The Record Industry's Decline

barry_abs

lil' beyutch

Logan Sama

BestThereIsAtWhatIDo
There is no need to pay for recorded media anymore. DVDs are next as soon as connection speeds get fast enough to download a movie in an hour.

Data is worthless.
 

barry_abs

lil' beyutch
There is no need to pay for recorded media anymore.
well people all over the world are making money off Open Source Software, which is FREE.. they charge to consult, train, maintain etc..

i can see a day when recorded media is free, or nearly-free (subscription-based maybe).. there's still money to be made from licensing, tours, merchandising etc..

DVDs are next as soon as connection speeds get fast enough to download a movie in an hour.
even once everybody has a computer and super-fast broadband, there's still a non-trivial faff in order to get connected (safely!), register, find dvd, purchase etc..

definately the way it's going though.. DVD players will become connected, with push-button access to downloads.

Data is worthless.
do you mean data as in recorded-media artifacts? if so, i agree.. it's the labels that have begged to differ for so long..
 

swears

preppy-kei
I think this is why so much MOR stuff like James Blunt is being pushed, because middle aged people into easy listening don't download as much as ver kids.
 

Logan Sama

BestThereIsAtWhatIDo
I apologise, I was dealing with absolutes. And as we all know, only Sith deal in those.

My point was that as more and more of the world becomes technologically proficient, data transfer becomes faster and data replication becomes more efficient, you will see a steady year on year decline in the necessity for people to actually pay for a hard copy of said data when they can obtain it themselves for negligible cost and effort.
 

barry_abs

lil' beyutch
most people i know in the generation above still find computers / tech in general a chore..

my mother will grab some back-catalog compilation off the shelf at Asda.

dizzee fans (younger) are more likely to download.. even if everybody illegally downloaded his record, exposure (and hence profile) is still high commanding higher appearance / ticket fees etc..
 
N

nomadologist

Guest
I think this is why so much MOR stuff like James Blunt is being pushed, because middle aged people into easy listening don't download as much as ver kids.

this is one of the most cogent things i've read on here today. totally right, and i'd be surprised if we don't see a lot more Blunt type of schlock clogging airwaves in the next year...
 

Guybrush

Dittohead
There is no need to pay for recorded media anymore. DVDs are next as soon as connection speeds get fast enough to download a movie in an hour.

Data is worthless.
OTM, and DVDs are doomed too. I download a movie in under 10 minutes (averaging 1–2 MB/s), and you can download pretty much any movie you want. I have seen people who share all of the films on IMDB’s ‘top 250 films’ list and the like. (And also obscure stuff, like every Tarkovsky film or French silent films.)
 

Woebot

Well-known member
disloyal as it might be of me to point this out, but there's a very (very) good thread about this at ilm:

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=41&threadid=58366#unread

the whole issue is mind-bendingly awful

what is interesting is that it's cd/record sales that have been really affected. other areas of the music industry: gigs/licensing revenues are actually up.

the remark that really stuck with me was david bowies, and this pertains to the way people's emotional investment has changed, who said that from now on listening to music will be like turning on a tap to get water. i thought that neatly encapsulates the way in which, though to some degree essential, music is completely taken for granted, is utterly invisible.

and that rings true with the way that even the catchiest pop music on the radio i've heard over the past 18 months simply hasn't been "catchy". things like amy winehouse as well for instance, i mean on no level whatsoever does this actually engage one.

it also makes me think that for the TRUE music head the only way to keep a sacred relationship with music any more is to make it for one's own consumption. sort of like growing one's own vegetables.
 
Last edited:

Jezmi

Olli Oliver Steichelsmein
But music has been made for thousands of years, it has been recorded for approx a hundred years. For the largest part music has been much more of an experience, an event rather than a tangible product. And it's only in the last few decades that records have been produced for a market, with all the marketing strategy / fan base stimulation / publicity stunts / celebrity worshipping shenanigans.

As Logan said, with the development of the technology that allows us to share data semi-instantaniously, the data and the experience of listening to it becomes less valuable. We'll have to find the value in other aspects of music. Like performences, which are hardly an act of individualism.

And as for
it also makes me think that for the TRUE music head the only way to keep a sacred relationship with music any more is to make it for one's own consumption. sort of like growing one's own vegetables.

Don't we appreciate musicians that do it for the love?
 

Woebot

Well-known member
Don't we appreciate musicians that do it for the love?

Not quite sure if I get your chain of logic.

I dunno but I'm inclined to think that

the marketing strategy / fan base stimulation / publicity stunts / celebrity worshipping shenanigans.

in short capitalism........has been good for music. i wonder if a single record would have come out of jamaica if the makers didn't at least have the dream of "making it" on the back of their effort.
 

swears

preppy-kei
in short capitalism........has been good for music. i wonder if a single record would have come out of jamaica if the makers didn't at least have the dream of "making it" on the back of their effort.

Well, yes and no. The problem is that record companies are now less willing to take risks.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
the remark that really stuck with me was david bowies, and this pertains to the way people's emotional investment has changed, who said that from now on listening to music will be like turning on a tap to get water. i thought that neatly encapsulates the way in which, though to some degree essential, music is completely taken for granted, is utterly invisible.

This rings very true for me - I teach 16-19 yr olds and I did a lesson about music formats earlier this year. I took in some of my records, some tapes, some CDs etc and we talked about the benefits and drawbacks of differing formats. The main thing I got back from them re. mp3s is that the ephemeral nature of them actually makes them harder to grasp and relate to - just making the point that the files are discrete units and not synonynous with the hardware was tough enough, but they really don't have the same attachment to music as my generation. Even the kids who're really into music - if their computer or mp3 goes down (which they often do, 'cos a lot of 'em have very cheap players) - so what? They can download it again.

Having said that they actually listen to more hours of music than I did at their age because of the 24 hour accessibility facilitated by mp3 players etc. Frequently in my lessons, as I'm talking to them, until they get a slap! (Figuratively speaking of course).
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
"I think this is why so much MOR stuff like James Blunt is being pushed, because middle aged people into easy listening don't download as much as ver kids."
I thnk that's a very good point actually - something I had never thought of.
 

matt b

Indexing all opinion
Even the kids who're really into music - if their computer or mp3 goes down (which they often do, 'cos a lot of 'em have very cheap players) - so what? They can download it again.


seconded.

also, because they're so used to listening to poor quality mp3s on rubbish headphones (or increasingly on shitty mobile phone speakers), i think it makes it harder to differenciate between the good and bad stuff- so much of it sounds like mush.
 

gumdrops

Well-known member
its the over 30s who still value bought tangible hard copies of music. most younger people dont give a shit. so they need to rely on the audience that is most likely to actually shell out for the stuff. doesnt say much for the taste of people in their 30s.
 

Dusty

Tone deaf
Its the quality issue I find a real shame, 99% of music listeners don't care about listening to 192kbps rips on tinny headphones. But I do.

If I'm going to listen to a new work by an artist I admire, I want it to have its crisp highs and deep lows in all their glory, I want my room to shake with clearly defined bass. CDs or records are a good way of storing high quality audio, and the most worrying thing about the digital revolution is the emphasis on lower quality.
 

daddek

Well-known member
seconded.

also, because they're so used to listening to poor quality mp3s on rubbish headphones (or increasingly on shitty mobile phone speakers), i think it makes it harder to differenciate between the good and bad stuff- so much of it sounds like mush.

This is true. No surprise that music is increcingly unappreciated, when sonically it has depreaciated so badly. The mp3 medium, the delivery of ipod speakers, and the loudness wars in mastering have resulted in a trashy listening experience. It sounds disposable.

The exponential growth in bandwidth might actually reverse this trend. It shouldnt be long before 16 bit wavs will be as quick to download as a shitty 128 mp3s are today, bringing downloaded music to the same sonic quality as CD. And once CD players are totally phased out (not long now), music downloads could superceed CD and vinyl quality, with 24 bit 96khz wav files (currently incompatible with CD players). Increases in bandwidth would mean that several pages of artwork and even videos would all be packaged within a single downloaded, all of which are tied into the process of browsing an ipod library. P2P sharing would still devour profits, but still the future is bright for the experience of downloading music.

CDs are and always were a shitty product anyway, they were inherently flawed. It's something to do with the size and packaging, they offer zero pride of ownership. DVDs were far more successful in that respect.
 

gumdrops

Well-known member
i agree with the lack of appreciation for music at a decent bit rate/generally pleasing sound quality and listening to it on something better than shitty ipod buds (i recently got rid of mine, for older walkman headphones, which made me realise just how terrible the ipod earphones are) but a lot of actual music is of a not so good cheapo aesthetic itself. grime - this forums favourite music- and hip hop are very guilty of this.
 
Top