I think you're misunderstanding his use of "audience". Given that it's a major chore to get people out of their houses, your audience consists of those who are downloading your music and buying your CDs online.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Are we recording too much, too soon?
- Thread starter Dave Martin
- Start date
Oh, I understand that all right - I simply haven't seen many musicians who are having folks pay to download their music or selling lots of CD's online, unless those people are touring and getting substantial airplay (on radio and TV.). While a few hundred CD's sold online is wonderful for those who sell them, it won't pay the rent, you know?
Looking ahead:
Eventually, no one will "own" music anymore, in the sense of physically possessing a CD or album.
Most of us will simply access an iPod-like library of every song ever recorded, hopefully in greater fidelity than what we are experiencing currently. The Great Jukebox in the Sky.
The challenge (to unknown bands) will be in getting added to that mammoth library of songs. Like everything, it's all about knowing the gatekeepers.
Live music will always be important, but the live music fanbase is shrinking due to all the other distractions. And currently, probably 90% of bands completely suck (live or otherwise). So it's a bit hit or miss for the live music fan.
That is all.
Eventually, no one will "own" music anymore, in the sense of physically possessing a CD or album.
Most of us will simply access an iPod-like library of every song ever recorded, hopefully in greater fidelity than what we are experiencing currently. The Great Jukebox in the Sky.
The challenge (to unknown bands) will be in getting added to that mammoth library of songs. Like everything, it's all about knowing the gatekeepers.
Live music will always be important, but the live music fanbase is shrinking due to all the other distractions. And currently, probably 90% of bands completely suck (live or otherwise). So it's a bit hit or miss for the live music fan.
That is all.
not every musician has the same agenda. not every bass player posting on talkbass has the same agenda.
Well let's be serious here, are you in a situation where you have an insight into the business model of every musician out there? I mean, why would you have seen musicians who are getting paid for downloads?
In any case, I feel like downloads have filled the niche that recorded music originally did, which is cheap demo media. That may translate into getting more people out to gigs or it may translate into getting more people to purchase physical recordings. In some cases, it's a direct sale thing. But like you, I don't know how everyone else is making their money.
My problem with that is currently the download forms aren't as high sound quality as CD. Which brings a trend in people in general aren't as concerned about quality and "Good Enough" is all they care about. In my day there were stereo stores everywhere and people wanted a good sounding stereo, now iPods, boomboxes, and most of the gear is acceptable. Same goes with music so much formula music and music all about video and media coverage not the quality of music or musicians. Some of the non-formula stuff is Indie, but they are mainly the ones with home studios and not high quality recording.
IMO with computers making producing all sorts of things cheaper and easier we are getting quanity, but not quaility.
I absolutley agree. And I think that will be great for both musicians and consumers.
People will be able to buy music directly from the artist, and the cost will be much less because of all of the associated costs (packaging, distributing, artwork, etc.) of putting out an actual CD for a record label.
But for musicians, they will actually make more money, because there is no need for record labels (in the way they are assembled now) anymore, and so all of the money will go to them, without the majority of it going to the record labels.
The difficulty for artists will be finding an audience, because there will not be giant record companies telling the average Joe what to buy.
IMO that just means that the artist needs to work within that limitation, either by adjusting their business model, production practices, or by writing better songs.
There is too much stuff out there right now which was "produced well" and suffers from awful songwriting.
Well, I don't have any insights, but I've been studying on this for a few years now, talking about it on forums such as this one, working with quite a number of indie type acts in a number of different fields (sometimes playing with them, sometimes either recording or producing them), and generally trying to figure out a workable business plan based only on the internet and downloads. And I haven't figured it out yet. Wothout constant touring and support (in one way or another) from a major corporation, I simply haven't found anyone who says that an internet only business method works. That's not to say that there aren't acts who have made it work, it's just that I haven't found one yet.
I absolutely agree that awful songwriting is the worst problem facing contemporary pop music, not downloads or the ever expanding entertainment options.
On the other hand, the music business as we know (or knew) it was based on 45rpm records, which certainly were NOT high fidelity. and up until the mid 1970's, kids listened to those 45's on AM radio. Fidelity isn't the problem - bad songs performed by bad singers and mediocre musicians are.
As a an old bass player who has seen a lot come and go, all of the posts are valid. Right now there are alot more recording studios in my town than there are places to play live. I'm sure all would rather play for a live crowd than a microphone. But, when the live gigs dry up you have to find an outlet and the studio has filled that need.
