What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
210 Comments
- trsitton, on 01/22/2009, -9/+68If they were so popular, why didn't they try playing a few gigs?
File-sharing is some of the best publicity a small band can get.
And you can't "pirate" your way into a concert, believe me, I've tried. - manova, on 01/22/2009, -12/+43FTA: "Would you want to continue doing something if you put all your energy, time and money into something and everyone told you you’re great and awesome but in the end you just get pissed on."
Yes, if I really love what I am doing and I am not just doing it for the money, then yes, I would keep making music no matter if it sold or didn't.
That is my problem with much of the music industry today. It should not be about the money, it should be about the music. I know that is idealistic. There are thousands of musicians and bands out there that make great music everyday that will never see more than beer money out of their work, but they still play and create. A handful will make it big, but most will not, but they will still play. If all of the record companies folded tomorrow, there will still be new music. True musicians just can't help themselves, they will play. - antechinus, on 01/22/2009, -2/+22That's totally ***** up. Music is an art.
- heystoopid, on 01/22/2009, -4/+21Sadly , if you look at the trash quality of new music such as the Rolling Stones top 100 or the Billboard top 100 , approximately 95 % of all the so called new music sold by the big four labels either sounds like a one note chainsaw singing off key , numerous cat and dog whippings or even some beating the "Alligators Ass" quite literally , for it is that bad it stinks so that you wish you hear no more of this ear twisting torture .
When you don't sell what the masses want you go out of business just like the buggy whip makers of old . - CressCrowbits, on 01/22/2009, -3/+20So how exactly do you expect musicians to feed themselves, pay the bills, record their music?
This is incredibly naive thinking. Music costs money to make, and those who put their heart and soul and not to mention a great deal of their time into deserve to make a living out of it, else why should they bother?
Do you want to see a world where the only music is from huge established acts who already got rich through traditional means, bedroom hobbyists or trust-fund kids? - thespiff, on 01/22/2009, -0/+16If you can't hear the art in your music, you're listening to the wrong music.
- dirtyknobs, on 01/22/2009, -1/+16The band in question did play shows in Japan. In this case though, they were specifically trying to target markets outside of the country. It's the same for bands in America trying to make it big in the UK, EU, wherever.
Yes, file-sharing is great to get a band's name out to many people, but struggling bands cannot eat publicity. If those fans who enjoy their music never give ANYTHING back, then they are simply killing off the thing they profess to love.
And also yes, live shows are absolutely the best way for a band to make money, and always have been. Still, a tiny band will always have problems traveling across the world. Until then they need to sell some REAL albums, then show that support to a label to get the backing to travel.
I am all for file sharing 100%, and I want to be clear that I don't disagree with you on any point. There just has to be a point when we step up and give something back. - michaelpinto, on 01/22/2009, -1/+13To me one of the main appeal of the J-pop bands is all of the visual stuff associated with them - I have friends who go crazy collecting limited edition CDs that come in all sorts of interesting packaging. These fans are so nuts they'll take photos of the CDs and share them with friends! So as much as I hate to say it the music itself has little value on its own - I wonder how many of those folks who downloaded the file even played it more than once?
So you're right in a sense - the fans are shallow. But it's not that they're shallow in their IQ, but rather that they're shallow in their loyalty (or interest) in the band. Much the way that you might listen to the song on the radio, like it when it's played again - but would never buy it. - borez, on 01/22/2009, -1/+13Actually I'm gonna add to this, I run a small independent London dance label, we don't shift a lot of vinyl, but we do get good radio, club plays etc. At the back end of last year I had one of the Dj's that we put single releases out with screaming at me down the phone over the lack of money he was making from his releases, the conversation went a little like this.
Him: WHAT THE ***** DO YOU MEAN IT HASN'T BROKE EVEN YET, THAT ***** TRACK IS PLAYING IN EVERY ***** CLUB I'M GOING TO... AND IT'S ALL OVER THE ***** RADIO?
Me: And how do you know it's playing in every club?
Him: BECAUSE WHEN I DJ I HEAR IT OUT ALL THE ***** TIME!
Me: And you're getting all these DJ gigs how?
Him: BECAUSE THE ***** TUNES BEING PLAYED ***** EVERYWHERE!
Me: So you're telling me you're not making any money?
Him: Yeah I'm ***** coining it in, just from DJ gigs though.
Me: And you're getting all these gigs how?
Him: ARE YOU ***** DEAF OR SOMETHING, FROM THE ***** SINGLE YOU PUT OUT YOU MUPPET!!!
Silence
Him: Oh.. I see your point mate
Nuff said really. - KMye, on 01/22/2009, -4/+15Perhaps it's terrible music, created by record companies, that's killing the industry...
Even all of my beloved sub-genres of electronic music, which have been much further from the poisonous influence of popular money than most generes, have been progressively ruined, in general, over the past several years by marketability's influence... - CressCrowbits, on 01/22/2009, -2/+12WRONG.
Only very large popular acts make money by touring. Your Madonnas, Cold Plays, U2s etc that can charge $100+ for a ticket make super-big bucks. Your fairly popular acts like Arcade Fire, mid-ranking rappers etc can make a reasonable return. Your small independent label band that doesn't have the investment muscle of a large label behind them will be very lucky to break even.
Acts who are touring by supporting a bigger act, have to pay to do so. They get nothing. - michaelpinto, on 01/22/2009, -0/+10Sadly that's what record companies think about their talent,,,
- JlmAWP, on 01/22/2009, -4/+14I think it's pretty well-known that bands make much more on tour than they do from CD sales. I buy all my music, and I go to concerts of bands I really like. Can't ask for much more than that.
Plus, it isn't helping that music is getting ***** by the minute. - robotwarlord, on 01/22/2009, -3/+12Your comment sounds clever, but is meaningless. A service and a product can be the same thing, music can be either. Whichever you describe it as has little bearing on this discussion.
- Arakcheev, on 01/22/2009, -3/+12Maybe they shouldn't have spent so much money on making themselves look like incredible douche bags. Could have cut costs there.
A band that hadn't even released a full album wanted to jump right into world touring?
It sounds to me like there were some poor management decisions involved here and as a result there's some nasty finger pointing. One thing I do know is that raging your "fans" and finger pointing won't encourage them to support you any more than they already have, which is apparently not at all. - borez, on 01/22/2009, -2/+11Note to that band: Start touring. Use your single, album etc. as a vehicle to get people through the front door of a venue... not as a profit making venture. That's how it works nowadays and that's how you'll make your money.
- magneteye, on 01/22/2009, -4/+13WTF? *****. The major labels (and others) killed it themselves by not adapting to the times. They were riding a wave of fortune that fell into their laps in the 50's. They have been taking advantage of artists and making billions. They deserve this. Who can actually feel sorry for those *****?
Anyway, you can't blame the "shallow" fans for not liking the way the music industry does things today. We all know that the "fans" like what people like Trent Reznor have been doing (obvious by his success), and that has been inspiring the current music scene. The fans are there! They just are tired of the RIAA and the ***** the "music industry" has been doing in the recent years (running the industry the old way). The fans, and the music are still there. Period.
It all comes down to paying attention, understanding your audience and giving them your art the way they want it. The band in this example apparently did it wrong, obviously. Bands like Radiohead and NiN are trying to do it right. NiN being at the forefront and best example of how to not only make more $$ as a band without a label, but also please your fans more. at the same time. The band wins, and so do the fans.
Ugh. ***** the RIAA! ***** me, I am drunk! - emailowndme, on 01/22/2009, -3/+11Facts are facts.
It's not the Artists who are failing, lets get that straight, it's the record labels that are. Music is still out there, and readily available with or without the record labels contributing. They control the radio, the merchandising, MTV, but they can't control the tastes of the consumer, and that is why the labels are failing. They pour ***** music down our throats because they control all of the above, and the internet is really the only place they don't control.
That said, to fail, even when your product is consumed more than ever before indicates a failure in your business model. It's only a matter of time before all of the major record labels fail, or change their business models, forcibly as a result of piracy.
Look at how Japanese companies deal with anime subbers for example. They utilize them for marketing, and their most downloaded products are quickly shipped to the US and elsewhere to make them money. If the record labels would utilize pirates in much the same way, perhaps as a source of advertising revenue, they may suddenly see an upsurge in profits. (a quick addendum, there are agreements made through communications with the 'pirates' that subbing stops when an anime is licensed in the US). What I personally see being viable with the music industry is a pay by advertising revenue method, and a bittorrent style service. CD's aren't going anywhere though, but adding more exclusive content to them would be nice (posters, interviews, hell, even stickers, etc)
Either way, failure, or remolding their business model, the consumers win(through piracy). - shinyhappydan, on 01/22/2009, -1/+9What if a band does not want to tour? Is making money out of recordings not a fair enough way of making money?
I think file sharing is great, but if you download music via P2P, really like it, and then NOT go out and buy a legitimate copy then that's wrong. Saying you're supporting them by going to gigs is great, but why don't you also support them by buying the music? You're getting enjoyment out of it. Pay for it.
By all means, if you download an album and think it's not worth the money then don't pay for it. But don't keep it on your hard disk either - inactive, on 01/22/2009, -0/+8...
- Chrysalii, on 01/22/2009, -0/+8you also can't tour without any money.
- inactive, on 01/22/2009, -1/+8I listen to music on last.fm, and I pay a $2.5 dollar fee every month. When I like a band, I buy the CD and add it to my collection.
I would buy even more CDs if they bundle more bands on them, be cause the technology allow the producers now to burn much more time music than the typical 8 to 20 songs. - CressCrowbits, on 01/22/2009, -0/+7Touring does NOT pay a lot, unless you are already massive.
- violentvinyl, on 01/22/2009, -0/+7I'm very glad you mentioned Picasso. To expand on that, you don't pay to look at low-res digital copies of Picasso's art (and if you do, you shouldn't). You pay to walk into a museum to see an original, as the artist intended it. You pay enough to keep the museum in business and so they can pay a modest salary to their employees. Companies pay royalties to use art when they want to make money. It should be no different with music. I don't want to pay to listen to your music over the radio, and I shouldn't have to if I want to put it on my iPod either. I have no problem paying to come see you perform it though, and I'd have no problem paying you to play it for a movie or game that I intend to make money on.
Technology gave artists a way to duplicate their work with very little effort and sell it. I think that means, through the use of technology, we have the right to take it back. The music industry has created this mechanism for selling music, and they do so by marketing and stifling local talent. They don't add any value to the equation. There is nothing gained by having everyone listen to the same music except to line the pockets of the industry suits and the artists who submit to them.
I feel very strongly that if we're ever going to truly move forward as a species, we have to get over this idea of hoarding intellectual property. As good as I believe capitalism can be, it relies very heavily on this idea of IP. There has to be a change, and unfortunately for the RIAA (and sometimes the artists who go into it "for the money") it's starting with our music. - grungegbunny, on 01/22/2009, -6/+13Instead of saying fans are shallow how looking at it from another point. Are the artists in it for money or for love of the art? Did Picasso think about all the money he would make when painting? Show me where it is written that music artists must be rich to be successful. Technology is only going to make it easier to get the music we want in the future not harder. It's time to reform the whole idea.
- 1980Tim, on 01/22/2009, -4/+11They DESERVE to make a living out of it? No. Just because you spend money, put your heart,soul and time into it doesn't mean you deserve anything.
My wife draws because she loves to draw. My grandma makes quilts because she loves to sew. My mom knits because, guess what, she loves to knit. None of them, no matter how much time and money they put into these things, think they DESERVE to make a living doing it.
If you want to be in a band be in a band. But don't bitch and moan when you don't become rich. We all have hobbies we put our hear and soul into and don't become rich from. Yours is no different. - powatom, on 01/22/2009, -2/+8Music from bands is a whole different thing from music from solo artists, or paintings. Being in a band requires organising. It means hiring somewhere to practice. It means shelling out for transport between venues.
I'm in a band, and for a small venue gig, it costs us around £60 if you tally up the cost each member spends on travelling to and from venues and rehearsal rooms. Then, we have to pay for recording if we want good quality. It's a LOT harder to record a band well than it is to record a solo artist well. That may not sound like a lot when divided between members, but it adds up. If we get asked to go play in London, we have to get ourselves down there, which increases the cost by a lot. I don't know about you, but the only money I get is the money I earn. I can't afford to just spend it all on performing and recording.
Bands spend far more money just being in a band than they receive from performing (hell, a lot of the time you don't even get your petrol costs covered, never mind any tangible benefit). Even extremely successful bands don't make much money considering the amount they generate through performances and record sales. It's the music industry's dirty little secret. The label will support the artist for as long as he / she is generating money for them. Only the hugely successful are capable of continuing their lavish lifestyles once they decide to stop recording or whatever.
We're in it because we love to do it, but if people complain how we never go to their town or we don't do enough gigs, I would just like to remind them that, as humans, we also need to eat. Which is why we all have to have full time jobs. If fans want a full time band - they should be ready to support artists. Music doesn't just magically appear in CD form - it takes time (and financial input).
If nobody got paid for performing, everybody would just pirate fruityloops and sit at home wanking over their new bassline. - samkityoung, on 01/22/2009, -0/+61980Tim,what seperates a hobby from a job? That band made a product to sell, therefore if people are using that product they should get paid. Of course that did not happen because everyone stole the music (yes, bury me, it is stealing no matter how much you rationalize how "good it is for the band"). Your wife draws. Does she do it to sell the product? If not, then great, I'm glad she enjoys. If she is trying to sell the product as a source of income, I'm sure she would not be happy if someone walked into your house and took the drawings.
People don't become rich from their hobbies. But people do expect to get paid at their jobs. - michaelpinto, on 01/22/2009, -1/+7It's very hard for a band that's outside of the United States to come here and tour. For a new act touring is hard enough, but add to that the logistics and paperwork of coming in from another country and it's a deal killer. You also have the chicken-egg issue of who will see a band they've never heard of before.
- Llanowar, on 01/22/2009, -1/+7That's because pirates are quite blunt. Storming the entrance with some weapon doesn't often get you in.
To get into concerts for free you'll need to be a ninja. - CressCrowbits, on 01/22/2009, -2/+8So you are saying music making should be purely the domain of the hobbyist?
And you are saying you deserve to get it for free, just because you can?
That's like saying because you can now download movies off torrents for free, means movie making should be purely the domain of the backyard hobbyist. Imagine a future where the only movies we can see are what people make and upload to youtube. That's some serious backwards thinking you've got going on there. - powatom, on 01/22/2009, -4/+10Every other job pays, dumbass.
- breakaway, on 01/22/2009, -0/+6DON'T COPY THAT FLOPPY!
- imakecomments, on 01/22/2009, -1/+6http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/
- thedogfatherx, on 01/22/2009, -2/+7Music is not free you ***** up. You don't think artists should be paid for their time? Do you know how hard it is to tour?
- djpray2k, on 01/22/2009, -1/+6Yeah Cribs is an odd one. You will hear 50 Cent complain about how badly pirates affect him but then you see him swanning around in Mike Tysons old house (or until it burnt to the ground). For someone with little (if any) tallent he doesn't seem to be doing that bad to me.
- ColoursInMyHead, on 01/22/2009, -0/+5Bang on.
- pudds, on 01/22/2009, -0/+5The author is probably right, and truth be told, I'm probably one of those people. I enjoy listening to music, and in fact, I listen almost constantly throughout the day. But music for me isn't a passion, it's background filler. If filesharing were to disappear, I'd go back to listening to the radio or listening online; I simply don't have the motivation to pay for music.
- CressCrowbits, on 01/22/2009, -1/+6Also, unless you are likely to attract many hundreds of fans to attend every one of your gigs, you'll likely lose a lot of money by touring.
- Danblank000, on 01/22/2009, -1/+6bands make **** all money from their CDs anyway. If you truly want to support a band then go see them live, this is their best source of revenue; live shows and official merchandise is the way forward.
- sport11rocks, on 01/22/2009, -0/+5Stop listening to the radio!
- dirtyknobs, on 01/22/2009, -0/+5Yes, you're exactly right. The visual scene is just that, VISUAL. It's NOT about the music and never really has been. That doesn't mean that there aren't some really amazing vis-kei bands out there. Regardless of why fans listen, it's still a massive undertaking to get even a single song recorded and promoted.
The point is, if you like a band, for whatever reason, the best way to support them is to buy their stuff and go to their shows, not wait for one person to buy it, share it and then pass the copy around a million times. Plus, showing a girl your micro hard drive full of tiny mp3s just doesn't seem as cool as whipping out a deluxe 12" special edition, if you know what I mean. - emailowndme, on 01/22/2009, -1/+6For an example of a band who has done all they can to avoid the limelight, despite being totally ***** awesome, and an amazing live show, check out Clutch.
The thing with them is, they ***** tour, alot, like 360 day's a year alot...
From what I am understanding from this article, these guys are glam rockers, Glam in the 80's relied on CD releases and crap, because their live shows were terrible...
Whatever though. - mrnathan, on 01/22/2009, -4/+9was. Music was an art.
- jguy584, on 01/22/2009, -1/+5This article brought up a great point, and shows why it doesn't matter that the big 4 only release ***** music. The audience that listens to this mass produced radio music are just shallow fans like the articles says. They don't care for the music, they care for fitting in. They care for being able to listen to the radio station that they think is "hip" to listen to, and knowing the latest big radio song to be released so they can play it at their party (and subsequently have 50 other shallow music fans come tell them how awesome the song is.)
Most people don't care about music, but feel they have too, so they just eat up any garbage that everyone else is. To them though it doesn't matter that it sucks, nor do they know any better to see why it sucks. It serves its purpose as a trendy tool, and that's all its meant to be. The big 4 know this and will continue to reinforce this everywhere, while continuing to push out bad music. - spikewilbury, on 01/22/2009, -0/+4sell vinyl
- exipolar, on 01/22/2009, -0/+4Truthfully, the problem I've discovered that with filesharing and the postmodern compartmentalization of music in the form of "genres" has turned kids into using music as a form a fashion to flaunt to their peers.
"See I listen to this, I'm better than you" this is the goal I see in many youth, that effect does not require one to purchase the material, simply that one has it. It's not about loving a band, it's about wearing them a feeling special in a meaningless world.
as sad as it is, as said in spaceballs, the real money is made in merchandising. - Krakerjax, on 01/22/2009, -1/+5What no one seems to realize is, regardless of what you say about "Oh I cant spend the money" or "I'm helping the band by telling my friends about it", the author is still right.
You people bitch and moan that music sucks now-a-days. Well no *****, how can it be good if none of the bands have any real monetary support from the fans? - doctordbx, on 01/22/2009, -0/+4CDs are pressed not burnt, and that 7.99 CD cost about 80 p to make including packaging, pressing, shipping etc.
- CressCrowbits, on 01/22/2009, -0/+4I'm fairly sure CDs or downloads of albums that have been 'produced' are 'products'.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 218 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is