The Seeker Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 I only know her because Kanye West interrupted her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edna Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 If not for the music industrywe wouldn't be here. We wouldn't have known about all the music that made us so happy. Now that I'm not part of it anymore, I still hope they will go on. Lowering prices and getting to agreements with the musicians, knowing the industry is not that powerfull now. It has changed, as Martin said, there are two or three majors now... hope they learned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farin Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 It has changed, as Martin said, there are two or three majors now... hope they learned. actually I meant that in a negative sense... they're so big because they bought everything and everyone else and in all types of economy a monopoly (or oligopoly) is bad for the consumers, because they dictate the quality and the prices with only few competition... I figured that, but I wanted to express my distaste for her celebrity by responding to your sarcastic ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRaccoon Posted November 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 I just wanted to express my opinion with a healthy dose of sarcastic ignorance that being said, I actually don't think she's that famous here (I only know her by name too) Haha I tend to forget that I'm the young one here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueAngel Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 ^Yeah, you have to make an allowance for Farin, in his old age he's just not keeping track of all the American, MTV, flavour-of-the-month pop tartlet cardboard cutouts like he used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 You guys are going to love Shawna's interview with Tommy James, where he makes the case for Sgt. Pepper starting the decline of the music industry (labels focus on albums instead of singles, so more chance of 10 songs nobody wants to hear instead of one). What I think is really interesting about Rocky's post is how the blame is placed on people who don't care about music taking over the industry. There's a lot of truth to that. My theory is that deregulation and technology put these people in place to begin with. Deregulation was more a problem in radio, where in the '90s the limits were lifted on the number of stations a company could own. Technology made it easier to create and distribute music, which made it easier for business types to dabble in the music, instead of the other way around. You're seeing the same thing on the Internet - Some guy who loves hiking starts a great website on the subject in 1998, which is bought by a big corporation in 2005 that's never been in the woods. They "monetize" the site, squeezing more money out of it, but slowly kill it in the process. By now, it's the established site with the best domain name, so people will keep going to it - for a while anyway. Wow, that was a little off-track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRaccoon Posted November 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 Yea. So many things have become regulated and corporated. It happens in radio a lot. Like, I DJ for a radio station and we are given a playlist that says "Heavy, medium or light." On the CD rack behind us, the CDs are labeled as heavy medium or light. We play the heavy's a lot, the mediums a bit and the lights every now and then. My friend and I have a specialty show and we can play whatever there. But I've seen this a lot where radio stations tell their DJs what to play. Regulate everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levis Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 A commercial or community station? Commercial stations are at the mercy of advertising revenue which will only come in when they have a substantial listening population. They can't focus on the music, so to speak, because they need to focus on making the money to keep themselves alive. Community stations are wayyy more flexible with music because they're not dependent on advertising revenue so much so can focus more on promoting independent artists and music no one's heard. If it was a community radio station that was telling DJs what to play (and it wasn't something underground or unheard) then something's wrong with the station itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 I guess someday albums will not be sold at all, but who cares really, professional musicians were able to make a living long before the invention of recorded music. I'm always confused when people act like music was born with the vinyl record and will die with the CD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRaccoon Posted November 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 A commercial or community station? Commercial stations are at the mercy of advertising revenue which will only come in when they have a substantial listening population. They can't focus on the music, so to speak, because they need to focus on making the money to keep themselves alive. Community stations are wayyy more flexible with music because they're not dependent on advertising revenue so much so can focus more on promoting independent artists and music no one's heard. If it was a community radio station that was telling DJs what to play (and it wasn't something underground or unheard) then something's wrong with the station itself. It's a college radio station. There are a few specialty shows where people play what they want but aside from that it's formatted. It doesn't play pop music though. Mostly folk, 60s music, indie music, jazz and spanish music. And odd selection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blind-fitter Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 Anyways; of course the music industry hasn't "died". As long as there is music, there will be some kind of a music industry. The more pertinent question is whether music can survive the music industry's relentless bid to break its spirit? I know it's blatantly "Video Killed The Radio Star" reductivism to put it this way, but I don't have time for a thesis. The music industry of which we speak should more honestly be referred to as "the entertainment industry", such is the interdependence now between "sound" and "vision": "image" and media ubiquity are now essentials rather than desirables, (or even non-requisites, as they might be, in an ideal world). Furthermore, who hasn't noticed the growing influence of an unfortunate developing and mutually-binding relationship with the televisual medium, via TV "talent" shows - "Idol" "X-Factor", etc.- which happen to be the most popular shows with the international viewing public right now. Whilst purporting to be in some way about "music", these are a deception on a massive scale. They create facsimiles of music; using a "painting-by-numbers" approach, they create a phenomenon which strongly resembles what music is perceived to look like, but which, by dint of the sheer soullessness of it all, is not actually music. Prior to his involvement in TV Talent programmes, Simon Cowell worked in the music biz, in A & R. His record for discovering exceptional musical talent was less than impressive; Sinitta, WestLife, etc. Soulless *******, which amply demonstrated his contempt for music and the mugs that buy into his vision of what music ought to be. Isn't it heartening that Cowell is now one of the most wealthy and influential people in the entertainment business? Is this the kind of world we want to live in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLizard Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 If it was a community radio station that was telling DJs what to play (and it wasn't something underground or unheard) then something's wrong with the station itself. We are supposed to play 50% rotation music during our shows on WVFI, but that's to give exposure to the new music, not to sell advertising or anything monetary. There's no money involved in anything going on in our station, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levis Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 I completely forgot about college radio. That doesn't count as community, does it? 3RRR (community) here plays mostly independent, local music and some old, obscure songs (it's where I heard that 'Concorde' song that B-F posted in Most Obscure Songs). The regular rotation, giving relatively more 'mainstream' (not necessarily top 40, or pop) stuff exposure is more in the hands Triple J which is more Manchester Orchestra, Passion Pit, Silversun Pickups, The Big Pink, Empire of the Sun and local acts with bigger names. It's much more international and current as opposed to 3RRR and PBS who are all obscure and underground and have different styles of music for each show. Not that they can play whatever they want (I think they have to play a certain % of Australian artists, for e.g.) but they do have significantly more freedom to do so than a station that has to depend on advertising revenue. Commercial stations are a bit dependent on non-profit stations for good, unheard music that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Joe Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 The music industry is not dead...but MTV is. Someone should let them know. It's sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edna Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 You're seeing the same thing on the Internet - Some guy who loves hiking starts a great website on the subject in 1998, which is bought by a big corporation in 2005 that's never been in the woods. They "monetize" the site, squeezing more money out of it, but slowly kill it in the process. By now, it's the established site with the best domain name, so people will keep going to it - for a while anyway. Wow, that was a little off-track. No, it wasn't at all. Because people in the music industry might as well sell insurances, shoes, food or whatever. Most of them love money more than music. I still recall those A&R who really knew something was good. They would hire the artist even if the artist wouldn't be a seel-out... those people working for labels also had a small little box for their feelings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Without getting technical... No, the music industry is BOOMING!!! Money-wise and music-wise. I remember before I was a teen-ager and my mother didn't understand or particularly care for Lynyrd Skynrd when they first sang "FreeBird" way back when! Some truly fantastic songs that many aren't familiar with currently will one day be classic years from now. Batman, one of my favourite posters, brought that to my attention and I believe it to be a profound concept which is true. JMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chutzpah Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 Look, the music industry is just re-inventing itself...It's all about money and in the long run...talent will prevail...although I do get a little nervous about these talentless rappers... but...people will remember the good ones and always buy the music (and play it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 people will remember the good ones and always buy the music (and play it) No disagreement there, chutzpah. Though, I disagree with the music re-inventing itself statement. Music wasn't "invented!" Music has always been music and music always will be that way! What or whom do you think created, or in your words, "re-invented music?" I'm curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 As usual, MT's got the words of wisdom! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chutzpah Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I was talking about the music "industry"...not artists...or musicians (though that can happen) (non musicians too)...I just meant I guess sampling but, in the long run it's going to be... good music is good music...and it will withstand whatever happens to the "industry" Hopefully, everyone understands... :guitar: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 How does sampling factor into the discussion? That specific art form has been around for nearly as long as recorded music has (sampling was invented in the 1930's, maybe earlier, and as far as I know the phonograph was invented in the late 1800's). I'm not really sure what you're trying to say about sampling, but there's really no general statement you can make about it since it has survived multiple generations and has accomplished different things in each generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chutzpah Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 OK...nah...it's a little different...sampling and stealing someone's riff Or chords (or in some cases stealing a whole song)...I'm sure someone's getting some money out of this...what I'm trying to say is...good music will survive...and very good music will go on...forever...minus the samplers and that kind of stuff...the music industry will always make money...they don't care about anything...except making money...and in the long run it's the musicians (the real people) who create and play...it's all about money folks... again I'm talking about the music industry...some people aren't talented...And make lots of money... because of what other people play and create...I'm being nice...because I play some of this stuff...but to have some ass@^%$ want to come up and sing...(or try) with his posse then complain when we really play...complain and stuff...about the words (that he does't even know) I'll always be around and playing (hopefully)Sorry, bout the long post again folks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted November 26, 2009 Report Share Posted November 26, 2009 Sampling isn't all about stealing, I mean in some cases it is ("Ice Ice Baby" is a popular example), but the people who do it well can take a part of a song and really mutate it into something different and oftentimes improve it. If you're doing it correctly, it's not any different than "stealing" the sound of a piano with a synthesizer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyRaccoon Posted November 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2009 I really hate it when the sampling is the main part of the song. I mean in Kanye's "Harder, Faster, Stronger" the entire part of the song that made everyone recognize it was a Daft Punk song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farin Posted November 26, 2009 Report Share Posted November 26, 2009 you have to differentiate, 'sampling' isn't always 'ripping off' or 'stealing', just like making a cover isn't always "too lazy to think of a hit song by yourself" the example I'm always showing when it comes to this discussion a song made up entirely out of samples... a rip off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now