Building a new music industry?

[skyrefuge]

The fact that the bandwidth is consumed largely by video isnt' surprising; the size of even high bitrate encoded music is still significantly smaller than even a crappy quality movie; so there is that to account for. In terms of sheer length, a 50 minute album encoded at 320kbps is still only just over 100 megabytes, where a 90 minute movie is going to be -at least- 600 megabytes or so for crappy quality encoding, though i'd wager most are in the multiple gigabyte range.

When the report gives its percentages based on content types, it is not counting bandwidth (the volume of data transferred). It is simply counting the number of torrents, or number of cyberlocker links. So file size does not factor in.

If they counted volume of data transferred instead, then music's percentage would be even smaller than it is.

Neil

 

[dcowboys311]

What's bogus about actually earning money from a product you've spent thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars developing? Just because a product isn't physical doesn't mean it costs any less to develop.

I'm a software developer by trade and I take steps to protect my work to be able to recoup my expenses. But I see thousands of downloads of my product on sites like RapidShare and MegaUpload claiming they have cracked the copyright protection. I don't download them because I don't want a virus, but it's very frustrating seeing more people download a pirated copy than who actually pay for my work.

I have to believe bands seeing their work freely distributed around the internet feel the same. And that's why I buy all the music in my collection and all the software on my computer.

I'd like to hear why you think copyrighting is bogus?

I have no idea what type of software you work in, so no clue if this is applicable to your situation...just curious and would like to hear from someone in the industry, I suppose.

I would think that for many kinds of software, piracy actually creates purchases. Could be totally wrong. Could be a stroke of genius.

Companies can't/won't function with pirated software. They need to buy legitimate versions to do their job well. So wouldn't some 16 year old kid downloading Photoshop and going on to use it in their career (legitimately) be a good thing? It's not like he'd be able to afford it either way...just wouldn't have had exposure to the product at all if it were not for piracy.

Definitely realize that this varies from software to software but I'd like to hear your input.

 

[skyrefuge]

Console gaming is harder to pirate and has been more successful financially than PC gaming. It's not difficult to see this trend manifest with companies like Bethesda making games more console-centric than PC-centric...that's just where the moneiz iz.

Are you done editing yet? Your assertion that console games are less-pirated than PC games may be reflected in the data. For the top 10000 torrents, they broke down games between console and PC. 281 of the 10000 torrents were console games, while 383 were PC games.

In comparison, only 291 were music, which is nominally the same as console games. However, I would guess that 281 console games represent nearly all of the console gaming industry's current catalog, while 291 albums are just a small fraction of the music industry's current catalog.

The seeders-to-leechers ratio is also noticeably higher for console games vs. PC games, perhaps indicating that while all console games are available, the difficulty in making use of them limits the amount that they're downloaded. However, the seeders-to-leechers ratio is even higher for music than it is for console games. Maybe this is due to the smaller file sizes, but it could also be an indicator that music is less in-demand.

Neil

 

[Dustin]

Interesting statistics! In regards to game piracy, it certainly is difficult for consol games to be pirated vs. PC just on the proprietary factors with the hardware involved. Not that it can’t be done, it’s just a very cumbersome process to make it work, and can cause costly issues with the hardware, so that might be why there are more seeders compared to leeches on those. When I bought my PS3, I know I took a stab at some old PS1 and PS2 pirate versions (that I used to own on disc format years ago) just for nostalgic reasons, and also since Playstation hadn’t re-released them as downloads at the time. The process to get them to work was so lengthy and buggy that I gave up on it after a few hours of failed attempts. So I would agree that because it’s not EASY to do, might make it a deterrent.

Returning back to the music topic regarding spiraling sales and piracy, I’m going to stick to my guns on my original theories, even keeping in mind the data included by Skyrefuge. I feel it is a problematic issue that is compounded by MORE THAN ONE factor. It appears that everyone is stuck to the tit of piracy, because it’s an easy target (no pun intended!) but it is not the ONLY reason of WHY, it is one of several contributing factors that seem to be overlooked.

1. TOO MUCH MUSIC – The more I analyze it, the more I feel this is still indeed the major problem. If your ears and mind were like your stomach, it can only retain so much at a time. The analogy used in the very beginning of this thread about used book stores is good, but another good analogy (which I used in the MySpace rant thread) would be that with the free market as well as the affordability & accessibility of quality recording technology – and if the world was a club or venue – there are more artists/bands climbing on stage that there are people paying at the door to attend, thus the pie slices getting thinner and thinner. There are several more examples that could be used, and I hear this more and more from the average Joe music consumer all the way up to the actual artists, some of which hold higher accolades, and making mention of this problem in interviews.

2. THE FREE MARKET – I love Steve Jobs for pushing technology to it’s limits, slowly moving away from the proprietary’s that Apple was know for, as well as putting out quality hardware/software. I love my iPhone and iPod, However, I despise him for his ideological views of a “free market” for music, unbundling the album, strong-arming the industry dinosaurs and artists, and allowing any schmoozer wannabe to compete on a digital level with no quality control. I know everyone disagrees with me, but I believe this goes hand-in-hand with the TOO MUCH MUSIC syndrome.

3. PIRACY – So there’s too much music, it’s a free market, and now you can go online and dump down to your HD whatever you are looking for, from the hottest selling artists, to the indie guy strumming guitar strings across his ass. Rather than sit and play “Samples” of hundreds of thousands of potential buys, it’s only a few mouse clicks to get everything and more for free and try it out later when you have the time to. As much as we all say we’ll buy it if we like it, the general majority of music consumers out there rarely, if never, buy anything in the long run if they already downloaded it.

4. GOOD-BYE BLIND BUYS - The days of blind-buying has been gone for years, and because of this trend, it makes consumers less apt to actually buy anything outright at all unless they listen to it first. Take in to consideration the first three problems listed above, and this one is self explanatory. Not a huge contributor, but still a contributor none the less.

5. CONSUMER COMPLACENCY – This is the nail in the proverbial coffin. With the digital age in full swing now, music has become, for lack of a better term, a “disposable commodity” for the consumer. There’s too much of it, it’s a level playing field for artists competing for potential buyers, it can be sampled up front or better yet, it can be acquired for nothing and as the end result, the consumer has nothing to show for it other than a crappy sound file on their computer. In the end, since it is not a tangible product, it really has no value whatsoever to the consumer. It has temporary satisfaction, and cannot be “sold” to re-propagate any value, but ironically can be easily deleted or re-acquired if the consumer deems it so. This is something that comes with the compounding issues in the first four factors, and ironically, according to the chart Glenn posted, Americans are the worst offenders. No surprise there.

 

[NuclearFire166]

actually I remember reading an article saying that the majority of most viri nowadays comes from blogs. In fact, you can get more malware and viruses from downloading music than from porn, because more people download music thesedays and obviously the people who write malicious software take advantage of this.

I fix computers for a living and the #1 reason that they come in to my shop is due to spyware/rootkit infection. The vast majority of infections seem to be from sites that relate to shopping, coupons, and celebrity gossip. Another major share comes from game sites geared towards little kids (a very sad state of affairs). Not as much stuff comes from porn it seems, because of the prevalence of the various ad-supported tube sites that don't really push crapware down people's throats anymore.

As far as music goes, it seems that having Limewire, Frostwire, or another clone of the same on a PC is a surefire reason for infection. Oftentimes, though, the people who get burned once switch to Rhapsody, iTunes, or some other pay service to get their music. This leads to another main reason for people to bring computers for repair - they screw up their iTunes library and want their music back.

 

[NuclearFire166]

In response to Dustin's excellent post above:

I think that with all the factors that you mentioned, the best way for a consumer to find music that they will love - and by this I mean that it will be a song to which they will get emotionally attached - is to be introduced to it and not seek it out. I think that bands have to - and are going to - tour more and get fans the hard way. A person who is enamored with a band's performance is likely to buy their CD at the show, while one who finds out about the band through a Google search is more likely to just torrent the songs.

 

[Pelata]

Good post Dustin...I would even say that #5 is a direct result of #1... there's so much, why bother?

 

[TribunalRecords]

Interesting statistics! In regards to game piracy, it certainly is difficult for consol games to be pirated vs. PC just on the proprietary factors with the hardware involved. Not that it can’t be done, it’s just a very cumbersome process to make it work, and can cause costly issues with the hardware, so that might be why there are more seeders compared to leeches on those. When I bought my PS3, I know I took a stab at some old PS1 and PS2 pirate versions (that I used to own on disc format years ago) just for nostalgic reasons, and also since Playstation hadn’t re-released them as downloads at the time. The process to get them to work was so lengthy and buggy that I gave up on it after a few hours of failed attempts. So I would agree that because it’s not EASY to do, might make it a deterrent.

Returning back to the music topic regarding spiraling sales and piracy, I’m going to stick to my guns on my original theories, even keeping in mind the data included by Skyrefuge. I feel it is a problematic issue that is compounded by MORE THAN ONE factor. It appears that everyone is stuck to the tit of piracy, because it’s an easy target (no pun intended!) but it is not the ONLY reason of WHY, it is one of several contributing factors that seem to be overlooked.

1. TOO MUCH MUSIC – The more I analyze it, the more I feel this is still indeed the major problem. If your ears and mind were like your stomach, it can only retain so much at a time. The analogy used in the very beginning of this thread about used book stores is good, but another good analogy (which I used in the MySpace rant thread) would be that with the free market as well as the affordability & accessibility of quality recording technology – and if the world was a club or venue – there are more artists/bands climbing on stage that there are people paying at the door to attend, thus the pie slices getting thinner and thinner. There are several more examples that could be used, and I hear this more and more from the average Joe music consumer all the way up to the actual artists, some of which hold higher accolades, and making mention of this problem in interviews.

2. THE FREE MARKET – I love Steve Jobs for pushing technology to it’s limits, slowly moving away from the proprietary’s that Apple was know for, as well as putting out quality hardware/software. I love my iPhone and iPod, However, I despise him for his ideological views of a “free market” for music, unbundling the album, strong-arming the industry dinosaurs and artists, and allowing any schmoozer wannabe to compete on a digital level with no quality control. I know everyone disagrees with me, but I believe this goes hand-in-hand with the TOO MUCH MUSIC syndrome.

3. PIRACY – So there’s too much music, it’s a free market, and now you can go online and dump down to your HD whatever you are looking for, from the hottest selling artists, to the indie guy strumming guitar strings across his ass. Rather than sit and play “Samples” of hundreds of thousands of potential buys, it’s only a few mouse clicks to get everything and more for free and try it out later when you have the time to. As much as we all say we’ll buy it if we like it, the general majority of music consumers out there rarely, if never, buy anything in the long run if they already downloaded it.

4. GOOD-BYE BLIND BUYS - The days of blind-buying has been gone for years, and because of this trend, it makes consumers less apt to actually buy anything outright at all unless they listen to it first. Take in to consideration the first three problems listed above, and this one is self explanatory. Not a huge contributor, but still a contributor none the less.

5. CONSUMER COMPLACENCY – This is the nail in the proverbial coffin. With the digital age in full swing now, music has become, for lack of a better term, a “disposable commodity” for the consumer. There’s too much of it, it’s a level playing field for artists competing for potential buyers, it can be sampled up front or better yet, it can be acquired for nothing and as the end result, the consumer has nothing to show for it other than a crappy sound file on their computer. In the end, since it is not a tangible product, it really has no value whatsoever to the consumer. It has temporary satisfaction, and cannot be “sold” to re-propagate any value, but ironically can be easily deleted or re-acquired if the consumer deems it so. This is something that comes with the compounding issues in the first four factors, and ironically, according to the chart Glenn posted, Americans are the worst offenders. No surprise there.

Dustin, i don't disagree with you on any points which is surprising hahaha. very well stated and putting a concise face/name to the issues at hand in today's market. and this coming from a record label owner and person in a band currently in the scene so i know about this all too well.

 

[Dustin]

In response to Dustin's excellent post above

Thank you kind sir!

I think that with all the factors that you mentioned, the best way for a consumer to find music that they will love - and by this I mean that it will be a song to which they will get emotionally attached - is to be introduced to it and not seek it out.

I have to agree here. In fact, as someone that buys a ton of music (and still place blind buys no less), I almost always find myself enjoying music recommended to me far more than casual purchases. But this of course is coming from people that know my taste when they make recommendations. I want to expand on this as you brought up something that is probably overlooked.

I would say that the problem now is that there is no filter out there for consumers, nor is there no longer a reliable or notable source outside of word-of-mouth or scavenging the internets. Seriously, with the flood gates open, where does one really start? Better yet, where does it end? 10-15 years ago, where did most people hear about artists? A vast majority was through radio, MTV/VH1 and - in a non-listenable format – print magazines. Outside of that, it was through word of mouth and/or “tape trading” and toa lesser extent, blind-buys. Now it’s debatable, but it would be safe to assume that non-casual music consumers don’t listen to the radio, watch music television, nor read print magazine (if any still exist) or “tape trade”. For sake of argument, we will call those old-school outlets “filters”, and most casual consumers relied on this method for years to hear what’s new, but now days, these filters are far too small, causing what could be potentially quality music from reach potential consumers ear, to spill out onto satellite radio and the internet instead. This in turn (I assume once again) results in these casual consumers turning to torrents to fill that void. Of course, this is only a mild example or scenario. I literally could list over a 1,000 scenarios (or excuses) I hear from people of why they don’t buy music, have no interest in checking anything new out… or are just plain in the dark outside of Lady Gaga.

I think that bands have to - and are going to - tour more and get fans the hard way. A person who is enamored with a band's performance is likely to buy their CD at the show, while one who finds out about the band through a Google search is more likely to just torrent the songs.

You have the right idea (someone being enamored with a live performance – a potential impulse sale at the merchandise booth!) However, the particular touring-model to make up for loss of revenue of music sales has been mentioned several times, and it is slowly starting to come to light that this is more likely to be an extremely expensive and a near-career ending direction to take.

Taking into consideration that there is too much music online, the same can be said on the touring circuit as well. Ironically, not only does it cost money to make music, but it also costs money to tour as well. Notable bands with a large, established fan base can get by on this method for now, however, smaller bands, bands on indie labels or even independent artists in general, would have to become a tribe of gypsies, touring relentlessly, making peanuts, and living a monk-like lifestyle… just to NOT have a day job (obviously they couldn’t if they were always on the road) and still support the costs of making music. Bottom line – unless the band has a trust fund baby supporting their ass, private investors willing to loose money, or still live with mom & dad and have a disposable job with no financial obligations, they could maybe make pull it off… maybe.


The minute you throw in even one of these variable: a car payment, mortgage payment, kids, tuition, medical bills/insurance or anything that would lead to a higher quality of life outside of top roman and a futon in a studio apartment; it then completely negates the continuous touring model and flat out throws that theory out the window.

Regardless of that, I guess it boils down to the quality of life said artist wants to live and what sacrifices said artist is willing to make to get their name out there.

Good post Dustin...I would even say that #5 is a direct result of #1... there's so much, why bother?

LOL… indeed! If piracy was 50% of loss sales… then #1 and #5 would easily make up for the other 50% .

Dustin, i don't disagree with you on any points which is surprising hahaha. very well stated and putting a concise face/name to the issues at hand in today's market. and this coming from a record label owner and person in a band currently in the scene so i know about this all too well.

Thanks Matt! …I think I might have peed myself a little after reading your statement!

 

[Corsair]

Are you done editing yet? Your assertion that console games are less-pirated than PC games may be reflected in the data. For the top 10000 torrents, they broke down games between console and PC. 281 of the 10000 torrents were console games, while 383 were PC games.

In comparison, only 291 were music, which is nominally the same as console games. However, I would guess that 281 console games represent nearly all of the console gaming industry's current catalog, while 291 albums are just a small fraction of the music industry's current catalog.

The seeders-to-leechers ratio is also noticeably higher for console games vs. PC games, perhaps indicating that while all console games are available, the difficulty in making use of them limits the amount that they're downloaded. However, the seeders-to-leechers ratio is even higher for music than it is for console games. Maybe this is due to the smaller file sizes, but it could also be an indicator that music is less in-demand.

Neil

Yeah, Sorry about the post editing. I tend to type before thinking. so most of my posts go through 2-3 revisions before i actually end up saying what I want to say