4 ms·

The music distribution industry's relationship with fans and artists just keeps getting more and more perverse. How were they able to operate with such hostile

The music distribution industry's relationship with fans and artists just keeps getting more and more perverse. How were they able to operate with such hostile policies in both directions (to both musicians and customers) for so long? It's a serious question; does anyone around here have any answers?

aarongough 17y ago
From what I have seen they were able to keep treating everyone badly simply because there wasn't (and really isn't still) a viable alternative available to bands that want large-scale distribution. Sure, a band can distribute their work via the internet, but unless they are already well known they are always going to have trouble finding an audience. I hope that the situation is slowly improving now that there are more ways to distribute your work, but it's still a sad state of affairs given that 'MySpace Music' is still the best known alternative distribution model...
- DrJokepu 17y ago
  It's not just about distribution. Production is extremely costly. Renting professional equipment costs a fortune every hour. You have to pay producers, sound engineers, technicians, etc. Music videos aren't exactly cheap to produce either. The costs of the production of an album can quickly reach five zeros. Record labels invest a lot in artists (on not very friendly terms for the artist, but that's a separate issue). Additionally, they provide them with connections. They help them getting performances in TV shows, getting their music played on the radio, etc. These days a many bands chose the alternative route of becoming independent. It's not impossible to succeed this way but if you go down that part you as an artist have to invest a lot more time in marketing yourself than you would had to if you signed up with a commercial label.
roc 17y ago
Vertical integration and horizontal collusion. The labels have been found guilty of such, several times, in the US.
- ABrandt 17y ago
  Do you have any sources for that information?
  - maelstrom 17y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola
cabalamat 17y ago
In an information-scarce world, they controlled the gateway between musicians and fans. The net is putting a stop to that. Has there ever been an industry whose downfall is more deserved?
- ABrandt 17y ago
  Of all the industries being ravished by web technologies, I would argue that the recording companies certainly brought this downfall upon themselves more than any other. There are problems with this new landscape though. To quote from my executive summary: "Advancements in technology have drastically changed the music industry by providing musicians direct access to resources previously controlled by record labels. While the Internet has increased musicians’ artistic freedom, it has also given them unwanted responsibility over their day-to-day operations. Musicians have to book and promote their own shows while also coordinating distribution channels for selling goods. This do- it-yourself environment has forced independent artists to divert their attention away from making music."

aarongough 17y ago

From what I have seen they were able to keep treating everyone badly simply because there wasn't (and really isn't still) a viable alternative available to bands that want large-scale distribution. Sure, a band can distribute their work via the internet, but unless they are already well known they are always going to have trouble finding an audience. I hope that the situation is slowly improving now that there are more ways to distribute your work, but it's still a sad state of affairs given that 'MySpace Music' is still the best known alternative distribution model...

DrJokepu 17y ago
It's not just about distribution. Production is extremely costly. Renting professional equipment costs a fortune every hour. You have to pay producers, sound engineers, technicians, etc. Music videos aren't exactly cheap to produce either. The costs of the production of an album can quickly reach five zeros. Record labels invest a lot in artists (on not very friendly terms for the artist, but that's a separate issue). Additionally, they provide them with connections. They help them getting performances in TV shows, getting their music played on the radio, etc. These days a many bands chose the alternative route of becoming independent. It's not impossible to succeed this way but if you go down that part you as an artist have to invest a lot more time in marketing yourself than you would had to if you signed up with a commercial label.

roc 17y ago

Vertical integration and horizontal collusion. The labels have been found guilty of such, several times, in the US.

ABrandt 17y ago
Do you have any sources for that information?
- maelstrom 17y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola

cabalamat 17y ago

In an information-scarce world, they controlled the gateway between musicians and fans. The net is putting a stop to that. Has there ever been an industry whose downfall is more deserved?

ABrandt 17y ago
Of all the industries being ravished by web technologies, I would argue that the recording companies certainly brought this downfall upon themselves more than any other. There are problems with this new landscape though. To quote from my executive summary: "Advancements in technology have drastically changed the music industry by providing musicians direct access to resources previously controlled by record labels. While the Internet has increased musicians’ artistic freedom, it has also given them unwanted responsibility over their day-to-day operations. Musicians have to book and promote their own shows while also coordinating distribution channels for selling goods. This do- it-yourself environment has forced independent artists to divert their attention away from making music."