Martin Orford August 2009

Finnforest wrote: Stoney, so now I'm close-minded?  Awe man, you never called me that in all this time

You're right Tea, I'm too lazy to go down that road with you. 

As I just mentioned, my interest is on the moral side of the equation, not the sales figure side, which matters not to me.  If people want to pirate their music, or pirate their satellite TV because they've concocted a reason that makes it "OK", fine.  I'm not saying you support that, I'm speaking generally. 


Edited by Finnforest - October 01 2009 at 20:28

you know, if the studies that show that illegal downloads do not account for a major part of the decrease in CD sales, but you wish (reasonably or not) to disagree, take a few moments to consider the experience of other musical acts ...
You know, the ones that are still able to make a career of it, despite no major label financing or contract, no radio airplay (on the major chain stations, anyway), no back catalogue of gold or platinum albums, no opportunities to even open for super star acts ... you know , the ones who have fans that WILL pay for albums, merchandise, tickets etc.

Give me a list of prog acts that believe that illegal downloads and the supposedly related implosion of CD sales & major record labels are the reason why they can't make it financially. Even better, add an explanation as to what level of financial comfort they expect to get or want from their music.

Then, give me a day or two and I will find you more acts that are able to support a career in music despite the obstacles presented by today's reality. They may also feel their music deserves to be heard. But most aren't spending their time whining about P2P. They're out there WORKING to earn their fans' devotion.

Social Distortion released their debut LP in  '82, one year before IQ. They had the misfortune of not being a british neo prog band when that genre was big in the U.K. . But they are still around. They make albums. They tour. I've mentioned Drive By Truckers. Our local Acadian rock n roll (and so much more in their musical stew) still manage to get together and tour every two or three years, pulling in about 40,000 over about 20 shows during a summer tour. Iron Giant, a local stoner metal band are still playing part time since 2001 . three albums later, eh. Cayouche , a guy who brought back old time country & western music, has managed to sell 90,000 copies of his four albums. There is not a small town in New Brunswick and parts of Quebec that he cannot pull 400 people and break bar records. And this going on 15 years. He must be doing fine, 'cause he paid cash for his Harley ! Which he brought over to France when he did a short tour this year. Sloan, from Halifax NS. They started their own record label because they no longer wanted to be owned by a major. SO now, they sign distribution deals, and do well in Canada. Not millionaires, but musicians with a career behind them, and likely one for years to come ... if they want it.

I await the list of the unfortunate artists that have seen their entitlement stolen, and will wonder why others still manage to get paid for their work ...

still, why would one or some bands be able to survive this "assumed" harm, while others can't  ?
I suppose the band's fans are to blame for not seeing the value of their music ...

Well this was an interesting thread.

Edited by Henry Plainview - October 01 2009 at 23:53

debrewguy wrote: you know, if the studies that show that illegal downloads do not account for a major part of the decrease in CD sales, but you wish (reasonably or not) to disagree, take a few moments to consider the experience of other musical acts ...

Wilcey wrote: Dean wrote:   Typical royalties are 10-20% ... that is of the net revenue, not the gross - so we are talking $1.20 per CD - which is then split between composer and the band, and the band share is then further split to the individual band members... let's assume a 4-piece band with equal composer/performer royalties  - 40¢/member/CD... the average earnings in the USA is £20,000/anum - total number of album sales required to earn a living for each band member - 50,000...     And that is required each year for a living, most bands are unable to release a yearly album if they do all their own admin, production etc etc.......... It's not much of a money spinner is it?

Wilcey, if I own a corner store that does not make enough money for me to support my family, is it shameful that I need to think about finding another job ? Am I the only one who sees that like most everyone else on this planet, you don't have the final word on what you might have to do to earn a living ? If you choose an occupation, including the arts, no one owes you a living. There is no entitlement to success, no matter what level was enjoyed in the past. And too often, this is what seems to be the impression - Poor Nick / Martin - they want to make music but they can't make money at it. Like f**k people, how many bands do you know that would like to be able to make music their full time career but can't ? Should they feel entitled to this too ? Or are there criteria that are to be met ?
There are bands that started at the same time as IQ & Pendragon that are still out there and making a living despite the killer illegal downloads. Why them & not IQ or Pendragon ? And there are bands that never even came close to enjoying anything close to the success that either band enjoyed or enjoys. Should they feel cheated ?

SO next time someone shows you a chart of P2P vs CD sales decreases, ask them to show you the dollars spent on other entertainment options. Tell them to compare how much was spent on Video games in 1996 to what was spent in 2006 ? How many Rockbands, Guitar Heros, even Pro Tools / Cubasis et al that were sold back then vs today ? Are the LPs, EPs, CDs manufactured by little indie labels or vanity labels all accounted for ? Iron Giant manages to self finance each of their releases. They still have full time day jobs. Their sales, mostly regional , have not suffered from P2P. Drive By Truckers have managed to ESTABLISH a viable career during the exact same time period when P2P exploded. Phish achieved its' biggest successes during the time of Kazaa's peak.  Bands like Pearl Jam that can no longer rely on radio to play new stuff (and PJ haven't needed that for years) have just managed to sell close to 200 000 copies of their latest album in its' first week out. And they can still tour to great crowds.
Are many selling fewer albums ? Heck, most are. But again, is it just P2P or is it that the pie is getting shared by many more musical acts, and surprise surprise, people are also spending it elsewhere .

To summarize - the bands that can make a living (see above), do. Those that can't, make excuses.

How many units are the Arctic Monkeys moving lately ? What about the Kings of Leon ? Why couln't Saga sell out a 400 seat venue in its' home country, in the prog capital of Canada ?

Or is the truth too hard to swallow ?
You can talk about morality all you want. But not being able to do what you got use to, or not being able to do the same as others seem to be able to do despite facing the same obstacles you do really doesn't do much to support your excuses.  i.e. if they can, why can't you ?

Dean wrote: BigBoss wrote: the label does the grunt work of selling an album, they make money, the artist makes money, if the album is downloaded instead of stolen, then the label goes out of business (SPV) and the artists retire (Martin).  simple economics, no grey areas. It is the simple economics that people are perhaps unaware of, or maybe just ignoring.   The financial models for small labels are different to those of the large labels. When sales decrease income decreases, the larger labels can affect profit by adjusting their overheads, cutting staff,  promoting their big sellers and cutting losses on the less popular artists, reducing their roster, not signing risk acts and limiting their exposure.   Smaller labels cannot do this - a proportional decrease in their income affects them disproportionately, they do not have any leeway in reducing costs, a slump in sales affects not just their profit, but their ability to pay royalties and creditors, it also reduces their ability to in investing in new releases.   So while music fans gripe and complain about "the majors" it is "the minors" who are suffering more, and in our narrow (niche) genre, most of our artists are with the smaller labels.

So commercial enterprises that put out music should be subsidized ? Can we include DIminished 5th Records then (http://www.diminishedfifthrecords.com/main.htm#) ?
The minor labels also compete with video games, PCs, laptop, cell phones, home theater and other entertainment options available now that weren't really around or as prominent 10 years ago. Add to that the many vanity releases, andagain the local acts that now can self-release their product.

If I'm buying 3 a Wii console ($250) & the attendant $150 of games, and my annual entertainment budget is $1000(or a $20 CD every week), can any of you see that I am not spending $1000 on the releases or acts that you want. Not even those that I might like to get ?
See the following list of purchases in 2009
legal downloads
Voivod - Infini
D.O.A. - Northern Avenger
Marillion - Happiness is the road
Marillion - somewhere else
marillion - anoraknophobia or marbles (one I bought the used CD, the other download, both put onto a blank CD, can't remember which )
Wishng Well - ostara

new :
EPs / LPs
Varsity Weirdos - self titled
Varsity Weirdos - fly me to the moon
Fear of Lipstick - Indie Band
Fear of Lipstick / The Creeps - split EP
Fear of Lipstick - EP II
The Strawmen - Jack Rabbit

CDs
Drive-By Truckers - the Fine Print
The Mars Volta - octahedron
Indukti -idmen
Eric's Trip - Long Days Ride 'Till Tomorrow
Saga - Contact live in Munich (DVD/ CD)
Steve Earle - Washington Street Seranade

CDDVDs not available locally even on special order
Pendragon - COncerto Maximo
King's X - XV

used CD
Phideaux-doomsday
Fragil-avenida larco (i wish I could meet the guy who sold this Lp to SPin-It. I guess he comes in about twice a year and disposes of the craziest sh*t)
John Coltrane - Sun Ship
Probot
Napalm Death - the code is red
Jelly Fiche


used LPs
Jackson Hawke - s/t
Hammersmith - It's For You
Anthony Philips- goose and geese (whatever
Patrick Moraz-story of I
Chris Squire - fish out of water
COntraction - COntraction
Abel Ganz - Gullible travels
Madden & Harris - fools paradise
Domenic Troiano- s/t
Erik Satie - Socrates
Erik Satie - Piano Works
Cano - tous dans le meme bateau
cano-eclipse
cano - spirit of the north
Morse Code - marche des hommes
morse code - procreation

Still on gotta buy list
Steve Earle - Townes
Drive By Truckers  - Live in Austin (CD/DVD)
Matadors - debut
Social Distortion - debut (plus Spin-It has their Orange County live DVD for rent)
at least that I can think about now

not counting some that I've bought used & traded or sold back (oops,. already I forgot one - Zolar X)

add to that that I've rented about 20 DVDs ... now who is it that you want me to buy with the rest of my money ?
Now, I'm considered a music freak among my friends. If I'm the average, are you wondering why most aren't able to buy everything they want to ? Maybe because they have so many more choices than they used to 10-20 years ago ? And if they do, should they feel guilty that bands they would love to support, like IQ or Pendragon , just happen to have a lower priority than other purchases ...?

It's not our fault that you can't make a living at it. Too bad. But some people are. Which is great if you like the Drive By truckers or Los Lobos.

Wilcey wrote: Dean wrote:   Typical royalties are 10-20% ... that is of the net revenue, not the gross - so we are talking $1.20 per CD - which is then split between composer and the band, and the band share is then further split to the individual band members... let's assume a 4-piece band with equal composer/performer royalties  - 40¢/member/CD... the average earnings in the USA is £20,000/anum - total number of album sales required to earn a living for each band member - 50,000...     And that is required each year for a living, most bands are unable to release a yearly album if they do all their own admin, production etc etc.......... It's not much of a money spinner is it?

I used to have a job that paid me just enough to pay an apartment, own a 15 year old car, which I had to cancel the insurance on in the winter, car pool to work, and barely afford a girlfriend. I no longer work there.
Your point ???

Oh, and most working people are unable to go to Florida once a year, they cook their own meals, cut their own lawns, get their own transportation to their workplace, buy their own clothing for work,
youknow, basically not being able to do just what they want ...
 Your point ?
oh, some bands are able to make a career in music nowadays. Even while doing their own admin, production etc... but then it's always been like that. Unless I missed an era when every band or even the majority of musical acts out there was able to live solely on their music. Was it the 60s ? 70s ? 90s ? the glory days of the 90s ? Please give some references where someone was practically guaranteed a livelyhood by playing music ...

debrewguy wrote: Wilcey wrote: Dean wrote:   Typical royalties are 10-20% ... that is of the net revenue, not the gross - so we are talking $1.20 per CD - which is then split between composer and the band, and the band share is then further split to the individual band members... let's assume a 4-piece band with equal composer/performer royalties  - 40¢/member/CD... the average earnings in the USA is £20,000/anum - total number of album sales required to earn a living for each band member - 50,000...     And that is required each year for a living, most bands are unable to release a yearly album if they do all their own admin, production etc etc.......... It's not much of a money spinner is it? Wilcey, if I own a corner store that does not make enough money for me to support my family, is it shameful that I need to think about finding another job ? Am I the only one who sees that like most everyone else on this planet, you don't have the final word on what you might have to do to earn a living ? If you choose an occupation, including the arts, no one owes you a living. There is no entitlement to success, no matter what level was enjoyed in the past. And too often, this is what seems to be the impression - Poor Nick / Martin - they want to make music but they can't make money at it. Like f**k people, how many bands do you know that would like to be able to make music their full time career but can't ? Should they feel entitled to this too ? Or are there criteria that are to be met ? There are bands that started at the same time as IQ & Pendragon that are still out there and making a living despite the killer illegal downloads. Why them & not IQ or Pendragon ? And there are bands that never even came close to enjoying anything close to the success that either band enjoyed or enjoys. Should they feel cheated ? SO next time someone shows you a chart of P2P vs CD sales decreases, ask them to show you the dollars spent on other entertainment options. Tell them to compare how much was spent on Video games in 1996 to what was spent in 2006 ? How many Rockbands, Guitar Heros, even Pro Tools / Cubasis et al that were sold back then vs today ? Are the LPs, EPs, CDs manufactured by little indie labels or vanity labels all accounted for ? Iron Giant manages to self finance each of their releases. They still have full time day jobs. Their sales, mostly regional , have not suffered from P2P. Drive By Truckers have managed to ESTABLISH a viable career during the exact same time period when P2P exploded. Phish achieved its' biggest successes during the time of Kazaa's peak.  Bands like Pearl Jam that can no longer rely on radio to play new stuff (and PJ haven't needed that for years) have just managed to sell close to 200 000 copies of their latest album in its' first week out. And they can still tour to great crowds. Are many selling fewer albums ? Heck, most are. But again, is it just P2P or is it that the pie is getting shared by many more musical acts, and surprise surprise, people are also spending it elsewhere . To summarize - the bands that can make a living (see above), do. Those that can't, make excuses. How many units are the Arctic Monkeys moving lately ? What about the Kings of Leon ? Why couln't Saga sell out a 400 seat venue in its' home country, in the prog capital of Canada ? Or is the truth too hard to swallow ? You can talk about morality all you want. But not being able to do what you got use to, or not being able to do the same as others seem to be able to do despite facing the same obstacles you do really doesn't do much to support your excuses.  i.e. if they can, why can't you ?