Gene Simmons on illegal downloading and the music industry..

I like Tom Petty's view on the subject

3 It's ridiculous to make people pay twenty dollars for a CD
"It's funny how the music industry is enraged about the Internet and the way things are copied without being paid for. But you know why people steal the music? Because they can't afford the music. I'm not condoning downloading music for free. I don't think that's really fair, but I understand it. If you brought CD prices back down to $8.98, you would solve a lot of the industry's problems. You are already seeing it a little -- the White Stripes albums selling for $9.99. Everyone still makes a healthy profit; it might get the music business back on its feet."

5 Record labels don't care about artists
"An act like ours wouldn't even be around today if someone hadn't brought us along and let us make mistakes and grow at our own pace. Today it seems that if you don't have a hit -- or even if you do -- they have no use for you the next time. It's like, 'Well, why wait for these guys to come back with another hit when we can bring in somebody else?' It's an asinine way to conduct yourself. These people are looking at balance sheets, not music. Most people involved in putting this music on the air or bringing it to us aren't really listening to it."

10 A lot of artists are as greedy as the industry
"Let me say this so it's definitely in the story: I don't think the industry is entirely to blame. Let's face it: The music industry has always been laughably corrupt, always. It's the artists themselves that often cause problems. Artists aren't necessarily business people. And they aren't neces-sarily aware of all the things that go on in their names. Some just want to make some music, but there is a lot of greed among artists as well. Whether or not we know it, we are all to blame. I think it's time -- starting with the artist -- to try to be a little more responsible and aware of what goes on in our name."

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5933643/tom_petty_is_pissed/

Getting off topic, but who cares!

On the subject of retail prices...

FYE sucks. They're about the worst place that I know of to buy a CD from. Sadly, they're one of the only major in-store retailers left because most retail music chains high-priced themselves out of business, but FYE has been able to survive for some reason. I find that if you get a DVD or CD within the first week or two of release, they have a competitive price (ex: just bought the new Avantasia for $12.99), but after that, it's anywhere between $17.99 and $29.99. I will admit, I go there often just because they're one of the few places in town to go to, but I browse alot more than I buy. It's a really small FYE, so there's a poor selection (they don't even have a video games section) as far as rock/metal goes, unless you're into the newer bands that get MTV & radio airplay.

Best Buy, Target, and Wal-Mart all have decent prices, but again, they aren't really the places that are going to fulfill my CD wish list unless there's a new release from a "name" veteran rock/metal band.

As far as downloading goes, I download to sample. Many file-sharing programs over the years have turned me onto so many bands, the amount of CDs I've bought thanks to downloading is countless. On the other side, if a CD is out of print, I say it's fair game to download. I'm not going to pay $30-$50 for a used CD, there is not a single album in the world worth that much money (unless it's a box set ). I'm going to download it if possible, and if it's not, then I'll just never hear the album. Downloading out of print albums hurts no one except price gougers on eBay & Amazon.

i've said it before...i download to preview. i always buy what i like & delete what i don't. i won't apologize for using the methods & tools available to me to make smart shopping choices. previewing a song or two on myspace does not cut it. i do not mind spending money... i just prefer to spend it on something i am positive i will enjoy.

I'm going to take a different angle and say not all downloading is wrong. I download crazy amounts of albums from various blogspots on the net, but this stuff is rare and unfortunately out of print. No way am i going to pay $60 for a secondhand oop record on ebay, the artist gets no money! Until the stuff gets reissued i'm not going to pay!

I've found a ton of good stuff from FYE's used section. My average cost of cd is 4-5 bucks. Their used prices clobber the hipper indie store in town. So not all is bad with FYE. Their new releases are a different matter altogether, but I hope they stay in bidness and don't go the way of the dodo any time soon.

As for downloading, I see nothing wrong with it as long as you buy albums you like. If you're just a mooch, then you're a cheap ass thief that deserves a kick in the nuts. The only time when mooching is acceptable is when somethings OOP, imo.

rattpoison wrote:

I'm going to take a different angle and say not all downloading is wrong. I download crazy amounts of albums from various blogspots on the net, but this stuff is rare and unfortunately out of print. No way am i going to pay $60 for a secondhand oop record on ebay, the artist gets no money! Until the stuff gets reissued i'm not going to pay!

I have no beef with this either. When its out of print, there is no way to purchase it. If the record company wants profits on the album, then release it. If you choose not to release any more copies, and there is still demand, then filesharing becomes perfectly legitimate in my opinion.

I agree with Tom Petty 100%...about the industry AND the artist.

I agree about the d/l thing when it comes to oop stuff. It is unfortunate that many do not share your opinion.

I think tom Petty's thoughts were interesting as well. I do think the music industry is just that - an industry. Much like other industries if it doesnt sell well out it goes. No one is stopping an artist from making music. If you love making music do it.

I hate to sound like the RIAA but I can understand music just doesnt pop up. I dont know a lot about the costs and overhead of making/releasing/promotion but if a company takes a risk on a product and it is good then that company deserves to reap the rewards. If you think a cd is overpriced walk away from it and dont support the label or artist - but dont steal from them either.. I dont know why that is so hard for some people to comprehend?

Alex

As one of millions who has met Gene, and his "personality"...he deals in reality.
The reality that is, in my opinion, an industry riddled with cookie-cutter bands
pumped out like loaves of wonder-bread and hitting the music stores and radio
faster than the European bullet-trains.

That wouldn't be so bad if most of those bands didn't TOTALLY SUCK!
I know of a bunch of "bands" who don't ever record their own CD's. The
labels get the hired guns to come in and play sh*t the way the want it
and then slap the "band members" names and pictures on the CD...and
off they go into the wild blue yonder!

But the ultimate reason why these labels fail (and why you will never see a 20 year reunion of Blink182) is because everything is created for instant gratification and not one thought is given to the longevity and profitability of GOOD SONGWRITING!

In the end, whether the buyer really understands it or not, he steals a few select songs of a record from the internet because the other 35+ minutes of that cd SUCKS!

Simmons is right! The model is broken because there is no long term support or honest desire to build a brand-aka "xyz band". The labels don't care what your doing next week. It's all about what you are doing today....and that's the reason they are suffering this miserable death...and destroying peoples real appreciation for good music!

In the end, if labels actually focused on quality instead of the "throw the spaghetti on the wall and see if it sticks" attitude, they would surely be singing a much more profitable tune. When something dies, something new and better will eventually grow in it's place...We can only hope!

\m/

In regards to Gene saying that there wouldn't be any new KISS music, I saw some comments by Dee Snider that I thought were appropriate...

On the future of TWISTED SISTER: "It's not the focus of my life anymore. Last year we did seven shows. We'll do festivals or something like that, and we'll put on the makeup and costumes and we'll go the whole nine yards and give the people what they want. One thing they don't want is new music. If we go, 'This one's from our new album!' you see hundreds of people standing up and walking out of the room. KISS put out their 'Psycho Circus' record in 1998, and it didn't sell! The fans don't want KISS 2000. They want 'Rock and Roll All Night'. So we have no illusions about that. We will continue until the spandex explodes.

Not sure if I agree with Dee, as I would love to hear some new Twisted Sister, but I guess he's got a point. While I think the quality of any new Twisted Sister music would be far better than any new KISS music, chances are, it would fall short of "classic" status.

I agree with Kong except for the Blink 182 comment...they actually helped start something (though I am not a fan) and were not followers...you'll never see a 20-year reunion of Good Charlotte, though...LOL!

And I agree w/ Dee...

rattpoison wrote:

I'm going to take a different angle and say not all downloading is wrong. I download crazy amounts of albums from various blogspots on the net, but this stuff is rare and unfortunately out of print. No way am i going to pay $60 for a secondhand oop record on ebay, the artist gets no money! Until the stuff gets reissued i'm not going to pay!

Here I have no problem with downloading. If it's old and rare, with no chance of ever being reissued, then I think the ability to download is cool. Of course, its still technically stealing, but equate this sort of thing to the trading circles from the 80s. Most of these rare items were extremely limited, released on tape and vinyl and such. I think any musician complaining about people uploading/downloading this material are being petty. Unless, of course, they were tunes that were stolen from studios or whatever, stuff they never wanted released. Then I think they have a valid complaint.

To me, the biggest problem is with the disparity in compensation. I have no problem with compensating the artists who produce music I love for their efforts. I also think the people who promote and distribute music should be compensated, but at a much lower rate than the artists who actually produce the product.

What I have a HUGE problem with is that the music industry does not work that way. The record label fatcats make tons of money off of a product that they are for the most part stealing from the artists producing it. As far as I'm concerned, a cd produced by a major label (not talking about small labels here, just the big 4), is stolen property and the labels are fencing it.

Yes, some big bands have made tons of money. Good for them, they deserve it. But most bands who sign a major label contract end up in huge amounts of debt because the record company takes absolutely no risk and reaps all the rewards. They are basically acting as bankers, loaning huge amounts of cash to artists, most of whom will never see the kind of success it takes to pay back those loans.

I'm not going to argue any points made, they all have some valid points. While I've downloaded for free in the past, it was never for a whole album and almost all the songs were hits you can still hear on radio from time to time. The ones that were not, were just a few songs from certain bands to help me decide if I would seek anything further from them (I got into many bands like that and later purchased albums-Gamma Ray, Nocturnal Rites, etc.)(I also rejected some-Lacuna Coil, Slipknot, Demon Hunter [though I may get some in the future now that metalcore is going to be deluted from their music], etc.). While I would still download songs (just until my debt is paid off and I have more money in the budget for music), I would never get a whole album-however, my problems with Vista doesn't allow me to download the players (Kazaa, Limewire, Frostwire, etc.) so it is a moot point.

Slightly off topic I love the lyrics in this song by Weird Al Yankovic:

Don't Dowload This Song
Once in a while
Maybe you will feel the urge.
To break international copyright law
By downloading mp3s
From file sharing sites
Like morphous or grokster or limewire or kazza.
But deep in your Heart.
You know the guilt would drive you mad
And the shame would leave a permanent scar
Cause you start out stealing songs
Then you’re robbing liquor stores
And selling Crack
And running over school kids with your car

[Chorus]
So Don’t Download This Song
The record store is where you belong
Go and buy the CD like you know that you should
Oh Don’t Download This Song

Oh you don’t want to mess
With the RIAA
They’ll sue you if you burn that Cdr.
It doesn’t matter if you’re a grandma
Or a seven year old girl
They’ll treat you like the evil Hard-bitten criminal scum you are

[Chorus]
So Don’t Download This Song (don’t go)
Pirating music all day long
Go and buy the CD like you know that you should
Oh Don’t Download This Song

Don’t take away money
From artists just like me
How else can I afford another solid gold Humvee
And diamond studded swimming pools
These things don’t grow on trees
So all I ask is everybody Pleaseeeeee

[Chorus]
Don’t Download This Song (Don’t do it No No)
Even Lars Urlich Know it’s wrong (You could just ask him)
Go and buy the CD like you know that you should (You Really Should)
Oh Don’t Download This Song

Don’t Download This Song (Oh please don’t you do it or you)
Might Wind up in Jail like Tommy Chong (Remember Tommy)
Go and buy the CD (Right Now) like you know that you should (Go out and Buy it)
Oh Don’t Download This Song.

Don’t Download This Song (No no no no no no)
Or you’ll burn in hell before to long (And you deserve it)
Go and buy the CD (Just buy it) like you know that you should (You cheap bastard)

Dallas that is absolutely hilarious !!!

ahh, the great al y.
though i don't feel downloading is horrible as long as you buy enough cds too even out the balence

MetalGuy71 wrote:

In regards to Gene saying that there wouldn't be any new KISS music, I saw some comments by Dee Snider that I thought were appropriate...

On the future of TWISTED SISTER: "It's not the focus of my life anymore. Last year we did seven shows. We'll do festivals or something like that, and we'll put on the makeup and costumes and we'll go the whole nine yards and give the people what they want. One thing they don't want is new music. If we go, 'This one's from our new album!' you see hundreds of people standing up and walking out of the room. KISS put out their 'Psycho Circus' record in 1998, and it didn't sell! The fans don't want KISS 2000. They want 'Rock and Roll All Night'. So we have no illusions about that. We will continue until the spandex explodes.

Not sure if I agree with Dee, as I would love to hear some new Twisted Sister, but I guess he's got a point. While I think the quality of any new Twisted Sister music would be far better than any new KISS music, chances are, it would fall short of "classic" status.

He's right, but he doesn't really say why. He's right because for most fans, music is nostalgic. Why most TS fans like their old stuff is because it reminds them of the great times in their lives. While they might like a new album, and even think its terrific, it can't touch the nostalgia associated with the "classic" albums.

I asked this question a while back...can the old school bands still making music today (Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Dokken, etc.) make an album that would top their classics? I don't think its possible. They could make an album that, strictly from a musical perspective, blows the doors off of their classic albums; but for the fans, it just can't touch them because of the nostalgia (consciously and subconsciously) attached to the classic albums.

There will never be another "Destroyer" or "Screaming for Vengeance" or "Piece of Mind" or "Back in Black" or "Tooth and Nail" or "Stay Hungry". These bands can still make albums and their fans will enjoy them; but man, Dee couldn't be more right. Most times they're just better off touring and touring on the strength of the old albums.

Depends on why their doing it. Strictly from a business point of view, you are 100% right, but if they have the artistic urge and feel they still have something to say, then I say put out a new album (but continue to stress the classic songs live).

Follower of Jesus wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

In regards to Gene saying that there wouldn't be any new KISS music, I saw some comments by Dee Snider that I thought were appropriate...

On the future of TWISTED SISTER: "It's not the focus of my life anymore. Last year we did seven shows. We'll do festivals or something like that, and we'll put on the makeup and costumes and we'll go the whole nine yards and give the people what they want. One thing they don't want is new music. If we go, 'This one's from our new album!' you see hundreds of people standing up and walking out of the room. KISS put out their 'Psycho Circus' record in 1998, and it didn't sell! The fans don't want KISS 2000. They want 'Rock and Roll All Night'. So we have no illusions about that. We will continue until the spandex explodes.

Not sure if I agree with Dee, as I would love to hear some new Twisted Sister, but I guess he's got a point. While I think the quality of any new Twisted Sister music would be far better than any new KISS music, chances are, it would fall short of "classic" status.

He's right, but he doesn't really say why. He's right because for most fans, music is nostalgic. Why most TS fans like their old stuff is because it reminds them of the great times in their lives. While they might like a new album, and even think its terrific, it can't touch the nostalgia associated with the "classic" albums.

I asked this question a while back...can the old school bands still making music today (Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Dokken, etc.) make an album that would top their classics? I don't think its possible. They could make an album that, strictly from a musical perspective, blows the doors off of their classic albums; but for the fans, it just can't touch them because of the nostalgia (consciously and subconsciously) attached to the classic albums.

There will never be another "Destroyer" or "Screaming for Vengeance" or "Piece of Mind" or "Back in Black" or "Tooth and Nail" or "Stay Hungry". These bands can still make albums and their fans will enjoy them; but man, Dee couldn't be more right. Most times they're just better off touring and touring on the strength of the old albums.

I understand your point and you are right but still its not always like that. You play a 15 year old headbanger THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST and then for exemple DANCE OF DEATH, he will like THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST a lot more, and not because nostalgia(he doenst have it) but just because the songs are much better.

okay