seems to me that a lot of these comments made here are by people who simply don't want to pay for there music, petes right. how many of you would like to have your wages stolen after you had busted a gut to earn it all week.
I love everything Pete Townshend says here, but I think we all know that Apple isn't out there to help the artist. Apple is out to get money and MORE money. I'm amazed that I agree with every point PT made in his lecture! I hope Apple finds their way to this video and actually considers some of the suggestions made here, but honestly, I don't think they give a f*ck about artists.
Now, back in the 70's (i worked part time at a record store), some albums would get sold for little margin because there was incredible amounts of competition back then and that's why a lot or record stores went out of business. Then came digital downloads and a lot MORE record stores went out of business because people were opting for digital download versions which were sold cheaper than the physical copy. That, in a nutshell, was what was/is going on.
He's talking about small and upcoming artists, not the ones like himself. He is spot on and as we've seen, Apple have had to move with the times and use the likes of Trent Reznor to change the format of iTunes is key to this progress...
Is there a link to the full lecture? I used to have the audio but lost it. This entire lecture is brilliant. To understand this lecture is to understand what he meant to do with Lifehouse.
I really liked what Pete had to say. He has some great ideas, IMO. Maybe if some of them were implamented, maybe we would have some good, new bands to look forward to... I just wish I could find the whole lecture...
BEFORE digital downloads, bands/artists sign record deals and they get fronted money per album, if the album gets released, then they produce CDs, DVD-A, SACDS, vinyl, etc. those cost money to produce, THEN they go to the distributor and THEY get a cut and they distribute these to the record stores and THEY mark up the product. But with digital downloads, they don't have the mfg costs involved, and they either go through a distributor or direct to iTunes and then iTunes takes a 30% cut.
Gimme a WOOT WOOT if you still watching in 2020!?!?😂 But seriously, I was saying, posting and blogging much the same in 2011. Now with streaming, the artist makes *even less* from the sale of their music. And unfortunately, the record industry that Pete is touting here has played along and continued to collect the wealth from artists, even without all of the benefits he mentions above. -And while I'm at it: GET OFF MY LAWN!
I can go through my understanding of DMCA laws because i have been reading up on this for the past 7 years because of someone violating my own copyrights and I have talked to attorneys on this. If the site (similar to CZcams) has someone posting content, the copyright holder has to contact the poster first. Then they have 14 days to pull it. If it is pulled within 14 days, that's UNWILLFUL intent. After 14 days, that's WILLFUL intent. Then they have to figure out the total number dl'd.
I'm a musician and know the industry in how it works. Personally, it is the consumer that's giving away free content that needs to be educated. Plus, the people are typically doing it are typically people with no money to spend on content. If they don't want their content being given away, then they either have to put it on vinyl OR on DVD-A with encryption to lessen the problem. It will still happen, but to a lessor extent, but they will limit their demographic.
@bizthin --- i agree with him to a point. Bob Dylan's first album flopped in 1962, his next album "freewheeling" is to this day a masterpiece. he could have never made that album unless some Columbia record executives believed in his talent based on him preforming live in the village. Had Dylan dropped a few songs on iTunes in1962, his low sales would have made him poison. the who's "Tommy" couldn't be made without producer Lambert pushing Townsend to a grander vision of the work overall.
Extremely practical, quietly subversive, and potentially revolutionary advice from Mr Townshend....all of which will go in one ear and directly out the other ear of the people that need to act on this. We live in hope Pete.
I didn't say he has to put things on vinyl. I am just saying that putting things on vinyl will reduce or eliminate stuff being copied which reduces revenue for the record labels and artists. Apple is NOT taking money away from the artists, but the digital downloads are sold for LESS money than vinyl records and CDs, due to the cost to mfg is not there. Plus a digital file can be easily shared, thus reducing revenue and royalties for the artists... Making vinyl was meant to be kinda humorous.
Myself and some others I know have directly benefitted from the collapse of the old record industry model. For the first time, through the interweb, we are able to target our audiences and sell products. It is a more sustained and direct revenue source than was ever available before for lesser-known artists. However, I still like some of Pete's ideas. Aggregators are the new labels, and they often forget that THEY need bands, not the other way around.
Well, that's why they are shutting down these web sites. The woman was sued IN COURT for sharing over Kazaa or Limewire, I forget which one. The jury handed her a $9850 per song that she shared over so many downloads. They won't bother people unless they can tell if the number exceeded a fairly large amount. They didn't mention exactly how many the level was, but it was probably at least 100 downloads of a single song. it's not flawed, it's REALITY. Some people PREFER the sound of vinyl.
It's been a while since i took some economics classes, but if someone uses a theoretical concept to throw around to act like they are an expert, you better give some examples of what YOU think the point of production is and how it backs up Pete's idea rather than how it is currently being done.
Radio transcripts music archivist preserve big band swing Duke Ellington In A Mellow Tone and Satin Doll Count Basis Band recorded in collaboration with Sinatra. Cheers Sir Peter
iTunes has been the worst piece of software ever coded since its beginning and never got fixed. To this day I hate the "music matched" replacements of my cherished original versions of songs with remastered (or worse - rerecorded) versions without wanting them, and all of the mismatched album art. It's 2021 and they still haven't fixed these. Thanks, Pete. You're one of my musician idols. But you're ever the idealist if you think Apple gives a rip.
Great points but what he's overlooking is that many of us are getting funded by fans now. it may not be enough to buy a home but Paypal and fans has made it possible for creative people to get stuff out there. The best film, art, music and comedy is going to be independently funded within about a decade-solely. Pete is really right on about copyright-that's the scariest because big budget mass marketers will strip mine ideas and few artists can afford to after them with attorneys.
I am both a performer and vet of the record biz. While amatuers like yourself can be funded by fans to get "stuff out there" may be a way of making $ enough to subsist, few can get a massive follow or the potential of a long career by crowdfund and Pete is 100% cotrect and you are a bit shortsighted. It may give you more control to Crowdfund, but the benefits Pete points out that were in existence at the labels are what is needed for a longterm career with a sustained following.
Here is another reason why the music industry has a problem, people are not buying content as much because most of the content coming out these days isn't worth paying for. Very few artists are making albums where every song is worth listening to.
Obviously I am talking WAY above your head. How do recording artists make money? By selling records, DVDs, CD, SACDs, digital downloads. The record label passes on the royalties per the recording contract AFTER the record label has recouped any front money for each recording project and the applicable marketing/advertising. If Pete wants to make money, they he has to SELL more records and eliminate stolen (shared) content.
How does HIS opinion make business sense? Please explain how his would work in the first place? The only way these record labels can make money is by selling recordings for more money and eliminating shared content, which reduces the number of recordings sold.
It all comes down to integrity. If one lives their life giving away free content and they disregard copyright laws, they might themselves at the receiving end of a lawsuit. There was a woman that got nailed for over $200K for sharing content over Limewire I think it was. I'm sure she won't do THAT again. Record labels are coming down hard on those people. Apple is at least trying to make it legal, but the artist can choose to sell digital copies or not, or people will still rip the CD.
Now, if the person who posted the content DOESN'T pull the content and they notify the web site owner, THEY now have 14 days to pull content. If THEY take over 14 days, then THEY can get sued. That's my understanding of the law. If you are an attorney and know of a case that sets precedence other than what I have explained, let me know. But that's how the DMCA Revision 2 laws are stated and Safe Harbor only protects the web hosting company to a certain point. The DoJ is going after sites.
The only way I can see someone like Pete Townsend making more money is by first creating a SELLABLE CD for as little money as possible. THEN he should sell DIRECTLY through iTunes, and totally bypass the record label (he has enough money to pay for musicians, producers, engineers and studio time) and then HE has to market it. But since he doesn't want to get involved with the business end and hire people to do that, then he has to stick to the record label method and make better recordings.
@donza01 hahahaahahhah.oh yeah ,your right of course... Townshend worked/campaigned against abuse 40 yrs as was pointed out by his peers including David Putnum, Jerry Hall(I know ,so what.?Im simply pointing out She campainged with him against abuse agaisnt abuse & pointed this out to media when Townshends Story broke) the DOUBLE O' charity he ran,... & He's the same as 'Glitter' ?? ( Glitter who downloaded over 2000 abuse images & since travelled internationally & got arrested for same)
I deal with how it is CURRENTLY being done using the digital download method vs how it was done BEFORE the digital download method and how now they also have to deal with people not buying content, the legalities surrounding it, and how that effects potential sales. You are bringing up some words you looked up regarding some econ class you might have or are taking and applying a lot of nonsense to act like you know ANYTHING about business is done.
@ChromeDestiny um, you obviously aren't paying attention. Pete has released lots of music the in the last 10 years. So what if he's wealthy? he deserves to be. He earned it. Think and do research before you post mistruths and opinions instead of facts.
What does writing music and understanding music laws, how digital downloads work and how Apple makes money from iTunes sales and how it makes no sense for Apple to become a record label. I am not a song writer, but a musician that caught someone using and selling copies of my recorded performances over the internet illegally? I did have the crap pulled and he doesn't have an account with CD Baby and their affiliates. Pete's opinion makes absolutely NO BUSINESS SENSE. PERIOD.
Pete can sell or NOT sell digital versions on iTunes or other digital download sites. That's HIS ultimate decision, NOT the record label's. Look at what the Beatles did. Once they got the copyright holders to sign a deal with the record label and Apple, then they could sell their catalog over iTunes, and because the Beatles are a LOT more popular than Pete Townsend, they sold a TON of product. Pete should focus on putting out music that's sellable and sell whatever format he chooses.
@donza01 Do some research and don't make flippant comments. Pete Townshend was abused when he was a youngster, thats why on Tommy he asks John Entwistle to write 'Fiddle About' and 'Cousin Kevin'. These songs were about sexual abuse of youngsters. Pete felt he was unable to write these songs because of his own personal experiences. I remember reading that when he was arrested for viewing such material on the web a few years ago, he wanted to learn more about what happened to him as a child.
All this A&R nurturing stuff is a fairy tale. The scale of artists/bands today is too huge for it. There may be a glut of musicians, but there will never be a glut of great ones. The market wants great talent, not mediocre performers. Elvis would still make it today. He'd post a video on CZcams, it would go viral, he'd end up on the talk shows, get signed to a label-- or create his own label like Ani DiFranco if he were smart. Perform well, and copyright your tunes! Apple's not yo mama!
AND make sure the composers get their MONEY! ... I´m sure YOU wouldn´t give your product away for nothing - so why should the composers?! ...fucking scandal!
from my experience many a&r people were drunks or just plain nuts,pete.but there are bloggers like heather browne whose opinion i value more highly than i would the expertise of virtually any cocaine snorting a&r man.i don't like itunes and i don't use itunes.i buy (lots of) cds and i share files.and it's not like stealing your son's bike.more like borrowing it.if i buy a painting,can other people look at it?if i buy a dvd,can i invite my friends over to see it?don't be so fucking greedy.
Apple isn't giving their work away for Free. They charge A RESONABLE amount of money and take a REASONABLE amount of profit. 30% is actually less than stores make from selling CDs. Apple spends a portion to maintain iTunes, Akamai delivery, etc. People are whether they buy the CD, or download it from Apple, WalMart, Target, Amazon, Google Play, Microsoft, etc., etc. The phenomenon of people giving away free copies started the day they put content on a CD. Apple had NOTHING to do with that.
Apple ITunes is a replacement for a physical record store. Does Apple charge any more than Amazon or any other download service? They only pocket a nickel for each song download. You want to know who the rip off company is? CD BABY.
I think you have some pretty powerful pot. It sounds like a bunch of meaningless words put in a sentence that doesn't make any sense. point of production? What's that? linking the artist with the audience in place of the worker and the point of production? for recordings the search engine is one such a point which is at present is where the artist loses control due to the subjective nature of the maths? I think you need either better pot or maybe you might want to stop smoking it altogether.
YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO COMPREHEND OR READ CAREFULLY. What person did 4% of the internet traffic who the courts can't touch. Do you have article on this person that I can read about? I am interested in that. But a women did get sued and jury DID hand her a $9850 per song violation and the total bill came to over $200K. That's what the record labels are doing. SUING for sharing content over the internet. The Statutory fines go up to $150K per song to the copyright holder for willful intent.
Let me ask you a couple of questions. 1. What does Apple have to do to prove that they care about the artists? 2. What's different between Apple ITunes and your local record store other than one is a physical building and one is an internet based store? 3. What's the role of a record label and what's the role of a record store? Are they the same?
Another way to make more money is not spend so much money on production. Some projects have small or big budgets, if they don't run over budget and keep their production costs down and still retain high quality production, that can help if the final product really is sellable. Then its a matter of getting their asses on tour to promote the content. If Pete spits out an album and doesn't tour or get on talk shows to promote it and they don't advertise it, then they might not get much sales.
@nosnhojriatsala The further away from iTunes and Apple the BBC stays, the better. The BBC needs to remain independent of monsters like Apple. What would Apple possibly do to help the BBC?
Why should Apple be a record label when they are a retail download site? Most people in society today do not buy the best music out there as a rule. The largest demographic are kids and young adults with little or no music education to figure out what is good or not. Hence, that's why we have so much garbage pop music. The record labels are just going by what the kids by and try to figure out the formula and spit it out until the next thing hits. That's why we have Justin Bieber, etc.
What does the search engine have ANYTHING to do with pete wanting apple to be a record label? What a search engine does is allows people to search through the catalog easy based on search terms rather than walking in a store and sifting through CDs manually. The artist NEVER has any control over how they buy and what they buy. They only have control over HOW they want it sold in terms of format and with what retail/digital download outlets.
Gotten all your works including your book for free at ThePirateBay for free Pete, sorry. I'm poor, mind. I'm at peace knowing that if I had an album of 9 "Hits" I'd only make money gigging it and only sparse peanuts from hard-copy sales or radio royalties. (Note: Even the Dixie Chicks got screwed by Sony Inc. and had to sue and WIN to make back 10% of what they'd been screwed out of after the friggin' lawyers were paid-- that's right, the Judge didn't force Sony to pay the litigation fees.)
Try that approach at the local grocer, and see if they'll give you your items for free. I hate that anyone thinks they should get their music for free. You won't work for free?
Do you know how much Apple takes home in net profit after they pay the overhead for iTunes Music Store/iTunes App/marketing, advertising/legal/software developers/Akamai content delivery/taxes? About a nickel a song per download. That's not a lot of money per download, is it? They allow people to post and download podcasts for FREE. All Apple does is allows a place to have download content posted for sale/etc. on a widely used Internet Store, THAT'S ALL APPLE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR,
I can discuss practically ANY concept on a rational level as long as the other is also being rational and has a certain degree of understanding and abilities to grasp the actual situation at hand. How can an artist make more money in the entertainment industry? 1. Make better content certainly helps and that's based on the songwriting and production. 2. Marketing/advertising. 3. Cut down on illegal downloads. 4. Availability through various types of stores/sites that have high traffic.
Pete, just because you have a British accent, have tons of money, does not make you intelligent in terms of what Apple should do. They are NOT a record label, if you want them to replace a record label, then they'll take even more profit.
I personally think Pete has probably a certain amount of brain damage from too much partying. I think he is TOTALLY out of line thinking that Apple has to become a record label. That's NOT iTunes place. They are simply a digital version of a record store and that's it. The record labels post the content and between the two set the price and the margin and the record label decides if they want DRM protection or not and what bit rate.
I suggest you take some business classes that are more practical in the area of studying the entertainment industry, some Finance classes and understand WHY Apple would be STUPID to try to become a record label instead of a digital download on-line retail store. First, it's kind of conflict of interest because they would also have to sell the same content to their competitors like Amazon, Wal Mart, Target, etc. Plus they have ZERO competencies as a Record Label.
what i think Pete should be upset at and getting at the record labels for is hiring kids with no talent that can't sing that need AutoTune and Melodyne and sequenced drum tracks instead of real musicians and real singing. I stopped watching the Grammys years ago when they started giving awards to rappers.
This is an obscene demonstration of arrogance, greed and blatant untruths. What Townshend is oh so delicately proposing is closing the door on millions of independent artists who previously had no opportunity to sell their music as digital downloads, or be heard by any mass market. He wants to turn back the clock to a time when he had a much bigger piece of the pie. Has anyone else ever characterized the music labels as nurturing to artists? That's simply insulting. I once idolized this creep.
hardly 'arrogance, greed and blatant untruths'. look at modern music - because of the internet, theres no quality control, meaning that most music is shit. and, being born in the late 90s, i can tell you for certain that it has gone down the fucking pan. look at the charts ffs. back in the day, you had to work your bollocks off to get your material heard and actually needed a little bit of talent to be noticed by anyone. then the record company hears your demo, likes it, signs you and puts you in a state of the art recording studio to record your first album. they would INVEST in you. then theyd put it out and, if it sold well, then you get to make a second album and so on. these days, youre expected to have most of your album recorded/mixed/mastered before you even walk in through the door. thats going to be hard for someone that works on a building site and doesnt have the money or knowledge to do that (like myself) because of these companies (itunes,youtube,spotify) all the money has been siphoned out of the music business leaving the record companies with a minuscule amount to invest, let alone operate. look at all the labels that went defunct or were bought out in the last decade. and because of this lack of money we now have the cheapest produced/sounding music. look at all this autotuned crap we got in 2020. songwriters should rightfully get 'a bigger slice of the pie' because without them theres no records for the record companies to sell or music for us to listen to. dont expect good art to be produced without paying good money for it. common sense and townshend aint no 'creep', hes a musical genius and has seen the post war music industry grow from the 50s right up until now. he knows what hes on about and is spot on because hes lived it. youre just a bit of an idiot really
This was a total embarrassment. He rambled incoherently, spent far too long on complete irrelevancies and exhibited only a vague familiarity with the subject he was supposed to be dealing with. Well done BBC, talk about a waste of Licence Payers money...It was rivetting listening, but for the wrong reasons.
I've done a lot more in explaining how things work and why Pete Townshend is out of his mind thinking that Apple should be a record label. You just brought up some theoretical econ terms that doesn't explain anything, except for our mentally challenged thought process which turns INTO mental masturbation because you don't grasp the situation.
well, I don't think Apple is the reason why people like Justin is successful. Blame Google and CZcams for that. THe bottom line is that SOME of the people in the record industry like putting out crap. Why? because most kids don't study music, don't learn how to play an instrument, but is that Apple's fault? No. All they are doing is providing a "legal" and I use the term loosely, to sell digital versions of content because that's what the masses want.
Opinion driven? Who's opinion? Some teenager that doesn't study music? To someone that doesn't have a wide range of music they study? So you think that a garage band is equal to the Vienna Symphony? REALLY? Much of the "pop" music barely even qualifies as music. A singer singing with pitch correction is singing?
Let's deal with the facts. You have just made an hysterical('beast/filthy) assumption that a person you dont know has caught paedophilia ,like a virus ,thru the internet. Without letting any facts of HIS case get in your way.He did wrong. I respect your right to be angry & to prefer Gary Glitter's music. He was condemned publicaly, internationally. His contact & warning to authorities was produced in court. I'll leave the moral judgments up to the 'God' types.
Pete’s always worth listening to.
seems to me that a lot of these comments made here are by people who simply don't want to pay for there music, petes right. how many of you would like to have your wages stolen after you had busted a gut to earn it all week.
I love everything Pete Townshend says here, but I think we all know that Apple isn't out there to help the artist. Apple is out to get money and MORE money.
I'm amazed that I agree with every point PT made in his lecture! I hope Apple finds their way to this video and actually considers some of the suggestions made here, but honestly, I don't think they give a f*ck about artists.
Elites only care about the next Adrenochrome fix.
Now, back in the 70's (i worked part time at a record store), some albums would get sold for little margin because there was incredible amounts of competition back then and that's why a lot or record stores went out of business. Then came digital downloads and a lot MORE record stores went out of business because people were opting for digital download versions which were sold cheaper than the physical copy. That, in a nutshell, was what was/is going on.
Yes good points.
Pete's the best mind in the music business .
He's talking about small and upcoming artists, not the ones like himself. He is spot on and as we've seen, Apple have had to move with the times and use the likes of Trent Reznor to change the format of iTunes is key to this progress...
Is there a link to the full lecture? I used to have the audio but lost it. This entire lecture is brilliant.
To understand this lecture is to understand what he meant to do with Lifehouse.
Brilliant and our only hope! thanks, pete!
I really liked what Pete had to say. He has some great ideas, IMO. Maybe if some of them were implamented, maybe we would have some good, new bands to look forward to... I just wish I could find the whole lecture...
can you give some examples. That might help me understand what you're getting at.
@donza01 The book deal is with Harper & Collins ,2012. Why dont you watch the website.
So positive ! So right !
@alvin01 2006, over half a decade ago actually.
BEFORE digital downloads, bands/artists sign record deals and they get fronted money per album, if the album gets released, then they produce CDs, DVD-A, SACDS, vinyl, etc. those cost money to produce, THEN they go to the distributor and THEY get a cut and they distribute these to the record stores and THEY mark up the product. But with digital downloads, they don't have the mfg costs involved, and they either go through a distributor or direct to iTunes and then iTunes takes a 30% cut.
Gimme a WOOT WOOT if you still watching in 2020!?!?😂 But seriously, I was saying, posting and blogging much the same in 2011. Now with streaming, the artist makes *even less* from the sale of their music. And unfortunately, the record industry that Pete is touting here has played along and continued to collect the wealth from artists, even without all of the benefits he mentions above. -And while I'm at it: GET OFF MY LAWN!
@petemarinovich1 why not bypass Itunes and publish yourself?
iTunes a fantastic piece of software? Mr. Townshend, surely you jest.
It was a foolish thing to say but I imagine it was an attempt to appear to be 'down with the kids' .
Seems tecnology is a kind of monster I'm still buy CD's and DVD's to be out of control and use it like now to find information.
Brilliant! 🍻
I can go through my understanding of DMCA laws because i have been reading up on this for the past 7 years because of someone violating my own copyrights and I have talked to attorneys on this. If the site (similar to CZcams) has someone posting content, the copyright holder has to contact the poster first. Then they have 14 days to pull it. If it is pulled within 14 days, that's UNWILLFUL intent. After 14 days, that's WILLFUL intent. Then they have to figure out the total number dl'd.
I'm a musician and know the industry in how it works. Personally, it is the consumer that's giving away free content that needs to be educated. Plus, the people are typically doing it are typically people with no money to spend on content.
If they don't want their content being given away, then they either have to put it on vinyl OR on DVD-A with encryption to lessen the problem. It will still happen, but to a lessor extent, but they will limit their demographic.
@bizthin --- i agree with him to a point. Bob Dylan's first album flopped in 1962, his next album "freewheeling" is to this day a masterpiece. he could have never made that album unless some Columbia record executives believed in his talent based on him preforming live in the village. Had Dylan dropped a few songs on iTunes in1962, his low sales would have made him poison. the who's "Tommy" couldn't be made without producer Lambert pushing Townsend to a grander vision of the work overall.
Pete townsend raises a vital point. Where did the manufacturing go in the uk record industry?
The 19 70s heyday was vinyl production but now nothing.
Extremely practical, quietly subversive, and potentially revolutionary advice from Mr Townshend....all of which will go in one ear and directly out the other ear of the people that need to act on this. We live in hope Pete.
I didn't say he has to put things on vinyl. I am just saying that putting things on vinyl will reduce or eliminate stuff being copied which reduces revenue for the record labels and artists. Apple is NOT taking money away from the artists, but the digital downloads are sold for LESS money than vinyl records and CDs, due to the cost to mfg is not there. Plus a digital file can be easily shared, thus reducing revenue and royalties for the artists...
Making vinyl was meant to be kinda humorous.
Peter Dennis Blanford Townshend a man for all generations!!!!!!!
Myself and some others I know have directly benefitted from the collapse of the old record industry model. For the first time, through the interweb, we are able to target our audiences and sell products. It is a more sustained and direct revenue source than was ever available before for lesser-known artists. However, I still like some of Pete's ideas. Aggregators are the new labels, and they often forget that THEY need bands, not the other way around.
Actually as a performer but also someone who worked in the "dying record business", there is no reason both can't exist.
Well, that's why they are shutting down these web sites. The woman was sued IN COURT for sharing over Kazaa or Limewire, I forget which one. The jury handed her a $9850 per song that she shared over so many downloads. They won't bother people unless they can tell if the number exceeded a fairly large amount. They didn't mention exactly how many the level was, but it was probably at least 100 downloads of a single song.
it's not flawed, it's REALITY. Some people PREFER the sound of vinyl.
@ChromeDestiny no music in 10 years ? the WHO released 'Endless Wire' about 3 or 4 yrs ago, a brand new album.
It's been a while since i took some economics classes, but if someone uses a theoretical concept to throw around to act like they are an expert, you better give some examples of what YOU think the point of production is and how it backs up Pete's idea rather than how it is currently being done.
Pete for President of iTunes!
Pete knows what he is talking about! :)
pete should set some label up
Radio transcripts music archivist preserve big band swing Duke Ellington In A Mellow Tone and Satin Doll Count Basis Band recorded in collaboration with Sinatra. Cheers Sir Peter
iTunes has been the worst piece of software ever coded since its beginning and never got fixed. To this day I hate the "music matched" replacements of my cherished original versions of songs with remastered (or worse - rerecorded) versions without wanting them, and all of the mismatched album art. It's 2021 and they still haven't fixed these. Thanks, Pete. You're one of my musician idols. But you're ever the idealist if you think Apple gives a rip.
Great points but what he's overlooking is that many of us are getting funded by fans now. it may not be enough to buy a home but Paypal and fans has made it possible for creative people to get stuff out there. The best film, art, music and comedy is going to be independently funded within about a decade-solely. Pete is really right on about copyright-that's the scariest because big budget mass marketers will strip mine ideas and few artists can afford to after them with attorneys.
I am both a performer and vet of the record biz. While amatuers like yourself can be funded by fans to get "stuff out there" may be a way of making $ enough to subsist, few can get a massive follow or the potential of a long career by crowdfund and Pete is 100% cotrect and you are a bit shortsighted. It may give you more control to Crowdfund, but the benefits Pete points out that were in existence at the labels are what is needed for a longterm career with a sustained following.
T Bone Burnett has been saying this for years . Right on Townsend .
Here is another reason why the music industry has a problem, people are not buying content as much because most of the content coming out these days isn't worth paying for. Very few artists are making albums where every song is worth listening to.
Renegade radio stations or stations off on ships lol
Obviously I am talking WAY above your head. How do recording artists make money? By selling records, DVDs, CD, SACDs, digital downloads. The record label passes on the royalties per the recording contract AFTER the record label has recouped any front money for each recording project and the applicable marketing/advertising. If Pete wants to make money, they he has to SELL more records and eliminate stolen (shared) content.
I objectively know what is good, and whatever you like isn't.
How does HIS opinion make business sense? Please explain how his would work in the first place? The only way these record labels can make money is by selling recordings for more money and eliminating shared content, which reduces the number of recordings sold.
It all comes down to integrity. If one lives their life giving away free content and they disregard copyright laws, they might themselves at the receiving end of a lawsuit. There was a woman that got nailed for over $200K for sharing content over Limewire I think it was. I'm sure she won't do THAT again. Record labels are coming down hard on those people. Apple is at least trying to make it legal, but the artist can choose to sell digital copies or not, or people will still rip the CD.
Now, if the person who posted the content DOESN'T pull the content and they notify the web site owner, THEY now have 14 days to pull content. If THEY take over 14 days, then THEY can get sued. That's my understanding of the law. If you are an attorney and know of a case that sets precedence other than what I have explained, let me know. But that's how the DMCA Revision 2 laws are stated and Safe Harbor only protects the web hosting company to a certain point. The DoJ is going after sites.
The only way I can see someone like Pete Townsend making more money is by first creating a SELLABLE CD for as little money as possible. THEN he should sell DIRECTLY through iTunes, and totally bypass the record label (he has enough money to pay for musicians, producers, engineers and studio time) and then HE has to market it. But since he doesn't want to get involved with the business end and hire people to do that, then he has to stick to the record label method and make better recordings.
@donza01 hahahaahahhah.oh yeah ,your right of course... Townshend worked/campaigned against abuse 40 yrs as was pointed out by his peers including David Putnum, Jerry Hall(I know ,so what.?Im simply pointing out She campainged with him against abuse agaisnt abuse & pointed this out to media when Townshends Story broke) the DOUBLE O' charity he ran,... & He's the same as 'Glitter' ?? ( Glitter who downloaded over 2000 abuse images & since travelled internationally & got arrested for same)
You are so clever...
Pete is correct. Part of the reason, we have the dearth of exciting music now is the greed of existing structures.
I deal with how it is CURRENTLY being done using the digital download method vs how it was done BEFORE the digital download method and how now they also have to deal with people not buying content, the legalities surrounding it, and how that effects potential sales. You are bringing up some words you looked up regarding some econ class you might have or are taking and applying a lot of nonsense to act like you know ANYTHING about business is done.
When Napster came into being, I knew the music industry was in deep trouble.
@bizthin Really, Elvis would make it today? Don't think so.
@ChromeDestiny um, you obviously aren't paying attention. Pete has released lots of music the in the last 10 years. So what if he's wealthy? he deserves to be. He earned it. Think and do research before you post mistruths and opinions instead of facts.
What does writing music and understanding music laws, how digital downloads work and how Apple makes money from iTunes sales and how it makes no sense for Apple to become a record label. I am not a song writer, but a musician that caught someone using and selling copies of my recorded performances over the internet illegally? I did have the crap pulled and he doesn't have an account with CD Baby and their affiliates.
Pete's opinion makes absolutely NO BUSINESS SENSE. PERIOD.
Pete can sell or NOT sell digital versions on iTunes or other digital download sites. That's HIS ultimate decision, NOT the record label's. Look at what the Beatles did. Once they got the copyright holders to sign a deal with the record label and Apple, then they could sell their catalog over iTunes, and because the Beatles are a LOT more popular than Pete Townsend, they sold a TON of product. Pete should focus on putting out music that's sellable and sell whatever format he chooses.
Hey Pete, if you don't like iTunes, then don't sell your music on that service. No one is putting a gun to your head.
Funny in a way, Apple used to be the record label of the biggest band in popular music. Now they're the label of everyone.
No, there are two different apples haha
@donza01 Do some research and don't make flippant comments. Pete Townshend was abused when he was a youngster, thats why on Tommy he asks John Entwistle to write 'Fiddle About' and 'Cousin Kevin'. These songs were about sexual abuse of youngsters. Pete felt he was unable to write these songs because of his own personal experiences. I remember reading that when he was arrested for viewing such material on the web a few years ago, he wanted to learn more about what happened to him as a child.
Haha 😂 and you bought his story? 👏 👏 👏 👏
CD BABY DOES NOT CHECK TO ENSURE THAT THE CONTENT THEY DISTRIBUTE IS ACTUALLY 100% LEGAL.
All this A&R nurturing stuff is a fairy tale. The scale of artists/bands today is too huge for it. There may be a glut of musicians, but there will never be a glut of great ones. The market wants great talent, not mediocre performers. Elvis would still make it today. He'd post a video on CZcams, it would go viral, he'd end up on the talk shows, get signed to a label-- or create his own label like Ani DiFranco if he were smart.
Perform well, and copyright your tunes! Apple's not yo mama!
AND make sure the composers get their MONEY! ... I´m sure YOU wouldn´t give your product away for nothing - so why should the composers?! ...fucking scandal!
from my experience many a&r people were drunks or just plain nuts,pete.but there are bloggers like heather browne whose opinion i value more highly than i would the expertise of virtually any cocaine snorting a&r man.i don't like itunes and i don't use itunes.i buy (lots of) cds and i share files.and it's not like stealing your son's bike.more like borrowing it.if i buy a painting,can other people look at it?if i buy a dvd,can i invite my friends over to see it?don't be so fucking greedy.
Apple isn't giving their work away for Free. They charge A RESONABLE amount of money and take a REASONABLE amount of profit. 30% is actually less than stores make from selling CDs. Apple spends a portion to maintain iTunes, Akamai delivery, etc. People are whether they buy the CD, or download it from Apple, WalMart, Target, Amazon, Google Play, Microsoft, etc., etc. The phenomenon of people giving away free copies started the day they put content on a CD. Apple had NOTHING to do with that.
Apple ITunes is a replacement for a physical record store. Does Apple charge any more than Amazon or any other download service? They only pocket a nickel for each song download. You want to know who the rip off company is? CD BABY.
I think you have some pretty powerful pot. It sounds like a bunch of meaningless words put in a sentence that doesn't make any sense.
point of production? What's that?
linking the artist with the audience in place of the worker and the point of production?
for recordings the search engine is one such a point which is at present is where the artist loses control due to the subjective nature of the maths?
I think you need either better pot or maybe you might want to stop smoking it altogether.
YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO COMPREHEND OR READ CAREFULLY.
What person did 4% of the internet traffic who the courts can't touch. Do you have article on this person that I can read about? I am interested in that.
But a women did get sued and jury DID hand her a $9850 per song violation and the total bill came to over $200K. That's what the record labels are doing. SUING for sharing content over the internet. The Statutory fines go up to $150K per song to the copyright holder for willful intent.
Let me ask you a couple of questions. 1. What does Apple have to do to prove that they care about the artists? 2. What's different between Apple ITunes and your local record store other than one is a physical building and one is an internet based store?
3. What's the role of a record label and what's the role of a record store? Are they the same?
Where is the book, Pete?
Another way to make more money is not spend so much money on production. Some projects have small or big budgets, if they don't run over budget and keep their production costs down and still retain high quality production, that can help if the final product really is sellable.
Then its a matter of getting their asses on tour to promote the content. If Pete spits out an album and doesn't tour or get on talk shows to promote it and they don't advertise it, then they might not get much sales.
@nosnhojriatsala The further away from iTunes and Apple the BBC stays, the better. The BBC needs to remain independent of monsters like Apple.
What would Apple possibly do to help the BBC?
Why should Apple be a record label when they are a retail download site?
Most people in society today do not buy the best music out there as a rule. The largest demographic are kids and young adults with little or no music education to figure out what is good or not. Hence, that's why we have so much garbage pop music. The record labels are just going by what the kids by and try to figure out the formula and spit it out until the next thing hits. That's why we have Justin Bieber, etc.
What does the search engine have ANYTHING to do with pete wanting apple to be a record label? What a search engine does is allows people to search through the catalog easy based on search terms rather than walking in a store and sifting through CDs manually. The artist NEVER has any control over how they buy and what they buy. They only have control over HOW they want it sold in terms of format and with what retail/digital download outlets.
Gotten all your works including your book for free at ThePirateBay for free Pete, sorry.
I'm poor, mind.
I'm at peace knowing that if I had an album of 9 "Hits" I'd only make money gigging it and only sparse peanuts from hard-copy sales or radio royalties.
(Note: Even the Dixie Chicks got screwed by Sony Inc. and had to sue and WIN to make back 10% of what they'd been screwed out of after the friggin' lawyers were paid-- that's right, the Judge didn't force Sony to pay the litigation fees.)
Try that approach at the local grocer, and see if they'll give you your items for free. I hate that anyone thinks they should get their music for free. You won't work for free?
Do you know how much Apple takes home in net profit after they pay the overhead for iTunes Music Store/iTunes App/marketing, advertising/legal/software developers/Akamai content delivery/taxes? About a nickel a song per download. That's not a lot of money per download, is it? They allow people to post and download podcasts for FREE. All Apple does is allows a place to have download content posted for sale/etc. on a widely used Internet Store, THAT'S ALL APPLE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR,
I can discuss practically ANY concept on a rational level as long as the other is also being rational and has a certain degree of understanding and abilities to grasp the actual situation at hand. How can an artist make more money in the entertainment industry?
1. Make better content certainly helps and that's based on the songwriting and production.
2. Marketing/advertising.
3. Cut down on illegal downloads.
4. Availability through various types of stores/sites that have high traffic.
Pete, just because you have a British accent, have tons of money, does not make you intelligent in terms of what Apple should do. They are NOT a record label, if you want them to replace a record label, then they'll take even more profit.
I personally think Pete has probably a certain amount of brain damage from too much partying. I think he is TOTALLY out of line thinking that Apple has to become a record label. That's NOT iTunes place. They are simply a digital version of a record store and that's it. The record labels post the content and between the two set the price and the margin and the record label decides if they want DRM protection or not and what bit rate.
I suggest you take some business classes that are more practical in the area of studying the entertainment industry, some Finance classes and understand WHY Apple would be STUPID to try to become a record label instead of a digital download on-line retail store. First, it's kind of conflict of interest because they would also have to sell the same content to their competitors like Amazon, Wal Mart, Target, etc. Plus they have ZERO competencies as a Record Label.
what i think Pete should be upset at and getting at the record labels for is hiring kids with no talent that can't sing that need AutoTune and Melodyne and sequenced drum tracks instead of real musicians and real singing. I stopped watching the Grammys years ago when they started giving awards to rappers.
This is an obscene demonstration of arrogance, greed and blatant untruths. What Townshend is oh so delicately proposing is closing the door on millions of independent artists who previously had no opportunity to sell their music as digital downloads, or be heard by any mass market. He wants to turn back the clock to a time when he had a much bigger piece of the pie. Has anyone else ever characterized the music labels as nurturing to artists? That's simply insulting. I once idolized this creep.
hardly 'arrogance, greed and blatant untruths'. look at modern music - because of the internet, theres no quality control, meaning that most music is shit. and, being born in the late 90s, i can tell you for certain that it has gone down the fucking pan. look at the charts ffs.
back in the day, you had to work your bollocks off to get your material heard and actually needed a little bit of talent to be noticed by anyone. then the record company hears your demo, likes it, signs you and puts you in a state of the art recording studio to record your first album. they would INVEST in you. then theyd put it out and, if it sold well, then you get to make a second album and so on.
these days, youre expected to have most of your album recorded/mixed/mastered before you even walk in through the door. thats going to be hard for someone that works on a building site and doesnt have the money or knowledge to do that (like myself)
because of these companies (itunes,youtube,spotify) all the money has been siphoned out of the music business leaving the record companies with a minuscule amount to invest, let alone operate. look at all the labels that went defunct or were bought out in the last decade.
and because of this lack of money we now have the cheapest produced/sounding music. look at all this autotuned crap we got in 2020. songwriters should rightfully get 'a bigger slice of the pie' because without them theres no records for the record companies to sell or music for us to listen to. dont expect good art to be produced without paying good money for it. common sense
and townshend aint no 'creep', hes a musical genius and has seen the post war music industry grow from the 50s right up until now. he knows what hes on about and is spot on because hes lived it. youre just a bit of an idiot really
He's gotta pay for those yachts somehow.
This was a total embarrassment. He rambled incoherently, spent far too long on complete irrelevancies and exhibited only a vague familiarity with the subject he was supposed to be dealing with. Well done BBC, talk about a waste of Licence Payers money...It was rivetting listening, but for the wrong reasons.
I've done a lot more in explaining how things work and why Pete Townshend is out of his mind thinking that Apple should be a record label.
You just brought up some theoretical econ terms that doesn't explain anything, except for our mentally challenged thought process which turns INTO mental masturbation because you don't grasp the situation.
@alvin01 Pete Townshend and websites? I would have thought he was in enough trouble, what with all the kiddie porn he downloaded!!
well, I don't think Apple is the reason why people like Justin is successful. Blame Google and CZcams for that. THe bottom line is that SOME of the people in the record industry like putting out crap. Why? because most kids don't study music, don't learn how to play an instrument, but is that Apple's fault? No. All they are doing is providing a "legal" and I use the term loosely, to sell digital versions of content because that's what the masses want.
Opinion driven? Who's opinion? Some teenager that doesn't study music? To someone that doesn't have a wide range of music they study? So you think that a garage band is equal to the Vienna Symphony? REALLY?
Much of the "pop" music barely even qualifies as music. A singer singing with pitch correction is singing?
Let's deal with the facts. You have just made an hysterical('beast/filthy) assumption that a person you dont know has caught paedophilia ,like a virus ,thru the internet. Without letting any facts of HIS case get in your way.He did wrong. I respect your right to be angry & to prefer Gary Glitter's music. He was condemned publicaly, internationally. His contact & warning to authorities was produced in court. I'll leave the moral judgments up to the 'God' types.
@alvin01 Meh. Pete Townshend. Gary Gitter. Two sides of the same coin. Filthy perverts. But at least Glitters music was good.