www.nettime.org
Nettime mailing list archives

Re: <nettime> Where Music Will Be Coming From - Kevin Kelly [2x]
nettime's jukebox on Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:20:47 +0100 (CET)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Where Music Will Be Coming From - Kevin Kelly [2x]



Table of Contents:

   Re: <nettime> Where Music Will Be Coming From - Kevin Kelly                     
     "roya.jakoby" <roya {AT} girlfish.net>                                               

   Re: <nettime> Where Music Will Be Coming From - Kevin Kelly                     
     david turgeon <david.t {AT} steam.ca>                                                



------------------------------

Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 11:37:26 -0500
From: "roya.jakoby" <roya {AT} girlfish.net>
Subject: Re: <nettime> Where Music Will Be Coming From - Kevin Kelly

" - to retroactively recontextualize some of the most revolutionary aspects of
digital cultural creation and dissemination by way of a strained antique economic
model."   ?

Oh my... went that text through the Art-O-Matic before it got posted? Is the use
of such secretive language just more interesting, or is it just secretive?

greetings, //roya./



Derek Holzer wrote:

> A quite compelling response to this article showed up on the [microsound] list,
> from Joshua Maremont.
>
> 'scuse my monoculture :)
>
> best,
> Derek
>
> +++
>
> Date:  Sun, 17 Mar 2002 18:25:06 -0800
> From:  Joshua Maremont <thermal {AT} boxmanstudies.com>
> To:  microsound <microsound {AT} hyperreal.org>
> Subject:  Re: [microsound] Where Music Will Be Coming From
>
> An interesting read, yes, but the writer seems to couch his quite
> valid reflections and predictions in a commercial-consumer model of
> music which I find limited and backward in its struggle - mirroring
> that of the MP3 and Napster litigations - to retroactively
> recontextualize some of the most revolutionary aspects of digital
> cultural creation and dissemination by way of a strained antique
> economic model.  His analysis is right on the mark until he
> lemming-trots into a wool-over-eyes future in which the current model
> of musicians financially enslaved to a centralized system of
> distribution and patronage is magically metamorphosized into what a
> marketing consultant would surely name a "net-savvy" version of the
> same arrangement (see:  SDMI and subscription downloads).  For me
> this analysis - like those of the entertainment industry plaintiffs
> in soft-music legal actions - misses (or deliberately hides) an
> entirely different future of music in which the laws of musical
> economics are not simply retooled or upturned (remember the New
> Economy?) but completely discredited down to the validity of their
> component terms and concepts.  This other future is one in which
> profit and music are not likely to be mentioned in the same sentence,
> in which music is made by those who now only buy it, and in which the
> source of the audio data is less important than the experience of
> finding and hearing and using it - one in which labels and stars lose
> their centrality and priority and become mere nodes in a system they
> no longer control.  And organs of the ever more loudly creaking
> centralized system - like Yahoo or NTY or Wired - cannot be happy to
> consider such implications of their own irrelevance.  I would retitle
> the article:  Where Corporate Music Will Be Bought From.  I imagine
> few here will be shopping at that mall, except for the occasional and
> covert girl-/boy-band fix.
>
> np - "Vertical Forms" compilation
> --
> Joshua Maremont / Thermal - mailto:thermal {AT} boxmanstudies.com
> Boxman Studies Label - http://www.boxmanstudies.com/
>
> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:15:36 -0500
From: david turgeon <david.t {AT} steam.ca>
Subject: Re: <nettime> Where Music Will Be Coming From - Kevin Kelly


>-- Songs are cheap; what's expensive are the indexable, searchable, official
>lyrics.

... now if only electronica wasn't all instrumental it could hope to make 
money too...

>-- On auction sites, music lovers buy and sell active playlists, which
>arrange hundreds of songs in creative sequences. The lists are templates that
>reorder songs on your own disc.

... but why stop there?  you could buy & sell creative grocery lists while 
you're at it...

>-- You subscribe to a private record label whose agents troll the bars,
>filtering out the garbage, and send you the best underground music based on
>your own preferences.

... you know, this always puzzled me; is there really anyone on earth whose 
preferences actually coincide with anything that claims to be "based on 
your own preferences"?

>-- The most popular band in the world produces only very good ''jingles,''
>just as some of the best directors today produce only very good commercials.

... & it sure looks like we're not about to get rid of either.

>-- The catalog of all musical titles makes more money than any of the record
>companies.

... knowing how much money the record companies make, that's a scary 
thought in itself.

>-- A generator box breeds background music tailored to your personal tastes;
>the music is supplied by third-party companies that buy the original songs
>from the artists.

... the concept of that has been invented a while ago...  it's not so far 
of auto-illustrator, for example, except for music (& there is, in fact, a 
music plugin for auto-i.)  at any rate, more likely the team of programmers 
who worked on the generative engine will end up with the paycheck.  though 
if there are actual performers, they might be entitled to a little bit of 
royalties, who knows...

>-- Because you like to remix dance tunes, you buy the versions of songs that
>are remix-ready in all 24 tracks.

... now, that would be the postmodern equivalent of guitar tablatures or 
something.

>-- You'll pay your favorite band to stream you its concert as it is playing
>it, even though you could wait and copy it at no cost later.

... & in a few years, nobody bothers to go to live shows anymore, the band 
finds out it's really only playing for an audience of webcams, so they sack 
their drummer & become a studio band like everybody else.

>-- The varieties of musical styles explode. They increase faster than we can
>name them, so a musical Dewey Decimal System is applied to each work to aid
>in categorizing it.

... & yet for years & years the mp3.com promo song of the week is 
invariably trance.

>-- For a small fee, the producers of your favorite musician will tweak her
>performance to exquisitely match the acoustics of your living room.

... which doesn't matter as the acoustic subtleties are constantly 
outweighed by the combined hums of the computer fan, hard drive & CD player.

>-- So many amateur remixed versions of a hit tune are circulating on the Net
>that it's worth $5 to you to buy an authenticated official version.

... only to be smacked by the realization that the authenticated official 
version was probably made with the same software the amateur remixers use.

>-- For bands that tour, giving away their music becomes a form of cheap
>advertising. The more free copies that are passed around, the more tickets
>they sell.

... & eventually, they should give free tickets & simply sell their own 
bodies for profit.

>-- Musicians with the highest status are those who have a 24-hour Net channel
>devoted to streaming only their music.

... & listeners with the least taste actually listen to these channels all day.

>-- Royalty-free stock music (like stock photography), available for any use,
>takes off with the invention of a great music search engine, which makes it
>possible to find music ''similar to this music'' in mood, tempo and sound.

... in how many decades do you expect this to be done?

>-- The best-selling item for most musicians is the ''whole package deal,''
>which contains video clips, liner notes, segregated musical tracks, reviews,
>ads and artwork -- all stored on a well-designed artifact in limited editions.

... how can it be both a limited edition artifact & a best-selling item?

>-- Despite the fact that with some effort you can freely download the song
>you think you want in a format you think will work for your system, most
>people choose to go to a reliable retailer online and use the retailer's
>wonderful search tools and expert testimonials to purchase what they want
>because it is simply easier and a better experience all around.

... i thought i wanted acid mother temple, but AOL said i wanted nelly furtado.

>In the end, the future of music is simple: more choices. As the
>possibilities of music expand, so do our own.

mr. kelly, your future still sounds pretty much like top 40 radio to 
me.  there is no adaptation to technology, rather a generalized overtaking 
of artist's rights & royalties without very much plan of compensation.  in 
mr. kelly's world there are a very few companies that turn in an 
extraordinary profit & a flurry of consumers with tastes vapid enough that 
they can be detected by "preference engines".  but hey, we're artists, we 
do it for the love & we're kind of stupid too.

have a nice day
~ david


------------------------------

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net