Is the future free available music only?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=72193
Printed Date: June 03 2025 at 00:38
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Is the future free available music only?
Posted By: Theriver
Subject: Is the future free available music only?
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 12:54
|
I ve only illegaly downloaded one album so far in my life. Money is getting tight and even if i don't want to, i have to admit, i probably will do it again one day or the other in the future. I know this topic really divides music fans of course more than musicians ( even tough we start to see now more and more groups making albums available for free download).
The music supports as vinyls or cds only appeared 50 years ago to be large. Music has been played and musicians have been living off music for centuries without any fo those supports but only by mainly playing concerts and through Patronage.
Is the internet and the illegal downloading only brings back the music industry to was it before the appearance of recording support.
Maybe record support was only a tiny part of the history of music. A music history that will go on anyway with or without.
If musicians could live of their music before without the appearance of vinyls cds why can't they do it now.As well as patronage, concerts their is new ways to make money merchandising etc...
I don't know if you all follow me and i am not trying to apologise to the fact i might download but really i think the future of music will be free available music whatever we want or not..
|
Replies:
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 12:59
|
We are very strict here in regards to topics about illegal downloads,so I will be keeping a VERY close eye on this topic. -------------  |
Posted By: thehallway
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:03
|
You may be right.
But we're talking many years away. CDs still greatly out-sell downloads (the "free" ones are generally illegal). And free downloads that are legal are just promotional right? ...Leading to further sales either from gigs or priced music, so the whole thing is circular; a miserable tautology...
|
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:03
|
Sorry i did not know.Can i know why? Even though i think the topic is more about the future of music than only the downloading itself but feel free to erase it if you think it is neccessary.
regards,
|
Posted By: thehallway
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:07
|
Phew
 |
If you're keeping a close eye.........Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:08
|
I believe that it is the PA equivalent of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy when it comes to illegal downloading. ------------- 
|
Posted By: omardiyejon
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:09
|
actually i believe that music will be free in the future. i am not going to discuss the ethical side of the topic or the financial satisfaction of artists but what i think is 'money' or the whole music bussiness(companies etc.) kills the spirit of music. they look like the establishers of the connection between the listeners and bands but all they do is to push the bands hard to earn more. i hope more bands will be encouraged to release their albums by the internet. this will be a win win situation in my opinion ------------- http://www.normalisr.com/?username=omardiyejon" rel="nofollow - http://www.normalisr.com/?username=omardiyejon |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:14
|
Pay for the music. Support the arts. |
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:20
|
I am not talking about the ethical side of the topic as well. I just think that maybe in the future prog will probably survive to a possible disappearance of recording support. People lived of their music before why can't it be possible nowadays.....Support arts does not necessarily mean buying cds, again the arts was supported before. |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:28
| I support the arts by paying to see them play and then by buying their Music/Merchandise. |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:50
|
This is an interesting and worthwhile topic - well done to the thread opener, who was not, I think, advocating anything illegal. I don't. I get most of my music via download now, but I don't touch things like bit torrents, for both ethical and also PC security issues. I have had a splurge lately on buying new music, and, like everyone else, I keep an eye out on price, because times are getting hard. As to the future, I would venture to suggest that CDs, in, say, 10 years time, will be as out of date as the old vinyl's, in other words, as a curiosity for avid collectors. In 30 yerars time, the same will apply to downloads - something else will come along to replace them, that's the nature of technology. Then, as now, most artists will get paid, rightly, for their work, and the best will make a decent living. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:57
I was going to say the same thing.  |
rushfan4 wrote:Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 13:58
| I think actually since the apperance of vinyls and cds a lot of terrible performers made a living out of musics which was probably not possible before. Maybe it has more to do with the world we live in than the record supportbut as Lazland said .....most artists will get paid, rightly, for their work, and the best will make a decent living. |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 14:24
There is nothing wrong with discussing illegal downloading and the impact it might have in the future.But,in the past sometimes people have made posts in topics like these with links to music dl blogs or start discussing the various merits of different P2P programs,etc.
You did nothing wrong,sorry if I came across like you did. ------------- |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 14:30
|
Eventually all music will be free to download I believe as simply artists and record companies will not be prepared to spend the money to stop it happening.
Interestingly Radiohead's 'In Rainbows' was available for free download before it got a CD release and then went to NO1 in America based on CD sales.
Perhaps it really is best left to people's conscience.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 14:47
This. It's quite simple really. Pay them for the job they do. You wouldn't expect a mechanic to fix your car for free. You wouldn't expect to go to the theatre for free, why would anyone expect musicians to record and play for free? It may come as a shock to many music fans, but musicians need to eat and pay bills too, like the rest of us. It's ok for bands like Radiohead to give away their work free, they've made their millions already. Most bands, prog or otherwise are not in that position. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 14:51
|
I think the good news for musicians is that there are more avenues than before for allowing people to hear your stuff without giving it away. And if I get really hooked on trying something that is streamed, I'll but a hard copy.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Lark the Starless
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 14:56
|
[/QUOTE] You wouldn't expect a mechanic to fix your car for free. [/QUOTE] At the prices they charge!   ------------- 
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 14:58
Those who downloaded In Rainbows had the option of paying something if they wish. It's heartening that many people did pay something, but dissapointing in equal measure that many didn't. In my opinion anyway. It was a good idea nonetheless. I bought the CD, and generally favour CD over download. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:00
|
The sad fact of the music industry is that when you buy a cd the band makes almost next to nothing from that product.They literally make a few cents on the dollar for every cd sold and the rest goes to record companies,managers,etc. The majority of the income that a band makes is from merch and ticket sales. ------------- |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:03
| I think the future will be a monthly subscription for a certain "package" of music streaming - certainly that's what the industry seems to want (as a compromise with the internet culture). Like for electricity or heating :) |
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:09
You do paid for the theatre, like you pay for concert. Music has always been a live thing since probably since the roman or ancient greek time while recording is still a new thing when you think about it. As i said in a previous post recording support might be rembered as a tiny moment in the history of music. I think most of the music will be available for free in the futur and musicians will earn money through concerts, merchandising, patronage, advertising on their own webside.
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:14
I've bought more that a few directly from the artist now. But I do get stuff from a variety of sources. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:23
|
Sorry, but music will NEVER be entirely available for free. Yes, some bands give away an album or two for free. Yes, most bands will give away their albums in exchange for a review. But the only reason why they do this is so that they will gain new customers in terms of buying their music and attending concerts. Think about it. If a band gives away 10 digital promos (which costs nothing, by the way) for reviews, think of all the new fans they could get (assuming the reviews are positive). There's a distinct difference between promotion and just giving away stuff for free. Musicians need to eat. They need to pay bills, have a house, and do everything that everybody else does. In addition to that, they also need enough money to fund their next album. Thus, it makes no logical sense to predict that all musicians will be willing to do their job for free. ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:35
| Of course not all musicians will be willing to do their jobs for free. But are they not many other ways for them to leave from their music than selling records. I think history proves it. |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:37
I would much rather buy my music directly from the artists. ------------- |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 15:45
-------------
|
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 16:15
|
From my experience of the independent rap scene, a lot of independent rappers do better than the major label guys. Sure, a major label will give you a whopping advance to get you to sign a contract but then absolutely screw you on the proceeds from your work. The major label guy will have more money today but in the long term the indepedent rapper who gets to keep the money from his gigs and records may actually earn more.
If you live in major US cities, it's easy to find a couple dozen no-label street rappers who make their music independently in home studios or buying studio time, press their own CDs and then push them on the street and on the web. The big advantage of this approach is that no money goes anywhere- it's all yours. It's the difference between selling 10,000 CDs at $20 and getting $1 from each ($10,000) or selling 1000 CDs at $20 each and keeping the complete $20 ($20,000). Some of the better ones makes 40-60k a year which isn't balling but it's enough to keep doing it, especially if they supplement with a part-time job or shows at clubs and so on.
As for music being free, it does seem like more and more artists are accepting that people don't accept that they MUST pay to hear your music and will only give you money if they feel like it, so they offer music for free in the hopes that some will. And you know, if it's good, they generally do. You're not going to become a billionaire this way, but you can definitely survive. I mean look at Big Star. If they came out now and were on the net, their cult fanbase would support the hell out of them.
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 16:26
I don't think I have a single download in my computer ... I don't like the quality of many of them and I prefer the CD's for the art and to ALSO give the ARTIST credit for their work.
I am convinced that one of the big problems with a lot of the music appreciation these days has to do with the downloads, where almost all of it is geared towards hits and songs, and few people are capable of even thinking of any artist as an "artist" ... they are just musicians playing songs, and I can honestly tell you that the "progressive" music you are searching for is not that at all, and that was not what made it become what it has become.
That said, I think the whole internet thing and how bands can get around, and not tour the world and kill themselves, is still young ... in its teens really ... and in the next 10 years, this will clarify itself even more.
The board has a responsibility to the artist and the music business and that is the reason why "illegal" things are not supported and why the discussion of bootlegs is sometimes difficult and not ... appreciated. But unlike a lot of music that is not on CD's, there is massive history in there, that needs to be addressed and checked out, and this is the part that many here are afraid of dealing with. I don't blame them, but that is like saying that people can hide for 20 years and you pay for it ... or Elton John finally admitting that he was gay (at least he was honest!) and his sales slipping by one third ... and he has had no major hits since!
My hope is, and was, that the Internet brings the "music business" to its knees and helps "kill it". Not for anarchy's sakes, but for the artists' sakes. That said, most 'popular music" are business interests that are simply going for the one ... the money that is, and advertising is making you feel guilty if you don't get this or see that, and some of your friends get caught up in it as well.
In the end, ALL music business will end up in the Internet, and it's a shame that they are afraid to get there with it. The likes of iTunes and many other services, are doing exactly the same thing that the "music business" was doing before, and this will hurt the artists, whose music gets buried and people have this idea that half a million downloads of Lady Gaga is good, and a progressive download is NOT.
And as mentioned above, the other precept is ... you do not get a thorough idea of the artist ... and if KC's first album had come out today, most people with today's style of discussion would probably trash it for an uneven and pretentious album.
It's the nature of the beast, you could say.
They can ... but many of them have to learn something about the business side of things, and there are many people that do not feel qualified to do that, and sometimes getting laid and smoking dope is easier than chasing down a good lawyer and accountant and have a kid with you that can do all the lights and sound!
But it is, somewhat harder, for an unknown band to walk into a club in Portland and get a gig ... on any night with 2 other piddly bands ... and that can be very furstrating and disappointing, and tends to help the bands break up and not enjoy the music or each other.
All in all, even if it is not our strength, the only way the music business can get hurt is if you take stock in your OWN WORK, and a band like Marillion, Dream Theater, have gotten the recognition and fan base they had because of it. And to give you an idea, at one time Marillion was broke and needed money for some studio work for their next album and their fan base provided it, for which they got a free concert, with dinner and CD after it all was said and done.
The legality of it all, is often based on "money" ... and when there is no money involved there are no lawyers out there that will bother with it much. They can not gain anything from nothing. So the legality of downloading something "illegal" when it's free, it almost always a mute point in court, but there are some that love to intimidate people with it as Metallica did with Napster at one time and others, which is one of the reason why I do not listen to that band or discuss their music! Their concept was "greed" and lawyers, not anything else. Or as Jackson Browne said .. lawyers in love!
I don't think, that there is a way that all of the music will be free ... you need to make a living as well as I do and everyone else ... what it going to be different is ... that you will not be paying a record company for the girls, the sex, the dope and everything else they rip you off with glittering and creative accountancy and scam more numbers out of you than ever ... you will never get a proper and correct number of sales, or you would know how much money they took in ... and that should help you put that guy with the colorful flying balls in perspective for you! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 17:30
I'll pony up a little extra if I know it's going more directly to the artist. But I do spread it around: internet retailers, independent brick and mortar stores, individual internet sellers, probably last of these these days is the local chain store I call OK Purchase. The only free music I get is that offered up for free. The most recent thing was an Umphrey's McGee CD being given away at a local store. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 18:13
Same ... I have gotten a lot of free music from many places and had even more when I was doing my Internet Radio show a few years back. And I still get some free stuff from GAS from my days of taking photos of them, a picture of which they used on a poster for almost a year.
I am considering doing that show again, as there is not a single show out there that is worth mentioning that is not doing conventional radio ... and progressive music was a reaction to that ... so I hope you can see the irony of it all and the dis-respect that we are showing for a way of life!
As ELO said ... roll over beethoven! ... it's all it is, isn't it? ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Xanatos
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 21:24
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 09:26
|
Good topic for discussion and I too do not think the OP meant anything bad.......my suggestion is just do not download anything without paying for it first.....100% agree support the arts. I also agree money is tight...CD's range from USD5 (eBay, Amazon, used...) to USD15 (BestBuy, FYE, retailers...).
Back in the day we (old metal heads
 ) had to buy everything on vinyl at about USD12......So the prices really have not dropped changed much.To keep my spending in check, I have been using subscription music service offered by Microsoft, the Zune Marketplace. For a monthly fee I can listen to all that I want and download all I want.....I know the artists are getting paid, everything is legal and I quench my huge appetitie for many different genres of music.
There are other services like this so I encourage those with tight budgets to go down this road rather than the road of "illegal".
I still buy CD's and vinyl when I find an album that I just want to "own", so my physical collection is still growing and honestly part of why I do this is to try and set an example for my kids who also enjoy music on a daily basis.......Plus they still are in awe when I spin a vinyl, that's cool!
-------------   
|
Posted By: Anaon
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 09:29
As an independent/diy musician, this is a truly interesting thread to follow!!  Do you think that free music has a bad image? (Consciously or unconsciously) ------------- My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/ My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/" rel="nofollow - http://groovesandmemories.com/ |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 09:38
Yep. Since some people don't like using the word "steal", I'll just say....don't take what you've not been given permission to take, from an artist.
People who justify doing so, for any reason, will never convince me what they are doing is not immoral. So save your breath, perps. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/shorts/sQD8uhpWXCw" rel="nofollow - It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood...Road Rage Edition |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 10:14
I think for me it is the word FREE......I have never gone to an artists page and downloaded an album or tracks.....I have streamed them to listen but not downloaded. I don't think anything is wrong with that, I just have not done it.
I don't belong to any club, review group where I get free CD's. -------------
|
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 10:30
|
I can exclusive reveal that the future will be either a. Totally free downloads of music from the few artist who could be bothered to record anything b. The artist keeps the album and you pay for each time you listen to the album from their website. I cannot see any other solutions in five years time than this. The technology is there for alternative b. and can be implemented in both Windows, whatever Apple does, Linux and any other operating systems. If you try to listen to a pirate, the operating system will close down the computer and/or if the operating system detects any music files being used on your computer. The legislation in most countries, with possible exception of Congo, also allows this to happens. Only a small tweak and the artists and perhaps the record labels wins back their products. This solution will also apply to the film and games industry. The CDs/LPs/cassettes/singles and the movies you have already bought will still be perfectly legal to own. All copying of digital files over a computer will be made impossible. I guess http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Cassette - cassettes will come back in fashion for the pirates movement. I believe alternative b. will happen and that in only a few years time.
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 10:37
|
^ That's a pretty extreme solution -------------
|
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 10:47
|
Does anyone knows Deezer, it is not downloading but it seems legal to listen to music through streaming on that website. Yo can listen to a lot of prog album on it. Most of the Musea recdord label is on it. Does the artist gets money? It could be a solution for the future.
Another solutions would be to have a small pop up window with advertising when we download a song or an album. The royalties could go to the artists.
I don't know i think there is a lot of solutions and again that free downloading will be the norm in the future and that artists will just learn to live with.
|
Posted By: Anaon
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 10:53
|
Even better than Deezer, it should works in the US very soon, it's called http://www.spotify.com/ - Spotify . I just can't understand that people still download to discover music with a legal tool like Spotify. Unfortunately, if artists get paid, it's such a little that even Lady Gaga complains about it LOL (I think I've never been paid from Spotify compared to Itunes for example). ------------- My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/ My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/" rel="nofollow - http://groovesandmemories.com/ |
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 10:57
| Your single gets 2 million airplays at Spotify and you earn $ 45. That is rip-off by everyone's standards. |
Posted By: Anaon
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 11:25
|
Yep... It's a great tool for listeners but it's not so good for artists unfortunately... It's still better than illegal download though. We can hope that if people like what they hear, they'll buy the album somehow (which is true as well with illegal download some may say )...
------------- My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/ My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/" rel="nofollow - http://groovesandmemories.com/ |
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 11:59
|
Free music is coming. As long as there is a band on every street corner in America and a "label" starting up in every basement, the music scene will remain flooded with not enough money to go around. Underground or above-ground, there are too many bands making too many albums for too many labels all reaching for the same small plate of money...most of them are just not going to get any of it.
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 16:21
Seems like you answered your own question. That is exactly the reason why I'm not interested in Spotify. It's just the big boys of the industry pretending to be indie. |
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 17:16
|
The access to music will change, but good artist will still be around as they were before. I think too many artist (and labels) made too much money from crap music for too long but the good bands will survive and still make a living from music. They is new ways to make living from music, there is more and more festivals ( i thinks) bands will have to tour more, sell merchandising....I don't why some musicians think they deserve to not make good money from music just because they recorded a cd. I can think a lot of harder jobs that barely gets what some musicians get for an average album. Maybe the future be more fair. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 21:00
No.
But free music has one advantage ... eventually it creates a massive audience. And any band that does not know how to play for free, is not a band that deserves the be playing music in front of an audience ... my point being, that you either love your work to the point where you also can give it away to some that also deserve it ... or simply admit it ... I'm trying to make a living off it.
The main problem, and California is an example, is that when someone says "free music" it usually means a bunch of freaks, hippies, druggies and ... lousy music! But don't try to convince me that Phish was free music ... more like over-rated notes! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 04:16
What are Spotify getting for the privilege of hosting those 2m plays? ------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: Anaon
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 06:25
By "big boys", you mean who? Spotify owners or Spotify artists? ------------- My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/ My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/" rel="nofollow - http://groovesandmemories.com/ |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 06:28
|
^ No, the big labels, who are owning the majority of the music streamed on Spotify and who apparently (according to something that I read some time ago and hopefully I'll be albe to find the link again) are behind it. "The big boys of the industry" are never the bands or the service providers, but the major labels. |
Posted By: Anaon
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 06:33
|
Actually, you can any kind of bands but some big labels don't want to offer their music on streaming on Spotify, no Beatles, no Pink Floyd, no Led Zeppelin for example but a lof of progressive bands, famous or not.
------------- My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/ My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/" rel="nofollow - http://groovesandmemories.com/ |
Posted By: xeokym
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 06:43
That is true, I have very often "sampled" music through illegal downloading & then gone & bought the "official" CD if it was something I really liked. I can only speak for myself but I can't be the only one who does that...there's nothing like owning the actual CD, and I'm happy the money goes to the band when I really appreciate the work (well...not entirely...you know). It's not much different than what you can do on, for example, amazon, where you're allowed to listen to all the songs on the album once fully through (which is better IMO than just being able to listen to like 30 seconds of the song, which isn't enough in some cases) before buying, and one can purchase songs individually for 99 cents each as well as the entire CD all at once. Gone are the days of paying for an entire album just to get 1 or 2 songs one really wanted and then getting stuck with the rest of the album that one doesn't like at all. Although, with prog/art rock type music, personally if I like 1 or 2 songs then I tend to like the band's entire sound, and 9 times out of 10 I do want the entire CD. Prog rock is a bit different than your average radio airplay stuff...you don't exactly get to hear that kind of music played freely on the radio too much. |
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 06:44
|
I dont think there is any blanket answer since the difference between a small time group like Tinyfish and the media darling that is Lady Gaga is huge, to the point where comparing the effects of illegal downloads is a bit pointless. "Artists" like Lady Gaga and any others with massive support form the major labels will continue as they are since they can build themselves up massive revenue streams through sponsorship and endorsments. Something tells me Porcupine Tree couldnt. As far as prog is concerned, I think there will always be an audiance willing to pay for the hard copy of a bands latest album as long as we think the band is worth spending money on. But remember that at the moment, the vast majority of still active bands that are listed on the archives are made up of semi- professionals, they do not make a living out of being musicians. To this extent I the major aim of selling music is to recoup the costs of recording it, since they arent likely to make much out of touring (some bands can make a small profit from touring, others make a loss). I dont know what revenue streams are like on merch so I wont talk about that.
To be honest though, the biggest thing that most of these bands are doing today is giving the labels the finger and going it alone. I was talking to Tom MacLean, lead guitarist of To-Mera, at the Summers End festival on saturday and he said that the band got fed up with the polotics and are now rebuilding to go it alone, we've seen Spock's Beard do that this year and Marillion have really provided the blueprint for this. As long as there are people willing to support these artists then I'm certain that they will keep going.
------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005 
|
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 06:47
You arent the only one, but as far as I can tell the majority just dont care, they'll take the songs and listen to them, but they wont give anything back. ------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005
|
Posted By: Anaon
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 08:03
It's a kind of "marketing law" indeed, even if it's sad to talk about marketing and music. People have to hear, then like the music so they could buy. That's why radio play is (was) so important. It was the door to the buying of the album. Everything is changing now people can download the song they liked on the radio, or even the album. But there's also quality. People are getting bored to find out the song they liked on the radio is the only one they like on the album. A good reason to not buy the album. ------------- My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/ My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/" rel="nofollow - http://groovesandmemories.com/ |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 15 2010 at 08:33
Spotify = payment spotty at best? ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 06:39
Yeah, but you can pay for singles and even there, people will just take the songs, no matter how much they like them, and never pay for them. Often the justification for this is "They're rich, I'm not". ------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005
|
Posted By: Anaon
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 07:51
|
Yep, I know... That's what I say it "was" important, it's already the past actually...
------------- My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/" rel="nofollow - http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/ My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/" rel="nofollow - http://groovesandmemories.com/ |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 08:32
|
In the future, music won't be either available or free.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 09:37
|
In the old days, bands had to work for months/years playing live and perfecting their songs hoping to scrape up enough money for 8 hours at the local studio to make a demo. Working hard, making demos and playing shows used to be something bands had to do to "get a deal"...that record deal was the brass ring. Now that those brass rings are sold on the internet, music, in all its genres, is saturated.
These days, for less than what those 8 hours used to cost, a band can buy Pro-Tools (or even worse, download a pirated version), learn how to use it and record thier songs. The next thing you know, there are "bands" everywhere! Just because you wrote a song and had enough money for a computer does not mean you are owed a living.
In the future, live music will begin to take precedent again over recorded music. The saturation will get so bad that people will quit putting the time/money into recording and simply go out and play then offer recordings of the shows or possibly recorded singles to their core audience.
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 09:45
Errm, NO. No band can get anywhere that fast, because the public only shows up when it hears actual quality. The fact that bands now have available a different model to record and release their music doesn't mean that the audiences have given up their demands. |
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 10:17
Errm, YES...have you seen the internet?
 There are more "bands" (ie groups of people trying to sell their recorded music) online than there are insect species in the rain forest. |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 10:21
So? Does that help them in any way if the music is not good? |
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 10:27
It's like opening a bar in a small town with 20 bars already there...people only have so much money to spend and just because you open a bar and people want to drink doesn't mean that Bar #21 will make it.
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 10:35
| But most of the bands who choose the alternative development model offer their music for free, there's no need to pay for their music. If there are bars with free drinks then people with flock to them. The only condition is to have the drinks just as good as in a regular bar - which is the real issue. |
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 10:57
I see what you're saying. I am only stating that one reason the music scene has gotten as bad as it is overcrowding...too many bands reaching for the same plate of money and not enough audience to go around.
Of course if you offer your music for free, there's no harm and no foul. But offering it for free is kind of a moot point when even if you didn't people would still get it for free. The difference is you're just going into not expecting money for it.
AND
Offering it for free doesn't guarantee an audience. People can't take your free offer if they don't know you're there. To let them know that, you have to find a way to stand out amongst the thousands of other bands competing for people's attention.
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 11:16
I don't think that having more bands and a tougher competition is bad, but the contrary. From my perspective of an end user that's how I see it.
That may apply to major bands, but for new bands with no previous exposure you can't say that "people would still get their music for free".
By this time there are already channels of distribution for free music. Myself, like others, have subscribed to various net labels and blogs who disseminate quality free music. A small audience, indeed, or at least so far, but very well oriented. |
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 11:36
Of course, in theory competition weeds out the weak (in this case the bad music).
But, too many bands to weed through can also cause "audience fatigue". Too many bands having easy access to recording equipment and the internet can quickly and easily tip the good to bad ratio sharply to the bad. It just makes the listener's job harder. Too many bad bands means that some of the good bands will sadly go unnoticed.
The listener's job gets harder having to wade through an ocean of bad music to find the good and the band's job gets harder trying to stand out in that ocean.
If a single CD is made and sold by a new band, then it's gonna get uploaded by somebody, somewhere. So whether this new band sells it or gives it away, many, many people will still get it for free.
That sounds awesome! Small audiences are the way to go anyway, IMO. A small, core group of fans who love you for what you do and who can follow you through any changes or shifts you may go through as a musician. King's X is a great example of this.
|
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 14:41
|
This is a very delicated subject and I'm afraid I do not have the answer either... here go some thoughts though:
Patronage was indeed common in the past, but I'm afraid it's not anymore for musicians. Nowadays we the audience are the patrons, whenever we pay for enjoying the work that the musicians have produced.
In the case of mainstream music, I'd guess CD albums could disappear quickly. It is based on songs not on albums, so most of its audience will be happy to live with radio airplay, 1-song download from iTunes etc. I do not see much future in people wanting to buy a Lady Gaga CD album of 70 minutes.
However for prog (and many other musical styles) it is quite different. I like to own the CD album, among other things because of the artwork, lyrics etc. Of course if you are patient you can also find and download these, but when you consider the time it takes you, at your average hourly rate, you find that it's cheaper to buy the original CD, and the quality is always better.
To those who say that illegal downloading will be made impossible by the future operating systems, it's likely to be so, but experience tells us that some backdoor will always be found. The question then is again that if the effort you have to make to get an illegal download is bigger than the cost of a new CD, then it looses all meaning.
I think free music must remain as a way to taste the music before you buy it, a promotional tool, which is very positive for the musicians, but if they and their industry are clever enough, they will always make it sure that the original CD (or whatever media it will be) will have enough attractive points as to make fans wanting to buy it.
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 15:17
|
Not until we have those flying cars, I think we're well overdue.
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 15:33
I had a similar conversation on a Metal forum. Like Prog, Metal fans are a "physical product" audience. CDs/physical format will continue to exist in some form for these genres. I could care less if Lady Gaga or Justin Beiber went 100% digital...but the day I can't buy a new, underground Prog CD I've discovered will be a sad one.
|
Posted By: Gerinski
Date Posted: October 19 2010 at 16:40
| I think many bands have realised this and therefore they make an effort that the artwork, sleeve booklet etc are good, so that people will feel like wanting to own the original CD rather than dowloaded tracks. I guess it's a good thing for everybody. |
Posted By: tuxon
Date Posted: October 20 2010 at 01:24
|
Internet just provided a need for a different bussiness model than that of the 70's to 90's.
I think Marillion created a nice niche for themselves, mostly because of a loyal fanbase and enough word-of-mouth and being famous enough to pull it off.
lesser known bands need to accept that they are not going to make much money from their hobby (that's how most bands start you know). we can't all make millions selling records.
If you are any good maybe it's worth just giving your music away for free, just so you can create a fanbase big enough to create money from merchandise/touring/selling records. If you are not any good please don't give your music away for free as you are wasting peoples time and getting in the way of serious artists.
anyway.
The future as I see it will be with free music, and more merchandising, and probably with more advertisement around legal free music sites. and artist will still be ripped off as they always have been.
Only the really big acts will make money, just like in the good old days when most bands were just hobbyist incidentally getting a little fame and than return to their hobby without getting rich off it. ------------- I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT |
Posted By: Theriver
Date Posted: October 20 2010 at 22:41
| What about downloading movies, we don't hear as many people says it will kill the cimena industry. Watching movies on dvs and vhs is relitavely a new thing ( mid 80s?) but cinema did exixt before and hollywood was huge before those supports. I am sure some people said it would be the end of cinema when tv channels decided to broadcast some. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: October 21 2010 at 00:01
|
Looks like. But there will always be the hardcore fans that will donate, either by purchasing the physical thing or sending in money. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: October 21 2010 at 05:30
|
I think that in future, more and more artists will self-release, so album's cost will drastically decrease. But the artists themselves will still get about the same money as they were receiving before. Promotion, paying all these people in music business, expensive recording sessions, fees ... Some of these costs are important, but most of them aren't. ------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu  Even my |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: October 21 2010 at 06:04
|
Here's my take on what the future of music will be: Serious artists will more and more shift towards making money from performing or selling their music themselves. They'll also record, produce and promote the music themselves, cutting out the middle men. Many of them will have regular jobs and record music in their spare time. As technology continues to improve, it will take less and less time and money to record high quality music, so musicians will depend less on how much money they make with albums. Consider Spock's Beard's latest album, or Maudlin of the Well's last album - 20 years ago it would not have been feasible for a band to produce such high quality music on such small budgets. Today it is, and this paves the way for a generation of musicians that don't plan their future in accordance with how many thousands or millions of albums they sell. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Pelata
Date Posted: October 21 2010 at 12:12
Every DVD I've rented in the last 5 years has a short film included in the previews that talks about how pirating DVDs is stealing and how it hurts the movie industry. It's just not as widespread or convenient as sharing/downloading music.
|