Music Downloads = Expensive Concerts?

melonman writes "According to an article at BBC News, $250 tickets for the latest Madonna tour are the fault of P2P file sharing. 'Before the advent of illegal downloads, artists had an incentive to underprice their concerts, because bigger audiences translated into higher record sales, Professor Krueger argues. But now, he says, the link between the two products has been severed, meaning that artists and their managers need to make more money from concerts and feel less constrained in setting ticket prices.' And it seems David Bowie agrees. Is 'the fans always get fleeced' the rock industry's equivalent to Moore's Law?"

Comments

I disagree entirely

[Quaoar]

Some musicians use only electronic equipment to produce their sound, particularly in the electronica genre. I personally love this kind of music. The concerts often involve them doing their best to reproduce the sound they make in the studio, and with some of these bands using thousands of samples (see: Boards of Canada), their "concerts" pretty much involve pressing play on their computers.

I don't think it's right to demand that an artist MUST be able to perform well live to receive compensation. That's just elitist and limiting.