Society is really screwed up now.

[O71394658]

but there are also the aforementioned manufacturers and the producers, publishers, managers, etc. etc. etc. that also get cuts. In the case of many of these people, they are not rich and their only source of income is from record sales - it doesn't often matter which band is selling, so long as units move - so they get screwed the most when people don't buy records. Bands don't get hurt if a few thousand people download their album instead of buying it, but that few thousand multiplies in the eyes of a publishing company or a recording studio that works with several different artists.

Enough people buy them right now that the record companies know price is not the issue.

Self-contradictory? :/

I would doubt that "piracy" would have such a dramatic effect as you make it out to be. It will never get so bad that so many will be put out of work. As for pure economics, more jobs would be created out of MP3 players, digital technology, and the like than would be lost through the manufacturing of CDs.

Money does not follow from skill. I worked at a dinky little club last spring, and I saw some phenomenal musicians and excellent songwriters go through, some of whom were even excellent businesspeople, who made a flat $25 there. If being a skilled musician was what it took to make you successful, there would be a few million more rich rock stars out there instead of 40-year-old washouts who played fantastic music for decades and never got signed. I can't tell you everything you need to make it in the business, because otherwise I'd already be famous. But skill alone won't do it, even accompanied with charisma and hard work.

This is quite obvious. My fault. I should've clarified that I was referring to artists that already had "made it", as in had commercially available CDs in record stores.

there have always been plenty of quality records available, and if you think there are too many CDs with only one good single apiece, you're not looking in the right places. In those cases, it's rarely the performer's ("artist's") fault, because the albums like that are contrived by the record companies and the performers don't generally write the songs.

I never intended this upon myself. As I've said, I've purchased more CDs, but I can understand the reasoning of many. As most of the American public are only followers of "popular" music, as in whatever plays on the radio, this would be the target demographic I would be referring to. I too have made the mistake of purchasing a CD for a single, and I won't do it again. I have absolutely no problem finding quality music. One of my main points was that I would not have discovered this music (thus buying the CDs) if it had not been for "piracy". I will not buy any music in which the so-called "artist" isn't an artist at all, but a puppet of the record company. They are not artists or musicians. In that case I have no pity for them, as if they get songs written for them and are powdered up by the record companies, they'll probably make millions anyway, so no harm would be done through CD sales.

no intelligent consumer buys full-priced albums from stores like Sam Goody. You can get the major-label ones for $15 at Target, and if they're not big enough for Target to carry them, I can almost guarantee you that you can order them from the record labels themselves for $9-$14 apiece. $15 is not an unreasonable price to pay for 40-70 minutes of music plus liner notes, and if you care about the artists, keep in mind that their cut is a percentage of the total retail price minus the packaging deduction. This means that bands will make more money if you buy CDs for $15 than if the prices drop, and thus more people will be willing and able to make music and be successful at it.

I see what you say, and I agree, but most Americans don't. They do shop at the Sam Goody's and pay the $20. They do buy the CDs for a single. That's why record sales have been slipping.

Regarding your other point, paying more money for a CD isn't necessarily going to put more money into the artist's pocket. It only drives away consumers (see falling CD prices for last 3 years for evidence). I also believe that regardless of the price, the artist's cut is generally going to remain the same. It's so negligible concerning the actual price of the CD that price fluctuations would have little difference (I think many artists have contracts on royalties per CD), so regardless if it was $10 or $15, the artist's would get basically the same amount.