Is it time we started giving recorded music away?
Discussion
Given how easy is appears to be to illegally download music these days, is it perhaps time that we considered a new approach? My rationale, from the perspective of an artist that no one has heard of, is that people would be more likely to take a chance on an artist they'd never heard of if they didn't have to pay anything for their recordings. This would enable the artist to build a fan base quicker and ultimately drum-up demand for live appearances where they'd make an income.
I know a guy who makes a good living as a DJ but said one of his tracks had got into the top 10 on Beatport (a sort of iTunes for dance music) with just 96 sales, such is the state of the market for paid-for recorded music. This made me think that perhaps we need to re-think the approach to monetizing music altogether.
I know a guy who makes a good living as a DJ but said one of his tracks had got into the top 10 on Beatport (a sort of iTunes for dance music) with just 96 sales, such is the state of the market for paid-for recorded music. This made me think that perhaps we need to re-think the approach to monetizing music altogether.
"I know a guy who makes a good living as a DJ but said one of his tracks had got into the top 10 on Beatport (a sort of iTunes for dance music) with just 96 sales, such is the state of the market for paid-for recorded music. This made me think that perhaps we need to re-think the approach to monetizing music altogether."
You've also got to think about the fact that with Beatport (and the genre of EDM in general), there's SO many people doing it, the share of the "pie" is much smaller - ie very difficult to make a living in it.
For other styles of music, this isn't necessarily the case.
Personally, a song-writer more than artist, I WANT people to buy the songs, as my income is generated from royalties.
But I'm also mindful that the artist I'm working with will generate income herself from live performances and videos etc.
The bigger thing is that the recorded aspect can be viewed as a piece of merchandise now, akin to the T-shirt, and mug..... they are all of equal "value" to the artist in terms of revenue.
Dan
You've also got to think about the fact that with Beatport (and the genre of EDM in general), there's SO many people doing it, the share of the "pie" is much smaller - ie very difficult to make a living in it.
For other styles of music, this isn't necessarily the case.
Personally, a song-writer more than artist, I WANT people to buy the songs, as my income is generated from royalties.
But I'm also mindful that the artist I'm working with will generate income herself from live performances and videos etc.
The bigger thing is that the recorded aspect can be viewed as a piece of merchandise now, akin to the T-shirt, and mug..... they are all of equal "value" to the artist in terms of revenue.
Dan
So photographers should give away their photos too, I assume? And authors? And artists? And film makers? ...all very easy to defraud via the internet.
I make a living writing music. I was up at 5 a.m. working to get something recorded that needed finishing before midday. You can see how I wouldn't be that pleased if I was forced to do that for free.
Are you prepared to work for free?
ETA... for your info, 99% of my earnings come from royalties on sales. And even though I now write for TV an film, I was in a pop band that earned most of it's money from sales of recorded music.
As mentioned above, composers can give their music away FOC if they wish, but to force them to is just daft. It's a job, like any other.
I make a living writing music. I was up at 5 a.m. working to get something recorded that needed finishing before midday. You can see how I wouldn't be that pleased if I was forced to do that for free.
Are you prepared to work for free?
ETA... for your info, 99% of my earnings come from royalties on sales. And even though I now write for TV an film, I was in a pop band that earned most of it's money from sales of recorded music.
As mentioned above, composers can give their music away FOC if they wish, but to force them to is just daft. It's a job, like any other.
Edited by GetCarter on Friday 13th June 15:41
Though with no experience of how it actually works, I reckon its probably easier for bands/ artists to get their music heard now, though I'm not sure its more likely people will actually buy something. A couple tracks on YouTube, Spotify etc, and then put the album on iTunes/ amazon etc. People already can listen to almost any band they want to for free now anyway, with the option of buying more music instantly.
Look at the threads for music recommendations, almost every suggestion has a link where you can listen to something.
Look at the threads for music recommendations, almost every suggestion has a link where you can listen to something.
Surely some of this comes down to the way music is brought these days. There's no value for money. Companies like iTunes are selling MP3 albums, what do you get for your money that you can't get by illegally downloading. If people are going to part with their money they want to see something for it. Music has become too disposable now, for some it will only ever exist as a digital file. Why would they pay for that when they can download it for free. To them there is no difference, it looks no different and probably doesn't sound any different.
Personally I buy vinyl, where possible from a source as close to the band as possible in the hope that it means more money for the band or to the company that's put hard work into them. For my money I get a proper album that I can hold, real artwork and more often than not these days an MP3 download. I can play my album 'properly' at home and on my MP3 player when I'm at work or in the car. Until people fall back in love with buying a physical album (doesn't have to be vinyl) I can't see there ever being much money in the sale of music again.
That said I still illegally download, I do it with a moral code though. If I like the band I will buy a physical copy, whether that's straight away or at some point I always make sure I do. If I don't like the album I will always try to find someone who I can recommend it to if it fits in with their taste. I'm not saying the way I do it is right but it works for me. Music definitely shouldn't be free though, artists need money the same as all of us do.
Personally I buy vinyl, where possible from a source as close to the band as possible in the hope that it means more money for the band or to the company that's put hard work into them. For my money I get a proper album that I can hold, real artwork and more often than not these days an MP3 download. I can play my album 'properly' at home and on my MP3 player when I'm at work or in the car. Until people fall back in love with buying a physical album (doesn't have to be vinyl) I can't see there ever being much money in the sale of music again.
That said I still illegally download, I do it with a moral code though. If I like the band I will buy a physical copy, whether that's straight away or at some point I always make sure I do. If I don't like the album I will always try to find someone who I can recommend it to if it fits in with their taste. I'm not saying the way I do it is right but it works for me. Music definitely shouldn't be free though, artists need money the same as all of us do.
I think a few people have misunderstood me here. I'm not saying musicians should be forced to work for nothing - far from it. What I'm suggesting is the possibility that people trying to break onto the music scene might be able to do so more quickly if they were to make their music free to download, thus stimulating interest more quickly as people will more likely take a chance on something they don't have to pay for. Subsequent demand for live gigs would then enable them to start making money and turn it into a paying career.
I had this exact same conversation with a record exec a few years ago. His job? Head of Sales (he is also a friend of mine, I should add!)
I put forward a decent case: give the album away for free, make money on merchandise, exclude paid-for download content, tours, youtube advertising, paid-for smaller instore signings etc....
He said that while the industry will head that way (kicking and screaming), right now they are trying to find ways to re-engage people into buying albums (both physical and download). I wonder how that is going....
I put forward a decent case: give the album away for free, make money on merchandise, exclude paid-for download content, tours, youtube advertising, paid-for smaller instore signings etc....
He said that while the industry will head that way (kicking and screaming), right now they are trying to find ways to re-engage people into buying albums (both physical and download). I wonder how that is going....
Hoofy said:
But you can do that if you want. Just stick it on a multitude of file sharing sites.
Indeed, though I was meaning a more integrated and strategic approach really.extraT said:
I had this exact same conversation with a record exec a few years ago...
He said that while the industry will head that way (kicking and screaming), right now they are trying to find ways to re-engage people into buying albums (both physical and download). I wonder how that is going....
The thing is, I still do buy recorded music. I tend to buy it on CDs so I have a 'best quality' 'hard copy' from which I can rip the music at a relatively low sample rate that'll fit on my iPod while retaining an original to go back to at some future date when iPods have far greater capacity, such that I can rip it again at a far higher sample rate. As a person who appreciates music I'd rather do that than buy highly compressed AAC files from iTunes and be limited to that level of quality unless I buy it again in future when things have improved. How many other people are sufficiently bothered as to sustain an industry for high quality recorded music sales though?He said that while the industry will head that way (kicking and screaming), right now they are trying to find ways to re-engage people into buying albums (both physical and download). I wonder how that is going....
It sounds like you are an enthusiast, someone who is willing to spend a high amount of money on Music, you probably have a decent sound system, and have upgraded your ipod buds to some high-end something or others (or not, i'm just typing that as an example!)
I just cant imagine the average One Direction fan doing the same thing....nor can I imagine anybody under the age of 22 doing the same thing.
I just cant imagine the average One Direction fan doing the same thing....nor can I imagine anybody under the age of 22 doing the same thing.
I believe I see what the OP is getting at, and I think it's an approach that has already been pretty much adopted by some of the bigger bands. I'm sure they still like getting money from sales of recorded music, but they are perfectly happy to have their old and new work on YouTube to be watched and listened to for free by anyone.
My hearing is very good but I find the sound quality on YouTube to be entirely adequate in most cases, so don't really need to buy anything if I don't want to.
My hearing is very good but I find the sound quality on YouTube to be entirely adequate in most cases, so don't really need to buy anything if I don't want to.
Hoofy said:
You mean using YT and free sites to give away music to boost interest is unstrategic?
I work as a graphic designer in a marketing department and my OH is a marketing manager, so I guess I'm just meaning 'strategic' to the nth degree. Generally I don't see the level of integrated campaigning from musicians that I'm thinking of, that's all.From a consumers point of view its already like that.
I spend hours most evenings on youtube or listening to the radio. I have an ad-blocker so never see/hear adverts on youtube, the experience otherwise would put me off going there ever again. BUT I do spend a lot of money on gigs and festivals, buying merchandise, and CD's if I feel like there is something special there.
The music industry has become too top-heavy with a few powerful record labels. You very rarely hear of the indi labels complaining as much, they dont have the millions of dollars to put behind an artist and places like youtube are exactly where their fans can learn about their acts.
I spend hours most evenings on youtube or listening to the radio. I have an ad-blocker so never see/hear adverts on youtube, the experience otherwise would put me off going there ever again. BUT I do spend a lot of money on gigs and festivals, buying merchandise, and CD's if I feel like there is something special there.
The music industry has become too top-heavy with a few powerful record labels. You very rarely hear of the indi labels complaining as much, they dont have the millions of dollars to put behind an artist and places like youtube are exactly where their fans can learn about their acts.
Gassing Station | Music | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff