It certainly doesn't help the industry when you can go on youtube and down load an entire album for free. I just did it with Robin Thicke's latest. I'm usually one who has to have an actual physical product in my hand with artwork, liner notes, etc but, in this case, it really wasn't necessary. And I know a lot of young people don't care anything about artwork and liner notes.

kitbradley said:

And I know a lot of young people don't care anything about artwork and liner notes.

And old people. Hell, they're happy if they knew the song title to find it.

kitbradley said:

It certainly doesn't help the industry when you can go on youtube and down load an entire album for free. I just did it with Robin Thicke's latest. I'm usually one who has to have an actual physical product in my hand with artwork, liner notes, etc but, in this case, it really wasn't necessary. And I know a lot of young people don't care anything about artwork and liner notes.

True but my take on that is, folks who were going 2 buy the product, will buy the product.

get rid of soundscan and all the charts and let the artists find creative ways to get their music out.let them use corporate sponsors like jayz or allow them to bundle the cd's with concert tickets,ect.

the real problem is that the music is not on the same level as yesteryear

Graycap23 said:

True but my take on that is, folks who were going 2 buy the product, will buy the product.

But they might not neccesarily buy an official product. There's people at jobs I've worked and in the neighborhood that sell CDs and DVDs that they make themselves. They have a list of songs/albums/movies that the person buying can choose from to make a custom CD, like a mix CD of different songs.

Cinny said:

kitbradley said:

And I know a lot of young people don't care anything about artwork and liner notes.

And old people. Hell, they're happy if they knew the song title to find it.

I know. It's so funny when I hear them in the record stores talking to a sales person, quoting lyrics and asking the sales person do they have that song? And it turns out to be something really old by the Chi-Lites or somebody like that.

But "old" people they are less likely to download MP3's or from youtube because most of them don't know how to do that either. We still have a few music stores around in Michigan. I go to at least one every weekend. I very seldom see anyone who looks under the age of 30 in any of those stores making purchases. Some may be brosing with their parents but that's about it. Like someone else said earlier, when I mention to anyone under the age of 40 that I still buy CD's, they look at me like I'm Fred Flintstone. Unless it's my only option, I don't think I will ever be comfortable downloading an entire album digitally (especially if I have to pay for it), if it's an artist I care about. The CD hunt is a musical experience for me. Downloading from the internet is not.

[Edited 8/5/13 7:07am]

Scorp said:

the real problem is that the music is not on the same level as yesteryear

I'm not sure I'd completely agree with that. The public has shelled out plenty of money for millions of copies of crappy music before, along with the quality stuff. It's not like only "good" music sold in the past.

Not that it doesn't have anything to do with quality, but it's bigger than quality issues - it's a shift of how lots of people consume music and a shift in how much physical music is valued.

There's seems to be a "death of music sales" article every month.

coltrane3 said:

Scorp said:

the real problem is that the music is not on the same level as yesteryear

I'm not sure I'd completely agree with that. The public has shelled out plenty of money for millions of copies of crappy music before, along with the quality stuff. It's not like only "good" music sold in the past.

Not that it doesn't have anything to do with quality, but it's bigger than quality issues - it's a shift of how lots of people consume music and a shift in how much physical music is valued.

There's seems to be a "death of music sales" article every month.

--------

"death of music sales" article every month" Because it is true. If people liked the music they would buy especially older people who actually have money to spend. It is not as easy to download free music as it was a few years ago. The music industry expected to see an uptick in sales once the used their lobby power to get rid of sites but because they continue to invest in no-talent artist with no clue has to develop anyone sales continue to slide.

coltrane3 said:

Scorp said:

the real problem is that the music is not on the same level as yesteryear

I'm not sure I'd completely agree with that. The public has shelled out plenty of money for millions of copies of crappy music before, along with the quality stuff. It's not like only "good" music sold in the past.

Not that it doesn't have anything to do with quality, but it's bigger than quality issues - it's a shift of how lots of people consume music and a shift in how much physical music is valued.

There's seems to be a "death of music sales" article every month.

it's like this......

I was 15 years old, just finishing my sophomore year in high school in 1987

and I was at my older cousins house one summer evening

I sat on her porch by myself and took in the entire scene and the music that was beginning to project to the public, particularly the new generation that was coming of age, a generation I was associated with

and as I sat there, I noticed the tone, the mood, the lyrical content began to change noticeably, exploitation of teh culture, aggressive presentation, a coarsening of the heart

and this change was not done in natural flow but deliberate

and after sitting there those couple of hours, a voice spoke to me and said "we are in serious trouble".....

and that's a day I'll never forget, so what we are witnessing now falls in line with what spoke to me 26 years ago.....

yes, there was bad music then, but it was more exception than it was the rule.....

but the well has run dry, culture has been obliterated and artists have been relying on samples for decades to come up w/catchy beats, to formulate the hook, to drive home the melody....

for myself, I don't focus on teh sales as much as I do the quality of the music or the lack thereof

take sampling out of the equation, and this industry would not exist.........

I've never ever been a proponent of sampling, it cheats everyone involved in teh long run: the artist who made the music, the artist using the music, and the record buying public from supporting anything authentic....

[Edited 8/5/13 7:56am]

Scorp said:

the real problem is that the music is not on the same level as yesteryear

the main problem is that few people want to pay for what you can get for free.

There are two different problems. One is ethical: many music fans are thieves, period. Thieves and cowards, because they steal thanks to the anonymity of the internet. They wouldn't dare to do it in a "physical" shop, because they're cowards. And the second is esthetic: many people don't value well-crafted cultural products, and are happy with shitty digital files.

-------

So: we have the governments we deserve. Stop moaning.

[Edited 8/5/13 13:10pm]

Javi said:

And the second is esthetic: many people don't value well-crafted cultural products, and are happy with shitty digital files.

Many teens and younger people grew up listening to music with Ipods, cell phones, and computer speakers. So that's all they know. They didn't grow up with a stereo system or boom box. So they might not know about sound quality or they might just think it's about surround sound speakers to watch movies and TV up loud and not necessarily for music.

.

Even in the record days, all records didn't have the same sound quality (and neither did tapes). It depended on what the processing plant used as material for the records, how much time is put on them, the quality of the tape the recording studio used, or special mixing like half speed or quadraphonic sound. In a lot of cases 12" maxi singles sound louder or have more bass than the same song on an album, even if it's the same exact version.

Sales will recover if the music industry divorced itself from iTunes, and found a way to force people back to stores to buy CDs. The worse thing the music industry did was align itself with the mp3 boom. THAT killed sales.

LiLi1992 said:

Scorp said:

the real problem is that the music is not on the same level as yesteryear

the main problem is that few people want to pay for what you can get for free.

Basically.

I can honestly say that I never download or "steal" music.I like to support artists who make good music that I like.Plus,I like having the actual CD with the liner notes,photos,lyrics,etc.I'm Old School,lol.

MickyDolenz said:

Javi said:

And the second is esthetic: many people don't value well-crafted cultural products, and are happy with shitty digital files.

Many teens and younger people grew up listening to music with Ipods, cell phones, and computer speakers. So that's all they know. They didn't grow up with a stereo system or boom box. So they might not know about sound quality or they might just think it's about surround sound speakers to watch movies and TV up loud and not necessarily for music.

.

Even in the record days, all records didn't have the same sound quality (and neither did tapes). It depended on what the processing plant used as material for the records, how much time is put on them, the quality of the tape the recording studio used, or special mixing like half speed or quadraphonic sound. In a lot of cases 12" maxi singles sound louder or have more bass than the same song on an album, even if it's the same exact version.

The thing I value the most in vinyls is not its sound (though I certainly appreciate it), but its beauty as physical objects: the black circle, the cover art, the photos... That's what I appreciate the most, also in CDs, though to a lesser extent.

One argument I don't agree with at all is that of the quality of today's music. The argument goes like this: record sales have diminished because there's not as good music as before. Several of the posters here have used this argument.

-------

On the contrary, I think there's fantastic music now, awesome new bands and amazing records by older acts. So I don't get why, when Adele started selling huge quantities, many people said: "See? When there's good music, it sells". No. There's fantastic music that doesn't sell just because people don't want to pay some dollars for it and prefer to download it for free. How sad is it?

MickyDolenz said:

Graycap23 said:

True but my take on that is, folks who were going 2 buy the product, will buy the product.

But they might not neccesarily buy an official product. There's people at jobs I've worked and in the neighborhood that sell CDs and DVDs that they make themselves. They have a list of songs/albums/movies that the person buying can choose from to make a custom CD, like a mix CD of different songs.

True.

Javi said:

One argument I don't agree with at all is that of the quality of today's music. The argument goes like this: record sales have diminished because there's not as good music as before. Several of the posters here have used this argument.

-------

On the contrary, I think there's fantastic music now, awesome new bands and amazing records by older acts. So I don't get why, when Adele started selling huge quantities, many people said: "See? When there's good music, it sells". No. There's fantastic music that doesn't sell just because people don't want to pay some dollars for it and prefer to download it for free. How sad is it?

if there was a stipulation implemented today that prohibited the use of sampling

could today's music industry thrive?

Scorp said:

Javi said:

One argument I don't agree with at all is that of the quality of today's music. The argument goes like this: record sales have diminished because there's not as good music as before. Several of the posters here have used this argument.

-------

On the contrary, I think there's fantastic music now, awesome new bands and amazing records by older acts. So I don't get why, when Adele started selling huge quantities, many people said: "See? When there's good music, it sells". No. There's fantastic music that doesn't sell just because people don't want to pay some dollars for it and prefer to download it for free. How sad is it?

if there was a stipulation implemented today that prohibited the use of sampling

could today's music industry thrive?

Current sampling laws are already so stifling, you will never hear a classic collage album like 3 Feet High And Rising, Fear Of A Black Planet, Paul's Boutique, or even The Chronic, again.

2006 was the beginning of the end. In 2006, Tower Records, Sam Goody, The Wherehouse/FYE, and a slew of Mom & Pop/Indies, etc starting closing their doors by the week.

---

Shortly before the closings, I would go into these stores with money in hand, looking for something new and walk out empty and saddened. There were racks and racks of CD's, but I either owned it or it wasn't interesting enough to buy. I was sick of the re-releases, re-issues of titles I already owned and I refuse to buy them again.

---

A 15 year old in 2006 is now 22, and never experienced having record/music stores in the mall and stores in their neighborhood. All they know is downloading and it's their norm. Deleting this experience from their everyday life has forced them to adapt on how they listen and "acquire" music.

---

I have a 14 year old. He has so much music and he never pays for it. I can't tell him that it's wrong to acquire music that way because he sees no harm in it and neither do I. How is it stealing when it's all constantly handed to you?

----

The machine invented itself...and there is no turning back.

Scorp said:

if there was a stipulation implemented today that prohibited the use of sampling

could today's music industry thrive?

There's little, if any sampling in many types of music. There's also music in countries besides the USA, so saying that the music business is dependent on sampling makes no sense. It's said that country music has the highest ratio of actual CD sales in the US, and it doesn't depend on sampling.

MickyDolenz said:

Scorp said:

if there was a stipulation implemented today that prohibited the use of sampling

could today's music industry thrive?

There's little, if any sampling in many types of music. There's also music in countries besides the USA, so saying that the music business is dependent on sampling makes no sense. It's said that country music has the highest ratio of actual CD sales in the US, and it doesn't depend on sampling.

That may be true but look atthe hottest song in the U.S. right now.

Blurred Lines...............using samples of Marvin Gaye.

Graycap23 said:

MickyDolenz said:

There's little, if any sampling in many types of music. There's also music in countries besides the USA, so saying that the music business is dependent on sampling makes no sense. It's said that country music has the highest ratio of actual CD sales in the US, and it doesn't depend on sampling.

That may be true but look atthe hottest song in the U.S. right now.

Blurred Lines...............using samples of Marvin Gaye.

But the music business is not only Top 40 hit radio. There's many types of music that is not played on Top 40 radio and never really has been, and they've managed to survive. The mainstream radio hits acts are a very small percentage of the thousands of performers and records out there. Top 40 is mainly dependent on a "star" system, so the labels spend a lot of money promoting (aka payola) a particular act to make them famous. Some groups became popular without radio hits like Pink Floyd and Metallica.

MickyDolenz said:

Graycap23 said:

That may be true but look atthe hottest song in the U.S. right now.

Blurred Lines...............using samples of Marvin Gaye.

But the music business is not only Top 40 hit radio. There's many types of music that is not played on Top 40 radio and never really has been, and they've managed to survive. The mainstream radio hits acts are a very small percentage of the thousands of performers and records out there. Top 40 is mainly dependent on a "star" system, so the labels spend a lot of money promoting (aka payola) a particular act to make them famous. Some groups became popular without radio hits like Pink Floyd and Metallica.

I understand.

Is this really that shocking?