General Music Chat

I have no connection to this film at all...but it seems like a worthy topic for all musicians. I'll wait to hear what some of you think about the concept of the film before saying anything else.



UNSOUND
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/unsound?goback=.gde_122380_member_5806882209482682371

The internet kind of leveled the playing field for all musicians around the world and took away the power and control the Record Industry once had. Yaaaay!
I feel for you guys trying to make a living at it... but it was never easy. Use to be one in a million now probably one in 10 million are going to make any money doing it. You better love it for all you will give up to do it.

Doesn't affect me much I just view it as an even greater impossibility than it ever was. I'm going to write and play regardless. So it really doesn't affect me if at all.

Though I'm still getting use to finding new music to listen to. The Radio also Sucks!

This film covers a very important topic in today’s digital age music business model. Although it paints a bleak picture, I do believe that the business has changed drastically but historically, the music business always has evolved, painfully for most musicians, yet still like a living animal it won’t lay down and die.
The financial outlays and risks have fallen on the musician’s shoulders whereas once this was the problem delegated to major record labels by way of contracts. It is true today as is was back in the pre-indie label days that success is a factor of how good the music is, its cultural/political message, its appeal and even its cult following. If you want to make a living out of playing music, it better be good….but “good” is subjective and so you won’t know until you pitch your music and it is this aspect of the business that has to be addressed. The Grateful Dead did not care about bootlegged music if it meant that thousands would pay to see their live performances.
Hunter Thompson’s quote was true then and is true now. Musicians rebelled against the major record labels which were the guardians, so-to-speak, of the music industry money-making machine but they are not as big, strong and fearful as they used to be. I would almost think they were a necessary evil. Who is left to protect our copyrights?
Something has to change…and it will.

Sounds of whining from the waning status quo.

Musicians and music existed for many millennia before there was any "music industry".

Some of the motivations to make music may change, the methods of making it and promoting it may change, but there will still be musicians making music.

... unless robots take over the planet.

Change is inevitable.

Adapt or die.

Sounds of whining from the waning status quo.

Musicians and music existed for many millennia before there was any "music industry".

Some of the motivations to make music may change, the methods of making it and promoting it may change, but there will still be musicians making music.

... unless robots take over the planet.

I agree. But there is a difference between making tips at a street corner (like medieval troubadours) and making a decent/good living (like the King's patron entertainers of the same time period).

I'm old enough to remember when people played music simply for the pleasure of doing it. For the joy of creating it, playing it, sharing it, and hearing it. Getting paid for it is really nice, but it isn't the all in all of music.

For me it's a medium . . . a way & means toward a greater end.
Would higher reimbursement make my job easier ?
No . . . it would likely make it more difficult.
But if it was easy, it not likely be worthy of the doing.

Sounds of whining from the waning status quo.

Musicians and music existed for many millennia before there was any "music industry".

Some of the motivations to make music may change, the methods of making it and promoting it may change, but there will still be musicians making music.

... unless robots take over the planet.

I agree. But there is a difference between making tips at a street corner (like medieval troubadours) and making a decent/good living (like the King's patron entertainers of the same time period).

Those musicians, of relatively wealthy families, thought worthy of royal patronage were few.

Everyone else played for tips (or just beer) ...


If people are happy to hear your music they will pay you with money and/or respect ... according to their enjoyment, wealth, and conscience.
http://youtu.be/n4sanmL8iRg

I don't believe evil to be a necessity for music or musicians.

Had a discussion with the Producer of this film, and he sincerely believes that people will "do the right thing" when they find out how this issue of stealing music impacts the lives of professional artists.

I couldn't disagree more.

I agree with Vinny that it comes across as whining. Whether right or wrong, people perceive artists as working 2 hours a week and partying the rest of the time. With everyone suffering in the current economy, no one gives a rip about their hardships.


It seems to me that the only real solution is one that would bring on a fascist police state. Before people quit stealing music (or any intellectual property), there will have to be consequences for having a stolen song/movie/book.

When you buy a CD or a movie, you are actually buying a license to enjoy them under restricted conditions. Example: you can't use someone else's music as the soundtrack for your own film without extra licensing...and you can't broadcast a football game in a public place without extra licensing, etc.

So, breaking out my crystal ball, the future is that every person will be required to carry all their licenses of ownership in one place that can be verified. That's easy to do once everyone is required to be chipped.

Not that I support that idea...just saying that's the only way to track who has their intellectual property legally.




.

But there is a difference between making tips at a street corner (like medieval troubadours) and making a decent/good living (like the King's patron entertainers of the same time period).

This is where we get the genre known as "folk". There was the music of the aristocrats, coming from educated and highly trained musicians....and then there was music of the common "folk"


.

Yod

Folk / rich people music - that line was breached quite a bit but for my money it was crossed most spectacularly by Vaughn Williams classic "Folk Song Suite."

Talbot

It's quite simple. Musicians cannot make a living selling recordings of their music any longer (except those few who, for whatever reason, can get sales in the hundreds of thousands or more). The 'record companies' sealed their dooms before the digital evolution started with how they approached music selling (and artist-tour support).
The woman who complains (whines) about having to tour means 'no families' can get a job playing with the local orchestras, doing local solo shows, etc. If a band/group/soloist is 'big' enough to make good money touring, they can afford to bring their family with them. If its 'medium' money, they can schedule to go home every 2 weeks or so. Don't like it or can't get that 'magic' gig, go get a 40-hour-a-week job and relegate music to the hobby/extra $ category like 99.9% of musicians.

The woman who complains (whines) about having to tour means 'no families' can get a job playing with the local orchestras, doing local solo shows, etc.

Local shows don't pay squat, and you can't do them every day. One really does have to travel non-stop to make a (decent) living as a musician

If a band/group/soloist is 'big' enough to make good money touring, they can afford to bring their family with them.

Sometimes...but I promise your wife wouldn't like it and your kids will be uneducated. Not to mention you have to deal with domestic issues in the middle of dealing with musicians. Do you have any idea how much fun that is?

If its 'medium' money, they can schedule to go home every 2 weeks or so.

That's why I've been doing since 2005. For the last 6 years I average 4 -5 days per month at home. I've missed so much of my little boys life and my little girl is almost 17. There is no guilt like being gone from home all the time to pay for having a home.

Don't like it or can't get that 'magic' gig, go get a 40-hour-a-week job and relegate music to the hobby/extra $ category like 99.9% of musicians.

Yea, but what if Led Zepplin had to do that? In today's music business climate, Led Zepplin would never had afforded the arena-style concert with quad and lasers. Notice those aren't happening much anymore?

It takes a certain adventurous personality to want to live out of a suitcase. People can't do that forever before it drives them nuts...unless it's worth it.

Would you work your ass off to come home a few days a month with nothing for very long? So the point is that a lot of great music will never be heard, while lesser qualified musicians will emerge simply because they're willing to live like gypsies.

I guess an eternal garage band scene wouldn't be all that bad...but sometimes ya want to hear artistic excellence.



.

I think music will change and evolve as it always has. The recording industry as we know it is really only about 60 yrs old and people have been making music forever. Back in the 1st half of the 20th century nearly all music was live performance in person or on the radio. I think we will get back to that place where musicians no longer depend on recordings, and live music on a local or regional level will have a renaissance. As long as fans are willing to buy tickets to see a great show there will be a place to play and get paid.

Charlie Christian, Gene Krupa, Django, Elvis, Dick Dale... all these players really made their mark in live shows at local or regional levels. I suspect this is the path forward for most with record sales becoming less of an income source.