Hear hear! A rousing rant. You're a veritable liberal, Steve!
http://www.bartleby.com/65/li/liberali.html
a dario
np: Gotan Project - Queremos Paz
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Catanzaro [mailto:stevencatanzaro@sprintmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 3:28 PM
To: ACIDJAZZ
Subject: [acid-jazz] O Brother; USA Today on Music Biz Woes
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0062_01C20C8C.6B227410
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The USA Today has a front page story on the woes of the music business. =
This, coupled with our thread on "quality" music last week, has got me =
thinking. (Potentially dangerous, I know...)
RANT WARNING *********** U.S. RIGHT WING REACTIONARY RANT TO FOLLOW =
*********** RANT WARNING
USA Today's full page ad (I mean article) on behalf of the vested =
interests in the music business has got me up in arms. I know that many =
of my left-wing friends imagine that as an unabashed, unrepentant =
supporter of GW Bush I should want to see the "status quo" maintained. =
But a "conservative" approach towards business is actually a misnomer. =
What many conservatives want is a dynamic free market where wealth is =
created by innovative entrepeneurs. What we hate to see is static =
bureacracy, especially one that spews out one wrong-headed, inefficient =
idea after another and stifles all attempts at reform.=20
The handful of conglomerates that have a stranglehold on the record =
business are just such a bureacracy. In my judgment, record business =
status quo is a worthy target for right-wing scorn. (Not to mention, =
most of the fat-cat players in the rec. business are Dem or Green party =
supporters anyway!)
Now, to the article. First, the headline is a misnomer. It says the =
"music biz" is in trouble, when what it should really say is the =
"recording" business is in trouble, and that's not necessarily bad for =
music.=20
The recording business has been bad for musicians since its outset. Bad =
for musicians, when Mozart died penniless and Paul McCartney is a =
billionaire?=20
Of course. Long before video killed the radio star, recorded music was a =
threat to musicians. Back in the day, any venue that aspired to provide =
music of some type had to hire musicians. Venue owners soon realized =
that pre-recorded music was much more predictable, and cheaper, than =
live musicians. As recording and playback quality increased, the =
opportunities for working musicians to ply their trade decreased. =
Everyone reading this has been to a restaurant, wedding, church service, =
etc. where there was plenty of music, maybe even a vocalist or two, but =
nary a musician in sight.=20
Even such music-dependant sites as Las Vegas and Broadway have paired =
back. It is not uncommon to see a CD player in a venue that was once =
occupied by a 30 piece ensemble, or, to see 2 or 3 keyboard players =
covering, via sampling and playback technology, the parts that 10-15 =
musicians used to handle.
What the recording business has done in the past 80 or so years is =
enabled a small minority of musicians to be virtually omnipresent =
everywhere music is needed. Yes, you could have your sister's cousin =
sing at your wedding, but you could also have Celine Dion! Yes, you =
could go to your local university and watch a young pianist perform an =
all-Chopin program, but you could also enjoy Arthur Rubenstein playing =
Chopin from the comfort of your own sofa. And, if you need to take a =
bathroom break, simply hit the "pause" button on your remote control, =
and the Maestro will politely wait for you to return to your seat. =
"Could you take it from the top again, Artie?" Gone forever are the days =
when the John Phillip Sousa band could get 2,500 to attend a Tuesday =
eveining concert in a town of 3,000. Where else could you hear a =
thrilling sound like that?
It was probably easy to predict that the record business would not be =
controlled by musicians, who, in the main, are not the best or sharpest =
business people around. So, the production, sale, and distribution of =
records fell to music business executives. Many of the most prominent of =
these types of people have actually bragged about their "tin ears" and =
stunning lack of musical aptitude. But it seems, at least this observer, =
that their "tin ear" extends beyond far beyond music.=20
For instance, many top music business executives have become the =
personification of greed. Take for instance Miles Copeland, the =
brash-talking former head of I.R.S. records, now riding atop his Ark 21 =
label. Copeland once wrote an "open letter" to L.A's Music Connection =
magazine, berating consumers for their lack of knowledge as to how the =
business really works.
When faced with criticism that the record companies routinely take a cut =
that would make a pimp blush (try .93 cents on the dollar) he trotted =
out the well-worn saw that the great majority of commercial releases =
lose money. Of course, this is technically true, but only when such =
business "necessities" as Copeland's Chataeau Marouatte castle in =
France, where he holds an annual 2-week "songwriters bootcamp," are =
factored in.*
In fact, the record business is rife with the kind of waste that would =
make Reagan-era pentagon officials stand up and take notice. The bills =
for these extravagences are ultimately applied to the artist's tab, and =
while one would think the musician would know better by now, this does =
not appear to be the case. A few days ago, drummer/producer Ahmir ?love =
Thompson of the Roots described the creation process behind D'Angelo's =
lauded second album, "Voodoo;"
"We started in late '96... [the album was released in January 2000]. We =
would go to Electric Lady [recording studio] everyday... I have an =
amazing concert archive collection. We'd sit down and watch it for =
hours... eat popcorn... and then jam... you know, after watching =
Parliament Funkadelic..."
Sounds like a fun way to create an album, except when one realizes that =
Electric Lady studio is one of the most prestigious, and expensive, =
shrines to itself the recording business has yet created. Presumably, =
D'Angelo is one of the extremely rare musicians who will never have to =
worry about money. Still, one wonders if he wouldn't have been wiser to =
eat popcorn, watch concert videos, and jam in his basement, and then go =
to Electric Lady only when ready to push the record button.=20
With overhead like this, and with robbing Peter to pay Paul a uniform =
industry practice, is it any wonder that so many commercial releases =
lose money? That so many once-vaunted artists are roaming the streets =
looking for any gig they can get? How many "Behind The Music" or "Where =
Are They Now" episodes do artists need to see before they learn that =
history can teach us something?
Now, the USA today reports that the record business fell off 1.2% in =
2001. Perhaps this could've been chalked up to the soft economy, even =
though it was the first loss since Soundscan started tracking sales in =
1991. But during the first quarter of 2002, with most economic =
indicators UP, the recording business has fallen 8.3% since the dismal =
2001! That's enough to get anyone's attention, even a man who lives in a =
castle.
So, the blame game begins. With one =
shoot-itself-in-the-foot-in-its-mouth scapegoat after another, the =
record business blames consumers, radio, and the artists.
The consumers, what with their crafty digital duplication techniques, =
must be foiled. So, we hear that Celine Dion's newest offering has a =
protection scheme which means it cannot be played in a computer's disk =
drive. Problem is, if you own a new i-mac and pop her disc in, not only =
can't you play the disc, but the machine shuts down and you can't get =
the door open without sending it out for repairs. While this may or may =
not serve you right for despoiling your i-mac with soft-pop fodder, it =
is just the kind of wrong-headed move that is going to make consumers =
feel even more justified in pirating tracks.=20
In addition, the recording industry is using its massive legal apparatus =
to go after file-sharing servers. They successfuly forced Napster into =
bankruptcy. Now they're going after Audiogalaxy. But everytime they =
squash one, 5 others pop up, and many of these are headquartered in =
places where US copyright law does not obtain. So, this is another =
futile waste of time which does nothing but inconvenience music fans, =
who now have to spend an additonal, oh, 20 minutes, finding, installing, =
and learning how to use a different free file-sharing program.
The silver lining in the USA Today article is the success of the "O =
Brother Where Art Thou" soundtrack, an album that was a breakout hit =
despite receiving virtually no commercial radio airplay, and not fitting =
into any of the machine programmed playlists. Alan Light, former editor =
of SPIN magazine, says "There is good music out there.... you have to =
find it yourself. Look at O Brother."
O Brother indeed. Light seems to forget that "O Brother Where Art Thou" =
was not exactly an underground creation, but the soundtrack album to a =
highly visible Hollywood movie! You didn't have to look too hard to find =
"O Brother."
What O Brother did show was this. People will respond to music that =
isn't sung by a 17 year old version of Jon Benet Ramsey. They will =
respond to music that doesn't sound much like what they are getting from =
MTV, VH1, TNN, or the various Clear Channel outlets. In fact, they'll =
respond to music even if they don't know what the artists look like =
(George Clooney isn't really one of the Soggy Bottom Boys, is he?)
But to do that, they need to hear it. The demise of the record business =
will, contrary to the USA Today article, probably be the best thing for =
the music business, as we might get some really "Clear Channels" once =
and for all. The record business as-is is thorughly corrupt; it's the =
reason a singer playing the piano in the 21'st century (Alicia "Keys") =
is actually regarded as something of a novelty.=20
In America, there are still alot of ways for a musician to make enough =
money to support his or her art habit. And there will be even more once =
the record business of today is washed away. The reality is, a musician =
can make a damn respectable living playing 250-500 seat gigs 200 nites a =
year, selling 20 thousand CD's, as well as a few t-shirts, bumper =
stickers and the like.
That is, so long as 93 cents of their hard-earned dollar (before taxes) =
doesn't have to be coughed up to pay for an army of apprachniks, not to =
mention those all-imporant French chateaus. =20
*************************************************************************=
*********************************************
*Maybe Copeland would argue that his Chateau was not paid for by the =
record company, but was a personal expense he was entitled to as a =
succesful businessman. True, perhaps, but one wonders if his personal =
salary as a music executive contributed to the note on those digs. And, =
one further wonders if he would've been able to afford such a castle if =
the musicians got 50% on the sale of their art. And finally, one wonders =
if a man needs a castle to be truly happy....
=20
=20
------=_NextPart_000_0062_01C20C8C.6B227410
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3502.4856" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The USA Today has a front page =
story on the=20
woes of the music business. This, coupled with our thread on =
"quality"=20
music last week, has got me thinking. (Potentially dangerous, I=20
know...)</FONT></DIV></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>RANT WARNING *********** U.S. RIGHT =
WING=20
REACTIONARY RANT TO FOLLOW *********** RANT WARNING</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>USA Today's full page ad (I mean =
article) on behalf=20
of the vested interests in the music business has got me up in arms. I =
know that=20
many of my left-wing friends imagine that as an unabashed, =
unrepentant=20
supporter of GW Bush I should want to see the "status quo" =
maintained.=20
But a "conservative" approach towards business is actually a =
misnomer.=20
What many conservatives want is a dynamic free market where wealth =
is=20
created by innovative entrepeneurs. What we hate to see is static =
bureacracy,=20
especially one that spews out one wrong-headed, inefficient idea =
after=20
another and stifles all attempts at reform. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The handful of conglomerates that have =
a=20
stranglehold on the record business are just such a bureacracy. In =
my=20
judgment, record business status quo is a worthy target =
for right-wing=20
scorn. (Not to mention, most of the fat-cat players in the rec. business =
are Dem or Green party supporters anyway!)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Now, to the article. First, the =
headline is a=20
misnomer. It says the "music biz" is in trouble, when what it should =
really say=20
is the "recording" business is in trouble, and that's not necessarily =
bad for=20
music. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The recording business has been bad for =
musicians=20
since its outset. Bad for musicians, when Mozart died penniless and Paul =
McCartney is a billionaire? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Of course. Long before video killed the =
radio star,=20
recorded music was a threat to musicians. Back in the day, any =
venue that=20
aspired to provide music of some type had to hire musicians. Venue =
owners soon=20
realized that pre-recorded music was much more predictable, and cheaper, =
than=20
live musicians. As recording and playback quality increased,=20
the opportunities for working musicians to ply their trade =
decreased. =20
Everyone reading this has been to a restaurant, wedding, church service, =
etc.=20
where there was plenty of music, maybe even a vocalist or two, but nary =
a=20
musician in sight. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Even such music-dependant sites as Las =
Vegas and=20
Broadway have paired back. It is not uncommon to see a CD player in a =
venue that=20
was once occupied by a 30 piece ensemble, or, to see 2 or 3 keyboard =
players=20
covering, via sampling and playback technology, the parts that 10-15 =
musicians=20
used to handle.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What the recording business has done in =
the past 80=20
or so years is enabled a small minority of musicians to be virtually =
omnipresent=20
everywhere music is needed. Yes, you could have your sister's cousin =
sing at=20
your wedding, but you could also have Celine Dion! Yes, you could go to =
your=20
local university and watch a young pianist perform an all-Chopin =
program, but=20
you could also enjoy Arthur Rubenstein playing Chopin from the comfort =
of your=20
own sofa. And, if you need to take a bathroom break, simply hit the =
"pause"=20
button on your remote control, and the Maestro will politely wait for =
you to=20
return to your seat. "Could you take it from the top again, Artie?" Gone =
forever=20
are the days when the John Phillip Sousa band could get 2,500 to attend =
a=20
Tuesday eveining concert in a town of 3,000. Where else could you hear a =
thrilling sound like that?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It was probably easy to predict that =
the record=20
business would not be controlled by musicians, who, in the main, are not =
the=20
best or sharpest business people around. So, the production, sale, and=20
distribution of records fell to music business executives. Many of the =
most=20
prominent of these types of people have actually bragged about their =
"tin ears"=20
and stunning lack of musical aptitude. But it seems, at least this =
observer,=20
that their "tin ear" extends beyond far beyond music. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For instance, many top music business=20
executives have become the personification of greed. Take for =
instance=20
Miles Copeland, the brash-talking former head of I.R.S. records, =
now riding=20
atop his Ark 21 label. Copeland once wrote an "open letter" =
to L.A's=20
Music Connection magazine, berating consumers for their lack of =
knowledge as to=20
how the business really works.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>When faced with criticism that the =
record companies=20
routinely take a cut that would make a pimp blush (try .93 cents on the =
dollar)=20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>he trotted out the well-worn saw that =
the great=20
majority of commercial releases lose money. Of course, this is =
technically true,=20
but only when such business "necessities" as Copeland's=20
Chataeau Marouatte castle in France, where he holds an annual =
2-week=20
"songwriters bootcamp," are factored in.*</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In fact, the record business is rife =
with the kind=20
of waste that would make Reagan-era pentagon officials stand up =
and take=20
notice. The bills for these extravagences are ultimately applied to =
the=20
artist's tab, and while one would think the musician would know better =
by now,=20
this does not appear to be the case. A few days ago, drummer/producer =
Ahmir=20
?love Thompson of the Roots described the creation process behind =
D'Angelo's=20
lauded second album, "Voodoo;"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"We started in late '96... [the album =
was released=20
in January 2000]. We would go to Electric Lady [recording studio] =
everyday... I=20
have an amazing concert archive collection. We'd sit down and watch it =
for=20
hours... eat popcorn... and then jam... you know, after watching =
Parliament=20
Funkadelic..."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sounds like a fun way to create an =
album, except=20
when one realizes that Electric Lady studio is one of the most =
prestigious, and=20
expensive, shrines to itself the recording business has yet created. =
Presumably,=20
D'Angelo is one of the extremely rare musicians who will never have to =
worry=20
about money. Still, one wonders if he wouldn't have been wiser to eat =
popcorn,=20
watch concert videos, and jam in his basement, and then go to Electric=20
Lady only when ready to push the record button. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>With overhead like this, and with =
robbing Peter to=20
pay Paul a uniform industry practice, is it any wonder that so many =
commercial=20
releases lose money? That so many once-vaunted artists are roaming the =
streets=20
looking for any gig they can get? How many "Behind The Music" or "Where =
Are They=20
Now" episodes do artists need to see before they learn that history can =
teach us=20
something?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Now, the USA today reports that the =
record=20
business fell off 1.2% in 2001. Perhaps this could've been =
chalked up=20
to the soft economy, even though it was the first loss since =
Soundscan=20
started tracking sales in 1991. But during the first quarter of =
2002,=20
with most economic indicators UP, the recording business =
has fallen=20
8.3% since the dismal 2001! That's enough to get anyone's attention, =
even a man=20
who lives in a castle.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>So, the blame game begins. With=20
one shoot-itself-in-the-foot-in-its-mouth scapegoat after another, =
the=20
record business blames consumers, radio, and the artists.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The consumers, what with their crafty =
digital=20
duplication techniques, must be foiled. So, we hear that Celine=20
Dion's newest offering has a protection scheme which means it =
cannot be=20
played in a computer's disk drive. Problem is, if you own a =
new i-mac and=20
pop her disc in, not only can't you play the disc, but =
the=20
machine shuts down and you can't get the door open without sending it =
out for=20
repairs. While this may or may not serve you right for despoiling your =
i-mac=20
with soft-pop fodder, it is just the kind of wrong-headed move that is =
going to=20
make consumers feel even more justified in pirating =
tracks. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In addition, the recording industry is =
using its=20
massive legal apparatus to go after file-sharing servers.=20
They successfuly forced Napster into bankruptcy. Now they're going =
after=20
Audiogalaxy. But everytime they squash one, 5 others pop up, and =
many of=20
these are headquartered in places where US copyright law does not =
obtain. So,=20
this is another futile waste of time which does nothing but =
inconvenience=20
music fans, who now have to spend an additonal, oh, 20 minutes, finding, =
installing, and learning how to use a different free file-sharing=20
program.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The silver lining in the USA Today =
article is the=20
success of the "O Brother Where Art Thou" soundtrack, an album that was =
a=20
breakout hit despite receiving virtually no commercial radio airplay, =
and not=20
fitting into any of the machine programmed playlists. Alan Light, former =
editor=20
of SPIN magazine, says "There is good music out there.... you have to =
find it=20
yourself. Look at O Brother."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>O Brother indeed. Light seems to forget =
that "O=20
Brother Where Art Thou" was not exactly an underground creation, but the =
soundtrack album to a highly visible Hollywood movie! You didn't have to =
look=20
too hard to find "O Brother."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What O Brother did show was this. =
People will=20
respond to music that isn't sung by a 17 year old version of Jon =
Benet=20
Ramsey. They will respond to music that doesn't sound much =
like what they=20
are getting from MTV, VH1, TNN, or the various Clear Channel outlets. In =
fact,=20
they'll respond to music even if they don't know what the artists look =
like=20
(George Clooney isn't really one of the Soggy Bottom Boys, is =
he?)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But to do that, they need to hear it. =
The demise of=20
the record business will, contrary to the USA Today article, probably be =
the=20
best thing for the music business, as we might get some really "Clear =
Channels"=20
once and for all. The record business as-is is thorughly corrupt; it's =
the=20
reason a singer playing the piano in the 21'st century (Alicia "Keys") =
is=20
actually regarded as something of a novelty. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In America, there are still alot =
of ways for a=20
musician to make enough money to support his or her art habit. And there =
will be=20
even more once the record business of today is washed away. The reality =
is, a=20
musician can make a damn respectable living playing 250-500 seat =
gigs 200=20
nites a year, selling 20 thousand CD's, as well as a few t-shirts, =
bumper=20
stickers and the like.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>That is, so long as 93 cents of their =
hard-earned=20
dollar (before taxes) doesn't have to be coughed up to pay for an army =
of=20
apprachniks, not to mention those all-imporant French chateaus.=20
</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>****************************************************************=
******************************************************</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>*Maybe Copeland would argue that his =
Chateau was=20
not paid for by the record company, but was a personal expense he was =
entitled=20
to as a succesful businessman. True, perhaps, but one wonders if his =
personal=20
salary as a music executive contributed to the note on those =
digs.=20
And, one further wonders if he would've been able to afford such a =
castle if the=20
musicians got 50% on the sale of their art. And finally, one wonders if =
a man=20
needs a castle to be truly happy....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> =20
</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0062_01C20C8C.6B227410--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jun 06 2002 - 19:07:28 CEST