 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote:
I hope the RIAA goes out of business and is dissolved. |
The good side of me hopes that their tactics show that they're becoming more desperate. The bad side thinks they're just getting more and more powerful and wreckless.
quote:
turns out cd sales have fallen over 50% in the seven weeks since they started this legal blitz. |
*applause* Where can I get this info? I'd like to keep myself up to date on how much they're sucking.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Soul Survivor
|
|
UChicago
May 2003
time: 05:30
|
|
well the record companies charge radio stations based on how many people the radio station's signal reaches
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Personally I don't find the tastes of the public today very appealing, thank you.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
If the record companies go bankrupt, then what? You'll be listening to internet radio recordings produced in someone's garage. That might have been OK for the tastes of the public in the 1950s (Motown, etc.) but not for today. |
False dichotomy. There's no need for record companies to go bankrupt, so long as they embrace the future instead of trying to forestall it. The fact is that CDs are going to go the way of 8-tracks, and the sooner companies realize this and move to the future, the better off they will be.
As computer technology improves, such "garage" recordings--or, more likely, independent recordings made by artists directly or through small labels--will be of such high-quality that the big, expensive studios used today will be rendered bloated, unneccessary anachronisms. Through direct internet distribution, artists will promote their works without having to go through the stranglehold of the RIAA.
And bad artists, like Ms. Spears, will be far less-tolerated, as their musical and vocal ineptness won't be glossed over by studio execs looking to mint a talentless hot body.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
DIE POP CULTURE DIE!!!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
False dichotomy. There's no need for record companies to go bankrupt, so long as they embrace the future instead of trying to forestall it. The fact is that CDs are going to go the way of 8-tracks, and the sooner companies realize this and move to the future, the better off they will be. |
So how are they going to make their profits? There's no money to be made in giving away downloads. Smaller profits means less investment in promoting new artists. quote:
As computer technology improves, such "garage" recordings--or, more likely, independent recordings made by artists directly or through small labels--will be of such high-quality that the big, expensive studios used today will be rendered bloated, unneccessary anachronisms. Through direct internet distribution, artists will promote their works without having to go through the stranglehold of the RIAA. |
Internet distribution though doesn't reach audiences in the great mass numbers as does the relationship between the RIAA member companies and the radio stations, MTV, and VH-1. I already asked this question: Does anyone know of a musician or musical group that made its reputation via the internet?quote:
And bad artists, like Ms. Spears, will be far less-tolerated, as their musical and vocal ineptness won't be glossed over by studio execs looking to mint a talentless hot body. |
Yup. There will be a general decline in the number of new artists attaining national prominence. Pop culture will die. Classical music OTOH tends to be subsidized by governments and the rich.
Hehehehehe DIE POP CULTURE DIE!         
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
|
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
So how are they going to make their profits? There's no money to be made in giving away downloads. Smaller profits means less investment in promoting new artists. |
Who said anything about free downloads?
Look at the porn industry. Okay, stop looking now. I said stop...
Seriously, porn has seized on the internet revolution and has done exactly what RIAA companies should be doing--using the internet as a medium for selling their product. Porn sites which offer direct downloads of videos and images have boomed and continue to profit, even in the economic malaise. You can still buy DVDs and videos to get more bang for the buck, however. Porn stars aren't going broke.
quote:
Internet distribution though doesn't reach audiences in the great mass numbers as does the relationship between the RIAA member companies and the radio stations, MTV, and VH-1. I already asked this question: Does anyone know of a musician or musical group that made its reputation via the internet? |
Such distribution WILL reach the audiences, when that is the predominant mode of obtaining music. Who among the consuming public wouldn't rather carry with them an mp3 player full of songs they've downloaded at a reasonable price--the playlist they can change at will at their computer--instead of lugging around a discman and a CD-carrier full of easily-damaged CDs that cost $15+ a pop to replace when they get scratched? That's the way the future will be, and if recording companies don't find a way to adapt to that new reality, they deserve to die. People won't put up with a more inconvenient and costly method of doing something because they've been threatened to be sued otherwise.
As for such musicians, I can't think of any, but then again, I'm an awful source, considering I know so little about popular and modern music. Regardless, plenty of people in other fields have made their reputation on the internet and have profited from it. Matt Drudge and Howard Dean are two names that spring instantly to mind. Why shouldn't the same hold true for musicians, once the stranglehold of the RIAA is gone?
quote:
Yup. There will be a general decline in the number of new artists attaining national prominence. Pop culture will die. Classical music OTOH tends to be subsidized by governments and the rich.
|
There will be an ascent, however, of truly gifted musical artists. In such an environment, one will have to be truly good to achieve prominence. Well, that's not totally true. See, people will still pay a lot of money to go see live concerts, so I can see that artists specializing in spectacle will still have some shelf life.
Oh, and most Classical venues aren't subsidized by the government. Having performed with a great many, I can attest that most are small outfits that are sustained by modest advertising from sponsors, individual donations from patrons and ticket sales.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Who said anything about free downloads?
Look at the porn industry. Okay, stop looking now. I said stop...
Seriously, porn has seized on the internet revolution and has done exactly what RIAA companies should be doing--using the internet as a medium for selling their product. Porn sites which offer direct downloads of videos and images have boomed and continue to profit, even in the economic malaise. You can still buy DVDs and videos to get more bang for the buck, however. Porn stars aren't going broke. |
You're missing the point. These companies could offer downloads for a fee, in fact soem of them do, but who is going to pay the feee when they can get the same for free? If the companies don't managed to stop this revenue hemorrhage it isn't going to matter whether the stuff is available on a disc or a website, people are going to go for the free stuff. quote:
Such distribution WILL reach the audiences, when that is the predominant mode of obtaining music. Who among the consuming public wouldn't rather carry with them an mp3 player full of songs they've downloaded at a reasonable price--the playlist they can change at will at their computer--instead of lugging around a discman and a CD-carrier full of easily-damaged CDs that cost $15+ a pop to replace when they get scratched? That's the way the future will be, and if recording companies don't find a way to adapt to that new reality, they deserve to die. People won't put up with a more inconvenient and costly method of doing something because they've been threatened to be sued otherwise. |
The distribution will reach the public, but the funds to pay the artists won't. The issue isn't the format of the medium carrrying the music, but whether or not the producers get paid for their service. I wonder how many of the people here who oppose the RIAA's attempt to quash file-sharing loss of revenues have ever given away a significant portion of their living? (Civilization mods don't count.) quote:
As for such musicians, I can't think of any, but then again, I'm an awful source, considering I know so little about popular and modern music. Regardless, plenty of people in other fields have made their reputation on the internet and have profited from it. Matt Drudge and Howard Dean are two names that spring instantly to mind. Why shouldn't the same hold true for musicians, once the stranglehold of the RIAA is gone?
|
A medium that reaches millions simultaneously (TV) is vastly superior for advertisement over one that is limited to a few hundred simultaneously(Internet). Surely you can realise that there is a great difference in sales potential between having your song aired to captive audiences of millions (TV) or tens of thousands (radio) compared to a mediium that allows perhaps a few hundred to hear it each day. ]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote:
You're missing the point. These companies could offer downloads for a fee, in fact soem of them do, but who is going to pay the feee when they can get the same for free? |
You're assuming everyone is a criminal. When CD costs actually go towards benefiting the artists instead of a few fat balding white males at the RIAA, many many more people will buy it--especially when it's also only the song they want etc.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Mad Monk
|
 |
of Ice Cream
Mar 2000
time: 23:30
|
|
Dr. S, my brother does exactly that.
http://www.sluggy.com/
He does a webcomic, and his product is available for free all day, every day. He still manages to make a decent living, because in spite of giving away his work for free, fans are willing to buy books, shirts, and subscriptions to an enhanced site for "extras". He's been doing this for SIX YEARS, now. When the recession caused a hit in his revenues to an extent that he wasn't making money (happened earlier this year), he had a donation drive that covered his needs for this year and next over the course of two weeks. He has a family to support, and he's doing it quite well without resorting to the comic syndicates (equivalent, for all intents and puposes, to the RIAA).
Such is the power of an independently cultivated and maintained fan base.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-09-2003 02:44
Completely legal, too, unless the RIAA starts charging radio stations per user 
|