Are C.d's On The Way Out ?

[Chalky]

Apple bought a streaming company like spottily a year or so ago. That along with the iCloud you can bet iTubes will rival Spotify and even better it very soon. They also have agreements with most if not all the major record companies in place for their iCloud music service.

Any platform that gets the music out there and the artists benefit can only be a good thing.

[Pete S]

When you're listening to 40, 50 year old music who cares if it's "lossless" or not, a decent mp3 sounds exactly the same to me.

[Ian Dewhirst]

Apple bought a streaming company like spottily a year or so ago. That along with the iCloud you can bet iTubes will rival Spotify and even better it very soon. They also have agreements with most if not all the major record companies in place for their iCloud music service.

Any platform that gets the music out there and the artists benefit can only be a good thing.

It could be a good thing if these streaming services and video clip operations actually paid out decent royalties but unfortunately they don't, so there's hardly any benefit to the artists financially.

To put it in perspective, Pete Waterman earned the grand total of £11 from over 100 million You Tube plays of "Never Gonna Give You Up" (which he co-wrote) off the back of the 'rickrolling' craze a couple of years back. Not much hope for the Lorraine's of this world at those rates is there?

Another shot in the foot of today's music business I'm afraid.....

Ian D

[Chalky]

Think YouTube is a different beast to the likes of Spotify, amazon and apple. Dunno what goes to the record companies and artists but they do have agreements with them.

Wasn't so long ago YouTube gave nothing but the threat of the companies it allowing them any music changed that. They do now pay royalties though.

[Guest Paul]

It could be a good thing if these streaming services and video clip operations actually paid out decent royalties but unfortunately they don't, so there's hardly any benefit to the artists financially.

To put it in perspective, Pete Waterman earned the grand total of £11 from over 100 million You Tube plays of "Never Gonna Give You Up" (which he co-wrote) off the back of the 'rickrolling' craze a couple of years back. Not much hope for the Lorraine's of this world at those rates is there?

Another shot in the foot of today's music business I'm afraid.....

Ian D

Very true. The harsh facts are that revenues from digital downloading and streaming are poor and don't even begin to make up for the losses caused by file sharing and declining physical sales.

Apart from the lower volumes, it's very important to consider that the value of sales has also decreased significantly. A small label which once sold 20,000 copies of an album with a retail value of £12.99 might now be selling 5,000 copies or less with a retail value of £7.99 so they've been hurt two ways.

Music has been seriously devalued and of course many people don't pay anything at all for it.

The industry acted far too late and settled for bad deals. And for every person who pays for a download there are hundreds (thousands?) who will get a free copy.

That's why the industry wants ISPs to introduce blanket licenses (similar to those issued by PRS to broadcasters) but even that would be of little real advantage to less successful artists and writers.

For most people it's a penny business now.

That's why the major companies offer '360' deals for new artists so they can share in the more lucrative proceeds of touring, merchandise and sponsorship etc. The actual music doesn't create significant income now, it just raises the profile to enable people to earn money from other things.

Selling a shirt or a poster is more important than selling an album.

Famous artists who can tour extensively will do okay but most specialist artists will have to become taxi drivers etc. Music will be more of a part-time thing or a hobby.

That's the sad truth.

[Ian Dewhirst]

Very true. The harsh facts are that revenues from digital downloading and streaming are poor and don't even begin to make up for the losses caused by file sharing and declining physical sales.

Apart from the lower volumes, it's very important to consider that the value of sales has also decreased significantly. A small label which once sold 20,000 copies of an album with a retail value of £12.99 might now be selling 5,000 copies or less with a retail value of £7.99 so they've been hurt two ways.

Music has been seriously devalued and of course many people don't pay anything at all for it.

The industry acted far too late and settled for bad deals. And for every person who pays for a download there are hundreds (thousands?) who will get a free copy.

That's why the industry wants ISPs to introduce blanket licenses (similar to those issued by PRS to broadcasters) but even that would be of little real advantage to less successful artists and writers.

For most people it's a penny business now.

That's why the major companies offer '360' deals for new artists so they can share in the more lucrative proceeds of touring, merchandise and sponsorship etc. The actual music doesn't create significant income now, it just raises the profile to enable people to earn money from other things.

Selling a shirt or a poster is more important than selling an album.

Famous artists who can tour extensively will do okay but most specialist artists will have to become taxi drivers etc. Music will be more of a part-time thing or a hobby.

That's the sad truth.

Yep, that is the sad truth. I think it's going to really impact people down the line when there's fewer acts, fewer live gigs and virtually no recordings anymore.

You can already see the collossal dip in quality with today's new releases apart from the established acts who presumably have the good budgets. It's very very sad to see an industry being crippled because of the stupidity of the people who used to run it.......

Ian D

[phillyDaveG]

My heart has been uplifted by this thread i thought i was an isolated case who was buying Soul by the dreaded format of cd or downloading.

Well as someone who still buy an awful lot of new releases, CD or downloading is the only available format in 99% of cases. Of course for pure sound quality, analog vinyl is significantly better than any digital format (all of which approximate analogue). However that's only the case if you have a top end deck and clean vinyl.

[Hammersoul]

Spoke to a guy who worked at the big rough trade shop in east London a while back and he said within 2 years it will be vinyl only.

I hope so

I still buy the odd cd but i find they jam/skip in the cab and it drives me mad.Especailly when there recorded on cheap cds.

For me you can`t beat the old fashioned way of actually holding a 7"/lp vinyl and the smell .For our scene i think it will always be vinyl,look at sales for cd`s on another forum and 2/3 sellers were struggling to sell older cds for under a fiver I think if you collect cds your in for bargain time,they don`t hold there price cos not many people want that format.

Now downloads,wav files or what ever there called...i`m not into new technology and quiet frankly am not interested in learning.i know it works for a lot of people and fair play to them but i what if your computer crashes or a virus hits your computer? I know you can have a back up but seems like a lot of hassle to me.

Each to there own..

[Ian Dewhirst]

I hope so

I still buy the odd cd but i find they jam/skip in the cab and it drives me mad.Especailly when there recorded on cheap cds.

For me you can`t beat the old fashioned way of actually holding a 7"/lp vinyl and the smell .For our scene i think it will always be vinyl,look at sales for cd`s on another forum and 2/3 sellers were struggling to sell older cds for under a fiver I think if you collect cds your in for bargain time,they don`t hold there price cos not many people want that format.

Now downloads,wav files or what ever there called...i`m not into new technology and quiet frankly am not interested in learning.i know it works for a lot of people and fair play to them but i what if your computer crashes or a virus hits your computer? I know you can have a back up but seems like a lot of hassle to me.

Each to there own..

Depends what you collect really. Early CD's which have been long deleted can fetch major money....try finding those Japanese P-Vine CD's now - they're gold dust.....

Also, with vinyl, if your house goes up in flames or there's a flood in your record room then that's it. Goodbye music collection. If my lappy goes down I've got several back ups so I would argue that having digital back up for your collection is just good sense.

If you actually listen to the music that is......

Ian D

[Chalky]

Very true. The harsh facts are that revenues from digital downloading and streaming are poor and don't even begin to make up for the losses caused by file sharing and declining physical sales.

Apart from the lower volumes, it's very important to consider that the value of sales has also decreased significantly. A small label which once sold 20,000 copies of an album with a retail value of £12.99 might now be selling 5,000 copies or less with a retail value of £7.99 so they've been hurt two ways.

Music has been seriously devalued and of course many people don't pay anything at all for it.

Maybe thats true Paul but you don't have the additional costs of art work and cases, shipping and distribution with downloads that you have with cds. The music simply sits on a server.

Besides how much of that difference between a 12.99 cd and a 7.99 download album actually went to the artist? zero. And another fact is we in the UK have for years paid more than say america for our CDs, music etc.

The internet has benefitted many artists, many who couldn't get a deal but sites like myspace and later FB got bands out there, got there music out there and some have made a tidy living out of the digital revolution.

The record industry has only itself to blame really, whilst everyone else was embracing the internet, downloads etc, the industry was fighting it and doing everything it could to stop it. If it had been at the forefront of the digital and internet revolution maybe it wouldn't be in such a mess, maybe downloading music illegally wouldn't have been and still continues to be so prevalent.

It's only the last tow or three years we have had a download chart yet kids have only really known downloads for years, most don't know what a record or record player looks like, many weren't even born when CD's came onto the market.

[Hammersoul]

Fair points Ian:

Re cd`s,yes the jap. ones seem to hold there price better than the u.s.but compare it with Vinyl and vinyl holds it`s price better(give or take the odd records).Not that it matters to me cos i won`t be selling any of my music what ever format

Good point re-Flood/Fire,if my records get flooded i would be very worried for rest of London cos i live 3 floors up on top floor .I think law of averages say you got more chance of your computer crashing than a fire,touch wood.

My wife is a mp3/down load junkie,have told her to back up her music,she won`t listen

[Guest Paul]

Maybe thats true Paul but you don't have the additional costs of art work and cases, shipping and distribution with downloads that you have with cds. The music simply sits on a server.

Besides how much of that difference between a 12.99 cd and a 7.99 download album actually went to the artist? zero. And another fact is we in the UK have for years paid more than say america for our CDs, music etc.

The internet has benefitted many artists, many who couldn't get a deal but sites like myspace and later FB got bands out there, got there music out there and some have made a tidy living out of the digital revolution.

The record industry has only itself to blame really, whilst everyone else was embracing the internet, downloads etc, the industry was fighting it and doing everything it could to stop it. If it had been at the forefront of the digital and internet revolution maybe it wouldn't be in such a mess, maybe downloading music illegally wouldn't have been and still continues to be so prevalent.

It's only the last tow or three years we have had a download chart yet kids have only really known downloads for years, most don't know what a record or record player looks like, many weren't even born when CD's came onto the market.

Hello Chalky,

The difference between the retail values I mentioned was referring to physical product, not digital downloads, I was making a point about the decreased values of physical sales (in addition to decreased volumes of sales). CD albums are now selling for much lower prices and therefore generate much lower royalties to owners / licensors and publishers.

Even some physical albums which are considered to be full price end up selling at mid-price or less via retailers such as Amazon, Play, HMV etc. and those deals result in lower income. The same applies to books etc which usually retail at half the listed retail price.

I'm aware of HMV, for example, buying stock at prices way below listed dealer prices and then actually selling product at retail prices which are even lower than the reduced dealer prices. In effect they are using music as a loss leader, as are the supermarket chains.

This may be good for consumers (we all like a bargain) but it is very damaging to other retailers - especially indie record stores - and it significantly reduces the amounts ultimately paid to owners / licensors and publishers who are typically paid at a percentage of dealer prices (actual prices or net receipts rather than listed prices).

Although some major companies and artists can still make money in these situations, most specialists or independents suffer losses which make many projects non-viable because their potential sales are so much lower.

By the way, I agree there are less costs of presenting digital products for sale but, as yet, the volumes are still low and the royalties are low so the amounts generated don't nearly compensate for the amount of income lost from lower physical sales. This is especially true for specialist music and that's why I referred to it as a penny business.

I also agree that the music industry (i.e. the majors) is responsible for most of the problems it faces because it was slow to respond to changes, unwilling to consider new business models and ultimately accepted poor deals from Apple iTunes etc. They were also aggressive with consumers and potential consumers (rather than with pirates) and they lost what little respect they had left.

Their attempts to enforce DRM didn't help and at first they wanted customers to buy bundled downloads (albums) rather than individual tracks so they didn't wanted to give customers freedom and value.

The sad thing is that the entire industry suffers as a result of the actions of the major companies which dominate the industry.

My own view is that it was possible to have a situation where customers have choices and value for money without damaging the industry to the extent that many artists are unable to make a living, many retailers have gone bust, many indie labels have closed or have had to reduced staff levels resulting in thousands of lost jobs.

Many things have contributed to the problems (not just technology and illegal downloading) but it's very sad that music has been devalued and that some people consider it to be free of charge.

The biggest difficulty we face is that many people (mostly younger people) have never paid for music and I doubt their attitudes can ever be changed.

Best regards,

Paul

[Chalky]

But as I said paul we as consumers in the UK have consistently paid about a fiver more than other countries when it comes to buying an LP/CD.....rip off Britain again. You can in almost every instance buy any CD cheaper from a retailer in the states (and I don't mean amazon) and have it delivered to your door. It cost pennies (seem to remember a figure of 50 odd pence) to produce a CD, yet they ripped the UK consumer off with high prices compared to other countries.

I don't think some think music is free, it is an unfortunate by product of the digital revolution. Because the record industry did all it could to stop digital and downloads people had to resort to other methods....file sharing via sites like audio galaxy and napster.....not condoning this either. They could get it for free and still do, you said it yourself its the attitude of those downloading. Like I said it is all their own fault, or many of the problems are of their own making.

Record companies execs. bit like those running various sports, old and out of touch with the world and the youth.

[Ian Dewhirst]

Record companies execs. bit like those running various sports, old and out of touch with the world and the youth.

Some record company execs Chalky. One reason why I bounce around a lot in this business is because I always end up getting on the boss's nerves with my uncannily accurate predictions of why the business has been going to shit for the last 25 years....

There's no point anymore. Nobody cares or wants to even listen. Sad really.

Ian D

[Guest Paul]

But as I said paul we as consumers in the UK have consistently paid about a fiver more than other countries when it comes to buying an LP/CD.....rip off Britain again. You can in almost every instance buy any CD cheaper from a retailer in the states (and I don't mean amazon) and have it delivered to your door. It cost pennies (seem to remember a figure of 50 odd pence) to produce a CD, yet they ripped the UK consumer off with high prices compared to other countries.

I don't think some think music is free, it is an unfortunate by product of the digital revolution. Because the record industry did all it could to stop digital and downloads people had to resort to other methods....file sharing via sites like audio galaxy and napster.....not condoning this either. They could get it for free and still do, you said it yourself its the attitude of those downloading. Like I said it is all their own fault, or many of the problems are of their own making.

Record companies execs. bit like those running various sports, old and out of touch with the world and the youth.

I agree, Chalky.

The excecs of the majors (and their advisors) have created most of the problems they face, largely because of greed and arrogance.

Similar to some of the players in the financial sector, the majors were in a "bubble" following the rise (and values) of the CD format, their collective dominance of the markets and the consumer booms. They thought it would never end.

This ultimately further reduced any respect they had from the creative community as well as from consumers.

Here in the UK they sometimes expected retailers to buy product wholesale at prices similar to the retail values in the US. I remember paying £16.99 and even £19.99 for CD albums in the late 1990s. For some reason we are expected to pay higher prices for many things in the UK - music, computers, audio equipment, cars, etc.

But at some point the majors started to focus on the volume of sales per account and they harmed the indie retail sector by offering crazy deals to the big chains and supermarkets. It was much easier for them to sell 20,000 albums to Tesco than to sell 20,000 albums to two thousand different indie stores. This greed and laziness backfired on them because (a) the big chains gradually squeezed the prices down further and (b) many of the the indie stores went out of business.

Even that didn't seem to bother the majors too much until they finally realised the extent of other serious problems created by new technology - such as illegal downloading which escalated in the late 1990s.

And even then they reacted too slowly (and aggressively at first) before they rolled over and accepted they were no longer in control.

Personally, I'm concerned about the creative community and the indie sectors (including the few retailers who are left) because they aren't responsible for the problems and they are left trying to repair the damage.

Meanwhile, the execs of the majors can easily afford to retire and live in luxury, similar to the financial "experts" who helped to ruin markets and economies.

Greed is the root of all evil.

Paul

[Guest giant]

I hope so

I still buy the odd cd but i find they jam/skip in the cab and it drives me mad.Especailly when there recorded on cheap cds.

For me you can`t beat the old fashioned way of actually holding a 7"/lp vinyl and the smell .For our scene i think it will always be vinyl,look at sales for cd`s on another forum and 2/3 sellers were struggling to sell older cds for under a fiver I think if you collect cds your in for bargain time,they don`t hold there price cos not many people want that format.

Now downloads,wav files or what ever there called...i`m not into new technology and quiet frankly am not interested in learning.i know it works for a lot of people and fair play to them but i what if your computer crashes or a virus hits your computer? I know you can have a back up but seems like a lot of hassle to me.

Each to there own..

great news, vinyl only for me