Music, to me, is the primary thing that keeps me from being able to say I'm an athiest. It has frequently been said that art and/or math are the universal languages. Either may be true but music was developed in every civilization, everywhere in the world and even if you are from a different country, and a different culture you can appreciate the music of another culture without any training, without any education and without any knowledge of the culture that produced it. This can be said about some art but the soup cans of Andy Warhol or the films of Ingmar Bergman likely wouldn't grab you if you didn't have some context for it and while you may be able to write a beautiful mathematical equation only those with an advanced education in mathematics will fully appreciate it. So the universal making of and appreciation for music is the one thing, for me, that serves as evidence of a possible higher power.
I thought it would be good to say that and have it there as background before I moved on to being critical of certain parts of the music industry and even some musicians.
There was a really disturbing article on
ReadWriteWeb about a week ago (June 2, 2009) entitled
Ten Years After Napster, Musicians Are Still Getting Screwed which proceeded to lay out how labels and fans are both screwing over recording artists. The article made some fair points, but was ultimately one sided and ignored many important facts.
What has happened to the "music industry" is about technology, but it is not about file sharing. It is about the cost of producing and distributing music. Once upon a time there were a handful of big record labels who would pump out a few hundred recordings a year. But the number of labels and the number of recordings produced has been going up for many years and in the last several years that number has gone exponential. According to
the Toronto Star there were more than 750,000 albums produced worldwide in 2007 compared to 38,000 in 2002. There are no figures , that I can find, for 2008 or 2009 but we can assume that that number did not go down, and there is no reason to believe it didn't go up just as sharply as it has been going up in recent years.
So let's have a look at that number: 750,000 albums were produced. We'll assume that that includes full albums, EPs, singles etc., and pretend that the average is about 10 songs per album (it really doesn't matter how close that average is as you'll see in a moment.) That means 7.5 million songs and if the average length of those songs was about 3.5 minutes it comes to 437,500 hours of music.
The averages may be off a bit but that is irrelevant. It would take a person, listening only to new music (never hearing anything twice) for 16 hours a day, 365 days a year almost 75 years to listen to all of the music produced in 2007. If that person were more normal and spend an average of an hour a day listening to music they'd never heard before it would take almost 1,200 years to listen to 2007's offerings. So, in a way, every time someone listens to one of your songs you've won a sort of musical lottery.
That is how things are now. It is not file sharing that is killing the 'music industry' it is pure competition for the ears of music lovers. I have trouble finding sympathy for music labels and older musicians who complain about how sales are down since napster. Of course they are.
Making it in music is no longer about album sales. It is about a mix of things that includes some music sales, other merch. sales (t-shirts, buttons etc.) and most especially live performance. It also helps if you have multiple projects going (in a few bands, back up friends at their shows, have a solo repertoire) so that you can tour and generally play live as frequently as possible and if you can swing it, getting your music into television, film and commercials will usually provide a decent living all by itself.
The age of big rock stars being driven around in limousines and trashing four star hotel rooms is very nearly over but if we want to and we work at it, the music community - fans and artists (not the music 'industry') can create an environment where talented musicians can, without a day job, earn a living on par with other highly skilled professionals.
That is the music world as it stands and that is what the old 'music industry' comprised of the big record labels, their lobby groups and some of the professional organizations for musicians do not seem to understand. The music industry cannot go back in time no matter how many governments they lobby and no matter how many people the sue. Such behavior is childish and smacks of a detachment from reality. It is the equivalent of a industry temper tantrum.
Even if their methods are successful to a degree, even if they stop people from downloading/sharing their music - or if they are successful at making it clear that if you want to play their CDs at your place of work you have to pay for the privilege all they will succeed in doing is taking their music out of the draw for the musical lottery. There are enough musicians out there who are freely giving away their music and encouraging their fans to share it, play it wherever they go that saying 'don't share my music' will only (in a best case scenario) cause people to stop listening to your music.
What artists need (other than perhaps a few good friends who make commercials, film or television shows) are fans. Fans will buy your CD - not because they can't get it for free (they can no matter how careful you are) but because they like you, respect you and want you to keep making music. Fans will come to see you live, buy your t-shirt, and in some cases they will buy your CD before you've made it
which will help you to make it in the first place.
The big machine of 'the music industry' as it was in the last half of the 20th century is gone but that doesn't mean that music is no longer a viable option. Let's say you have a band with four people in it. If you can find 25,000 people worldwide who are willing to spend $20 per year on your music (CDs, T-shirts, live shows ...). If you can keep your expenses under 50% of what comes in, each member of your band would take home $62,500 / year - which should be good enough to quit your day job.
(25,000 x $20 = 500,000 - 50% for expenses = 250,000 / 4 = 62,500)
So, if you're in music what you need (as has always been the case) is fans and the relationship with your fans (as it always should have been) needs to be based on mutual respect. Play good music, let people listen whenever and wherever possible and you've got a chance (though it will never be easy.) Lobbying governments for unenforceable laws, suing people or organizations, presenting
large bills to people who are only trying to help and generally attaching strange fees to people's enjoyment of music doesn't help, it never has and never will. It may generate some quick cash, but it does not build a fan base for anyone.
So, in short music is good, ReadWriteWeb is wrong and music is still a viable business - but maybe not an 'industry' at least in the same sense as before.
Labels: music, Music Industry
