4 ms·

Except for the tiny percentage of superstars, musical artists have always made more money through live performances than recording contracts. Ticket sales, merc

• billybob 16y ago
  Be that as it may, can you see that it's legitimate for a musician to want to make, record, and sell music - not an associated industry of products? And there are fans who don't go to concerts or buy t-shirts, but really like listening to music? If you're a fan like that, and you don't give back to the artist at some point, you're making it less likely that the recordings you want will be made in the future. Notice that I'm not throwing around moral claims. I'm just making an observation. If you want something to be made, and it costs time and money to make, you can encourage its creation or not. But don't complain that the music selection sucks if you don't financially support the music you like.
  • eru 16y ago
    > And there are fans who don't go to concerts or buy t-shirts, but really like listening to music? While buying music is one solution, another approach is donating to the artist. (And with easy piracy, both amount to the same thing modulo middle-man.)
  • deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  • tow21 16y ago
    "Be that as it may, can you see that it's legitimate for a musician to want to make, record, and sell music - not an associated industry of products?" It's legitimate to want any sort of business model to work. But if it doesn't work, complaining that you wanted it to doesn't help.
    • nlawalker 16y ago
      The shame is, I can't think of anyone who wouldn't want it to work. I don't know about you, but I like the fact that I can listen to recorded music and not have to go to a live performance.