This afternoon Amplifier posted on Facebook a mock-up front page of the Daily Mail which seemed to announce their final UK tour. This was a piece of hyperbole, meant to illustrate the question they were asking in the post. Presumably advance ticket sales for an imminent tour aren’t quite what they expected and they were asking why it seems that UK audiences seem more reticent to travel to gigs than fans on mainland Europe.
To be honest, while I am going to see Amplifier on Monday, I am probably one of the biggest culprits. I haven’t travelled to see a gig in about five years, but I do go to somewhere in the region of forty gigs a year in York. I am making the effort to go to Sheffield for one gig this year, but it is for a farewell tour and I am going with my wife and daughter.
Anyway, Amplifier’s post prompted me to think about the situation and, as is my wont, to put finger to keyboard.
Firstly, Amplifier are a prog-rock band. It’s my understanding that prog has a much wider audience on mainland Europe than it does here. Conversely, there are a lot of well-known prog bands who come from the UK. This might explain why audiences seem to travel more when such bands tour in Europe. I have no figures to back this up, it is just speculation, but it seems logical.
Among my friends (and by that I mean people that I know outside of Facebook – many of the people I have “met” through that site I have done through a shared love of music, including prog), few are interested in the genre. Those that are tend to have not heard of the more modern bands and still think prog consists of Genesis, Pink Floyd, ELP and Yes. Sadly, those people seem very hard to educate. I also know few people who go to local gigs.
York itself suffers from its size – being a relatively small city, even if it can maintain the same proportion of residents that, for example, Leeds or Birmingham has that attend gigs, the numbers are small. It also has a fair few venues, possibly more than its size can support, It’s my experience that audience numbers in York are small. There have been two occasions when I have been the only member of the audience that wasn’t in or related to one of the bands on the bill. While people do travel to York to gigs, it seems to be for bands they REALLY want to see.
My own reasons for not travelling are, just that… my own. I don’t pretend to speak for anybody else. Firstly, while I have a very understanding family who are generally quite happy to allow me to go to whatever gigs I want to (as I type, I plan to attend three in the next five days), adding travelling time beyond the ten to twenty minutes it takes me to get to local gigs is, in my opinion asking a bit much. Also, travelling doesn’t always fit in with childcare responsibilities – I was recently offered a lift to see one of my favourite bands but, even if I wanted to, wouldn’t have been able to go as the departure time didn’t fit in with getting my daughter to her swimming lesson.
Limiting myself to local gigs does mean that I sometimes have to miss out. One favourite band recently dropped York as a venue in favour of another North East location that they hadn’t played before. Their aim was to widen their fan base, presumably hoping that people in the area who didn’t/couldn’t travel to York would go to a more local venue. I was disappointed and said so, but I didn’t moan and wished the band well with the gig. However, staying local does mean that I get to see more bands than some people who follow their favourite bands across the country. I saw Amplifier for the first time when they played York in 2011, based solely on the fact that I saw an advert for the gig in Prog Magazine. Up until then, I hadn’t even heard of the band. If there are no touring bands playing, I might venture out to see a local band or artiste – sometimes discovering a new band that I really like and occasionally seeing somebody I hope never to cross paths with again. Doing that I feel that I’m not only supporting local talent, but also the local venues. Without the venues, live music dies.
There’s also the cost of travelling. Most of us only have a finite amount of money. Travelling to gigs means having less money to spend on gigs (and CDs, of which I buy more than most people I know). Buying tickets in advance can add to the ticket price – I try to buy in advance at the venue, usually buying a ticket for my next planned gig when I’m attending a gig, rather than through a website or agent, because it’s the cheapest way of doing it. This can mean that I have a ticket two weeks in advance or, in some cases, just one day. A few people responding to Amplifier’s post are saying they are going to pay on the door. Obviously bands, promoters and venues have to somehow take these sales into account when looking at ticket sales.
My own personal gripe is people who say they love live music but only go to big-ticket gigs. If everyone who spend tens of pounds on a ticket and potentially hours of travel time to see a well-known arena band would also buy a much-cheaper ticket for a gig at a local venue the state of club-level live music would, in my opinion, be a lot healthier. These people might also discover a new band (or two, or three) that they liked rather than limiting themselves to the past.
Showing posts with label Ranting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ranting. Show all posts
Wednesday, 13 March 2013
Monday, 27 April 2009
Aaaar, Jim Lad!
Monday 27th April: Over the last couple of weeks, piracy has been quite big in the news. Somalian pirates seemed to cast their nets wider and, in at least one case, came off the worst after aggravating the United States and the founders of ThePirateBay were found guilty (apparently to their surprise) of some charge or other in their native Sweden. This latter story prompted BBC news, Radio 5 and the BBC news website (among others, probably) to allow experts and the general public to voice their opinions of whether music (and video) piracy was necessarily a bad thing.
It was while scanning through some of the vast number of comments left on the BBC website that I first thought of putting my thoughts down on "paper", but as a blog entry rather than a short comment. The BBC's actual question was actually something along the lines of "where do you buy/get your music from?" than the more blatant "do you think piracy is OK?" but you can probably guess that the people who answered "I download it illegally" are pretty much OK with the idea of piracy.
First off, a bit of a caveat. I'm not trying to upset, judge or p*ss off anybody, whether I know them or not. There may well be a groan coming from a regular reader... These are simply my own opinions. I'm also not that good at formulating arguments and, for the purposes of this entry, I have done very little research. (So what I'm saying may actually be total rubbish.)
Piracy, to me, is an almost complete no-no. I wouldn't walk into HMV, pick up a CD and walk out without paying for it (despite, in my opinion, HMV's poor pricing structure) so why would I download music from illegal file-sharing sites? If there was another shop, located just down the road from said HMV, which was giving away the same CDs, I would probably treat it with a degree of suspicion. Surely taking something that you should have paid for can only defined as stealing. Take another point of view - if you were an artist, would you want people paying for your output or getting a copy for free?
Of course, there is the argument that X have already made a bag full of money and that they get little revenue from CD sales, most of the cost of the actual product going to the record companies and, therefore, to fat-cat executives. But surely, without those fat-cat executives, the music industry as a whole would fall into disarray. That's not to say that I agree with the corporate set-up. There are almost certainly better ways of sharing the revenue than happens currently. However, I do believe that destroying major record labels would have an adverse effect on all aspects of the music industry.
But, at the other end of the scale, how can anybody reconcile sharing the music of artists who self-record, play small gigs and get little mainstream recognition? The problem (or one of the problems) with file-sharing is that it doesn't distinguish between successful and struggling bands. Anybody can take any piece of music and allow millions of people access to it for free, which can end up taking vital revenue to new bands.
What amuses (and annoys me) are the various reasons that people use to justify the fact that they don't purchase the music they listen to. I've already covered the corporate aspect, but what about:
I own too much music to have the physical disk - they take up too much room. That's fine, but you could reduce the room taken up by your collection (I use CD wallets) or pay for legal downloads.
Downloading my music is better for the environment - no waste and no production "costs". Again, pay for your downloads. However, it is currently unlikely that you not buying a copy of a CD is going to reduce the number that are created so you aren't really doing that much for the environment.
I already bought the music on a previous format, why should I have to buy it again? Now this one I can kind of see the logic in, but where do you draw the line? What happens if your copy gets scratched? Or lost? Or stolen? Of, if you have downloaded it legally, what happens if your hard-disk crashes? Until a crack-proof way of recording ownership in perpetuity can be found, there doesn't seem to be a sensible way of policing this. However, I do think that there is a valid case for setting something up. I bet the fat-cats don't.
CDs are really expensive. Again, I can see that. In some cases. However, the average cost of a CD bought by UK consumers has fallen to well below £10 (and is probably still falling). Shop around. Most albums can be found cheaper than on the high street and if you are downloading, chances are that you are savvy enough to use on-line shops. Oh yeah, and legal downloads are probably still cheaper than the physical thing.
Let's face it, the main reason people download illegally is that it doesn't cost them anything. And, in my opinion, the only difference between downloading and stealing from HMV is that you are unlikely to get caught doing the former. (And before anybody points out to me that downloading music isn't actually illegal and that it is the file-sharing that is, I know but I doubt the argument would be any different if it were.)
Of course, there are perfectly acceptable ways of getting free music that are supported by the artists involved. But, generally, these are ways that the artists choose to promote their own material. I accept that some of these free downloads are lesser quality but my ears aren't good enough to tell the difference (particularly since I mostly play downloads on my i-Pod as I cycle to work).
Going back a few paragraphs, perhaps for the people who don't want to support the corporate fat-cats, it would be an idea to think more about what music they buy and where from, rather than how much they pay for it. Bear with me on this, the point is coming...
I like having physical CDs. The tangibility means something to me, as does the little booklet containing the lyrics, pictures, credits and little messages from the artists. I like and buy a wide range of music from a wide range of artists - some will be well-off into their old age and probably don't need the small amount of revenue coming from my purchase. Others, though, probably welcome every sale. It is from these artists that I try to buy directly, either while at gigs of from the artist's own web-site. I would have thought that any artist would prefer the revenue to come directly to them, even if they have had to pay for the recording process and, possibly, copies of the CD in the first place. There are also some bargains to be had - 98Pages' debut album was just £5 at the launch gig. You don't get much cheaper than that.
Or, how about supporting artists who produce albums by asking for pre-payments? I have personally done this for Mostly Autumn and Panic Room (in both cases, getting limited edition copies of the output) but other bands use this method either independently or through Sellaband, arguably a much more structured way. I am supporting three artists through Sellaband and received the first of my "Believers" limited edition CDs today. I'll try to remember to post a review when I've had a chance to listen to it properly.
Finally, a few words about copying CDs. (This is where that groan I mentioned may appear.) I won't say how, but I often have the opportunity to "look after" (accept) "backups" (copies) of CDs. I turn them down for a variety of reasons. Among those reasons are:
It was while scanning through some of the vast number of comments left on the BBC website that I first thought of putting my thoughts down on "paper", but as a blog entry rather than a short comment. The BBC's actual question was actually something along the lines of "where do you buy/get your music from?" than the more blatant "do you think piracy is OK?" but you can probably guess that the people who answered "I download it illegally" are pretty much OK with the idea of piracy.
First off, a bit of a caveat. I'm not trying to upset, judge or p*ss off anybody, whether I know them or not. There may well be a groan coming from a regular reader... These are simply my own opinions. I'm also not that good at formulating arguments and, for the purposes of this entry, I have done very little research. (So what I'm saying may actually be total rubbish.)
Piracy, to me, is an almost complete no-no. I wouldn't walk into HMV, pick up a CD and walk out without paying for it (despite, in my opinion, HMV's poor pricing structure) so why would I download music from illegal file-sharing sites? If there was another shop, located just down the road from said HMV, which was giving away the same CDs, I would probably treat it with a degree of suspicion. Surely taking something that you should have paid for can only defined as stealing. Take another point of view - if you were an artist, would you want people paying for your output or getting a copy for free?
Of course, there is the argument that X have already made a bag full of money and that they get little revenue from CD sales, most of the cost of the actual product going to the record companies and, therefore, to fat-cat executives. But surely, without those fat-cat executives, the music industry as a whole would fall into disarray. That's not to say that I agree with the corporate set-up. There are almost certainly better ways of sharing the revenue than happens currently. However, I do believe that destroying major record labels would have an adverse effect on all aspects of the music industry.
But, at the other end of the scale, how can anybody reconcile sharing the music of artists who self-record, play small gigs and get little mainstream recognition? The problem (or one of the problems) with file-sharing is that it doesn't distinguish between successful and struggling bands. Anybody can take any piece of music and allow millions of people access to it for free, which can end up taking vital revenue to new bands.
What amuses (and annoys me) are the various reasons that people use to justify the fact that they don't purchase the music they listen to. I've already covered the corporate aspect, but what about:
I own too much music to have the physical disk - they take up too much room. That's fine, but you could reduce the room taken up by your collection (I use CD wallets) or pay for legal downloads.
Downloading my music is better for the environment - no waste and no production "costs". Again, pay for your downloads. However, it is currently unlikely that you not buying a copy of a CD is going to reduce the number that are created so you aren't really doing that much for the environment.
I already bought the music on a previous format, why should I have to buy it again? Now this one I can kind of see the logic in, but where do you draw the line? What happens if your copy gets scratched? Or lost? Or stolen? Of, if you have downloaded it legally, what happens if your hard-disk crashes? Until a crack-proof way of recording ownership in perpetuity can be found, there doesn't seem to be a sensible way of policing this. However, I do think that there is a valid case for setting something up. I bet the fat-cats don't.
CDs are really expensive. Again, I can see that. In some cases. However, the average cost of a CD bought by UK consumers has fallen to well below £10 (and is probably still falling). Shop around. Most albums can be found cheaper than on the high street and if you are downloading, chances are that you are savvy enough to use on-line shops. Oh yeah, and legal downloads are probably still cheaper than the physical thing.
Let's face it, the main reason people download illegally is that it doesn't cost them anything. And, in my opinion, the only difference between downloading and stealing from HMV is that you are unlikely to get caught doing the former. (And before anybody points out to me that downloading music isn't actually illegal and that it is the file-sharing that is, I know but I doubt the argument would be any different if it were.)
Of course, there are perfectly acceptable ways of getting free music that are supported by the artists involved. But, generally, these are ways that the artists choose to promote their own material. I accept that some of these free downloads are lesser quality but my ears aren't good enough to tell the difference (particularly since I mostly play downloads on my i-Pod as I cycle to work).
Going back a few paragraphs, perhaps for the people who don't want to support the corporate fat-cats, it would be an idea to think more about what music they buy and where from, rather than how much they pay for it. Bear with me on this, the point is coming...
I like having physical CDs. The tangibility means something to me, as does the little booklet containing the lyrics, pictures, credits and little messages from the artists. I like and buy a wide range of music from a wide range of artists - some will be well-off into their old age and probably don't need the small amount of revenue coming from my purchase. Others, though, probably welcome every sale. It is from these artists that I try to buy directly, either while at gigs of from the artist's own web-site. I would have thought that any artist would prefer the revenue to come directly to them, even if they have had to pay for the recording process and, possibly, copies of the CD in the first place. There are also some bargains to be had - 98Pages' debut album was just £5 at the launch gig. You don't get much cheaper than that.
Or, how about supporting artists who produce albums by asking for pre-payments? I have personally done this for Mostly Autumn and Panic Room (in both cases, getting limited edition copies of the output) but other bands use this method either independently or through Sellaband, arguably a much more structured way. I am supporting three artists through Sellaband and received the first of my "Believers" limited edition CDs today. I'll try to remember to post a review when I've had a chance to listen to it properly.
Finally, a few words about copying CDs. (This is where that groan I mentioned may appear.) I won't say how, but I often have the opportunity to "look after" (accept) "backups" (copies) of CDs. I turn them down for a variety of reasons. Among those reasons are:
- With nearly 500 CDs of my own, and my collection continually growing, I probably wouldn't have time to listen to them.
- As you will have noticed from the above, I believe that taking something without paying is wrong.
The prime reason, however, is probably that I'm a true Yorkshireman. Why should other people benefit from me spending my own money? If that sounds selfish, I apologise, but I do believe that everybody is entitled to their own principals.
And, if that sounds as though I'm a bit naive, I apologise again. I know that I have lent CDs to people and that they have copied them. I just have my own rules. I'm not sure I could clarify them, even to myself. Suffice to say, I won't copy any CD for anybody and I probably wouldn't lend anybody a newly-released CD, especially one that I had pre-paid for. I would, however, consider lending out older CDs, especially ones that I picked up really cheaply. How old would they have to be? I don't know.
I guess that last paragraph makes me both a bit two-faced and a bit hypocritical, doesn't it?
Squawk! Pieces of eight!
Thursday, 23 October 2008
Isn't t'internet Brilliant (at least when compared with...)?
Thursday 23rd October: Whatever format you prefer to purchase (or otherwise) your music in, you can't possibly disagree that the internet is the best thing since sliced bread.
Whether it's tracking down long deleted albums through auction sites, buying regular stuff from mainstream sites or simply trying something new from small bands' websites/networking pages, the sheer volume of stuff out there is mind-blowing. Vinyl, CD or digital download, whatever format you want is at your fingertips whenever you want it.
Why am I suddenly spouting off like this? Well, to put it simply, it's because I came to realise yesterday how poor the bricks-and-mortar version of HMV is, at least in York.
There are two HMV outlets in our fair city - one in the centre and one on an out-of-town shopping park. I try to avoid the latter. It's the smaller of the two and, with limited floor space, generally limits its stock to mainly newer stuff. I had, however, been given a not inconsiderable amount of HMV vouchers so off I trundled into the centre to spend them, thinking that the bigger store would have a lot more choice.
It used to be that the vast majority of the downstairs was given over to rock/pop/chart CDs. Yesterday, there was probably less than half of that floorspace given to music at all. The rest had been taken over by DVD boxsets and sale DVDs, presumably in the run-up to Christmas. I don't mind DVDs. I've got quite a few. I just didn't want to buy any yesterday.
So I meandered about the (small) selection of CDs, trying to find something to buy that would get me the best return on my vouchers. There was a 2-for-£10 offer on, which meant I could have walked out with ten CDs. But there was very little decent in it. I'm not a big fan of most chart CDs (and those that I do want are on my Christmas wish-list anyway) so I checked out the full price selection and walked out with just five CDs (after adding nearly a tenner cash to the vouchers...)
It's not that I'm picky when it comes to buying CDs. I like a wide variety of music and if I were ever to win the lottery there are probably hundreds of CDs that I'd like to own. It's more that HMV's selection, if you don't want the latest WestZone or High School Aloud album is extremely limited. I went in with a few ideas of what I was after and walked out with completely different CDs. And their prices are astronomical. I know I wasn't actually paying for the stuff but three of my purchases cost me £16 each - all of them are cheaper not only at the likes of Play.com but also on HMV's own website. The trouble is, you don't seem to be able to spend the gift vouchers online.
So, what did I buy?
Queen: - Jazz
Queen: - A Day At The Races
Asia: - Live In The USA
Asia: - Phoenix
Roger Waters: - In The Flesh
Despite the above rant, I'm looking forward to hearing them all and I may even get time to write reviews of some of them.
In the meantime, whenever I'm planning to buy music I'll stick to sending my credit card details over the web. More choice, less cost works for me every time.
Whether it's tracking down long deleted albums through auction sites, buying regular stuff from mainstream sites or simply trying something new from small bands' websites/networking pages, the sheer volume of stuff out there is mind-blowing. Vinyl, CD or digital download, whatever format you want is at your fingertips whenever you want it.
Why am I suddenly spouting off like this? Well, to put it simply, it's because I came to realise yesterday how poor the bricks-and-mortar version of HMV is, at least in York.
There are two HMV outlets in our fair city - one in the centre and one on an out-of-town shopping park. I try to avoid the latter. It's the smaller of the two and, with limited floor space, generally limits its stock to mainly newer stuff. I had, however, been given a not inconsiderable amount of HMV vouchers so off I trundled into the centre to spend them, thinking that the bigger store would have a lot more choice.
It used to be that the vast majority of the downstairs was given over to rock/pop/chart CDs. Yesterday, there was probably less than half of that floorspace given to music at all. The rest had been taken over by DVD boxsets and sale DVDs, presumably in the run-up to Christmas. I don't mind DVDs. I've got quite a few. I just didn't want to buy any yesterday.
So I meandered about the (small) selection of CDs, trying to find something to buy that would get me the best return on my vouchers. There was a 2-for-£10 offer on, which meant I could have walked out with ten CDs. But there was very little decent in it. I'm not a big fan of most chart CDs (and those that I do want are on my Christmas wish-list anyway) so I checked out the full price selection and walked out with just five CDs (after adding nearly a tenner cash to the vouchers...)
It's not that I'm picky when it comes to buying CDs. I like a wide variety of music and if I were ever to win the lottery there are probably hundreds of CDs that I'd like to own. It's more that HMV's selection, if you don't want the latest WestZone or High School Aloud album is extremely limited. I went in with a few ideas of what I was after and walked out with completely different CDs. And their prices are astronomical. I know I wasn't actually paying for the stuff but three of my purchases cost me £16 each - all of them are cheaper not only at the likes of Play.com but also on HMV's own website. The trouble is, you don't seem to be able to spend the gift vouchers online.
So, what did I buy?
Queen: - Jazz
Queen: - A Day At The Races
Asia: - Live In The USA
Asia: - Phoenix
Roger Waters: - In The Flesh
Despite the above rant, I'm looking forward to hearing them all and I may even get time to write reviews of some of them.
In the meantime, whenever I'm planning to buy music I'll stick to sending my credit card details over the web. More choice, less cost works for me every time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)