It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Idea to change the music industry.

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:04 PM
This question has probably been spoken by trillions of people by now. But why hasn't much been done to the music industry to get people back into BUYING music anymore?

I say buying music because of all the websites that exist only to serve as a means of a new channel for listening only.

You have websites like Spotify, Pandora,, iHeartRadio, Radio Verdant, Sony Music Unlimited (Which Sony's flagship music streaming service name has changed about 9 billion times since it was created. I remember when it used to be called "QRIOCITY" just barely TWO YEARS AGO.), and so on and so on. You even have the major digital music stores streaming music now like iTunes, Amazon, and soon it will be Google.

I don't think the problem is exposure, access, or acquiring a means of listening to music anymore. I think the consumers have lost interest in the idea of owning the music. All because they can simply create a profile on a website, and have computational algorithms they create, that brings them the music they want to hear. And create playlists off of the criteria that only they specify. Like if they hate Eminem and prefer to listen to more Dr. Dre then the algorithm will simply ignore one artist over the other when the playlist chooses the next song to stream.

This method of making radio more "personalized" has really caused people to "Shut out" all chances for up and coming artists to get heard. Which means the artist must bow at the whim of each and every individual listener who has the power to hit that little "unlike" button.

This is a major problem in the music industry today. AT LEAST IT IS WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE NUMBER ONE SOURCE PERTAINING TO THE PROBLEM OF EXPOSURE. Or maybe I am just a mad man.

Artists now have to pay out of pocket, or do so by a means of a third party, to get ads on youtube, or on certain channels in the style of a 'musical spot' before another track, or before a video starts. In an effort to get listeners or attract an audience.

Simply put all marketing efforts in this manner HAVE FAILED. MISERABLY FAILED! No one even considers this as an avenue to get listeners anymore. It is so hard to get anyone's attention to follow your music compositions, that some artists, including myself, have to RUSE people into listening. Even if it is just for 20 ****ing seconds. Other artists have tried a lot of other means of getting their music "out there" but it all fails. From going to concerts and handing out CD's of your work to people standing in line, or exiting the building. All the way up to trying to get featured with an artist DURING A CONCERT (Which has happened A LOT before.)

Another means is when artists get featured on an album release of your favorite artist. And the music that is produced just..... I really don't want to say it but most of the time what they produce either fits into one of the two following categories explained in detail that say the exact same thing:

1. What they produced sounds awesome as a stand alone piece, but when you go and see the artist who mixed with your favorite artist you discover that he really is Talantless/Tasteless/notwithstanding/ Or any other word that you want to put here besides using the nice words of "its just not my cup of tea."

2. He got lucky enough to actually score some listens, but again it is just missing an element from your favorite artist that he seems to be lacking. So once again falling under the same thing as "Just not my cup of tea."

Another avenue used to be CD/Casset Tape/Vinyl album artwork. In the beginning with Vinyl it was just on the cover to let you know what you were playing, and making it easily identifiable. This evolved into adding in lyrics of the song inside of the casset tape's encasement as an added bonus. This was the drive for music for A LONG TIME. That was until CD's came into the market place. CD Cases offered artists more room for more artwork, and, in some cases, allowed more "marketing space" for each album release. Some artists used the CD case booklet to advertise their website, or other artists who were of the same sound. Or just as a means of promoting their next album that was to release when you look at what some other underground artists had done. Especially with materials found inside of the CD cases like stickers, or vouchers.

But soon enough MP3's came along and just stole the show with having the ability to carry every single song you had in your collection within your pocket. All with it being just a bit smaller than a Casset player. These little things just killed it for audiophiles. The dynamics of sound were getting compressed, and to those with less finer tuned ears (Such as myself) actually believed there was no "degradation" of the sound. Or at least it wasn't really noticeable until it hit the 92 kbps rate.

I for one never touched 92 kbps song files. I always went for the 320 kbps files and above. But of course you still have those people who want to argue that there really isn't anything truly SPECTACULAR with larger bit rates.

If that wasn't enough for audiophiles to become overly depressed about, they came up with the idea of LIMITERS AND COMPRESSION SOFTWARE PLUGINS FOR DAW's.

If you are the person who is saying "What the **** is that?" Don't worry. It can all be explained without some major Audiophile coming in this section to blast you with his expert knowledge of the situation making you feel belittled. But I can say showing you this video will explain why Compression and Limiting the sound is actually A BAD THING. But the entire music industry truly doesn't give a **** about the sound quality because of something you complain about. "The loudness" of a track.

And before you watch this video, please please PLEASE please PLEASE wear headphones so you can better understand what the **** audiophiles are talking about. Do not watch this video without your headphones. Even if they are cheap ones. Even if you have a surround sound stereo system that costs more than my house, HEAR IT THROUGH A SET OF HEADPHONES.

See it is such a basic thing we could actually tackle as a group of producers from every corner. But because the Music industry needs to see Sales numbers as their defining purpose for following a new direction of music....

Something needs to be done in several different areas. And attacking this using mostly a means of psychological warfare we can definitely beat this. And possibly re-invigorate the true producers of the industry back into it being more of a profession instead of it being a bunch of knob tweaks for more compression.

So how can we get people interested in purchasing music again?

How can we identify which areas of our brains are tailored to the purchasing of an item?

Well actually I found it to be rather simple to be able to strangle money out of the entire music industry. (Which would include artists, labels, distributors, online stores, producers, mixers, masterers, DJ's, featured artists, and ultimately each and every individual consumer in the marketplace.)

I sound a lot like a marketing guy trying to pitch you an entire piece on why you should invest in me. But I am not that type of person. I just seem to have an idea and would like to share it, but I am overly cautious on who to trust with sharing this idea to.

So I need your help. Is there anyone in the Music industry seeing this?

posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:08 PM
So far my research into this endeavor has sprawled up a complete company idea, it has a name, a concept of how it would function, how it would be implemented, what marketing technique should be used and how to approach people with it, and overall coming up with an imaginative number for starting funds.

This idea has a 50/50 risk of being a total failure, or a major success.

edit on 10222015 by GiulXainx because: Trying to find people in a better way.

posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:16 PM
By leading people away from buying their music on disc etc, and leading them to a music supplier, you gain control of what they can listen to.
When was the last time we had a genuine protest song???

posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 07:33 PM
My recent epiphany is there a very few composers around these days...if any at all.

In 1970s, we had a ton come along such as Enio Marconne, Mason Williams (classical gas), Glenn Cambell, etc.

Name one song written where an orchistra was needed to accompany the song writer in recent times?
edit on 22-10-2015 by Granite because: sp

posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 03:49 AM
Most of the composers have gone to film and video games. They record for audiences that are more "mainstream."

And each time the composers used different instruments than just the regular sets. In some cases no Tenors were used for the vocals.

But when it comes to song writing they all use VSTi's or sampled orchestral strings. When it comes to instrumentals they have pretty much fiddled out all of the players. All to save some money I guess. or just personal taste. Why try to construct an entire ensemble when I could have much more fine tuning done with digital work?

My guess is that people are all too involved with "life." even though I have seen so many different people's version of "life" and it is pretty psychotic now a days.

I am just trying to get people interested in coming back to music. Back to at least purchasing it instead of trusting radio stations or video game releases to generate sales.

posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 07:15 AM
1)Stop over compressing.
2) Understand music is art, not an assembly line.
3) Remove 95% of artists treating music like an assembly production plant.
4) Stop over compressing.
5) Explore new chord progressions.
6)Stop over-compressing vocals and tracks.

I'm sure there is more.

posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 07:19 AM
a reply to: GiulXainx

There is something about live music that will never replace digital. And this is coming from someone who has produced with nothing but synthesizers. People have to remember, not only are you getting the energy of that instrument, you are getting the personality of the musician. 4-5 personalities, all lovers of music injecting that energy into a final product which is then composed and arranged by another person with their own set of energies.

Compared to one person with a bunch of pre-sampled sounds. It can not compare, no matter how well you are at emulating the sound and function of instruments digitally, which I am good at.

posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 02:10 PM
The term music industry is your main and only thing that should concern you. The two words and meanings are totally incompatible. The moment industry got involved in music was the start of the slippery slope because music then became a money making scheme.
Let me make myself perfectly clear. A musician is a person that writes and performs his own compositions. It is not a TV program or a producing team (whether that's a record company or not) that gets a person or groups of people and manufactures their sound. Oh, yes, yes they will make millions but they aint musicians. And the same goes for any electronic "music". It's a noise, yes, but put someone on a stage at a concert venue with all their electronic"wizardry" and by the end of their set they would only have the smackheads nodding and they will nod at anything.
When a musician can get up on stage and perform with no noise altering machinery (by that I mean just amps and backing singers) and people like his music they will buy it.
There are musicians but the producers etc. are just parasites on his talent. Take the parasites out of the bussiness and you might stand a chance but that's an impossibility as they now control the whole shebang.
The only other thing is the "artistes" themselves. Full of their own self importance they are bulled up by their backers and believe their own hype.

posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 11:03 PM
I am so glad I got these responses so far. My idea behind at least getting people to purchase music once again is further reinforced by the views from users on other "artists" and listeners.

I do have a fully fledged sick plan that just might consume the artists more than the listeners or fans. Who knows maybe this idea I have would be sort of a laughable but yet almost totally expected spectacle to happen. And it does seem ridiculous the more I theoretically place this sucker into the media, or out in the open.

Forgive me because this idea is probably something that would make you roll your eyes at how it could fail, or how stupidly profound this idea would change everything. I think I will just have to wait until I submit a patent for this ridiculous idea. Which will take some time. But this idea still has a 50 50 chance of being successful.

top topics


log in