Some of you are thinking of Metallica or Bieber or some other such rubbish. Yes, there are musicians that make millions of dollars. They are an ever-shrinking minority. Most bands are working musicians. They're on the road most of the year. Yes, it sure beats working for a living, and it's a dream many — including myself when I was wee — have not been able to fulfill (thanks to an adorable lack of talent in my case). Creating music is not easy, it takes time, effort, and talent. If everyone could do it, everyone would do it.
So the fact is, you have a segment of the population that can do something, wants to do something, and is trying to make a living doing that something. Why do so many others want to punish these people? If you don't think musicians (or writers or actors or anyone decently creative) deserve to make a living entertaining others, well, I have two words for you, and they rhyme with truck poo.
The days of record labels pouring money into unknown bands is gone. Record labels are gone. The storied A&R guys scouring clubs for the next big thing? Gone. They don't exist anymore. There are a few artists at the top who make lots of money, and then there's everyone else trying to scrape by. Don't believe me? Look at this chart to see how ridiculous it is trying to make a living as a musician.
Most of my friends are musicians. They would all love to "make it big." Barring that, even the chance to just live off making music would be an over-the-top win. But they're not counting on it. They can't. The reality is, they don't make music for the hope it'll make them rich. They make music because they love making music. If they could, they would make MORE music, if jobs and rent and, you know, needing to eat, didn't get in the way. With less and less money spent on music, it gets harder for those trying to make it, to make it.
This is not a lament for days gone by. This is not a cry for higher prices or "better" digital rights management (hell no). This is a plea to pay for music because music, and art, and writing are the only things worth a damn in this shitty world, and if we penalize those who are good at making it, we're going to have less of it.
Think about that. That's where we're headed, to a place where there's less music, as musicians are forced to work "real" jobs instead of entertaining.
Because trust me, the world has enough disgruntled former musicians. We're called bloggers.
"That's where we're headed, to a place where there's less music, as musicians are forced to work "real" jobs instead of entertaining."
Hogwash. In fact, it's been the exact opposite for decades now. There's TOO much music from TOO MANY bands and this has more to do with their ability/inability to make a living as anything else. The consumer base and demand has not increased at anywhere near the rate of supply. The pie has not grown at a rate that can sustain the sheer number of those trying to get a slice of it. For example, look at Earache Records (and I'm a fan). 45 bands on this label and it's likely the average person has heard of none of them. They're catering to a niche and they know it. But even as a fan of this niche, am I expected to support FORTY-FIVE bands with my music budget?? No.
It's irresponsible to blame the consumer and things like Spotify alone for dwindling music sales. What about data plans and high speed internet and Netflix and Sirius and the app store, etc. that all compete for a similar portion of our monthly paychecks? And still - a ten minute search for new music will easily net you twenty bands you've never heard of. The flood gates of music are not closing, no matter how few are getting rich off of it.
So thank God for Spotify (and labels like Earache who make all their music available there). Honestly, how else am I supposed to keep up??
"There's TOO much music from TOO MANY bands..." "... how else am I supposed to keep up??"
There will always be reasons to deny due payment to artists. This one is creative, I'll have to give it that much. Regardless, an artist's music is a recognized commercial product for which the artist is due payment. We all know this, it's not something new. And no amount of complaining or justifying is ever going to change it.
Due payment is determined by the market. I can slap paint on a canvas and throw a $10,000 price tag on it, but unless someone is willing to pay that then it doesn't matter what my perceived due payment is. Look at iTunes. Apple and the labels determined the value of a song is between 99 cents and a $1.29. The market responded by making iTunes the largest music retailer in the U.S. Right or wrong, it's a reflection of what people want.
Seems you're confusing due payment with fairness. If so, then remember even before mp3s most major label artists received roughly three cents for every album sold. How much do you think they make now per song from iTunes? An educated guess suggests it could only be a fraction of a cent... which is absolutely no different than Spotify, Mog, or Rdio. Is it a fair rate? Probably not, but that's between artist and label and again - I don't think it's something that's changed drastically in the past 20 years.
Interesting the author gives a pass to Pandora. How much do artists make off of that service? Are they getting paid per stream like on Spotify? I hope not, since Pandora basically picks what you hear. Oh, and your argument that you constantly buy CDs after listening to artists on Pandora? Yeah, that's the same thing people who use BitTorrent say. And in fact, I believe there's some research to suggest it's true... Which means your argument against Spotify and Mog is what again exactly?
I listen to *free* Pandora a lot. It provides a service which has a cost to them. If they didn't have a way to make money to provide that service they would cease providing it and I would lose that avenue of entertainment. The artists who provide the music on Pandora live under the same income/expense dynamic and if they don't have enough money to pay for the expenses of recording and distributing their music then your only chance of hearing them is if they have enough time outside their day jobs to rehearse and play live somewhere near you in a venue you can afford to attend.
There was a Pandora player I was using that I liked because not only did I not have to open my browser to use it, but it also eliminated my having to listen to the occasional advertisements. To make a long story short, I realized that by using that player I was breaking a link in the chain of income/expense for both Pandora and the artists I was listening to. I was getting something for nothing and others were paying the expenses to provide it to me. I'm not that cheap so I don't use that player any more. Not only that, but a worker is worthy of their wages. Give them their due, or click 'skip'.