|
|
|
February 8th, 2010
05:23 pm - a few thoughts about music (part 1)
I was contemplating my phone, which has among its many talents impersonating a portable music device, and idly wondering how many regulations I would be violating if I went to the trouble of figuring out how to de-proprietize any bits of my music collection I might want to illegally copy, and what sort of non-system royalties I could theoretically provide to compensate the actual artists for their work. But how DO you track down the members of, say Pink Floyd these days to find out what kind of cupcakes they like?
In any case it occurred to me that in terms of human history AND the nature of music as a creative force/item/art, the "music industry" is a rather short-lived and unusual phenomena. It's been around in the hard core marketing industry sense since radio and recording media became common is my guess (idle speculation without research here) - and to be sloppily generous with my time-frame I'll stretch the definition all the way back to hand-copied manuscript commissions to favored musicians from kings and courts and such.
So the music industry as I see it is 40-70 years old if we are talking about folks squawking about digital piracy destroying music as we know it, which is of course nonsense. Even if it destroys the music industry as we know it, people will go on making and sharing music like they always have. Which leads me to my second batch of thoughts...
Current Music: Kiss Them For Me - Siouxsie & the Banshees
|
Music won't die, but the ability to make money off it might be crippled. The best analogy I can think of (and it's a poor one) is of the horse. It used to be that horse were a major part of industry -- pulling carriages and plows. Now horses are around just for recreation and sport. I'm not it's better or worse, just a change.
I agree that the need to make music is almost innate to humans. It's interesting that each culture's music is different. |
|
|
|
|
LiveJournal.com |
