Aerogram said:

It boggles the mind that people think Drake and others are proof the Internet is a great thing for music. It's been the slow death of the music industry, but for the big media companies, music is only one revenue stream among others. Pop music has always been a business, but one that was at its best) conducted with passion and flair, not just metrics.

.

Which changed long before the Internet started fucking shit up in the late 1990s. Look into the numerous mergers in the early 1990s, when the bean counters took over.

.

Note that there are still plenty of small labels run by people who love music.

.

Wherever you stand on Prince and his musical worth nowadays, you have to recognize he's been at the forefront of important battle between creators and the media companies that turn a profit off the whole cacophony, many of his concerns turned out to be prescient.

.

Prince was ripping off artists in EXACTLY THE SAME FASHION he was bitching about.

.

Also: look at how Prince treats his back catalogue and PPR's back catalogue.

.

There is an urgent need for breaking excessive media control in the hands of the few. It's not just music, but all intellectual properties including books. Massive availability through a few giants like Amazon or Apple has hurt the very fabric of these industries and allowed mega-companies to dwarve the traditional players.

.

In the past two decades Prince has made numerous exclusive deals with such major entities. All he's done is bitched about iTunes not wanting to pay him an absurd advance. Or bitched about WBR not hurrying to release a record he couldn't be arsed to promote.

Aerogram said:

BartVanHemelen said:

BartVanHemelen said:

ufoclub said:

Actually, I think, back then, anyone who read the full quote could infer what he meant, because I did. The media and onine posts kept shortening the quote down to that fragment.

""The internet's completely over. I don't see why I should give my new music to iTunes or anyone else. They won't pay me an advance for it and then they get angry when they can't get it." - Prince as quoted by The Mirror

and as you can see, back in June:

http://prince.org/msg/7/417335

[Edited 11/12/15 17:36pm]

.

Expecting an advance from iTunes et al is just idiotic. They're a medium.

.

Middle men leaving artists with tiny profit, yes, which is I think his critique.

lezama said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Expecting an advance from iTunes et al is just idiotic. They're a medium.

.

Middle men leaving artists with tiny profit, yes, which is I think his critique.

.

No, his critique is right there:

.

They won't pay me an advance for it

I found it very odd that in order to find examples of "dirty" lyrics, the reporter referenced "Lust U Always" and "Schoolyard".

billymeade said:

billymeade said:

I found it very odd that in order to find examples of "dirty" lyrics, the reporter referenced "Lust U Always" and "Schoolyard".

Probably just wanted to prove to the fans reading it that he is a fan too.

I felt a bit awkward when reading that bit though. Mentioning those songs just felt fairly irrelevant in the context.

Yeah, I read that. But what is the point of such a statement? His perspective is that Apple should pay for what they end up profiting from. So, say you were an artisan working in a crafts shop, and the owner makes bank off of the crafts that you send to his shop, but instead of you getting a fair wage for what you produce you get pennies on the dollar consistently across the board for everything you take to have sold in his shop. Some people might be ok with entering into such an exploitative type of relation.. if they're happy with that ok, so be it. But anyone looking hard and deeply at what the shopowner is pocketing in profit will say to themselves there's something seriously fucked up here. They may not have an immediate solution to it, but recognizing the power relations in the crafts industry would be an important first step to finding alternative ways to bring your crafts to market.

BartVanHemelen said:

lezama said:

.

No, his critique is right there:

.

They won't pay me an advance for it

lezama said:

Yeah, I read that. But what is the point of such a statement? His perspective is that Apple should pay for what they end up profiting from. So, say you were an artisan working in a crafts shop, and the owner makes bank off of the crafts that you send to his shop, but instead of you getting a fair wage for what you produce you get pennies on the dollar consistently across the board for everything you take to have sold in his shop. Some people might be ok with entering into such an exploitative type of relation.. if they're happy with that ok, so be it. But anyone looking hard and deeply at what the shopowner is pocketing in profit will say to themselves there's something seriously fucked up here. They may not have an immediate solution to it, but recognizing the power relations in the crafts industry would be an important first step to finding alternative ways to bring your crafts to market.

BartVanHemelen said:

I don't think it is that simple..

Do you know what Apple's cut would be per stream play vs Prince's?

Do you know what Apple's overhead is per stream play vs Prince's?

2funkE said:

lezama said:

Yeah, I read that. But what is the point of such a statement? His perspective is that Apple should pay for what they end up profiting from. So, say you were an artisan working in a crafts shop, and the owner makes bank off of the crafts that you send to his shop, but instead of you getting a fair wage for what you produce you get pennies on the dollar consistently across the board for everything you take to have sold in his shop. Some people might be ok with entering into such an exploitative type of relation.. if they're happy with that ok, so be it. But anyone looking hard and deeply at what the shopowner is pocketing in profit will say to themselves there's something seriously fucked up here. They may not have an immediate solution to it, but recognizing the power relations in the crafts industry would be an important first step to finding alternative ways to bring your crafts to market.

I don't think it is that simple..

Do you know what Apple's cut would be per stream play vs Prince's?

Do you know what Apple's overhead is per stream play vs Prince's?

Well in my analogy it isn't as simple as I stated it either.. there's all sorts of things at play in being a capitalist, investment in capital, maintenance of capital, investment in innovations etc etc. Thats not what Im referring to.. the artist exploitation is the same in any case and its pretty drastic.

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/spotify-apple-music-tidal-music-streaming-services-royalty-rates-compared/

there were some good parts of it, like his concept of being free playing the piano without a band.
I still think he will be rehearsed, but he can easily do a lot with this show.

.

And he can't tell me he isn't tied to 'those songs' lol doesn't mean you are controlled by them.

Then he plays the hits...

.

“Tell me a musician who’s got rich off digital sales. Apple’s doing pretty good though, right?”

Who is Apple? Appolonia?

I never felt he committed to the Rock n Roll direction he talked about with the 3rd Eye Girl direction. He seemed to have fallen back too quickly on feeling the need to play to the crowd(or at least what he felt they/we wanted)

I hope this 1 man piano show shakes him up... call Lisa Coleman to accompany you Prince

I could be way off here, but is it possible that we have just entered a new age where being a talented musician/entertainer does not necessarily mean that you are entitled to make 10's or 100's of millions of dollars ayear from the public playing of your music? I can see Prince lounging in his silk jammies at night fuming that his singular talent cannot turn him into a billionaire & it is consuming him.

He has fought so long to get control over his masters so he could cut out the middle men, but now that he has, the world has changed, the margins have vanished ,and he can't monetize that ownership the way he thought he would be able to without selling it again.

In fact every day that he keeps his current and past works in the shadows, out of the public eye his greatest asset (back catalogue) is diminishing in value as his fan base ages and shrinks. It's a shame as his music is timeless and could appeal to new generations but alas they will never come across his work and therefore never shell out the cash to see him live which is the last place some real margins exist.

2funkE said:

I could be way off here, but is it possible that we have just entered a new age where being a talented musician/entertainer does not necessarily mean that you are entitled to make 10's or 100's of millions of dollars ayear from the public playing of your music? I can see Prince lounging in his silk jammies at night fuming that his singular talent cannot turn him into a billionaire & it is consuming him.

He has fought so long to get control over his masters so he could cut out the middle men, but now that he has, the world has changed, the margins have vanished ,and he can't monetize that ownership the way he thought he would be able to without selling it again.

In fact every day that he keeps his current and past works in the shadows, out of the public eye his greatest asset (back catalogue) is diminishing in value as his fan base ages and shrinks. It's a shame as his music is timeless and could appeal to new generations but alas they will never come across his work and therefore never shell out the cash to see him live which is the last place some real margins exist.

good post

BartVanHemelen said:

Aerogram said:

It boggles the mind that people think Drake and others are proof the Internet is a great thing for music. It's been the slow death of the music industry, but for the big media companies, music is only one revenue stream among others. Pop music has always been a business, but one that was at its best) conducted with passion and flair, not just metrics.

.

Which changed long before the Internet started fucking shit up in the late 1990s. Look into the numerous mergers in the early 1990s, when the bean counters took over.

.

Note that there are still plenty of small labels run by people who love music.

.

.

Prince was ripping off artists in EXACTLY THE SAME FASHION he was bitching about.

.

Also: look at how Prince treats his back catalogue and PPR's back catalogue.

.

There is an urgent need for breaking excessive media control in the hands of the few. It's not just music, but all intellectual properties including books. Massive availability through a few giants like Amazon or Apple has hurt the very fabric of these industries and allowed mega-companies to dwarve the traditional players.

.

In the past two decades Prince has made numerous exclusive deals with such major entities. All he's done is bitched about iTunes not wanting to pay him an absurd advance. Or bitched about WBR not hurrying to release a record he couldn't be arsed to promote.

Same old, same old... these deals were a necessary evil and he did it in a way that did not tie him forever.

As for the way he used to behave, it's like the way we used to behave: made mistakes, hopefully changed our way.

By the way, it's "All he's done is bitch", not "bitched". I'm surprised you don't know the verb better considering YOU have been bitching far more than Prince for the last 20 years.

OldFriends4Sale said:

2funkE said:

I could be way off here, but is it possible that we have just entered a new age where being a talented musician/entertainer does not necessarily mean that you are entitled to make 10's or 100's of millions of dollars ayear from the public playing of your music? I can see Prince lounging in his silk jammies at night fuming that his singular talent cannot turn him into a billionaire & it is consuming him.

He has fought so long to get control over his masters so he could cut out the middle men, but now that he has, the world has changed, the margins have vanished ,and he can't monetize that ownership the way he thought he would be able to without selling it again.

In fact every day that he keeps his current and past works in the shadows, out of the public eye his greatest asset (back catalogue) is diminishing in value as his fan base ages and shrinks. It's a shame as his music is timeless and could appeal to new generations but alas they will never come across his work and therefore never shell out the cash to see him live which is the last place some real margins exist.

good post

Prince could clean up in today's market, youtube is just a marketing tool. prince thinks if the kids listen to music there then that is it.
I went to see Blur this year, by the time i got back to the house, there was video's on youtube of the concert. I said to my partner "better get those ripped so you can keep them" (she's the blur fan) she was all 'nah, they wont go anywhere' and they didnt along with cell phone footage, there is one exceptionally high def concert from hong kong, and many tv spots and apearance of them promoting there album (the magic whip)
Did it stop albuim sales ? of course not, there album did really well, there conerts sold out, people even bought there ice cream.
I've seen people on here calling prince a marketing genius (or words to that effect) he really is not, he is a strange odity from a bi gone era, that every time he summons journalists to PP with another pointless prattle he looses more and more cred.
The kids have very interest or even knowledge of his music. This is the age of androgynous looks and attitudes and he is singing about getting robbed at gun point on a make believe fantasy tour. All of those classics buried in his paranoia about someone, somewhere enjoying his music for free.

The truth of the matter is his work has not been very good. It doesnt matter of you are the beatles or MJ or anyone else. The work itself still matters. Status alone is not enough. If his current work was at the level of his 80's work then we would see a slightly diffrent outcome. And yes, a part of it is the zeitgeist, and Prince couldn't be further away from that even apart from his age. He just rubs a lot of people the wrong way, and especially so when he became a religious zealot.
The market has changed, but it still has a lot to do with the individual.

Regardless, he is still an incredibly talented live artist with an incredible back catalog that he can milk for the rest of his life.

V10LETBLUES said:

The truth of the matter is his work has not been very good. It doesnt matter of you are the beatles or MJ or anyone else. The work itself still matters. Status alone is not enough. If his current work was at the level of his 80's work then we would see a slightly diffrent outcome. And yes, a part of it is the zeitgeist, and Prince couldn't be further away from that even apart from his age. He just rubs a lot of people the wrong way, and especially so when he became a religious zealot.
The market has changed, but it still has a lot to do with the individual.

Regardless, he is still an incredibly talented live artist with an incredible back catalog that he can milk for the rest of his life.

Agree, it's true.

V10LETBLUES said:

The market has changed, but it still has a lot to do with the individual.

Yeah but its never JUST individuals, its their labels, their promoters, management. Each major artist (i.e. someone who's name is consistently in papers) is a business interacting with other business.

Remember when it was exciting to get a new Prince interview? No more. The Vibe one from 1993, remember that one? ahh.

lezama said:

People who used the internet to build a small but loyal following. The second they were offered a "deal" they took it and stopped giving their music away for free.

There is a huge difference between being discovered on the internet, and actually making money simply by uploading your music to youtube.

Noodled24 said:

People who used the internet to build a small but loyal following. The second they were offered a "deal" they took it and stopped giving their music away for free.

There is a huge difference between being discovered on the internet, and actually making money simply by uploading your music to youtube.

The truth has been told.

V10LETBLUES said:

lezama said:

Yeah but its never JUST individuals, its their labels, their promoters, management. Each major artist (i.e. someone who's name is consistently in papers) is a business interacting with other business.

Yes and you need that interaction more with an unknown artist than an internationally known legend. His shows and music does not slip through the cracks unnoticed like it does with an unknown. And it is a business. Business is predicated on the basis of potential profit. No one going to walk away from money if they felt strongly about its potential. There's the rub.

Except Prince just wants to make enough money doing what he wants -- and he can.

If Prince wanted to make as money as he can, he'd be playing the game, releasing videos, appearing on talk shows and touring constantly. Instead, he's been supporting and promoting others, he's not even pushing 1000 hugs and Kisses, which could easily be a good size hit with a little promo.

He's his own zeitgeist, time will tell.

Aerogram said:

KingSausage said:

Doozer said:

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

Doozer said:

.

Wow, Prince is so right. No one has ever made any money online.

.

I think you're missing my sarcasm. Plenty of people have made a fortune online. They have just been smart enough and inventive enough to get it done.

.

Unfortunately this is classic Prince revisionist history: "Now that I've seen what has happened, I can tell you what I really meant when I said what I said years ago."

QueenofPurplePalace said:

Half the people labeling Prince as being bitchy probably are the ones who pirate and torrent albums themselves and figure 'hey so and so is already rich...it won't hurt'. Whatever you feel about Prince is your opinion but the fact remains that music sales are at an all time low. When was the last time any of you went to the store to buy an album? ........okay then. He's an old man....of course he's gonna be about the money....where the hell y'all been for 38 years....oh wait when he was popular you looked past it... mmkay. Also it's almond surreal reading people of THIS site complain about HIS bitching....

Agreed. And to your last sentence, we've all gotten kinda used to it.

Why should musicians expect to get rich? It's a fucking hobby job, not brain surgery. Prince is wealthy enough. He's always banging the same old drum.

V10LETBLUES said:

The truth of the matter is his work has not been very good. It doesnt matter of you are the beatles or MJ or anyone else. The work itself still matters. Status alone is not enough. If his current work was at the level of his 80's work then we would see a slightly diffrent outcome. And yes, a part of it is the zeitgeist, and Prince couldn't be further away from that even apart from his age. He just rubs a lot of people the wrong way, and especially so when he became a religious zealot.
The market has changed, but it still has a lot to do with the individual.

Regardless, he is still an incredibly talented live artist with an incredible back catalog that he can milk for the rest of his life.

This quote, seems to me, to typify, Prince's songwriting problem:

He’s also wryly funny on topics ranging from his songwriting (“I have to do it to clear my head, it’s like … shaking an Etch a Sketch”

I really think that he works that way. He just writes for the sake of writing.