What busking could teach the music industry

January 8, 2004 11:02 AM

What busking could teach the music industryAn intelligent essay on how the music industry should adapt to the new digital realities, drawn from the author's experiences as a street (well, subway) musician. No one who could learn from it will read it, of course.
posted by mojohand (41 comments total)

Now if I could only figure out a way to get my electronic keyboard down there...

In other words, practical for the guitar player, not so much everyone else. But I agree with him about the free downloads. Some sites I know at least give a snippet of what a song sounds like. Better than nothing.
posted by konolia at 11:09 AM on January 8, 2004

I've always thought the correct meditation point for the RIAA is those little candy bins at the supermarket: everybody snitches a caramel chew once in a while, and I often see people standing there sampling in order to decide what to buy a bag of. Posting security guards next to the candy bins would just make people walk by faster and make them less likely to stop and buy anything.
posted by hob at 11:20 AM on January 8, 2004

Before we get on to excoriating the music industry, let's set this busker straight. What right does he have to force me to listen to his miserable twanging as I wait for the train or traverse a pedestrian tunnel? He's an aural mugger, robbing me of the ability to enjoy silent thought, reading, or the music in my own head. Sometimes, I like to make up my own songs while I'm waiting for the train. How am I supposed to do this while his crappy noise is filling the air? Sometimes, I like to listen to the shuffle of feet, or the grinding of rails -- the music of working humanity on the move. I pay the same fare as he does. Yet he thinks he has the right to shove his music down my throat, at a time when I have no choice but to stand there and take it. A busker is a bully, plain and simple. He's a one-man cartel, as bad as the big bad record companies. He limits my choices as severely as they do -- and just like the record companies, he is allowed to continue because simple-minded, insensitive bozos give him money in exchange for his annoying racket.
posted by Faze at 11:33 AM on January 8, 2004

Holy God, this guy has NO idea how record labels function.

Number 1: Drop CD Prices The cost of a CD includes development/recording costs, producer fees ( recoupable ), copyright costs, packaging, artwork, distibution, overhead, marketing etc etc. The label makes about $2 per CD sold. Take away development costs and most of favorite bands won't have the funds to make great albums. Take away marketing dollars, and there will be 3192 buskers in your local subway all trying to be heard at the same time.

Number 2-Branch Out
The industry is a business, every label wants to make money regardless of size. Sub Pop is a emo label, Ninja Tunes is a electronica, Jive is a Pop label. There are labels for ecclectic tastes, there are labels for mainstream tastes. Bands/artists are an investment, labels that 'reach' and fail to find customers go out of business.

Number 3-Embrace File Sharing - No, embrace legal ALBUM downloading. Filesharing fucks songwriters and artists, and makes the industry single driven. If individual song sharing becomes the norm, we will never get to hear "Revolution #9", "Fitter Happier" or other quirky experimental tracks found on our favorite bands albums. Bands will only care about writing catchy downloadable songs, which will suck.
posted by remlapm at 11:36 AM on January 8, 2004

Interesting. I wish he gave ratios for how many albums he was selling at various price points. Logically, if dropping your price from $10 to $5 triples your sales you should do it.

I'm surprised when I talk to musicians who think that because they have a lot of members and that they spent a lot on the recording they have to charge more for their CD. I try to explain that supply and demand determines pricing not the cost of production but that's a strange concept for a lot of people.
posted by bobo123 at 11:39 AM on January 8, 2004

...he is allowed to continue because simple-minded, insensitive bozos give him money in exchange for his annoying racket.

Somebody needs a hug.
posted by majcher at 11:42 AM on January 8, 2004

If individual song sharing becomes the norm, we will never get [a pony]

I thought the whole point of this here Internet thing was that we got to have more than one way things work. There does not have to be one and only one system for the distribution of music or anything else; there is room for lots.
posted by hob at 11:45 AM on January 8, 2004

nemlapm: Have you ever heard of the Stax-Volt collections? They're collections of singles. I'd rather hear at least 90 percent of their content any day before listening to "Revolution No. 9" again. How many people fast-forward through that one on the White Album after hearing it a couple of times?
posted by raysmj at 11:51 AM on January 8, 2004

Faze: you are quite the grump. Why don't you go live in a cabin in the woods, miles from civilization, where you can write your manifesto in peace?
posted by bshort at 11:53 AM on January 8, 2004

remlapm: If individual song sharing becomes the norm [...] bands will only care about writing catchy downloadable songs, which will suck.

While I agree the Internet may change music production and consumption, I do think giving consumers more choice is good. I also note that no industry likes giving their customers more choice.
posted by Triplanetary at 11:56 AM on January 8, 2004

Mostly remlapm:

Number 1: Drop CD Prices
The guy makes a point about how it wasn't difficult for him to get production prices for his own album under $2. While I can't imagine a big-name band working at this low of a cost, every time I read the list of crap that goes into making a CD, I wonder how much inefficiency could have been discounted from the cost of a CD that has ended up lining the fatcat's pockets or paying for suits against DVD Jon, et al.

Number 2: Branch Out
Labels that 'reach' and go out of business from a failure to find customers are in a catch-22 situation. They don't have the marketing dollars that a big label has, and so can't force the public to swallow their tripe as easily as the big labels can, so they're not earning the money they need for more agressive marketing. (This goes vaguely along with my theory that if you could listen to nothing but zydeco for a month or two, you would start to develop a taste for it. But what station will play zydeco when they're being paid so well to play Christina Timberlake/2-Cent continuously?)

Number 3: Embrace File Sharing
Without a method to expose and distribute songs from unknown bands, you're not even going to find their single amongst the buzzing of RIAA labels. More bands/labels should employ free downloading of singles from bands that might benefit from better exposure. Then hit them up for a legal album or individual song fee.

Bands that went download-only wouldn't have to produce 2 good tunes and 13 crappy ones just to fill out an album. They could concentrate of producing only, say, 5 good songs. Then folks would want to download the 3 they hadn't heard yet. The idea that "albums" are the sales unit in the music world is a concept that needs to go in the world of internet music availability.
posted by ringmaster at 12:02 PM on January 8, 2004

The label makes about $2 per CD sold.

LOL
posted by rushmc at 12:11 PM on January 8, 2004

Holy God, this guy has NO idea how record labels function.

No, he's saying they don't function well. Certainly not as well as they used to. They blame technology, he blames a bogus system. I'm more inclined to agree with him.
posted by Foosnark at 12:17 PM on January 8, 2004

I don't think the "album" will ever go away, although it may diminish as the means to measure a certain artist's popularity. Bands that make groups of songs as coherent musical compositions, like albums are, won't give up on that. Artists that earn their popularity and money by having hit singles already have given up on albums. A Britney Spears/Destiny's Child/Justin Timberlake/etc album would sell just as many copies even in today's situation if it were just 5 tracks, all singles. The vast majority of the fans included in the multi-million/platinum figures of these albums don't care about the non-single tracks; those tracks are irrelevant to the sales of the album.

My point is that if the internet continues to become the dominant form of transmitting/exchanging/selling music, bands that actually care about making a deep, thoughtful, meaningful work of music will continue to group there music in a form similar to an album. It just might be offered in a primarily electronic form.

And come on, will we really miss "Revolution 9"? I know I won't, but bands like Radiohead won't stop making "Fitter, Happier" and "Pull/Pulk Revolving Doors" no matter what the convention for releasing music is.
posted by BloodyWallet at 12:18 PM on January 8, 2004

raysmj is right. For my part, I would pay extra to get a CD without "Revolution Number 9" or anything like it...

As far as buskers are concerned, riddle me this: How is it that MeFiers go ballistic when they feel the GWB or someone in his administration is restricting their freedom in the public sphere, and yet accept without a murmur the obnoxious restriction of aural freedom enforced by buskers on unwilling commuters everyday of the week? Maybe I like music. Maybe I like music on thje subway. Maybe I just don't like THAT GUY'S music on the subway. What choice to I have?
posted by Faze at 12:23 PM on January 8, 2004

Just buy an iPod already, Faze.
posted by turaho at 12:37 PM on January 8, 2004

How is it that MeFiers go ballistic when they feel the GWB or someone in his administration is restricting their freedom in the public sphere, and yet accept without a murmur the obnoxious restriction of aural freedom enforced by buskers on unwilling commuters everyday of the week?

what about the obnoxious noise and gas pollution of all these so-called automobiles i see driving on my nice quiet roads? what about the obnoxious comments and whistling that some of my female friends get all over the city? and what's with this homeless dude asking me for money?

i love to hear most of the birds sing, but i wish those damn pigeons would shut up. why doesn't the city just kill them all? etc, etc.

you should either accept the fact that subway musicians are not offensive enough for most people to care, or else start a petition to make them illegal wherever you live. if everyone were as offended as you, it shouldn't be that hard to pass a law to change the current behavior (for example, panhandlers in san francisco can now be arrested for asking for money more than once, i.e. being "aggressive.")

hey, i know how it feels. i'm offended by "In God We Trust" on my currency, but what the fuck can i gonna do about it? i'd bet 90% of the U.S. population disagrees with me.
posted by mrgrimm at 12:48 PM on January 8, 2004

Did anyone else know before reading this article that Orrin Hatch was a songwriter? Where can I download his stuff? It's gotta be better than Ashcroft (John, not Richard), right?
posted by chandy72 at 12:53 PM on January 8, 2004

During the Depression in America (roughly 1929+ a few years) many guys would stand at street corners and sell apples. Hoboes, later, would sell copies of The Hoboe News--I learned that this was simply a way of begging and keeping one's dignity by giving something in return....in Spain (Madrid), the gypsies threatened to curse you if you did not cross their palms (a handout), but I discovered that not understanding Spanish or Romany saved me money and put the curse option on the gypsy.Moral: listen. Don't pay attention. Give. Walk away and mutter....or, better, get wealthy and take cabs.
posted by Postroad at 12:54 PM on January 8, 2004

Take away development costs and most of favorite bands won't have the funds to make great albums.

It doesn't take a lot of money to make an album, it doesn't take a lot of money to release an album, or promote an album. The problem is that major label business structures are modelled mainly to make money off huge album sales, rather than (as many Indies can) be able to make money off smaller sales numbers (say 40,000).

With so much music available now, music companies will need to become more like book companies where specific publishers are focused on specific niches.
posted by drezdn at 12:56 PM on January 8, 2004

i'm offended by "In God We Trust" on my currency -- mgrimm
I appreciate your irritation. On the other hand, you do have to reach into your pocket, pull out a quarter, hold it up to your face and read it in order to be offended by "In God We Trust." But no special activity is required to be oppressed by the busker-bullies. You don't have to seek them out, they seek you out. And while bus exhaust and other pollutants simply poison your body, buskers poison your soul with crappy, inept, or unwanted music.
posted by Faze at 12:58 PM on January 8, 2004

You know, the real problem with buskers is limited repetoire. There are guys on my platform who play the same 2 or three songs over and over and over. It just makes a late train that much more painful. But some street musicians are pretty damned good, and when they're good it's cool to have live music in a public place. So I guess like most things you take the good with the bad.
posted by Outlawyr at 1:08 PM on January 8, 2004

(somewhat) more succinctly:

the Bush administration is offensive to me b/c (among other offenses) they are restricting the speech of specific individuals based on its content.

subway buskers (or street musicians) are not offensive to me b/c they aren't removing any of my rights, except the debatable right to pure silence. i find loud cell-phone talkers or even rough-housing teenagers to be certainly more annoying than musicians anyday.

on preview: i'd rather have my soul poisoned than my body, and i'd rather listen to some crappy, inept music than have none allowed at all. we're obviously examining the issue from very different POVs.

apologies for the continued derail ...

as for the RIAA, i think they'd do a lot better to imitate their Russian counterparts: AllofMP3.com

$.01/mb (or $whatever/mb) available in various formats and bit rates seems like a logical step forward.
posted by mrgrimm at 1:14 PM on January 8, 2004

Did anyone else know before reading this article that Orrin Hatch was a songwriter? Where can I download his stuff? It's gotta be better than Ashcroft (John, not Richard), right?


The Music of Senator Orrin Hatch
posted by gyc at 1:23 PM on January 8, 2004

Faze, let me get this straight. Every three minutes or so, a subway train is going to screech by, generating as much as 100 decibels of piercing high-frequency noise that can literally hurt your ears and over time can damage your hearing; and it's the music that bothers you?

Suck it up. You have no right to "aural freedom" any more than you have a right to "visual freedom" that is violated by ugly people. Your obsessive resentment of NYC has become irrational; you are now a crank.
posted by nicwolff at 2:19 PM on January 8, 2004

Good essay, with some good points made.

As for subway buskers: I don't mind them. I've heard some really good ones, and even if they're playing something I don't like, it's not like I'll be at the station for a long time...10-15 minutes at most. It's not like they've set up in my living room or anywhere, it's a public place and I don't expect pure silence. If I want that, I'll just drive with the radio off.
posted by SisterHavana at 2:39 PM on January 8, 2004

we should take Faze's viewpoint to it's logical conclusion and ban all forms of public prayer and ministering.
posted by mcsweetie at 2:58 PM on January 8, 2004

er, its I mean!
posted by mcsweetie at 2:59 PM on January 8, 2004

we should take Faze's viewpoint to it's logical conclusion and ban all forms of public prayer and ministering.

In my dreams. Music I don't mind; nonsense spewed at me, I do.
posted by rushmc at 3:15 PM on January 8, 2004

SisterHavana's driving a Mercedes, I take it.

What right does he have to force me to listen to his miserable twanging as I wait for the train or traverse a pedestrian tunnel?

About the same right one has to thrust one's harsh opinions upon strangers browsing a community weblog?

...and now, while you wait for A train, let me regale you with a little John Lennon tune---

Don't Bring me down!

*dah dah dah dum dah*

Don't bring me down!...
posted by y2karl at 3:17 PM on January 8, 2004

Nooo...no Mercedes for me! Sorry to disappoint! : )

Okay, maybe not PURE silence but a nonmusical experience. How's that? (Won't happen, since I like musical background when I drive. but anyway.)
posted by SisterHavana at 3:22 PM on January 8, 2004

See, I get through the whole busker (spellcheck suggestion: "abuser") issue by believing the following simultaneously:

1. Buskers have the right to do their thing; and
2. They bother he hell out of me.

Which is why I do want a cabin in the woods someday. It's the choice that I have. Of course, I also want a T1 out to said cabin. I may be a crank, but I'm not a Luddite.
posted by amery at 3:29 PM on January 8, 2004

Faze,
as a musician myself, I can easily screen out other sounds, rhythms, to focus singly on the sound that I want to hear. When I was younger I did this often and was better at it.. I had excellent listening and could eavesdrop on conversations in a crowd.

As a musician this of course enables me to concentrate on my part easily when with other players, and play independently of them when it is necessary.

It is hardly an aural assault to me. Were it even screaming and non painful screeching I could adjust. Of course I still find some things annoying. And quite so. But it is not the case that noise disrupts everybody.
posted by firestorm at 5:00 PM on January 8, 2004

This guy doesn't understand the concept of the categorical imperative or the economy of scale. If, for example, CD blanks were made by individuals working at home and keeping their own hours, etc., it wouldn't be so cheap for him to buy them to make his CDs.

Also, if every musician in (for example) the greater Boston area tried to promote him or herself by busking at subway stations, there would hardly be room for the commuters. Or, if regulated, each musician would get approximately 17 seconds a week "on stage".

It's kind of like "Walden", only less interesting. Thoreau could live in a cabin and grow beans because his mother's servants did his laundry for him every week when he walked the mile and a half to her house. And, of course, he could afford the cabin and the laundry on the proceeds of his parents' pencil factory.

I don't disagree with this guy's assertions at the broadest level--the music industry is inefficient and there is a tremendous amount of administrative waste--but this isn't a well-thought-out analysis of the problem.
posted by Sidhedevil at 5:05 PM on January 8, 2004

Firestorm, as a musician myself, I find many subway buskers annoying and loud enough to hurt my ears (though I have very sensitive hearing and had to wear cotton when playing Mahler).

More than that, here in Boston they make it impossible to hear the already-difficult-to-understand announcements. There has been more than one occasion when I've wound up going literally miles out of my way because some idiot was singing songs about "JEEEEEEEE-zzzzussss" with his karaoke kit cranked to 110 dB during the "this train is going nonstop to SomewhereSidhedevilDoesn'tWantToBe" announcement.
posted by Sidhedevil at 5:10 PM on January 8, 2004

simple-minded, insensitive bozos give him money in exchange for his annoying racket.

Translation:

People who value different things than I do are sooo stupid!

(and here I thought simple minded and sensitivity went together)
posted by namespan at 6:14 PM on January 8, 2004

[a tangential, late-in-thread ramble - and probably none too original at that]

Busking, or something a lot like it, is likely to be the new revenue model of the music industry (note—not the recording industry).

[on second thought – ramble distilled to the following]

1. The value of a recording lies not in the medium but as a record of a performance.
2. The bar to acquiring recordings at little or no cost to the consumer has irrevocably been eliminated for all practical intents and purposes.
3. From #2, the recording has little or no intrinsic value (and may never had such in the first place)
4. While the performer has lost control over the recording, s/he still controls the terms of performance.
5. Hence the performance still retains value.
6. The music industry needs to restructure itself around #5—recordings become nothing more than advertisements for perform(ers)(ances).
7. Whereas the current thinking is that live performances support the promotion of recorded music sales,
8. The reverse is now the case—recordings should promote the sales of admissions to live performances.
9. The ultimate result being:
   1. The shift to releases of greatly diminished sound quality or incomplete recordings which are freely distributed or otherwise forced down our throats (cf advertising in general)
   2. The distribution/promotion wing of the recording industry is repurposed to promotion of live performances, monopolization of performance venues, &c
   3. Music recording is no longer the path to lucrative profits, bowing to technology the same way as many other crafts (weaving, carpentry, smithing, etc) before it.
   4. Studio albums/performers find other revenue streams for support. I'm thinking of strategies like sponsor/client relationships found in the realm of visual arts like painting and sculpture where a work is commissioned. Costs are recouped through exhibitions or written off as a public good.

[further speculation deleted]
posted by Fezboy! at 7:21 PM on January 8, 2004

Don't bring me down!... -- y2karl
Thanks for the song. I dug it.
posted by Faze at 6:34 AM on January 9, 2004

I thought that was an ELO tune?

you're looking good, just like a snake in the grass
one of these days you're gonna break your glass...don't bring me down!

what in the wide of world of sports does that mean?
posted by mcsweetie at 9:49 AM on January 9, 2004

y2karl has good taste in music. He wouldn't dream of foisting an ELO song on his fellow passengers.
posted by Faze at 9:52 AM on January 9, 2004

you are crazy! ELO was the bomb. Telephone Line, Showdown, Evil Woman, Livin' Thing, Don't Bring Me Down, Turn to Stone...unstoppable!
posted by mcsweetie at 11:22 AM on January 9, 2004