Music executives judge Jobs, lament losses

[MacBytes]

http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Music executives judge Jobs, lament losses (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20070228131725)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

[RichP]

-Todays music generally sucks.

-CD cost way too much. They were supposed to get cheaper as they got more popular. That never happened. If a CD cost 12-14 dollars, Im very willing to try a new artist. When I go to the store, grab 3 CDs off the shelf and my bill is north of 50 bucks, Im not so willing to experiment, and buy things just because I like a particular song.

-Face it. Industries die. Industries change. Either embrace the future or get crushed by it.

[paddy]

-Todays music generally sucks.

-CD cost way too much. They were supposed to get cheaper as they got more popular. That never happened. If a CD cost 12-14 dollars, Im very willing to try a new artist. When I go to the store, grab 3 CDs off the shelf and my bill is north of 50 bucks, Im not so willing to experiment, and buy things just because I like a particular song.

-Face it. Industries die. Industries change. Either embrace the future or get crushed by it.

Amen to that, especially the first point. Music has gone to the dogs since 95.

[crees!]

Panel member Mike Bebel, CEO of Ruckus music service, said: "Look, I don't think anybody is necessarily down on Apple. The problem is the proprietary implementation of technology...and it's causing everybody else who is participating in the marketplace--the other service providers, the labels, the users--a lot of pain. If they could simply open it up, everybody would love them."

Wasn't it the labels who demanded "their" music to be protected? They have "copy-protected" CD's you can buy from brick and mortar stores. Was it each of those stores that demanded all CD's sold through them be copy protected too?

Most of the panel members, save for Greg Scholl, CEO of independent music label The Orchard, believe that some form of DRM is necessary.

Scholl said flatly that DRM doesn't work. "The idea that DRM gives us choice isn't right," he said.

So it's necessary, but doesn't work. Is there a 3rd side this guy can take?

Gewecke also defended record labels against the criticism that the music industry has its head in the sand and just doesn't understand the Digital Age. He said that Sony BMG is working with technologists and retailers, and is constantly is looking for technological solutions to some of the industry's problems.

Those solutions are already there and available. MP3, AAC, etc...

"We routinely talk to companies about what's different," Gewecke said. "We're constantly looking for where value is being created in a business model. We are being flexible. There's still an evolution that has to happen. I say it's an optimistic time considering there's more music being listened to now than ever before....

The value is in your artists. Drop the crappy ones. Don't release records that suck. More music is being listened to because there are more avenues to FIND music (iTS, Zune Marketplace, Amazon, etc...).

Some people just don't know how to read and understand the facts. Their own ignorance and greed is what is bringing them down.

[poopooplatter]

Amen to that, especially the first point. Music has gone to the dogs since 95.

:rolleyes:

Yes, music today sucks. Or you're just too lazy to find it. Try the "internet"!

http://www.metacritic.com/music/bests/2007.shtml

[dejo]

So it's necessary, but doesn't work. Is there a 3rd side this guy can take?
Actually, he didn't say it was necessary. Everyone save (= but) him did.

[dashiel]

this is a great quote

Panel member Mike Bebel, CEO of Ruckus music service, said: "Look, I don't think anybody is necessarily down on Apple. The problem is the proprietary implementation of technology...and it's causing everybody else who is participating in the marketplace--the other service providers, the labels, the users--a lot of pain. If they could simply open it up, everybody would love them."

that same logic could easily be applied to removin DRM altogether, well except most people are down on record companies and removing DRM would be viewed as a "finally, you morons" rather than "we love you".

you know i wasn't that surprised at how poorly the recording industry initially reacted to the internet, but it's the fact they continue. there's a colloquialism "insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." each day that goes by is one day closer to their extinction.

i think anyone with half a brain can see apple is laying the ground work to become a home for recording artists... once they become tastemakers (free music tuesday) and are the top music retailer you'll see them start signing artists (and thanks to their deal with apple corps, they can). the big 4 will be screwed at that point. they can't pull the itunes catalog because it represents too much income, and they won't be able to compete with apple's artist deals (if apple is smart they'd do something like split the sales 60/40 with the larger portion going to the artist.. they could do 50/50 and it'd still be a better deal for both parties, but 60/40 would look much better in the eyes of the artist). to really piss off the big 4 apple could offer a portion of all ipod sales to artists signed to their label... something bronfman wants, but doesn't deserve.

then to avoid anti-trust laws apple could license fairplay to authorized manufacturers and online stores. each nono-ipod mp3 player would land apple a sale, as would each song sold on another store.

the only bummer in all of it would be that DRM would still be around. still it'd stick it to the RIAA good.

[sinisterdesign]

there is PLENTY of new music that doesn't suck if you look for it (unless you like hair bands, then those have kinda died out), but i'm constantly finding new bands to buy. now, the RADIO sucks, don't look for new music there. it's a wasteland of crap. check out Pitchfork (http://pitchforkmedia.com), Coke Machine Glow (http://cokemachineglow.com), or Paste Magazine (http://pastemagazine.com/).

but i agree that the music industry as a whole are a bunch of greedy, whiny, %#@#$!s. i don't think iTMS is the perfect solution, but for the money, it's the lesser of all evils for me. not the solution for everyone, but works for me most of the time.

[bartelby]

:rolleyes:

Yes, music today sucks. Or you're just too lazy to find it. Try the "internet"!


*
Your day to day commercial music sucks!
The albums released by major labels contain 2-3 singles then filler.

Outside of "Chart" music there's a wealth of amazing music out there to listen too!


EDIT: *I forgot the "I agree" bit

[juniormaj]

From the article:
------
"The economics of the business are over for good and aren't ever going to be the way they were before," Scholl said. This is a position that some in the music industry are starting to warm up to.
------

I'm glad that they are "starting to warm up to" that idea, but it should have been at the top of their agenda more than 5 years ago.

[mainstreetmark]

Apple has maintained a stranglehold on the digital music industry by locking up iTunes music with DRM.


Um, nope. Anyone, anywhere, is free to work with the recording industry and do their own deal. As far as I know, apple has no exclusive agreement with any of them. And, if I recall, it was the RIAA folks who made them DRM the stuff in the first place.

Popularity doesn't equal stranglehold. After all, Home Depot/Lowes doesn't have a stranglehold on the plywood industry.

Apple HAS maintained a stranglehold on the iPod. That is true.

[solvs]

Yes, music today sucks. Or you're just too lazy to find it. Try the "internet"!

Mainstream music. ;)

[SPUY767]

The singles model killed music. Give an artist with more carnal appeal than musical talent, a catchy tune written by someone else, so the artist has no real connection to it, fill the rest of the CD with shitey filler tracks, and presto, you have a modern pop CD. This model of pushing artists to sell CD's with a minimal temporal gap between them by basically getting one hit song and filling the rest of the CD with rubbish is astounding. Music execs already killed the concept of an album, and that in turn has slowly but surely killed their revenues. No one will ever again make a "Dark Side of the Moon" or a "Houses of the Holy", and with the exception of fetishists like myself who simply must have an artists entire catalogue if they have a single song, people are becoming increasingly less willing to fork over their jack for a CD when stealing the single good track from said disc is so much easier and more convenient.

The iTunes Music Store combats this by selling the tracks that people want a la carte, and the music industry blames iTMS for ruining CD sales. Incorrect, iTMS only exposed the monumental flaws of the system by giving those with too much moral fibre to steal songs a means to purchase a single track legally rather than buy the whole CD. So what do the music execs do? They impiose restrictions on the purchase of their precious singles making them only downloadable if one purchases the entire album in an attempt to make the purchase of a CD more of an analogue. Wow, I'm rambling. Bottom line, the music industry made its bed and now it should be made to lie in it rather than expect john law to rescue it from its own mediocrity.