F the RIAA
I have lots of old vinyl and storage bins full of CDs. Yes, I worked at a record store for a year and yes, I have a few preview CDs in my collection. If I were to hazard a guess, however, I'd say that 60% of all the songs in my entire collection (hand-picked, mind you) are crap.
I remember the feeling from my first days as a music lover after buying a record someone recommended only to be bitterly disappointed in all but a couple of songs. Sure, I could've bought singles, but more often than not, the songs I ended up liking were buried in the detritus.
Now, I have what I consider to be a respectable music collection. I'm sure it's a fraction of a fraction of the DC Liar collection, but it's a nice cross-section of stuff I like. I admit here and now that I have traded music over the internet via peer to peer networks realizing full well that this is on the illegal end of a sketchy/gray argument.
My opinion is that if you can show that you have purchased or own more than one copy of the same record in multiple formats (LP/CD/Cassette/8-track) or if you have more than 200 of any combination of media, that you should automatically be immune to any type of potential litigation. Music lovers should not be punished for trading music because I believe there are more music sales than not as a result amongst this crowd.
Why is the RIAA suing college students? I suppose it's the modern version of the Columbia House Record Club but with higher stakes. I really think it's more about control. Peer to peer networks don't lie. The new Lady Sovereign CD might only have two good tracks on it (ok - NO good tracks but one good video) and the number of downloads/seeders/peers is a new, no-nonsense way of seeing it.
Right now you can type the name of a band into any P2P software (i.e. Limewire or Kazaa) or pay-per-song programs (iTunes, etc.) and the songs at the top of the list are the songs being traded the most. They may not be from the same album. This is not what the record companies want. They want you to buy the whole thing now, then buy the new one in a year.
Most recently, I got hosed by Muse. The new album is ok but more like Thom Yorke fronting Neil Peart and Geddy Lee. But not as interesting. Friends of mine liked it, it was reviewed to high praise, and I heard one song that sounded original and exciting. I cannot listen to the whole CD from front to back. I cannot get my money back, either.
So, I'm happy to make compilation CDs for friends to spread the word. I might cause someone to spend some extra $$ or I might just save them from a significant disappointment. For the record, lots of bands have web stores now so you can buy music from them directly. F the RIAA.
Posts
6 comments:
The record companies are a little scared about what this all means, and I sympathize with them to a degree. For a fan, there is one overwhelming positive--more choice. But for the labels, their whole business model is being blown up. They need albums, not as some artistic statement, but as a marketable commodity to the mass media. I don't see how the music business would function if a band released a song a month. That seems too fragmented. I don't think we'll see the death of the album proper any time soon, but I'm sure glad I can go on Itunes and buy individual tracks.
You know, some labels (mostly small ones like the Periodic Label) are getting the hang of this brave new world. They offer a few songs for free to whet the appetite, then they support their mostly genre-less artists. The key is to put out good music and that's the real problem for the majors.
Most of the majors began by latching on to a few great musicians and riding them. Over the years, music has become like sports - overpaid, position-specific athletes/musicians and a business plan instead of a dream.
Maybe Prince had a point.
"She had ta bring saliva inta this!"
Chris, you said: "Most of the majors began by latching on to a few great musicians and riding them. Over the years, music has become like sports - overpaid, position-specific athletes/musicians and a business plan instead of a dream."
I almost totally agree. The best thing about the hit that the music business has taken is there seems to be no way to ram Born in the USA or some new Madonna as cultural icon thing down our throats. I like Bruce Springsteen and Madonna by the way, but the status of rock or pop music as some sort of societal bench mark Puh-lease...
Sure there are efforts to get a regular cycle of 25 songs the record companies want to push in the collective minds of America...but now those things are easier than ever to avoid and some much more free and freer media to enjoy or explore.
But with the change and what it means to moving "millions of units" it means that pop stars will have to be famous for something else and that means they will spend their energy promoting themselves in other ways - dating Ben Alfflak, adopting babies from Africa, or shaving their heads & flashing their beavers...
That shit too is easy to avoid and laugh off unless you are somehow convinced it means something...
The only part I don't agree with in your nice statement was the comparrison to professional athletes...with some exceptions there is reward for merit or a measurable excellence in athletes - by the way I know you are concerned with social justice and things of that sort (one of the things I admire about you)...I am not foolish enough to think that A-Rod deserves to be paid 10,000 times the ammount of a public school teacher...
But if you want to compare the old system of bloated wealth in rock for worthless results...compare it to movie stars. There is no way the Tom Hanks and others of the world deserve 25 mil a picture...
Juiced up or not, Barry Bonds can do shit we can not dream of doing...those hands - that swing (Sultan has taught me something on this front I used to think Bonds' swing was totally choppy but after reading some of that Teddy Ballgame stuff I know understand what fast hands and fast hands through the zone means and looks like)...but Bonds or ARod or Sorriano they all are less worthy of scorn than stars and starletts who have and or adopt babies to promote crappy movies.
Back to what I agree with, I had a nice talk with our friend Bob-0 at Record Rev...he told me about a CHristmas card the store got from Brad Wood that read: "Rock and roll is dead only the roaches are left"
and the point was (sort of) it is still here for those of us who care to make something good not to make ourselves into an industry.
I grew up never having a new record come out that I really cared about...I discovered everything that was decent later...
People who care to find good music in an era where EVERYTHING is not directed by the industry (I am not foolish enough to think industry has been taken out of the equation)...but things are such where fans don't need to be told what to buy
Ironically there are a lot of people who miss that shit and just give up on music thinking it doesn't matter anymore. To me it means more than ever because each time I hear that new record that I love (and there are so many ways for me to find it, not just through friends like you who care enough to share good stuff they know about)...but each time I find that new thing that sounds cool or that is stuck in my MP3 player I think 'Good for them (the band or musician), and good for me - they got their shit out there and I somehow found it'
ok, sorry to eat up so much space here talking about this. You and the Sultan know and care WAY more about the record business than I do but that's my 2 cents
I contend that there is reward for merit in the music industry as well. The musicians that have sold millions of records (Rolling Stones, Eagles, etc.) are the Bonds and Sorianos of their industry. Ozzy might be the Cal Ripken of music. Or the Dale Earnhart.
Well said ChrisB - however I think it might be easier to be a uselss and talentless douchebag and still get filthy rich in Hollywood or in music than in baseball or football. You might say "Well Tony Mandarich took a bunch of drugs and ballooned" - and I'd say you have me there. He is clearly a product of promotion from college to the pros. The Pack were sold a dream when they bought him...promotion won the day there...
Maybe I am making your point and should shut up because the more I think about it FUCKING BARRY ZITO is way over paid and it is all promotion/market driven...
It's not that I don't want to continue the lively art of debate or that I am a chickenshit - but I think you have me here and the comparrison you originally made was a good one - just lump in Tom Cruise with overpaid and stupid and I'll be happy
Post a Comment