The term "device" in this context doesn't include turntables, cd players, etc. We all know what it means and doesn't mean.chris harris wrote:As far as whether or not you listen to music on a "device", I'm sorry but you're just wrong. Your device may be a turntable, in which case, you've probably already noticed your relatively limited options for music consumption. Or it may be a cd player, in which case you better maintain your existing model and prepare for the day that you won't be able to by new titles. The market doesn't care about your lack of interest in a digital music device. The world has changed and you're in a very small minority that it will soon no longer be cost effective to cater to.
I've downloaded lots of stuff using rapidshare, mediafire, etc. Most of it has been from blogs that feature great music that's out of print, impossible to buy new, and nearly impossible to find used, especially at an affordable price, though buying used doesn't help the artist anyway. Buying new doesn't help an artist who's dead, either.
A few Kim Dotcoms getting rich doesn't bother me. Spotify, Apple and all the rest will and have gotten rich off of artists also. Steve Jobs was a lot richer than Kim Dotcom ever dreamed of. That doesn't bother me either, though what bugs me about Apple is they conned a ton of people into buying into conformity posing as rebellion, but there's nothing new about that and it's a whole other subject.
If people can't hear my music for free, how are they going to hear about it? Not all music is made by bands or live performers. I can't play my latest record live-- I can't play three instruments at once. Plus, expecting people to have to tour to promote records makes as much sense as expecting filmmakers to tour the world play-acting their film to promote it. Music recordings and live music are totally different media, as different as a stage play and a movie are from each other.
Most people aren't going to pay for something they can get for free. It's just human nature. What they can't get for free is something you haven't done yet-- if they want more from you, someone will have to put up the money for you to be able to make the music, otherwise you'll do something else that pays. I think a model like patronism.com has some potential. I can only speak for myself, but as a music listener I have no interest in something like Spotify. As a music maker, hey, whatever works.
I don't see a whole lot of people over 35 or so with earbuds in. Who wants to listen to music constantly, wherever you go? Most adults want to be present in the real world and not sucked into their head. Listening to music for me is an event, something to focus on, not background noise or muzak or a soundtrack for my day.
As for the market, they lost me the day I went into the record store and all the records were gone. I used to buy records pretty frequently. I've bought only a handful of cds over the years, and most of them were of friends' music, not major label stuff or even any label in some cases. The market won't miss me. I don't care. Put out something worth listening to and I'll buy it-- if there's a way for me to become aware of it. That's a rare enough event in any case that the market won't notice the difference.
There's plenty of music already recorded that's worth listening to that there's easily a lifetime's supply. There's no point in releasing anything if it's not better than something in that lifetime supply of music. Of course, who's to judge? No new titles? Why should I care?
