CANNES — Now that even digital music revenue growth is faltering amid rampant file-sharing by consumers, the major record labels are closer than ever to releasing music on the Internet with no copying restrictions — a step they once vowed never to take.
Executives of several technology companies meeting here at Midem, the annual global trade fair for the music industry, said this weekend that a move toward the sale of unrestricted digital files in the MP3 format from at least one of the four major record companies could come within months.
Music executives, while saying that timetable was self-serving on the part of technology companies that would benefit from the change, nevertheless acknowledged that the debate was front and center.
Behind the public posturing, there are signs of a new appreciation in the industry for unrestricted copies, which could be sold as singles or through subscription services or made freely available on advertising-supporting Internet sites.
“The question is what is their level of pain,” said David Goldberg of Yahoo. “What level of sales decline is needed to take that leap?”
Instead of reaching out, examining new technology, the RIAA spent their time and energy trying to be the Telcos of music. Holding back progress at the expense of consumers has been their only strategy — so far.
“the major record labels are closer than ever to releasing music on the Internet with no copying restrictions — a step they once vowed never to take.”
I find that very strange. I’ve been buying music off the internet without copying restrictions for years. My source is Amazon.com and the DRM-free format the music industry is using is called the Compact Disc.
I order them online, they ship them, then I rip them. I can’t believe that the music industry is unaware of this.
The major labels haven’t figured out yet that they are 21st century buggy whip manufacturers..
Can I put in a good word for DRM? — at least as a concept?
There must be a way to get royalties back to the artists and record companies. I can’t imagine how you’d do that in a digital era without some sort of DRM.
I think the subscription model is probably the answer — get as many people as possible to pony up a monthly fee for all-they-can hear. In the CD era, I probably bought one a month on average — I’d be willing to spend that same amount to listen to an ENTIRE catalog of music for a month.
But, that, of course would require some sort of DRM, right?
SN, although CDs don’t have DRM record companies do things to their media to make it harder to rip a CD. If you remember some time ago Philips ordered the removal of the Compact CD logo from some music CDs since the modifications done to the media was so extreme that it went out of the CD standard.
http://tinyurl.com/2qofmn
3. “I can’t imagine how you’d do that in a digital era without some sort of DRM.”
The music industry currently makes most of its money selling digital music without any DRM. It’s called the compact disc.
Live music will be the primary way for artists to make money.
Successful acts will make each show a little different, yet similar enough that each songs still feels like the one that induced the audience to come to the show.
Think Grateful Dead, Phish, etc.
Recorded music will be given away to entice you to come to the live shows.
Because of technology, there is a GLUT of good music out there in digital form.
But a great live act? That will something more rare.
6. “Because of technology, there is a GLUT of good music out there in digital form.”
Very interesting. It is certainly very easy for a musician to get his music heard by millions, nowadays. The problem is that all of this talent is not being focused.
There was a time when radio stations were run by humans who loved music and would take chances on new music. (Sure, radio was never perfect, but at one time it was more open.)
Nowadays radio playlists are very tight. No one takes chances and anyone who is even slightly different will be ignored.
The music industry itself is shooting itself in the foot by promoting style over substance. It’s almost as if they want a series of vapid one-hit-wonders versus artists with established careers and fan bases.
As I’ve said before, the music industry will not die, only the current music industry will die. There is a band called Koopa which managed to get a top-40 hit in the UK without being signed and without even releasing a CD.
Eventually a system will develop which will allow talent to rise above the crap without the current music industry. I personally think it’s not too far off.
Maria Schneider won a Grammy for “Concert in a Garden” — a wonderful jazz suite — in 2004 without touching a recording contract. She released every track for free at her website, eventually selling her 1st CD the same way. It was the first Grammy ever awarded based solely on Internet traffic/sales.
Her experiments continue and, dudes, she’s making a living handing her career on her own. Screw the record companies!
>>It is certainly very easy for a musician to get his music heard by millions, nowadays
>>Eventually a system will develop which will allow talent to rise above the crap.
As a professional musician who has “been around” , I have to disagree with these two points.
1) Although *theoretically* the Internet can allow millions to hear your music, there is now so MUCH music competing for the ear…that you never get listened to.
2) Real talent only gets you a ticket in the “discovery lottery”.
If your ticket is chosen from among the *many thousands* of truly talented people in the entire world on the Net…then you can do pretty well.
Here is what I have learned after 25 years in the business: You hear an amazing person on the radio or on a CD. You think: “They are famous because they are the best.”
Logical…until you eventually find 100 other people JUST AS GOOD, who have been playing bars and small clubs for years.
And you suddenly see that it IS a lottery. But you had to be great to even have a ticket.
Unfortunately, the “standards” of music talent declined over the years, and now even low-talent people with catchy marketing are popular!
8. “Maria Schneider won a Grammy for “Concert in a Garden”…”
Great comment. This proves exactly what I was ranting about in 7.
The current music industry is crumbling. The fact that the Grammy judges had to look outside the current music industry to find someone worthy of giving an award speaks volumes.
9. “As a professional musician who has “been around” , I have to disagree with these two points.”
Before the internet the only way an unsigned artist could get his music heard would have been to tour constantly. Nowadays a musician can get his music out there, the hard part is getting people to listen.
The led to my second comment, that a system will have to develop to allow talent to rise to the top. Look to artists such as Maria Schneider or Koopa for examples of this.
Will any system be perfect? No. Will talented artists be ignored? Yes. Will luck play large parts of the new system? Yes.
RE: 11.
SN, We pretty much agree.
I just think that the barrier for talented people has changed.
Once, it was radio program directors who “let you in” so people could hear you.
Now, it is rising above the “din” of Internet-based music so that people will listen EVEN ONCE. One listen, and you’ve “got ’em”.
But that first listen never comes.
My hope is in “filters” that recommend you to people based on what they already like. But you have to be listened to SOME to even get into the filters.
I say: do great live music to find the ears and spread the word. The Internet is too crowded with Garageband, Live! and loop-based tunes, and whatever else is now so easily generated by computer for Internet consumption.
12. “I just think that the barrier for talented people has changed.”
Yep, I certainly agree with that.
“But you have to be listened to SOME to even get into the filters.”
I think we’re heading back to the 70s where constant touring is going to make or break artists. An artist will tour, hype their internet site, a few of the concert goers will check out the music, rate it highly, and slowly that artist will rise to the top.
The good news (at least to me) is that talented artists will do better in live situations versus “loop-based tunes.” If you have the equipment, it doesn’t take a lot of talent to throw samples together. And watching some tech play back those samples on stage couldn’t evoke much of an emotional response.
Which is another way of saying that I think real song writing and musicianship is about to make a come-back.
>>>Which is another way of saying that I think real song writing and musicianship is about to make a come-back
I think you may be right. I certainly hope so.
People raised on plastic, fast food can be AMAZED when they taste real, made-from-scratch food for the first time. And they hunger for more of that.
I already hear more melody and meaningful lyrics re-emerging. Even RAP has started getting actual music into it.
But the BIG THING will be “play it live”. THAT will separate the talent from the drag-and-drop loop folks. Don;t get me wrong, some loop peple are amazing PRODUCERS. But they are not players. And there seem to be10,000 button pushing techies for every one true “loop artist.”
And as you say, no body pays to see a producer work on stage. They come to see the music generated live, real time, with VARIATIONS.
Two comment…
First the music industry finds themselves at the whim and mercy of Apple Inc. The Second place company, eMusic sells DRM free mp3s. I think the electronic music distribution business will bifurcate into two tiers. The DRM and DRMless branches. Top tier musicians, prone to copying will always have DRM. Musicians seeking to promote themselves will distribute their music DRMless, hoping for a network effect. Even though a musician might have a website to freely distribute their product, they will use services like eMusic, because there are advantages to being found/heard on eMusic like services.
Secondly, as far as artistry is concerned, musicians have always used all the technology available to them. Look at the development of the electric guitar. Almost as soon as it was technically feasible, musicians began using it. I think it is the same thing with ACID music and its derivatives (Garage band). Great musicians will make great music weather they use classical guitar or loop tools. My observation of the new tools is enhanced composition of newer music. It was not all that long ago that pop music was two or three riffs for the whole song, and maybe a key change. Modern (good) music, particularly the electronic variety, has much more variety with the new tools.
As far as I can tell, just as computer technology has ushered in a golden age in movie making, it has for music as well. However it has been disruptive of the old distribution methods. Give it some time, and it will find its economy.
Problems with distribution…
What music do you like, the group like, the area likes.
HOW big of s store to make, to HOLD all this music.
Stock on hand, if they run out, ITS GONE and NO more sales.
How to know what people will buy, and NOT just the kids.
Other countries music.
These are the concerns.
DRM adds to the price..
Lower the price due to competition.
Even the RIAA says that coping only takes up AROUND 5-7%. I know ALOt of 7-11’s/quickie marts/… that would LOVE that.
whats needed, is a better, faster, more selective, distribution.
Its was proven to THEM, that there was a better way. It had lower costs, better selection, ease of material costs, ALOT less over head, and they could make money…
With about 10-20% going to Shipping, artwork, packageing, they found a way to DUMP all that and just SELL the product RAW. And the accounting for sales, was done by someone ELSE.
But, the RIAA, wasnt going to take the first step, and werent going to ADVANCE, unless Someone ELSE did it.
DANGER, Will Robinson, DANGER
Beep Boop Beep Boop *fizzle* *fizzle*
17. Yeah, it was pretty good. It’s too bad it couldn’t survive. I’d like an alternative to Amazon.
I purchase DRM free music via CD at Amazon. It’s great, but one facet that never appears in the DRM debate is this: I want top quality recordings – yes, I’m into Hi-Fi, (it’s still around, you know) but the online music industry ignores this market. Snail mail CD purchasing is a pain. Quality impaired mp3 does not meet my needs for audio reproduction. In these days of high bandwidth connections, surely it is not beyond the wit of the record companies to offer uncompressed *.wav format files for direct CD burning with downloadable CD covers. I would happily pay good money for this service. Come on you guys in the music industry, a lot of people want to buy things from you – open up the store!
This rather civil discussion is one of the most interesting I’ve seen here in awhile, especially the give and take between SN and Glenn. One point, though – it was my understanding that concerts have always been the chief income producers for successful musicians. CD sales are great but their price-rigged profits all go to the RIAA middlemen. Has that changed, or was I misinformed?
If the middlemen take the CD profits, how are the artists any worse off getting their name recognition on the net instead of through the increasingly plastic promotions of the record companies?
If the record companies actually share out some of the CD profits to the artists, I owe them an amends. I’ve been going to artists’ sites to buy CDs for years, on the theory that the artists will at least see a piece of my payment that way.
20,
then lets ask…
what happened to Quad stereo?
The industry has found that portable music format is the BEST for sale..
No fixing it, no remixing, no nothing…you dont need 2 diff formats…Burn it and ship it. and thats Stereo only.
the only thing no one has mentioned MUCH, is that this is a monopoly… A Full blown monopoly..
And yes..IF there was a loction to BUY the WHOLE amount of their recordings… It would be cool.
I even have the idea and concept on paper, BUT, they wont do it. None of the corps I have suggested it to, want to even THINK about a better way.
21: you understand correctly. One reason that the Stones and the Who still tour is that they got almost nothing from the millions of records and CDs sold with their names on them. The Beatles and a few other bands established their own labels, and so get royalties from their music.
23: Quad transmogrified itself into the various multichannel systems used in movie soundtracks. Not so secret knowledge: if you played many stereo records using an amp that had SQ decoding, you got a bonus set of rear channel feeds in your rear speakers. No incentive to buy the more expensive SQ records.
It would be cool to be able to buy any music ever recorded, over the Internet. iTunes is trying to do this–they have many albums/songs for sale on their site that have long been out of print. Unfortunately for the audiophile people (I’m no longer one, too many rock concerts), they’re all in AAC/MP4 format. And–iTunes hasn’t offered much classical music.
In the meantime, I’ll be haunting used CD stores, looking for the cool stuff I listened to in the 60s through the 90s. Hopefully the 00s will eventually come up with its own great sounds…but I haven’t heard the next big thing yet.
TJGeezer,
Good point. I think you are correct that concerts were always the money maker for performers. But now recordings won;t make the kind of money they used to…given the easy ability today of making perfect digital reproductions of CDs, and that the copies are as good as each original.
So musicians really have to do live shows now even more than they had to before.
Film and TV placement of recorded music always was another way to sell recordings. But I have to believe that today’s increasing supply of digital recordings for sale will dilute the amount of money paid out from those licenses as well.
#6 >>The music industry currently makes most of its money selling digital music without any DRM. It’s called the compact disc.
And the LACK of DRM on CDs directly led to massive song piracy on a scale impossible in the analogue age.
Look, I’m not defending DRM in it’s present form.
To put DRM on purchased music changes the very nature of what we consider ownership. When I buy something — I am buying the right to use it anyway I want (obviously, I don’t get the right to the master — only the copy.)
If I were a record company, I think I’d persue the subscription music model — (with DRM!)
I think a lot of people would pay the equivalent of one CD per month — to listen to all music available.
First, it’s a model people understand and think is fair: we pay for lots of things on a time-limited basis.
Second, it’s a model that can fairly pay the artists according to popularity.
Third: It fits then nature of music — it would allow people to hear all the fresh new pop artists plus make mixes of their old favorites.
It wouldn’t eliminate piracy — nothing can — but I think it would reduce it. Piracy is work and a little risk — why be a pirate when you can pay to have all music available? (it has to be a reasonable fee, of course)
26,
I would think they would just drop the price of the music, and force the Hijackers out…Its not that hard.
The hijackers WONT make a profit, IF you force the price down.
But there is no reason that variaty ISNT out there. there are ways to get alot of OLD nice music out and about.
I don’t want a subscription model. I’ve already got a lot of damn subscriptions that I don’t have the time to use to their full capacity. If I had a music subscription, I could imagine going nuts the first month and then gradually slacking off to the ponit where I’m paying $19.95 a month for one or two tracks. I’m with Mike Caddick (#22) — Open the catalog and let me buy what I want (and I’ll bet if the whole catalog was open, I’d buy a heck of a lot more than I originally wanted).
#10 8. “Maria Schneider won a Grammy for “Concert in a Garden”…”
Great comment. This proves exactly what I was ranting about in 7.
The current music industry is crumbling. The fact that the Grammy judges had to look outside the current music industry to find someone worthy of giving an award speaks volumes.
I agree that the industry is crumbling and I agree that artists need to divorce themselves from major labels. I agree with most things you say about the music industry.
But Elvis Costello lost a Grammy to The Starland Vocal Band… So please don’t try to convince anyone that the Grammy judges are interested in giving awards to those who are “worthy”. 🙂
#13 SN wrote – Which is another way of saying that I think real song writing and musicianship is about to make a come-back.
I’ll argue with anyone who said it ever went anywhere. Now, if you are saying that a mass audience for real musicianship was waning and might be coming back, okay… I can get behind that idea.
#15 GregA wrote – First the music industry finds themselves at the whim and mercy of Apple Inc
I don’t agree. Apple is not the big deal everyone wants to make them out to be. iPods are cute, but they aren’t anything more than George Jetson’s Sony Walkman and they don’t sound any better. But DRM is doomed, ultimately, and business models will veer toward pro-artist models that will be pro-consumer too.
The music industry is at the mercy of a 15 year old boy in a basement in Kansas City whose name we know only as a jumble on nonsense 1337 sp33k… Not Apple.
#24 Floyd said… Hopefully the 00s will eventually come up with its own great sounds…but I haven’t heard the next big thing yet.
Do you need me to make you a mix CD?
However, it is possible that the era of the big thing might be over. When I grew up in the 70s and early 80s in a small town called Pigshit, Ohio, I had maybe 2 and a half choices for music. I could listen to crap, shit, or dung. Sadly, not everyone has the good fortune of being born in and growing up in New York City.
Today, there is a vibrant array of niche markets so a band like Of Montreal doesn’t have to languish in obscurity while Kelly Clarkson rakes in all the tin ears of the audience.
With so many bands able to cater to so many tastes, I find it hard to imagine a new Beatles or Led Zeppelin… But I know that there are bands as good playing today.
#28 Pfkad wrote: Open the catalog and let me buy what I want (and I’ll bet if the whole catalog was open, I’d buy a heck of a lot more than I originally wanted).
I agree… But I don’t want vaporware… I want a disc. I want a library of shiney discs with thier spines all aligned in alphabetical order… I want this music to be available today, next week, next year and to the children of children I’ll never live long enough to meet. (My taste is that good 🙂 )
You can’t do that with mp3 downloads, and compression sounds like crap. If I have to responsible for my own archiving, I’m going to need a cost effective solution with the longevity of a production quality CD and the same ease of use.
CD-Rs don’t last nearly that long.