Prince says the Internet is "over"

[TheBigA]

I know he's mainly talking about internet distribution of music, not radio, but it's an interesting interview:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2010/07/05/prince-world-exclusive-interview-peter-willis-goes-inside-the-star-s-secret-world-115875-22382552/

He's taking a lot of heat about this interview. The comment about wanting an advance seems so 20th century. But Prince is from a different time. He wants control of his music. The problem is that control is not the way to become popular. The way to become popular is to give up control. That's not in his nature.

He's a brilliant musical genius, but even Prince can't fix what's wrong with the music industry. He needs to just make music and leave the rest to others. Am I chomping to hear his new music? Truthfully I'm curious, but like everyone else I'll hear it for free at some point.

 

[landtuna]

He's a brilliant musical genius...

Self-proclaimed no doubt. Sort of like "King of Pop".

 

[TheBigA]

Self-proclaimed no doubt. Sort of like "King of Pop".

Not exactly. If you've seen him play 23 instruments, all perfectly, there's no other word besides genius. You may not like his music, it may not be in your taste, but he's brilliant at what he does. There's a difference between skill and personal taste. King of Pop is marketing, although I'd suggest that Michael is a genius too. Completely self-taught, and to watch him in the studio is a work of art. He somehow impressed Quincy Jones, who worked with Sinatra and Ray Charles.

 

[landtuna]

... but he's brilliant at what he does.

That must be why every time you read 'Prince' it is accompanied by "brilliant musical genius".

King of Pop is marketing, although I'd suggest that Michael is a genius too.

He could sing - but so can thousands of others - many much better than he. He could dance - but so did many others - some dancing far beyond Jackson's capabilities. And none of them stole their routines from East German marching styles. Jackson was a one-trick pony and not an especially good one at that. And we won't even get into his personal life.

He somehow impressed Quincy Jones, who worked with Sinatra and Ray Charles.

Jones must have been easily impressed. Sinatra was more a teen sex symbol than accomplished singer - the Elvis of an earlier generation (except that Elvis was a much better singer). Sinatra could act though. Charles was a unique performer but I doubt he would ever be considered one of the 'great' musicians.

 

[TheBigA]

Which just proves that opinions are like noses: Everybody has one.

All of which is off topic to this thread: If web delivery is "over," then what is the future of music distribution? Certainly not free CDs in newspapers. Is he off base by keping his music from iTunes? And who should pay? Labels? Advertisers? Subscribers? Consumers? Broadcasters?

 

[llewow]

So tonight I'm gonna iTunes like it's 1999!!!

 

[Jay Peninger]

Which just proves that opinions are like noses: Everybody has one.

All of which is off topic to this thread: If web delivery is "over," then what is the future of music distribution? Certainly not free CDs in newspapers. Is he off base by keping his music from iTunes? And who should pay? Labels? Advertisers? Subscribers? Consumers? Broadcasters?

It's kind of pointless when you think about it.... Wants to keep his music off the Internet because of piracy yet I would venture to guess despite his efforts that his Albums are all very popular on the various torrent sites....

In the end all he is doing is forcing his legit fans to go buy his music at Walmart or wherever he has chosen to sell it...

I wonder how many new pirates he has created with this approach? Some people simply like Internet Distribution of music and if they can't find it via Paid Channels they will venture to the dark side...

 

[TheBigA]

Most of the "music stores" are gone. So all you really have are the big box stores that stack the CDs next to the flat screen TVs. They only stock the Top 50. So it's really forced music to the internet.

 

[Carmine5]

Prince is undoubtedly a musical genius. However, that doesn't make him a genius at everything, including marketing. From what I hear he is very frustrated that distribution control over his music is slipping away from him. What Prince sought to achieve when he left his label, he's losing to the internet and file sharing.

However, in a way, I tend to agree with him. Of course, giants like Apple and Amazon are reaping millions from the internet. But I don't know of any small companies who have discovered the secret of making decent money from it, certainly not media companies or recording artists. It's a great sales and publicity tool but that's about it. Plus it takes a tremendous amount of time and, in many cases, money to keep a website fresh and promote it successfully, often with little ROI.

Prince would do better to surrender and let iTunes and Amazon carry his music, even if the financial rewards from download sales are a lot smaller then what he was once used to. It's better then having his music ripped off through file sharing.

 

[beatlenut]

If web delivery is "over," then what is the future of music distribution? Certainly not free CDs in newspapers.

Maybe in the future, we'll be cutting them out for free from the backs of aluminum cereal boxes!

 

[Jay Peninger]

If web delivery is "over," then what is the future of music distribution? Certainly not free CDs in newspapers.

Maybe in the future, we'll be cutting them out for free from the backs of aluminum cereal boxes!

Well Prince missed the boat on this one because as network speeds increase wireless technology creeps into more and more areas of our lives and at some point our computers are simply going to be one other device we access the internet with. Almost makes me sorry my last name is Prince...

Google is leading the way to web based applications and they understand that if you create the right web based tools you are always going to have an endless supply of potential customers for advertisers.

As a hosting provider I have seen the numbers a popular and properly monetized web site can generate we recently did a job for a site that will remain nameless who's revenue from advertising on their site generated $2.5 million last year.

With people generating money like that on the Internet and record labels such as Universal creating music distribution channels online for unsigned artists and I venture to say other labels are following their lead it won't be long and artists signed or unsigned will be releasing their new music to an eager internet for a very long time to come...

 

[Starbucks]

I hate to say this....but Prince's career is over. The last few albums and single releases has come a fraction to an Erotic City or I Wanna Be your Lover.

 

[Carmine5]

There's a great article in Digital Music News in which the author, Paul Resnikoff, argues not for a return of the music label but taking the best of what the labels did, the marketing strategy, and developing that into a service for indy artists to use.

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/080310parting

He too feels that the DIY marketing approach using the internet (getting " a paltry check from CD Baby - or ReverbNation, TuneCore, Bandcamp, or whomever") is "crap." No doubt this is the same conclusion Prince has come to.

 

[TheBigA]

He's right, and I've been to my share of those same conferences where the mantra is to engage your "1,000 true fans" and you can make a living off them. To me, as a practitioner of mass media, I say that may be nice, but my audience won't care. If you're an artist with a fan base of 1,000, and that has the impact of a butterfly burp. No one cares. Even today, Taylor Swift needed a million friends on her MySpace before anyone paid attention.

It's still about supply and demand. There is no restriction on distribution. Anyone can access the internet. But because of that, supply is infinite, and demand is not. That's why the value of music is so low. So yes, there is still a need for what record labels do, in terms of creating that impact, or else you're just another amateur on YouTube. It's the same for internet radio. Just putting your station on the internet isn't enough. You have to get people to listen. And OTA radio is simply better at getting tune-in that the internet.

 

[landtuna]

That's why the value of music is so low.

Again, if we're talking about current pop/country music genres, the problem is also the quality. I have heard many, many people of multiple generations say they do not like what is being produced today and will not listen or buy it. The technology today is leagues ahead of anything in the past but it is being wasted.

Personally, unless some creativity and individuality comes back into pop music I signed off many years ago. Many others have done the same. This period can be compared to the "girl group" phenom which existed for a few years following the 50's payola scandal. They all looked and sounded pretty much alike and most had minimum talent. The major difference then and now was there were no reasonable alternatives to radio stations and records. Now there are.

 

[TheBigA]

Again, if we're talking about current pop/country music genres, the problem is also the quality. I have heard many, many people of multiple generations say they do not like what is being produced today and will not listen or buy it.

They're lying. Look at what's selling, and it's not a function of quality, but a function of hype.

 

[landtuna]

They're lying. Look at what's selling, and it's not a function of quality, but a function of hype.

Yeah, that's it. They'd have every reason to lie to me. Someone who is not in the biz and has no dog in the fight (other than my opinion poodle, of course).

Today's pop "musicians" are mostly video "stars". Lady Gag-me, Britney, etc ad nauseum....virtually no audio talent but lots of bare skin dancing and outrageous clothing. 15 minutes later they will exist only in the dust bin of has-beens. Go to the male side and it is even more of a disaster. Bieber's hair and a whole plethora of dancers who dress and look exactly like each other.

Take away the video and teen fawning and what's left? And remember, I'm not arguing what is selling but rather comparing it to a generation or two ago on quality, diversity, originality etc.

 

[Jay Peninger]

Record Labels have been robbing the artists for decades and their greed and inability to grasp new technology and adapt has lead them to the financial brink and they are desperate to find revenue which is why they are seeking to get performance royalties from radio stations...

http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/archive/story/78954/radio-execs-head-to-d-c-to-talk-performance-royalt

If they succeed small stations and web broadcasters would either be forced to fold up shop, switch to talk, or play unsigned local artists not under the RIAA's thumb as of yet.

Why should radio stations be forced to pay artists money that was stolen from them by their own labels and their greedy executives. I suspect what will happen is the radio industry will have to turn a blind eye to labels seeking such royalties and only play artists that agree to opt out of such payments.

Artists can distribute music themselves and still make a big splash it just takes a little work, and the smart artists are learning this rapidly as digital distribution comes into its own via iTunes, Zune, and even one smart label Universal Music Group who has digital distribution group for unsigned artists...

 

[TheBigA]

They're lying. Look at what's selling, and it's not a function of quality, but a function of hype.

Yeah, that's it. They'd have every reason to lie to me.

Don't take it personally. It's not about you. People want an excuse for liking bad music. So they say if the music was better, they'd listen to it. But it's not about quality. It's about taste. And to put it simply, most people have bad taste. And they prove it every day, in the clothes they wear, the food they eat, and the culture they enjoy.

Don't blame music quality. Great quality music is available. And as you said, the people aren't limited to AM/FM radio to get it. But even with all the choices and options, they still end up choosing crap. That's just how it is. It's not about quality. If it was, we'd all eat better, and obesity wouldn't be such a problem.

 

[TheBigA]

Why should radio stations be forced to pay artists money that was stolen from them by their own labels and their greedy executives.

This is a good point. Before Congress considers adding any more royalties, they need to take a serious look at the relationship between artists and labels. I believe regulations should be imposed, with controls on how labels operate. The public has a right to enjoy music, and they shouldn't be forced to pay $16 for a CD when less than a dollar goes to the artist.