delete

[jeffbayson]

Yes, the industry is in deep, deep, DEEP doo-doo. The decline is well on its way. Consider this: My roommate worked for Palm Pictures - a conglomerate of record labels and movie studios. He just got laid off. One of the record labels under Palm Pictures' umbrella is V2, home to such artists as Moby, Underworld, The White Stripes, Mercury Rev, Aimee Mann, Stereophonics, Tom Jones and The Black Crowes, to name a few. You've heard of those bands, right? Sounds like a respectable label, right? A successful label, even? Guess how many people now work at V2 Records? After their latest round of layoffs... One. One person runs the entire label. As I said, deep, deep, DEEP doo-doo.

[Gtoledo3]

I know this is really unpopular, but I think people need to feel like they are going to -Get heavily fined. -Possibly have their computer confiscated. That is simply what needs to happen to re-establish the "social guidelines."

[Gtoledo3]

Right now, since the music industry are the only ones getting screwed... we're in a kind of limbo. But the way I see it, this is an issue that ALL copyright holders need to jump behind fast. It's really not that long before we can have cheap machinery to make plastic items in our households...how long is it going to take before people are "burning" themselves up some Barbie's, or pokemon or whatever? Really, not too long. Copyright is inherently flawed, I won't argue that. The only ones that can keep it going are the government... no one can stop somebody from bootlegging all on their own. Yet these shithead congressmen are trying to make it easier to bootleg... AAAAAAHHHHH..our society is going to the shiter FAST!!!! Rome is burning!

[Salyphus]

I think if the music industry collapses it will have itself to blame, and both the musicians and consumers can only benefit. :thu:

[Monkey Mouse]

[quote]Originally posted by eljefe: [QB]My roommate worked for Palm Pictures - a conglomerate of record labels and movie studios. He just got laid off. One of the record labels under Palm Pictures' umbrella is V2, home to such artists as Moby, Underworld, The White Stripes, Mercury Rev, Aimee Mann, Stereophonics, Tom Jones and The Black Crowes, to name a few. You've heard of those bands, right? Sounds like a respectable label, right? A successful label, even? Guess how many people now work at V2 Records? After their latest round of layoffs... One. One person runs the entire label.QB][/quote]I find that pretty funny since Moby's albums (the last 2 anyway) sold many millions of copies. I would love to see one person take care of all the details on a scale like that. I would suppose the Ex-Prez Billy Boy isn't the 1 guy - he doesn't do his best work without an intern.

[Stephen Fortner]

On the one hand, stealing is stealing. Should people have their computers confiscated and be classified as enemy combatants for downloading an Eminem song? Surely not. But they should certainly face the same consequences as if they got caught trying to shoplift a CD from a retail store. In effect, it's the same crime. On the other hand, it seems we would need a virtual police state to enforce this otherwise reasonable approach. Downloading from the comfort of one's living room is, physically, a far more private act than leaving the house to go steal from the retail store, or going to a red-light district to buy stolen property. (My favorite analogy for frequenting the download sites.) The industry certainly needs to find the right combination of carrot and stick, but the difficulty about the stick part is this: Enforcement would take the form of getting a knock on your door because of what you clicked on at some previous time. That's creepy. Perhaps a less creepy way would be to do what some localities do withtraffic tickets. Let's say you run a photographic red light. You get a citation in the mail. If you ignore it, you show up on a a list of names and fine amounts published in a local paper, below a notice instructing people to show up at the court and pay their fine (or enter a plea) within 30 days if they don't want to get arrested. It's still hard to get past the fact that "taking the photo" essentially involves spying on people in their own homes, where they again have much more of a reasonable expectation of privacy than in a mall or in their cars. As a musician and recordist, though, this is still less offensive to me than their harebrained idea to put copy-cop chips in all A/D/A convertors. As for the carrot, I think a return to marketing singles (remember 45's ?) is brilliant. Download a song for two or three bucks, then be able to burn your own mix CD's for the car. Not only could people have their own online, credit card-based accounts, but stores could sell impulse-buy gift cards like Borders does. Here's $25 worth of music because you got an A on your math test, Susie. Marketing to audiophiles could even be incorporated here. There could be file formats intended for eventual playback on high-end listening systems (well, there already are), and downloading in these formats would both cost more and require better hardware. An ultra-high-quality burner amd broadband connection would be as standard-issue for the audiophile as good speakers. Not only this, but next to the standard highest-quality MP3's, you'd have a link for the "platinum" audio quality or whatever, with instructions that it's only for people with higher-end stereos and such. People LOVE to feel like they're members of an exclusive club, so a lot of consumers would pop for the extra and swear they can hear the difference on their Monsoon computer speakers. In summary, there ARE ways to make it work, by applying sound marketing principles. Problem is, these principles are largely outside the box with regard to how the record industry typically does business. If the elephant can learn to dance, though, it can dance all the way to the bank.

[Wrave]

Seems like the comparison to casettes always coms in and somone always points out that they didn't kill the recording industry. The big difference between copying a tune to a casette to give to a friend and making downloads off of the internet is the magnitude of the numbers that can be copied nowadays. If I made a tape of a tune and gave it to a fellow band member for rehersal purposes, that was one copy (or five) but the number of copies being taken from the internet sights is significant. I don't agree that anyone has the right to invade my privacy by examining the contents of my personal computer. But just this morning a co-worker was telling me about someone that he knows that DJs and the DJ was bragging about how he downloads all he needs from the net and then uses these for his gigs. I think this is illegal and it should be. If the industry wants to stop this sort of thing, here's a good place to start. It would be quite easy to drop in on a DJ and check for licensed copies of the music being played. I know that will step on some toes but what is right is right.

[Deathtoallwhoopposeme]

[quote]Originally posted by Sal ©: [b]I think if the music industry collapses it will have itself to blame, and both the musicians and consumers can only benefit. :thu: [/b][/quote]I agree but let me expound on this a bit. the Big labels have NEVER been about promoting art and talent. They are very very good at marketing shit, and making the most money from it possible. Now, the artists that are actually out there, of whom I do feel are for real, RARELY ever see a dime of Record company royalties anyway. Call it creative accounting, call it what you will but this is the truth. Most artists have to make their cash from other sources such as Live preformance, publishing to an extent and licnexing. Ok, so if the "Industry" collapses, i see if have very little impact on the true talent anyway. As far as Music Video's go, Artists can make their own, even if it's live performance stuff edited in Final Cut pro, Shot on DV cam, Embellished with After Effects, for a few grand.....And you would be suprised at how close to the technical wizardry level of todays Million dollar videos these kids on a budget can get on a MAC with the right tools and talent...Todays Video bugdets are overblown and unneeded and ultimately take away from the artists bottom line. The same thing can be for very little cash. So, the artist can easily stil have their stuff on VH1 or MTV without the big labels...As far as airplay, the big Media corporations will simply have to just stop charging hundreds of thousands of dollars to artists to play their songs because in the post bloated record industry era, the artists will not stand for the raping. With no music, the radio stations can't sell their advertizing as there will be no listeners. We'll all get XM and be done with the bastards....In this scenerio, more diversity on the airwaves is possible because the radio stations know they need the artist's music to attract the listeners and therebye sell them their crap via advertizing, therebye staying in business..Win, Win, Win..Finally....And Downloading will be a beatifull thing for the artists unencumbered by Big label pressurem because it's just great advertizing for their live shows..and KAZAA or any other downloading arean can NEVER match the energy or the magic that happens at a Live show. People will come in droves to see their favorite artists..They always have and always will but now the artists are free to actually make more money touring because they are not beholden to the record companies anymore and dont forget merchandising.....Artists will do Very very very well touring...They will probably be touring more steadily after the fall then before to keep maximum revenue coming in. I think ticket prices will fall as a result too and everyone will still make money....less greed...So, you can see that the real artists who are thinking creatively about the situation in the record industry, are not really worried about it's collapse......There will be rampant downloading, Music video's and radio will be even more accessable then before for more artists, and touring and merchandising will never go away. The only thing gone will be the ingnorant, greedy, no-ear-for-real-talent, bottom line monger, no creative talent accountant type record exec. weilding all the power to shape the musical landscape and influnce popular culture....I say it will be a good day for MUSIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And if Hollywood isn't carefull, the same thing can happen to them..Hopefully they will see the writing on the wall by watchin the music industry implode and start putting out real meaningfull pictures.....

[Super 8]

[quote]Originally posted by GT3: [b] AAAAAAHHHHH..our society is going to the shiter FAST!!!! Rome is burning![/b][/quote]Oh, man! What a play on words!!! Did you say that on purpose!?!? Here's a bit of irony for you: [b]*****Nero Burning ROM*****[b] Sorry, I just had to point that one out... :D If our society is going to the shitter, perhaps the record companies are finally reaping all that they have sewn. They have never apologized for profiting BIG off of the corruption of youth. They never thought twice about 'sticking it to the consumers' by replacing LP's with CD's which are cheaper to produce than LP's and then jacking up the price. It never bothers them to exercise 'share-cropping' tactics on their recording artists. Many a broken dream has translated into megabucks for the record industry. They had no problem screwing Napster beyond repair -when they could have bought into it and made some money. So now they're hurting and screaming like a bunch of stuck-pigs... Why? Isn't this the language the industry speaks? Aren't they getting what they've given? Honestly, I don't think this is the downfall of the record industry. But if it is, it can't happen fast enough as far as I'm concerned! "In the end the love you take is equal to the love you make".

[Ed A.]

[quote]Originally posted by SteveFortner: [b]On the one hand, stealing is stealing. Should people have their computers confiscated and be classified as enemy combatants for downloading an Eminem song? Surely not. But they should certainly face the same consequences as if they got caught trying to shoplift a CD from a retail store. In effect, it's the same crime. [/b][/quote]So I guess it's also stealing if you tape some music from the radio? You do have a right to do this since the fair use law was passed in 1992. What is the difference between this and downloading a song...aren't both forms of broadcast? If the RIAA had its way, we'd be writing them royalty checks anytime we listen to a song on the radio. ;) The record companies are essentially giving their product away because of their lack of foresight regarding digital technologies. It would be like Colgate sending you a product sample in the mail, then telling you that you can't legally use it because they say so. It's up to the recording industry to make a product that can't be duplicated, like the movie industry did with DVDs. DVDs can't be copied on a computer due to the multilayer technology involved in their production. The recording industry's lack of vision is their problem, now they're paying the price.

[Jotown]

The sharing part is the difference. Plus the quality of a casette recording vs a digital copy. Add to that the fact that someone can make a copy and then distribute that copy to millions of people in minutes for free, I think that you see a very big difference, no?

[Gtoledo3]

[quote]Originally posted by Super 8: [b] [quote]Originally posted by GT3: [b] AAAAAAHHHHH..our society is going to the shiter FAST!!!! Rome is burning![/b][/quote]Oh, man! What a play on words!!! Did you say that on purpose!?!? Here's a bit of irony for you: [b]*****Nero Burning ROM*****[b] Sorry, I just had to point that one out... :D [/b][/quote]Of course!!! I'm surprised you got it. You have to remember, you're dealing with a genius, albeit a mediocre one :p

[Ed A.]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]The sharing part is the difference. Plus the quality of a casette recording vs a digital copy. Add to that the fact that someone can make a copy and then distribute that copy to millions of people in minutes for free, I think that you see a very big difference, no?[/b][/quote]But that's not my problem as an individual downloader, it's the record industry's problem. I am not breaking copyright laws by mass distribution of copyright material, ie, I don't upload. I just listen to the download. Also, how can the level of quality of a recording make any difference on the legality of copying it? An MP3, like a casette, is not near the same quality as a CD. By that logic, recording from the radio is OK because the quality is not as good as a CD or downloaded MP3.

[DJDM]

[quote]Originally posted by php: [b][QUOTE]DVDs can't be copied on a computer due to the multilayer technology involved in their production...[/b][/quote]Not true... :eek: I will say no more about this.

[ZootHornRollo_dup1]

As a musician working in the trenches for many a year, I sincerely hope the reputed demise of "the industry" is not just a tease. For me, it couldn't possibly happen fast enough...and when and if "they" do go down...I will dance a jig and throw a party! "They" ARE NOT OUR FRIEND! and in addition to some of the astute comments offered already re: share cropper tactics and all of the underhanded, un-ethical, crap they deal...they are also about only promoting the fewest possible artists for the most gain. It's the cult of personality where it's all about super-stardom or nothing at all... they look for huge sales and then throw everything behind that! resulting in homogenised pap that infants love but any sophisticated pallet wants to spew! Die Industry...PLEeeeese Die!

[LiveMusic]

I won't bore you with a long-winded response as I've stated it on here several times. But a post in here said "they caused it to theirselves." Regarding piracy, I disagree. Greed caused it. And lack of recognition that it's theft. Immoral. It's stealing, plain and simple. As long as people think it's "okay," the industry is toast. I don't know what's going to happen. Scary. But as long as file-sharing is left to go unabated, it's over, IMHO. One other thing... many times posters on here will mention crappy quality. I think that's only important to people like those on this forum. Less than 1/100 of 1%. The quality is fine for just about anyone who downloads mp3s. I just hope a solution is discovered.

[Ed A.]

[quote]Originally posted by LiveMusic: [b]I won't bore you with a long-winded response as I've stated it on here several times. But a post in here said "they caused it to theirselves." Regarding piracy, I disagree. Greed caused it. And lack of recognition that it's theft. Immoral. It's stealing, plain and simple. As long as people think it's "okay," the industry is toast. [/b][/quote]You don't suppose it might also have something to do with the average price of a CD being $18.99 while it costs only about $0.25 to manufacture? I would guess that even after promotion and distribution costs, they probably make about a 2000% profit on a CD. The artist, however, sees maybe a minute fraction of that. What happened to passing the price reduction on to the consumer? I recall that the record companies used the earlier high cost of manufacturing as an excuse to charge a lot more for CDs than what they charged for LPs. If CDs were a more reasonable $5.99, maybe they would sell more and downloading would be less of a problem.

[LiveMusic]

QUOTE]You don't suppose it might also have something to do with the average price of a CD being $18.99 while it costs only about $0.25 to manufacture? I would guess that even after promotion and distribution costs, they probably make about a 2000% profit on a CD. The artist, however, sees maybe a minute fraction of that. What happened to passing the price reduction on to the consumer? I recall that the record companies used the earlier high cost of manufacturing as an excuse to charge a lot more for CDs than what they charged for LPs. If CDs were a more reasonable $5.99, maybe they would sell more and downloading would be less of a problem.[/QB][/QUOTE] You sure got some funny accounting there. Maybe it costs $.25 to manufacture the CD but that's nothing compared to total cost of producing it. BTW, I don't really give a rat's ass about major labels. I don't know a soul at one. I just know that people getting free music won't fly. It's the end if it continues. If nobody gets paid, ain't a business on earth that survives. And if people have an opportunity to mooch, they will mooch. A vast majority will, anyway. It's too tempting if you can get it for free. Maybe some whiz will invent a solution.

[Ed A.]

I don't know if this will work, but what about the radio station model via the Internet? Radio stations pay record companies for the rights to broadcast their music. They make their money by advertising income. Couldn't that business model transfer to the Internet? There could be many different music websites that pay the record companies a specific amount for the privilege of making music available on their websites. The websites that have the best selections are also the ones that get the highest amount of website traffic. Since this increased traffic is valuable to advertisers, the advertisers would be willing to pay the websites an appropriate fee for advertising on their sites. The record companies make money, the websites and advertisers make money, and the general public has access to free downloads. Everybody wins! :D

[Jotown]

[quote]BTW, I don't really give a rat's ass about major labels. I don't know a soul at one. I just know that people getting free music won't fly. It's the end if it continues. If nobody gets paid, ain't a business on earth that survives. And if people have an opportunity to mooch, they will mooch. A vast majority will, anyway. It's too tempting if you can get it for free.[/quote]Amen to that. You are preaching to the choir son.

[Shayne White]

Virtually all of the stuff the major record labels sell is crap, so why don't we boycott them in favor of good Indie music? They'll close down, and then we don't have to bother with them anymore. :wave: At last we won't get bombarded by Brittany (how she's really supposed to spell it) Spears everywhre we look, and everbody's happy. :) Shayne

[Jotown]

The bottom line is: Music will never die. The Music Industry will never die. It will morp, and mutate, bend and break, and become something else all together. But it will not die. And the Indie's are in the music industry also. My New Years resolution has been to worry less about the technology, and file sharing, and peer to peer software, and spend more time working on my music and my mission. Thats all I can really control anyway. Art and Music, are the spirit of humanity. I am just trying to make myelf remember that spirit never dies.

[Salyphus]

Why can't some smart people create a NEW music industry, doing it the way it should be done, completely sidestep the current system, and get the best independent artists to participate? You could probably even woo a lot of established artists over who are fed up with the current system. I'll go start writing the business plan now ;) But seriously, this is what I think needs to happen. And now is the best time to do it: kick 'em when they're down!

[Wewus432]

The music business IS NOT [b]Music[/b]. As long as people make music there will be a business to support it. If the present business model doesn't work, or support music, it will be replaced by something that does. Do you really think that music will stop because the Big Five record companies aren't turning a profit? Ha, it can only get better. This is capitalism at it's best. If a company doesn't pay attention to their market, take care of their customers, and use all the tools at their disposal, such as new technology, THEY LOSE. File sharing is only one of the many problems that record companies have today. They screwed up royally and now they want to blame it on their customers.

[Shayne White]

By the way, I hate the term "Music Industry." It sounds like music is manufactured in a factory like Dell computers (sometimes it is, though!). How about something like "Music Network" or "Music Market"? Industry sounds too business-like. It takes away the art elements. Shayne

[Magpel]

Sorry for the internal OT post, but I just have to ask: Are you the real Zoot Horn Rollo, or a fan of same? If you are the real ZHR, outstanding. I've been listening to Trout Mask Replica all week. This would be a real thrill. [quote]Originally posted by ZootHornRollo: [b]As a musician working in the trenches for many a year, I sincerely hope the reputed demise of "the industry" is not just a tease. For me, it couldn't possibly happen fast enough...and when and if "they" do go down...I will dance a jig and throw a party! "They" ARE NOT OUR FRIEND! and in addition to some of the astute comments offered already re: share cropper tactics and all of the underhanded, un-ethical, crap they deal...they are also about only promoting the fewest possible artists for the most gain. It's the cult of personality where it's all about super-stardom or nothing at all... they look for huge sales and then throw everything behind that! resulting in homogenised pap that infants love but any sophisticated pallet wants to spew! Die Industry...PLEeeeese Die![/b][/quote]

[rdpete]

[quote]Originally posted by Shayne White: [b]By the way, I hate the term "Music Industry." It sounds like music is manufactured in a factory like Dell computers (sometimes it is, though!). How about something like "Music Network" or "Music Market"? Industry sounds too business-like. It takes away the art elements. Shayne[/b][/quote]going by whats on the radio & mtv, that description fits perfectly.......

[realtrance]

I think worrying about establishing new rules to support the old order is just putting a band-aid on change that is already substantially underway. Even if, right this moment, all downloading and file-sharing were obliterated, those involved would have such extensive music collections that they might never have to go out to a store to buy another CD. I think there's a huge, structural shift going on, and I'll exemplify it with something from another industry: computer games. Take something like Neverwinter Nights, Morrowind or Dungeon Siege (all role-playing games for PC). Each has a HUGE user base. Each game also has a full-fledged development system, with documentation, active and extensive user base, all of which make it POSSIBLE for anyone out there to use the system to develop their own game. And many are. The end result is that extensive collaboration becomes possible, "products" better than the originals sold become possible, which can be given away for free, people with better skills and talent than those in the original company develop the art, or AI, or scripting, etc. It's happening. Oh, throw The Sims into this mix as well; same thing with the massive file sharing of "skins" for characters, new objects for the gameworld, etc. Now, how does this affect the overall business model? Why haven't the publishers of these games clapped handcuffs on the developers who've shipped the development tools along with the game? Because it increases the breadth _and_ the depth of the market for such games, and such engines, multifold. Doing a good game with any of these systems is challenging, takes a lot of time, labor, skill, attention, and gives the maker a sense of pride and accomplishment that just playing the game would never provide. Participating in the community of developers that spring from these tools is also cool; being into the process of game development becomes as fun, or more fun, than being into just playing the game itself. How does this apply to the music "industry"? Well, to oversimplify, a younger generation of participants are looking for the same kind of model in their experience of music. They're not interested in listening to the expert work of professionals, except maybe as inspiration for their own efforts. Only problem is, in the world of music creation we're only at stage one of providing the "development tools" for widespread participation. Software synths and sequencers and samplers running on a PC are the first step there. More will come. In both cases, the very open question is: in the future, what will the role of expert developers, in our world known as musicians, and publishers, be? Will they be tossed aside? They will survive as teachers, mentors, in the former instance; and providers of the means of communication and interaction, in the latter. The better a job the publishers do of providing the most efficient and effective interaction between the "professionals," "experts," "shamans," "masters," and the "students," "disciples," etc., i.e. what we used to call "the audience" (which soon will no longer exist), the more competitive they will be. Those will be the new functions for the professional creators, and the "publishers" of made works.. and everyone else. The companies using musician websites as advertising media are looking backwards, and will fail. The musicians using websites as opportunities for communication and interaction with their audiences, will succeed. That's the future, folks. Prepare. rt

[fantasticsound]

[quote]Originally posted by php: [quote]Originally posted by Jotown: The sharing part is the difference. Plus the quality of a casette recording vs a digital copy. Add to that the fact that someone can make a copy and then distribute that copy to millions of people in minutes for free, I think that you see a very big difference, no?[/quote][b]But that's not my problem as an individual downloader, it's the record industry's problem. I am not breaking copyright laws by mass distribution of copyright material, ie, I don't upload. I just listen to the download.[/b] Also, how can the level of quality of a recording make any difference on the legality of copying it? An MP3, like a casette, is not near the same quality as a CD. By that logic, recording from the radio is OK because the quality is not as good as a CD or downloaded MP3.[/quote]Wrong. Downloading is unauthorized copying. Period. It has no protections under the Fair Use statutes. That is precisely why Napster lost, then settled out of court, then disappeared. Radio is inherently different. Radio stations pay tens of thousands of dollars in royalties for the rights to play anything that is in BMI's, ASCAP's, etc. catalogs. Any recording you make of music that the record labels made available for broadcast can be recorded [i]for your personal enjoyment[/i] because it has been broadcast over the open airwaves. Even under fair use, making copies for your friends is not legal, but was tolerated in the past because it was not feasable to investigate or litigate most cases and the ability of a single person to make multiple copies was limited. Anyone who used mass copying techniques on analog equipment, if discovered, WAS prosecuted. No-one in a P2P network is paying royalties for "broadcasting" files to other people. They have no license to broadcast copywritten works without permission from the copyright holder. Unlike showing a copywritten movie for profit without permission, in file sharing each "viewer" or "listener" ends up with a [i]copy[/i] of the work. Now, instead of the person showing the movie being charged with a crime, the audience becomes complicit in receiving stolen goods. You can argue the merits of the current system vs. the need for a new business model. You can argue that record labels have inflated prices. You can argue that famous musicians make too much money and the rest never get their due. But no matter how many people rationalize their involvement, file sharing without permission of the copyright holder is stealing. Period. Feel free to flame away about your rights. The fact is, you have none. No one, not our founding fathers, certainly not God, if you believe in a God, ever gave us the inalienable right to steal. It just isn't there, people. (Of course, Saddam Hussein may have made it legal in Iraq to file share... Hey! Now I understand why we're at the brink of war! It has nothing whatsoever to do with oil or weapons of mass destruction. It's those $&%&%^#@ file-sharing Iraqi's!!! ;) )

[Jotown]

[quote]"the audience" (which soon will no longer exist)[/quote]Realtrance, I am impressed with your thought process and how well you understand the gaming mentality. But, I think you are making the assumption that an entire generation shares you perspective. Though I am sure many do, there still are certainly millions and millions of young music fans out there. Why else would file sharing be such a big deal? It is only a big deal due to a huge demand for music. That "demand", is currently being filled by a flawed delivery system. I think that your assertion that; "the audience which soon will no longer exist" is an erroneous one. There will always be an audience for music. Just like for movies. The film industry is doing remarkably well. People still want to be entertained and enchanted. They always have, and they always will. Gaming, role playing, and interactive pastimes are certainly growing, and will continuem to. But there will always be a market for music that is art. That is; Music that is well done and transforming to the listener. The current problem's in the record biz are many, but the big issue is how to best distribute in the new digital economy. The karaoke culture, and DJ mix software that allow people with no musical talent, to whip up "music" on their PC, is just an extention of gaming culture. Some people will really get into it, and some people will not. In the end, an artist, (in any medium) that is complelling, and inspiring, will always be able to capture the imagination of a certain segment of the audience that is seeking to be compelled and inspired. There is nothing more wrong with the audience now, than there ever was. The problem is with the distribution system, (which is transforming) and a handful of companies that are trying to keep the current system of distribution intact. The audience, and the artist's, will be just fine once the distributhion model is defined. That, along with a way for the artists to get paid, will eventually emerge. Just my opinion.