Jump to content

David Lowery just wishes things could be how they've always been


Recommended Posts

I feel sort of morally bound not to use spotify to listen to music. I use it to check music out, and if I like it I'll buy it (on cd or vinyl), that's made for fewer duff purchases in recent years.


I mean I don't mind that new technology has made music less of path to megawealth. People will still carry doing something they love for a decent living wage, and fewer U2s can surely only be a good thing (in terms of the strutting egomania, I still like some of their stuff).


But this expectation that they basically do it for free could really mean for a choice between home grown, seeing them live and generic derivative style over substance, which can't be a good thing.


So a choice of Mildred Faquar and the Hamsters at the Buffs club (self published 3 gram vinyl and cd-roms available at the back) and Miley Cyrus/Lady GaGa/Puff SYmbol.


I think I've just made myself cry.

I don't know what the best advice for anyone trying to make a living out of music but 'wishing things could be like they were' is probably the least helpful.


My opinion is that the same money is still floating around, it's just floating around in different ways and in different places and - just like the good ol' days - many (most, even) won't get their hands on it.


I love the idea that somehow the music biz - aka Shyster Central - used to be 'fairer'(!!)

:)


I'm not convinced the same money is out there though, given there's a whole generation who thinks everything is available for free on t'interweb.


But there are obviously opportunities in the new technologies as well as pitfalls, and people will always pay to watch music live. So the era of the superband may be over but it may be easier to make a half decent living nowadays.


I think that was the point i was trying to make rather than it was better when it were all fields.

A great piece on 'how to make a living playing music'.


"If you are a very materialistic person, skip this article, I don't think you are going to like what it says."


http://dannybarnes.com/blog/how-make-living-playing-music

RE the whole streaming / digital thing


I have some friends who work at new, eager, thrusting-type publishers - who are very positive about the Brave New World - and what it will offer their artists (and hence will bring them, seeing as they're on a percentage).


It's all pretty new stuff, in its infancy. Personally - last year was the first year I received anything of note as a direct result of YouTube plays. Things are changing. Anyone who wants to make it needs to embrace the change, not mope about griping about some mythical past where everything was fair.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I was also woken by this. It happened in two bursts, which felt even more anti social.
    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...