Then please explain to me why my parent's could NOT for their life get a signal on their Verizon phones at my house while I'm talking to my girlfriend on my Cingular phone....
I appreciate EVERYONE (all like 20 of you) who told me how the system works. I know how the system works. I know most of that stuff is reimbursed by the artists. What you people don't seem to realize is that in a industry where making money is important, turning a profit is plays an important part of this.
Consider this, I start a record company. I give a band 200,000 dollars to engineer, procduce, record, advertise, and distribute an album. Lets say after all is said in done the spend it all to get the tour bus, some new gear, and some cool new stage clothes as well. So now they're on tour and they're album is in stores but they only sell 25,000 copies. Bringing lets say 100,000 dollars back, I still haven't turned a profit on this investment because the band has only paid back half of what they owe.
If you borrow money or loan money you make no money until the inital loan is paid back, correct?
The record companies INVEST in bands, thus they make no money on the band until the inital investment is recouped. Same with the band, they take a loan from the companie and make no money until the loan is paid back. Come on folks this is simple Buisness 101 stuff here. Even if the band repays everything owed, the record company still makes money because they have to pay for the pressing and distrobution.
Make no mistake I have no sympathy for the record companies, they need to put out quality music again if they want to increase the numbers. BUT, there's a lot more that the record companies put money up for then just pressing and distrobution. They make an investment.
So really since they invest in like 100s of new bands yearly and only a VERY small percentage succeed, what they are doing price wise is covering their butts. They're attempting (be it right or not) to recoupe money lost on bad investments.
Hence the reason a CD would be so expensive, the artists have to pay for it so the CD is more expenseive so the artist get more money to pay back the record company.
If it's "fronted" as you say, it's still coming out of the company's pocket (even IF it is to be paid back). Please go read "Everything You Need to Know About the Music Buisness", then talk to me.
Keep in mind that for every like 200 bands that the record companies sign only like 5 ever go platinum and less then that make gold and even less then that make silver (100,000).
As much as most people don't like to admit it, the record companies DO take risks to sign and record those artists.
There's a lot more that goes into that album then just packaging and studio time....
Just to name a few more expenses:
--Advertising (this includes print adds, video ads you see on TV, those nice displays you see in stores for some albums, etc)
--Food (the record company usually pays for the food the band eats in the studio)
--Room and Board (record compnaies usually pay for the artist to live in a hotel while the album is being recorded)
--Payola (assuming the record company participates in this practice, believe it or not some don't)
--Photographers (gotta put photos on that album and adds right?)
--Music Video for the first single (this isn't always done, but with a lot of artists it is)
--Producer, Engineers, co-writers, etc (all these people have to be paid for their work, most producers get what's called "points" of each album sold)
--Travel Expenses (the record company pays to get the band to and from the studio, the tour bus, flights to interviews, etc)
So yea, theres a lot more that goes into making an album then what most people think. However there are ways the companies could circumvent such costs. Like for instance, pick a studio in the band's hometown (or close to it) and fly the producer down and just pay for ONE persons expenses rather then 3-6 peoples. That's just one example.
I agree with this. Why should I pay 250 dollars for 4 gigs of space when I can pay the same price, get 20 gigs of space and FLAC support (I download from the live music archive so FLAC support is pretty cool to me) in the Rio Karma. I would have been all ready to spend 100-150 for a 4 gig Ipod, but not 250 when I can get 20 gigs for that price.
With radio stations doing payola (and those that believe that this is a dead practice, think again), and giving air time to those that pay for ir (be it an artist or an advertiser), radio can simply not survive. The fact that XM and Sirus are continuing to have their customer base grow is proof of this. Why listen to radio when you can pay a small fee and have more chances and stations to listen to what YOU want.
What's happening here is a consumer-led based market. Instead of people TELLING the consumer what they want/need. The consumer is telling the buisness what they want/need. Most of the public hates radio in it's current form (music stations or not). They hate the commercials and thus have been slowly moving towards commercial free radio with stations that are run by people like them, so they have more of chance of hearing what THEY want. This is also evident in the fact that things like iTunes are having heavy turn outs, people will buy what they want to. And if you give them a big enough selection to rival the freebes out there, they will pay as long as they have the chance to actually pay for something they want.
Radio will never go away, however in it's current form I'm not sure how much longer it stay that way. As for the RIAA, well they're going to start eating their words as buisness like iTunes continue to pull buisness.
For the Linux side anyway, my apologies if you already know about some of these, just throwing them out there. Also some of these have windows versions (Mozilla, Open Office, GAIM, Thunderbird, Firebird, etc).
Email - Evolution, Mozilla Mail, or Thunderbird
If you want something that looks like Outlook (and even acts like it in most places) use Evolution. Mozilla Mail is included in Mozilla and Thunderbird is like Firebird, but for mail.
WWW - Mozilla or Firebird
These 2 you can't really go wrong with. Also for good measure make sure lynx is installed for console web browsing
IM - GAIM
THere's also Everybuddy, but I perfer GAIM
Office - Open Office or KOffice
Open Office is slightly more well rounded but KOffice is pretty slick IMHO.
Media - XMMS, mPlayer, Winamp
Everyone knows Winamp for MP3s on Windows. XMMS is a Winamp like program for Linux. mPlayer is for movies (and also audio) that plays MOST formats.
"decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux--"
*phone rings*
*click*
"Hello?"
"Hi, Kettle?"
"Yes?"
"This is pot"
And now you know the rest of the story...
See here's the thing. Protools is something you drop around 10-24k for. Then you usually have to drop a few grand to have someone install it and make it all work. Now this is all fine and dandy when you have studios that can afford this. But the average consumor can't afford that. So we got Digi stuff. Digi001 = $700 and Digi002=$1500-$2000(on ebay) still rather pricey. I helped a friend build a small home studio with a Delta44 for around $400. The other 400 was spent on mics and cables. So that's $800 for a sound card, mics, and cables. As opposed to the $800 (700 plus tax) to get Digi001. Now my friend didn't have any software because he's running Linux (the Gentoo flavor) so he compile Ardour. I've been in recording studios that use protools, I've even used it myself. But for a person doing a home-small studio Ardour is perfect. And you can create a recording in equal quality to a protools setup. I've seen it done. Protools is the industry choice, but that doesn't mean it's the best. Just like Windows is a standard on the desktop, doesn't mean it's the best. But Protools is good at what it does, hence the reason studios use it. Personally I'm an analog man, but that stuff gets 5-10 times as expensive as protools (to do it right) so I have to settle for DAWs. Price is generally a factor, especially in a home studio project.
More then likely it will give them more ammo against the P2P crowd. The RIAA and the companies it represents are trying hold onto a buisness practice that doesn't work with the changing market. The real estate market is going through a similar problem. Instead of fixing the way THEY do things, they expect everyone to buckle and do things the way they've been doing them for so long. The RIAA knows they aren't going to get too much money out of the people they're suing, it's mainly a scare tatic. We sue a few people and guess what, people might not want to do it just because they don't want the hassle. So even if sales keep dropping they'll never admit it's them. And when/if sales do return to normal, they'll just simply praise their own efforts. Either way, the people on the technology side lose.
I think diffrent combinations work for differnt people....
If you have a laptop, I would invest in a wireless card and move from there (maybe get a bigger hard drive and 2 extra batteries).
If you have only a desktop do what I did (that whole 1 semester) was I had a tape recorder that I used to record the class while I took notes. Then back home I would transcribe my notes onto my computer (no laptop yet) while listening to the tape and inputing any stuff I missed, I would then print up my notes and place them in that classes binder. I know it sounds like a lot but I passed my classes so I must have been doing something right.
I think a combination of technology and old-fashion know how works best. Most people have a tendency to remember what they write, then plus if you also type that up, AND relisten to it via a recording then you really don't have an excuse for missing something.
Just my $0.02 though
Time for the drone to step up and explain to you that while you are correct in the fact that the cinematography and acting in Clerks sucked, the bit about the dialogue is way off base. Personally I think you're just pissed that Kevin Smith made a living doing what he loves to do and you're stuck at some job doing what you need to do to get buy. Chasing Amy PROVES the man can write. There's tons of emotion and great dialogue in that movie, not to mention, the life lesson in the movie is a great one.
Also what people LIKE Kevin Smith are putting out is WAY better then the meaningless dribble that Hollywood is making a "killing" off of (2 Fast 2 Furious anyone?). Oh wait, I'm sorry you probably thought "Fast and the Furious" was a GOOD movie, I mean since you apparently have no taste and lack the ability to actually THINK. Oh yea, and "Triple X" was a piece of cinimatic greatness wasn't it? Please, the ratio of stuff being put out by Hollywood to stuff that is actually GOOD is like 50 to 1 or so. And I for one will be first in like to see Mr. Smith's new flick "Jersey Girl" because it's suppose to be kind of along the same lines as "Chasing Amy" which again, was actually a good movie. Personally I would like to know what you think is such a great movie that you feel the need to bash a person who actually has some thought and originality in him, as opposed to just going and making something everyone once him to make (ie another Jay and Bob movie), he's trying to grow and mature as a writer/director.
So back off, you know in your post you don't prove your point in ANY manner. You just seem to bash. Why did the dialogue suck in Clerks? Why do you think that Kevin Smith lacks originality? Maybe instead of running your mouth you should back some of your statments up. Oh wait, that would require thought again, nevermind...
First: You need to read a book called "All You Need to Know About the Music Buisness" by Donald Passman. This book is a great read for exactly how record company math REALLY goes. You also find out that basically the entire goal of the recording industry is to screw the artists and keep as much for themselves. (I mean really I can have 1000 CDs pressed for right around $1000 WITH the the cool cover art and everything, so where is all that money really going?)
Second: Most record companies (the big 5 anyway) are stationed out of either LA or New York, and California placed a law into effect that basically makes bands that sign to recording contracts nothing more then "works for hire". In other words the artists don't even OWN their music anymore. This law is being relooked at and hopefully changed. So just because it's not TECHNICALLY stealing, it's not exactly what one would call moral either...
Three: The fact that YOU quote a contract lawyer saying "most always owed significantly more the they have been paid" TOTALLY makes your whole argument right above that COMPLETELY null and void...
A lot of this is from a book called "All You Need to Know About the Music Buisness", which by the way if you're a musician is a GREAT read and point of reference. I think that opening story is actually word for word out the book (I'll have to check my copy at home though to be sure). But Steve Albini, definatly knows a thing or 2 himself.
You mean the same sophisticated viewing public that pays to see movies like "The Fast and the Furious" (or the sequal "2 Fast 2 Furious")? Or the same sophisticated view public that pays to see "Bringing Down the House", "Dumb and Dumberer", any movie in the "Scream" franchise, or a non-James Cameron "Terminator 3"? I think you're giving people WAY too much credit. But then again, I fully believe that Hollywood's philosophy is "You will never go broke under-estimating the stupidity of the American public." If the story line is even HALF of what the story was in the first one it'll be better then 1/3 of the dribble Hollywood releases.
Slashdot Mirror
Then please explain to me why my parent's could NOT for their life get a signal on their Verizon phones at my house while I'm talking to my girlfriend on my Cingular phone....
Here's a book on the subject.
When my father and I were playing (softball and little leauge respectivly) he bought an earlier copy of this book.
I appreciate EVERYONE (all like 20 of you) who told me how the system works. I know how the system works. I know most of that stuff is reimbursed by the artists. What you people don't seem to realize is that in a industry where making money is important, turning a profit is plays an important part of this.
Consider this, I start a record company. I give a band 200,000 dollars to engineer, procduce, record, advertise, and distribute an album. Lets say after all is said in done the spend it all to get the tour bus, some new gear, and some cool new stage clothes as well. So now they're on tour and they're album is in stores but they only sell 25,000 copies. Bringing lets say 100,000 dollars back, I still haven't turned a profit on this investment because the band has only paid back half of what they owe.
If you borrow money or loan money you make no money until the inital loan is paid back, correct? The record companies INVEST in bands, thus they make no money on the band until the inital investment is recouped. Same with the band, they take a loan from the companie and make no money until the loan is paid back. Come on folks this is simple Buisness 101 stuff here. Even if the band repays everything owed, the record company still makes money because they have to pay for the pressing and distrobution.
Make no mistake I have no sympathy for the record companies, they need to put out quality music again if they want to increase the numbers. BUT, there's a lot more that the record companies put money up for then just pressing and distrobution. They make an investment.
So really since they invest in like 100s of new bands yearly and only a VERY small percentage succeed, what they are doing price wise is covering their butts. They're attempting (be it right or not) to recoupe money lost on bad investments.
Hence the reason a CD would be so expensive, the artists have to pay for it so the CD is more expenseive so the artist get more money to pay back the record company.
If it's "fronted" as you say, it's still coming out of the company's pocket (even IF it is to be paid back). Please go read "Everything You Need to Know About the Music Buisness", then talk to me.
Sorry, silver might 250,000, I can never remember the exact numbers on that ...
Keep in mind that for every like 200 bands that the record companies sign only like 5 ever go platinum and less then that make gold and even less then that make silver (100,000).
As much as most people don't like to admit it, the record companies DO take risks to sign and record those artists.
There's a lot more that goes into that album then just packaging and studio time....
Just to name a few more expenses:
--Advertising (this includes print adds, video ads you see on TV, those nice displays you see in stores for some albums, etc)
--Food (the record company usually pays for the food the band eats in the studio)
--Room and Board (record compnaies usually pay for the artist to live in a hotel while the album is being recorded)
--Payola (assuming the record company participates in this practice, believe it or not some don't)
--Photographers (gotta put photos on that album and adds right?)
--Music Video for the first single (this isn't always done, but with a lot of artists it is)
--Producer, Engineers, co-writers, etc (all these people have to be paid for their work, most producers get what's called "points" of each album sold)
--Travel Expenses (the record company pays to get the band to and from the studio, the tour bus, flights to interviews, etc)
So yea, theres a lot more that goes into making an album then what most people think. However there are ways the companies could circumvent such costs. Like for instance, pick a studio in the band's hometown (or close to it) and fly the producer down and just pay for ONE persons expenses rather then 3-6 peoples. That's just one example.
I agree with this. Why should I pay 250 dollars for 4 gigs of space when I can pay the same price, get 20 gigs of space and FLAC support (I download from the live music archive so FLAC support is pretty cool to me) in the Rio Karma. I would have been all ready to spend 100-150 for a 4 gig Ipod, but not 250 when I can get 20 gigs for that price.
Radio is not needed in it's current form.
With radio stations doing payola (and those that believe that this is a dead practice, think again), and giving air time to those that pay for ir (be it an artist or an advertiser), radio can simply not survive. The fact that XM and Sirus are continuing to have their customer base grow is proof of this. Why listen to radio when you can pay a small fee and have more chances and stations to listen to what YOU want.
What's happening here is a consumer-led based market. Instead of people TELLING the consumer what they want/need. The consumer is telling the buisness what they want/need. Most of the public hates radio in it's current form (music stations or not). They hate the commercials and thus have been slowly moving towards commercial free radio with stations that are run by people like them, so they have more of chance of hearing what THEY want. This is also evident in the fact that things like iTunes are having heavy turn outs, people will buy what they want to. And if you give them a big enough selection to rival the freebes out there, they will pay as long as they have the chance to actually pay for something they want.
Radio will never go away, however in it's current form I'm not sure how much longer it stay that way. As for the RIAA, well they're going to start eating their words as buisness like iTunes continue to pull buisness.
For the Linux side anyway, my apologies if you already know about some of these, just throwing them out there. Also some of these have windows versions (Mozilla, Open Office, GAIM, Thunderbird, Firebird, etc).
Email - Evolution, Mozilla Mail, or Thunderbird
If you want something that looks like Outlook (and even acts like it in most places) use Evolution. Mozilla Mail is included in Mozilla and Thunderbird is like Firebird, but for mail.
WWW - Mozilla or Firebird
These 2 you can't really go wrong with. Also for good measure make sure lynx is installed for console web browsing
IM - GAIM
THere's also Everybuddy, but I perfer GAIM
Office - Open Office or KOffice
Open Office is slightly more well rounded but KOffice is pretty slick IMHO.
Media - XMMS, mPlayer, Winamp
Everyone knows Winamp for MP3s on Windows. XMMS is a Winamp like program for Linux. mPlayer is for movies (and also audio) that plays MOST formats.
Use the following links to research
Mozilla, Firebird, and Thunderbird
GAIM
XMMS
mPlayer
Open Office
Evolution and other Ximian products
Hope this was helpful.
"decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux--" *phone rings* ...
*click*
"Hello?"
"Hi, Kettle?"
"Yes?"
"This is pot"
And now you know the rest of the story
See here's the thing. Protools is something you drop around 10-24k for. Then you usually have to drop a few grand to have someone install it and make it all work. Now this is all fine and dandy when you have studios that can afford this. But the average consumor can't afford that. So we got Digi stuff. Digi001 = $700 and Digi002=$1500-$2000(on ebay) still rather pricey. I helped a friend build a small home studio with a Delta44 for around $400. The other 400 was spent on mics and cables. So that's $800 for a sound card, mics, and cables. As opposed to the $800 (700 plus tax) to get Digi001. Now my friend didn't have any software because he's running Linux (the Gentoo flavor) so he compile Ardour. I've been in recording studios that use protools, I've even used it myself. But for a person doing a home-small studio Ardour is perfect. And you can create a recording in equal quality to a protools setup. I've seen it done. Protools is the industry choice, but that doesn't mean it's the best. Just like Windows is a standard on the desktop, doesn't mean it's the best. But Protools is good at what it does, hence the reason studios use it. Personally I'm an analog man, but that stuff gets 5-10 times as expensive as protools (to do it right) so I have to settle for DAWs. Price is generally a factor, especially in a home studio project.
More then likely it will give them more ammo against the P2P crowd. The RIAA and the companies it represents are trying hold onto a buisness practice that doesn't work with the changing market. The real estate market is going through a similar problem. Instead of fixing the way THEY do things, they expect everyone to buckle and do things the way they've been doing them for so long. The RIAA knows they aren't going to get too much money out of the people they're suing, it's mainly a scare tatic. We sue a few people and guess what, people might not want to do it just because they don't want the hassle. So even if sales keep dropping they'll never admit it's them. And when/if sales do return to normal, they'll just simply praise their own efforts. Either way, the people on the technology side lose.
I think diffrent combinations work for differnt people....
If you have a laptop, I would invest in a wireless card and move from there (maybe get a bigger hard drive and 2 extra batteries).
If you have only a desktop do what I did (that whole 1 semester) was I had a tape recorder that I used to record the class while I took notes. Then back home I would transcribe my notes onto my computer (no laptop yet) while listening to the tape and inputing any stuff I missed, I would then print up my notes and place them in that classes binder. I know it sounds like a lot but I passed my classes so I must have been doing something right.
I think a combination of technology and old-fashion know how works best. Most people have a tendency to remember what they write, then plus if you also type that up, AND relisten to it via a recording then you really don't have an excuse for missing something.
Just my $0.02 though
Time for the drone to step up and explain to you that while you are correct in the fact that the cinematography and acting in Clerks sucked, the bit about the dialogue is way off base. Personally I think you're just pissed that Kevin Smith made a living doing what he loves to do and you're stuck at some job doing what you need to do to get buy. Chasing Amy PROVES the man can write. There's tons of emotion and great dialogue in that movie, not to mention, the life lesson in the movie is a great one.
...
Also what people LIKE Kevin Smith are putting out is WAY better then the meaningless dribble that Hollywood is making a "killing" off of (2 Fast 2 Furious anyone?). Oh wait, I'm sorry you probably thought "Fast and the Furious" was a GOOD movie, I mean since you apparently have no taste and lack the ability to actually THINK. Oh yea, and "Triple X" was a piece of cinimatic greatness wasn't it? Please, the ratio of stuff being put out by Hollywood to stuff that is actually GOOD is like 50 to 1 or so. And I for one will be first in like to see Mr. Smith's new flick "Jersey Girl" because it's suppose to be kind of along the same lines as "Chasing Amy" which again, was actually a good movie. Personally I would like to know what you think is such a great movie that you feel the need to bash a person who actually has some thought and originality in him, as opposed to just going and making something everyone once him to make (ie another Jay and Bob movie), he's trying to grow and mature as a writer/director.
So back off, you know in your post you don't prove your point in ANY manner. You just seem to bash. Why did the dialogue suck in Clerks? Why do you think that Kevin Smith lacks originality? Maybe instead of running your mouth you should back some of your statments up. Oh wait, that would require thought again, nevermind
First: You need to read a book called "All You Need to Know About the Music Buisness" by Donald Passman. This book is a great read for exactly how record company math REALLY goes. You also find out that basically the entire goal of the recording industry is to screw the artists and keep as much for themselves. (I mean really I can have 1000 CDs pressed for right around $1000 WITH the the cool cover art and everything, so where is all that money really going?) Second: Most record companies (the big 5 anyway) are stationed out of either LA or New York, and California placed a law into effect that basically makes bands that sign to recording contracts nothing more then "works for hire". In other words the artists don't even OWN their music anymore. This law is being relooked at and hopefully changed. So just because it's not TECHNICALLY stealing, it's not exactly what one would call moral either... Three: The fact that YOU quote a contract lawyer saying "most always owed significantly more the they have been paid" TOTALLY makes your whole argument right above that COMPLETELY null and void ...
A lot of this is from a book called "All You Need to Know About the Music Buisness", which by the way if you're a musician is a GREAT read and point of reference. I think that opening story is actually word for word out the book (I'll have to check my copy at home though to be sure). But Steve Albini, definatly knows a thing or 2 himself.
You mean the same sophisticated viewing public that pays to see movies like "The Fast and the Furious" (or the sequal "2 Fast 2 Furious")? Or the same sophisticated view public that pays to see "Bringing Down the House", "Dumb and Dumberer", any movie in the "Scream" franchise, or a non-James Cameron "Terminator 3"? I think you're giving people WAY too much credit. But then again, I fully believe that Hollywood's philosophy is "You will never go broke under-estimating the stupidity of the American public." If the story line is even HALF of what the story was in the first one it'll be better then 1/3 of the dribble Hollywood releases.