wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] detv8 from East Village January 07, 2009 - 02:11PM

  Your opening music says it all. The labels reliance on throwaway pop killed acts that might have had more longevity. Keep offering people bad product and eventually nobody will want it, even for free.

  
  
• [2] Paul from Rockland January 07, 2009 - 02:14PM

  Thank you.

  I believe CD's for music lovers donot go away. While your guest is right, one thing that could have changed things was the price for music. At $10 for a CD, many people WOULD NOT HAVE been downloading nearly as much.

  
  
• [3] Paul from Rockland January 07, 2009 - 02:14PM

  Thank you.

  I believe CD's for music lovers do not go away. While your guest is right, one thing that could have changed things was the price for music. At $10 for a CD, many people WOULD NOT HAVE been downloading nearly as much.

  
  
• [4] Gregory Mortenson from New York, NY January 07, 2009 - 02:18PM

  the digitization of music hurt the industries profit margins but also solves the problem of production, shipping, and inventory costs. albums do not need to be 1 hr+. i think the future is short EPs released digitally at a higher frequency sold for a modest price.

  
  
• [5] paul from New York January 07, 2009 - 02:20PM

  What if the record labels had the foresight to INVENT Napster, rather than letting a 19 year do the work and then try to capitalize on it. Everyone with a CD Player and a Computer saw the digital revolution coming years before Napster even existed. If the inovation had come from the inside, maybe there wouldn't be this problem in the first place.

  
  
• [6] Mitch from NY city January 07, 2009 - 02:25PM

  The price was a huge issue, beginning in the late 1980s'. At that time, virgin vinyl was expensive. The CD blank quickly became so cheap that replicating costs were only a fraction of the cost of vinyl record production.

  So what the the labels do 20 years ago? They RAISED the price from about $13 for an LP to $18 or $19 for a CD. That helped kill the enthusiasm that could have helped save the industry.

  
  
• [7] albert from new york January 07, 2009 - 02:25PM

  Now that this change has come, will we ever see a site like iTunes allow buyers in one market purchase song downloads in other iTunes stores? For example, a US buyer to purchase from the iTunes Germany store?

  
  
• [8] Todd from manhattan January 07, 2009 - 02:25PM

  One thing that I rarely hear discussed is that music as a purchasable commodity is a fairly new idea. Before the advent of recorded music, it was as much of a commodity as dance--that is to say, you didn't buy it, you listened to it, or possibly paid to go to a performance.

  I think the commodification of music is the real blip (not piracy, etc.), eventually we'll go back to something closer to where we were 100 years ago.

  
  
• [9] Paul from Harlem January 07, 2009 - 02:25PM

  One thing that hasn't been brought up in this discussion is the issue of sonic quality that has been lost in the rush to digitize music. The mp3 is a low quality, crappy sounding file. It sounds ok on an ipod but not so good on a larger sound system. Just as cassettes and CDs were pushed as the newest, better format, no doubt there's a better file in development (equivalent to HD TV) that will be pushed as the format everyone should buy. The music industry (the majors) cannot survive without repackaging its older catalogs.

  
  
• [10] Alan from Manhattan January 07, 2009 - 02:25PM

  The discussion so far seems to be oriented towards popular music. To what extent do the same factors apply to classical music?

  
  
• [11] Jim from Manhattan January 07, 2009 - 02:26PM

  Why not a music industry model that goes back to the past with vinyl albums - they sound so much better than digital, it would create new sales in music electronics and for the first time in 20 years listeners could hear music in as it was meant to be played.

  Audiophile

  
  
• [12] Robots Need 2 Party from Brooklyn January 07, 2009 - 02:27PM

  Paul from Rockland is absolutely right. $10 cd's would have helped. Wasn't the price of CD's supposed to come down after their introduction. Wasn't part of the $16.99 price point meant to recoup the R&D of CD? CD's cost about $1.50 with artwork & promo to produce. Why so expensive? Then the labels keep reselling their catalogs to us with format changes. Like vinyl to cd. The labels and the newspapers should get together. At least to commiserate their margin losses due to the internet.

  
  
• [13] kelly from brooklyn January 07, 2009 - 02:32PM

  i agree with the gentleman below. for true music lovers, owning the physical object will never die. I LOVE Cd's and vinyl. I enjoy being able to look at my music collection and allow something to reach out to me as i decide what to listen to. i don't feel like i can do that with my ipod. although most of my music is downloaded onto my ipod, i rarely use it and generally buy cd's as opposed to downloading music(except for pop singles). the quality is inferior and to me it has no soul. i would never download a great album.

  
  
• [14] Richard Fried from East Brunswick, NJ January 08, 2009 - 09:06AM

  What a lovely trip down memory lane. I think back to those fervent nights on Napster, searching for the most obscure music, and finding it! I sing in a choir where we frequently sing ancient music that (usually) cannot be found on a record label, but I'd often find a university recording on some anonymous soul's hard-drive. There is still nothing like it today, unless you count YouTube, where there is a proliferation of concert videos, some of reasonably good quality. Oh--where are those Beatle's rarities, Dr. Demento classics, torah readings, even personal compositions. Now they're spread out, all over the internet.

  
  
• [15] Richard Mitnick from Highland Park, NJ January 08, 2009 - 02:25PM

  Glad to see a comment from Jan 8.

  Here is the deal as I see it, after 30 years running or helping run a business:

  There is nothing more constant than change. Business models must adapt to the changes in technology and changes in public interest.

  The model which is successful now is digital. That means downloads of music and, ultimately, video. In video, Netflix is not hiding under a blanket because of video downloading. Instead, they are trying to lead the industry.

  And, you know, mp3's are just not bad for most people. Today I buy nothing but .mp3's, and they are generally 320kbits- not too shabby.

  So, if digital is going to be the new paradigm, then all parts of the industry will need to adjust to that.

  Some time ago, John had on a certain string quartet which issued a grammy winning celebration of a Jazz great based upon one of the great man's most important pieces. When I found that I could not get it in .mp3 at Amazon, I emailed the group. They at first replied that it was not up to them. I responded that this very important work would wind up at something like the Pirate Bay. Well, all of a sudden the .mp3 was made available in less than 48 hours.

  So, if that's where it's at, composers and artists are going to need to make it work for them and not against them.

  And, here is another news flash: a music concert which took place not 24 hours ago is going to be offered as a podcast. Free. I want the concert and I won't even need to record it.

  If I like what I hear, I will pop over to Amazon and buy other work from the artist.

  All of this is today's state of technology, like it or not.