The government's UK copyright law site outlines the IPO and Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the principal legislation covering intellectual property rights in the United Kingdom and the work to which it applies.

Main Forums >> Music Business
        Print Thread

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
dubbmann
active member


Joined: 17/03/04
Posts: 1545
Loc: 3rd stone from the sun.
Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc
      #1058320 - 19/07/13 11:17 PM
Hi all,

I was reading an article (blog?) by the New Yorker magazine's Sasha Frere Jones on the latest salvo in "should music be free" wars centering on the efforts of messrs Yorke and Godrich as well as the contributions of Damon Krukowski of galaxy 500 and David Lowery, of the rock band Cracker. the url is

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/sashafrerejones/2013/07/spotify-boyc ott-new-artists-music-business-model.html

anyway, the money quote for me is the following:

"The issue beneath all the complaints about micropayments is fundamental: What are recordings now? Are they an artistic expression that musicians cannot be compensated for but will create simply out of need? Are they promotional tools? What seems clear is that streaming arrangements, like those made with Spotify, are institutionalizing a marginal role for the recordings that were once major income streams for working musicians—which may explain the artist Damon Krukowski’s opinion that music should simply be given away, circumventing this entire system."

A number of years ago (c. 2005?) I tried to start a discussion thread on SoS titled "If Music is Free, Will You Still Make Music?" to solicit the thoughts of SoSers. Not one of my better performing threads ;-) (My best was "Favorite Lesser Known Guitarists" followed by one on the Dr Who correlation effect - ie, your favorite Doctor was probably the one you first watched - which I somehow managed to relate to music a/o instruments but I can't remember for the life of me how I managed to connect the two)

So w/t excuse of the current kerfuffle re: Spotify, let me pose the question again to SoS-land:

**** If Music is Free, Will You Still Make Music? *****

Fire away!

Cheers,

d

You may choose only one
Yes, it's my addiction/passion/,,,,
No f'ing way: it's a job, and I don't work for free
Music? I just like buying expensive gear and sitting around staring at it
I thought this a question about making dope beatz....


Votes accepted from (19/07/13 12:00 AM) to (No end specified)
View Poll results



--------------------
http://www.thinkbluecounttwo.com/
http://www.phichibe.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
BigRedX



Joined: 03/09/04
Posts: 286
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058338 - 20/07/13 08:46 AM
Are you just talking about recorded music, or including playing live as well?

I think that until someone comes up with a new workable way of making money from selling recordings, then we need to accept that the stand-alone recording as a saleable product is dead and has become a promotional item instead. Recordings are still financially viable if they are attached to something else like films or television programs, but a recorded work on its own has little direct monetary value at the moment.

These days everyone is saying that the live performance is the product. However IME even this still favours the established acts who got their foot in the door under the old system. Try being a new band playing on your own material and using the live performance as your main source of income. It isn't going to happen without a lot of time and hard work first. And how do you fund the band while you are building up a reputation and audience to the levels where it can pay? If you can record at home then once you've bought the equipment producing the music is essentially free. Every gig that you play costs money, at the very least in terms of getting to the venue and if you are still relying on another job as your main source of income you need to be cable to take time off in order to play those further afield gigs. I have at least once used up my entire holiday allocation for the year taking half days off so that I would be able to get to the gigs my band was doing on time.

My current band Dick Venom & The Terrortones have built up a reputation as being a great live act, but it's taken us 3 years of very hard work to be able to get there. We are now in the position where we can ask enough money when we play to at the very least cover our expenses. But to get to this position it has taken an awful lot of very hard work - first finding venues and promotors and persuading them to put us on, and then turning up and making sure that we delivered a memorable performance both musically and visually. Also you have to get on stage and deliver EVERY SINGLE TME! If it's not happening in the studio then you simply don't bother to press record and no-one other than yourselves will every know. When the live performance is the product, you can no longer afford to have an off night. And while the live performance is not quite as critical for picking mistakes, you still have to be able to be consistent gig after gig. In the early days in particular every audience is a new audience and if you want to play again you have to impress and you really only get one chance to do it.

But even after all this effort it's still not a living. We make enough to cover getting to the venue with our gear, food and drink for the evening (and if the gig is a long way away) staying overnight, and if we are lucky we might come away with enough left over to pay for a few more hours in the rehearsal room. However at minimum wage levels it isn't enough for even one of us to give up the day job, let alone the whole band, and it's now getting to the point where in order to move the band to the next level it really needs at least one person to be concentrating on it full time. Right now what makes it all worthwhile is when we go and play somewhere new and get a great reaction, pick up some new fans and sell some merchandise.

And there's the thing. At this current level we still sell quite a lot of recorded music. It's mostly at gigs when we can sell people who've just seen us a CD (and soon vinyl as well). Audiences like to be able to deal directly with the band, it makes it all seem a bit more personal and special. For those who don't have any money left at the end of the evening, they can get buy one the next day off our website. I'm sure it's also available on-line for free for those who want to spend time looking, but I do also get the feeling that at this level, audiences like to support the bands. Although as with everything else it's still only at the break-even point.

So would I still be doing this if I wasn't getting paid at all? Almost definitely yes. But, I doubt that I'd be spending up to 7 hours in the van going to gigs if I was funding that as well out of my own pocket. It just depends how satisfied I'd be playing to an audience that consisted mostly of friends and the same local fans every time. Small bands can still sell recorded music if they are playing the right genre of music and there is some added value in the physical product. IMO part of the problem with buying downloads is that it feels too ephemeral and there's nothing tangible about it. Even the much-maligned CD has more going for it than a file that only exists on your computer's hard drive (or even worse only in "the cloud").

These days my biggest and most consistent form of musical income is through my PRS royalty payments. More then ever, if you are playing original music that you need to be credited as a writer composer and to join the relevant organisations to get your royalty payments.

--------------------
RockinRollin' VampireMan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
molecular
member


Joined: 13/12/03
Posts: 699
Loc: north a bit, west a bit
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: BigRedX]
      #1058339 - 20/07/13 09:14 AM
Quote BigRedX:

we need to accept that the stand-alone recording as a saleable product is dead and has become a promotional item instead. Recordings are still financially viable if they are attached to something else like films or television programs, but a recorded work on its own has little direct monetary value at the moment.




Quote BigRedX:

At this current level we still sell quite a lot of recorded music. It's mostly at gigs when we can sell people who've just seen us a CD (and soon vinyl as well). Audiences like to be able to deal directly with the band, it makes it all seem a bit more personal and special.




I'm not quite sure how to reconcile these two statements?

My experience of live shows is much the same as you describe - the amount of money involved and where to spend it etc, but also that it is the best place to sell recorded music. I think recorded music still does have monetary value for exactly the reasons you descibe.

More broadly, re: spotify etc -

1.

people punt a lot of maths and stats around and fire royalty rates at each other, but I've yet to see anyone make a realistic attempt to calculate what the average value of a single play of a song is (and was) for traditional recorded music sales. For example - I buy an album for £10, I will probably listen to it A LOT for a couple of years and then my listening will tail off to the same background level as the rest of my collection. For a real favourite I'm not sure I'll listen to one song more than maybe two or three thousand times in my lifetime... you get the point. So I'd be interested to know if anyone can link to someone who's actually bothered to do these sums.

2.

My answer is an emphatic yes - and my favourite musical moments are "free" (as in bonfire singalongs). BUT recorded music is not free. It's not free to make, so why should it be free to own? Even if you throw out the window any idea of being paid for your writing and performance on said recording, and even if you accept that the cost of recording has plummeted in recent times, it still costs a sh**load of money to make and release a well recorded album. So people who want to own it can bloody well contribute to the cost.

That whole "it's a promotional tool" is part of the same exposure/competition/anyone-can-be-a-star/fight-your-way-to-the-TOP dystopia that Sonicbids want you to live in... Please let's not let it happen!

--------------------
Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja
http://www.hectormacinnes.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
BigRedX



Joined: 03/09/04
Posts: 286
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058341 - 20/07/13 10:03 AM
I don't express myself very well because it came out as a long stream of consciousness.

What I was trying to say is that my band sells recorded music nearly only at gigs, but really it's just another merchandise sale like a T-shirt or badge. We have a pretty good web presence and we are slowly building up radio play but that doesn't generate sales of recordings like the gigs do. When we do sell CDs on-line its almost always as a direct result of a gig we've just played and the orders always come in within a day or two after the gig.

When we released our first EP we got some great reviews. However we only sold a handful of CDs as a result. What we did get was lots more paying gigs.


On the question of Spotify, I consider it to be more like radio than owning the CD or record. If an artist decides to pull their music from the service then it's gone. If Spotify go out of business then all the music on there is gone. If you bought the record or CD you won't suddenly lose it. It's your for as long as the physical delivery medium survives.

Services like Spotify work well for established artists because listeners are already aware of them. If I put my recordings up on Spotify I still have to do all the work of persuading people to listen to them in order to generate any performance royalties. And on the whole apart from a few people who are really interested in searching out new music most listeners stick with what they already know. Great if you already have an audience. Pretty rubbish if you are trying to get heard.

--------------------
RockinRollin' VampireMan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
molecular
member


Joined: 13/12/03
Posts: 699
Loc: north a bit, west a bit
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: BigRedX]
      #1058342 - 20/07/13 10:25 AM
Quote BigRedX:

Services like Spotify work well for established artists because listeners are already aware of them. If I put my recordings up on Spotify I still have to do all the work of persuading people to listen to them in order to generate any performance royalties. And on the whole apart from a few people who are really interested in searching out new music most listeners stick with what they already know. Great if you already have an audience. Pretty rubbish if you are trying to get heard.




Yes, this is my feeling as well. I personally would like to see Spotify make some big changes. E.g. I was all in favour of their 5 listen limit for free subscribers (I am one, and I immediately bought two albums as a result of going over that limit) but now it's disappeared again...?! I'd also welcome the possibility of a boycott movement by emerging artists. I don't want it to disappear, though.

The services that have made the biggest difference to me and my band(s) have been...

1. Soundcloud, who have an embeddable player that isn't crap, and a genuine sense of artistic community among users. I would rather advertise myself on soundcloud than spotify for streaming.

2. Bandcamp, which is fair and provides a great one-stop shop for selling music, cds/vinyl, merch, videos packages etc.

3. iTunes, where my album is indistinguishable in presentation style from the major label releases, and whatever you think of apple is at least a sustainable model for the future.

--------------------
Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja
http://www.hectormacinnes.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dynamic Mike



Joined: 31/12/06
Posts: 1974
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058350 - 20/07/13 11:17 AM
Like many professions (sportsmen & women, actors, etc.) the income of successful recording artists has become disproportionate to it's worth. We don't notice this anymore because it's become the accepted norm, but it's not that long ago that musicians like Mozart were toadying up to the aristocracy for commissions. An artist should earn a living wage, no more, no less. I know that sounds like communism but what I mean is they need to lower their expectations and no longer judge their success from their income. Music in general has been democratised, much like DIY, the tools required are no longer in the possession of the time-served few.

--------------------
Disclaimer: The views or opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of the poster by the time you read this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
molecular
member


Joined: 13/12/03
Posts: 699
Loc: north a bit, west a bit
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Dynamic Mike]
      #1058356 - 20/07/13 01:10 PM
Quote Dynamic Mike:

Like many professions (sportsmen & women, actors, etc.) the income of successful recording artists has become disproportionate to it's worth. We don't notice this anymore because it's become the accepted norm, but it's not that long ago that musicians like Mozart were toadying up to the aristocracy for commissions. An artist should earn a living wage, no more, no less. I know that sounds like communism but what I mean is they need to lower their expectations and no longer judge their success from their income. Music in general has been democratised, much like DIY, the tools required are no longer in the possession of the time-served few.





Mike, you are right of course, and I entirely agree that the lowering of costs of recording is great, and by and large making and selling music today is great. As I mentioned, I'm a big fan of the bandcamp style of doing things, and even of iTunes.

Nobody I know objects to Spotify because they want to be rich and famous. We collectively object generally to the culture it reinforces because all we want IS a living wage.

Re: Mozart - not that I am mozart, but I do go around toadying up to the purse-string holders (these days the lottery fund distributors) for commissions, and have been successful and unsuccessful in equal measure. Between that, teaching and sound engineering I scrape a living wage together.

If we want to earn a living wage, we need to charge an appropriate amount so that our modest sales are valued properly. If we want to "risk it all" to become stars... - that is when it makes sense to bend over and let spotify do it's will.

Maybe I misread your post - is that what you meant, anyway?

--------------------
Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja
http://www.hectormacinnes.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Thomas.



Joined: 29/04/12
Posts: 231
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058357 - 20/07/13 01:30 PM
A small example: I went to see Deep Purple last night, and knowing that they had a new album I bought a copy so that I would at least be familiar with the songs being played. It was bleedin' obvious who else had, and who was just there to hear "Live in Japan"...

That said, the ticket price (90 Swiss francs, about 60 quid) is as much as I can pay for a concert, and I'll get more value from the 11 francs I spent on the album. Roger Waters wanted 150 francs for The Wall, and its too much.

All that to say that I think there is still a market for recordings (which can also have things that are hard to replicate on stage), but maybe the way they are sold needs to evolve.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dynamic Mike



Joined: 31/12/06
Posts: 1974
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: molecular]
      #1058359 - 20/07/13 02:07 PM
Quote molecular:

Maybe I misread your post - is that what you meant, anyway?




Not really, but I agree we agree in principle. I was implying rather that being the lead singer of a commercially successful band should enable you to get a mortgage on a four bed detached in a nice area, close to a decent school and perhaps a low milage secondhand people carrier. What it shouldn't get you is country house with a garage full of Ferrari's. Obviously I don't mean 'you' personally.

--------------------
Disclaimer: The views or opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of the poster by the time you read this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
johnny h



Joined: 24/07/06
Posts: 3398
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Dynamic Mike]
      #1058608 - 22/07/13 11:15 AM
Quote Dynamic Mike:

Quote molecular:

Maybe I misread your post - is that what you meant, anyway?




Not really, but I agree we agree in principle. I was implying rather that being the lead singer of a commercially successful band should enable you to get a mortgage on a four bed detached in a nice area, close to a decent school and perhaps a low milage secondhand people carrier. What it shouldn't get you is country house with a garage full of Ferrari's. Obviously I don't mean 'you' personally.



Why? Being at the top of your game in the field of computers makes you about 70 billion dollars. Being decidedly average at computers gets you a mortgage and an ok house.

So why exactly should musicians get a very average wage and everyone below can't pay the bills at all? The median income for musicians is zero as it is.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
johnny h



Joined: 24/07/06
Posts: 3398
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058609 - 22/07/13 11:17 AM
And spotify can do one. Total blood sucking arseholes. Making themselves super rich by using the hard work and talent of others. Most musicians on spotify couldn't even buy a bag of peanuts on the royalties they dish out.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
grab



Joined: 08/07/07
Posts: 2892
Loc: Cambridge, UK
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Dynamic Mike]
      #1058639 - 22/07/13 01:46 PM
Quote Dynamic Mike:

Music in general has been democratised, much like DIY, the tools required are no longer in the possession of the time-served few.




You're making the bogus assumption that it's all about the tools.

Is your music-making like building a garden shed from a B&Q kit, is it like building a house, or is it like building a skyscraper?

Any muppet can build a garden shed from a kit of parts, using DIY tool (although even there it takes a small degree of competence to do a decent job). A committed amateur could learn the skills to build/plumb/wire/decorate a house and do it all themselves, but it takes a fair amount of learning and probably a fair amount of trial-and-error, as well as all the right tools for the job. And on a skyscraper, it takes a whole bunch of people at the top of their game to make it stay up. You could give an amateur all the tools of a civil engineer, and they'd never make it work.

In construction, there's a clear continuum of skills from odd-job-man upwards. Should everyone be paid the same as the odd-job-man? Clearly that's a ludicrous suggestion. So why should it apply to music?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
ezza



Joined: 19/11/04
Posts: 346
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058650 - 22/07/13 02:37 PM
Quote johnny h:

Quote Dynamic Mike:

Quote molecular:

Maybe I misread your post - is that what you meant, anyway?




Not really, but I agree we agree in principle. I was implying rather that being the lead singer of a commercially successful band should enable you to get a mortgage on a four bed detached in a nice area, close to a decent school and perhaps a low milage secondhand people carrier. What it shouldn't get you is country house with a garage full of Ferrari's. Obviously I don't mean 'you' personally.



Why? Being at the top of your game in the field of computers makes you about 70 billion dollars. Being decidedly average at computers gets you a mortgage and an ok house.

So why exactly should musicians get a very average wage and everyone below can't pay the bills at all? The median income for musicians is zero as it is.




70 billion? A top developer would be lucky to earn more than 100k.

Edited by ezza (22/07/13 02:40 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dynamic Mike



Joined: 31/12/06
Posts: 1974
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058672 - 22/07/13 04:20 PM
Quote johnny h:

So why exactly should musicians get a very average wage and everyone below can't pay the bills at all? The median income for musicians is zero as it is.




So exactly how much more is a musician is worth than a nurse? Or a soldier? And why?

To quote the late, great Joe Strummer, when a producer spent an hour EQing the hi-hats 'Who cares, it's just a turdy record.'

--------------------
Disclaimer: The views or opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of the poster by the time you read this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
johnny h



Joined: 24/07/06
Posts: 3398
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Dynamic Mike]
      #1058681 - 22/07/13 05:06 PM
Quote Dynamic Mike:

Quote johnny h:

So why exactly should musicians get a very average wage and everyone below can't pay the bills at all? The median income for musicians is zero as it is.




So exactly how much more is a musician is worth than a nurse? Or a soldier? And why?





Loads more.

Because its really easy to be a nurse or a soldier. You just sign up, do some training and that's that, you are in the job. How many people spend years and 10s of thousands of pounds on music courses and can't achieve so much as a cursory brush-off email from a record label or studio?

Its easy to say someone who puts their life on the line for your country is a hero. That's the story the government like to peddle. But its not true. All these guys are doing is risking their life in exchange for money and 'honour'. The 'honour' being performing violent acts to please your elite masters, who in return view you with utter contempt.

“Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy.", Henry Kissinger.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Launch Pad



Joined: 19/08/12
Posts: 3
Loc: London, U.K.
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058682 - 22/07/13 05:08 PM
This recurring question of weather music should be free or not really winds me up.

The people that bring it up usually seem to be people that don't actually make music so they can't appreciate what they are actually talking about.

--------------------
http://www.launchpadmusicservices.com


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
lukeandrewhill



Joined: 06/01/09
Posts: 175
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058683 - 22/07/13 05:09 PM
Surely the answer to that (at least in the past) is that the musician's worth is directly proportional to the number of people willing to pay to have his or her music. Not every musician in the 70's or 80's or whatever when music paid drove around in flash cars - only the good ones who sold lots of records - presumably as a result of being rather good at what they did. The problem now is that even if you are really good at making music you don't get paid for it as no one is buying.

Not sure I agree about the wage argument for musicians either. They aren't in a factory churning out music as if they were making furniture or something. Its all a lot more intangible and surely what you get paid must relate to the number of units you sell - a wage kind of gives the impression that musicians should get paid a reasonable amount even if no one likes what they have made (and therefore doesn't consume it.

Sorry for stream of conciousness post - not much time for self editing...

L

--------------------
please make it all simple.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
johnny h



Joined: 24/07/06
Posts: 3398
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: ezza]
      #1058684 - 22/07/13 05:10 PM
Quote ezza:


70 billion? A top developer would be lucky to earn more than 100k.



I know guys who have made over 10 million just buying and selling domains. Its a good business.

Bill Gates is at the top of the computer game. He is worth $72.7 billion as of 2013.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
grab



Joined: 08/07/07
Posts: 2892
Loc: Cambridge, UK
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Dynamic Mike]
      #1058692 - 22/07/13 06:10 PM
Quote Dynamic Mike:

So exactly how much more is a musician is worth than a nurse? Or a soldier? And why?




You're either a troll or a teenager.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Hugh RobjohnsAdministrator
SOS Technical Editor


Joined: 25/07/03
Posts: 21597
Loc: Worcestershire
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058695 - 22/07/13 06:34 PM
Quote johnny h:

All these guys are doing is risking their life in exchange for money and 'honour'. The 'honour' being performing violent acts to please your elite masters, who in return view you with utter contempt.




You have a very strange, disturbing, and to me at least, offensive view of the UKs forces, let alone the many challenges of nursing.

If you think it's so easy being a nurse, or a soldier, you should try it...

H

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dynamic Mike



Joined: 31/12/06
Posts: 1974
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: grab]
      #1058748 - 22/07/13 11:09 PM
Quote grab:

Is your music-making like building a garden shed from a B&Q kit, is it like building a house, or is it like building a skyscraper?

Any muppet can build a garden shed from a kit of parts, using DIY tool (although even there it takes a small degree of competence to do a decent job).




The only difference between knocking out a trance tune in a DAW using a sample pack with an arpeggiator, to assembling a flat-pack from Ikea is that you don't have to worry about the bits you've got left over & you can undo your edits ad nauseum. Talented producers create software plug-in versions of themselves, studio owners sell IR's of recording spaces, you can now even purchase hardware emulations of mastering set ups. The music industry is de-skilling itself one piece at a time. That's what I was insinuating about democratisation in Art and it today appears it's not unique to music http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23376199

Having a different viewpoint hardly constitutes trolling, but you're right I was once a teenager.

--------------------
Disclaimer: The views or opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of the poster by the time you read this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dynamic Mike



Joined: 31/12/06
Posts: 1974
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058750 - 22/07/13 11:37 PM
Quote johnny h:

How many people spend years and 10s of thousands of pounds on music courses and can't achieve so much as a cursory brush-off email from a record label or studio?




W.D.Y.C.A.I

--------------------
Disclaimer: The views or opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of the poster by the time you read this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
johnny h



Joined: 24/07/06
Posts: 3398
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Hugh Robjohns]
      #1058754 - 23/07/13 12:35 AM
Quote Hugh Robjohns:

Quote johnny h:

All these guys are doing is risking their life in exchange for money and 'honour'. The 'honour' being performing violent acts to please your elite masters, who in return view you with utter contempt.




You have a very strange, disturbing, and to me at least, offensive view of the UKs forces, let alone the many challenges of nursing.

If you think it's so easy being a nurse, or a soldier, you should try it...

H



If you think my view is offensive, how do you feel about Henry kissinger's view of the armed forces? I am not in a position to send troops to fight as "political pawns", as he called them. Yet he was.

I understand that people need to feel to belong to a certain group and that having enemies is quite a natural thing, but what has this got to do with the relative pay between musicians and soldiers?

I never said it was easy to be a nurse. It's just harder (or at least rarer) to be a musician that says something to a large group of people.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
hollowsun



Joined: 20/01/05
Posts: 5582
Loc: Cowbridge, South Wales
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058761 - 23/07/13 01:48 AM
Quote johnny h:

Because its really easy to be a nurse or a soldier. You just sign up, do some training and that's that, you are in the job.



Sweet Jeeeez, Johnny you've excelled yourself.

Have you tried nursing? How much piss, blood, sick and vomit have you mopped up, how many arses have you wiped, how many catheters have you inserted, how many diabetics have you rescued from a coma, how many kids with leukaemia and other illnesses have you consoled when they are in pain or considering their impending death? Ever changed a colostomy or urostomy bag? Ever had to clean either of those stomas?. Ever given a bed bath to a disabled child or a pensioner after they've just ignominiously shat themselves? Ever washed their [ ****** ] laden clothes by hand? Ever assisted in an emergency birth?

No. Thought not.

Well, I have.

And you glibly say it's "easy"? It's not ... and I was just the tip of the iceberg doing the superficial stuff as a volunteer St John's Ambulance Brigade cadet (award winning, I should mention) for many, many years. I worked the Dan-Y-Bryn residential homes here, OAP residential homes, childrens' hospitals, cancer hospices and so on. I was on call FFS - they could call me any time and I'd be expected to get out there (all changed now). But what the real nursing staff had to do sometimes defies description, especially in A&E (where I did a few stints). You're on the go all the time, barely enough time to grab a cuppa. Lunch? What was that? The night shift (when I was assigned to them ... rarely) was usually uneventful but bloody hell, if it kicked off .... ! Have you ever assisted in a tracheotomy?

And have have you tried training with the army ... maybe out there on there Brecon Beacons in [ ****** ] weather laden down with equipment? Not sure you'd last 5 minutes. I've not done it (I am too much of a wimp) but I know several who have - it's not Dad's Army with flatfoots, Cap'n Mainwaring and Corporal Jones and some dour Scotsman ... it's WELL tough.

You do a disservice to these people ... and you think someone dicking around on a computer with some loops is worth "loads more" than them? Shame on your socialist principles.

If someone makes a living/fortune from their musical endeavours, fine - good luck to them - but to say that nursing/soldiering is "easy" is just arrant nonsense.

Whether you approve of the army or not and want to make some (another) political statement about the "ruling elite" is neither here nor there - fact is that nursing and army life is a f'k'n tough job, the likes of which I imagine few of us here could do. Least of all you, I suspect.

As Hugh says above, if you think it's so easy, try it yourself.

--------------------
Website / Music Lab Machines / Blog


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
hollowsun



Joined: 20/01/05
Posts: 5582
Loc: Cowbridge, South Wales
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058763 - 23/07/13 02:47 AM
Quote johnny h:

I never said it was easy to be a nurse.



You did actually...

Quote johnny h:

Because its really easy to be a nurse



Errrmmm!

Quote johnny h:

It's just harder (or at least rarer) to be a musician that says something to a large group of people.



Define 'musician' - someone with a copy of Garageband (whatever) or a gitwrist who knows a few chords and calls themselves a 'musician' is worth more than a nurse or a community carer, someone who could save another person's life? Oddly enough, when I was a St John's cadet and doing whatever in whatever environment, when there was a life threatening situation or a broken spine or limb, a head injury, a serious wound or even just a hurty knee, I wasn't told to quickly whip out a guitar and give 'em 12-bar riff ... or get my synth out and subject them to some serious abstract retro 60s electronica. No, I had to get in there with no messing about.

I do, however, believe that bands/artists should be rewarded according to their popularity whether that's 2p or £20 millions - market forces decide that one - and I don't wish to devalue their contribution to society and so on ... they bring a lot of joy and pleasure to many. Even during the years I did with St John's, sometimes playing someone a favourite record of theirs (or a cassette as it would have been) was often more effective than their prescribed medication. That said... to quote Dan Le Sac vs Scroobius Pip...

Thou shalt not put musicians and recording artists on ridiculous pedestals no matter how great they are or were.
The Beatles: Were just a band.
Led Zeppelin: Just a band.
The Beach Boys: Just a band.
The Sex Pistols: Just a band.
The Clash: Just a band.
Crass: Just a band.
Minor Threat: Just a band.
The Cure: Were just a band.
The Smiths: Just a band.
Nirvana: Just a band.
The Pixies: Just a band.
Oasis: Just a band.
Radiohead: Just a band.
Bloc Party: Just a band.
The Arctic Monkeys: Just a band.
The next big thing... Just a band


--------------------
Website / Music Lab Machines / Blog


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
johnny h



Joined: 24/07/06
Posts: 3398
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: hollowsun]
      #1058785 - 23/07/13 08:24 AM
Quote hollowsun:

Quote johnny h:

Because its really easy to be a nurse or a soldier. You just sign up, do some training and that's that, you are in the job.



Sweet Jeeeez, Johnny you've excelled yourself.

Have you tried nursing? How much piss, blood, sick and vomit have you mopped up,




Yeah it's definitely not a pleasant job, I never said that. I said it was much easier to become a nurse. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying for one minute being a musician is a harder job when you get there. I've worked in offices where nobody really does anything and thats a far worse job than being a musician. Once you have reached a certain level it is a very privileged position to be in.

When I say it's easy to be a nurse or soldier I'm only talking in terms of having a clear path laid out for you. There are clear and simple ways to go about it - attend nursing school / apply in an army centre. Obviously it doesn't guarantee you a job but the odds are far higher than making a career after doing a music technology course.
Quote:


You do a disservice to these people ... and you think someone dicking around on a computer with some loops is worth "loads more" than them? Shame on your socialist principles.




I'm not a Marxist. I believe in equal opportunity and hence I'm against large inheritances, special favours and nepotism. Nurses are very important of course.
Quote:


If someone makes a living/fortune from their musical endeavours, fine - good luck to them - but to say that nursing/soldiering is "easy" is just arrant nonsense.

Whether you approve of the army or not and want to make some (another) political statement about the "ruling elite" is neither here nor there - fact is that nursing and army life is a f'k'n tough job, the likes of which I imagine few of us here could do. Least of all you, I suspect.

As Hugh says above, if you think it's so easy, try it yourself.



You won't find me joining the army anytime soon. You're going to pay me to sit around at checkpoints watching DVDs wondering if today's the day I get a sniper bullet in my head? Busting open houses with my psycho fellow soldiers killing whole families? Nah, not for me. I know a few people in the army and they hate it. In truth they are there because they couldn't think of a better thing to do with their lives, and they regret it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Hugh RobjohnsAdministrator
SOS Technical Editor


Joined: 25/07/03
Posts: 21597
Loc: Worcestershire
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058799 - 23/07/13 09:09 AM
Quote johnny h:

If you think my view is offensive, how do you feel about Henry kissinger's view of the armed forces?




Henry Kissinger isn't a member of this forum and doesn't have to abide by its rules. You are, and you do!

johhny h Quote:

I never said it was easy to be a nurse.




Er...
Quote johhny h:

... its really easy to be a nurse or a soldier






H

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Hugh RobjohnsAdministrator
SOS Technical Editor


Joined: 25/07/03
Posts: 21597
Loc: Worcestershire
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058802 - 23/07/13 09:16 AM
Quote johnny h:

I said it was much easier to become a nurse.




More offensive bollox. You have to study, practice and qualify to become a nurse. Anyone can call themselves 'a musician' with no qualifications, no study, and no skills -- and a very large number of people do exactly that!

Quote:

Busting open houses with my psycho fellow soldiers killing whole families?




And yet more! You're on very thin ice and its getting thinner with every post, Johnny h!

H

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Gary_W



Joined: 18/10/06
Posts: 458
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: dubbmann]
      #1058814 - 23/07/13 10:11 AM
I'm in the fortunate position whereby I have a day job. Music is just my hobby and as such it costs me money as opposed to making me money. I have neither the will, the drive nor the talent to change that situation. I like having it as my place to go for fun and leisure - as such, I will always make music just for the joy of it. But of course, that is easy for me to say as I don't have to rely on it to feed my family.

On a wider point, the 'value' of any commodity is still really supply and demand / how much the market is willing to pay for it. With something that has very little 'physical' value, that latter part is always up in the air.

As Dynamic Mike pointed out earlier in the thread, music never was a well-paid job. These days, for some people, it is. But if you are going to choose it as your career then you have a minuscule chance of making it to the 'I can buy an island' group. You have a large chance of being in the 'just making ends meet' group. Sheer talent seems to not be enough these days to get you into the former group - there is some cracking stuff out there that is heard by so few.

Being a nurse of a soldier, you get mediocre wages for a very hard job which is clearly defined. You have to put in an awful lot of hours. If you put in the hours and work hard, you have the potential of a living wage. You have no hope of buying the island no matter what..... You might get on in the ranks and do a bit better but you're never going to get rich at it. You are doing something that could never really be called 'fun'. You are doing something that most people think is valuable to society in some way.

Being a musician, you either get no wages, mediocre wages, a living wage or enough to buy an island depending on circumstances. Your chances of being in the first three categories vastly outweighs your chance of being in the latter. Whilst the work CAN be hard, it isn't 'hard' in the same way as coal mining is. Neither is my job, and I tell myself this when I'm having a bad day

At least with music as your living you can console yourself with the fact that you're doing something that you love (if you don't then why do it with the chances of poverty vs riches) for a living that is PHYSICALLY not overly taxing in most cases, PHYSICALLY not dangerous compared to most other jobs and tends to take up far less time than doing a 'proper' job where you're doing 12 hour shifts down t'pit. Yes, I know there are exceptions and yes I have moved large speaker cabinets Your value to society is purely in the ears of the listener - even with someone who is successful. My mum probably thinks Buble is more valuable to society than Radiohead. I would not concur.

You have a free choice to go into any career you like. If that choice is a career in 'the arts' then you are taking a very, very big gamble. What you provide is not an essential service. We are in relatively hard times all round. People have less disposable income and now you have Spotify which makes it easy for them to (legally) listen to your music. Most people will either believe that the artists are getting money for this or they don't really think about it. Either way, your plight is unlikely to bother too many nurses or soldiers.

Back to Spotify - I subscribe and, as I'm on the consumer side of the fence, I absolutely love it. In my case, it causes me to buy music but it means I make the right choices. In years gone by, you'd hear a single and you'd buy the album for £15 from Our Price. You'd discover one other track was to your liking. So you've spent £15 on 2 tracks. I have a cupboard jam packed with CD's that rest unloved. There are others that still see constant play and, by rights, those artists should have had my money several times over.

These days, I hear a single on 6 Music. I listen to the album on Spotify. If I listen to it again on Spotify and still love it, Amazon gets a CD order.

Sometimes, I play 'Spotify Radio'. It'll play me stuff based on an artist I already like. On one occasion, it resulted in me discovering an artist whom I have STILL never heard on national radio and caused me to buy an album direct from them at their home page.

As for artists - I really hope some way can be found to get fair pay from Spotify / whatever comes next. All I can say is that at least there is HOPE of money from it. If people just go to the pirate sites you have no hope of cash. At least there is a corporation here with a desk to pound upon.

As a consumer, Spotify is perfect - it allows me to 'try before I buy'. And buy I do if my ears deem it worthy. I'm a great Radiohead and Thom Yorke fan but, if I can't listen to the Atoms for Peace album on there then I'm unlikely to buy it unless I hear the next 3 singles on the wireless and like them all..... I guess that I'm a risk-averse old fart these days which is why I'm happy with Spotify making my choices easy and why I make my living in a 'regular' job, not music


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
CS70



Joined: 26/11/12
Posts: 402
Loc: Oslo, Norway
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Gary_W]
      #1058828 - 23/07/13 11:02 AM
Quote:

On a wider point, the 'value' of any commodity is still really supply and demand / how much the market is willing to pay for it.




Well, unfortunately that point no longer applies to recorded music. The situation is how it is nowadays simply because recorded music (and other media) has become so easy to steal with impunity in the last decade or so. The key words being "to steal" and "impunity".

There would not be a market for cars if anyone could pinch them on the street without consequences. The definition of "market" is based on the idea that you cannot simply take the goods.

Music is not free insofar it takes skills and monetary investments to produce. And for decades the results proved to have a market, i.e. people were more than willing to exchange money to acquire the results. The market disappeared when it became possible to steal the products without consequences.

While it may possible to churn out trance tunes ikea-style as someone was saying (I guess: I wouldn't know where to start to make one), I know for a fact that creating and a crafting a tune and its parts, gathering the necessary skilled people, record, assemble and produce the final complete work takes lots of time and effort and some cash. So even if, missing talent, the result is a piece of crap.. it will still be a rather expensive piece of crap. How it can be even discussed that such result should be acquired for free, I cannot understand.

That at the moment we have to live with it (like we have to live with pollution, or road congestion or other less than nice aspects of modern life) does not make it right or sensible.

--------------------
http://www.silver-spoon.org - It's just music
..and the FB page


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Gary_W



Joined: 18/10/06
Posts: 458
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: CS70]
      #1058834 - 23/07/13 11:24 AM
Quote CS70:



Well, unfortunately that point no longer applies to recorded music. The situation is how it is nowadays simply because recorded music (and other media) has become so easy to steal with impunity in the last decade or so. The key words being "to steal" and "impunity".

There would not be a market for cars if anyone could pinch them on the street without consequences. The definition of "market" is based on the idea that you cannot simply take the goods.

.............

That at the moment we have to live with it (like we have to live with pollution, or road congestion or other less than nice aspects of modern life) does not make it right or sensible.




I agree with all of what you're saying here..... The Internet changed everything in the world and not all of it for the good.

However, the CONCEPT of Spotify to a consumer is 'you give us £10 a month, you listen to what you like, we pay the artists' is a step in the right direction vs the other possibility is that everyone rips you off by going to Pirate Bay. The devil is in the detail of how the money they collect gets to the people that actually make the music in the first place!

On a side note relating to piracy and how music is distributed these days I've ranted in the past at iTunes for still only offering 256k downloads at the same price as Amazon will ship me a CD for so I have a choice of legally paying Amazon for good quality but I wait, legally paying iTunes for inferior quality and it's instant or paying nobody for anything and getting it as a FLAC from some dodgy site. I legally buy the CD, after checking it out on Spotify first. Others will just go for the rip off

My £10 a month to Spotify means I get 320k streaming of anything I want. I would be delighted if some way could be found for more of that money to go to artists. Even if very little goes to artists, it is (at least) a 'loss leader' that will result in the odd physical CD sale and also enables me to discover your music via Spotify radio and the other apps it has.

So what I'm saying is that Spotify is wonderful for a consumer. For an artist, it is far from ideal but surely a lot better than the alternatives that you point out..... Making honesty this cheap is surely a good thing when dishonesty has no punishment. I know people should just do the right thing, the legal thing. But, until you can change the human nature of a lot of people, Spotify at least gets some money back into the business and it surely makes it easier for record buyers like me to buy something that they know they will love.

Edited by Hugh Robjohns (23/07/13 12:10 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Frisonic



Joined: 27/01/10
Posts: 3531
Loc: London, United Kingdom
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058839 - 23/07/13 11:52 AM
Quote johnny h:

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

Quote johnny h:

All these guys are doing is risking their life in exchange for money and 'honour'. The 'honour' being performing violent acts to please your elite masters, who in return view you with utter contempt.




You have a very strange, disturbing, and to me at least, offensive view of the UKs forces, let alone the many challenges of nursing.

If you think it's so easy being a nurse, or a soldier, you should try it...

H



If you think my view is offensive, how do you feel about Henry kissinger's view of the armed forces? I am not in a position to send troops to fight as "political pawns", as he called them. Yet he was.

I understand that people need to feel to belong to a certain group and that having enemies is quite a natural thing, but what has this got to do with the relative pay between musicians and soldiers?

I never said it was easy to be a nurse. It's just harder (or at least rarer) to be a musician that says something to a large group of people.




I'd like to know the context in which Henry Kissinger said that? I tend to view our military as performing an exclusively defense role these days. They do use measured force, when all other options have failed, but generally to prevent violent acts. Which is not heroic in itself (although it can provide for opportunities to perform acts of 'larger than self' bravery in a way that stacking shelves in a supermarket does not). However, I agree with your analogy of what it takes to be a soldier or a nurse, which are both sophisticated professions compared to how either used to be, but still relatively straightforward and entry into the mainstream of either may almost be presumed. Whereas to be a professional musician by definition means you have beaten the odds. Which should make being a musician highly valued. Yet society now largely expects musicians to provide their services in the voluntary sector.

--------------------
Strictly project and just for fun


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
StevoDaDevo



Joined: 28/05/10
Posts: 17
Loc: UK
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: CS70]
      #1058842 - 23/07/13 11:57 AM
CS70

Just to be a pedantic accountant, the market price relating to supply and demand still holds true.

The problem is that the near zero cost of perfect copying means that supply is technically endless so demand can always be met instantly, hence the intrinsic value of digital music tends towards being nil.

Whether this copying is legal or not is only a a small part of the argument and will eventually become irrelevant.

The fact that the (legit) producer (in industrial terms) of the product can deliver any required volume (after the initial master copy)at extremely low cost (tending towards zero) would mean that demand can always be met instantly and it is only the cartel-like behaviour of the producers (iTunes, etc) that gives the product a value greater than close to zero anyway.

So the only value that matters is the cost to create the original master (product) to the standard expected by the mass market of paying customers in the first place.

SOSers know that this has dropped massively over the last 15 years, but it needs to drop a lot further, and it is.

This is probably where the Spotify's of this world come in to play, and Thom Yorke is wrong.

In the punk era, there were endless bands who would make singles for a few hundred quid (allegedly).

They then sold a few hundred copies, probably at gigs, which would fund the next single.

Eventually if enough of a buzz was generated the record companies / radio stations would pick up on them.

This is not so easy now since records companies are dying and radio stations are selecting tight demographic bands to play to, leaving little room for real innovation by new artists.

Streaming sites on the internet (Spotify, MySpace etc) democratise access to all music at extremely low cost to customers.

As long as advertising and subscription revenues are split fairly between the service provider and artist, pennies per play is a perfectly fair and accurate way to pay towards the initial creation of the product.

The issue is that the music business has a precedent of always underpaying the artist for 'sales' in a new format (form of distribution), so Spotify etc currently underpay.

This balance does need to be addressed, but it is now inevitable that the income per play / sale will be close to zero for everyone, so volume is the way to go.

Volume will depend on convenience to the end customer, breadth of choice, technical capacity to deliver, (sound) quality and price to customer.

iTunes is the market leader in these currently.

Pirate Bay and their like won't be able to compete with ligitimate suppliers, if those suppliers get the above points right.

The same applies to iTunes etc as more competitors provide similar services for lower cost or differentiate their product etc.

We're not there yet, but we will be someday.

We all just need to settle into the new paradigm and accept that the past is gone and look forward working on making the future acceptable to all involved, but especially for the customer.

And that is where the market is.

--------------------
What would Bob Clearmountain do?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
johnny h



Joined: 24/07/06
Posts: 3398
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Hugh Robjohns]
      #1058843 - 23/07/13 11:59 AM
Quote Hugh Robjohns:

Quote johnny h:

I said it was much easier to become a nurse.




More offensive bollox. You have to study, practice and qualify to become a nurse. Anyone can call themselves 'a musician' with no qualifications, no study, and no skills -- and a very large number of people do exactly that!




I mean in terms of a job that pays the bills. Like I've already said, I'm not saying *being* a nurse is easier, I'm saying its an easier path to follow into a rent paying full time occupation. Certainly its a much harder job when you get there. Playing music is in no way comparable in terms of hard work to being a nurse. I don't mean it like that at all.
Quote:


Quote:

Busting open houses with my psycho fellow soldiers killing whole families?




And yet more! You're on very thin ice and its getting thinner with every post, Johnny h!

H



I don't mean to cause any offence. Its a difficult and complicated topic and I think I have omitted too much information to be clear about what I mean.

I have friends are in the army and my grandfather served for decades, including the whole of WW2, so I have heard many stories about life in the military. I have great respect of them of course, and they are / were very good people doing it for the right reasons. I've spoken to them a lot about the job, the people above them, their fellow soldiers the realities of the situation on the ground. And some of it is really horrific.

This conversation has got a little sprawling, so lets leave it at that for now. I'm sorry if I have caused any offence. I have total respect for soldiers and nurses. I typed that post on my iphone and it came across totally wrong. I should have reviewed it more carefully before posting and I will do so in future.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Hugh RobjohnsAdministrator
SOS Technical Editor


Joined: 25/07/03
Posts: 21597
Loc: Worcestershire
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058845 - 23/07/13 12:17 PM
Quote johnny h:

I'm sorry if I have caused any offence. I have total respect for soldiers and nurses. I typed that post on my iphone and it came across totally wrong. I should have reviewed it more carefully before posting and I will do so in future.




Thanks Johnny.

Hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dynamic Mike



Joined: 31/12/06
Posts: 1974
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: johnny h]
      #1058847 - 23/07/13 12:31 PM
Quote johnny h:

I don't mean to cause any offence. Its a difficult and complicated topic and I think I have omitted too much information to be clear about what I mean.




I feel the way I posted the question was equally lazy & inflammatory, but it really wasn't the outcome I'd expected. I thought people would offer a defence along the lines of the 'rewards are proportionate to the risk of failure'.

Johnny is right in so much as (other than perhaps teaching) there is no clear career pathway for musicians, which I'm sure was his point. Career progression is more likely in a hierarchical structured environment, and professions such as nursing/teaching have traditionally supported this. One thing I've learned in life is that everything looks easy when someone else is doing it & there probably is no 'money for nothing'.

--------------------
Disclaimer: The views or opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of the poster by the time you read this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
grab



Joined: 08/07/07
Posts: 2892
Loc: Cambridge, UK
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Dynamic Mike]
      #1058853 - 23/07/13 01:30 PM
Quote Dynamic Mike:

The only difference between knocking out a trance tune in a DAW using a sample pack with an arpeggiator, to assembling a flat-pack from Ikea is that you don't have to worry about the bits you've got left over & you can undo your edits ad nauseum.




If you get your shed wrong, you can always unscrew the bits and try again.

Quote Dynamic Mike:

Talented producers create software plug-in versions of themselves, studio owners sell IR's of recording spaces, you can now even purchase hardware emulations of mastering set ups. The music industry is de-skilling itself one piece at a time.




The producer plugins are plugins of their equipment, not of their skills. IRs and emulations are of equipment. For sure cost of equipment has lowered the barrier to entry, but skilled use of that equipment still takes experience and perhaps some amount of natural talent.

Quote Dynamic Mike:

Having a different viewpoint hardly constitutes trolling, but you're right I was once a teenager.




Except a viewpoint that musicians don't ever deserve to be paid definitely does...

If someone wants what you produce, they need to pay what you value that at. If you charge too much, they won't pay it, of course. But it doesn't mean that you, Spotify or the kid down the street can say "I want that tune and I don't think I should pay for it".

By income, I'm more valuable than a squaddie. So are the builder who lives over the way from me, the plumber I called in last month, the mechanic I take my car to, and the manager of the local Tescos. More people want what we do than they want a squaddie. And yes, being a squaddie *is* something that anyone can do, which is why it's traditionally been standard employment for young men without intelligence or skills in any particular field which lead to a job. I'm not saying that I'm a better person than a squaddie, just that my skills are more valuable to other people than his are, and hence I'm better paid.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Frisonic



Joined: 27/01/10
Posts: 3531
Loc: London, United Kingdom
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: grab]
      #1058858 - 23/07/13 01:50 PM
Quote grab:

being a squaddie *is* something that anyone can do




If you talk to anyone who had been conscripted or did national service you'll find that being a squaddie is something many people had no choice in. There's been quite a lot of that over the centuries. Maybe that's what will happen to us. Spotify, iTunes and YouTube will pool their collective lobbying power and win legislation forcing all musicians to produce two albums a year for free or face a firing squad. Cheered on by a general public who expect to be given something they no longer value for free. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the great unwashed valued the public executions, syndicated on prime time reality television and generating premium advertising revenues, more highly than they value music.

Personally I'm not releasing any of my music until it becomes clear how society intends to value the good stuff. Not that mine necessarily is. But intellectual property is like virginity. You only ever get to give it away the once so you need to chose your moment carefully. In the mean time I'm happy just making it for myself. I have nothing to prove to people who want something for nothing.

--------------------
Strictly project and just for fun


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dynamic Mike



Joined: 31/12/06
Posts: 1974
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: grab]
      #1058883 - 23/07/13 04:38 PM
Quote grab:

The producer plugins are plugins of their equipment, not of their skills. IRs and emulations are of equipment. For sure cost of equipment has lowered the barrier to entry, but skilled use of that equipment still takes experience and perhaps some amount of natural talent.

Quote Dynamic Mike:

Having a different viewpoint hardly constitutes trolling, but you're right I was once a teenager.




Except a viewpoint that musicians don't ever deserve to be paid definitely does...


By income, I'm more valuable than a squaddie. So are the builder who lives over the way from me, the plumber I called in last month, the mechanic I take my car to, and the manager of the local Tescos. More people want what we do than they want a squaddie. And yes, being a squaddie *is* something that anyone can do, which is why it's traditionally been standard employment for young men without intelligence or skills in any particular field which lead to a job. I'm not saying that I'm a better person than a squaddie, just that my skills are more valuable to other people than his are, and hence I'm better paid.




Waves producer series- Delivers Eddies Kramer's signature classic rock sound. Eddie's words, not mine.

IR's/Emulations are available of specific recording rooms- Ocean Waves Studio for UAD

VRM box et al

Nobody said musicians didn't deserve to paid fairly for their output & efforts. Simply that writing a few banging toons didn't merit a stately home & a Ferrari stable. They deserve a comfortable living, as indeed most people do.

Nobody mentioned squaddies. Saying the armed forces are soley comprised of squaddies is akin to saying all musicians are drummers (JOKE). And you ARE saying you're a more valuable member of society than a squaddie, and I'm sure you believe that. But who do think defends your liberty to say that? Bono?

--------------------
Disclaimer: The views or opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those of the poster by the time you read this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
hollowsun



Joined: 20/01/05
Posts: 5582
Loc: Cowbridge, South Wales
Re: Interesting Article on Spotify/Streaming Revenues/Thom Yorke/etc new [Re: Frisonic]
      #1058886 - 23/07/13 04:59 PM
Quote Frisonic:

Yet society now largely expects musicians to provide their services in the voluntary sector.



Now? It was largely ever thus.

Back in the way back, musos were generally 'hobbyists' and did it in their spare time - they'd spend the day tilling, chopping wood, tending to their herd/flock/whatever and they'd play in the pub in the evening often for no money or sometimes (if they were lucky ... and good) for all the ale they could drink (jeeez - I've done far to many gigs like that!). It was rare to have full time professional musicians who did it exclusively for a living - even Bach had to supplement his income with teaching and Mozart died a pauper. It's only in recent times that we have had the 'luxury' of having a career in music, some, of course, enjoying fabulous riches (largely through airplay royalties, sync fees, etc.). And even in recent times, most musos are spare timers, working by day and gigging in the evenings/weekends - in fact, they are some of the happiest musos I know ... the day job pays the bills and the gigging is for fun, some 'gear money'. Some of the best home studios I've seen are owned by such types ... friend of mine is an undertaker by day (and sometimes by night) and does outstanding photography and also makes albums in his spare time in a nicely equipped studio - that has to be the oddest combination I know (and he has some truly bizarre tales to tell of his day job ... as you can imagine!).

Classical musicians can make a career out of music but typically need to be exceptional players. Furthermore, they will have been playing and practicing and practicing and practising some more, several hours a day, since they were six or seven years old, will have gone through all the grades, studied music theory, done diplomas, gone to music college or maybe an overseas conservatoire, likely been taught by the finest. At enormous cost.

They say that doctors spend the most time studying for their qualifications. Pah - nothing compared with a typical classical musician who may have put in 15 years or more before they land their first decently paid job. And even when they've landed a job in some orchestra, they'll be practicing for up to eight hours every day (as an aside, two professional violinists with the Halle orchestra had the threat of of their property and violins being possessed under noise abatement laws). And there's another thing... when you see these people on, say, The Proms, those people are playing instruments costing tens of £thousands (and more) each - you do not enter into a career in classical music lightly ... and people complain when a plug-in costs $25!!!

But after all that, if they're lucky, they might land a job in an orchestra paying £20,000pa - to use the cliché, you can earn more as a plumber. The leader of the (again) Halle quit his job because he couldn't afford to live on his salary - the insurance on his violin alone nearly crippled him.

Of course, if you are truly exceptional (and doggedly determined) you might make it as a soloist and earn £50,000 a night but they are the exception rather than the rule.

I don't know if you ever go to those concert hall places where they have lunch time piano recitals or a string quartet playing while you sup a coffee, a glass of white or a beer? The musos playing their hearts out with dazzling technique acquired over many, many years/decades of intense practice and dedication are typically doing it for nothing ... for the experience ... and maybe a free sandwich afterwards. My daughter's piano teacher accompanies choirs and so on - she barely gets expenses and for school events, doesn't even get that ... but she loves doing what she does and enjoys it and makes a modest living from teaching and the accompaniment gigs are good experience - not that she needs it ... she's been playing for 40 years or more but there's always something to learn. My daughter also accompanies choirs now. She's 16 and has been playing for half her life. Sometimes, she gets to see the piece beforehand but sometimes she has to just turn up and play/sight read what's thrown at her ... which can be exciting and nerve-racking in equal proportions and exhilarating afterwards when it went perfectly ... and then they might slip her her a £tenner for her trouble!

Let's face it, unless you're very talented (and/or just damned lucky), music is not a good full-time career option! Never has been, really.

That said, there are LOTS of opportunities in this biz we call 'music' to make a reasonable living if you're determined, resourceful, talented (and lucky enough), maybe know some people and so on ... having a few tunes on Spotify, however, is not one of them (IMO)!

--------------------
Website / Music Lab Machines / Blog


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)

Rate this thread

Jump to

Extra Information
0 registered and 7 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  David Etheridge, James Perrett, zenguitar, Martin Walker, Forum Admin, Hugh Robjohns, Zukan, Frank Eleveld, SOS News Editor,  
Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled
Rating:
Thread views: 12615

August 2014
On sale now at main newsagents and bookstores (or buy direct from the
SOS Web Shop)
SOS current Print Magazine: click here for FULL Contents list
Click image for August 2014
DAW Tips from SOS

 

Home | Search | News | Current Issue | Tablet Mag | Articles | Forum | Subscribe | Shop | Readers Ads

Advertise | Information | Privacy Policy | Support | Login Help

 

Email: Contact SOS

Telephone: +44 (0)1954 789888

Fax: +44 (0)1954 789895

Registered Office: Media House, Trafalgar Way, Bar Hill, Cambridge, CB23 8SQ, United Kingdom.

Sound On Sound Ltd is registered in England and Wales.

Company number: 3015516 VAT number: GB 638 5307 26

         

All contents copyright © SOS Publications Group and/or its licensors, 1985-2014. All rights reserved.
The contents of this article are subject to worldwide copyright protection and reproduction in whole or part, whether mechanical or electronic, is expressly forbidden without the prior written consent of the Publishers. Great care has been taken to ensure accuracy in the preparation of this article but neither Sound On Sound Limited nor the publishers can be held responsible for its contents. The views expressed are those of the contributors and not necessarily those of the publishers.

Web site designed & maintained by PB Associates | SOS | Relative Media