179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← archive index

Re: [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry

18 messages · 12 participants · spans 6 days · search this subject
◇ merged from 2 subjects: in-store listening · mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-19 20:36Brian, from inside his own brain [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-19 20:47Shimone Samuel Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
└─ 2000-05-19 20:54Josh Davison Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-20 00:45Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
└─ 2000-05-22 10:54Konstantin Minko RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-20 03:10Maximo J Mihelik Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-20 03:17Intermodal Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-20 05:43Intermodal Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-20 06:30Brock Landers Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-21 02:54John [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-21 22:29Christopher Miller [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
└─ 2000-05-22 11:54Irene McC [idm] in-store listening
2000-05-22 23:39John [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-23 18:35Brian, fresh from his hurdy-gurdy Re: [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-23 18:36Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-23 18:36Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
└─ 2000-05-24 06:51Konstantin Minko RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
2000-05-26 06:03Christopher Miller [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
2000-05-19 20:36Brian, from inside his own brainAll... My recent question about artists and mp3s may have been seen as moralizing, but tha
From:
Brian, from inside his own brain
To:
Date:
Fri, 19 May 2000 13:36:51 -0700
Subject:
[idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <3925A5E2.5A6F71FD@us.oracle.com>
All... My recent question about artists and mp3s may have been seen as moralizing, but that wasn't the point. I was curious about other artists who had weighed in against mp3s because it doesn't seem to me that many artists are making their voices heard. If the artistic community really cares, why haven't we heard more? All I see on this list (aside from what I mentioned last time) is overeager fans ready to spill their morality onto the rest of us. My question is this: if the artists don't care enough to make their own voices heard, why should we care? The truth is this: mp3s are not going away. They may not take off like some think they will, but no one is going to ban mp3s forever. If record companies find a way to make money from mp3s, they'll cement their place forever in modern music. Copyright law is fine and dandy, and I respect the artists' rights to their own work, but very little of this seems to be about copyright law. Either it's about someone pushing their morality down your throat or it's about money. I fully respect the Ninjas stance on this, but they're not going out of business because of this. Ninja Tune fans are going to buy records and support the label...have no fear. Smaller labels like Ninja Tune should be concerned, but not really worried...very few of us are going to wait for MMM's next album to be show up on napster; no, we'll be in the store shelling out hard currency. The difference between mp3s today and the radio (and bootlegs) twenty years ago is minimal. Think of mp3s as airtime (on the net, rather than the radio) which can be heard AND recorded, just like the radio twenty years ago. The difference, of course, is the technology and the ability to have a more perfect copy (i.e. mp3) than was available twenty years ago. But, consider this...our ears are more finely tuned these days. I would have been happy with a radio copy of a live show then...today, I want CD-quality sound...which, as we all know, doesn't happen as often as you would like with mp3s. Just look at the number of people complaining about mp3 sound quality and you will see that even as technology bridges the gaps, so too do our ears adapt and find new flaws. One last thing concerning mp3s and the record industry. It's high time this happened! As long as record companies continue to sell a 48-minute cd for $16.99 after they've only spent $1-2 on production costs, then expect us to buy the entire CD for one hit single, I don't feel guilt about pulling an mp3 off the net. If they want to play the game of greed, I'll play, too. This isn't about the artists getting their due and it never was...if it was, labels would be more concerned about the artists actually GETTING their due and less about taking as much from the consumer as they can get. Perhaps this happens with smaller labels (Does Warp or Skam or Ninja Tune give a higher % to the artist than, say, Capitol?), though I wouldn't know. I respect those dissenting opinions in this argument, but mp3s are not going away. Napster might be hit hard, but something else will come along. Instead of complaining and playing morality police, those artists and record companies who don't like losing out on money should find a way to use mp3s to their own advantage. If you want to make it about money, fine...let's make it about money. But don't play morality police and begin talking about 'poor, starving artists' who need that money...if they're poor and starving, it's because their record contracts aren't paying them enough. See, if you want to make it about money, we can play that way, too. ---brian p.s. anyone else hear about LucasArts suing Dr. Dre over copyright infringement? Interesting timing now that Dr. Dre has come out against Napster...I wonder where LucasArts stands on this napster discussion... -- And then the evil hurdy-gurdy came tumbling down. And all that remained was the purple alien and his bodhisatva friend who salivated too much to have his own friends. Brian Gause Technical Writer Applications Division Oracle Corporation (650) 506-1311 bgause@us.oracle.com The statements and opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of Oracle Corporation. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-19 20:47Shimone SamuelI think this here point is what stands out above everything else. The simple fact that the
From:
Shimone Samuel
To:
Date:
Fri, 19 May 2000 13:47:49 -0700
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <3925A875.138A4990@staticbeats.com>
I think this here point is what stands out above everything else. The simple fact that there is NO REASON for a cd to cost $16.99 !! Especially since the amount of money from each transaction that trickles down to the artists is SO minimal it boggles the mind. I like what Emusic has going with selling MP3 albums for $8.99 but I'm really bummed not getting the cover art. As stated in my original post : "Once the industry figures out how to get their 'cut' this will all be over....." shimone "Brian, from inside his own brain" wrote:
quoted 7 lines One last thing concerning mp3s and the record industry. It's high time> > One last thing concerning mp3s and the record industry. It's high time > this happened! As long as record companies continue to sell a 48-minute > cd for $16.99 after they've only spent $1-2 on production costs, then > expect us to buy the entire CD for one hit single, I don't feel guilt > about pulling an mp3 off the net. If they want to play the game of > greed, I'll play, too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-19 20:54Josh DavisonI heard something on the radio this morning about a court order forcing the big wigs in th
From:
Josh Davison
To:
Cc:
Date:
Fri, 19 May 2000 15:54:30 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
Reply to:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <Pine.NEB.3.96.1000519155034.72868E-100000@shell-1.enteract.com>
I heard something on the radio this morning about a court order forcing the big wigs in the music industry to lower the prices of cd's by at least $5... of course the industry is in a complete tizzy. somebody actually had the gall to say that a 1700% markup on the cost of manufacture is "price fixing"!! now the poor dears will have to cope with a mere 1200% markup. poor poor WEA, poor poor Sony. -- String Theory : Digital Music for Humans http://www.enteract.com/~yoshi/index.cgi On Fri, 19 May 2000, Shimone Samuel wrote:
quoted 27 lines I think this here point is what stands out above everything else. The simple> I think this here point is what stands out above everything else. The simple > fact that there is NO REASON for a cd to cost $16.99 !! Especially since the > amount of money from each transaction that trickles down to the artists is > SO minimal it boggles the mind. I like what Emusic has going with selling > MP3 albums for $8.99 but I'm really bummed not getting the cover art. As > stated in my original post : "Once the industry figures out how to get their > 'cut' this will all be over....." > > shimone > > > "Brian, from inside his own brain" wrote: > > > > > One last thing concerning mp3s and the record industry. It's high time > > this happened! As long as record companies continue to sell a 48-minute > > cd for $16.99 after they've only spent $1-2 on production costs, then > > expect us to buy the entire CD for one hit single, I don't feel guilt > > about pulling an mp3 off the net. If they want to play the game of > > greed, I'll play, too. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-20 00:45Jeff Waye/Ninja TuneJust to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price.... -I set domestic CD lists pric
From:
Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune
To:
Date:
Fri, 19 May 00 19:45:40 -0500
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <200005192330.TAA21941@sparkle.Generation.NET>
Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price.... -I set domestic CD lists prices as $14.99 not $16.99 -yes, it does cost $1-$2 in production cost depending on the packaging. There is also the recording fees, studio costs, mastering, etc... -what you're also not factoring in is the cost to market that...print ads, tour support, co-ops, promo copies, print media publicity, radio publicity, postage, etc... -then there's the incidentals...paying for overstock, defects, office overhead, etc.... -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount per CD. -people argue right now that online distribution of MP3 sales eliminates a lot of those costs and makes it cheaper. That would be marginally correct for now, but if it takes off as a viable revenue source, then on top of my expenses now, I ad the following....hiring additional employees to take care of on-line business, advertising on the web, co-ops with web companies, more promos sent to online media and radio.... -essentially what I'm getting at is that the digital world will become just as expensive as the real world to sell records in, and maybe it will level out to be about $11.99 a record but you don't get the packaging. Also that's assuming my CD's sales hold steady and that I don't need to factor in lost revenue on that side of the business. I'd pay the extra $3 for the packaging anyday. also, don't seperate the artist with the industry. Any artist wanting to make a living off their music is part of the industry. So the argument that we're only fucking the 'industry' when downloading material doesn't work. The artist revenue comes from the label, so when 'fucking' the label/industry you are in fact also fucking the signed artist. Even if said artist is stuck in a shitty deal it just makes it an even more shitty deal when their marginal income is taxed even heavier. To the person asking about whether indie artist normally get a better rate then major....mostly yes. Most indie labels I know either give 50/50 split on profit or give approximatly 20% of the distributor price with no recoupables. Plus there's also mechanicals and publishing income paid out to artists. Typically if you're on a major selling an okay amount of records, ie. say 20 000, then you're probably not seeing alot of money. If you're on a major selling 250 000 copies you're probably doing okay unless you just grossly mis-managed your career. If you're on an indie with a good deal/smart label (financially) and selling 20 000 copies your probably doing just fine, not rich by any stretch, but probably quite comfortable....and after all, any sane person only wants a roof over their head, some good food, and money to buy more records. PLEASE NOTE : nothing is this should be taken as a stance towards the rights and wrongs of illegal downloads. Just correcting/clarifying some assumptions that I see kicked around and supplying info to perhaps allow for more informed personal moral decisions. Nor is this any sort of 'official' Ninja Tune postion, just the ramblings of one of many people involved. Jeff
quoted 21 lines I think this here point is what stands out above everything else. The simple>I think this here point is what stands out above everything else. The simple >fact that there is NO REASON for a cd to cost $16.99 !! Especially since the >amount of money from each transaction that trickles down to the artists is >SO minimal it boggles the mind. I like what Emusic has going with selling >MP3 albums for $8.99 but I'm really bummed not getting the cover art. As >stated in my original post : "Once the industry figures out how to get their >'cut' this will all be over....." > >shimone > > >"Brian, from inside his own brain" wrote: > >> >> One last thing concerning mp3s and the record industry. It's high time >> this happened! As long as record companies continue to sell a 48-minute >> cd for $16.99 after they've only spent $1-2 on production costs, then >> expect us to buy the entire CD for one hit single, I don't feel guilt >> about pulling an mp3 off the net. If they want to play the game of >> greed, I'll play, too. >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-22 10:54Konstantin Minko> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune [mailto:jeff@ninjatune.net] > Se
From:
Konstantin Minko
To:
, Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune
Date:
Mon, 22 May 2000 13:54:58 +0300
Subject:
RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
Reply to:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <NCBBIPIBKLNBCLNLHFHBGEGJEJAA.ibss@ukrpack.net>
quoted 7 lines -----Original Message-----> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune [mailto:jeff@ninjatune.net] > Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2000 3:46 AM > To: idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry > >
quoted 10 lines -people argue right now that online distribution of MP3 sales eliminates> -people argue right now that online distribution of MP3 sales eliminates > a lot of those costs and makes it cheaper. That would be marginally > correct for now, but if it takes off as a viable revenue source, then on > top of my expenses now, I ad the following....hiring additional employees > to take care of on-line business, advertising on the web, co-ops with web > companies, more promos sent to online media and radio.... > essentially what I'm getting at is that the digital world will become > just as expensive as the real world to sell records in, and maybe it will > level out to be about $11.99 a record but you don't get the packaging. >
With all due respect, I do not think this is correct. In the macro scope getting your business online nowadays gives benefits from thousands of directions and lowers business expenses to impossible minimums. It is a general trend and publicly available facts. Let's look in the music industry using your scale of price content. Eliminated components: Production costs. Physical distribution. Paying for overstock. etc... Components that remain on the same level are: recording fees, studio costs, mastering, print ads, tour support, co-ops, promo copies, print media publicity, radio publicity, postage. Componets that are lowered in cost: number of employees (online business needs 10 or 20 times less employees to run), office overhead costs, management costs, etc. New components: online ads (can easily be avoided at all or put inside the same physical ad budget), web co-ops (can be avoided at all or minimized on less costly basis with physcal co-ops, online promos (can be avoided or put inside the same physical promos budget). PLUS: A huge rise in sales due to increased avalability of your products which is the most important benefit of online business. And that's a look from the person who's not involved in music industry (I am a financier and involved in online business). If to take into account that only 1/3 of CD price is generated by record company... This means that digital music can be available less than for 5 bucks minimum. Where is figure of $11.99 is generated? Please explain. Let's just guess how much a record company would benefit if not only a part of its business moves online but all physical sales are suspended and switched to online... You just have to keep your recording, mixing, mastering, etc. phase and then have a couple or more employees responsible for sales!!! Other parts of infrastructure like advertising or promoting will remain and/or be adapted to online which provides additional cost-effective schemes. this message is pure MHO not intended to hurt anyone but please do not hide the truth from us. take care Alien np. MP3's of U-ziq's "In Pine Effect" which is pretty shitty for me in comparison to his later works and which I could have bought if not for mp3s! God bless MP3. btw: Ninja is a great label and is not particularly a subject of our discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-20 03:10Maximo J MihelikHello, Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune wrote: > > Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list
From:
Maximo J Mihelik
To:
Cc:
Date:
Fri, 19 May 2000 21:10:47 -0600
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <20000519.211050.-538799.0.bzrec@juno.com>
Hello, Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune wrote:
quoted 6 lines Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price....> > Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price.... > > -I set domestic CD lists prices as $14.99 not $16.99 > -yes, it does cost $1-$2 in production cost depending on the packaging. > There is also the recording fees, studio costs, mastering, etc...
This is bullshit. Actually It isn't. You think that the money for advertising, promotion, and everything just appears? No. you have to make that money back, jsut as you have to make the money from production. The cost of a CD is the cost of what it takes to produce, and sell it as a whole. Studio time, air play, promo copies, postage... I happen to run a small label, and I know. Even these costs have nothing to do with the reason why a CD costs 15 dollars at the store. Actually they do, he wasn't lying, and he has no reason to do so.
quoted 2 lines -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount per> -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount per > CD.
not really, you have been doing it on what, 5 dollars a unit or so all this time. The whole remainder of this message is just stupid. CDs are shitty quality? Vinyl is better, are you aware that CDs are 44000, and Vinyl is a bit more than half of that? All I know is mr ninja speaks the truth. And if you'd done a little research before sending your message you would have found that out. But, I did a little for you. cdman.com - a cd manufacturer. 500 CDs, jewel cases, 2 page booklet and a tray card. $889. That doesn't include the films for the booklets, studio time, postage, promotion or advertising. But I think you get the point. It's not cheap. Most labels are justified in the prices they charge. I go now. ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-20 03:17IntermodalHello, Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune wrote: > > Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list
From:
Intermodal
To:
Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune
Cc:
Date:
Fri, 19 May 2000 23:17:10 -0400
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <392603B5.47BF21A4@ix.netcom.com>
Hello, Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune wrote:
quoted 6 lines Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price....> > Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price.... > > -I set domestic CD lists prices as $14.99 not $16.99 > -yes, it does cost $1-$2 in production cost depending on the packaging. > There is also the recording fees, studio costs, mastering, etc...
This is bullshit. All the fees that you are using to justify have nothing to do with the actual cost if a record. Your 15 dollar CD costs about 9-11 dollars from BMG or Sony wholesale, which means that a label is seeing about 5 dollars per releases(or somewhere in the area, I have not worked on that side of the business.)
quoted 5 lines -what you're also not factoring in is the cost to market that...print> -what you're also not factoring in is the cost to market that...print > ads, tour support, co-ops, promo copies, print media publicity, radio > publicity, postage, etc... > -then there's the incidentals...paying for overstock, defects, office > overhead, etc....
Even these costs have nothing to do with the reason why a CD costs 15 dollars at the store. 2/3rds of the cost of a CD comes from the distributor and the record store, it has nothing to do with the label itself. Do not lie to these people, because I know there is no way in hell that you are getting $10 a unit from your distributor. The people who are screwing consumers are the distributors. There is no reason a CD should cost more than a cassette tape. Cd's are expensive because of greed, plain and simple.
quoted 2 lines -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount per> -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount per > CD.
not really, you have been doing it on what, 5 dollars a unit or so all this time.
quoted 6 lines -people argue right now that online distribution of MP3 sales eliminates> -people argue right now that online distribution of MP3 sales eliminates > a lot of those costs and makes it cheaper. That would be marginally > correct for now, but if it takes off as a viable revenue source, then on > top of my expenses now, I ad the following....hiring additional employees > to take care of on-line business, advertising on the web, co-ops with web > companies, more promos sent to online media and radio....
and once again this is bullshit. If you are pricing at the rate that your distributor is giving you I can see this, but you will not be doing that. If you charge $8-9 per unit, you are doubling your revenue per unit, as well as knocking off 2 dollars per unit for pressing costs. So it seems to me that your revenue would grow 70% by going to a downloadable format, and cutting out retailers and distributors, while(shockingly enough) reducing your price to the consumer by more than 33% if you are into business newspeak, it is what they call "disintermediation" a simple way to say it is: as a business we have figured out that we can make more money and sell our product cheaper to the consumer if we can cut out the two unnecessary tiers of the previous distribution scheme. Ford and GM are in the process of doing it with cars, and no matter how many excuses are made or lies told, you will be doing it with digital audio.
quoted 6 lines -essentially what I'm getting at is that the digital world will become> -essentially what I'm getting at is that the digital world will become > just as expensive as the real world to sell records in, and maybe it will > level out to be about $11.99 a record but you don't get the packaging. > Also that's assuming my CD's sales hold steady and that I don't need to > factor in lost revenue on that side of the business. I'd pay the extra $3 > for the packaging anyday.
and this is where you come in as a label, in the future there are going to be two formats: Digital Audio and Boutique packaging. The only way you will be able to justify the pricing of a physical audio format will be to have elaborate packaging. Frankly, I will not buy CD's anymore if vinyl is available. I hate the format, I think it has all but destroyed lable art, and it is a shitty audio standard to begin with. As far as I am concerned, I am getting screwed by this poor container for digital audio. I don't want to pay 6 more bucks for some crappy little post card art and an ugly little case. I will buy vinyl, with great label art, and if I know I am going to play the hell out of something, I will burn an extra copy for repeated listening.
quoted 8 lines also, don't seperate the artist with the industry. Any artist wanting to> > also, don't seperate the artist with the industry. Any artist wanting to > make a living off their music is part of the industry. So the argument > that we're only fucking the 'industry' when downloading material doesn't > work. The artist revenue comes from the label, so when 'fucking' the > label/industry you are in fact also fucking the signed artist. Even if > said artist is stuck in a shitty deal it just makes it an even more > shitty deal when their marginal income is taxed even heavier.
perhaps, but if you are dumb enough to get into a position like that you get what you deserve.
quoted 13 lines To the person asking about whether indie artist normally get a better> > To the person asking about whether indie artist normally get a better > rate then major....mostly yes. Most indie labels I know either give 50/50 > split on profit or give approximatly 20% of the distributor price with no > recoupables. Plus there's also mechanicals and publishing income paid out > to artists. Typically if you're on a major selling an okay amount of > records, ie. say 20 000, then you're probably not seeing alot of money. > If you're on a major selling 250 000 copies you're probably doing okay > unless you just grossly mis-managed your career. If you're on an indie > with a good deal/smart label (financially) and selling 20 000 copies your > probably doing just fine, not rich by any stretch, but probably quite > comfortable....and after all, any sane person only wants a roof over > their head, some good food, and money to buy more records.
You are right on the indie tip, but you are dead wrong about the Majors. If you sell 20,000 records, you are getting nothing and you are probably in debt up to your ears. A quarter million, you might be breaking even, you might eat if you sell your publishing. These days gold records are not even enough for the majors. The Major label system has changed since the CD. They don't develop artists anymore, they delete back catalogs after they drop below a sales figure, and they still do not pay anything. Unless you are Aphex Twin and you have the leverage to negotiate a decent deal, there is no reason to be on a major. 12 points minus recoupables isn't worth it, especially if you are not making radio music. You might be treating your artist pretty good at Ninja Tune, but Universal/MCA isn't treating their artists too well. look around on the internet, there are plenty of articles talking about how bad the business practices of major labels are, look around. Chunk D. will be glad to talk at length about it. It is not a secret, this current business strategy does not work for the artist and that is going to have to change. mt -- Michael Taylor : Chrome3@ix.netcom.com http://homes.arealcity.com/Intermodal/index.html http://www.mp3.com/TheMSProject --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-20 05:43IntermodalMaximo J Mihelik wrote: > > Hello, > > Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune wrote: > > > > Just to shed so
From:
Intermodal
To:
Maximo J Mihelik
Cc:
Date:
Sat, 20 May 2000 01:43:48 -0400
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <39262614.1519521B@ix.netcom.com>
Maximo J Mihelik wrote:
quoted 18 lines Hello,> > Hello, > > Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune wrote: > > > > Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price.... > > > > -I set domestic CD lists prices as $14.99 not $16.99 > > -yes, it does cost $1-$2 in production cost depending on the packaging. > > There is also the recording fees, studio costs, mastering, etc... > > This is bullshit. > > Actually It isn't. You think that the money for advertising, promotion, > and everything just appears? No. you have to make that money back, jsut > as you have to make the money from production. The cost of a CD is the > cost of what it takes to produce, and sell it as a whole. Studio time, > air play, promo copies, postage...
Ok, lets think about this. Downloadable digital audio..does it make sense that the pressing and shipping costs are cut out? I will say it slowly for you, the costs for the physical medium are gone, this means labels do not pay pressing costs. The other costs are still there obviously, but 2/3rd of the retail price of a CD have nothing to do with what it took to make that CD. The cost to a consumer of a CD is not what it costs the label. the cost of a cd is roughly: 1/3 the labels costs (artist fees, promo, pressing, all the stuff you already have to pay for, exactly what you are talking about...) 1/3 the distributors fee (warehousing, promotion, shipping...) 1/3 the retailers markup (brick and mortar costs...) I will say this slowly for you again. 2/3rds of the cost to a consumer of a cd has nothing to do with the label, IOW the label is not seeing 2/3rds of the retail price of a CD. Once again, all the stuff you pay for as a label is covered in your 1/3rd, the distributor and retailer mark-ups do not pay for you to produce a CD. A label has to pay for everything on this 1/3 of the retail cost of a CD. once again, it means that the label has to pay for everything with 5 dollars out of a 15 dollars CD. That means that the consumer is paying 10 dollars for the physical media to be put within their reach. If we go to a non-physical media, like say...downloadable digital audio...you can automatically cut out 10 dollars of the cost of music by removing distributors and retailers. A CD only costs 5 dollars from a label, you as a consumer are paying another 10 dollars to have this CD brought to a store where you can buy it. If you cut out the system that gets the CD from the label to the store, you don't have to pay them their 10 dollar cut, doesn't that make sense? Remember, the CD is only a container, it isn't the actual product. If you charge 5 dollars to download the audio, you are making just as much money as you would with a physical release, but the consumer is only paying for the label costs, not the costs of the distributor and the record store...that's why it costs a third as much. Now say you charge 7 or 8 dollars to directly download the audio from your site. You are making 3-4 dollars more per unit than you were selling it to a distributor, and the consumer is still spending less than he would if he bought the CD from a record store. Obviously there are costs in the digital realm, but those costs would still be less per unit than the pressing and shipping costs of physical media. Remember, the CD is only a container, it isn't the actual product. the whole point of my post was that if you can sell your product directly to consumers without having to go through middle-men(retailers/distributors, which is where 2/3rds of a CD's final retail cost comes from) you can charge more per unit, and the end consumer will still pay less than if he had gone through the standard distribution system. It is the whole factory direct idea, labels make more because they are selling direct, and consumers pay less because they are buying direct. The technology is not there yet, digital audio is not going to be decent until we get better resolution and bandwidth with data compression. Perhaps some kind of anti-copy encryption, and a digital watermark is you want to be anal. I know the digital-audio-as-a-source-of-revenue idea is not quite ready yet, but wait another decade. We are not there yet, but we will be. Your kids might even find the idea of record stores kind of strange and antiquated.
quoted 7 lines I happen to run a small label, and I know.> > I happen to run a small label, and I know. > > Even these costs have nothing to do with the reason why a CD costs 15 > dollars at the store. > > Actually they do, he wasn't lying, and he has no reason to do so.
If he can find me a distributor that will buy my records for 15 dollars, and sell it to a record store for 15 dollars, who will sell it to a consumer for 15 dollars, I will fly out to his pad and mow his lawn for the rest of the summer. Music costs so much because of middlemen, not record labels. remember, 2/3rds of the price you pay is to get that container from the label to a store where you can buy it.
quoted 10 lines -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount per> > > -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount per > > CD. > > not really, you have been doing it on what, 5 dollars a unit or so all > this time. > > The whole remainder of this message is just stupid. CDs are shitty > quality? Vinyl is better, are you aware that CDs are 44000, and Vinyl is > a bit more than half of that?
Vinyl still has a better resolution than those 16-bit stair steps your ears have become accustomed to. Despite what you have been told by the record industry, CD audio is not the holy grail of audio standards. I personally believe that old synths, recorded on tape, mastered from tape to plates to vinyl sound better than DDD records and CD's. We are holding on to this antiquated 17 year old format because of money, not because the quality of the format. Honestly, as a generation, we have been robbed of good audio. Our grandkids will look back at 16-bit 44.1 khz the way we look back on the old "reverb and echo" production techniques from the 50's. in 2000 we could be doing a lot better than 16 bits and 44.1. It is sad that an entire generation of music has been castrated of its upper and lower inaudible harmonics. There is a reason why a symphony in a good hall will always sound better than a site recording of the same performance. 44.1 audio means that in reality you have about a 22khz frequency response when the Nyquist Theorem kicks in. Which on the surface of things makes sense, most of us can only hear to 20 khz as kids, and 15 khz as adults. The problem is that what you can't hear effects what you can hear, the harmonics outside of our hearing range reach into the harmonics we can hear. That is why the hall sounds better than the site recording, because all of those overtones are present in the hall and that makes the sound richer. 22khz cuts out a huge part out the audio spectrum out, making acoustic recordings sound less rich, and I will not even go into modern studio equipment. It is a good thing that the newer boxes are breaking with 16 bit resolution, which hopefully we will be past in a decade.
quoted 3 lines All I know is mr ninja speaks the truth. And if you'd done a little> > All I know is mr ninja speaks the truth. And if you'd done a little > research before sending your message you would have found that out.
I have read This Business of Music and more articles on the music business than I care to admit to. As a musician of 10 years, I would like to think I have some idea of how the record industry works.
quoted 8 lines But, I did a little for you.> > But, I did a little for you. > > cdman.com - a cd manufacturer. > 500 CDs, jewel cases, 2 page booklet and a tray card. $889. That > doesn't include the films for the booklets, studio time, postage, > promotion or advertising. But I think you get the point. It's not > cheap. Most labels are justified in the prices they charge.
you forgot mastering lab costs, paying your graphic designer, advances and all the other fun things that come with running a label. I never said that indie labels charge too much for records, I know the reality of the business(I know it is a business and I know just how grim it is.) Most of the label owners I know are really good guys with good intentions who are fighting hard just to break even and pay their artists. trust me, I have no illusions that indie label owners take monthly trips to the bahamas and support coke habits on the backs of their artists. What I have a problem with are major labels and their distributors who screw their artists over. the whole 12 point minus recoupables system is a very real part of the music industry and it does not amount to much more that indentured servitude for the vast majority of signees. Groups like TLC went bankrupt for a reason, and TLC sold more records in a month during their peak than I will sell in my career as a musician. The major label and distribution system is set up to make money off of the back of artists. They have the system locked up from labels, to distributors, to record store payola, to every form of promotional media Sony, BMG,Universal/MCA, Time-Warner, and Virgin have the industry locked down. That system has to be stopped, and I believe that digital audio is the way to do that. It strikes me as being the most equitable way to distribute music while allowing the most consumer friendly avenue to purchase music. I am sure Jeff from Ninja Tune has good intentions, and I was wrong to take that tone with him, but the fact remains that the industry is rotten. It is set up for the most part to gouge the artists and the public, and that is wrong. The artists should be making more money and the public should be paying less for music. I think downloadable digital audio is the best way to accomplish this. I respect labels that do 50/50 profit splits, or 20 percent off the top, but the vast majority of the industry is not set up this way. It is set up to screw artists, and that is a fact, that system needs to change. It is not that I think profit is a horrible thing, I just do not believe you need to screw over other people in order to survive. A 12 point major label deal is prostitution is every sense of the word. I will not be pimped by the record industry, and I do not think this should happen to any other artists. One day there will be a system where artists and labels can deal directly with their fans and make money from it. I believe that is the ideal system, and it is what we should be shooting for as business people/artists. mt -- Michael Taylor : Chrome3@ix.netcom.com http://homes.arealcity.com/Intermodal/index.html http://www.mp3.com/TheMSProject --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-20 06:30Brock Landersuummmm....buddy....not sure if you read maximo's email or not but he didnt question your l
From:
Brock Landers
To:
idm
Date:
Sat, 20 May 2000 02:30:29 -0400
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <002c01bfc224$e4de7a60$0200000a@g>
uummmm....buddy....not sure if you read maximo's email or not but he didnt question your logistics on the digital audio....he questioned you telling Jeff that he as no idea about that costs of putting out cds....i think overall that is pretty ignorant on your part.....you are nearly 100% correct about the digital format information...but Jeff knows what hes talking about 100% for physical media, and maximo didnt even comment on your info on digital audio.....it is the wave of the future and its great...but i dont think its wise to call people liars....especially when they are very knowledgable and outright have no reason to lie.... -brock ----- Original Message ----- From: "Intermodal" <Chrome3@ix.netcom.com> To: "Maximo J Mihelik" <bzrec@juno.com> Cc: <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2000 1:43 AM Subject: Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
quoted 10 lines Maximo J Mihelik wrote:> Maximo J Mihelik wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune wrote: > > > > > > Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price.... > > > > > > -I set domestic CD lists prices as $14.99 not $16.99 > > > -yes, it does cost $1-$2 in production cost depending on the
packaging.
quoted 6 lines There is also the recording fees, studio costs, mastering, etc...> > > There is also the recording fees, studio costs, mastering, etc... > > > > This is bullshit. > > > > Actually It isn't. You think that the money for advertising, promotion, > > and everything just appears? No. you have to make that money back,
jsut
quoted 97 lines as you have to make the money from production. The cost of a CD is the> > as you have to make the money from production. The cost of a CD is the > > cost of what it takes to produce, and sell it as a whole. Studio time, > > air play, promo copies, postage... > > Ok, lets think about this. > > Downloadable digital audio..does it make sense that the pressing and > shipping costs are cut out? I will say it slowly for you, the costs for > the physical medium are gone, this means labels do not pay pressing > costs. The other costs are still there obviously, but 2/3rd of the > retail price of a CD have nothing to do with what it took to make that > CD. > > The cost to a consumer of a CD is not what it costs the label. the cost > of a cd is roughly: > > 1/3 the labels costs (artist fees, promo, pressing, all the stuff you > already have to pay for, exactly what you are talking about...) > > 1/3 the distributors fee (warehousing, promotion, shipping...) > > 1/3 the retailers markup (brick and mortar costs...) > > I will say this slowly for you again. 2/3rds of the cost to a consumer > of a cd has nothing to do with the label, IOW the label is not seeing > 2/3rds of the retail price of a CD. Once again, all the stuff you pay > for as a label is covered in your 1/3rd, the distributor and retailer > mark-ups do not pay for you to produce a CD. > > A label has to pay for everything on this 1/3 of the retail cost of a > CD. > > once again, it means that the label has to pay for everything with 5 > dollars out of a 15 dollars CD. That means that the consumer is paying > 10 dollars for the physical media to be put within their reach. > > If we go to a non-physical media, like say...downloadable digital > audio...you can automatically cut out 10 dollars of the cost of music by > removing distributors and retailers. A CD only costs 5 dollars from a > label, you as a consumer are paying another 10 dollars to have this CD > brought to a store where you can buy it. If you cut out the system that > gets the CD from the label to the store, you don't have to pay them > their 10 dollar cut, doesn't that make sense? > > Remember, the CD is only a container, it isn't the actual product. > > If you charge 5 dollars to download the audio, you are making just as > much money as you would with a physical release, but the consumer is > only paying for the label costs, not the costs of the distributor and > the record store...that's why it costs a third as much. > > Now say you charge 7 or 8 dollars to directly download the audio from > your site. You are making 3-4 dollars more per unit than you were > selling it to a distributor, and the consumer is still spending less > than he would if he bought the CD from a record store. > Obviously there are costs in the digital realm, but those costs would > still be less per unit than the pressing and shipping costs of physical > media. > > Remember, the CD is only a container, it isn't the actual product. > > the whole point of my post was that if you can sell your product > directly to consumers without having to go through > middle-men(retailers/distributors, which is where 2/3rds of a CD's final > retail cost comes from) you can charge more per unit, and the end > consumer will still pay less than if he had gone through the standard > distribution system. It is the whole factory direct idea, labels make > more because they are selling direct, and consumers pay less because > they are buying direct. > > The technology is not there yet, digital audio is not going to be decent > until we get better resolution and bandwidth with data compression. > Perhaps some kind of anti-copy encryption, and a digital watermark is > you want to be anal. I know the digital-audio-as-a-source-of-revenue > idea is not quite ready yet, but wait another decade. We are not there > yet, but we will be. Your kids might even find the idea of record stores > kind of strange and antiquated. > > > > > I happen to run a small label, and I know. > > > > Even these costs have nothing to do with the reason why a CD costs 15 > > dollars at the store. > > > > Actually they do, he wasn't lying, and he has no reason to do so. > > If he can find me a distributor that will buy my records for 15 dollars, > and sell it to a record store for 15 dollars, who will sell it to a > consumer for 15 dollars, I will fly out to his pad and mow his lawn for > the rest of the summer. > > Music costs so much because of middlemen, not record labels. remember, > 2/3rds of the price you pay is to get that container from the label to a > store where you can buy it. > > > > > > -when you put it all together is equals a pretty significant amount
per
quoted 7 lines CD.> > > CD. > > > > not really, you have been doing it on what, 5 dollars a unit or so all > > this time. > > > > The whole remainder of this message is just stupid. CDs are shitty > > quality? Vinyl is better, are you aware that CDs are 44000, and Vinyl
is
quoted 105 lines a bit more than half of that?> > a bit more than half of that? > > Vinyl still has a better resolution than those 16-bit stair steps your > ears have become accustomed to. Despite what you have been told by the > record industry, CD audio is not the holy grail of audio standards. I > personally believe that old synths, recorded on tape, mastered from tape > to plates to vinyl sound better than DDD records and CD's. We are > holding on to this antiquated 17 year old format because of money, not > because the quality of the format. Honestly, as a generation, we have > been robbed of good audio. Our grandkids will look back at 16-bit 44.1 > khz the way we look back on the old "reverb and echo" production > techniques from the 50's. in 2000 we could be doing a lot better than 16 > bits and 44.1. It is sad that an entire generation of music has been > castrated of its upper and lower inaudible harmonics. > > There is a reason why a symphony in a good hall will always sound better > than a site recording of the same performance. 44.1 audio means that in > reality you have about a 22khz frequency response when the Nyquist > Theorem kicks in. Which on the surface of things makes sense, most of us > can only hear to 20 khz as kids, and 15 khz as adults. The problem is > that what you can't hear effects what you can hear, the harmonics > outside of our hearing range reach into the harmonics we can hear. That > is why the hall sounds better than the site recording, because all of > those overtones are present in the hall and that makes the sound richer. > 22khz cuts out a huge part out the audio spectrum out, making acoustic > recordings sound less rich, and I will not even go into modern studio > equipment. It is a good thing that the newer boxes are breaking with 16 > bit resolution, which hopefully we will be past in a decade. > > > > > > All I know is mr ninja speaks the truth. And if you'd done a little > > research before sending your message you would have found that out. > > I have read This Business of Music and more articles on the music > business than I care to admit to. As a musician of 10 years, I would > like to think I have some idea of how the record industry works. > > > > > But, I did a little for you. > > > > cdman.com - a cd manufacturer. > > 500 CDs, jewel cases, 2 page booklet and a tray card. $889. That > > doesn't include the films for the booklets, studio time, postage, > > promotion or advertising. But I think you get the point. It's not > > cheap. Most labels are justified in the prices they charge. > > you forgot mastering lab costs, paying your graphic designer, advances > and all the other fun things that come with running a label. I never > said that indie labels charge too much for records, I know the reality > of the business(I know it is a business and I know just how grim it is.) > Most of the label owners I know are really good guys with good > intentions who are fighting hard just to break even and pay their > artists. trust me, I have no illusions that indie label owners take > monthly trips to the bahamas and support coke habits on the backs of > their artists. > > What I have a problem with are major labels and their distributors who > screw their artists over. the whole 12 point minus recoupables system is > a very real part of the music industry and it does not amount to much > more that indentured servitude for the vast majority of signees. Groups > like TLC went bankrupt for a reason, and TLC sold more records in a > month during their peak than I will sell in my career as a musician. The > major label and distribution system is set up to make money off of the > back of artists. > They have the system locked up from labels, to distributors, to record > store payola, to every form of promotional media Sony, > BMG,Universal/MCA, Time-Warner, and Virgin have the industry locked > down. > > That system has to be stopped, and I believe that digital audio is the > way to do that. It strikes me as being the most equitable way to > distribute music while allowing the most consumer friendly avenue to > purchase music. I am sure Jeff from Ninja Tune has good intentions, and > I was wrong to take that tone with him, but the fact remains that the > industry is rotten. It is set up for the most part to gouge the artists > and the public, and that is wrong. The artists should be making more > money and the public should be paying less for music. I think > downloadable digital audio is the best way to accomplish this. > > I respect labels that do 50/50 profit splits, or 20 percent off the top, > but the vast majority of the industry is not set up this way. It is set > up to screw artists, and that is a fact, that system needs to change. It > is not that I think profit is a horrible thing, I just do not believe > you need to screw over other people in order to survive. A 12 point > major label deal is prostitution is every sense of the word. > I will not be pimped by the record industry, and I do not think this > should happen to any other artists. One day there will be a system where > artists and labels can deal directly with their fans and make money from > it. I believe that is the ideal system, and it is what we should be > shooting for as business people/artists. > > mt > > > -- > Michael Taylor : Chrome3@ix.netcom.com > http://homes.arealcity.com/Intermodal/index.html > http://www.mp3.com/TheMSProject > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-21 02:54JohnAs the owner of a small label here's my view: Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they
From:
John
To:
Date:
Sun, 21 May 2000 12:54:23 +1000
Subject:
[idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <4.3.1.0.20000521122838.00ac2310@pop3.zipworld.com.au>
As the owner of a small label here's my view: Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they are great for getting the music heard and enticing people to buy the album or release the mp3 comes from but also may result in lost sales, especially since this type of music appeals to the computer geeks and the likes who do spend huge amounts of time in front of their computers and hence the computer is there optimum listening environment. Having said that we have unreleased mp3's on the AI website @ http://www.aural-industries.com.au in the downloads section that we use for promotional purposes and from the download statistics it would seem they are very popular. We have no way of knowing how or if this translates to actual sales of CD's but that's fine with us. What is not fine with us is the blatant boot-legging in mp3 format of an entire release (CD, album or 12") from the AI label.. if we had wanted the release to be via mp3 we would have done it ourselves... quite simple really.
quoted 6 lines This isn't about the artists getting their due and it never was...if it>This isn't about the artists getting their due and it never was...if it >was, labels would be more concerned about the artists actually GETTING >their due and less about taking as much from the consumer as they can >get. Perhaps this happens with smaller labels (Does Warp or Skam or >Ninja Tune give a higher % to the artist than, say, Capitol?), though I >wouldn't know.
In Aural Industries case... as well as paying reasonable advances I then actually split the money between the artist and the label on a 50/50 profit sharing basis on wholesale. So I take the financial risk and the artist takes the musical risk and as you can see, if their release sells well, the artist can make a bit of money by releasing on my label. I deliberately set it up this way in an effort to give more back to the artist. As I really disagree with the big label models that have been adopted for the music industry, with the artist only getting 1% or some such of each sale. So in AI's case yes if you boot-leg the artists material via mp3 and like it and don't buy their album you are financially hurting the artist. And I'm sure the same goes for many small labels like mine. So please keep this in mind when you hear an mp3 you like from a particular artist on a small label and then support both by buying the release. Truly, it could really mean the difference between there being another release or not for the artist on that label or the label itself. Regards, John Aural Industries Pty Ltd http://www.aural-industries.com.au --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-21 22:29Christopher MillerOn Sun, May 21, 2000, John noted: > Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they are great
From:
Christopher Miller
To:
Music That Sounds Like Stoves Talking To Refrigerators
Date:
Sun, 21 May 2000 18:29:59 -0400
Subject:
[idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <200005212231.SAA04793@yoda.fdt.net>
On Sun, May 21, 2000, John noted:
quoted 3 lines Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they are great for getting the music> Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they are great for getting the music > heard and enticing people to buy the album or release the mp3 comes from > but also may result in lost sales
Lost sales might also be from folks listening to the mp3s and realizing they just plain don't like the songs (or the artist). A large amount of mp3s I download end up in the little `trash' icon down at the bottom left corner of my computer screen rather than being transferred to .aiff and then onto cdr. So then... why in the world would you buy something you don't like? My main beef with the music industry and record shops as a majority are that they seem to rely on me not actually knowing what it is that I'm buying because I've never heard it. Then I get home and am pissed off because I just dropped $15+ on a crappy cd. Most record shops have the policy of `no returns', and very few will actually allow you to listen to the cds in the store before you buy 'em. There should be (scratch that... should always have been) a way you can preview a record/cd before you decide you want to buy it.
quoted 4 lines Having said that we have unreleased mp3's on the AI website @> Having said that we have unreleased mp3's on the AI website @ > http://www.aural-industries.com.au in the downloads section that we use for > promotional purposes and from the download statistics it would seem they are > very popular.
I don't listen to Real Audio files or that kind of thing. I can't really tell if I like a song by a small 30 second excerpt. The full-length track as Real Audio doesn't do me any good either. I also can't make a decision based on standing at the front counter of a record shop with headphones on while they've got other music playing over their own speakers. I need a good long listen. Not one, but more like three to five good listens. Since mp3s have come along, I've saved a whole lot of money from not having to buy a lot of crap. CDs are just too damned expensive! Isn't price-fixing supposed to be illegal? I rarely have anything anymore that I want to trade in at the used shops. If I like it, then I go out and buy it. If it's no longer available, then the record labels are the ones losing out - I would have bought it, and still will if there are more pressings later. I like the whole package, not just a cdr with a hand-written tracklisting. mp3s suck quality-wise anyway (in my opinion), and i'd rather have the real thing. .`-). christopher miller o o.' evil@fdt.net == ' ps. John... this sin't an attack against you or your label. Good luck in your ventures. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-22 11:54Irene McCOn 21 May 2000, Christopher Miller wrote re [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the mu: > Most re
From:
Irene McC
To:
Date:
Mon, 22 May 2000 13:54:25 +0200
Subject:
[idm] in-store listening
Reply to:
[idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <39293C11.10488.81D9CA@localhost>
On 21 May 2000, Christopher Miller wrote re [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the mu:
quoted 3 lines Most record shops have the policy of `no returns', and very few> Most record shops have the policy of `no returns', and very few > will actually allow you to listen to the cds in the store before > you buy 'em.
I know the manager at my local shop, he lets me bring in my own disc-man player and headphones and I can park off in a corner of the shop with a pile of things... but it *still* doesn't give me the "vibe" of listening to music in my own space and making a realistic decision on whether or not I will continue liking it.
quoted 3 lines I also can't make a decision based on standing at the front> I also can't make a decision based on standing at the front > counter of a record shop with headphones on while they've got > other music playing over their own speakers.
Exactly. In SA we pay dearly (by the SECOND) for phone calls, so downloading MP3's doesn't work out to be that cheap a deal either, especially with flakey bandwidth etc. so it is a continuing battle to order stuff from overseas without having heard it before - oh, we poor obsessed creatures. I * --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-22 23:39JohnChris, >> Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they are great for getting the music >> h
From:
John
To:
Cc:
Christopher Miller
Date:
Tue, 23 May 2000 09:39:34 +1000
Subject:
[idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <3.0.32.20000523093932.00911100@pop3.zipworld.com.au>
Chris,
quoted 10 lines Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they are great for getting the music>> Mp3's are a double-edged sword in that they are great for getting the music >> heard and enticing people to buy the album or release the mp3 comes from >> but also may result in lost sales > > Lost sales might also be from folks listening to the mp3s and >realizing they just plain don't like the songs (or the artist). A large >amount of mp3s I download end up in the little `trash' icon down at the >bottom left corner of my computer screen rather than being transferred to >.aiff and then onto cdr. So then... why in the world would you buy >something you don't like?
It's a cyclic arguement but look at this way if some one has gone to the effort of boot-legging an albums worth of material in mp3 format which would take a fair bit of time i'd say they liked it enough in the first place or at the very least see it as currency in obtaining more mp3's. Yes contrary to what most people say on here there is quite a big market in trading boot-legged mp3's. I'll continue the arguement a little further on one of your other points that is a bit hypocritical..
quoted 8 lines My main beef with the music industry and record shops as a majority> My main beef with the music industry and record shops as a majority >are that they seem to rely on me not actually knowing what it is that I'm >buying because I've never heard it. Then I get home and am pissed off >because I just dropped $15+ on a crappy cd. Most record shops have the >policy of `no returns', and very few will actually allow you to listen to >the cds in the store before you buy 'em. There should be (scratch that... >should always have been) a way you can preview a record/cd before you >decide you want to buy it.
This only happens in certain stores/chains America as far as I know. All record shops here in Australia will let you listen to a release (even vinyl!!) before you decide whether or not you'd like to purchase it or not.
quoted 3 lines Having said that we have unreleased mp3's on the AI website @>> Having said that we have unreleased mp3's on the AI website @ >> http://www.aural-industries.com.au in the downloads section that we use for >> promotional purposes and from the download statistics it would seem they
are
quoted 8 lines very popular.>> very popular. > > I don't listen to Real Audio files or that kind of thing. I can't >really tell if I like a song by a small 30 second excerpt. The full-length >track as Real Audio doesn't do me any good either. I also can't make a >decision based on standing at the front counter of a record shop with >headphones on while they've got other music playing over their own >speakers.
I never mentioned Real Audio as AI uses full-length mp3's on the AI website. Though I see nothing wrong with the use of Real Audio it gives you the chance to listen and decide if you like the music or not.. all be it at a poor quality but still it's a poor excuse for boot-legging in-print music. Many people hear stuff on the radio and upon hearing and liking it buy it.. radio is of similar quality. So I take it you have never searched for or bought anything after hearing it on the radio?
quoted 2 lines I need a good long listen. Not one, but more like three to five good> I need a good long listen. Not one, but more like three to five good >listens.
This bit is the bit I find hypocritical... can you name other products you can borrow legally for a length of time to decide whether or not you actually like them enough to buy?? I mean come on imagine walking into a car dealer and saying "oh i'm not sure if I really like the car.. can I borrow it for 5 to 7 days to decide?".. it just doesn't happen.
quoted 4 lines Since mp3s have come along, I've saved a whole lot of money from not> Since mp3s have come along, I've saved a whole lot of money from not >having to buy a lot of crap. CDs are just too damned expensive! Isn't >price-fixing supposed to be illegal? I rarely have anything anymore that I >want to trade in at the used shops.
I hear this arguement all the time but then a quick poll of the mp3's most wanted and traded by people on this list would show up it's never the crap that gets distributed but the quality stuff from high calibre artists such as Aphex Twin, BoC and Ae.
quoted 5 lines If I like it, then I go out and buy it. If it's no longer available,> If I like it, then I go out and buy it. If it's no longer available, >then the record labels are the ones losing out - I would have bought it, >and still will if there are more pressings later. I like the whole >package, not just a cdr with a hand-written tracklisting. mp3s suck >quality-wise anyway (in my opinion), and i'd rather have the real thing.
Yeah agreed hear and that's why I said it's a two edged sword in my original email, as i'm sure for everyone who has heard the mp3's and bought the CD there are many more who haven't. Though there will probably nevber be a way of knowing this for sure.
quoted 2 lines ps. John... this sin't an attack against you or your label. Good luck in>ps. John... this sin't an attack against you or your label. Good luck in > your ventures.
Nor did I see it as one. May I ask did you buy Thug's Isolated Rhythm Chock? If so, what did you think of it? Cheers, John --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-23 18:35Brian, fresh from his hurdy-gurdyJohn, Actually, this isn't unheard of in the states. I've done it and I know others who ha
From:
Brian, fresh from his hurdy-gurdy
To:
John
Cc:
, Christopher Miller
Date:
Tue, 23 May 2000 11:35:16 -0700
Subject:
Re: [idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <392ACF64.F37E6AF1@us.oracle.com>
John, Actually, this isn't unheard of in the states. I've done it and I know others who have, as well. ---brian John wrote:
quoted 9 lines I need a good long listen. Not one, but more like three to five good> > > I need a good long listen. Not one, but more like three to five good > >listens. > > This bit is the bit I find hypocritical... can you name other products you > can borrow legally for a length of time to decide whether or not you > actually like them enough to buy?? I mean come on imagine walking into a > car dealer and saying "oh i'm not sure if I really like the car.. can I > borrow it for 5 to 7 days to decide?".. it just doesn't happen.
-- And then the evil hurdy-gurdy came tumbling down. And all that remained was the purple alien and his bodhisatva friend who salivated too much to have his own friends. Brian Gause Technical Writer Applications Division Oracle Corporation (650) 506-1311 bgause@us.oracle.com The statements and opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of Oracle Corporation. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-23 18:36Jeff Waye/Ninja Tunelook it's cool if you don't want to agree, but I think it's safe to say I do have a rather
From:
Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune
Cc:
Date:
Tue, 23 May 00 13:36:43 -0500
Subject:
Re: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <200005231720.NAA09198@sparkle.Generation.NET>
look it's cool if you don't want to agree, but I think it's safe to say I do have a rather informed opinion on this. Yes it's bias towards a label point of view, but I have been doing this for 11 years now (and have worked at retail, at distributor, and at label level) and do know the financial realities of it all. It is a weightly system and maybe the internet will take some of that off, but I'm still skeptical. My workload has already increased with the amount of .com compannies calling, and more work means I have to pay more people. Simple economics. I wish it was as easy as everyone just magically knowing when a new record comes out. Simply...production and time do factor into a cost. It's like saying you should only pay $1 to see a movie because a studio only needs to pay for it's film. It don't work that way. Finally....Rjyan had some good points. You can shuffle around the system all you want but it just means money saved one place usually means expenses added somewhere else and it all just levels out in the end with maybe a couple dollars in savings when all the dust settles. Jeff
quoted 11 lines Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price....>> Just to shed some light on the breakdown of a list price.... >> >> -I set domestic CD lists prices as $14.99 not $16.99 >> -yes, it does cost $1-$2 in production cost depending on the packaging. >> There is also the recording fees, studio costs, mastering, etc... > >This is bullshit. All the fees that you are using to justify have >nothing to do with the actual cost if a record. Your 15 dollar CD costs >about 9-11 dollars from BMG or Sony wholesale, which means that a label >is seeing about 5 dollars per releases(or somewhere in the area, I have >not worked on that side of the business.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-23 18:36Jeff Waye/Ninja Tunethe $11.99 figure comes from my thinking that... -in the end I think all online distributi
From:
Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune
To:
Konstantin Minko ,
Date:
Tue, 23 May 00 13:36:45 -0500
Subject:
RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <200005231720.NAA09289@sparkle.Generation.NET>
the $11.99 figure comes from my thinking that... -in the end I think all online distribution will cut out is the packaging cost, so that's the figure I derive minus the packaging. -you say the it takes less people to employ to run a digital side. I currently run our entire U.S/Canada operation with 5 people. Most web sites I know have a lot more working for them. Neither of those 5 people have anymore time on their hands. To ad digital distribution I would need to hire more people and essentially become self-distributed (there's a reason I don't distribute our records directly and it's purely financial). If I don't do that, I license the right to a company....a company that needs to also make money to survive (ie. get their cut in the markup) -I think generally the digital world is skewed in perception right now. Most companies seem to have a good deal of private investment, or are public companies and can afford to operate at a loss for awhile. Once that dries up and all the web companies need to maintain a revenue stream then the cost will level back up to the current 'real world' costs (but yet then I employee twice as many people). -okay what I didn't factor in is the convenience of 'stock on demand', but I'm pretty tight with the pressings so I'll give another dollar off....so $10.99. Look I could be totally full of shit on this, I don't have any experience in the web world expect based on what I see now. I can appreciate it from a marketing standpoint and that it does give us higher visability, and if 100% of my sales become digital than it's all good and easy but until then it's a lot of financial juggling between the two. Okay, I'm done now. Jeff
quoted 54 lines With all due respect, I do not think this is correct. In the macro scope>With all due respect, I do not think this is correct. In the macro scope >getting your business online nowadays gives benefits from thousands of >directions and lowers business expenses to impossible minimums. It is a >general trend and publicly available facts. > >Let's look in the music industry using your scale of price content. > >Eliminated components: Production costs. Physical distribution. Paying for >overstock. etc... > >Components that remain on the same level are: recording fees, studio costs, >mastering, print >ads, tour support, co-ops, promo copies, print media publicity, radio >publicity, postage. > >Componets that are lowered in cost: number of employees (online business >needs 10 or 20 times less employees to run), office overhead costs, >management costs, etc. > >New components: online ads (can easily be avoided at all or put inside the >same physical ad budget), web co-ops (can be avoided at all or minimized on >less costly basis with physcal co-ops, online promos (can be avoided or put >inside the same physical promos budget). > >PLUS: A huge rise in sales due to increased avalability of your products >which is the most important benefit of online business. > >And that's a look from the person who's not involved in music industry (I am >a financier and involved in online business). If to take into account that >only 1/3 of CD price is generated by record company... This means that >digital music can be available less than for 5 bucks minimum. Where is >figure of $11.99 is generated? Please explain. > >Let's just guess how much a record company would benefit if not only a part >of its business moves online but all physical sales are suspended and >switched to online... You just have to keep your recording, mixing, >mastering, etc. phase and then have a couple or more employees responsible >for sales!!! Other parts of infrastructure like advertising or promoting >will remain and/or be adapted to online which provides additional >cost-effective schemes. > >this message is pure MHO not intended to hurt anyone but please do not hide >the truth from us. > >take care > >Alien > >np. MP3's of U-ziq's "In Pine Effect" which is pretty shitty for me in >comparison to his later works and which I could have bought if not for mp3s! >God bless MP3. > >btw: Ninja is a great label and is not particularly a subject of our >discussion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-24 06:51Konstantin MinkoIn general, I wouldn't like to go on commenting on this thread as 1) I'm not involved in m
From:
Konstantin Minko
To:
, Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune
Date:
Wed, 24 May 2000 09:51:09 +0300
Subject:
RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
Reply to:
RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <NCBBIPIBKLNBCLNLHFHBKEIKEJAA.ibss@ukrpack.net>
In general, I wouldn't like to go on commenting on this thread as 1) I'm not involved in music industry and 2) my interlocutor runs one of the best record labels available. And my only intention was to point out the benefits which introduction or total switch to online distribution might bring to a regular record label. Then I'd like to put a couple more words on it.
quoted 8 lines -----Original Message-----> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune [mailto:jeff@ninjatune.net] > Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 9:37 PM > To: Konstantin Minko; idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry > > > the $11.99 figure comes from my thinking that...
at first, I am sorry for such an inapproprite question - of course pricing policy is a confidential data for any company, especially in such a tricky business as music industry is.
quoted 12 lines -in the end I think all online distribution will cut out is the packaging> > -in the end I think all online distribution will cut out is the packaging > cost, so that's the figure I derive minus the packaging. > -you say the it takes less people to employ to run a digital side. I > currently run our entire U.S/Canada operation with 5 people. Most web > sites I know have a lot more working for them. Neither of those 5 people > have anymore time on their hands. To ad digital distribution I would need > to hire more people and essentially become self-distributed (there's a > reason I don't distribute our records directly and it's purely > financial). If I don't do that, I license the right to a company....a > company that needs to also make money to survive (ie. get their cut in > the markup)
If your operation require such few people then online distribution may add maximum one-two persons to your rooster which is enough to run even more comlicated and staff ample businesses in their online version. If you are worried on how this would complicate your business you could start this operations from zero. Paid online downloads is just another version of the software for your web site and online shop billing system and a guy to watch if it runs smoothly. I don't think that this guy's salary and new software shall not be covered with what direct net distribution to almost unlimited audience of Internet might bring in proceeds terms to your business. Of course this is just an option but I do believe that digital net distribution is a future of music industry, though I admit that packaging (especially on Ninja releases I own) is excellent and shall not be replaced by self made CDRs.
quoted 6 lines -I think generally the digital world is skewed in perception right now.> -I think generally the digital world is skewed in perception right now. > Most companies seem to have a good deal of private investment, or are > public companies and can afford to operate at a loss for awhile. Once > that dries up and all the web companies need to maintain a revenue stream > then the cost will level back up to the current 'real world' costs (but > yet then I employee twice as many people).
One of the best advantages an online can bring to B2C (business-to-client) businesses is a direct contact with millions of customers browsing online nowadays. That is why many online companies operate from the start on no-profit level. The direct access to audience and increase in customers is a general booster to online companies' share price and operation policies. In your case what you will loose, only a person who would buy online (let's say $5) version of new Amon Tobin or Funki Porchini instead of buying them on CD for $15. But this losses shall be covered with lots of people who would not like to spend $15 in any case and prefer to buy everything cheaper but do not have access to pirate sites or just do not want to deal in illegal way. I, personally have CDRs of Ninja stuff from originals from my friend's collection (he's a Ninja maniac trying to gather all Ninja Tune and Tone releases in originals), but with all the piracy in my country and totally lower than yours level of life in here I do own several original CDs of Funki Porchini, Amon Tobin and Animals on Wheels though I could easily copy them on CDR. I just want to have them in original. I know that I'm not the one.
quoted 9 lines -okay what I didn't factor in is the convenience of 'stock on demand',> -okay what I didn't factor in is the convenience of 'stock on demand', > but I'm pretty tight with the pressings so I'll give another dollar > off....so $10.99. > > Look I could be totally full of shit on this, I don't have any experience > in the web world expect based on what I see now. I can appreciate it from > a marketing standpoint and that it does give us higher visability, and if > 100% of my sales become digital than it's all good and easy but until > then it's a lot of financial juggling between the two.
Look I may be totally full of shit too. I did not want to offend anyone and especially you. Just telling what I know about it. Take care and go on ninjing... Alien
quoted 76 lines Okay, I'm done now.> > Okay, I'm done now. > > Jeff > > > >With all due respect, I do not think this is correct. In the macro scope > >getting your business online nowadays gives benefits from thousands of > >directions and lowers business expenses to impossible minimums. It is a > >general trend and publicly available facts. > > > >Let's look in the music industry using your scale of price content. > > > >Eliminated components: Production costs. Physical distribution. > Paying for > >overstock. etc... > > > >Components that remain on the same level are: recording fees, > studio costs, > >mastering, print > >ads, tour support, co-ops, promo copies, print media publicity, radio > >publicity, postage. > > > >Componets that are lowered in cost: number of employees (online business > >needs 10 or 20 times less employees to run), office overhead costs, > >management costs, etc. > > > >New components: online ads (can easily be avoided at all or put > inside the > >same physical ad budget), web co-ops (can be avoided at all or > minimized on > >less costly basis with physcal co-ops, online promos (can be > avoided or put > >inside the same physical promos budget). > > > >PLUS: A huge rise in sales due to increased avalability of your products > >which is the most important benefit of online business. > > > >And that's a look from the person who's not involved in music > industry (I am > >a financier and involved in online business). If to take into > account that > >only 1/3 of CD price is generated by record company... This means that > >digital music can be available less than for 5 bucks minimum. Where is > >figure of $11.99 is generated? Please explain. > > > >Let's just guess how much a record company would benefit if not > only a part > >of its business moves online but all physical sales are suspended and > >switched to online... You just have to keep your recording, mixing, > >mastering, etc. phase and then have a couple or more employees > responsible > >for sales!!! Other parts of infrastructure like advertising or promoting > >will remain and/or be adapted to online which provides additional > >cost-effective schemes. > > > >this message is pure MHO not intended to hurt anyone but please > do not hide > >the truth from us. > > > >take care > > > >Alien > > > >np. MP3's of U-ziq's "In Pine Effect" which is pretty shitty for me in > >comparison to his later works and which I could have bought if > not for mp3s! > >God bless MP3. > > > >btw: Ninja is a great label and is not particularly a subject of our > >discussion. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2000-05-26 06:03Christopher Milleron Mon, May 22, 2000, John rebutted: > I never mentioned Real Audio as AI uses full-length
From:
Christopher Miller
To:
Music That Sounds Like Stoves Talking To Refrigerators
Date:
Fri, 26 May 2000 02:03:28 -0400
Subject:
[idm] Re: mp3s and change in the music industry
permalink · <200005260605.CAA27374@yoda.fdt.net>
on Mon, May 22, 2000, John rebutted:
quoted 6 lines I never mentioned Real Audio as AI uses full-length mp3's on the AI> I never mentioned Real Audio as AI uses full-length mp3's on the AI > website. Though I see nothing wrong with the use of Real Audio it gives you > the chance to listen and decide if you like the music or not.. all be it at > a poor quality but still it's a poor excuse for boot-legging in-print > music. Many people hear stuff on the radio and upon hearing and liking it > buy it.. radio is of similar quality.
I had just mentioned RA as another option offered out there where you could `listen-before-you-buy'. Good idea i suppose, but I don't only listen to music while staring at my computer monitor. It's too restrictive. What's the option there when I'm out in the yard digging in the dirt and planting things?
quoted 2 lines So I take it you have never searched for or bought anything after hearing it> So I take it you have never searched for or bought anything after hearing it > on the radio?
I don't listen to the radio. Maybe that's just me. I pretty much only get into stuff while I'm in a positive situation like hanging out at a friend's house or riding in a car with someone. Or maybe a friend loans me a disc. Again, record shops to me do not reflect a relaxed mood where I can actually enjoy anything I'm listening to.
quoted 8 lines I need a good long listen. Not one, but more like three to five good>> I need a good long listen. Not one, but more like three to five good >>listens. > > This bit is the bit I find hypocritical... can you name other products you > can borrow legally for a length of time to decide whether or not you > actually like them enough to buy?? I mean come on imagine walking into a > car dealer and saying "oh i'm not sure if I really like the car.. can I > borrow it for 5 to 7 days to decide?".. it just doesn't happen.
Sure... some of the larger electronic shops will let you take home things like video cameras or tvs. You charge the item on a credit card (`risk free') and make a decision whether you like it or not. Of course, they're counting on you being too lazy to return the stuff. I've not ever done this myself, but that's what the commercials claim. maybe this is a bad example. What about software? I mean you can download a lot of sound editing software nowadays with time limits put on how long they can be used before you have to buy them (I you choose to do so). Also, I've got small boxes of cereal in the mail before. I eat it in my kitchen, I'm not rushed and am in a comfortable/familiar environment, and then if I dig it I buy a box at the grocery store. When I do go into record shops there are no v/a sampler cds available for me to take home free. Why not? I'm thinking the labels are *counting* on me not knowing what the music sounds like and buying their crap soley on the allure of the sleeve art or what i read in a magazine review or label advertisement somewhere. I don't care how many reviews i read on IDM, or how many of my friends say "Chris, the new __________ album is great"... music is meant to be heard, not described through words or pictures. I wish there was a way to... um... let's say download an entire album, but it's set up so it won't play for you any more after a thirty-day trial period. And you are not able to copy it. If you want to hear it again, then you have to pay for it. If you hate it and it sucks, then at least you didn't buy music with a blindfold on (earplugs, rather). Is it too much to ask for wanting to *know* what it is that you're paying for in advance?
quoted 4 lines I hear this arguement all the time but then a quick poll of the mp3's most> I hear this arguement all the time but then a quick poll of the mp3's most > wanted and traded by people on this list would show up it's never the crap > that gets distributed but the quality stuff from high calibre artists such > as Aphex Twin, BoC and Ae.
True, true. But that's unfortunately a lack of morals on their part. I feel that some person(s) took the time to make the music, and then other people took the time to lay out the packging, so that should be rewarded obviously with me shelling out the bucks for the cd or whatever. Making music, and making the sleeve is their job. I'm not out to rip folks off.
quoted 2 lines Nor did I see it as one. May I ask did you buy Thug's Isolated Rhythm> Nor did I see it as one. May I ask did you buy Thug's Isolated Rhythm > Chock? If so, what did you think of it?
Nope, not yet (but I will). Don't even have a cdr of it either. ;) Sorry, i had to say that. .`-). christopher miller o o.' evil@fdt.net == ' ps. I apologize for the late response... too busy this week. on: The Beach Boys _Smile_ (would *definitely buy this one if it was ever actually released) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org