Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu
Does anyone believe that music available to consumers would be better overall if musicians received the lion's share of money spent on recorded music instead of the relative pittance they more typically receive? I don't really believe it.
|
Better is subjective. Fairer to the artist and songwriters?
Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu
I like the model where musicians make their money from touring and merchandise rather than royalties (the musical equivalent of coupon clipping).
|
Except that's nearly impossible in 2016. Baby bands are funded by their parents on the Warp Tours, etc. No one earns money from unit sales. Performance Income is dwindling. Sales and Performance are being replaced by Streaming, which pays a pittance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu
Btw, if I wanted to reward my favorite artist beyond just attending a concert, do they generally make more money from the sale of a t-shirt or the sale of a CD at their merchandise table (assuming both were the same price)?
|
Back in the day, Merch and touring would generate more money than album sales and publishing, even though both numbers were substantially higher than today.
But in today's market, bands sign a "360 Deal", in which the record company takes a share of the album sales, publishing royalties, touring revenues and merchandise.