> Great example! Sonic Youth's early output was a cacophonous mess, > along the lines of early Boyd Rice. Then they started getting > popular when they started recording pop songs (such as Sugarcane). > Those pop songs are what made Sonic Youth a household name, and > Pavement rips off nothing but their pop songs. You wouldn't see > Pavement trying to rip-off the sound of Sonic Youth's early > recordings! beyond the aesthetic calls, can we agree that sonic youth might have had a hard time surviving those first few years if the people who liked their messy noise had obtained high-quality recordings for free instead of buying them / if SST hadn't been able to stay in the black? can you just please respect that point? i'll i'm saying is that people should pay for the music they listen to. maybe that just means buying a ticket to a show once in a while. but the old model worked pretty well, where you bought a ticket, evaluated the live music, and then were given a choice whether to spend more on the recording. now you buy a ticket and watch the show and go home and download the record, if you're like most people.\ i swear to god, once nanofaxes become cheap and popular, and people's e.g. sheet metal fabriction skills can no longer be compensated, we're going to hear a different tune from a lot of folks.
Message
Re: [CZsynth] Re: music economics
2008-08-11 by ezra buchla
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.