Is The Music Production Business Dead?

[vurt]

i always said ronson was a prick.

[vurt]

although, he did have a big hit about bukkake, which is no easy feat.

[dark water]

Indeed Vurt.

Even stranger given that Ronson in his own TED talk banged on about his love of sampling etc.
Still, tbh, it's probably done me a favour as I was getting sick of remixing anyway

[vurt]

Even stranger given that Ronson in his own TED talk banged on about his love of sampling etc.

that surprises me, i thought hed be more the "everything sounds better if you add muted trumpets" lecture kinda guy.

[dark water]

^^ I know right? But:



Although to be fair to Ronson, as much of a cockwomble as he undoubtedly is...
actually, I'm not sure what the second part of my sentence is

[vurt]

[jochicago]

I think the current industry is down to 2 things:
1. It is way easier to make music now. For instance way easier To sound like you have a 300k grand piano recorded with 50k worth of mics, or you can hit all your notes in perfect pitch. So there are tons more people doing it, and of those there are tons of people doing a decent job of it that it blurs the line between highly polished AAA albums vs. very well executed home studio stuff. And most listeners can barely tell the difference at the higher quality of work anyway.

2. The internet brought upon mass transfer of information. Long gone are the days that people knew of and followed only a handful of artists. With the illegal download culture, internet radio, mass music and video sharing websites, people got used to not having to pay for music and having as much as they please, far more than before.


Where the industry is:
Trying to cope with #1 and #2. Labels can no longer push the next pretty face with decent voice into a package of expensive production and mega marketing. For every one of those there are another 1000 just as pretty, that sound pitch perfect on the record (regardless of if they can actually hit those notes in a row) and whose semi-pro production is more than enough. With a good serving of hard work and luck on Youtube, any 19y/o can become the next pop sensation without the labels. Not that it is easy to do at all. But the labels are left playing a game that a kid with no budget can beat them at.

The streaming services are the answer to the alternative, which is to make no money at all. Spotify says: look, your stuff is being streamed and downloaded for free all the time. Let me have it and I'll pay you peanuts, but at least you'll have a few peanuts.

Fast forward a few years and now we are reshaping the culture from free access to music (often illegally), to at least paying peanuts legally. But the situation is not great for artists and it is not sustainable.

So yes, streaming is growing fast. Tons of people will take that deal: pay very little to have tons of music. The streaming services get their share. The public get what they want, super low cost legal access to music, and the labels are learning to catch some of those peanuts before they land. Artists these days make more money trying to sell their own stuff: albums, tshirts, video and live performances. That's not a ton of money for the majority of cases. Usually not enough to compete with an office job salary.

This picture doesn't leave much budget for production. Sure the artist needs a polished record, but without the backing of a label how much money can they play with? Even the labels have to tighten the belt because the quality of the production is way secondary to playing the numbers. Spotify is full of decent semi-pro productions doing alright. Why should even a label bother with much more?

I wonder how even the best producers / studios stay afloat. All that expensive hardware needing maintenance, all that studio space costing rent. I would be surprised to hear if the top 10% of mixing engineers make at least as much as your run-of-the-mill software engineer working for Google or Amazon. Maybe not even the top 1%.

[wagtunes]

I think the current industry is down to 2 things:
1. It is way easier to make music now. For instance way easier To sound like you have a 300k grand piano recorded with 50k worth of mics, or you can hit all your notes in perfect pitch. So there are tons more people doing it, and of those there are tons of people doing a decent job of it that it blurs the line between highly polished AAA albums vs. very well executed home studio stuff. And most listeners can barely tell the difference at the higher quality of work anyway.

2. The internet brought upon mass transfer of information. Long gone are the days that people knew of and followed only a handful of artists. The illegal download culture, internet radio, mass music and video sharing websites, people got used to not having to pay for music and having as much as they please, far more than before.


Where the industry is:
Trying to cope with #1 and #2. Labels can no longer push the next pretty face with decent voice into a package of expensive production and mega marketing. For every one of those there are another 1000 just as pretty, that sound pitch perfect on the record (regardless of if they can actually hit those notes in a row) and whose semi-pro production is more than enough. With a good serving of hard work and luck on Youtube, any 19y/o can become the next pop sensation without the labels. Not that it is easy to do at all. But the labels are left playing a game that a kid with no budget can beat them at.

The streaming services are the answer to the alternative, which is to make no money at all. Spotify says: look, your stuff is being streamed and downloaded for free all the time. Let me have it and I'll pay you peanuts, but at least you'll have a few peanuts.

Fast forward a few years and now we are reshaping the culture from free access to music (often illegally), to at least paying peanuts legally. But the situation is not great for artists and it is not sustainable.

So yes, streaming is growing fast. Tons of people will take that deal: pay very little to have tons of music. The streaming services get their share. The public get what they want, super low cost legal access to music, and the labels are learning to catch some of those peanuts before they land. Artists these days makes more money trying to sell their own stuff: albums, tshirts, video and live performances.

It's nice to have somebody tell it how it really is and not paint a rosy picture of the industry.

[t3toooo]

I think the current industry is down to 2 things:
1. It is way easier to make music now. For instance way easier To sound like you have a 300k grand piano recorded with 50k worth of mics, or you can hit all your notes in perfect pitch. So there are tons more people doing it, and of those there are tons of people doing a decent job of it that it blurs the line between highly polished AAA albums vs. very well executed home studio stuff. And most listeners can barely tell the difference at the higher quality of work anyway.

2. The internet brought upon mass transfer of information. Long gone are the days that people knew of and followed only a handful of artists. The illegal download culture, internet radio, mass music and video sharing websites, people got used to not having to pay for music and having as much as they please, far more than before.


Where the industry is:
Trying to cope with #1 and #2. Labels can no longer push the next pretty face with decent voice into a package of expensive production and mega marketing. For every one of those there are another 1000 just as pretty, that sound pitch perfect on the record (regardless of if they can actually hit those notes in a row) and whose semi-pro production is more than enough. With a good serving of hard work and luck on Youtube, any 19y/o can become the next pop sensation without the labels. Not that it is easy to do at all. But the labels are left playing a game that a kid with no budget can beat them at.

The streaming services are the answer to the alternative, which is to make no money at all. Spotify says: look, your stuff is being streamed and downloaded for free all the time. Let me have it and I'll pay you peanuts, but at least you'll have a few peanuts.

Fast forward a few years and now we are reshaping the culture from free access to music (often illegally), to at least paying peanuts legally. But the situation is not great for artists and it is not sustainable.

So yes, streaming is growing fast. Tons of people will take that deal: pay very little to have tons of music. The streaming services get their share. The public get what they want, super low cost legal access to music, and the labels are learning to catch some of those peanuts before they land. Artists these days makes more money trying to sell their own stuff: albums, tshirts, video and live performances.

It's nice to have somebody tell it how it really is and not paint a rosy picture of the industry.

Huh?

I this a quote from a book?

To me it looks like the music industry is just fine and makes tons of cash, more than ever before

[wagtunes]

I think the current industry is down to 2 things:
1. It is way easier to make music now. For instance way easier To sound like you have a 300k grand piano recorded with 50k worth of mics, or you can hit all your notes in perfect pitch. So there are tons more people doing it, and of those there are tons of people doing a decent job of it that it blurs the line between highly polished AAA albums vs. very well executed home studio stuff. And most listeners can barely tell the difference at the higher quality of work anyway.

2. The internet brought upon mass transfer of information. Long gone are the days that people knew of and followed only a handful of artists. The illegal download culture, internet radio, mass music and video sharing websites, people got used to not having to pay for music and having as much as they please, far more than before.


Where the industry is:
Trying to cope with #1 and #2. Labels can no longer push the next pretty face with decent voice into a package of expensive production and mega marketing. For every one of those there are another 1000 just as pretty, that sound pitch perfect on the record (regardless of if they can actually hit those notes in a row) and whose semi-pro production is more than enough. With a good serving of hard work and luck on Youtube, any 19y/o can become the next pop sensation without the labels. Not that it is easy to do at all. But the labels are left playing a game that a kid with no budget can beat them at.

The streaming services are the answer to the alternative, which is to make no money at all. Spotify says: look, your stuff is being streamed and downloaded for free all the time. Let me have it and I'll pay you peanuts, but at least you'll have a few peanuts.

Fast forward a few years and now we are reshaping the culture from free access to music (often illegally), to at least paying peanuts legally. But the situation is not great for artists and it is not sustainable.

So yes, streaming is growing fast. Tons of people will take that deal: pay very little to have tons of music. The streaming services get their share. The public get what they want, super low cost legal access to music, and the labels are learning to catch some of those peanuts before they land. Artists these days makes more money trying to sell their own stuff: albums, tshirts, video and live performances.

It's nice to have somebody tell it how it really is and not paint a rosy picture of the industry.

Huh?

I this a quote from a book?

To me it looks like the music industry is just fine and makes tons of cash, more than ever before

And of course you would know because you have first hand information on all the ins and outs of the industry.

Let me ask you a you a question. When was the last time you spent any money on music? I can tell you that for me it's been years. Why bother? Everything is up on Youtube. Name an artist and a song and it's there with the exception of maybe the Beatles. But all the old stuff that's off limits to Youtube, I bought when I was a kid and didn't have any other options.

Today? There is absolutely NO reason to spend money on music.

So where is all the money for this thriving industry coming from?

It's coming from concerts (don't go to them), merch sales (don't buy merch) and streaming (don't pay for streaming)

At least years ago you had to actually go to a record store and buy a 45, LP, cassette tape, 8 track tape or CD, depending on the era. Those days are gone.

So again, where is all the money coming from?

Cause I'm sure as hell not spending it.

[jancivil]

FTR, I really could hardly care less about whatever the 'music production business' is. I'm not in it, and it doesn't rely on the likes of me.

I started buying CDs in earnest in 2003. And I have bought almost none in the years since. I don't have anything to play such a disk on today, this computer doesn't even have that kind of drive, and the last used one I bought had it disabled. I have never bought an mp3 except from a friend at Bandcamp.

The record industry quit taking chances on artists (NB: the operative part of the word, *art* here) a long_time_ago. So the absolute most commercial things are manufactured into physical media en masse today because people are buying that many units? I wouldn't even know. I don't know how this is all supported today, people really buy the mp3s? Spotify? I've never used it. Never will.

I saw an interview with Paul Schrader where he says, as far as he's concerned the old motion picture studio system is dead. It's much easier to make a picture today, and if any big entity is funding it it's Netflix or Amazon Prime. He mentioned crowdfunding. I have a close friend that wrote and crowdfunded (along with the director) - EDIT: and made - a movie recently, for that matter. Schrader mentioned the incredibly fast turnaround on this picture. It was a horrible failure of a movie IMO (caught it on Netflix) but that's not to draw a necessary inference. But the idea here is, couple million and you can make a reasonable looking picture, without all the waste and paying people who add very little to the project.

And the last time I was in a movie theater was early 2007, Inland Empire at the California in Berkeley. And it's the last theatrical release from David Lynch. Note well.

[woggle]

I had to look up Wikipedia to see who Mark Ronson was. I couldn't give a shit if the whole commercial mass music industry went belly up.

[t3toooo]

And of course you would know because you have first hand information on all the ins and outs of the industry.

Let me ask you a you a question. When was the last time you spent any money on music? I can tell you that for me it's been years. Why bother? Everything is up on Youtube. Name an artist and a song and it's there with the exception of maybe the Beatles. But all the old stuff that's off limits to Youtube, I bought when I was a kid and didn't have any other options.

Today? There is absolutely NO reason to spend money on music.

So where is all the money for this thriving industry coming from?

It's coming from concerts (don't go to them), merch sales (don't buy merch) and streaming (don't pay for streaming)

At least years ago you had to actually go to a record store and buy a 45, LP, cassette tape, 8 track tape or CD, depending on the era. Those days are gone.

So again, where is all the money coming from?

Cause I'm sure as hell not spending it.

Are you sure you're not spending it?

In Germany any Cashpoint is a potential computer, able to play music and therefore the bank has to pay broadcast contribution. Elevators, Supermarkets too and possibly a lot of other places needs to pay for the music business.

I guess there are a lot of more or less hidden fees. Legal but not so obvious.

It's possible that you are spending way more money for music than you ever expected.

[woggle]

I guess there are a lot of more or less hidden fees. Legal but not so obvious.

It's possible that you are spending way more money for music than you ever expected.

every movie, every game, every store that plays music, telephone on hold music

[wagtunes]

And of course you would know because you have first hand information on all the ins and outs of the industry.

Let me ask you a you a question. When was the last time you spent any money on music? I can tell you that for me it's been years. Why bother? Everything is up on Youtube. Name an artist and a song and it's there with the exception of maybe the Beatles. But all the old stuff that's off limits to Youtube, I bought when I was a kid and didn't have any other options.

Today? There is absolutely NO reason to spend money on music.

So where is all the money for this thriving industry coming from?

It's coming from concerts (don't go to them), merch sales (don't buy merch) and streaming (don't pay for streaming)

At least years ago you had to actually go to a record store and buy a 45, LP, cassette tape, 8 track tape or CD, depending on the era. Those days are gone.

So again, where is all the money coming from?

Cause I'm sure as hell not spending it.

Are you sure you're not spending it?

In Germany any Cashpoint is a potential computer, able to play music and therefore the bank has to pay broadcast contribution. Elevators, Supermarkets too and possibly a lot of other places needs to pay for the music business.

I guess there are a lot of more or less hidden fees. Legal but not so obvious.

It's possible that you are spending way more money for music than you ever expected.

What are you a smart ass? NO, I spend NO money on music. I don't care what supermarkets, restaurants or whoever spends on the crap they force me to listen to when I'm shopping or eating my dinner. It's not coming out of MY pocket. That's all I care about.