Over in the EMI thread viewtopic.php?f=30&t=13741&p=1348090#p1348090 I made a typically snarky comment about how the demise of the recording industry as we know it will just be blamed on the usual scapegoats (particularly illegal file sharing) rather than the industry's taking any responsibility for its own downfall. Hanzo responded by asking, "What are the other factors?"

I was already thinking that we needed a catch-all thread in which we keep track of all the things that the RIAA has done to shoot itself in the foot. Hanzo's question inspired me to follow through on creating the thread.

Please post your thoughts on this issue and links to other threads or websites that answer the question.

Or do you feel that the recording industry as we know it is alive and well?

I'd have to say illegal file sharing certainly contributed to it. I know many people who flat out don't buy music anymore, opting to download it illegally.

And the music industry's lawsuits against file sharers and downloaders didn't help matters much. Not to mention their attempts at copy protection with spyware and rootkits. All they ended up doing was shooting themselves in the foot.

I agree that it has defnitely been part of the problem, but my point in the other thread was that the industry seems to blame it ALL on illegal sharing as if the industry itself has done nothing to create its own problems.

(1) Their slow acceptance of downloadable music as a viable option screwed them over for years. Not to say that they would have recouped all of their losses, but (if they had embraced an iTunes-like concept sooner) they certainly would have lost less to illegal sharing.

(2) I had a meeting with some old bandmates on Sunday. Every one of them finds the perfectionism of current recordings to be more detrimental to music than positive.

(3) Price fixing. Strong arming retailers who sold used CDs. Both hurt the industry's image.

(4) Screwing the artists repeatedly didn't help. The way that accounting is done is shady at best. It might be perfectly legal, but it sure isn't very ethical. A while back, the RIAA wanted to change the laws so that every recording artist would be classified as a "worker for hire." I don't recall the specifics; but, by doing that, artists were screwed once again. Needless to say, that plan fell through.

(5) Their attempts to change the laws to state that, when someone is accused of illegally downloading, there doesn't need to be any proof of it! An intent to share is sufficient. (The judge in the recent Pirate Bay case even misquoted this law. I think the laws are so confusing and convoluted that no one really knows what is and isn't illegal most of the time.)

And how much more business would they be doing now if they offered lossless files at a fair price???

I also think there has been little respect to the idea of culture, by both the industry and the public. Music used to mean something. It does not help that be it record companies, or artists who have had some success, opt to release albums in after so many years versus months or once a year. Even into the early - mid 80s, waiting 18 months was a long time. Who is going to care about an artist if you don't hear for them for 3+ years. There is so many elements to the end of the industry, but I think it goes way beyond simply the evil record company (although there is a big sticking pile of crap on their plate).

Part of the reason for this phenomenon is that artists (especially veterans with a following) can now make more money touring rather than recording. Album sales have fallen sharply, while concert prices have skyrocketed. Some artists probably figure it isn't worth the bother to spend all that time, money and effort on an endeavor that will net them a minimum return when they can play the same old songs over and over for much more money for a few months on tour each year.

I do miss the days of yearly albums or at the most, two years between albums. Those were the days, my friends.

a Canadian study found the opposite ...

Canadian Study: Piracy Boosts CD Sales
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html;jsessionid=4B6C9C6BFFC0BBB0A63A32635672CA95?forumID=102&threadID=243454&start=0

I think it comes down to
1. Greed - getting used to the profits generated by the change from vinyl to cd and thinking that would last forever. Rememeber the idea that they had to price a cd at $15 because there were so few manufacturing plants... and than watching the prices rise as time went on.
2. the abandonment of the commercial single (which itunes doesn't do - to the detriment of albums) - Which one of us didn't buy singles before we bought albums... because they were cheaper?

after posting above I see the thread about EMI.
Goodness.
On a quasi-related note: anyone else have some buyer's remorse regarding the Beatles remasters? I preordered both boxes, and the Beatles were the only music I listened to from 11 to about 17, and have been a main fixture since...but I'm just thinking about cancelling them...maybe keeping to the Mono, for no other reason than it being limited and hearing all the "its how it was meant to be heard"...it better be worth it

When DVD arrived, it was the natural replacement for the CD. Better sound and more room for music. A pity they didn't fade the CD out for the music DVD, if that was the case they could now fade the music DVD out for the music Blu-RAY.

Also the pricing doesn't help, a 1 year old movie on DVD is cheaper than a 30 year old album on CD.

I think that the loss of Top 40 radio has made people more narrow-minded about music. Thus when they move on from their pre-teen idols, they really don't know where to go next. So they follow the next trend, which they outgrow or it fades out. Then music no longer is important in their life. They listen to whatever the DJ or cover band is playing, which is purposely bland to appeal to the widest audience. Or they just keep listening to their old CDs over and over.

I also agree that three or four years between albums is long enough to forget about that performer or move on to something else. If that follow-up sucked, you wont bother waiting another three years to see if they get back on track. During the Sixties, you'd make at least two albums per year. If you didn't like their summer album then you'd wait for the xmas one. Frequent albums also made the industry more dynamic. Music changed radically between 1965 and 1968 because the really good bands were picking up other's cues and expanding on them within weeks.

I think that most of the remastering and bonus tracks are purely financial moves and am tired of buying the same CD over and over. Do the remastering the first time, scour the vaults once, put it out.

Music wasn't as much of a PRODUCT as it is now. It's hard not to feel manipulated by the movie tie-ins and the popular songs by current stars in the TV commercials, and the blatant prostitution of stardom by reality shows. People feel abused and they dislike the record indusrty, thus have no qualms about ripping the bigwigs off.

There are simply too many bands out there to keep up with. Some of them are not ready for prime time. That's what happens when your major stars are waiting four years between albums. Somebody has to fill the gap.

Rock hasn't died yet. There's no real product to push. Roughly speaking: 1930s - jazz, 1940s - swing, 1950s - pop music, 1960s rock, 1970s disco & punk rock, 1980s new wave rock , 1990s grunge rock. The needle is stuck on rock. Bing Crosby didn't pull in a lot of money in the 1960s, but the Stones are making millions. Elvis had maybe five good years, the Beatles had six big years. U2 is still dragging along after nearly thirty. Rock must die. Yes, I know that Rap / Hip-Hop / Urban Contemporary is big. It hasn't displaced rock the way that other musical trends have swept aside the past. Caucasians are not yet a minority and they need a melody to go with their rhythm.

The music isn't as good as it was in 1966.

$18+ CDs
CDs with one to two good songs and a bunch of filler
The music industry being way too slow to adapt to digital

Available now at your local FYE.

I highly recommend "Appetite For Self-Destruction" by Steve Knopper for an in-depth answer to this question: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1416552154/?tag=imwan-20

1.)The destruction of MTV, VH1 and MTV2
2.)Charging way too much for CDs
3.)Lame product
4.)Ripping artists off
5.)Kids stealing music and feeling they're ENTITLED to do so.
6.)Casual and diehard fans being turned off by poorly assembled best-ofs a blind ape could do a better job on.
7.)The death of Falco

This. When Der Kommissar left town, that was the end.

Quote:

I think that the loss of Top 40 radio has made people more narrow-minded about music. Thus when they move on from their pre-teen idols, they really don't know where to go next. So they follow the next trend, which they outgrow or it fades out. Then music no longer is important in their life. They listen to whatever the DJ or cover band is playing, which is purposely bland to appeal to the widest audience. Or they just keep listening to their old CDs over and over.

In my opinion Top 40 music as it is today is not listenable anyway. Pop music as it was in the 1960s and 1970s was exciting, innovative and had real musicians and great signing. The art of singing and innovation in my mind is one of the reasons we don't buy any new music today on CD.

I read an earlier post above that the DVD format is not used more as an improvement of CDs. This is yet another reason I myself do not buy CDs as much. Why buy an inferior sounding product when there is better technology available and not being exploited.

Some of the best music I have heard sonically is a DVD of a Vinyl Rip from a Led Zeppelin Audiophile LP converted to 96/24 Digital. The sound is fresh, powerful and miles better than the CD version. This is what should be happening to all music in my opinion.

I myself will buy music on DVD that has the best optimal sound available.

People said the same thing in the 1960s about Elvis - "The big band era was exciting, innovative and had real musicians and great singing!"

Yeah, I'm careful about what I say about modern music. I don't want to sound like Steve Allen, although at times I'm sure I'm guilty of exactly that.

"Alles Klar, Der Kommissar..."

I do think the hip-hop domination of Top 40 has gone on wayyyy too long. I miss the days when a rock or New Wave song could hit the top of the charts.

I agree 100%. It's not even fun looking at the singles charts due to Rap, Country and Kiddie Pop.
Very, very rough for any Rock songs to chart but they still crack through.