Speaker: Copyright Must Change
2201 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 51 52 53 54 55 … 89 Newer→ Last
-
I think the early 70s were still pretty good for Paul, though. 'Another Day', 'Every Night', 'Band on the Run', 'Coming Up', 'Jet', 'Junk'... we're kind of Wings revisionists in our household
Most of those you listed ain't Wings though. I'm thinking of the banality of 90% of the output from about 75 onwards until about 88. I remember Goodnight Tonight being hailed at the time (esp the 12") as a second coming..look, he can still pull it off...but then we had the rest to knock us back into line.
And I'm a bit of a Wing's revisionist myself....there are moments, even in that eighties solo dross.
Much easier if we blame it all on Linda and Yoko though....
-
I like 'Silly Love Songs', so I clearly have no judgement whatsoever. Hey, what about 'Maybe I'm Amazed'? That's pretty good too...
Oh, Linda was OK, really... can we just blame everything on Yoko? Interesting artist, thoroughly annoying person.
-
Hey, what about 'Maybe I'm Amazed'? That's pretty good too..
Solo...1970.
McCartney showed some style when he approved and apparently loved this twist on his tune:
-
Hey, what about 'Maybe I'm Amazed'? That's pretty good too...
And if you listen to it backwards, you'll hear a recipe for a really ripping lentil soup.
-
Just to make up for my previous PM link:
Sounds more like McCartney than Lennon but hard to tell sometimes. But when Lennon kicks in at 1 minute it gets brilliant.
-
Um, isn't that George letting rip? Macca usually played bass.
-
Don, it was a Lennon throwaway for the Yellow Submarine movie ('Boys, you don't have to be in the next movie but we need four new songs by tomorrow'), but his throwaways were often anybody else's moment of brilliance
-
The lead guitar was Lennon mostly on Hey Bulldog, but Harrison chipped in IIRC. McCartney was on bass.
I'm not sure how I knew that...
-
Once again: Major-label NZ artists are represented to iTunes by their labels
what's the key point you're trying to get across with the "major label artist" part?
many major artists are represented to itunes by their labels through agrigators. they don't get to skip that stage. my example was arch hill who has bats, mcglashan kilgour etc. they're all getting the agrigator cut taken out of their pie.
is your point that the 4 majors act as their own agrigator and by pass that step?
I guess that would mean that most of the people who get to skip the agrigator part are on major label deals so most people are screwed either way, apart from ffd who's label deals direct.
-
I'm having trouble taking any 'commentator' of the industry who doesn't know the basics,
I guess that leaves you in the room by yourself.
if he'd have said "at one time blah blah blah," would hat have made his statement correct?
Truth is many different media are bought up an owned by many of the same people, its hardly ground breaking news. and then some sewage company from france (or was it belgium) buys the lot.There is something to be taken from that point and that is that a battle between you tube (or myspace etc) and warner (or any other major) is one buy out away from being a family affair, if it isn't already. That's hardly a crap point and not grounds for dismissal although it does take away from the magical mystique of the media showground.
-
3410,
Since we're droppin' Beatles vids, this track was big news for Beatlemaniacs a couple of weeks ago.
(starts getting unusual from about 3:50): -
I guess that leaves you in the room by yourself.
if he'd have said "at one time blah blah blah," would hat have made his statement correct?Oh, you mean if they'd said something completely different, would it have been correct? Only if it was actually correct. But he / she didn't so there we go.
But anyone who puts themselves up as a commentator on the corporate relationships between certain organisations and then presents nonsensel as fact doesn't really warrant further investigation. The relationships they presented were a key part of their argument and they were false. That's all that matters.
one buy out away from being a family affair, if it isn't already. That's hardly a crap point
It's a crap point if it hasn't happened. So, yes, it's a crap point. It's just making shit up to suit.
Google=WMG=MySpace=Universal=Clear Communications=Sony=whoever is just nonsense.
CBS / Sony used to use "Fuck The Bunny" as an in house corporate sales slogan. The Bunny is Warner Music, which gives you an idea how close and pally the relationship between the majors really is. We like to think it's all one matey evil co-operative but that's just not true, they spend more time, internationally, trying to screw each other than anyone else.
-
I like 'Silly Love Songs', so I clearly have no judgement whatsoever.
Silly Love Songs and in particular the cover of that song by The Replicants are fantastic.
-
@robbery
At the risk of engaging in another death-spiral "discussion" ...
is your point that the 4 majors act as their own agrigator and by pass that step?
Yes. That is what I said more than once. It's a very simple point.
I guess that would mean that most of the people who get to skip the agrigator part are on major label deals so most people are screwed either way, apart from ffd who's label deals direct.
Artists on independent labels, or the labels themselves, will generally go via an aggregator, as will artists who have P&D deals with a major so long as they haven't signed over digital distribution rights to the major label , in which case they will be stuck with a much lower rate of return. Short version: as an artist, you're much better off paying 20% to an aggregator than having your digital distribution rights with a major.
-
Short version: as an artist, you're much better off paying 20% to an aggregator than having your digital distribution rights with a major.
shorter version then,
digital retail takes 30 % (to itunes) plus 20 % to an aggrigator.(distributor).
at present its difficult to get past that. not really so good for the artist but great for the middle men once again. -
not really so good for the artist but great for the middle men once again.
It's waaaay better than getting 20% of 75% of the 70% that Apple pays, out of which all costs come, if you are signed to a major and it's a waaaaay better situation to be in than I was in when actively trying to get my edgier stuff into the dozen or so so shops nationwide that might've cared enough to stock the stuff. A global superstore with no stock costs..hell yeah, and one that pays me on every sale. That's about 70% of the battle won. Promoting the stuff is the easy and fun part.
-
It's waaaay better than getting 20% of 75% of the 70% that Apple pays,
sure, if you compare it to major label suckers but I find the comparison to old model splits more interesting, as indicated by 'once again' at the end of the quoted sentence.
The new model of salvation takes 50% of thee cost of delivering an item from artist (or small label) to customer. This without having an actual physical stock item to manage.
compare that to $14.42 to artist/ small label retailing @ $29.95 ie approximately 50% again.
The split hasn't really changed but the investment for distributor and retailer has.As for better than getting stock into edgier stores. do itunes turn down anything? Surely they don't stock every home recorded cdr some deluded bedroom rock star makes?
Getting paid is indeed important. there's still plenty of time for them to mess that up.
Promoting the stuff is the easy and fun part.
ha! if only both parts of that sentence were true.
getting your best kept secret noticed above the noise floor of complete rubbish maybe indeed fun if you enjoy clawing your way through a crowd but it is by no means easy.
if it was easy everyone would be doing it successfully and if everyone was doing it successfully then we'd be back to a big wall of noise.
purely by the nature of how much music is being made and pushed on us we can not possibly digest it all so its a game of who you can push won in order to grt yours noticed ahead of theirs. With winners there have to be losers. That makes the game not easy. -
Just because someone "wins" does not at all mean anyone "loses". Digital distribution and marketing is not a zero sum game, especially when you take long tail into account. Interesting that the conventional record industry is not alone in struggling with that concept.
Oh, and Pirate Bay go all VPN on our asses, reports Pat Pilcher.
-
The split hasn't really changed but the investment for distributor and retailer has.
and the investment for artist/small label hasn't?
am i correct in assuming the artist/small label is getting a similar percentage return per album, with no physical cd manufacturing/shipping costs on the sale, but the potential market access has been multiplied by millions of times compared with record shops?
and that is not good for the artist/small label?do itunes turn down anything? Surely they don't stock every home recorded cdr some deluded bedroom rock star makes?
hello? do you know what an aggregator does?
-
and the investment for artist/small label hasn't?
you're missing the point.
the cost of a cd is a small part of the finished product equation,
high street rent, shelves, stock management, and the staff to do all that is a big part of the retail equation.
my point is the prices are getting kept high, and its more at the retail end.hello? do you know what an aggregator does?
do you?
an aggrigator presents items to retailers. essentially they're the distributor, like border or rhythm method.
My question which you don't appear to be able to answer was, do digital retailers stock everything they're offered? its possible for an aggrigator to take up any old artist that will pay them to do so (that's how some aggrigator deals work, you pay them to represent your work on a track flat fee basis).
Unless you're a digital retailer or have direct knowledge of an item you presented for retail that got turned down then maybe you should sit this one out.if stuff does get turned down then its same old same old. competing for shop space only this time its virtual hop space.
its interesting that there's resistance to seeing the new world of music distribution in comparison to old world and how in some areas its not that different at all.
-
Unless you're a digital retailer or have direct knowledge of an item you presented for retail that got turned down then maybe you should sit this one out.
ooh, so asking a question deemed by you to be inappropriate, means i "should sit this one out"?
YES, SIR!
THREE BAGS FULL, SIR! -
ha! if only both parts of that sentence were true.
worked for me, but I guess that's just me. You'll note I didn't say the sale was the easy part, that really comes down to how good your product is and what you do with that, but promoting a record / song is, second only to the recording, and even then not always, the easy and fun part.
The chase was more fun than the kill.
-
its interesting that there's resistance to seeing the new world of music distribution in comparison to old world and how in some areas its not that different at all.
Probably because, as a label and copyright owner, it's about as different as it gets. See notes above. It's a completely different ball game, aside from the royalty wrigglings the majors apply to their accounting practices. That someone takes a cut is hardly a major point of similarity.
-
It's not the same as a physical shop. For one, iTunes is the distributor and the retailer - but also the marketer. Hence the value of being in their space - because they aggregate buyers. Geez.
-
but also the marketer.
Yes, but physical retailers do that too, often in conjunction with the copyright owner or licensee. Much of the placement on iTunes front, and the other crucial placement is either bought, or as the result of behind the scenes machinations.
In the same way physical stores advertise with what they term co-op advertising in the media and elsewhere where the label pays a price, either in cash or discounts or, the great bugbear of all acts, free stock, on which they pay no artist royalties.
Similarly instore product placement and windows are bought. Your album doesn't get racked by the door in most shops unless it's part of a deal, or end up on the listening posts.
the value of being in their space - because they aggregate buyers.
Yep...the true value of iTunes is the way it sits on just about every personally owned computer in the world with an internet connection. I just wish it was more user friendly.......
Post your response…
This topic is closed.