posted
These are the words I uttered to my friend as I spontaneously followed her away from class during a break. I didn't go back. If I had any more than two and a half weeks left, I don't know how I'd be able to handle it.
The class is music management. It's a music industry class, obviously. Many of you may not be aware, but it has been almost exactly one year since I left the music industry program in favor of a marketing degree with a music industry concentration. I had many reasons for making this decision. A lot of it had to do with the fact that I didn't really feel as though I was learning anything. I was incredibly frustrated and mostly very bored. It's not that I'm not interested in the music industry; it's that my experiences in the music industry are so wildly different from others in the program that I don't feel as though I'm hearing anything new at all. The other reason is the other students in the program. I'm just sick of the name-dropping and constant posturing. It's ridiculous. They're music snobs, really. And they have very little respect for the industry itself, which also bothers me.
At any rate, I made a post in another thread about a guy who came to speak to us who said that the portability of music was devaluing it and making it more disposable. Well, today in class, the professor asked us what we thought of the speaker and what had stuck out to us about what he said. After squirming in my seat for a while, I finally brought that up. Everyone else in the class seemed to think that he was totally in the right.
I said that I thought that making music more portable made it a much more integral part of people's lives. It makes it less of a frivolous luxury purchase. Those weren't the words I used, though; the rest of the class is made up of music industry majors, and I'm sort of the black sheep BBA student.
Some kid started spouting off something about how if you listen to music while you do other things, you're just being a consumer, you download a song and don't listen to it or listen to it once and never pay attention to it again, and if you listen to music while you're not just sitting there listening to music, you're not fully appreciating the music as an art, and so forth. He then said something along the lines of, "When I listen to music, I sit at home in my room every night and really pay attention to it."
I said, "Well, when I listen to music the most is when I'm doing something else, like jogging or walking somewhere. And quite honestly, I don't think it decreases my quality of listening at all. I pay a lot of attention to the music; I think it helps me to be doing something else at the same time."
Cue "You don't do that. You're just SAYING that." And other such comments. And everyone else AGREED with him.
What a prick. It's people like that who make me despise the program itself. How DARE you tell me what I do inside my own head? How DARE you take this smug, superior attitude to the entire rest of the world simply because YOU liked such-and-such band "before they sold out." It's bullshit. And the fact is, I think I have much better insights into the minds of consumers than anyone else in that class, and part of the reason behind it is that I don't feel the need to prove anything. I just like music. Period. And I think it's stupid to make derisive comments or judgments about people based on their musical tastes.
Maybe I just have a broader taste in music than the rest of the people who were a part of the program. I really, honestly, will listen to pretty much anything. I feel like every kind of music has its place in my life. Maybe it's because I'm used to matching music with listeners. Maybe it's because I've personally seen how happy it can make some kids when some guy from Simple Plan or whatever smiles at them. I just can't help feeling like my classmates missing something.
This kind of thing goes on a lot. The fact that the class is almost over just gets me more riled up because I've dealt with this kind of mockery for three years, and now I'm about to be done with it, and I feel like I should speak my mind. I know there are at least a handful of other kids who feel the same way; we usually make good friends. It's just terribly frustrating. It's like I'm still in high school; I've gone out of my way to make sure that very few of these students know about my past experience or what I'm planning to work on next. They seem to think that I was into business before I was into music. The truth is, I've been playing instruments since I was two years old, and I can probably play more instruments than seventy percent of that class. But the truth is, I don't really want to prove my worth to them. I just want to say what I've been wanting to say for three years: get off your damn high horses, wake up, and take a look around you.
At any rate, in my mind, that sort of thing is going to remain a problem in the music industry. We've got closed-minded people controlling it now, and we'll have closed-minded people controlling it in the future. For some reason, people have this very difficult time combining both music and business. They seem to pick one and focus almost entirely on that single element, and that's a real problem.
Anyway. A non-copyright-infringement-oriented music industry thread. Enjoy.
posted
In my opinion, someone who truly loves music makes it a part of their life and does not stop living just to listen to music. But sometimes does that, too.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:We've got closed-minded people controlling it now, and we'll have closed-minded people controlling it in the future. For some reason, people have this very difficult time combining both music and business. They seem to pick one and focus almost entirely on that single element, and that's a real problem.
Then it's a good thing we've got people like you in there as well, pH. Once you get out there, make yourself heard!
posted
I listen to music when I have things to do. It helps me get things done. If I had to just sit and listen to it my mind would wander and I wouldn't get anything out of the music.
Posts: 747 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Music snobs suck. Why can't I like the music that appeals to me, even if Professor Know-it-all says the arrangement is elementary? It's pleasing, and I like it, and I'll continue to listen to and enjoy any band that meets that standard for as long as they meet that standard.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do people like that kid really run the music industry? If so, that would go a long way towards explaining the RIAA's misguided (IMO) policies...
Personaly, I listen to music in a variety of ways. Often it's just in the background, like when I'm working on homework or reading or on the computer. Other times I'll plug my guitar in and play along, and on some occasions I'll turn it up and just rock out (particularly when driving home late at night).
Basicaly, not to rip on that guy in your class too much, but he deffinately seems out of touch with the role music plays in my life, and this seems like a poor trait for a potential future music industry leader.
Posts: 148 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: In my opinion, someone who truly loves music makes it a part of their life and does not stop living just to listen to music. But sometimes does that, too.
Well if you want music to be your life that's ok too isn't it? Only yah, then you really have to want it bad.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I listen to music when I drive. I listen to music when I clean house. I am a bad person. From now on, I will light a meditation candle in front of my CD player, dim the lights and listen to Bach with pure concentration. I will put on talk radio if I am unable to devote full attention to the music.
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: Music snobs suck. Why can't I like the music that appeals to me, even if Professor Know-it-all says the arrangement is elementary? It's pleasing, and I like it, and I'll continue to listen to and enjoy any band that meets that standard for as long as they meet that standard.
Well your responding to someone who has shown you a lack of understanding or patience. I consider myself a conscientious music snob. I pay attention to the music, and to the people who don't. Thing is this professor really does hear something different in the music you listen to, and if you had gone through a similar process as him, you'd likely feel the same way.
Not that this is a mandatory part of everyone's life, some people don't need or want that kind of depth in their study of music, but the fact is that most popular music is just not as complex or "academically" challenging as the stuff he or she is probably listening to. I have personal value judgements about pop music, but those are irrelevent to that part of the discussion, there can be no argument about the level of technical complexity. Obviously the prof. is more impressed and concerned with complexity, and this is because he/she has made it his life to understand music in depth.
You probably felt snubbed by the prof, and since you didn't like the attitude that came with the sentiment, you ignored him as a know it all, and rightly so I think. Not all classic/romantic/modern music efficianados are like that, in fact most aren't, but your likely only to hear from or meet the ones that look down on you. It's naturally really, academics and composers comprise a sub-culture of people who do nothing but talk about musical forms, composition, history, technique, etc, so the level at which they feel comfortable operating is different. When they are forced to contend with the average person's concepts of what is important, they often forget themselves.
I sit in class all day and talk about polymodality, pitch class set, and other obscure topics in musicology and theory, and if I started trying to get you interested in these topics (which are of no interest to anyone not interested in writing modern music in a very specific genre), you would likely think me a snob for thinking what I was saying was somehow vital or important. Because it would only be vital and important to me, not the people I wanted to project my desires onto.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can relate, pH. Reminds me of sitting in an intense painting class and trying to explain to someone that I'm interested in comic art and animation.
Still though, for every person that got pretentious about it with me, there was another who would reply, "Really? I love Cowboy Bebop," or, "Have you read The Watchmen?" Which made it okay for me.
It must be utterly frustrating to be in that kind of situation where people are arrogantly offering up personal preferences as the absolute good. Especially without a solidly sane portion to take the edge off.
Look on the bright side though. Either this guy will end up in some hipster band that plays maybe a gig a week between his Burger King shifts, or he'll wise up to the fact that just because he has an extremely narrow focus doesn't make it true ofr everyone.
If you have to, to stay sane in future classes, imagine the look of perfect, sweating, eye-bulging, INTENSE concentration we'll say he makes while he listens to music.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
I offer my perspective on this, (it being my only one, ), which is related in an anecdote:
I went out with a nice girl, a freshman (bit too young for me anyway) who is in theatre/drama and such. We hit it off pretty well, went to the movies, dinner, snuggling in front of the TV, sleep-over( I was a perfect gentleman though, honestly ), etc.
Anyway maybe the 4th or 5th time we saw each other, we were with some other people having a beer, and the topic of music comes up and someone asks what I'm into. I'm a classical musician, and she says, oh Lloyd (that's me orin), he's into "CLASSICAL" music. She said it like I don't know what, like it was the kiss of social death. In that moment I felt so old. I was pops orincoro and she was humoring my "classical" tendencies like I was some kind of red-wine sniffing, cheese nibling wanna-be intellectual F-tard. That's how I felt anyway. And after that I felt a little bit sour towards the whole thing, and she sensed it and unfortunately the whole thing petered out pretty quickly.
I don't know if that was the reason, but I do know that I couldn't have gone on with that over my head, I couldn't feel like a real person around her, since she didn't get me at all. That's how I feel alot of the time when I talk to non-musicians now, the culture insulates you, because people that don't do classical music don't get it, and the people that do are very ambitious and competitive. The result is that I have friends contsantly grow and discover new facets of the music world, and we leave the rest of society behind. We're very happy as a group doing this, but solo the difference becomes clear. Our lives are so centered around music that people hold up as this sort of freakish thing that they don't understand or think they can't understand, or think is trivial and specialized to absurdity. The result is that I walk around loathing the music I hear at the gym, in a cafe, at the mall, in an old friend's car, because my tastes are so wildly different from the mainstream.
I also sometimes don't understand how there can be this thing that is so powerful, so rich and full that the majority of people have abandoned because they don't want to think too hard. Or they say that it doesn't apply to them, or its boring, or its music for sleeping and elevators. I suppose no-one is required to like classical music, but being a person who loves it, I have a hard time relating to people who don't think much of it, and they have a hard time taking me seriously.
You can just go ahead and laugh at people like me, because it is kind of funny. But I'll always listen and try to understand what it is about J-Z that makes him the best thing since, whomever was the best thing before him.
On a related note, I started mentoring a local teen band about 6 months ago. They are the hard-core punk metal variety of 13 year-old suburban white kids from central California. We've worked alot on presentation, less on music, and they've gotten alot better, IMO, at listening to eachother and having some dynamic qualities to their music. It still sucks pretty much, but its sounding better every month. I'd like to think this is owing something to my ear for chamber music, that my experience can still be relevant to a bunch of kids who asked me if I knew how to play "Pachelbell's Canon...by Mozart" Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:At any rate, I made a post in another thread about a guy who came to speak to us who said that the portability of music was devaluing it and making it more disposable
The attitude that you spoke of seems to me to be a product of cultural theorists such as Benjamin and Adorno. They both argue that the ability to reproduce and digitize music distorts its essence and makes its (and eventually our) reality distorted. In addition, Benjamin (I think) wrote a well-known essay about how the constant interplay of music in our daily lives alters our responses to it and thus is less authentically experienced.
In university circles, these guys are pretty well-known as part of the postmodern/modern pantheon of authors to read and quote. As those sorts of thinkers seem to be all the rage on college campuses these days, it is no surprise that people will try to subscribe to their ideas and twist their writings for their own arguments, even in a field as seemingly practical as music industry.
Sorry you have to deal with it! I know first-hand how annoying that attitude can be.
Posts: 484 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Thing is this professor really does hear something different in the music you listen to, and if you had gone through a similar process as him, you'd likely feel the same way.
I absolutely agree with this. My point is that just because you, for instance, hear things in music that I don't doesn't make the way I listen to music wrong. In other words, don't expect everyone to have as sophisticated tastes in music as you do, and we're fine. You can hate my music, but don't look down on me for liking it. (I'm addressing this post to Orincoro, but he hasn't been a music snob to me, so I'm not putting him in the same category as the guy in pH's class).
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Orinoco, my problem is that these people (not the professor as much, but the other students) seem to believe that I know nothing about music whatsoever. I've had years of musical training. I started ear training at a very young age, and as a result, when I got to high school, I was taught to tune other instruments for concert band and pipe and drum corps (because yes, you can indeed tune bagpipes, and they're much more beautiful when you do). I am perfectly capable of responding to music on both technical and emotional levels.
The fact is, most of the students in this class don't know all that much about music as...MUSIC. They don't know much about classical. They play guitar, and they can tell you how to play random "good" classic rock songs. This particular guy thinks he's hot shit because he's into the recording and engineering side. I'm not. Because I'm a business student, I don't have to take the tech classes. I'm used to the language because I've worked in a recording studio, but when it comes to describing recording, I definitely use what this professor refers to as "manager speak," which means I say things like, "It just sounds too...flat. Make it less flat." I have been informed that when I say something sounds too flat or lacks *insert wavey hands* richness, what it really means is that there's too much compression.
On top of that, the grand majority of people who listen to music don't know anything about its technicalities. So we should...what? Turn up our noses to them and deny them the music they love? It's ridiculous.
There are a handful of bands that just absolutely grab me, and they have a common thread amongst them despite the fact that they're in different genres. But I haven't been able to put the similarity into words. It's the way the song "feels," which to me, is made up of a number of different factors. But if they're there, they'll grab me no matter what I'm doing when I hear them. One of them I actually first heard when I was rushing to Best Buy to make some frivolous purchase. They were being played on some radio station, when the radio didn't yet completely suck, that was usually pretty good about playing new music from less popular bands. Within fifteen seconds, I was hooked. And even worse, I turned on the radio RIGHT AFTER they announced the name of the group, so I lived in excruciating agony until I could find out who they were.
quote:Originally posted by Kristen: The attitude that you spoke of seems to me to be a product of cultural theorists such as Benjamin and Adorno. They both argue that the ability to reproduce and digitize music distorts its essence and makes its (and eventually our) reality distorted. In addition, Benjamin (I think) wrote a well-known essay about how the constant interplay of music in our daily lives alters our responses to it and thus is less authentically experienced.
In university circles, these guys are pretty well-known as part of the postmodern/modern pantheon of authors to read and quote. As those sorts of thinkers seem to be all the rage on college campuses these days, it is no surprise that people will try to subscribe to their ideas and twist their writings for their own arguments, even in a field as seemingly practical as music industry.
Music often acts as a filter through which we view our reality, anyway! Especially if you're totally obsessed with it. People in general respond to it because it makes them feel something. Period.
I don't know; I have been informed by the professor that I am a statistical anomaly in that I will go to concerts of people I don't know just because I want to go to a concert, and I think subscription music services are so the best, and so forth. It's possible that my response to music is wildly different from that of the general public, but I'm inclined to believe that the only difference, really, is the depth and intensity of the emotional response.
quote:Originally posted by twinky: I'm such a music snob that I look down my nose at music snobs. How's that for snobbery?
But do you restrict your worship of music to the sacred altar of your home? For it is blasphemous to enjoy the musical arts if you are not sitting absolutely motionless alone in an empty room in the dark. Sinners! Sinners, all of you!
posted
I'm not a music major or a skilled musician or anything, but this statement
quote: the portability of music was devaluing it and making it more disposable.
is not necessarily one I disagree with. When I took music appreciation in college last year (that fine art requirement in the core curriculum, you know) I was the only student there who had ever heard a live symphony before our mandatory concert attendance.
Do digital files really replace the beauty of hearing live music? I don't think so. And I think as we move further and further into the "digital age" or whatever, we become accustomed to things that are really poor substitutes for the real thing.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess my frustrations business- and education-wise are complicated by the fact that I really, really want school to be something more than going to class and coming home, but for some reason, when it comes to interacting with people who are actually in classes with me, it's barely an improvement from high school. I mean, come on. Aren't we supposed to be past this nonsense by now?
My freshman and softmore years in college, I had a few acquaintances that I knew from other classes, but for the most part I had no real friends there. I worked thirty hours a week doing carpentry/construction, and so right after class I got in my car and drove to my job, eating some sort of breakfast bar on the way.
It wasn't until I joined a research grant on campus that I made some actual "friends". This came naturally for me, even though I find it hard to go from acquaintance to friend, since we spent several hours a day interacting in our office.
If there's nothing similar to this which you can do at your college, I would suggest joining some sort of club. Something that meets often, and isn't all that serious. I never joined any clubs at my college, but I wish I had, because I think I would have made a lot more friends that way.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xavier, I'm leaving undergrad in...thirteen weeks. And I don't think they offer clubs for the ten-week semester.
But I AM getting involved in some cool stuff that will probably lead to my meeting people. Just not people from my school.
I'm looking into working at Jazzfest, and I've also been asked to help organize both a national disaster relief tour and a national underground hip-hop tour. Do I know anything about the hip-hop scene? Not really. It'll be an adventure. And pretty much what the company said to me was, "You seem to have a knack for music things. We'll show you what we're doing and what we have in mind, and you can just do whatever you want that you think will help."
posted
I also sometimes don't understand how there can be this thing that is so powerful, so rich and full that the majority of people have abandoned because they don't want to think too hard.
While I commend you for your efforts at self-improvement, I must assure you that music is, was, and always SHOULD be, an EMOTIONAL, FEELING experience.
Very much like sex, if you're thinking about it, you're doing it wrong.
Edit: I am speaking purely from a consumer's point of view. Of course, a creator must think about it. But if she thinks TOO MUCH, the music will suck. Posts: 524 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The lineup at Jazzfest rocks this year, and working it's a lot of fun. Lemme know if you need help with that.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my view, sophisticated tastes are good insofar as they help you enjoy more "sophisticated" music but bad insofar as they prevent you from enjoying less "sophisticated" music. I do think it's possible to have the former without the latter, too.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
See Orincoro I enjoy classical music. Well, to be honest I enjoy most types of music, but I guess you can say I like classical music the best. I don't know anything about it, though. I have a vague understanding that there was a baroque period and a classical period and a romantic period, and I think that they occurred in that order, but that's about the extent of my knowledge. I can't really talk to anyone about classical music though, because either people think it's the most boring thing in the world, or they know everything about it and they can't understand that I just like it. Classical music majors tend to treat me like I'm desecrating the music when I say that I liked "the fast section" or that I found some famous piece boring, but have no idea why. So as a a result, I stay away from classical music majors, because I can't just discuss my love for the music with them, I have to discuss all of the technicalities, and I have no interest in doing that.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Do digital files really replace the beauty of hearing live music? I don't think so. And I think as we move further and further into the "digital age" or whatever, we become accustomed to things that are really poor substitutes for the real thing.
Perhaps... but in some ways, popular culture is bringing people TO live music. The last two symphonies I attended were pop-culture ones--Lord of the Rings and Final Fantasy. LOTR was really good (though I got sleepy during it; we were very high up, and it was hot and stuffy). Final Fantasy was AMAZING. Absolutely amazing. I would go see it again in a heartbeat. And there's other "pop culture" stuff I'd love to see played live. The Battlestar Galactica soundtrack comes to mind.
pH, your first post in this thread just made me smile like crazy. I'm so glad someone like you is getting into the music business. It needs more people like you. You go, girl.
Posts: 1805 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think your professor and that kid are both tools.
Academia is filled with them. That's where tools go to hobnob with other tools and impress themselves with how much more they understand Subject X than the hoi polloi could ever hope to.
Eventually you'll get out into the private sector, where the general public's opinion matters quite a bit, and your understanding of them will be valued instead of mocked.
posted
I would assume the vast majority of people listen to music while doing anything but sitting in clam meditation. I listen to music all day at work, (I-tunes or pandora.com), in my car, pretty much anytime but when I am reading or watching TV. There are times when it's background noise and then there are times when I give it much more attention. I don't think it diminishes my listening experience.
I think the Music industry has/is missing the boat on the whole digital age. They are struggling to keep up with how people are acquiring and listening to music. It will be interesting to see how some of the new bands/musicians find ways to use this digital age to get heard. We seem to be at a major turning point. Long gone are the days where a record exc sees you in a bar one day and makes you a superstar the next. But on the other hand it has never been easier for artist to record and distribute their music. I hope the easy availability of music (free, paid for or pirated) will lead to more musicians making a living off of performing live. My thinking is along the lines, It’s OK if some of the recorded stuff is given away, or stolen as long as you go to up for the shows. Of course that means you have to be able to put on a good show.
I would be interested in how you guys see the Music Industry going, especially you pH since you are “in” the industry.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SC Carver: I think the Music industry has/is missing the boat on the whole digital age. They are struggling to keep up with how people are acquiring and listening to music. It will be interesting to see how some of the new bands/musicians find ways to use this digital age to get heard. We seem to be at a major turning point. Long gone are the days where a record exc sees you in a bar one day and makes you a superstar the next. But on the other hand it has never been easier for artist to record and distribute their music. I hope the easy availability of music (free, paid for or pirated) will lead to more musicians making a living off of performing live. My thinking is along the lines, It’s OK if some of the recorded stuff is given away, or stolen as long as you go to up for the shows. Of course that means you have to be able to put on a good show.
I would be interested in how you guys see the Music Industry going, especially you pH since you are “in” the industry.
I think the music industry CAN shift its focus toward digital distribution. The thing is, digital music sales currently only account for like 5% of total sales right now.
They do have the right idea in pushing for subscription services, in my opinion. I think the reason most people don't accept subscription services is because they haven't tried them and don't really understand the value they offer.
Especially with increased access to broadband Internet, a subscription music service becomes sort of a personalized, commercial-free version of radio. You can listen to whatever you want whenever you want as many times as you want.
One of the biggest problems I see is smaller labels getting greedy. Labels like (off the top of my head) Victory will suddenly haul off and sign twenty bands after their first big success. That's just not the way to go about it. Your first success, as a small label, generally comes from the amount of attention you pay to this small group of bands that you love. Saying, "Cool, this worked, let's get everyone else in on it, too!" is completely the wrong way to go about it. Artemis did that, as well. Their one big success was Kittie. To a lesser degree, Crossbreed did all right, but if you look at their list of bands, it's about 95% groups you would never have heard of in your entire life unless you lived in their hometowns.
I have a lot more to say, but it's time for ancient law class. Back later.
quote:Originally posted by twinky: I'm such a music snob that I look down my nose at music snobs. How's that for snobbery?
But do you restrict your worship of music to the sacred altar of your home? For it is blasphemous to enjoy the musical arts if you are not sitting absolutely motionless alone in an empty room in the dark. Sinners! Sinners, all of you!
No, I don't. Indeed, I look down my nose at those who do (i.e. music snobs). I'm a meta-snob.
I listen to lo-fi FM transmissions of lossy digital copies of source audio while doing something else entirely all the time. That is, I use my FM transmitter to listen to music from my iPod while driving. Is the quality great? No, it isn't. But then, I'm also comfortable connecting my 5.1 surround sound speaker setup to my computer's noisy analog audio output to listen to those same lossy digital copies of source audio. Indeed, for the most part, I think that does sound great. And even if you can't hear every last little detail, what I'd consider the essence of the music is still there -- that is, the melody and most readily audible harmonies.
It's odd to hear me advocating against audio quality, because one of the reasons I'm not huge on listening to the Beatles is how dated and, well, thin the recordings sound. It's interesting that my copy of some Rachmaninov performances (him playing his own works) sounds better despite the fact that the source material is decades older.
Sometimes I do sit cross-legged in the middle of my living room floor with the lights off, surrounded by my speakers, and really listen to something, but I don't think listening to something uplifting while driving down the road on a bright and clear summer's day is in any substantive way a lesser experience.
Added:
quote:I think the music industry CAN shift its focus toward digital distribution. The thing is, digital music sales currently only account for like 5% of total sales right now.
5% is infinitely higher than the percentage before the introduction of iTMS, though. Indeed, going from 0% to 5% in this short a time frame is explosive, which means that there was a lot of pent-up demand for legal digital distribution well before it became available. I think it will continue to grow rapidly if the labels don't force the distributors to accept variable pricing on singles. If they do, there might be problems.
quote:They do have the right idea in pushing for subscription services, in my opinion. I think the reason most people don't accept subscription services is because they haven't tried them and don't really understand the value they offer.
I think you're wrong here. I don't know a single person in my circle of friends who listens to the radio anywhere but in the car, and even those people are a minority. I think radio is in the early stages of what I'm guessing will be a long decline into niche status and ultimately maybe even death. Added 2: Of course, if that happens, it'll probably take at least the better part of this century.
quote:Especially with increased access to broadband Internet, a subscription music service becomes sort of a personalized, commercial-free version of radio. You can listen to whatever you want whenever you want as many times as you want.
Only for as long as you subscribe to the service and continue paying the monthly fee. You're renting the music rather than buying it; while people who buy a single for $1 from iTMS don't technically "own" anything, the sense of ownership is still there. You exchange money for music in the same way that you would do it if you went to a record store and bought a CD. Indeed, once you've bought whatever you want, you can listen to it whenever you want as many times as you want. You certainly can't do the last of those things with a subscription service. Added 2: Really, both the subscription and pay-per-download models generally place restrictions on the "whenever," too. AllofMP3.com is the obvious exception, but then it's only quasi-legal.
I think that most people are occasional buyers, and I think occasional buyers are more interested in pay-per-download services than subscription services. I also think that the relative success of iTMS compared to other online services bears this out.
I do get your point, and it's a reasonable argument, I just don't agree with it. Presumably time will tell.
quote: I think the music industry CAN shift its focus toward digital distribution. The thing is, digital music sales currently only account for like 5% of total sales right now.
This may be true, but I bet it is growing very fast and I would be willing to bet that a much larger percentage of the music people are listening to now comes from the computer some how.
Sharing files the internet e.i. Napster, or one of it's many clones Or
Sharing files with friends, copying CD's and MP3's, this is how I see most music being acquired right now. One person buys it and shares with all their friends who share it will friends…. So the end result that are a lot more people who have and are listening to artist music than are paying for it.
I don't see how the music industry has learned to take advantage of this. Obviously it hurts the record companies, but I haven't really seen any artist trying to find a way to use it yet. The only way I see to use this is to get all those people listening to your music to come see you perform it. I think sometime time soon some young and hungry artist will figure out how to do this.
I know there is a long thread on pirating "wonders off to read it"
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not saying that the music industry has fully grasped the ability to use digital distribution. Absolutely not. But despite the fact that yes, 5% is a significant amount of growth over a short period of time, it's still not really enough to attract the kind of attention it deserves.
Again, I point to previous industries facing technological change. Transportation, film, there are plenty of instances in which companies just did not understand, sometimes for extended periods of time, that they needed to take advantage of the changes rather than fight them. Most large businesses are afraid of change.
As to subscription music services, I was NOT referring to subscription radio. Absolutely not. I was referring to the ability to pick and choose unlimited numbers of tracks to put on one's mp3 player. Are there restrictions on usage? Yes. Are there restrictions on the "whenever?" Not really. All you have to do is connect your player to your computer once a month so that it can verify that you're still subscribing to the service, and chances are if you own an mp3 player, you connect it to your computer more than once a month to begin with. I really do think that the subscription model isn't getting enough attention. Because yes, most people do not HAVE twenty gigabites of music to put on their players. But at the same time, again, if you buy more than fifteen songs (or one CD from any retail store) per month, the subscription makes perfect sense. Unfortunately, since iTunes doesn't offer a subscription option, most people seem to write it off altogether.
The comparison to radio was more in reference to the fact that you have the ability to listen to a variety of music of your own choosing. If you don't like that crappy Beyonce song, you don't have to put it on your mp3 player. Then, you'll never hear it while you're driving or walking around or doing whatever it is that you do while you listen to music.
Oh! About the FM transmitter thing: I tried it. I also tried a regular little car kit for CD players, the kind with the cassette that you plug into the device. The CD player car kit sounds MUCH better than the FM transmitter. So if you have a tape player in your car, try it out.
quote:Are there restrictions on the "whenever?" Not really.
What I'm saying is that "you can only listen to these songs for as long as you maintain your subscription" is a significant restriction on "whenever." If I never buy any more music for as long as I live, I'll still be able to listen to the music I already have.
I don't buy one CD per month -- I might go four months with no purchases and then buy two or five all at once. In late 2004 I spent a month and a half in New Zealand with my family, which would have been problematic if I'd been a subscriber to a service where the licence to play back songs on my iPod had to be renewed monthly by connecting the player to my home computer (I don't have a laptop).
quote: So if you have a tape player in your car, try it out.
My car is CD-only, so I'm out of luck on that score. Still, I'm generally satisfied with the FM transmitter's sound quality when the signal is boosted by plugging the iPod into the cigarette lighter via a car adapter. Cruising on the highway provides enough background noise that the difference is noticeable, but not dramatic. Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
twinky, the subscription can be held on up to three computers at once. I have two computers, and both of them can access my account. I can also have two devices. Right now, I have a 20gig player and a 2gig player. And on top of that, you can change which computers are authorized to access the account. So if I replace these two computers with two more computers, I can just remove the authorizations for the old computers.
The FM transmitter drove me up a wall! Hahahaha. But it may also depend on how loud you play the music. I usually listen at a higher volume, and maybe that makes the static all the more noticeable.
quote:twinky, the subscription can be held on up to three computers at once.
This wouldn't have helped me in New Zealand, at least not without imposing more on my relatives than I would have been willing to do.
(And I wouldn't really want to authorize an internet kiosk to play my downloads. )
quote:I have two computers, and both of them can access my account. I can also have two devices. Right now, I have a 20gig player and a 2gig player. And on top of that, you can change which computers are authorized to access the account. So if I replace these two computers with two more computers, I can just remove the authorizations for the old computers.
As far as feature-comparison goes, iTMS allows five computers, unlimited iPods (but only iPods, that's the kicker), seven or ten burns of a specific playlist, and unlimited burns of an individual song (on different playlists). Computers can also be deauthorized. That sounds like a wash to me. (Added: iPod restriction excepted, of course.)
To reiterate: If I buy a track from iTMS (or comparable pay-per-download service), I can play it forever. If I rent a track from Napster via a subscription, I can only listen to that track for as long as I maintain my subscription.
Unless you can burn rental tracks to a CD. Can you?
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Napster offers a pay-per-song service just like iTunes. So if you want, you can forego the subscription fee altogether and just pay $.99 a song. If that's the case, I can put the songs onto as many mp3 players as I want and burn both playlists and songs in an unlimited manner. I own a few hundred songs from Napster like that; I had a $9.99 a month subscription that allowed unlimited plays on the computer. Napster has three different options. One has no monthly fee and is $.99 a song, just like iTunes. One has the ten bucks a month fee, and you can play anything you want on your computer, and if you want to burn or transfer anything, you pay $.99 a song. I had that for over two years. A month ago, I upgraded to the "to Go" fifteen bucks a month subscription. And since I bring my mp3 player with me everywhere I go anyway, it works really well.
Also, I haven't tried it yet, but I'm pretty sure that authorizing a computer to use Napster to Go to renew your licenses doesn't require that you actually download the songs. In other words, I THINK you download the songs only when you're putting them into your mp3 player. I base this assumption on the fact that when I had the other subscription, the music didn't have to actually be downloaded onto my computer in order to play, as long as I wasn't on dial-up.
posted
I adore music and would listen to it every second if I could... I also REALLY LOVE classical music and get irratated by how it gets abused in pop culture. Put into stupid commercials and lame boring movies... Grah. Classical music deserves better. It drives me insane when I want to find something rare and weird like the Dolly Suite by Faure, NOT the orcestral version but the version for 2 pianos! It takes me ages to find stuff like that. The rarity of classical music recordings I want is a bit frustrating...
pH I wonder if you'd like Dir en grey... I talk about them constantly because to me they are just the best band every and fit my criteria for that. I wonder if I am a snob, but I advocate playing music while doing EVERYTHING. Even watching television. If I am not listening to music I might have to make up songs. Stupid ones that would scandalize music students.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Now there is an artist using the digital age to her advantage. I think we will see more of this kind of thing.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Surprisingly, SC, when I brought up that story in class today, I was informed that it was clearly just a publicity stunt on the part of the label.
So I guess major labels just can't do anything right in the eyes of these people.
quote:Originally posted by pH: Napster offers a pay-per-song service just like iTunes. So if you want, you can forego the subscription fee altogether and just pay $.99 a song. If that's the case, I can put the songs onto as many mp3 players as I want and burn both playlists and songs in an unlimited manner. I own a few hundred songs from Napster like that; I had a $9.99 a month subscription that allowed unlimited plays on the computer. Napster has three different options. One has no monthly fee and is $.99 a song, just like iTunes. One has the ten bucks a month fee, and you can play anything you want on your computer, and if you want to burn or transfer anything, you pay $.99 a song. I had that for over two years. A month ago, I upgraded to the "to Go" fifteen bucks a month subscription. And since I bring my mp3 player with me everywhere I go anyway, it works really well.
Yes, you've explained Napster's options before. I'm definitely not saying that Napster is bad. Leaving aside the fact that Napster is not Mac-compatible or Linux-compatible, which makes it completely useless to me but isn't a problem for about 96% of personal computer owners, the multiple options are a decent compromise.
I guess what I've been talking around but have yet to state clearly is that I don't think subscription models have the growth potential you seem to think they do. My theory is that consumers want DRM to be as non-intrusive as possible. For me, as an iTunes user and iPod owner, the iTMS DRM has been essentially invisible. It has only prevented me from doing something I wanted to do with my music once. I should note, here, that this does occasionally include sharing it illegally, but that the "once" I mentioned wasn't one of those instances. If I never buy another song from Apple again, it will continue to generally not prevent me from doing what I want to do with it. With a subscription model, this is not as true, because the subscription model is inherently more restrictive than the pay-per-download model.
On the other hand, as I noted, there's something to be said for having the choice, because the subscription model suits some people (like you). What I'm saying is that I don't think it suits most people, or even enough for it to be the desired primary mechanism for digital distribution.
quote:Also, I haven't tried it yet, but I'm pretty sure that authorizing a computer to use Napster to Go to renew your licenses doesn't require that you actually download the songs. In other words, I THINK you download the songs only when you're putting them into your mp3 player. I base this assumption on the fact that when I had the other subscription, the music didn't have to actually be downloaded onto my computer in order to play, as long as I wasn't on dial-up.
iTMS doesn't require the files to be present on the computer for authorized playback either, though of course with a non-subscription service the only way this happens is when I've got my iPod connected to someone else's computer. This actually happens more than you might think. What I really wish, though, is that Apple would licence FairPlay to Microsoft's Home and Entertainment division so that the Xbox 360 could play protected AAC files as well as unprotected ones. I'm somewhat tempted to strip the DRM from my iTMS files just so I can stream them when I buy an Xbox 360. That was the one thing I wanted to do with iTMS purchases that I can't do -- I took my iPod to a friend's place and we could stream all of my non-iTMS music to his 360 just by connecting the USB cable, but the iTMS stuff was a no-go.
Of course, that's more of a nice-to-have for the sake of my geek lust than anything else.
posted
But the thing is, twinky....I really do think that the subscription market has potential. Again, it's rather unfortunate that over 70% of the market has next to zero exposure to it. In that respect, I'm kind of hoping that the labels DO get iTunes to offer a subscription service, if for no other reason that I really want to see how the general public responds to it. In general, people who've tried subscription services have loved them. And the thing is...why do the restrictions even matter? Again, I don't generally burn CDs. I listen to music on my computer and on my mp3 players. And a good portion of the people who use iTunes, it is my impression, listen to a lot of their music either on their computers or on their iPods.
The thing is, I gravitated to the subscription model from the beginning. My parents told me a couple of Christmases ago that since I'd gotten the scholarship to school and whatnot, and since I was so involved in the music industry, they wanted to give me a digital download account. But I researched the various services that were available at the time before I chose one, and quite honestly, I think that a subscription model WOULD work for a larger number of consumers if they were exposed to it.
High quality. The ability to burn my own CDs if I want because I like to make my own mixes and I just can't afford an I-pod right now (though I want one).
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by blacwolve: See Orincoro I enjoy classical music. Well, to be honest I enjoy most types of music, but I guess you can say I like classical music the best. I don't know anything about it, though. I have a vague understanding that there was a baroque period and a classical period and a romantic period, and I think that they occurred in that order, but that's about the extent of my knowledge. I can't really talk to anyone about classical music though, because either people think it's the most boring thing in the world, or they know everything about it and they can't understand that I just like it. Classical music majors tend to treat me like I'm desecrating the music when I say that I liked "the fast section" or that I found some famous piece boring, but have no idea why. So as a a result, I stay away from classical music majors, because I can't just discuss my love for the music with them, I have to discuss all of the technicalities, and I have no interest in doing that.
Classical musicians are taught very early on in analysis and musicology classes that, "I really liked it," it not a sufficient expression.
As a result we're practiced in analytical thought, and rarely bother with more basic judements: "I thought it was TOO slow, or TOO fast." We learn to forget about what we would like, and focus on what was done in the music and why. There is always the judgement in the back of your head, either you like it or not, but for the sake of analyis, nearly everything is INTERESTING either way.
As a result we learn to appreciate the complexities of a peice of music, or the orchestration or the history or context or whatever makes that peice important, even if it isn't "beautiful" to others. It speaks to you on a different level if it reminds you of something you think is important.
The thing that I don't think many people see is that Classical musicians and theorists are often vilified as snobs, while other artistic endeavors from the same time periods and in the same vanes are not. Your not a snob if you study literature, and everybody loves some book or other that was written centuries ago: it isn't too much for people, it isn't too intense or too obstruse. The culture has unfortunately convinced alot of people that classical music (speaking in the very broad sense of written music between 1250-1920), is somehow unreachable.
We don't ask that we not be bothered with classical literature or art, we don't say that we prefer simple books or that we always read something that's fun. We read challenging books in school and like them, we read challenging material as adults and we think we are doing ourselves good. But we never want to challenge ourselves when it comes to music, and I have no idea why that might be.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: We don't ask that we not be bothered with classical literature or art, we don't say that we prefer simple books or that we always read something that's fun.
There are plenty of people who do this.
And there are also plenty of people who enjoy classical literature but don't know the names of the literary devices used. So? Does everyone in the world need to take a score of advanced theory classes in order to appreciate music?
posted
No, I didn't say they did. I'm a literature major as well, and the ratio of bug eyed looks I recieve for saying that is way lower than the ones for music.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I really do think that the subscription market has potential. ... In general, people who've tried subscription services have loved them.
I can't just take your word for this, you know. Besides, given the low availability of subscription services, the people who've tried them are probably people like you who gravitated toward them anyway. For my own use, subscription services are a non-starter. I'm not interested in having to pay company X or Y a rental fee for music that I could buy and own forever for a comparable sum. I don't see the value. Of course, I also overwhelmingly buy music by album (I almost never buy singles), so I'm not exactly the average consumer.
Anyway, I'm unconvinced, but as I said, we'll see. Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I'm saying that the reason everyone assumes you're a snob when you say you're a classical music major is that what inevitably follows is you talking down to them. Like you're doing here.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
), which is related in an anecdote:![[Cool]](cool.gif)
), etc. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
