I have purchased my last CD

Originally Posted by SongwriterFan

Nope . . . but each one would be entitled to 1/1000 of the song.

So for a typical 3-minute song, you'd get to listen to 0.18 seconds of it.

I just hope that my 0.18 seconds is not during a pause in the music, in between beats. That would really suck...

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by hmrhd

I just hope that my 0.18 seconds is not during a pause in the music, in between beats. That would really suck...

Maybe you could trade your 0.18 seconds every year with somebody else.

[smorgdonkey]

Originally Posted by SongwriterFan

Few want to work for free!

...but...you said...

Originally Posted by SongwriterFan

Unfortunately, you've basically got to LOVE to do it and not worry about being eternally broke (with just a small chance of making it big).

[astrummer]

In terms of DRM free music ( not free in terms of no cost just DRM free )enabling more portable "fair use" of music, it looks as if the last major hold out Sony, may be starting to give in.....

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/04/s...rm-free-music/

and if what I see at this site is true it looks like having the choice between CD and DRM free download for the whole amazon catalog is their goal

http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/03/w...-drm-pressure/

So given that I'm not audiophile enough to really notice the difference between the higher quality mp3's available at amazon and CD's. I wonder how long it will be before I have bought my last CD?

[stratokatsu]

Originally Posted by sharkydude50

Bet I'm deader than a door nail & colder than the Artic Circle before that happens!

Agreed - Here too...

Honestly, I only worry about it in principle only. My point is, 90% of what i really listen to anymore is on cd's bought over the internet from the musician's website. Once I discovered a particular performing venue near me, (sadly closed now), the quality of the unknowns playing there just took me by storm and I started buying all their music. Now, I tend to trust recommendations from friends and I'm rarely disappointed.

I haven't been into a record store in a couple years now and the lack of buying what I occasionally hear on Clear Channel stations doesn't seem to be affecting my health.

[astrummer]

As far as modifying the laws, not necessarily making them toothless ( my hyperbole ). 95 years of protection or after the death of the author plus 70 years ( which I think is the present duration in the U.S. )seems to, tragically, guarantee there is substantially diminished public domain intergenerational hand off of musical tradition ( making it difficult even for girl/boy scouts to sing campfire songs with their mentors ). Patents only have 20 years of protection. Perhaps something like 50 years would be more reasonable ( covering the "career" of most artists adequately but not their heirs or foundations ). This is the case for performance / recordings in Britain despite the attempts to lengthen it.

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/25/0228245

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by smorgdonkey

...but...you said... "Unfortunately, you've basically got to LOVE to do it and not worry about being eternally broke (with just a small chance of making it big)."

Yes, I did . . . . . but they aren't working for FREE, which is what I said.

Also, lots of people LOVE to play music enough that they'll work for a very small amount. But few who have the skills of marketing and promotion and the tecnical ability to make songs available are willing to work for that same very small amount. It's hard to get as passionate about that as it is about the actual writing and performing.

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by astrummer

So given that I'm not audiophile enough to really notice the difference between the higher quality mp3's available at amazon and CD's. I wonder how long it will be before I have bought my last CD?

I prefer the CD-format, though. And, no, I can't really hear any difference between a high-quality mp3 or the CD.

I guess the CD just seems like a more "stable" and "permanent" way for me to make sure I don't lose my music, rather than having to rely on CD-R or magnetic hard drives for that purpose.

I'll tell you what *I* would really like, though: That would be to be able to buy the CD and get the high-quality mp3's with the mp3 (perhaps as data files on the CD . . . most CD's have plenty of room left over to do this).

That way, I don't have to rip the CD's myself.

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by stratokatsu

Once I discovered a particular performing venue near me, (sadly closed now), the quality of the unknowns playing there just took me by storm and I started buying all their music. Now, I tend to trust recommendations from friends and I'm rarely disappointed.

I'm lucky that there's a place that hosts singer/songwriters near me (if you think 15 miles is near). Actually, I think there's another one now, but I haven't been there yet.

The "problem" is that MOST people aren't willing to invest that kind of time into discovering new music. Which is the main reason that "big corporate music" exists.

[Chicago Sandy]

Hey, SongwriterFan, PM me with where that venue is located--I tour on weekends and occasionally for longer periods (and try to work a gig or an open mic into family vacations).

I find that the people who buy physical CDs from us at our gigs tend to be those in late middle age--who listen in their cars and don't carry iPods or digital music (those who commute by train rip to their laptops or purchase from iTunes)--and younger seniors who don't use computers at all (and sign up as snail-mail-only on our mail list). Older seniors at our concerts do not buy anything that takes up space, but are mostly starting to get rid of stuff and simplify their lives (they tend to be the rugged-individualist Thoreau/Emerson types anyway). Most do not own computers, and the ones that do use them mostly for communication and word processing. But they do come to concerts and festivals.

[beach bob]

Originally Posted by beach bob

Well, thanks friend, but I already have a career. It's not really my job to record and market the music that I want made available to me.

Originally Posted by SongwriterFan

I have a career, too . . but if I thought I could make some "big bucks" by picking up those artists that record labels left behind, I'd do it. The thing is, I'm pretty sure there's a REASON that the labels drop those acts . . . because they aren't making enough money!

Originally Posted by beach bob

In other words, the potential book market may be twice as big as it appears to be, if only we can get over the economics of scarcity.

(btw this one ^ is a quote from the wired(dot)com article)

Originally Posted by SongwriterFan

But therein lies the problem. You can't get ignore economics. Authors will want to be PAID (in some fashion) by those who read their books. And whoever puts up the time/capital to promote the books and make them readily available will want to be paid for HIS efforts, as well. Few want to work for free!

OK Mr SongFan.

I challenge you to REREAD post #53 (mine) in its entirety, and for that matter, read the dang link I gave, to glean some idea of what I'm talking about: The Long Tail... it's ALL ABOUT the economics. I challenge you to comment thoughtfully on it. And not just snip out a random line to pick at.

re: the 'economics of scarcity', that is a reference to the old paradigm wherein the consumer cannot get hold of a certain book due to it physically not being on the shelf at his local store. It's describing the old way, and the whole point of the wired(dot)com article (and my post for that matter) is that the web now makes this no longer the case. Nowadays anybody can get the item, no matter where they are. Your out of context quote shows either you aren't paying attention, or you prefer to make little jibes by picking out what you can counter, regardless of the main point of the post you quote.

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by beach bob

Nowadays anybody can get the item, no matter where they are. Your out of context quote shows either you aren't paying attention, or you prefer to make little jibes by picking out what you can counter, regardless of the main point of the post you quote.

Oh, I'm pretty sure people can still get a copy of Brittany's CD's and all that rap crap fairly easily.

Just what fraction of the music "swapped" on P2P networks do you think falls under the category you describe? If THAT'S all the traffic these P2P networks were generating, I'm pretty sure BMI/ASCAP couldn't care less about it.

I also submit to you that there is NOTHING preventing current singer/songwriters (who aren't with big labels) from using P2P networks to distribute their music, if that's what they want to do. They can even put them on their own Myspace pages if they like. Many are doing so . . . . but their sales will probably always remain low (not in aggregate but indvidually) because it takes EFFORT for people to seek them out.

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by Chicago Sandy

Hey, SongwriterFan, PM me with where that venue is located--I tour on weekends and occasionally for longer periods (and try to work a gig or an open mic into family vacations).

Sandy,

I just sent you an email with some info.

Let me know if you're going to be performing in the Houston area sometime. I'd love to make it out to see you.

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by beach bob

re: the 'economics of scarcity', that is a reference to the old paradigm wherein the consumer cannot get hold of a certain book due to it physically not being on the shelf at his local store. It's describing the old way, and the whole point of the wired(dot)com article (and my post for that matter) is that the web now makes this no longer the case. Nowadays anybody can get the item, no matter where they are. Your out of context quote shows either you aren't paying attention, or you prefer to make little jibes by picking out what you can counter, regardless of the main point of the post you quote.

Sorry for my post last night. I was tired, and it shows in my reply, unfortunately.

You're going to have to be a bit more specific in exactly what it is you're trying to change in the system. What are you actually talking about doing here?

How, exactly, do you think the web should be used to do whatever it is you're propsosing, and how is it different that how the web is arleady being used?

[beach bob]

Originally Posted by SongwriterFan

Sorry for my post last night. I was tired, and it shows in my reply, unfortunately.

Ah, I see. That never ever happens to me

As to what do I propose, I'm not sure that I have a proposition formulated. I was merely pointing up what I found to be an interesting and well-laid-out concept (the one I linked to), where a strong arguement is made that there is money to be made in minor artists who have slow sales, be it book authors or musicians. That there is a business advantage to having a large roster of slow sellers, and by doing that, gain a larger market share (= greater profit). That's how it used to be in the music biz from the 60s through the ?? late 80s I'd guess. Then came the record company mergers and attendant slash & burn to the artist rosters. How we get from where we are now (short list of supposedly bankable artists, like Britney Spears <hack cough>), to what used to be (large roster of artists, some majorly succesful, many others minor hits / 'respectable' sales), I have no idea. Point being, there exists a strong arguement that a large artist roster is economically viable for the record company willing to build such a business.

As for utilizing the web, I'm not sure what difference it makes now... I suppose the web does level the playing field between the big record company, and the upstart. But if your product is doggy doo, the consumer in Yellowknife, Canada isn't going to buy. OTOH the small upstart with good product and savvy marketing will make that sale. The reverse is also true of course. But the upstart doesn't have to fight for shelf space down at Sam Goody's anymore.

I would personally argue that the current state of affairs with record companies is indeed short sighted, and not in their own best interest. Put all your eggs in one basket, e.g Garth Brooks, and what do you get? Chris Gaines!

Thank God for Sugar Hill Records... I'd be much poorer muscially were it not for them and their (btw pretty dang large) artist roster. Matter of fact, take Sugar Hill as your Exhibit A for an alternate way to be a successful record company.