Musician Forum - Band Discussion Board - BandMix

This is an interesting read:

http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/the_adams_theory_of__content_value

I think you could make the same argument Scott makes for music as well.

It's all kind of depressing, in a way. But the world has a way of coming full circle...

I recently received a thank you from someone whom said the lyrics of one of our songs was stuck in her head. And that it had helped her through some troubling times in her life.

I suppose it all depends on what we value.

In a world where nothing matters, except what wont last
Focus on the eternal, and forget about the past
And love one another just like Jesus did
This is all that matters when you see God in the end..

WOW SANS.!!!!

Awsome. What song is that?

While I love Adams I'm not entirely on board with his argument. Yes people consume illegal content. Many believe that "the evil empire" has already made too much money from the peasants and that the internet is the great leveler. His argument assumes that 90% of all music is now consumed illegally. But many people will spend $1 for a track they want, and many do. There's the legality issue; many people don't want to mess with it. There's the ethical consideration; people are more moral than given credit for (I for one have never consumed illegal content because, as an author and producer of content, I believe it is wrong). Finally, there's the quality issue; mp3's cannot be compared to Cds or even a good vinyl record. Many audiophiles will spend money on superior sound.

jimmydanger wrote:While I love Adams I'm not entirely on board with his argument. Yes people consume illegal content. Many believe that "the evil empire" has already made too much money from the peasants and that the internet is the great leveler. His argument assumes that 90% of all music is now consumed illegally. But many people will spend $1 for a track they want, and many do. There's the legality issue; many people don't want to mess with it. There's the ethical consideration; people are more moral than given credit for (I for one have never consumed illegal content because, as an author and producer of content, I believe it is wrong). Finally, there's the quality issue; mp3's cannot be compared to Cds or even a good vinyl record. Many audiophiles will spend money on superior sound.

Very well put, Jim. You covered a lot of ground with that post.

I tend to agree with you Jimmy.

I do wonder what the ramifications of the internet will be, long-term, for professions like writers and musicians.

I tend to think that if you can place a price tag on something, people will figure out a way to make money from it. So I'm not really buying the argument that he's making. But it's an interesting argument and makes for some neat thinking.

[i]ALL THAT REALLY MATTERS[/i]

Lyrics and melody: Ray Jackson
Music: NOISY KUNG FU !!

sanshouheil wrote:I recently received a thank you from someone whom said the lyrics of one of our songs was stuck in her head. And that it had helped her through some troubling times in her life.
i][/b]

I had this same thing happen to me. After her father died, Twanna Turner (good person) said my song "Folks I Knew" really struck home; thanked me for writing it.

Uh, just for perspective purposes...

I personally know a guy that, near the beginning of the download craze, managed to find an umbrella deal that gave him free access to about a dozen different sites (napster, etc.). The agreement was a one-time fee of $1.00, and was a lifetime agreement.

You read that correctly. One buck, one time, downloads forever.

I forget how many he actually has at this point: 250 thousand, maybe closer to 400 thousand downloads. Album upon album, anything you could imagine, tons of stuff that he himself has never listened to.

I know what you're thinking, but it was a legitimate agreement (as far as I know), and the guy never uses this "database" of music for professional purposes (i.e., he's not a pro DJ).

Still, how much do you think that is, per song? $1 divided by 250, 000 downloads? I wonder how many artists have gotten rich from that...haha.

Do you think he's the only one? Seriously?

And as for quality vs. quantity, please...millions of people are walking around right now, listening to recordings-the quality of which are the sound equivalent of a horse drawn carriage (in comparision to the available technology-the automobile, for instance), and they couldn't care less. Yes, there is a (vastly) small group of consumers that are always going to concern themselves with quality, but I for one, don't believe that you could survive financially based on the actions of that one miniscule little faction.
The value of music today? Zero?.
Mo. It's less than zero. Sorry guys, but the truth hurts.

I think I may know 4 "audiophiles," out of everyone I've ever met in my life.

Ppl don't care about that stuff anymore. MP3's have worse quality sound than any medium I've ever used, but ppl still want them, for the convenience.

Ppl are getting so jaded with so much crappy stuff & so many toys, that they've gotten to the point that it simply doesn't matter anymore.

When you buy something on-line, the sound quality is in the basement, more often than not. You also miss out on the cool packaging that used to be so important.

How many of us older folk have bought music just because the album cover was so cool? You don't get that anymore.

It's all becoming so easy, so cheesy, that it isn't worth the consumer's buck.

Someone needs to come up with a medium for music that's convenient, & still high-quality, & wipe out the Ipod & the Itunes & the pure junk that's being distributed as "music."

I wanna hear those distant little nuances that I used to hear on my LP's with headphones on. And the artist & the composer also needs to be protected in this new medium.

Jimmy, CF, you have your mission, if you should choose to accept it. This message will self-destruct in 30 seconds...