The Death of Record Labels

[[R4A]Bigman]

Well, I am sure most of you are aware by now that the new Radiohead album will be available for download from their website at a price to be determined by the buyer. In short, you pay what you think it might be worth and you receive. No questions asked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7021743.stm

The way I see it, this promises to practically irradiate piracy for this particular album. Why would anyone download it illegally when they can get a legit copy for 50p? So adding all those pennies up might actually make this a worthwhile business model. In addition to that, Radiohead have a large enough fan base which is willing to pay much more than that to get the album. In fact, I would speculate that many would put worth on the album in the region of £5-10. I know I would pay that blindly for this album and probably will.

On a similar note, Amazon (US) have just started a new DRM-Free music service.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=163856011

The prices seem fairly reasonable - somewhere in the region of $1 for most songs, and albums as low as $5 up to $20. All this seems good, and a bit of competition against iTunes never hurt anyone. But the best bit is the complete lack of DRM - so you get your MP3s and then you can move them around, put them on what you want, when you want and however you want. After all, you have paid for them, right? As far as I can find out, other than having some info in the ID3 tag which says where it was bought from, there is nothing else in there that would distinguish it from mp3s you have encoded yourself from a CD.


So does this mark the start of the Death of Record Labels? Already independent unsigned artists can have their music sold on iTunes along with the greats of the music industry, but arguably the downfall of iTunes is the restrictive nature of how the songs are released. So with a major retailer now releasing songs without DRM, and a major band releasing a variably priced album independent of a record label, could this mark the future of the music business? Or are both ideas going to fall down, with the basic rules of capitalism - supply and demand will determine that the average price of the Radiohead album will fall to next to nothing and a loss will be made, and releasing mp3s without DRM will simply fuel the current piracy 'crisis' that the industry faces?

[UltraMagnus]

seems like a good business model i guess, shame its being done by a band i wouldn't download even if it allowed me to put a negative value in...

that being said, i still think SLSK is move convenient.

[Funkstar]

I think it will be interesting to see the stats in a few months once the Radiohead CD has been released. I'll put money on a significant number of people buying at store* prices as opposed to downloading it for whatever they feel it's worth. I'll be doing this. I'd think about it if there was a lossless download with embeded artwork, i'd still rather a CD though.

* By store prices, i don't really mean high street, as £15 for an album is rediculous. £9 from Play.com on the other hand is perfectly reasonable.

I can see a major change in the current label system though. The big labels aren't sustainable in he long term i don't think. Indipendents are good though, i do still think we need record labels of one form or another.

[UltraMagnus]

and what real purpose do record labels serve exactly? i fail to see why they should even exist in the 21st century

[G4Z]

and what real purpose do record labels serve exactly? i fail to see why they should even exist in the 21st century

Well for one thing I need my media in vinyl format... at least until I can afford mp3 decks. I welcome the demise of the big labels though as they dominate the radio and all other broadcast media with utter crap. I might go and download that radiohead album for my girlfriends ipod actually as I want to support this kind of direct sales with artists.

[UltraMagnus]

hmm... someone that uses vinyl eh.

just one question, if you value music quality that much... why on earth would use use MP3?

[Funkstar]

I'm guessing G4Z uses his vinyl for DJing/mixing, not because it sounds better than CD. In fact, in a club, sound quality is probably the least of your worries. Some of those 12" disks of black vinyl can get pretty wrecked depending on what kind of mixing you are doing. I've heard of DJs that buy multiple copies of decent tunes in case one wears out.

[G4Z]

Spot on Funkstar.





Sound quality on vinyl isn't great, I think only people fooling themselves could believe that. I find mp3 quality can easily be higher than vinyl with a decent bitrate (say 320k+). I play both through the same amplifier and I would have to say the mp3 trumps vinyl easily. Totally OT like...

[mycarsavw]

The way I see it, this promises to practically irradiate piracy for this particular album. Why would anyone download it illegally when they can get a legit copy for 50p?

I disagree.

Free < 50p

There will always be someone who wants it for nothing therefore there will always be piracy.

[Funkstar]

mycarsavw is right. But the other factor is, of the people downloading it for free, how many of them would actually buy it if they couldn't get it for free?

A lot of people will download content simply because they can. I used to do this at Uni because of the novelty of a direct JANET connection, realised it is kind of pointless after a few months though

[UltraMagnus]

to be honest, its less cost and more convenience, its easier to just browse soulseek than to go to a band website, type in a 14 digit debit card number etc....... yada.... etc

until there is a convenient way to buy albums directly from bands, its just not going to work.

although, i can see why they are doing it, if you pay them 50p you are probably giving them more than if you bought the CD

[Funkstar]

And it easier to walk into a shop, help yourself to anything you want and just walking out instead of having to que and pay for things.

Doesn't mean it right though does it.