A surprising truth

January 6, 2008 at 6:33 pm 3 comments

OK, at the risk of sounding all preachy and holier-than-thou… I make this post.

As I said in a recent posting, one advantage of DJ’ing in Second Life is that I have a direct conduit to the audience, who freely IM comments, questions, and so on. While it’s sometimes difficult to spin music and stay on-top of all the text communication being thrown at me, it’s one of the parts of Second Life DJ’ing I particularly enjoy.

As I speak with fans, I continue to be surprised at the nonchalant attitude so many people have toward copying and sharing music. Starting with Napster, AudioGalaxy and others several years ago, peer-to-peer file sharing apparently has instilled a belief that all music should be free, and has no inherent value. (Please stick with me before you think I’ve gone all RIAA on you.)

I have to say that it’s really difficult for me to shed many tears for the Justin Timberlakes and Alanis Morissettes and Fergies and Norah Joneses of the world. These products of the corporate music machine are crammed down our throats like yesterday’s leftover french fries whether we like them or not. And whether justified or fair or otherwise, I also don’t stay up at night worrying about whether Sony or Universal/BMG or EMI or Warner (the big four international music companies) are suffering from piracy-related sales drops. Quite the contrary… If they’d spent half the dollars they spend on piracy lawsuits instead developing business models to adapt to 21st century realities, they wouldn’t have this problem to start with. (And I’m politely ignoring the fact that they don’t take risks, and instead spoon-feed the public the same formulaic pap that worked at some time in the past, hoping against hope that some of it will gain traction.)

But all the “big corporate machine” commentary and grousing about garbage music doesn’t change one single, simple fact: Piracy actually is theft, and in my view, nobody is hurt more by it than the dance and electronic music genre.

While dance and electronic are relatively “big” in Europe, here in the United States, it’s a niche genre in the extreme. Some major radio markets (about four of them at last count) are fortunate enough to have a radio station playing dance; most aren’t. Walk into a Best Buy and try to find dance music, and what you’ll find is half a rack, sparsely stocked, largely with mass market compilation CDs like Now That’s What I Call Dance Vol. 78. (Yes, that’s a joke.) You might find named CDs from the biggest artists, like Tiësto or Van Buuren if you’re lucky. But there’s just not enough retail interest to justify anything more.

Further, dance music’s emphasis on singles; the fact that many artists crank out maybe one or two songs a year; and the fact that much of it originates in Europe and isn’t even licensed for sale in the United States; well, it’s just plain difficult to buy a lot of dance music even if you wanted to. Add into this mix an overall feeling many have that music should be free, and you end-up with a music sharing free-for-all.

What made me wake-up to this issue is getting to know people in the industry. Months ago, Tim Corrimal interviewed Amber for his GoRainbowRadio podcast, and among the things Amber talked about was piracy. Amber, who used to be affiliated with a major label, is now an independent. The woman works her ass off to earn a living to take care of her and her children, and she’s very passionate about what she does. Suddenly sharing an Amber song takes on a new meaning. Now you’re taking money away from an individual, not a faceless international corporation.

How would you like it if people chipped away at your paycheck, 25 cents at a time? One person wouldn’t be noticeable. Hundreds of people doing it, and suddenly it starts to hurt. Thousands, and suddenly you wonder how you’re paying your mortgage.

That’s quite literally what happens with the majority of dance and electronic artists. They are people in their basement studios, their garages, their small apartments, doing what they love, and hoping that maybe somebody might take an interest and actually buy something. Most have real jobs to pay the bills.

So, who’s it hurting? Yeah, I don’t really give much of a crap about Justin Timberlake’s bank account either; I have to be honest. But dance artists I know quite personally like Rikah, Cory Conley and Jennifer Rivers (Pleasure Center), Jacinta, James Roy, and Cary August among others are not faceless companies. They are real people, genuinely nice people, they work hard at what they do, and frankly, they deserve the 25 cents a pop or so that they actually receive when you buy one of their digital downloads instead of snagging a copy from a friend. It’s personal.

And really, what’s a buck or two at Beatport or iTunes? That’s less than a latté at Starbucks, and while the coffee’s gone in minutes, the song download goes on and on, play after play.

The other side of this coin is that the dance music industry needs to try harder too. Most are well ahead of the game, recognizing that quality counts, and that consumers don’t like DRM (digital rights management, i.e., copy protection). Most dance music (except those tracks from major labels, like remixes of major artists) are sold as MP3 files, easily copied, burned to CD, etc. Most of those are high bitrate (often 320 kbps), which purists prefer.

But distribution continues to be an issue. Territorial licensing restrictions make it tough to buy tracks in the United States that are created in Europe (and perhaps vice-versa, I don’t know). There needs to be market demand for a track before a US label will pick it up for distribution here. If you can’t find a track any other way than pirating it, what options do you have? This has to be made easier for the consumer. In time, hopefully it will be.

Meanwhile, you might give it a little thought before you go handing out your music to your friends like a stick of gum.

As for me, no, I’m not above all this. While I have never (not even back in the day) served or hosted music (i.e., put-up a shared folder and let people download), I’d be lying if I said I didn’t do some downloading when the original Napster was in its heyday. But it’s been years since I’ve even loaded (let alone used) Limewire or any of the other popular sharing systems, and I’m proud of that.

However, I do seem to have people e-mailing me tracks so I’ll play them, and I’ve not done enough to discourage that. I refuse to label it a “New Year’s Resolution,” but that practice stops today. As I said earlier, this has become personal. Unless you’re a record label, a recording artist, or someone with the rights to a track and are sending it to me for promotional purposes—do not send me music. I’m sorry I don’t have a song you want to hear, but if you have the song to send it to me, then stop listening to me and press the “play” button on your iPod.

I have very rarely given copies of music to others in recent years, and when I do, it’s to other DJs. That doesn’t make it right either, so that practice stops today as well. If I have something you like and want, go buy it. If you’re too cheap to buy it, or you’re too lazy to secure legitimate promotional copies (in the case of a DJ), then load Limewire and do the dirty work yourself, instead of trying to make me complicit in an act of theft.

In closing, I want to be clear that I don’t really like the four major international record companies. I am no fan of the RIAA, or their over-aggressive tactics of suing and threatening and scaring the bejesus out of consumers in an effort to stop piracy. It isn’t working, it won’t work, and it’s a waste of time and money at a time when the recording industry is already bleeding to death. The RIAA and their member companies need to wake the hell up to today’s reality, and put their MBA brains to work coming-up with a product consumers want and an approach that consumers want to use to buy that product.

But for all the deficiencies the RIAA and their member companies might have in my view, stealing is still stealing, and I’m sick to death of watching good friends work their tails off pursuing their passion (music), only to have to slog through the muck to eek out the occasional pocket change as their reward for it. Simply put, that’s just not right, and I’m not going to be even a small part of it anymore.

Entry filed under: Dance Music Industry. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

The top 50 dance songs of 2007 Can’t keep it a secret

3 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Andy Zadeh  |  January 15, 2008 at 4:33 am

    First off, Wesley … wow.

    You’ve a gorgeous web presence (I’ve only been to http://www.wesleyspengler.com and here, thus far … if I risk the MySpace™ I’ll get back to you) and it’s been a pleasure thus far to surf you.

    Secondly, I fully agree with your “fundamental” position about digital music. Tossing .mp3s about like they were candy (or witty quotes) is stealing.

    While it’s true — as the digerati love to say, “Information wants to be free” — music (if it’s music) is … art.

    While raw data (information) wants to be free, I believe art (the passion associated with the production, delivery, and consumption of stuff that “soul-f*cks” us — and most “music” is that, “art”) wants us to pay a price.

    Art costs.

    You mentioned the friends you see “slogging through the muck” to “eek out pocket change” … as their “reward for it.”

    I hear you. But I’m confused.

    I guess I’ve two “comments” in the form of queries …

    (1) Why did it take you so long to “not even be a small part of it anymore,” and

    (2) if the folks you care for are hurting, is it because they are producing art and not being compensated properly for said production … or is it because you sense the injustice associated with how our culture / society / reality compensates “artists?”

    I’m just seeking a deeper understanding of your position (no pun / a pun intended).

    In my opinion, you’re an artist. What’s the cost?

    With love,

    Andy

    Reply
  • 2. Wesley Spengler  |  January 15, 2008 at 5:02 pm

    Andy,

    Glad to have you stop by, and thank you for the comments, and the challenge. I’m happy to try and answer your questions.

    First, why did it take me so long?

    Good question. I think that this has to do with my transition from a music consumer (which of course I still am too) to a music industry participant (if only in my relatively small sphere of influence, admittedly).

    As a consumer, piracy is somewhat faceless. It’s just a song, just a small MP3 file, no sweat, nobody’s hurt, I wouldn’t have bought the song anyway, I couldn’t find the song to buy, no big deal, etc., etc. As I said in my original post, this now has a face (or rather, faces), and they’re people I like and care about. Bottom line is that I always reserve the right to change my mind, and this one has been such a change for me.

    Where I continue to be somewhat troubled is that I actually believe in the value of MP3 files (and sharing them) as a promotional vehicle. Would any of us really buy a book without either a strong recommendation, or the ability to leaf through the pages at a bookstore? Would any of us buy a painting without seeing it first? Of course, many people DO buy things site-unseen, but most of us like to be exposed to new things, evaluate it on our own, make a decision, and so on.

    The difference with music is that a 30 second iTunes-esque sample is nearly useless, especially with dance music. So exchanging or listening to a full-length track is a great opportunity to get a full view before purchase. But once you have the full-length track, what motivation is there to buy it? The honor system isn’t working so well, witness the recent experiments by Radiohead and separately, by Trent Reznor.

    I don’t really have the answers, unfortunately. Maybe low-res, full-length tracks for free and authorized for sharing, and you pay for the high-res? Who knows.

    Second, are my friends not being compensated sufficiently, or is it a societal issue (my paraphrase)?

    I’m not sure, but it’s probably more the former. I don’t have a great deal of faith that society is going to change markedly. While I don’t have the answers, as I said, I sense that there is a solution to this that doesn’t necessarily involve society being forced to change their nature. Certainly the RIAA sue party isn’t discouraging much; only yesterday I read an article on C|Net News.com that piracy rates have stabilized after their initial declines.

    That’s sort of a non-answer answer. The long and short of it is that this is going to be a difficult problem to solve. I do believe that artists (of any kind) have a right to be compensated fairly and properly and as they desire (which includes nothing, if the artist so chooses) for their work. It’s also true that long before music piracy ever came onto the scene, some people make it and some don’t. There are myriad factors here, and just because you decide to be an artist doesn’t form an entitlement to be compensated for producing things if people generally don’t like what you produce.

    You also raised a great point in your closing: You’re an artist, what’s the cost? I’ve invested huge sums of money in software and hardware over the years for my “art.” A painter needs to buy paint and canvas; a sculptor needs clay; a photographer needs cameras and lenses; and so on. There is a cost to choosing to be an artist, and those costs are there before any work is produced, let alone saleable work that someone might wish to buy. So yes, being an artist has a cost, and the artist makes a conscious choice to pursue their art and take the risk of that investment. Basically, all of this just further complicates an already complex issue.

    Good points, Andy, although I suspect my responses just further muddy the waters. Thanks for reading.

    Wes

    Reply
  • 3. Andy Zadeh  |  January 24, 2008 at 12:53 am

    Wes,

    Thanks for your considered and thoughtful response. I don’t think the water’s been any more muddy(ied) than it already is … like many things in “life,” we’re discussing a complex issue. I really don’t think you can communicate meaning with others in “snippets” or bytes.

    Don’t downplay consume / delivery. It’s both a fundamental point and one of the most wiggly to pin down! I seriously think you addressed the fundamental issue … we both consume and produce. At some point, there is a feeling the balance is “off.” Even if you don’t directly “produce,” you feel for those you care for that do … and are not recompensed for being consumed.

    I guess I was lucky in that I was sued for copyright infringement very early in my life … at the age of 12 I was “the producer” (well … I was the token child “producer”) for a local television show, where youngsters could learn to produce content for local consumption and run TV cameras, write scripts, etc., etc.

    We (I mean “me and the coven of well-meaning adults that helped make it all take place” when I say “we”) happened to pick a song by Harry Mancini as the theme song for our show.

    Happens that Harry vacationed in the area where I was raised, was channel-surfing one day, and heard a few milliseconds of his work on “public access” … Harry stopped surfing, and on a whim … made a phone call to his lawyer. I guess it sucks to be on vacation and be bored.

    The lawsuit was dropped (after the appropriate motions were made … I typed “motions” and did not realized I’d double entrendre’d myself), but I learned a number of valuable lessons that have served me well.

    Without ever seeing his face, I realized that the music we’d chosen to use … had a face behind it.

    Now that does not mean I’ve never stolen music since then? No. I have, and most likely will do so in the future.

    I think you’re mistaken in thinking Radiohead’s recent effort to distribute their latest album “didn’t work.” Short of jumping away and doing some research, I’ve read they did very well offering their music on a “pay-what-you-think-it’s-worth” basis … and regardless, whatever they are doing … it’s not what’s “been happening” so any experiment in alternative delivery systems is a step up, in my opinion.

    (I’m still angry … just a bit … at Radiohead for keeping their stuff off of iTunes® because as “artists” they wanted folks to purchase / buy the entire album they’d produced … and not just a single song. Just me, or is that a bit crazy, for a bunch that a few years later “gives away” an entire album? Wes, you’re in good company when you reserve the right to change your mind.)

    About art … I’ll steal: “Art is making something out of nothing and selling it.” Frank Zappa.

    Thank you, again, for the deep consideration and ponder-age. And the wicked tunes.

    Andy

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Calendar of Posts

January 2008
S M T W T F S
« Nov   Feb »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Categories

Recent Posts

Twitter Updates


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 171 other followers