Post by scorpiodog on Oct 7, 2014 12:28:20 GMT
This is something I've been arguing with myself about for months, but for some reason today three things connected with it have come to my attention on facebook, so it seems opportune to raise it for discussion here.
Have professional musicians got good reason to complain about their lot?
I have heard professional musicians complain about:
1)Streaming services - because the musicians don't get paid
2)iTunes - because they don't get paid enough
3)Cd copying - because they don't get paid (they call it piracy - ahar! Jim Lad! Imagine Blackbeard ignoring the Spanish treasure ships so he can run off another hundred copies of Let It Be)
4)Open mic nights - because it destroys the local music "scene"
5)Amateur bands only charging a few quid - because it not only destroys the local music "scene" but also reduces the amount local venues will pay.
6)Local venues - because they don't pay enough and don't charge enough for admission to pay decent amounts to the artiste.
7)Youtube - because it's free and doesn't distinguish between good and bad musicians.
8)Karaoke - the list of becauses is too long to write here)
9)The Music Industry - because there are too many hangers on each taking their cut.
10)X Factor because it's killing the Music Industry
When I talk about professional musicians here, I am talking about the popular music types, not classical musicians, who seem to treat their profession as a job, and don't get involved in this sort of thing.
Now from my point of view, I do see the truth in some of the arguments, but not others. So:
I always pay for my recorded music. I make one exception to this. Occasionally, I'll come to an arrangement with someone to "swap" tracks and I'll burn a cd for them in return for them burning one for me. No more than 1 song per artiste, and this only to suggest things they might enjoy (or that they think I might enjoy). Using this method, I have discovered many artistes I wouldn't otherwise have heard, and I've bought their music as a result - so the musician is paid.
I do watch some things on Youtube (usually because I know the person or because I'm trying to learn a song) - so the musician is not paid.
I sometimes buy printed music (never single pieces of sheet music any more, but sometimes books and collections) but sometimes I will work out a song for myself, or, more often, I will go somewhere on the web and see what someone else has done with it. - so the writer can be paid, but may not be.
I do play at open Mics (but not Karaoke) and Folk Clubs, sometimes in the street, at parties (if anybody's foolish enough to ask or even hint!) and I do it for free.
I play gigs for not much money if anybody wants me to. Usually in pubs. I rely on the PRS to compensate the songwriters.
So. Who's right?
Is it reasonable for someone who has decided to be a professional musician to expect the world to arrange itself in such a way that they can receive the maximum possible amount from their efforts (bearing in mind that it's terribly competitive and they really ought to know that before pursuing it as a profession).
Is it reasonable to expect some money not just for creating a piece of work, but to benefit every time the format for recorded music changes, or each time it's performed or played?
Is it reasonable to expect people who would give their eye teeth to do what they do to stand aside from their best efforts just to nurture the best and most expensive?
Or should we value our talented musicians more, because we'll lose them if we don't?
Should we agree with the extreme view that technology will prevent another Beatles, Rolling Stones or Elvis Presley (and is that a bad thing?) and abandon or regulate this new technology?
Sorry for the length of this post, but I didn't want to get Writers' Block
Have professional musicians got good reason to complain about their lot?
I have heard professional musicians complain about:
1)Streaming services - because the musicians don't get paid
2)iTunes - because they don't get paid enough
3)Cd copying - because they don't get paid (they call it piracy - ahar! Jim Lad! Imagine Blackbeard ignoring the Spanish treasure ships so he can run off another hundred copies of Let It Be)
4)Open mic nights - because it destroys the local music "scene"
5)Amateur bands only charging a few quid - because it not only destroys the local music "scene" but also reduces the amount local venues will pay.
6)Local venues - because they don't pay enough and don't charge enough for admission to pay decent amounts to the artiste.
7)Youtube - because it's free and doesn't distinguish between good and bad musicians.
8)Karaoke - the list of becauses is too long to write here)
9)The Music Industry - because there are too many hangers on each taking their cut.
10)X Factor because it's killing the Music Industry
When I talk about professional musicians here, I am talking about the popular music types, not classical musicians, who seem to treat their profession as a job, and don't get involved in this sort of thing.
Now from my point of view, I do see the truth in some of the arguments, but not others. So:
I always pay for my recorded music. I make one exception to this. Occasionally, I'll come to an arrangement with someone to "swap" tracks and I'll burn a cd for them in return for them burning one for me. No more than 1 song per artiste, and this only to suggest things they might enjoy (or that they think I might enjoy). Using this method, I have discovered many artistes I wouldn't otherwise have heard, and I've bought their music as a result - so the musician is paid.
I do watch some things on Youtube (usually because I know the person or because I'm trying to learn a song) - so the musician is not paid.
I sometimes buy printed music (never single pieces of sheet music any more, but sometimes books and collections) but sometimes I will work out a song for myself, or, more often, I will go somewhere on the web and see what someone else has done with it. - so the writer can be paid, but may not be.
I do play at open Mics (but not Karaoke) and Folk Clubs, sometimes in the street, at parties (if anybody's foolish enough to ask or even hint!) and I do it for free.
I play gigs for not much money if anybody wants me to. Usually in pubs. I rely on the PRS to compensate the songwriters.
So. Who's right?
Is it reasonable for someone who has decided to be a professional musician to expect the world to arrange itself in such a way that they can receive the maximum possible amount from their efforts (bearing in mind that it's terribly competitive and they really ought to know that before pursuing it as a profession).
Is it reasonable to expect some money not just for creating a piece of work, but to benefit every time the format for recorded music changes, or each time it's performed or played?
Is it reasonable to expect people who would give their eye teeth to do what they do to stand aside from their best efforts just to nurture the best and most expensive?
Or should we value our talented musicians more, because we'll lose them if we don't?
Should we agree with the extreme view that technology will prevent another Beatles, Rolling Stones or Elvis Presley (and is that a bad thing?) and abandon or regulate this new technology?
Sorry for the length of this post, but I didn't want to get Writers' Block