Should people make money for music?

Hello, I've been using the site for three years now to teach
my self to play music, haven't posted much at all. I've been getting frustrated that I have no one to talk music with.

But what do you think? Personally I'd say no. It's my belief that introducing the idea of monetary gain instantly jeopardizes the integrity of musical creation.

Music brings happiness, happiness brings unison, unison brings harmony, harmony brings music. What more could we want?

I'm so damn frustrated with society. Where's the love!? Hehe.

Music is entertainment. Entertainment is something you provide to people as a service. A service is something you provide to society, and your services are worth something.

I can agree in some ways, but If people will pay for it, who am I to argue? I do believe sometimes they are overpaid because tickets and merchandise are ridiculously priced.

Message to Metallica, ACDC, Santana, etc...

You're already rich, stop trying to charge me $100 for general admission and $30 a t-shirt!

Sorry, I don't share the same view. The entertainment industry to me is a testament to the scope of our depravity. I realize I'm being overly idealistic here, I just can't give up believing that we can simply help one another for the sake of our collective happiness. Something like a family.

And I agree, in our current situation, there's not much point in fighting it.

EDIT:I deleted my original post after reading Justjeffs, since his made way more sense and was more to the point.

Though just my 2 cents, I believe that the music industry will always be around in some form or another, and that bands will always want more money from the bar/venue.

And helping to pay the wages of the people who design album art, do production on the album, take it to the shops, market it isn't helping one another?

If it was all free with that much effort in then we'd be expecting a lot of people to work for free, not every artist can self produce an album they wrote sort out artwork and release it for free - although some do e.g. Nine inch nails, radiohead among others

EDIT: also many +=1s to jeff, he hit the nail on the head

This is the truth. Making money off of music is definitively not jeopardizing the integrity of music - there are loads of music I love to listen and bring me great joy and they were produced and yieldeda profit. Pushing out garbage albums just to makes sales is a little different, but then people won't really buy those albums much I wouldn't think.

Ofcourse people should make money with music, but theres nothing wrong if not! LOL.

This isn't a question about music...it's a statement about free market vs. subsistence living. All we need is a place to sleep and 1000 calories of food a day. The inverse of that is pigging out on whatever we want and buying tons of stuff...music included.

Wafflesyrup: you are liking the simple living vs. the needing and having money thing..right?

I sit and play my guitar with my family. I make up songs and we all sing. Everybody gets paid!

As for the music industry overall, for fans I think it is better now. Most musicians in the past made way too much money. Not that they didn't deserve it. It's supply and demand. You either had to buy the album or go see them in concert. That's it! Now, I can be entertained by music on the internet for free all day. If I really want to own an experience, I can buy it or pay to see them in concert.

I think that people should be able to get paid for whatever they do. You just have to be more realistic as a musician these days and understand that you may not get what you think you deserve.

I would like to ask a knew quistion. How many of you have baught albums or murchandise of a band because you knew some money was going to them? I buy things from bands that I like not only to have the music/merchendice but also to encorage them to keep making there music.

@thatguitarguy,

I saw a prog band called MoeTar a few months ago at a small jazz club in Fullerton CA. They said their music is available on iTunes so I downloaded it to help support them. Keep in mind though: I did it because they are really good! I listen to them all the time. It's really no different than tossing a buck into a can of some street performer.

@ thatguitarguy:

I do it a fair amount of the time actually.

Aye sir. And yes, the thought does stem more from my own societal views.

As far as production, cover art, etc. All that is beside the point. Music is in the moment, records do not capture the joy experienced within the act of music. Don't get me wrong, I love the ability to record and revisit, but excess is the issue at hand.

The way I see it, the moment a musician or a group of musicians decides to fashion their work so as to appeal to a certain group of folk, music has been compromised. That's not to say these works should be dismissed, but I do believe this trend severely constrains the progression of music.

My buddy has insisted numerous times that I could just torrent King Crimson's entire discography. Not something I'm going to do.

well that didnt work at all. that top part is the quote, the bottom part is just my 2 cents.

Oh I agree, can't stop it. I'd just like to see it spread I suppose.

First bolded comment: I agree that records don't capture the joy of making music, but I am not sure that's the point. Why does it matter if it captures the joy of making the music, so long as it brings joy to the listeners? See, I could really care less if a group like Smashing Pumpkins made "Siamese Dream" to make money or cater to a certain audience; it has given me great joy for going on 20 years and I still listen to it routinely. I guess I just don't see that making money off of music as a bad thing, because without it, I never would have had the pleasure of listening to that album. Just an example there.

Second bolded comment: I am not convinved that the majority of music caters to a certain audience though. I mean, generally speaking, certain types of people like certain types of music, sure, but that doesn't mean the music itself has been altered. My guess is that a band like Killswitch Engage isn't catering to metalheads - they already have that group. And I don't think they change their music to become more rap friendly or anything, as that is a wasted effort and won't improve sales. I guess my point is that I really doubt this happens too often in any genre outside of mainstream pop, where these bands are produced and spit out as if they come from an assembly line.

I'm not arguing otherwise really, what I'm getting at with this is that I think the music industry has had definite subtle influences over popular music and how we all play, listen, and connect with one another.

I mean, yeah, I agree with that.

i wanted to spit out my 5 cents but it has been answered by everyone and this topic can go on forever...

correct me if I'm wrong but I was reading it as aesthetic ideal Like a Apollonian and Dionysian argument, rather then a physical identity.



most certainly does just in different ways. Mainstream pop acts get told what to do this is true, but other acts are forced not to do things. Both are very forceful and can not be overlooked. Many things have been kept hidden for years due to the money guys not wanting to publish it. Many people have been held back and destroyed over things like that.

but...

makes it the point useless. I think once we get our *** together were in for a cultural explosion.


As for the OP I'm very sympathetic to the starving artist (think Kafka), but in the end who cares.

Sympathetic as in you believe the delight of the spirit should be a tool to feed the practical needs of the body within a society? It takes time and effort to develop musical intuition, but it doesn't have to devour someone's life. I don't believe art is a profession.

http://records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/kafka/hungerartist.htm

I don't know if it's abridge or not of if the translation good, but I did the finding work for you.



ergo Profession is not art, thus life will be miserable. Can't say I can agree with that. Art as a lofty ideal has always been silly to me.