Music downloads .... who is the thief ?
Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:46 pm
i'm not really surprised to see that the "download or not" question has surfaced (again) in the "BAF gone?" thread. it's a real question when a record company we all like (more or less) have problems. anyway i'd like to share some points of view about the whole "downloading stuff"
first, i consider it would be a mistake to have a definitive point of view on this question.
the music industry had to survive against the home tape recorder, the CDR and now the MP3s and other digital formats. is there something really new in mp3s ? i'm not that sure of it.
i consider we should take care of who we are talking about when we think about downloading ; small record companies, major companies, major industry leaders ?
in my opinion, there is no doubt blood & fire, pressure sounds, motion records, badda music, joe gibbs europe, trojan, makasound etc ... lose potentially money because of downloading. reissuing records can be seen as an advantage because they don't have to produce albums, pay the studios, musicians, engineers etc ... they can make a deal for far less money than needed if you record a whole new album with new songs from the beginning. in the other part, they have a small business market and probably can't afford more than a very few (if not one) very poor selling album.
as for majors, thinking that downloading harms them is, in my humble opinion, a nonsense. these majors have always been stealing the artists in a way or another. the producers selling their artists songs to the majors are robbing them as well. i don't think many people understand how difficult it is for an artist to know how much he has really sold albums or singles. do you really think he can trust his record company to tell him the exact number of sales and then how much the record company should pay him ? no joke! i had the luck to meet the lawyer maitre andre bertrand who is defending most of the reggae artists in their struggle against major companies, you wouldn't even believe what i've heard and seen.
as for the industry, let's not even talk deeply about it. rather than complaining about the CD sales they should maybe take a look at the figures of their cd + dvd + merchandising etc ... sales. people have been buying these last years millions of dvds and for 90% of us who are not that rich, you have to make a choice between cds & dvds, you can't afford to buy both. so the reason why industry is selling less cds than a few years ago is quite simple; people spend around the same money for culture than before and now they are buying cds + dvds when a few years ago they were only buying cds.
there is another point, specially for us reggae listeners, that comes to my mind. is it piracy to download a record which is out of print for decades ? how could we harm a company for not buying music which is out of print ... when you buy a record at ebay or gemm or others, noone gets money except the seller.
in my opinion, digital formats, protected or not, should be a great luck for record companies to re-release obscure music at very low cost. they don't have to take care of distribution, packaging etc ... if they still have master tapes, even a small remastering for the most known artists could be possible. i would never pay anything for a degraded mp3; but if greensleeves release all their 12" in flac format ... i may buy lots of them for christmas.
once again the artists can't get money because record companies don't want to re-release their music. i often think about it as it's a real shame. in my opinion, if a record company doesn't want to reissue an artist album for more than (let's say...) 10 years, the producer first then the artist should have the possibility to do it by themselves and get most of the money as the record company doesn't consider it's a valuable record.
well i've been a bit long but as a conclusion, downloading music from small record companies should be considered as dangerous for them. these companies make a good job releasing music out of print for long with a decent packaging, often very interesting liner notes, most of time pay something to producers and artists and even sometimes the record has a great sound (even if i still prefer the sound of a mint vinyl, but that's another question). alright, sometimes we can be disapointed by a specific release, but hey that's the rule in buying music. it can't be great all the time. so supporting these labels by buying their music is imho essential for the future of vintage roots reggae music.
as for the big ones, they should try first to put some deontology in their behaviour, make some effort to release interesting reissues (not just one or two bonus tracks without liner notes or anything)and more than all, support their artists. then (but only then) i might modify my opinion about them.
all the best
seb
first, i consider it would be a mistake to have a definitive point of view on this question.
the music industry had to survive against the home tape recorder, the CDR and now the MP3s and other digital formats. is there something really new in mp3s ? i'm not that sure of it.
i consider we should take care of who we are talking about when we think about downloading ; small record companies, major companies, major industry leaders ?
in my opinion, there is no doubt blood & fire, pressure sounds, motion records, badda music, joe gibbs europe, trojan, makasound etc ... lose potentially money because of downloading. reissuing records can be seen as an advantage because they don't have to produce albums, pay the studios, musicians, engineers etc ... they can make a deal for far less money than needed if you record a whole new album with new songs from the beginning. in the other part, they have a small business market and probably can't afford more than a very few (if not one) very poor selling album.
as for majors, thinking that downloading harms them is, in my humble opinion, a nonsense. these majors have always been stealing the artists in a way or another. the producers selling their artists songs to the majors are robbing them as well. i don't think many people understand how difficult it is for an artist to know how much he has really sold albums or singles. do you really think he can trust his record company to tell him the exact number of sales and then how much the record company should pay him ? no joke! i had the luck to meet the lawyer maitre andre bertrand who is defending most of the reggae artists in their struggle against major companies, you wouldn't even believe what i've heard and seen.
as for the industry, let's not even talk deeply about it. rather than complaining about the CD sales they should maybe take a look at the figures of their cd + dvd + merchandising etc ... sales. people have been buying these last years millions of dvds and for 90% of us who are not that rich, you have to make a choice between cds & dvds, you can't afford to buy both. so the reason why industry is selling less cds than a few years ago is quite simple; people spend around the same money for culture than before and now they are buying cds + dvds when a few years ago they were only buying cds.
there is another point, specially for us reggae listeners, that comes to my mind. is it piracy to download a record which is out of print for decades ? how could we harm a company for not buying music which is out of print ... when you buy a record at ebay or gemm or others, noone gets money except the seller.
in my opinion, digital formats, protected or not, should be a great luck for record companies to re-release obscure music at very low cost. they don't have to take care of distribution, packaging etc ... if they still have master tapes, even a small remastering for the most known artists could be possible. i would never pay anything for a degraded mp3; but if greensleeves release all their 12" in flac format ... i may buy lots of them for christmas.
once again the artists can't get money because record companies don't want to re-release their music. i often think about it as it's a real shame. in my opinion, if a record company doesn't want to reissue an artist album for more than (let's say...) 10 years, the producer first then the artist should have the possibility to do it by themselves and get most of the money as the record company doesn't consider it's a valuable record.
well i've been a bit long but as a conclusion, downloading music from small record companies should be considered as dangerous for them. these companies make a good job releasing music out of print for long with a decent packaging, often very interesting liner notes, most of time pay something to producers and artists and even sometimes the record has a great sound (even if i still prefer the sound of a mint vinyl, but that's another question). alright, sometimes we can be disapointed by a specific release, but hey that's the rule in buying music. it can't be great all the time. so supporting these labels by buying their music is imho essential for the future of vintage roots reggae music.
as for the big ones, they should try first to put some deontology in their behaviour, make some effort to release interesting reissues (not just one or two bonus tracks without liner notes or anything)and more than all, support their artists. then (but only then) i might modify my opinion about them.
all the best
seb