Bumblefoot on the music industry

[don_vercetti]

Personally, i completely agree with Ron.  I think the industry is currently in dire need of reformation, around the internet.  Itunes is undoubtedly leading the charge, but it needs more power to itself.  I think Apple ought to make their own record label (beatles jokes aside) and that would really stir things up.

On the other note, i think that I myself am a perfect example of what Ron is talking about. 

I'm 17, and using bittorrent, i downloaded Appetite for Destruction.  I now own all Gnr albums.  I downloaded Led Zep IV, and i know own nearly ever Led Zep album.  I could name various other groups who I've heard through bittorrent, and since paid money too.  I only ever heard the music of these groups through the internet, as for one reason or other, there are no classic/hard rock stations where I live. 

So I am technically a downloading motherfucker.  But I have given Gnr plenty of my money, and intend to support them in any concerts that should come to the UK.  So surely I should be encouraged...not sued and chased by these guys. 

Having read this, I have a lot more respect for bumblefoot, I gotta say. 

[bazgnr]

I think its difficult to speak to what does and does not hurt the artists involved when *you* aren't an artist, and it's not your music being shared/stolen/dowloaded/previewed/insert-you-own-word-choice-here. ?I'm sure the situation varies for many artists depending on their differing levels of popularity and success, which makes the ability to generalize in this situation increasingly difficult.

I believe downloading without the artists receiving compensation -in whatever form- is wrong. ?It doesn't matter to me if they make more money by touring or not. ?Furthermore, I don't feel it's my place to presume where an artists' money comes from, let alone how much they might legitimately depend on income from album sales in order to continue doing what they love and make a living in the process.

To me, digital music - in all of it's forms and aliases - is both a) a means to decide on which albums become part of my collection and b) a safeguard to ensure that I put my money into an album that I (subjectively) feel is worth owning. ?Too many times, I've bought an album because I love the single only to find 11 additional crap-tastic tracks that sound like a different band recorded them.

Then again, I'm a guy who loves buying CDs and albums - tangible, tear-the-wrapper-off, CD's with album artwork, booklet inserts, liner notes, etc. - the whole package the way the artists intended it to be consumed. ? I'm sure I'm in the increasing minority, but I'm a sucker like that. ?

[cyllan]

Then again, I'm a guy who loves buying CDs and albums - tangible, tear-the-wrapper-off, CD's with album artwork, booklet inserts, liner notes, etc. - the whole package the way the artists intended it to be consumed.   I'm sure I'm in the increasing minority, but I'm a sucker like that.   

Count me in to that minority too!  And that includes hearing an album with the tracks in the order in which the artist intended it ; I can't bear any of that shuffling tracks business either.   

[Demon Wolf]

It's true. It seems I actually like CD's I buy more than those I download. The whole experience around it really, reading the lyrics and studying the cover while listening... 

[estrangedpaul]

Interesting to hear Ron Thal say this - he didn't condemn it as such, he said it misrepresented the bands music, but he didn't condemn anyone for downloading it, he definately understands why we do it, which is kinda cool.

[MotherGooseLuvR]

I wish we could just buy music directly from artists and cut out the huge asshole corporations that ran their industry in a way that totally gave way to the rise of internet downloading.  Now those dinosaurs are wasting their time and money trying to keep the future from happening.  I say fuck them.

I think it would be cool that if you were into an artist and wanted to get a new album from them, you could pay them fifteen bucks (or the price of a CD) which they would use to create new music and live off of.  As long as they're loyal to their fans and hardworking, there's no reason to think their fanbase wouldn't continue to support their work as an artist.  Kinda like how Izzy does it.  Just recording and releasing music to your fans.

It probably means there won't be so many super-rich multi-media mega stars, but I'm fine with that.  Doubt Axl would though.  He would have lost the support for recording Chinese Democracy a looooooooooong time ago, I'm afraid. 

But maybe that'd be a good thing.  It would prompt him to really work hard.  And encourage him to be at least aware of the fact that he has a fan base.

[cyllan]

Interesting to hear Ron Thal say this - he didn't condemn it as such, he said it misrepresented the bands music, but he didn't condemn anyone for downloading it, he definately understands why we do it, which is kinda cool.

Well, seeing as how he admitted downloading stuff himself, it would have been rather hypocritical of him to condemn others.

[bigblue88112]

Then again, I'm a guy who loves buying CDs and albums - tangible, tear-the-wrapper-off, CD's with album artwork, booklet inserts, liner notes, etc. - the whole package the way the artists intended it to be consumed. ? I'm sure I'm in the increasing minority, but I'm a sucker like that. ?

That's the only way to do it in my eyes! 

[cyllan]

As long as they're loyal to their fans and hardworking, there's no reason to think their fanbase wouldn't continue to support their work as an artist.

If you don't mind me saying, I find that an intriguing, but somewhat bizarre, notion as to why I, as a fan, would support Axl's musical endeavours.  I can't even begin to imagine the criteria by which I would be expected to judge his efforts.

But maybe that'd be a good thing.  It would prompt him to really work hard.  And encourage him to be at least aware of the fact that he has a fan base.

I'm in no doubt that Axl is aware of exactly the kind of fan base he has.

[GypsySoul]

I'm in no doubt that Axl is aware of exactly the kind of fan base he has.

BBF might be confusing his and other artistis' fan base to that of Axl's.  And I think we can all basically agree that Axl fans are a unique entity unto themselves.

"Axl fans" will download every note of anything he does (or is rumored to have done) and download every bootleg video of every concert he's done AND STILL will purchase anything and everything when it is made "legally" available to them, whether they (the Axl fans) feel it is totally top quality thru-n-thru or not. 

How many other artists have as rabid a fan base as Axl?

MY POINT BEING:  IMO, BBF is now MISTAKENLY looking at the "downloading" issue from a perspective that includes the "Axl factor".  And we all know that,  as fas as the fans are concerned, Axl is the exception to every rule!

Even though I'm sure BBF posted that to encourage a debate on the issue, he's being a hypocrite since he admits he does it himself.

My question to him would be ...  "if you know how much harm it does to the artists (including yourself), what's your excuse for doing it?"

[Bartlet]

I'm in no doubt that Axl is aware of exactly the kind of fan base he has.

BBF might be confusing his and other artistis' fan base to that of Axl's.? And I think we can all basically agree that Axl fans are a unique entity unto themselves.

"Axl fans" will download every note of anything he does (or is rumored to have done) and download every bootleg video of every concert he's done AND STILL will purchase anything and everything when it is made "legally" available to them, whether they (the Axl fans) feel it is totally top quality thru-n-thru or not.?

How many other artists have as rabid a fan base as Axl?

MY POINT BEING:? IMO, BBF is now MISTAKENLY looking at the "downloading" issue from a perspective that includes the "Axl factor".? And we all know that,? as fas as the fans are concerned, Axl is the exception to every rule!

Even though I'm sure BBF posted that to encourage a debate on the issue, he's being a hypocrite since he admits he does it himself.

My question to him would be ...? "if you know how much harm it does to the artists (including yourself), what's your excuse for doing it?"

i think he doe it coz it doesnt do that much harm and can in fact encourage more sales.

He also, like many, wants to send the music industry a message to hurry up and get the hell in line with the way of the world now!  Legit downloads are too expensive, there is little opportunity to try beforte you buy, and not enough labels/artists have made the necassary agreements to make their work available to download - there isnt the same diversity and availability in one place, like there is in a music chain store. Plus, they need to drop restrictions on what you can do with the file once you have bought it.

These issues must be rectified.

[gunns1]

What I find really interesting is,


where discussing poitnless shit, eg downloading , which can never be stopped, and which in turn, means artists have to literally
get of their arse and tour to make money (which is a good thing) as it seperates the fakes, from the perfromers...

And as to Ron doing the interviews, debates/whatever,
is this a good sign that gnr have completely finished everything? considering ron is doing sosososososomany interviews, spending time on the net,
you think this might be a good sign???


I
freaking hope so

[Bartlet]

What I find really interesting is,


where discussing poitnless shit, eg downloading , which can never be stopped, and which in turn, means artists have to literally
get of their arse and tour to make money (which is a good thing) as it seperates the fakes, from the perfromers...

And as to Ron doing the interviews, debates/whatever,
is this a good sign that gnr have completely finished everything? considering ron is doing sosososososomany interviews, spending time on the net,
you think this might be a good sign???


I
freaking hope so

could be a realy bad one too.

[gunns1]

I just dont kNOW what bumble's intentions are when he wrote this,


is he trying to persuade us as to buy cds instead of downloading them, because no matter who reads this,
we all have predetermined opinions on whether or not we buy or download illegal stuff, its our choice after all.

And bumble knows that probably only fans would really read what he says, and knowing that, fans of course will buy chinese democracy,
so What was bumbles intentions when he wrote this, its not like it was an assignment for school or something???

[flicknn]

since this wasnt on his site or grn.com or posted by jarmo , it just seemss as a light heated blog entry to a anonimous site , I see nothing to get worked up about

[stolat]

Oh, all in 'good' humour. Riiight! Your 'humour' is in very poor taste.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Good read. Very insightful.

[slashsbaconpit]

Here's an idea that hasn't been considered ? when Chinese Democracy is released as an album, I won't have any reason to look for leaks.
I don't download stuff, I borrow stuff from friends (actual CDs), except when it comes to GNR stuff. But I'm going to buy their stuff anyway, so what does it matter?

[acompleteunknown]

Downloading (non-leaked material) hurts nobody except the record industry.

This is an old argument used to guilt the consumer into buying more albums.  The problem is the record industry has one goal...to make money.  If they really cared about the artist, they would pay them more than 2% of the CD revenue.  I remember the Dixie Chicks complaining that the three of them earned less than a million dollars combined from the sales of their first two albums.  Their albums sold a combined 30 million copies worldwide, earning Sony Nashville revenue over 250 million dollars.  Sony Nashville = 250 million.  Dixie chicks = 1 million.  Who is downloading really hurting in this scenario? 

To put this in perspective, the band Clap Your Hands Say Yeah was an internet darling last summer.  They had no label but were talked about by all the big music blogs...who even offered multiple tracks fro FREE from their album.  Because of this CYHSY sold almost 250,000 copies of their album, earning them revenue of close to 2 million.  CYHSY made twice as much money selling 250,000 copies as Dixie Chicks did selling 30 million.  Did downloading hurt CYHSY? 

One thing that no one ever talks about is Napster and record sales.  When the original Napster was live, record sales were at their highest of all time.  When Napster was shut down, record sales took an immediate dive.  In the first month alone, record sales dropped almost 10%!  Within 3 months, it was down almost 20%. 

The record industry is made up of talent-less idiots who ride the coattails of people with talent.  I used to work in this industry and saw the frivilous waste of money on a daily basis.  Catered sushi lunches, trips to Disneyland for entire departments, late night private plane flights to Vegas, free steak dinners because certain employees had to drain their petty cash.  And that's what would happen in a typical week!

The record industry killed itself, abusing their releationship with the customer.  Now someone needs to come up with a way to download oil.

[creepingvines]

i think a world in which all recorded music became free could be cool.  free downloaded songs become like a type of advertisement to see the band live, and those who put out the best songs and put on the best show get the best reputation and are the most successful through ticket sales and merchendising.   that way there's a huge incentive for bands to puton fantastic live shows and only the truly talented achieve success.  people like fergie would dissappear because no one would want to pay to go see her foot-face singing scom live in concert... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1kCs7Gbg_A