Slashdot Mirror


Music Downloading not Entirely to Blame

Outlyer writes "A recent article in The Economist discusses the proximate causes for the decline in music sales. Of some note is this quote in the article: "According to an internal study done by one of the majors, between two-thirds and three-quarters of the drop in sales in America had nothing to do with internet piracy. [...] Other explanations: rising physical CD piracy, shrinking retail space, competition from other media, and the quality of the music itself. But creativity doubtless plays an important part." The article discusses in some depth the short-term viewpoint of the majors and why that is likely to be the dominant problem, not the internet bogeyman."

27 of 538 comments (clear)

  1. fp by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I switched from buying new CDs to buying used ones. It saves money and puts dents in the RIAA statistics.

    1. Re:fp by creep · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Right, but it does nothing to help the artist. Even for musicians and bands who're on RIAA-represented labels (who receive next to nothing for album sales), new album purchases serve as an important popularity gauge. The *only* entity you're helping when you purchase used music is the store you're buying from. Might as well just download the music for what it's worth.

    2. Re:fp by superpulpsicle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ever since I started buying music on iTunes, I have yet to buy an entire album. What does that suggest? There are too many junky tracks on every CD. There is no reason to make consumers pay $12 for CD, when I can download the track I want for $0.99.

      The sad part is the consumers are being blamed, when the record company execs steal the most. They don't need a promotion everytime an artist successfully go mainstream. If anything they should be fired for the lack of promotion of new artists. So many good artists out there are invisible under the radar unless you sample on iTunes or something.

    3. Re:fp by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Ever since I started buying music on iTunes, I have yet to buy an entire album. What does that suggest? There are too many junky tracks on every CD. There is no reason to make consumers pay $12 for CD, when I can download the track I want for $0.99

      It could also suggest that you no longer are interested in stuff that you don't like right away. Looking back at all my CDs, I find that it is very common for my favorite tracks to be ones that I initially did not think much of. They grew on my after many listens, as I came to appreciate things I hadn't noticed on the first listen.

    4. Re:fp by PriceIke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's very true with me. I will buy a CD for one or two songs, then over the course of listening to it, I will grow to love other tracks on the CD that I didn't pay much attention to at first.

      That's why when I hear something new that I like, I will download a few tracks by the artist, and if I like him/her, I will buy their CD. I will first look at my used store for it though. I'd happily buy it new from Streetside if the RIAA weren't being such assholes about suing people who share music. If the RIAA would just leave file sharers alone they'd see their sales increase rather than decrease.

      --
      It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
    5. Re:fp by Solarbeat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Could it be that all the crappy music from that era has already been filtered away by time, so these stations only play the really good songs that have staying power?

    6. Re:fp by radish · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My kids are entering their teen years and have found that they really like music.

      Now there's a surprise :)

      No, music is pretty much for shit these days.


      And this is different from when my parents told me the same thing 15 years ago how? Adults never like the popular stuff of the time, but then they're not the target market.

      I don't like much "pop" these days either, but then to be fair I never did. But it's a huge mistake to infer from this that there's no good music being made right now. There's loads. Music is a huge part of my life and there's plenty of good stuff around...you just have to look beyond your local "all hits, all the time" radio station.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    7. Re:fp by Idarubicin · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You get a copy without compensating the copyright holder.

      You're not actually serious, are you?

      Yes, I did get a copy without directly compensating the copyright holder. Someone else no longer has the copy for which they already paid the copyright holder.

      There originally existed one copy, for which royalties were duly paid. There still remains one and only one copy. Unauthorized file sharing, on the other hand, can produce an unlimited number of copies without payment of royalties.

      How can you equate the two? And did you study economics at an RIAA-sponsored institution?

      Does Ford deserve a royalty payment if someone sells a used car? No, because the original owner no longer has the use of the property. Sheesh.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
  2. When The Economist slams a huge industry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, at least we can be reasonably sure that the RIAA higher-ups will read it. Not that they'll listen, but they'll at least read it.

    1. Re:When The Economist slams a huge industry... by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course they won't listen to it. It says that they are the cause for most of their ills. They are the ones that are recruiting shitty music, pushing it to shitty/controlled radio, not embracing the Internet, wasting time on lawsuits instead of their original purpose, and not buying up the independents that they used to get some of the best fringe talent from.

      The Economist just blew away their views on how their little corner of the world works.

      I have a feeling that the music industry will claim that this article is nothing more than a conglomoration of Internet forum non-sense and that their business-model is acceptable and will continue. Afterall, they can claim whatever they want, the media/controlled-radio will distribute it, and the public is stupid.

    2. Re:When The Economist slams a huge industry... by lifeblender · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They will listen, but they will still respond as you suggest. The article will be ignored, and when record labels are asked for comment they will downplay its accuracy and relevance.

      However, the labels will take notice. Now the people in the recording industry who have wanted to alter the course of industry have something big to point to. They will slowly attract the attention of the executives to alternatives, and eventually, the recording industry will be prepared to handle the current state of technology and science.

      Right before the world changes out from under them again.

      --
      Playing pornographics games during the day is evil! Play at night!
  3. Re:I don't buy music by Pope · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe you should expand your horizons beyond the top 40 then. There's plenty of good music out there, almost always has been. You just have to do the legwork to find the stuff that'll keep you interested.

    --
    It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  4. Brick and mortar stores don't serve me by nyekulturniy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am not a big music buyer, mostly because I can't get the music I like to hear (classical, folk and Celtic) at local stores such as Wal-mart, and the local folkie store is off my beaten path and has little parking. I would use a service such as this eagerly. And yet, everyone seems to focus on the indie rock scene and the big rock/pop/hiphop acts, and don't think that online distribution might mean the flowering of genres with smaller fans, such as folk, bluegrass, opera, choral, or whatever!

    Frankly, the best way for a business to thrive is not to have a radical change of the business model. Instead, incremental changes and continual improvement (hitting singles instead of homers) will get the job done. One incremental change can be to make sure that downloadable music isn't just for young listerners.

    --
    Nyekulturniy... Proudly confusing readers and editors since 1981!
  5. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    According to an internal study done by one of the majors, between two-thirds and three-quarters of the drop in sales in America had nothing to do with internet piracy.

    So, one-quarter to one-third of the sales drop is due to internet piracy? I can see why companies might be worried about this. (And everyone who votes me down because I won't subscribe to their "waaa waaa waaa! I want my music for free!" is a wanker.)

    1. Re:But... by Penguinshit · · Score: 5, Insightful


      The point you're missing here is that, apparently, file-sharing isn't the major cause of the downtrend in sales. If the recording companies would focus on the real causes, and embrace the Internet in the way in which their customers demonstrably want it fashioned (as shown by the popularity of the old Napster and other peer-to-peer technologies), then they could stabilize the sales numbers and see a huge profit from opening up a new revenue stream.

      The current download facilities, while popular, still fail to address the real issues presented by peer-to-peer. The RIAA already imposes a "CD Tax", why couldn't it have imposed a "Napster Tax"? The issue isn't really about free music, but rather about unfettered access to a wide variety.

      Of course, the record companies fear decentralized distribution because it removes some of their current complete power over the industry, which is what this issue is REALLY all about.

  6. Let's get one thing clear though... by jxyama · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...that this still does not legitimize music piracy.

    no harm != legitimate in many people's opinions.

  7. people like me quit buying altogether by CrudPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have bought 2 cd's in the past 3-4 years, not because I am pirating or downloading, but because I firmly believe the RIAA are the biggest crooks in this picture and refuse to support them.

    I believe the RIAA will rape their artists every which way they possibly can, and cheat them out of their royalties at every chance. Given this, I find it more than a little ironic that the RIAA campaigns against piracy by boldly proclaiming that downloaders are cheating the artists.

    Here's to hoping that sales continue to decline until the RIAA crumbles entirely out of the picture.

    --
    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
  8. The War on Piracy. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Its the economy stupid!
    We know that, and they know it too... But they wanted to be seen acting decisively, by declaring a War on Piracy. A "War on declining shelf space" or "war on crappy music" doesn't sound as good.
    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  9. The cell phone killed the CD star by killbill! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TFA mentioned a reason why CD sales were dropping is that CDs are competing for shelf space with other, higher-value forms of entertainment.
    Which is true (that the OST CD is worth almost as much as the full DVD is puzzling at best), but missed a more important point.

    Two words: Cell phones.

    Here in Europe most basic plans cost EUR 40 a month. That's a sizeable share of a teenager's allowance. That's at least 3 CDs a month they won't buy.

  10. I vote poor quality by Morpeth · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't think I'm too old (I'm a 30-something) to be interested in new sounds and genres, but man - the stuff out today does nothing for me. I'd say 90%+ of hip-hop/rap is utter garbage, and the alternative stuff isn't all that alternative.

    H-H is horrid imo - endless, short, electronic loops of intensely annoying sounds, weak and/or stupid lyrics, bad singing (if they even sing at all), it's overly produced, etc. etc.

    Any new CDs I buy now are established artists who've been around for a while and have a new CD out; or I'll just buy some 'classic' stuff.

    Once uninventive, regurgitated hip-hop took over, the industry pretty much lost me.

    --

    'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
    1. Re:I vote poor quality by snoig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm someone who is to old and I really like a lot of the new music I hear today. The problem for RIAA is that none of it is published by them. There are so many alternative sources for music these days that I haven't purchased any RIAA stuff in years. I have purchased cd's from bands at live shows, streamed Internet radio, purchased music from magnatunes.com, downloaded from bands websites, downloaded live shows from sites like etree.org. All legal alternative ways to get quality music these days. RIAA just needs to wise up.

  11. Re:Music Distribution with large retailers by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This would eliminate the need for shelving for CD's, as well as allow retailers to have a much wider selection of music available.

    But at a much higher cost. Not only do you have to pay for the burner machine, but you also have to deal with issues like what to do about inserts, cases, etc. Also, a listen/burn machine is a serial use item, while shelving is parallel use. Finally maintenance, content updating, etc., all raise the cost even more.

    Anyway, it's non-viable when I can just sub in another rack of DVD's at a higher margin. If we end up where DVD's are the only thing available, who cares. People will generally spend their entertainment income on what's promoted and available. Which bits happen to be on the plastic doesn't matter to the retailers. Nor does it matter to the conglomerates who are just as happy (if not more so) to sell a crappy DVD as opposed to a crapy CD.

    --
    That is all.
  12. Is it all relative? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The news from the industry is that sales are in decline since the 90's. One thing that isn't clear is the relative sales of new material vs newly released material. During the early 90's the CD player became affordable to the masses, and many people started to replace their older cassettes and records in addition to buying new CDs. The music companies started raking in sales, but after a decade, most of the old albums have been replaced.

    Sure there are re-releases today still but the numbers dwarf in comparison to the beginning to 90's. This was a point brought up during PBS Frontline "The Way the Music Died" documentary on the troubles of the music industry. I seem to remember that Frontline pointed out that sales relative to new albums have actually gone up. But the overall sales have gone down because older albums sales have decline greatly. This Economist report doesn't address this point.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  13. MPAA / RIAA biggest fear by bani · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the one thing that gives them nightmares and keeps them up at nights.

    it's not p2p or theft or piracy or even used CD/DVD sales.

    their biggest fear is that you tune out and stop watching/listening altogether. that would mean not only no sales, but no advertising revenue either.

    if this happens on any scale, i expect the mpaa/riaa to push through 1984/maxheadroom style legislation requiring a TV in every house turned on 24/7, and make it illegal to turn them off.

  14. Re:How come.. by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Then you get bands like Chumbawamba who, after decades of singing subversive anti-corporate rhetoric, manage to prove their point most eloquently by writing a single album designed to be a one-hit wonder -- as a JOKE.

    Now it's tough to find their good old albums because the stores only stock the sucky one-hit wonder album. Seems that the older stuff just doesn't fit the band's image anymore.

    Irony is lost in the free market.

  15. It's getting better. . . by Java+Ape · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I agree with the sentiment that mass-marketed music has declined dramatically in quality in recent years. However, the cloud has a silver lining that is becoming rapidly more apparent. As commercial music becomes increasingly unpalatable, niche markets for creative local groups become available.

    We are experiencing a Renaissance of locally-produced music, from street performers to small bands. Music is no longer the exclusive domain of a handful of mega-conglomerates, but is being taken back and revitalized on the micro scale. Seattle/Portland (near me) support a thriving community of small indepenent musicans producing truly excellent music. It's like the 60's all over again. Not so much "new" sounds, but new takes on the folk/rock/celtic traditions and a resurgence of interest in vocals and acoustic instrumentation rather than synthesized, reprocessed top-40. Complex, muti-layered arrangements that depend on real musicians, not 20 year old pinups with digitally-enhanced vocals supporting their silicon-enhanced figures.

    Personnally, I'm excited by the trend, and am actively building a large and varied CD collection with very little help from the RIAA.

  16. Nothing new here? by mikers · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not too long ago, there was a slashdot article of an interview with David Crosby on Frontline.

    He talked about how at some point the tone and attitude of big music changed from being supportive and developing of young talent for the long term to being adverserial and short term profit minded.

    I think this economist article is the conclusion and proof of what he was talking about, his thoughts were mostly anecdotal without concrete evidence. From the interview:

    "When it all started, record companies -- and there were many of them, and this was a good thing -- were run by people who loved records," he says. "Now record companies are run by lawyers and accountants. ... The people who run record companies now wouldn't know a song if it flew up their nose and died."
    SRC: PBS Frontline

    The result of this commercialization and 'selling out' resulted in companies the likes of Sony, BMG, EMI, etc. run by lawyers and accountants. Of course, their first instinct when faced with new technology and a threat is to sue the pants of grandmas and 12 year olds. Way to go corporate America!!!

    I'm gonna apologize for my attitude, for this next part but... I got karma to burn.

    Evidently, having some lawyer or accountant run a business may just well run it into the ground. There is apparently no substitute, no matter how ivy or expensive your degree may be, for heart and really appreciating the business you work with or work in. Being in it for money will eventually sink the ship. It's love of music that brings out the great music, and brings it to the people, not lawsuits, not cheap thrills turned into overnight successes with the help of Payola (to radio stations -- ahem Clear Channel), over promotion and slick advertising (ahem -- MTV).

    I hope Elliot Spitzer rips these companies and the lawyers who run them a new one with his Payola investigation.

    M