Gama Bomb Singer Comments on State of Music

The government HAS done something about it. And musicians aren't fucked, most bands don't make a dime out of record sales today, the market's all about live performances.
 
Which is why "Tales From the Grave in Space" was free. it gave Gama Bomb alot more exposure, and hell, I bought a t-shirt and the album itself because I liked it, and they're touring with Evile, meaning I'll buy more stuff when I see them. That's just me but still...
 
I think that its difficult to combat file sharing and its going to get even harder. IMO find a way to capitalise on it so that bands do get paid for their work. Drop prices of albums because thats a big reason why people download them anyway. Try to encourage people to buy more CD's. include stuff with them you couldn't get any other way etc.

Theres a ton of ways you can encourage people to buy the real thing without trying to shut out file sharing.
 
It doesn't matter if the Gama Bomb was free or not that is the only thing that has been proved here. You cannot fight file sharing. Phil is right there, but you don't have to go "Oh well here's the album for free" as all they have shown is that the people who were going to buy it, would buy it and the people who wouldn't... well yeah. FACT is it hardly did anything and maybe brought a bit more of a loss than usual because they had the free CDs in Metal Hammer or Terrorizer (I forget).

Another thing it proves is that the quality of music still sells albums in my opinion. The 35K Dig was referring to on his label has to be Evile, especially if Gama Bomb are what the second biggest on their label? Evile wrote a quality first album and that shot them right up. People will still download it though so there's no point in making it free like that. What you could do is just ignore the fact people are illegally downloading it and just market the CD to get that sold.

Also I believe the music industry needs to move on with the times. You can't constantly find new ways and take people to court over downloading. It's impossible to stop. You have to move forwards with the time. Say with things like Spotify. Free STREAMING music but you can still gain money from it. So people won't download an album they'll listen to it on Spotify because that's easier to do. And even though there's only a small profit from it... There's still a profit.

Another way I've discussed in the past is like your TV license. You have to pay for a TV license which pays the wages of everybody involved in the media there. AND music videos too... It's PRS money that's gained but that money is coming from the viewers.

SO when you pay your monthly internet bill or whatever. If you have downloaded... There could EASILY be an automatic fee there. And that fee can go to the labels and the bands. It would be automatic payment, just like when you pay your TV License. BUT the music industry is taking ages to move on. I sent this idea out in an open letter to our old government, obviously got no reply. But the fact is it makes sense.

ANOTHER way of regulating torrents. A more trust-able way of no viruses and what not. Why can't there be an official torrent website? Sorta like they have iTunes. Where you pay to download a torrent.

There are soooo many ways the music industry CAN move forwards. So why the fuck aren't they? Don't sit back and let it slip away. DO something about it.
 
It doesn't matter if the Gama Bomb was free or not that is the only thing that has been proved here. You cannot fight file sharing. Phil is right there, but you don't have to go "Oh well here's the album for free" as all they have shown is that the people who were going to buy it, would buy it and the people who wouldn't... well yeah. FACT is it hardly did anything and maybe brought a bit more of a loss than usual because they had the free CDs in Metal Hammer or Terrorizer (I forget).

Another thing it proves is that the quality of music still sells albums in my opinion. The 35K Dig was referring to on his label has to be Evile, especially if Gama Bomb are what the second biggest on their label? Evile wrote a quality first album and that shot them right up. People will still download it though so there's no point in making it free like that. What you could do is just ignore the fact people are illegally downloading it and just market the CD to get that sold.

Also I believe the music industry needs to move on with the times. You can't constantly find new ways and take people to court over downloading. It's impossible to stop. You have to move forwards with the time. Say with things like Spotify. Free STREAMING music but you can still gain money from it. So people won't download an album they'll listen to it on Spotify because that's easier to do. And even though there's only a small profit from it... There's still a profit.

Another way I've discussed in the past is like your TV license. You have to pay for a TV license which pays the wages of everybody involved in the media there. AND music videos too... It's PRS money that's gained but that money is coming from the viewers.

SO when you pay your monthly internet bill or whatever. If you have downloaded... There could EASILY be an automatic fee there. And that fee can go to the labels and the bands. It would be automatic payment, just like when you pay your TV License. BUT the music industry is taking ages to move on. I sent this idea out in an open letter to our old government, obviously got no reply. But the fact is it makes sense.

ANOTHER way of regulating torrents. A more trust-able way of no viruses and what not. Why can't there be an official torrent website? Sorta like they have iTunes. Where you pay to download a torrent.

There are soooo many ways the music industry CAN move forwards. So why the fuck aren't they? Don't sit back and let it slip away. DO something about it.

Whilst I agree with most of what you said, I don't think Spotify can create a decent enough profit for artists and labels. For example, one label had over 50,000 plays and only got something ridiculous like $3. Then again, I suppose the main advantage of it enables band to promote their music. But surely if you wanted to do that, it would be better to upload a few tracks, not whole albums?

And would like a tv license style kinda thing work for the music industry? It takes £150 a year from about 20million households to fund just 75% of the BBC, and the music industry is so much bigger, with so many more people to pay. This means in order to pay everyone, consumers would have to pay probably more than that, and would they be willing? But I suppose a system like this is better than nothing.
 
Well I don't think Spotify is the solution. It's just a great alternative to downloading and even though there is only a small profit, it's better than nothing.

That payment like a TV license thing could work if your internet provider could track where your downloads are and direct the money to the right places.
 
Pirate_Monkey.jpg
 
Part of what I study, this would come into it. But it's not nice writing essays about it. Because if I say it could work I'd need proof and quotes from other people to back up my points. And that's pretty difficult in cases like this. So I'd have to read books about media and TV Licenses instead haha! I do think an idea like that could work. I may write a letter out to a few people if I can word it right.