Death By Download

The digital age combined with the internet is a perfect vehicle to get music to fans quickly and with very little overhead which, for the artist, presents an opportunity to directly connect with their fan base, so why has it all gone so wrong?  Well, one compelling factor is illegally downloaded music.

In my opinion, The Record Companies are to blame for the free download dilemma that is rife within the cyber world - they should have seen this coming and rallied together to prepare themselves,the industry and their label artists for it.

Napster was a slap in their faces and presented them with a very bitter reality pill to swallow but they were too busy wanking themselves over the next "big" thing to concentrate on events that were unfolding before them, the very events that could potentially cripple the very heart of what keeps them in business - the punters/fan $$$.

Its only recently that the big labels are trying to figure out the correct and most beneficial "model" for the sale and distribution of digital music - despite this being well over 10 years after Napster bent them over and shoved a big G Major up where the sun don't shine.

One main component on trying to rectify the free downloading situation starts with education - the average punter doesn't realise the ramification of downloading music for free - I guess in that aspect the artist is almost faceless - it doesn't occur to the fans that artists are also trying to sustain a living - but how do you educate a teenager (the majority of culprits practicing free downloading) about economics when they probably don't understand the concept of money? What excuse does the older generation have, knowing full well how hard it can be to make ends meet in day to day life?

Then other end of the spectrum are the Internet Service Providers(ISP's) - they need to play a role in thwarting illegal downloading but there would have to be some form of incentive presented to compensate their current business model, for the ISP's file downloads are the basis of their current revenue stream - so why would they implement a mechanism to cut off their own revenue supply?

The main issue is that while music fans can download music without paying for it, all other viable models for that revolve around a "pay for what you use" basis are doomed from the onset - why would anyone pay for music they can download for free?

There are various sites, which I eluded to in my previous blog, that allow users to download music for free (www.guvera.com)  while the artist is duly compensated. These sites will however take time to evolve further and expand their musical libraries, make their sites easier to use and provide quicker search facilities. Unfortunately these sites are fighting a losing battle against their formidable "download almost any song you can think of for free" opponents.

One important point of note that needs to be stressed is that some artists choose to allow their music to be downloaded for free but this is at their own discretion, they can control how long the "free" period lasts and what song(s) they will release for consumer consumption without charge - this form of promotion brings them closer to their fan base. It's also true, major artists such as Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails have established their own independent channel for the distribution of their music but this is the exception to the norm.

What the fans (especially the indie/alternate ones) need to realise is that if this continues, their access to this genre of music will rapidly be depleted over time - they will be stuck with mainstream mindless music - the only music that the major labels will hang onto and keep funding - its a matter of economics. When this happens, well - that's the day that music will truly die.

The Bad Apple

iTunes' ambition to dominate the digital music download market needs to be thwarted: Their dictatorial method of when and where music that you PURCHASE can be played is bullshite to the maximus. I emphasise the word "purchase" as the subject of this piece is music that is legitimately bought and not music that is downloaded illegally. The assumption of being able to play your music when and where you please is a reasonable expectation but have you ever tried playing your iTunes purchases outside of iTunes? Have you ever tried playing music that you purchased on iTunes on a NON Apple device? Have you ever tried to download your music that you purchased via iTunes from your Apple device back onto your PC?(e.g those times when the Hard Disk on your PC has crashed) Notice the lack of options within iTunes that allow for simple interoperability of your digital music and other non Apple musical devices?

Now, I have heard attempts to offer plausible reasoning for these limitations and restrictions, all based around the premise that Apple are making it difficult for digital music tracks to be copied between computers. Therefore making it more difficult to share music via peer to peer networking sites like LimeWire or even simply distributing music between your friends. Hence, the argument goes, Apple has the musicians best interests in mind by protecting their intellectual property. All of this is utter nonsense, Apple's best interests are Apple and their bottom line, they are a corporation (granted a technology leader in developing aesthetically superior computers, phones and digital music players) and as such creating a market where they alienate all competitors by developing their own proprietary hardware and complementary software. Fair enough you may say, after all its just business and all about increased market share but the music at stake isn't Apple's commodity to use as a bargaining chip, exacerbated further by the fact that Apple set their own price on that music. So, paradoxically, as Apples domination grows the more restricted the open digital music market becomes to the consumer(remember the days of domestic air travel in Australia before it became deregulated and we only had two options to choose from?), which is totally counter productive for the owners of the music - the musicians.

The future of music relies on the digital age - the way we consume music today has changed considerably (I don't agree with this, as I am a purist that still enjoys the humble record shop - but that's another subject for a different blog). So, if the  future of music relies on the digital age then surely this new digital market must be an open one? One where the consumer is free to purchase (or legitimately download for free ) music from various sources AND play these their music on devices of their choice? Surely this market should not be controlled by a single entity (especially one with other vested interests blinded by blatantly conflicting ones) but a variety of independent entities that ensure that digital music remains in and accessible via an open market AND that the welfare of musicians is not compromised.

There are examples of viable alternatives, groups that have been doing the groundwork, establishing and finalising agreements with the record industry and artists, the obvious one is MySpace Music, where artists and labels decide what music can be downloaded for free and music that needs to be purchased (Apple has recently launched Ping to try and combat this threat). Another company (an Australian company to boot) is called Guvera https://www.guvera.com/ , which is an example of where the consumer can download music for FREE (a la LimeWire) but the artist still gets PAID per download. Music downloaded or purchased at these sites can be played on any standard digital music player and/or copied onto any of your computers or portable drives.

Hopefully these alternative options represent the blueprint for the future of digital music; the distribution of such in particular - one that provides the consumer a diverse range of download options in addition to providing musicians a medium with which to form a mutually beneficial and harmonious relationship and most importantly, one that is free from domineering corporations.

OK Computer ... Now What?

On August 1, 1981 MTV was launched and with it came a massive shift within the music industry, particularly on the sales and marketing front. Music Videos were now the central focus and method by which Record Labels would sell music to the ever consuming public. Revolution or evolution, a debatable subject, since music videos did exist prior to MTV’s inception but, to some point, were much more low key.

In 1997, Radiohead’s ground breaking album, “OK Computer” was launched. Its subject matter involved a world dehumanised by the rapid and constant growth of technology. Fast forward a decade later and isn’t this the world we live in today?

Mobile Phones, The Internet, iPods/MP3 players, Facebook, Myspace etc. Where once we all communicated, to some point verbally, today we seem to isolate ourselves, shielded by this form of technology and this very technology is responsible for the current huge paradigm shift within the music industry. Digital Music and the easy accessibility to it, via a portal called The Internet, has resulted in quick and easy access to music that can be downloaded and played on a MP3 player within minutes, so much more convenient and cheaper than going down to the local CD shop. This has also led to a monumental increase in record piracy, as not all of these music downloads are actually paid for. This poses many problems, the two most important being Musical Artists losing revenue and the record labels becoming obsolete or at very best expendable.

So what to do? Well, many of you would be aware of Radiohead’s retaliation to this by releasing there latest album on the Internet and exclusively available on the bands Website, at a nominal fee, based on what the fan was prepared to pay. There have been many bands to follow this method, amazingly at the begrudging criticism of some artists like KISS and Moby…jealously or ignorance?, you be the judge.

So, what of the Record Labels, well they are also adapting, recently Myspace MkII was launched, a huge revamp on its old format where Record Labels such as Sony/BMG, Universal and Warner are actually investing in Myspace's new venture. With this new agreement, revenue generated from music downloads is divided up between Record Labels and their respective bands and artists. This format is by no means the only one currently evaluated, there are other online revenue based schemes out there but as Prince said this is a ‘Sign ‘O The Times’.

I think it's all early days yet but there is no doubt that record Labels and Artists alike, are taking this seriously and are doing what is required to ensure their ultimate survival…..Watch this space …..

Radiohead - In Rainbows

Its been many years in the waiting since the last Radiohead CD, too long in fact.

I must admit I was concerned that they would in fact never release anything again and even if they did, would it ever be as good as any of their previous efforts?

Someone once told me that you either get Radiohead or you don't, there is no middle ground when it comes to this bunch of "Oxfordites". I guess this does ring true, and admittedly their music does take a few listens to "get your ear in" and appreciate it for what's its worth.
Anyway, enough said.

"In Rainbows" certainly fits this notion but even on the first listen I felt that this was something special, so pure and so clean.

It is not as plaintive as most of their other stuff in fact its quite uplifting, maybe fatherhood has given Mr Yorke a new outlook on life, however the last song "Videotape" is pretty depressing, to me anyway.

In terms of other Radiohead release "In Rainbows" fits in somewhere between "The Bends" and "Kid A" a mixture of guitars and electronica but it still retains its uniqueness.

My favourite songs are:

• Bodysnatchers
• Reckoner
• House Of Cards
• Jigsaw Falling Into Place

"In Rainbows" is almost as good as "OK Computer"...almost. For me "OK Computer" is one of the THE finest albums ever made but that is another story..or should I say Blog.

Enjoy.
David