The music industry now is dictated by a few individuals who run record labels and tell us what THEY WANT and THEY play. Even the singles chart is an illusion of public choice. It's all to make money, and no-one dares complains as interest is low.

There are tonnes of talented artists out there, that NEVER get that big break, but they still make albums with little to no success and they enjoy making and performing music for the fun of it. There are a few bands and vocalists on the bar/club scene who like performing for fun, whilst maintaing an ordinary job. The bonus of a couple of free drinks and £50.00 is just a mere after-thought. These people are the real talents.

Then you get, the record company pets - these are the ones who start of honestly like above, but prostitute themselves because of the money and fame. If I was a musician or vocalist, I'd keep my career to the UK and possible Europe only where there is big nations like Germany, France and Spain (maybe even the latin world if you know a few words of Spanish). Artists become "fake" now when they try the US. The US isn't all that, it changes people when the vast reality in that country is people there are starving and struggling. It's all a money making scam. I think Beyonce may indeed be a product of a higher power - time will tell, especially next year when Obama has to step down. There are few performers out there with a social consicence, and the music channels and radio are in state because the big labels plug their acts and song. This is why you have a stale playlist, and a stale singles chart.

The music industry might be honest in some other countries like Spain, Germany, Italy but in the Anglophone world big players (UK, US and to a lesser point Australia and NZ) it is not.

I am sorry to say all of this, but the whole thing is a sham.

Product of a higher power?

Yeah she's a evil queen! Never trust someone he claims to write her own songs, when she's just robbed them lol

YouTube is a clear indication of how bad is the situation.

Particularly in the jazz scene, many artists publicise their videos on YouTube as it's a far better tool than the PR dept of their record label. They don't mind their recordings being ripped as, as it'll be few in number and very little loss to them. They're hoping the exposure will lead to more people seeing them live where there's a chance of masking some money.

I was agreeing with you until the "product of a higher power nonsense". I think a lot of music fans know how corrupt and vile the music industry is. Thankfully the internet has made it easier than ever to discover the real talent out there and to find musicians who aren't over-sexed morons with the imagination of a gormless ape and I am so glad about that.

While it has always been this way, the music industry doesn't always get its own way these days, for example Kylie and Madonna's latest albums have been disappointments sales wise despite multi million $ production and marketing budgets. If the record labels still had masses of power they'd get all of their artists massive AirPlay and therefore pretty much guarantee a hit, but in the last few years in particular TV and radio had ignored some big names and favoured newer acts (whether they are signed to big labels or not)

I remember reading an article on Prince last year in MOJO magazine, prior to the release of the two albums, where he spoke of his disappointment of many great under-rated artists like the jazz singer, Lianne La Havas not getting the commercial success they deserve.

He even performed a gig at his woman's house in London

Has someone been watching those David Icke documentaries again?

so true but there are many more reasons for the major decline in popular music and the charts. The rise of digital radio and internet in the 2000s meant that any interesting, authentic music was all left to the "specialist" stations to deal with, and the mainstream radio and TV only had to cater for the "average" general public and the kids. Therefore the mainstream now consists of mostly manufactured pop while the real musical talent is hidden away. I've been working on a rather epic article about how things changed and how the music industry tries to paint a different picture of the state of things...

It's funny but as these 'state of the music biz' threads turn up, there's one bunch of people who seem to suggest as here that there are all sorts of problems with the music biz and that the real talent finds it hard to break through. As with this thread.

And then there's another bunch who suggest that the problems are only with chart music and those that only listen to the top 40, there's plenty of great music if you only go and search it out. Hasn't the music biz always been like this, but now there are so many ways to listen to music what does it matter?

There may well be some truth in both views. The point really is that we live within an economic framework called capitalism which is not limited to Anglophone nations and effectively sets the environment in which the music biz has to operate. One key element of that pop music environment or ecosystem is that there can only be a small number of big winners. There are large numbers outside the pantheon of pop stardom but only a few ever get in.

You make out like we don't already know this?

Commercial music aka mass production has always been this way. Exactly the same as blockbuster films have so much money pumped in and yet smaller independent films hardly get noticed. Music is a vital part of the economy and is a business.

Most people enjoy music and are happy to listen to the charts, and yet there are those who love music and enjoy discovering new artists and listening to raw talent.

It really annoys me when music has to be seen as black and white. Why can't people just accept that some individuals would love to go and see Katy Perry put on a hell of a theatrical show with fireworks, a great production, dancers the LOT and have a little jig and a sing...and others would rather go see a band play in a little tiny club. Both individuals will enjoy it, whats the problem?

Record labels have been playing it safe for years because they are being run by bean counters rather than people who are actually interested in music.

Gone are the days when a label would make a long term investment in an artist or band, it's all about the quick buck these days.

a gig is perhaps pushing it, considering the audience was her and 2 flatmates and 3 journalists. it was really just a press conference. but althought she was on SNL last year with prince, she can walk about unnoticed. i saw her outside a gig on her own last month and apart from myself and a friend, no-one recognised her

prince seems to think if someone is talented (cough - good looking young female who can sing and play an instrument - cough) they deserve to get paid well, but remember the word industry in music industry. it's a commercial setup, and similar to many other goods and services, the top quality goods and services, such as hand made goods, usually sell considerably less than the mass marketed cheaply made products, and it's the same with music in a way. few people are interested in folk or jazz or muso style music and it doesn't sell well, but you can take someone who's not great vocally and get some guys programming tunes in the studio on a computer and sell millions of copies

prince is strange in that respect as he made music he wanted to make and reached minor commercial success with his 5th album, then went away and made a movie and commericla sounding recording and became a megastar almost overnight, was number 1 in the single, album and movie charts at the same time, and had the number 1 live tour. then followed that up with an album released without a lead single or video, that sounded little like the previous album, when he had piles of material recorded already that sounded like the hit album with tracks just as good, then he repeated the forumula of releasing stuff that sounded little like the last album until his commercial appeal dwindled, he pissed off the record company and eventually left them, leaving him to do what he wanted. so what did he do? release loads of albums regularly, no. sales bombed and after nearly 20 years of flitting around various major and indie labels and online downloads and free magazine albums, he signed back with warners the rest of that story isn't publically known yet, but fans are starting to realise what's happened. to top it off, he released an album for free last week with a new (cough - good looking young female- cough) "protoge" artist, to which he has lawsuits being fired his way as they were supposedly under contract elsewhere

the record companies are there to make money, and artists that critics will often consider as great, are often not big sellers, whereas artists that critics will often consider shit are often the biggest sellers. when you are in charge of running a business, you have an obligation to your shareholders to give them as much in return as possible, so that's why the market is as it is. however there are plenty other avenues for artists to get music out and even make a living without using a major label, such as selling direct on itunes or cdbaby

but at the same time, individuals usually want to maximise their income, so if someone comes along to you and offers you a great financial package in exchange for your perhaps lowering your artistic ideals, you have to be crazy to turn it down. artists also want people to hear thier music, and usually as many people as possible, so they can stick to having 500 fans and make music exactly how they want to, or they can make compromises and sell millions of copies, play arenas and stadiums and live in a big white mansion. once they've done that and filfilled a contract, they can then live a comfortable life and then make the music they want, which may not sell mushc, but how many artists do that?

Really Was it just that. I just just can't believe that. If I knew that, I wouldn't have referred to it as a "gig".

Prince is someone who I believe in general believes that woman are capable of being as good musicians as men. You only have to look at his current all-female trio, 3RDEYEDGIRL.

I can enjoy and appreciate both actually... I like it when artists put on a big, extravagant show but I also like seeing artists perform a simple, stripped-back set. If you've got the talent, you can make it work.

Nothing new really in this thread, though I would argue with the suggestion that Madonna and Kylie's recent sales prove the industry doesn't always get its way. The likes of Radio 1 have really given up on both and so that is reflected in their chart positions definitely; had their new material been pushed as much as say, Sam Smith or Ed Sheeran, they may well have done better.

you can call it what you want, but there were twice as many crew members (not including band) than "audience"


actually, i don't think he thinks that at all. he is very fond of female artists like joni mitchell for example, and the majority of his side projects have female lead singers, but that's mainly because if he wanted a male vocal he would sing himself, and because he can write songs from a "female perspective" - if the female was a sexist chauvinist. he's long wanted an all girl band. when putting together the band that was to end up morphing into the revolution he wanted a mix of male and female and black and white like sly and the family stone, pretty much regardless of how great the musicians were and similarly with this band he's put them together almost regardless of how great (or not as the reality was) they were. the current band are cheap for him compared to some of the more accomplished musicians used in the past (which is the main reason why certain members don't work for him, directly and indirectly), and of course being stripped down to a smaller band and having the girls husbands/boyfriends as part of the crew is preferable too. the girl band of relative newbies means he can take more advantage of them by getting them to play what he wants with little backchat. the band weren't great to begin with, and often making mistakes, but the good side to that was that prince had to play better and play more to make up for it, isntead of giving all 23 folk in the horn section a 10 minute solo in each song. but since last year they have practiced a lot and improved notably. but who knows how long they will last. he has his other alternate band members to call upon too, and some of them (known as npgq 9q for quartet) played on the judith hill album. and she's not the only ex reality show person he's worked with, sheena easton was one, so were the twins and so was tamar (you are free to say "who"?). and that's just another hippocrisy with him, being against reality shows and those guitar based video games, and cover versions, whilst playing coves of other folks songs himself and working with folk from reality shows, whilst singing kiss and joking about reality shows instead of dynasty

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...nload-20150328

They also make money from ads on youtube.

"According to data on music sales from the Recording Industry Association of America, sales in the US from streaming music were $1.87 billion in 2014, the RIAA said, while CD sales were $1.85 billion."

The music industry made more from streaming than CD sales last year in the US.

Digital downloads still make the most, making $2.58 billion last year... but you can see streaming is not to be ignored.

Yes it has 'always been this way' but I don't know why some people find it so hard to accept it's gotten worse. It's the same reason fewer good films are getting made. Most of the medium sized labels have been bought out leaving a few majors who dictate to each artist they sign who will produce/write their albums; they're a few names that keep cropping up like John Shanks; and the type of music they want. This is no different to film directors who are strait-jacketed by studios into producing films to their design. And with few labels for independent artists left, this trend will get worse. It's the Cowell-isation of music.

what exactly is getting worse? what exactly are you referring to? and can you present some proof of what you are saying?


do you have any proof of this? comparing the last 5 years with previous periods in which you think more good films are made?

i think this is such a huge amount of data to process that it's not feasible to do so, and you haven't done this and are just making a statement based on your single perception of things, whereas the reality may be the opposite but you are unaware of it. there have been good and bad movies and good and bad music made for decades, and more movies and music is being made today due to larger population and it being easier for people to have access to the facilities to do so


when an artist signs to a label they make a legal agreement. labels don't always dictate who will sign and produce, so that's just generalising. ultimately the artist chooses who they want to work for and the restrictions they agree to


a movie is something that's usually made by a team of people, and with a commercial movie it's usually a large team with a large budget, incredible large in the cases of most movies most people will think of, with even the smallest budget being for millions, and the larger budgets being for a hundred million or even multiples of hundreds of millions. people making movies aren't usually making them with their own money. people who invest money into making things are stakeholders and want to ensure their investment is invested wisely and will make them a return. this is another thing that's been the case for decades. movie makers can rarely make great movies without funding by others. even movie makers who make millions from movies will rarely take that money to fund a movie themselves


not necesarily as you don't need a record lable to release music these days. you can sell it directly or via online services, so the requirement for indie labels isn't perhaps as high as before when you needed someone to manufacture and distribute product to the streets and around the world to be heard. now you just take the track you made in your bedroom and upload it on the computer in your bedroom and promote it yourself and people around the world can hear it, without you haven't to listen to anyone elses advice about your own music or be tied into any contracts

It's like everybody in this party shining like illuminati

Same here.

Either they're big labels or people making records in their bedrooms. There's no middle ground, labels like Rough Trade, Epitaph or Creation Records ready to sign underground acts who make their own music and give them the budget to make a big release..they're not there anymore

That isn't true, such labels do exist. Kscope, Nuclear Blast, and Burning Shed, are three off the top of my head.

The difficulty these days it is virtually impossible for any of those labels to get mainstream coverage for any of their artists.

People are right, because of the internet it has never been easier to get your music "out there", but to me that misses the point. As a Symphonic Metal fan it is very easy for me to find new music, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of bands out there creating music and releasing it online. Because i know the genre and what I'm looking for it is easy for me to find, but what about the person who doesn't know Symphonic Metal even exists? How are they supposed to "access" such music if they never hear it any of it through any mainstream outlet?

Ripple Music are a favourite of mine.

There is also Relapse Records and Earache Records.

The thing with finding music from a genre that they are unfamiliar with, there are blogs, forums and social media designed to get you started. I used a combination of all 3 to get started in symphonic metal as, before last year, my knowledge on the subject would have fitted on the back of a postage stamp with space left for my knowledge on jazz.

There's plenty of middle ground. Here are a bunch of indie labels' youtube channels.. and this is just what I found looking through one of my personal music playlists.

https://www.youtube.com/user/NewRetroWave
subs: 80k
total views: 21M
most popular song: LazerHawk - King of the Streets 1M views

https://www.youtube.com/user/spaceshowermusic
subs: 50k
total views: 30M
most popular song: Gesu no kiwami otome - Killer Ball 7.4M views

https://www.youtube.com/user/PolyvinylRecords
subs: 27k
total views: 26M
most popular song: Of Montreal - Wraith Pinned to the Mist 2M views

https://www.youtube.com/user/fatwreck
subs: 24k
total views: 6.5M
most popular song: Mad Caddies - State of Mind 800k views

https://www.youtube.com/user/rounderrecords
subs: 15k
total views: 14M
most popular song: Raffi - Baby Beluga 1M views


Every one of those labels is far bigger than what most artists can achieve on their own.