Most releases are just too crappy to be bought
Published February 18, 2004
I'm bored. I thought I'd point out a news bit I find interesting today:
That's a whole new way to look at it:
Through her attorneys, Michele Scimeca contends that by suing file-swappers for copyright infringement, and then offering to settle instead of pursuing a case where liability could reach into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, the RIAA is violating the same laws that are more typically applied to gangsters and organized crime.
Which just reminds me of that different view I lately read about again that, in reality the artists are not the ones that worry much about material that's shared online, because many of the people involved in a production are paid per hour or paid per month, and they do not profit from the rest of the money that's made by record companies and such. The ones that really profit in the end are the record companies, but not the artists.
As far as I know Michael Jackson gets about 3 to 4 dollars per album that's sold. The rest goes to the company, and in Michael's case e.g. SONY hasn't even promoted his last album for that money they made. And Michael is one of the artists that actually earns well per album. There are other artists, that earn a lot less per album that's sold. No wonder that Michael didn't support the RIAA and said they should stop suing people. He knows he won't earn more money afterwards anyway, especially if his company fails to promote an album that could have sold probably twice as much as it did. There's no point for many artists to complain, especially for those that are paid per hour.
They're all just trying to make money with least effort. Suing a few individuals for several 100 thousand dollars is quite a cheap way to make money and saves a lot of time and money they could instead invest in promotion to make that money they get from these few sued individuals.
But ah well... I don't like music much anymore anyway. I'd also see no point in suing people, because they mostly just exchange stuff online that they also wouldn't buy if they couldn't get it online. People just listen to a lot of stuff, because they can get it easily. But if they didn't have the Internet they'd not want to have most of the stuff really and would never go to a shop and buy it, too. So I wonder how much money artists and companies would really lose if you abolished the Internet again. They'd probably just sell the same amount of albums, because people would still think twice about whether they want to buy the stuff or not.
I find most of the released stuff so crappy nowadays that I wouldn't even waste my time on downloading it. I do not even watch music TV channels anymore, because it annoys me to have to listen to most of the stuff, and there I could get all that mess for free also. Same with the radio, I never listen to it, pointless.
I think the RIAA should better ask around and ask what people want and think about how to make a change about the music industry to make it more attractive again to buy albums. But the RIAA doesn't even want to know about that kind of things. They just want money.
- Most releases are just too crappy to be bought
- Published: February 18, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Music
- Filed Under: Music: News
- Writer: Michelle Mauriere
- Michelle Mauriere's BC Writer page
- Michelle Mauriere's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
tom speaks the truth. same for me. and i've got a sagging floor to prove it.
There's always the isolated gem here and there, but the majority of the major, big-sales items are one- or two-hit wonders.
Yeah, that's very true. And worst part of it is - mostly those 1 or 2 great songs are on the same album or two different ones and the rest on the album is a mess. So why buy an album that's filled up with fillers for the sake of one song? And why buy the single if the single already costs half as much as the album?
Hence the popularity of file sharing, especially of pop hits, where the album IS mostly filler.
Just want to add my 'huzza!" to Tom J's gospel of good music.
One could spend YEARS learning about/listening to/buying etc. various greats from the past. And there's no guessing: The stuff has already been deemed worthy thanks to the filter of history. These pop robots won't even be a footnote in music, so I say stick to the best.
The one problem: you have to expand your tastes and do a bit of research.
re: RIAA suing, etc.
Shark says SCREW THEM! Here's my music collecting past --- hence, my justification for criminal acts against the music biz:
I bought the album,
I bought the 8-track,
I bought the cassette,
and I bought the CD.
The way I see it: THOSE FUCKERS OWE ME!
For the curious:
Currently in my CD changer =
Django Reinhardt: Entire Works - Vol.1
The Pearl - Jelly Roll Morton
Back to the Barrooms - Merle Haggard
The Vivaldi Album - Cecilia Bartoli
Sex Pistols
seriously.
*note: nothing after 1979
yeah, well, i say - hail the 80ies!
but please spare me with most of the stuff released since the early 90ies.
even worse than that Mr. Shark, the my order of self-abuse is:
I bought the album,
I bought the 8-track,
I bought the cassette,
and I bought the CD.
and I bought the album again
seriously though Michelle, if you want to dig up a pile of indie releases head over to cdbaby.com
you can browse by genre and check out tons of artists. i've bought quite a lot of stuff through them.
happy hunting.
thanks for the hint, though really, i'm fed up with music. i enjoy the silence instead. it may sound weird, but i mean it. :P
LOL @ Shark - you gave me an idea for a blog, though can't do until the weekend.
Anyway, in my CD changer -
Allman Brothers Band - Live at Atlanta Intl. Pop Fest 1970
Joe Strummer & The Mescaleros - Streetcore
"Gangs of New York" soundtrack
The Best of Delaney & Bonnie
The White Stripes - Elephant
for what it's worth.....
I actually do like some of the newer stuff.
In my "changer"
The Appleseed Cast - End of the Ring Wars
At the Drive-in - In Casino/Out
Hall and Oates - Rock n Soul part 1
Iron and Wine - Our Endless Numbered Days
Ryan Adams - Love is Hell EP's
I will not deny I am sick in the head, but have embraced that fact and thus am quite happy.......
Chris:
re. "Idea" for a blog - You'll give me credit, right?
Email royalties to fwbull@earthlink.net
Thanks in advance.
Re. Delaney & Bonnie - I saw them open for Blind Faith.
Jealous, ain't cha.
Mark,
re.
I bought the album,
I bought the 8-track,
I bought the cassette,
and I bought the CD.
and I bought the album again
Man, I should invite you to my next garage sale!
heck, i even buy new vinyl.
eric sez i'm hopeless.
Though I have always avoided multiple-format buying (for, um, obvious reasons: it's kind of redundant), there are many records I have bought more than once. I think my record (pun fucking intended) is Hot Rocks:
bought it around 1972
lost it in the Great Fire of 1977
bought it again when I got the insurance money
wore it out DJing with it by mid-'80s
bought it again
was stolen along with about 100 other records from the trunk of my (then)wife's car
bought it again
all of this was vinyl and I still don't own it on CD.
Dudes, I don't have a CD changer at work, but I want to get in on this, so here are the last 5 CD's played at work today (In reverse order):
The Coral-Magic and Medicine
Rites of Spring-Self titled
My Bloody Valentine-Self titled (twice)
Antimatter-Saviour
Boss Hog-Whiteout/Stephen Malkmus solo record CDR
But when I go home, of course I'll turn on my 50 DISC CHANGER. Anything more than 50 is gaudy, like wearing a silver Superman medallion that's too big. A little bling is a good thing. As long as it matches your track suit and sneakers.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/12901)
I'd also see no point in suing people, because they mostly just exchange stuff online that they also wouldn't buy if they couldn't get it online.
I agree, and it's a very good point. The industry doesn't want to admit it, of course, because it blows any of the tiny amount of credibility with which they manage to inject their sob-story.
They'd probably just sell the same amount of albums, because people would still think twice about whether they want to buy the stuff or not.
In my case, they sell more. I use mp3s only as samples. If I like what I hear, I buy it. If I don't, I delete them.
I find most of the released stuff so crappy nowadays that I wouldn't even waste my time on downloading it.
This is absolutely not true. Okay, it may be true for you, but it is NOT true what you're insinuating: that most music is bad. Most popular music is bad, but there is so much incredible, intriguing, beautiful music out there that never makes a commercial dent. I would say that the overwhelming majority of popular artists are putting out sub-standard albums, but I could say the same thing 10 years ago, or 20 . . . it has been true for a long time. There's always the isolated gem here and there, but the majority of the major, big-sales items are one- or two-hit wonders. The really worthwhile music is likely to be the stuff that never even shows up on the charts. If you're missing out on that stuff, it's your fault - you can seek it out. I did, others did. Seek and ye shall find. The good stuff is definitely out there.