To clear up a few misconceptions about my attitude and general point:
1) I never said that middlemen are unnecessary, and that sound engineers are unnecessary, though it really could be the case that this is true. Perhaps technology isn't to a point where people can entirely do it on their own without some degree of talent or experience, but we are moving in that direction. If those who had blasted me took the time to actually read and comprehend my later post, what I clarified was that I thought that a more direct agreement between artists and engineers could yield much better work, without the oversight of studio executives that are more interested in the bottom line than in artistic expression and actual talent.
2) There is no way that a single, small group of people is going to completely replace the labels and their promotional machine, simply for reasons of scale an economics. What I am advocating is not some strange world where the tiny, poor artists somehow pull off the huge marketing campaigns that are the hallmark of "success" at this point, but rather a situation where a trade is made - more exposure and freedom for second-tier acts and unsigned bands, in exchange for most likely losing the extravagancy that some seem to think I believe that this format could lead to. You could make a living at music, be directly compensated, and still have more artistic liberty than you do under a contract where the record company owns all your music.
3) I am discounting videos and tours, but I don't think that we really need them. They're a nice distraction, but it doesn't take a whole lot for a band with a little drive to get out and tour. I've helped out with more than a handful of local bands at their shows around town, and I've covered days for my buddy who's in the band I was talking about helping out. If they're necessary, then go hire someone to do it, but don't trust someone who's already signed your artistic soul for the entirety of your contract to not also shaft you on every cost they can.
4) The fact that not everyone could manage a transition is not something I'm terribly worried about, in any case. When I listen to things that some of my peers are holding up as "music" right now, I'd be glad to watch 80% of those "bands" go crashing and burning. However, that being said, I did advocate the formation of musicians' groups or collectives, as a kind of union-like support group that could offer business advice, legal representation, and the other benefits of banding together under a common interest.
5) Specifically to eSnow: In a market that has been specifically set up to require a contract with the industry to gain any measure of financial success, there is little choice to be had. You can go indie and still face some of the same crap, but maybe keep your soul, or you can gamble all of your creative material on the chance that you might,
might make it to something bigger, only to have your leash pulled tight by the people who own your creations.
6) I never said that taking music for free and not compensating anyone was right, or that it should be the way things are done. Stop putting words in my mouth, people.
nuckinfutz said:
A vast majority of artists do not make their money on CD sales. Sure if you're selling Multi-Platinum record then you can but that's only that top 5% or so. The rest of artists make their money touring. So therefore the asinine comment that "iTunes doesn't do anything for the artists" shows shuch a profound ignorance for the business. It's obvious idiots like downhillbattle and other don't know any musicians personally. LOL making money off a CD. For instance MC Hammer had a great deal that paid him about a buck per CD. That was unheard of at that time and that's why he amassed 22 worth(before squandering it).
I think you missed something, then, futz. Nobody's knowledgeable is arguing that the artists make some huge profit from CD sales, but a lot of us are saying that they ought to get a much bigger cut of their sales than they do. That's what downhillbattle and I are both trying to convince people should be the case - not that music is free and shouldn't be paid for, but that artists should be the ones who are compensated the most, not bureaucratic businessmen who's only concern is that they pimp the lowest common denominator for the most cash possible.
neonart said:
Have you compensated all of the artists you've stole-(cough) downloaded music from?
Have you sent ANY money to ANY artist after downloading the music for free?
Yes and yes.
