Text 22750, 138 rader
Skriven 2011-11-08 19:00:30 av Richard Webb (1:116/901.0)
  Kommentar till text 22745 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: FidoNews Vol. 28 No. 45 News Around the Web
===================================================
HEllo Bob,

On Tue 2011-Nov-08 08:31, Robert Bashe (2:2448/44) wrote to Richard Webb:

RW> This has been the biggest hurdle the industry faces, and again it's
RW> the small operators, the independent artists and small companies that
RW> get hurt the most.

RB> I have to admit, this surprises me somewhat.

RB> For one thing, piracy is surely most prevalent in the case of "big
RB> names", well-known artists with a wide distribution. The "little
RB> guys" simply aren't well known enough to be pirated - or at least I
RB> would have thought that. 

True, but, when you figure that small operate is pressing
his disks by the thousand lots, and hoping to sell them at
gigs to recoup his investment, and, as I noted earlier
subsidize the performance a little bit.  But, when the guy
who bought one at the last gig shares his music and it's
able to be located he'll sell less at those gigs because the fans will just
download the tracks they like.  YEs, the well known artists are hurt, visibly,
but it's the small
operators that get hit in the pocketbook even harder, and
they're not even on the radar.  HEnce, to protect
themselves, they end up using online resources that offer
the very thing the customer doesn't want oftentimes, or cut
costs where they can.  OFten this cost cutting is the very
places where they shouldn't be cutting costs, such as
professional mastering, etc.

RB> And for another, the people who are lobbying most for stricter and
RB> stricter copyright laws aren't the little guys, but the big content
RB> corporations who see the big money they used to get from CD sales at
RB> prices _they_ set threatened. Such corporations always argue that
RB> they are stiving to improve the lot of the individual artists, but
RB> when you look a little deeper it seems that the artists (except for
RB> big names) get very little of the sticker price for a CD, and the
RB> corporations are mainly worring about their own welfare. I've heard
RB> that less well-known groups can't even find a label to publish their
RB> work. 

That's right, so they self publish, and in so doing find
themselves cutting corners which if they really want to jump that hurdle to the
majors shouldn't be cut.  As I commented
earlier, these are the folks I deal with, and when I'm
finished with them, or they did it in their basement studio, either way it goes
is when they need such services as
professional mastering at a real mastering lab, but they'll
take their two track working master or submaster, burn disks on their pc at
home, do sleves and what not in their desktop publisher of choice, and
everything from the recorded sound
to the packaging shouts "amateur hour!"  Hence, they can't
get played on the radio, they can't get the notice of the
very people they need to notice them to move up, and that
drunk guy at their last gig who shared their music for free
with half a dozen buddies kicks their tails.  The majors
don't represent them, in fact the majors could care less
about them.

A great song, and I do mean great will transcend all of
this, but there are few truly great songs that will get such notice.  IF they
do the songwriter gets to sell it to the
majors and they get a major label artist to record it, hand
him his fee and tell him to shut up and go away, unless he's got some more that
are just as great.

IT's always been a very cut throat business, made only
more-so by modern methods of piracy.

RB> There's also the consideration that pirated music can increase the
RB> public awareness of a group or single artist and make them more
RB> popular, thus indirectly raising their chances of financial success.
RB> But of course, at that point the negative side kicks in and they (or
RB> at least their publisher) lose more from piracy than they gain by
RB> the added presence.

That's right, and you're not going to get noticed if the
production is poor because you cut corners.  See above.

Then, consider this.  That guy who does get noticed because
his track went "viral" on youtube doesn't get what used to
be the benefits of major label support, and that's called
artist development.
ARtist development means performance coaching, etc.  That's
why we have so many one or two disk "flash in the pan"
artists you never hear from again after their fifteen
minutes of fame.

<snip again>

RB> But in any case, what we think isn't really that important, since
RB> the genie is out of the bottle and can't be crammed into it again.
RB> All an upcoming artist can do is try to live with reality - and some
RB> certainly try. I've seen reports that some actually invite people to
RB> pirate their songs (or at least some of them) to try to gain added
RB> attention for their work.

Right, but if you're going to do that, then you better save
your shekels and bite the bullet and spend that money for
professional mastering.  iN fact, the professional mastering game has even
become more complex.  tO maximize the
benefits, you master a little differently for the version
that will be released as an mp3, another master for the
folks who'll be listening in an uncompressed format on their home system, etc.
iT used to be mastering was a simple
process, make sure the disk cutter could cut it, listen on a monaural playback
source to make sure you didn't cancel
something out when summed to mono, listen on the average car stereo, if all
sounded good print that sucker!  The variety
of formats that may be used for playback make mastering more essential now than
ever.

RB> Anyway, from what I read you're right when you say that live
RB> performances make up the bulk of the income for artists nowadays.
RB> One of the reasons is that the artists are directly involved and get
RB> a larger share of the profits than with CDs or commercial music
RB> downloads. And this is probably the way things are going to develop,
RB> since trying to kill pirating is a little like trying to empty an
RB> ocean with a teacup.

RIght, but there are fewer places to play in many
communities than there were back when you and I were young.
So, you have that driving the price down.  Where you once
played for a guaranteed return, now you play oftentimes for
what you can bring in at the gate, and these means
advertising ahead of time, all the more reasons to record,
round and round we go.

The business model has changed quite radically from when we
were young, and the profit centers in the business aren't
what they were.


Regards,
           Richard
---
 * Origin:  (1:116/901)