The Record Industry's Decline

Does this strike anybody else as being a funny kind of reversion to jazz-era models of music-making...? where musicians have to work and play live all the time to make any money, with recording as kind of a adjunct/promotional thing...?

We're basically at a point where it's easier than ever to be a sort of *serious part-time musician*, i.e. work a day job, put out your stuff yourself (or on a small indie label), promote via the internet, and with hard work and talent maybe turn it into a secondary income stream. If you want more than that though, it seems like hardcore touring is pretty much the way to get it at this point. Course there's also licensing and all that, but with more competition for that money than ever it's probably not likely to become a reliable source of income for most.

I was struck by how a medium I really love and get a lot of enjoyment out of is basically being forced into extinction.

I was saddened to see this sort of sentiment reduced to "fetishism", I think it was in a recent thread.

Odd isn't it then, that while people are reluctant to pay even peanuts for recordings, they'll fork out huge monet for live tickets - when I was young, gigs were cheaper than records, now they're a multiple thereof.

eh, 'money'

We're basically at a point where it's easier than ever to be a sort of *serious part-time musician*, i.e. work a day job, put out your stuff yourself (or on a small indie label), promote via the internet, and with hard work and talent maybe turn it into a secondary income stream.

well this is basically what I do now (although "income stream" is perhaps an exaggeration - more like "break even stream")

I was saddened to see this sort of sentiment reduced to "fetishism", I think it was in a recent thread.

it isn't just fetishism tho - its not that I prize the object itself, I like that it contains additional information that supplements the listening experience. This is why those Funkadelic albums, for example, are so great to me, they're packed with stuff that amplifies and informs the music.

WTF is wrong with fetishism anyway?

And wtf is the ipod about anyway?

its the same with the Sgt Pepper sleeve, or anyhing written by Leonard Feather, or Big Black's hilarious "The Rich Man's 8-Track Tape" collection, or or or ad infinitum

x-post

Odd isn't it then, that while people are reluctant to pay even peanuts for recordings, they'll fork out huge monet for live tickets - when I was young, gigs were cheaper than records, now they're a multiple thereof.

The price people pay to stay in their comfort zone, mostly, in my opinion. Know so many people who wouldn't dream of seeing a group play a 300-seat club for 8 bucks who're setting the alarm to get up tomorrow morning to log on Ticketmaster to try and get Police tix for, what, a couple hundred? They're probably going to be good and all, so are the Eagles or Stones or wotever I guess but in the end it's an oldies show for classic rock fans. Although I don't think you'd have to sell one of your huge Monets for even Police Gold Circle brought to you by American Express tix :)

well my understanding is that fetishism implies an attachment to the object itself, the object is loved for what it represents and not for its function...? I dunno, its been a long time since I read up on my marxism...

x-post

THE POLICE
balc 1 - $80
mezz - $120
orch- $200
elite box - $WATER LILLIES

I'm just amazed/saddened that the majority of listeners want a less enveloping musical experience - they don't want MORE, they want LESS. so strange.

I'm just amazed/saddened that the majority of listeners want a less enveloping musical experience - they don't want MORE, they want LESS. so strange.

Except at live reunion shows in arenas, it appears. The peeps love them some explosions!

hey who doesn't

haha our next album will EXPLODE when you listen to it

I think one significant issue that no one ever mentions (i.e. anywhere I know of) is not that the labels were slow to adapt to filesharing (although obv they were and didn't remotely handle it correctly).

I can remember back to 1997 or so when I was basically into stuff like snatching up fonts and warez off of usenet and hotline that I first learned of the mp3 file format itself.

I called my one friend who worked at a major label to essentially warn him about it (so he could bring this to the label president's attention thus making him look like he was really on top of everything-- because he was actually my friend and I wanted him to look good so he could hold on to his as-it-turned-out-tenuous job, not because I wanted to help the majors out in any way).

Anyway, he basically said "ah, that's not gonna mean shit" and i was kinda like, ok, I am really trying to clue you into something that is really happening out there that your company should have a strategy for but whatev., I ain't getting paid for this level of "consulting" so fuck it.

Thing was, all of their technology consultants who were net-booming it up doing for the majors had no vested interest in bringing the issue to their attention (maybe because they wouldn't have known how to integrate a download store into the piss-simple html sites they were building at $250,000 a pop), or else it was just still a really underground (mainly Mac) thing.

I remember there used to be a document floating around the hotline servers called "mp3 wtf?" and i can remember DLing it and being thinking hmmmm, this is interesting. I remember it was quite a while before I actually found any mp3s I actually wanted though!

So Saxby, are you saying the labels were slow to adapt because they couldn't really feasibly adapt at the time? Because that's an interesting point.

Something I've found interesting, and I haven't seen much written about it, is how, now that people talk about brands and the importance of branding, major labels now have virtually no brand association whatsoever. I thought of this when Ahmet Ertegün died, how he built Atlantic records and what that name came to mean. And it was a big record label eventually (though not a major), with a lot of money and a huge acts, and to be on Atlantic was a very important things for bands like Zeppelin. Columbia too, with John Hammond. But now, Jesus -- Epic is still a label in some fashion, and what does it mean to be "on Epic"? Or to be on Sony? Warner Bros. has a little, b/c they took some changes w/ alternative music in the 90s.

it isn't just fetishism tho - its not that I prize the object itself, I like that it contains additional information that supplements the listening experience. This is why those Funkadelic albums, for example, are so great to me, they're packed with stuff that amplifies and informs the music.

Oh I knew you meant that. I was saying that I didn't like the idea that someone could get enjoyment out of the physical product in whatever manner could be reduced to the same level as someone who enjoys feet.

I'll never forget when I found that duffed up copy of America Eats Its Young on the wall at St. Mark's Sounds! It was $40 and I had to make the dude SWEAR that he wouldn't sell it to anyone else while I RAN to the nearest ATM to take out what I am almost sure would have been my last few $.

Wait no, I guess you're saying the tech people at labels just had no reason to alert their bosses. Which might be true. But I've also heard it pointed out that most labels just didn't really have enough tech people working for them at all.

Matt, that's a good point - and ironically it's the indie labels who have been much smarter about branding (5RC, WARP, DFA, Drag City, Def Jux -- each brings to mind very specific musical associations)

@Mark:
That's what has been so pathetic about the major labels. Nobody says "I wonder what's coming out on Universal this month." Record companies have been focusing so much on controlling distribution (through retarded DRM schemes, radio consolidation and payola, destroying the indie record stores with crap like this, and a relentless consolidation of their resources behind a few (usually older) bands, that they have forgotten their whole purpose. Labels are supposed to be a trusted filter for all the crap music in the world. Insanely, they thought they could control the distribution channels so completely that people would have no choice but to listen to whatever crap they were pushing. I mean, how much sympathy can you have for corporations that aren't even interested in maintaining their brand value?

And the same applies to radio. They forgot their purpose, and thought that they could eliminate risk by buying into the corporate payola scheme. The whole point of radio is to hire music lovers as program directors and sell advertising around the music those people chose. The frickin' radio stations were so greedy they thought they could make money on the music too.

As far as I'm concerned, all of these a-holes deserve their fate. They took a perfectly profitable business, tried to create a risk-free monopoly, and got burned. Boo-hoo.

whoops - I forgot to close a parenthesis.

or maybe I shouldn't have even opened one in the first place...

And the same applies to radio. They forgot their purpose, and thought that they could eliminate risk by buying into the corporate payola scheme. The whole point of radio is to hire music lovers as program directors and sell advertising around the music those people chose.

Word. I'm 52. I was looking at the book that came with the first Nuggets box one day, every track with their highest Billboard chart position, how many weeks on chart--I heard every last one of those tracks on my AM radio station when I was a kid. No matter if the song peaked at 107, two weeks on the chart. They played the song and let the listeners decide. In about 1988-9 or so I was invited to some label dinner where I was fortunate to meet John Hiatt. At the dinner was a kid about 25, worked for Lee Abrams and was a radio consultant with one of the big rock stations here in Atlanta. Hiatt was just miserable and so was I. This child did not know shit from shine dope. The writing was on the wall. I think Public Enemy wrote a song about this kid shortly after.

As much as I'd like to believe that the industry's decline is directly proportional to its indifference to true music lovers, I'm not sure it's true. After all, Starbucks has done quite well ignoring true coffee lovers.

The big light bulb for me in this thread is the CD copying among friends. I keep forgetting about that, because no one in my circle does it, but I see those wallets full of cloned discs. Burning a duplicate of the latest RHCP for your office mate is the real p2p, but there's no way to make examples, or even find those people. They don't read music blogs, they don't even make mix cds. The rest of the whole RIAA vs Music fans is an echo chamber. The fan who has the wherewithal to figure out online trading is the label's best customer too. I bought my first CD in nearly a year the other day, because it wasn't on eMusic, hadn't got a promo for it, and I was chatting to the store owner and wanted to support him. I have to say, the packaging was crap, but it was a double disk, and worth it just to get that many tunes.

Which is to say, 25-50 cents is my price point.

re:online ventures, Okayplayer was already relevant when it started in 1999, with major label artists on board and although it looked & sounded nice, I remember thinking uh-oh, here they come, the majors have just figured something out. But no, it remains a cool hip hop community to this day. Somehow the web couldn't be co-opted that easily but proved a natural fit for open-minded artists, broadcasters... and their file sharing audience eventually.

Record companies sort of started digging their own grave with all those hit compilations dominating the market more and more from the late 80s, and the emergence from the late 80s onwards of throwaway teenybopper acts who were never expected to have anything but a few hits.

If they had rather gone for the early 70s approach of building album oriented long lasting careers over time, filesharing would have meant less as the audiences would have been more interested in entire albums (with intact sleeves and all) rather than single tracks. The entire "Now That's What I Call Music" and "Hit Album" thing turned the kids less into favourite acts and more into favourite tracks, and this has helped filesharing being a much larger disaster to record companies than had they chosen another path back then.

That's a common line, but I don't buy that one. Every era of music has had tons of crap, most of which is forgotten. So when you look back you only see the good stuff that has lasted and it seems better than it was.

Yeah, there was a HUGE failure to success ratio (both monetarily and artistically) for album-oriented rock.

true, but I think that ratio got worse as time went on. There's some quote in the beginning of one of christigau's record guides where he lists the number of new albums that came out by major labels in 1980 vs 2000...it's like 10x the number.

I think in the 70s they let some people cut a few more records before dropping them (c.f. springsteen) whereas in the last twenty years, either you hit big on your first try our you were out.

dood do yourself a favor and don't agree with Geir

I haven't read one of his posts in over a year.

I'm saying "every era has crap" is not the same as "the industry had different A&R practices in different eras"

Anyway, he basically said "ah, that's not gonna mean shit" and i was kinda like, ok, I am really trying to clue you into something that is really happening out there that your company should have a strategy for but whatev., I ain't getting paid for this level of "consulting" so fuck it.

Out of curiosity, did your friend ever realize how he read that totally wrong?

Yes I'd love to know if he had a moment of kicking-self too. Ah schadenfreude.

the audiences would have been more interested in entire albums (with intact sleeves and all)

the era of the compact disc is the real culprit here. the "sleeve" is this plastic thing with some paper shoved inside. also, compact discs have always been and continue to be overpriced.

I think the real reason the record industry is in decline is that most people simply aren't into new music anymore. People don't pay attention to the Billboard Hot 100 when the Billboard Hot 100 is nothing but music for 12-year-olds.

Stunningly insightful.

I think the real culprit is Mr. Mustard. In the pantry. With a pointy stick.

FWIW, I have it from a good source that Cl1ff B3rnst31n, manager of Metallica and head of QPrime, used to insist that the whole internet wasn't ever going to be of much importance to music - granted this was a long time ago.

what I'm surprised not to have seen years into this debate is some semblance of an ethical consensus surrounding these issues coming from 'music-loving' communities, even in the academic sense. It almost seems like people on all sides of the issue are waiting to see what 'the music business' will eventually settle into before they posit what it should actually 'be', which is making it more scary than exciting for everyone involved. I've caught wind of various models from patronage to all-you-can-eat subscriptions, etc.; is there any top-down models you guys have seen that seem sustainable/feasible(ie. people will actually buy into it)/equitable? we'll leave 'enforceable' off the table for right now lol) or is it actually better to have the myriad players grope at what works for them hodgepodge like they are now? I'd rather defer to some of you with more experience before i jump in so I'm being vague on purpose, just kind of tired of the rome-fiddlers-at'ers vs. finger-waggers tenor that these discussions tend to take on. Like, what is should be next?

in re: label branding, rap has kinda carried the torch for that, which I like - as a collector/fetishist/whatever, I enjoy feeling like there's more at play than just a business releasing a product

Like, what is should be next?

if anyone knew the answer to this, they'd keep it to themselves.

What should be next is that the majors should drop the prices of CDs...considerably. To five fucking dollars. Ellaguru (who the majors should be hiring as a high-paid consultant like yesterday) said it above: the four problems are price, price, price, and bootlegging. As soon as he mentioned flea markets in neighborhoods w/o DSL and fast computers, I was like "Where is this neighborhood on my town?" And I get serviced (very occasionally nowadays but still) by the majors with promos. So if CDs were $5, the majors may have a chance at beating the bootleggers at their own game. Also, those with DSL and a fast computer may just forsake the fear of getting sued and run out to buy the new T.I. album for $5. $5 is better than, what, $2000-$6000.

And put them in 7-11s, supermarkets, more gas stations, etc. The nearest 7-11 to my apt. sells almost no music (I remember seeing a Jessica Simpson [I think] Xmas CD near the cash register once but that's all). I bought a cutout Gary Numan album on vinyl at a supermarket in the early days of CD. Today, the nearest supermarket to my apt. has a decent sized DVD section. But I have NEVER seen one single piece of music for sale there.

And guess what a supermarket in a low income neighborhood in my town is selling? DVDs for $1 some of which include two movies on one disc. Yes, the quality is poor. But not unwatchably so (I know cuz I bought one). And yes, the selection is odd at best. But guess what you can't buy there? CDs at ANY price.

"Where is this flea market IN my town?" that should read. I know where the neighborhoods are.

Anyway, he basically said "ah, that's not gonna mean shit" and i was kinda like, ok, I am really trying to clue you into something that is really happening out there that your company should have a strategy for but whatev., I ain't getting paid for this level of "consulting" so fuck it.

Out of curiosity, did your friend ever realize how he read that totally wrong?

Yeah, every time I razz him about it! ;-)

Well, what does he say, though?

the four problems are price, price, price

yeah I've always believed this and am still willing to believe this, I guess -- the industry seems wedded to hellacious price points that they have everything to gain by throwing overboard, which goes quadruple-duple if we're talking about digital distribution(right? don't the hard numbers HAVE to favor pushing more digital units no matter what?). this is where someone needs to tell me it's waaaay waaaaaaay more complicated than that using as many insults as possible.
this is all assuming we're in 'save the music industry as we know it mode' which is as good a place as any to start, sure.