Steve Albini on the state of music industry

[GeckoYamori]

In the music industry you constantly end up with this status quo of jobs and professions that are completely built and dependant around the technological limitations of the time. When that status quo is shaken up, which happens to variying degree across a bunch of decades, naturally those who are dependant on that status quo to keep their jobs relevant are going to get all doom & gloom about the death of the industry. In the earliest days of the industry, you had shops where you could buy piano sheet music and there was always someone around to play the music for you before deciding on a purchase. I can't imagine those people were too happy with records becoming a common consumer product.

Of course there's always going to be a profitable music industry around, even if the current (or currently percieved, rather) status quo built around the physical record industry is crumbling. If there's anything humanit is really, consistently good at, it's figuring out how to make money from something. We're still in a transitional period right now and it's the innovators who see new possibilities that are going to come out on top, and those who are too dependant on the old ways and only see obstacles that threaten their old and cozy jobs are going to lose out.

[Zombie Queen]

If there's anything humanit is really, consistently good at, it's figuring out how to make money from something.

Can't say it's not very true, but it makes me feel even more an alien...

I find that article really good, it articulates things that I had in the back of my head for a while. Plus, the ending is spot on. If I were more human, I should sue Sony for moral damages, caused by "Last Christmas" shoveled up my brain every year, this time of year while shopping. This should be banned by Geneva Convention.

[robogone]

Compare this with the uninformed drivel that came out of Gene Simmons mouth a few months back where he was berating the death of music.

It's great to hear someone actually give an informed opinion for a change.

[Watto]

He's got money already and he basically doesn't care, is the message I get from him.

He was on Sonic Highways (the Foo Fighters thing) very recently. What emerged was the picture of a guy with strong moral convictions, who just makes enough to get by (and sometimes doesn't).

You're aware that he's never earned a cent after his original fee for a recording? He doesn't take points. Edit: that includes some enormous money spinners, Nirvana etc.

Disagree with his views all you like, but the guy lives his philosophy.

[Chopper]

He's got money already and he basically doesn't care, is the message I get from him.

He was on Sonic Highways (the Foo Fighters thing) very recently. What emerged was the picture of a guy with strong moral convictions, who just makes enough to get by (and sometimes doesn't).

You're aware that he's never earned a cent after his original fee for a recording? He doesn't take points. Edit: that includes some enormous money spinners, Nirvana etc.

Disagree with his views all you like, but the guy lives his philosophy.

this.

[GaryG]

If Albini isn't your thing then you could always read this guys take on how things are today:

http://io9.com/this-is-how-artists-make ... 1660864329

Not sure I recognise what he's describing but each to their own...

[Kriminal]

Big Black were quite good in the day, but i really dont want to hear some old bloke moaning about something he has no relevance to.

Do an anniversary tour or something, and let everyone else do their thing.

[metamorphosis]

He was on Sonic Highways (the Foo Fighters thing) very recently. What emerged was the picture of a guy with strong moral convictions, who just makes enough to get by (and sometimes doesn't).

You're aware that he's never earned a cent after his original fee for a recording? He doesn't take points. Edit: that includes some enormous money spinners, Nirvana etc.

Disagree with his views all you like, but the guy lives his philosophy.

Yeah, he's getting paid by the biggest bands in the industry. And, since he doesn't get paid in points, he doesn't have to worry about actual sales. Hence, he's got enough money and doesn't Have to Care.

[ZenPunkHippy]

Big Black were quite good in the day, but i really dont want to hear some old bloke moaning about something he has no relevance to.

He wasn't moaning ... quite the opposite in fact.

[herodotus]

He was on Sonic Highways (the Foo Fighters thing) very recently. What emerged was the picture of a guy with strong moral convictions, who just makes enough to get by (and sometimes doesn't).

You're aware that he's never earned a cent after his original fee for a recording? He doesn't take points. Edit: that includes some enormous money spinners, Nirvana etc.

Disagree with his views all you like, but the guy lives his philosophy.

Yeah, he's getting paid by the biggest bands in the industry. And, since he doesn't get paid in points, he doesn't have to worry about actual sales. Hence, he's got enough money and doesn't Have to Care.

You have got it backward. He gets paid far less than the likes of Bob Rock or Rick Rubin. He does it because he has ethical standards that don't allow him to earn more because the band makes it big.

And he doesn't just work with major bands. Most bands he records are obscure underground acts. He charges all of these bands the same hourly rates.

What I find most interesting, though, is how much he has changed his mind about digital audio. He used to hate it. But now he sees more than most other analog studio owners that it is a good thing for musicians. Even though it must dig into his bottom line.

He is a jerk, certainly. But he has integrity. More than most, actually.

[xNiMiNx]

"There's a lot of shade thrown by people in the music industry about how terrible the free sharing of music is, how it’s the equivalent of theft, etc. That's all bullshit...

From my part, I believe the very concept of exclusive intellectual property with respect to recorded music has come to a natural end, or something like an end. Technology has brought to a head a need to embrace the meaning of the word "release", as in bird or fart. It is no longer possible to maintain control over digitised material and I don't believe the public good is served by trying to.

Music has entered the environment as an atmospheric element, like the wind, and in that capacity should not be subject to control and compensation. Well, not unless the rights holders are willing to let me turn the tables on it. If you think my listening is worth something, OK then, so do I. Play a Phil Collins song while I'm grocery shopping? Pay me $20. Def Leppard? Make it $100. Miley Cyrus? They don't print money big enough." - Steve Albini

[blueman]

The cruel irony of this situation: we (the musicians making this seemingly valueless art) continue paying good money for sounds, samples, virtual instruments, fx, and all manner of digitized audio solutions to help us create music that few ppl want to hear and almost no one is willing to pay for. Hmmm

[msorrels]

The cruel irony of this situation: we (the musicians making this seemingly valueless art) continue paying good money for sounds, samples, virtual instruments, fx, and all manner of digitized audio solutions to help us create music that few ppl want to hear and almost no one is willing to pay for. Hmmm

Ok, take your next album/song (or your last) and make it a Masterclass on song writing, song mixing, song mastering. Create videos explaining the process. Write a detailed class book/pdf that explains how exactly you made the song. Include the project files, recordings, stems, MIDI files, presets. Sell it with reuse rights, let people remix your track legally, or make it educational use only what ever feels right to you.

If people are buying sounds/samples/presets/etc to make their own music then sell that. Big song writers have been selling books with their hits for home use for years. It's never been a big business but there is nothing that says smaller indie music couldn't actually find more success there (with better product/more usage rights/etc). People want to make music, help them.

I have a subscription to Groove3 and have spent a fair amount of time watching the class on mixing with Sonar. In it Bill Edstrom mixes The Hawthorne Effect's song "Devil Don't Care" After watching the class several times I actually bought the song on Amazon. Not a huge sales influx I'm sure but still I wouldn't have bought the song without the class. The maker/educational community has always been a market/outlet for musicians.

[jopy]

The cruel irony of this situation: we (the musicians making this seemingly valueless art) continue paying good money for sounds, samples, virtual instruments, fx, and all manner of digitized audio solutions to help us create music that few ppl want to hear and almost no one is willing to pay for. Hmmm

Some people go running to challenge themselves and get some fresh air without ever racing. Some people make gardens in their backyard so they can sit in them and relax on sunny days and never show them off to the neighbors. And some people create music with different sounds, samples, instruments, and effect because the act of creation itself is enjoyable and fulfilling. I don't mean to diminish commercial ambition as an ancillary benefit of making music, but sometimes just doing music for fun is a perfectly good use of time and money.

[blueman]

That's a good outlook, jopy, thanks