3 ms·

I agree with your conclusion but not your argument. What does it matter if making a living as a musician through record sales is a historical anomaly? And can

I agree with your conclusion but not your argument. What does it matter if making a living as a musician through record sales is a historical anomaly? And can you really call it an anomaly if previous generations didn't have the option of selling records as the technology didn't exist? That's like saying "cars are a historically anomalous mode of transport". Great. So? And by the way, in the early 20th century Broadway made a lot of money from sheet music. A product.

smacktoward 13y ago
Yeah, really. Just about everything we take for granted as part of modern life is an historical anomaly. Electric lighting is an historical anomaly. Clean drinking water is an historical anomaly. Etc.
pyre 13y ago
It's a 'sound byte' that popped up in response to the people that preach doom and gloom if the "piracy problem" isn't solved (e.g. "music is doomed") as if all music would cease to exist, and no one would have motivation to be a musician if it wasn't for record sales.
m3mnoch 13y ago
two quick things. on the cars -- horses were bought and sold. trains. boats. you name it. buying a product that is transformed by technology is not the same as trying to take a service and transform it into a product through technology. you can augment the service (large margins) or automate the service (thin margins), but you can't turn it into a product. on the sheet music -- precisely! that's the exact analogy. note the incredible consumer demand for sheet music today! it's not exactly a booming market outside of the niche training/instruction arena. edit: btw, that last bit about the incredible demand today for sheet music was sarcasm. just in case it didn't come across....
- stdbrouw 13y ago
  > you can augment the service (large margins) or automate the service (thin margins), but you can't turn it into a product. Why not?
  - m3mnoch 13y ago
    playing fast and loose with formal definitions here, but basically because services, by their very nature, are scarce goods -- you are paying for someone's time. once you productize/automate that, it becomes non-scarce and the marginal cost falls through the floor. so, like the whole ideas and sharing flames analogy. now, note, this does not pertain to products that perform services. that's a whole 'nuther ball of wax. but, in our example, that'd be like cloning the musician rather than the music.
    - stdbrouw 13y ago
      This simply does not apply to music, where each producer has the monopoly on their music. Only once you take piracy into account does that change. But then your thesis also changes from "you can't get people to pay for recorded music" to "you can't get people to pay for recorded music because it so happens they can steal it", which are two different things altogether.
    - wwweston 13y ago
      > this does not pertain to products that perform services. This is exactly what a recording does, though -- it automates a performance.
      - m3mnoch 13y ago
        no. the music recording is the manifestation of the performance/service. so, not viable as a product. cd players perform the service of playing the music. (aka automates the performance) totally viable as a product. think of it like a many-to-one relationship. the "one" is what can be productized. the "many" cannot. scarcity is key for what can be economically considered product-viable.
pessimizer 13y ago
It matters because the distribution situation has changed, so now you have to actively and aggressively impede the distribution of all recorded sound in order to preserve the business model. It's like the government tearing out everybody's plumbing in order that the outhouse builders can still make a living. >And by the way, in the early 20th century Broadway made a lot of money from sheet music. By harassing and imprisoning people who would play music without buying it first; a vile little historical chapter.
- wwweston 13y ago
  > It matters because the distribution situation has changed, so now you have to actively and aggressively impede the distribution of all recorded sound in order to preserve the business model. False dichotomy much?

smacktoward 13y ago

Yeah, really. Just about everything we take for granted as part of modern life is an historical anomaly. Electric lighting is an historical anomaly. Clean drinking water is an historical anomaly. Etc.

pyre 13y ago

It's a 'sound byte' that popped up in response to the people that preach doom and gloom if the "piracy problem" isn't solved (e.g. "music is doomed") as if all music would cease to exist, and no one would have motivation to be a musician if it wasn't for record sales.

m3mnoch 13y ago

two quick things. on the cars -- horses were bought and sold. trains. boats. you name it. buying a product that is transformed by technology is not the same as trying to take a service and transform it into a product through technology. you can augment the service (large margins) or automate the service (thin margins), but you can't turn it into a product. on the sheet music -- precisely! that's the exact analogy. note the incredible consumer demand for sheet music today! it's not exactly a booming market outside of the niche training/instruction arena. edit: btw, that last bit about the incredible demand today for sheet music was sarcasm. just in case it didn't come across....

stdbrouw 13y ago
> you can augment the service (large margins) or automate the service (thin margins), but you can't turn it into a product. Why not?
- m3mnoch 13y ago
  playing fast and loose with formal definitions here, but basically because services, by their very nature, are scarce goods -- you are paying for someone's time. once you productize/automate that, it becomes non-scarce and the marginal cost falls through the floor. so, like the whole ideas and sharing flames analogy. now, note, this does not pertain to products that perform services. that's a whole 'nuther ball of wax. but, in our example, that'd be like cloning the musician rather than the music.
  - stdbrouw 13y ago
    This simply does not apply to music, where each producer has the monopoly on their music. Only once you take piracy into account does that change. But then your thesis also changes from "you can't get people to pay for recorded music" to "you can't get people to pay for recorded music because it so happens they can steal it", which are two different things altogether.
  - wwweston 13y ago
    > this does not pertain to products that perform services. This is exactly what a recording does, though -- it automates a performance.
    - m3mnoch 13y ago
      no. the music recording is the manifestation of the performance/service. so, not viable as a product. cd players perform the service of playing the music. (aka automates the performance) totally viable as a product. think of it like a many-to-one relationship. the "one" is what can be productized. the "many" cannot. scarcity is key for what can be economically considered product-viable.

pessimizer 13y ago

It matters because the distribution situation has changed, so now you have to actively and aggressively impede the distribution of all recorded sound in order to preserve the business model. It's like the government tearing out everybody's plumbing in order that the outhouse builders can still make a living. >And by the way, in the early 20th century Broadway made a lot of money from sheet music. By harassing and imprisoning people who would play music without buying it first; a vile little historical chapter.

wwweston 13y ago
> It matters because the distribution situation has changed, so now you have to actively and aggressively impede the distribution of all recorded sound in order to preserve the business model. False dichotomy much?