they no longer identify with having the *actual object*[/b]
True beyond words. I can't remember the last time I saw a CD collection of more than 30 at the house of someone younger than 24. But I'll bet everyone in the room had a pretty full iPod. At best, one person in a group of friends will own the CD and burn it for everyone else. At best.
However, I'd say that a significant portion of blog downloaders are not customers, because the status quo gives them so much music for free.
The thing is, though, that you have to compare that person to somebody with similar interests and resources from the pre-download era, in terms of the gauging the overall effect on the industry. Yeah, it's not a lost individual sale, in the sense that that person doesn't buy music anyway, but in a previous era, when buying music was the only (or at least best) way to get it, a person that spends that much time DLing music now would probably have also spent substantial money on music.
If some guy sees a CD he never knew about on a blog, and downloads it, the reasoning follows that since he never knew about it before, he's not a potential customer. But that's faulty reasoning to me. From behind the counter, it just doesn't follow that people who are unaware of a certain release are therefore *not* potential customers.
If you give a CD away for free, you'll move more copies than if you charge a fee. The same logic applies to downloads. The reasoning is that one download does not necessarily mean one lost sale, if the potential customer would not have bought the release given the chance. It has nothing to do with awareness of a particular release's existence.
I'm not going to defend the position any further because I can't say definitely what the impact of file sharing is, I really just brought it up for the sake of argument. What I do know is that file sharing has opened me up to many artists that I otherwise would not have been aware of. If I download something I like I seek it out on vinyl.
But then it seems like saying "downloading is not affecting sales" is semantic trickery. Like, it IS actually affecting sales, but not in the way that the question has been posed.
Re TNG - is that really the point? Is there a difference between downloading a couple Elvis tunes to play a wedding with, or downloading a rare, out of print album on Waxidermy and rocking an entire external hard drive full of current, in-print music?
However, I'd say that a significant portion of blog downloaders are not customers, because the status quo gives them so much music for free.
The thing is, though, that you have to compare that person to somebody with similar interests and resources from the pre-download era, in terms of the gauging the overall effect on the industry. Yeah, it's not a lost individual sale, in the sense that that person doesn't buy music anyway, but in a previous era, when buying music was the only (or at least best) way to get it, a person that spends that much time DLing music now would probably have also spent substantial money on music.
Right, in the pre-download era this is irrelevent because for the most part the only way to get the music was to buy it. But the world is not reverting back to a prior state, it will only become easier to download music for free as technology progresses.
they no longer identify with having the *actual object*[/b]
True beyond words. I can't remember the last time I saw a CD collection of more than 30 at the house of someone younger than 24. But I'll bet everyone in the room had a pretty full iPod. At best, one person in a group of friends will own the CD and burn it for everyone else. At best.
My neighbor has a gang of cd's that she doesnt even listen to anymore. She just copped an Ipod and is downloading the same shit that's in cd collection and contemporary stuff that gets played on tv all day erryday. While her 13 year old is myspace/ipod robot. When I showed him what scratchin was he looked at me like Wizard of Oz.
But then it seems like saying "downloading is not affecting sales" is semantic trickery. Like, it IS actually affecting sales, but not in the way that the question has been posed.
I guess what I'm really trying to say is that it's the mentality born of this is what is truly destructive, and I can see no way around that.
If some guy sees a CD he never knew about on a blog, and downloads it, the reasoning follows that since he never knew about it before, he's not a potential customer. But that's faulty reasoning to me. From behind the counter, it just doesn't follow that people who are unaware of a certain release are therefore *not* potential customers.
If you give a CD away for free, you'll move more copies than if you charge a fee. The same logic applies to downloads. The reasoning is that one download does not necessarily mean one lost sale, if the potential customer would not have bought the release given the chance. It has nothing to do with awareness of a particular release's existence.
Again, this is just faulty logic to me. Giving a CD away for free = more sales? I don't see that at all being the case. Even with myself as the example!
And the if... then... argument is faulty at best. It is like putting a kid in a white room, handing them a CD, and then asking "will you buy this?" of course, the answer will often be "no." Like Faux_Rillz said, you have to look at previous patterns versus current ones, and consider how people find out about and are attracted to certain albums in the first place.
Having seen, witnessed and felt the impact of downloading in the actual artist community I don't know how anyone could deny that it HASN'T had an impact. Alot of little/young dudes will continue to defend the fact that it isn't hurting artists because it hurts their own self-construction and disrupts their instant gratification way of living.
More disturbing though is the attitude and sense of entitlement that younger music fans/consumers are getting in terms of releases. They feel like music should be free and that the artists OWE them for all the support they give them by blogging about them and file sharing them on the net. And, almost unbelievably, actual physical theft is up amongst people at our shows and I have heard this from other artists as well. Motherfu**Ers taking jackets, sunglasses, etc. from the artists because they feel like they deserve it for "supporting" the artists.
Ask yourself this young dude: If this whole shit isn't hurting music, then why are independent record stores, labels and studios shutting down and disappearing? Where is the second and third albums from the buzz-hype groups that everyone supported by blogging and illegally downloading? etc. etc. etc.
If Danno or Day or Cos or Myself decided to never put out another release because it just wasn't worth it to see the whole project, years of work, artwork and care get reduced to a free bitstream then that would be the music fans loss, not ours. The music is still in our heads, it just won't be in your ipod. And that is something these cats just don't get.
Shouldnt that EMI/Apple deal bring the "industry" closer to what's happening online?
And would that help indies "sell" in the same manner as the "label" artists on the EnderNet?
I doubt it. Internet economics have brought cultural products like music/text into a state where people don't pay for these anymore. Although there still are a few youngsters that care for the original, this form of consumption is def. over. Done. Only niche products that cater to a collectors market will survive. And online sales so far are a joke. And cosign on all these dubious research papers. Comps will suffer most. And although no DRM is a good sign, the industry still has to compete with illegal dl'ing. Sorry to not add anything new to the discussion. I dont want to get cynical about it, but sometimes it is hard....
If we assume that DLing is inevitable then what are Danno's real options? I think that he would do better to look for ways to make lemonade than eat lemons. I believe that over time his efforts, because of their quality and originality, will pay off. I just couldn't say exactly how. Lots of artists have been confronted with similar situations and have come out positive on the cash side. The Dead looked at the whole taping culture and used it to turn their operation into a multi-million dollar business. It took a long time to accomplish this but nevertheless, one can learn from their approach to the problem of "stealing".
If we assume that DLing is inevitable then what are Danno's real options? I think that he would do better to look for ways to make lemonade than eat lemons. I believe that over time his efforts, because of their quality and originality, will pay off. I just couldn't say exactly how. Lots of artists have been confronted with similar situations and have come out positive on the cash side. The Dead looked at the whole taping culture and used it to turn their operation into a multi-million dollar business. It took a long time to accomplish this but nevertheless, one can learn from their approach to the problem of "stealing".
So considering that Danno is not a touring band but a man doing small-print CDs and licensing, where is there lemonade to be made?
And even with touring bands, I knew a lot of guys back in the day that would book a date for less-than-ideal money just because they could make it all back on CD and merch sales. Thes - is that still a viable market for dudes like the Journeymen or Atmosphere?
Having seen, witnessed and felt the impact of downloading in the actual artist community I don't know how anyone could deny that it HASN'T had an impact. Alot of little/young dudes will continue to defend the fact that it isn't hurting artists because it hurts their own self-construction and disrupts their instant gratification way of living.
More disturbing though is the attitude and sense of entitlement that younger music fans/consumers are getting in terms of releases. They feel like music should be free and that the artists OWE them for all the support they give them by blogging about them and file sharing them on the net. And, almost unbelievably, actual physical theft is up amongst people at our shows and I have heard this from other artists as well. Motherfu**Ers taking jackets, sunglasses, etc. from the artists because they feel like they deserve it for "supporting" the artists.
Ask yourself this young dude: If this whole shit isn't hurting music, then why are independent record stores, labels and studios shutting down and disappearing? Where is the second and third albums from the buzz-hype groups that everyone supported by blogging and illegally downloading? etc. etc. etc.
See, this is what I was getting at when I told Danno the best approach was probably an appeal to the conscience and to hope that it actually resonates with a few of these kids.
We are talking about little dudes with a supreme sense of ass-hurt entitlement.
Demanding that the music be removed is just going to make them perceive him as Darth Vadar/The Man--as someone they are totally justified in stealing from. It's foul, but that's the state of the world now.
The problem with the vast amount of downloading that goes on now, is that it takes away any value to the music. The days of listening to one LP over and over again because thats all you had and you loved it are long gone, times that by every kid doing it and very soon you're left with a generation unwilling to pay for music and treating it like any disposable product out there. Once that mindset is there it will be hard to change. I really don't think getting a well produced CD which was obviously a labour of love for less than a round of drinks direct from the source is to much to ask these freeloaders to do.
However this is the reality of it now, and it's only going to cause more heartache to you Danno by letting it get to you than it is to all those who are downloading it for free. For what its worth that album has made a hot day here go really chilled with a few glasses of red, and I for one appreciate the effort gone into it. It's bloody amazing.
As for the EMI / Apple situation, theres some arguement that it is the last throw of the EMI dice before they really have some company ending financial troubles, which would make their current difficulties pale into insignificance. For those thinking good, be aware that a lot of peoples day jobs are caught up in the majors faltering, the vast majority of people are on substantially less money than they could be earning in similar positions in other industries and take less because they need to be around music. These are the people often running their own labels on the side, putting out niche products for the love of it. I also believe that they are still selling to iTunes at the same wholesale price, so really it's iTunes making the extra money from the DRM free deal over the long term in exchange for a big fat upfront payment to EMI.
Great post, Thes. This part in particular is spot on:
More disturbing though is the attitude and sense of entitlement that younger music fans/consumers are getting in terms of releases. They feel like music should be free and that the artists OWE them for all the support they give them by blogging about them and file sharing them on the net.
Exactly. And the worst part is, you can't reason with them about it--that sense of entitlement is pretty much etched in stone.
Naw, it's funny. I sit at the merch table and cats come up like "yo, I dl'd your album when I heard you were coming through" I'm like "Thanks. I guess" They usually bounce without buying anything. Merch sales are def. down and alot of the indy venues have been purchased by Clear Channel, they want 15% of merch sales, they want you to claim and pay taxes on shit, it's all corporate. They argument that downloading helps us do shows is bullshit. If you get a record for free I believe you are less likely to value the art contained within, and thus less likely to care about the live show.
personally speaking, I still buy music. Do I buy as much as I did pre-file sharing era? Probably not, and I assume this is echoed by most people here.
Instant accessibility has given us the luxury of previewing purchases in the comforts of our own home. This has made my purchasing habits that much more critical.
danno, luckily the music you're marketing is timeless, the dl angle won't hurt you on the level of a 1 month club banger. Your target audience are definitely not the ysi/rapidshare bloggers. So consider it as free publicity.
On a related note, I am interested in hearing the new soundway Colombian comp.
danno, luckily the music you're marketing is timeless, the dl angle won't hurt you on the level of a 1 month club banger. Your target audience are definitely not the ysi/rapidshare bloggers. So consider it as free publicity.
I think you might be disconnected from the blogosphere.
danno, luckily the music you're marketing is timeless, the dl angle won't hurt you on the level of a 1 month club banger. Your target audience are definitely not the ysi/rapidshare bloggers. So consider it as free publicity.
Hand up if you've never downloaded something illegally.
It's not illegal for me to download music. I'm not breaking the law...
Because it's American copyright?
I believe its because theres a tax on every piece of copyable material sold in Canada (DVD Rs & CDs ) etc to offset the cost of people downloading music over there. To that end though, where does morality come into it? I'm no saint I have done it and suspect I will again, but hiding behind the 'it's not illegal' arguement is a bit weak. To whomever said that, if you got taken in a morally suspect but not illegal scam, would you just right it off to experience? I think not.
This is probably the main reason that after 20 years and 70+ releases I am easing out of the record game. Downloading has actually been used as a threat by competing labels.
There is a big difference between dubbing a tape/CD-R for a friend or two and making something available to literally millions from your living room.
Downloading has a negative effect on the major labels, but it FUCKS the little guy.
And Faux hit it on the head when he mentioned little dudes with a sense of free music entitlement.
but seriously, and sorry for the off-topic here, but dudes who are so interested in seperating 'timeless' from 'month-long club banger' are an enigma to me, as if they don't realize today's disco comp was yesterday's now! compilation
danno, luckily the music you're marketing is timeless, the dl angle won't hurt you on the level of a 1 month club banger. Your target audience are definitely not the ysi/rapidshare bloggers. So consider it as free publicity.
I think you might be disconnected from the blogosphere.
I don't think danno was counting on sales from them. He said to me (in the real world none the less hah!) he was hoping to target sales from folks who shop at the "world music" section of a chain store. A la folks who bought "buena vista social club" and such.
but dudes who are so interested in seperating 'timeless' from 'month-long club banger' are an enigma to me, as if they don't realize today's disco comp was yesterday's now! compilation
Comments
True beyond words. I can't remember the last time I saw a CD collection of more than 30 at the house of someone younger than 24. But I'll bet everyone in the room had a pretty full iPod. At best, one person in a group of friends will own the CD and burn it for everyone else. At best.
The thing is, though, that you have to compare that person to somebody with similar interests and resources from the pre-download era, in terms of the gauging the overall effect on the industry. Yeah, it's not a lost individual sale, in the sense that that person doesn't buy music anyway, but in a previous era, when buying music was the only (or at least best) way to get it, a person that spends that much time DLing music now would probably have also spent substantial money on music.
If you give a CD away for free, you'll move more copies than if you charge a fee. The same logic applies to downloads. The reasoning is that one download does not necessarily mean one lost sale, if the potential customer would not have bought the release given the chance. It has nothing to do with awareness of a particular release's existence.
I'm not going to defend the position any further because I can't say definitely what the impact of file sharing is, I really just brought it up for the sake of argument. What I do know is that file sharing has opened me up to many artists that I otherwise would not have been aware of. If I download something I like I seek it out on vinyl.
Re TNG - is that really the point? Is there a difference between downloading a couple Elvis tunes to play a wedding with, or downloading a rare, out of print album on Waxidermy and rocking an entire external hard drive full of current, in-print music?
Right, in the pre-download era this is irrelevent because for the most part the only way to get the music was to buy it. But the world is not reverting back to a prior state, it will only become easier to download music for free as technology progresses.
My neighbor has a gang of cd's that she doesnt even listen to anymore. She just copped an Ipod and is downloading the same shit that's in cd collection and contemporary stuff that gets played on tv all day erryday. While her 13 year old is myspace/ipod robot. When I showed him what scratchin was he looked at me like Wizard of Oz.
I guess what I'm really trying to say is that it's the mentality born of this is what is truly destructive, and I can see no way around that.
Damnit, why do I not have photoshop installed on this computer. Can we get a Q-Bert of Oz picture?
Again, this is just faulty logic to me. Giving a CD away for free = more sales? I don't see that at all being the case. Even with myself as the example!
And the if... then... argument is faulty at best. It is like putting a kid in a white room, handing them a CD, and then asking "will you buy this?" of course, the answer will often be "no." Like Faux_Rillz said, you have to look at previous patterns versus current ones, and consider how people find out about and are attracted to certain albums in the first place.
More disturbing though is the attitude and sense of entitlement that younger music fans/consumers are getting in terms of releases. They feel like music should be free and that the artists OWE them for all the support they give them by blogging about them and file sharing them on the net. And, almost unbelievably, actual physical theft is up amongst people at our shows and I have heard this from other artists as well. Motherfu**Ers taking jackets, sunglasses, etc. from the artists because they feel like they deserve it for "supporting" the artists.
Ask yourself this young dude: If this whole shit isn't hurting music, then why are independent record stores, labels and studios shutting down and disappearing? Where is the second and third albums from the buzz-hype groups that everyone supported by blogging and illegally downloading? etc. etc. etc.
If Danno or Day or Cos or Myself decided to never put out another release because it just wasn't worth it to see the whole project, years of work, artwork and care get reduced to a free bitstream then that would be the music fans loss, not ours. The music is still in our heads, it just won't be in your ipod. And that is something these cats just don't get.
I doubt it. Internet economics have brought cultural products like music/text into a state where people don't pay for these anymore. Although there still are a few youngsters that care for the original, this form of consumption is def. over. Done. Only niche products that cater to a collectors market will survive. And online sales so far are a joke. And cosign on all these dubious research papers. Comps will suffer most. And although no DRM is a good sign, the industry still has to compete with illegal dl'ing. Sorry to not add anything new to the discussion. I dont want to get cynical about it, but sometimes it is hard....
So considering that Danno is not a touring band but a man doing small-print CDs and licensing, where is there lemonade to be made?
And even with touring bands, I knew a lot of guys back in the day that would book a date for less-than-ideal money just because they could make it all back on CD and merch sales. Thes - is that still a viable market for dudes like the Journeymen or Atmosphere?
See, this is what I was getting at when I told Danno the best approach was probably an appeal to the conscience and to hope that it actually resonates with a few of these kids.
We are talking about little dudes with a supreme sense of ass-hurt entitlement.
Demanding that the music be removed is just going to make them perceive him as Darth Vadar/The Man--as someone they are totally justified in stealing from. It's foul, but that's the state of the world now.
However this is the reality of it now, and it's only going to cause more heartache to you Danno by letting it get to you than it is to all those who are downloading it for free. For what its worth that album has made a hot day here go really chilled with a few glasses of red, and I for one appreciate the effort gone into it. It's bloody amazing.
As for the EMI / Apple situation, theres some arguement that it is the last throw of the EMI dice before they really have some company ending financial troubles, which would make their current difficulties pale into insignificance. For those thinking good, be aware that a lot of peoples day jobs are caught up in the majors faltering, the vast majority of people are on substantially less money than they could be earning in similar positions in other industries and take less because they need to be around music. These are the people often running their own labels on the side, putting out niche products for the love of it. I also believe that they are still selling to iTunes at the same wholesale price, so really it's iTunes making the extra money from the DRM free deal over the long term in exchange for a big fat upfront payment to EMI.
Exactly. And the worst part is, you can't reason with them about it--that sense of entitlement is pretty much etched in stone.
Same here, but this will get tougher. Our 1999 consumption patterns clash more and more with these days and times
Instant accessibility has given us the luxury of previewing purchases in the comforts of our own home. This has made my purchasing habits that much more critical.
danno, luckily the music you're marketing is timeless, the dl angle won't hurt you on the level of a 1 month club banger. Your target audience are definitely not the ysi/rapidshare bloggers. So consider it as free publicity.
On a related note, I am interested in hearing the new soundway Colombian comp.
It's not illegal for me to download music. I'm not breaking the law...
Because it's American copyright?
I think you might be disconnected from the blogosphere.
"timeless" is club bangers with an army
or something
I believe its because theres a tax on every piece of copyable material sold in Canada (DVD Rs & CDs ) etc to offset the cost of people downloading music over there. To that end though, where does morality come into it? I'm no saint I have done it and suspect I will again, but hiding behind the 'it's not illegal' arguement is a bit weak. To whomever said that, if you got taken in a morally suspect but not illegal scam, would you just right it off to experience? I think not.
There is a big difference between dubbing a tape/CD-R for a friend or two and making something available to literally millions from your living room.
Downloading has a negative effect on the major labels, but it FUCKS the little guy.
And Faux hit it on the head when he mentioned little dudes with a sense of free music entitlement.
GTFOOHWTBS!!!!
but seriously, and sorry for the off-topic here, but dudes who are so interested in seperating 'timeless' from 'month-long club banger' are an enigma to me, as if they don't realize today's disco comp was yesterday's now! compilation
I don't think danno was counting on sales from them. He said to me (in the real world none the less hah!) he was hoping to target sales from folks who shop at the "world music" section of a chain store. A la folks who bought "buena vista social club" and such.
umm, no. you're silly.