RA: Month to Month - Analysis of Vinyl and Techno...hmmmm

[Martin Dust]

Sure, there's no one rule for all things but could those two releases not have benefitted even more from a mixed format release?

I think making music available in the formats that people want to buy them in just makes good sense. I don't really understand why labels refuse to supply a demand for their music. I can't see who it benefits or protects.

People just resort to filesharing to meet the need, so the artists and labels lose out on the revenue and the exposure. Seems counterproductive to me.

Because they don't want to, it's as simple as that, not everyone wants to conform to a general accepted point of view.

Sometimes it's just the right thing to do, just say NO to mass production and other peoples desires ;)

[rhythmtech]

People just resort to filesharing to meet the need, so the artists and labels lose out on the revenue and the exposure. Seems counterproductive to me.

exactly.. pounding grooves for example - lawrie, for whatever his reasons, doesnt do digi.. unfortunatly you can get the entire pounding grooves back catalogue as 320kps on any p2p site. if you run a search for labels that do digi the results are fewer!

[Martin Dust]

if you press 1000 of a vinyl, that means (illegal downloads and copies not included) that legally only 1000 people should have that track. we all know that more people will download it so y not release it digitally yourself and possibly recoup some oof the vinyl expenses so that the next release can be done and the one after that.

If only it was that simple, if you can't sell a 1000 records you shouldn't be pressing that many, and most techno labels recoup very little off downloads.

i just did.

I don't see how you really can and expect me to take it seriously.

like i said, meet some new people.. i know plenty of people that love techno and always ask what a certain track is and where they can get it. i say you can oreder the vinyl online and they dont want to know. cost, shipping etc.. and most people dont have a turntable anyway.

i dont know where you stand on the digi issue but surely making your music more available to a wider audience is a good thing? or have i suddenly stepped into bizzaro world?

What are you on about? Meet some new people.....This isn't about me.

[Martin Dust]

exactly.. pounding grooves for example - lawrie, for whatever his reasons, doesnt do digi.. unfortunatly you can get the entire pounding grooves back catalogue as 320kps on any p2p site. if you run a search for labels that do digi the results are fewer!

That's his choice tho and you have to accept the fact that some people wont pay for anything, regardless of how available it is.

[Jay Pace]

Because they don't want to, it's as simple as that, not everyone wants to conform to a general accepted point of view.

Sometimes it's just the right thing to do, just say NO to mass production and other peoples desires ;)

To an extent I can understand this....

Maserati could make a cheap sports car for everyone and sell hundereds of thousands, but they choose to sell in tiny numbers to people who are passionate enough about them to pay crazy money. Not the greatest analogy, but some of it holds up.

So sure, labels can opt not to release digital because they aren't interested in their product being bought or played that way. Seems a bit weird to me - but I suppose if the label has a ethos they are committed to, and have artists who support that ethos its their collective decision. And on that basis they aren't missing a trick, they're opting not to take it.

Fair enough if people want to go down that route. Guess you'd have to be doing pretty well financially though to turn down money for your music. I don't know many artists who wish they'd sold less music and made less money...

[Martin Dust]

Fair enough if people want to go down that route. Guess you'd have to be doing pretty well financially though to turn down money for your music. I don't know many artists who wish they'd sold less music and made less money...

Your looking at this completely wrong Jay, not everything and everyone is about £££.

And you say you don't know anyone, well we've just finished our tracks for DS93 005, I'm going to sell less, make less money but produce a hand finished 12", rubber stamped, hand numbered with a screen printed sleeve and when I have it in my hands I'll be happy.

[rhythmtech]

If only it was that simple, if you can't sell a 1000 records you shouldn't be pressing that many, and most techno labels recoup very little off downloads.

by that thinking a lot of the most respected labels should hang up their gloves? and there is money to be made on downloads but limiting yourself to 1 or 2 download sites, like some lables do, isnt going to get you very many sales

I don't see how you really can and expect me to take it seriously.

ok i'll give you that one

What are you on about? Meet some new people.....This isn't about me.

its about all of us and i see it everywhere.. im just back from poland where they knew nearly every track we played out there.. there was actually people singing along (THE HORROR) during davethedrummers set. these werent people that dont give a **** about techno but the majority would much rather buy a download than a vinyl.

im sure in a few years there'll be some new magical medium and we'll all have to readjust again.. its the way of the industry isnt it?

[Martin Dust]

by that thinking a lot of the most respected labels should hang up their gloves? and there is money to be made on downloads but limiting yourself to 1 or 2 download sites, like some lables do, isnt going to get you very many sales

They probably should anyway :)

Your point about 1 or 2 sites is also incorrect, you'll make most of your money on the big 3 only (itunes/beatport/bleep), you'll make very little on the small players, enough for a pack of fags, probably.

its about all of us and i see it everywhere.. im just back from poland where they knew nearly every track we played out there.. there was actually people singing along (THE HORROR) during davethedrummers set. these werent people that dont give a **** about techno but the majority would much rather buy a download than a vinyl.

Not in Poland they don't, they don't pay for **** all. Real CD's only sell for two euros because of bootlegged out there is so bad and guess where all the illegal sites are hosted.

I think your confusing a few things, they care about having a good time, they certain don't care about buying pucker stuff and supporting the artist that way, they where probably singing "Hey Dave, I got your whole back catalogue for 15 Cents" :)

im sure in a few years there'll be some new magical medium and we'll all have to readjust again.. its the way of the industry isnt it?

I don't think we will, people have had enough of formats in general. The industry is ****ed, so pass me my violin.

[Jay Pace]

Your looking at this completely wrong Jay, not everything and everyone is about £££.

You could release it on betamax wrapped in raw silk if you wanted, or limit your release to 100 hand carved solid gold plates. If thats what does it for you cool, not griping its a passion and unique and individual preference and all that.

Where it gets a little weird - is when people start complaining that people won't buy their music in the format they want them to. They won't buy vinyl/betamax/solid gold discs and instead just get the music in whatever format suits them best, legitimate or not.

People moan about the state of the industry, vinyl sales and the fickle public, but then they deliberately choose to solely cater for an increasingly niche audience. If thats their intention then good luck. If not, they've got not really got a valid reason to moan.

[Martin Dust]

You could release it on betamax wrapped in raw silk if you wanted, or limit your release to 100 hand carved solid gold plates. If thats what does it for you cool, not griping its a passion and unique and individual preference and all that.

Now you're just exaggerating :)

Where it gets a little weird - is when people start complaining that people won't buy their music in the format they want them to. They won't buy vinyl/betamax/solid gold discs and instead just get the music in whatever format suits them best, legitimate or not.

People moan about the state of the industry, vinyl sales and the fickle public, but then they deliberately choose to solely cater for an increasingly niche audience. If thats their intention then good luck. If not, they've got not really got a valid reason to moan.

I aint moaning, I ****ing love it.

[djshiva]

Why? Does it actually exist? Weak argument, if you want a big audience, if that's what it's all about, join a ****ing boy band.

well it's the chicken and the egg argument here tho, isn't it? does the wider audience exist to market the music to? CAN the wider audience exist without wider accessibility of the music? ad infinitum...

it's not about giving into some boy band commercialization notion. it's about understanding how you can keep your music fresh and even (dare i say it) underground, bypassing the common notion of "big labels" and still being able to get your music into the hands of people who love it, using a method that can still stay separate from the "big music business" mentality.

like i said, if it weren't for the digital option, right now my poor ass wouldn't be buying ANY music. and i ask you, from a purely logical (and not emotional) standpoint, which is better? all vinyl, no digital, and less music sold, meaning more money lost and less good music heard...or digital <i>options</i>, music sold, tunes played, people happy, musicians making something for their work, labels surviving to put out more music?

you say it's not about money, but martin, let's face it...if you can't pay rent or put food on the table, music becomes secondary to survival. and i know most musicians have day jobs, and aren't trying to get rich, but the ability to at least make a little scrilla off their work is nice. and frankly, if the labels are not making sales, they won't survive. so sales are, at some point in this debate, very relevant.

i WANT to buy the music. i want the musicians to get paid. i want the labels to survive. now i have more options. sure i want to see vinyl survive, but in all honesty, it's more important to me that the MUSIC survives.

at the end of the day, it's all soundwaves bouncing off of eardrums. how they get transported there is less important to me than the fact that they do.

[RDR]

Here's something else to add fuel to the fire

http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archiv..._true_fans.php

[Martin Dust]

like i said, if it weren't for the digital option, right now my poor ass wouldn't be buying ANY music. and i ask you, from a purely logical (and not emotional) standpoint, which is better? all vinyl, no digital, and less music sold, meaning more money lost and less good music heard...or digital <i>options</i>, music sold, tunes played, people happy, musicians making something for their work, labels surviving to put out more music?

The only answer I can give it what I've already stated, I do what I believe is right for the project/music, that's what comes first to me, not consumerism.

[Martin Dust]

Here's something else to add fuel to the fire

http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archiv..._true_fans.php

Alan Oldham said that way back in the day, it's an interesting theory and one that does work.

[RDR]

Alan Oldham said that way back in the day, it's an interesting theory and one that does work.

Its a bit long winded but a really good read (IMO of course... I AM a nerd afterall)

[SlavikSvensk]

i don't really see why there's even a vinyl versus digital debate. why debate? there's no "right" answer, just different advantages and disadvantages.

and for the record, i sincerely doubt techno will ever reach as wide an audience as it did 10 years ago. but that doesn't mean it can't still sell well (on either format) or be relevant.

[TechMouse]

There seem to be a lot of conflicting stances in this thread, and I think the point is getting lost.

I don't think that anybody is saying that label X is stupid not to release digitally because they're missing out on money / fame / kudos / whatever. The argument is that by refusing to release digitally you're essentially flipping off the vast majority majority of people in the world who don't own a set of decks (or even a hi-fi turntable for that matter).

It's a vanishingly small minority of people in the world that even have vinyl listening facilities, much less buy vinyl with any regularity. So are you saying that most people don't deserve to listen to your music? If they really cared they would save up and get some decks?

I dunno, that just seems like an odd attitude to me.

I totally get where Martin is coming from - he makes music for himself; the finished product is an end in of itself; there is no drive for profit - and I totally respect that, but I don't think this is about maximising revenue or compromising ideals. It's about not excluding most people from what you do.

[djshiva]

The only answer I can give it what I've already stated, I do what I believe is right for the project/music, that's what comes first to me, not consumerism.

ok, let me qualify by saying that i am not about consumerism or the idea of music as "product" any more than you are, i think. and please know that all of my questions are more about hearing different sides, and not necessarily about being right about any of it (since i don't think a "right" answer exits).

let me then ask you this: as someone who has been a musician all my life, who eats sleeps shits breathes music, who wants to see good music recognized and valued, who wants to see musicians and artists' work valued, who does NOT want to see the music cheapened or turned into disposable crap (and i do think there is some validity to the idea that the abundance and availability of digital music COULD contribute to its disposability, so that is an argument i actually recognize has some merit)...as a person who loves music more than anything on this planet, how exactly is it BAD that i can afford to access the music easier now?

know too, that i do recognize the value of hunting down that elusive record, the process, the goal, the overwhelming joy of finding what i have been searching for, and the feeling i get from having really had to work to find it. i am from a small town in indiana originally, and i had to drive at least 2 hours or more to go record shopping when i first started buying electronic music. i KNOW all about the search and the dedication of working to find the music. and i know that i really appreciated what i had after that process. that said, it cost me SO much to engage in this process, and even though that process has been made easier by online record shopping, i have been working in the non-profit field for years, and trust me, it pays a pittance. i may not have to go through the exact same process to find music now, but i still hunt every day for good tunes. i am still picky as hell, and i still listen to hundreds of bits of music, and still only buy a handful that i believe are the top of the heap, just like i did when i was record shopping. ;)

so my question is basically this (and i know you have every right to dictate the terms of how your own label works, i am not questioning that):

even though you do have the right as a label owner to dictate the terms of how the music is presented, does a DJ/fan/afficianado not have any room to have a say in how they get to listen to it? because i cannot afford to buy records (or let's say i am not a dj, but just someone who loves techno and wants to listen to it), am i then to just accept the fact that i cannot hear brilliant releases because i cannot afford it/have the wrong player format?

what possible good can come out of a music afficianado being told that they cannot hear good music because of money or format issues? is this really about the idea of consumption? is it about product? is it about music? is there something inherently good or bad with increased accessiblity? i am genuinely asking. i don't necessarily think there is a right or wrong to all of this, or that i have the answers, but i am very interested in intelligent discussion about it. so please don't take this as an attack. it's more me trying to understand different people's viewpoints about it and spur some good discussion. :)

[Martin Dust]

Shiva is the crux of what you're saying is that you believe you have a "right" to access "good" music regardless of what the label/artist decides?

[Martin Dust]

It's a vanishingly small minority of people in the world that even have vinyl listening facilities, much less buy vinyl with any regularity. So are you saying that most people don't deserve to listen to your music? If they really cared they would save up and get some decks?

I dunno, that just seems like an odd attitude to me.

Vinyl sales are up so I don't think that statement stands and it's not me who's saying people don't deserve to hear the music, that's a really odd statement, I don't have duty to do anything other than what I wish. Music has never been a democracy by its very nature and on some projects I do the end product is final, like a painting. You may think it's odd but that's the way we work.