promoting and selling music in the 21st century

[selector.dub.u]

why are you denying reality? I have several friends who have spent plenty of $$$ on dubstep releases and club nights because I turned them onto it via mix CDs that I made myself. As far as I'm concerned I've been doing more than my fair share of spreading the word and promoting the music. If you can't grasp the logic here I can't help you grasp it at this point.

making mixes to promote music and sharing whole pieces of work are 2 different things..

you are still using your false analogy i.e...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apples_and_oranges

Thank you. 100%

yes.

welcome both of you 100%.

[b&w]

so for the sake of discussion- lets just forget about money and the music business for a second and examine artistic integrity a little . as an artist in most cases presentation and timing are 2 very important factors in maintaining artistic integrity and for the the vision of the artist to be realized .

do you think this is true?

I think this is less true by the day/hour/minute. Music as a "commodity" is becoming timeless and faceless. Timing and presentation are becoming increasingly abstract and elusive. What you are saying isn't far from people getting upset about CDs back in the day because they felt that the packaging was being marginalized. Hey I liked those fold out Led Zeppelin albums too, but you know what? At the end of the day it's about the music. I bought In Rainbows and it didn't come with any artwork at all. And you know what? I don't even like Radiohead that much, but I bought their album because they let me decide the price. Hmmmmmmmm. Times they are a changing once again.

[selector.dub.u]

so for the sake of discussion- lets just forget about money and the music business for a second and examine artistic integrity a little . as an artist in most cases presentation and timing are 2 very important factors in maintaining artistic integrity and for the the vision of the artist to be realized .

do you think this is true?

I think this is less true by the day/hour/minute. Music as a "commodity" is becoming timeless and faceless. Timing and presentation are becoming increasingly abstract and elusive. What you are saying isn't far from people getting upset about CDs back in the day because they felt that the packaging was being marginalized. Hey I liked those fold out Led Zeppelin albums too, but you know what? At the end of the day it's about the music. I bought In Rainbows and it didn't come with any artwork at all. And you know what? I don't even like Radiohead that much, but I bought their album because they let me decide the price. Hmmmmmmmm. Times they are a changing once again.

i don't think you are getting my point here. Please set aside all considerations of business and marketing and the language used by economists.

Lets speak as artists.

as an artist one of the few things that really matter is integrity -imo.

So i dont want something that i have not completed being shared before I decide to introduce it to the market or even just as a gift amongst friends.



This is not just about commodification and business this is also about artistic integrity.

[b&w]

who's sharing unfinished music? is this a problem?

[selector.dub.u]

who's sharing unfinished music? is this a problem?

ok i call baloney -now you are being obtuse- i think.

i am quitting this discussion now.

thanks
bye

[b&w]

laters...thanks for the conversation!

peace.

[seckle]

Is there some sort of underlying guidebook to having a discussion with you? If I don't feel that your questions merit answers, then I'm not going to draw a map for you, so it feels better.

No guidebook man, however, engaging in a true dialogue entails responding to basic questions, otherwise you're just talking at me and may as well not be posting at all.

I think you're missing what people are saying in order for you to have your longwinded "dialogue" about a topic that billion dollar conglomerates with massive piracy depts and staff can't even answer.

The people in this scene operate and conduct themselves very much like a family. Everyone supports and looks out for each other, so please understand that being disrespectful or taking advantage of a Record Label, producer or dj is not going to win you friends very quickly at all.

[tempest]

and you don't make friends with salad..........



bitch.

[b&w]

I think you're missing what people are saying in order for you to have your longwinded "dialogue" about a topic that billion dollar conglomerates with massive piracy depts and staff can't even answer.

The people in this scene operate and conduct themselves very much like a family. Everyone supports and looks out for each other, so please understand that being disrespectful or taking advantage of a Record Label, producer or dj is not going to win you friends very quickly at all. I'm done here.

Seckle, seriously, why is this thread upsetting you so much? I had a very cool exchange w/ selector (see previous posts) with some thought provoking ideas (which is the point), and as I mentioned I support the scene whole heartedly here in Seattle.

I think you may need to watch the thin line between "close knit family" and "clique", because your replies indicate that you've potentially crossed over into the latter camp.

[b&w]

and you don't make friends with salad..........



bitch.

I see someone with something intelligent to say has joined the discussion.

[seckle]

I think you're missing what people are saying in order for you to have your longwinded "dialogue" about a topic that billion dollar conglomerates with massive piracy depts and staff can't even answer.

The people in this scene operate and conduct themselves very much like a family. Everyone supports and looks out for each other, so please understand that being disrespectful or taking advantage of a Record Label, producer or dj is not going to win you friends very quickly at all. I'm done here.

Seckle, seriously, why is this thread upsetting you so much? I had a very cool exchange w/ selector (see previous posts) with some thought provoking ideas (which is the point), and as I mentioned I support the scene whole heartedly here in Seattle.

I think you may need to watch the thin line between "close knit family" and "clique", because your replies indicate that you've potentially crossed over into the latter camp.

There is no clique. I'm talking about fundamental respect for creativity and the process that supports it's output. That's it. There's no hidden agenda's, so stop looking for them.

[tempest]

and you don't make friends with salad..........



bitch.

I see someone with something intelligent to say has joined the discussion.

sorry maen... just trying to get some hectic dialogue going, you obviously don't see where i'm coming from...

[b&w]

There is no clique. I'm talking about fundamental respect for creativity and the process that supports it's output. That's it. There's no hidden agenda's, so stop looking for them.

Cool man, I'm just wary of cats with "holier than thou" attitudes stating their opinions as gospel on forums.

It is obvious to me that many people in the dubstep "scene" (a word I'm not particularly fond of) are open minded. This is encouraging.

I tend to have strong opinions, but I'm also a good listener, and I like arguing/debating/questioning all in the name of promoting free and critical thinking. It's when people stop questioning the status quo that things get scary IMO.

So, just to bring things full circle, the point of this thread was to challenge people to consider new and creative possibilities in the face of an "industry" that is evolving at light speed.

In any case, no ill will, I'm happy to be here as part of this community.

[dubliss]

b&w, just from reading this post it seems though you may not be so welcome in the clique / close knit family, you seem to be a real power house in the "i only want to start dialouge" crew, although it has to be dialouge that i can agree with or this whole post is a waste of time.

As you say you are a small time producer (your words) so it surely works in your favor to throw your music around as wide as possible, hell why not pay people to take it of your hands because it seems nobody is going to buy your music..........yet.

Imagine though this is your career? this music pays your bills, feeds you and helps you survive. Would you like some little "oik" to give it away free on your behalf because the said little "oik" half way round the world truly believes he is helping you and that as an artist you are now indebted to him for helping launch your new tune for free........................ This is not a business to you, do not forget you are the customer!

I come from south London and one of the words we use for the above mentioned is ....... A Joker.....

[b&w]

b&w, just from reading this post it seems though you may not be so welcome in the clique / close knit family, you seem to be a real power house in the "i only want to start dialouge" crew, although it has to be dialouge that i can agree with or this whole post is a waste of time

Dubliss, did you read all of the posts in the thread? I feel good about the discussion I started and about the nature of the majority of the replies...most of which are from people who did not agree with me, so your comment above makes no sense. And if the discussion in this thread isn't to your liking go start your own!

It appears that there are some people willing to bend their minds a bit to see another side to things, and this precisely is what the future of making and selling music in the 21st century will require.

If you think that file sharing is going away any time soon you're kidding yourself. The wise and effective thing to do is to learn how to use that fact to your advantage and to come up with new ways to promote and (hopefully) sell your music. That's why I started this conversation.

Peace.

[thinking]

here we go, mammoth post of arguments & rebuttals....

Also I must stand up now and say I particularly detest those who share music pre-release. In my mind it is always disrespectful to pass round an artist's work for free with no consideration for their wishes/rights, but to pre-empt their release by stealing their thunder is the lowest of the low, and I challenge anyone who does so and still calls themselves a music-lover.

Hmmmmm, you appear to be letting your personal opinion interfere with basic logic and reality here. Let me illustrate via example. A dubstep friendly radio DJ get an advance promo copy of an upcoming release and plays it on his/her radio program. Fans listening to the radio show record it/download it and share it with peers precisely because they are music lovers.

DJs don't play whole LPs over the radio, and not in hi-quality either. This comparison is facile and irrelevant.

I don't even like Radiohead that much, but I bought their album because they let me decide the price.

no you didn't - you 'bought' it because they made a huge song & dance about the 'new paradigm' they feel they have introduced by selling/giving away their LP on their own web site - despite the fact that many artists, big and small, have been doing the same for a long long time. I'm sure that you don't go about DLing every LP that is given away for free. You have simply been made aware of this particular album due to good marketing and a swathe of publicity for one of the world's biggest bands.

A side note...I produce music myself and personally believe it helps me to have my stuff on P2P file sharing networks and free digital downloads...I consistently sell MP3s and hard copies of my music via sites like CD baby and myspace...I think the file sharing actually aides in sustaining that.

it's your right as an artist, and creator of an original work, to do as you wish with your music. It is also the right of every other artist to exert their wishes over their own works. If that happens to be that it should only be available to BUY, on an officially released 12"/CD/mp3, then we as consumers and supporters of a scene should respect that.

You're working from a myopic vantage point I'm afraid...thinking too concretely about this. I have turned many friends of mine onto dubstep via DJ mixes I have made and then given them. They in turn buy releases by the artists they like and support local dubstep club nights. What price are you going to put on that?

Sharing a whole release before it is even in the stores and announcing it to the world is removing the incentive for some people to buy it.

How do you know this? What if it builds a buzz and actually gets more people to buy it? Why does this possibility not occur to people?

this is spurious and untimately a non-argument. Can YOU tell me i.e. quantify in hard figures how much filesharing has benefitted artist X or label Y? No. Conversely, I cannot quantify the opposite i.e. what negative effects there are. However, since (I assume) that we logically agree that there must be both postive and negative effects, and that it is impossible to prove whether ultimately the good outweighs the bad, I am of the opinion that filesharing should not be supported in order to err on the side of caution.

If a label or artist believes that giving their music away for free in addition to selling it is a positive thing, then it is their and only their prerogative to do so. I am sure that most musicians in this day & age are perfectly aware of their options should they wish to share their music for free - If they want to do it, let them do it their own way in their own time.

I cannot see how anyone can seek justify their actions when DLing/sharing illegally-ripped music simply because they have assumed a positive effect on sales to assuage their own guilt.





All I can do is repeat myself and state that it is inherently disrespectful to rip/leak music onto p2p/torrent networks, since it is down to the artist/label to decide how to disseminate their product. Those who download are essentially showing their support for rippers/leakers by DLing and re-hosting copies of the music in question.

In my mind anyone who supports illegal filesharing in this way and still considers themselves a 'music-lover' should re-evaluate the way in which they support the art and artists which they purport to 'love'.

[b&w]

All I can do is repeat myself and state that it is inherently disrespectful to rip/leak music onto p2p/torrent networks, since it is down to the artist/label to decide how to disseminate their product. Those who download are essentially showing their support for rippers/leakers by DLing and re-hosting copies of the music in question.

In my mind anyone who supports illegal filesharing in this way and still considers themselves a 'music-lover' should re-evaluate the way in which they support the art and artists which they purport to 'love'.

ThinKing, thanks for the thoughtful and thought provoking response.

I hear you, and I agree that the artist should decide how and when their material will be presented/sold/distributed.

This still doesn't address the aforementioned question regarding the reality of file sharing.

I'll draw an analogy to the war in Iraq. I was opposed to this war, however once it started I was in the camp of people looking for solutions to it rather than continually complaining about it.

Similarly with file sharing, people can sit around and complain about it or they can actively figure out new strategies for working with it as a reality.

Let me pose another question that looks at the issue from a different angle. Let's pretend for a moment that P2P file sharing never existed. Do you think more or less people would be aware of dubstep?

[thinking]

I'll draw an analogy to the war in Iraq.

Firstly, do yourself a favour, stop drawing analogies, or at least poor ones. To compare filesharing with the Iraq war/occupation is utterly inane.

This still doesn't address the aforementioned question regarding the reality of file sharing.

yes, but to sidestep the moral arguments, and to essentially put your head in the sand and carry on blithely (and illegally) DLing music is pig-headed and (as you accused someone else of being earlier) myopic.

Simply because it's already there, and because other people do it, does not make it any less morally reprehensible. Don't make your own moral judgements purely on what others do or what precedents have already been set.


FYI there are companies and individuals out there working on both sides of this very large coin - by that I mean people who are trying to prevent filesharing via the use of advanced technology, and also people who are trying to find new business models to at least make it less attractive (or provide attractive alternatives). Perhaps one day these may make p2p/torrents a thing of the past, at least until the next thing comes along.

Oink was taken down today, and cleanly - with a little cooperation from ISPs, the police in the UK and Holland, along with int'l police forces and Interpol could soon be banging on the doors of many many users, all across the world. This could also set an interesting precedent for handling torrent sites, and punishing users heavily.

Let me pose another question that looks at the issue from a different angle. Let's pretend for a moment that P2P file sharing never existed. Do you think more or less people would be aware of dubstep?

this is irrelevant, and again an effort to distract yourself and others from the basic moral argument of copyright infringement. Don't try to justify filesharing to yourself & others by recounting how many people you've introduced to the music. You know what? You could have introduced exactly the same number of people without downloading a single illegally ripped tune.

Also, it's not a popularity contest - I couldn't give 2 shits whether 10 people or 10 million people listen to dubstep. I like it, and that's all that matters. Yes I would like to see the artists I respect succeed and make a living from their art, as this would provide me with more music to listen to. However, I am happy with what I get, indeed I am grateful, since I remember the days of dubstep when we were overjoyed to be able to buy one release a month. I can't afford all the music I want, but I've never seen the need to bolster this with ill-gotten wares.

[John Locke]

B&W: yr original post was pretentious, devoid of any real substance and the subject has been discussed bare times already.

I havent responded to any of your "questions", because as far as I can see there was actually only ONE question contained in yr post and it just wasnt very interesting. In fact i'm surprised this thread didnt die an immediate death.

Unfortuntely I missed the earlier thread in which u allegedly try to defend distributing another artists unreleased material so I cant comment on this.

But in answer to yr question as to who is distributing un'finished tracks i can give u a v clear example, and the artist in question is not at all happy: go to the myspace page of mexican electronic artist Murcof and check out his blog pleading with fans NOT to download the leaked copy of his new LP as these tracks are unfinshed and therefore not in a state he would want us to hear them.

IMO something thats gonna come back and haunt all of us at some point is demos. everyone starts sumwhere, and most of us start off shit.

presumably u've sent out demos to various labels over the yrs, or still do now. what happens if in 2 years time, say, u get real good and make it big? embarassed by those earlier efforts. But sum1 recognises yr name as being the same on the dusty old CDR demo at the back of the cupboard full of wak FL dubstepwobblerpack-join-the-dots tracks... and they put it out 4 download.

Its gonna happen to a lot of people i reckon. bootleg LPs even. early days yet but....

Something thats overlooked in this argument about downloading though, is that some people jus cant afford to buy music, and they wouldnt buy it anyway even if they culdnt download.

easy 4 people on this forum to condemn it, but one quick scan of the "where do you work" lets me know that most have got nice well paid jobs (or families with nice well paid jobs who r paying them their way thru college).

Seckle (i think it was u, sorry if it was someone else, maybe ThinKing), you said someone who claims to love music but downloads needs to think about what they r doing, right? But I dont think this a fair argument (tho in an ideal world i'd agree). This is an argument of the privelaged. There's always been a huge number of people that loved music but didnt/couldnt buy it ("home taping kills music" remember?). The (un)fortunate difference now is that it aint like getting a dodgy C90 of a radio show off yr mate, a download is identical to the original copy. basically if u can afford to buy, then buy. if not, then who am i 2 say u dont have the right to enjoy music?

B&W's point that the world has changed is entirely correct (though just not a very original or exciting observation) and we just got 2 accept that we cant make money out of sales anymore (even if theoretically we should have the right to do this). Obviously playing live/Djing is the alternative. What B&Ws post mightve prompted - if it had been more interesting - is a discussion suggesting alternative directions we might have for making ends meet through music.

But then again maybe not, as I already posted a similiar question b4 and no one gave a fuck.

[thinking]

we just got 2 accept that we cant make money out of sales anymore (even if theoretically we should have the right to do this). Obviously playing live/Djing is the alternative.

that's a terrible alternative - the lack of viable profit margins and swells in DJ fees is half the reason we have so many shit DJs on the circuit in various scenes (DnB for example). Producers put all the hard work in, buy kit, learn their trade, then labels put the music out for not much profit or respect, then DJs earn £100s per hour to play those records. Fair?

Plenty of producers felt compelled to learn to DJ, just to make a living from their music. This takes time & energy away from being able to write music, damages their ears....trust me I know a few well-known producer/DJs who would much prefer just sticking to production, but it's just not possible these days.

who am i 2 say u dont have the right to enjoy music?

but who are you (or anyone else) to say that one person's right to enjoy music should outweigh the right of the artist to do as THEY see fit with it?

Off the top of my head, I could name 2 or 3 artists who've had terrible sales, or even had to cancel the release of albums, due to leaks onto P2P. If this continues, and if people have to abandon their art in favour of performance just to earn a living, we'll eventually lose the amazing music of those artists who will become constrained by the reality of the business model you're proposing.