'The internet will suck all creative content out of the world'

[iainx]

David Byrne of Talking Heads is having another go at Spotify and streaming services: http://www.theguardian.com/music/201...-content-world

It's a complicated argument, and I do agree that the middle men are getting rich while the artists suffer and the fans get screwed over, but I don't see how there's any other solution. I also don't see the rich successful musicians who are bemoaning Spotify, the Radioheads, the Black Keys etc are actually helping the poor unsigned musicians they purport to be so concerned about.

I stopped using Spotify a few years back, and decided that I'd spend the £10 a month on buying music directly from the artists (if possible, or at least buy music again), but work has given me a free Rdio account and it's very tempting to use it...
I also wrote a website that scraped music blogs for soundcloud links and presented them, but because no-one ever uses it, I don't feel like I'm contributing to the death of music too much.

The whole record label system is fucked up, and is the root of many of the evils in today's industry, and instead of spitting the dummy at Spotify while still being complacent in the broken label system... I dunno, it seems to be the wrong battle to fight.

I could go on a rant about how fans are getting shafted by the myriad "remastered" (the Loveless remaster: two different remasters that sounded identical) or "10th anniversary bonus editions" (All the tracks you already have, and lots of shit we didn't think was good enough to be released 10 years ago...)

But I've often said that the internet is the snake eating its own tail, and for every advance it brings, it leaves a trail of destruction in its wake and some days I feel like I'd be happier if it all went down, but then I'd be unemployed and unable to do anything so look at me being a hypocrite. It's ok, we are all hypocrites in our own little ways.

Bet you're glad that I've returned from a busy few weeks in work and travelling with an incoherent angry rant :biggrin: - it's a tricky situation that I don't quite know how I feel. :uh:

[seismic1]

Newton's third law.

There is a lot I don't like about the Internet, but there is a lot that I do like. Maybe I'm cherry-picking, probably not. I feel like the whole thing has been hijacked by corporates, governments, and theives, but, to be honest, I knew it would happen back in ~98, so any disappointment I feel is relatively minor.

I don't make any money from my "musical" exploits, so my Internet gripes all relate to how other parties abuse their position on the net. Phishing, scams, back-doors, trojans, peer-to-peer exploits really upset me. In a way, they relate directly to, and support your statement, because it seems that I am constantly fighting these undesirable elements, just to stay "clean". I had to spend an hour-and-a-half the other day, researching and removing Microsoft's attempt to put Windows 10 on my computer. I managed to get rid of it, but it was 90 minutes I would rather have spent doing something else.

I'm not exactly responding to your post here, just skirting around the edges of it.

When the IOT arrives, even your fridge will eat you.

[Altus]

It's easier for an underground artist to have his/her music heard and enjoyed because of the internet. As far as I'm concerned, the amount of good the internet has brought to the masses greatly outweighs the bad.

In regard to mainstream music, the big guys complaining about small numbers from Spotify seem to forget they were getting zero when piracy was rampant. Of course, piracy still exists, but I believe these subscription-based services have helped lessen it some. I also believe the concept of purchasing an album is dying. The masses don't care about experiencing an album. They just want something to fill the silence. Subscription-based services are the perfect and cheap answer for them.

As artists, I think it's safe to say we don't agree with that, and likely never will. We understand the importance of supporting the artist, financially or otherwise. I admit: I would love to see the music industry completely collapse. Those in it only for the money would disappear. Tiny niche labels would take over. All that would be left are the artists who write/compose/perform because they NEED to.

Inspired music is all that would remain. Imagine that.

(Yes, I realize I'm living in a fantasy world) :daydream:

[Pharos]

Spotify was founded by one of the founders of Napster. Where Napster was simply to ripoff the labels and artists, Spotify aims to still ripoff the labels and artists, while making money for themselves and their investors this time.

[ablaut]

I have a much more positive view. I see the internet as a platform for the democratization of content delivery (amongst other things). Never before has it been so easy to share creative content with the world. Especially since I make ambient music, which is a niche genre, I couldn't have hoped to find so many listeners so fast in the pre-internet era. Also, it wouldn't have been as easy to find a group of like-minded people like this forum, where we can learn from each other and share our music.

Yes, the internet forms a paradigm shift, and people trying to make money the way they used to last century are having a harder time. But change is inevitable. So new business models are needed. And it is no use to complain about piracy and streaming. People want easy access to content. So, give them what they want, and be more creative in finding ways to make money. People are not averse to paying for concerts and merchandise, for example.

[iainx]

Spotify was founded by one of the founders of Napster.

Spotify was founded in 2006 by Daniel Ek and Martin Lorentzon, neither of whom had anything to do with the founding of Napster.
In 2010 Spotify received "a small investment" from Founders Fund and Sean Parker (the co-founder of Napster and a managing partner of Founders Fund) joined the Spotify board of directors.

[iainx]

People are not averse to paying for concerts and merchandise, for example.

I disagree. People are attending the big name concerts in their droves, but local bands and minor big names are finding it hard. For example, I saw Plaid (who are arguably one of the big 5 of British electronic music) play on Friday night, to about 100 people, in a venue that could hold 3 or 4 times that. And it was pretty cheap at £10. With two support acts, one of whom was Boxcutter, again, not a minor name in the genre and a local act to boot.

[Ambire Seiche]

People are not averse to paying for concerts and merchandise, for example.

I disagree. People are attending the big name concerts in their droves, but local bands and minor big names are finding it hard.

I do wonder how much of this is due to lack of promotion and/or record company support though

I came across this by Talib Kweli a few days ago and found his experiences interesting, it's definitely some huge shifts in technology and industry going on (the one relatively steady constant is the need for good creative marketing) - https://medium.com/cuepoint/why-i-le...m-a0ecfa06ae91

[Pharos]

Spotify was founded by one of the founders of Napster.

Spotify was founded in 2006 by Daniel Ek and Martin Lorentzon, neither of whom had anything to do with the founding of Napster.
In 2010 Spotify received "a small investment" from Founders Fund and Sean Parker (the co-founder of Napster and a managing partner of Founders Fund) joined the Spotify board of directors.

Good to know. The documentary about Napster called 'Downloaded' claimed that Parker had a hand in forming Spotify.