On tour
Concert coverage often includes a phrase saying a particular band is "on tour to support its new album."
In an age when many listeners prefer buying songs piecemeal on iTunes, album sales aren't what they used to be.1
However, concerts revenue is immune from digital file sharing. While listening to a downloaded MP3 is pretty darn similar to listening to a full-price CD, there's no shortcut to an in-person concert experience.
Thus, bands shouldn't be on tour to support their new albums. Bands ought to release CDs to support their tours.
Instead of traveling around the country to drum up business for a new CD, bands should put out new CDs in order to rally support for its upcoming concert tour.
1It's more complicated than that. Sales for the top artists are doing just fine, thank you. But I'm simplifying things here. Don't make me get bogged down with details.
8 comments:
dl004d, you hit the nail on the head with the new business model in the music industry. Recordings are simply promotional tools for artists these days. Recorded music, whether distibuted by physical means like CDs or via digital media like .mp3s, no longer provides sustainable income for artists. Instead those $.99-per-track recordings promote performers who can charge $75 for a concert ticket on tour. Except for a handful of top-tier artists, this new model applies in both the pop and classical realm. The record labels have been loathe to adjust, while the concert promoters like ClearChannel have been able to cash in.
So the language you reference is completely opposite of what is happening. It's like an author saying they are writing a book to promote their appearances on talk shows.
Albums, in whatever form, have rarely provided sustainable income for artists in the pop realm.
Most bands never recoup the money the label has lent them to record, film videos and promote the record, so touring (and t-shirt sales) have for years been how the vast majority of non-superstar artists make a living.
So while some reviewers may write that a band is touring to support its new album, that's never technically been true. Artists tour in connection with new albums -- new album equals fresh material to play live -- but albums, and singles before them, have generally always been tools used to get gigs.
My favorite thing ever by Steve Albini (okay, his work with Nirvana, the Pixies and PJ Harvey is pretty good. And his band Shellac kinda rocks), is this article pointing out the flaws in the music industry and how the biz tries to rip off bands. Just reinforces what ed002d said about how bands rarely recoup the money.
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
However, my band, Twin Earth, will be playing in support of one or two mp3s at Velvet Lounge on Feb. 2
The one thing you left out is that illegal downloads continue to hurt music sales far more than iTunes.
I'm just one guy, but the ease of iTunes has me buying far more music than I ever have (hell, I'm even buying more music now than I got for free when I'd sign up for Columbia House under a fake name).
The RIAA wants you to believe that illegal downloads are hurting album sales, but the evidence compiled by anyone other than the music industry is pretty inconclusive. To wit: This story , published in 2004 in the NYT.
I was actually just relating it comparatively to the size of iTunes impact on sales. iTunes facilitates the legal sale of music. To say it has negatively impacted the sale of music is, to me, foolish.
The impact of file sharing and illegal downloads are debatable for sure, but have an impact greater than software that puts the music you want a mouse click and $0.99 away.
Ah, I see. You're right: Overall music sales in 2007 rose to the highest level ever, thanks in part to digital sales, even as albums dropped off 15 percent. There's more data here if anyone's interested.
Post a Comment