Greg X. Volz - God Only Knows is available!!

Talk about Petra albums, songs, and concerts.
brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4305
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 148

Post by brent » Sun Mar 15, 2009 7:05 am

separateunion wrote:God forbid we don't drop $15 per album.
What's wrong with that? $15 bucks for something that lasts forever if you take care of it? The cost of records has not incresed in 20 years. In fact it has dropped from the $25-30 when it was released in 1981, to $9 (and even $5 for re-releases/compilations, in a recession at Walmart!). Man, how we forget our past.

The average cost for a record from the big three is around $10. There are an average of 10 songs on a record. $1 a tune for an MP3 is not that good of a dea compared to a CD, which has better fidelity (no data compression or loass of information, phasing, loss of stereo imaging, download times, etc). CD's are the way to go sonically and they benefit the artists directly. The artists see little to no money selling downloads even at $1 a tune. Apple and the others don't even make money selling them. The only reason they do is to create demand for iPods.

Thats ok. You cheapos keep on complaining and cheaping out on the artists and see how long they stay at it. I think the bible has something to say about robbery, paying a man his wage for his work, and in the case of church, bridling the ox.

Why don't people expect free concerts as well?
0 x

St_Augustines_Pears
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 12:57 pm
#1 Album: GOD FIXATION
Pethead since: 1999
Location: Dead Moines, IA
x 5

Post by St_Augustines_Pears » Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:02 am

brent wrote:The average cost for a record from the big three is around $10. There are an average of 10 songs on a record. $1 a tune for an MP3 is not that good of a dea compared to a CD, which has better fidelity (no data compression or loass of information, phasing, loss of stereo imaging, download times, etc). CD's are the way to go sonically and they benefit the artists directly. The artists see little to no money selling downloads even at $1 a tune. Apple and the others don't even make money selling them. The only reason they do is to create demand for iPods.
I did not know that.

brent wrote:Thats ok. You cheapos keep on complaining and cheaping out on the artists and see how long they stay at it. I think the bible has something to say about robbery, paying a man his wage for his work, and in the case of church, bridling the ox.
You know he's right.

When Sue said that John's 1st album, SHAKE, was now out-of-print, my reaction was, "Crap! How am I gonna replace my scratched up copy?". Brent said just buy a used copy off of Ebay, and then give John the money directly.

So currently, I'm looking on Ebay for a mint copy of SHAKE, and if I buy it, the next time I see John in concert, I'll hand him $15.00 (on top of all the other merch I plan to buy 8) ).
0 x
THOMAS R. LEHMER 6/7/44-2/11/05.

"This journey seems so long, as I await the dawn...all alone and so weary" - Petra's "Over The Horizon"

executioner
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:56 am
#1 Album: JAH
Pethead since: 1980
Location: Earth
x 55

Post by executioner » Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:00 am

brent wrote:
separateunion wrote:God forbid we don't drop $15 per album.
What's wrong with that? $15 bucks for something that lasts forever if you take care of it? The cost of records has not incresed in 20 years. In fact it has dropped from the $25-30 when it was released in 1981, to $9 (and even $5 for re-releases/compilations, in a recession at Walmart!). Man, how we forget our past.

The average cost for a record from the big three is around $10. There are an average of 10 songs on a record. $1 a tune for an MP3 is not that good of a dea compared to a CD, which has better fidelity (no data compression or loass of information, phasing, loss of stereo imaging, download times, etc). CD's are the way to go sonically and they benefit the artists directly. The artists see little to no money selling downloads even at $1 a tune. Apple and the others don't even make money selling them. The only reason they do is to create demand for iPods.

Thats ok. You cheapos keep on complaining and cheaping out on the artists and see how long they stay at it. I think the bible has something to say about robbery, paying a man his wage for his work, and in the case of church, bridling the ox.

Why don't people expect free concerts as well?
Brent has a good point. You all always complain about paying $13-$15 for a CD, and that price is nothing compared to the benefits you reap from hearing the good music and message from these artists, and to top it all off you get to keep it for the rest of your days.
How many cups of coffee do you all get each week @ Starbucks? How many times a month you all go get a meal @ Chili's, Applebees, and Fridays and easily put down $15-$20 per person? To think that these rewards are on very limited time frame before you have to go sit on the crapper.
If I was an artist and I heard you complaining about buying one of my CD's for $15; I would tell you to get your priorities straight and not to buy my CD because I wouldn't want someones money that is a cheapsake.
0 x

Shell
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 3242
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:26 am
#1 Album: Beyond Belief
Pethead since: 1985
Location: L.A. area
x 43
Contact:

Post by Shell » Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:09 am

The downloading issue is one of those topics that doesn't seem to go away...

I don't have a background in the music biz, so I don't really know how royalties and all works, other than it's a share of however much music is sold. I would be willing to assume the record companies aren't as concerned about the artist getting paid as they are with their own profit and/or benfit. (That's not a jab at record companies specifically, that's just the business world). I was under the impression so long as you were paying for what you downloaded it was legal. It shouldn't necessarily have to be a well-known site like iTunes so long as you're paying for it.

Whatever the case, the Internet has opened up access to a lot of different things, including music, and it will probably always be an issue as long as we have the Internet.
0 x

imc
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:40 am

Post by imc » Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:18 am

Talk about flogging a dead donkey! The recording industry as it was is dead, even if it is desperately trying to convince people otherwise! The internet changed everything, now that you can get a decent quality digital recording of anything you want for free it's only a matter of time before no one is prepared to pay $15 for something they can get quicker and easier for free.

I'm not condoning illegal downloading of music, I'm saying that the music industry is changing beyond recognition, especially the revenue streams. Advertising is likely to play a big part in the future, for example Spotify (which has Petra's whole back catalogue on!) or Pandora, (both of which have correctly realised that you can only fight illegal free music with legal free music) or bands signing with brands instead of labels. Exactly how the industry will continue to make money is unclear, but what is clear is that it won't be through selling $15 plastic disks, most teenagers today don't even own a CD album!

As for itunes not making any money on the downloads, not sure where that data comes from. It's reliably believed they make 10-15% profit on each track, and considering they sell billions a year - that's quite a tidy amount of money!
0 x

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4305
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 148

Post by brent » Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:32 pm

The recording industry is not dead. That is absurd. It is still a multi-billion dollar business. Labels are spending as much money as they did five years ago on artists, marketing, etc. They are just spending it in different places, on different people. Is it down? Yes. Are there less people involved? Yes. That is a good thing. There were too many people in it for the wrong reasons.

The sales numbers that we all see from the RIAA do NOT include indies and un-tracked, non-UPC coded product. There are more indies (new unsigned and old, former RIAA'd unsigned) artists than ever. People that were successful as a result of being signed have crested and now are on their own selling hundreds of thousands exclusively through retailers like Target, Walmart, etc. Those numbers are not added into the RIAA's numbers.

To clarify:

1. Re: my comment about a site where demand determines prices on the front side. There is a rule that the largest and most successful, highest stock valued, retailer lives by. You can NEVER successfully raise prices and maintain sales. You can only cut prices and maintain sales. Walmart knows something about that. Once people are used to free or darn near free anything, they will buck when they have to start paying for it. That site will not last. I will place money on that.

2. I am not saying that if you buy a used out of print record on ebay that you should send $15 to the artist. That's silly. All I said in that previous conversation was this: if you buy it used or new from a supplier that is not paying the artist, and you want to support the artist because you are blessed and or impressed with the work, then send the artist 3 bucks or so, because that is the most the artist would have received on a label.

3. Given the choice of CD or downloads for the same money, buy CDs. CDs sound better, they last longer, and the artist makes more money selling phyical product than with digital downloads in many cases.

CD sales at concerts go to the artist most of the time. Secular shows usually see a 50/50 split of merch receipts with the promoter. Christian shows, especially in churches, the artist can get it all.

4. Re: iTunes and the other big three download services. Unsigned artists do not just pay itunes their 10%. They can't even GET on iTunes on their own. They pay a handler to get them onto iTunes. The artist pays a set up fee per song, set up fee per record per year, in some cases membership fees. Some of these handlers keep close to 40%! By the time the artist pays royalties, etc, there isn't much left, if anything at all.

5. There will never be a new business model. There is nothing wrong with the old one really. There is corruption, but we have that in the church, TV ministries, government, car manufacturers, union halls, colleges, etc. The model itself is fine. There is no other way that it can be done.

People make music. That costs money. If they want to sound like commercial records, they need to use the same gear, facilities and people. That costs money. The music needs to be sold. That costs money. To be sold, demand needs to be created. Publicity, marketing, touring, ariplay, etc...all cost money. Big money. The music needs to be in the top retail and download providers. That costs money. No matter what, someone has to front the money for all of this. Banks won't do it. Rich people and networked loan sharks (labels) will. As long as commerce is involved with the music, there will always be this model.

The music industry is not alone. Print media is having a VERY hard time finding ways to make money on-line. It is nearly impossible. So internet commerce is not the solution. It is only part of an answer to the solution to a different question.
0 x

St_Augustines_Pears
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 12:57 pm
#1 Album: GOD FIXATION
Pethead since: 1999
Location: Dead Moines, IA
x 5

Post by St_Augustines_Pears » Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:37 pm

brent wrote:I am not saying that if you buy a used out of print record on ebay that you should send $15 to the artist. That's silly. All I said in that previous conversation was this: if you buy it used or new from a supplier that is not paying the artist, and you want to support the artist because you are blessed and or impressed with the work, then send the artist 3 bucks or so, because that is the most the artist would have received on a label.
Seriously, I want to give John the whole $15.00. His work, whether with Petra or his solo career, has blessed me so much through the years. It's my small way of saying "thank you".
0 x
THOMAS R. LEHMER 6/7/44-2/11/05.

"This journey seems so long, as I await the dawn...all alone and so weary" - Petra's "Over The Horizon"

User avatar
separateunion
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 4:20 pm
Location: Char's House
Contact:

Post by separateunion » Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:15 am

brent wrote:
separateunion wrote:God forbid we don't drop $15 per album.
What's wrong with that? $15 bucks for something that lasts forever if you take care of it?
What's wrong with it? It adds up. I'd only be able to buy from a select few artists every year if I was always dropping $15-$20 per CD. That's 5-7 per $100. The issue I take is that you get upset and assume something is illegal because they aren't charging full price for a CD. It's a ripoff. About the only way I'll buy a CD anymore is direct from the artist either via website or at a concert.
Why don't people expect free concerts as well?
People don't go to nearly as many concerts a year as they buy albums. I'll gladly drop $20 for a concert once every month or two. I'd even maybe do it twice a month, but there's no way I'm going to as many concerts as CDs I purchase per year. Not even close. There's also the fact that there is generally more than 1 band playing and you can get autographs and possibly talk to the band, so it's a bit of a novelty.

Like I've said before, if I had not been able to download music, I'd never have gone to many of the concerts I did because I didn't get to hear the music beforehand. The bands would have made less money because I wouldn't have bought tickets, t-shirts, Cds (at the concert), etc. I also still pre-order CDs from my favorite bands, but I do so from their website, not at Sam Goody.
0 x
"Daylight, save me..."

User avatar
separateunion
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 4:20 pm
Location: Char's House
Contact:

Post by separateunion » Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:24 am

executioner wrote:Brent has a good point. You all always complain about paying $13-$15 for a CD, and that price is nothing compared to the benefits you reap from hearing the good music and message from these artists, and to top it all off you get to keep it for the rest of your days.
Except, I listen to very little music from the Christian Music Industry anymore. Many of the CDs that I paid $15-$20 for are collecting dust on a shelf because I don't like the music anymore.
How many cups of coffee do you all get each week @ Starbucks?
Maybe one every three months.
How many times a month you all go get a meal @ Chili's, Applebees, and Fridays and easily put down $15-$20 per person? To think that these rewards are on very limited time frame before you have to go sit on the crapper.
I've been to Chili's once in the last four months, but regardless, comparing a necessity like food with a non-necessity like a CD is kinda ridiculous.
If I was an artist and I heard you complaining about buying one of my CD's for $15; I would tell you to get your priorities straight and not to buy my CD because I wouldn't want someones money that is a cheapsake.
Priorities? Really? Since when is buying music a priority? I's a luxury. It's that kind of thinking that's got the US economy in shambles right now. Maybe someone who makes $40k plus a year can consider it a priority, but those of us who make money near or at the poverty level can't say the same. Call it being a cheapskate if you want, I call it making my PRIORITIES paying my bills.
0 x
"Daylight, save me..."

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4305
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 148

Post by brent » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:59 am

separateunion wrote:
brent wrote:
separateunion wrote:God forbid we don't drop $15 per album.
What's wrong with that? $15 bucks for something that lasts forever if you take care of it?
What's wrong with it? It adds up. I'd only be able to buy from a select few artists every year if I was always dropping $15-$20 per CD. That's 5-7 per $100. The issue I take is that you get upset and assume something is illegal because they aren't charging full price for a CD. It's a ripoff. About the only way I'll buy a CD anymore is direct from the artist either via website or at a concert.
Why don't people expect free concerts as well?
People don't go to nearly as many concerts a year as they buy albums. I'll gladly drop $20 for a concert once every month or two. I'd even maybe do it twice a month, but there's no way I'm going to as many concerts as CDs I purchase per year. Not even close. There's also the fact that there is generally more than 1 band playing and you can get autographs and possibly talk to the band, so it's a bit of a novelty.

Like I've said before, if I had not been able to download music, I'd never have gone to many of the concerts I did because I didn't get to hear the music beforehand. The bands would have made less money because I wouldn't have bought tickets, t-shirts, Cds (at the concert), etc. I also still pre-order CDs from my favorite bands, but I do so from their website, not at Sam Goody.
I too would like to have every artist's CD that I like. But that is not reality. You have to budget and work for more. I would love to have more gear in my studio but I cannot afford it. My wife and kids would like to have more clothes. I would love to pay more bills. But I have to budget and do what I can.

This is hard for the US culture today to choke but music is not a right or an entitlement. Music is not an essential. Music has a cost like anything else. There is supply and demand. We all have to shop, budget and spend wisely. It is not the artist's fault that we cannot spend more and yet want more.

The average cost of CD sold in the USA from the big three is around $10. The average downloaded album in $10. People complaining about spending $10 are either not in a position to be spending $10 to begin with, or are mismanaging money.

Again, support the artist paying his or her expenses for their work. Don't pay excessive media store mark-ups. Shop smart from AUTHORIZED and LEGAL sources.
0 x

imc
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:40 am

Post by imc » Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:31 am

brent wrote:The recording industry is not dead. That is absurd.
I never said it was dead, I said that as it was it was dead. The primary revenue stream of selling CD albums is if not dead, on its last legs. Next time you're around a bunch of teenagers, find out how many of them own a CD album - you might be suprised! Both you and me know that CD's sound better, but that's because we've grown up with that quality of audio. The emerging and future record growing public on the whole are quite happy with the quality of mp3's, and as bandwidth and storage drops in price the quality of the files will increase, as it already has done on itunes.

Even at concerts bands are resorting to digital means, I was at a delirious concert not long ago, and to promote their new single they put a number up on the screens for fans to text - and in response they would have the single downloaded to their phone (for the cost of the premium SMS). Think of the convenience to the consumer and the band, not to mention savings on manufacturing. They probably sold a few hundred before the gig had finished.

Like it or not, selling music as physical product is not the future, I'd even wager that selling music will not be the music industries primary revenue stream in the future either, as pointed out by some of the examples in my previous post. Like you say, there is supply and demand - and the demand for CD albums is running dry.

I am loads more selective with the music I buy today, because I can listen to full albums on services such as lastfm and spotify in high quality for free (and legally), so I only buy the music I really, really love. Why would I do anything else?
0 x

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4305
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 148

Post by brent » Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:20 pm

imc wrote:
brent wrote:The recording industry is not dead. That is absurd.
I never said it was dead, I said that as it was it was dead. The primary revenue stream of selling CD albums is if not dead, on its last legs. Next time you're around a bunch of teenagers, find out how many of them own a CD album - you might be suprised! Both you and me know that CD's sound better, but that's because we've grown up with that quality of audio. The emerging and future record growing public on the whole are quite happy with the quality of mp3's, and as bandwidth and storage drops in price the quality of the files will increase, as it already has done on itunes.

Even at concerts bands are resorting to digital means, I was at a delirious concert not long ago, and to promote their new single they put a number up on the screens for fans to text - and in response they would have the single downloaded to their phone (for the cost of the premium SMS). Think of the convenience to the consumer and the band, not to mention savings on manufacturing. They probably sold a few hundred before the gig had finished.

Like it or not, selling music as physical product is not the future, I'd even wager that selling music will not be the music industries primary revenue stream in the future either, as pointed out by some of the examples in my previous post. Like you say, there is supply and demand - and the demand for CD albums is running dry.

I am loads more selective with the music I buy today, because I can listen to full albums on services such as lastfm and spotify in high quality for free (and legally), so I only buy the music I really, really love. Why would I do anything else?
Listening to music free does not help the artist cover their expenses or fund more. If this keeps up, you will not see artists sticking it out. You will always be listening to rookie artists that never develop and mature with time. That's the big deal now. No longevity. There is currently no culture in any music genre for artists to develop. They must have hits on album one and so on.

Not including the hundreds of thousands of indie releases (signed and unsigned), 2008 accounted for 428.4 million units (down 8.5 percent from 500.5 million in 2007). CD sales fell 20% to 362.6 million from 450.5 million. Digital album sales increased 32% to a record 65.8 million units. Apple was up 27%. So CDs are still dominating. At shows, download cards are not selling well for bands. They have flopped at retailers. CDs are instant gratification.

You are correct. The kids are not the future salvation of the music industry unfortunately. Kids do not have or spend the money that moves the economy either. It is the 20s and 30 somethings that can change some things. They have some money to play with.

Then we must consider the fact that not everyone is on the web with a computer. Some people are using phones exclusively. Some people are not on the web at all, or have geographic limitations on fast service. So as long as there are people without computers, phones, iPods, etc, there will be a CD provided. It is going to take another couple of decades before the CD, or someother backward compatible disc, goes completely away.

There is a huge indie movement. Indie labels are doing serious business. So we cannot make assumptions about the business as a whole, because the RIAA is going to slant numbers, retailers are going to slant numbers, Apple is going to slant numbers, all in the name of self preservation. Until there is a universal, free (or darn near free) way to document every physical and download purchase, we will only have vague numbers.

I know this. CD Baby saw an increase of nearly 30% in royalty checks to indie artists in 2008, who sold about 35 MILLION dollars worth of music uncounted for by the RIAA. There are many others out there like CD Baby. So, the machine is just morphing and changing hands. But at the end of the day, some machine is selling music to those willing to pay for it.
0 x

cndfogie
Pethead
Pethead
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:38 pm

Post by cndfogie » Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:25 pm

My goodness did I ever open a can of worms....mmmmm...well brent, This "cheapo" loves free or "cheap" tunes always has and always will. And my question is Who made you God over all thing in the music industry?? I throw some info out there that people can do with what they want and am called names?? Honestly I don't know who the hell you think you are? I can say this is that you and your holier than thou attitude really shows the kind of blow hard you really are. To the admins go ahead and delete this as well as my account with TPZ.net. Honestly it seems posting here does more harm than good. I can go away knowing the mighty hand of brent smiteth me down.. Oh well. Have fun keeping the "Petra candle" burnin.
0 x

brent
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Extreme Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 4305
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:06 am
x 148

Post by brent » Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:12 am

No many made me God. Look, I own and operate a business that provides studio services, rentals, etc. Before that I toured for about 10 years with some of the largest sound companies in the US as well as some Grammy, CMA and GMA artists as their engineer and manager. I know the mechanics and the production side of the music business very well. I am offering a solution to the artists that are trying hard to stay at it. You are not.

The ONLY artists supporting free music are those that cannot get a distribution or record deal and need the exposure. They think that exposure will create sales. Not so. Not all of the time. Again, it's simple economics and histiry does not lie.

Call John and Bob. Ask these two people who had to go millions in debt to make Petra happen if free music would have been their choice over record/CD/tape/LP revenue. Heck, as John right now how easy it is to compete with your own free product on the net, while trying to recover 40-50k dollars for the production of a CD. Free is the devil in this case.

The artsists are seeing concert revenues go down. Pollstar reveals that there are more live acts than ever. There is only so much money to be had. Live shows were the only way to really make a living. Since concert revenues are down, merch sales are down.

It is getting harder for bands to make good sounding recordings in good studios with good producers, engineers, etc. With all of the artists revenue going down and in some cases away, how DO YOU propose that that artists make the money to make their music?
0 x

User avatar
separateunion
Pethead Fanatic
Pethead Fanatic
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 4:20 pm
Location: Char's House
Contact:

Post by separateunion » Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:32 pm

brent wrote:The ONLY artists supporting free music are those that cannot get a distribution or record deal and need the exposure.
That's a lie and you know it. Many popular artists support the sharing of their music for free.
0 x
"Daylight, save me..."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 103 guests