Music industry ‘should embrace illegal websites’

[Azure]

The music industry should embrace illegal file-sharing websites, according to a study of Radiohead’s last album release that found huge numbers of people downloaded it illegally even though the band allowed fans to pay little or nothing for it.


“Rights-holders should be aware that these non-traditional venues are stubbornly entrenched, incredibly popular and will never go away,” said Eric Garland, co-author of the study, which concluded there was strong brand loyalty to controversial “torrent” and peer-to-peer services.

Radiohead’s release of In Rainbows on a pay-what-you-want basis last October generated enormous traffic to the band’s own website and intense speculation about how much fans had paid.


He urged record companies to study the outcome and accept that file-sharing sites were here to stay. “It’s time to stop swimming against the tide of what people want,” he said.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e72884f6-6...077b07658.html

[HOOT]

If it is a good album I will go buy the real deal, however if artists keep putting out 20 song CD's with 2-3 good songs on them I will continue to download them.

With how easy it is to use torrent sites, I don't see why they would ever think it will go away. They should find a way to use it as an advertising platform to make money off the albums that way.

[Engine09]

if artists keep putting out 20 song CD's with 2-3 good songs on them I will continue to download them.

What kind of bands do you listen to?


I use torrent sites the same way I used my friend's cassette tape collections. Make copies of what I was interested in, if it sucked I would tape over it, if it was good I would buy my own copy.

Kids are different these days though, they don't mind mp3s and can listen to 96kbps rips all day, happy as hell. I'll never pay for a download, I need a cd I can put in my stereo.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Kryzsky

What kind of bands do you listen to?


I use torrent sites the same way I used my friend's cassette tape collections. Make copies of what I was interested in, if it sucked I would tape over it, if it was good I would buy my own copy.

Kids are different these days though, they don't mind mp3s and can listen to 96kbps rips all day, happy as hell. I'll never pay for a download, I need a cd I can put in my stereo.

I do the same..download as a means to check something out, and if its good, I'll buy it. I really feel the need to purchase quality music, because I feel bands or artists who are creating good work deserve to be paid for it. Also, to me a music collection is kind of an extension of who you are, I really like my CD collection and like to see what other people have.

However, as you mentioned, kids today are different. To them, music is something that is readily available, free, and dispensible. I really wonder if kids that are so used to downloading actually value music the way that many of us did growing up. Do they value listening to an entire album anymore?

[Traditional_Ale]

I dont think its fair to judge the musical attention span of an entire generation based on their downloading habits.

Music education right now at the basic level is decent enough to instill a respect for the skill of playing an instrument well.

Downloading is happening because in a world where kids are taught to be adults faster (without the appropriate skills) they see downloading as the sensible economic alternative.

In Quebec, people still buy albums en-mass into their late 50's.

As technology enables the home recording engineer to manifest a better and better product, more emphasis from the mainstream audience and the media will be placed on the live show/performance. This is where the future bread of the music industry is, and personally, I say, bring it on.

Everyone and their Mom can make a decent recording for less than $1000 not incl. computer. ProTools M-Box, couple of mics...

The highest end professional recordings will always need a high-end room with high-end gear, wicked engineers...etc etc etc...but decent demos are not totally achievable out of the home.

Check out DNA6 from Vancouver for wicked home/pro-recordings.

[missdpuck]

I have to agree with you again. Trad. Ale. For some people music is just a youthful phase,for others it is a life-long love affair. I know a 60 yr old guy who thinks Killswitch Engage and BFMV are 2 of the greatest bands ever. My mom at 72 still likes to listen to the Stones, Metallica, and Guns n Roses along with lots of other stuff. She loves opera too, as do I. People who only listen to the music of their youth as some kind of nostalgia thing arent really music , uhhhh, lovers or whatever IMHO Of course that's too much of a generalization who am I to say!! So like with any other generation, some will stay with it, some wont, no matter how they get it now.

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by HOOT

If it is a good album I will go buy the real deal, however if artists keep putting out 20 song CD's with 2-3 good songs on them I will continue to download them.

Oh please...

Yes, bands intentionally release albums with 17-18 crappy songs on it.

"So we've got these 3 really good tracks, but we need to add 17 other tracks. Got any crappy tunes hanging around we can toss on this thing?"

Your tastes should not dictate if you steal something or not.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

Your tastes should not dictate if you steal something or not.

Well, there's not much point in stealing something you don't even like...

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

Oh please...

Yes, bands intentionally release albums with 17-18 crappy songs on it.

"So we've got these 3 really good tracks, but we need to add 17 other tracks. Got any crappy tunes hanging around we can toss on this thing?"

Your tastes should not dictate if you steal something or not.

Well I'd venture that there are a bunch of songs that they put on because of contractual obligations to release something and as such you end up with some required "filler" songs. They aren't strong, but they help make up an album that can be released.

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by kermitology

Well I'd venture that there are a bunch of songs that they put on because of contractual obligations to release something and as such you end up with some required "filler" songs. They aren't strong, but they help make up an album that can be released.

Maybe, maybe not.

As a musician, you're not actually condoning illegally obtaining artists' material are you?

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

Maybe, maybe not.

As a musician, you're not actually condoning illegally obtaining artists' material are you?

A musicians first and foremost objective is to make their music available for others to listen. My album is available for free because we hope that people might just want to listen to the kind of stuff we've written. If by some reason that makes people like our stuff and we can start playing more in public, then I'm happy. I'm not in it to make money.

The record industry is evil in many ways. It takes a lot of time and resources to develop an artist and it's far easier to promote some crappy pop sensation that will last for a few years (Backstreet Bots). The amount an artist receives from the purchase of a CD is minimal. If you want to support them, go to a concert and buy merchandise there.

But for example, many bands have become major successes on the basis of piracy, the most notable of which is ironically Metallica, who would be nowhere without the tape trading/bootlegging of the 1980s.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by HOOT

If it is a good album I will go buy the real deal, however if artists keep putting out 20 song CD's with 2-3 good songs on them I will continue to download them.

Figures. Music Artists charge too much but Cell Phone companies don't. Again, it shows where your bias lies and how false your "everything goes up, just live with it" statements really are. You do care about what you get and how much you pay, except when you're employed by one of them.

/end thread hijack

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by kermitology

A musicians first and foremost objective is to make their music available for others to listen. My album is available for free because we hope that people might just want to listen to the kind of stuff we've written. If by some reason that makes people like our stuff and we can start playing more in public, then I'm happy. I'm not in it to make money.

The record industry is evil in many ways. It takes a lot of time and resources to develop an artist and it's far easier to promote some crappy pop sensation that will last for a few years (Backstreet Bots). The amount an artist receives from the purchase of a CD is minimal. If you want to support them, go to a concert and buy merchandise there.

But for example, many bands have become major successes on the basis of piracy, the most notable of which is ironically Metallica, who would be nowhere without the tape trading/bootlegging of the 1980s.

Sorry, but this sounds like quite the copout to me. The industry is evil so people can obtain the product any way they want.

Most of the artists who give their stuff away simply are unable to "sell" their stuff. If you could play more in public, would you not be making more money? Or are you going to tell me you will play in public for free as well? If that's the case, then your band is in the minority from everything I've ever encountered in the industry.

I spent more than 8 years in broadcasting and another 5 years managing in the industry and I met hundreds of intelligent, creative and excellent musicians.

They should be compensated for their efforts.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

Sorry, but this sounds like quite the copout to me. The industry is evil so people can obtain the product any way they want.

Most of the artists who give their stuff away simply are unable to "sell" their stuff. If you could play more in public, would you not be making more money? Or are you going to tell me you will play in public for free as well? If that's the case, then your band is in the minority from everything I've ever encountered in the industry.

I spent more than 8 years in broadcasting and another 5 years managing in the industry and I met hundreds of intelligent, creative and excellent musicians.

They should be compensated for their efforts.

Good for you, aren't you now managing a cell phone store? What happened?

Are you telling me that Radiohead (who give you the option to give it away) or Trent Reznor (who criticized Radiohead for offering up crappy quality digital copies) are unable to sell?

I like to think about what John K. Samson of the Weakerthans mentioned when asked about the recording industry.. most musicians are popular largely due to luck. There are so many talented people that will never be heard by anyone, and the lucky ones are the ones we know about.

But I also like how you ignored the part about how musicians hardly make anything off of album sales (think a couple of cents per album) and that most of the money comes from touring. Even artists themselves know this and THAT is why I think that sharing music is a wonderful thing.

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by kermitology

Good for you, aren't you now managing a cell phone store? What happened?

Nope, was offered a position and am considering it. I didn't say I "now" work in the industry, but if that was an attempt to personally attack me, fine then.

Originally Posted by kermitology

Are you telling me that Radiohead (who give you the option to give it away) or Trent Reznor (who criticized Radiohead for offering up crappy quality digital copies) are unable to sell?

No. They are cases of artists choosing (not people stealing) to distribute some of their music in a different fashion. Again, the artist's/recording companies choice.

Originally Posted by kermitology

I like to think about what John K. Samson of the Weakerthans mentioned when asked about the recording industry.. most musicians are popular largely due to luck. There are so many talented people that will never be heard by anyone, and the lucky ones are the ones we know about.

Yeah, so? What makes that different than any other time? It's always been this way. Same goes within any industry really. Is Keanu Reeves REALLY a good actor?

Originally Posted by kermitology

But I also like how you ignored the part about how musicians hardly make anything off of album sales (think a couple of cents per album) and that most of the money comes from touring. Even artists themselves know this and THAT is why I think that sharing music is a wonderful thing.

No, I didn't ignore it, but it doesn't justify stealing either. Artists agree to terms within a contract and collect funds based upon those terms.

Walmart is a huge big bad corporation that underpays it's employees, demands certain delivery times from distributors/manufacturers/etc. based on their needs and TELLS these people what they will pay for their product, so based on them being "evil" is shoplifting OK then at your local Walmart?

Your bias seems to be based in your dislike for the music industry and the companies running said industry. Could this be based in the fact that your band has not obtained a recording contract and thus not been able to garner radio airplay or any other kind of promotion, other than "giving" your music away on an Internet forum?

I really don't think this should be personal, but I would think you certainly shouldn't condone piracy within your own industry. I own my own software company and piracy puts more companies out of business than can stay in business.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

Your bias seems to be based in your dislike for the music industry and the companies running said industry. Could this be based in the fact that your band has not obtained a recording contract and thus not been able to garner radio airplay or any other kind of promotion, other than "giving" your music away on an Internet forum?

I don't care about getting a recording contract. All of us are engineers and music is a creative outlet for us. My point is still that sharing music helps spread new things to people and I think it should be encouraged.

[REDVAN]

I download torrents all the time, and it's usually stuff I would never ever buy. The stuff I would actually buy, I usually do buy. So my downloading is exposing me to stuff I would have never listened to if not for free.

I think the music industry should be happy, because there are a handful of artists that I have become huge fans of through this process, and subsequently bought their (next) albums.

[Weiser Wonder]

I started off my music collection through downloading on the internet. Now, I've pumped more than $500 dollars into the music industry just this summer.

Under the current economic climate, record companies really need to embrace the fact that people can and will get their music for free. Start making concessions to the consumer, instead of fear-mongering. It might not be fair, but it's reality.

[Dion]

There's a lot of new and up and coming bands looking for exposure to get thier music heard. In that sense i can appreciate why bands like Kermie's allow listeners to download thier music. It's a lot better than hoping and praying that some music label picks them up and decides to distribute thier music.

I suspect there are bands out there that wouldn't be around today if it weren't for the free downloading of music.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

I download torrents all the time, and it's usually stuff I would never ever buy. The stuff I would actually buy, I usually do buy. So my downloading is exposing me to stuff I would have never listened to if not for free.

I think the music industry should be happy, because there are a handful of artists that I have become huge fans of through this process, and subsequently bought their (next) albums.

Co-sign.