What Determines Musics' Inherent Value?
Is downloading music illegally really all that bad?
Music is everything. Most
importantly, it’s a way of thought and communication. Music is everywhere. In
the current day, it's almost impossible to go throughout a whole day without hearing
a single note of music. Music is deep. The emotion and stories invested in
music can be expressed through instrumental arrangements and lyrics. In a piece
of music, you can ask yourself: do the combination of chords and notes have a
depressing or uplifting or angry message? Are there double meanings or
metaphors in the lyrics? Is there an underlying story? What is the inspiration
behind this song?
In asking these questions, you
can find a piece of music's inherent value. The definition of inherent value
is: something of relative worth existing
in someone as a
permanent and inseparable
element. From this definition, I think that a song
or genre has inherent value only if a musician has passion for the music they
create. In my experience of being a musician and writing my own music, I
believe all musical compositions, whether finished or still in the making, have
inherent value. Even though these compositions are more solidified when
recorded, if the composition exists in someone's mind or on paper in anyway,
then the song has value. Without copyrighting the song, legally the song
belongs to anyone who finds it. However, creating music is a very personal and
labor-intensive task. Therefore, morally, the music belongs to the artist(s)
who came up with the idea for, and wrote the musical arrangements to the
song.
In the matter of obtaining music
to listen to, I think that it's all right to own music without paying for it.
The reasons vary from band to band though. If it's a huge band like Green Day or 30 Seconds to Mars, then those bands won't miss a few dollars. If it’s a new
band, it's better to first spread their sound and then start putting money into
their pockets by going to their shows or buying merchandise. I either buy my
music from iTunes or get it from a friend's music library via flash drive. Only
occasionally will I download music from YouTube. When music is spread freely
via Internet, those who download it are more likely to feel attached to the
musician. From this, the person who downloads the music will be more likely go
out of their way to buy merchandise from the band or go to concerts.
Each song that I write is an
extension of my spirit and point of view. In putting my music up on YouTube, I
would feel very honored if people liked it enough to download my songs, even
without paying for it. If I ever started to get big in a music career (solo or
otherwise), then maybe I would start to need the money to continue to make the
music that I love. However, at the moment, songwriting is just a creative
activity for me to enjoy and explore.
5 comments:
I agree that big bands won't miss a few dollars, but I'm going to play devil's advocate here. Wouldn't newer bands have a higher need for money to be able to begin to produce their music at a good quality?
Ray: yes newer bands would need money from the start, but, as we are in a band, I am more concerned to get our name out first. get our name and sound out there and then start a record deal. If, by chance, the people don't like our sound for constructive reasons, we can work with that and try again.
I'm not talking about record deals. I mean for general equipment to get at least a few home-made CDs out or instruments to produce a better sound, live or otherwise. Getting a sound "out there" probably involves more money than being out there.
But, in order to get out there the money to make those first CDs would most likely have to come out of the artist's own pocket
I agree with the fact that new bands should definitely obtain money for their music but I also believe that music is a gift and we need to pay the artist who created it regarding of their popularity.
Post a Comment