Dear music industry, low quality = low demand

[boogieordie]

Dear music industry, low quality = low demand
By Mandy Jenkins
The Cincinnati Enquirer
Memo
TO: Music Industry Executives
RE: The truth

I've heard the music industry is upset. You say a bunch of downloading kids are stealing your money and you're gonna take their shoplifting butts to court. Record sales are down and have been for a few years. You blame this on music pirates; I think you're missing the point.

This is all your fault.

People aren't buying because the music industry itself is faulted. First of all, CDs are too expensive for Gen X-ers and teens to buy. They will buy only the music of artists they really have loyalty to - otherwise, it's easier to download a single hit than slap down $20 for a whole CD of crap.

That's right, I said it. The music industry sucks right now and your audience knows it. You aren't putting out music that is worth the cost of a CD.

Your problem is that as soon as one band or singer gets big, you go right out and find 10 more who sound exactly like them and slap together a CD with one or two good songs in the bunch. The result? Low-quality music that all sounds alike and tons of one-hit wonders on the airwaves.

Who can tell the difference between Avril Lavigne, Michelle Branch or Vanessa Carlton? They were created to imitate each other. Why would I buy each of their CDs, when I could download "Sk8r Boi" and "Game of Love" and be done with it?

Same thing goes for Nickelback, Staind, Puddle of Mudd and all of those bands that were created to be the "new" Creed (a rip-off of Pearl Jam, anyway). And the emo/wannabe punk bands like All-American Rejects, Simple Plan and Good Charlotte? They all sound the same.

The first bit of evidence: the album sales top 10. The long-lasting sales on the charts go to groundbreaking new artists (Norah Jones, 50 Cent) or perennial favorites with proven talent (Metallica, Steely Dan, Radiohead). Those one-hit wonder bands don't stick around for long and it isn't because of downloaders - it's because they aren't that good.

The second bit of evidence: I'll bet almost all online file-traders are between 15 and 30; however, they are not the only people who listen to music. What about everyone else; why aren't they buying music?

My mom couldn't download a music file if her life depended on it, but you aren't going to catch her at a record store, either. Music isn't good enough to get her to pay that much for anything less than a "greatest hits" CD - and most of today's artists will never see one of those.

Get my point? As long as the music industry continues to charge more for putting out garbage, your sales will decline. It doesn't matter how many college kids with T1 lines you find to sue - you will still lose in the end.

This isn't a question of ethics and it isn't a statement of legality; it is a measure of quality - and you aren't delivering anymore.

------

My setiments EXACTLY! Good work, Mandy!

Ashley

[Piccolo]

Great article !! I buy Ayumi CDs because I know everything will be worth listening to !! Not just one or two songs !!

[boogieordie]

Me too, Piccolo. That's what first attracted me to Ayu's music. I could pick of any one of her CDs and listen to it straight through. That's changed now, I can't listen to Rainbow straight through, but it's still better than any American CD that I own.

I'm glad that someone wrote an article like that, because it is so true. Why would I buy a $20 CD for one good song? It makes no sense. They act like most people are hoarding entire albums, heck no, entire albums aren't worth the effort of even downloading these days. Sure, it does happen, but more people download the hit songs and only the hit songs.

Ashley

[chsf]

he-he, the author made a very good point with this:

My mom couldn't download a music file if her life depended on it, but you aren't going to catch her at a record store, either.

The music industry is pretty good at ignoring the segment with the most money: the settled adults
Who make a much better group than teens and younger people as they have plenty of other things to use their limited amounts of money.
It's insanity

[sxesven]

Now there's someone who knows what's going on. I'm so sick of 'artists' who release 'great albums' with nothing but fillers, costing an awful lot of money to the rec co, which, ultimately, the customer pays for! It's gotta stop!

I say boycot. Just buy underground records or from indie corporations. That'll teach em!

[ayu_ready78]

I also only buy cds from artists I like, esp. Ayu like other ppl here. Considering JPop/Rock albums are so expensive, its very difficult to get everything you really want. So most ppl only download those songs from singles and album that they like.

Also, programs like Kazaa and Winmx can help strengthen the popularity of new artists who wouldn't get much publicity in the first place.

[Unimatrix Prime™]

This isn't a question of ethics and it isn't a statement of legality; it is a measure of quality - and you aren't delivering anymore.

*stands up and applauds*



That article was quite nice! It hit all the main points, such as how artists nowadays just don't release good stuff, to how the RIAA is attacking the wrong group. Very interesting indeed, and I do hope that one day, hopefully within our lifetimes, we can go get the latest music (whether thru CDs, mp3s, or whatever is popular in the future) and say "wow... this was actually worth every bit of my money!" Now that would be what I'd agree to buy, since I know that it won't have filler stuff and it'd be something I'd be proud to talk about years later and would love to keep supporting the artists who continue to deliver A-quality works !!

[Peruvian_Sky]

That article is just pure ignorance. I agree, mainstream music for the most part, sucks. But there is more than the garbage that is shown on eMpTyV and played on the radio. For every 5 crappy bands in the mainstream there are 10 in the underground that extraordinarily talented and write great music but go ignored. A good example, one of my favorite bands, Dream Theater. I just went to one of their concerts on this past Monday. The place was packed. There wasn't an empty seat to be found. And it's not like their music can't be found in stores. You can go into any record store and find their CDs. They are also on a major record label. But yet, they are virtually unheard of. It's not the music industry at fault. It's the public's own musical ignorance at fault. If the public continues to purchase the crap, the industry will continue to put out the crap. And the good stuff goes unnoticed. Get my point?

P.S. I won't even touch on the ignorant comparisons of Pearl Jam to Creed and Michelle Branch to Avril Lavigne. The author of the article apparently has no idea as to what the hell she is talking about. And maybe should actually try listening to music for a change instead of going on other people's opinions and prejudgements.

thats really good! that should be published in papers and everything!, I can only name one or two artists that i really would buy teh cd and listen to every track. The industry is full of imitators, no originality is present.

[squarenuts]

this articles is interesting, yet uneducated... first off, it can be said that creed's vocalist does imitate pearl jam's, but that's where the similarity stops. have you ever seen what the guitarists are doing? pearl jam was grunge aka power chords, whereas creed plays a lot of arpeggios- entirely different bird. and michelle branch and avril are entirely different too- branch wasn't commercialized- she entirely wrote almost everything herself (except the song with Santana) okay, on to real stuff- you don't think every other decade had it's group of sell-outs? as my friends once observed, it sucked to be a revolutionary band, because once you get big, everyone imitates you, and all of a sudden your popularity drops as a result. the grunge movement is a good example- after Nirvana got big there were a bunch of bands that followed and became one-hit wonders.... so actually, it is d/ling that is causing the drop in sales- as the author said, "Why would I buy each of their CDs, when I could download "Sk8r Boi" and "Game of Love" and be done with it?"- it's that attitude that is why file-sharing is such a problem... it would have been better to write an article on how CDs are overpriced, considering they cost less to make then a tape, and are a lot more expensive... but that would be an educated arguement, oh yeah... true, singles are better than the radio- of course, that's generally because singles are usually written with the intention of selling out... as for good albums, i can name several albums worth getting- any our lady peace, black sabbath, led zeppelin, or beatles album is good, as well as nirvana- yes i do realize nirvana is the only american band i mentioned.... but the point is, there are always a million crappy bands out there- and as peruvian noted, there are many great unknown bands out there... all because they're not punk, or emo, or pop, or this whole nu-metal craze (which isn't that great)

[Peruvian_Sky]

Originally posted by squarenuts
this articles is interesting, yet uneducated... first off, it can be said that creed's vocalist does imitate pearl jam's, but that's where the similarity stops. have you ever seen what the guitarists are doing? pearl jam was grunge aka power chords, whereas creed plays a lot of arpeggios- entirely different bird.

Creed actually relies more on power chords. Pearl Jam is more of a classic rock/blues style rock band. I hear more Zeppelin, Beatles, Vaughan, Hendrix, Skynyrd, Who, Stones, etc. influence in them than in Creed. Creed borders on being nu-metal. I really hear no similarities whatsoever between Pearl Jam and Creed. Just because Scott Stapp and Eddie Vedder both sing in baritone doesn't mean that one is mimicking the other.

But I agree with what you said. I have always wondered why CDs were more expensive than cassettes, considering they do cost less to manufacture. But the bottom line is, the author of that article is an uneducated moron that only knows the music she hears on Clear Channel radio stations and MTV. Maybe if she actually knew something about music and the business of music she could write a well-thought out, educated article on the subject.

[Set_0ne]

I really like what this artical is saying!

[sxesven]

Originally posted by Peruvian_Sky
But I agree with what you said. I have always wondered why CDs were more expensive than cassettes, considering they do cost less to manufacture.

Only for profit. A cassette lasts for like two years, a CD for a lot more. So if ppl like an album and buy it on cassette, they'll have to buy another one. And another one. With CDs you buy one.

First off, I have to agree on a point Peruvian Sky and squarenuts brought up - the writer of this article is clearly ignorant. Avril, Michelle, and Vanessa are basically clones? "They were created to imitate each other"? That is a pretty ridiculous claim. And 50 Cent is groundbreaking? NWA was groundbreaking, 50 is not. Such statements nearly ruin whatever point she was trying to make.

Nonetheless, the general public's lack of enthusiasm about buying music over the past few years may very well be because they might think that there isn't much quality music out at the moment. I'm not sure if I'm totally sold on the notion that the cost of CDs and the ease of downloading music off of the net is causing this year-by-year slump. Take a look back at 2000. CD prices were the same and Napster was at its height, yet it was one of the most successful years in the history of the industry.

One could rack this up to the cyclic nature of the business. The huge rise of urban music and the reemergence of bubblegum pop drove the industry to great heights in the latter half of the 90s. Maybe music is waiting for the next BIG thing.

[isaac hiew]

She just spoken right out of my heart....

Malaysian Governments are even more radical on this stuff..... they even plan to control the prices of the CDs and force them on a reasonable price as to curb the ever-long piracy problem.

Now there are nearly no pirated CD stalls on the roadside of KL..... the police carry out strike operations almost everyday..... they even plan to inspect all residential houses for any sign of porn/pirated VCDs!!!!!

[Set_0ne]

Originally posted by isaac hiew
She just spoken right out of my heart....

Malaysian Governments are even more radical on this stuff..... they even plan to control the prices of the CDs and force them on a reasonable price as to curb the ever-long piracy problem.

Now there are nearly no pirated CD stalls on the roadside of KL..... the police carry out strike operations almost everyday..... they even plan to inspect all residential houses for any sign of porn/pirated VCDs!!!!!

Wow, that is REALLY taking it to the extreems. Are they actually able to come into your house and check for that stuff?? Isn't it an invasion of privacy?

[Unimatrix Prime™]

Originally posted by Set_0ne
Wow, that is REALLY taking it to the extreems. Are they actually able to come into your house and check for that stuff?? Isn't it an invasion of privacy?

Remember... Malaysian laws are different than here in the US, so I suppose that there, such things are common and few could resist it... Issac even told me that they fine u $500+ for chewing gum in public !

[sxesven]

Originally posted by isaac hiew
Now there are nearly no pirated CD stalls on the roadside of KL..... the police carry out strike operations almost everyday..... they even plan to inspect all residential houses for any sign of porn/pirated VCDs!!!!!

Wow... even porn is illegal?

[Set_0ne]

Originally posted by Unimatrix Zero™
Remember... Malaysian laws are different than here in the US, so I suppose that there, such things are common and few could resist it... Issac even told me that they fine u $500+ for chewing gum in public !

Whaaaat..wow..that is soo much money for chewing gum in public..I think that was to stop the gum being thrown onto the grown and making it all sticky?

What about littering too..there is something high fine for that too.

[boogieordie]

I think you guys were missing the point of the article if you want to get into specifics about who sounds like who. Maybe her examples were off if you're focusing on that you're missing the point. Her point was that once something is a hit, record companies sign other people just like the other artist, because it's proven to sell. What you end up getting though is maybe one good song and a bunch of crap.

Example - Reality shows and the entertainment industry. Survivor and the Real World and whatever are hits, now you see way too many crap reality shows, a few might be good, but none of them have the potential to ever make it onto DVD and have some sort of longevity.

Also - Peruvian_Sky You said

If the public continues to purchase the crap, the industry will continue to put out the crap.

That's exactly what they're not doing and that's her point. But instead of not producing crap, the RIAA wants to go and sue everyone who downloads an mp3.

Squarenuts

"Why would I buy each of their CDs, when I could download "Sk8r Boi" and "Game of Love" and be done with it?"- it's that attitude that is why file-sharing is such a problem

This article isn't encouraging file sharing. It's laying the blame where it belongs. It's not trying to offer up some magic solution either, it's just saying that suing individuals isn't the answer and maybe if record companies and artists would produce better songs at a lower price, we wouldn't see the moment in file sharing that we do today. It's not like this lady is the first person in the world to think of that. The point is why pay $20 for 2 songs?

Ashley