Streaming!

Hi,

Anyone not looking at the history of music, will die regretting anything that happens to it.

At one time, music was only known by word of mouth and your friend hummed a bit of it. Later some of it became local bar songs, or theater songs. Later something else ... and later still ... something else ... and so far of these 2K plus years, no one charged anything as far as we know and understand, and it was only on the Shakespeare days that we learned that there were some "tickets" that had prices on them.

That means, that no one got paid for nothing, but, as has been suggested in many movies, they were thrown food, and money and whatever else, and later they collected it for themselves?

What is really difficult is that the "business" side of the music world has gotten so out of control in stealing, that streaming is considered a steal, specially with so many services that are not paying the artists what they deserve, and instead are stealing the 90% of the money for it ... and no one is doing audits of these folks to find out how much they are actually streaming ... if they are not raking in as much as we think, I have no issues with the artists not getting a whole lot, and I can not suggest that there are more streaming folks out there, that would suggest that musicians are being robbed of millions and millions, when in essence the very folks saying that have been the biggest robbers of all time! And they are the ones ruining the system.

I, honestly, do not feel that Martin has a whole lot to complain about, since he is one of the few folks that got lucky ... it feels like the Beatles complaining about the extra millions they did not get.

There is another side.

I grew up in the early days of bootlegs, when the record companies did not think that rick music had any value whatsoever, and it wasn't until they saw that many people at Woodstock that the business model changed ... even Mr. Graham Fillmore said it ... Woodstock killed the music ... and the wrong people became in charge of it. At that time, there were many bands that allowed the bootlegs, and the 2 most famous have never worried about it, and they are 2 of the richest folks out there when it comes to music and self ... Bob Dylan and The Grateful Dead.

They say that every coin has two sides. I, like LAZ, do not stream a whole lot, and do not visit many of those websites, and I already avoid the tube that so many list here, because you know that some artists are not happy with it. However, many artists are extremely happy with it and have gotten a lot of interest and sales because of it ... so what is good for one, is also good for the other.

I agree that streaming needs a face lift, but I do not want to see it in the hands of a music company that decides the top ten and you think that those are the only good albums out there ... or do what Virgin did way back when ... start their own top ten, and lie to people, and then all of a sudden, they are selling like crazy ... nothing like a good lie!

The main hypocrisy for me, is that Mr. Flying Balls, owes a lot of people a lot of money and three of the most famous ones were Mike Oldfield, Tangerine Dream and Gong ... and you and I know that others were also ripped off, but he is now a Lord (or some sheep dip like it) and everyone thinks he's this and that, and in essence, he was a thief ... and I do not wish to associate many of these websites with someone like him ... a god of thieves that we even worship and fly his airline!

I do think that there has to be some accountability ... but are you going to spend 24 hours auditing the 24 feeds that Joe Schmoe has and which songs were played (and not in its entirety!!!!!!) and then which songs were downloaded? That would be two different financial situations.

I do not have an answer ... but I will tell you one thing. I have no issues using the tube or some fo these websites to gain my fame, and one day, I pull everything to my own website and close down the distribution of any other music to other sites ... and now, someone is playing with their livelihood for touching your music, see? ... but you better be ready for some fan backlash, upset that you took away their fun, and now they are not going to buy your next album, or bother with your upcoming concert ... it's a two edged sword that will hurt you regardless.

Martin, and many others, were lucky and made a lot in their lives. They should really be more thankful of their work and what they received from it. I really have no qualms with his comments, but find the whole thing similar to the greed that so many bands have shown over the years ... and my comment is ... what about the music? Is it really important? Or you really don't care and just want the money?

I have enough to live on ... do I really need/want a lot more that I should have that Mr. Flying Balloon stole from me? NO. He can have it ... I don't need his balloons or airplanes and don't want them.

I just want to live and love the art! I could use the money, but don't need it!

Now, tell me honestly ... who do you trust more?

Pandora Paid Pharrell Just $6300 For 105 Million "Happy" Plays

"Pharrell Williams was paid just $6300 for 105 million plays of his hit song ‘Happy,’ according to the Financial Times.  The $6k was reportedly before Sony took its share.

While working on several fronts to reduce rates, Pandora currently pays about $.0014 per song play split among all rightsholders.  "We’re projecting over a billion dollars of revenue next year,"said Pandora founder Tim Westergren, "and we’re sharing that revenue very fairly with the artist community.”"