Stump Does Concert with 50 Cent, the Demise of Albums going Platinum: What's Going On Here?

This week I had the opportunity to explore the blogosphere and educate myself about some interesting things in the music industry. Both posts I decided to comment on were from the blog Idolator. I first read about an interesting concert pairing. We have all heard of shows where artists who do not fall into the same bracket play together, but the pairing of Fall Out Boy frontman Patrick Stump and 50 Cent takes the cake for most ridiculous concert bill. Next, I read about some rather sad news in the music industry. It appears as though CD sales are so small that artists are having difficulty going platinum. This is obviously a result of file sharing and illegal music downloading. This is terrible because going platinum used to be a milestone for musicians, and now it looks like artists can only do this if they are popular culture icons like U2. For more recently successful musicians it looks like the opportunity to go platinum will disappear once the music industry initiates its new business plan providing free music for everyone. Below you can find links to the blogs and my comments.


"No, Patrick Stump, There's No Way to Make 50 Cent Credible"
Comment

I could not agree with you more. Tours with artists who clearly have extremely different core fan bases are a terrible idea when these artists are as well known as Patrick Stump and 50 Cent. However, this pairing may not be for favors to a record label or exposing new people to music. It is possible that they are touring together because they are unable to play their desired venues alone at this point in time. With the economy in shambles people are less willing to pay for over priced tickets, therefore, a good way for both Stump and 50 Cent to play large venues while making a profit is to tour together knowing that their fans may not like both of their sets. The Stump/50 Cent combo is just ridiculous in my opinion even though both are part of the popular music genre, just different ends of the spectrum. There may be a few people at this particular show that do not know anything but popular music and are fans of both, but a great amount of the people at the concert will, as you said, “go to the concession stand during [50 Cent’s set].” Also, this pairing is not the brightest choice for both because as a rock fan I know that pop/punk rockers are not typically big enough fans of club banger music to want to see it live. There’s a big difference between the mix on your CD or iPod and a concert. However, since we are talking about bands touring together, there is an interesting combo set to tour in the near future: Nine Inch Nails and Jane’s Addiction. This combo is unlikely because Nine Inch Nails produces electronica music and Jane’s Addiction is rock/funk, but the paring is understandable at the same time. You won’t have as many people “hating actively” during their sets if they are there to see just one of the acts. Both bands came up in the 80’s and 90’s, their music is more similar than the Stump/50 Cent pairing, and they probably share some of their audience members. Big name acts like 50 Cent and Patrick Stump should really tour with acts more similar to their own while at the same time different when they are making efforts to expand their fan bases.

"CD Sales: How Long Can They Go?"
Comment

It is sad that only mega-huge groups like U2 can have a shot at going platinum. File sharing and torrent downloads are killing the meaning of album sales. Since music is hardly ever purchased anymore album sales do not correlate with artists getting the masses to hear their music. U2 probably would have gone platinum already if it were not for illegal downloads. It is also compelling to think about how many artists would go platinum that are not as well known as U2, but since their demographic might be younger and more familiar with how to download music they do not sell albums at the same rate bands like U2 do. I think that file sharing, if it could be calculated, combined with album sales would a good way to judge if an artist’s music is prolific. Anyways, these things will not even matter in a few years. Labels are preparing to make music free through ad-supported models like Qtrax. There will be no such thing as albums going platinum, just download stats. Once music is free, download stats will not even matter since people will be able to download albums without having any sort of repercussion like a smaller wallet. Therefore, people will just download everything without a care, and the music industry executives will be raking in the money through the ads users have to see to get the music they want. I do not think you are outing yourself as an old school person for having these feelings. I am a college student who shares your same beliefs. It is hard to sit and watch the music industry make changes to its business plan as a result of file sharing and illegal downloads. Fifteen years ago, which is not really that long, the music industry was thriving, and awesome bands like Alice in Chains, Nirvana, and artists like 2 Pac were doing great. Now, the quality of music has diminished since the major labels cannot take as many risks with whom they sign and promote. Album sales are sadly obsolete now, who knows what will replace them to generate the same stats and information.

Uncontrollable Illegal downloading, legally free music, and 360 deals: Good or Bad?

In my previous posts I have explained my grievances with illegally downloading music as well as possible solutions for the problem. In this post I explain how now that music is available for free, people will not willingly start to pay for it. When solutions for tracking Internet piracy are presented people just come up with a way to get around getting caught. While the music industry wants the climate of their business to be different they have started to realize that they need to embrace the situation and start to change the plan of their business to generate income in different ways. The importance of changing their way of collecting money became more crucial this week when an Internet organization announced the release of software that will leave no trace of illegal downloading when used by downloader’s. Now it is more important than ever for the music industry to change their business model in order to compensate for the possibility that they will never be able to collect money from lawsuits regarding Internet piracy.

Illegal downloading of music is inevitable. It is a shame that artists are getting robbed of their products over the Internet, but there is nothing record labels, artists, or law enforcement can really do to stop individuals from around the world from bootlegging music. An organization called “The Pirate Bay” announced that they are launching the beta testing phase of their virtual private network (VPN) software, which would enable users to use the Swedish BitTorrent tracker without leaving a data trail for only a small monthly fee of about seven dollars a month. "Surfing the Internet leaves a trail of "cookies" – messages web servers send to your browser when you visit internet sites." What does it mean to have no data trail? Let me tell you…

When you hear stories about people getting arrested for illegally downloading copyrighted material or just making it available such as music, movies, or software; or even doing unlawful things over the Internet it is not because they tracked down by the FBI or Interpol going door to door looking for them, these people get arrested because of their data trail, otherwise known as their digital footprints, on the Internet. If there is no trail to follow, these people cannot be arrested. Therefore, the release of The Pirate Bay’s VPN software will be not only detrimental for the music industry, but for all industries affected by Internet piracy. This software is the equivalent of a tool or something professional thieves could use, if it existed, that would erase all traces of their crime with the push of a button. Evidence of outrage towards The Pirate Bay organization is even prevalent on their website, but interestingly they almost like how much corporations hate them. Legal threats have been made by companies from around the world towards The Pirate Bay from Microsoft, DreamWorks, EA, SEGA, Warner Music, Apple, Warner Bros, and the MPAA, just to name a few.

The VPN that The Pirate Bay is going to launch is going to be called IPREDator, “named after IPRED,” which stands for Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive a measure made by the European Union aimed at preventing Interent piracy as well as other forms of copyright infringment made over the Internet. IPRED is set to launch in Sweden on April first. IPRED is the main reason the VPN IPREDator is being launched by The Pirate Bay. It is a response to the regulation set forth by the European Union. As evidenced by the statement “0 torrents has been removed, and 0 torrents will ever be removed” from The Pirate Bay, illegal downloading is now a part of everyday life around the world, while corporations mostly wish to stop internet piracy, this is not necessarily the case for the music industry. Music industry CEO’s and musicians may wish things were different, but things are getting set in motion to make the best out of the situation.

Victoria Shannon, an author for the International Herald Tribune, explains that “the mainstream music industry is coming to recognize a price for digital songs that might be good enough to compete with the underground exchange of tunes on the Internet: free.” This acceptance of an illegal practice came swiftly since sales have been dropping faster than imaginable. The catch to getting this free music is exposure to advertisements. A website that has joined the ad-supported free-music business is called Qtrax. The business model for Qtrax is stressing the point that they are the “first free and legal peer-to-peer music service.” The great thing about Qtrax is that all the major record labels are signed on to have their music on the service totaling about twenty-five million tracks, which is only an estimate from other peer-to-peer networks. Another great quality about the Qtrax service is that the downloads will be virus and spyware free as well as clear of any technical obstacles that other peer-to-peer networks are recognized for. Qtrax is not the only interface available that allows music to be downloaded legally. There are other programs such as Rhapsody that allows users to legally download music over the Internet for free or very small monthly/yearly fees.

Hopefully, despite The Pirate Bay’s VPN software, people will choose legal ways of obtaining music over the Internet. People are obviously at work in the music industry to compensate for losses resulting from Internet copyright infringement now that they realize that there is not much they can do to stop people from downloading. While people might enjoy aspects of free and legal music there are however ways that artists could be hurt if record companies decide to move to advertisement based revenue. No doubt, it will most likely be able keep the music industry afloat, but this aspect of this business plan could cripple artist’s income from their music being free instead of sold. Also, in addition to musicians making less money from album sales their deals with record labels might include the record companies taking a cut of merchandise and tour revenue, which are currently the main ways artists are making money. This type of deal is also known as a 360 deal which means that artists will "give labels their standard cut of CD and digital download sales, but also give them a percentage of event ticket profits, merchandise sales, endorsement deals and anything else that uses the artist’s brand or music." These deals are becoming more common these days, and will soon be mandatory as labels prepare for the free music business plan.

Paramore, a popular rock band has had great success under the contract of their 360 deal. There are definitely some perks to bands signing this type of arrangement because "in return for that bigger share, labels might give artists more money up front and in many cases touring subsidies that otherwise would not be offered. More important, perhaps, artists might be allowed more time to develop the chops needed to build a long career. And the label’s ability to crossmarket items like CD's, ring tones, V.I.P. concert packages and merchandise might make for a bigger overall pie." There are however, some serious drawbacks to the terms of a 360 deal. "The industry’s hunger for 360 deals might also subtly shift the ways labels view the scouting and cultivation of talent, a process known as A&R, or artist and repertory, development." This means that rather than officials working for record labels looking for new talent, developing a bands image and sound, they are going to be looking for the complete package - bands that are already have a look and material ready for radio play and touring. This will make it very difficult for emerging acts to get signed.

Whatever happens in the music industry those responsible for this situation are the people illegally downloading copyrighted songs. Executives and CEO's are always going to be alright, but the musicians who just want to pursue a career they are passionate about, a career that entertains millions of people every day may end up suffering. The Pirate Bay's VPN and other services that allow music to be downloaded illegally only make the situation worse, but hopefully the music industry is going to flip the current condition on its head and make the climate of the music industry better for both the executives and the artists.

Two Sides of Music: New Downloading Ideas and Some Tips For Musicians

This week I decided to do some more research on internet downloading. Coolfer had a great post titled "Choruss Keynote at Digital Music Forum East" about a new peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing program called Choruss. Starting off as an experiment on college campuses, Choruss will hopefully revolutionize the way music is paid for; or rather make music get paid for. You can read the Keynote speech by clicking the picture of Jim Griffin, the creator of Choruss, below and to the right. I also did some research on some new ways musicians can help their careers. I stumbled upon a post on Buzzsonic called "Keeping Every Fan Happy Through Communication" which outlines some great ways for musicians to acquire fans and keep their fans. I found the author of this post provides some insight to very useful tools that all original artists should be aware of. The author goes over some new programs and widgets available on the Internet that can open new lines of communication between artists and fans, and even goes over strategies for keeping fans that require using more than one of these advantageous programs. I actually called one of my current gigs immediately after reading this post because I had to tell him about the new knowledge I obtained. Below you can see the comments I made on these two posts from the blogosphere.

"Choruss Keynote at Digital Music Forum East"
Comment

Choruss is definitely a great idea. Making those who download music pay fees for the music would obviously be a great leap forward for musicians of all levels of fame in addition to the music industry as a whole. The fees collected from the ideas presented by Choruss could rekindle the music industry, put money in the pockets of artists and labels who are desperately needing it, and also help independent bands break. As Jim Griffin, Choruss’ founder pointed out “According to their industry associations – and indie music has proven especially supportive of Choruss – independent artists fare better on digital networks, and Choruss is committed to fairness.” If his experiment proves to be successful I do see some issues with the Choruss implementation on campuses. While all of Griffin’s ideas are sound he has clearly forgotten some facts about college students that are very pertinent in regards to today’s music downloading community. Even if students are required to have the Choruss software on their computers it does not mean that they will use, even if the software has to be purchased by them. College students, who likely have monthly allowances given to them by their parents, in addition to the possibility that they probably are unemployed or do not make much money at their day job, are very unlikely to be willing to pay for P2P downloads: especially if they are charged by the file size or by the song. Students at universities are well aware of the software available to them on the Internet that can get them all the music in the world for free, asking them to pay for it will not go over well when they have other things they could spend their money on. I see the only way for something like Choruss to be successful on the college campus level is to have some sort of access restrictions to using the Internet on campus. Something like If the server on campus detects illegal file sharing software on an individual’s computer then they cannot use the internet on campus until it is deleted would be an effective measure to ensure the Choruss software is used by students, even if it is only while they are at school. I really like the ideas presented by Jim Griffin, I hope Choruss gets launched soon.

"Keeping Every Fan Happy Through Communication"
Comment

Hey Greg, this post really hit home for me. I am one of those musicians that you are talking about who has to juggle time between school, a day job, recording sessions, and gigs for multiple bands. Your assessment that fans must be kept happy since in this day and age “there is no excuse, no communication gaps or barriers stopping you from developing relationships with every fan that wants one” could not be more accurate. There is no doubt that only the most successful bands open lines of communication with their fans. Interaction is a key factor in getting crowds to shows as well as enticing people to listen to your music constantly. As you said, “If you can listen to your fans, you are well on your way to keeping them happy.” If people do not feel like they know about a bands members and their personalities they can only care about buying your music and showing up to gigs so much. Personally, it has not been my responsibility to promote the bands that I play for (I am a sideman), but from my experience responding to fans MySpace messages or e-mails is the absolute least you can do. The Canned Response feature from G-Mail is something I am going to tell my current gigs and all my future ones about. The fact that fans feel attended to after they send you without you, the time crunched indie-musician, having to spend the time to write them a personal message is awesome. Also, your point about directing your fans to interact with you in specific ways like meeting from 7-9 on Twitter is an excellent way to grab attention. Then combining your automated response from Canned Responses or messages you have saved to guide fans to interact with you tells the fans that as an artist you care about them. This way even though they may know that the response is automated, at least fans are informed of ways they can get in touch with you in a more intimate environment. This is a great post to help bands begin to learn the art of promotion and keep fans interested in the music you are creating.

I Know It's Only Rock N' Roll, But I Like it: Can I Afford it?

 Talk has been occurring throughout February over the merger between the ticket broker service Ticketmaster and the giant national concert promoter Live Nation. This week deliberation over the merger of Ticketmaster and Live Nation heated in Washington D.C. The contemplation is partly due to the possible violation of the Sherman Anti Trust Act, which was created to “prohibit abusive monopolies.” According to the Rule of Reason in the Sherman Anti Trust Act, this merger would be using tactics that are illegal to maintain power in the music industry because Ticketmaster/Live Nation would be in control of too many facets involved with artists booking shows, prices for tickets, music distrubution, etc. If this merger occurs it could mean that “too much power over the U.S. and global live music industry [would be] in the hands of just one company,” according to the Reuters MediaFile blog. Interestingly, some artists have expressed that they are in favor of the Ticketmaster/Live Nation merger. This unification given the current state of the economy could actually be terrible for artists and their tours. Artists who have already achieved fame are in favor of this merger because the company it would result in would provide them with great services in addition to a rather large signing bonus. With so much control of the market, the amalgamation of these two companies could mean very high ticket prices, and end the "golden age of concerts."

The proposed merger is clearly a bad idea. Currently economic geniuses like Warren Buffet predict that the economy is doomed at least for this year and possibly for years to come. Buffet stated that “the economy will be in shambles throughout 2009–and for that matter, probably well beyond” in his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders just last week. With the music industry in such turmoil for the last few years, this merger could be traumatizing for the concert aspect associated with it. I've already explained how illegal downloading is killing the music industry, but some say "the age of downloading could be turning into a golden one for the concert business." This golden age of concerts could be over very quickly if this merger goes through when considering that right now people have less money to spend in general. Therefore, the odds of an average American being willing to pay for expensive tickets accompanied with surcharges is getting smaller every day. Now consider rock star Alanis Morissette's manager who explains "only 10 percent of artists make money on record sales; the rest go on tour." If people cannot afford to go to a concert, how are artists going to make a living? I am not talking about already successful acts like Seal, Journey, Van Halen and Shakira careers dying. I am talking about new artists trying to make it. Some of the aforementioned acts already signed a $70 million multiple rights deal with Live Nation last year, I doubt up and coming acts will be offered such generous deals. Thus, artists and consumers/concert goers are going to suffer from the amalgamation of Ticketmaster/Live Nation because of the monopoly it would create. New artists will have a much more difficult time getting deals similar, or even close, to acts like Van Halen. 

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer slammed the deal ahead of its formal announcement, calling for a federal probe into Ticketmaster, the top U.S. ticket vendor. Schumer proclaims that "this merger would give a giant, new entity unrivaled power over concert-goers and the prices they pay to see their favorite artists and bands. It must be viewed skeptically and scrutinized." I have no choice but to agree with Schumer. In the article "Live Nation to Buy Ticketmaster," author Yinka Adegoke explains that the merged company would have more than 140 concert

 venues around the world resulting in the newly merged company selling over 140 million tickets during the year. They would be selling the tickets for 22,000 concerts a year, and additionally, Ticketmaster/Live Nation would manage a client roster that included acts like Madonna, Jay-Z, Miley Cyrus, and the Eagles. With the U.S. economy in such turmoil this could possibly be catastrophic, and could be the final blow to the already dying music industry. Rock star Seal stated in his letter which was mentioned in the Reuters blog that “The record business is not what it used to be” as a reason for his support of the merger, but this is exactly why the unification of these two huge companies should not be supported. James Love, a writer for the Huffington Post, explains that “the merger would reduce competition in the core business areas of both companies, it would likely lead to high ticket prices, while making small independent booking venues and artists both more vulnerable in business dealings with the new giant.” There are already expenses associated with using Ticketmaster and Live Nation when purchasing concert tickets such as surcharges. There are processing fees and consumers even have to pay just to obtain the privilege of printing a purchased ticket at home some times adding up to ridiculous sums. Pearl Jam actually canceled part of one of their tours because of these surcharges and the control it had of the ticket market in 1994, but ended up giving into using Ticketmaster's services a year later. Fred Moody, from the "Seattle Weekly" sheds light onto the dispute between Ticketmaster and Pearl Jam. According to their manager, the band "objected to Ticketmaster's service charges on two grounds. Ranging from $4 to $8 from venue

 to venue for the same $18 ticket, the charges clearly bore no relationship to the ticket price, and appeared to have no relationship to the cost of the service provided. And even at their lowest level, the service charges seemed unreasonably high." 

Just for fun I decided to see how horrendous these charges are by going to Ticketmaster’s website to do some investigating. I pretended to “buy” tickets for the 80’s cover band Steel Panther, who plays every Monday night at the Key Club in Los Angeles. The price for the ticket was eighteen dollars, and then they tack on another two and a half dollars if you want to print your ticket. However, there is the option of picking up your ticket at the venue before the event. To do this Ticketmaster charges customers a dollar when they already have to use gas and time to get to the venue. The only way Ticketmaster's services are free is if event goers want to pick up their tickets the evening of the event they are attending. Now, I agree that $2.50 or $1.00 is not an insane amount of cash, but when buying a ticket for hundreds of dollars it seems quite unnecessary to tack on a couple extra dollars when Ticketmaster already owns about 70% of ticket distribution nationwide. Combine this 70% ownership of the market with Live Nation moving from concert promotion to making record deals, all of a sudden two companies merge together creating a monopoly. If these two companies unite there would be no incentive for Ticketmaster/Live Nation to sell tickets at their face value since almost all their competition would cease to exist, causing consumers to go to less concerts since tickets will become so expensive.

While this deal might appeal to some artists on paper, it is not as it good as it looks at first glance. If concerts are not selling out then the artists and the other parts of the music industry, even Ticketmaster/Live Nation are going to lose money. These two companies possess too much power in the concert circuit and music industry without their fusion, when combined the drawbacks of the merger would be severe. Concert ticket prices would sky rocket causing concert attendance to decrease, which would mean that artists would lose one of the last ways that they make their living. Also, the merger is only going to make it harder for new artists to achieve success since so much would depend on how the officials at Ticketmaster/LiveNation feel about them. Hopefully this merger is prevented so people can still go to concerts for decent prices, and also so there is still hope for new and up and coming artists. If people cannot afford to go to concerts how are artists going to make a living in the music industry given its current environment?

Consumers Vs. The Industry: Internet Downloading and the Guaranteed Hit

In my previous post I discuss how artists are dealing with lawsuits due to the fact they are literally copying other artist’s melodies and chords, which is causing the music released to the mainstream to become “safe” for music industry executives because they know they will make a profit. This week I explored the blogosphere and discovered an article that talks about the other side of the music industry’s fight for life. The first blog I read was an Idolator post titled “Copyfighers: Yep, They’re Still Jerks, For the Most Part” explains how people go out to stores and place stickers on merchandise that say it is available over the Internet for free whether it is music, software, or movies. The next article discusses what this mindset causes the music they love to become the same thing with a twist. While the creators of this post may not have the same type of authority as a website that only discusses music, Albotas.com has a large community that explores their website every day. The post “Proof that Mainstream Music is Bad For You: Every Hit Song Uses the Same Four Chords” is not all that serious, but it does provide some insightful information and sounds for everyone interested in music and the music industry. Just because the post is satirical does not mean it has no value. The video that accompanies the post includes a few guys, one playing the piano and another one or two singing the lyrics to songs dating back to the 1960’s until as recently as 2008 with the same four chords being played the same way the entire time. This is similar to an argument I made in my last post about how record labels do not take risks. Just like during the Tin Pan Alley, the music industry is purely concerned with yielding a profit. Rap and hip-hop artists want to make a “club banger,” while pop/rock artists want to have a hit single. My responses to these posts can be found below underneath the title of the post from the blogosphere.


Copyfighters: Yep, They're Still Jerks, For the Most Part"

Having read your post I firmly agree with you in the fact that The Free Art and Technology Association engages in deplorable conduct in their using “Available Online For Free” stickers on copyrighted merchandise. Placing these stickers is in essence aiding and abetting others to commit theft. This type of theft stretches beyond the music business, expanding to all aspects of the entertainment industry as well as the software empire. Those associated with placing the “Available Online For Free” stickers do not realize that they may actually be destroying the art form they love, whether they place the sticker on a DVD, video game, or a compact disc. Internet downloading may always exist, but if more people are conscious of the effect of these kinds of actions, perhaps some change can be made to allow room for new genres and artists to make it in the ever so hungry, yet dying music industry. It is ethical if an artist or label permits one song to be downloaded for free. This is called promotion. However, without consent from the artist or label, whether it is one song or an entire album, it is pure theft. Because the economy is in a state of flux it is necessary for people to spend their money to serve as a stimulus to the marketplace, not only for just the entertainment/music industry, but also throughout all sectors of society. The music industry is currently in an age of marketing prepackaged and ready to sell bands and artists to the public due to the increased amount of copyrighted and released music being pirated on the Internet. This practice not only interferes with the opportunity for new bands to get signed and promoted by record companies, but also obstructs certainty that a record label will gain financial reward from their investment. Labels are reluctant to sign artists that do not fit the mold of popular musicians because there exists a greater chance their investment will never be profitable. The idea of artists getting “discovered” has virtually disappeared due to the fact current artists on the radio have existed since the pre-MySpace era or they have a ton of fans via MySpace, or finally if they win some reality television show like American Idol. The ultimate effect of the Free Art and Technology Association’s “Available Online for Free Stickers” contributes to artists, software engineers, and even record storeowners becoming unable to make a living.


“Proof that Mainstream Music is Bad For You: Every Hit Song Uses the Same 4 Chords”

As a musician I find it very pleasing that other people have noticed this phenomenon in mainstream music. Is there anything original anymore? The pending lawsuit of Satriani versus Coldplay over Coldplay’s potential copyright infringement of Satriani’s song “If I Could Fly” with their song “Viva la Vida” speaks for this cause. There is little doubt that that this action involves the simple addition to an exact replication of the music composed by Satriani. Coldplay is far more mainstream than Satriani, not to put Satriani’s fan base down. Despite this controversy, Coldplay performed this song in the most recent Grammy’s before millions of viewers who have never heard of Satriani. Despite this known controversy Coldplay won the coveted Song of the Year Award for it. There is no doubt Satriani might have contempt for Coldplay, however, as an artist and composer of the melody he must have been hopeful they would as his fan base would only potentially grow once the truth was revealed. Does the addition of original lyrics make it a new composition? However, your post forgets to mention that there are different melodies/lyrics being sung over the songs you have compiled, which apparently appears to be a key factor when discussing just how original a song is. Since the beginning of music, songwriters have reused and appropriated or misappropriated, the same chord progressions while adding a different melody. Having the chords sound different accompanied with a different melody is essential element for a song to remain within certain copyright boundaries. However, as your video has shown, as long as the chords are played at the same rhythm or timing, any song can be sung to them, the same progression of chords played a different way is a different ball game. Is the fact that mainstream songs use the same four chords bad? It is important however that in a New York Times article by Jeff Leeds that "the big record companies, whose fortunes are still overwhelmingly tied to CD sales, are taking a far more expansive view of how to carve out pieces of the music economy, which by some estimates runs as high as $75 billion, including recording sales, music publishing, concert ticket and merchandise sales and other sources of revenue," which is undoubtedly on of the reasons for this phenomenon. I am not certain that "bad" is the best way to analyze this situation. Countless bands such as Elvis, the Beatles, Bob Dylan, and the Rolling Stones have not only become legends but also voices of social movements in the United States.

Modern Tin Pan Alley: Chord Progressions, Melodies, Sampling, and the Music Industry

To the public the Grammy’s is an award show where musical proficiency and creativity is awarded. To artists in the music in the music industry there exists an undercurrent where other musicians are getting recognition by ripping-off other artists music and lyrics. In the latest Grammy Awards Coldplay won the coveted Song of the Year award for their song “Viva la Vida.” Great controversy exists about this award because this song undoubtedly resembles a song recorded about five years ago by guitar virtuoso Joe Satriani titled “If I Could Fly.” Coldplay's song is musically very similar if not exactly what Satriani composed the only difference is that Coldplay had a lyricist singing the melody he arranged on the guitar. Despite Satriani filing a claim of copyright infringement before the Grammy Awards, Coldplay still won the song of the year. Interestingly, Satriani was rooting for the song to win because it would mean his song won an award and he would receive more money upon his successful lawsuit against them (click on the picture of Joe Satriani on the left to hear clips from both songs). This practice of re-appropriation dates back to a time period called Tin Pan Alley, which went from about 1885 to 1930. Also, classical era composers appropriated chord progressions and melodies from other composers. During the Tin Pan Alley era of music publication “song composers were hired under contract giving the publisher exclusive rights to popular composer's works. The market was surveyed to determine what style of song was selling best and then the composers were directed to compose in that style. Once written, a song was actually tested with both performers and listeners to determine which would be published and which would go to the trash bin.” It is widely understood that during this time composers would attempt to replicate already popular songs with either similar chord progressions or similar melodies accompanied by different chords. The goal during the Tin Pan Alley days of songwriting was purely to make a profit from a composition. Why is this important? It is important because it resembles the climate of the music industry today as evidenced by mega pop groups like Coldplay as well as other genres of music such as rap and hip-hop. Since the emergence of hip-hop, a practice similar to the replication during tin-pan alley, has been used to write songs. This practice is called sampling. The problem with what Coldplay did, and artists who use sampling, is that they do not give any credit to the people they sample, and in Coldplay's case, blatantly copy.

Arists have been using the same chord progressions since the rock genre began. The difference between using the same chords and the sampling that is used in hip-hop music is that the rap/hip-hop artists take already recorded material and put it into their songs, otherwise known as sampling. In “modern-day sampling" it is necessary to use the actual sound recorded by the original artist. Musicians in a sense sample when they use the same chord progressions in a song, but this type of sampling is different because they actually take their instruments into the studio and use them during the recording process. "For example, versions of the folk song ‘In The Pines,’ alternatively known as ‘Where Did You Sleep Last Night,’ have been recorded in 160 different variations by such varied artists" like jazz saxophonist, Bill Monroe, and Seatle grunge-rockers, Nirvana. Even though rock groups and artists copy chord progressions like Tom Petty did in his song “Last Dance With Mary Jane,” which resembles Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young’s song “Almost Cut My Hair,” but at least the way these two songs sound is entirely distinct. The practice of sampling gives the original composer little or no credit while the artist who used the previously recorded material makes all the money for doing a relatively low amount of work when it is taken into consideration that the musician who recorded the track had to become proficient on their instrument, as well as spend long hours in the studio getting each part perfect for the recording. Rap and hip-hop artists are literally taking melodies, chords, and even lyrics from previously recorded songs dating back to the Tin Pan Alley time period, allowing them to eliminate the use of musicians in a studio due to the fact the music they are using is taken from a song already recorded and released. While economical, because these artists can spend less time and money on musicians to record their albums, there is controversy associated with artists who use samples without crediting where the sample came from and the dispute as to who really should make the money comes into play.

The hip-hop group Run DMC had a hit where they copied the song title and main riff from Aerosmith’s song “Walk This Way.” Surprisingly, Aerosmith took this as a compliment and the groups combined to make a version of “Walk This Way” together. Also, Grand Master Flash recorded a song titled “The Adventures of Grand Master Flash on the Wheels of Steel” (click on the picture of Grandmaster Flash on the right to hear this song) where he shows his audience how well he can sample. In this one song he samples multiple artists including Chic, Queen, Sugarhill Gang, Spoonie Gee meets the Sequence, Blondie, and even himself. While it is interesting to listen to, Grandmaster Flash hardly attempted to give his own spin to the songs he sampled, unlike Tom Petty and Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young, who may not have even realized their two songs were the same, except where two chords would have to be switched with each other to make them identical chord progressions. This is not to say that there is no creativity involved in rap and hip-hop songs. By definition "Sampling is a music-making technique that incorporates a portion of a previously existing sound recording - sometimes in an altered form - into a new work." The description of what sampling is explains that it is a creative act to sample. Rap/hip-hop came into being because of the message delivered by the lyricist in order to unite and inspire communities where poverty and crime ran rampant. Messages delivered by lyricists or MC’s were originally messages talking about common issues in their living environment. It is important to note that some very prolific artists despise the practice of sampling such as Paul McCartney and Prince who describe sampling as "simple piracy;" however, some artists, namely Clyde Subblefeld, "the most sampled musician, was happy when hip-hop revived his own forgotten music." This is important to consider. Sampling could be a way to rekindle the fire of the music industry if artists who sampled material merely had to state where they got the components that make up each of their songs. There is creativity involved in the lyrics and effectively sampling music. Creating a song from an already recorded song or songs is no doubt a form of art. There just needs to be some modifications letting listeners know what artists have been sampled in a song and compensating the original artists for their material. 

In order to foster creativity changes need to be made to prevent issues like the Coldplay and Joe Satriani lawsuit, as well as crediting artists sampled in rap/hip-hop songs. If rap and hip hop artists had to reveal to listeners who they sampled in their songs, even though it is only a few seconds used in the sample it could contribute to helping the music industry’s revival. That way listeners could see who was sampled, even when the original artist sampled is not getting paid due to the length of time the artist re-appropriating the music is using, listeners would be able to buy the original songs used by artists who sample today. Using the aforementioned method for sampling would mean more money to the record labels, which could then sign more artists and take more risks with who they sign. This way, artists who are not within the usual restrictions of popular music because they push the envelope more could have a greater chance at success in today’s music market. While re-appropriation of chord progressions has occured since music existed, it is important to remember where the music came from. And, now with sampling added to the way songs are created, it is especially important for people to know the roots of what they are listening to.

Welcome to Life's Soundtrack: First Post

Welcome to my music blog. Being that I am a new member of the blogosphere this is my first blog post ever, and I am not sure exactly what direction what the main focus of my blog will be. I am a musician so I am making my blog about issues and news in the music world. In order to gather information about important music news and issues I have gathered a list of some of the best websites I could find on the Internet. These websites can be found in the linkroll on the right side of the web page. In order to find these websites I used search engines such as Google as well as Meta-Engines like Dog Pile. The sites I have selected can be categorized into different criteria. Some are strictly interested with news in the music world like Billboard, others are organizations concerned with issues in music such as freedom of expression and censorship like the website Freemuse. There are also commercial websites like MTV, and finally others are music blogs such as the one I found from the "Guardian," a newspaper from the United Kingdom. I chose these sites based on the Webby Awards and the IMSA criteria. In order for Webby Awards standards to be met the websites that I chose had a sort of rubric I used when it came to their content, which is the information provided by the site whether it be text, sound, or video; structure and navigation, meaning that these websites are organized and information is accessible in a consistent intuitive way; virtual design, which is the aesthetic appearance of the website and how appropriate it is in regards to its content; and lastly experience and authority in their field. The blogs I chose easily met the IMSA criteria which means the author is citing and reading good material, and also has influence and is established in a community. Also, the content must be covered with depth and authority. Another important factor the IMSA criteria points out that the writing in is rhetorically correct for the content they are covering and the audience they are writing to. In addition according to the IMSA a good blog blog allows for comments and others’ points of view, and the bloggers are undoubtedly experts in their field. For example, many of the blogs I read are from the widely recognized and distributed music magazine “Rollingstone.” These blogs allow for readers comments and their point of view to be available to all readers. I hope my blog can be a valuable resource for my readers, and I also hope that my experience as a musician will be useful in making my blog distinct from other music blogs on the Internet.