The Artists Speak About The Modern Age

It is of no surprise that many people, especially in this modern age, obtain music by downloading MP3s, burning CDs, sharing files, or other free means. But what does this mean for the artist? Are they mad because they are not making profit, or do they only wish to get their music out there? The opinions, especially after the attempted passages of SOPA and PIPA (two outrageous copyright bills), varied, however, even before copyright issues were more prominent of a problem, musical artists did not seem to mind their music being distributed for free or recorded.
                In a 2001 “Nardwuar” interview with Julian Casablancas (vocals) and Nick Valensi (first guitar)of The Strokes, the question of someone recording videos of their shows was posed.

Nardwuar: “Are you worried he might steal some ideas at all?”
                 Julian Casablancas: “No, I think that’s the way that art should progress.”

Some may call Casablancas’ response naïve as the interview took place early on, before the band could know the life of a “true” musician. 2001 marked The Strokes’ debut album Is This It? , and for such young men of 20 – 23 years of age, they had great success, which included a sold-out UK tour simply from the EP released before the full album (documented by The Strokes’ second guitarist, Albert Hammond Jr, here). The Strokes remain a lesser known band, but even though they’ve progressed since Is This It? , one can still argue that they care more about the music than the money.

                A band that started out in 1996, Linkin Park, had similar apathy towards the copying of their first album. The opinion is voiced by Mike Shinoda (vocals, keys, guitar) in a 2011 interview with Fuse.

“At the time when Hybrid Theory came out, we were still doing real snail mail lists, email hadn’t caught on yet.  … but we sent out our album samplers with two songs on it…half of them were CD half were cassette, and the fans got them and passed them around and dubbed them and everybody made copies, whatever. “

As with The Strokes’ Is This It? , Hybrid Theory was the key to Linkin Park’s establishment in the music scene. Unlike The Strokes, Linkin Park did not continue their belief that free distribution of music is okay; rather they were furious when their 2012 album Living Things was leaked. From this, it can be inferred that most bands are alright with illegal means of getting music if the consequence is that their music spreads.

                I was lucky enough to have gotten in contact with New Hampshire band A Simple Complex via Facebook to get their opinion on the matter. They offered great insight both as consumers of music and as an unsigned band, stating "Digital music is both a blessing and a curse". Like many music fans, they are ecstatic to find songs by their favorite artists for a cheap price of about a dollar in comparison to buying CDs as well as imports “priced anywhere from $2 to $13, to get the extra songs that didn't make the album” and even more-so to find free songs to fulfill their inner psychotic music fan (a necessary quality to be a music maker).

            

They continue, “On the flipside (pun intended), as an unsigned band, we spend about $1200 in the studio to make 3 polished songs. We then spend another $500 getting 300 CDs made for those songs. We mail 1/3 of them to radio stations and music publications (for free - let's add another $100 in postage for that!) Though we've had a lot of radio play and critical praise from industry people and rock fans in general, we have yet to recoup those expenses on any of the 3 CDs we've released thus far. So the idea of people ripping our CDs and giving the songs to their friends can be hard to swallow. However, we have to consider that there are people who have become fans only because they got a copy of our music for free - if they hadn't gotten it for free, they would never have become a fan. So these days, recordings of songs are almost considered 'pamphlets' (expensive ones) that you're supposed to hand out to then generate a fan base from, in hopes this will make them want to spend money to come see you perform live and purchase other merch like shirts and such. Recording your music is necessary, yet not immediately recoupable, like handing out free stickers or flyers for your upcoming shows in hopes it pays off - except recording can be a lot pricier, especially if you want it done right (by a professional).”

Here they are in their awesomeness.

(Source)

Left to Right: Mark (guitar 1), Stu (guitar 2), Jess (vocals), Jim (bass), Chris (drums)

So, what's the verdict of this post? When someone's a new band, it's hard to get out there. Free music helps and hurts. As a consumer, one should be wary.

Artist's Views On The Value Of Music

All the artists who's opinions I gathered had the same general ideas on the value of their music. They were all against the idea of their fans obtaining their music for free, although some more than others.  It seems all artists would agree that flat out taking someone's music without paying for it is wrong, and kind of insulting to the artist, but all musicians have different opinions on things like Pandora, or Spotify, sites that pay royalties but doesn't demand the customer buy the music to listen. Arjen Lucassen, a dutch singer/songwrighter said in an interview with Sound Shock, "as a musician, when your album isn’t even out and people are already downloading it for free, it hurts. It’s my only income and at a point like that, you’re thinking ‘something will have to be done.'" It's upsetting to him when people take his music without paying for it, when music is your only source of income it makes sense. Although he realizes that this dilema is nearly impossible to police, he hopes that his real fans will help him out by buying his music. Like many other  artists, he is concerned that some people trying to come into the music industry will either be turned away, or fail because they won't be able to support themselves on royalty fees from websites like Spotify and Pandora. Artists, especially ones just starting out need a solid income in order to keep producing music. The music industry is neither cheap nor easy to make it in, so musicians who are just starting out are finding it hard to keep going. It was hard enough to make it when people had to pay for music but now that people are able to obtain it for free, it is only getting harder and harder to "make it". In an interview with Calum Robson, Lucassen says that he would try to stop people from taking his music, but he knows that people won't like it, and in the end he may end up on the bottom, without fans.

Most musicians would agree that illegal downloading is wrong, but some like David Bryne go far enough to be against all music distribution sites, incuding ones like Pandora and Spotify. Even though both of these sites pay huge royalty fees, some feel cheated if they're not getting everything. Byrne feels that these high prices are going stop development in the music industry and therefor "suck all creative content out of the world". While Lucassen was hesitant with saying flat out that he was extremely against people taking his music, Byrne doesn't hold back, he seems to hate everything that lets people stream music, to me that seems greedy, especially when the sites that he's talking about (Spotify) pays 70% in royalty fees. In the beginning of his article he seems to be just against music sites like Pandora or spotify, but by the end he goes on to say that the internet as a whole is "sucking the creative content out of the world". So, to me it just seemed like Byrne liked to complain.

I was also able to speak with Marblehead's own Hayley Reardon who seemed to be more on Lucassen's page then on Byrne's.  She said that these sites can be really good for getting your music out to the public, but music has worth and she finds it dissapointing when her fans obtain her music without paying for it. Although, in Hayley's case, she makes the majority of her money from live performances anyway, so if her music being listened to for free is what's going to get people to come pay to listen to her live, it almost seems worth it to let your music be free.

From my research I found that every artist has a different opinion on things like Pandora or Spotify, but they all seem to agree that it shouldn't be okay for people to take music without paying for it. So, after reading and hearing the opinions of many different artists on this subject, from now on I will not be downloading music for free, but I don't think I'll ever stop using Pandora and Spotify.

Artist’s Views on the Importance of Music

Artists from all over the world express different views on the inherent value of music and the issue of music piracy.  The artist’s opinions usually depend on his or her status, wealth and how successful he or she is in the music industry. The 1960’s Beatles star, Paul McCartney, originally stated that he had no issue with music piracy but in 2009 he stated, “If you get on a bus you've got to pay," McCartney said, "And I think it's fair, you should pay your ticket. The problem is you get a lot of young bands coming up and some of them aren't going to last forever, so if they have a massive hit that's going to pay their mortgage forever, they're going to feed the children on that and if they don't get that money, if they don't see that money, I think it's a bit of a pity."  Even though Paul McCartney was an artist who was extremely successful, his views still state that piracy isn’t the right thing to do especially with young bands that might only have one big hit.  He comes from an age where this had not been an issue, and where one would simply walk into a store and purchase “a 45”.  David Bowie, another artist from the 1960s, has a slightly different opinion on the matter.  “I don't even know why I would want to be on a label in a few years because I don't think it's going to work by labels and by distribution systems in the same way," Bowie said. "The absolute transformation of everything that we ever thought about music will take place within 10 years, and nothing is going to be able to stop it. I'm fully confidant that copyright, for instance, will no longer exist in 10 years, and authorship and intellectual property is in for such a bashing.”  David Bowie is saying that piracy is neither good nor bad and there is not much the world can do about it due to the recourses available to consumers.  These are two views from artists from the 60’s, so it is interesting to see what a current artist has to say.  Hayley Reardon is from Marblehead Massachusetts and is a singer/songwriter who shared how she promotes herself and explaines her feeling on music piracy.    “I use your typical social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr) to keep people updated on live shows and new music. I also collect email addresses and send out an email newsletter with all kinds of info.”  When asked how she feels about artists giving away music online for free, Hayley said, “I think giving away music can be a really good marketing tool to get your music heard by more people and I’ve done it myself many times. I also believe, however, that art is worth something. So in my mind it’s about creating a balance between giving up sales when you know it’s going to gain you some new fans, and charging for your art when you know there are people out there who love it enough to pay for it.” Finally she answered the question of illegally downloading music and how she feels if her fans did that with her own songs.  Hayley had mixed feelings about it and said, “Its always a bummer to have people getting your music for free when they could be paying for it, but I don’t take it personally. I’m thrilled to have people listening to my music regardless of how they get their hands on it. As I said, I have pretty much come to accept how integrated into our world music piracy has become. I’m always on the look out for new, creative ways to subsidize my music and make up for the free downloading that goes on. There are musicians out there handling the issue in a really creative, positive way and successfully facing the challenges of making a living off of music in a changing digital world. That’s my goal - to focus less on how to stop people from illegally downloading my music and more on new, creative ways to fund what I love to do.”  Each artist shared a slightly different opinion on the matter, and it is interesting to see views of an artist from the 1960s, and an artist from 2013.  

The Value of Music: Artist's Perspective

In my research, I have found a few examples of copyright infringement to support the need for licenses. Here I have included a link to the very famous copyright case over Vanilla Ice's “Ice Ice Baby.” The hit rap song released in 1990 samples Queen and David Bowie's 1982 hit “Under Pressure.” Ice admitted that he sampled the song without getting permission and although the case never made it to court, had to pay royalties to Queen and Bowie. The case against Vanilla Ice provides an example of copyright infringement by means of sampling without permission.

A current artist may be charged with a somewhat different type of infringement: Robin Thicke, singer of the hit summer tune “Blurred Lines,” could be charged with being “influenced” buy two Marvin Gaye songs. The case was made by both Gaye's family and Bridgeport Music, who believe that Thicke's song sounded very similar to Gaye's songs “Got to Give It Up” and “Sexy Ways.” The question is: is it considered infringement if Thicke did not directly sample either song? The two ways to commit infringement are to 1) directly copy or sample a song and 2) create a song with substantial similarity to a prior work. So, did Thicke break copyright laws? I, along with others who have viewed this article, have listened to the three songs (Got to Give It Up, Sexy Ways, and Blurred Lines) and believe that Thicke did indeed break copyright laws. “Blurred Lines” sounds strikingly similar to “Got to Give It Up” alone, but when you take “Sexy Ways” into account, there is no doubt that Thicke was, at the very least, inspired by Gaye's songs.

Below I have included some quotes from various artists on their opinions of copyright and the possession of music:

“The absolute transformation of everything that we ever thought about music will take place within 10 years, and nothing is going to be able to stop it. I see absolutely no point in that it's not going to happen. I'm fully confident that copyright, for instance, will no longer exist in 10 years.” -David Bowie (obtained from BrainyQuote) 

                                                                      (Source)

“Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it.” -John Lennon (BrainyQuote)

                                                                   (Source)

“All good music resembles something. Good music stirs by its mysterious resemblance to objects and feelings which motivated it.” -John Cocteau (BrainyQuote; this one does not necessarily say anything about copyright, but I think it represents a feeling towards the similarity between a pair of songs)

“No, generally I think 'influence' is used as a nice word for plagiarism.” -Gilbert Gottfried (BrainyQuote)

“When I listen to Radio 1 and here five different tracks in a row using old disco samples, well that's plagiarism, that's taking other people's music.” -Jay Kay (BrainyQuote)

As you can see, different artists have different opinions on the idea of copyright. Some believe it will help their careers, but most others do not like the idea of plagiarism.

Tag! You're It is a pop/punk band originating in Phoenix, Arizona. It consists of Josh (guitar/backup vocals), Matt (bass/backup vocals), Reuben (drums), and Sonny (lead vocals). Interview with Tag! You’re It:

            Rhei (RB): “Is music the only source of income for you?”

Tag! You’re It (TYI): “Music is not the only source of income. We all have full-time jobs and attend school during the week days. It helps with funding our goals”

RB: “How are you getting your name out there?”

TYI: “We promote free using social media tools. In addition, we also go to shows, malls, other events to pass out fliers and meet new people.”

RB: “How would you feel about fans downloading your music illegally?”

TYI: “We love the idea of being able to spread our music by any means. Our goal isn't to make money, but to inform and become contagious.”

RB: “Is any of your music available on big sites like iTunes or Spotify? If not, do you want it to be?”

TYI: “Our EP is available on Bandcamp only at this time. Our new full album will be available on iTunes and Spotify. So yes, we do want to be.”

RB: “How do you guys interact as a band? How do you get along?”

TYI: “We have come a long way as friends and as band members. We work all of our issues out be being patient and listening to one and other. Our friendship has grown the strongest it's ever been each and every day. Time has also allowed us to communicate better, which is important.”

RB: “How did your group form?”

TYI: “It's kind of interesting. This band started off with all different members. We have all been in the same friends group for years. It formed by previous members leaving and eventually we replaced their positions with our others friends. Sonny, Josh, and Reuben met almost 5 years ago. Josh and Matt went to school with one and other. Things lined up perfectly, and we have been at it ever since.”

RB: “How many live shows have you played?”

TYI: “We have played a quite a bit of shows. I would have to say 50+ shows. We absolutely love to perform. The feeling is so addicting.”

RB: “How do you/would you split up royalties?”

TYI: “We haven't gotten quite to that point where we've concerned ourselves with money. Primarily because we all went to invest back into Tag! You're It. At this time, everything we make goes back into improving that much more. It's for our growth as a whole, not individually.”

RB: “Do you have any advice for new artists trying to get their names out there?”

TYI: “The best advise we can give is never let anyone say you can't do anything. Anyone can grow with persistence.”