Rain

spacey
...album sales are up. Music sales are up.

 
How about numbers to back up the assertion? According to Billboard magazine it isn't. Overall Album Sales Drop 6.1%. Overall. Again see the link I posted in my previous reply.

I kinda think that this is big record companies upset that they are not getting the revenue flow they used to and that things like rap and other brands, are simply eating away at these record companies.
 
Billboard, I believe, is put together by these companies and conglomerates, and I have always thought that these numbers were always stretched towards THEIR product and not the reality of what is out there through the Internet, which at this point, no one knows really how much and how many and there are no "totals" to compare it to!

IMO, Always best to digest stats with a grain of salt more or less, whatever {burp}! 
 
Therefore, arguments over Albums vs Singles vs CD vs Vinyl vs Cassette, vs Sticks n Stones vs sales up vs down will no doubt lead to heated arguments; endless loopy tit-for-tats. Whatever the state of the music scene is now, is probably a byproduct due to the nature of the beast; The Internet, or otherwise known as the Wild West (scams, misinformation, thief)! 
 
The point is, the debates over conflicting stats derived from various sources all miss what is way, way, way (<--- repeat that a 1000x) more of a concern. To explain further – for example:  
 
1) "Streaming" is a worrisome trend for content creators (musicians/writers) due to the fact that content creators are quite frankly "getting screwed" i.e. the rate of payment per-stream in regards to most music sites (especially sites for musicians, fanned by musicians, gloated by musicians) are either non-existent (zero pay per-stream) or at best, woefully inadequate earnings. Brick n mortar stores are battling to stay afloat due to this trend (streaming, downloading) i.e. HMV a global premier brick n mortar retailer almost totally closed; luckily HMV has been saved (Hilco) $50 million deal: NEWS and to give another perspective for example scroll down to see #3 (and read my pervious post). That said; 
 
2) Major labels usually receive higher rates per-stream whilst pittance of rates paid to Independent Labels. That said; at the very least, unsigned bands are probably best registering their own label AND songs with SoundExchange and Collections i.e. ASCAP = US residents, as for anyone living outside the US, they should register with for example: APRA/AMCOS (Australia.) If already registered for example,  APRA/AMCOS and moving permanently to another country i.e. the US? Will already be listed with ASCAP, in that case; contact APRA/AMCOS to notify change of permanent residency.
 
3) Younger (teens) music lovers: Nowadays have iPads, (or Tablets) and phones (and earbuds), use sites such as YouTube. No doubt, YouTube is probably the most popular of all streaming sites. Sure, there is a lot of terrible audio quality on YouTube but the Y kids grew up listening to formats such as MP3 on crappy earbuds and mini desktop monitors or built-in laptop speakers. Actually, IF initially the video’s audio source produced @ 24bit/48 and then release on YouTube, the sound quality is much better compared to most other music sites.
 
The “possible” good news is that, it appears changes are underway for example; (although I'm not sure) Google plans to have two-tier accounts (YouTube) launched in the near future and what does that mean? I "guess" it means there will be subscription (paid) accounts and the usual free accounts. Sorry, I have only read a snippet about THIS. 
 
4) With section 1, 2, 3 said… What does this all this mean for content creators? It’s a wait and see what the heck will these changes be and how it will improve or worsen the situation for content creators (particularly independent bands/writers) and it’s also a wait and see what changes in the laws will do to improve what should be: “Fair Music Trade” in regards to: 
(A) Intellectual Property Rights   
(B) Licensing laws
(C) Fair Share: Increase payment per stream.
In regards to (A, B, C), IF the power’s that be finally get it right? This will benefit the economy and maintain a more profitable outcome for content creators, a much more worthwhile and profitable endeavor. However, I suppose I am being overly optimistic. 
 
There are other means for bands can make additional income for example; IMO in regards to the current affiliated/partner programs: It would be better to have non-obtrusive advertising such as; “Ticker Ads”, Clickable ads displayed between the video and player controls. This can also be adapted to audio players. For quite some time now, bands can opt-in (signup) to affiliate/partner programs and be paid per-ad displayed and additional pay per-click but full-size adverts are annoying - Although there are options to opt-out or not opt-in at all during the initial release of the music/video.
 
Please see my previous post: I explained IMO other reasons why “Singles” have become the dominant force over albums however, I am not saying that Albums are dead. IMO, CD-on-demand (i.e. Amazon) is a more sensible alternative especially for independent bands because there are no up-front fees for manufacturing however, of course there will be the retailers/sales fee …% commission deducted per sale.
 
-

Songcraft brings up some relevant data.  The one thing I would ad is that artists have always got the short end of the stick when it came to revenue from record sales. They have just found newer and sexier ways to screw them. A perfect example of the paradigm shift is an interview I read with a fairly popular artist who said he actually made more money by uploading (and technically bootlegging his own songs) his songs to file sharing sights that offered click based revenue sharing than via his actual record sales.

dubdisciple
Songcraft brings up some relevant data.  The one thing I would ad is that artists have always got the short end of the stick when it came to revenue from record sales. They have just found newer and sexier ways to screw them. A perfect example of the paradigm shift is an interview I read with a fairly popular artist who said he actually made more money by uploading (and technically bootlegging his own songs) his songs to file sharing sights that offered click based revenue sharing than via his actual record sales.

Agree. Yes, better ways to screw them; The Internet, is a double edge sword, the pros and cons I mentioned earlier. That is the sad reality of the music scene from a business perspective, the power's that be need to get up to speed. I mean seriously, the additional work (online) bands/artists do to earn an extra fist of pennies still doesn't quite float the boat. And not only bands/writers are having to charter shark infested waters in a leaky raft - brick and mortar stores are battling to keep their ship from sinking. 
 
To be signed to a major label deal does not necessarily translate to a good life, because nowadays it's a much more super-fast paced and stressful career... a lot of famous artists usually burn out by their middle age or earlier. So with all the money these artists are worth, what's the use of it all if the poor guy/girl ends up throwing him/herself off the deep end. 

Aww dang it, it's a mad world after all. Think I might create a virtual interactive 3D band called the iBots and get them signed to a major label (360 deal) the iBots will be working non-stop 24/7, 365 days a year LOL!! I'll be happy staying at home in my rocking chair with an iRemote and a very large bag of fresh popcorn.  

dubdisciple
Songcraft brings up some relevant data.  The one thing I would ad is that artists have always got the short end of the stick when it came to revenue from record sales. They have just found newer and sexier ways to screw them. A perfect example of the paradigm shift is an interview I read with a fairly popular artist who said he actually made more money by uploading (and technically bootlegging his own songs) his songs to file sharing sights that offered click based revenue sharing than via his actual record sales.

But there is one good side effect to all this ... all the conglomerates complained when the video tapes came out ... so what did a porno film do? Tell the theaters and their owners (the movie studios of course!) to stuff it, and by themselves, they create a "new business", for video, and it never died! It still thrives, hugely.
 
Copying a LP was impossible and when cassettes and the 8-tracks came out, the record companies immediately posted numbers that their sales went down, and that people were cheating and copying and not buying the LP.
 
So, we already know that "streaming" will have the same issues, and has had it, and it was a band called Metallica that helped make the "digital" download even more famous. Had they shut up, it probably would not have grown up as fast as it did, and make folks realize how easy it was ... this helped computer sales ... as well! And 10 years later, you can do it on your small phone on your hand!
 
The real problem is that the copyright laws are stuck to a process, not the artist! That means tomorrow's technology does not apply to you!
 
BTW, if you think this is bad, the movie studios, "own" the film, and no one, NO ONE, in those films has a right to anything except a big kick in the as$! Talk to Gayle about her fight with Warner Brothers for 200 Motels! She can't even release the album on it, because of it! That's how fudged up the whole copyright laws are! I would simply like to see the copyrights be strictly to the artist, but how do you do that in a film, when the cinematographer is the person that made the film good? Or the music? ... or one actor or actress, and the rest of the film is forgettable?
 
It's not as simple as we think! Albums, are just a part of it all as well!
 
And I still think that albums changed the way we listen to things, and distorted our music appreciation from the work itself (or person) to something else that has less to do with the person than it does with anything else that surrounds the art itself! Basically, you guys that play, are ALL getting robbed!

Moshkiae
 
 
BTW, if you think this is bad, the movie studios, "own" the film, and no one, NO ONE, in those films has a right to anything except a big kick in the as$!

 
That really depends on who put up the money to make the movie.