Do you feel any guilt about the cheapness of music these days?

I'm quite certain none of you do, especially all the money you spend on collecting. But I still can't get over this free music jukebox called youtube where you can basically listen to any song you can think of and now most full albums are available there, too. It just doesn't seem right, and it never will , to me. Maybe if I had a decent income I'd buy more records to donate to the artists but I just don't. I end up taking this outrageous handout but I don't feel good about it.

 

No guilt.
I only listen to a bit on youtube to preview something I am considering purchasing but am unsure whether the actual music will be of enough interest to me.
I don't use it for any regular listening.

 

Music is more expensive than ever to me. Shows are getting pricier ,and the merch therein, and when I was a kid I could never have imagined I would sometimes spend more than $50 on a single lp.

 

But are the things that collectors want, or the real life experience of a concert being overpriced to compensate for the overall plummeting music sales?

 

No as i only have ever brought physical product and lived through an extended era where CD's were $29.99 AUD. The vinyl i continue to by is by far mostly original pressings from 1964-75, often UK or Japaneseor a promo (when possible) and often expensive.

 

You can take solace in the notion that the sound of the free music on Youtube is crap.

 

Few times at Bandcamp - pay what you want.I started to feel cheap.

 

Probably to some degree , yeah. But - and I'm gonna speak generally (and a bit pretentiously) here - there is a constant chunk of the population, that may vary by % 10 percent or so, that just could not give that much of a **** about art. Sure, they see a movie once in a while or listen to the radio but they're the people Cobain sang about on In Bloom and they put no value on it at all. So if I and my brethren have to pick up the slack for those philistines, so be it.

 

When it comes to streaming, I will listen to some to see if I like it. If I don't own it or have downloaded on my phone, I don't bother listening to it.

YouTube for me is mostly miscellaneous entertainment.

 

Of course, used CDs and vinyl don't help out the artist at all, except for keeping stores (both online and physical) open for longer.

 

YouTube pays royalties to the musicians, like the other streaming services do. Granted, it's a very very tiny amount per view, but it's not like the musicians aren't being paid anything.

 

artists generate money from youtube plays. if the songs are registered correctly anyway.

 

"Most full albums"? From my experience I'd be amazed if more than a fraction of 1% of all albums are on YouTube, and those that are vary wildly in quality. One of the least practical or enjoyable means of listening to music I can imagine.

 

Most of the time it's supported by the artists. You can tell, because whenever you try to post anything Beatles (even isolated vocal tracks) they get taken down instantly. It's not piracy. Also the ones uploaded without permission are often at garbage quality and you can't select or skip songs within the album.

 

Live concerts are where the big money is nowadays..Youtube and second hand music sales all help promote artists.

 

Seems to me you are the troll, the OP asked a perfectly reasonable question.

 

That I'm referring to?

 

The music industry, historically, has treated artists very badly. I don't know about now but, for instance, a lot of contracts used to exclude artists getting any revenue at all from 'formats yet to be invented'. Consequently some of them never earned a penny from CD sales. The history books are littered with such tales (as I'm sure you already know). The record companies had absolute control of their artists. Now it has changed and it's easier for a new artist to get their work out there, so that is a plus. On the downside, yes, a few years ago some artists were making more money from ringtone sales than shifting their albums but all industries have changed since globalisation and, of course, the internet. I do feel bad for struggling artists who get ripped off from bit torrent etc, but it's part of the game now and all involved must endeavour to make their living in more inventive ways. Concert tickets have sky-rocketed but that's fair enough. It's a bummer for the fans (especially when secondary sales come in to it) but it's the most lucrative revenue stream, with the associated merchandise etc, so it's hardly surprising. McCartney and Roger Waters et al wouldn't be almost constantly on the road if that wasn't the case so there's a lot more work involved for people like that and I doubt vinyl and deluxe boxsets and stuff would be as prevalent without the need to offer something that can't just be transferred digitally. I don't feel guilt particularly because I'm not interested in streaming or anything other than top quality audio and, like many here I guess, if someone gave me a piece of paper with the amount I have spent over the years on records, CDs, merch etc I would probably collapse.

 

If the artists from the era before phonograph managed to create music that no one could call "cheap", I don't see a reason to feel guilty if the recent musicians are not able to achieve this.

 

The real music fans perspective:

Those expensive box sets?
Concert tickets prices?
The cost of merchandise?

 

No, because I only listen to physical media and because my tastes aren't middle of the road it costs me a fortune to buy what I like and a fortune to get it shipped to Australia.

I only use YouTube or Spotify to sample stuff, once I like it I purchase it, usually on vinyl. I never use them to just listen to music.

 

I can't even come close to being able to afford most concerts. I don't mind the fidelity of most youtubes. 99% of my listening involves streaming online but I do pay for Sirius radio. Tonight I wanted to hear a couple CDs, Deliver the Word by War and Carole King - Music. Searched and both were on youtube. I own both records but it was far easier to just listen where I was than to go find them and listen on a system.

 

I totally understand that and occasionally listen to music on YouTube that I own on CD or vinyl myself. Mostly though, I like the things that vinyl buyers talk about so much it's almost a cliche, taking the album out, placing it on the turntable, looking at and holding the sleeve, turning it over etc. I like the whole experience. I also like a good CD booklet to read while listening.

I use computers at work and don't want to use them for my hobby and as little as possible in my personal time.

 

I've put in enough money and still do. Spotify is my reward and I pay for that too. YouTube is a bonus but I don't really do any serious listening there. No guilt whatsoever.

 

How to Be a Responsible Music Fan in the Age of Streaming | Pitchfork