Students put their own spin on downloading music

USA today ^ | 4.20.03 | Jefferson Graham

[discostu]

It is a bad thing because music made as a hobby gets no legs, it doesn't travel. Everbody looks at how people grab music from the net and thinks it will keep on that way, what they've forgotten is that you must first know about a song before you can got get it. If the current distribution model collapses you won't know about a song, so you won't be able to go get it. Music was a very minor part of people's lives before this current distribution model was invented, when this model collapses it will go back to that. It is a bad thing, at least it's a bad thing to a full time music junkie like me.

[Not Insane]

I believe people produced quality music before recording was invented.

How many musicians do you know NOW that DON'T have day jobs (and can pay rent or a house payment)?

[Not Insane]

__Some of the best music/songs ever produced were made as a hobby, not a job. __

Bingo! The problem with so much POP music is that it was created for one reason: earn money.

"Quality" music comes from the heart. And it will exist whether the artist is paid for it or not.

[discostu]

I believe it too. But I also believe that 7 million people worldwide didn't hear it.

I don't know any musicians now that don't have day jobs, and you'll never hear a single song they ever make because of it. Once the distribution model breaks down there will never again be a nationally or internationally known musician, every one will be a local phenomenon.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

What about electronica? Are people going to pay to see someone on-tour push the play button on their sampler?

What about video games? How much money are you going to make selling Doom T-shirts?

What about movies? When they perfect eye-glasses that can project a large-screen-like image on your retina there will be no reason to ever go to the movies.

Telling Bruce Springsteen to make his money on the road is one thing, but what about all of the other artists making easily pirated digital forms of art that don't have the same opportunities to make money off "experiences" or "hardware" associated with their software property.

[Not Insane]

__Once the distribution model breaks down there will never again be a nationally or internationally known musician, every one will be a local phenomenon. __

I disagree, if for no other reason than the fact that there was widespread distribution of music prior to the invention of the record. I think music will still be "sold," but only as attached to something else of value.

There ARE nationally known basketball players, even though almost ALL of their antics are watched live.

[Not Insane]

__...but what about all of the other artists making easily pirated digital forms of art that don't have the same opportunities to make money off "experiences" or "hardware" associated with their software property. __

They'll have to produce something people are willing to pay for - as most of the musicians I know do during their "day jobs."

[discostu]

But a lot of very good music was made with little intention to make serious money on it which then exploded into mass popularity. By limiting your arguement to pop music, a very small genre by published quantity inspite of it's large revenue, you show the problem with your whole arguement. The entire progressive 70s music run (my favorite genre) was music released on the idea that there had to be an audience for it somewhere and a global distribution scheme would find the people, most of it didn't go gold forget platinum, but it was popular enough to draw in for a profitable tour and allowed the artists to hone their skills for the next album by being full time musicians. The free download model won't do that.

[MississippiMan]

The logic the downloaders quoted is obviously silly, but the recording industry has lost this battle. Although I cannot defend the principle of the theft involved, I must be honest and say that I also have no sympathy whatsoever for the recording industry. They have consistently done everything in their power, for decades, to kill every digital recording technology that has arisen. This one came out of nowhere, too quickly for them to muscle people.

MM

[who_would_fardels_bear]

"If the current distribution model collapses you won't know about a song, so you won't be able to go get it."

There is now technology ... which will continuously be improved ... to analyze songs for musical content. It may be possible in the future to map songs not by artist or genre, but by some sort of profile based on the intruments used, the beat, the harmonies, etc.

Then you could type in a few of your favorite songs, and out would pop a list of similar songs tucked away in obscure places all over the net.

Looking for a song could become some weird version of "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon"!

[Not Insane]

__The entire progressive 70s music run (my favorite genre) was music released on the idea that there had to be an audience for it somewhere and a global distribution scheme would find the people, most of it didn't go gold forget platinum, but it was popular enough to draw in for a profitable tour and allowed the artists to hone their skills for the next album by being full time musicians. The free download model won't do that.__

True. It will do something else. Time will tell what. And seriously, it could be better!

[FierceDraka]

Of course once the bottom drops out of the CD market then the bottom will drop out of the entire music industry. Without the CD to push a band will no longer be able to build the reputation necessary to have a large profitable tour (where the real money for the band has always been). Then it's bye bye full time music makers, making music will once again be a hobby that some people do during their free time.

And is that outcome necessarily a bad thing? I believe, as an earlier poster stated, that the buggywhip makers and blacksmiths felt the same way a hundred years ago. And you're right - making music might be a hobby, just like the buggywhip makers and blacksmiths are today.

[Paul C. Jesup]

It is a bad thing because music made as a hobby gets no legs, it doesn't travel.

If it is good enough, it does on P2P programs, and since artist does the song as a hobby and NOT for profit, chances are that artist posted it on the P2P programs themselve.

Music was a very minor part of people's lives before this current distribution model was invented,

That is was YOU THINK! Music was VERY MUSH ALIVE before the current distribution model, it was alive in the churchs, bars, saloons, hotels, parties, privates homes and anywhere else someone felt like breaking into song and dance.

when this model collapses it will go back to that.

Nope, just a better model will replace it, and that model probably WON'T need middle-men.

It is a bad thing, at least it's a bad thing to a full time music junkie like me.

You're a music junkie and you DON'T mind the RIAA ripping you and the artist off. Now I know you are either crazy or lying.

[discostu]

There wasn't widespread distribution of music prior to the record. Prior to the record (and with it the music radio station) music was distributed in sheet form often by door-to-door salesmen, and anybody that didn't know how to play and instrument and own one to play was left out, and almost nobody heard the original version.

Basketball players have a national league (actually two national leagues if you count the college career) they play in with national (and international) TV contracts. They are watched live but they are watched live EVERYWHERE, without the NBA and NCAA (and NBC and TNT and ESPN and now Fox Sports) acting as the distrubution channel you would only know about these guys if you went to local basketball games and they played in them.

[Knitebane]

Gee, that explains why nobody's ever heard of Beethoven, Bach, Mozart or Chopin. Or Gershwin, Rogers, Hammerstein, Straus, Sousa or George M. Cohan.

Good thing we have that distribution model you spoke of that allows people to become known world-wide unlike those poor saps. Maybe then they wouldn't just be local phenomenons.

/sarcasm

[Not Insane]

So, financially speaking, what motivates everyone in the sports industry to do their part. Clearly it is not from sales of RECORDINGS of basketball games.

[longtermmemmory]

The problem is the price fixing of cd's. The price of a dvd has plunged but cd remain at the same high price. You are now able to buy whole seasons of popular shows at significant reduced prices for a quality set/package. The music industry has never understood what business they are in. They are not there to sell disks or packages they are there to sell the song. If they accepted napster's settlement offer they would still be alive.

Its not about protecting rights, its about protecting distribution. When a consumer can obtain a song at greater ease than buying a blank cd then they will have a desireable product.

[B-Chan]

Is downloading music the same as stealing music? Yes it is.

That being said: people in general are weak-willed; most folks will steal anything they can easily carry away as long as "everybody does it" too. And since there's no way to stuff the digital-music genie back in the lamp, the cold hard fact is that downloading (=stealing music) is here to stay.

Now, if you're saying that this means the death of the zillionaire touring "rock star/country star" icon we grew up with, then yes, it does -- but that sort of thing was always the creation of the recording industry anyway. Music has been liberated from that prison; they quit selling 45s years ago, and WLS isn't broadcasting Hank's latest honky-tonk hit from the stage of the Opry anymore. Information and media have been divorced: instead of selling expensive physical disks based upon exposure via nationwide radio/MTV airplay (based more on media hype and payola than quality), performers will now give away digital recordings of their works (they'll have no choice!). With these artist-sponsored free copies acting as promotional items, fans of the music will hopefully be driven to hear it performed live, thus providing income to the artist. Sales of t-shirts, posters, and other fan club items will supplement income from concert performances, and popular artists with big audiences will further profit from corporate sponsorships and website ad sales. Every artist becomes his own label! Yes, that means less money for most -- but it also means no suits to mess with the artistic content (or take their cut off the top)!

From now on musicians will have to build their audiences the hard way -- no more major-label hype, no more gifts to big-market jocks in exchange for airplay, no more shipping plastic disks around in trucks. From now on performance and presentation will draw the crowds; from now on sounds and skill are king.

Like it or not, recorded music is free from now on. The bad news (to some) is that the age of the major-label Music Superstar is closing. The good news is that the MTV/radio/RIAA "axis of evil" is dead as well -- and thus control of music to the people who create it -- the musicians -- returns.

[HighWheeler]

""I'm not scared," says UCLA history major Ean Plotkin, 21, who says he still downloads regularly. "The record labels will never be able to stop downloading. It's too widespread."

If this guy has any brain, he would have made up that name and age for the writer.

[discostu]

But how will my mapping software know to look for it? The internet is a big place and while the music corner currently gets a lot of attention it's actually very small. Many millions of URLs probably less than 1% actually have music behind them. That's a lot of searching for nothing. As for profiling music, some of my favorite musical discussions are trying to decide what genre band X fits into, this isn't an easy feat especially for anybody on the cutting edge or with a serious catelog.