开云体育

Content producers of the world unite!
By focusing on consumption, both sides in the debate over illegal file-sharing ignore the value of creative labour.
Jason Walsh

"Everyone and their dog knows that the media is being torn asunder by the forces unleashed by the internet. Almost every movie ever made is available on BitTorrent, half of television's history is easily accessible worldwide courtesy of copyright-flouting Chinese video websites and, despite the success of legitimate services such as iTunes and Spotify, illegal downloads continue to dwarf online music sales. Then there are newspapers, almost all of which appear to be unprofitable - a situation that, by all accounts, is only going to get worse for producers."

More:

Scary Thought: Are Musicians Doing Worse Than Ever Before?
Friday, October 29, 2010


Music fans are doing better than ever in history, that is never debated. But not only are artists struggling these days, they actually might be worse off than they were 10, 20, or even 30 years ago. We're so used to hearing about how liberated musicians are, how easily they can connect to fans and the greater percentages they're earning. But talk to an actual artist, and most will say that their actual earnings haven't changed at all - and it may be getting worse.

It may take years before we understand what's truly happening here, though artists currently have less access to financial backers and supporters. Sure, the big label is often deleted from the discussion, but so are their once-deep pockets.

But even outside of that system, plenty of artists were gigging and paying the bills back in the day. "In 1980 I was a full time musician, earning a true middle class living," independent musician Clark Colborn commented to Digital Music News. "And I knew dozens of other full time musicians living in or near our city [Rockford, IL] making about the same income. Now, I think Rick Nielsen (Cheap Trick) is the only full time rock musician living in our city. The musical middle class, which many of these so-called experts claim didn't exist until the last decade or so, is a myth."

Then again, who's kidding who? It's never been easy to be an artist - and that's why your parents begged you to put down that horn. But gigging musicians are definitely struggling, and even established artists like Imogen Heap are having trouble making road economics work. "I've been telling people this, but the ones who believe it's a wonderful time to be a musician don't want to know that for most musicians it is actually harder to make a living now," noted Suzanne Lainson, head of research at Brands Plus Music, also in the same thread. "A lot of the local gigs that sustained bands/musicians in the past are gone. Or if they still exist, they pay less money. And it used to be that local/regional bands could make good money selling CDs (and before that cassettes) directly to fans at shows."

But, what about the incredible opportunities presented by direct-to-fan relationships? Shouldn't things like demographically-detailed email lists and cultivated superfans be changing the calculus? That's the rap of most DIYers, though perhaps the elements that created those opportunities are also working against musicians as well. The noise floor is often impenetrable, simply because every artist suddenly has equal footing. But beyond that, potential fans are more inundated with information, tweets, text messages, and screens than ever before in history. Perhaps the net result is simply negative.

I missed the beginning of this thread.
Is there a Sibelius real book available? That is the real book in .sib files?

Could some one clue me in,

Hi Juan,

Michael Colina, great keys player and composer/arranger, right? He's
also a fellow "cubano"...

Yes, that's him. You should check out his Guitar Concerto. I think
you'll like it a lot.

*"Goyescana,"* a concerto for guitar and orchestra commissioned by
Robert Phillips for performance with the Imperial Symphony Orchestra



michaelcolina.com

best,
Bobby

Hey Bobby,

Michael Colina, great keys player and composer/arranger, right? He's also a fellow "cubano"...

Cheers,
JV

Juan Vega

A friend of mine, Michael Colina, switched to Sibelius when his Concerto
for Guitar required engraving for publishing, and the engravers charged
him 25% more because he'd sent them the file in Finale instead of
Sibelius. Apparently, Sibelius requires less tweaking to conform to
pro-standard expectations than does Finale.

best,
Bobby


Bobby, O Yes, I agree, Sibelius is even easier to work with ... once you learn
the pretty intuitive menus and such ... it becomes almost second nature to enter
notes and values, etc., etc. but all the BS with dealing with exchanging of
files is just craziness ....

Hi John,

Yes, Sibelius is the industry standard, and
more powerful than Finale, but it knows it and cares little to commune with the
rest ...

A friend of mine, Michael Colina, switched to Sibelius when his Concerto for Guitar required engraving for publishing, and the engravers charged him 25% more because he'd sent them the file in Finale instead of Sibelius. Apparently, Sibelius requires less tweaking to conform to pro-standard expectations than does Finale.

best,
Bobby

Hi John,

... I do have both ... but they do not exchange files ... that's the
point of
the problem ....

I have been thinking for a long time about Sybellius when it comes time
to upgrade (although I am finally getting better at Finale, the
Sybellius files I've seen look to be better engraving). I thought they
advertised that the program can convert Finale files. No?

best,
Bobby


.... Lately I'm going more with Finale/PrintMusic, in fact, I just upgraded for
$20 ... Sibelius has very little support for Mac ... I called them for a fix and
it it didn't solve my problems ... Yes, Sibelius is the industry standard, and
more powerful than Finale, but it knows it and cares little to commune with the
rest ...

Hi John,

... I do have both ... but they do not exchange files ... that's the point of
the problem ....

I have been thinking for a long time about Sybellius when it comes time to upgrade (although I am finally getting better at Finale, the Sybellius files I've seen look to be better engraving). I thought they advertised that the program can convert Finale files. No?

best,
Bobby

Just buy both.... You don't want to stand in the way of commerce, do

you?

... I do have both ... but they do not exchange files ... that's the point of
the problem ....
... In fact, no one needs to "stand in the way of commerce" when they have that
"proprietarily" covered all by themselves .....






Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest ? Unsubscribe ? Terms of Use
.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Oh, here we go, Angelo,

Why would they need to hire a lawyer if the record companies are as squeaky
clean as you say they are... ??

Because any business deal involving possibly millions of dollars should never, ever be negotiated without proper representation. Angelo, you don't have to go to Harvard Business School to know that, do you? In fact, if you go into partnership over even a hot-dog wagon, you should have a good lawyer. If you sell a home, you need a lawyer. &c., &c. What about that don't you understand? - oh, that's right - you said that I said that record company execs are honest.

and yet, they keep playing on...

The labels need to look to themselves for their loss of profits,
we are talking about people who couldn`t even store Zappa`s
tapes properly.

non sequitur

I love it! Because you can't follow it, it doesn't follow... haha

No. It's non sequitur because because whoever didn't store Zappa's records properly has nothing to do with whoever is pirating copyrighted materials. You see, Angelo, it's non sequitur for pretty much the same reason as just about every post of yours on the subject has been - because it's non sequitur.

Bobby

On 11/1/2010 7:16 PM, Angelo wrote:

First of all I don't propose piracy... That's your convenient twisting of my
statements.
I also say that musicians are being ripped off. I think we agree an that...
My point is, and always has been, that you and some others here, blame
everything on "piracy" and give the record companies a free pass...

No one gave the records a free pass. The statement was that Internet piracy has more than ripped off the musicians; it's devastated the industry.

You sound like an apologist for them, quoting THEIR figures as facts...

No. I use facts from "Hit Men", and from "This Business of Music". I do not know what the record company's "facts" are, except for the gross loss of units sold. Are you saying that they are making up the numbers and lying on their taxes?

Dismissing others personal dealings with them as not valid, whereas yours
are gold...

I never dismissed Will's personal dealings. I said that I didn't know what they were. I did say that you obviously have no personal dealings with the issue. If you want, tell me I'm wrong and why, and I'll listen.

Bobby

On 11/1/2010 5:45 PM, Paul Sametz wrote:

--- In jazz_guitar@...
<mailto:jazz_guitar%40yahoogroups.com>, Angelo <angelo.nyc@...> wrote:

I have Sibelius and Finale ... and never the twain shall meet ...

they both > want > their own proprietary territory ... one would think
it good business to > welcome > the > community of musicians using
both formats ... but, no, the almighty buck > reigns!

Just buy both.... You don't want to stand in the way of commerce, do

you?

Very funny, Angelo. It's hard enough keeping track of different file
versions from the same product - especially if you have updated the
software and the older version can't read the newer one's files.
The correct way to do this is to demand from both software publishers
that they make their files compatible with each other.
Ammo

All companies try and succeed in getting away with this for a while, but
eventually a standard emerges.

Bobby

The specs say 23 frets. Does that strike anyone else as really weird?
Chris

--- In jazz_guitar@..., andy seyler <awseyler@...> wrote:

I need to??modify my "original" request from "Web site" to which BOOK is the most accurate for Steely Dan Voicings? Any suggestions would be
helpful.

Thanks,
Andy

(paperback-cherry-lane-music)--pid10960690/



I don't expect online tabs to *ever* be correct, they may be a good starting point, if you use your ears, as well:

Dear Congressman John Hall,

From your response, it is apparent that you are saying that because you were a musician, that other musicians do not deserve equally fair representation from you as their congressman as do non-musicians, including sites which pirate copyrighted works.

This issue regards laws which have been on the books for years, the violation thereof which has bankrupted many hundreds of people, and has even affected the huge part of the GDP that the music business is.

I am forwarding this letter to everybody I know, whether they be a musician or not, so that they know where you stand in terme of properly reperly representing your constituents (ALL of them). Who knows what it is you may have in common with others so as to recuse yourself from representing them as well. They can make up their own minds tomorrow as to whether they feel this should affect their vote. I have also posted it on the musical discussion lists I belong to. I haven't decided as of yet as whether or not to post this on FaceBook.

Bob Hansmann

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Bob Hansmann <bobbybmusic@...>wrote:

Hi Will,

I am not going to name the labels or studios I was involved
with back in the 1980s for legal reasons. However what I posted
is quite true.

But there are far too many variables for me to even wager a guess about,
other than to just take your word. For example, of the many negotiations
that you say you were involved in, how many times did you or the band
put out the money necessary to hire a skillful musical lawyer? Most
bands think that can wait... not!

Why would they need to hire a lawyer if the record companies are as squeaky
clean as you say they are... ??

The business model of the 1960s is dead - back then a top
ten recording had to sell 100k units to make the charts, when I
was in the industry it was just 3k per week. The interest
in owning the latest recordings died long before the digital
age.

A lot of it was very much alive before all of the Internet pirating
began to occur in the 80s. Ask Dave about it - he can tell you a lot!

The kids who download and share would not ever purchase a recording
they pirate for it`s own sake. Closing every single file sharing
site will not make a significant difference to legal sales.

The hell it wouldn't. It might even make it remotely for an artist to
break even instead of just throwing his money, time, and career away to
take a guaranteed major loss. What keeps the many, many striving artists
pushing as hard as they do is the hope and the dream of a possible
success (unlike the naivety of those lazy ones who spout out that they
alone are in it "for the music", and the others are simply not
spiritually minded enough). Internet piracy has all but eliminated that
hope and that dream.

and yet, they keep playing on...

The labels need to look to themselves for their loss of profits,
we are talking about people who couldn`t even store Zappa`s
tapes properly.

non sequitur

I love it! Because you can't follow it, it doesn't follow... haha

Revolutionary?? A re-invented guitar??? It looks like a regulag wood
guitar to me... Now, if they had made it out of meat, or you got your sound
by blowing into it, that I would have called, "Revolutionary" or
"Re-inventing". Sometimes a guitar is just a guitar....

Hi Will,

I am not going to name the labels or studios I was involved
with back in the 1980s for legal reasons. However what I posted
is quite true.

But there are far too many variables for me to even wager a guess about, other than to just take your word. For example, of the many negotiations that you say you were involved in, how many times did you or the band put out the money necessary to hire a skillful musical lawyer? Most bands think that can wait... not!

The business model of the 1960s is dead - back then a top
ten recording had to sell 100k units to make the charts, when I
was in the industry it was just 3k per week. The interest
in owning the latest recordings died long before the digital
age.

A lot of it was very much alive before all of the Internet pirating began to occur in the 80s. Ask Dave about it - he can tell you a lot!

The kids who download and share would not ever purchase a recording
they pirate for it`s own sake. Closing every single file sharing
site will not make a significant difference to legal sales.

The hell it wouldn't. It might even make it remotely for an artist to break even instead of just throwing his money, time, and career away to take a guaranteed major loss. What keeps the many, many striving artists pushing as hard as they do is the hope and the dream of a possible success (unlike the naivety of those lazy ones who spout out that they alone are in it "for the music", and the others are simply not spiritually minded enough). Internet piracy has all but eliminated that hope and that dream.

The labels need to look to themselves for their loss of profits,
we are talking about people who couldn`t even store Zappa`s
tapes properly.

non sequitur

best,
Bobby

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Bob Hansmann <bobbybmusic@...>wrote:

To all,
There are so very many people of diverse skills necessary for the making
and marketing of a successful recording. Producers, engineers (not the
same thing, btw), assistant engineers, mastering engineers, equipment
engineers, studio carpenters specialized in acoustics, artists, PR
people, TV people, musical lawyers, entertainment lawyers, contract
lawyers, agents, accountants, publishers, .... the list goes on and on
and on - I haven't even scratched the surface.

A quick look at Beyonce's live concert DVD which is all over the place
now will reveal that she's got well over 100 people up there with her
just to make her live show work, and that's just who you see. The
credits at the end go on for several minutes. These people are not
hacks, but are, rather, very specialized artists and pros at what they do.

For a band or artist to think they can successfully self-produce is
,more often than not, an exercise in absolute futility. I would bet that
not even 1% of 1% of all self-produced recordings and musical projects
even break even, and that the greatest reason for the high degree of
failure is that of ignorance.

To imply that the recording industry is just a bunch of Mafioso, sitting
around screwing over talent is simply not true.

To think that making a recording at all is an inexpensive endeavor is
nothing short of stupid.

To pirate by uploading to the Internet that which is the fruit of all
this necessary expense, labor, and time is absolutely grand theft, by
any standard. Think what you want, but i think all the bastards should
be sued, and often. i really don't care if they are 5 years old or 95
years old.

To find that NY Congressman John Hall is unwilling to protect copyright
law (because he WAS a musician?) is inexcusable. His office should be
bombarded every hour of every day by irate creative people and
supporters of the arts with letters telling him just what a pussy he is.

All this money spent on trash, while good musical acts don't get looked
at... I'm sorry, I don't feel any sympathy for these pricks if they lose a
few dollars for polluting the scene. I know I wouldn't waste the bandwidth
necessary to steal that shit. They still make millions on that crap. Lady
Caca is the most pirated act AND the best selling act. Hmmm, might there be
a connection? Is it possible that people are beta-testing the performances?
I can't explain the phenomena...