A lot has been posted lately on Prince's views of the new digital music landscape and how it affects his ability to capitalize on his music; here's an interesting take on downloadable music from Mick Jagger:

“I am quite relaxed about it. But, you know, it is a massive change and it does alter the fact that people don’t make as much money out of records. But I have a take on that – people only made money out of records for a very, very small time. When the Rolling Stones started out, we didn’t make any money out of records because record companies wouldn’t pay you! They didn’t pay anyone! Then, there was a small period from 1970 to 1997, where people did get paid, and they got paid very handsomely and everyone made money. But now that period has gone. So if you look at the history of recorded music from 1900 to now, there was a 25 year period where artists did very well, but the rest of the time they didn’t.”

I can understand how Prince may be having a hard time accepting the way things are certainly because he's had little success in joining the game, but there are plenty of artists from his (othat is our) generation who have adapted. Even if he personally doesn't get it there are plenty of talented and creative people who do that could help (he could start by taking a tip from Wendy & Lisa). Considering he battled Warners because they were restricting how much music he could release, why can't he embrace the fact that tomorrow he could distribute as much music as he wants with practically no overhead. It's disappointing that instead he's on a Don Quixote crusade against the current music culture...

I doubt he's on a crusade, he just talks - just like politicians on both parties and religious leaders.

Did I just say that out loud?

alphachannel said:

A lot has been posted lately on Prince's views of the new digital music landscape and how it affects his ability to capitalize on his music; here's an interesting take on downloadable music from Mick Jagger:

“I am quite relaxed about it. But, you know, it is a massive change and it does alter the fact that people don’t make as much money out of records. But I have a take on that – people only made money out of records for a very, very small time. When the Rolling Stones started out, we didn’t make any money out of records because record companies wouldn’t pay you! They didn’t pay anyone! Then, there was a small period from 1970 to 1997, where people did get paid, and they got paid very handsomely and everyone made money. But now that period has gone. So if you look at the history of recorded music from 1900 to now, there was a 25 year period where artists did very well, but the rest of the time they didn’t.”

^ Very nice point here

Mick's got good reason to be relaxed about it.

They weren't in the norm. An artist should be paid for their craft a fair fee, not suckered out of their $$$

mzsadii said:

They weren't in the norm. An artist should be paid for their craft a fair fee, not suckered out of their $$$

That's the mob music industry for you.

alphachannel said:

I can understand how Prince may be having a hard time accepting the way things are certainly because he's had little success in joining the game, but there are plenty of artists from his (othat is our) generation who have adapted. Even if he personally doesn't get it there are plenty of talented and creative people who do that could help (he could start by taking a tip from Wendy & Lisa). Considering he battled Warners because they were restricting how much music he could release, why can't he embrace the fact that tomorrow he could distribute as much music as he wants with practically no overhead. It's disappointing that instead he's on a Don Quixote crusade against the current music culture...

That's NOT what is was about.

i love listening to music in my headphones. you wont see me at a live show often, if at all. i dont like crowds and i'm too lazy to make the effort to go there.

i respect prince's views on all this, it must seem very unfair the way digital tek and the internet has swiped profit out of artists pockets.

not only that, but most people dont use their digi tek properly when they're making records anyway so no wonder most of it sounds crap.

Mick is intelligent and has an interesting & realistic perspective, but I am not sure it's okay that for 75% of the time the artist got ripped off for their recordings!

To use a Prince analogy, it's like saying "for hundreds of years there was slavery in the US, and there has only been none for 150 years, so what's the big deal if it comes back?"

I am certainly not saying one is bad as the other, but just because something used to be one way does not make it the right way to be.

NDRU said:

Mick is intelligent and has an interesting & realistic perspective, but I am not sure it's okay that for 75% of the time the artist got ripped off for their recordings!

To use a Prince analogy, it's like saying "for hundreds of years there was slavery in the US, and there has only been none for 150 years, so what's the big deal if it comes back?"

I am certainly not saying one is bad as the other, but just because something used to be one way does not make it the right way to be.

What an odd comment and comparison! Are you high or what?

OzlemUcucu said:

NDRU said:

Mick is intelligent and has an interesting & realistic perspective, but I am not sure it's okay that for 75% of the time the artist got ripped off for their recordings!

To use a Prince analogy, it's like saying "for hundreds of years there was slavery in the US, and there has only been none for 150 years, so what's the big deal if it comes back?"

I am certainly not saying one is bad as the other, but just because something used to be one way does not make it the right way to be.

What an odd comment and comparison! Are you high or what?

Nice to see you again too!

the point is, it does not mean something SHOULD be bad just because it WAS bad for a longer period of time.

Definitely a thought-provoking, if not somewhat disturbing, take on it all.

Perhaps we're just moving towards a new model altogether - maybe that's what Prince feels, and is holding off releasing much until said model emerges. Maybe.

That said, I must admit, I had a giggle at a tweet I saw today:

"Janelle Monae's Amazon sales up nearly 5000% after her fab Glasto set. People doing the right thing & *buying* records.http://t.co/NuLFF7P"

This is seriously awesome (and richly deserved) news for Janelle, but it does seem kind of funny, coming a few days after Prince was claiming that Glastonbury was trying to use his name to promote their festival.

I understand where he got it from (obviously someone starts those notorious rumours for some reason), but with stats like these, perhaps Prince might have just discovered a reasonable distribution method. Release it the usual way, then play Glastonbury

Looking at what Prince has said in recent interviews, I think he feels he's been burnt by the internet as a distribution method, and he sees models like iTunes as just another version of record companies where someone else takes a big slice and leaves crumbs for the artist.

From that perspective I can see where he's coming from, but the internet makes many models of business viable, I don't think Prince has tried them all, or if he has, a lot of the problems he encountered were logistical and to do with the way he and people in his employ did business.

I think you get back what you put in.

alphachannel said:

A lot has been posted lately on Prince's views of the new digital music landscape and how it affects his ability to capitalize on his music; here's an interesting take on downloadable music from Mick Jagger:

“I am quite relaxed about it. But, you know, it is a massive change and it does alter the fact that people don’t make as much money out of records. But I have a take on that – people only made money out of records for a very, very small time. When the Rolling Stones started out, we didn’t make any money out of records because record companies wouldn’t pay you! They didn’t pay anyone! Then, there was a small period from 1970 to 1997, where people did get paid, and they got paid very handsomely and everyone made money. But now that period has gone. So if you look at the history of recorded music from 1900 to now, there was a 25 year period where artists did very well, but the rest of the time they didn’t.”

I can understand how Prince may be having a hard time accepting the way things are certainly because he's had little success in joining the game, but there are plenty of artists from his (othat is our) generation who have adapted. Even if he personally doesn't get it there are plenty of talented and creative people who do that could help (he could start by taking a tip from Wendy & Lisa). Considering he battled Warners because they were restricting how much music he could release, why can't he embrace the fact that tomorrow he could distribute as much music as he wants with practically no overhead. It's disappointing that instead he's on a Don Quixote crusade against the current music culture...

Jagger's point of view is from someone who's been a recording artist coming up on 50 years and a blues fan who is well aware that a lot of people whose songs he recorded were ripped off. The Stones went on to a new label in 1970 with new management and made a ton of cash in the process.

Warners was notorious for giving artists the worst royalty rates possible, but they gave artists free rein to do what they want in the studio.

Very few artists are able to sell 10 million CDs anymore. 10 years ago a group like N'Sync sold a million copies the day of release.

But why record sales went down wasn't piracy as much as it was people were done buying back catalog to update their music collection from vinyl to CD in the mid 90s. Once people were able to rip their CDs to MP3, there was no need to have a physical copy, or they chould just keep what they had as a backup if the burned disc was damaged, or something happened to their mp3 player. This is what hurt the recording industry. Most labels depended on back catalog to survive. So... now they have to step it up, make it more interactive, make it more elaborate, etc.

The next step is Blu Ray (Lossless) Audio or Hi Def audio, whatever they'll call it. Neil Young's already put his archives out on it. The bit rate is higher than regular CDs, and The Beatles have the tapes ready to be released in that format. Except that it's not "the norm" in most cars, so there's still a limit where you'd listen to it and enjoy the fidelity, and if they want to add things like music videos, interviews, and documentaries to it, they can do so. It also allows room for multiple mixes of an album, so there's the possiblility of the original Warners era mix that would just be remastered, and Prince's mix.

The Pink Floyd "Immersion" box sets are going to also have a Blu Ray disc included.

The singles market is alive and well, the "Now" compilations do extremely well when they come out.

But the Stones were one of the first bands to have a corporate sponsor, and it was the same tour Prince had the misfortune of taking part in.

You know I've been kinda studying Prince's relationship with Warner. Had he been upfront about the money instead of just being creative and hungry for the stardom that came with him creating music, maybe he'd be better off than he is now or maybe he'd probably had gone to another label but other labels wouldn't have given him that much freedom. Who knows?

NouveauDance said:

Looking at what Prince has said in recent interviews, I think he feels he's been burnt by the internet as a distribution method, and he sees models like iTunes as just another version of record companies where someone else takes a big slice and leaves crumbs for the artist.

From that perspective I can see where he's coming from, but the internet makes many models of business viable, I don't think Prince has tried them all, or if he has, a lot of the problems he encountered were logistical and to do with the way he and people in his employ did business.

I think you get back what you put in.

Absolutely agree, on all counts.

I would love to ask him why, in the interim (ie. before whatever the next great distribution method reveals itself), he does not have a very simple website, with CDs and/or lossless downloads available to buy of everything in his catalogue that he currently has control over.

A small percentage of the sales income would go towards maintaining this very basic website - effectively just a shopping cart - and the rest would presumably go straight to him (and the other artists, depending on their agreements, etc...)

It keeps the fans happy, because they have an easy way to get much of his back catalogue legitimately, and it provides a stream of income (even if it's not very large atm) that his past CDs - not to mention NPGMC downloads - can no longer offer him.

I just don't understand the downside. New music? Sure. I understand that (to an extent). By all means, find novel ways to distribute it en masse before it becomes available online for free. But for the stuff that's already out there, don't discount the consumers that actually WANT to pay a musician for their work.

By assuming that no one will pay for work (on principle, to reward the artist, etc...) that's otherwise available for free, he is actually contributing to that culture, not fighting it.

Chiquetet said:

NouveauDance said:

Looking at what Prince has said in recent interviews, I think he feels he's been burnt by the internet as a distribution method, and he sees models like iTunes as just another version of record companies where someone else takes a big slice and leaves crumbs for the artist.

From that perspective I can see where he's coming from, but the internet makes many models of business viable, I don't think Prince has tried them all, or if he has, a lot of the problems he encountered were logistical and to do with the way he and people in his employ did business.

I think you get back what you put in.

Absolutely agree, on all counts.

I would love to ask him why, in the interim (ie. before whatever the next great distribution method reveals itself), he does not have a very simple website, with CDs and/or lossless downloads available to buy of everything in his catalogue that he currently has control over.

A small percentage of the sales income would go towards maintaining this very basic website - effectively just a shopping cart - and the rest would presumably go straight to him (and the other artists, depending on their agreements, etc...)

It keeps the fans happy, because they have an easy way to get much of his back catalogue legitimately, and it provides a stream of income (even if it's not very large atm) that his past CDs - not to mention NPGMC downloads - can no longer offer him.

I just don't understand the downside. New music? Sure. I understand that (to an extent). By all means, find novel ways to distribute it en masse before it becomes available online for free. But for the stuff that's already out there, don't discount the consumers that actually WANT to pay a musician for their work.

By assuming that no one will pay for work (on principle, to reward the artist, etc...) that's otherwise available for free, he is actually contributing to that culture, not fighting it.

Your post makes too much sense in the real world to ever work in Prince world.

NDRU said:

OzlemUcucu said:

What an odd comment and comparison! Are you high or what?

Nice to see you again too!

the point is, it does not mean something SHOULD be bad just because it WAS bad for a longer period of time.

Yes, i understood your point, but it's such an odd comparison. You must be high lately

OzlemUcucu said:

NDRU said:

Nice to see you again too!

the point is, it does not mean something SHOULD be bad just because it WAS bad for a longer period of time.

Yes, i understood your point, but it's such an odd comparison. You must be high lately

yes I am high on home made granola

NDRU said:

OzlemUcucu said:

Yes, i understood your point, but it's such an odd comparison. You must be high lately

yes I am high on home made granola