Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Why am I not shocked by any of this. The entertainment industry is just ignorant.That is going for both music and movies. There is nothing but crap being churned and then they keep on raising prices and scratching their heads and wonder why ppl are not buying.
Music executives love to blame illegal downloading for their industry's woes. But, based on the results of a new nationwide poll, they might want to look in the mirror.
Eighty percent of the respondents consider it stealing to download music for free without the copyright holder's permission, and 92% say they've never done it, according to the poll conducted for The Associated Press and Rolling Stone magazine.
Meanwhile, three-quarters of music fans say compact discs are too expensive, and 58% say music in general is getting worse. "Less talented people are able to get a song out there and make a quick million and you never hear from them again," said Kate Simkins, 30, of Cape Cod, Mass.
Ipsos' telephone poll of 1,000 adults, including 963 music listeners, from all states except Alaska and Hawaii was conducted Jan. 23-25 and has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
The music industry has spent several years in turmoil, as downloading and the popularity of iPods upend its traditional business model. A total of 618.9 million CD albums were sold during 2005, sharply down from the 762.8 million sold in 2001, according to Nielsen Soundscan.
At the same time, 352.7 million tracks were sold digitally in 2005, a category that wasn't even measured five years ago. Digital sales of music and ring tones offer new revenue opportunities, but often at the expense of more lucrative CD sales.
Although buying music digitally hasn't exactly become widespread -- only 15% of poll respondents said they have done it -- there appears to be a growing acceptance of this type of transaction. The poll found that 71% of music fans believe that a 99-cent download of a song is a fair price or outright bargain.
Even though millions of tracks are downloaded for free each week on peer-to-peer networks, a sense of queasiness remains. "Somebody is putting their art out there. They should be compensated for it," said Mickey Johnson, 41, from Charleston, Tenn.
The industry would be wise to embrace downloading, said Greg Hoerger, 42, of Minneapolis, who suggested that customers could receive five or six free downloads from an artist when they buy a CD.
For fans like Hoerger and Simkins, buying a CD for about $20 is no bargain. They'd rather download one or two favorite songs to their iPods. The digital music revolution also has other benefits, Simkins said: with the iPod, she no longer has to have cassettes or CDs cluttering her car.
The last CD she bought, a few months ago, was by the Killers. "It was on sale," she said.
Many fans also say they just don't like what they're hearing. It may not be surprising to hear older fans say music just isn't what it used to be when they were growing up. But the poll also found that 49% of music fans ages 18-to-34 -- the target audience for the music business -- say music is getting worse.
"Even if our parents didn't like how loud rock 'n' roll was, or that it was revolutionary, at least they could listen to some of it," said Christina Tjoelker, 49, from Snohomish, Wash. "It wasn't gross. It wasn't disgusting. It wasn't about beating up women or shooting the police."
The last CD she bought was Neil Diamond's new one, "because Oprah was raving about it," she said.
Overall, music fans were split on why music sales have been declining for the past five years: 33% said it was because of illegal downloads, 29% said it was because of competition from other forms of entertainment, 21% blamed it on the quality of music getting worse and 13% said it was because CDs are too expensive.
FM radio is still the main way most fans find out about new music, according to the poll. Television shows are a distant second.
Rock 'n' roll is the most popular style of music, cited by 26% of the fans. It runs neck-and-neck with country among fans ages 35 or over.
Rap music is the source of the biggest generation gap. Among fans under age 35, 18% called rap or hip-hop their favorite style of music, the poll found. Only 2% of people ages 35 and over said the same thing.
If we are lucky, the whole music business will be reorganizing over the next couple of decades, and maybe the middle men can actually be cut out (wouldn't you rather give your money straight to the band than a company?). This would ultimately result in fewer mega-rich mega-stars and far more economically viable if not rich bands.
The notion that music is "getting worse" really rubs me the wrong way though. No one person could possibly be familiar with any more than a tiny percentage of the music that is being made in large city at one time, let alone in the U.S. or in the world or over a span of time like a year. I have always found that all it takes is a little curiosity and a little effort to discover some truly amazing music or films that I've never heard of before. With the way the internet works these days, there is absolutely no way that anyone could say "There just isn't any good new music (or film) out there". That could only be true for someone who isn't interested in making the slightest effort to seek some out.
The problem is that people talk about "music" and "the music business" as if they were synonomous. The same could be said about movies, and I find that concept to be stomach-churningly obnoxious and ignorant. There is a lot of music and film being made where the primary goal is too make money. There is far more being made where the primary goal is not to make money (in many cases the goal is art or expression, in others it just might be fun or to get laid, but there is a lot of it out there). The impression is created by TV, radio, magazines (mostly owned by the same companies that are selling the music or movies) and other forms of advertising that the profit-motive stuff is the only choice out there.
The studios make a buck on something, then they try to replicate it so they can make money again. Then they market the hell out of it and make it ubiquitous on every magazine cover, TV show, billboard, radio station etc. (many of which they own) and basically create the impression that recycled crap is the only option. The "entertainment media" (read: extension of the advertising dept.) gives this notion their stamp of appoval and create the impression that corporate products are the only options out there. Then "the public" pays for these music and movies because they aren't aware of other options, and the studios say: "See, people like this crap. We're just giving them what they want." Bullsh!t.
For my money, I think one of the most realistic ways to address this issue is to educate kids about media consumption. Teach them the strategies and motivations that corporations use to sell this stuff and teach them alternatives (so easy for those with access to the internet).
Post by jambandjohn on Feb 3, 2006 21:31:26 GMT -5
It's my own humble opinion that the current sorry state of the music industry can be laid largely at the feet of corporate radio (ie Clear Channel and their ilk..). They've niched, demographed and sphlintered popular music into neat little packages. FM was once cutting edge, now it's the same as AM with slightly better reception. They've got computer generated formats based on marketing surveys.
I grew up listening to WOUR in central NY. You got six songs in a row every time. If a new record came out, if it was any good, chances are in few days, you'd had heard every track on it. The station had DJs in tune with the local scene, not radio personalities and they were there in the studio, not piped in from half way across the country. The wide range of music at their disposal was amazing. At the end of each music set, you always got the name of the album each tune was from. I can't tell you the number of new bands I discovered from this one source.
Recently, I traveled to Florida and flipped on the radio in my rental car. The first station I found sounded just like the local station here - exactly, right down to the nickname, the slogan and the same crappy contests. The same 40 - 50 songs, too.
I know somebody is going to say - satellite radio, but it gauls me to have to pay out. It's like suddenly having to pay for sunsets, where before you could just enjoy them for free...
I know somebody is going to say - satellite radio, but it gauls me to have to pay out. It's like suddenly having to pay for sunsets, where before you could just enjoy them for free...
I understand what you're saying about satellite radio, but its totally worth paying for. Sirius has Jam On, which is cool, but Sirius is going to tank by the third quarter of this year (Barron's, the Wall Street trade magazine, did a huge piece on Sirius and its near-inevitable failure). If sunsets beamed advertisements every dusk, or if they became clouded and obscured every day, then you would surely pay for a beautiful sunset again. Commercial radio is that kind of terrible, unviewable sunset. Sunsets are organic, beautiful sights that inspire and humble us. Terrestrial radio represents the worst in humanity: greed, commercialism, and phoniness. Think about how crappy network television is compared to HBO. Thats basically the same thing terrestrial radio is to satellite. When HBO first came out, or even cable, no one wanted to pay for it...but it is how television and radio are meant to be heard: without interuption, digital quality sound, and uncensored.
