Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Lily Allen, In The Music Business You Start Out With Huge Debt!

Recommended Posts

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle6836024.ece

Music piracy is having a dangerous effect on British music, but some rich and successful artists such as Nick Mason, of Pink Floyd, and Ed O’Brien, of Radiohead, don’t think so. Last week, they told The Times that file sharing is fine. It probably is for them. They do sell-out arena tours and have the biggest Ferrari collections in the world. For new talent, though, file sharing is a disaster — it makes it harder and harder for new acts to emerge.

Mason, O’Brien and the Featured Artists Coalition say that file sharing is “like a sampler, like taping your mate’s musicâ€, but mix tapes and recording from the radio are different from file sharing. Mix tapes were rubbish quality — you bought the real music because you liked the track and wanted to hear it without the DJ cutting off the end of each song. In digital land pirated tracks are the same quality as bought tracks. The coalition also says that file sharing is good because it “means a new generation of fans for usâ€. This is great if you are a big artist at the back end of your career with albums to flog to a new audience, but emerging artists don’t have this luxury. The FAC is basically saying: “We’re all right, we’ve made it, so file sharing’s fine.â€

You don’t start out in music with Ferraris. You start with a huge debt from your record company, which you spend years working to repay. When you get a contract, all those videos and posters have to be paid for — and you, the artist, pay for them.

I’m lucky that I have been able to pay back the money I owe the record company, but not everyone is so fortunate. The more difficult it is for new artists to make it, the fewer new artists we will see and the more music will be nothing but puppets paid for by Simon Cowell.

And it’s not as if there aren’t alternatives to illegal downloads. Sites such as Spotify give us access to music without ripping anyone off. MySpace streams music and helps acts to win enough fans to convince record companies to sign them up.

If this sounds like I’m siding with the record bosses, I’m not. They have been complacent about new technology and spent all the money on their own fat salaries, not industry development. As they start really to lose out from piracy, they’re not slashing their salaries, they’re cutting what they invest in A&R. A&R people won’t have the funds to take risks, which again makes British music Cowell puppets.

File sharing is not good for British music. We must find new ways to help consumers to hear and buy music legally, Obviously I will benefit from combating piracy, but without fighting it British music will suffer.

The thought that the business model used by the big studios could be flawed doesn't enter her little head. The idea that just perhaps giving away music free might get more people interested in your music doesn't appear to enter Lily's head.

People download music because it's not cheap, but lowering the costs doesn't appeal to the music stars ego's as they are clearly worth the money.

It's amazing how many people accept debt as the way forward without question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thought that the business model used by the big studios could be flawed doesn't enter her little head. The idea that just perhaps giving away music free might get more people interested in your music doesn't appear to enter Lily's head.

People download music because it's not cheap, but lowering the costs doesn't appeal to the music stars ego's as they are clearly worth the money.

It's amazing how many people accept debt as the way forward without question.

Not to mention that it seems that the average downloader also buys a lot more music - study

The real problem for the average band is the record industry itself. The article "The Problem with Music" by the record producer Steve Albini gives quite an interesting analysis of just how much the record industry screws the average musician.

Edited by apr400

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle6836024.ece

The thought that the business model used by the big studios could be flawed doesn't enter her little head. The idea that just perhaps giving away music free might get more people interested in your music doesn't appear to enter Lily's head.

People download music because it's not cheap, but lowering the costs doesn't appeal to the music stars ego's as they are clearly worth the money.

It's amazing how many people accept debt as the way forward without question.

Firstly, you ever dis' my Lilly again and will find you :P

Secondly, in the move to digital music and file sharing music has lost it tangibility. It's no longer a thing that you buy collect and display, proudly, in your bedroom. It's now something you hear, like, listen to a few times and throw away. Artists that can sell albums will always do ok as I still believe people still want to own an album as aphysical thing.

Single sales are dead, the charts are a waste of time, full of ten-a-penny dance tracks or maufactured shite. Not all manufatured music is shite and not all shite is manufatured.

At one point I must have had over a hundred gig of downloaded music and lost the lot to a HD failing on me. Since then rather than getting every tune I like the sound of, just to have it, I've started trawling the record shops for old albums, clasics that stand the test of time. I can now honestly say everything on my PC has been paid for just, not at silly first release prices, usually 3 for a tenner or something.

Damo

Edited by GBdamo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've started trawling the record shops for old albums, clasics that stand the test of time. I can now honestly say everything on my PC has been paid for just, not at silly first release prices, usually 3 for a tenner or something.

That may settle your conscience but it's still just as illegal. So you're in the same position as someone who didn't have the problem with their conscience in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly, you ever dis' my Lilly again and will find you :P

Secondly, in the move to digital music and file sharing music has lost it tangibility. It's no longer a thing that you buy collect and display, proudly, in your bedroom. It's now something you hear, like, listen to a few times and throw away. Artists that can sell albums will always do ok as I still believe people still want to own an album as aphysical thing.

Single sales are dead, the charts are a waste of time, full of ten-a-penny dance tracks or maufactured shite. Not all manufatured music is shite and not all shite is manufatured.

At one point I must have had over a hundred gig of downloaded music and lost the lot to a HD failing on me. Since then rather than getting every tune I like the sound of, just to have it, I've started trawling the record shops for old albums, clasics that stand the test of time. I can now honestly say everything on my PC has been paid for just, not at silly first release prices, usually 3 for a tenner or something.

Damo

It looks to me that on current trends that in the future - the only bands that will make a go of it financially are those that can fill a hall with paying customers.

How that's a bad thing for music quality I have no idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That may settle your conscience but it's still just as illegal. So you're in the same position as someone who didn't have the problem with their conscience in the first place.

how so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks to me that on current trends that in the future - the only bands that will make a go of it financially are those that can fill a hall with paying customers.

How that's a bad thing for music quality I have no idea.

Like I said, you'll see a two way split. The telly and major radio will be full of simon cowell's shite.

Real music will grow by word of mouth, internet or niche radio shows.

Album band and arena fillers will make money. If your a two bit 'celebrity' then the record company owns your ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thought that the business model used by the big studios could be flawed doesn't enter her little head. The idea that just perhaps giving away music free might get more people interested in your music doesn't appear to enter Lily's head.

The thing is that all that happens is people don't buy your music. This has been argued ad nauseum for the last ten years and there's one fact, sales are down, labels don't take risks anymore signing "interesting" bands, labels are closing down as are many live venues.

It's amazing how many people accept debt as the way forward without question.

When you start out in the music biz you are, effectively, taking out an interest free small business loan from the label as well as hiring their teams of professionals to record and promote your wares. The label take a huge risk when signing a band. Many bands don't work out or even reach the point of having their album released.

People download music because it's not cheap

No. People download music because they can.

but lowering the costs doesn't appeal to the music stars ego's as they are clearly worth the money.

Nope. I don't see many people here working for FREE for 3-4 years building up debt on the off chance that they recoup their debt and make money to pay for the last 3-4 years of living expenses from a record they release.

If you don't support something it goes away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That may settle your conscience but it's still just as illegal. So you're in the same position as someone who didn't have the problem with their conscience in the first place.

er....this bit :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. People download music because they can.

I think you would find that if you had a subscription service where people could download as much as they want say by via torrents you would get huge number of takers.

If you move to downloading music as you model you can slash costs you don't need marketing men as people will download what they like and the artists can stand on there own two feet.

If the music is good enough people will listen to it. How many good bands fail to make it because they don't fit in with the labels marketing strategy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
er....this bit :blink:

You're in the same position because someone who doesn't believe it's wrong to share music has the same conscience as you (a clear one) whilst being on the same side of the law as you (the wrong one).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle6836024.ece

The thought that the business model used by the big studios could be flawed doesn't enter her little head. The idea that just perhaps giving away music free might get more people interested in your music doesn't appear to enter Lily's head.

People download music because it's not cheap, but lowering the costs doesn't appeal to the music stars ego's as they are clearly worth the money.

It's amazing how many people accept debt as the way forward without question.

It sounds a bit like book royalties. You get an advance against sales amounting to the royalties they expect you to earn in a year. So you owe the book publisher money which they take back out of royalties as money come in. Seems reasonably normal to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like I said, you'll see a two way split. The telly and major radio will be full of simon cowell's shite.

Real music will grow by word of mouth, internet or niche radio shows.

Back to the good old days then :)

These things are cyclical and we are due another musical revolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whilst being on the same side of the law as you (the wrong one).

why so?

This is as close as I could find on the RIAA Website

Copying CDs

  • It’s okay to copy music onto an analog cassette, but not for commercial purposes.

  • It’s also okay to copy music onto special Audio CD-R’s, mini-discs, and digital tapes (because royalties have been paid on them) �" but, again, not for commercial purposes.

  • Beyond that, there’s no legal "right" to copy the copyrighted music on a CD onto a CD-R. However, burning a copy of CD onto a CD-R, or transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player, won’t usually raise concerns so long as:
    • The copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own

    • The copy is just for your personal use. It’s not a personal use �" in fact, it’s illegal �" to give away the copy or lend it to others for copying.

    [*]The owners of copyrighted music have the right to use protection technology to allow or prevent copying.

Which Law am I breaking?

Edited by GBdamo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The telly and major radio will be full of simon cowell's shite.

I remind myself of how much I hated Stock Aitken and Waterman when they ruled the pop world. But their reign eventually came to an end, as will Cowell's... one day...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It sounds a bit like book royalties. You get an advance against sales amounting to the royalties they expect you to earn in a year. So you owe the book publisher money which they take back out of royalties as money come in. Seems reasonably normal to me.

Take a look at the article here, by a record industry insider, giving an idea of how much an average band actually walks away with given a successful first album (a hint they'd have been better off working in a burger joint).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That may settle your conscience but it's still just as illegal. So you're in the same position as someone who didn't have the problem with their conscience in the first place.

pfft. What is legality? Our state is legalised gangster extortion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[...]

If you don't support something it goes away.

You mean there is a way to make Lily Allen go away? :rolleyes:

Seriously I find it hard to give a toss, the whole bloated, overpaid music industry can go burn for all I care

The internet makes them pretty unnecessary (sp?), they are just % sucking middlemen who've signed a devils pact with the artists promising to make everyone rich at the customers expense

Lily Allen is just talking her own book as usual...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you would find that if you had a subscription service where people could download as much as they want say by via torrents you would get huge number of takers.

I think you would find that people who can get it for free have no interest in a system that means they start paying for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   296 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.