lastdecember said:

Interesting stuff. Does seem more then a coincidense that the boots pretty much stopped straight after he got outta his WB contract.

I wish people were like Bob Dylan, who couldn't care less if boots exists (the way Prince used to feel perhaps?), and of all people, Michael Jackson doesn't seem to care either (though that may be because he has no clue a few boots of his exist online).

I agree with Annie - but she needs to chat with Trent who also ended his stint with Interscope recently (from Wired magazine):

Yeah, what's ludicrous about being a musician today, and this is a whole other hundred hour conversation I can have, is because any record label still meat and potatoes come from retail brick and mortar sales, they can't offer anything for sale until it can show up in the store...meanwhile, avid fans who you want are monitoring the Torrent sites and the PtP sites for that first — you know, as I do as a fan of bands. Do I want to hear it now or do I want to wait a month, go to the store and then put it back on my computer, or just get it on the computer? So, you have to work around that leak date, which always at the latest happens when it goes to manufacturing. There's people there that just upload it. And as you know one copy means every copy.

...but what I've come to realize, you know, since it can't be stopped — and I blame that on an outdated concept of what copyright law is in the way of ownership. Primarily the greed of the record industries have not — their own greed has prevented them from adopting any solution that would give people what they want. People want to listen to a lot of music and do whatever they want with it. They don't want DRM, they don't want subscriptions. They don't want a player that only can do this but can't do that and you only have one copy. They don't want that. You know? I don't want that. And they're so rooted in this outdated business model that they're not willing to give up their CEO salaries or their Lear jets or their ridiculous overdone staff or their lion's share of the cut of records that get sold. And so, a couple years ago I kind of realized that music essentially is free now. I'd prefer if it wasn't. But it is. And being on the other side of that argument is a losing battle. And once you kind of get your head around — it's not a flawless thing, because I think the songwriter he's more fucked in this scenario. But applying it to my own life, hey I've had a pretty good run. I can still make a living with touring. And maybe you buy a t-shirt. And I would rather 10 million people get my record and listen to it for free than 500,000 that I coerced to pay $15 for it, you know? And I think given the state of the way the industry is right now, the only way to look at it is I think what Prince is doing. I think Radiohead, if they would have executed it better, could have — you know, the idea is right. Eliminate this dinosaur in the corner that's primarily taking all your money, based on a thieving business model, and are making enemies out of the people that they're customers. You know, that's ridiculous. I mean if you're going to go after someone go after ISPs. Don't go after somebody that — what good is that going to do?

thesexofit said:

well, releasing a single or two in advance of the album used to fulfill this purpose, and it did so quite nicely in the heyday of MTV, but since singles don't mean jack anymore and MTV is now...well, you know...it's time for a new approach.

DiminutiveRocker said:

Thing is, cant trent stop the leaks himself? I mean, it is easier said then done, but Iam sure you can watch your back in recording studios surely? I have no idea how studios work, but I assume you go in for a session for say 6 hours, save ur shit on a computer or disc or however its done now, and leave it. Cant you password protect your mixes, take your demos home with you? Make sure when you take it to be mastered, you watch everybody to make sure no leak happens?

If your that paranoid about leaks getting onto torrents weeks before the cd hits the shelves, then theres your answer, dont let it leak (easier said then done I know). This only solves the problem until the street date of your product, then afterwards, its on torrents, but cant record companies encrypt cd's with software to stop copying? I know they tried this years ago, but there must be a way round this surely?

Anxiety said:

Not releasing a single, but just letting a few full tracks be downloaded, off your site, as a sampler to the album. Leave the full free tracks up there for as long as you want, or set a time limit, or whatever?

Radio in the UK is different to the US mind you. As far as I know, no clearchannel and the horrilbe US "lets segregate every genre" type bullshit over here. Radio 1, radio 2, local stations, will play a bit of pop, hiphop, rock, alternative whatever on the same show....., so a pop single over in the UK at least, can catch a rnb record buyer for example. So singles, at least radio wise, do have some purpose in the UK at least still. Not much of one, but its something.

thesexofit said:

If any of them could stop all the leaks don't you think they would? The reality is, none of this stuff is air-tight. You have engineers and assistant engineers and god knows who else in those recording studios - then it goes to mastering... it can be leaked in various places. I have gotten hold of CDs WAY before their retail release date simply because I knew someone who knew someone who had access. And this situation is not unique to me, obviously. And all it takes is one person to upload it to the internet and there it goes! And in the digital world - these are files being moved around, not on CD-R necessarily. And the label people all want copies to listen to... so the shit gets out there in various ways. Encryption never works - - DVDs are supposedly encrypted and there are lots of programs you can get to burn around that.

DiminutiveRocker said:

Yeah, its naive of my to think leaks can be prevented, but as has been mentioned, Prince doen't have this trouble anymore does he? Maybe, as lastdecember said, its majors, giving away promos and freebies to mates that are fueling the fire so to speak.

Ur right though, record companies arn't stupid, and they must of and no doubt have tried to stop leaks and downloads. Remember napster all those years ago? Maybe record companies shoulda struck a deal with them somehow?

thesexofit said:

The labels were all so greedy... now look what's happened? In the end, it's the artist who gets screwed.

DiminutiveRocker said:

Sad but true. Its also hard to gauge if music is more popular now, then say 10 years ago, as nobody knows who is downloading what and how many times? Comsumer wins, as variety, thanx to the internet is HUGE now. Why even hear new music, when you can find maybe something more to your liking through youtube etc....

....This new way of checking anyones "back catalogue" of music so to speak, numbs the need somewhat, to even bother with new music. This was not the case in the 60's as much for example. All alot of people had was tv and radio, playing what they thought you should hear, and well, as we know, the internet has changed that.

thesexofit said:

Exactly i have always said this is why things have stayed pretty "lucrative" for UK artists and the reason you see so many more american "POP" artists trying to go to the uk and get into that market, mainly because there are so many open outlets to try, and the thing is there is more competition over there since, as far as i can remember isnt their still "one" main chart? not like here in the USA where there are about 50.

thesexofit said:

Well things really started to change around 2002, the more power the net was getting and the more leaks that were happening, label people were getting less and less in terms of "promos" and "advances", case in point i remember dealing with a rep from EMI and in early 2001 he gave me the Norah Jones CD "Come away with me" almost 8 months before its release because he wanted me playing it in my store to get the "buzz" happening, and all label reps would do this when they came around, but as the years went on, by 2003 the reps would come around and i would ask for something and they would say, they couldnt get advances anymore, the higher ups were holding them till release day. So i think alot of leaks that have come in the years from 2003 and on, you can look to the highest rungs of the label ladders and maybe find the culprits.

lastdecember said:

Yes, one main "top 40 singles chart" or whatever its officially known as, still exists. Downloads count now aswell, but Iam all for that. Airplay does not count though, at least, Iam 99% sure it doens't. I find the US single charts confusing nowadays. Vast majority of the singles in the UK top 40, actually do have a physical cd single availible to buy somewhere. Only the odd download may not, though Iam not sure about that.

Our music stations are fucked though. Not sure if we (and europe) get more choice then you guys. We cant get BET for example. We get mtv dance, mtv 2, mtv base, mtv hits..., then theres the box etc.., which I know you have.

lastdecember said:

thesexofit said:

Our video stations are awful, if you can even call them Video stations, the only one i watch is IMF the International Music Feed, mainly because no one artist or genre can monopolize it, plus you get to see artists from all over. Yeah the USA gave up on the cd single though they still come out every now and then, they are basically non existent, but i find myself constantly buying imports of my favorite artists because the UK still issues them and they always have something extra, yet another BAD decision on the USA's part, eliminating the physical single.

lastdecember said:

I guess because America is so much bigger then UK, that distributing cd-singles requires alot more business acumen (how many to ship etc..). Also, where you are, you might get a jam thats only big say, on the east coast, but not in the west. At least, thats how radio use to play in the US. You know, a single might be huge in Chicago, but not in Califonia for example. We dont get that in little old England. I liked/like that about USA. Ur country is so damn big, that some hits only get played in certain states sometimes.

thesexofit said:

It can be that way from time to time, but honestly radio here is so bought and sold i gave up on it a long time ago. DJ's are so restricted that they have to play a list of songs and cannot vary, and that list is usually about 10-20, so here in america you can have a chart where a song has been in the top 20 for 6-8 months, its like slow death, the US killed its own market basically. Thats why i very rarely look at our charts here, it used to be part of my job, till i found out how it was all bought and sold and inflated i had to get away from it.

lastdecember said:

Damn, thats sad that something that was part of your job depressed you so much. I noticed you get the same no.1 for months in the US. Thats quite common right? Unfortunately, the UK chart ain't what it used to be. Often the highest entry is in the first week of sales. I think with downloads, that has changed slightly, but the "straight in at no. 1", would only ever be for a week, then it would dissapear forever and forgotten about. But as I said, downloads have changed the playing field somewhat. Not by much, but its a good thing I think for the UK at least.

Xmas no.1's was a HUGE thing in the UK. Papers would be all over it, but x-factor/pop idol etc... has ruined it for the last 5 years or so, as the first single, by the shows winner, is always out between december 18-december 25, leaving no chance for outsiders as everyone always buys the first single. Its dull and it got predictable. So talent shows ruined xmas no.1's. Bookies would take serious bets in the past. It was fun. Props to Simon Cowell etc..., for manipulating people and timing it like that. It works (or seems to), but I hate that.

The whole x-factor/american idol thing will be totally played out in a year or 2. Its run its course, and we all know it.

thesexofit said:

Well alot of that started when we adopted "soundscan" as the bible here in america. This basically put an end to songs and albums "climbing" the charts, which is the purpose of reading the things, i used to open it and wonder where so and so moved or did it fall etc.. now you debut, and you fall and fall and fall, its the same thing every week, so i stopped looking because i really stopped caring, i could predict the chart. the last time i can remember caring about the chart was when Norah Jones first album came out "Come Away with me" mainly because here in NYC, i had spent time at here shows, she was big here at clubs playing years before her deal, so i took interest in pushing this album and her to people, well it was just a cool thing to see an album slowly catch on and move, it was a word of mouth thing, like Elton John in 1970, and if i rmember correct it took Norah about 5 months to get into the top 10 with the album. But that was a fluke because now here in america everything is so HYPED that you debuted and then gone, music has lost its value for the most part.

lastdecember said:

Same over here, at least singles wise it pretty much is. Note so sure about album chart. Seems hyping and force feeding adverts, promotional tv spots/interviews down ur throats is the way to go, or was. Its overkill

BOTH ANNIE LENNOX AND TRENT REZNOR CAN LEARN A LESSON FROM ICE CUBE, WHO RECENTLY SAID THAT HIS NEXT CD IS FOR HARDCORE ICE CUBE FANS. HE'S NOT TRYING TO REACH OUT TO THESE YOUNG CATS. ALSO HE DID GOLD NUMBERS IN THIS "FAST FOOD" MUSIC GENERATION WHICH IS A MIRACLE!!!!!
LENNOX & REANOR BOTH HAVE A CORE AUDIENCE SO IT SHOULDN'T MATTER!!!!! JUST KEEP ON GIVING YOUR DIE HARD FANS GOOD QUALITY MUSIC, AND THEY WILL APPRECIATE YOU EVEN MORE!!!!!

DiminutiveRocker said:

He's basically right, but even writers are okay. Those people live off spreading themselves everywhere, so they might take a little hit here or there, but when everything is handed out they're way better off than an artist or label, for YEARS after the fact.

I don't know if I can cry for studio artists anyway though. People like Diane Warren are no gift to music and neither are any studio musicians. They contribute to the wave of crap.
[Edited 1/10/08 7:49am]

thesexofit said:

Dude, I never even thought about it like that!!

Adisa said:

thesexofit = genius

How naive is she? You can't compare the acquisition of music to a coffee...

Mong said:

Why?
What things are OK to steal and which not?

Surely she's established well enough that she could get one-off album deals with majors, a la Prince. What's her point? She doesn't like going the download route, and she doesn't want a long-term contract. So?

PANDURITO said:

music is a far more "liquid" product than food. food is an item. you can put it in a cup or a box, you can lock it in a pantry, you can store it behind glass.

music, however, is something that people are going to experience whether they pay for it or not, or even whether they WANT to hear it or not. if i hear an annie lennox song while i'm at the supermarket, should i give her money? if my neighbor is blasting annie lennox in the middle of the night and keeping me awake, do i owe annie lennox money because her music is crossing my earspace?

ok, i'm taking my example a little bit too far, but i think it's difficult if not impossible to compare the properties of music to the properties of a cup of coffee.

Anxiety said:

what if a cup of coffee... crosses your earspace.

someone had to pay to make it.

Cinnie said:

you know what else can cross your earspace? let me show you!

Anxiety said:

can i lock it in a pantry or store it behind glass?