Students put their own spin on downloading music

USA today ^ | 4.20.03 | Jefferson Graham

[freepatriot32]

LOS ANGELES

[MacDorcha]

exactly!

[MacDorcha]

toy steve-b:
why does one phrase have to condemn someone to being a "jackass"? could it be that all you have left is personal attacks?

[MacDorcha]

and when you come to realize that most "commentators" can't tell the Aerosmith from Guns n' Roses, then what?

[Not Insane]

__quit gassing up your car then.__

I ride a bicycle or motorcycle to work.

[Not Insane]

You make some good points in your post. There are so many issues at play here. One really IS that when you have an industry like the one we have had for the last few decades, a lot of crap really DOES rise to the top for one simple reason: It's different than what peaople heard yesterday.

Modern pop is "throw away" music. It is also what is being affected by this downloading stuff. My daughter downloads classical music that she is playing in her high school orchestra, so she can better understand what it sounds like. She would never shell out the money if she had to buy it. I do the same for music I am going to cover. Again, I would not purchase it, or I already have it on a CD or vinyl.

I can legally record off the radio or sattelite. What's so special about MP3? Actually, we all know the answer: It's convenient. That convenience is going to kill the POP music industry as we know it. Most others will not be nearly as affected.

One thing's for sure, prices are going to drop like a dress at prom night! Fact is, we may not have the quantity of music we have now, but I will expect higher quality because the motivation behind the music will be MORE from the right place.

Music is just too easy to make today anyway. In a world where I can produce professional quality recordings with my computer, a few hundred dollars worth of software and hardware and a 300 dollar mike - and burn cd's from the same computer. Why sign with a major label. All they produce nowadays is one hit wonders anyway. And they end up owing the company money when the popularity fades. Who the heck wins in that situation?

It's like the clothing industry in reverse. That is, people stopped making their own clothes because it is now cheaper to buy than to make your own.

With music, the opposite is true. It is now cheaper to make your own than to buy it. Maybe if RCA allowed me to download any song for ten cents, I'd buy more music than I do now. I haven't bought a CD in years, but I only started using Kazaa Lite a few months ago, my first downloading experience ever.

Downloading music is not the problem many would have you believe. People download stuff they would not buy. They download out of curiosity. They download because they haven't heard a song in decades. They download what they already have on vinyl and it's easier than recording their record to wav. Heck they download a ton of stuff and never even listen to it.

The REAL problem with this whole thing is that people don't respect what they don't have to pay for. I have noticed a trend. That is, recorded music is treated like all the othere free stuff in the world today. Free forks, free napkins, free samples at costco, free carrying case, free tote bag with every order. The "gen X" and younger croud does not understand the concept of a tv without a remote, or paying for the plastic bag at the grocery store. And they will very soon not understand the concept of paying for recorded music any more than we expect to pay to listen to it in the elevator.

Music has gone full circle. The recording-and-selling phase of the late 20th century was interesting and made a lot of people filthy rich, but it's gone full circle.

Recorded music, like a Saddam statue, has been pulled from it's pedestal and we're dancing on it's grave. It's time to get back to basics.

I'm a musician.

[Not Insane]

__why dont you start a diamond smuggling business? __

It's not convenient. Plus, with diamonds we are dealing with something in the physical world.

It ALL hinges on that last statement.

[Not Insane]

__why would you let people overload their brains with music all the time?__

I do not wish to control the lives of others.

[Not Insane]

__why does one phrase have to condemn someone to being a "jackass"? could it be that all you have left is personal attacks? __


What you said! Which is why I decided to honor Discostus refusal to continue after his tyrade of insults.

[js1138]

most of the music most of us heard in the 50s and 60s and 70s was free. It was on radio. If you really liked it you bought it. MP3s are like cheap art prints. you look for a while, then throw away. If you want something good you pay for it.

Perhaps live performance is the only way to make a lot of money in the future. Such a shame.

[Not Insane]

Your analogy of cheap art prints is a good one.

If I really like music, I buy it. Of course, that hasn't happened in a few years. I HAVE, however, bought several concerts on DVD.

I don't consider what's happening a shame however, mainly because I don't know how it will play out yet. It'll be interesting to watch, though.

I have pri

[js1138]

The music industry needs to price its product according to quality of the "print" and cost of production. I can imagine a system in which relatively low quality MP3s are available for a reasonable subscription fee, without regard to qualtity. These would be promos, pretty much like AM radio used to be. Any song or any band that attracted enough attention would justify release of quality CDs or audio DVDs, not to mentioned tours.

Right now the music industry loses money on 90 percent of everything, due to production and promotion costs. This is silly. Songs can be recorded sampled on the internet at low cost, and the market can decide which deserve expensive promotion. If the CD package includes some worthwhile extras, people will pay for them. I'm no expert at marketing, but I do know what I'm willing to pay for.

[MacDorcha]

then quit gassing up you motorcycle.

im reading the rest of your stuff, and you also have a good head on your shoulders. obviously, this issue is deeper than either of us alone can delve into with the resources at hand.

as for the "jackass" comment, it was a reminder that by saying it, you made yourself vulnerable, and thus, falable in that instance. both of you seemed to have moments of assness... of the jack variety.

i think it may be best (and i think... from reading your thoughts on this, that you would agree) it is best to just watch this thing play out. music itself cannot possibly "die", it's as old as human thought itself. but we both feel different on what is the "right" thing to do.

oh well, it's good to excercise the ol brain! keep thinking, you're good at it ;)

[MacDorcha]

"It's not convenient. Plus, with diamonds we are dealing with something in the physical world.

It ALL hinges on that last statement. "

yeah yeah, i already posted the "truce" just throwing this up in the air too.

why do you never hear "happy birthday" on tv?

[Bulldogger]

"Recorded music, like a Saddam statue, has been pulled from it's pedestal and we're dancing on it's grave. It's time to get back to basics."

By "back to basics," do you mean artists putting less emphasis on CDs as a revenue source and more emphasis on live performance and merchandise as revenue sources?

I'm a recording artist trying to make my hobby into a profitable career. It seems I've picked some turbulent times in the music biz in which to do it.

[Not Insane]

__By "back to basics," do you mean artists putting less emphasis on CDs as a revenue source and more emphasis on live performance and merchandise as revenue sources?__

Yeah. That and maybe their day jobs. I think people will still make a living with music and it may actually broaden the number of people who make an actual living at it. It will probably DRASTICALLY reduce the number of "non-artists" in the industry, however. It may also reduce the number of mega-stars.

I'm thinking lots of musicians making a reasonable living, instead of a few mega-stars and lots of one hit wonders.

Imagine a web page where you get a low quality sample of, say, 30 seconds of each song, and a cd quality download for a dime? I think most people would pay for music they REALLY LISTEN TO.

Don't mean to yell, it's just easier than using italics tags...

BTW, my guitar player is in the same boat as you. The business is changing, not going away, and I believe the ones with the least to lose and most to gain are the musicians. I believe their opposite is the recording industry infrastructure, back office, etc.

[Terriergal]

I think you guys have to agree on a definition of "gouging" - if the market will bear the price, it's not gouging no matter the markup... at least that's what I would say.

If you charge more than they will pay, yeah, you are writing your business death warrant.

So if you don't want to break the law d/l'ing pirated music, you listen to the radio and don't buy CD's.

(I could be way off here as I haven't followed the thread too closely...)

[MacDorcha]

sounds good to me. i hadnt thought of that, but yes, you do underline my side in the case ;) ty