IPODS?

[Temple of Blood]

I don't think the problem with smaller CD sales is primarily piracy.

I think it is the vast array of entertainment options that people have now.

Case in point, the comics industry has seen a similar drop to the music one and it's not because people are swapping free digital copies of comics they have scanned in.

It's because they have so many more entertainment options now due to digital media/the internet/cable tv with 200+ channels/etc.

I don't buy anywhere near as much music as I did 10-15 years ago. One reason is because I am older and feel like I have heard it all. My closet is full of CDs that I consider great and I have dispensed of the ones that weren't as good as those. It takes a lot for a band to release an album that is worthy of inclusion in there. I look around the internet at people's lists of the "top 20 metal albums of the year" and most of the time I like only 1 or 2 of those albums at all, and sometimes none of them. Few new metal bands are doing anything worth hearing to me and the old classic metal artists are almost all well past their prime. The old leaders of the metal scene aren't doing anything worth paying attention to except playing the old hits live and the singers can't come close to hitting the notes any more.

Another reason I don't buy near as much music is that I used to buy a lot of music merely to try it out but now I don't have to. In 2008, I can sample 1-4 tracks off MySpace before I make a purchase. Even nowadays this saves me quite a bit of money but costs quite a bit to the artists in sales I am sure.

Not everything about today's music scene is doom and gloom. There are some advantages to the consumer, that frankly are long overdue, like previewing tracks on MySpace.

I tend to think we built rock stars of the past up into demigods anyway and they were way overpaid. I don't mind seeing them put back down into their place of just being normal working stiffs now.

[Sascha]

I don't buy anywhere near as much music as I did 10-15 years ago. One reason is because I am older and feel like I have heard it all. My closet is full of CDs that I consider great and I have dispensed of the ones that weren't as good as those. It takes a lot for a band to release an album that is worthy of inclusion in there. I look around the internet at people's lists of the "top 20 metal albums of the year" and most of the time I like only 1 or 2 of those albums at all, and sometimes none of them. Few new metal bands are doing anything worth hearing to me and the old classic metal artists are almost all well past their prime. The old leaders of the metal scene aren't doing anything worth paying attention to except playing the old hits live and the singers can't come close to hitting the notes any more.

Wow! Please don't take it personal but to me this sounds way too grumpy and embittered. There is a LOT of actual stuff that is great and deserves to be bought and listened to. Sure you are right, that the market is bigger than 10 years ago and there is a lot of redundancy. You simply don't have the time to listen to all that stuff available.

But to say that there are no musicians today that deserve "demigod" status is wrong and ... well grumpy. At least it sounds so to me. I can only speak for myself but I feel the metal fire burning in so many new bands and I think it's great that they are there. Once again... Metal isn't the right genre for this discussion.

Sure, a guy like Robbie Williams is hyped too much and if you want it to say that way "overpaid". But this will be hard to find in Metal.

I'm just glad that many metal fans out there don't feel like you feel, because if they all would, there would be no reason for bands like Manilla Road for example to continue. And on KIT I saw many new (and young) fans of the old sound as well, so classic Metal will be strong for years to come.

[Prof]

I don't buy anywhere near as much music as I did 10-15 years ago.  One reason is because I am older and feel like I have heard it all.  My closet is full of CDs that I consider great and I have dispensed of the ones that weren't as good as those.  It takes a lot for a band to release an album that is worthy of inclusion in there.  I look around the internet at people's lists of the "top 20 metal albums of the year" and most of the time I like only 1 or 2 of those albums at all, and sometimes none of them.  Few new metal bands are doing anything worth hearing to me and the old classic metal artists are almost all well past their prime. The old leaders of the metal scene aren't doing anything worth paying attention to except playing the old hits live and the singers can't come close to hitting the notes any more. 

Wow! Please don't take it personal but to me this sounds way too grumpy and embittered. There is a LOT of actual stuff that is great and deserves to be bought and listened to. Sure you are right, that the market is bigger than 10 years ago and there is a lot of redundancy. You simply don't have the time to listen to all that stuff available.

Very true. There is an abundancy of great metal by new/young bands out there, you just have to set your mind to it and get into it! Why else but to (re)create good music would Temple of Blood be around, right?

As for those old geezers not being able to hit those higher notes anymore - at the latest KIT edition, Harry Conklin has proven you wrong TWICE. There are examples to the contrary, sure, but a healthy number of the older singers still are able to sing stuff from the 80s like they used to.
Plus, when I hear a younger guy like Michael Grant (Crescent Shield, Cypher Seer, Onward) doing his thing live at such a high quality level, it just amazes me that you would be inclined to only focus on the 'has-been' aspect of traditional metal.

The 80s were a golden age metal-wise, but denying all that quality that is around today is just an oversight and pointlessly negative, sorry.

[rapanzel]

I agree. Just take a look at the new, young bands that have this 80's spirit again, just awesome! There are so many new bands yet to discover, it's nearly impossible to get all great bands, due to lack of time or/and lack of money
Even in the modern age with all new technology, I still refuse to download stuff or getting into this MYSPACE thing. Sure, it helps young bands to get in touch with people from all over the worls, much faster than in the "old" times, when everybody was writing letters back and forth. Well, for me, this old type of conversation was much more personal than todays emails.
Anyways, the scene is exploding with some great bands and fans shoud support them!

[Jeff Ulmer]

hm, the key thing is - the music consumer knows that the artist does not get any money from the label for the 15 bucks he spends for the cd (maybe 50 cents besides your name is Metallica). So there's no benefit for the band, that's the thinking of the consumers. Hence to download music for free is ok. And I can understand that attitude looking at the behaviour of the music industry in the last 20 years.

Unfortunately, what the consumer "knows" when it comes to CD sales is not always correct, in fact, the assumption that artists do not make money from CD sales is completely false.

It is true that the per CD royalty may not be very much, but there are other factors that many people fail to recognize:
- the record company generally finances the recording, or at least buys a license to sell it. These actions alone can be the difference between music being released or not. Without the labels, the majority of artists would never have their music heard since going the independently financed/promoted route is a very long and difficult process, and given that the odds of success are heavily stacked against you, chances are that most people would simply give up somewhere along the way. The trade off for the artist is that, since they are not assuming the majority of the financial risk, they don't get as much of a return. Is it fair? Well, if the alternative is never getting your music published or your act promoted, then what is the true cost to the artist?
- CD sales do more than generate royalties for the artist, they are also used as a benchmark for every other aspect of an artist's career. The higher the record sales, the bigger budgets the artist can have for producing their next record; the more promotion they will get from the label; the higher performance fees they can command; the higher profile tours/performance opportunities they have access to; more exposure through better promotion means more opportunity for spin off ventures - merchandise etc.- and higher volume of these products mean lower per unit production costs=more profits. All of these are directly related to album sales.

The problem is that music has lost its financial value - it certainly is still very important in people's lives, otherwise there wouldn't be such a demand for ipods and access to downloads. It would be one thing if consumers had abandoned music entirely, but an industry based on free downloads is not going to foster the kind of atmosphere needed to discover and develop real talent, and what you will be left with is McMusic, stuff that people will buy in droves, but which has no lasting value. Of even more serious concern is that there is no distinction between music with value and music without - it's all available for free, so people just take it.

What needs to happen is an attitude shift amongst consumers. For too long people have been assuming the role of victim by blaming record companies, when really, the internet affords the perfect opportunity to allow new artists to flourish and connect directly with their fan base. Fans have the power to assume roles that were exclusive to the labels in the past - they can directly finance recordings by supporting their favorite artists work through sales, they can act as the publicists through bulletin boards and blogs. They can influence magazines to cover the acts by contacting them demanding articles (as opposed to labels buying space through advertising). All the tools are already in place for this to happen.

As for media, I have mixed thoughts. While I do love a well produced CD package, the convenience of digital files is hard to argue, both from a delivery standpoint and management/storage (as anyone who has moved/organized a large CD/LP library knows). I believe that physical media will soon be relegated to a niche market. While the cost of production may have fallen over the years, the cost of mailing has become restrictive. Anyhow, enough rambling.

In summation, the record companies aren't all bad. They have provided the opportunity and financing to allow thousands of artists a chance to be heard. CD/LP/download sales are important, even if the artist isn't making a huge percentage of the selling price (however for indie artists like yours truly, the profits aren't being skimmed off by the record company...). Lastly, even in a world of downloads, fans have the power to shape the music they listen to by directly supporting their favorite bands and allowing them to pursue their creative endeavors. I can only hope that the audience uses that power wisely.