The Record Industry's Decline

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.

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.

Ok, on this I am saying that these "tech people" were all very highly paid outside web consultants (broadly speaking, obviously I don't know everyone), responsible for building these things called "websites" that every major seemed to feel they needed and had no idea how to do in-house (but which in retrospect were quite basic).

Now while these guys were raking in bare dough on one hand while reading Websites For Dummies in the bathroom with the other, they did not have the impetus to inform the companies that the mp3 file format existed (and I am not the least bit convinced they themselves knew about the file format,as it was still a largely underground and Mac-driven format, and we are talking the Gil Amelio years here!).

Well, what does he say, though?

Safe to say he is in another line of work now. He doesn't say anything particularly as this wasn't his responsibility in the first place. I was trying to school him and make him look good to the company's (crazy) president, but it's not as though this was his job. He was in A&R. He had the prez's ear so I thought it would be cool for my friend to make some points but he chose not to. He barely remembers the entire experience of working there to be totally honest.

One thing I think about sometimes is that the whole Napster thing happened in about 2000, right? The main demographic for a lot of music is 18-24. This means not only that everyone who was in that demo when Napster was really going is already OUT of that demo, but that anyone currently IN that demo really knows nothing BUT the age of Napster and if not FREE MUSIC, then certainly not necessarily the physical product itself either.

I think that interestingly, if you were to hang around Other Music for an hour or two, though, you would nonetheless see loads of people in that demo buying stuff, (although between 9/11 and Tower Records closing down not nearly as much stuff as they would like, I bet).

Inasmuch as the industry made its bed by building its entire stoopid businesses around the big hits, it is really more the Kelly Clarkson downloads (whoever that is) off of lowlife places like Kazaa or Limewire that is killing the business than anything Other Music might carry.

The one thing I don't get is: isn't in incumbent upon any self-respecting college student or young adult to have at least 30 or so CDs lying around their apartment, if for no other reason than to map their "identities" to guests? I mean, first thing I do once I have dispensed with the pleasantries of entering someone's home is go have a look through their books and CDs! I guess that's rude maybe but I can't help it, I am interested and it is a good way to start up a conversation too. (Although nowadays it's usually like "oh yeah, my son used to be really into dinosaurs too at that age"). ;-)

Does that type of thing just not go on anymore or do people just pick up the person's iPod nowadays and scroll through that? I am not just kidding, I would really like to know...

Also I want to talk more about that branding stuff but I don't have time right now. Anyone else care to revive that end while I vamp a bit over at this end? hope so, I think it's an interesting topic (and points made).

the last time I hung out with a 16 yo daughter of a friend of mine, the first thing she wanted to do was have me check out her iPod and guess what was on it. I haven't hung out with any college age kids in awhile tho (not since big pre-Iraq invasion anti-war protests anyway) so I'm no help there...

isn't in incumbent upon any self-respecting college student or young adult to have at least 30 or so CDs lying around their apartment, if for no other reason than to map their "identities" to guests?

Is it? Let's face it, 'identity' is constructed by the means of what's to hand -- and it wasn't like CDs (or recorded music period) was always around. If this is just part of the overall shift in what constitutes what you are, there ya go.

The advantage of working at a college -- I can ask a Real Life Young Adult right here, IE my student worker Ricky, who I know has a few favorite bands and all. His take:

* He likes having some CDs around because, as he puts it, it's like he has a 'piece of the band' that way (cf Ice Cube's comment re: P-funk)

* Most of his friends just have mp3 lists/iPod setups.

* He has a *real* disdain for people who live their lives all around music, ie people who create playlists and say 'this is the kind of music I listen to when I'm sad' -- he views music as a way to relax but not as something to live your life around.

* Verbatim: "gaining status for listening to a certain kind of music is completely fucking retarded to me! The whole underground scene of music I have no problem with, it's the fans I have a problem with -- it's all about status, 'Oh I listened to this band when they were in their garage and had only five fans.' You *want* your favorite bands to become known, and that's what any band wants, to be heard by as many people as possible." Plus further trashing of fans complaining about bands being 'sellouts' (using AFI as a specific example).

So there ya go.

hahahaha Ned I kiss you, very Marshall-McLuhan-in-Annie-Hall move there

Did you tell him AFI still suck?

do people just pick up the person's iPod nowadays and scroll through that?

resolutely yes. I'm a college stuent myself and the thing that always happens at parties now is someone has their mp3 player plugged into whatever system is available and insists on playing their music while others scroll through theirs looking for something they'd rather stick on, and sticking it on when the other person's back is turned. It's all very obnoxious. People pick up each others mp3 players and scroll through them, or even their phones or make you look though them.

I'm also of the "demographic" (it feels so dehumanizing) that had napster available when 16/17 but the difference between then and now is that I was on a slow costly dial up and had no way of listening to mp3s outside of using the computer until i bought a cd burner, meaning i was much bigger music purchaser than corresponding demographic is today probably in the age of broadband.

these days people my age are downloading whole series of tv shows like Veronic Mars (don't ask why 24 year olds are watching that) or weeds and burning them and swapping them. Music isn't the only business this is effecting, and I don't think tv and movie execs are really seeing it coming. They think if they amp up the definition and stick more copy protection on players that'll ward it off, but it won't.

haha thats true all the tech geek guys I know have given up paying for cable/movies and are just ripping shit for free off the web

which is great cuz if there's anything that needs killing its TV advertising

glad Ned is here to provide us with Real Life Young Adult example

You're 87, right?

the points he makes are pretty much OTM for me as well (though progressively less so as you go down the list)

though I know I am an exception because I buy most of my tangible music on used vinyl (because a) it's cheaper and b) the music I enjoy listening to is available on vinyl)

(I still buy CDs obv. but I'm less inclined to buy them on a whim because they are damn expensive)

and most of the music enthusiasts I know use soulseek/bittorrent

which is great cuz if there's anything that needs killing its TV advertising

Yeah, but I mean, like, just for argument's sake, ya know, it does take a budget to make a film or a tv show. Where do you expect that budget to come from if everything's free and there's no advertising?

slave labor. Harvey Weinstein could stand to lose a few pounds through hard work.

Its funny how file sharing has killed the industry but liberated musicians so much; we can hear more, the free software, knowledge, people from all over the world can hear our music and all that stuff.

Apart from people who know they'd be making more money if 100,000 people hadn't downloaded their latest album and maybe 20,000 had bought it, most artists I've spoken to don't really care about filesharing. I remember talking to a guy from round here (free improv drummer, been playing since the 60s) saying that most people he talks to get his music off soulseek., he didn't seem to fussed about it, this seems to be the case with a lot of people I speak to… just glad that people are listening and more people are coming to his shows.

Most of the really talented musicians I know, those that actually could call themselves full time musicians, in the sense that they actually put a 35 or more hour week into their music, get money through arts council funding and that sort of thing. Most of them belong to some sort of collective where they all share resources/talents, outside of that, they teach music to make money. I don't see where the record company is needed in this instance.

I can see new music being heard in the same way as those funny emails that go round, I guess we see it all the time with music writers bigging stuff up then suddenly its massive. Its fun to predict what might happen, record companies hosting nights, buying up clubs/venues, more integration with visual media, will be interesting to see where all this goes. I'd like to see music becoming more localized, more live music, better pay for performers, sound engineers, visual artists and integration of other arts into the whole thing. Now I've written this it seems a bit off topic, but oh well.

as a musician who grew up wanting to make albums - you know, pieces of music that came with artwork and an aesthetic and functioned as discrete objects - I don't really feel liberated so much as confused.

altho I'm glad to see major labels fail. Hooray!

I think most musicians who aren't shifting lots of records (i.e. over 99% of them) aren't bothered about filesharing because no-one ever gets paid anyway. It just means you have to admit it's a hobby rather than something you might make a living out of someday.

well, i think we're only only just getting into a time where musicians are starting to understand how they can make a living out of music. its only in the last few years where its been affordable to record you own music to a quality that rivals major releases. plus i think we're likely to see audiences grow.

i'd agree with shakey, its confusing. but most musicians either don't want to, or don't know how to run themselves as a business. i'm looking forward to having a decent van, studio, good enough tunes and a few hundred quid saved to see how well i can do. its like starting a business, a big risk, but i'm sure its possible... if you're any good that is

Like, what is should be next?
How to make money through the celestial jukebox (TM). All music streamed from anywhere, no storage needed. Please don't tell me phone companies will rake it all in due to sheer bloated- & cluelessness of all other major players.

The Celestial Jukebox (every piece of music ever recorded) has GOT to be the model of the future. All-you-can-stream over ubiquitous broadband wirless for a monthly fee. The big question is - how far are we from this? And is satellite radio a similar model that we can learn from?