backtop


Print 80 comment(s) - last by PaterPelligrin.. on Mar 22 at 8:39 AM


Jon Bon Jovi says iTunes is a prison and he can't break free. He says that the music business has been shot to the heart and Apple CEO Steve Jobs is to blame.
Rock superstar says Steve Jobs is killing music with iTunes

Apple, Inc., owner of the world's largest online music store, today yields tremendous power in the music business and is able to make or break musicians.  Even major record labels who are used to abusing customers and musicians alike find themselves victims of the power of iTunes.  Apple can essentially name its own terms, and refusing to comply is essentially business suicide, given the amount of revenue that iTunes generates.

That situation is very bad news according to rock legend Jon Bon Jovi.  The front man for the iconic 80s group Bon Jovi, he says that Steve Jobs promises musicians heaven, but puts them through hell.  

He says that because of Apple, independent music stores are going out of business.  He says record storeowners should hold on to what they've got -- it doesn't make a difference if they make it or not.  But he admits there's likely no one to save them, the damage is done.

In his interview with The Sunday Times, a British newspaper, Mr. Bon Jovi states, "Kids today have missed the whole experience of putting the headphones on, turning it up to 10, holding the jacket, closing their eyes and getting lost in an album; and the beauty of taking your allowance money and making a decision based on the jacket, not knowing what the record sounded like, and looking at a couple of still pictures and imagining it."

Now such stores are living on a prayer, thanks to Steve Jobs.  He comments, "God, it was a magical, magical time. I hate to sound like an old man now, but I am, and you mark my words, in a generation from now people are going to say: 'What happened?' Steve Jobs is personally responsible for killing the music business."

Mr. Bon Jovi has always prided himself on doing things his way.  But Steve Jobs is making it hard for him to live while he's alive.  

On the other hand, iTunes has made superstars out of some obscure independent artists, even as big time artists like Bon Jovi and brick and mortar stores find themselves down on their luck.  In other words, Apple offers artists great visibility, but is merciless in its pricing demands.

Ultimately, the industry might be halfway there to bucking the Apple beast.  Google is reportedly preparing to launch a major streaming music service.  That could mean an end to the era of Apple being able to list its demands to the music industry.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

More like shot in the wallet!
By MeesterNid on 3/14/2011 10:09:02 PM , Rating: 5
Gotta love the, "Kids today have missed the whole experience of putting the headphones on, turning it up to 10, holding the jacket, closing their eyes and getting lost in an album; and the beauty of taking your allowance money and making a decision based on the jacket, not knowing what the record sounded like, and looking at a couple of still pictures and imagining it."

So he's whining that people are actually able to listen to what's on an album and chose only the "good" stuff (or what they perceive to be good) instead of buying it blind and getting all the filler crap along with 2 good songs?

Booooohoooooo, so sad!




RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By maverick85wd on 3/14/2011 11:17:48 PM , Rating: 1
I know, right? He sounds like a record company executive. You would think they were paying him to say this stuff or something, but he's getting old and senile, so maybe not.

While I disagree with that part, I do still think it's ridiculous to pay a dollar for a low quality MP3 file with DRM. THAT is what I thought he was going to be talking about.

Dear record companies : Let me buy lossless tracks with complete ID3 tags and maybe an album picture for $.05 a go and I'd easily spend $5/week. I'm almost glad you don't, because then I'd be broke. But if you want people to quit sharing/stealing/whatever your content, that's what it's going to take. I thought it was crazy to pay $15 or $20 a CD in the late 90's and I think it's even more insane now.

/rant


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By maverick85wd on 3/14/2011 11:18:39 PM , Rating: 2
just to clarify, I disagree with Bon Jovi, not you.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By maverick85wd on 3/14/11, Rating: -1
By Shadowmaster625 on 3/15/2011 8:45:57 AM , Rating: 2
Careful what you wish for. Every time a site makes that sort of change, it becomes annoyingly slow. Then we just end up not even posting anything.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By dubldwn on 3/15/2011 12:02:01 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
While I disagree with that part, I do still think it's ridiculous to pay a dollar for a low quality MP3 file with DRM

It's not. It's 256kbps AAC without DRM.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By B3an on 3/15/2011 7:36:13 AM , Rating: 2
256kbps AAC isn't that great, and it's still lossy compression. It's better than MP3 at the same bitrate though, but that isn't saying much.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By mindless1 on 3/16/2011 1:07:36 AM , Rating: 2
True it isn't, because nobody can double blind pick either of them (so long as the MP3 is VBR) from the uncompressed original.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By BladeVenom on 3/15/2011 7:36:15 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
turning it up to 10

I turn mine up to 11.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By psaus42 on 3/15/2011 9:28:15 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
I turn mine up to 11.


Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?

[pause] These go to eleven


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By formulav8 on 3/15/2011 12:07:02 PM , Rating: 2
Thats Spinal Tap right?


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Azethoth on 3/15/2011 10:36:39 PM , Rating: 4
No, This is Spinal Tap


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By SunTzu on 3/19/2011 4:33:39 AM , Rating: 2
This man truly deserves a 6 for this ingenious comment!


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By cfaalm on 3/15/2011 6:49:33 PM , Rating: 2
+1


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By cochy on 3/15/2011 9:57:29 AM , Rating: 1
lol while the greed of the record labels is mind boggling, I think $0.05 a track is equally crazy. $1 is reasonable imo.

When record labels and movie studios say that can't run a business if they give their content away at such low prices, maybe they shouldn't pay actors and musicians millions of dollars. On a $30 million movie, probably 20% of that goes to the A-list actors. Who says George Clooney needs to make $5 million for starring in a movie? That's crazy. Pay him $100,000 for his time and presto there's your profit again. If he doesn't want to work for reasonable pay because he won't be able to afford his dozen super cars well screw him, don't screw us.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Stuka on 3/15/2011 3:41:52 PM , Rating: 2
I would agree. When they offer the convenience of buying songs track by track, $1 a piece is reasonable. What I would like to see more often is complete albums that aren't $1 per track. A 15 track album should be $1 each, or $7.50-$10 for the album. My personal rule is if I like at least three track previews, I buy the whole thing 'cos the rest may grow on me. I absolutely don't buy complete albums that are $1 per track.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By cfaalm on 3/15/2011 7:03:54 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
$1 is reasonable imo.
For a lossy format? No way.

It doesn't have to be studio quality (24bit/96KHz or even 192KHz) because lossless would be just that when it's a modern recording. This is our chance to ditch the CD-format (16b/44.1KHz) and go with 24b/48KHz. Lossy for the sake of portability is OK, but I'll decide the bitrate myself.

On the article: how many referenced to or quotations of Bon Jovi lyrics can be put into one article? You're nowhere close to the limit.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Alexvrb on 3/16/2011 12:56:46 AM , Rating: 3
$5/week and you'd be broke? 5 cent songs, lossless to boot? You're making Bon Jovi's remarks look downright sensible by comparison.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By bety on 3/15/2011 12:07:50 AM , Rating: 3
Yes...the "magic" of buying something you can only imagine and may actually be crap! It is indeed terrible knowing what you are buying!

I'm really glad Jon's music is better than his reasoning.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By icrf on 3/15/2011 1:36:36 AM , Rating: 5
Not all music is so manufactured. Some artists really do create albums meant to be listened as a whole, not two marketable songs that the label demands they fill out to make more coin. I think that's the real casualty in all this.

And to his point, knowing what you're buying isn't necessarily wrong, it's just that people make judgments based on 20 second random samples and buy each track individually. Without the context of the rest of the album, a snippet may not be a fair representation.

I absolutely see where he's coming from. The problem is the album as an art form was abused by music as a business and created the problem that iTunes fixed.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Aloonatic on 3/15/2011 5:23:56 AM , Rating: 4
I quite agree. The album making art is a dying one. The music industry would have been better off somehow differentiating more clearly between it's junk food* like acts who are just on the tread mill, to be abused and milked until they are dumped in the nearest night club, singing their greatest hits when their hair style is no longer cool. And those who are in it to produce an album to get a message over which will take a lot more investment in time from the consumer, slowly growing in popularity.

Sadly, the industry keeps on trying to make out that every second of music that they produce is written on parchment hand rolled on the thighs of virgins, performed by skilled artisans, so they should all be paid top dollar to protect the artists "investment". Whereas the reality is that the majority of music (as seen on all the "talent" shows) is nothing that vast swathes of the population could not reproduce, and they only sing the stuff that they are told to sing, written by music-tron 2000, or some bloke with a dodgy come-over who really shouldn't be writing about how much he loves his new high school sweet heart, and mean it.

*I have nothing against junk food, but everything in moderation, I enjoy indulge in it from time to time, I'm just not going to pay Michelin start prices for it.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By torpor on 3/15/2011 10:07:52 AM , Rating: 3
True, there are albums created out there to be single pieces of art. And Jon Bon Jovi is one of the best. He's avoided the commercial temptation of rolling out singles that teenagers will throw their allowance money at and been true to the craft.

When I think of the total work of artistry that is, for example, Slippery When Wet, I think of how I used to be impressed with Dark Side of the Moon. Now I've lost all respect for Pink Floyd; they need to study what this man did. There wasn't a single hit single on SWW, it succeeded on the strength of the whole as a rock Magnum Opus.

Oh, wait....


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By maven81 on 3/15/2011 1:32:03 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize they sued to be able to sell their music only in album form exactly because they did not want to chop it up right?


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By maven81 on 3/15/2011 1:33:26 PM , Rating: 2
Nevermind, I see what you did there ;)


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By theapparition on 3/15/2011 10:24:09 AM , Rating: 2
Just wanted to second that opinion.

I can name numerous albums with tracks that taken individually are completely lost without the other works. Gone is the art of listening to a whole album, where some songs that may not be radio friendly super hits would never be heard otherwise.

Now, it's either a megahit iTunes download or is quickly forgotten by the newest generation.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By rennya on 3/15/2011 10:15:26 PM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty damn sure none is produced by Bon Jovi though.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By dgingeri on 3/15/2011 11:44:23 AM , Rating: 2
I definitely agree with this. I know it's not regular in the pop/r&b world, but in the country world, the whole album is more likely to fit together into one big performance. Taylor Swift, Rascal Flats, Trace Adkins, Shedaisy, and Garth Brooks have all done albums like that. When I buy country these days, I'm more likely to buy the CD and rip it to mp3, but when I buy pop/rock/r&b, I tend to buy just one song at a time in mp3 format. pop/rock/r&b seem to artificial lately.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Maiyr on 3/15/2011 12:02:37 PM , Rating: 2
agreed ! Can you imagine listening to a snippet of Dark Side of the Moon. You would think it was utter crap. Only listening to the whole album shows its genius.

Maiyr


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Azethoth on 3/15/2011 10:43:38 PM , Rating: 2
I like "Money" but it does not belong on the dark side of the moon. Complete failure of the vision.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By kleinma on 3/15/2011 10:52:44 AM , Rating: 3
Except people will just buy the one or 2 songs that made their way onto the radio and not bother to even listen to the rest of the album for good tracks. This really does turn it into "whatever everyone else likes is what I like". I have countless times found awesome tracks on albums by listening to the whole thing versus just a single track that is being played to death on the radio/tv. I sometimes HATE the songs that are "popular" which in turn makes me dislike the artist until I hear some other songs they did that are not popular and I love some of them. Yes there are plenty of albums out there with filler, but there are also other albums that are meant to be listen to as an album, and those are suffering now.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By TSS on 3/15/2011 11:37:33 AM , Rating: 2
Until everybody's figured out most of those songs can also be found on youtube in their entirety.

Not all of course. But if any musician is smart he'll put them up on youtube himself, so there's control over the quality. More publicity more fans and probably more oppertunity for concerts which'll then rake in the money.

There was a time before we could carry music around, and we paid the musicians for their efforts. Today, where able to download just about any song i wish in better quality then the musician can even sing (thanks to computers and mixing several samples) in less then a second. Hell today if you want you can even download the video and see him. Value comes from scarcity, and music isn't scarce anymore by a long shot, so music in itself has no (material) value.

Seeing a good artist perform is still very scarce.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By 91TTZ on 3/15/2011 11:24:30 AM , Rating: 2
You have a point that nowadays you can buy only what you want, which is a good thing.

But Bon Jovi does have a point about the entire experience being much less than what it once was. It's hard to describe but the experience of going to music stores, looking at album covers, and listening to music was much, much better than it is now with everything dumbed down and reduced to a commodity.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Arsynic on 3/15/2011 1:01:13 PM , Rating: 2
...will have to stop releasing "crap sandwich" albums with like four or five great songs and crap in between. They can no longer justify charging $20 for 14 songs 10 of which are mediocre to crap, some pretty artwork and a cheap plastic case that I can buy for $1 a piece at Staples.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Hiawa23 on 3/15/2011 7:11:32 PM , Rating: 2
He is whining cause now we consumers can listen to music before buying or can choose to buy a track if the whole album is not worthy. I usually buy my music on Amazon & I love the fact that I can listen before buying instead of just blindly buying a cd & hoping it's good. He should have made enough money to live the rest of life on, if he hasn't find another profession.


RE: More like shot in the wallet!
By Rasterman on 3/15/2011 8:16:30 PM , Rating: 2
LOL no kidding, totally agree


The Good ol' days...
By kyleb2112 on 3/14/2011 10:42:30 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, we should all go back to the time of paying $15 for albums with only 2 good songs. It's easy to see how an '80s rocker can miss those days. Let's extend that concept: 10 rotten eggs in a carton, 5 cokes in a 6 pack are Tabs...




RE: The Good ol' days...
By YashBudini on 3/15/2011 12:48:09 AM , Rating: 2
You do realize you can open the styrofoam container and look at the eggs inside, yes?


RE: The Good ol' days...
By ipay on 3/15/2011 2:46:46 AM , Rating: 3
you do realize you can't see through eggshells to know that the eggs are rotten, yes?


RE: The Good ol' days...
By YashBudini on 3/15/2011 8:16:05 AM , Rating: 3
35 years of buying eggs I've never had it happen.


RE: The Good ol' days...
By Maiyr on 3/15/2011 1:15:33 PM , Rating: 2
same, 40 years of blindly buying non see through eggs and never a rotten one...


RE: The Good ol' days...
By YashBudini on 3/15/2011 7:54:42 PM , Rating: 2
That's why I thought he was referring to broken eggs.


RE: The Good ol' days...
By cochy on 3/15/2011 10:01:55 AM , Rating: 4
The biggest difference between now and the Good ol' days is that music was good back then and kids today get Justin Beiber instead of Elvis, The Beetles or Tears for Fears. Sorry Jon ;)


RE: The Good ol' days...
By Rasterman on 3/16/2011 10:30:20 AM , Rating: 2
That is totally false, ask every generation and the answer is the same, the older generation always hates the current generations music. Your 'good ol' days' is a load of crap, for every Elvis, Beetles, and Tears for Fears, there were 1000 similar artists that no one remembers because they were crap, and yes they were at the #1 spot. Music of old has gone though billions of ears to filter out the crap, just like 50 years from now no one will know who the hell Beiber is. And one more not so small detail, nostalgia, remember the good feelings and experiences you relate to a younger period of your life has a huge effect on liking something from the past.


RE: The Good ol' days...
By Ammohunt on 3/15/2011 2:26:12 PM , Rating: 1
it forces bands to make every song on the album worth buying not an easy task for the likes of Bon Jovi.


It hurts!
By mikable on 3/14/2011 9:47:56 PM , Rating: 2
man that's too much! lol




RE: It hurts!
By Samus on 3/14/2011 9:54:41 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yes, the record labels are so innocent and iTunes is guilty guilty guilty!


RE: It hurts!
By Totally on 3/14/2011 10:34:10 PM , Rating: 3
To me they are partners in crime, one with the brains to plan it all out, the other with the means and resources to do so, both driven by greed.


RE: It hurts!
By Kiffberet on 3/15/2011 8:52:56 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree with Bon Jovi entirely.
All itunes do is sell ablums and songs. The musci industry have been doing this since the 60's but through music stores. In those cases the stores sold the ablums/singles and took a cut. In itunes case, they're doing exactly the same.

As for b1tching about people picking the best songs off an album on itunes, whats wrong with that. There's very few ablums out there where I can actually listen to the whole thing without skipping a track or 2 (or 5!!).

Make good music and people will buy every song!

As for Simon Cowel and those 'talent' shows - they're the ones to blame for all the cr@p music out there.


By akugami on 3/14/2011 11:10:06 PM , Rating: 5
The music industry.

Yes. The music industry is killing itself. It's not even English based music or whatever. Music in Asian countries are just as bad. The quality of music, and I use that term lightly, today is just utter crap. It used to be that there were a lot of bad songs but there were also a lot of good songs to balance it out. Today, there seems to be 1 good song for every 100 when you used to be able to find 1 good song for every 10 released.

What Bon Jovi is complaining about is really just distribution. As for killing smaller local music stores, it's not really Apple's fault. Apple is just finishing what Walmart and Amazon began. I think Bon Jovi has a valid point, it used to be fun wandering a store like Tower Records (a very nice music chaim) and just putting on a set of headphones and trying out new songs. But again, as per my rant above, most songs are so much crap nowadays that I wouldn't even want to do that even if Tower was still around.

It doesn't help when the music industry is guilty of collusion and price fixing. Not to mention they've been selling some music they don't have the rights to and collecting the money without bothering to pay the artists who created it. And lest we forget, the music industry has been screwing over the artists (funny accounting, oppressive contracts) who slave away making music for so many decades that I feel little sympathy for them getting bent over by Apple.

I'm not even that old being in my early 30's but I can remember some songs growing up that were from the late 70's (both English and Chinese) that I still love today. I can remember those old songs. Today's songs? I doubt many people can claim to remember a song from 6 months ago much less 6 years.

I'd love to buy new music. I'm no audiophile but I've got decent equipment including a $300 pair of headphones here for crying out loud. I want music. I'd like to enjoy it. Considering the manufactured pop culture crap it's hard to find any good music. I've largely given up. Yes, I know there are some indie music and stuff out there but I don't have the time to go wandering everywhere for the few good songs. I've got other demands on my time with a family and other concerns.

It's so sad that the music industry finds it easier to make a profit (and that's what it's all about to them) selling manufactured shit rather than invest in genuine talent that may not sell at first. Just sell what's popular, not what's good.




For a second there...
By DNAgent on 3/14/2011 10:14:58 PM , Rating: 4
I thought I was reading an article from The Onion.

While I do agree that iTunes has changed the music scene (and probably not for the better) in a manner analogous to how Wal-Mart changed retail, I'm not sure Steve really deserves the blame here. The plum of digital downloads was ripe for the picking, if Apple hadn't done it someone else would.




RE: For a second there...
By Azethoth on 3/14/11, Rating: 0
I bet he judges a book by its cover
By stm1185 on 3/15/2011 4:08:32 AM , Rating: 2
Since he buys a cd based on its jacket. Musicians might miss out on selling you a terrible CD with a hot chick on the cover because of Steve Jobs. Dam him and his interference in our impulse buying!




By Silver2k7 on 3/15/2011 8:41:16 AM , Rating: 2
atleast you might look at the jacket and then ask the store for some headphones.. well back when there was a store ;)

nowdays its either fleamarket 2nd hand or online stores.. or the poor selection at the supermarket/gas station.

Ive probably bought 2 CD's new this year..
and maybe 25 2nd-hand for about €1 each.

But yes I do miss having a real record store!!


The last gasp of the dinosaurs
By Tony Swash on 3/15/2011 8:23:53 AM , Rating: 2
Napster was launched four years prior to iTunes, making it possible for anyone to readily share music files with one another over the Internet in simple fashion.

The music industry initially did not embrace digital distribution of music - instead it waged a long legal campaign against Napster and all the Napster clones and look-a-likes that came after. The genie would not go back in the bottle.

Piracy was winning.

When iTunes Music Store (iTMS) was launched April 2003, it was the first viable legal download service that could take on piracy in any meaningful fashion. Tying the iTMS to the wildly popular iPod player gave the new distribution model a huge and immediate boost.

Apple didn’t invent digital distribution of music. They invented legitimate digital distribution. The iTMS saved the music industry from destruction by piracy.

Apple used its near monopoly of legal digital distribution of music not to push up prices (as say Microsoft would have done) but to push prices down. It undertook a long struggle for 99 cents tracks, per track purchases and cheaper album bundles. The labels hated that as did many of the music stars who were used to living on the ridiculously bloated wealth associated with the baroque age of the music industry. But the buyers of music loved it. The iTMS has refocussed the whole music industry on what the buyers of music want.

Apple had to install a DRM system in iTMS in order to get the labels aboard. Apple doesn't want DRM and it doesn't need DRM because its primary business is making things not selling digital content (the content is only there to add value to the things). Apple has always said it would drop DRM if the labels agreed and when they did (EMI for example) Apple has indeed dropped DRM.

In a recent interview Mick Jagger said he thought the age of musicians making vast fortunes from their music was over. When the Rolling Stones started out no musician made vast fortunes, the labels did. Then for about 30 years the big stars of the music industry (like Bon Jovi) racked in enormous sums of money. That aberrant period is coming to an end and musicians now must make money doing what they have always done - playing music in front of audiences.

For anybody who likes music the world is a better place because of iTMS.

The only thing I miss is the Long Playing album - the covers were so damn convenient for rolling spliffs on!




By PaterPelligrino on 3/22/2011 8:39:35 AM , Rating: 2
Man, what is it with you and all this pro-Apple propaganda? You've literally made hundreds of posts in praise of all things Apple. You must spend a good part of your waking time doing this. You even have a life of your own that doesn't revolve around Apple?

I'm beginning to think this is your job; because if you aren't getting paid for this, you really are one sorry dude. You remind me of another DT contributor, tho all his posts are made in support of creationism. In both your cases, religion seems to be the motivating factor: he worships Jehovah, you worship Steve.


Here's an idea.
By RedemptionAD on 3/15/2011 1:42:00 PM , Rating: 2
64-96kbps quality songs are free(basically the same quality you would get from recording off of the radio,which is legal AFAIK). The quality is crappy enough so that even non audiophiles will know the difference. $1.00 per song in choice of 320kbps mp3 quality or better with the option for lesser quality options once the song is purchased. Heck, I would open an online music store charge record companies/independent musicians $0.10 per song and laugh all the way to the bank. Have a different section for independent artists vs major labels. If the record company wants added exposure for an artist it goes for a price. Independent artists will have a different price for their section for added exposure. Get the system set up in independent record stores so they can have a kiosk set up to make a disk in-store just like buying the album only with a variety of artists available. The indie store get that fee and SHAZAM!!! That's just my 2 cents.




RE: Here's an idea.
By RedemptionAD on 3/15/2011 1:52:06 PM , Rating: 2
I don't, because the mob is trying to kill me ATM.


Best Article Ever!
By Azethoth on 3/14/2011 10:46:48 PM , Rating: 3
It even has its own rocking theme song!




sounds like a scammer
By dgingeri on 3/15/2011 11:37:17 AM , Rating: 3
"Why can't we scam people anymore?" is all I'm hearing, besides some really bad uses for song lyrics...




People's Choice
By basbrian on 3/14/2011 10:51:25 PM , Rating: 2
I like Bon Jovi and sympathize, but he is wrong. Personally, I think it is a little weak to pay the same amount for a lower quality mp3 or support artists that can't put together a whole album worth buying. I buy CDs and drop them on my media server and mobile devices. They sound much better than a mp3, but some can't tell the difference.

The fact is that Apple is not wrong. People were given a choice, and they decided to bypass the record store. In all fairness, Best Buy, Walmart and Amazon did more to kill the record store than anyone.

If your like me dig a music store, you may find me at Waterloo in Austin or Cactus in Houston cruisin' the CD or maybe even *gasp* the vinyl sections.




Amazon MP3
By RjBass on 3/14/2011 11:05:37 PM , Rating: 2
Nuff said.




Deja vu
By YashBudini on 3/15/2011 12:42:14 AM , Rating: 2
His comments reflect Elton John's comments about the record industry back when he was royally screwed on Goodbye Yellow Brick Road. The only thing that has changed is who the rapist is.

Of course it's always fun to take a criminal justice course, address intellectual property rights, and watch the heads of teenagers explode before than can even conceive of such an idea, not to mention all the cops that can't take it seriously.

JBJ - Get a website & release your own stuff there. You won't make much but you'll get heard enough, and most of the pocket money was made on tour anyway. Or better yet go on tour and play your new stuff announced on your website, just pretend recordings don't exist, you'll be far less upset that way. You'll never close Pandora's box, just walk away. Your fans will love you either way. (Not that I care for his music).




Where he's coming from
By wordsworm on 3/15/2011 7:28:18 AM , Rating: 2
There's an expression: easy come, easy go. It means that the value of something is diminished when it's easy to get something. Take modern means of getting music as an example. Today, it is very easy to torrent files for free. Therefore, the value of music is severely depressed.

In the days before the Internet and torrents, kids had to make a serious decision to purchase music. So an album must have been really treasured. For me, in my youth, it was pretty easy, really. I had a record player when everyone else had a CD player. I discovered the art of finding music at garage sales for 25-50 cents per album. Since most of the best music was on vinyl, and CDs are inferior to vinyl, not to mention more expensive, it was a no brainer for me. But still, when I played an album, you had to work for it: go to the collection, select an album, put it in the machine, and listen for about 20 minutes before flipping it over or changing it. So, you got a full album experience.

I don't know about the tastes of many of the commentators here. Frankly, I think most only like commercial music which has been played ad infinitum on the radio. Myself, I hate commercial music. They play only a few songs which, though may be good, are a paltry representation of what the artist(s) have put together.

Now, when I play MP3s, which are unfortunately inferior to CDs which are inferior to albums, I still play the whole album (portability of course is now a greater factor in my choice of media since I have the tendency to move from country to country and must keep worldly goods to around 45kg). It feels like a journey or like watching a whole movie rather than just watching the titillating bits of TnA or special effects.

I can see what Jovi is saying, despite the fact that his music nauseates me.




out of touch
By invidious on 3/15/2011 11:33:31 AM , Rating: 2
People said radio would kill the music industry, then people said MTV would kill it, then people said piracy would kill it, now people are saying itunes it killing it. People will always make music, people will always listen to music. The only thing that has changes is who is getting rich in the process.

The RIAA is to blame, it created a dire need for reform with its inability to adapt. Apple just happened to fill the void, if it wasn't Apple it would have been someone else.

Apple didn't do it perfect and they are certainly exploiting their power. But I still blame the RIAA for their pitaful attempts to cling to their prehistory business model.

PS: Probably the best piece Jason has written in months.




By DarthKaos on 3/15/2011 1:33:32 PM , Rating: 2
Music is ancient. Music was once only heard live but then came the radio. Did music die? Then we had records, tapes, CDs, walkmans, and MTV. Did music die? Now we have iTunes and iPods. Will music die? No it will not.

By the way it was never that much fun to buy an album based on the cover and have the music suck. That was always a horrible feeling. Now I can hope on iTunes, check out reviews, compare iTunes reviews with other online reviews by critics and fans, then listen on iTunes and buy an album or song I know I will love.

The music industry is changing. The dinosaurs are dieing. RIP Bon Jovi.




Bon Jovi
By hiscross on 3/15/2011 1:55:32 PM , Rating: 2
Is a liberal right? Well, there ya go. Open and progressive as long as nothing changes. BTW: I love vinyl. I play my music on a Goldmund studio w/T4 arm with a Benz Micro Ruby, Conrad Johnson all tube preamp, QuickSilver 100s mono tube amps outputting to Magnepan 3.6R. Sure beats any Zune.




By rika13 on 3/14/2011 11:18:29 PM , Rating: 1
Bon Jovi is a mouthpiece for the RIAA. This is the recording industry's greatest fear, the ability to bypass THEM. Artists are now free to record and then distribute digitally, keeping a bigger piece of the pie than the record companies would let them. Napster terrified the RIAA because it was the harbinger of the digital distribution meteor that was going to kill them off. They closed their little dinosaur eyes and said "it isn't real, they won't see it if we don't see it". People did see it, both customers (thanks to the idiotic publicity campaign of the RIAA and it's slaves which became a "get free shit here!" ad) and the tech industry. Some others realized the model was sound, such as BitTorrent, which was designed to offload corporate traffic to customers (World of Warcraft uses BT for updates). Some realized that it was time for the middle man to die (Steam, iTunes, etc.).

The old B&M store is dead and buried in a landfill with the other trash. Newegg, Amazon, Steam, and iTunes are showing that, with enormously more efficient operations than Best Buy, Gamestop, or the music stores, and maybe even Wal-Mart (big box stores are highly effective, since they reduce overhead considerably).




tsk
By Proxes on 3/14/2011 11:39:47 PM , Rating: 1
He that would pun, would pick a pocket.




Weird
By messele on 3/15/2011 3:47:15 AM , Rating: 1
I don't get where JBJ is coming from on this. The amusing thing is, like Steve Jobs, he is one of a select few who has learned how to wring every buck out of his industry and is an incredibly gifted businessman in his own arena.

I get his lament, things WERE better when I was a kid and you had to save your money and wait for perhaps weeks to buy that album you were waiting for and news of it came through magazines or whatever. Things are so easily accessible these days that nothing is really special anymore.

Having said that maybe that's just because that was the period that I was a kid and really it's being a kid that's the special bit.

I'm afraid what is killing music are people like Simon Cowell who are pushing to the front cheap trashy pop acts who for the most part really do not have much talent but are contemporary and sellable in some way.

What chance do small acts have when these mannequins are marketed so heavily, where are the "battle of the band" style TV programs for real musicians that could be the next Bon Jovi.

The world has changed, I don't think for the better but we have to deal with it.




Worst piece of drivel ever on DT?
By jeremypeake on 3/14/11, Rating: -1
RE: Worst piece of drivel ever on DT?
By Warwulf on 3/15/11, Rating: -1
RE: Worst piece of drivel ever on DT?
By Natfly on 3/15/11, Rating: -1
RE: Worst piece of drivel ever on DT?
By morphologia on 3/15/2011 3:28:36 PM , Rating: 3
Personally I like the puns, very tongue-in-cheek. And others might admit to doing so, too, if there wasn't so much unjustified personal dislike of Jason Mick on this forum. Seriously...did Mullah Jobs issue a Fatwa against him or something??

Too may of you seem to think that you are the next Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters, and that your opinion of journalistic professionalism matters in the slightest, but you are wrong.

If you really cared about stale, frumpy journalistic tactics over entertainment value, you wouldn't get your news here. You'd go to some boring, stale, uninteresting site like Fox News, and waste your inane venom on their articles.


RE: Worst piece of drivel ever on DT?
By bennyg on 3/15/2011 11:25:16 PM , Rating: 2
The puns were great. I wouldn't have read it without the title that's for sure. In reality I don't really care whether I know drugtarded senile ex-rockstars think.

As for "celebrity journalism"... I don't care who writes something, I don't even look at by-lines. I don't care who Mick Jason is. I read content and decide for myself and keep an open mind whether it sounds like ranty drivel or something to file away in the back of the brain.

I just think all the references were missed by the kiddies who wouldn't know one mullets from another.


By morphologia on 3/16/2011 3:30:36 PM , Rating: 2
Bon Jovi didn't have a mullet back in the day. He had girly hair. There's a difference. :p


RE: Worst piece of drivel ever on DT?
By mindless1 on 3/16/2011 1:12:15 AM , Rating: 1
I wouldn't call it worst ever, but yes it was annoying and unoriginal after the 2nd or 3rd time.


RE: Worst piece of drivel ever on DT?
By morphologia on 3/16/2011 3:29:14 PM , Rating: 2
What is "original?" Nowadays you'd have to invent your own language and culture from scratch to do something truly "original." Calling something unoriginal is a waste of time and effort. Better to judge the cheese factor in terms of degrees, rather than whether you've heard it before.

I just think this comment forum (like all such) is infested with Comic Book Guy types. "Worst...demographic...ever."


By mindless1 on 3/18/2011 8:34:11 PM , Rating: 2
original is doing it the first time, not the 2nd or 3rd... that's kinda what original means???


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki