So, what is music worth to you...talking actual dollar value.

I made the switch to almost all digital downloads about a year or so ago. I also prefer as much of the money to go to the artist as possible, that is why I like things like the kickstarter concept where the artist goes directly to the fans. That way fans can get the CD for usually $5 - $10 and if they want to pay more there are usually premiums they can get. I ALMOST paid $200.00 on one campaign that featured the cd, plus a free concert ticket and a meet and greet with the band at a concert venue of your choosing on their next tour.

Record labels are broken and at this point probably need to go away. They have chosen marketing over music and thus need to pay the price by being ushered out of the equation as fast as possible. As for how much I am willing to pay - well that all depends on the band. I'll pay $5 for a band I have an interest in but am not really a 'fan' of. And I'll go up to $15 for a CD from a band I really like for the digital download. But again, I prefer to go as direct to the band or artist as possible.
 
Dogsinotpalc said:
Based on how most folks are, you're far from typical. It seems the new typical art consumer think it either is or should be free. Part of this assumption is based off of how disposable art is to them. Again, they'll spend more on a pair shoes than they're willing to spend on music for a year. But I'm ranting too much.
Click to expand...

I don't think your references with shoes or suits works. People would like to get those free also but there is really no mechanism to do that outside of stealing I guess. Which brings us back to Napster and other file sharing. lol I guess that is part of the difference. Music is easy to steal without major consequences therefore its monetary value is lower.

I value an album download or CD at $10-$15 and a single song at a $1-$2. Keep in mind I haven't bought but maybe 3-4 CDs and one digital downloaded album in the last few years. I listen to free Pandora at the gym 5 hours per week. No artists are getting rich off the likes of me. I just don't listen to music like I did when I was younger.
 
To be honest, the problem, as I see it, are things like YouTube, Spotify, satellite radio, internet radio, etc., combined with the fact that people are cheap bastards.

I don't really see any way out of the hole other than to double down on crowd-sourching models (ArtistShare was doing it for years before KickStarter) and hope for the best, i.e. find some rich patrons.

I'm a big believer in government grants for acts who can make a good case for themselves, and it's a feasible reality in much of the first-world, but that's not something we can really talk about here in depth, sadly.
 
I have spent up to $50 on a disc that I was looking for. This could have been a rarity or an import which are expensive anyway. I love to buy used CD's for artist I looking to catalogue. For artist who release their own product I will buy direct since those artists sometimes don't have mass distribution. As for when I buy, it is trends. If I really like the artist and don't have anything from the catalog, I will go on a spree looking for stuff - usually used.

I don't use satellite radio but do listen to You Tube occasionally if I hear of an artist that I am interested in listening too.
 
Last edited:
ff_1593.png


About the only time I ever buy CDs anymore is at live shows. They're usually smaller venues and I feel like the artist is getting the bulk of the money (at least I hope so). They're usually in the $10-$15 range depending on the band.
 
Dudeman1967 said:
I don't think your references with shoes or suits works. People would like to get those free also but there is really no mechanism to do that outside of stealing I guess. Which brings us back to Napster and other file sharing. lol I guess that is part of the difference. Music is easy to steal without major consequences therefore its monetary value is lower.

I value an album download or CD at $10-$15 and a single song at a $1-$2. Keep in mind I haven't bought but maybe 3-4 CDs and one digital downloaded album in the last few years. I listen to free Pandora at the gym 5 hours per week. No artists are getting rich off the likes of me. I just don't listen to music like I did when I was younger.
Click to expand...

People can buy a nice pair of shoes that will last for years for a $80-100 or a nice suit that'll do the same for less than $500. But the fashion minded folks will spend exponentially more for both and then get rid of them at the end of a season to be replaced with new versions that are more in style. Modern consumers tend to look at things as more disposable regardless of cost. I don't view music that way. People spend well beyond their needs in other areas and be getting gouged far more than they ever have for music...$3.50 or more a day for a cup of coffee, at least once a day daily. But pay for music!? Fuck that are you crazy? I stopped partaking of certain foliage because I'd rather buy music, music books, and maintain my need for new strings years ago. We've all got priorities, music is one of mine. The shit gives me the happy screams, fucking LOVE IT!

That said, I've never had a lot of money, but I've never been "poor". Yet I've always been thoughtful/careful about how I spend my money. I would pay significantly more to maintain my music collection than I would in rent (pay way too fucking much), utility costs (see previous), food (well that's a literal life or death thing, but still), clothing (only buy to replace what gives out), etc. All of that stuff is fine being enough to get by. I don't regret the money I've spent on music, but most everything else...plenty of regret (as noted). I'm still buying music at a decent clip and finding plenty of new stuff to like as well. My dad gave me his music jones and I've never shaken it, nor do I want to.

Basically the stuff is pretty priceless to me. I'm glad I'm able to buy it relatively cheaply, but it would be cooler if more of my investment went directly to the artists. Sorry the horse is dead...I'll try to stop.
 
I get sad thinking about stuff like that.

"Record companies fuck the artists; let's cut out the middleman, and we'll fuck the artists ourselves!"
 
Tralfaz said:
we simply don't listen to music the way we used to, back when an album was an event and it lived on your turntable for weeks. .
Click to expand...


Perfect....I agree...The only cd's I buy now are when one of my favs put one out every few years or so and it actually is an event for me and it usually gets played over and over until I get it,like we used to do...

Tom Petty,Steve Earle,Dwight Yoakam,Kasey Chambers,etc...

The last cd I bought was a few months ago...JR Cash' new one...


Not much recent moves me.....Though I do like Post Modern Jukebox...
 
The problem is no longer distribution, it’s promotion. Unless you’re already famous you won’t get noticed by even the shittiest of blogs without spending thousands, of dollars on PR. Few musicians have that kind of money and need to sign with a label to get it. I’m not sure that there’s a way to fix this because any genre capable of supporting musicians is now watered down with an endless stream of new releases that nobody can keep track out without paying staff to do so.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
Around 10-12 dollars for an album, plus or minus. More if there is something extra. I generally prefer a physical album on CD or otherwise, and like good album art. I also greatly prefer cardboard holders rather than jewel cases. I hate jewel cases.
Click to expand...
So my answer above has been tested in the last week, and holds true. I purchased a couple albums (Tweedy, Foo Fighters, Weezer because the boys wanted it) for $9.99 to 11.99, including AutoRip instant download and a physical CD, as I prefer. Went to go do the same with the new Pink Floyd, and it is $30.00. I will probably get it in a bit, but am putting it off as I have a few other things to pay, and that seems a lot to me. I will probably get it at some point, but not now. So, my answer was market tested, and proved correct, for me. Apparently, I am not yet ready to pay a lot of bananas for the new Pink Floyd.
 
Last edited:
I got into a bit of a tiff on Facebook this week about Spotify and streaming music, with one musician threatening to punch me in the throat.

This is a difficult issue. I don't use Spotify much, and I buy most of the music I consume, through iTunes or other legal download services. I've also contributed to a handful of musicians' Kickstarter campaigns. Still, I don't think Spotify and other streaming music services should shoulder all, or even much, of the blame for the current sad state of the music industry.

As I said on Facebook, being a musician during the pop music era has generally been a tough way to make a buck. There are a few musicians who make a great living, a few hundred artists who work their asses off and manage to scrap out a living, a bunch of other artists who have to supplement their income with day jobs.

Despite the stand Taylor Swift took on Spotify -- which was entirely her right -- streaming music ain't going away. Companies like Apple and Amazon are expanding into streaming.

The music industry is still struggling to find a good payment model. The big labels fought the Internet for years, and they lost.

I have a lot of sympathy for musicians. Heck, I'm a reporter in the print media industry. If any industry screwed up its response to the Internet worse than the music industry, it was print media. The Internet ate our lunch. Still, some media companies have finally found a way to make the Internet work for them. I hope the music industry can do the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top