Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Free E-book - Music 2.0 by Gerd Leonhard
Without a doubt, the music industry is a-changing. For the first time ever, musicians are able to manage their own marketing, promotion and distribution to the entire broadband-connected planet. CDs haven't even completely died yet and the IPOD is already obsolete. It's anyone's guess where this is all going, and Gerd Leonhard is brave enough to make his guess public.
Gerd Leonhard just released a collection of his own blog postings and papers in a FREE e-book called Music2.0. In it, Mr Leonhard made predictions about how the music industry was going to mutate once mixed with the new technologies. You can get the book here.
I'm about a quarter of the way through Music 2.0, and it's a really interesting read. I'd say it is essential reading for people in the music business; especially for independent artists. Really Especially for Older Independent Artists who grew up with music being something you bought at Target on a cassette tape and listened to in a Sony Walkman. The paradigm shift is equal parts traumatic and exciting.
It's interesting to see what Mr Leonhard predicted correctly. One thing he points out is something I've ranted about for years; the changeover of music from a product to a service. The music subscription service I've bitched about for years is finally available thanks to the Verizon/Rhapsody merger, but he predicted this years before I did.
I'm excited to read his current predictions and imagine what things will be like if he is correct when Music 3.0 comes out...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Gerd Leonhard just released a collection of his own blog postings and papers in a FREE e-book called Music2.0. In it, Mr Leonhard made predictions about how the music industry was going to mutate once mixed with the new technologies. You can get the book here.
I'm about a quarter of the way through Music 2.0, and it's a really interesting read. I'd say it is essential reading for people in the music business; especially for independent artists. Really Especially for Older Independent Artists who grew up with music being something you bought at Target on a cassette tape and listened to in a Sony Walkman. The paradigm shift is equal parts traumatic and exciting.
It's interesting to see what Mr Leonhard predicted correctly. One thing he points out is something I've ranted about for years; the changeover of music from a product to a service. The music subscription service I've bitched about for years is finally available thanks to the Verizon/Rhapsody merger, but he predicted this years before I did.
I'm excited to read his current predictions and imagine what things will be like if he is correct when Music 3.0 comes out...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Book Review, Music Industry, Predictions
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Go Indie! Or, how the RIAA is like a spouse who attacks you with a kitchen knife
Every now and again, I flip back through the archives here at conradzero.com, and yesterday I came across this easily forgettable post from a year ago. Back in March 2007, Gizmodo announced their position on the RIAA's unethical tactics, and posted an accurate and meaningful manifesto which called the RIAA out on their own bullshit.
If you are a musician, or even a music fan, you owe it to yourself to know the truth, and at least skim through the manifesto. You should understand who the RIAA are, and what they are doing. Once you know what they are doing, you won't need to be told that it's unethical. You'll understand why established bands like Nine Inch Nails are leaving their labels. You'll understand why new bands like Jagged Spiral have no interest in being 'signed'.
The RIAA served their purpose when we had nothing else, but for years they have actively fought against using the internet as a method of music distribution, and when they finally (begrudgingly) put their music up on the internet, they poisoned it with DRM.
This is the point where we don't need the RIAA anymore.
The parting could have been avoided if they simply gave the customers what they wanted (and were more than willing to pay for,) internet distribution of music that we could purchase and play on our own terms. They wouldn't give it to us, and the internet opened another method of music distribution, so this is the point where we say "Goodbye RIAA, it's been great! So long!"
The parting could have remained amicable if the RIAA hadn't decided to become unethical. Unfortunately, the RIAA decided to rewrite and twist the laws of this country to their own ends, and to start unfairly suing their own customers and innocent people.
So this becomes the point where we don't need OR WANT them anymore. This is the point where we say, "Piss off RIAA, you really screwed up that relationship! Fuck you!"
What saddens me most is that all this bullshit gets between the musicians and the consumers. The desperation of consumers to get at music they want is being held up by the greed of the RIAA to restrict access, and control how consumers use the product they sell.
It didn't have to be this way, but the RIAA made their choice. They went to the Dark side. They chose...poorly.
It doesn't have to continue to be this way, but that's for YOU to decide.
What can YOU do about it? Simple. Don't endorse the behavior. Don't fuel the RIAA's efforts. Now that the RIAA's antics are public knowledge, people don't have the right to be ignorant. Anyone purchasing music from the RIAA labels is endorsing, enforcing, and promoting this behavior. Likewise for artists who sign contracts with RIAA labels.
Trust me, there is SO MUCH independent music out there, that the RIAA labels and artists could all die today, and you wouldn't miss them for long. Finding the music you like is half the fun. Check out local bands, and "indie" labels. Look at myspace, pitchfork, Hype Machine and such. If you like music, there's plenty to pick from, lots of it better and lots of it worse than what the RIAA provides, and much of it is in your hometown!
If you want music to thrive, the best thing you can do is to give your money directly to the artists - go to their shows, go to their websites, and buy the art directly from them. The worst thing you can do is give money to the RIAA. Don't fall for I-Tunes. Don't fall for Rhapsody, Zune or Napster. Support websites that support independent artists:
emusic
mp3tunes
Magnatune
Garage Band
CD Baby
Yes, even Amazon.com.
If you know of others, please comment them!
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
If you are a musician, or even a music fan, you owe it to yourself to know the truth, and at least skim through the manifesto. You should understand who the RIAA are, and what they are doing. Once you know what they are doing, you won't need to be told that it's unethical. You'll understand why established bands like Nine Inch Nails are leaving their labels. You'll understand why new bands like Jagged Spiral have no interest in being 'signed'.
The RIAA served their purpose when we had nothing else, but for years they have actively fought against using the internet as a method of music distribution, and when they finally (begrudgingly) put their music up on the internet, they poisoned it with DRM.
This is the point where we don't need the RIAA anymore.
The parting could have been avoided if they simply gave the customers what they wanted (and were more than willing to pay for,) internet distribution of music that we could purchase and play on our own terms. They wouldn't give it to us, and the internet opened another method of music distribution, so this is the point where we say "Goodbye RIAA, it's been great! So long!"
The parting could have remained amicable if the RIAA hadn't decided to become unethical. Unfortunately, the RIAA decided to rewrite and twist the laws of this country to their own ends, and to start unfairly suing their own customers and innocent people.
So this becomes the point where we don't need OR WANT them anymore. This is the point where we say, "Piss off RIAA, you really screwed up that relationship! Fuck you!"
What saddens me most is that all this bullshit gets between the musicians and the consumers. The desperation of consumers to get at music they want is being held up by the greed of the RIAA to restrict access, and control how consumers use the product they sell.
It didn't have to be this way, but the RIAA made their choice. They went to the Dark side. They chose...poorly.
It doesn't have to continue to be this way, but that's for YOU to decide.
What can YOU do about it? Simple. Don't endorse the behavior. Don't fuel the RIAA's efforts. Now that the RIAA's antics are public knowledge, people don't have the right to be ignorant. Anyone purchasing music from the RIAA labels is endorsing, enforcing, and promoting this behavior. Likewise for artists who sign contracts with RIAA labels.
Trust me, there is SO MUCH independent music out there, that the RIAA labels and artists could all die today, and you wouldn't miss them for long. Finding the music you like is half the fun. Check out local bands, and "indie" labels. Look at myspace, pitchfork, Hype Machine and such. If you like music, there's plenty to pick from, lots of it better and lots of it worse than what the RIAA provides, and much of it is in your hometown!
If you want music to thrive, the best thing you can do is to give your money directly to the artists - go to their shows, go to their websites, and buy the art directly from them. The worst thing you can do is give money to the RIAA. Don't fall for I-Tunes. Don't fall for Rhapsody, Zune or Napster. Support websites that support independent artists:
emusic
mp3tunes
Magnatune
Garage Band
CD Baby
Yes, even Amazon.com.
If you know of others, please comment them!
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Call To Action, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Monday, June 02, 2008
2008 National Conference for Media Reform
It isn't often that Minneapolis gets to host events like this. If you care about the state of media, here is the place to share ammunition for the revolution...
http://www.freepress.net/conference
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
http://www.freepress.net/conference
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Cool Event, Minneapolis Event, Music Industry, Ubercool
The Effects of media consolidation on [put genre here] Radio
A recent article written for the Future of Music Coalition left me with mixed feelings.
The Effects of Media Consolidation on Urban Radio by Eric K Arnold analyzes how the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has impacted "Urban Radio". Don't worry, I didn't know what it was either. Here is the definition directly from Mr. Arnold's article.
"Generally speaking, urban radio is defined as programming whose primary demographic targets people of color living in urban areas."
Anyway, you could already guess the impact of governmental decisions on American business. Do you think it made things better or worse for big businesses? Do you think it made things better or worse for artists and small/indie businesses?
The effect is summed up in the first paragraph of the article:
"Let's cut to the chase: urban radio sucks. You know it, artists know it, and programmers know it too. It offers little room for creative programming, tends to favor established artists at the expense of new voices, and kills any halfway-decent song that does manage to land in rotation by playing it as much as three times an hour. Most of all, urban radio sucks because it rarely meets the needs of the local community from which its listeners are drawn. "
I agree wholeheartedly with all of this, *BUT* try this simple test: Reread the quote and replace the words "urban radio" with your own favorite genre of music. Country? Metal? Adult Urban Contemporary? It doesn't change the truth of the quote, does it? The bigger truth is that All Terrestrial Radio Sucks, for the exact same reasons. The problem isn't limited to Urban Radio at all.
So I have to take issue with Mr. Arnold's narrowing of the problem to how it only affects his chosen genre of music. Don't get me wrong, the article is truthful and accurate. But the conclusion we are left to draw is that the deregulation of terrestrial radio has ruined it for Black Urban America. It's not wrong, but it is being narrow minded at least.
So I'm all for whatever positive change can come from his article, and he mentions several things that YOU CAN DO to make things better, but I have a hard time endorsing discrimination, especially from a 'journalist' who should know better.
One thing Mr. Arnold does not mention regarding Things You Can Do to help is to grow some balls and not sell out if you are running a radio station. This is a part of the problem that cannot be overlooked. The stations that cared about the needs of the local community and used to play local music are gone because the owners sold off to the large corporates, or they tried to compete/cash in and started playing what everyone else was playing, to get a piece of the bigger pie. Either way, they had the option to continue playing independent music BUT THEY CHOSE NOT TO.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 made it possible for large corporate radio stations to make buyout offers to the smaller independant stations, but did not force any of them to sell out. The owners and operators who sold out are more guilty than the government for what happened. You can look them up in the phone book and ask them why they didn't stand up for [fill in the genre] radio. Another thing you can do is open a radio station that plays local music. Then, when the big media moguls come around and offer you a fat wad of cash for your radio station, you can see what it's like to be in their shoes and see what kind of decision you would make.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
The Effects of Media Consolidation on Urban Radio by Eric K Arnold analyzes how the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has impacted "Urban Radio". Don't worry, I didn't know what it was either. Here is the definition directly from Mr. Arnold's article.
"Generally speaking, urban radio is defined as programming whose primary demographic targets people of color living in urban areas."
Anyway, you could already guess the impact of governmental decisions on American business. Do you think it made things better or worse for big businesses? Do you think it made things better or worse for artists and small/indie businesses?
The effect is summed up in the first paragraph of the article:
"Let's cut to the chase: urban radio sucks. You know it, artists know it, and programmers know it too. It offers little room for creative programming, tends to favor established artists at the expense of new voices, and kills any halfway-decent song that does manage to land in rotation by playing it as much as three times an hour. Most of all, urban radio sucks because it rarely meets the needs of the local community from which its listeners are drawn. "
I agree wholeheartedly with all of this, *BUT* try this simple test: Reread the quote and replace the words "urban radio" with your own favorite genre of music. Country? Metal? Adult Urban Contemporary? It doesn't change the truth of the quote, does it? The bigger truth is that All Terrestrial Radio Sucks, for the exact same reasons. The problem isn't limited to Urban Radio at all.
So I have to take issue with Mr. Arnold's narrowing of the problem to how it only affects his chosen genre of music. Don't get me wrong, the article is truthful and accurate. But the conclusion we are left to draw is that the deregulation of terrestrial radio has ruined it for Black Urban America. It's not wrong, but it is being narrow minded at least.
So I'm all for whatever positive change can come from his article, and he mentions several things that YOU CAN DO to make things better, but I have a hard time endorsing discrimination, especially from a 'journalist' who should know better.
One thing Mr. Arnold does not mention regarding Things You Can Do to help is to grow some balls and not sell out if you are running a radio station. This is a part of the problem that cannot be overlooked. The stations that cared about the needs of the local community and used to play local music are gone because the owners sold off to the large corporates, or they tried to compete/cash in and started playing what everyone else was playing, to get a piece of the bigger pie. Either way, they had the option to continue playing independent music BUT THEY CHOSE NOT TO.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 made it possible for large corporate radio stations to make buyout offers to the smaller independant stations, but did not force any of them to sell out. The owners and operators who sold out are more guilty than the government for what happened. You can look them up in the phone book and ask them why they didn't stand up for [fill in the genre] radio. Another thing you can do is open a radio station that plays local music. Then, when the big media moguls come around and offer you a fat wad of cash for your radio station, you can see what it's like to be in their shoes and see what kind of decision you would make.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, Music Industry, Open Letter
Thursday, March 06, 2008
New Nine Inch Nails Album Release
After the inital carnage of Nine Inch Nails new release, 'Ghosts I-IV' I forked over my $10 (Plus $6.99 for, um, Shipping and Handling, er, I meant "Shipping" and "Handling"...) and downloaded all 36 tracks.
Yes, that's 36 tracks, and not a vocal on a-one of them. Still haven't had a chance to listen to the whole thing yet, but I like what I hear so far. It's the essence of what makes NIN so great. Layers. Textures. Tones. Things that most bands today can't even imagine, and what makes people like Pink Floyd, Marillion, Stevie Ray Vaughan and Jimi Hendrix masters in their craft.
The real buzz behind Ghosts is the release format. The first nine tracks are being given away online for free under Creative Commons licensing.
I could go on (again) about how the old Music Industry don't f**king work, and how I think it should be fixed, but this article from fool.com does a better job than I could.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Yes, that's 36 tracks, and not a vocal on a-one of them. Still haven't had a chance to listen to the whole thing yet, but I like what I hear so far. It's the essence of what makes NIN so great. Layers. Textures. Tones. Things that most bands today can't even imagine, and what makes people like Pink Floyd, Marillion, Stevie Ray Vaughan and Jimi Hendrix masters in their craft.
The real buzz behind Ghosts is the release format. The first nine tracks are being given away online for free under Creative Commons licensing.
I could go on (again) about how the old Music Industry don't f**king work, and how I think it should be fixed, but this article from fool.com does a better job than I could.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: music, Music Industry, NIN
Saturday, March 01, 2008
Downsizing the Music Industry
In case you missed it, a few years ago the recording industry (known as the RIAA, and more specifically comprised of Warner, EMI and Universal) sued the shit out of file-sharing companies like Napster, Kazaa, etc. Last year, they settled for Hundreds of Millions of dollars of royalties they swore up and down were owed to their artists.
But the artists are still wondering where their money is.
Of course, the RIAA swears they are 'working on it' and that much of the money was used up in legal fees.
So, when the landlord asks for the rent, artists can simply say they're 'working on it'?
It's the hypocritical system I've made fun of for years. Anyone who has half a brain can follow this anti-logic:
-Fans (via retailers, natch) pay money to the Recording Industry
-The Recording Industry keeps the money
-Artists get squat, with the few exceptions of those who are uber-famous, or smart enough to hire their own attorney.
So tell me again how the music industry is faltering, and then cry me a fucking river. They are a parasite that people had to tolerate before, but we don't need them anymore. If I want the new Jagged Spiral album, I'll buy it from them directly, and the money goes to the artist where it belongs.
In the American Music Business, those who make the product (artists) need to recognize the RIAA for what they are: the middleman, someone who gets inbetween the artist and the consumer, takes all the profit, and provides little by way of value.
Time to downsize, and let them go. Make sure to sue them first.
Once those corporate execs at the RIAA are penniless and living under a bridge, and they come up to you asking for change, just tell them you're 'working on it'...
The moral of the story is that the only winners in this system are the lawyers.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
But the artists are still wondering where their money is.
Of course, the RIAA swears they are 'working on it' and that much of the money was used up in legal fees.
So, when the landlord asks for the rent, artists can simply say they're 'working on it'?
It's the hypocritical system I've made fun of for years. Anyone who has half a brain can follow this anti-logic:
-Fans (via retailers, natch) pay money to the Recording Industry
-The Recording Industry keeps the money
-Artists get squat, with the few exceptions of those who are uber-famous, or smart enough to hire their own attorney.
So tell me again how the music industry is faltering, and then cry me a fucking river. They are a parasite that people had to tolerate before, but we don't need them anymore. If I want the new Jagged Spiral album, I'll buy it from them directly, and the money goes to the artist where it belongs.
In the American Music Business, those who make the product (artists) need to recognize the RIAA for what they are: the middleman, someone who gets inbetween the artist and the consumer, takes all the profit, and provides little by way of value.
Time to downsize, and let them go. Make sure to sue them first.
Once those corporate execs at the RIAA are penniless and living under a bridge, and they come up to you asking for change, just tell them you're 'working on it'...
The moral of the story is that the only winners in this system are the lawyers.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, Music Industry
Friday, January 25, 2008
93X Rocks...er, I mean, Sucks
For a change of pace at work today, I was trying to listen to KXXR, the local "Hard Rock" radio station also known as 93X.
Cake?
The White Stripes?
Red Hot Chili Peppers?
W.
T.
F?
Thought I had the wrong station for a moment, until they played some whining, crying screamo (Linkin Park), and then some Post-Black-Album-Metallica (AKA: Mooktallica), then I knew I had the right station: 93X, We Play Meddle for Boys in Caps! Crank it up while you drive your 4x4 down to the "World of Wheels"!
Bitchin.
And if it wasn't bad enough that the music is watered down like the drinks at the strip club, there were more commercials and annoying DJs than songs. Should anyone be surprised that terrestrial radio is losing market share to satellite?
Don't get me wrong, I think Tool deserve to be played every single day, but the Fucking Red Hot Chili Peppers?
This town needs a real Hard Rock / Metal radio station. Let's hear some Prong (Did you know they have a new album?) or Motorhead. There's an interesting genre called Melodic Metal, but 93X wouldn't know about that.
There's been some great releases in the last couple years; Kamelot's "Ghost Opera", Blind Guardian's "Twist in the Myth", The Deathstars "Termination Bliss", In Flames "Come Clarity", and more; bands that kick the piss out of crap like Godback and Nickelsmack, and might even make people interested in music again, but 93X has no clue.
Female-Fronted Hard Rock / Metal bands are going gangbusters; Nothing Gained, Scarlet Sins, Betty X, and my new favorite OTEP. I mean, here are some talented bands, and they are even TRYING to get Pop Metal stations like 93X to play them by doing metal covers of pop songs. Scarlet Sins did a cover of "Strangelove" by Depeche Mode, and OTEP covered "Breed" from Nirvana, you can check it out here:
OTEP - "BREED"
Add to My Profile | More Videos
This remake hit the Billboard charts in Canada. Have you even heard of this band? Of course not, because you were listening to Angry Teen Angst God-Damned-Nickel-Smack-Back on 93X.
Call me spoiled. I was so happy when 93X first launched, and they really were playing good music; Nirvana, Motorhead, G-n-F-n-R, Prong, NIN, classic Metallica, Marilyn Manson..., stuff that made me blow out the speakers in my car over and over again.
What happened? Regardless, the honeymoon is over, and where the playlist for 93X hasn't stagnated completely, it's moving into mook-rawk and screamo. Ever hear a radio station say they needed to go 'back to their roots'?
It's 2008, and 93X doesn't know Doro Pesch from Peaches.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Cake?
The White Stripes?
Red Hot Chili Peppers?
W.
T.
F?
Thought I had the wrong station for a moment, until they played some whining, crying screamo (Linkin Park), and then some Post-Black-Album-Metallica (AKA: Mooktallica), then I knew I had the right station: 93X, We Play Meddle for Boys in Caps! Crank it up while you drive your 4x4 down to the "World of Wheels"!
Bitchin.
And if it wasn't bad enough that the music is watered down like the drinks at the strip club, there were more commercials and annoying DJs than songs. Should anyone be surprised that terrestrial radio is losing market share to satellite?
Don't get me wrong, I think Tool deserve to be played every single day, but the Fucking Red Hot Chili Peppers?
This town needs a real Hard Rock / Metal radio station. Let's hear some Prong (Did you know they have a new album?) or Motorhead. There's an interesting genre called Melodic Metal, but 93X wouldn't know about that.
There's been some great releases in the last couple years; Kamelot's "Ghost Opera", Blind Guardian's "Twist in the Myth", The Deathstars "Termination Bliss", In Flames "Come Clarity", and more; bands that kick the piss out of crap like Godback and Nickelsmack, and might even make people interested in music again, but 93X has no clue.
Female-Fronted Hard Rock / Metal bands are going gangbusters; Nothing Gained, Scarlet Sins, Betty X, and my new favorite OTEP. I mean, here are some talented bands, and they are even TRYING to get Pop Metal stations like 93X to play them by doing metal covers of pop songs. Scarlet Sins did a cover of "Strangelove" by Depeche Mode, and OTEP covered "Breed" from Nirvana, you can check it out here:
OTEP - "BREED"
Add to My Profile | More Videos
This remake hit the Billboard charts in Canada. Have you even heard of this band? Of course not, because you were listening to Angry Teen Angst God-Damned-Nickel-Smack-Back on 93X.
Call me spoiled. I was so happy when 93X first launched, and they really were playing good music; Nirvana, Motorhead, G-n-F-n-R, Prong, NIN, classic Metallica, Marilyn Manson..., stuff that made me blow out the speakers in my car over and over again.
What happened? Regardless, the honeymoon is over, and where the playlist for 93X hasn't stagnated completely, it's moving into mook-rawk and screamo. Ever hear a radio station say they needed to go 'back to their roots'?
It's 2008, and 93X doesn't know Doro Pesch from Peaches.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: anti, Music Industry
Sunday, November 25, 2007
A New System for Soft Products
The Current System does not work.
If you want to purchase the new Nine Inch Nails CD: "Y34RZ3R0R3M1X3D" online, you have two choices: Piracy or DRM-infected files. I do not advocate Piracy. It is not OK to steal the work of others. But, I also do not advocate DRM. But this is the Current System: we have the IPOD for music and video, and we have Kindle for books. We have subscriptions for online newspapers, and paid access to the content of certain websites (you know what I'm talking about...).
But the system is not working: people are still pirating soft products like graphics, music, video, books and software, and the creators of that content are not getting paid for their work.
Why is the Current System not working? I suggest three reasons. Not surprisingly, they are the same three reasons consumers need to purchase a product of any kind - Want, Cost and Convenience.
I suggest a New System be devised, which takes these things into account, in order to reduce piracy, and increase the potential for artists to be fairly compensated for their soft products.
1) Want - The consumer must want or need the product.
Why would consumers want DRM-infected files? Why should they pay for files that come with a list of restrictions on how they are used? Would you buy a car that came with rules for when and where and under what conditions it can be driven? Or a shirt that came with rules for what days of the week it can be worn, and what accessories need to be worn with it? Of course not.
People use DRM-infected content from I-tunes because they don't know any better, or don't care. People who do know and care pass on the DRM-infected files and opt for the non-DRM ones available through piracy. Neither of these solutions is acceptable.
Also, why should consumers tolerate products like Kindle that will only work with one supplier? I wouldn't buy a CD player that only played CDs from a particular Record Label, but that's exactly how the new Kindle from Amazon works. This is not an acceptable solution either.
The New System will have to let consumers use soft products the same way they can use the hard products: WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS.
2) Cost - Consumers must believe the product is worth the price.
There is an underlying rule which never changes: PRODUCTS ARE WORTH WHAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR THEM. Get your mind around that. Accept it. It is an infallible truth: it doesn't really matter how much it cost to make the product; it never did. The consumer ultimately sets the price. You can set your price point anywhere along the bell curve, but the consumers ARE the bell curve.
Hard goods aren't a problem. People are willing to pay $30 for a Jagged Spiral hoodie. They know $30 is 'less expensive' than the effort and materials it would take them to make it themselves. But for soft products like music and books, the internet has created a system where the product is an endlessly renewable and instantly duplicatable resource, available anywhere, at any time. Remember the laws of Supply and Demand? Worldwide, instant availability with negligible distribution cost has created a significant shift in what people are willing to pay. It truly has devalued soft products, and the existing system has not taken this into account.
For example, you can draw a picture of your stupid kid with his tongue stuck to a flagpole in a Minnesota Deep Freeze, and hang it on the wall of the local coffee shop with a $200 price tag. But scan and post that same picture on the internet. How much is that worth?
What is the cost of your picture done in Charcoal on Canvas, versus the cost of your JPG? I already told you: They are worth whatever people are willing to pay for them. The questions you *meant* to ask are: What are people willing to pay for Charcoal on Canvas, and what are people willing to pay for digital bits on the internet? OK, how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your Charcoal on Canvas? Let's see...Art Supplies, Art Lessons, then the time required to duplicate your every stroke, or possibly contract an artist willing to duplicate your work for a lesser price... OK, now how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your jpg?
And song downloads from I-Tunes are a dollar each? So a 12-song CD that used to cost $12 is still...$12???? Why should people pay the same price for downloaded, mp3-compressed, DRM-infected files that they pay for the higher quality and unlimited use of the physical CD? Wrong, wrong, wrong. Some people buy the DRM-infected files because they want the song badly enough, but they shouldn't have to. The cost is too high.
The New System will have to take this into account. The more the prices line up with what the consumer is willing to pay, the less attractive the piracy options becomes. That is why bands like Radiohead are jumping onto the model that Jagged Spiral devised: post the media online for free, and let the customer pay what they want. This might be the New System. It might not. But it holds to the rule that the product is worth what the customer is willing to pay. I'm well aware that it could turn out that artists are not able to make a living on this system.
3) Convenience - The customer can't get the product more conveniently anywhere else.
Which do you think is easier; downloading/installing BitTorrent and downloading an album, or opening an account on Amazon with a unique username and memorable but secure password, entering your personal info and shipping address, agreeing to the No-Privacy Statement (without reading it, natch), entering your credit card info, verifying your e-mail address, going through the checkout line with your purchase...
Admittedly, the online purchasing experience has gotten better. It would be better still if someone could devise a system where the consumer's online 'wallet' was usable at all online locations. Consumers should not have to provide any personal information for a downloadable soft product purchase, and they certainly should NOT have to provide their personal info for each-and-every-website they do business at. You don't have to go through all that bullshit when you go to a Burger King you've never been to before! You shouldn't need a username and password to make a purchase at amazon.com, or any website! ID and Credit Card, that's all!
Google, PayPal and Microsoft are working on this, but it just isn't there yet. This is a major holdup to a New System that would reduce piracy, and there is no reason for it, other than businesses that are not willing to cooperate. They want that user info, they want those e-mail addresses. They want it to be difficult for you to purchase from somewhere else.
The New System should let you make your purchase quickly, securely, and conveniently, without setting up an account on the seller's website.
Conclusion
When we look at the Current System from the perspectives of Want, Cost and Convenience, Piracy makes more sense; it offers better product for less, and it's easier to access. I'm not advocating piracy, I'm saying the existing system is fucked up, and here is why, so let's get it fixed so I can buy music online at a fair price and without DRM restrictions.
No System is going to eliminate piracy, there are people who will pirate works simply for the fun of it. But a New System that takes Want, Cost and Convenience into account could significantly reduce piracy by filling consumers needs, and help artists make a living selling their works online.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
If you want to purchase the new Nine Inch Nails CD: "Y34RZ3R0R3M1X3D" online, you have two choices: Piracy or DRM-infected files. I do not advocate Piracy. It is not OK to steal the work of others. But, I also do not advocate DRM. But this is the Current System: we have the IPOD for music and video, and we have Kindle for books. We have subscriptions for online newspapers, and paid access to the content of certain websites (you know what I'm talking about...).
But the system is not working: people are still pirating soft products like graphics, music, video, books and software, and the creators of that content are not getting paid for their work.
Why is the Current System not working? I suggest three reasons. Not surprisingly, they are the same three reasons consumers need to purchase a product of any kind - Want, Cost and Convenience.
I suggest a New System be devised, which takes these things into account, in order to reduce piracy, and increase the potential for artists to be fairly compensated for their soft products.
1) Want - The consumer must want or need the product.
Why would consumers want DRM-infected files? Why should they pay for files that come with a list of restrictions on how they are used? Would you buy a car that came with rules for when and where and under what conditions it can be driven? Or a shirt that came with rules for what days of the week it can be worn, and what accessories need to be worn with it? Of course not.
People use DRM-infected content from I-tunes because they don't know any better, or don't care. People who do know and care pass on the DRM-infected files and opt for the non-DRM ones available through piracy. Neither of these solutions is acceptable.
Also, why should consumers tolerate products like Kindle that will only work with one supplier? I wouldn't buy a CD player that only played CDs from a particular Record Label, but that's exactly how the new Kindle from Amazon works. This is not an acceptable solution either.
The New System will have to let consumers use soft products the same way they can use the hard products: WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS.
2) Cost - Consumers must believe the product is worth the price.
There is an underlying rule which never changes: PRODUCTS ARE WORTH WHAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR THEM. Get your mind around that. Accept it. It is an infallible truth: it doesn't really matter how much it cost to make the product; it never did. The consumer ultimately sets the price. You can set your price point anywhere along the bell curve, but the consumers ARE the bell curve.
Hard goods aren't a problem. People are willing to pay $30 for a Jagged Spiral hoodie. They know $30 is 'less expensive' than the effort and materials it would take them to make it themselves. But for soft products like music and books, the internet has created a system where the product is an endlessly renewable and instantly duplicatable resource, available anywhere, at any time. Remember the laws of Supply and Demand? Worldwide, instant availability with negligible distribution cost has created a significant shift in what people are willing to pay. It truly has devalued soft products, and the existing system has not taken this into account.
For example, you can draw a picture of your stupid kid with his tongue stuck to a flagpole in a Minnesota Deep Freeze, and hang it on the wall of the local coffee shop with a $200 price tag. But scan and post that same picture on the internet. How much is that worth?
What is the cost of your picture done in Charcoal on Canvas, versus the cost of your JPG? I already told you: They are worth whatever people are willing to pay for them. The questions you *meant* to ask are: What are people willing to pay for Charcoal on Canvas, and what are people willing to pay for digital bits on the internet? OK, how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your Charcoal on Canvas? Let's see...Art Supplies, Art Lessons, then the time required to duplicate your every stroke, or possibly contract an artist willing to duplicate your work for a lesser price... OK, now how much would it cost them to exactly duplicate your jpg?
And song downloads from I-Tunes are a dollar each? So a 12-song CD that used to cost $12 is still...$12???? Why should people pay the same price for downloaded, mp3-compressed, DRM-infected files that they pay for the higher quality and unlimited use of the physical CD? Wrong, wrong, wrong. Some people buy the DRM-infected files because they want the song badly enough, but they shouldn't have to. The cost is too high.
The New System will have to take this into account. The more the prices line up with what the consumer is willing to pay, the less attractive the piracy options becomes. That is why bands like Radiohead are jumping onto the model that Jagged Spiral devised: post the media online for free, and let the customer pay what they want. This might be the New System. It might not. But it holds to the rule that the product is worth what the customer is willing to pay. I'm well aware that it could turn out that artists are not able to make a living on this system.
3) Convenience - The customer can't get the product more conveniently anywhere else.
Which do you think is easier; downloading/installing BitTorrent and downloading an album, or opening an account on Amazon with a unique username and memorable but secure password, entering your personal info and shipping address, agreeing to the No-Privacy Statement (without reading it, natch), entering your credit card info, verifying your e-mail address, going through the checkout line with your purchase...
Admittedly, the online purchasing experience has gotten better. It would be better still if someone could devise a system where the consumer's online 'wallet' was usable at all online locations. Consumers should not have to provide any personal information for a downloadable soft product purchase, and they certainly should NOT have to provide their personal info for each-and-every-website they do business at. You don't have to go through all that bullshit when you go to a Burger King you've never been to before! You shouldn't need a username and password to make a purchase at amazon.com, or any website! ID and Credit Card, that's all!
Google, PayPal and Microsoft are working on this, but it just isn't there yet. This is a major holdup to a New System that would reduce piracy, and there is no reason for it, other than businesses that are not willing to cooperate. They want that user info, they want those e-mail addresses. They want it to be difficult for you to purchase from somewhere else.
The New System should let you make your purchase quickly, securely, and conveniently, without setting up an account on the seller's website.
Conclusion
When we look at the Current System from the perspectives of Want, Cost and Convenience, Piracy makes more sense; it offers better product for less, and it's easier to access. I'm not advocating piracy, I'm saying the existing system is fucked up, and here is why, so let's get it fixed so I can buy music online at a fair price and without DRM restrictions.
No System is going to eliminate piracy, there are people who will pirate works simply for the fun of it. But a New System that takes Want, Cost and Convenience into account could significantly reduce piracy by filling consumers needs, and help artists make a living selling their works online.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, consumerism, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Open Letter to Gene Simmons - RIAA Spokesperson and Douchebag
Unfortunately, the full article on billboard.biz requires subscription, but you can read enough excerpts from the Motley Crue fan club site to get the point:
Gene Simmons is an Idiot with a Capitalist I.
He really thinks that all of this "Free Music" nonsense could have been prevented if the Recording Industry had taken action from the beginning. Quote:
The record industry doesn't have a f*cking clue how to make money. It's only their fault for letting foxes get into the henhouse and then wondering why there's no eggs or chickens. Every little college kid, every freshly-scrubbed little kid's face should have been sued off the face of the earth. They should have taken their houses and cars and nipped it right there in the beginning. Those kids are putting 100,000 to a million people out of work. How can you pick on them? They've got freckles. That's a crook. He may as well be wearing a bandit's mask.
Gene Simmons must be the RIAA's wet dream, so entrenched in "the way we've always done it" that it is simply outside of his understanding that the rules have changed.
Sorry Gene, that the internet has made things complicated for you. Here is something for you to think about (when you can break away from the book you are writing about all the prostitutes you've slept with): I can go online and view the Mona Lisa any time I want. For Free. I can also go to the Louvre and pay to see it for a short time. For slightly more money I can own a print copy. For an ungodly amount of money I could own the real thing.
Now, why on God's Green Earth would people pay to see the Mona Lisa, or pay for a copy of the Mona Lisa, or pay to own the Mona Lisa, when they can see it online for Free? OH MY FUCKING GOD! HOW CAN THE ARTIST MAKE ANY MONEY WHEN YOU CAN ACCESS THE ART ONLINE FOR FREEEEEEeeee..... [insert sound of Gene Simmons screaming as he falls into the abyss of his own stupidity here]
Gene, here is another thing for you to think about when you aren't reducing KISS to a laughable product (because we all need an electric toothbrush that plays "Rock & Roll All Night"): As a musician, I would rather give my music away for free (as a matter of fact, I do give it away for free) than to see a DIME go into the pockets of the Recording Industry. They are irrelevant. They are the middlemen who have leeched the money from the pockets of talented people for DECADES. THEY are the real thieves, and the internet has eliminated their usefulness. You think they still have some value because they helped make you rich? You are a fool. I bet you still listen to terrestrial radio.
It gets better:
Billboard: But some artist like RADIOHEAD and Trent Reznor are trying to find a new business model.
Simmons: That doesn't count. You can't pick on one person as an exception. And that's not a business model that works. I open a store and say "Come on in and pay whatever you want." Are you on f*cking crack? Do you really believe that's a business model that works?
Someone points the way out of Gene Simmons stupidity, and he asks them if they are on drugs. This is where it becomes clear why he is so upset; it isn't about the music with him, its about the *Business* of music. Music is just a vehicle to MAKE MONEY. No wonder he is upset.
You know Gene, as a matter of fact, opening a store with almost negligible overhead, upkeep and distribution costs, with GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION and open 24x7x365 then asking for donations is a fucking phenomenal business model. How do you think wikipedia.org is still in business? How do you think the projects on sourceforge are funded? Are you aware that Radiohead are actually making an average of $6 per download by Giving Away their art and letting people donate what they want? And not a penny goes to the RIAA middleman. $6 average per customer, Gene. Do YOU make that much?
This is all overlooking the fact that the music is more important than the money, but this is also outside Gene Simmon's frame of reference:
Billboard: So what if music just becomes free and artists make their living off of touring and merchandise?
Simmons: Well, therein lies the most stupid mistake anybody can make. The most important part is the music. Without that, why would you care? Even the idea that you're considering giving the music away for free makes it easier to give it away for free. The only reason why gold is expensive is because we all agree that it is. There's no real use for it, except we all agree and abide by the idea that gold costs a certain amount per ounce. As soon as you give people the choice to deviate from it, you have chaos and anarchy. And that's what going on.
Gene, you almost figured this out. Things have Always been worth what people are willing to pay for them. Now, change "CD"s into "Digital Bits on the internet", and stir... Calling this change "chaos and anarchy" is incorrect. It is Change; change from one system to another system, one that you don't like, because you can't see how it will make you money.
Gene, as a young boy, I looked up to you as a Hero, and now you tell the world there is no real use for music unless you sell it to make money.
Blow me, Gene Simmons, you're a fucking idiot.
You worked hard, and made some good music and you made some good money using the system you had available at the time, and it worked out well for you. You got yours. Hooray for you. But the system has changed, and it's time for you to shut the fuck up and let people work with the system they have.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
3 Comments
Permalink
Gene Simmons is an Idiot with a Capitalist I.
He really thinks that all of this "Free Music" nonsense could have been prevented if the Recording Industry had taken action from the beginning. Quote:
The record industry doesn't have a f*cking clue how to make money. It's only their fault for letting foxes get into the henhouse and then wondering why there's no eggs or chickens. Every little college kid, every freshly-scrubbed little kid's face should have been sued off the face of the earth. They should have taken their houses and cars and nipped it right there in the beginning. Those kids are putting 100,000 to a million people out of work. How can you pick on them? They've got freckles. That's a crook. He may as well be wearing a bandit's mask.
Gene Simmons must be the RIAA's wet dream, so entrenched in "the way we've always done it" that it is simply outside of his understanding that the rules have changed.
Sorry Gene, that the internet has made things complicated for you. Here is something for you to think about (when you can break away from the book you are writing about all the prostitutes you've slept with): I can go online and view the Mona Lisa any time I want. For Free. I can also go to the Louvre and pay to see it for a short time. For slightly more money I can own a print copy. For an ungodly amount of money I could own the real thing.
Now, why on God's Green Earth would people pay to see the Mona Lisa, or pay for a copy of the Mona Lisa, or pay to own the Mona Lisa, when they can see it online for Free? OH MY FUCKING GOD! HOW CAN THE ARTIST MAKE ANY MONEY WHEN YOU CAN ACCESS THE ART ONLINE FOR FREEEEEEeeee..... [insert sound of Gene Simmons screaming as he falls into the abyss of his own stupidity here]
Gene, here is another thing for you to think about when you aren't reducing KISS to a laughable product (because we all need an electric toothbrush that plays "Rock & Roll All Night"): As a musician, I would rather give my music away for free (as a matter of fact, I do give it away for free) than to see a DIME go into the pockets of the Recording Industry. They are irrelevant. They are the middlemen who have leeched the money from the pockets of talented people for DECADES. THEY are the real thieves, and the internet has eliminated their usefulness. You think they still have some value because they helped make you rich? You are a fool. I bet you still listen to terrestrial radio.
It gets better:
Billboard: But some artist like RADIOHEAD and Trent Reznor are trying to find a new business model.
Simmons: That doesn't count. You can't pick on one person as an exception. And that's not a business model that works. I open a store and say "Come on in and pay whatever you want." Are you on f*cking crack? Do you really believe that's a business model that works?
Someone points the way out of Gene Simmons stupidity, and he asks them if they are on drugs. This is where it becomes clear why he is so upset; it isn't about the music with him, its about the *Business* of music. Music is just a vehicle to MAKE MONEY. No wonder he is upset.
You know Gene, as a matter of fact, opening a store with almost negligible overhead, upkeep and distribution costs, with GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION and open 24x7x365 then asking for donations is a fucking phenomenal business model. How do you think wikipedia.org is still in business? How do you think the projects on sourceforge are funded? Are you aware that Radiohead are actually making an average of $6 per download by Giving Away their art and letting people donate what they want? And not a penny goes to the RIAA middleman. $6 average per customer, Gene. Do YOU make that much?
This is all overlooking the fact that the music is more important than the money, but this is also outside Gene Simmon's frame of reference:
Billboard: So what if music just becomes free and artists make their living off of touring and merchandise?
Simmons: Well, therein lies the most stupid mistake anybody can make. The most important part is the music. Without that, why would you care? Even the idea that you're considering giving the music away for free makes it easier to give it away for free. The only reason why gold is expensive is because we all agree that it is. There's no real use for it, except we all agree and abide by the idea that gold costs a certain amount per ounce. As soon as you give people the choice to deviate from it, you have chaos and anarchy. And that's what going on.
Gene, you almost figured this out. Things have Always been worth what people are willing to pay for them. Now, change "CD"s into "Digital Bits on the internet", and stir... Calling this change "chaos and anarchy" is incorrect. It is Change; change from one system to another system, one that you don't like, because you can't see how it will make you money.
Gene, as a young boy, I looked up to you as a Hero, and now you tell the world there is no real use for music unless you sell it to make money.
Blow me, Gene Simmons, you're a fucking idiot.
You worked hard, and made some good music and you made some good money using the system you had available at the time, and it worked out well for you. You got yours. Hooray for you. But the system has changed, and it's time for you to shut the fuck up and let people work with the system they have.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, consumerism, idiots, Music Industry, Open Letter
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Best Buy to open Musical Instrument Store
Page 51 of this week's City Pages has an ad for the opening of a new Musical Instrument Store at the Richfield Best Buy. The grand opening party on Sat, Nov 10 will feature in-store performances by Shannon Curfman and local staple GB Leighton.
I am not surprised. Check out the latest Best Buy advertisement; the FIRST FOUR PAGES are Guitar Hero gear ONLY. I've said it before, the recent surge of popularity in shows like American Idol, Rock Star, and the smashing success of the Guitar Hero video game are jacking the interest in releasing your inner musician and goosing musical instrument sales. Guitar Center added on a Third store here in the Minneapolis metro area, which seems to be doing well, and now Best Buy is poised to dip a toe in the water.
Best Buy has always dabbled in music gear, carrying the Donkey Konga Bongos and maybe a Casio keyboard or two, and a smattering of Yamaha gear on their website. But it seems they have slipped into bed with a couple major distributors, Gibson, M-Audio, Suzuki, and Fender (although I've never heard of a Fender STARcaster before. Sounds kind of sketchy...)
Anyway, I read about a Best Buy in California which did the same thing. According to that blog post, it sounds like they really are giving it more than simply lip service, and even added on an isolated acoustic room in the store. Guitar Center certainly has to be nervous, because the distribution power of Best Buy far surpasses that of Guitar Center, both in Brick and Mortar stores and websites.
My suspicion is that if Best Buy's Musical Instrument Flagship takes off, they will add it as a feature to their larger stores in the same way they added the Magnolia Home Theatre section to certain stores.
I don't think Guitar Center needs to worry unless Best Buy spins off their musical instrument sales into separate stores and starts carrying real gear. Real musicians won't be fooled by the name 'Starcaster' and they will go to a real music store for their gear. And Guitar Center employees know music (for the most part) and while this might be a passing fad for Best Buy, making music is Guitar Center's lifeblood.
The worst thing that could happen is that a bunch of talentless and spoiled brats who look up to Nickelback and Bruce Springsteen get their hands on a Starcaster and post a bunch of shit-rock to their myspace page. But the internet has plenty of room for more music, and I'd rather see kids writing bad Emo music than selling Crack, and even playing a Starcaster poorly is better than playing Guitar Hero well.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
I am not surprised. Check out the latest Best Buy advertisement; the FIRST FOUR PAGES are Guitar Hero gear ONLY. I've said it before, the recent surge of popularity in shows like American Idol, Rock Star, and the smashing success of the Guitar Hero video game are jacking the interest in releasing your inner musician and goosing musical instrument sales. Guitar Center added on a Third store here in the Minneapolis metro area, which seems to be doing well, and now Best Buy is poised to dip a toe in the water.
Best Buy has always dabbled in music gear, carrying the Donkey Konga Bongos and maybe a Casio keyboard or two, and a smattering of Yamaha gear on their website. But it seems they have slipped into bed with a couple major distributors, Gibson, M-Audio, Suzuki, and Fender (although I've never heard of a Fender STARcaster before. Sounds kind of sketchy...)
Anyway, I read about a Best Buy in California which did the same thing. According to that blog post, it sounds like they really are giving it more than simply lip service, and even added on an isolated acoustic room in the store. Guitar Center certainly has to be nervous, because the distribution power of Best Buy far surpasses that of Guitar Center, both in Brick and Mortar stores and websites.
My suspicion is that if Best Buy's Musical Instrument Flagship takes off, they will add it as a feature to their larger stores in the same way they added the Magnolia Home Theatre section to certain stores.
I don't think Guitar Center needs to worry unless Best Buy spins off their musical instrument sales into separate stores and starts carrying real gear. Real musicians won't be fooled by the name 'Starcaster' and they will go to a real music store for their gear. And Guitar Center employees know music (for the most part) and while this might be a passing fad for Best Buy, making music is Guitar Center's lifeblood.
The worst thing that could happen is that a bunch of talentless and spoiled brats who look up to Nickelback and Bruce Springsteen get their hands on a Starcaster and post a bunch of shit-rock to their myspace page. But the internet has plenty of room for more music, and I'd rather see kids writing bad Emo music than selling Crack, and even playing a Starcaster poorly is better than playing Guitar Hero well.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, Minneapolis Event, Music Industry
Friday, September 28, 2007
Death of AnywhereCD.com
Looks like CD's really are dead. At the very least, AnywhereCD.com is dead, or will be in a couple days. I've never heard of AnywhereCD until this post from the Michael Robertson (former CEO of mp3.com before it was sold off to AOL, and current owner of mp3tunes.com)
The idea behind AnywhereCD was a good one, some people want the CD, but they also want the music RIGHT NOW. On AnywhereCD, when you buy the CD you also gain instant access to the high-quality mp3 download. Sounds silly at first, because people can always rip the CD to mp3 themselves, but the idea is that people who want the CD online also don't want to wait for it to come in the mail. They want the instant gratification of listening to it as soon as they push the [Pay Now!] button, and Michael Robertson figured this out.
Unfortunately, I think he figured it out too late. The release of AnywhereCD was lost beneath the media blitz surrounding I-Tunes posturing at selling Non-DRM music files. (Not actually *Doing* it mind you, just the mere mention of it). Michael lists other factors which undoubtedly contributed to the companies demise, including the fact that the CDs on AnywhereCD.com were listed at prices above what the American consumer believes fair (Strangely, he knew this but did not change his pricing.). Also, he was only able to pick up One of the major labels. Only Warner was willing to distribute through AnywhereCD. You should read how the rest of the major labels reacted to Michael's business model, it's pretty funny.
Oddly I've never heard of AnywhereCD before now, and if they missed me, it's because they simply weren't trying At All. I have read Michael Robertson's blog from time to time. I have an account on mp3tunes.com. I'm on the mp3tunes.com mailing list. Extremely strange that I haven't heard of them.
Not that it would have helped. Even if I had heard of AnywhereCD I wouldn't have touched it. I heard ages ago that Amazon was working on selling DRM-Free mp3's and you can already check out the beta site here. Walmart is offering Non-DRM mp3s *AND* they are undercutting the prices of I-Tunes. (Not that I would buy from WalMart either...) It won't be long before real brick-and-mortar CD stores like Best Buy, Down In The Valley and others jump in on the mp3 action. I'd be much more likely to buy a CD from an online store that has a location I can return or exchange problem merchandise, than some company with no phone number located in India.
I think Michael was simply trying to build up AnywhereCD.com just to sell it off, just like he did with mp3.com, only this time he was too late. If AnywhereCD had started up five years ago, had DRM-Free tracks, and ALL the major labels, it would have been the current I-Tunes, and Michael could have retired several times over. Instead, we get Apple running the show, and making it look like buying their DRM-Infected files is K-E-W-L. Hopefully, not for too much longer. I think that by Christmastime Amazon and Walmart will shove a sleighbell up I-Tunes chimney, if you know what I mean.
Meanwhile, take advantage of Michael Robertson and buy up his surplus of CDs at $7 each before AnywhereCD shuts down...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
The idea behind AnywhereCD was a good one, some people want the CD, but they also want the music RIGHT NOW. On AnywhereCD, when you buy the CD you also gain instant access to the high-quality mp3 download. Sounds silly at first, because people can always rip the CD to mp3 themselves, but the idea is that people who want the CD online also don't want to wait for it to come in the mail. They want the instant gratification of listening to it as soon as they push the [Pay Now!] button, and Michael Robertson figured this out.
Unfortunately, I think he figured it out too late. The release of AnywhereCD was lost beneath the media blitz surrounding I-Tunes posturing at selling Non-DRM music files. (Not actually *Doing* it mind you, just the mere mention of it). Michael lists other factors which undoubtedly contributed to the companies demise, including the fact that the CDs on AnywhereCD.com were listed at prices above what the American consumer believes fair (Strangely, he knew this but did not change his pricing.). Also, he was only able to pick up One of the major labels. Only Warner was willing to distribute through AnywhereCD. You should read how the rest of the major labels reacted to Michael's business model, it's pretty funny.
Oddly I've never heard of AnywhereCD before now, and if they missed me, it's because they simply weren't trying At All. I have read Michael Robertson's blog from time to time. I have an account on mp3tunes.com. I'm on the mp3tunes.com mailing list. Extremely strange that I haven't heard of them.
Not that it would have helped. Even if I had heard of AnywhereCD I wouldn't have touched it. I heard ages ago that Amazon was working on selling DRM-Free mp3's and you can already check out the beta site here. Walmart is offering Non-DRM mp3s *AND* they are undercutting the prices of I-Tunes. (Not that I would buy from WalMart either...) It won't be long before real brick-and-mortar CD stores like Best Buy, Down In The Valley and others jump in on the mp3 action. I'd be much more likely to buy a CD from an online store that has a location I can return or exchange problem merchandise, than some company with no phone number located in India.
I think Michael was simply trying to build up AnywhereCD.com just to sell it off, just like he did with mp3.com, only this time he was too late. If AnywhereCD had started up five years ago, had DRM-Free tracks, and ALL the major labels, it would have been the current I-Tunes, and Michael could have retired several times over. Instead, we get Apple running the show, and making it look like buying their DRM-Infected files is K-E-W-L. Hopefully, not for too much longer. I think that by Christmastime Amazon and Walmart will shove a sleighbell up I-Tunes chimney, if you know what I mean.
Meanwhile, take advantage of Michael Robertson and buy up his surplus of CDs at $7 each before AnywhereCD shuts down...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, music, Music Industry
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
How I learned to learned to stop worrying and love the (non-DRM infected) mp3
Some old, fat, white industry exec must have realized that mp3s aren't really a fad after all, and it might be a good idea to shift marketing over to the New format. So the floodgates are open, and businesses are clamoring over themselves to get mp3s into your ears, and some $$ out of your account.
The revelation came too late for Sony, though. According to the latest garageband.com newsletter, Sony Connect has folded, and good riddance. Sony can take their proprietary-my-way-or-the-highway crap and, well, hit the highway with it. Take your fucking 'memory stick' technology with you.
MTV's Urge service is merging with Real Networks Rhapsody. While I wish they would both die a quick death with Sony's Connect, it turns out they are working on a merger with Verizon Wireless, which sounds like a really great way to fuck up my phone service. "Can you hear me now?" No. I can't fucking hear you now, because all the satellite bandwidth is used up by people downloading the latest Jagged Spiral release.
I'd like to this was all my fault for posting things like this, but industry execs don't read my blog. That probably also explains why I haven't been offered a job by them (or been assassinated by their smokin' hot female ninja hit squad).
But the best news hit me from the most unlikely of allies. Wal Mart's online store is offering non-DRM infected mp3s, and undercutting the prices on itunes...
...you read that right. Wal Mart, (whom I've been less than kind to in the past) turns it's Consumerism-Tractor-Beam-Of-DOOM on the customers of I Tunes.
HA! It's like watching two people I hate get into a fist fight. Either way, I win!
Even better news (I know, it's hard to believe it could get better) is that Amazon.com has been threatening to get in on the non-DRM frenzy since Feb 2007, but the rumor is that they may start having non-DRM mp3s available online as soon as mid September, probably in an attempt to
(Um, hello Amazon? Mid-September would be Right Now, Ahem.)
HEY I-TUNES! I DOUBLE-DOG-DARE YOU TO CONTINUE RELEASING YOUR MUSIC WITH DRM! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa.....
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
The revelation came too late for Sony, though. According to the latest garageband.com newsletter, Sony Connect has folded, and good riddance. Sony can take their proprietary-my-way-or-the-highway crap and, well, hit the highway with it. Take your fucking 'memory stick' technology with you.
MTV's Urge service is merging with Real Networks Rhapsody. While I wish they would both die a quick death with Sony's Connect, it turns out they are working on a merger with Verizon Wireless, which sounds like a really great way to fuck up my phone service. "Can you hear me now?" No. I can't fucking hear you now, because all the satellite bandwidth is used up by people downloading the latest Jagged Spiral release.
I'd like to this was all my fault for posting things like this, but industry execs don't read my blog. That probably also explains why I haven't been offered a job by them (or been assassinated by their smokin' hot female ninja hit squad).
But the best news hit me from the most unlikely of allies. Wal Mart's online store is offering non-DRM infected mp3s, and undercutting the prices on itunes...
...you read that right. Wal Mart, (whom I've been less than kind to in the past) turns it's Consumerism-Tractor-Beam-Of-DOOM on the customers of I Tunes.
HA! It's like watching two people I hate get into a fist fight. Either way, I win!
Even better news (I know, it's hard to believe it could get better) is that Amazon.com has been threatening to get in on the non-DRM frenzy since Feb 2007, but the rumor is that they may start having non-DRM mp3s available online as soon as mid September, probably in an attempt to
(Um, hello Amazon? Mid-September would be Right Now, Ahem.)
HEY I-TUNES! I DOUBLE-DOG-DARE YOU TO CONTINUE RELEASING YOUR MUSIC WITH DRM! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAaaaaa.....
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Business Phenomena, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Friday, August 24, 2007
The Loudness War, Continued
Yet another article about the loudness war.
http://spectrum.ieee.org/aug07/5429
For those who don't know, the Loudness War is the music industry's attempt to make their recordings louder than everyone else's, because research has shown that louder songs get noticed more.
No shit. Sadly the research told them nothing about the quality of the recordings.
There is a hint in the article that current overcompressed music fatigues listeners, and that it might account for the decrease in music sales, but of course there is no proof of this.
The article also talks about future technologies like “Replay Gain” which try to nullify the Loudness War by playing back all songs at the same relative volume.
I agree with Bob Katz, recordings that are overcompressed and radio stations like 93X that blatantly abuse volume compression, forsaking all else for loudness are ruining music, and make it tiring to listen to. Hey, compress the shit out of MP3s because they’re meant to be listened to on laptop speakers and I-pod earbuds. But CDs should take advantage of their dynamic range and richness of sound. Let the consumers wreck the music if they want, but if I'm buying the CD, I can turn the volume knob up myself. I'd much rather have a rich recording that breathes.
I MEAN, WHY DON'T WE JUST TYPE ALL OUR BLOG POSTS LIKE THIS? IT MUST BE BETTER BECAUSE IT GOT YOUR ATTENTION, RIGHT?
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
http://spectrum.ieee.org/aug07/5429
For those who don't know, the Loudness War is the music industry's attempt to make their recordings louder than everyone else's, because research has shown that louder songs get noticed more.
No shit. Sadly the research told them nothing about the quality of the recordings.
There is a hint in the article that current overcompressed music fatigues listeners, and that it might account for the decrease in music sales, but of course there is no proof of this.
The article also talks about future technologies like “Replay Gain” which try to nullify the Loudness War by playing back all songs at the same relative volume.
I agree with Bob Katz, recordings that are overcompressed and radio stations like 93X that blatantly abuse volume compression, forsaking all else for loudness are ruining music, and make it tiring to listen to. Hey, compress the shit out of MP3s because they’re meant to be listened to on laptop speakers and I-pod earbuds. But CDs should take advantage of their dynamic range and richness of sound. Let the consumers wreck the music if they want, but if I'm buying the CD, I can turn the volume knob up myself. I'd much rather have a rich recording that breathes.
I MEAN, WHY DON'T WE JUST TYPE ALL OUR BLOG POSTS LIKE THIS? IT MUST BE BETTER BECAUSE IT GOT YOUR ATTENTION, RIGHT?
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, consumerism, Cultural Observation, music, Music Industry, Technology
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Will Clear Channel Ever Learn?
It's amazing that Clear Channel doesn't choke to death on its own stupidity.
Take this report for example. It tells all about Clear Channels latest attempts to fuck indie artists out of their royalties.
I'm sorry, but when the FCC busts you for payola, and says that as punishment you have to pony up some airtime for indie artists, (an overly reasonable and unpainful punishment, if you ask me) then you don't turn around, and force indie artists to sign away their rights to royalties before playing them!
No. Clear Channel, you don't get to put stipulations, addendums, conditions or riders on punishments imposed by the FCC. That would be like showing up for Community Service drunk, or paying for a speeding ticket with merchandise of "equivalent value".
No! Bad Clear Channel! Bad!
Anyway, I hear the FMC has some plans to make your stupidity famous. I can't wait to see what they have in store for you...
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Take this report for example. It tells all about Clear Channels latest attempts to fuck indie artists out of their royalties.
I'm sorry, but when the FCC busts you for payola, and says that as punishment you have to pony up some airtime for indie artists, (an overly reasonable and unpainful punishment, if you ask me) then you don't turn around, and force indie artists to sign away their rights to royalties before playing them!
No. Clear Channel, you don't get to put stipulations, addendums, conditions or riders on punishments imposed by the FCC. That would be like showing up for Community Service drunk, or paying for a speeding ticket with merchandise of "equivalent value".
No! Bad Clear Channel! Bad!
Anyway, I hear the FMC has some plans to make your stupidity famous. I can't wait to see what they have in store for you...
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, Music Industry
Thursday, May 31, 2007
I-Tunes Goes DRM Free...kind of
Bestill my beating heart.
I-tunes sees the error of their ways. Kind of. It isn't the entire I-Tunes library; just EMI at the moment, but from what I hear, EMI is not doing so well, and this could be their last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship. I hope it works for them.
While the DRM-Free tracks (.m4a) are encoded at 256-bit instead of 128, they list at $1.29 each instead of the $.99 for the DRM-infected (.m4p) tracks. Strange, it should be the other way around, I mean, it took a lot of engineering and tech to infect those files with DRM!
Also, keep in mind that the .m4a files have your account name embedded in them, so don't be too quick to drop them on bittorrent. This really is just a different type of DRM, but at least it allows the user to playback their music on any device or player, and make unlimited copies (for themselves, natch...)
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I-tunes sees the error of their ways. Kind of. It isn't the entire I-Tunes library; just EMI at the moment, but from what I hear, EMI is not doing so well, and this could be their last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship. I hope it works for them.
While the DRM-Free tracks (.m4a) are encoded at 256-bit instead of 128, they list at $1.29 each instead of the $.99 for the DRM-infected (.m4p) tracks. Strange, it should be the other way around, I mean, it took a lot of engineering and tech to infect those files with DRM!
Also, keep in mind that the .m4a files have your account name embedded in them, so don't be too quick to drop them on bittorrent. This really is just a different type of DRM, but at least it allows the user to playback their music on any device or player, and make unlimited copies (for themselves, natch...)
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Stand Aside, I-Suck! Amazon comes through!
In my neighborhood, the first person to mow their lawn in the spring is a jerk, because then the rest of the lawns look like ass, and we have to mow them. Here is a typical spring conversation in my neighborhood:
"Hey Bill, I see you finally caved in and mowed your lawn, huh?"
"Yeah, it was up to my knees, and I figured..."
"Thanks A Lot, Asshole!"
I imagine it was the same with DRM-Free music, nobody wanted to be the first to sell it, and be hated by the RIAA. Smaller sites like magnatune and mp3tunes were too small to be a threat, so they were like weeding the garden, and didn't really count. But we knew the end was near when we heard Steve Jobs half-hearted anti-DRM speech.
But now, like Fish says, "The game is over!". Amazon has announced that they will have DRM-free music available later this year.
So the rest of the music outlets can hate Amazon for forcing their hand, and i-tunes and microsoft will be forced with a decision. They are big enough that they could try to keep their DRM-infected collections in place, perhaps offering them at reduced rates compared to DRM-free tracks. (Or, if you see the glass as half-empty, consider that the DRM-free tracks would come with an "I buy DRM-Free Music, and therefore, I am a criminal, and must pay extra" fee). Oldsters might remember the fee that was added to blank cassette tapes and blank CDs marked as blank "AUDIO" CDs. This is how the industry dealt with their fear that anyone with a tape deck and a CD player was 'ripping them off', and I see no reason for them to be original now.
Perhaps Microsoft, i-Tunes and such could contract big-name acts to come over and release only DRM-infected tracks EXCLUSIVELY through their websites. That would be a clever way to get people to succumb to their DRM-Protection; even if people knew about it, understood it, and didn't like it, they would still Buy it if they wanted the product badly enough.
It would also make them the New Record Labels.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
"Hey Bill, I see you finally caved in and mowed your lawn, huh?"
"Yeah, it was up to my knees, and I figured..."
"Thanks A Lot, Asshole!"
I imagine it was the same with DRM-Free music, nobody wanted to be the first to sell it, and be hated by the RIAA. Smaller sites like magnatune and mp3tunes were too small to be a threat, so they were like weeding the garden, and didn't really count. But we knew the end was near when we heard Steve Jobs half-hearted anti-DRM speech.
But now, like Fish says, "The game is over!". Amazon has announced that they will have DRM-free music available later this year.
So the rest of the music outlets can hate Amazon for forcing their hand, and i-tunes and microsoft will be forced with a decision. They are big enough that they could try to keep their DRM-infected collections in place, perhaps offering them at reduced rates compared to DRM-free tracks. (Or, if you see the glass as half-empty, consider that the DRM-free tracks would come with an "I buy DRM-Free Music, and therefore, I am a criminal, and must pay extra" fee). Oldsters might remember the fee that was added to blank cassette tapes and blank CDs marked as blank "AUDIO" CDs. This is how the industry dealt with their fear that anyone with a tape deck and a CD player was 'ripping them off', and I see no reason for them to be original now.
Perhaps Microsoft, i-Tunes and such could contract big-name acts to come over and release only DRM-infected tracks EXCLUSIVELY through their websites. That would be a clever way to get people to succumb to their DRM-Protection; even if people knew about it, understood it, and didn't like it, they would still Buy it if they wanted the product badly enough.
It would also make them the New Record Labels.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Million Dollar Idea, Music Industry
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
The End of Drive 105
Listeners who tuned into Drive 105 this morning were probably quite shocked to hear their alt-rock replaced with nostalgic 60s-80s fluff.
Star Tribune reports why.
The reason Drive 105 got pulled should be no surprise. Low Ratings. The low ratings should be no surprise: Three fucking radios stations. 105.1 105.3 and 105.7 depending on where you are in the cities. For someone who primarily listens to radio in my car (If I listen at all) I can tell you that I was rarely able to listen to the station. It seemed no matter where I was in the city, all three stations sounded like ass. It has been that way since 105 was born as Rev 105 (Revolution Radio) and reborn as Zone 105 (The Edge).
The playlist for Drive 105 wasn't the greatest, but it certainly was one of the best in town, which just goes to show you how bad terrestrial radio has become. I laughed every time they said they were "taking chances" The fact is, I didn't hear much on 105 that didn't already have some buzz or a Seal of Approval from Pitchfork et al. They could have tried harder to be different, and they certainly could have played more local music.
It's too bad that one of the better radio stations in town got turned into a clone of the new Jack 104.1. No doubt the massive success of Jack (A completely mediocre station which only thrives because everything else sucks so much) has spurred 105 to switch. Hey, Maybe the tagline for the new 105 can be, "We're Playing What We Want TOO!"
For those lamenting the demise of Drive 105, don't feel too bad. Check out Radio K instead 106.5 /100.7 and punctuate your listening with some White Stripes and Cake, and you will be fine.
...and don't even Talk to me about The Current.
Here is a Million Dollar Idea: How about a Radio station that only plays songs from Independent Labels? Here is a Ten-Million Dollar Idea: How about a Radio station that ONLY PLAYS LOCAL MUSIC? That same station could broadcast live shows every night from a different bar. There is so much live music here in Minneapolis, I think people really have NO idea.
Why can't any people with money think of these things?
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Star Tribune reports why.
The reason Drive 105 got pulled should be no surprise. Low Ratings. The low ratings should be no surprise: Three fucking radios stations. 105.1 105.3 and 105.7 depending on where you are in the cities. For someone who primarily listens to radio in my car (If I listen at all) I can tell you that I was rarely able to listen to the station. It seemed no matter where I was in the city, all three stations sounded like ass. It has been that way since 105 was born as Rev 105 (Revolution Radio) and reborn as Zone 105 (The Edge).
The playlist for Drive 105 wasn't the greatest, but it certainly was one of the best in town, which just goes to show you how bad terrestrial radio has become. I laughed every time they said they were "taking chances" The fact is, I didn't hear much on 105 that didn't already have some buzz or a Seal of Approval from Pitchfork et al. They could have tried harder to be different, and they certainly could have played more local music.
It's too bad that one of the better radio stations in town got turned into a clone of the new Jack 104.1. No doubt the massive success of Jack (A completely mediocre station which only thrives because everything else sucks so much) has spurred 105 to switch. Hey, Maybe the tagline for the new 105 can be, "We're Playing What We Want TOO!"
For those lamenting the demise of Drive 105, don't feel too bad. Check out Radio K instead 106.5 /100.7 and punctuate your listening with some White Stripes and Cake, and you will be fine.
...and don't even Talk to me about The Current.
Here is a Million Dollar Idea: How about a Radio station that only plays songs from Independent Labels? Here is a Ten-Million Dollar Idea: How about a Radio station that ONLY PLAYS LOCAL MUSIC? That same station could broadcast live shows every night from a different bar. There is so much live music here in Minneapolis, I think people really have NO idea.
Why can't any people with money think of these things?
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Million Dollar Idea, Music Industry
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
The Internet Radio Equality Act
If you aren't into Internet Radio yet, you should be. Check these sites out:
Accuradio
Live365
Pandora
Digital Gunfire (My personal favorite)
Do you enjoy the content? Diverse huh? Cool, huh?
Not for long. Internet Radio sites are being unfairly shafted by 'The Man'. They need your help. Check the following link, they do a better job of defining the problem than I do.
The solution is to call your Congressional Representative, and tell them (don't ask, that's not how it works.) TELL your representative to cosponsor the Internet Radio Equality Act, or forever hold your tongue about how internet radio became the same bland shit as terrestrial radio.
You have until 15 July 2007.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Accuradio
Live365
Pandora
Digital Gunfire (My personal favorite)
Do you enjoy the content? Diverse huh? Cool, huh?
Not for long. Internet Radio sites are being unfairly shafted by 'The Man'. They need your help. Check the following link, they do a better job of defining the problem than I do.
The solution is to call your Congressional Representative, and tell them (don't ask, that's not how it works.) TELL your representative to cosponsor the Internet Radio Equality Act, or forever hold your tongue about how internet radio became the same bland shit as terrestrial radio.
You have until 15 July 2007.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Call To Action, Music Industry, political, Politics
FCC Recognizes Payola Scandal - Almost Punishes Recording Industry!
The FMC (Future of Music Coalition) has been working for over seven years to try and stop the recording industry from providing 'perks' to the radio stations in exchange for airplay, a practice so well-known, that it garnered a nickname: Payola.
Payola is unfair to small labels and independent artists, who simply don't have the resources to compete against the deep pockets of the recording industry.
It's sad to see the recording industry go on a smear campaign of their own customers and harp endlessly about how "Filesharing Is A Crime" but then blatantly engage in the equally illegal practice of greasing the palms of the Radio Station Program Directors for airtime.
But it looks like we are one step closer to the end of Payola.
The Twelve Million dollars the industry bigwigs had to cough up is like about Twelve Dollars to you and me, hell the FCC probably spent more than that on their investigation. All the nonsense about "Maintaining Compliance" through data collection and yearly training is bullshit. This stuff was all 'off the books' before, do you think they are going to start writing down shit like:
-Dec 01: Received Front-Row Tix for NIN concert in exchange for playing Dougherty's latest crap.
-Dec 02: Received Limo Rental for one day, dinner at Jax, a hummer, and a strawberry fruit smoothie in exchange for playing Dashboard Confessional's latest crap. (Also threw in a 12-pack or Pabst Blue Ribbon for the DJ if he would say that he personally loved the band.)
Not.
The cool thing about the FCC's decision is that they are requiring Radio Stations to provide more than 4000 hours of airtime to local and independent artists. It should make for some more diverse programming on terrestrial radio, something I NEVER thought would come to pass.
I might actually listen in to my local radio stations again.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Payola is unfair to small labels and independent artists, who simply don't have the resources to compete against the deep pockets of the recording industry.
It's sad to see the recording industry go on a smear campaign of their own customers and harp endlessly about how "Filesharing Is A Crime" but then blatantly engage in the equally illegal practice of greasing the palms of the Radio Station Program Directors for airtime.
But it looks like we are one step closer to the end of Payola.
The Twelve Million dollars the industry bigwigs had to cough up is like about Twelve Dollars to you and me, hell the FCC probably spent more than that on their investigation. All the nonsense about "Maintaining Compliance" through data collection and yearly training is bullshit. This stuff was all 'off the books' before, do you think they are going to start writing down shit like:
-Dec 01: Received Front-Row Tix for NIN concert in exchange for playing Dougherty's latest crap.
-Dec 02: Received Limo Rental for one day, dinner at Jax, a hummer, and a strawberry fruit smoothie in exchange for playing Dashboard Confessional's latest crap. (Also threw in a 12-pack or Pabst Blue Ribbon for the DJ if he would say that he personally loved the band.)
Not.
The cool thing about the FCC's decision is that they are requiring Radio Stations to provide more than 4000 hours of airtime to local and independent artists. It should make for some more diverse programming on terrestrial radio, something I NEVER thought would come to pass.
I might actually listen in to my local radio stations again.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, Dashboard Confessional Sucks, Music Industry
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Open Letter To Music Industry Execs
Sounds like it's only a matter of time before you get rid of DRM and the idiot who signed off on it. You don't have a choice really. Without a massive worldwide task force to police every single online transmission, and punish offenders, you simply are not going to stop file sharing. Remember when CDs came out and people could make high-quality copies of new releases from CD to cassette tape ? Remember how you cried yourself to sleep thinking of all those lost dollars? What did you NOT learn from that experience?
Remember Buisness 101 Law of Supply and Demand? Until the price of songs comes down to meet the demand, people will simply P2P their music, or pass on it. Its a mixed blessing: the prevalence of instant music accessibility has driven down the price point. Accept it, and bring the prices down enough that your customers will gladly pay to download the song from you than to try and figure out how BitTorrent works. Hell, if songs were a quarter apiece, I'd probably pay you to download it again, instead of walking out to the car to get the CD!
Instead of crying about how the price of music has gone down, rejoice that your distribution costs have reduced exponentially! Rejoice that you can reach markets you never dreamed of, in countries where CDs have to be sent in by carrier pigeon or camel-ed across the desert!
Now that that's all cleared up, where is the next "Hotel California"? Where is the next "Jagged Little Pill"? Where is the next "Nevermind"? The crap you put out now is the 'Reality TV Programming' of music. You are quick to push shitbands like The Fray, but have you even heard of Vampire Hands? Jagged Spiral? Nothing Gained? Betty X? Where is the imagination? Where is the experimentation? Is Trent Reznor the only Visionary you could find? You need to MAKE new genres, not try to copy ones which were designed to poke fun at you. Let the kids have their "Indie", and make something they haven't even dreamed of.
Stop wasting your resources fighting a losing battle AGAINST YOUR OWN CUSTOMERS, and spend them on making it even easier to get music to your customers!
Get in bed with companies no one else could imagine. Fire your marketing staff, and hire some 16-year olds to run the think tank. Give away free mp3 downloads with Happy Meals or Apple Jacks or Little Debbies.
Figure out why people can't buy a song the second they hear it, anywhere, anytime. If there was a "MINE!" button on your radio, and it cost a quarter to push it, and whammo-o! people could own a copy of the song they were listening to... If there was a way to access the song purchase via cell phone... If there was a simple way for people to provide access to your downloads through links on their own website or e-mail signatures...
If you diverted your funding away from lawsuits against your customers and into technology like this......can your tiny minds grasp how much money you would make?
Also, get people to think about music when they are NOT near their computer, because if you read http://lefsetz.com/ he will tell you that radio simply isn't doing it.
One more thing, abolish Dashboard Confessional. In fact, abolish the entire Emo genre. It is the open chancre sore on the the face of music history.
No charge for this advice.
Love,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Remember Buisness 101 Law of Supply and Demand? Until the price of songs comes down to meet the demand, people will simply P2P their music, or pass on it. Its a mixed blessing: the prevalence of instant music accessibility has driven down the price point. Accept it, and bring the prices down enough that your customers will gladly pay to download the song from you than to try and figure out how BitTorrent works. Hell, if songs were a quarter apiece, I'd probably pay you to download it again, instead of walking out to the car to get the CD!
Instead of crying about how the price of music has gone down, rejoice that your distribution costs have reduced exponentially! Rejoice that you can reach markets you never dreamed of, in countries where CDs have to be sent in by carrier pigeon or camel-ed across the desert!
Now that that's all cleared up, where is the next "Hotel California"? Where is the next "Jagged Little Pill"? Where is the next "Nevermind"? The crap you put out now is the 'Reality TV Programming' of music. You are quick to push shitbands like The Fray, but have you even heard of Vampire Hands? Jagged Spiral? Nothing Gained? Betty X? Where is the imagination? Where is the experimentation? Is Trent Reznor the only Visionary you could find? You need to MAKE new genres, not try to copy ones which were designed to poke fun at you. Let the kids have their "Indie", and make something they haven't even dreamed of.
Stop wasting your resources fighting a losing battle AGAINST YOUR OWN CUSTOMERS, and spend them on making it even easier to get music to your customers!
Get in bed with companies no one else could imagine. Fire your marketing staff, and hire some 16-year olds to run the think tank. Give away free mp3 downloads with Happy Meals or Apple Jacks or Little Debbies.
Figure out why people can't buy a song the second they hear it, anywhere, anytime. If there was a "MINE!" button on your radio, and it cost a quarter to push it, and whammo-o! people could own a copy of the song they were listening to... If there was a way to access the song purchase via cell phone... If there was a simple way for people to provide access to your downloads through links on their own website or e-mail signatures...
If you diverted your funding away from lawsuits against your customers and into technology like this......can your tiny minds grasp how much money you would make?
Also, get people to think about music when they are NOT near their computer, because if you read http://lefsetz.com/ he will tell you that radio simply isn't doing it.
One more thing, abolish Dashboard Confessional. In fact, abolish the entire Emo genre. It is the open chancre sore on the the face of music history.
No charge for this advice.
Love,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry, Open Letter
Friday, April 20, 2007
Thank God For Trent Reznor
Required reading for those who think I dote on too much about my personal hero, Trent Reznor:
Here is the take from Bob Ezrin, an industry insider whose opinion is far more worthy than my own.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Here is the take from Bob Ezrin, an industry insider whose opinion is far more worthy than my own.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Music Industry, NIN
Thursday, April 05, 2007
RIAA VS NIN (Maybe)
The interesting news is NOT that the R.I.A.A. doesn't know it's A.S.S. from a H.I.T.G., we knew that already.
The interesting news is NOT that Trent Reznor tips some info about the ongoing NIN Year Zero marketing campaign:
...The same source told Billboard that NINE INCH NAILS frontman Trent Reznor views the campaign as a "new entertainment form." The source added that the campaign will continue for the next 18 months.
"Year Zero" is reportedly the first of two concept albums, the second of which Reznor hopes to finish next year...
-From http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=69841
Of course, "The Campaign" mentioned is well documented at ninwiki.com, so I won't cover it here.
No, the potential news is a lovely theory I just concocted, which the tools on Digg.com nearly figured out.
Fact: Roadrunner Records, as pointed out on Digg, is a member of the RIAA.
Fact: A member of the RIAA is pointing out that the RIAA sued website owners for posting intentionally leaked copies of the new NIN album.
Sounds stupid right? Why tell everyone that you did something so stupid?
Until you add this:
Fact: Trent Reznor is a marketing genius.
If the tools on Digg.com weren't so busy posting "The RIAA SUX!!!!", "NIN RULEZ!!!" and providing links to download copies of songs which are already easily streamed from the yearzero.nin.com website, they might have figured it out.
My theory, of course, is that the lawsuit and press release were expected, and possibly planned. I would not put it past anyone to take advantage of the free publicity offered by the RIAA's timely lawsuit, not to mention how fast the word spreads on the RIAA's foolish decisions.
Make the RIAA look bad AND get free publicity for your new album release...which JUST SO HAPPENS to be this month....
*What* a coincidence!
I'm telling you, folks: Marketing Genius.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The interesting news is NOT that Trent Reznor tips some info about the ongoing NIN Year Zero marketing campaign:
...The same source told Billboard that NINE INCH NAILS frontman Trent Reznor views the campaign as a "new entertainment form." The source added that the campaign will continue for the next 18 months.
"Year Zero" is reportedly the first of two concept albums, the second of which Reznor hopes to finish next year...
-From http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=69841
Of course, "The Campaign" mentioned is well documented at ninwiki.com, so I won't cover it here.
No, the potential news is a lovely theory I just concocted, which the tools on Digg.com nearly figured out.
Fact: Roadrunner Records, as pointed out on Digg, is a member of the RIAA.
Fact: A member of the RIAA is pointing out that the RIAA sued website owners for posting intentionally leaked copies of the new NIN album.
Sounds stupid right? Why tell everyone that you did something so stupid?
Until you add this:
Fact: Trent Reznor is a marketing genius.
If the tools on Digg.com weren't so busy posting "The RIAA SUX!!!!", "NIN RULEZ!!!" and providing links to download copies of songs which are already easily streamed from the yearzero.nin.com website, they might have figured it out.
My theory, of course, is that the lawsuit and press release were expected, and possibly planned. I would not put it past anyone to take advantage of the free publicity offered by the RIAA's timely lawsuit, not to mention how fast the word spreads on the RIAA's foolish decisions.
Make the RIAA look bad AND get free publicity for your new album release...which JUST SO HAPPENS to be this month....
*What* a coincidence!
I'm telling you, folks: Marketing Genius.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: music, Music Industry, new release, NIN, Viral Marketing
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
The Album Is Dead! (Part Two)
Hey, the Recording Industry reads my blog!
Check out this story in the NY Times by Jeff Leeds, about a group just signed by a record label..
...to do Two songs. TWO. Thas'all.
Sound Familiar?
The album distribution model was perfect for hard-copy records, tapes and CDs. So you really liked "Pour Some Sugar On Me" because you heard it on the radio. You ran down to Musicland on 3 August in 1987 and bought Hysteria the day it came out. You paid $11.99
Why did you pay that much for one song? You didn't. You only wanted the 'hit', and you might have actually paid twelve bucks for it, but that truly would be a rip-off, since the single (in cassette tape format, natch) was available for $3.99. That makes 12 songs for twelve bucks sound like a hell of a deal. Those were your options, and they sucked.
But not anymore. On the interweb, you preview each song before you buy it, and you pick and choose the songs you want. Who the hell wants to buy the entire album of Wang Chung's "Points on the Curve"?
You only want this song, and this one. Maybe this one, if you're a true fan.
But this? It's crap. If it was a piece of furniture in your house, you would pay to have it hauled away; you certainly wouldn't want to be caught Dead with it taking up space in your I-Dope Shuffle. The song was tossed into the album so the price could be set higher, a technique called "Value Added", a concept thought up by a marketing person who should have been disemboweled for coming up with the idea.
Yes, the time is up for the album. It's just as well, since few bands use albums to their full potential anyway. The article mentions Tool and Radiohead, but has anyone heard of Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick"? The CD has one track on it, about 45 min long. Its not even a concept album. It's a 45 min SONG.
Concept albums? Nobody does that anymore. You'd have to be drunk or stupid to even try that shit nowadays.
But the real proof that the record companies read my blog? I quote:
Another solution being debated in the industry would transform record labels into de facto fan clubs. Companies including the Warner Music Group and the EMI Group have been considering a system in which fans would pay a fee, perhaps monthly, to “subscribe” to their favorite artists and receive a series of recordings, videos and other products spaced over time.
From: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/26/business/media/26music.html?ex=1332561600&en=7a34accc8988c811&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
I wonder if I will get any credit for coming up with the idea first.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Check out this story in the NY Times by Jeff Leeds, about a group just signed by a record label..
...to do Two songs. TWO. Thas'all.
Sound Familiar?
The album distribution model was perfect for hard-copy records, tapes and CDs. So you really liked "Pour Some Sugar On Me" because you heard it on the radio. You ran down to Musicland on 3 August in 1987 and bought Hysteria the day it came out. You paid $11.99
Why did you pay that much for one song? You didn't. You only wanted the 'hit', and you might have actually paid twelve bucks for it, but that truly would be a rip-off, since the single (in cassette tape format, natch) was available for $3.99. That makes 12 songs for twelve bucks sound like a hell of a deal. Those were your options, and they sucked.
But not anymore. On the interweb, you preview each song before you buy it, and you pick and choose the songs you want. Who the hell wants to buy the entire album of Wang Chung's "Points on the Curve"?
You only want this song, and this one. Maybe this one, if you're a true fan.
But this? It's crap. If it was a piece of furniture in your house, you would pay to have it hauled away; you certainly wouldn't want to be caught Dead with it taking up space in your I-Dope Shuffle. The song was tossed into the album so the price could be set higher, a technique called "Value Added", a concept thought up by a marketing person who should have been disemboweled for coming up with the idea.
Yes, the time is up for the album. It's just as well, since few bands use albums to their full potential anyway. The article mentions Tool and Radiohead, but has anyone heard of Jethro Tull's "Thick as a Brick"? The CD has one track on it, about 45 min long. Its not even a concept album. It's a 45 min SONG.
Concept albums? Nobody does that anymore. You'd have to be drunk or stupid to even try that shit nowadays.
But the real proof that the record companies read my blog? I quote:
Another solution being debated in the industry would transform record labels into de facto fan clubs. Companies including the Warner Music Group and the EMI Group have been considering a system in which fans would pay a fee, perhaps monthly, to “subscribe” to their favorite artists and receive a series of recordings, videos and other products spaced over time.
From: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/26/business/media/26music.html?ex=1332561600&en=7a34accc8988c811&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
I wonder if I will get any credit for coming up with the idea first.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, consumerism, Cultural Observation, Million Dollar Idea, music, Music Industry
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Bum Rush The Charts
An interesting idea, the website bumrushthecharts.blogspot.com is urging people with I-Tunes accounts to purchase an indie single today and push it to #1 on the charts as a 'stick it to the record industry' gesture.
How the band is selected is beyond me, and isn't the fact that your music on I-Tunes (and therefore DRM infected) imply that you have given in to the man, and how is it possible to 'Stick it to the man' by buying music on his website???
I would probably dig deeper before participating, to make sure you aren't getting sucked into a very clever marketing scheme, but I don't have an I-Suck account, so I'm not going to fret about it. If you are interested in proving that a bunch of people can send an indie single to #1, and if you think that will somehow make the record industry jealous, head over to the following link and show your support.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
How the band is selected is beyond me, and isn't the fact that your music on I-Tunes (and therefore DRM infected) imply that you have given in to the man, and how is it possible to 'Stick it to the man' by buying music on his website???
I would probably dig deeper before participating, to make sure you aren't getting sucked into a very clever marketing scheme, but I don't have an I-Suck account, so I'm not going to fret about it. If you are interested in proving that a bunch of people can send an indie single to #1, and if you think that will somehow make the record industry jealous, head over to the following link and show your support.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, music, Music Industry
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
The fate of indie music as we know it
A Smashing (albeit lengthy) article on Salon.com about the 20 Mar 2007 rulings by the FCC and Copyright Royalty Board, which put the screws to internet radio services by retroactively charging them increased royalties for internet radio services.
While I'm sorry for internet radio services like Pandora and AccuRadio who now owes Millions more than they ever made with their services, I know this is the kind of thing that happens when a multibillion dollar industry has their claws around the testes of the government. You don't tug on Superman's Cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off the Lone Ranger, you don't visit Crystal, MN without packing some heat, and you don't set up shop against the record industry without some serious lawyers, insurance, and compromising pix of high-ranking officials.
The recording industry is laughing now, but it sounds to me like they just pulled the trigger before they looked to see which way the gun was pointing. While this ruling might kill internet radio, and toss the Recording Industry enough cash to sue some more innocent fans, it will also dissuade new artists AWAY from the old royalty paradigm, and onto things like creative commons licensing, and services like magnatune.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
While I'm sorry for internet radio services like Pandora and AccuRadio who now owes Millions more than they ever made with their services, I know this is the kind of thing that happens when a multibillion dollar industry has their claws around the testes of the government. You don't tug on Superman's Cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off the Lone Ranger, you don't visit Crystal, MN without packing some heat, and you don't set up shop against the record industry without some serious lawyers, insurance, and compromising pix of high-ranking officials.
The recording industry is laughing now, but it sounds to me like they just pulled the trigger before they looked to see which way the gun was pointing. While this ruling might kill internet radio, and toss the Recording Industry enough cash to sue some more innocent fans, it will also dissuade new artists AWAY from the old royalty paradigm, and onto things like creative commons licensing, and services like magnatune.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, Music Industry
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
The 2007 'Worst Company in America' Award
Conratulations to the RIAA on their overwhelming landslide victory in the 'Worst Company in America' Award" for 2007!
Don't forget, this month is Boycott the RIAA month! Help get the word out that DRM infection and lawsuits against innocent people are not acceptable. Tell the Recording Industry to read Lefsetz if they want to know why their CD sales are in the shitter.
Tell them a quality band or two might be in their own best interest. Arcade Fire is a good start. Hinder (Rhymes with 'bee-hind-er') is Not. Tell them Divas are DONE, and they should trade in one Gwen Steffani for a dozen talented bands. Tell them to shoot their marketing departments and put Lefsetz or myself in charge, (maybe both), and we could turn that dying dog around. Maybe.
Or perhaps, tell them to stop living in the past, join us in the present, and listen to reason, instead of Keeping Their Heads Buried In Their Lower Intestines.
For gods sake, someone tell them that MTV is dead, and we need a necromancer to bring it back!
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Don't forget, this month is Boycott the RIAA month! Help get the word out that DRM infection and lawsuits against innocent people are not acceptable. Tell the Recording Industry to read Lefsetz if they want to know why their CD sales are in the shitter.
Tell them a quality band or two might be in their own best interest. Arcade Fire is a good start. Hinder (Rhymes with 'bee-hind-er') is Not. Tell them Divas are DONE, and they should trade in one Gwen Steffani for a dozen talented bands. Tell them to shoot their marketing departments and put Lefsetz or myself in charge, (maybe both), and we could turn that dying dog around. Maybe.
Or perhaps, tell them to stop living in the past, join us in the present, and listen to reason, instead of Keeping Their Heads Buried In Their Lower Intestines.
For gods sake, someone tell them that MTV is dead, and we need a necromancer to bring it back!
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Friday, March 09, 2007
Burnlounge
Burnlounge is a classic Multi-Level Marketing site that gives YOU the OPPORTUNITY to make money selling music! Open and Manage your own virtual music store! Your very own Sam Goody (or Musicland, for those who remember such things). Make your OWN website, PROMOTE it YOURSELF, then sit back and RAKE IN THE CASH!
Of course, we know this is bullshit. What this really is, is a chance for you to try to make other people money.
Care to know who your comptetition is? I-Tunes. Napster. Rhapsody. You might have heard of them. I hope you have some $$$$ because it's going to take some serious marketing to compete with them. Somehow, burnlounge believes that you are so foolish, and that the power of Multi-Level Marketing will somehow make them a competitor.
Talk about despiration.
Now, they might have had a ghost of a chance except for three things.
1) D
2) R
3) M
The fact that burnlounge has partnered up with Warner, Universal, EMI, and Sony should tell you all you need to know. Never mind that they try to play both sides by including IODA and CD Baby, it did not take long reading through the Terms of Use to find this:
Conditions to Sublicensing of Digital Downloads to You. Digital Rights Management ("DRM") software will be downloaded onto your Approved Electronic Devices along with your Digital Download music files, and will limit your uses as specified in the Usage Rules.
A lot of the online reviews of Burnlounge talk about whether the business model of MLM can succeed or not. It can't, but that misses the point:
DRM IS EVIL!
Don't support burnlounge. Support DRM-Free sites like
emusic
mp3tunes
Audio Lunchbox
Hype Machine
Garage Band
Amazon.com
mp3 Fiesta
etc...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Of course, we know this is bullshit. What this really is, is a chance for you to try to make other people money.
Care to know who your comptetition is? I-Tunes. Napster. Rhapsody. You might have heard of them. I hope you have some $$$$ because it's going to take some serious marketing to compete with them. Somehow, burnlounge believes that you are so foolish, and that the power of Multi-Level Marketing will somehow make them a competitor.
Talk about despiration.
Now, they might have had a ghost of a chance except for three things.
1) D
2) R
3) M
The fact that burnlounge has partnered up with Warner, Universal, EMI, and Sony should tell you all you need to know. Never mind that they try to play both sides by including IODA and CD Baby, it did not take long reading through the Terms of Use to find this:
Conditions to Sublicensing of Digital Downloads to You. Digital Rights Management ("DRM") software will be downloaded onto your Approved Electronic Devices along with your Digital Download music files, and will limit your uses as specified in the Usage Rules.
A lot of the online reviews of Burnlounge talk about whether the business model of MLM can succeed or not. It can't, but that misses the point:
DRM IS EVIL!
Don't support burnlounge. Support DRM-Free sites like
emusic
mp3tunes
Audio Lunchbox
Hype Machine
Garage Band
Amazon.com
mp3 Fiesta
etc...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
March 2007 - Boycott the RIAA Month
The fight is on.
Gizmodo has declared March 2007 Boycott the RIAA Month
Check the Manifesto here. It explains what the RIAA is, what it does, and why it is harmful to artists, consumers, and the music business as a whole.
If you purchase music at all, whether in CD or download form, and ESPECIALLY if you have an I-Tunes account, you should read this.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Gizmodo has declared March 2007 Boycott the RIAA Month
Check the Manifesto here. It explains what the RIAA is, what it does, and why it is harmful to artists, consumers, and the music business as a whole.
If you purchase music at all, whether in CD or download form, and ESPECIALLY if you have an I-Tunes account, you should read this.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Monday, February 26, 2007
The Album Is Dead!
Albums are dead.
I love it when Lefsetz is right, and he's always right. Now he's saying that 'the album is dead' and long live the single. People can not only buy the singles they want, but they can also mix their own playlists. They play the SONGS they want, not generally the ALBUMS. In many cases, there is only one song on the album that is any good. Commercial Radio stations (remember them?) only play the singles anyway.
This is not news to anyone. I've thought this ever since first hearing the term 'One-Hit Wonder'.
So why bother writing an album? Why not just write a hit?
Of course, it does not work that-a-way. I can tell you firsthand that when a group gets together and writes songs, they don't know which one is going to be The One (if any at all). If it were that easy, the entire album would be filled with hits! Oh, the band has their favorites, and their not-as-favorites, they might even have some 'throwaway' or 'filler' songs that don't SUCK per se, but they aren't single-worthy. But part of any hit is hook, and part is luck.
Lefsetz is right that the record companies would be nothing but wise to change from the Album paradigm to the Single paradigm. The majority of the consumers already have. Perhaps releasing songs one track at a time is a better distribution method? Doesn't it suck to wait YEARS for your favorites band's next release? Wouldn't it be cool if your favorite band released a new single EVERY MONTH instead? Wouldn't it keep your interest in a band longer? Hell, by the time Tapes-N-Tapes release another stiff, you won't remember that you even bought their old one!
Wouldn't it be cool if a band promoted their upcoming album by releasing it a track at a time on the internet FOR FREE?
Blog on,
-CZ
2 Comments
Permalink
I love it when Lefsetz is right, and he's always right. Now he's saying that 'the album is dead' and long live the single. People can not only buy the singles they want, but they can also mix their own playlists. They play the SONGS they want, not generally the ALBUMS. In many cases, there is only one song on the album that is any good. Commercial Radio stations (remember them?) only play the singles anyway.
This is not news to anyone. I've thought this ever since first hearing the term 'One-Hit Wonder'.
So why bother writing an album? Why not just write a hit?
Of course, it does not work that-a-way. I can tell you firsthand that when a group gets together and writes songs, they don't know which one is going to be The One (if any at all). If it were that easy, the entire album would be filled with hits! Oh, the band has their favorites, and their not-as-favorites, they might even have some 'throwaway' or 'filler' songs that don't SUCK per se, but they aren't single-worthy. But part of any hit is hook, and part is luck.
Lefsetz is right that the record companies would be nothing but wise to change from the Album paradigm to the Single paradigm. The majority of the consumers already have. Perhaps releasing songs one track at a time is a better distribution method? Doesn't it suck to wait YEARS for your favorites band's next release? Wouldn't it be cool if your favorite band released a new single EVERY MONTH instead? Wouldn't it keep your interest in a band longer? Hell, by the time Tapes-N-Tapes release another stiff, you won't remember that you even bought their old one!
Wouldn't it be cool if a band promoted their upcoming album by releasing it a track at a time on the internet FOR FREE?
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, Million Dollar Idea, Music Industry
Friday, July 28, 2006
Sony BMG tries DRM Free
Hmm,
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17212&ch=infotech
Guess they read my blog..
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17212&ch=infotech
Guess they read my blog..
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Thursday, July 27, 2006
The cure for the common Hit
A decent article from Wired called "The Rise and Fall of the Hit" (although you can just read pages 1 and 3, and skip the history lesson on page 2)
The article points out that the last Mega Hit Album was NSync's No Strings Attached, which was also noted as the fastest-selling album of all time. That was back in 2000.
With the explosive growth of the internet and the accessability of music that comes with it, one would expect the previous milestones to be shattered at an exponential rate, but instead we have the opposite. Since 2000, music sales have declined, radio listenership is down, and music stores sales are floundering. Even the popularity of iTunes and Amazon are not enough to propel any singles or bands to Mega-Status.
Why not? Why hasn't there been any kind of SuperMegaBand or SuperMegaAlbum in the music industry since 2000? Where are the bands to replace U2 and Aerosmith? Where are the albums to replace 'Jagged Little Pill' and 'Appetite for Destruction'? The White Stripes had a good run, and became the poster children for the 'indie' genre invasion, but the closest thing we have to U2 now is Green Day.
Green Day is the new U2. Wow.
And the best we can do for the cover of Rolling Stone are the Red Hot Chili Peppers? It doesn't simply make my soul cry, it makes my soul swallow rusty razor blades until it dies of internal hemmoraging.
What could have caused this? Perhaps aging baby boomers and Gen-X-ers now have better things to waste their money on. Perhaps the RIAA scared people away with their paranoid cries of piracy, and thier the poisonous, evil hackjob at copyright management known as DRM. Perhaps there simply haven't been any albums or bands of Super-Mega-Calibre in the past six years?
That is a saddening thought. I have a happier idea.
What if instead of people spending their money on what the Industry tells them to, people actually are spending it on what They want? What if right now, more money than ever is being spent on music, but that money is going to the artists instead of the Record Company? Because if everyone paid money directly to the artist for the art they liked, Soundscan wouldn't track it, and Billboard and Spin wouldn't know it. This would explain the current situation.
Perhaps what I have been hoping for all this time is finally beginning to happen: the Industry is beginning to fail, and people are bypassing the middleman and going right to the artist. That is the way it should be, and to hell with 'The Hit', and Good Riddance. Spread the money out among all the artists instead of giving it all to the U2's of the world.
Or, maybe it's just my little fantasy, and everyone is really downloading their music on BitTorrent.
Whatever the real reason for the lack of Mega Hits and Artists, the Movie Industry needs to pay close attention, because the trends in video tend to follow the trends in audio by about five years....
Blog on,
-CZ
3 Comments
Permalink
The article points out that the last Mega Hit Album was NSync's No Strings Attached, which was also noted as the fastest-selling album of all time. That was back in 2000.
With the explosive growth of the internet and the accessability of music that comes with it, one would expect the previous milestones to be shattered at an exponential rate, but instead we have the opposite. Since 2000, music sales have declined, radio listenership is down, and music stores sales are floundering. Even the popularity of iTunes and Amazon are not enough to propel any singles or bands to Mega-Status.
Why not? Why hasn't there been any kind of SuperMegaBand or SuperMegaAlbum in the music industry since 2000? Where are the bands to replace U2 and Aerosmith? Where are the albums to replace 'Jagged Little Pill' and 'Appetite for Destruction'? The White Stripes had a good run, and became the poster children for the 'indie' genre invasion, but the closest thing we have to U2 now is Green Day.
Green Day is the new U2. Wow.
And the best we can do for the cover of Rolling Stone are the Red Hot Chili Peppers? It doesn't simply make my soul cry, it makes my soul swallow rusty razor blades until it dies of internal hemmoraging.
What could have caused this? Perhaps aging baby boomers and Gen-X-ers now have better things to waste their money on. Perhaps the RIAA scared people away with their paranoid cries of piracy, and thier the poisonous, evil hackjob at copyright management known as DRM. Perhaps there simply haven't been any albums or bands of Super-Mega-Calibre in the past six years?
That is a saddening thought. I have a happier idea.
What if instead of people spending their money on what the Industry tells them to, people actually are spending it on what They want? What if right now, more money than ever is being spent on music, but that money is going to the artists instead of the Record Company? Because if everyone paid money directly to the artist for the art they liked, Soundscan wouldn't track it, and Billboard and Spin wouldn't know it. This would explain the current situation.
Perhaps what I have been hoping for all this time is finally beginning to happen: the Industry is beginning to fail, and people are bypassing the middleman and going right to the artist. That is the way it should be, and to hell with 'The Hit', and Good Riddance. Spread the money out among all the artists instead of giving it all to the U2's of the world.
Or, maybe it's just my little fantasy, and everyone is really downloading their music on BitTorrent.
Whatever the real reason for the lack of Mega Hits and Artists, the Movie Industry needs to pay close attention, because the trends in video tend to follow the trends in audio by about five years....
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: music, Music Industry
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
DRM = (Customers) Dont Really Matter
Ah yes, another un-satisfied customer of DRM. Sorry you learned the hard way.
Hey RIAA, can you hear me now?
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
Hey RIAA, can you hear me now?
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Monday, June 19, 2006
The "New Man"
I've been working on a theory about the direction the music/recording industry would take, based on its present predicament.
In the past, the industry would simply wait for talented folks to come to their door in Los Angeles. This made sense, because this is what you did when you thought you might have some talent. You sold everything, moved to L.A., blew a record exec, and maybe you got a contract.
One night, after mixing LSD, Red Bull, and Whiskas Cat Treats, an executive had the radical idea that there might be talent Outside of L.A., Hell, possibly even Outside of CALIFORNIA ITSELF in one of those other states people in California sometimes hear about.
Thus was born the Talent Scout, whose job was to sift the talent from the masses, for mass consumption. And life was good. Middle-aged, balding, overweight, uneducated, Recording Industry executives could still get laid. Talented, moralless, illiterate people could still get a record deal (Without moving to California). Consumers could believe that what poured from their speakers was nothing but the Golden Manna of songcraft, filtered from the musical heavens by people who were true authorities on what 'good music' really was all about.
Until The God-Damned-Interweb came along, and fucked up the works.
Now, any fool with an Internet connection and a soundcard can hack and wail into their computer and post it to their myspace page. (Ex: www.myspace.com/jaggedspiral ) People across the globe can find, sample, download and Paypal all the music in the world, right from their bedroom, without even getting dressed.
For a moment, the Recording Industry was able to hold off the tide, by doing things that your average home recording enthusiast couldn't dream of: No, not Use Talented Musicians, you silly! I mean: Slick Production. Bob Rock! Brittney Spears! Production so slick it ran through your ears like Castor Oil.
But the tide could not be held back. In fact, the discriminating public, realizing that they had been listening only to bands who would sleep with Middle-aged, balding, overweight, uneducated, Recording Industry executives, began to turn a blind ear to the overproduced fluff coming from the Record Industry, and the Independent (Also known as "Indie", or "Nothing-To-Do-With-The-Recording-Industry") Genre was born.
You are here. Enjoy your stay.
But you can't. Because you KNOW what is good. Really, truly objectively good. You liked Nirvana WAY before anyone else. You liked Cake, and Crystal Method, and Coheed and Cambria...and let's not even mention that you knew that Tapes 'n Tapes were good BEFORE YOU YOURSELF EVEN HEARD THEM! HA!! SO THERE!!
But you find yourself drowning in a barrage of independent music from every direction. Radio stations abound, whose program directors feed every scrap of audio into their playlist and hit "Random". You can't stand in a group of more than four people at the bus stop, for fear that a fucking Music Fest will break out. You are drowning in a sea of, well, everyfuckingbody throwing their demo recordings into the caucophony web of the AudioNet, and everyotherfuckingbody tossing out their blog-review of what is like, the best band in 4EvR!!!
So where is here? You are stuck between two hells. On the one hand, you are not going to fall for what "The Man" tells you is good, and on the other hand, it is impossible to navigate the quagmire of "This is the New Good Music"-dom that floods every conceivable media outlet. Even if you could, there simply isnt enough time in the average human life expectancy to sift through it all. So what is left to do?
I will offer you two solutions, but you won't like either of them.
One option is to re-invent "the man". Yes, you must find yourself a resource that you trust to make judgement calls about what is good music. Even if you don't agree with them 100%, you sill must find some source of filtered music. For instance, www.vita.mn , www.pitchforkmedia.com or the inevitable www.myspace.com
The other option is to embrace the Buddhist approach of letting go of desire. You must let go of the lazy, American desire to have someone, anyone hand you "good" music that you will like, because this is impossible, and only causes suffering. There are two things you have in common with every other person on the planet. You won't agree on pizza toppings, and you won't agree what music to listen to while eating said pizza.
I told you that you wouldn't like either option.
Clearly, Americans are all about the cheap way out. They want someone to tell them what is good, because they can't be bothered to pay attention themselves. They are not fans of music, they just want to hear music they believe is good.
They have chosen poorly. In the meantime, sites such as www.pitchforkmedia.com will proliferate and spread until they start charging admission, or advertising, or sexual favors to get your band a favorable listing.
And the New "Man" is born, build by your own hands to keep you down...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
In the past, the industry would simply wait for talented folks to come to their door in Los Angeles. This made sense, because this is what you did when you thought you might have some talent. You sold everything, moved to L.A., blew a record exec, and maybe you got a contract.
One night, after mixing LSD, Red Bull, and Whiskas Cat Treats, an executive had the radical idea that there might be talent Outside of L.A., Hell, possibly even Outside of CALIFORNIA ITSELF in one of those other states people in California sometimes hear about.
Thus was born the Talent Scout, whose job was to sift the talent from the masses, for mass consumption. And life was good. Middle-aged, balding, overweight, uneducated, Recording Industry executives could still get laid. Talented, moralless, illiterate people could still get a record deal (Without moving to California). Consumers could believe that what poured from their speakers was nothing but the Golden Manna of songcraft, filtered from the musical heavens by people who were true authorities on what 'good music' really was all about.
Until The God-Damned-Interweb came along, and fucked up the works.
Now, any fool with an Internet connection and a soundcard can hack and wail into their computer and post it to their myspace page. (Ex: www.myspace.com/jaggedspiral ) People across the globe can find, sample, download and Paypal all the music in the world, right from their bedroom, without even getting dressed.
For a moment, the Recording Industry was able to hold off the tide, by doing things that your average home recording enthusiast couldn't dream of: No, not Use Talented Musicians, you silly! I mean: Slick Production. Bob Rock! Brittney Spears! Production so slick it ran through your ears like Castor Oil.
But the tide could not be held back. In fact, the discriminating public, realizing that they had been listening only to bands who would sleep with Middle-aged, balding, overweight, uneducated, Recording Industry executives, began to turn a blind ear to the overproduced fluff coming from the Record Industry, and the Independent (Also known as "Indie", or "Nothing-To-Do-With-The-Recording-Industry") Genre was born.
You are here. Enjoy your stay.
But you can't. Because you KNOW what is good. Really, truly objectively good. You liked Nirvana WAY before anyone else. You liked Cake, and Crystal Method, and Coheed and Cambria...and let's not even mention that you knew that Tapes 'n Tapes were good BEFORE YOU YOURSELF EVEN HEARD THEM! HA!! SO THERE!!
But you find yourself drowning in a barrage of independent music from every direction. Radio stations abound, whose program directors feed every scrap of audio into their playlist and hit "Random". You can't stand in a group of more than four people at the bus stop, for fear that a fucking Music Fest will break out. You are drowning in a sea of, well, everyfuckingbody throwing their demo recordings into the caucophony web of the AudioNet, and everyotherfuckingbody tossing out their blog-review of what is like, the best band in 4EvR!!!
So where is here? You are stuck between two hells. On the one hand, you are not going to fall for what "The Man" tells you is good, and on the other hand, it is impossible to navigate the quagmire of "This is the New Good Music"-dom that floods every conceivable media outlet. Even if you could, there simply isnt enough time in the average human life expectancy to sift through it all. So what is left to do?
I will offer you two solutions, but you won't like either of them.
One option is to re-invent "the man". Yes, you must find yourself a resource that you trust to make judgement calls about what is good music. Even if you don't agree with them 100%, you sill must find some source of filtered music. For instance, www.vita.mn , www.pitchforkmedia.com or the inevitable www.myspace.com
The other option is to embrace the Buddhist approach of letting go of desire. You must let go of the lazy, American desire to have someone, anyone hand you "good" music that you will like, because this is impossible, and only causes suffering. There are two things you have in common with every other person on the planet. You won't agree on pizza toppings, and you won't agree what music to listen to while eating said pizza.
I told you that you wouldn't like either option.
Clearly, Americans are all about the cheap way out. They want someone to tell them what is good, because they can't be bothered to pay attention themselves. They are not fans of music, they just want to hear music they believe is good.
They have chosen poorly. In the meantime, sites such as www.pitchforkmedia.com will proliferate and spread until they start charging admission, or advertising, or sexual favors to get your band a favorable listing.
And the New "Man" is born, build by your own hands to keep you down...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, Music Industry
Thursday, June 01, 2006
The Fight Against DRM
There is no question that DRM (Digital Rights Management) is evil. Imagine a virus on your computer that looks at the media you use (movies, games, music, e-books, etc) and decides whether you have the right to use the media or not. If the virus doesn't decide you have the right to use the media, it stops the media from being accessed or copied.
How could this virus possibly know whether you have the right to use the media or not? What are it's criteria? You would never load such a virus on your computer...
But some of you did. Sony got busted making a virus just like this, which infected thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of unsuspecting user's computers.
I understand when people want to 'rise up' and tell The Man that they can't do shit like that. The link above is to a group Defective By Design who wants to put an end to DRM, and 'protect our rights'. I admire their spirit. I applaud their cause. I wish them well. But I won't be joining them.
I won't join them because the approach is wrong. Destructive Criticism of simply saying "Nope, you can't do that!" to the Recording Industry and manufacturers/distributers of DRM is not going to work in a free market society. It is an ineffective approach to stand outside the capital and complain that companies aren't making products the way you want them. FlashMob protests of this nature are really socio-political-jacking-off. You feel like you are doing something, but you aren't. [Ed Note: Hmm, kind of like this blog...]
So that I don't end up falling into the same trap of Destructive Criticism, and simply complaining that Defective By Design's plan wont work, and saying "Nope, you can't do that!" I will make some suggestions of Constructive Critcism:
How about using this new organization to COME UP WITH A BETTER COPY PROTECTION IDEA THAN DRM. Of course, this idea doesn't do much good for Johnny Consumer, who is pissed because he just realized that he does not 'own' all the music he bought on ITunes, and now he wants to Do Something. Without mad programming skillz, what is Johnny Consumer going to do? Of course! Pick up a sign, and storm the capitol! Hmm. Guess we need a better solution...
How about looking at the problem from the industry's point of view? What would you do if you were the CEO of Virgin Records and you learned that record sales were down and piracy was up? Fight fire with fire? Two wrongs make a right, right? Of course that's not the case, but they did it anyway. We know they suck, but what would you do differently?
What if the music industry changed music to a service instead of a product? Design a service which allows people to stream ANY audio or video recording on demand. Now, cross-breed the IPod with a cellular phone, and tie it to a monthly subscripton. Every audio and video recording at your fingertips, and no more concept of 'buying' or 'owning' media. You pay for the right to access it. Suddenly, we are talking about a product I would sell my fucking car to own, and to Hell with Cable, XM, Sattelite TV and Internet radio. Let's see, Gas Bill, Internet Bill, Electric Bill, Media Access Bill...
What if Defective By Design actually told you about other sites that Don't use DRM? Strange that they dont. They are so Anti DRM, that they focus only on the companies using it, instead of the companies that aren't. www.mp3tunes.com has been doing DRM-Free music for years. Amazon.com too.
...and audiolunchbox...
...and Hype Machine...
...and GarageBand...
...and I'm doing this from memory.
If you really want to fight the fire-fighting-fire with fire, hows about advocating for some software which defeats DRM? Like this?
No. What Defective By Design intends is a political battle waged on the steps of Congress, wrapped in the American Flag, and touting words like Liberty and Freedom, flogging their signs flacidly in the air, in the hopes that the big "DRM" in a circle with a slash through it will change anything. This might work to keep a Wal-Mart from opening in your town, but I think it is a losing approach to fighting DRM.
So, to Defective By Design, I say "Good luck!" but if this were a fight I would put my money on the Recording Industry. I would feel pretty dirty about it, but the odds are too good to pass up...
PS: Change your freaking name! "Defective By Design" makes me think that the DRM technology can be 'fixed' somehow. If you really want to completely obliterate DRM, you need to give it an unattractive name, like "The AntiFreedom Virus" or something...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
How could this virus possibly know whether you have the right to use the media or not? What are it's criteria? You would never load such a virus on your computer...
But some of you did. Sony got busted making a virus just like this, which infected thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of unsuspecting user's computers.
I understand when people want to 'rise up' and tell The Man that they can't do shit like that. The link above is to a group Defective By Design who wants to put an end to DRM, and 'protect our rights'. I admire their spirit. I applaud their cause. I wish them well. But I won't be joining them.
I won't join them because the approach is wrong. Destructive Criticism of simply saying "Nope, you can't do that!" to the Recording Industry and manufacturers/distributers of DRM is not going to work in a free market society. It is an ineffective approach to stand outside the capital and complain that companies aren't making products the way you want them. FlashMob protests of this nature are really socio-political-jacking-off. You feel like you are doing something, but you aren't. [Ed Note: Hmm, kind of like this blog...]
So that I don't end up falling into the same trap of Destructive Criticism, and simply complaining that Defective By Design's plan wont work, and saying "Nope, you can't do that!" I will make some suggestions of Constructive Critcism:
How about using this new organization to COME UP WITH A BETTER COPY PROTECTION IDEA THAN DRM. Of course, this idea doesn't do much good for Johnny Consumer, who is pissed because he just realized that he does not 'own' all the music he bought on ITunes, and now he wants to Do Something. Without mad programming skillz, what is Johnny Consumer going to do? Of course! Pick up a sign, and storm the capitol! Hmm. Guess we need a better solution...
How about looking at the problem from the industry's point of view? What would you do if you were the CEO of Virgin Records and you learned that record sales were down and piracy was up? Fight fire with fire? Two wrongs make a right, right? Of course that's not the case, but they did it anyway. We know they suck, but what would you do differently?
What if the music industry changed music to a service instead of a product? Design a service which allows people to stream ANY audio or video recording on demand. Now, cross-breed the IPod with a cellular phone, and tie it to a monthly subscripton. Every audio and video recording at your fingertips, and no more concept of 'buying' or 'owning' media. You pay for the right to access it. Suddenly, we are talking about a product I would sell my fucking car to own, and to Hell with Cable, XM, Sattelite TV and Internet radio. Let's see, Gas Bill, Internet Bill, Electric Bill, Media Access Bill...
What if Defective By Design actually told you about other sites that Don't use DRM? Strange that they dont. They are so Anti DRM, that they focus only on the companies using it, instead of the companies that aren't. www.mp3tunes.com has been doing DRM-Free music for years. Amazon.com too.
...and audiolunchbox...
...and Hype Machine...
...and GarageBand...
...and I'm doing this from memory.
If you really want to fight the fire-fighting-fire with fire, hows about advocating for some software which defeats DRM? Like this?
No. What Defective By Design intends is a political battle waged on the steps of Congress, wrapped in the American Flag, and touting words like Liberty and Freedom, flogging their signs flacidly in the air, in the hopes that the big "DRM" in a circle with a slash through it will change anything. This might work to keep a Wal-Mart from opening in your town, but I think it is a losing approach to fighting DRM.
So, to Defective By Design, I say "Good luck!" but if this were a fight I would put my money on the Recording Industry. I would feel pretty dirty about it, but the odds are too good to pass up...
PS: Change your freaking name! "Defective By Design" makes me think that the DRM technology can be 'fixed' somehow. If you really want to completely obliterate DRM, you need to give it an unattractive name, like "The AntiFreedom Virus" or something...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: DRM Sucks, Music Industry
Blog Feeds
Subscribe to this Blog by E-Mail
Zero Links
Jagged Links
Search
Blog Archives
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
