On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:33:34 +0000, Bruce wrote:

Tim S wrote:

I'd have more sympathy with the RIAA/MPAA and their ilk if they stopped
bleating, stopped encouraging ripping customers off, got with the times and
helped to make a move towards sensible internet selling at a sensible
price.


A recent survey showed that 19 out of 20 music tracks being listened to
on MP3 players were illegal copies or illegal downloads. That
represents a huge amount of revenue that is being denied to musicians
and composers.

You'll find very few tears shed for the record companies among jobbing
musicians - we've long known what a rip-off the whole system is.
The key word in the phrase 'music business' is business. Talent and
fresh ideas are only ever brought to the table if there's a chance
that someone can make a fat wadge of cash out of it - and that's
unlikely to be the artist.

I did a gig a while back where I was fortunate enough to find myself
rubbing shoulders with the likes of Eric Clapton and Bryan Ferry.
We all had nice big portacabins each and there was a free 24 hour
buffet and bar and lots of nice men to pick and carry for us.
I'll admit I very much enjoyed it and certainly didn't turn my nose up
at the extravagant hospitality - but did any of us need or deserve it?
At the end of the day it's just a job, like any other that requires a
skill - but aside from a need for some extra security to keep some of
the less sane fans at bay there's really not much else that I or any
other musician needs over and above anyone other skilled worker.
Ultimately its the punters who foot the bill, and that's reflected in
the price of CDs.

If a high proportion of people respected copyright, prices could be
lower. The trouble is that prices stay high because only a small
proportion of music is being paid for.

Prices stay high because people are stupid enough to pay them - and if
you think that increased sales will result in lower prices then more
fool you. Take a look round any 'record' shop and see which artists
sell at premium prices and which artists only go for budget prices -
it's the big sellers who command the highest prices.
The new U2 album will sell by the skip-load and should therefore be a
prime candidate for a reduced price. I won't bet on it.

There are quite literally millions of artists out there would who jump
at the chance have their music recorded and distributed - and who
would do so quite cheaply - but the record industry is about
generating mass-appeal and then feeding it...and usually with
talentless bores or regurgitated and banal pap.

No doubt you will suggest that, if the prices were lower, more people
would buy legal copies. Well, I very much doubt that, because once the
principle of copyright theft is as well established as it is now, the
same people will still steal the music for nothing, and musicians and
composers will get even less.

How many artists do you listen to ( one the radio, on telly etc. ) and
'quite like' but would never consider shelling out 10 or 15 quid to
buy any of their albums simply because you're not that interested in
their music or you only like a selected amount of it?
Would a fiver an album change your mind?
Would you bother downloading a highly compressed poor-quality track at
50p when you could have the real deal for the same price?
Sure, there will always be freeloaders - and always have been ever
since the dawn of the cassette tape - but the vast majority of
listeners actually do want to buy albums...and they'd buy more if they
were cheaper.

The entire business needs a long-overdue reality check, but it's not
going to happen as long as people are prepared to pay over the odds
for albums while they watch artists being pampered like royalty - and
the easier it becomes for unknown artists to prepare and distribute
their work via the new communications technologies that are still
evolving, the harder the record companies are going to fight to keep
their hands on all that filthy lucre.
They make the banks look like charities.

Regards,


--
Steve ( out in the sticks )
Email: Take time to reply: timefrom_usenet{at}gmx.net