July 28, 2010

Are Musicians Losing Incentive to Make Music?

A recent study — by the same dudes who tried to discredit the notion that file sharing was sinking the music industry, no less — has found that file sharing has indeed taken a bite out of the music business’ pie.

That’s all well and good, but the RIAA has taken these findings — coupled with data from the U.S. Department of Labor, showing that the number of professional musicians correlates directly with album sales — and extrapolated a pretty specious conclusion: The downturn in sales of records and rise of file sharing is destroying the incentive of musicians to create and record music.

In other words, if musicians won’t sell albums they won’t make music. Now I understand wholeheartedly that a lack of record sales impedes a musicians’ ability to make a full-time living from music (just remember what Ted Leo said if you have any serious doubts about that fact). And I realize that the RIAA dissected SoundScan numbers to demonstrate a slowing of new releases over the last few years. However, none of this proves causation. If anything, it only proves that decreased sales destroys the incentive of record labels to invest in new music.

At the end of the day, though, will artists really stop making music altogether because album sales won’t prop them up (again, just remember Ted Leo’s frank discussion about the matter)? Sure, it might keep Interscope from giving Lady Gaga the budget to hire 45 extra session musicians (which accounts for at least one piece of the drop in “professional” musicians), but that’s hardly the same thing.

We’re talking about people who are compelled to make music, right? People stopped being delusional about getting rich and famous from being in a band 20 years ago, right? You make music to make music, right? Even when the grind of being in a band — sleeping in a van, eating poorly, living poorly, being away from family, showering irregularly — wears you down, that doesn’t mean you want to give up completely, right?

18 Responses to “Are Musicians Losing Incentive to Make Music?”

  1. On 07/28/10 3:50 PM, sammy said:

    I think a decline in professional musicians is and will continue to shift dominant music forms. You will lose the emergence of new bands with complex musical arrangements (like Arcade Fire, Radiohead, Coldplay, Polyphonic Spree, etc.) that need a lot of free time to work on their music and get more one-member artists (which seems to be a craze), electronic music (which goes hand in hand with the one-member thing) and more visceral, minimal music. I’m not saying this is a bad thing (although I personally think it is), but I do think it’s what is happening.

  3. On 07/28/10 7:30 PM, Sergio Hernandez said:

    One can still follow their dream of being in a band, touring, banging random chicks in Topeka, etc. without having to live like a pauper.

    The problem with a lot of musicians is that they have no backup plan. It’s successful musician or bust and when they bust, they end up a 30-something year old assistant manager at Hot Topic.

    Kids need to get a degree, save their money, and hire a financial planner. While that’s easier said than done and is decidedly un-Axl Rose, it will help them earn a good living and give them the possibility of retiring at 65 when their band “Weep for the Bullet Under the Rose” breaks up.

  5. On 07/28/10 7:56 PM, Shawn Bradley said:

    Come up with a better way to sell the product so the musicians and supporting companies can be paid properly. I don’t know what the plan should be, but if the dudes in suites in down town LA at the record companies would try to work on this not just be douchers , perhaps they could save there heads. Its like reading about the horse industry bitching about cars. Shit changes, adapt if you must. Im sure music will be ok drama queens. Knibb High Football Rules!!!11!!!1

  7. On 07/29/10 8:16 AM, Jay DiNitto said:

    In this situation I think it’s best, since there is less consumer demand for physical copies of music, to shift capital towards complimentary goods, like shows, tshirts/stickers/other merch, or specialized physical copies like vinyl and the like — although bands/labels are already starting to do this.

  9. On 07/29/10 9:17 AM, Dr. Jones said:

    So basically we’re going to lose the rock stars who charge $18 for a CD, and upwards of $100 for a concert ticket, and the DIY bands that have been making awesome music in their garages and charging $5 for a ticket to a house show are still going to be around. I don’t see a problem with that.

  11. On 07/29/10 9:54 AM, Jay DiNitto said:

    You probably wouldn’t “lose” the rock stars…they would just have to shift their prices in accordance with consumer demand. CDs don’t cost $18 dollars any more because there’s less demand for them from legal/illegal downloads. CDs were able to be sold at higher prices (the highest price) because the market could bear it.

    I don’t think concert prices would change that much because the demand for them remains the same (there’s no equal alternative to seeing band x live). If anything, the prices could increase because fans have more disposable income to spend from the drop in music prices.

  13. On 07/29/10 10:24 AM, sammy said:

    I don’t think anyone on Buzzgrinder is going to be talking about “rock stars”. Hell, I paid over $100 to see Tom Waits and no indie band has a damn thing on him.

  15. On 07/29/10 11:16 AM, Chad Pearson said:

    Very interesting. As one who has worked in the industry for a few years and owned a few labels (The Militia Group and P is for Panda) I used to never really mind “illegal” downloading. In fact, I swear its how some bands on Militia got discovered by their fans (Rufio, Copeland, Beautiful Mistake) and then those fans talked about them to their friends and then they got bigger and bigger and were able to make a living playing music.

    Now days, there seems to be a shift. All of a sudden its a fans right to download the record for free and then we all say, “I will go see a show and buy a shirt to show my support” Problem is, for the most part, people (myself included) dont live up to that promise, and these new artists, who need some developing and fan support, end up playing shows to maybe 5 people a night. Now, does that mean a band sucks and should just quit? No. (Ok in some cases, yes) It just means that the band/artist, might just go home and become a bouncer and not make music anymore.

    I am guilty of obtaining records illegally, I mean, the new Delta Spirit LP is 19 bucks. Ouch, and I dont want to spend 10 bucks to get just the mp3s when my buddy can give them to me for free. They just lost a sale. And since they are my buddies, I didnt pay for the show when they came into town, and I got another friend in for free too. But they are one of my favourite bands and I have never spent one penny on them. That just sucks. Doesnt that seem wrong? I wonder if we all stop to think about it, how many of our favourite bands have we never actually supported financially? Me personally – quite a few. And I am in the damn music industry. Holy hell. Also we all will bitch and moan when our favourite bands come to town and charge 20 -50 bucks to see them play and thus we just don’t go. What sucks, is they have to charge that much just to survive. Bands arent making money on the road anymore. For real. It may seem like it, but after a month tour – a band will be lucky to come home with 100 bucks. I hate it. I want the days of the $5.00 show back. But that won’t happen anymore unless we get Scion or some other desperate company who wants to “look” cool to sponsor the tour.

    Sheesh – rant wow, sorry about that – all in all, it is tougher out there. I have personally seen my salary cut in half this year because of lack of record sales. I don’t take percentage of a bands merch, live shows sales, etc etc – thats just plain wrong in my book. We can all sit there and blame the “evil” music industry, and we do need to accept responsibility for our actions, but we also should want to support our favourite bands, who we claim mean so much to me.

    Dammit, I just talked myself into buying that Delta Spirit LP. Thanks guys.

  17. On 07/29/10 12:33 PM, j said:

    maybe music shouldn’t be something you can make a living doing. maybe it should be something one does if they truly have something to convey – not for money, or any other reason that makes music a business. maybe music culture should be turned over to the bedroom/part time people. i’m not suggesting this should be permanent – but maybe everyone needs this:
    a. to weed out the bullshit
    b. to make listeners/fans more appreciative of what they are helping to destroy by expecting all music for free (and then making the empty promises, as chad suggested above)

    when bands tour in some foreign countries, they are treated with respect and admiration – something that rarely happens in the united states. it’s so different, that it’s shocking. something major has to change here for anything to get better.

  19. On 07/29/10 12:36 PM, sammy said:

    I have been a mp3 buyer for like 3 years now, and I don’t understand why people make such the big difference between that a physical copy. I stopped buying CDs because they took up too much room, I never looked at the packaging after I initially bought it, and I was just ripping it to my computer to put on my iPod anyway. Add to that that mp3s are cheaper than CDs have just about ever been (especially with the lovely eMusic), and I will gladly pay for mp3s to help support bands.

  21. On 07/29/10 4:36 PM, George said:

    @ sammy

    But in 30 years you won’t have that new Arcade Fire mp3 to give to your grandkids, while I will have one of 18 different physical copies to pass down- something for them to cherish and hold.

  23. On 07/29/10 6:45 PM, sammy said:

    Haha, yeah, but I will have 85 copies of every Coalesce album on vinyl in numerous colors to give them.
    Plus, I may not have kids. I haven’t settled down yet with a wife and kid and a teaching job to where I have to get a whole bunch of tattoos to convince myself I’m still cool.

    P.S. George, have you heard the 8 Years Colour Revolt song?

  25. On 07/29/10 8:16 PM, George said:

    You forgot motorcycle, and no, I haven’t heard it.

  27. On 07/29/10 8:21 PM, George said:

    @ sammy

    I take that back- I have already heard it. I liked it until he dropped the C word.

  29. On 07/29/10 8:23 PM, George said:

    @ sammy

    Also, three kids, not one.

  31. On 07/30/10 1:00 AM, Sean Cannon said:

    but the second and third kid don’t come until you’ve already gotten all the tattoos you can. except, of course, for the kids’ names nestled between your koi and black flag logo.

  33. On 07/30/10 1:47 AM, jimmy said:

    sorry dudes. i know home recording has done a lot for sound quality, but in all honesty, a great-sounding record (and i’m talking a OK Computer, Led Zeppelin IV, In Utero type record… i mean things that actual have gorgeous tones and top-notch production) costs money. it will always cost money. no record sales=no great-sounding records. sure, there will be exceptions (Funeral is one… those guitars sound fantastic), but as a rule, the days of delicious tape-recorded kick drums are gone.

    unless! you pay money for all those hours of pleasure you get from a great record. what else are you gonna do with that cash? i mean really.

  35. On 11/10/10 2:24 AM, Matt Bentley said:

    … let me guess. You make music? You don’t? How the fuck are you qualified to comment?
    Yes, incentive has definitely disappeared. Entirely. That is, external incentive. You cannot compete with free, even if you make your own stuff free, because everybody else already has the ‘name brands’ for free. So, the opportunity to get yourself heard- the promise that the internet delivered – is dead. Officially, over, until piracy becomes less mainstreamed once again.

ADVERTISEMENT

Leave a comment