the ethics of file-sharing in experimental music

[schiksalgemeinschaft]

i think my whole point is that all the stuff you just described is bad. bad for music, bad for the artists, and bad for the format.

you're just giving more reasons why it's bad. or maybe just restating the ones i already gave.

m

Okay, but that basically boils down to saying "the supply demand price setting system is bad". I agree more or less, but don't see a workable alternative.

I don't think the system necessarily leads to bad music/etc., lots of great albums have come out the last 5 years, not only in the field of improvisation. Albums like 'The Room', etc., etc., were made for the format (correct me if wrong Jon), so...

I agree that when an art form sells it heart to commerce totally, it'll be bad in 98% of cases.

[Gaendaal]

I bought a CD from an actual shop, took it home and listened to it in its entirety on a CD player for the first time in maybe a year yesterday.

Crazy times.

[mudd]

Okay, but that basically boils down to saying "the supply demand price setting system is bad". I agree more or less, but don't see a workable alternative.

no, i'm saying the business model is bad. you can't balance supply and demand when the product can be infinitely reproduced for free. the entire concept of what the 'supply' is in music is obsolete. it only still exists because nobody else has established an alternative yet either. but the outcome of pursuing an obsolete business model is eventually nobody gets paid.

m

[presquepartout]

a two things i haven't seen addressed in this thread

-for those defending piracy as a means of exploration, your argument is anecdotal and ignores both the counterfactual and larger picture. without piracy, it's not clear whether you would or would not have gotten into this experimental music. the fact that you do now enjoy said music suggests that you have (had) the capacity to the enjoy experimental music. you could, maybe not as easily, stumble upon this music through more conventional means--word of mouth, buying a cd on a whim, reading a damn good review, etc. moreover, although piracy has led to possibly a purchase for y'all, think of all of the individuals who, upon sampling an album through an mp3, decided not to purchase the album. from the perspective of a label and musician, try-before-you-buy has a dual, negative component.

-the debate surrounding aural quality of 320 v. lossless v. cd is probably irrelevant to today's youth. for those who have grown up listening to 192kbps files, i doubt their ears are even attuned to granular refinements found on a well-produced cd. moreover, it's likely the case that even if they have a preference for these details, financial and liquidity constraints probably trump these perceived small differences.

[surfer]

……………………………………………

I’ve found this discussion useful in that it’s brought up some new ideas and helped concretise others that have been circling for a while, and which I shall now try to implement at Another Timbre over the next year or so. Most immediately I’ve had an idea that when the next batch of AT discs comes out, I shall state clearly and publicly that I don’t want anyone to fileshare the music for a period of 3 months after the release date (as it seems that generally 80-90% of sales occur within the first 3 months of a disc’s release). I think Michael P is right in saying that “the vast majority involved in the music are a pretty ethical, responsible bunch”, and I'd like to think that within such a tight-knit (if geographically far-flung) community as ours, some such voluntary code of practice could become standardised for new releases on all non-profit labels. Or am I being naive?

It may end up being naive, but I do think its a good strategy to publicly say that you dont want anyone sharing the release digitally within 3 months of the release date, Simon. Its a reasonable request. Additionally, I think its a good idea to perhaps think about some other strategies that non-profits and charities use to encourage philanthropy. Two ideas that came to mind are:

1) a Another Timbre Club of some sort, whereby a patron pays, say, $100 at the beginning of the year, and not only receives all of the AT releases for the year, but receives them one month before everyone else, maybe gets limited release goodies, t-shirt, special CD release parties or concerts, whatever. The advantage to this is you receive the money up front and can use it to finance other releases, or even the releases in the upcoming year. Vineyards in this area all have these clubs, and its a great way to engage the listener in the label itself, not just individual releases, and make them feel like they are contributing to its future.

2) Show exactly where the cost of each CD or download goes. For example:

CD costs $10: $1 to graphic design, $4 to production of CD and booklet, $3 to artist, $2 to label to finance future releases.

Donors to charities always want to know specifically how their money is being used, and the more transparent you can be, the more a donor/consumer can make a educated and ethical choice about supporting this music. This is perhaps even more important in the case of pay-for-download, because I'm sure a lot of people think a dl costs "nothing", and so dont feel a need to pay for the digital file. How much goes to the artist, label, for maintaining the website?

I have other ideas adapted from the non-profit sphere that may not by as good a fit. Nevertheless, its important that labels and musicians start thinking beyond the business supply / demand model (as mark pointed out) and start looking to other models for adaptation strategies. I think non-profits and philanthropic models may offer some ideas.

Someone else pointed out that artists should be compensated for creation, and not for distribution. That is philanthropy; a patronage model, as opposed to a goods / capital model.

[RFKorp]

you could, maybe not as easily, stumble upon this music through more conventional means--word of mouth, buying a cd on a whim, reading a damn good review, etc.

yeah, this. I mean. I'm younger than Kirby and I even found my way to this music by just buying shit. (Though, for the record, I completely respect his experience and find no fault with it.) Reading lists of musicians in the liner notes of releases I like and then buying other things when I recognize names. Grabbing discs purely based on cover art. Or recomendations by record shop staff. There was a time when even the novelty of finding a DIY-assembled cdr in a slimline case in the jazz section of Tower Records was enough to get me to give something a shot.

Also regularly going to concerts by bands I didn't know but at venues I felt were attuned to my taste introduced me to tons of new sounds (and immediate cd purchases if I liked the show). Although I already owned a couple Erstwhile cds (I think a used copy of the Otomo/Voice Crack was my initial label gateway but I hadn't noted the label name or looked up the rest of its discography) the first time I ever heard of Keith Rowe or Christian Fennesz was when I went on a whim to their solos/duo show Jon organized at Tonic purely because the venue's promo blurb called them something like "world class improvisers."

And listening to your friends' copies of albums wasn't even the only way to preview music. I bought plenty of CDs at Downtown Music Gallery heavily influenced by the fact that Bruce or Manny would pop 'em into the stereo and play the disc for me. - but I do realize living in NYC with access to stores like this that specialized in less conventional music (and so many venues hosting it) definitely made my journey easier.

Honestly, I sometimes worry I've probably discovered a lot less variety now that my options for browsing racks of CDs in person are so diminished by the increasing move to an online shopping system. The impulse buys that led me to all this are kinda a thing of the past now.

[RFKorp]

To add one more digression, branching off from Simon's point above - do the label owners and musicians here find Simon's sales patterns to hold true for them? I ask as I routinely post my writing about a release 3-6 months following its release; I am wondering if reviews that appear along that time-line serve a little to remind people of a release after its initial appearance, or make no difference. The consensus opinion I recall from prior discussions is that reviews have zero-minimal impact on sales of this music anyway.

Personally, I'd say the reviews pay off.

They're definitely a good reminder for me personally when there's something relatively new out that I had wanted to pick up but put off and forgot about for some reason.

But also, my experience running my own label was previously one of a surge of orders within like the first three weeks. and then barely anything. but with Anne Guthrie's CD (that's getting more reviews and internet talk than previous discs), it gets yet a few more orders within the weeks following each new review. Though it is still in Simon's declared 3-month window, so time will tell.

[frogger]

A few more thoughts on my own personal cd buying, listening and downloading practices over the years, which may or may not apply more generally:

When I used to have more income and buy 50 or so cd's a year, some were a gamble. I could not always preview them depending on the store I went to. Some, to this day, have been barely listened to. Others I grew into over time, some were simply sold or in rare cases given away. I did not always feel i got good value out of my purchases.

My mp3 collection, mostly illegal, consists of many mp3's barely listened to. Occasionally I mass delete a bunch of records, others sit around for quite awhile because I either forget about them or I think I might come back to them in the future. A handful of them I listen to frequently. I download more now partially because I can and partially because I have a lower income. I still purchase some cd's, and also support artists in other ways, such as concert attendance and in my efforts promoting and organizing shows throughout the years. But its decreased as my rent went up, disposable income went down, etc.

I feel that if my income were higher, I would purchase more cd's and likely get more into vinyl. For now, its not reasonable for me to do so. However, I think I would still download, and likely download more than I could still afford or even listen to carefully. I think this last point has an upside and a downside. The upside is that I would be purchasing more, and beyond my purchasing power, listening to downloads of even more artists and expanding my appreciation of the art form. It might pay off in the future, perhaps if my income were higher, the artist were touring, or my tastes shifted more towards that artist's style and less towards whatever it was i was formerly purchasing. The downside, or maybe a downside, is that I'm still not paying for everything i enjoy, and that there are more and more artists (via my awareness via downloading and an expanding global set of music producers) potentially competing for my paying attention, so maybe, it might average out to less of my money for a particular artists and more for artists in general. I'm not sure, but it seems a possibility.

[washline]

cds are as obsolete as vinyl records or cassettes. they are inefficient, over-priced, and all too often unappealing. as of today the main reasons to buy cds are specifically to support the artist or to collect/obtain the art object. that's probably a harder-line statement than how i really feel, but if it's not true already it's not far off. legal downloads through bandcamp, itunes, or wherever will eventually overtake the first of those reasons. music releases might end up like prints or even paintings, available for the wealthy collector but otherwise completely replaced by mp3s as postcards.

Actually, vinyl records used to be obsolete. They aren't anymore. They happen to be one area where record labels are making money once again, albeit with smaller, specialized audiences. CD is indeed a dying format, but CD prices in general have come down a great deal in general. In the areas of experimental music, they remain a bit high but probably necessarily so as the volume of sales is quite small.

[schiksalgemeinschaft]

Okay, but that basically boils down to saying "the supply demand price setting system is bad". I agree more or less, but don't see a workable alternative.

no, i'm saying the business model is bad. you can't balance supply and demand when the product can be infinitely reproduced for free. the entire concept of what the 'supply' is in music is obsolete. it only still exists because nobody else has established an alternative yet either. but the outcome of pursuing an obsolete business model is eventually nobody gets paid.

m

thanks for the clarification, I agree.

[schiksalgemeinschaft]

pay upfront ... maybe gets limited release goodies, t-shirt, special CD release parties or concerts, whatever.

I'm not sure if subscription systems would work: I think they have low appeal since hardly nobody wants to buy all releases of a label (this might work if you know the full publishing schedule of a year upfront, but that kinda boils down to the package deals AT or Cathnor or ... often use anyhow.

About the goodies, shirts, etc.: I'd think this is for kids and teens. Not sure if t-shirts in this realm of music sell. Collectible, rare releases might add something yes, but also have extra production costs. And access to release parties/concerts works only for the few people living in the country/city of the label. Hardly a way to appeal to international customers. Fan clubs with extra's etc. seem to me to be more the trademark of artists like Britney Spears and Metallica.

2) Show exactly where the cost of each CD or download goes. For example:
CD costs $10: $1 to graphic design, $4 to production of CD and booklet, $3 to artist, $2 to label to finance future releases.

This might help raise awareness, yes, but I don't think it would convince many diehard downloaders. I mean, people that d/l taomud without ever paying for the bulk of it, seem to me to have limited ethics anyhow, or ethics corrupted by poverty.

Someone else pointed out that artists should be compensated for creation, and not for distribution. That is philanthropy; a patronage model, as opposed to a goods / capital model.

Playing this kind of music seems to me to be philanthropy, as is trying to run a label to distribute this music (granted, maybe via an obsolete business model) without cutting deep in your own financial skin.

-----

It's what Faster said some pages back: what are we talking about here? The music industry are cooperate fucks, let them bleed. Did anybody of the label owners of taomud on this board thought they would earn a living when they started a label for music that only has a scene of "150 people"? And did the label owners in the pre-internet days that released very obscure music do this for a living? No, these things have mostly been a labor of lover for ever. If Jon hadn't got out before the bubble burst, I'm guessing there would be no ErstWhile.

There probably are some labels that fall a bit in-between the division L.O.L.-corporate (maybe the likes of Leo, Emanem, etc. I dunno, but EFI seems to have (had) a much wider appeal anyhow. Or a label like HatHut, but that has been heavily funded by sponsors, Swiss state, etc. I don't think Evan Parker is making money with Psi, nor that that ever has been his intention. Etc., Etc.)

Let's not forget that without the internet, the (post)-EAI scene would probably be not half as active as it is now, not so widespread, etc. as it is now.

I do not believe it is a coincidence that about 10-12 years ago, when internet became widespread and easily available for intellectuals, "eai" started to arise (give or take). People ask about the importance of reviews. Of course they are important. Which worldwide distributed zine would have printed a review for Do? (Except for The Wire maybe?). I think the influence of this board and blogs like Brian's are not to be underestimated. Not everybody has an older brother, and not everybody lives nearby places were there's an EAI gig each month. I'm just saying.


----

one more thing about the business model being obsolete - vinyl maybe shows that being obsolete might be temporarily (but then again, maybe this upsurge of vinyl is temporary itself). I have the feeling that for independent/DIY/niche/toamud music their always will be a market of ethical buyers interested in buying the physical objects as a representation of something more than computer files, not even taking the back up-factor into account.

Look at the metal scene: there is a very solid base of people who buy albums, and when I buy a metal album, I'm often amazed about the expensive packaging and the likes - this expensive packaging trend hasn't decreased in the last 10-15 years, on the contrary, and the number of metal releases hasn't gone down, it probably has risen, as has the number of labels. I feel no crisis of the music industry in that scene, on the contrary. The internet is first and foremost a blessing for the human race.

[mudd]

cds are as obsolete as vinyl records or cassettes. they are inefficient, over-priced, and all too often unappealing. as of today the main reasons to buy cds are specifically to support the artist or to collect/obtain the art object. that's probably a harder-line statement than how i really feel, but if it's not true already it's not far off. legal downloads through bandcamp, itunes, or wherever will eventually overtake the first of those reasons. music releases might end up like prints or even paintings, available for the wealthy collector but otherwise completely replaced by mp3s as postcards.

Actually, vinyl records used to be obsolete. They aren't anymore. They happen to be one area where record labels are making money once again, albeit with smaller, specialized audiences. CD is indeed a dying format, but CD prices in general have come down a great deal in general. In the areas of experimental music, they remain a bit high but probably necessarily so as the volume of sales is quite small.

i guess i was talking about vinyl being technologically obsolete. as far as a medium of distribution for new and reissued music vinyl is clearly very much alive. i think the new vinyl market is indicative of an audience willing to overlook or even seek out inconvenience in order to demonstrate their support of the music. cassette culture even more so, though it's also even smaller.

mississippi records makes a pretty swift business selling cheap (both in price and to some extent quality) records of their favorite music, obscurities or whichever. to me its a perfect example of label as curator.

m

[surfer]

While I agree with a lot of what you wrote Schiksal, and appreciate the comments, the idea wasnt to present a perfect silver bullet solution to this difficult problem. It was to throw out ideas that may or may not be useful, but are at least looking at the problem from a different perspective. A few additional thoughts and some rebuttals:

pay upfront ... maybe get limited release goodies, t-shirt, special CD release parties or concerts, whatever.

I'm not sure if subscription systems would work: I think they have low appeal since hardly nobody wants to buy all releases of a label (this might work if you know the full publishing schedule of a year upfront, but that kinda boils down to the package deals AT or Cathnor or ... often use anyhow.

Depending on the details and the perks, I would definitely consider joining such a "club" or subscription service for AT or Erstwhile (though the Sachiko or Toshi CDs I'd probably pass on ), and would definitely join one for Gravity Wave. Agreed about publishing schedule, but again, the idea is to build loyalty to the label rather than individual releases.
(MIssissippi Records, Erstwhile, AT, Soul Jazz all have loyal followings because of the quality of their releases, and than includes packaging)

About the goodies, shirts, etc.: I'd think this is for kids and teens. Not sure if t-shirts in this realm of music sell. Collectible, rare releases might add something yes, but also have extra production costs. And access to release parties/concerts works only for the few people living in the country/city of the label. Hardly a way to appeal to international customers. Fan clubs with extra's etc. seem to me to be more the trademark of artists like Britney Spears and Metallica.

Kids and teens are passionate about music as are we. Not sure why you're making a distinction here. Are you saying that eai denizens arent materialistic? Doubtful. It depends on what the item is. I'm sure many people on this board have t-shirts they like to wear related to music or musicians. It doesnt even have to say the label or the musician, just art of some sort. How about a t-shirt with just the eclair from Weather Sky on it? Its iconic. How about a black t with the chairs from the Erstlive series? A t-shirt that says, "I'm one of the 125 on earth who listens to eai". Doesnt have to be clothing. Signed score from Michael P? This isnt a new idea obviously. When I renew my membership with Surfrider, I get a choice of items. And some people probably dont want any of it. You're not forced to have it. Chacun a son gout.

Because of AT's London location, and Erstwhile in NY, release parties or concerts for members (SF Jazz reserves its front 3 rows for members only) is a definite possibilty. Of course it doesnt work for me because I'm in California, but I'm ok with that. Again, these ideas arent bulletproof and wont work for everyone, but I think people would understand that.

2) Show exactly where the cost of each CD or download goes. For example:
CD costs $10: $1 to graphic design, $4 to production of CD and booklet, $3 to artist, $2 to label to finance future releases.

This might help raise awareness, yes, but I don't think it would convince many diehard downloaders. I mean, people that d/l taomud without ever paying for the bulk of it, seem to me to have limited ethics anyhow, or ethics corrupted by poverty.

I'm not trying to convince all downloaders, only some. There was already one person on this thread who specifically asked where the money from downloads and CD sales go. I'd like to see the breakdown myself. It costs nothing to put this info on a page on the website, maybe the same page where Simon requests people not digitally share a new AT release form 3 months, and if it convinces 1 person, or even just as you say, plants awareness or the seeds of guilt, its worth it. It never hurts to be transparent. imo

Someone else pointed out that artists should be compensated for creation, and not for distribution. That is philanthropy; a patronage model, as opposed to a goods / capital model.

Playing this kind of music seems to me to be philanthropy, as is trying to run a label to distribute this music (granted, maybe via an obsolete business model) without cutting deep in your own financial skin.

While I agree that almost everyone in this area of music is doing it as a labor of love, it doesnt mean they should do it for free. Or that it should be the listeners decision. While some may cringe at the smell of capitalism when we talk about things like tiered concert pricing, material extras, exclusive concerts or CD releases, we have to look at a broader picture here. Label owners and musicians arent being greedy, they're trying to survive, and we should be sympathetic to them doing what they need to do to produce and create great music.

As mark said, the cash for music model is not sustainable when the music is readily available for free. That only leaves a few choices:

1) Appeal to the listeners desire for high quality recording. This is rapidly disappering with the evolution towards lossless digital files.

2) Appeal to the consumers desire for desirable packaging. "Art product", if you will. This is really an appeal to the consumers materialism. So what other materials would an eai consumer covet, other than packaging?

3) Appeal to the consumers ethical principles, and desire to support music and musicians. This starts with showing where the cost of a CD or download goes. Perhaps Simon's appeal to not share digital files for 3 months after release.

4) Appeal to the the consumer's inner elitist. Early shipping on releases, exclusive concerts or tiered pricing, limited editions, etc. Sorry if people dont like the word "elitist", but fundraising depends on leveraging your core group of supporters. Selling experiences that cant be downloaded digitally. A friend who really likes Duos for Doris once asked me rhetorically, man that guy Brian O got to be at that recording session. How much would someone pay to have been allowed in the studio for that session?

Again these may be completely unfeasable, unrealistic, unprofitable. Its very easy to sit back and poke holes in these down one by one, I could do it myself. I'm just throwing out ideas. Its up to each label owner and musician to decide what works and what wont work for them. My opinion is that there are some ideas that could be relevant if you look towards the non-profit, and small "mom-and-pop" business communities.

It just seems to me that the worst option is

5) The passive option. Release quality music, and hope that people buy it, and pray that people dont download it illegally. Give them a reason not to. Ultimately it may not work, but at least you're trying to adapt.

[Jesse]

nicely done, darren.
let me know if you want in on a crow with no mouth promotions tee.
[i have bookmarked these, crikes the'yre expensive merch].

[surfer]

nicely done, darren.
let me know if you want in on a crow with no mouth promotions tee.
[i have bookmarked these, crikes the'yre expensive merch].

I would absolutely take one.

Signed,

An unabashed Materialist

Seriously though, I realize merch is really expensive and may not pay off, (I know Jon sold tees for awhile) but maybe you could buy cotton t-shirts in bulk and if you know someone who silk-screens, maybe get them to donate the printing or at least give you a discount. Just an idea.

[Jesse]

we're finding bartering is essential and meets with a lot of *that's-not-in-my-conceptual-box* resistance/reluctance.
it is interesting for me to be reading pretty in depth, as i try to make the cwnm thing fly, about the history of anarchism, as guilds/barter/syndicalism were essential elements. allie is a development director, so i get a lot of ideas from her, including the pursuit of a small-ish [but adequate] curator's grant for a concert series idea in 2012. i am not a 501[c][3], so the studio where i am presenting shows has offered to be my sponsoring agent, as they are.
i digress, not sure what i might add to the thread theme- i haven't thought through the issue at hand, beyond not wanting to participate in the musicians and labels getting ripped off. i am actually considering launching a very limited label myself, so that's probably diagnostic.

[jon abbey]

Depending on the details and the perks, I would definitely consider joining such a "club" or subscription service for AT or Erstwhile (though the Sachiko or Toshi CDs I'd probably pass on ), and would definitely join one for Gravity Wave. Agreed about publishing schedule, but again, the idea is to build loyalty to the label rather than individual releases.
(MIssissippi Records, Erstwhile, AT, Soul Jazz all have loyal followings because of the quality of their releases, and than includes packaging)

FWIW, the reason I've never done this is that I don't like asking people to pay for something that doesn't actually exist yet, especially if there's a chance it might not happen at all (Martin Tetreault/Le Quan Ninh and Tim Barnes/Jason Lescalleet were two Erst projects that were on the schedule for a long time, but ended up falling through). I don't even like to take preorders before a project has gone to the plant, because who knows if there will be a last minute butting of heads or whatever.

[washline]

i think the new vinyl market is indicative of an audience willing to overlook or even seek out inconvenience in order to demonstrate their support of the music.

mississippi records makes a pretty swift business selling cheap (both in price and to some extent quality) records of their favorite music, obscurities or whichever. to me its a perfect example of label as curator.

Mudd, would you mind explaining what you mean by "seeking out inconvenience?" I'm not sure I get what you mean by that.

Doxy is another specialized label working with vinyl.

[washline]

I agree with this perspective, and regard unauthorised file-sharing as an activity that is unfair and harmful both to the labels and the musicians whose work is effectively being looted. Though a few individuals might go on from downloading an album to actually buying it, I’m sure that this is a small minority, and I think that file-sharing makes the survival of labels specialising in experimental music more difficult.

Simon, I understand how you feel, but I don't think file-sharing is the cause of reduced sales of music. I think the larger problems with the economy are much more to blame, and I think a lot of people these days prefer the convenience of having their music on servers of various kinds (mp3 players, etc.) rather than owning physical objects. When I was in grad school in the early nineties, I couldn't afford to buy CDs, so I taped whenever I could, usually from the university radio station. In fact, I did the same as an undergrad from the university library and the downtown Carnegie library. These were pre-internet times obviously, but if I had gone to school during these days with the same low level of income, I would certainly be downloading and plugging in all the time. If you can't afford to buy music, but you want and expect to hear it, you're going to download, ethical questions aside. The problem you're dealing with here is that the growing audience for this music is coming from a younger and lower income demographic, who, if they can't download, won't be buying and adding to your bottom line. The older crowd (generally but not always in a better income demographic) is listening to other kinds of music now, Jesse Goin and a few others excepted.

I don't really see any way out of the dilemma you're discussing other than perhaps to not release your music on a digital medium. But even an analogue medium can be copied with the right equipment, and then you restrict your demographic as well to people who can play back the medium, and a number of people can't do analogue. Maybe you can run a deal from time to time to get people to let go of some of their limited cash. Or it might be necessary to release music spread out over a longer time period so that the limited market won't be too spent out to buy new recordings.

[Jesse]

Bill, how do you arrive at the age demographic above - on the basis of fora like IHM? Are you guessing somewhat?
Not even challenging your take [younger = eai-orientation, older = other musics]; it challenges my not-very-reflected-on assumption that it is nearly the reverse of what you say, or perhaps 50/50.
Do you principally mean jazz and *classical* is the metier of the *older* crowd?

edit/afterthought: abbey, hatta, pinnell, alastair, chabala, 40- late/40-ish, right? me, brian o., 50+...this is hardly a large sample size, but i don't know what decade the kud, vanessa, et al are in, but the 7-8 above are pretty hardcore.