|
|
|
Rick Rubin says music business model is 'done'
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 4 September, 2007
Recently appointed as co-chairman of Columbia Records, Rick Rubin, who has worked with the likes of Red Hot Chili Peppers, Beastie Boys and L.L. Cool J, had some words for the recording industry. In statements made in the New York Times, Rubin talks about the effects of iPods and digital music on the industry as a whole. "Columbia is stuck in the dark ages," Rubin told the Times.
"I have ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
10. September 2007 @ 14:50 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by wordwan:
Perhaps, what it's really time to do is simply pay the artists what you think they are worth. And do so, directly. Find your artist's website and send him a check or paypal. Do it, now.
The idea of a room full of lawyers or bookkeepers, needed to figure out what cut of the artist's work, the artist gets, should be over.
You support your local 7-11 even, don't you, by not stealing the chocolate bars he keeps on his shelves to help guarantee his rent so you can still go to the store anytime for chocolate bars?
Why can't you see artists in the same way? Pay them what they are worth, so they can buy their own chocolate bars (or yours, if you are another artist) and let's not shift this old paradigm, let's remove it.
Find the artist whose work you are listening to and pay him, oh, say, the cost of a chocolate bar. (And don't tell me you can't afford it. How many chocolate bars did you buy this week?) Imagine if we all, each one, did even that.
I bet lots of artists could live quite well on that.
Visit your local artist online and ask him, "where's the money" to be sent to?
Just a thought.
Heather Lovatt
wordwan
"Support your local creatist"
Interesting idea, but I still think it is in the best interest of the artist if he/she was in total control of pricing. Artist provides art - customer pays artist. No need for money to exchange from any other hands. If you're feeling benevolent enough, then it wouldn't hurt to donate to an artist either ;-)
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
10. September 2007 @ 16:10 |
Link to this message
|
This is not going to solve the issues. Clombia needs to move to digital but not drm locked files.
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
10. September 2007 @ 16:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by borhan9:
This is not going to solve the issues. Clombia needs to move to digital but not drm locked files.
Which issues are you referring to? People downloading music for free? People don't like DRM and there are ways to bypass it. So DRM isn't really a factor in any argument. It's just a nuisance. Artists need to drop labels, give up on any DRM and put their trust in their fans. There has to be a point where the artist says "if you like my work, buy my stuff" - and then accept whatever profit he/she makes. That profit would determine the value of that persons art. Invite the fans into their world. Provide the experience they want. Work for the $$$ by relying primarily on touring. Create quality merchandise. Music should be something heard freely without charging frivolous royalties. Just my opinion.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. September 2007 @ 16:46
|
|
mebjolz
Account closed as per user's own request
|
10. September 2007 @ 20:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by wordwan:
Perhaps, what it's really time to do is simply pay the artists what you think they are worth. And do so, directly. Find your artist's website and send him a check or paypal. Do it, now.
The idea of a room full of lawyers or bookkeepers, needed to figure out what cut of the artist's work, the artist gets, should be over.
You support your local 7-11 even, don't you, by not stealing the chocolate bars he keeps on his shelves to help guarantee his rent so you can still go to the store anytime for chocolate bars?
Why can't you see artists in the same way? Pay them what they are worth, so they can buy their own chocolate bars (or yours, if you are another artist) and let's not shift this old paradigm, let's remove it.
Find the artist whose work you are listening to and pay him, oh, say, the cost of a chocolate bar. (And don't tell me you can't afford it. How many chocolate bars did you buy this week?) Imagine if we all, each one, did even that.
I bet lots of artists could live quite well on that.
Visit your local artist online and ask him, "where's the money" to be sent to?
Just a thought.
Heather Lovatt
wordwan
"Support your local creatist"
that all sounds great in theory, and to a certain extent it has been implemented already, for example The Brian Jonestown Massacre have the majority of their albums (full albums!!) available for free download from their website along with a link for fans who are generous enough or feel indebted enough to pay funds into a paypal account for them. Unfortunately, as an artist myself I know how people value creativity until it comes down to their wallets, its a different matter then...
|
|
militantm
Junior Member
|
14. September 2007 @ 15:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm with the rest of the folks here who say $20 a month to rent, to hell with that, try more like 10 a month. Satellite radio is less than that already and Sirius plays some great stuff. As for the record companies cutting into half the acts profits from touring and merch, they have nothing to do with either one, why should they be entitled to half of the real work the acts have to do to survive? You can check for yourself a lot of these groups have to tour constantly just to stay financially stable. Most are not millionaires, at some point half of nothing is nothing. Next they'll be projecting expected tour profits and go off that then sue the acts for the remaining amount they didn't able to come up with. there is such a thing as cancelled shows and failed tours due to less than expected ticket sales you know. That's certainly a marriage I wouldn't want to be involved in. There was a time when I thought old Rick was cool cat, if he really said any of what was mentioned in that article he can go jump in the lake, his pockets are plenty full. Whoever wrote some of his production efforts were sub par they were also correct, he may have some popular recordings(units sold) under his belt, but let's face it folks, the quality of the production on a lot of them is crap.
|
Member
|
15. September 2007 @ 13:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by emugamer:
What's your view on Ricky Ru? Initiate something.
On all fronts he's a fat cat. He's also not stupid. He knows that the industry types are backed into a corner due to the downloading market. He's also seen a massive decline in new artists due to self promotion/publishing and all that. So basically, he's looking to screw any new artists or smaller established ones with a Half-your-touring-fees-thank-you type contract. As somebody else said, any artist worth his/her salt is never going to agree to that.
My earlier argument still stands. The discussions concerning the RIAA and the morals of illegal downloading are totally irrelevant to this topic, although given the topic subject, not totally unexpected. The real question is: Given the current state of play with legal downloads and with more artists promoting themselves, how likely is it that these big industry types will cease to exist altogether eventually. The hype in the press was that if the mainstream industry ceased to exist, that quality music would also cease to exist. More likely it's the other way round. The wave of opportunity that has been opened up thanks to the power of the Internet can only lead to more quality material we might have never heard otherwise. It'll also hopefully rid us once and for all of the big money-making manufactured tripe we're all subjected to at the moment.
True evolution, people power style!!!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
