Downloading Myth

Reprinted from the Stereophile website:

http://www.stereophile.com/shownews.cgi?1643

 

Great article, Grant. Thanks for the link. I agree with everything the article says.

 

I totally agree with AKA. That article hit the nail right on the head. I believe record sales are down because the quality of music has been on the decline. There's a mere handful of albums that aren't reissued that I would spend my hard-earned money on.

 

I've been consistently saying in many posts on this subject that the recording industry needs to control its costs, diversify its catalog, and not worry about downloading because it's just good advertising for the real product. You heard it here, maybe not first but many times over. Oh yeah, and lower the cost of CD's.

 

Super article Grant, thanks!

Hopefully, an article like this will finally start to wake up the music execs.

 

All this study shows is that some people are big music fans and some are not.

 

I like these stats from 2000:

Age Group Average CD sales/person
10 to 14 4.09
15 to 19 6.01
20 to 24 6.21
25 to 29 5.15
30 to 34 4.50
35 to 39 4.40
40 to 44 4.03
45 + 2.31
All 3.35

Anyone in here "average"?

mud-

 

I doubt it. The RIAA ignores anything that stands in the way of their objective, and that is to abolish all file-sharing and media copying.

 

That's how many CDs we buy per day, right?

 

I disagree that music quality is down. There's good music being made, it's just that most of the buying public doesn't know about it. We're hit over the head with selected new releases, and most of that is dreck.

 

I dunno everytime I turn on the TV showing a musical act or the radio..(unless it's an oldies station)....I wanna PUKE! It's the same ole drone...

 

I agree; The article is great, but I'm willing to bet very FEW of us could be described as "average" music buyers...

 

I agree. We're only exposed to ten artists at any one time. They get almost all the exposure. That's a load of mule muffins. I have to spend a lot of energy finding the good music that's being made. You have to hear about this stuff through friends, accidentally hear them somewhere or go to clubs every night. Clear Channel is the real evil! Let some of the other music through!

 

They want complete contriol and sure fire acts that are going to generate dollars...Usually the talented "ARTISTS" are in the background waiting...It's business and buisness thrives on money...There's no art in Money. I'm sure if anyone knows that it's you...Must bug the S**t outta you...

 

I also agree the article was very interesting... thx Grant!

 

Great article. But there are even more to the story. I read an article in a Swedish magazine that big studies that was made and what thay find out was that MP3 does not make people buy less music.
According to the article the US sales have been down a little, but if one look little closer you see that a lot LESS albums have been released during that time. Less music = more boring music = no sale.

Same time in France, they released a little more albums that year and surprise, surprise, album sales was up.

So if the records industry want to make some money, drop the ******* copy protection and release more good music.

My look on this.

 

The average cd buyer purchases ONE cd every FIFTEEN weeks!!!!



mud-

 

My mother wishes that I were the average CD buyer but she knows that I buy so many CDs and used LPs every so often and lets me continue.

 

That study sounds inconclusive to me. In other words, "people interested enough in music to download it were more likely to purchase music as well." No kidding.

I'll bet people who read music magazines are more likely to purchase CDs, too. I'd also venture that people who attend concerts are more likely to purchase CDs. While I'm out on my limb, I'll speculate that people who participate in this forum buy more music than the average internet user.

The question is whether they buy fewer CDs than they would have purchased without access to file-swapping or CD burning.

 

As an example, I don't think Radiohead would have sold more copies of Amnesiac and Kid A if there were no file sharing. I think the arguement could be made that those records sold MORE because of file sharing, which resulted in the biggest buzz in rock music (in the US) over the last 5 years. I don't think EMI did anything amazing to promote those records... they had a life of their own.

The new Madonna record, on the other hand, is selling fewer copies than her last two albums because most people have heard it and don't like it!

 

Amen!

 

Then they will all have to be blank CDs. It costs money to record the music, pay publishing and other royalties, make videos, create artwork etc.

I'm not saying all CDs should be the same price. Any band or artist that isn't expected to incur tons of expenses (touring, videos, radio etc.), shouldn't be priced as high as artists that do.

 

Speaking of the cost of CD-Rs, we ARE paying a tax on CD-Rs that goes to the labels, right? Wasn't that part of the legistlation in 80s that blocked consumer DATs?

So in a sense, you download an album, you burn a disc, the labels get money. Or am I way off here?