That reality* is causing record companies to reassess just what constitutes a hit - and spawning questions to which labels haven't yet found a set answer.
"The thing that becomes challenging is: how much should you spend?" said Paul Burgess, executive VP at TVT Records, home to rappers Pitbull and Lil' Jon.
"Do you need to record 20 tracks? Should you be investing enormous amount of money on the marketing? Ultimately we make most of our money from breaking artists, and not songs."
*For better context, the reality being referred to are the drastically sinking album sales in the music industry.
Man, record execs are finally admitting that they churn out one/two-hit ponies. The catalyst being the people are finally catching on to this and not purchasing the entire album but the song(s) of their choice in mp3 or ring tone format. This is mutually damning for both parties (record labels and music consumers), in a holier-than-thou fashion, of course.
First, the music business scum with their abhorrent ability to commodify and duplicate ad nauseam trends and movements within music until all genuine creativity has been sapped. They're eating crow now as they are (seemingly) admitting that all of their focus has been on encouraging artists to hone their marketability instead of their craft (if they had a craft to begin with is unbeknownst to me) and are being sent back to the drawing board, heads down and ashamed.
Second, the general music (at least music-al fans, not to be confused with musical fans) enjoying public is admitting it can only enjoy music in short bursts. The general listening public is disinterested in musical craftsmanship and the development of an idea or sound across an album. The album is dying a simultaneously slow and quick death. And why wouldn't it?
Most albums (this goes for you too, so-called indie labels) seem to have a handful of redeeming songs and mess of filler. The average listener will break out the music sieve and let those crummy songs go by the wayside and only have the gems left. But why should the consumer purchase an $18.00 CD when the one or two enjoyable songs can be downloaded for 99 cents or, better yet, free? It's a no-brainer!
Ultimately I really don't care, while I'm not a "I'll pick up the single"-guy, I'm also not the music-crazed person I was 5 years ago. I'm not sure if it's me or the music, but most of this shit sucks and they can charge or not charge all they like; I'll keep my oldies and I'm content with being that guy. Somebody's gotta do it, right?
BY THE WAY, THIS DISJOINTED, HASTILY THROWN TOGETHER, AND INCOMPLETE BLOG WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE GOOD FOLKS AT XM RADIO.
No comments:
Post a Comment