[diademgrove]

Interesting article by David Bryne and how streaming affects musicians. More questions than answers but very thought provoking.

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/oct/11/david-byrne-internet-content-world?CMP=share_btn_fb

[Paulski]

Yep - velly intellesting.
Welcome to the handcart to hell!

[S.T.C]

The empire strikes back. Yes, after getting knocked by the WWW., the music industry is taking control of the ship and sailing it it to profitability again...maybe not like the 'good old days' but they're not complaining.

As to the artists , music creators..well it's tough! but it's not all doom and gloom...how else would Malaysia be the third best  country, for the tracks i have streaming  on there.....yes it's a trickle of monies at best...but it gets my name out there..and who knows how beneficial that may or may not be.

[MartiMedia]

Great article... I like thinking outside of the box (so I encounter a lot of 'yes, but...' reactions in real life), but it also gets people thinking about the matter in a different way.

So ootb (just a shot):
-We artists make the stuff so we unite and support each other.  
-We'll invent an indepentent artists 'Spotify' kind of community, giving away a few free streams per artist, but the consumer has to buy the album after x streams or so.
-90% of the income goes to the artists, 10% is used by the 'Spotify' clone for promotion of artists' work.

So:
-Helping each other would mean we don't need producers, labels, marketeers etc. who normally get rich by stealing from the inventors. Instead we should use all qualities of every individual member. We have mastering skills among us, and video enthousiasts, and great mixers, and and and... So let's rule the musical world colllaborating together!
-Let's start growing a common listener base (combine all our individual listeners) so we'll have a starting 'audience'..

Just a base idea. Would that work? (Try to stay out of 'Yes, but...' ;-))
MM

[Boydie]

Just a base idea. Would that work? (Try to stay out of 'Yes, but...' ;-))

No, I don't think that would work

There is already enough free (fantastic) music by lots of amazing artists out there - more than you would ever need in a lifetime

However, it is the labels (marketeers with the £££ behind them) that take something great but the difference is they make it "desirable"

This obviously applies mostly to mainstream pop but the principle is the same for all genres of music - and all products actually

Having a fantastic "product" (song, artist, burger, chocolate bar, car etc.) is only the first step

Making it desirable to either "the masses" or "niche markets" is a whole other set of skills and this is where the labels / marketing departments show their worth

I actually have a lot of respect for the labels - and for all the stories of success where the label is seen to be "milking" the stars - and the stars complain about labels - there are a gazillion other stories where the labels have lost out on acts that haven't made it

It is a shame labels are becoming more "risk averse" in the current "digital revolution" of the music industry and I do think there is room for a model for emerging acts

However, IMHO this model would still need a lot of marketing/business support to have any chance of success

Something more along the lines of "Not On The Highstreet" would be interesting where an overarching company brings lots of cottage industries together

BUT

What if one of the acts became successful and made millions

Presumably they would want to break away on their own, which isn't fair to the original company that promoted them (Ie the "Not on the Highstreet" company)

So presumably there would need to be a contract in place to protect both parties...

...which is back to the Record Label model isn't it?

[MartiMedia]

Lol there goes my ootb thinking... Yeah you're probably right Boydie...
Just still think the musicians (ok except for the best) deserve to earn a bit more (hear too much stories, but you're right, the label side of story is less often heard).
Great arguments though.. I think I should correct the 'stealing from the artists' in my vision to 'helping to promote the artists'... And then my ootb thinking doesn't make sense anymore..
Thanks for changing my view!
MM

[Boydie]

It is always the same story...

Desperate artist sells their soul to an evil record company that makes them a success and as soon as they are a success they complain about the deal they signed when they weren't successful

I wonder how many of today's major artists would have had the ball$ to invest the gazillions into themselves rather than asking a label to do it and take all the risk 

Don't get me wrong, labels have not not been angels themselves and there are some terrible things they have done but I do find it a little difficult to swallow when I hear about artists complaining about labels from their mansions - "hindsight management" is really easy!

ALL of the major artists were a huge risk at some some point early in their career - it is unfortunate that they forget this

I do think the solution is for the labels to "look after" their talent with better deals as they make more money for the label and this is already happening (in the same way big football clubs look after their big star players)

Whether there should be an argument that there should be a "cap" on what an artist/label can earn from an act - with the rest being invested in "grass roots" (whether music or football) is another discussion