apermanentwreck

The Ramblings of a Man
(Destined for Self-Proclaimed Greatness)

Vol 1: "Music Business & Why Its Failing (Terribly)"

So I've been reading the entertainment news and there are all these studies about if CDs are selling better or worse than digital downloads and it seems where ever you turn there is someone being sued by the RIAA for file sharing. So why is the music business failing and is it even failing at all. Well here's my opinion...

Rather than make this one long essay form of information, I'm going to break it up into sub topics and discuss those as such. The topics will be:

DVDs vs CDs-Price & Content Value
About 3 years ago, when Spider Man 2 came out on DVD (it came out in theaters in 2004), I was driving to work and on a rare moment listening to the radio, Kevin & Bean on KROQ to exact. And at the time, there was a lot of controversy about downloads, I think Napster was being sued, so Kevin & Bean were in good form. I, then, was going to school to get a degree in Music Business from the best school in the nation (USC, NYC was ..2) and was very anti-illegal downloading and animate about that topic. I had a roommate who used to download everything he could just because he could; he had a hard drive filled with music that he didn't care to listen to, he just wanted it because he could get it. So anyway, I'm listening to Kevin & Bean talk about how the DVD comes loaded with like 4 or more hours of extended content, website links, and everything you could ever hope to come on a DVD. So one of them makes the comment that there is way too much content on one disc for one person to ever watch or enjoy, and they begin discussing the apparent differences between DVDs and CDs.

And then it dawned on me...here are the specs and differences between CDs & DVDs.

..	CDs	DVDs
avg. length of content	30 mins	6 hrs
avg. length of good content	6-7 mins	2 hrs
avg. cost	$10-15	$10-15

So look at that, for about the same price you can get 6 hours of content on a DVD with about 2 hours of it being actually good; and 30 minutes of content on a CD with about 6 minutes being good. Does this sound insane to anyone else? No wonder the labels are failing to captivate an audience. I bet if I had access to the books at the major motion picture studios, I'd probably find that they're doing pretty good. I know that you're all thinking, why don't you look at reports or some web research that says they labels are doing great, but the only way to really know, is to see the books yourself, and that's not likely to happen. Everything in the media come with some sort of bias, so until I see the actual numbers on the record labels, I'll just speculate now after seeing reports that Apple is doing great with digital downloads, and the fact that everyone I come across says they're still downloading music. So there you have the differences between CDs and DVDs and the fact that the labels haven't reduced their prices accordingly is one reason why the labels are failing. This and every reason will lead to the same commonality, the main reason the record companies are failing is the fact they have old mentality and are unwilling to let new ideas and unique thoughts flow through their industry. I'll relate every point to that same fact. So pay attention.

Artist & Repertoire and Artist Development Don't Exist
The idea behind A&R and Artist Development is supposed to be exactly what it sounds like...develop the artist career and aid them along the way. A&R should be out scouting out talent. So how do they do that you might say? Well no one but them knows and my guess is that there is something about the A&R rep that can see talent and a successful long career.

Well whats happening today with A&R is that one guy signs an act and somehow by a fate of God it becomes successful (because their is no real good formula on how an act becomes successful). So that A&R person now becomes the big shot around the office and he tries to formulate how that act became successful, so he signs another band, but this time, not using his gut instinct like before, he tries to place the new band into the same formula as the now successful band. And it doesn't work. So they get fired and are left looking for a new label to work for, in the meantime someone else is hired to replace them and the cycle continues. So what you get is a band who puts out one album because the formula doesn't allow for the second album to flop and you have bands only putting out one album. I recognize that not all bands end up like this and there is room for some bands to leak through the system and put out successful first and second albums. But for the majority of bands, one album is released and successful and the second flops. Lets define success here real quick and then I'll explain further why the labels are failing by raising one hit wonders with sophomore slumps instead of career artists. Success for the artist is being defined here by the longevity of career and success for the label is defined as a viable product that turns a profit. So taking that into account...how many bands out there are career artist putting out successful album after album such as the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Ramones, the Beach Boys, U2, etc? And how many labels are recouping off their artist? Chances are there are a few such artists and labels that are successful, but not enough to call the industry successful. The idea behind a successful industry is to have somewhat control of your buyers demand with monetary gain. Thats not happening. Labels are losing money on almost every artist, but their catalog artist. Whats a catalog artist; one that has a successful career and is making the label so much money that it pays for all of the other unsuccessful ones. So what does this have to do with A&R & Artist Development...everything. As stated above, the A&R people are trying to formulate success and there is no artist development (hence I didn't need to discuss it). When selling to varying buyer tastes, you can't formulate a success because it would be nearly impossible to figure out what over a billion people want from a record. If there was artist development, then the artist would put out its first album with varied success, most likely wouldn't recoup, but there would be a good enough buzz to keep interest in the name. The label would then work with the artist and help aid in a better second album, and the third would be even better.

Now you ask, how do I know labels aren't doing this already? Well of the bands I named, how many of them are current? In fact, think of all the bands that have been signed to the 4 major labels, and of them, how many can you think of that have put out successful 3rd albums? Chances are, you're drawing a blank. Thats how I know. If labels were developing artist, I wouldn't be reading that such and such an artist was dropped from this label, or this subsidiary label of this major label is now bankrupt and selling off back catalog. So why are labels not developing their artists, if you say all their problems relate to artist development? Main reason I speculate...is because its not cost effective to waste time trying to pay for an artist year around to write the next great record. That and the fact that labels, every since the success of the Beatles, have been trying to figure out how to get a band to the level they were, internationally. American Idol is a prime example of that type of formulation. Why has Kelly Clarkson been the only mainstream success act to last? What happened to Ruben Studdard and why was Clay Aiken more popular than the winner? What about the other winners, whose names are longer than their careers?

Brings us right back to the other reason, old mentality and a general lack of fresh young blood with new and innovative ideas is causing labels to fail.

Final Thoughts
Those are the 2 best reason why the labels are failing, but here's a few more things to think about that amaze me about the industry I'm so quick to chastise yet love so much.

One question, where are all these files coming from so that they can be available to download? A few answers...one, someone had to buy it originally for it be available. But people are downloading albums before they become available? How is that possible? Has anyone at the labels stop and thought, that maybe the very people that make up their industry are the same ones that are stealing albums and loading them up on servers for mass download. Probably not because "hear no evil, see no evil" seems to be the mentality and best explanation. The interns at labels, and recording studios, the assistant and 1st engineers, the personal assistants are all the exemplary people that are putting files up for download. And the best part about that, is the RIAA is suing the end users and in the same breathe its consumers for downloading these files. Last time I checked, the law offered the same punishment for theft and accessory to theft. So why are the people whom upload the files not being persecuted and taken to financial destitute? Why does the RIAA go after the end user rather than the source? Maybe because they can't find the source, so since they have to save face and punish someone, they go after the end user. The really sad part about these lawsuits, is the RIAA and the labels actually think that this is going to stop people from downloading. But how many of you remember when you were a kid and your mom or dad told you not to touch something, so when they weren't looking you touched it? Probably everyone, so what makes the labels think that making downloads the forbidden fruit was going to stop illegal downloads? And this is exactly what I'm talking about...

Everything, all of my arguments leave right back to the same theme. The old mentality that exists in the corporate world is the same that exists in the entertainment industry. Why is Apple's stock steadily rising? Is it because the iPod was the first mp3 player? Not at all. Is it because Apple computers take up a significant part of the computer market? No actually they only take about 5% of it. So why is Apple's stock rising and what does this have to do with the entertainment industry? Well Apple is on the rise because they embrace new technologies and are always looking for ways to improve old technologies as opposed to reinventing the wheel. As far as the Apple and the entertainment industry link...Apple started the legal digital download phenom with its iTunes Store and business has been good for them. You can look up the figures but its pretty impressive how many downloads they've had in 4 years they've been around.

So word to the labels, fire all your old stagnant employees who can't embrace the internet and new forms of technology and start hiring all of the young and innovative kids fresh out of college. Because it is a business, but with a strong creative force.

-Mr. Newton

Tags: apermanentwreck, music, music business, ramblings
Current Location: Claremont
Current Mood: irritated

Advertisement

Advertisement