Comments on: Digital music sales up 40 percent…but…

By: Reiki Attunements

Reiki Attunements — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:31:10 +0000

Love Perusing your blog… always interesting. Thankyou!!!

By: Myriam

Myriam — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:34:50 +0000

I side with the one who said live is the way to go. I remember reading at the start of '07 about radiohead putting an entire, free album online. Gutsy, but I bet it worked. A tour will not kill you-it didn't kill anyone else. (Well, okay, Ozzy came close after biting off the bat head... Uh, just don't bite nothing then. XD) The point is-we're not disrespecting here. Mom actually bothered to get the studio version of "Billy Jean" by David Cook the minute it went up. Wouldn't be on P2P fast enough for her. It's just that, the money can be made. Everyone, STOP saying that those who won't buy art will kill art-one, that has never happened-I can't recall a single artform that actually DIED. Besides, we ARE buying art. In concerts, where people put on a SHOW. Second, this is not a painting. I'm willing to repeat that. The system behind one of those is drastically different. You cannot charge a performance with a painting. You can't really resell the original over and over again, somehow still getting the same price. The painting and prints system is much different, as is every other artform. (Except for videos, but that's why the movie industry is whining too. *shrug*) I don't know what to say to movie people, but to singers, get over it. Let people admire the price of your sell-out ticket, instead. If your as good as your albums make you sound, you'll do fine. ^_^ And if you're not, you shouldn't be here. Shoo, go get a real job, :P

By: Jay

Jay — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:28:37 +0000

With tools like mediaconverter.org you can get any video off youtube and convert it to mp3. Now would that be legal? Well probably more legal than using LimeWire to get your songs, but hey, is there really a difference? Oh and by the way, even though it isn't legal to download copyrighted music off the internet for free, here in Canada we are protected against P2P lawsuits. Not much effort to end this craze by anyone.

By: neil fawcett

neil fawcett — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:36:27 +0000

The notion that "art should be free" is ridiculous, selfish, and incredibly disrespectful to the artist.

People who refuse to pay for the artistic creations of others don't seem to realize that if you don't pay for art, eventually there will be no art, because few will be able to afford to make it. Too many people, especially young people, have no concept of the idea of intellectual property. Their moral code seems to be: "I want it, it's available, I'm not interested in the rights of the person who created it."

By: Charlie

Charlie — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:42:03 +0000

Get over it and move on, the horse was replaced by the car.

Before the advent of the phonograph (which wasn't that long ago), musicians made tons of money touring.

They can still make tons of money touring. Get them off their lazy asses.

The period of time in which you could make serious money from recorded media has come and gone. Much Like radio, the web is going to be a place where your music will be played and get noticed and develop the critical mass necessary to put on Live shows, cuz that's where the money will be.

By: D.E.W.

D.E.W. — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:11:38 +0000

Enough already! I'm sick of hearing how the poor music industry is losing money! I've paid them for the album. I've paid them for the tape..but I ain't gonna pay them again for the CD! If they made it a lot more reasonable in costs to download online they'd be stunned at the responce. In the "good ole days" a friend would buy the album and "share" it with their friends who would make a copy on a tape. What's the difference? It's called major greed in the music industry. Sadly the money does not trickle down to the artists in most cases.

By: shelley

shelley — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:37:57 +0000

Maybe the music industry should wake up and realize that some people like certain individual songs rather than the whole album. I'm tired of seeing albums being sold for $30 or more because not enough people buy them like XTC, old rolling stones or moody blues albums. Yet for $15 or less you can get tired old albums you are sick of hearing on the radio are plentiful. There are old songs I'd love to hear again but the radio doesn't play nor can you even find them on the internet. The music industry should be going back to the old formula of using concerts for real money and promotion of artists. They are being lazy just using large cities for concerts sites and using media outlets for selling cds.

By: Morris

Morris — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:40:34 +0000

PS – sorry about the T shirt slip – I swear it wasn't intentional…but I could
on the other sleeve say it isn't also intentional that a superbowl was jaded by
a nipple and a "we ain't ready for that" pull back…the music industry wasn't that cool – no touchdown yet…retreat, retreat and blame the bad judgement on the girl, not the wimpy wannabee soul singer, ahem, solow singer.

By: Morris

Morris — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:33:29 +0000

Music business, owned by entrepreneurs who pay to have their chosen "artists" who they feel will make people buy the product they write, produce and release and later support their tour, their overpriced T shits, calenders and stuff they can brand on. What's wrong. The public can't choose artists because artists aren't usually the business. The business controls us and the death of the business will signal a new and improved model, controled and owned by artists and the public will choose which artists live and die as the system which evolves must ensure this is the method of success. I don't know where its going, but a change is gonna come – Sam Cooke would have made it at any time he appeared. Today there is too little talent and too much business.

By: Dave

Dave — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:06:31 +0000

Maybe if the sellers didn't gouge people for the songs they sell online it would be more popular. As I see it I could buy the cd for cheaper than downloading the album. If the sellers of music wish to have a greater volume of people downloading make it cheaper!! There is no cd costs no covers no jewel cases why doesn't the music industry make songs 10 cents or 25. If they wish to charge these prices they will continue to see the terrible numbers that they have listed above. I am not against musicians making money. But there is too many Corporate execs making millions on the backs of the artists. That is there problem not mine. My problem is paying .99 a song plus taxes for something that I could get for free.