Music Sales Down for 7th Year

[admin]

Music sales went down globally for the seventh straight year, with 2007 marking a sort of ramping up of the downturn, according to London-based International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). Physical music shipments dropped by 11% to $17.5 billion last year while distribution through digital channels such as mobile services and online music stores jumped 85% to $2.1 billion.

Discuss "Music Sales Down for 7th Year" here. Read the article.

 

[Leprkon]

well, it's pretty obvious that the recording industry should panic that 5% of its sales are now for individual files... They should absolutely quit making CDs for those 95% who continue to buy them...

 

[jonnythan]

Love the graphic.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

What even makes this more interesting is the fast rate in which the population is growing during this decline. With the population growing as fast as it is..... you'd think these huge industry declines wouldn't be possible.

I wonder how many people fit into my mold...... because I stopped buying CDs soon after my college years. In fact, I've never even used my HT for 'just music'. I cant say that I've ever sat down just to listen to music since my college days, even though those 80's jam sessions were very fun indeed) Of course, I dont figure into the decline because as old farts like me stop buying music..... 2 more youngin's enter the market.

The emergence/growth of the internet has to the major contributing factor of this decline........

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

1. Need better pricing. For every 50 CDs I buy from BMG ($6.99) I buy less than 1 CD for $18.99 at a retail store.

2. Need to introduce quality standards. Best sound CD I have is more than 15 years old.

3. Make all new releases hybrid SACD/CD. Then drop the CD in 10 years. No more easy piracy.

 

[cfrizz]

BINGO!!!! We have a winner!

1. Need better pricing. For every 50 CDs I buy from BMG ($6.99) I buy less than 1 CD for $18.99 at a retail store.

2. Need to introduce quality standards. Best sound CD I have is more than 15 years old.

3. Make all new releases hybrid SACD/CD. Then drop the CD in 10 years. No more easy piracy.

 

[WmAx]

3. Make all new releases hybrid SACD/CD. Then drop the CD in 10 years. No more easy piracy.

Assuming that SACD is as 'secure' as it is now, how would this work? You could not use SACD on a computer or rip files for your portable music device, or use the data across a network for streaming with music servers. If you do allow SACD to be used on computer, it's 'security' features will probably be rapidly hacked if it is the only primary delivery medium.

-Chris

 

[jeffsg4mac]

LOL, that was my first thought when I read the headline. Ha-ha

 

[10010011]

Quite frankly I have not heard any new music that I would buy for a long time.

I blame music piracy for that.

 

[abboudc]

A funny Fake Steve Jobs post on the subject, while satirical, is pretty much right on:
http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2007/07/music-industry-nobs-have-finally.html

 

[FastEddy]

" ... 3. Make all new releases hybrid SACD/CD. Then drop the CD in 10 years. No more easy piracy. ..."

" ... Assuming that SACD is as 'secure' as it is now, how would this work? ..."

What do you mean "how would this work?". It would work just like it did and does with LPs ... buy it, play it, make a tape or digital backup if you want, give the tape or digital copy to friends if you want ... So what. If I buy something, I own it and I should own the rights to make copies. Period.

This is what has gotten the music industry 'tween a rock and a hard place = this anal retentive disregard for the customers' rights. The proliferation of copys of good performances is advertising, not piracy. The proliferation of copys of bad performances is not worth it ...

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

You could not use SACD on a computer or rip files for your portable music device, or use the data across a network for streaming with music servers.

Which is exactly the point.

 

[davidtwotrees]

It would work just like it did and does with LPs ... buy it, play it, make a tape or digital backup if you want, give the tape or digital copy to friends if you want ... So what. If I buy something, I own it and I should own the rights to make copies. Period.

Wow. That's pretty arrogant, Ed. Plus there is a HUGE difference form the old album days. Making a cassette tape was time consuming. The copies of tapes weren't as good as the original. The internet and digital copies are totally different. One "copy" can go to thousands of people in the blink of an eye. Perfect exact copies. If you buy something YOU DO NOT OWN THE RIGHTS TO MAKE AND DISTRIBUTE COPIES! Copyright laws are there to protect the artists. You are taking money out of the artist's pocket when you copy and distribute music. Period.

 

[fmw]

" ... 3. Make all new releases hybrid SACD/CD. Then drop the CD in 10 years. No more easy piracy. ..."

" ... Assuming that SACD is as 'secure' as it is now, how would this work? ..."

What do you mean "how would this work?". It would work just like it did and does with LPs ... buy it, play it, make a tape or digital backup if you want, give the tape or digital copy to friends if you want ... So what. If I buy something, I own it and I should own the rights to make copies. Period.

...

Sure, for yourself. But not for someone else. How on Earth would you keep people like you from pirating the product. What you bought is an authorized, royalty paid copy of the recording for your own use. You can sell that authorized, royalty paid recording to someone else, if you like, and then it is for their own use. As soon as you make a copy for someone else you break the law and that's the way it should be. Period.

Obviously you have little regard for the recording artists and the companies that employ people to record and distribute the performances for you. A good college level course in economics might be a good move for you. It might help improve your understanding of business and investment. Piracy is stealing. Period.

Incidentally, my old Nakamichi cassette deck still makes analog copies that are nearly indistiguishable from the originals.

 

[jonnythan]

SACD would be broken within days if they were to become playable on PCs.

Besides, all it takes is one guy to patch the analog outputs of his computer or preamp to the analog inputs of his computer to put the file online.

 

[jvm051]

First thing is, that SACD is basically dead, with the exception of people that post and read websites like this one, most people still don't even know what SACD is. I would guess that more records were sold then SACD's in the last year. People want there music to carry with them, regardless of sound quality. One of the other reasons I think sales are way down, is the music that is being making it out there. I am a fan of all different types of music, but pop and music in general sucks right now. Take a look at the Billboard Top 10. The #1 song by Rihanna, the Umbrella song, to me sounds like she is having a seizure. Then you have Fergie, and Avril Lavinge, and a few poor excuses for Hip Hop, that gives all good Hip Hop a bad name. So without quality music, why buy a CD. Give people good music, that does not follow the same formula, and people will buy. 30 years from now, regardless of what format comes out, people will still be buying the Beatles, Metallica, Beastie Boys, Mozart etc. Rihanna and Fergie, will be just like Pepsi Clear with folks wondering what they were thinking. Just my $.02

 

[hemiram]

All I want to do is be able to make backups to put in my truck. If I can't copy it, I'm not buying it, and I sure as hell am not paying 18+ bucks for it. I think the most I've paid recently is about 12 bucks to replace an old CD that I dropped and somehow cracked. I would rather just download individual songs at a buck a pop, since most "albums" are mostly filler with a couple of good songs anyway, just like always. If I can copy it, and it's a lossless copy, I'm there, if there's DRM, forget it.

I haven't bought new material in years, maybe 5 or so.

 

[MDS]

I tend to agree. Althought in the past I have used IRC to dowload music, I did so mainly to build a list of music I want to own and then spent months and several hundred dollars to find compilation discs that had the individual songs I want.

I want to own the music. I rip the discs and keep the uncompressed WAV as well as transcode the WAV to MP3. I buy music but once I own a legitimate copy of it, I should be able to do with it what I want. I will never make my collection available for anonymous strangers to download free of charge.

I understand the argument that most albums have only a few good songs but that doesn't justify downloading it for free. How about paying for the few songs you do like?

I've found that over time I tend to like many other songs than the few I originally purchased the album for. Now if CD prices were more reasonable more people would pay for content, but in my case I tend to look for older music which is cheap anyway (compared to prices for new releases which are mostly gangsta rap that I don't care for at all).

Sooner or later the RIAA will recognize that 'collectors' are willing to pay for the music they want to own and will get rid of the DRM crap. There will always be those that think music and movies should be free, but you shouldn't penalize the legitimate consumers to protect against the few bad appples that think it's ok to pirate music because they don't have the funds available to purchase it.