garywillis.com
future
schedule
slaughterhouse 3
bass
gwb1005
gwb35
setup
audio
cd downloads
discography
video
streams
links
print
101 bass tips
fingerboard harmony
ultimate ear training
the collection
archives
mtb
lessons
ask willis
the rest
press
links
|
 |

time for sharing
For a majority of a generation of people who are now mostly grown up, free music from the internet is now considered an unalienable right along with those dinosaurs free speech, freedom of the press, habeas corpus, personal privacy, etc. Anyone with access to a computer and the possession of a minimum of point and click skills can fill an iPod to overflowing without ever paying a dime. To give you and idea where I'm going with this, let's start with the terminology: "File Sharing" is the innocent sounding euphemism for what it really is: unpaid downloading. "P2P" translates to unauthorized uploads provided for unpaid downloading. Here's some interesting research:
According to a CBS News poll, nearly 70% of 18 to 29 year olds think that file sharing unpaid downloading is okay in some circumstances, and the 18 to 29 years olds are the age group that does the majority of the unpaid downloading.
The perception of music for free has many justifications and they all contain an element of truth. These are a few that I'm aware of:
- I'm getting back at the record industry, the man, etc.
- The artist is rich and can afford the loss of my little purchase.
- I'm a poor artist myself so I'm entitled to a break.
- The artist makes his money off concerts and touring so it's not necessary to pay for his music.
- I'm just browsing and if I like it I'll buy it.
- An MP3 is not full quality so it's not the real thing.
- I'm helping to promote their music by uploading to P2P networks where I've found music I never would have found otherwise.
Taken individually:
I'm getting back at the record industry.
While it's true that the record industry was and is corrupt and some form of punishment/protest is necessary to kill it. The RIAA's aggressive prosecution of dead grandmothers, elderly computer novices, a woman with multiple sclerosis, and even those without any computer at all is doing a fine job of killing itself without your help. A positive endorsement of a new business model is in order and artists like myself and many many others have gone to extraordinary lengths to provide the opportunity to purchase music directly. Unpaid downloading negates these efforts quite efficiently.
The artist is rich and can afford the loss of my little purchase.
I can only speak for myself and short of providing bank and credit card statements, you'll just have to take my word for it. I pretty much live month to month like most artists out there. I don't own property, assets, or any of those monetary instruments over $10,000 you always read about on the back of the customs forms you fill out when you return to the US. Also, do not take this as complaining - this is a lifestyle choice that comes with the freedom to make the kind of music I want and wouldn't trade for anything. My main assets are the intellectual property I've been responsible for creating or designing - music, books, bass guitars and one crappy video. The integrity of my book publisher (Hal Leonard) and bass manufacturer (Ibanez) have fortunately provided me with honest accounting and royalties that make the income form the record industry (money from actually creating music) laughable. Thankfully, my books and basses are not on any P2P network that I know of yet. The direct loss of the income from one encoded CD download is 10 Euros (almost $14). So basically, that's my lunch sitting there taking up space in your iPod. And yes, I'm trying to make you feel guilty.
I'm a poor artist myself so I'm entitled to a break.
This is one of the better ones. Still, bottom line is, I'm supposed to sacrifice my lunch (see above) and at the same time you get to keep your lunch money and you also have the added possibility of being inspired by my work. Still have an appetite?
The artist makes his money off concerts and touring so it's not necessary to pay for his music.
This is one from the man himself: Shawn Fanning - one of the original founders of Napster. So Shawn, if you're reading this - I wish you were with me and my bandmates during that one particular US tour. You know the one where the 4 of us in one van circumnavigated the North American continent for 7 weeks and ended up netting less than $300 a week. And that was before individual personal food and phone expenses. So as a creator of music, according to you, I'm sentenced to lifting bass amps, trap cases, my own luggage and driving an ungodly and unsafe amount of miles a day (that's right, that's the kind of tours you get with this kind of creative music) until I physically can't do it anymore. Oh yeah, there's no retirement plan for touring musicians - so I'm actually supposed to tour and live out of a suitcase away from my family for the rest of my life pretty much until I drop dead. Sure, I'll do it as long as you join me - you do have CPR certification, a drivers license and some other sort of useful skill like lifting equipment, right?
I'm just browsing and if I like it I'll buy it.
It would be great if that was true. But the numbers don't agree. Back when the Supreme Court was deciding the Napster case and it was about to shut down. There was a huge surge in downloading - everyone was grabbing everything they could before they were left having to look elsewhere to find it, which of course, they did and continue to do. Unpaid downloading has become such a casual activity specifically because the consequences for the artist are never taken into account or discussed. Every artist that goes to the trouble and expense of providing direct purchases also provides samples of each tune for this specific browsing purpose. Putting off the decision to buy even if you have good intentions is not a good enough justification.
An MP3 is not full quality so it's not the real thing so it's not really stealing.
That's why MP3's are priced less. An MP3's intended listening environment is a car or earphones where the ambient noise pretty much eliminates any advantage of listening to CD-quality encoding.
I'm helping to promote their music by making it available to P2P networks where I've found music I never would have found otherwise.
This is the old "internet as radio" comparison. Like all of these justifications, there's an element of truth involved. Still, getting more music onto more iPods is still not the same as the one-time listening experience that you get with radio. It's great in theory but it doesn't have any real world evidence for me. If it were true, then my personal music royalty income and direct sales income would easily eclipse book and bass royalties, but the numbers don't lie. It's true, a cassette tape of music off of FM was an early form of "unpaid downloading" but that doesn't make it any more ethical. For the majority of mainstream music artists out there, more unpaid downloading does mean more exposure which translates to more "buzz" which, because of the Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Amazon machinery - translates to more sales, radio airplay, concerts and eventually more income. That's why most major artists don't take a stand against downloading because their peripheral income machinery is greased with the unpaid downloading phenomena.
- - - - -
The old business model for the record industry started its slow death about a decade ago. Since the music I make has always been at the fringe of the traditional record industry, I'm more than happy to see it go. Unfortunately, a new improved version doesn't seem to be functioning any better.
It takes only a small degree of intellect to grasp the supply and demand logic of the situation: The supply of unique music in the marketplace is not infinite. In order to perpetuate the availability of a product, its producers need support. Unauthorized uploading and unpaid downloading weakens the already flimsy support system that exists for music that's not mainstream.
Another byproduct of the "music should be free" generation is that the consideration of music as something that's "disposable" has increased exponentially. Since there's no exchange taking place, the value placed on owning a piece of music is not accompanied with any sense of paying for it or a sense of earning the right to own. The experience of being personally invested in your own music catalogue is now absent from a whole generation.
In the old business model, artists like myself struggled with the expense of hiring lawyers to look over contracts that we signed with record labels, naive in the belief that the other side would keep up their part of the bargain. Still, it was eventually with tacit resignation that you could expect to get screwed and you tried to get as much money up front as possible in order to create incentive for the record company to market and sell your work. The new model is much more abstract in that there's no contract with all the anonymous downloaders out there. But still, the same sense of resignation is required to do business in the Record Industry 2.0 business model.
With the overwhelming acceptance of unpaid downloading, it really isn't going to matter whatever new, convenient, ethical delivery system is provided. People seem to be determined to get their music for free. Fringe musicians like myself are facing an ethical vacuum that really calls into question the sacrifices necessary to continue a life of artistic creativity weighed against the sobering austerity that the marketplace participants (i.e. you, and Shawn and all the other downloaders) are asking us to accept.
I don't pretend to think that my contribution to this discourse will make even the smallest .001% dent in what seems to have evolved into a permanent online condition. And I also don't intend for it to be misconstrued as a cry for help. Mainly, in all the discussions that I've read, the voice of the individual artist seems to be the one most absent. And finally, I would like to use this opportunity to personally thank and congratulate the many that have contributed to the perpetuation of creative music by direct purchases on mine and other artists sites.
|
 |
|
Thank you.
hero hero hero
All the best, Michael
I have passed the link of the blog to my friends, I hope it helps... thanks for it
Serg
Right now there is a program that’s called Emule that is similar to Napster. I know of it because I have lots of friends that use it, and say all of the excuses that Gary mentioned. I prefer to just surf youtube and/or search on artistdirect.com to look at the new stuff and buy it if I like it.
Keep the good work and the great blog Gary!!!
take care, Franklin
I'm so glad I'v got his CDs almost from "his hands" and pay for it "almost on his pocket".
That's the way ! No one actually needs any "music industry" stuff.
actual fiction = actual money 4 actual stuff.
Keep on Gary ! You make the world a better place...
I'm so glad I'v got his CDs almost from "his hands" and pay for it "almost on his pocket".
That's the way ! No one actually needs any "music industry" stuff.
actual fiction = actual money 4 actual stuff.
Keep on Gary ! You make the world a better place...
Yeah. What are you stupid? I just heard the name Gary Willis because someone linked to your blog. I still haven't heard your music but could by clicking your links up there. I have discovered TONS of music by downloading a sample song.
When you stretch the truth to fit your narrow view, you remove any credibility your arguments may have had.
Yeah. What are you stupid? I just heard the name Gary Willis because someone linked to your blog. I still haven't heard your music but could by clicking your links up there. I have discovered TONS of music by downloading a sample song.
When you stretch the truth to fit your narrow view, you remove any credibility your arguments may have had.
-Uriah Duffy
i know how it is, since i have seen my new CD with my band aghora already on a certain russian site whom, i wont name here.
im not supposed to go crying online about the harsh realities of music as a biz , but i will here, since you made light of the truth and topic.
IM BROKE!!! its so very hard to sell CDs and dvds. my solo bass cd is on itunes, i think ive sold 6 or less "cds" ever on there. and my new bass double dvd i made, which took days .... i have sold a whopping 2 copies. im ready to throw the basses off of my balcony at this point.
anyway,
im happpy, since i have tried to or have "supported" you the "real way" * i have every tribal tech CD ! * not download... i have 1 solo cd of yours, and your bass gwb1.
i also bought your video tape. prog basssics back in the day.
im glad you made this blog.
its so true.
the artists who we idolize, are often just as broke as ourselves. or worse.
i know what eating 15 cent ramen noodles is like let me tell you .
i wanted to ask you, is living in espana europe more money then in santa fe ?
i would imagine so...
good luck to you and even tho id love to go to see your clinic in atlanta, i dont think i will have the money to rent a car and make it. 8- 10 hours away
peace, alan goldstein
myspace.com/alangoldstein
Take care
Franklin
Sincerely,
Roger Mills
cheers,
John
I 'd like to share my experiences with downloading:
from time to time I search for new reviews of my own records on the internet.
While doing this I found out that somebody put my newest record "Tritone Barrier" for FREE on a sharing site!! This was announced in a blog on a site for Jazzrock fans and this
is why I post my opinion here. I was very disappointed because the life of an artist andmusician like me is really not easy concerning record companies, marketing, selling cds ,
etc... I spent a lot of money, time and efforts to make a record like this and I paid almosteverything on my own!
And now, about 3 months after the release, the cd is available for free on the internet??
Maybe the guy who did this did not consider the problems that this can cause.Hey man,this is really not the right support for independant musicians!
I know how easy it is to find cool records on the internet and I think most people do not think of the things that I mentioned before, but please support the artists you
love and BUY their records! Otherwise we will no longer be able to do cool records ...and I think Iam not alone with my concerns.....
Maybe it's the wrong place here to discuss this and share my opinion, but it's a
topic that is in my heart and very important for the future of a lot of great musicians on
this planet. We do not have big record companies with a big budget! We pay every studio day, musician, cover work, etc.. with OUR OWN MONEY!
And one more thing: in 99% you can buy the records directly from the artists
website for a reasonable price...this would be a real support....
please reconsider...if you have to...
kind regards,
Gerald Gradwohl
I 'd like to share my experiences with downloading:
from time to time I search for new reviews of my own records on the internet.
While doing this I found out that somebody put my newest record "Tritone Barrier" for FREE on a sharing site!! This was announced in a blog on a site for Jazzrock fans and this
is why I post my opinion here. I was very disappointed because the life of an artist andmusician like me is really not easy concerning record companies, marketing, selling cds ,
etc... I spent a lot of money, time and efforts to make a record like this and I paid almosteverything on my own!
And now, about 3 months after the release, the cd is available for free on the internet??
Maybe the guy who did this did not consider the problems that this can cause.Hey man,this is really not the right support for independant musicians!
I know how easy it is to find cool records on the internet and I think most people do not think of the things that I mentioned before, but please support the artists you
love and BUY their records! Otherwise we will no longer be able to do cool records ...and I think Iam not alone with my concerns.....
Maybe it's the wrong place here to discuss this and share my opinion, but it's a
topic that is in my heart and very important for the future of a lot of great musicians on
this planet. We do not have big record companies with a big budget! We pay every studio day, musician, cover work, etc.. with OUR OWN MONEY!
And one more thing: in 99% you can buy the records directly from the artists
website for a reasonable price...this would be a real support....
please reconsider...if you have to...
kind regards,
Gerald Gradwohl
I 'd like to share my experiences with downloading:
from time to time I search for new reviews of my own records on the internet.
While doing this I found out that somebody put my newest record "Tritone Barrier" for FREE on a sharing site!! This was announced in a blog on a site for Jazzrock fans and this
is why I post my opinion here. I was very disappointed because the life of an artist andmusician like me is really not easy concerning record companies, marketing, selling cds ,
etc... I spent a lot of money, time and efforts to make a record like this and I paid almosteverything on my own!
And now, about 3 months after the release, the cd is available for free on the internet??
Maybe the guy who did this did not consider the problems that this can cause.Hey man,this is really not the right support for independant musicians!
I know how easy it is to find cool records on the internet and I think most people do not think of the things that I mentioned before, but please support the artists you
love and BUY their records! Otherwise we will no longer be able to do cool records ...and I think Iam not alone with my concerns.....
Maybe it's the wrong place here to discuss this and share my opinion, but it's a
topic that is in my heart and very important for the future of a lot of great musicians on
this planet. We do not have big record companies with a big budget! We pay every studio day, musician, cover work, etc.. with OUR OWN MONEY!
And one more thing: in 99% you can buy the records directly from the artists
website for a reasonable price...this would be a real support....
please reconsider...if you have to...
kind regards,
Gerald Gradwohl
However, there came a point where there were a few albums that I liked but couldn't afford or "didn't like enough to buy", and that's where my principles were compromised, as these not quite good enough to buys began to overtake the ones I bought or deleted.
So even good intentions go wrong. The vast majority of myspace pages give you enought to sample, and record shops usually allow you to listen to see if you like the music. If that's not enough and you still feel the need to download, you don't like the music enough, so leave it alone.
Cheers all,
Tim
There are, however, a couple of cases where file sharing might be ok. First is if someone gives some music to another as a taster. It could be someone who has never got into a genre of music. As things stand they're not in the market but might change their tastes if exposed something new.
The second case I can think of is DVD's that are coded by region. Why should someone in Europe be denied access to an American region DVD? Possibly file sharing is marginally justified in this case.
But what is really wrong here is the way our society is obsessed with materialism and market exchange.
A far more advanced and civilised method would be to share cutlural and intellectual products without thought for a financial return. On the other side of the coin the role of the musician, artist, etc would be respected and honoured with gifts. This is a method common in many traditional cultures and you see it emerging to a very limited extent today under materialism.
When you dig down below the surface the fundamental reality here is that recent technological develepments (the IT revolution) have transformed basic economic relationships. Now the cost of producing an extra unit (CD, DVD, software copy) is effectively zero. However, instead of this being the means for making stuff available much more cheaply we have got a whole generation of parasites eg. the music industry. whose only input is to find clever ways of locking up products and charging for the keys. This is just not efficient use of technology and understandably provokes a reaction. File sharing of course does not in any way answer the problem because it is a totally one sided response. Taking without giving just because you can get away with it might be a defining virtue in a the materialist world but it is a very primitive response.
Instead what we need to do is take on board everything that Gary is saying and stop ripping off musicians and other artists while at the same time reducing to an absolute minimum our support of outdated ripoff systems like the music industry. It doesn't take a huge amount of imagination and effort to find ways of doing that.
As a final suggestion I propose that anyone reading this blog who feels their conscience challenged by what Gary and others are saying send some money to an artist they respect. There's no law against doing that only a deep rooted belief there has to be exchange in an economic relationship.
An MP3 is not full quality so it's not the real thing so it's not really stealing.
That's why MP3's are priced less. An MP3's intended listening environment is a car or earphones where the ambient noise pretty much eliminates any advantage of listening to CD-quality encoding.
Ok, first of all, MP3's are not priced less. .99 cents per track equates to the same amount you'd pay in most stores.
And second, MP3's are not solely or even primarily intended for portable devices. You have to store them on some computer in order to even put them on a portable device! I suppose Gary will tell me that home theater computers, Apple TV, WinAmp and iTunes software packages exist for no reason at all?
No. I would be willing to bet more people listen to mp3's on computers than portables. And yes, the sound quality is NOT the same, the REAL reason mp3's are popular is because of the cross-platform capabilities and also for ease of use - no more bulky plastic cd's, jewel cases, etc. Plus it's much less interactive - you don't have to constantly switch physical media, just make a playlist or randomize your entire library.
Point of all this is, even though we get less quality, we're STILL paying physical media prices even though these companies no longer have to pay for media, pressing, shipping, printing or anything.
And even when we DID pay for all those things and bought physical media we were still getting screwed! Record companies jack up the cost on an order of magnitude just out of sheer greed and because they could.
But now they're losing their grip and they don't like it. Too bad. With the advancements in technology & communication like social networks, mp3's & global internet connectivity we now have a solid channel for distribution and promotion. We no longer need these leeches to promote artists.
And mp3's just happen to be the catalyst for this change. Viva la MP3!
If anyone wants to read the truth about what's going on in the record industry, I suggest that everyone take a look at the facts:
http://www.azoz.com/music/features/0008.html
cause these days u have so much choice that u are not able to concentrate,Attention deficit disorder like they say.
if u buy 1 cd in 1 week, u r able to enjoy the whole music and the experience, and are able to absorb the vibe,
this whole downloading thing actually sucks
cause its killing the way listen to music.
But yeh i dont give a damn about some american idol or britney spears crap.
Consider the fact that we would never have had any Beatles records after "Help". No "Rubber Soul" no "White Album". And now consider all of the art that will never get made because the artist simply could no longer eat or house themselves and still create it.
This ought to be a very simple equation, if you like something and use it, you should buy it. Vote with your pocketbook and artists you enjoy will continue to make music you enjoy.
No matter what you call it, it's just stealing. Just because technology has made it easy to steal and difficult to get caught, it is no less stealing.
And I guess that is the moral standard in the world today. If you can't be caught and it saves a measly $15, people will sell their souls. The current price of integrity is about $15.
Steve
So this is where my dilemma comes in. I do have the disadvantage of enjoying quality music. I confess it. And in order to listen to good music, I can't rely on the major media.
So well, let's by CDs. So the typical Brazilian will head to a music store and begin searching for a (lets say) Pink Floyd - The Wall. It's quite an ordinary find in any music store. Well, not always in Brazil.
But let's say we do find one. So I check the price willing to buy it. Here comes the bad part. I once thought of buying it. I went to a few music stores and found this "The Wall". Lets get into money now. The price I found was 100 reais (our currency). In dollars, it would cost something around U$65,00.
However, if you look at the Brazilian minimum wage, we are talking about 400 reais. Simply put, a Pink Floyd CD costs 1/4 of our minimum wage.
Imagine if you had to pay 1/4 of the American minimum wage for Pink Floyd's The Wall.
I'm not trying to convince you of anything, however, I'm sharing the problems we have in other countries, poor ones. Believe, there are thousands of people avid for good music in Brazil and other countries alike, we like to buy CDs when we can, to have the real deal. However, we can't do it all the time.
Should these people be completely ignorant about Pink Floyd then?
How can such thing be solved?
But just complaining about it unfortunately isn't going to change a thing. The way we make our living through music is undergoing a major paradigm shift, and I'm afraid we will all have to simply find alternate ways of making money in the future.
"Would you like fries with that?"
So you have my support to buy your music, book, and concert, master class.
you done a fantastic works
I love your music
Philippe Beurier (France)
Pay for the music you want, that is true support to good musicians, and Gary is a tremendously good one!!!!