We regularly bash the major labels for their business practices, greed, dishonesty, resistance to change, sense of entitlement - I could go on until dark but you get the picture. However labels do one thing very well, as mentioned in a nice roundup of this week's Future of Music Coalition Policy Summit in Wired News:
- Others said the explosion of new music — partly driven by digital music production technology and the Internet — has made it easy for bad music to proliferate throughout cyberspace.
"There's an incredible amount of mediocrity," said musician/songwriter Eric Bazilian, formerly of the rock group The Hooters.
John Flansburgh of They Might Be Giants said although record labels are fun to bash, they help filter music. Now consumers must do much of that work themselves.
"It's ironic that we'll miss the majors when they are gone," Flansburgh said.
All agree that one way or another, prices for music are coming down, down, down:
- Others, however, said sanctioned downloading and burning is on the rise, suggesting the Internet could more than make up the gap created by closed retail outlets.
Already, Listen.com offers song downloads for 99 cents each — the lowest price the labels will allow.
"It should be 50 cents, if not 25 cents, per burn," said Tim Quirk, Listen.com's director of editorial/music programming, noting that internal surveys suggest sales would increase 400 percent at those levels. "Within the next year, you're going to see these prices come down."
Article comments
1 - Phillip Winn
I love to bash the bigs myself. Until I hear someone else say that they don't do anything at all but suck up money. I don't think they are worth what they charge us, but editorial control has always been at or near the top of my list of benefits that labels provide.
The same is true of the minors, as well. I know I can count on a certain something from Tooth and Nail, to name one example, and I've been known to buy albums by bands I haven't heard when I saw the familiar black-and-white logo on the case.
Then again, that helpful editorial control that they provide also brings us fantastic albums like Mariah Carey's latest or anything by Kelly Clarkson, so maybe it's not as strong an argument as I'd like it to be...
2 - Eric Olsen
I'm definitely including all labels in this filtering service - indies are often more consistent than the majors.
3 - Anastasia Pantsios
I don't agree at all that the majors provide anything like valuable filtering any more. Of course, there's mediocrity and worse everywhere- and a larger quantity of it than ever before. But I have found that the music you get from a major label is no more likely to be worthwhile than something you might stumble across accidentally - and way less likely to be worthwhile than something you might read about or that a friend might recommend. In fact, the majors have narrowed the scope of music they release and narrowed the demographic they try to reach, putting out more insipid music than ever that merely echoes feebly what they have already released. It's not even the Mariah Careys and Kelly Clarksons that are so bad (there is a genuine audience for them) but the umpteenth pop punk Blink-182 soundalike or the zillionth anonymous nu metal band.
I do agree with Philip Winn that indies DO provide this sort of filtering, because most indies are focused on a particular type of music that its owners are passionate and knowledgeable about.
4 - Phillip Winn
The indies are better at it, because of the niche markets, but come on now - if you think that you're equally as likely to find something worth listening to browsing mp3.com as you are browsing your local record store, you probably haven't really tried lately.
Can you find crap from the bigs? Sure. It's generally well-produced crap, but you hear it every day. Can you find gems floating around the net from unsigned artists? Sure. It's usually poorly-produced demo material, but sometimes it shines and sparkles precisely because we can see potential in the music that hasn't yet been washed out by The Machine.
But just because you can find diamonds in the rough while surfing the net doesn't make that the best source of music. Remember that they're still rough, after all.
Given that a lot of what the bigs put out and promote the most isn't in your niche, what they do put out in your niche is far less likely to be unpleasant to listen to than the next random band to float through iuma.com. And that despite the fact that artists tend to self-filter before getting themselves on iuma.com!
As an (probably horrible, but freshly thought up) analogy, I might occasionally find good food from a guy selling unlabeled meat sandwiches in the parking lot of the weekend football game, but the odds are far more likely that I'm going to find something I like at Chili's, even though I find Chili's normally pretty bland.
I'll just quit now, since I'm having trouble getting my point across.
5 - Mark Saleski
one of the best indie sources i've found is cdbaby.com. the first time i went there i easily put together a list of over 20 new artists.
plus, i just like the idea of the whole thing. a band (or solo artist) puts together the material and then uses cdbaby as a selling tool. no major (or minor!) label interaction necessary.
6 - Eric Olsen
A, I agree that there are better filtering tools than the majors, like a radio show you like, a writer you trust, or friends - and the indies are usually much more focused and therefore predictable, BUT as Phillip mentioned, the major stuff in a genre you do like is likely to, on average, be of higher quality. I can often tell by the artwork if there is a remote chance.