it's definitely his own fault he's getting sum-ups like this
Stereogum @stereogum 59m59 minutes agoSteve Albini still loves online streaming, hates Miley Cyrus http://bit.ly/1uFPe2c
― da croupier, Monday, 17 November 2014 20:30 (nine years ago) link
hope somebody makes an image for a spotify debate article with Taylor Swift and Bob Seger on the anti-side and dave grohl and steve on the pro
― da croupier, Monday, 17 November 2014 20:32 (nine years ago) link
I'd actually love to see a breakdown of what a band makes now vs. 15-25-35 years ago (be most interesting by some sort of median success metric so the platinum artists of their era vs. whatever exactly approximates that these days on down to the bar bands). Obviously return on recorded media is going to be lower, but cost/distribution of same also less and I do wonder if touring is more lucrative now.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Monday, 17 November 2014 20:52 (nine years ago) link
Has touring ever been lucrative since recordings became the mainstay of the industry?
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 17 November 2014 20:54 (nine years ago) link
let's ask Mick Jagger
― Οὖτις, Monday, 17 November 2014 20:55 (nine years ago) link
"ethical treatment of room sound"?
― The Complainte of Ray Tabano, Monday, 17 November 2014 20:56 (nine years ago) link
Anecdotal but it's far from lucrative for the serious rock musicians I know. If the purpose of touring in the 'old model' was to promote recordings, i.e. it was not profitable in itself, have ticket prices (or audiences) really increased enough to make this a sustainable income source in and of itself?
2xpost
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 17 November 2014 20:56 (nine years ago) link
I wasn't (and am not) talking about the handful of stars on Jagger's level.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 17 November 2014 20:57 (nine years ago) link
xp Probably not but I don't think under the "old model" touring money plus recordings = to a sustainable income for most people either.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Monday, 17 November 2014 20:59 (nine years ago) link
Tbh, I haven't really noticed a radical jump in ticket/gig prices, relative to inflation. Would be curious to see stats.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 17 November 2014 21:00 (nine years ago) link
Definitely much more expensive in San Francisco.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Monday, 17 November 2014 21:00 (nine years ago) link
sorry, acoustics
― da croupier, Monday, 17 November 2014 21:01 (nine years ago) link
yeah I know just joeks... seriously from my anecdotal evidence it seems p lucrative on the high end and then as you move down the ladder it gets less and less lucrative. To the point where a four-person band in a van is going to be constantly struggling to break even from city to city. But it seems like this has been the case for a long time.
xp
― Οὖτις, Monday, 17 November 2014 21:01 (nine years ago) link
long Alibini disqusitions like this are pretty rare anyway and this one's fun imo
― The Complainte of Ray Tabano, Monday, 17 November 2014 21:06 (nine years ago) link
i was with him until the hall of fetishes
― example (crüt), Monday, 17 November 2014 21:19 (nine years ago) link
he seems really hung up abt sex
― mattresslessness, Monday, 17 November 2014 21:21 (nine years ago) link
Songs About Fucking Over Managers And Labels That Used To Make A Comfortable Living
― nakhchi little van (some dude), Monday, 17 November 2014 21:22 (nine years ago) link
What if your fetish is to be fucked by a corporation? Do you get a pass?
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 17 November 2014 21:39 (nine years ago) link
A new CD, when The Problem With Music was published, cost $27-31, and an international band’s show cost $30. Now a new CD costs $13-22, and as he says in the speech, an international band’s show costs $60-120.
― the incredible string gland (sic), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 00:49 (nine years ago) link
Well, I was comparing gig prices to inflation, not to CD prices, which have obviously dropped. But yeah, the Bank of Canada's inflation calculator says that a basket of goods that cost $30 in 1993 would cost $46.79 today so if ticket prices are 2-4x what they were, that would be considerable.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 00:53 (nine years ago) link
Sorry, it would cost $44.04.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 00:54 (nine years ago) link
I'd actually love to see a breakdown of what a band makes now vs. 15-25-35 years ago (be most interesting by some sort of median success metric so the platinum artists of their era vs. whatever exactly approximates that these days on down to the bar bands). Obviously return on recorded media is going to be lower, but cost/distribution of same also less and I do wonder if touring is more lucrative now.― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Monday, November 17, 2014 2:52 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
The answer is: fuck no because of gas prices
― i did it all for the 'nuki (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:00 (nine years ago) link
Concert prices (in the US, I'm assuming?) are 43% higher than they were three years ago, according to this: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=87981&page=1
OK.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:01 (nine years ago) link
I do wish he'd made clearer that he must think Spotify is a sick joke. It's going to be too easy for people to ignore the bit about "hybrid approaches" and pretend he's signing off on every type of "brave new world" we're being offered
File under new methods of fart collecting.
― forbodingly titled It's True! It's True! (Eazy), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:10 (nine years ago) link
The answer is: fuck no because of gas prices --i did it all for the 'nuki (upper mississippi sh@kedown)
I'm sure that hurts but I'd still like to see it all broken down.
― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:22 (nine years ago) link
A new CD, when The Problem With Music was published, cost $27-31
does anybody know anybody who actually paid 27-31 dollars for a new CD in '92? I had a CD player and bought CDs. They cost about 15 bucks.
― The Complainte of Ray Tabano, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:26 (nine years ago) link
i think this is a canada thing
remember thinking it must suck to live in canada when i bought comics as a kid
― da croupier, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:26 (nine years ago) link
MSRP on CDs back then was like $18-19, which would get marked down to $12-13 at a big box retailer. What really has dropped was list for doubles, which usually MSRP'd then for $30-40.
― Don A Henley And Get Over It (C. Grisso/McCain), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:46 (nine years ago) link
Albini was not speaking in North America.
― the incredible string gland (sic), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 01:49 (nine years ago) link
if he was referring to the market in Australia, then i can confirm that new CDs in '92 sold in the ballpark of 30 AUD.
― charlie h, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 02:01 (nine years ago) link
which felt like a substantial rip-off even at the time.
― charlie h, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 02:02 (nine years ago) link
music becoming much much cheaper to record, cheaper to distribute, cheaper to hear is a net win for everybody,
if you consider a market that allows Burger Records to exist / flourish a "net win," sure
― Jimmywine Dyspeptic, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 02:41 (nine years ago) link
ahahaha
― sleeve, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 02:48 (nine years ago) link
what's wrong with burger records
― don't ask me why i posted this (electricsound), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 02:49 (nine years ago) link
burgers aren't records!
― mattresslessness, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 02:54 (nine years ago) link
xp sorry I couldn't help it, imo they suffer a bit in the quality control department but I like some of the releases
― sleeve, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 03:02 (nine years ago) link
and yes I consider it a net win overall for people to have cheap access to the means of production, sometimes bad bands get good later
― sleeve, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 03:04 (nine years ago) link
i think they've tightened up their QC quite a bit recently, but tbf that's referring to their own actual releases not when they're acting as the tape manufacturing arm of other labels xp
― don't ask me why i posted this (electricsound), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 03:05 (nine years ago) link
ah that makes sense, they are pretty big around these parts
― sleeve, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 03:07 (nine years ago) link
I saw JAMC for £6 in 1987, which is £15.36 in today's money. I'm seeing them again on Friday in the same venue for £31.50 plus booking fee. So prices have doubled for that one band in that one venue.
It's difficult to compare like for like as these anniversary nostalgia tours sell quickly at inflated prices thanks to sad old fucks like me but that's a huge increase.
― doesn’t matter what the content is, as long as it’s content (onimo), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 11:16 (nine years ago) link
yes definitely, likewise Reading festival ticket was £78 in 1999, which is £119 in today's money. Last year's festival ticket price was £213.
― jamiesummerz, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 12:35 (nine years ago) link
The first time I saw Fugazi in 89 it was £3.50, the last time I saw them in 2002 it was £7.50 (source: Fugazi live show archive) so ignoring the fact the prices are artificially low even their tickets cost more than doubled in a little over 10 years.
― the bowels are not what they seem (aldo), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 12:47 (nine years ago) link
Screw Fugazi, those selfish, money-grubbing jerks!
The Eagles in the mid'70s cost around $6 a ticket. Now, it's more like $1 million. But they're selling fewer records.
― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 12:52 (nine years ago) link
Also, t-shirt prices have skyrocket. You can't download a t-shirt.
― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 12:53 (nine years ago) link
yet
― bizarro gazzara, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 12:59 (nine years ago) link
I conceded the point about ticket prices already, referring to actual statistics.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 13:03 (nine years ago) link
Fuck statistics, we have anecdotal evidence!
― doesn’t matter what the content is, as long as it’s content (onimo), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 13:46 (nine years ago) link
in the DIY punk or 'eternally unsuccessful' sphere of things entry fees to gigs have been stuck around the £5 mark in the UK since time immemorial. attempts to whack it up to a price that reflects the costs involved tends to get raised eyebrows and/or no-one turning up because they think it's too expensive
― proper maoist (DJ Mencap), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 14:08 (nine years ago) link
I'd compare more "price to see a new relatively unknown band" in 1977 vs. "new relatively unknown band" in 2014 instead of comparing ticket prices to see the same band.
― forbodingly titled It's True! It's True! (Eazy), Tuesday, 18 November 2014 14:50 (nine years ago) link
Well, new relatively unknown bands are in no position to make any money until they are less new and better known, so comparison is moot.
― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 18 November 2014 14:52 (nine years ago) link