Devaluation of Music

Jalapeno

Student Of The Blues
That was an interesting article. But whenever I read these types of analysis of the music/money complex I wish they'd do just a modicum of historical research.

a. Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Stravinsky, etc etc had either church, aristocratical or royal patronage. They also all had students to help pay the bills.
b. Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Duke Ellington, Tommy Dorsey all had to tour and play on the radio to make a living.
c. symphonies have to perform and get a lot of their money via charity drives and patronage from the wealthy.
d. Jazz and Blues guys in the 1950's sold drugs and did odd jobs (Big Bill Broonzy was working as a Janitor when he was asked to fill in for Robert Johnson at Carnegie Hall when R.J. croaked). Heck, Robert Johnson only sold about 17,000 records total during his lifetime. iirc.
e. Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra went to Hollywood to make their big money.
etc

Making any money from music (for the artists) was a 20th phenomenon beginning with rock and roll and continuing through rock/soul/pop, but in reality the Tin Pan Alley guys made money from selling paper, and the rock/soul/pop folks made money from selling plastic discs and touring.

Just my opinion. In the history of the world a very few privileged people actually made any money from selling music. The coal stokers union on the steam locomotives probably whined about there not being much money made anymore stoking coal when the diesel engines were replacing the steam ones :)

But it is still fun to read articles like that. :thumbup:
 

PapaBear

Guit Fiddlier
Every band I ever been in began to fall apart as soon as someone got the notion "hey we could make some money doing this" because right after that comes "but we gotta do these if we want to get gigs" my first inspiration to play guitar was Neil Young and many fans hated his ever changing directions, I thought it was perfect, well up to the point his politics became more important than music
 

CaptainMoto

Blues Voyager
Interesting.
I absolutely agree with the premise that our society is under-valuating the benefits of music education in our schools.

As one who is just recently trying to dabble in the "Music Business", I'm just beginning my education on the "industry".
I'm just scraping the surface of some of the mechanics making money in the business.

After procrastinating for years, I've recently launched some of my music on the streaming services and It's been quite an education.
As an example, I've learned a little bit about how the streaming pays artists.
As best I understand it, it works like this:
When I signed up to put my stuff out there, the sites are very vague on what you get paid.
In general, they just say that on average payments are about 1/2 cent per stream.
Thought outside sources, I've learned that in reality it is much more complex, but always working in favor of big players vs little guys.
From what I understand, all the revenue goes into one pot, and then doled out , not by the number of streams each artist has but, based upon a percentage of streams.
Example:
Captain Moto gets 1,000 streams so he thinks he's getting 1000 x .005 = $5.00..Wrong!
It's just too complicated to explain or even understand.


I know I live in a cave sometimes but, I had never heard of this artist, she is the hottest thing in music today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbMwTqkKSps
 
Last edited:

Terry B

Humble student of the blues
That was an interesting article. But whenever I read these types of analysis of the music/money complex I wish they'd do just a modicum of historical research.

a. Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Stravinsky, etc etc had either church, aristocratical or royal patronage. They also all had students to help pay the bills.
b. Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Duke Ellington, Tommy Dorsey all had to tour and play on the radio to make a living.
c. symphonies have to perform and get a lot of their money via charity drives and patronage from the wealthy.
d. Jazz and Blues guys in the 1950's sold drugs and did odd jobs (Big Bill Broonzy was working as a Janitor when he was asked to fill in for Robert Johnson at Carnegie Hall when R.J. croaked). Heck, Robert Johnson only sold about 17,000 records total during his lifetime. iirc.
e. Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra went to Hollywood to make their big money.
etc

Making any money from music (for the artists) was a 20th phenomenon beginning with rock and roll and continuing through rock/soul/pop, but in reality the Tin Pan Alley guys made money from selling paper, and the rock/soul/pop folks made money from selling plastic discs and touring.

Just my opinion. In the history of the world a very few privileged people actually made any money from selling music. The coal stokers union on the steam locomotives probably whined about there not being much money made anymore stoking coal when the diesel engines were replacing the steam ones :)

But it is still fun to read articles like that. :thumbup:

And if you go back a little further, in addition to lack of financial renumeration early minstrels were in danger of losing their heads if the king wasn't pleased with their performance. :eek:
 

MarkDyson

Blues Hound Wannabe
I know that each industry is unique, but from what I've seen this race to the bottom of the pay scale affects many of them, especially creative ones. As a visual artist I see exploitation and commoditization of what by rights ought to be prized skill sets on a distressingly regular basis. Tangentially related, there are anecdotal tales of kids working in the video game development industry who live in their cars or have to take out loans to make rent, while being hit with 100 or so hour work weeks at crunch time.

I have no data to back myself up, but I wonder whether there's a tendency to view folks who create "leisure time" related product (including music) as generally less-worthy. "Money for nothin' and their chicks for free." :Beer:
 

Cowboy Bob

Horse Player/Guitar Wrangler
...I have no data to back myself up, but I wonder whether there's a tendency to view folks who create "leisure time" related product (including music) as generally less-worthy. "Money for nothin' and their chicks for free." :Beer:

POTUS signed the Music Modernization Act into law last year. It deals directly with issues of getting paid.

All, I don’t want this to be political, so please leave your opinions about POTUS at the door.

Production Expert has a very good blog post and interview with entertainment lawyer Elizabeth Russell. Check >>this here<<.

Respectfully
 

JohnHurley

Rock and Roll
I did not read the article.

I have a brother in law teaching jazz guitar he has a secure position on tenured track for Oberlin college music conservatory.

In rock and pop and hip hop there are obviously some people doing fine but thats not at all typical. So many talented people playing gigs locally for free.

In classical symphony and jazz it is very mixed and a fair number of people doing ok but so many more that tried to get there and end up making a living doing something else.

If we do not pay in our society math and science teachers well and obviously we do not then yikes it is not any better for most music teachers.
 

Elio

Student Of The Blues
Interesting.
I absolutely agree with the premise that our society is under-valuating the benefits of music education in our schools.

As one who is just recently trying to dabble in the "Music Business", I'm just beginning my education on the "industry".
I'm just scraping the surface of some of the mechanics making money in the business.

After procrastinating for years, I've recently launched some of my music on the streaming services and It's been quite an education.
As an example, I've learned a little bit about how the streaming pays artists.
As best I understand it, it works like this:
When I signed up to put my stuff out there, the sites are very vague on what you get paid.
In general, they just say that on average payments are about 1/2 cent per stream.
Thought outside sources, I've learned that in reality it is much more complex, but always working in favor of big players vs little guys.
From what I understand, all the revenue goes into one pot, and then doled out , not by the number of streams each artist has but, based upon a percentage of streams.
Example:
Captain Moto gets 1,000 streams so he thinks he's getting 1000 x .005 = $5.00..Wrong!
It's just too complicated to explain or even understand.


I know I live in a cave sometimes but, I had never heard of this artist, she is the hottest thing in music today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbMwTqkKSps

I've never heard of her either, but I think I'll pass.
 

Jalapeno

Student Of The Blues
I had never heard of this artist, she is the hottest thing in music today.
289 million views yesterday, over 300 million this morning. That's pretty hot. Her debut was apparently Oct. of 2018.

I like the music, pleasant.
I like her voice. It's so nice to hear a young singer that isn't auto-tuned (or if auto-tune was used it is so subtle I can't detect it).
I can't understand the lyrics so I don't know if I like the song or not :) I like the music though.

Eric
 

MarkDyson

Blues Hound Wannabe
289 million views yesterday, over 300 million this morning. That's pretty hot. Her debut was apparently Oct. of 2018.

This is part of the out-of-touch-with-today feeling I often get. I see YouTube's use as a place to find how-to/instructional stuff, and to share home movies or presentations, but as a source of entertainment? Intellectually I see how it gets used that way, but I've yet to come to grips with seeing it that way intuitively. My hat's off to the visionaries who saw this stuff and made it happen. Me, I'll just scratch my head and muddle on. :Beer:
 

Jalapeno

Student Of The Blues
If that is whats hot I must be in the freezer
Yoda-Retina_2a7ecc26.jpeg

Target audience not are you.
 

Momantai

Red nose, red guitar
Really, now I know I’m old...
I don’t like her voice nor the music. I guess I’m stuck in the “good old times” like Led Zep and Deep Purple....
 
Top