Steve Jobs killed the music industry

JBJ: STEVE JOBS IS PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR KILLING THE MUSIC BUSINESS:
Jon Bon Jovi accuses Steve Jobs of putting a shot through the heart of music, stating "Steve Jobs is Personally Responsible for Killing the Music Business..." - bit.ly/f4ZAZI.

Coverage from: www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/031411jovi:
"Not so long ago, Steve Jobs was hailed as a savior of the music industry. But that was before digital didn't pan out, and before everyone realized that Apple was really making billions off of devices - while piggybacking music. Now, Jobs is just another bogeyman.
And even music's elite - and very rich - are harboring ill will. "Steve Jobs is personally responsible for killing the music business," Jon Bon Jovi ranted to the Sunday Times Magazine. "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?'"
Well, a lot of things happened, and Jobs is just one part of that disruption. But it's still unclear whether digital distribution has really hurt Bon Jovi in the end. After all, the wheels of discovery are more lubricated than ever, and Bon Jovi mints hundreds of millions in touring income annually. In fact, Pollstar ranked the band first among all touring acts last year, with receipts of nearly $150 million in North America alone. Of course, many of those attendees were born long after "Livin' on a Prayer," and have discovered Bon Jovi through digital channels. Still, Bon Jovi feels that an essential part of the experience is now missing. "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."

Digital sucks. Jon is right about the experience of having the physical album in your hands.

Troublezone wrote:

Digital sucks. Jon is right about the experience of having the physical album in your hands.

Yes, kids today don;t know about holding the LP jacket in their hands. My kids know what a CD is and an LP (since I have some vinyl), but ipod is how music is played to them for the most part.

As far as Steve Jobs and the evil empire (when I was at AOL, we called Apple the Evil Empire, they called us the dark side), he didn't kill the music industry, the record execs are doing their best to kill it by 1) not giving artist time to grow and gather a following 2) putting out crappy music 3) not figuring out a business model that works - suing people that illegally download isn't the way to slow it down

I think there are lots of reasons the music industry is going down the tubes and digital downloading is just one of them.

However, I do agree that kids today are missing out on an experience that I had growing up. There was nothing like going into the record store and holding those albums in your hand, taking it home and placing in on the stereo for that first listen. Mine wasn't an allowance, but the money I earned mowing lawns in my neighborhood. Even hanging out at the local record stores was part of the experience. It was almost like you were part of something.

I read this article the other day. Digital downloading plays a factor, yes, but isn't the only reason record sales are down.

Steve Jobs didn't kill anything. He offered up new technology, the record label suits who were still stuck in the 1960's chose to ignore it. It's the fault of the labels.

While I tend to agree with Jon on the whole "experience" stuff, digital downloads and file sharing were around before Steve Jobs latched on an made it sleeker & sexier.

Sounds more like JBJ has some kinda personal agenda against Jobs.

detuned wrote:

Steve Jobs didn't kill anything. He offered up new technology, the record label suits who were still stuck in the 1960's chose to ignore it. It's the fault of the labels.

100% agree, it was coke sniffing record exec's who have the inability to think 5 minutes into the future

detuned wrote:

Steve Jobs didn't kill anything. He offered up new technology, the record label suits who were still stuck in the 1960's chose to ignore it. It's the fault of the labels.

And the government's, partially. They have never once seriously stepped in. The rampant pirating through the Internet has ruined so many industries—music, movies, porn, and soon publishing. That can hardly be good for an economy.

Of course, there's more to it than that, but I personally think downloading things without paying should be something people fear doing. No one does.

Because people are afraid of government monitoring of the web. It's a fine line that can easily be abused.

manny wrote:

detuned wrote:

Steve Jobs didn't kill anything. He offered up new technology, the record label suits who were still stuck in the 1960's chose to ignore it. It's the fault of the labels.

100% agree, it was coke sniffing record exec's who have the inability to think 5 minutes into the future

Yep. If their bonus compensation model was changed to be based on say 5 year growth instead of bonus off what they sell today their business model would change pretty quick. There is no reason for them to change their behavior right now by making $$$ off the hits now. Change it too a long term incentive package and that will change faster than it takes the record execs to snort a line of coke!

ultmetal wrote:

I think there are lots of reasons the music industry is going down the tubes and digital downloading is just one of them.

However, I do agree that kids today are missing out on an experience that I had growing up. There was nothing like going into the record store and holding those albums in your hand, taking it home and placing in on the stereo for that first listen. Mine wasn't an allowance, but the money I earned mowing lawns in my neighborhood. Even hanging out at the local record stores was part of the experience. It was almost like you were part of something.

I agree - there are a lot of people to cite but in the end it comes down to how people want to buy the music. The era of albums is over for a lot of people who just want individual songs. It is a shame they will miss out on the better music - the non hit stuff.

manny wrote:

detuned wrote:

Steve Jobs didn't kill anything. He offered up new technology, the record label suits who were still stuck in the 1960's chose to ignore it. It's the fault of the labels.

100% agree, it was coke sniffing record exec's who have the inability to think 5 minutes into the future

well stated on both parts!

I'm glad to be an exception to the majority of people my age. I never download a thing and don't even own an mp3 player. For me music is the whole package of artwork, inserts, and the actual music; I couldn't stand if I only had files on my computer

There are a lot of factors that play out in this situation. Downloading is just one of them. The economy is probably the biggest factor in this whole ordeal. To blame Steve Jobs is just asinine! The labels are also to blame. Signing a lot of garbage bands has become the norm lately I have seen, and half decent bands releasing garbage albums. In a lot of ways I don't think people even care about music much anymore.

Steve Jobs built the only truly successful 'LEGAL' means of distributing digital content. iTunes. He made purchasing music as easy as can be and made huge profits because of it. He was HELPING the industry! He also consistently tried to get the record labels to allow iTunes to lower the prices of albums/singles in download format so he could spur on more sales of legal downloads...but the labels have been refusing non stop for the past decade.

In the meantime, did the big labels come up with anything to really compete? No. Did they come up with a new improved PHYSICAL product that appeals to consumers. No. Are they any closer to an answer now than they were in 2000? Not a chance.

P.S. - who would take anything Jon Bon Jovi says seriously? Really!

All of these Idol shows have done their damage too, I think.

Part 2 and I tend to agree...

Industry commentator Moses Avalon has weighed in on the Jon Bon Jovi vs Steve Jobs debate. His view is somewhat different to that most others seem to have taken. So from his newsletter and website comes this:

"Jon Bon Jovi has learned a lesson of the Internet age the hard way. The lesson he learned is that the techies, who wave the freedom-of-speech flag when it comes to music being free and net neutrality, are not so cool about free-speech when it criticizes one of their gods, like Steve Jobs. Indeed they respond rather childishly to just about anyone, no mater how famous, if even the slightest opinion about internet-related services is anything less than 10000000% positive. (Read what Bon Jovi said here.)
Now, in the before-time no one cared what geeks thought. They were in the back room. But blogs have given them the big stick in the public debate. And they want respect. They are getting it and proving the old adage that power corrupts; using their new tools to silence and intimidate those that are a threat. If they agree with you, you are launched to the top of a mountain, if you disagree with their position, they can out SEO you, out blog you and make you look ridiculous in a mater of seconds across the entire globe.
Now, most politicians and other public-people have learned this lesson years ago. Even I got a taste recently of how infantile some of these cats can get if you throw the slightest criticism at them. (I noticed an error in a Techdirt blog wherein they called IPS licensing fees, a “tax” for music. The guy freaked out on me and called me a “liar” all over Twitter.)
These techies can not take it when you disagree with them. It shatters their entire foundation and they get nasty. But poor Jon Bon Jovi, must have missed this memo. He committed the most heinous crime that a person can commit in today's blog/news world; he committed the offense of being obvious; of saying what everyone in the know, knows but is afraid to say:

iTunes is bad for music in the long run. Why, be afraid to say it? Well, you've no doubt seen the posts; because legions of keyboard jockeys will come after you in their blogs and virally disseminate a twisted version just to increase their Google rankings. They'll even Skype to each other while doing it and have a virtual party, with virtual booze and virtual girls.
Now, what did Bon Jovi say that was so terrible? Well, he spoke the truth for one thing. iTunes has helped devalue the business model that made music an industry. It may not have started the fire, but it poured gasoline on it in gallons.

Let's look at some iFacts:
1) iTunes has not, as some have suggested “saved the record business.” iTunes has made up less than 10% of sales over the years since launch.
2) Nor did Steve Jobs “invent” a way for artists to get paid from the internet, (I think Al Gore did that.)
3) Finally, I believe it was Lawrence Lessig or some fool like him who promised—“If you give people a legal way to buy music they won't steel it.” Remember that one? Not true: P2P file sharing did not decrease since iTunes went on-line — it actually increased.
What iTunes did that sucks most for music is it destabilized the “album model.” Yeah, yeah, I know, many of you think that that is good for the consumer, but it's really not in the long run. Not if you're a true music fan. Why?

Point 1) Economics: It costs more to make less, which means less risks will be taken on new acts.
If you remove the 80 cents or so that songwriters used to receive for each album sale and replace is with the 9 cents they get for a single, you don't have to be a math genius to see that you need to sell about seven times more units to break even on a promotion that costs $1,000,000 whether you release an album or a single; or, a production costing about $10,000/song to produce if you do an album, but $25,000/song is you go single-for-single.
Yes, it costs majors the same money to promote a single as it does to promote an album and three times as much to record the equivalent amount of singles that an album composes.
Add to that, that without the album economics you lose the 1:14 chance of one of the cuts becoming a hit and reduce those odds to 1:1. To duplicate the effect of an “album promotion” with singles, labels would have to spend more than ten times as much to have the same shot-gun effect that an album delivers.

WHO CARES
Why should indie artists care about majors and their costs? Well, now that it costs more to make less, these costs trickle down to everyone in the music food chain.
To sell a single for 99 cents on iTunes the indie artist ends up netting about 64%. With a CD album sold at a local store for $14 the Artist/label took almost $10 home—almost 75%. Sold off the side of the stage for $10, the same indie artist took home almost all of it, save a $1, for manufacturing—90%. Big winner here— Apple.

Point 2: Art. For those interested in music as an art, the devaluation of an album as an art form has neutered the musical experience. Deep cuts are dead for the future. This decreases the value of music as an experience and as a communication method. This disembowels artists from helping do what they are supposed to do— make the world a better place. They have been relieved of that job thanks to iTunes and P2P. Now they are just “content providers” and all we want from them are "hits" that are nice, radio safe singles. Great.
When musicians were in charge of music they helped end wars and elevate social consciousness. Now it's in the hands of the techies. I can only pray they do not abuse this power. So far, I'm not impressed. How can anyone be, with a culture that does not value one of America's greatest cultural contributions-- pop music.
This is what Jon Bon Jovi was really trying to say. What he probably meant with his comments was that the glory days of music are over. They are. It's true. And iTunes did accelerate the legitimacy of that decline more so than any other vehicle. But was it Steve's fault? No. Someone else would have done it eventually anyway.
Jon, I feel ya brotha. I feel your pain. I kid you not when I say some of these guys are so cult-like in their Apple fanaticism that it would not surprise me if I read that an Apple fan threw a rock at your window. Get an extra body guard for a week or two and hire a great defamation lawyer. I have.
~ Mo out."
Full Article & Comments at: www.mosesavalon.com/mosesblog/http:/www.mosesavalon.com/mosesblog/bon-voyage-bon-jovi-rock-star-blames-steve-jobs-for-music-biz-erosion/

MELODIC BRIEFS:
Nightmare Records announces that Alberto Rigoni's new solo album "Rebirth" is going to be released on May 24th (Pushed back from previously stated April 26th) via Sony / RED distribution (North America) & Code 7/Plastichead (United Kingdom) Twilight -(G.A.S.), Bertus-(Netherlands-Europe). Meanwhile is now available a live video footage featuring Alberto Rigoni and John Macaluso (Ark, TNT, ex Yngwie Malmsteen, etc.) playing "Ontogeny", a song from the upcoming album. The video has been recorded during John Macaluso's italian clinic tour "The drumming of ARK" on sept. 25, 2010.

Some interesting points, but a little too much in the opposite direction. There is a middle ground that's closer to reality.

a few quick thoughts...

High Speed Internet. As soon as you could download an entire album in a couple minutes, the floodgates poured open.


AND REMEMBER...the record labels are the ones that decided to go digital in the first place! If they were still selling LP's, none of this would be an issue. But they "de-valued" the music to "1's" and "0's", which could be copied millions of times with no loss in quality. They sewed the seeds of their own demise.

That high speed internet connection gave birth to Napster (the original one). It managed to combine music sharing (ie: stealing) with a social network type of vibe...years before facebook. It seemed like it just exploded overnight. I remember going to a couple "Napster parties", where everyone took turns downloading songs to play. showing off their DJ chops. It was fun. People liked it. So the labels killed it and replaced it with a bunch of decidedly dull and cumbersome variations. The people thought it sucked. They weren't wrong. When they shut down Napster, the blogs exploded...and when the iPod took off, all that binary code was portable and disposable. The perception of music as something to "collect" went from being the norm, to being the fringe. Why carry a HUGE case of CDs in your car (so they can get scratched and/or stolen) when a thumb drive can hold 10 times the same amount of music?

Kind of hard to believe how quickly everything can change.

Bill - the article's point is comparing apples to oranges - to make a true comparison, you have to look at Itunes single song downloads VS singles back in that day - i.e. CD singles, cassette singles at 45's.

Or they should just compare full album downloads to CD sales and look at what the artists and record companies are taking.

A couple of thoughts on this topic:

While I feel that illegal downloading was a major cause, IMO the reason that record industry is dying is because of greed, plain and simple.

In the mid 80's when CD's first became available they were expensive and remained so to this very day, VHS which exploded around sametime also started being pricy, but the movie execs got wise and lowered their prices, and it allowed customers who would have never considered buying a movie would impulsively buy a movie because it was affordable, record labels did not do the same. Unless you were buying a CD at Walmart or used music store you were paying an average of $15 to 18 for a brand new CD.

Also the record labels relied on their back catalog too much, when CD's came out, people like me went out and replaced my old vinyl, tape copies to CD, as this market segement started to tap out in 2000's, the labels still relied on their back catalog but resorted to reissuing the same albums over and over, with bonus discs etc and these where even pricier, even if someone like me was inclined to again repurchase the same album I cannot afford to this, in some cases like The Who 'Live at Leeds' that has been reissued 3 or 4 times!!!

As recent as last year when FYE had tired the experiment to sell all CD's for 9.99, alot of labels pulled their inventory out of the store in the stores trying this experiment, the result was that FYE had their best sells in years, but the labels refusing to cooparate made them impossible to continue this practice and the result was thousands of FYE stores choosing to close their stores.

The labels are no longer in the job of promoting careers or artists but singles, inspiring no loyality to the artist and further devaluing the music.

Bottom line, IMO it was greed that kicked the radio star.

Looking forward to any feedback regarding my opinion.

I think Manny hit the nail on the head, as well as the others who've stated that the music industry has refused to let go of its antiquated, 1970s era business model.

When the internet first started to gain prominence in the mid 90s, the music business kinda looked down its nose at it like "Pfft. It's a passing fad. It'll never catch on." Now they're paying the price for it.

Fat Freddy wrote:

I think Manny hit the nail on the head, as well as the others who've stated that the music industry has refused to let go of its antiquated, 1970s era business model.

When the internet first started to gain prominence in the mid 90s, the music business kinda looked down its nose at it like "Pfft. It's a passing fad. It'll never catch on." Now they're paying the price for it.

Yep!!!! In fact, in the 70's the record industry tried to stop the manufacture and sale of cassette records and blank cassette tapes - they thought it would be the death of the industry. Instead, record sales reached new heights in the 80's.

thejokeriv wrote:

Yep!!!! In fact, in the 70's the record industry tried to stop the manufacture and sale of cassette records and blank cassette tapes - they thought it would be the death of the industry. Instead, record sales reached new heights in the 80's.

Remember the little "HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC!" logos that used to be on the back of some LPs?

A couple of Venom albums had a parody of that logo on the back that said "HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC -- SO IS VENOM" Hahaha.

Fat Freddy wrote:

thejokeriv wrote:

Yep!!!! In fact, in the 70's the record industry tried to stop the manufacture and sale of cassette records and blank cassette tapes - they thought it would be the death of the industry. Instead, record sales reached new heights in the 80's.

Remember the little "HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC!" logos that used to be on the back of some LPs?

A couple of Venom albums had a parody of that logo on the back that said "HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC -- SO IS VENOM" Hahaha.

Barely - LOL!!! I think I remember that Venom sticker too....