Originally posted by sonia_lastrega:[..]
The major labels need to get their collective heads out of their collective asses
Absolutely!
Specially the ones who throw "collectives" you can find on YouTube. Originally posted by sonia_lastrega:[..]
The major labels need to get their collective heads out of their collective asses
Specially the ones who throw "collectives" you can find on YouTube. Originally posted by thunderbolt:[..]
Just like it already does. An investor/ promotor would pay in advance the necessary amount to start the tour, then he gets his share as it goes on and the rest is for the band. When the Zoo TV kicked off, Achtung Baby had just been released (like 3 months before). I don't think sales were as high to support something as big as Zoo TV and the album's production, marketing, etc.
But back to the question, I think music would work just as a video clip or a single: just to promote the tour.
Great topic you've started!
Originally posted by drewhiggins:How about when a guy working over at Sony said to an exec that every new act should have their first song downloaded for free?
Can anyone guess what the exec's response was?
Other questions we should have here (I'm still thinking of responses to them):
- Do you think DRM and copy-protection on music is necessary to prevent the downfall of the industry and the safety of the signed acts?
- Is just anyone being signed up because the labels see talent in them or just to keep their monetary profits going?
- How is it none of these acts are producing King Crimson-like progressive suites of music or concept albums?
but I find it hard... I was watching on Natgeo the other day a girl composer working with a software that based on the succesfull songs of the time would tell if the new composition she made would sell well... so sad 
... I guessmusic now is more for fun, there isn´t the feeling of an anti cultural thing... I´m sad Originally posted by NLOTH_Victor:[..]
What are DRMs an etc? sorry don´t know...
I think that labels sign mostly what sells, that´s why we have no new pink floyd, new U2 or whatever else.. I wish there was a new king crimson
Originally posted by NLOTH_Victor:[..]
Just wandering though... how much of these 100,000 would be spent on recording, equipment, gigs, etc? and its something but not that much if you think .... split that int 5 members in a band... 20,000 a member to spend n 12 months... if you need to buy a good guitar... the month is gone... of course he´d have another job, no?
Originally posted by Risto:Most hated topic on the biggest dutch tech site. Well his popularity wasnt that good, but this isnt helping.
He actually said that the internet can be controlled. The USA has 'noble' success with fight against childporn and China has 'not so noble' success controlling the internet.
Dont know what got into B's head. Criminalising his fans and put piracy next to childporn and China's Cyberwall.
Originally posted by sonia_lastrega:[..]
I don't think he was proposing that as an absolute limit, or as a cookbook for artistic living, but as a different way of looking at the problem. And I believe he was speaking of that $100/fan as a net amount, not a gross.
Originally posted by drewhiggins:[..]
Digital rights management is a technology which restricts what you from doing what you want with your downloaded music. Many sites are getting rid of it now. But when it was on the files you had a certain amount of times it could be played, transferred to devices or burnt to disc...so really, just another stupid industry idea which doesn't work.
It was also pointed out CDs (well, except those from Sony with copy protection) don't have it so why should downloads? In the process of DRM being removed files went from 128Kbps to 256Kbps but at a price premium, which was the prick from the labels for that convenience.
) I agree... I think that musicians shoud be well paid, same with athletes, but not so much... teacher, for example, are much more important to society....