This clip is a trailer for a film created in 2006 called “Before the music dies”. A documentary, it gives provocative insights into the music industry as it is today. It tells the story a music industry split in two – “the homogenous corporate product which is spoon fed to consumers, and the diverse independent music that finds devoted fans online and at clubs across the country”. The film features engaging interviews with artists, music industry insiders, critics and fans who all tell of their own unique experiences of two aspects of an industry which are fundamentally at odds. It brings out well the contrasting ideologies of the mainstream and the independent, and hints towards the political rammifications of both outlooks. The film comes highly recommended. Find out more about the film, or purchase it at www.beforethemusicdies.com.

Pick the band is an interesting concept: it is the first fan run label.  It is a label which relies heavily on the participation and collaboration of the music community to make decisions. It is loosely a talent contest featuring unsigned bands from various locations within the US (it is not global yet), and is orientated around Rock. Fans get to vote on which bands continue to the next stage of the competition, their favourite single, create music videos and design merchandise and album artwork. It invites fans to participate by provide designs, video concepts, song ideas, song title and tour stops. Pick the band really has embraced the possibilities for collaboration that the internet provides; it is an archetypal music 2.0 (or 3.0?) website.

This is a website which understands the weaknesses of the old record label structure and is attempting to redefine, it its own way, what the term record label means within a new music environment. However, it does incorporate some of the tendencies that Record Labels are known, and sometimes criticised, for. It does require Bands to surrender a deal of control over their music, although now it is the fans who influence decisions rather than production managers. If anyone should affect the decision on which t-shirt the band should use, what song they should release as a single, how their video should look, it should be the fans, right? This raises an interesting question though – is the role of a band to satisfy their fan base or to make music on their own terms?  Shouldn´t bands just “do their own thing” and collect fans based on their evolving individuality? It is their music, after all – they should do with it as they please.  What does everyone else think about this idea?

Has music been devalued? This is an interesting question, because on the face of it is seems counter intuitive and almost nonsensical. Let´s expand the question and see if we can make any sense of it.

Beginning from the understanding that music is intrinsically valuable, it is quite clear that music can never be valueless. Music is valuable, because, well, its music! Music moves people, it affects people’s emotions, it communicates feelings, perspectives, and ideas. Even bad music does this, in one way or another. With this said, no matter what external measure one puts on music, for example its price on a capitalist market, it does not really need this measure in order to have value in itself. One could rant about the fact that there is too much free music, mp3s, illegal downloading and the access to music is too overwhelming – but this doesn’t, or shouldn’t, affect the capacity of value a piece of music has to its listener.

So when people are talking about how music has been devalued, they must be referring to its economic value.  Now it is undeniable that the changing music environment is making it more difficult to extract economic value from music; the traditional market value of music is becoming redefined. Now the only people who really deserve sympathy in this instance are the artists; those who dedicate their life to creating music deserve to make a living from it. Artists are primary, those actors who have exercised their dominant position and used artists music to make themselves rich, with only a superficial concern for the artists themselves, deserve no sympathy at all. On the other hand, one should lend sympathy to those who truly wish to support artists and help them continue to develop their music; those who believed in music for the sake of music. However, it is an encouraging thought that these people are probably the ones who were smart enough to adapt to the changing environment, and are now directing their efforts to finding new ways for artists to make money.

So no, music has not been devalued. We are entering a new era where those who support the artists must find new ways for them to earn a livelihood from their creations. Rather than see this new environment as an obstacle, it would be wiser to see it as an opportunity.

The Record Industry is losing money, this is no secret. EMI recently announced losses of a whopping $1.2 billion dollars, with revenue falling from $2.8 billion to $2.3 billion. But the truth is that record labels everywhere are generally experiencing reduced revenue streams. This is reducing the volume of records which are being put out, and means that more pressure to succeed is being put on the few records are that are being released. As Glen Peoples of Coolfer points out in this article, this is a climate which discourages risk taking. Record Labels are no longer willing to take risks on relative newcomers but would rather focus on bands which already have an established fan base and a few releases behind them. This same kind of risk analysis forces labels to focus on signing mainstream artists (which have a greater chance to make them money) than focusing artists outside the mainstream which are seen as a more risky investment.

This logic is understandable since their old revenue structure is being increasingly challenged by the changing music environment, but it doesn’t detract from the criticism that questions of risk and profitability are distracting them from brining us fresh records. This view was voiced by Epic Records U.K. managing director Nick Raphael who said at a recent musexpo meeting, “It’s about finding great music and great artists, and not getting distracted in the process”. But it seems they are getting distracted, distracted because they feel increasingly pressured by questions of risk and profitability. This fails the bands who are trying to forge new paths outside of the mainstream and at the same time the listeners who expect labels to innovate and keep the music industry vibrant and alive. If this trend continues, it seems like the onus is on the new music generation to fulfil their role and find the talent they will inevitably miss, and to provide the resources for bands who are considered “high risk” to have an equal chance at developing their music. With distribution and promotion channels becoming more accessible to the majority, and recording costs far cheaper, questions of risk and profitability will hopefully become less central and the conditions within the industry more democratic and inclusive.

The music world has changed and continues to do so without anyone really able to accurately predict how the future of music will look like. The good thing is that music is still being enjoyed and celebrated by people all over the world. It wakes people up in the mornings and gets people through their day, it allows people to relax, disconnect and reflect and transcend their environments in spouts of elation; it provides a life narrative and strengthens the self identity of many individuals while moving and uniting people in a common bond of shared experience.

This much has not changed. What has changed is that a large chunk of music which wasn’t available to the masses has now become available. Why be satisfied with mainstream hits when the horizons to discover new music are so broad? The problem for the music industry of 10 years ago is that many have been slow to adapt to these changes. They focus, and still do, on selling a huge volume of a select few artists, whereas those who listen to music these days are able to diversify their taste to such a degree that these select few artists are becoming less attractive (the thing to read here is The Long Tail by Chris Anderson). There is so much more music out there for people to listen to and buy.

It seems that the goals of the services of the new music generation are clear. First, we have to make as much of this glorious but neglected market of unheard “niche” music available to as many people as possible: we need to give it a fair listenership. Second, and perhaps the most challenging, is to make it easy to navigate this new diverse realm; to discover new and clever ways of filtering this world of music based on individual listener preferences. Thirdly, we need to provide a good way to support the artists in this new environment, to give them a way to make money so that they can continue to move us with their music. These are challenges which we at Record Union are determined to face, head on.