, merchmen, and management all had their place in line before the artist... now it's just the promoters and talent-buyers. You can in-house everything else, and indeed, you should.--->JMS

Killjingle · Post by **Killjingle** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:46 pm

I have to admit, as a media mega-consumer, I really like that there is access to so much more music.

I agree with you on this too. It just seems to me that the internet might be the "terminator" or "super computer" machine that takes over the world.

Without going to deep into this... just consider a few things that online shopping and bill paying has hurt

The Post Office
The Music Industry as a whole (including the ma and pa stores)
State revenue from sales tax
Newspapers
Magazines
Books
Independent tire dealers
Movie rentals

...those were just a few that I could think of...

I love the internet but its kinda scary where we are heading

Charltor · Post by **Charltor** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 7:41 pm

timemoney0 · Post by **timemoney0** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 9:56 pm

Perhaps the govenment should step in and conjour up a cash-for-cassettes program. $4,500 per cassette? Sounding like a new PA system

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Sat Aug 08, 2009 10:02 pm

Charltor wrote:

hahahahaha !!!