Slashdot Mirror
Moby Says Techie Fans = Fewer Sales
jalefkowit writes: "Launch is reporting that Moby explains the recent slide in sales for his newest album, "18", by describing what he calls the 'Pearl Jam Effect': bands and artists with more tech-savvy fans sell fewer albums than those with less tech-savvy fans, as the techies will disproportionately get their copies of the album from friends with CD burners or P2P services rather than from record stores. What do you think, are we putting our favorite bands in a bind?"
To me, the "Pearl Jam Effect" means that they haven't released a good album since Vs. Sure, there have been a few decent tracks here and there, but none of the albums since Vs. has been worth a hill of beans... Is this what Moby means?
Artists like Moby are precisely the sort of artists who stand to benefit the most through distribution of their music through p2p networks. The reason is simple: Moby's music would be considered by many "alternative" and consequently it doesn't get a lot (any) air play. So where am I supposed to hear it to know whether I like it enough to buy the album?
If that's the case, then why hasn't this album taken off then? Well, I'd say the recent successes of the RIAA in getting p2p networks shut down has probably helped, but ultimately, maybe the album just isn't as good? Not having heard it, I can't comment on that.. Maybe someone else can. Maybe the marketing of the album sucked? (I haven't heard of it all until now). Either way, I think it's clear that blaiming the p2p networks is based on opinion (And FUD) rather than fact.
I feel that having a large following of tech fans is a plus, because a larger amount of them understand things such as value and capitalism. Reading slashdot user comments shows people always telling us to support artists that we like by buying their stuff. Look at Mandrakesoft. They say they're out of money, put up a donate link, and bam, cash flow. Why? Because their product has more value than $0 to many people who use it.
It is the non tech people who hurt sales; they see $0 vs $19 and don't consider things like quality, bandwidth, time, and value as measures of money. A lot of my non-tech friends used to buy CDs, but now don't understand why the money needs to change hands.
It is those people who will download with no intention of buying, not tech savy economically conscious slashdotters. (In most cases at least)
--------
It's OK to be social, just don't tell anyone about it.
"18", the new album, just isn't as good IMHO, and I'm sure that's the reason why it's selling less, and not due any music copying going on.
Amusingly, Moby used to be an MP3 advocate, even appearing in an advert for the Apple iPod.
Moby is only saying something that's been repeated a million times elsewhere. He's an intelligent enough to address the issue without berating his fans Metallica-style.
I would say this is hard to refute. Indie, geeky, techno, and others in the technophile musical demographic are being copied left and right. Oh course there are huge advanteges to this in terms of exposure, concert attendence, etc. For instance, even before the broadband P2P revolution, back in 1998/1999 Stereolab managed to sell out two good sized Chicago venues. This is a band that never got any local radioplay and never came close to the top40 or top100 record sales.
Shameless copying is a tradition that started with music lovers and has simply been made easier through technology. Moby questions how the industry measures success. That's a very important issue. The genie is out of the bottle, but the industry measures success through outdated methods.
In another way this isn't exactly new. A lot of talented artists who take risks instead of sticking to pop formulas tend to be undervalued and underexposed. At least P2P can fix the latter.
Before tech savvy people had the computer we had the radio and tape cassette.
People could ALWAYS pirate music, yet michael jacksons triller sold 20 million copies, funny how no one decided to pirate him even though it was all over the radio all the damn time and everyone had it and could copy the cassette.
I know, I had one of those dual cassette players, you stick both cassettes into it, play one and record on the other. Funny how when everyone was using cassettes the RIAA didnt complain about sales but now, that they are losing their monopoly, piracy is suddenly a big problem?
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
He thinks that sales of his and other band's CDs are lower because people are d/ling mp3s instead of buying them. He thinks the recording industry doesn't properly account for that when it "decides" how popular an artist is. (They're probably too busy suing people to worry about it.)
I'm not sure why 20 bazillion posts need to be made about how you think the CD sucks. I think that ground has been covered just a tad.
And another quore from Moby about this issue:
"What do you think about Napster and CD burning?
Moby: On one hand the thought of people in the music business losing their jobs makes me sad. I have a lot of friends who work in record stores and at record companies, and I know that they're nervous these days. So I hope that some way is found to protect their jobs. But I do hope that as the music business becomes less profitable that the people who are in music only to make money will be forced out. People who love money more than music shouldn't be involved in the music business, in my opinion."
From a random interview i found.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
The Pearl Jam effect is not what Moby says it is.
Moby says Weezer is also suffering from the "Pearl Jam Effect." "Weezer sold a lot of records in their first week of release, but since then their sales have dropped off considerably, even thought they have radio hits..."
What happened to Weezer (and Moby) is that the audience changed. They have a group of core fans who went out and bought their album as soon as it came out. But their sound, though solid, no longer bit the general audience as hard. Pearl Jam is a perfect example of this. It's not that their music is overshared, it's that no one in the larger audience cares, they've moved on to something else (not neccesarily something better).
I can't believe this FUD came from Moby. I can't believe he had this thought and then sat down at his computer and then typed his thought out and then sent his thought to his website. File sharing isn't hurting the record industry any more than MTV and the radio have.
Moby claims that he has "very technically savvy fans" and that everyone else who manages to sell records does not. That's such a silly argument, it's hard to believe he said it. Does he have numbers to show that his audience consists solely of super-intelligent computer geeks? Or that only computer geeks participate in file sharing or CD burning?
Poor Moby, you're album is at 35. Last week it was at 15! Sorry, buddy, I've heard it and this album isn't "Play", it's just another silly Moby album. The people that are dedicated Moby fans are going to run out and buy it immediately. Word of mouth is going to say, "It's not all that good, unless you're a big Moby fan", and then sales drop as people who aren't as into you (e.g. me) stay home in droves.
Saying that his fans are more savy is rediculous. Stealing music isn't technically difficult. You need only a computer and internet access (can you say "College Student"?). One person with ripping software gets the MP3s on the web and the rest is just the personal choice effect. I would bet that the most shared music is also the most sold music. Moby's music isn't getting shared more than Eminem's. That's the bottom line.
Sweat
It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
I actually did buy the new album, and it does suck compared to his previous offerings (esp. Play, which was a pretty good). The first track is decent, but the rest sound completely uninspired (IMHO). I've told all of my friends not to buy it.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
So hmmm, Wilco breaks into the billboard chart at number 13 thanks to mp3 trading on the web,
and Moby is "barely floating".
Good! First off, Moby may know a thing or two about making music, but what exactly does he know about Economics, and specifically those that are related to album sales? Ah! He doesn't have any qualifications. Thats fine, I am not a slave to "pieces of paper" that say Harvard or Yale, what is his evidence?
1) he's not doing so hot.
2) Weezer's not doing so hot.
3) Pink is beating the PANTS off them both.
Hmmm, could it be that PINK spend mad money on songwriter (Specifically the lady from 4 Non Blondes) Linda Perry
Hunh, maybe she's just getting more air play and has better quality songs?
okay, okay, fine. WEll, what about Wilco, who's album has been available for ages on the web, I would think they have a techie fan base?
And didn't wide spread MP3 availability simply help them out?
So let us re-phrase the Pearl Jam Effect- when your new album sucks in comparison to your previous albums and you don't sell because you don't deserve it?
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
And you never know. All that repressed homosexuality may well come to the surface.
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
I'm replying to this because I want to voice a similar sentiment, and speak to Moby's invocation of "The Pearl Jam Effect" The reason everyone and their brother bought "Play" and Pearl Jam's "Ten" is that they were the right kind of album at the right time. "Play" came along just as everyone wanted to hear what this whole electronica thing was about, and, thus, sold well. "Ten" also sold well because people wanted to hear good old fashioned rock-n-roll after 80's new wave became old wave.
Subsequent albums by Pearl Jam (and here, Mr. Moby, is what the real "Pearl Jam Effect" is) were exactly the same as "Ten", except not so good. They sold poorly because the public's taste had changed, the music did not change in the same way, and nobody wanted to hear Eddie Vedder's political vitriol.
What "18" has shown us is that Moby is likely interested in only making albums that are almost like "Play" but not quite as good. Thus, our study of history teaches us that we are seeing the beginnings of another "The Pearl Jam Effect", and that no future Moby album will be good, or relevant.
Before you start railing against me because I bash Pearl Jam and Moby, note this; this whole reply is purely my opinion. I think that both "Ten" and "Play" are two of the more influential and well-crafted albums of my day. I own both, and I still listen to both. I've heard "18" and all I thought was "ho-hum". That is the exact same thing I thought after I purchased Pearl Jam's "vs.", which is one of the albums that taught me to make damn sure I like it before I drop my hard-earned cash on it.
First, let me say I'm not a huge Moby fan. I don't dislike the guy, but I remember when he was a basic rave DJ in the San Francisco area.
Funny that he made his money for so long by mixing records of other peoples' stuff together. Somehow I doubt he paid the appropriate ASCAP or BMI fees. So right off, I have a hard time sympathizing with his complaints about piracy.
But beyond that, isn't it notable that artists with a large fanbase in the tech community blame that fanbase whenever sales slip? Metallica was the first; Moby is just the latest.
My theory is this: Acts like Metallica or Moby build up a cult following over years. By nature, that cult following is largely techies and other folks who don't follow the Christina Spears of the month club. People who actually care about music and are willing to follow smaller bands to get what they want.
At some point, some of these bands go to pot (literally, figuratively, or both). Their later work becomes increasingly detached and less and less like the early work, eventually ending up as a mellowed out, regurgitated pablum made up of bits and pieces of all of their early work, mixed with maybe a few mainstream artists whose stolen sounds might help draw in a few more customers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfans. Fans lose interest and buy less.
And then, as the final stage of intellectual and moral decay, these acts engage in a strange form of denial crossed with egotism crossed with paranoia. "The fans must still love us!" they shout. "We're sure they're still listening to this new crap we put out, but for some reason sales are down. It's those goddamned fans! They must be stealing our crappy new stuff, because after years of paying for our old, quality stuff, they've suddenly become a backstabbing pack of thieves! Yeah, that must be it! Those fans of ours sure do suck!"
Anyways, that's my theory. It would just be sad, if it didn't have the dangerous potential of impacting our legal system.
Cheers
-b
>I've told all of my friends not to buy it.
;-).
Same here.
I *do* buy CD's I've heard and know I'll enjoy listening to (end to end, not for some stupid single).
Moby's "Play" was one of those must-buy CD's... it had a nice groove start to end, while "18" has *one* good track.
Now, perhaps "18" will bring Moby some new fans. Or maybe he just wanted to experiment (good for him)... but I just don't like the new album. It's far too melow and slow.
PS -- It's *completely* unfair to label "techies" as CD copy fiends. It seems the last time I checked, the #1 CD on cddb.com was Eminem... that's *hardly* music for the "techie crowd" (I'll resist the opening to label the Eminem crowd
I thought it was the other way around: the public wanted another Ten, but got "Not for You" and the aforementioned politics. When it comes to a platinum album, most fans don't want a radically different sequel. This is a band we're talking about, not Picasso.
What the hell is wrong with you people? Moby didn't attack anyone in his journal entry. He didn't editorialize. He didn't whine or complain, or moan about lost sales. At no point did Moby even say that he minded this supposed effect. He put forth a reasonable theory with some empirical evidence to back it up, for the sake of discussion. Why is everyone attacking him? He's done nothing wrong. He hasn't even suggested that we've done something wrong. Why is everyone on this board acting like a total asshole, instead of reasonably debating the points that he made? I can't help but notice that very few people have mentioned Weezer at all to this point.
Finally someone has figured out how Britney Spears manages to sell as many CDs as she does.
--
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." - Homer Simpson [1F10]
How did this get modded +5 Insightful?
1) Fair Use. Sharing is not Fair Use - never has been. Consult a lawyer if you need convincing, or read up on it.
2) You do have rights over the physical media but not the contents. You claim you don't have rights over the media because you are prevented from using the contents as you wish! Why distinguish between media and contents if you don't see a difference.
3) Fair use DOES cover making a personal backup copy. So if your media fails you have still got the music.
Moby is feel'n the burn because 18 sucked. Tons of people ran out to buy 18 because Play was great... hence the great initial sales. However, after most people placed 18 in their CD player and realized that 18 was not as good as Play (it was like a bizzaro rehashed version of Play), the word got out, and sales slowed down.
Go to any record store which sells used CDs... you can find a million and one copies of 18 used. Used CD stores are a -great- way to tell if a new album is good or bad. If a lot of people are buying it, and keeping it... it is probably good. Yet, if a lot of people are buying it and selling it back for 4 or 5 bucks, it probably sucks.
I think the numbers speak for themselfs. I'm obviously not the only one that ran out to buy 18 and was let down.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
When a CD sells a zillion copies, but not a bazillion copies, that's not a flop. That's more success than just about any of us reading this will ever have.
All the people blasting Moby as being old and over the hill are pretty funny. 36 is not old, except to know-it-all teenagers.
There sure are a lot of people with bottled up angst, wanting to put down this CD in some sort of all-encompassing way. It's just a CD! If you don't like it, don't listen to it!
And then there are the people who say you should copy it because either (a) it sucks, or (b) Moby has an attitude problem. What weird logic! If those cases you think you wouldn't want anything to do with it, but it's the old double standard of "I hate you music industry, but I desperately need what you sell."