Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Mike Rivers
 
Posts: n/a
Default Doonesbury


Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  #2   Report Post  
nmm
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Mike Rivers wrote:
Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html

--



It's an intresting concept that Thudpucker is putting out. I'd like to
see the investment vs. return numbers for Reuban Stutter, and Kelly
Clarkson before making a call on the future of recorded music.

I've already heard that the LOw-Fi aspects and popularity of MP3s are
killing the R&D budgets at recording equipment manufacters

  #3   Report Post  
hev
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1109351826k@trad...

Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html



I completely agree. In fact this is what was taught to me at audio school in
the more business related classes.

What people have to accept is that music/information is free now. It is! If
you think otherwise you are in complete denial. A business model has to be
created around musicians making a living from touring, not selling music.
Profit will come from ticket sales & T-Shirts/Merch.

--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=14089013




  #4   Report Post  
Trevor de Clercq
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Call me crazy, but I'm not even sure I totally believe in copyright
laws. I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas or
intangible things like chord progressions or voicings in a specific song
or arrangement. Music is so derivative anyway I feel noone can claim
the complete right of ownership to a recording or composition because so
much in any recording or composition is stolen from hundreds of other
recordings or compositions.

I guess I feel musicians should make their money from teaching,
performing, working as technicians/engineers, or just working regular
jobs. So the "music industry" dying doesn't seem a big deal to me. I
think CDs should cost money to pay for the packaging and distribution
costs, but the royalties are a weird thing.

As far as audio engineers and technicians go, I think there will always
be a market, but maybe not like there was. But so what?

Maybe I'm too much of a socialist or something. I don't know. I'm
obviously opening myself up to criticism and haven't really 100% thought
through these ideas. Maybe I play too much classical music and
bluegrass to care about copyrights....

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq
(a musician, songwriter/composer, and audio technician)

Mike Rivers wrote:
Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

  #5   Report Post  
Geoff Arnold
 
Posts: n/a
Default


nmm wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote:

Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html

--




It's an intresting concept that Thudpucker is putting out. I'd like to
see the investment vs. return numbers for Reuban Stutter, and Kelly
Clarkson before making a call on the future of recorded music.

I've already heard that the LOw-Fi aspects and popularity of MP3s are
killing the R&D budgets at recording equipment manufacters


Many years ago I conceived an idea for a band that would not produce albums; the only way to hear
them would be at concerts and through bootleg recording people might make. I never got very far with
the concept because the bands I'd form wouldn't last and I am a recording engineer and love the process.

But at a more "local" level, many bands are doing just this. They didn't and don't have the money to
make recordings so the only way to hear them is to "experience" them live. You have to go see them.

The whole Thudpucker thing is really nothing new. We talked about the dynamic of how the record
labels were (and continue) ripping off artists. This conversation never ends. Sinead O'Connor was
quite vocal about the cost of production vs. the royalties paid to musicians being so completely out
of balance that she threatened to walk away. I haven't heard much from her after the whole Pope
thing years back, so I suppose in some way or another she may be sticking to her principles, maybe
even doing her stuff independently. Don't know.

Anyway, at the core of this argument is the fact that the bands that are stubborn enough and keep
going, if they have anything at all to offer, will generally succeed in having a career -- short or
long -- at a national/international level. The weeding out takes place automatically. That the
record labels have their own agenda, in my opinion, that in a way they are dictating what we are
going to like, what we will listen to, and for how long, is not so far fetched when you turn on the
radio and listen to what's being played. Do people who have an appreciation for music actually
listen to that stuff?? I wonder...

--fletch



  #6   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Just caught those strips this morning; I'm really not sure what to
think.

The musician (in the sense that when I am playing I wish to be an
instrument of music) in me believes that what Thudpucker proposes would
give rise to a lot more *good* music.

However, doesn't his model leave not only the dinosaur
recording/publishing industry but also the pro audio industry (that's
US) out in the cold, starving to death?

I imagine that I could fairly easily find a gig playing again, but I
began concentrating more on engineering than musicking fifteen years
ago precisely because the life of a wandering minstrel had lost its
luster. Furthermore, are populations really going to be kinder to
traveling musicians than the last couple of generations of clubowners?

Hev suggests that music and information are the same thing; I'm not at
all sure I agree. I'll give you the point that music is free now but I
continue to question whether that's the way it *should* be.

Your mileage will, of course, vary--I'm not trying to start a war here,
just thinking out loud and bemoaning what appears to be my own
unemployability . . .

--Gordon Rice

  #7   Report Post  
Stu Venable
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mike Rivers wrote:
Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html


I am very ignorant when it comes to the music business. I head a local
band that's met with (what I consider) moderate success. We play gigs,
we sell (moderately priced) CDs and a little merchandise. I know
*nothing* about the "real" music business. With that being said:

Wasn't (or isn't) the whole purpose of touring to promote the record?
I've always assumed that the real revenue came from CD sales and touring
was there as part of the record company's marketing campaign.

Aren't the rising ticket costs, merchandising, etc., methods to
meliorate the cost of (and perhaps from) this particular aspect of
marketing?

Stu
  #8   Report Post  
hev
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
oups.com...
Just caught those strips this morning; I'm really not sure what to
think.

The musician (in the sense that when I am playing I wish to be an
instrument of music) in me believes that what Thudpucker proposes would
give rise to a lot more *good* music.

However, doesn't his model leave not only the dinosaur
recording/publishing industry but also the pro audio industry (that's
US) out in the cold, starving to death?

I imagine that I could fairly easily find a gig playing again, but I
began concentrating more on engineering than musicking fifteen years
ago precisely because the life of a wandering minstrel had lost its
luster. Furthermore, are populations really going to be kinder to
traveling musicians than the last couple of generations of clubowners?

Hev suggests that music and information are the same thing; I'm not at
all sure I agree. I'll give you the point that music is free now but I
continue to question whether that's the way it *should* be.



Anything that can be digitized. Music, movies, books, software, etc. They
are all free at this point. The business model has to take shape around this
fact. I'm not about to begin debating about how it *should be*, but I am
here to tell you how it is *now*. The future just means higher bandwidth,
better more transparent data compression (or bandwidth allowing no
compression at all) and more users partaking.

I think people will still buy CD's
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/s...315039,00.html). But I
think at this point it would be wise to start offering a T-Shirt for $15
that includes a link for a downloadable version of an album or what have
you.

--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=14089013



  #9   Report Post  
dt king
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Stu Venable" wrote in message
.net...

Wasn't (or isn't) the whole purpose of touring to promote the record?
I've always assumed that the real revenue came from CD sales and touring
was there as part of the record company's marketing campaign.


I expect we could see an era where CDs support the tour. The big returns
will always belong to the people with the money to buy marketing. We can
look forward to a golden age of huge carnival music festivals going every
week, all year, so the "superstars" can haul in enough cash to pay for more
layers of bling.

The smaller groups and singer/songwriters will feed off the overflow,
setting up secondary acts and putting out the hat. Swag tables as far as
the eye can see, like supermarkets of emblematic apparel, program books and
souvenire doodads.

I'm going to get a Green Day toaster.

dtk


  #10   Report Post  
will
 
Posts: n/a
Default

All intellectual property should be free, huh - try selling that to
the software industry. Registered marks, trademarks, copyrights, etc.
are all alive and well, it would seem, except for the music business.
People who insist that these things should be free are rationalizing
criminal behavior and encouraging theft. Plain and simple.

A different business model for the record industry is one thing, but
don't think all the blame lies with so-called 'greedy' label execs.
Artists and management pushing for ever escalating advances haven't
helped. Go back and study what has actually happened in the industry
in the '70's and '80's.

But, trying to suppress property rights is just plain communistic and
shouldn't be allowed to happen in this country. Free enterprise does
NOT mean that you can steal something that belongs to someone else
without paying for it.



  #11   Report Post  
hev
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"will" wrote in message
oups.com...
All intellectual property should be free, huh - try selling that to
the software industry. Registered marks, trademarks, copyrights, etc.
are all alive and well, it would seem, except for the music business.
People who insist that these things should be free are rationalizing
criminal behavior and encouraging theft. Plain and simple.


I'm only commenting on the current state of information sharing via the
internet. I do not view this as theft or criminal behavior and neither do
the millions of people using this new technology worldwide. What we need to
do is find a way to pay the creators of the information being exchanged. A
great way would be a royalty type system that tracks downloads like we have
for the radio.

Free information exchange is here to stay and growing everyday... are you
ready to accept this new way of life Will? Being stuck on the 'moral'
aspects of this phenomenon is just prolonging a workable solution.

--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=14089013


  #12   Report Post  
Sean Conolly
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Stu Venable" wrote in message
.net...
Wasn't (or isn't) the whole purpose of touring to promote the record? I've
always assumed that the real revenue came from CD sales and touring was
there as part of the record company's marketing campaign.


Touring is how the band makes money, because they see so little from the
records after the record company subtracts the production costs. Of course
I'm talking about the bands that actually subsidize their own tours.

Sean


  #13   Report Post  
Sean Conolly
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1109351826k@trad...

Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html


... that Trudeau is a communist? I already knew that.

Sean


  #14   Report Post  
Michael
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article 1109355256.7b4ddb60f579bb554367d58cc4d74907@teran ews,
says...
Call me crazy, but I'm not even sure I totally believe in copyright
laws. I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas or
intangible things like chord progressions or voicings in a specific song
or arrangement. Music is so derivative anyway I feel noone can claim
the complete right of ownership to a recording or composition because so
much in any recording or composition is stolen from hundreds of other
recordings or compositions.


Call me crazy, but I'm not sure I totally believe in patent laws.
I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas. Patents are
so derivitive anyway. Why should we pay to see a movie? Why should
we pay to rent a book? Directors can make their money off teaching,
performing(?), just like writers. Why isn't ciruit design free? It's
just artwork, right?

I guess I feel musicians should make their money from teaching,
performing, working as technicians/engineers, or just working regular
jobs. So the "music industry" dying doesn't seem a big deal to me. I
think CDs should cost money to pay for the packaging and distribution
costs, but the royalties are a weird thing.


Musicians make music. TEACHERS teach, ENGINEERS engineer, etc.
Just because technology has made it easy to steal a musician's work
(and now film-makers as well) doesn't make it RIGHT! You're not
entitled to the fruits of my work just because it's easy to steal.
It's easy to steal oranges out of an orchard too, but it ain't right.
The thieves of this world are going to make us pay for EVERYTHING
on the net eventually, by their actions. People whose hard work is
ripped off aren't going to stand for this forever, so eventually
this Good Thing will come crashing to an expensive end.
--
---Michael (of APP)...
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/au...plantmusic.htm
  #15   Report Post  
dale
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Wasn't (or isn't) the whole purpose of touring to promote the record?
I've always assumed that the real revenue came from CD sales and

touring
was there as part of the record company's marketing campaign.


before records, musicians toured, edison came and the rest is being
digitized.



  #16   Report Post  
hev
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Michael" wrote in message
...
In article 1109355256.7b4ddb60f579bb554367d58cc4d74907@teran ews,
says...
Call me crazy, but I'm not even sure I totally believe in copyright
laws. I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas or
intangible things like chord progressions or voicings in a specific song
or arrangement. Music is so derivative anyway I feel noone can claim
the complete right of ownership to a recording or composition because so
much in any recording or composition is stolen from hundreds of other
recordings or compositions.


Call me crazy, but I'm not sure I totally believe in patent laws.
I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas. Patents are
so derivitive anyway. Why should we pay to see a movie? Why should
we pay to rent a book? Directors can make their money off teaching,
performing(?), just like writers. Why isn't ciruit design free? It's
just artwork, right?

I guess I feel musicians should make their money from teaching,
performing, working as technicians/engineers, or just working regular
jobs. So the "music industry" dying doesn't seem a big deal to me. I
think CDs should cost money to pay for the packaging and distribution
costs, but the royalties are a weird thing.


Musicians make music. TEACHERS teach, ENGINEERS engineer, etc.
Just because technology has made it easy to steal a musician's work
(and now film-makers as well) doesn't make it RIGHT!



Neither is the ridiculous way the music and film industry has made their
money. $19.99 for a CD?!? Please. The true crimes were commited AGAINST the
public in the first place. This is just sweet justice.

Times are changing Michael. You need to start looking at the internet like a
radio that people are "taping" things off of. Royalty might be the way of
the future on the internet. Why not just add a buck of tax to our internet
connections and then have a royalty based system for all art forms to enjoy?


--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=14089013


  #17   Report Post  
Dave Martin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

These are actually Doonesbury Flash backs from a few years ago - I think
maybe they were written around the time of the Napster thing...

--
Dave Martin
Java Jive Studio
Nashville, TN
www.javajivestudio.com


"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1109351826k@trad...

Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo



  #18   Report Post  
Dave Martin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"hev" wrote in message
news:vDJTd.60838$wc.32012@trnddc07...


What people have to accept is that music/information is free now. It is!

If
you think otherwise you are in complete denial. A business model has to be
created around musicians making a living from touring, not selling music.
Profit will come from ticket sales & T-Shirts/Merch.

If music is free, why did I just spend all that money on the project I'm
currently finishing? I guess the musicians, the arrangers, the cartage
companies and the piano tuners didn't realize that it was free.
--
Dave Martin
DMA, Inc
Nashville, TN





  #19   Report Post  
Dave Martin
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"hev" wrote in message
news:yEMTd.55503$Dc.52534@trnddc06...

Neither is the ridiculous way the music and film industry has made their
money. $19.99 for a CD?!? Please. The true crimes were commited AGAINST

the
public in the first place. This is just sweet justice.

I don't think that's enough, either... Oh, wait - you think that 60 minutes
of music aren't worth $15 or $20? Then don't buy the damn CD. But don't
steal it, either. Unless you're one of those people who thinks that if
something costs more than you feel like it's worth, then stealing is OK. By
the way, I think that an Escalade is overpriced...

Your mileage obviously varies, but I can think of many, many albums where I
feel like having ONE song that I can play whenever I like to hear it is
worth more than $20. Some examples come to mind right off - Brother John,
from the Wild Tchapitoulas, How High the Moon from Ella Live in Berlin,
Pocky Way from the Meters Live on the Queen Mary, ANY song from the Ella and
Louie Armstrong records, any single song from Spike Jones is Murdering the
Classics, anything recorded by Jonathan and Darlene Edwards. I could really
go on for hours about single songs I think have brought me at least $20
worth of enjoyment. And for all of these records, that means that the other
10-15 songs on the record are bonuses.

--
Dave Martin
DMA, Inc
Nashville, TN





  #21   Report Post  
play_on
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 10:15:01 -0800, Geoff Arnold
wrote:

Many years ago I conceived an idea for a band that would not produce albums; the only way to hear
them would be at concerts and through bootleg recording people might make. I never got very far with
the concept because the bands I'd form wouldn't last and I am a recording engineer and love the process.

But at a more "local" level, many bands are doing just this. They didn't and don't have the money to
make recordings so the only way to hear them is to "experience" them live. You have to go see them.


But people still share live tapes and MP3s, if the band has done any
recording... still, as the "jam band" phenomonon shows, some bands are
focusing primarily on playing live over recording, and are making
decent money at it to boot. It's a healthy direction IMO.

Al
  #22   Report Post  
play_on
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:43:05 GMT, Stu Venable
wrote:

Mike Rivers wrote:
Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html


I am very ignorant when it comes to the music business. I head a local
band that's met with (what I consider) moderate success. We play gigs,
we sell (moderately priced) CDs and a little merchandise. I know
*nothing* about the "real" music business. With that being said:

Wasn't (or isn't) the whole purpose of touring to promote the record?


Not all. For many bands touring is making money. For example, ZZ Top
in the early part of their career were a top concert draw, more than
their record sales would suggest. They didn't have a top 40 hit until
much later. The Grateful Dead of course is another example of this.

I've always assumed that the real revenue came from CD sales and touring
was there as part of the record company's marketing campaign.


Most bands don't make much money on sales of recordings unless they
are superstars. Smaller acts are usually signed to deals that are
more advantageous to the record companies than to the act.

Al
  #24   Report Post  
play_on
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 25 Feb 2005 11:29:38 -0800, "will" wrote:

different business model for the record industry is one thing, but
don't think all the blame lies with so-called 'greedy' label execs.


CDs cost about 60 cents to make, and they sell for $17. Are you
saying that the lion's share of that money is going to the artists?

Al
  #25   Report Post  
play_on
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 13:14:08 -0500, Trevor de Clercq
wrote:

Call me crazy, but I'm not even sure I totally believe in copyright
laws. I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas or
intangible things like chord progressions or voicings in a specific song
or arrangement. Music is so derivative anyway I feel noone can claim
the complete right of ownership to a recording or composition because so
much in any recording or composition is stolen from hundreds of other
recordings or compositions.


Absolutely correct. Even the great classical composers ripped off
folk melodies with abandon.

Al


  #26   Report Post  
Trevor de Clercq
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I know your post is intended to be "satirical" but I'm not sure I
believe in patents either. You are correct in saying patents are
derivative of many different sources than just the individual from whom
the idea came.

As far as books go, I can just go to the library and check them out for
free. It's great! Who "rents" books? I understand paying for a
service (like Netflix which sends you DVDs via the mail or going to a
movie where you sit down in an A/C'ed room to watch on the big screen),
but I can also go to the library and check out CDs, DVDs and VHS tapes
for free! And that is totally legal.

Also, a lot of people have software and circuit design for free. This
is the whole concept behind the open source movement.

And by the way, musicians teach. My family is entirely comprised of
musicians and artists, all of whom teach or have taught. Your argument
is akin to saying "those who can, do; those who can't, teach". Yet I
took guitar lessons for two years with a national champion flatpicker.
Obviously, he "could", but also taught. Some view teaching as an
integral part of fulfilling ones duty and role in society.

Tangible things can be stolen, but I'm not sure that you can "steal"
ideas or intangible things. It's like saying you're stealing the color
green. It doesn't make sense. And no, I don't think I'm entitled to
your work, but neither do I think you are solely entitled to it either.
I don't think anyone is entitled to ideas. Ideas are perhaps
un-entitleable (if that's a word).

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

Michael wrote:
In article 1109355256.7b4ddb60f579bb554367d58cc4d74907@teran ews,
says...

Call me crazy, but I'm not even sure I totally believe in copyright
laws. I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas or
intangible things like chord progressions or voicings in a specific song
or arrangement. Music is so derivative anyway I feel noone can claim
the complete right of ownership to a recording or composition because so
much in any recording or composition is stolen from hundreds of other
recordings or compositions.



Call me crazy, but I'm not sure I totally believe in patent laws.
I have conceptual problems with people "owning" ideas. Patents are
so derivitive anyway. Why should we pay to see a movie? Why should
we pay to rent a book? Directors can make their money off teaching,
performing(?), just like writers. Why isn't ciruit design free? It's
just artwork, right?


I guess I feel musicians should make their money from teaching,
performing, working as technicians/engineers, or just working regular
jobs. So the "music industry" dying doesn't seem a big deal to me. I
think CDs should cost money to pay for the packaging and distribution
costs, but the royalties are a weird thing.



Musicians make music. TEACHERS teach, ENGINEERS engineer, etc.
Just because technology has made it easy to steal a musician's work
(and now film-makers as well) doesn't make it RIGHT! You're not
entitled to the fruits of my work just because it's easy to steal.
It's easy to steal oranges out of an orchard too, but it ain't right.
The thieves of this world are going to make us pay for EVERYTHING
on the net eventually, by their actions. People whose hard work is
ripped off aren't going to stand for this forever, so eventually
this Good Thing will come crashing to an expensive end.

  #27   Report Post  
Trevor de Clercq
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Because it's worth spending money on art and music for no other reason
than to create quality art and music. When did people start making
music solely because they wanted to make money? That's not why I play
music and that's not why a lot of people who make money making music
make music. If you can earn a living, that's a bonus.

It's kind of like the standard argument around here of why not get into
the recording industry. If you get into recording because you want to
make money, forget about it. But if you get into recording because you
believe it's worth investing time, effort, and money into something like
that, then go for it.

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

Dave Martin wrote:
"hev" wrote in message
news:vDJTd.60838$wc.32012@trnddc07...


What people have to accept is that music/information is free now. It is!


If

you think otherwise you are in complete denial. A business model has to be
created around musicians making a living from touring, not selling music.
Profit will come from ticket sales & T-Shirts/Merch.


If music is free, why did I just spend all that money on the project I'm
currently finishing? I guess the musicians, the arrangers, the cartage
companies and the piano tuners didn't realize that it was free.

  #28   Report Post  
hank alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default

hev wrote:

The future just means higher bandwidth,
better more transparent data compression (or bandwidth allowing no
compression at all) and more users partaking.


The future a little further down the road is not like that. It's much
more like the pre-petroleum past. You want bandwidth, or you want food?
Pick one.

--
ha
  #29   Report Post  
hank alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default

hev wrote:

Neither is the ridiculous way the music and film industry has made their
money. $19.99 for a CD?!? Please. The true crimes were commited AGAINST the
public in the first place. This is just sweet justice.


Yeah, the way those poor publicians were forced to buy all that music
they didn't want. I feel so sorry for their taste.

What the **** is this all about? Compare the amount of material on a CD
and what it costs in today's money against those figures for an LP in
1966 and get back to me about why it's way too much for the CD.

Please, what a bunch of lame excuse making for theft. "Those record
company assholes **** the musos so badly I'm just gonna steal the music
and show 'em a thing or one..."

Yeah, baby, that's some ethicality for us. Now y'all "justifiers" get to
**** the musos, too, and claim it's somebody else's fault. But is that
_your_ money dick doing the ****ing? My, my, my.

Why not just add a buck of tax to our internet
connections and then have a royalty based system for all art forms to enjoy?


Oh, groovy, now we get a new tax, paid by everyone, even those who don't
want the goods allegedly purchased via the tax, so that _you_ can get it
cheaper? You can afford the ****ing computer but you can't afford the
music? Then make some damned music of your own. No biggie. I do it
often.

Then there might be issues with the new middleman who will distribute
this new tax... "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you. But
you're not bending over far enough!"

--
ha
  #30   Report Post  
Stu Venable
 
Posts: n/a
Default

play_on wrote:
On 25 Feb 2005 10:32:21 -0800, wrote:


I imagine that I could fairly easily find a gig playing again, but I
began concentrating more on engineering than musicking fifteen years
ago precisely because the life of a wandering minstrel had lost its
luster. Furthermore, are populations really going to be kinder to
traveling musicians than the last couple of generations of clubowners?

In my personal experience the demand for live music at smaller events
is evaporating. And I hear from other players that this is not a
local problem, it's national. Young people now prefer DJs with dance
mixes over live music. There is no tradition of live music with these
people and they no longer hire bands for weddings or other functions,
they just hire a guy with a pile of CDs and a sound system.

Al


Those DJs will be ass out of luck when the supply of new CDs dries up...

I think there still is a hunger for live music. But I think our culture
has "forgotten" how much we enjoy it. With the various lip-synching
scandals and the crap-to-quality music ratio on the climb, I think we've
gotten out of the habit of going to concerts.

From my own experience: my band performs at a Renaissance Faire in
So-Cal and we do three shows a day and *routinely* bring in 350-500
people per show (6-7 weekends). The response is always great. I think
it's gotten to the point that live music is considered a novelty, which
is sad.

As far as club venues, we haven't done much of that (we've played the
Galaxy in Santa Ana and we're playing the House on Blues, Anaheim in
March), but I've noticed that there aren't a lot of venues out there,
and many of them seem to operate on a shoestring. Most of the ones that
have closed (that I know of) were shut down by their city governments
for noise or some such. It wasn't from lack of attendance.





  #31   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

play_on wrote:
On 25 Feb 2005 11:29:38 -0800, "will" wrote:

different business model for the record industry is one thing, but
don't think all the blame lies with so-called 'greedy' label execs.


CDs cost about 60 cents to make, and they sell for $17. Are you
saying that the lion's share of that money is going to the artists?


Well, last album I worked on was recorded in about eighty hours, with
thirty-four musicians in the band making union scale, three soloists
probably making better than union scale, a conductor and a producer.
Handel is dead so he didn't get paid, but the arrangers got paid some
mechanicals. I probably billed a good $12k, about half of which goes
for maintenance. The hall rental probably cost at least that.

And I'll be surprised if more than 10,000 discs are sold.

I hate to say it but that comes to a lot more than sixty cents a disk.
I'd be surprised if the label breaks even at $17. That's without even
thinking of the promotion cost (which in this case is probably limited
to a thousand free disks and an ad in Gramophone).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #32   Report Post  
Hev
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"hank alrich" wrote in message
. ..
hev wrote:

Neither is the ridiculous way the music and film industry has made their
money. $19.99 for a CD?!? Please. The true crimes were commited AGAINST
the
public in the first place. This is just sweet justice.


Yeah, the way those poor publicians were forced to buy all that music
they didn't want. I feel so sorry for their taste.

What the **** is this all about? Compare the amount of material on a CD
and what it costs in today's money against those figures for an LP in
1966 and get back to me about why it's way too much for the CD.

Please, what a bunch of lame excuse making for theft. "Those record
company assholes **** the musos so badly I'm just gonna steal the music
and show 'em a thing or one..."

Yeah, baby, that's some ethicality for us. Now y'all "justifiers" get to
**** the musos, too, and claim it's somebody else's fault. But is that
_your_ money dick doing the ****ing? My, my, my.

Why not just add a buck of tax to our internet
connections and then have a royalty based system for all art forms to
enjoy?


Oh, groovy, now we get a new tax, paid by everyone, even those who don't
want the goods allegedly purchased via the tax, so that _you_ can get it
cheaper? You can afford the ****ing computer but you can't afford the
music? Then make some damned music of your own. No biggie. I do it
often.

Then there might be issues with the new middleman who will distribute
this new tax... "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you. But
you're not bending over far enough!"




It isn't stealing. You just can't accept the new vehicle in which music is
being delivered to the market. And because of this thinking people still
aren't getting paid and still aren't utilizing what may be the best
connection to their target market they have ever had in their history.

--

-Hev
remove your opinion to find me he
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com
http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=14089013


  #33   Report Post  
Mike Rivers
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In article .com writes:

The musician (in the sense that when I am playing I wish to be an
instrument of music) in me believes that what Thudpucker proposes would
give rise to a lot more *good* music.

However, doesn't his model leave not only the dinosaur
recording/publishing industry but also the pro audio industry (that's
US) out in the cold, starving to death?


I think that there will always be a demand for recordings of music,
but that the demand will be created from hearing a live performance
rather than hype in magazines, MTV heavy rotation and multi-semi
tours. The coffee house singer who hawks his own CDs from the stage is
a good example. Sales are usually pretty brisk at these gigs, and at a
reasonable $12-15 makes a nice supplement to the modest take from the
door or however they're paid.

I imagine that I could fairly easily find a gig playing again, but I
began concentrating more on engineering than musicking fifteen years
ago precisely because the life of a wandering minstrel had lost its
luster.


Well, if musicians were busy gigging, they wouldn't have time to learn
how to be their own recording engineers and you could start recording
them for fair money.

Furthermore, are populations really going to be kinder to
traveling musicians than the last couple of generations of clubowners?


That's not really a fair question, but I'll bet they'll be kinder to
traveling musicians than to major record labels and big concert
promoters.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  #34   Report Post  
Mike Rivers
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In article writes:

I am very ignorant when it comes to the music business. I head a local
band that's met with (what I consider) moderate success. We play gigs,
we sell (moderately priced) CDs and a little merchandise. I know
*nothing* about the "real" music business. With that being said:

Wasn't (or isn't) the whole purpose of touring to promote the record?


That's the way it is in today's model. It used to be that the record
promoted the artist.

Aren't the rising ticket costs, merchandising, etc., methods to
meliorate the cost of (and perhaps from) this particular aspect of
marketing?


I'm amazed at how affluent certain audiences are. The Birchmere (which
used to be a grubby restaurant that on Tuesday nights hosted The
Seldom Scene, arguably the top rated bluegrass band in the US for
no cover charge) recently held a four-songwriters show headlined by
Guy Clark. The ticket price for this show was $100, and they sold out
three nights, for a $180,000 take. In addition, there's a bar area
outside the music room, while they didn't charge a cover for that
room, they passed the hat and collected another $29,000. And it was
just four people on stage with their guitars. OK, the restaurant has
relocated twice, now seats 600 and has an excellent sound system (but
still has lousy food that you just about gotta come for if you want to
get a decent table) so it's classier than it used to be, but that's
mighty big bucks. I didn't go because I can't conceive of paying that
much money for a concert, but 1800 people did. I think there's some
potential here.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  #36   Report Post  
play_on
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:09:12 -0500, Trevor de Clercq
wrote:

As far as books go, I can just go to the library and check them out for
free. It's great! Who "rents" books?


Not only that, the book's author doesn't have to sign away everything
to get published.

Al
  #37   Report Post  
will
 
Posts: n/a
Default

play_on wrote:
CDs cost about 60 cents to make, and they sell for $17. Are you
saying that the lion's share of that money is going to the artists?

Al


Oh, right. As if the record label gets all $17.00. Read up on how
retail and wholesale works. Then take a quick course in how to operate
a profitable business. There's quite a lot of misinformation going
around about all this. The record company takes ALL of the risk and
pays for EVERYTHING up front- artwork, packaging, promotion,
distribution, shipping, etc. -and that's all BESIDE the fact that
they've paid for all of the costs associated in producing that
masterpiece. Then they have to wait for many months, sometimes years,
to get it back. What's that business running on in that meantime?
Shouldn't the label be allowed to recoup what it spent plus some
interest? It is huge risk, after all and if you check out how any
business works that deals with risk, you'll find they work in a
similiar manner. Check out venture capitalists, for example.

And another thing - if the artist bombs he walks away. Who pays for
that? Because the label retains ownership of the product they might be
able to offset some of the loss by selling that product as cut-outs,
but that doesn't bring in much. Now figure in just how many artists
actually have a positive sales record over how many actually are signed
and muItiply this over and over. Is this making any sense to you?
You're an artist and you want to play the game but don't have any money
- fine, but it's going to cost you on the backside of the deal.
Otherwise, do it yourself and you pay for everything. But you won't
have the benefit of the marketing, distribution, promotion, product
availability, etc. that the label provides to the artist.

One of the big problems is that many in artist management (and many
artists) want that big advance. If the market went to paying for what
actually sold - after it sold - it'd be a very different game. Mostly
because you'd be dealing in real numbers. But, management has fought
that tooth and nail over the years because they'd have to wait to get
paid and possibly they wouldn't get paid as much. And they don't have
to pay for recoupment - the artist does. Free money for management at
the expense of the artist! That's only one part of the story, but an
important one.

Don't get me wrong, I think that $17.00 for some of the crap that
passes as music today is pretty awful. I won't defend the high price
of CD's. But, I've always thought that there should be a two-tiered
scale for releases: one lower priced product for new artists so that
they can build an audience and get some sales and one higher priced for
established artists. But, even with the higher price I will buy
releases of artists that I like and believe in. They are getting
something from that sale which they wouldn't if I stole it on the
internet.

  #38   Report Post  
Trevor de Clercq
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I still buy CDs. After I burn a copy from a friend or listen to some
mp3s and decide it's something worth spending money on.

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

Mike Rivers wrote:
Doesn't anyone have anything to say about the last couple of days'
Doonesbury strips? Or is there nothing more to say?

Jimmy Thudpucker speaks the truth.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:39 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"