So how could they manage through all this piracy. Even if they make a contract with you and be the first to own you music, it'll be in the NET in a few months 
.What do you think?How could record lables manage through internet piracy!
-
- KVRist
- 107 posts since 6 Jul, 2003 from ME
This idea corsses my mind from time to time whenever I think of selling my music to record lables in 10 years from now So how could they manage through all this piracy. Even if they make a contract with you and be the first to own you music, it'll be in the NET in a few months .What do you think?
So how could they manage through all this piracy. Even if they make a contract with you and be the first to own you music, it'll be in the NET in a few months .What do you think?Thorough preparation makes its own luck
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 107 posts since 6 Jul, 2003 from ME
On the light of this How can some record lables still make millions out of some bands!i think once your music is released, there's nothing you can do
anyone can buy your cd and share it on the net
Thorough preparation makes its own luck
-
- KVRian
- 951 posts since 18 Jun, 2004 from Here I am.
actually i don't really know, but i think there are many reasons to that ...
there are still (hopefully) people who still buys originals cds, who like to get lyrics
and info on the cd
the music is played on radio,so the label gets royalties for that ...
everyone hasn't a web connection
everyone who has a connection doesn't want to download illegal stuff (hopefully)
i think also bands get a lot of money by touring and playing live
i think the big labels are less affected by piracy as they have a promotion arsenal that makes them sell cds ...
anyway just my 2 cents
there are still (hopefully) people who still buys originals cds, who like to get lyrics
and info on the cdthe music is played on radio,so the label gets royalties for that ...
everyone hasn't a web connection
everyone who has a connection doesn't want to download illegal stuff (hopefully)
i think also bands get a lot of money by touring and playing live
i think the big labels are less affected by piracy as they have a promotion arsenal that makes them sell cds ...
anyway just my 2 cents
-
- KVRAF
- 3441 posts since 15 Mar, 2003
I think the days of making money in the music bussiness is coming to an end.
With internet sharing of music, internet radio, pod casting, and all of the talented (and not so talented) home musicians making music as good and better then the commercially released music, there will be so much music out there that no one will be able to get enough of an audience to make any money.
I think music will become an amateur endevour.
With the exception of a few mega-stars to fill the need many people have to have people to idolize. And they will be primarilly personallities and only secondarally musicians, because most people aren't really all that interested in decent music.
With internet sharing of music, internet radio, pod casting, and all of the talented (and not so talented) home musicians making music as good and better then the commercially released music, there will be so much music out there that no one will be able to get enough of an audience to make any money.
I think music will become an amateur endevour.
With the exception of a few mega-stars to fill the need many people have to have people to idolize. And they will be primarilly personallities and only secondarally musicians, because most people aren't really all that interested in decent music.
-
Reverse Engineer Reverse Engineer https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=9129
- KVRAF
- 4968 posts since 23 Sep, 2003 from Glasgow
Record labels combat piracy by selling Music. It's a simple fact, but it's the only (real) defense they have. It seems to be working too as CD sales have risen year on year.
I recall a slogan along the lines of "Home Taping is Killing Music!" Is it dead yet? Tapes certainly are.
I recall a slogan along the lines of "Home Taping is Killing Music!" Is it dead yet? Tapes certainly are.
-
- Banned
- 1842 posts since 4 Aug, 2004 from just right here
The pioneers made some cash because they had a bit of a monopoly, though you couldn't always find something you could enjoy. Ever since there were home recording devices poeple were copying. But if you don't know anyone who's got a copy and you like it, well you probably buy it, even maybe just for the cover. These major acts they earn income from everthing associated with being a recording artist and being a public
personality, through marketing, appearance and touring.
Paul Mcartney doesn't sell too many records these days, but can fill a stadium. What I think is the lower the price a CD is the less likely anyone would go to the bother of copying it, but you would have to sell world-wide. Thing is though, there is so much of it, and the best you can hope for is the flavour of the month. Im not that serious, and I don't realy want to be in the public eye, anyway. Don't forget its the same for movies and games.
personality, through marketing, appearance and touring.
Paul Mcartney doesn't sell too many records these days, but can fill a stadium. What I think is the lower the price a CD is the less likely anyone would go to the bother of copying it, but you would have to sell world-wide. Thing is though, there is so much of it, and the best you can hope for is the flavour of the month. Im not that serious, and I don't realy want to be in the public eye, anyway. Don't forget its the same for movies and games.
-
- KVRian
- 951 posts since 18 Jun, 2004 from Here I am.
here i disagree because those "hobby musicians" even if they get a good quality production, will never got to be known by a wide audience except through hosting music sites like soundclick or others (and i honestly don't think that by releasing music through these will make you go tour the world and fill stadiumsPT wrote:I think the days of making money in the music bussiness is coming to an end.
With internet sharing of music, internet radio, pod casting, and all of the talented (and not so talented) home musicians making music as good and better then the commercially released music, there will be so much music out there that no one will be able to get enough of an audience to make any money.
and i also think that those who put their music are not really willing to be famous world star)...unless they sign to a major/label which will give them the opportunity to have very wide audience by advertising on tv radio etc etc....
what i mean is that the audience will not be divided ...and it's not dividing ...there's already tons of free and good quality music out there, still majors making money with bull****
yes, for many many many people, music is just entertainment, whereas for others it's more a passionPT wrote:because most people aren't really all that interested in decent music.
Last edited by dsp music on Sat Jun 18, 2005 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRist
- 325 posts since 10 Jul, 2002 from About 3 feet below sea level
I've thought about this dilema as someone who's really keen to exploit the internet as a musical distribution medium.
I still think that artist's will still make good money from selling downloads cos real fans will always want to contribute in some way (it has been claimed that most people buy with their emotions meaning that if you feel something for a product, you very often WANT to pay for it...)
Secondly, file sharing and going to dodgy free download sites leaves your computer vunerable to all manor of attacks and viruses, so parradoxically, viruses and malicious programes might actually help steer people towards safe legal download sites!)
Lastly, diversification is the name of the game if a business is to be successful. I was reading the other day that the Ford motor company actually make more money from their financial arm than they do from their core business of selling cars.
I'm sitting here in a casual Tee Shirt made by a company who also manufacture Bulldozers...
I still think that artist's will still make good money from selling downloads cos real fans will always want to contribute in some way (it has been claimed that most people buy with their emotions meaning that if you feel something for a product, you very often WANT to pay for it...)
Secondly, file sharing and going to dodgy free download sites leaves your computer vunerable to all manor of attacks and viruses, so parradoxically, viruses and malicious programes might actually help steer people towards safe legal download sites!)
Lastly, diversification is the name of the game if a business is to be successful. I was reading the other day that the Ford motor company actually make more money from their financial arm than they do from their core business of selling cars.
I'm sitting here in a casual Tee Shirt made by a company who also manufacture Bulldozers...
-
- KVRAF
- 5703 posts since 8 Dec, 2004 from The Twin Cities
This only seems strange because of a false (but very common) notion of "The P2P villain" that everyone here seems to have.Ahmed wrote:On the light of this How can some record lables still make millions out of some bands!i think once your music is released, there's nothing you can do
anyone can buy your cd and share it on the net
The only people that I personally have known who have engaged in P2P habitually have been hardcore music fans. We are talking about people who spend more on c.d.s in a year than I have spent in the past ten years.
To such people, p2p acts as a form of radio, where they can hear new (or old, or weird) music that would just never get on the radio. This practice is becoming more and more common as college radio stations (at one time thought to be the last, best hope of non-mainstream musicians) have succumbed to the CMJ phenomenon, whereby they have become almost as commercial as the commercial stations.
Clearly p2p in this case would not discourage music buying at all. On the contrary, it encourages buying c.d.s by the artists one discovers (in crappy mp3 format) on the p2p network.
-
- KVRAF
- 2844 posts since 1 Jan, 2003
Tux makes a good point. I have never downloaded any mp3s, have never used warez. Initially I wasn't thinking about the ethical issues, I had a friend who screwed her computer for good after loading it with stuff she'd gotten off Napster, so that scared me off of file sharing permanently.
I'm afraid PT may be right, too. When I was growing up, music was THE currency of youth. That's all we had. There was no internet, no games, no movies aimed at the youth market, whatever disposable income we had (much less back then than young people have today) was spent on LPs (and weed). There were fewer releases, if an LP was deemed "cool", everyone had to have it. Those days are gone.
I just read an essay written by the editor of our local weekly music magazine. He remarked that it's been years since he actually "listened" to music. It plays in his car while he drives, he pops in a CD while he works, but he never just listens anymore.
I think many factors have come together to create this situation- MTV, video games, cable TV, and even CDs themselves, with the tiny artwork and the ability to stick it in your player and then ignore it. LPs required an amount of care, the artwork was fascinating and worth pouring over, you could only listen for 20 minutes or so before having to turn the damn thing over so you tended to stay close by and pay attention.
All industries have their day, technology eventually makes them obsolete. I think we're on the back side of the recording revolution now. Good for home recording buffs, bad for home recording buffs who fantasize about being more than that.
I read an interview with an guy running a dance label (funded by BMG) who believes that a kid born today will have no idea that music was ever in a fixed format (LP, CD), would never "own" any music. He wondered how the industry would cope with that reality, and, given the current mindset of most record executives, he doubted that it could.
I'm afraid PT may be right, too. When I was growing up, music was THE currency of youth. That's all we had. There was no internet, no games, no movies aimed at the youth market, whatever disposable income we had (much less back then than young people have today) was spent on LPs (and weed). There were fewer releases, if an LP was deemed "cool", everyone had to have it. Those days are gone.
I just read an essay written by the editor of our local weekly music magazine. He remarked that it's been years since he actually "listened" to music. It plays in his car while he drives, he pops in a CD while he works, but he never just listens anymore.
I think many factors have come together to create this situation- MTV, video games, cable TV, and even CDs themselves, with the tiny artwork and the ability to stick it in your player and then ignore it. LPs required an amount of care, the artwork was fascinating and worth pouring over, you could only listen for 20 minutes or so before having to turn the damn thing over so you tended to stay close by and pay attention.
All industries have their day, technology eventually makes them obsolete. I think we're on the back side of the recording revolution now. Good for home recording buffs, bad for home recording buffs who fantasize about being more than that.
I read an interview with an guy running a dance label (funded by BMG) who believes that a kid born today will have no idea that music was ever in a fixed format (LP, CD), would never "own" any music. He wondered how the industry would cope with that reality, and, given the current mindset of most record executives, he doubted that it could.