"All music should be free"

[Muffin Top Merkley]

Link: All music should be free - Sun News - by William Wolfe-Wylie

Being a professional comedian is hard work. Being funny on demand can be excruciating and the market in recorded comedy is small. Making money at it is all but impossible. But still thousands of would-be comedians flock to Twitter, offering jokes and missives to the masses for free.

Why give away what you're already having trouble selling?

Marketing. And it's a lesson that the music industry is going to have to learn if the latest crop of high school students have anything to say about it.

A little over a week ago, I took part in a roundtable discussion called Youth Tech Jam at a Scarborough, ON, high school to get students to chat about how they felt technology was changing the world, how they interact with that new world and how it is going to change their future career prospects.

The students were between the ages of 15 and 18, and their world is most likely very, very different from your world.

One student told me they never pay for music. Ever. Another said they pay for music, just not the recorded kind. "I'd rather spend $40 on a concert than spend $40 on iTunes," one young woman said.

The idea is pretty widespread, too. Not one person in the group of 12 saw any problem with downloading music for free. To them, it's not theft, it's market research.

To this generation, music is a promotional tool for a brand. It is what you use to promote an image, an icon and an ideal. The music is not the product, the brand is the product. Art is reduced to billboard.

Instead of spending money on digital downloads, these students argued, they would much rather go see a live performance, buy merchandise exclusive to concert-goers, or hold an autographed ticket in their hands.

In an age where digital products are copied, ripped and distributed with ease, the tangible still carries the most value.

Melanie Wood, who organized the roundtable discussion along with dozens of others, says the whole idea is to get young people thinking about the future.

"These students are not just going to be the consumers that are buying and using the services being conceived of now; they're going to be the employees that are building them as well," she said.

Music was the first of the big industries to be disrupted by the Internet. Napster, and then iTunes, destroyed the brick-and-mortar music store before this generation of high school students ever had their first dollar to spend.

But rather than shun the idea of spending money, they embrace a new idea of commercialism that celebrates the way information spreads online: Anyone can post to YouTube, build their own website or live-stream a private performance, and so they they are expected to.

One student went so far as to say: "I mean, if my iPod holds 20,000 songs, that's $20,000 to fill it on iTunes."

The Web is no long where you go to sell your wares, it's where you go to get discovered, and is exactly how the likes of Justin Bieber, Sam Tsui and even Rebecca Black found their fame.

The ads on YouTube alone provided Rebecca Black with a six-figure income.

For Wood and the Youth Tech Jam, these kinds of insights into the future of commerce are important survival tools for today's big businesses.

"Like any industry, you need to be able to adapt to what the market wants in order to thrive. Our Youth Tech Jam conversations are an effort to shed light on where we should all go next," she said.

These conversations will culminate in Montreal this fall with the World Congress in Information Technology, where Tech Jam people will join with youth from around the world to discuss the problems, opportunities and changes they see for technology. As difficult as it will be for industry leaders to accept that "piracy" might just be a new business model, today's youth are building their own celebrities and supporting them financially.

Legacy music industries can choose to listen and jump on the new generation's roller coaster, or be left behind.

I stumbled upon this article a few months back but was unable to make a proper thread regarding its content until now.

It's interesting to see how as more time passes pirating music, while still an illegal activity, seems to appear like less of a risk and more acceptable with each passing day but I don't think I can agree with everything that these kids are saying.

Sure, sometimes I'll search something like Youtube and listen to a song that I enjoy or find something new for me to listen to but that has never transitioned me to buying the performers merchandise or tickets to their concert. On the other hand, of course bands and their labels can garner immense amount of interest in a song/artist by managing/controlling the release free songs as a form of getting the sound out to those who may be unaware of the music. Bands like The Greatful Dead actually encouraged individuals to record and share the bands music, even going as far as setting up special areas for recorders at their concert.

So I turn this over to you to get your thoughts on the matter.

Is illegally downloading music become more acceptable?
Do you download music? Individual songs or full albums?
So you support downloading music?
Do you support the artist who isn't receiving any money from your illegal download buy purchasing merchandise or concert tickets?
Is releasing free songs to download the best marketing practice for the music industry today?

I don't expect people to answer each specific question, I'm just looking for some general thoughts or concerns regarding free music.

 

[Trill Co$by]

The biggest artist out there to benefit from the "Free Music Marketing" is Lil' Wayne. People can say what they want, but he's smart. For each album he releases for sale, there's at least 3 more mix tapes that he releases for free. Some say it's stupid, but the sales of his Carter albums prove otherwise.

That doesn't mean that I believe all music should be free. Simply because, it's not free to make. Literally hundreds to thousands of dollars go in to making albums, including the marketing strategies, finding retailers to sale your product, and even buying the samples of music (for rapper, pop stars, etc). Then you have to realize that they need to have some way of providing for themselves.

Youtube Rapper, DeStorm will release a free song every Monday on his channel, but even he agrees that with his debut album, it was well worth making his fans pay for it. And he got a lot of copies sold, hard copies... let alone the digital copies.

Basically, I don't agree in "all music should be free". A lot of times you CAN find music on youtube and that's fine. But downloading without paying for it really isn't.

 

[Eyrothath]

I'm big in the metal scene and have roughly 50,000 songs on my computer.. I didn't buy them all, that would be insane, I don't use itunes, but on occasion I will buy like a "special edition" CD on Amazon.. There's no record stores around here either, not that I would find a single band I listen to at one anyways.. Most bands make their money off merchandise anyways, as well as concerts, all the money from buying CD's and the music usually goes straight to the record label, they use that money to try and help promote the band and book them for tours.. This is why bands have a hard time making it, unless you get signed, in which, they rip the band off but in the process, so I don't see little difference, signing onto a record label is basically taking a shortcut, but you don't own any of the rights to your own music after you take that route..

I myself would rather play as a bard and would just want people to hear my music, I am no musician, but I think a successful internet base will get you far in the music industry, if you are popular on the internet, you'll be popular in the real world as well, I believe that is how bands will make it in the future, it's how they are doing it right now..

The music industry in general, is really a giant monopoly..

ONE corporation alone owns the 5 biggest music video channels in the U.S. and together they make about $40-50 billion a year and 90% of the releases on major labels don't profit, they release about 100 songs per week..

Only 3 or 4 of those songs are added to the average radio playlist on that week..

So I am somewhat for BANDS making as much money as they can, I want them to succeed.. But I have a very strong distaste for the music industry.. I believe that bands can make it on their own or under independent record labels, it will take longer for them to become big, but in the process, it would be better for them and their music and to have a strong internet fan base.. Nuclear Blast is a shining example of what a record label should be in the rock/metal industry..

 

[Starcaller_Nasath]

I used to be against illegally downloading music, and then I got to the point where I'd go "I'll download this and if I like it, I'll buy it, if I don't, I'll delete it", now I'm at the point where unless it's an absolute favorite band and I feel like I need the physical CD I'll go out and buy the album.

I don't usually download individual songs unless the album is shit minus one or two singles.

If bands still made a big amount of money from album sales, I'd definitely buy all the music I own, but the thing is, most bands either get enough royalties from before downloading started or they make money from touring.

One of my favorite bands recently re-released all their albums remastered with bonus discs. I bought the first two volumes (three volumes of five albums) right away, pre-ordered them in fact. By the time the third volume came out, I'd fallen on hard times and so about seven months after the third one came out, I broke down and downloaded it from thepiratebay. When I have the money, I definitely will buy the physical release.

So apart from my rambling, I don't think music should be free, I think people should support artists they like, not necessarily all artists, and I think downloading music illegally is wrong.

 

[Slash-LN]

Is illegally downloading music become more acceptable?

I think it is. With mp3 players and media players on computers. A few years ago the band Goldfinger sent out a free download of their album with artwork to everyone on their Myspace friends list the day before the physical copy was in stores.

Do you download music? Individual songs or full albums?

I didn't used to until this year. I download both. I've only downloaded a few things though. I will definitely download stuff that's out of print. If they wanted me to buy a physical copy then it should be available on that platform.

So you support downloading music?

I didn't used to. I've had a change of heart.

Do you support the artist who isn't receiving any money from your illegal download buy purchasing merchandise or concert tickets?

Yes. I go to as many concerts as I can and almost always buy a shirt or two.

Is releasing free songs to download the best marketing practice for the music industry today?

That's tough. I think the singles off an album should carry enough weight to get people to buy your album and want to hear more songs. However with that being said I know a lot of people who will download or buy albums and only listen to the singles. So I'm split on that.

 

[Sinister Shadows]

I'm all for downloading music for free in many cases. (though I buy most of my cd's anymore because most of the music I want comes out on independent labels at a reasonable prices.) The people that actually do any of the work on a cd get's very little of the money. Seen an interview with Hank Williams III here while back about his deal with Curb records. He was signed for 5 cd's he wound up getting screwed for 8 cd's for Curb records. He had to sue the label to release his third cd, he done all of the writing, recording, and mixing on the cd. Curb didn't market it at all. but still he only got ten cents for every cd sold. why the hell wold the label (who didn't do anything) get 17.90 out of every cd sold, when the person who is responsible for it get's ten cents?

I'm a believer if you want to support your favorite band, go to concerts, buy merch.

 

[Harthan]

I believe in a free market economy where consumers dictate price. If the price they dictate is free, then so be it.

It's also worth noting that file sharing is not theft - it's sharing. It's a consumer defined library, which is something we have a right to establish on our terms, industry notwithstanding. It's the world's largest mix tape.

 

[lenguy]

Is illegally downloading music become more acceptable?

Depends on who you talk to. I'm sure those record labels aren't in favor of it by any means,unless,of course they are making money off it. In a more broader aspect,I'll give a yes. People don't like to pay for things,I know I sure don't. I'd rather shit free but hey,that's just not how business or even the world works for that matter. People would rather take short cuts to save money. Downloading music,whether illegal or not is just that,a short cut. I mean,the internet makes it so easy,so why not? I think people just accept it because,like I said it is just easy access. People will make an argument that all music should be free,well,that can be tough on the artists that make it their living. Music should be shared and the internet is a double edged sword when it comes to this.

Do you download music? Individual songs or full albums?

I'm still old school. I go out and buy full albums in the store if available,I just like physically owning my items. If not then,still I'll ether buy the album online and have it shipped or I'll just go digital and buy it online,via ITunes. The only exception I make is when Its ether a song or album that's impossible to find anywhere. That's the only time I will download,illegally.

So you support downloading music?

Absolutely. In this digital age we live in,making music and uploading it online is beneficiary for a multitude of reasons. It gains exposure for the artist,making it easy for them to be heard. People love to share and the internet makes that much easier for just about anybody. It gives the artists who can't break out on the radio a platform for their music to be heard. Justin Beiber. As your opinion on him may vary,he's a perfect example. A Star,born on the internet to explode onto the scene of pop culture to become one if if not the most recognizable musical figure on the planet.

The only draw back is the illegally downloading part. Then again,I think mass exposure for the artist is an equally fair trade for the lose they may or may not have taken on dipping record sales.

Do you support the artist who isn't receiving any money from your illegal download buy purchasing merchandise or concert tickets?

I don't really download illegally as I've said. I'm all about supporting the artist. Now say,if the artist is in favor of downloading music then go for them. They still put all that time and effort in to creating their own works of art that there should be some sort of compromise.

Is releasing free songs to download the best marketing practice for the music industry today?

I know some bands already do this. They will make their first singles or other demos/EP's available on their sites,sometimes even full albums. It's a great move I believe. Give people a sample and if they don't like it then hey they didn't just waste a dollar on it. If they do like it then it could potentially draw the person back in for another taste once the full album drops. It could really provide as an ice breaker for people who linger on a band who's music remains undecided for them. Perhaps that free single will all they need to sway their decision. I know ITunes has their free single of the week thing. I've discovered one of my favorite groups that way. Its free,so what do you have to lose?

I'm not against downloading music,be it illegal or not. It has its draw backs but it also provides great opportunity. I mean if you are going to download music,make sure you do it safely. Never know what type of virus you might find in that file. I know I've had the problem very consistently before I got fed up and just started using ITunes.

I suppose this subject is all really opinionated. Though,where I stand,it's not that big of an issue. Maybe it was 10 years ago but in the digital world we live in now its a very practical and pragmatic practice that I think much of the social world has been very embracing of. It's come a long way in 10 years and this is only the beginning.

 

[LascoX]

I am against illegally down loading music. It hurts the artists that create the music most of all. If an artist wants to release thier music for free that is thier option but the wholesale theft of thier work hurts them in the long run. I normally buy the hard copy of the work but I am not against downloading someones work. People really don't realize how much work and exspence an artist puts into creating thier stuff. They often simplistically look at an artist and say "Oh they are rolling in cash" simply because they have a song on the radio. They fail to realize the record company that flipped the bill for production and distribution is recooping all thier money first before the artist see's a dime from them. These days if a band isnt selling at a platnum level they are generally cut from the roster regardless of how good they are. Sure the internet is a great marketing tool and reaches millions but a million free downloads still equates to a giant goose egg "O" for the artist who is struggeling to pay thier bills and muster enough cash to produce thier next album. Touring costs money, studio time costs money, mixing and promotion costs money. Most artists have paid thier dues and the general public has no idea what it's like to play a gig to a sparse house and yet keep doing it night after night because it's something you love to do. People have no problem getting something for free but they have no clue what it takes to put the music together for public consumption.

 

[Wald]

I think it definitely is becoming more acceptable and that it should be as well.

Here's the thing musicians rarely talk about when they say they're being screwed by this, up until the 50s it was very rare for you to make any money from recorded music. The business model was centered around recorded songs being a way of getting people out to shows. That changed with the explosion of rock and roll and lasted up until a couple of years. During that time it was possible to become very rich from being a musician, something which wasn't necessarily true before.

But those days are gone now and we're back to recorded music being about getting people interested in seeing you live and with the majority of profit that used to be there being gone now.

So talking about the rights and wrongs of downloading is like talking about the rights and wrongs of supermarkets have cheap alcohol sales that hurt the bar business, it's something that has happened and needs to be accepted. It won't ever return to where you can be an average band that makes a lot of money from it.

The business model for music has changed, if you, as a musician, can't accept that than find another line of income because you won't ever get rid of downloading.