By Troy Brownfield

Hey all. Though I truly wish that I could blow hundreds of thousands of your tax dollars to fly in a jet and talk on a boat, I'll just settle for the website. Besides, I'm going to be talking about how you can save some money and stick up for the little guy, and that's something you'll never hear from Washington anyway.

CD? $18. Concert Tickets? $200. Screwing the Record Industry? Priceless.

Here's the deal: everybody has their own opinion on file-sharing, music downloading, and everything that entails. A federal court has already ruled that Kazaa, Grokster, Morpheus and the like are legal, and their only illegality is determined by intent. Of course, the Recording Industry Association of America, or RIAA, wants it taken away. Whether they acknowledge it or not, their actions prompted recent raids on college-server-based music-swapping networks like the one at Ohio State.

Despite the constant war of words, despite the lawsuits, despite the claims of artists who are for and against on both sides, this dispute will continue to linger on one lone principle: RIAA and their ilk do not understand that they are, without a doubt, THE BAD GUYS. It's not the file-swappers, and it's not the artists; it's the suits, major labels, and big money. Here's why.

RIAA keeps flogging the fact that the record industry is losing sales. It's at their fingertips to address the two immediate concerns: high prices and bad music. Linkin Park's latest release is priced out at over $20 in most locations. Frankly, for $20, a CD should give you a backrub and jerk you off. There is no appreciative difference between this CD, and say, a $14 copy of The Beatles' "One", except for the fact that The Beatles disc contains a couple of dozen immortal songs and Linkin Park's is another piece of crap. So why $6? Because they CAN.

Really, part of RIAA's problem is that they're warring on technology. Years ago, CDs seemed like a shiny futuristic item, made by arcane means. They jacked the prices higher, making the average CD cost about $5 more than cassettes, but the difference in quality and longevity seemed to be worth it. However, as tech expanded and people realized that a disc takes about a buck and a quarter to make and package, public opinion started to shift a little bit. Of course, the disparity in cost vs. price is often portrayed to be artist greed.

Let me tell you that that's most likely not the case. Steve Albini, founder of the seminal old-school indie group Big Black and producer of records like Nirvana's In Utero, wrote this brilliantly scathing indictment of the music industry, "Major Labels: Some of Your Friends Are Already This Fucked". In it, he explains how the music industry bends over new artists. His formula shows how a band can sell a quarter-of-a-million copies of a record, make over three million bucks for the record industry, and still be in the hole $14,000 after a successful tour. I also refer you to TLC's "Behind the Music", where the late Lisa Left-Eye Lopes gives a terrific breakdown of how you can sell 7 million records and still go bankrupt. Pure and simple, it all goes back to one thing: the corrupt, money-driven nature of the major label.

Even with all that, there are still some artists with solid integrity and rep that don't like file-sharing. The mighty Bob Mould is against it, primarily because he thinks indie artists need all the money that they can get. I sympathize with this point, and I don't totally disagree. In fact, I'm working toward my own major point that cohabits quite strangely with his own.

You see, the real fear on the part of the recording industry is that THEY will lose money. You aren't hurting the artists, who actually profit more from tours and other merchandise. In many ways, a record is actually a loss-leader for other products. In much the same way that single issues of a low-selling comic can make for a best-selling trade paperback, artists pump out records to keep up their public presence while earning the real cash from other deals. It makes sense, and I don't begrudge the artists for it. What the records themselves support is a monolithic dinosaur of an industry that refuses to lower prices, won't break new music, and put the screws on MTV to narrow their videos to 35 videos a week to promote only the artists that they themselves have invested the most money in, whether they suck or not. Radio is the same way, bought and paid for. Anybody who says that you should get free music just by listening to the radio either hasn't been listening, or has terrible taste.

Here's my theory on major label acts:

1) If you must buy a disc by a major-label act, get friends and split the cost, then copy it amongst yourselves. By all means, see the band on tour, but don't give the label money. In all likelihood, the band is only getting a few cents per copy. Refer to Albini's model, and see how many hands get cash before the band. It will disgust you. In this manner, you're supporting the band with a sale and concert tickets, but cutting into the label.

2) SEE THE BAND LIVE. I can't overstate this enough. Lots of bands thrive on tours for years after album sales wane. See them in a club, in an arena, or a parking lot, but support them. Buy a friggin' T-shirt too if you're so inclined. THIS is where you support the band.

3) If you like a band, encourage your friends to listen. Get them to follow step 2.

Now, some people probably don't like the above model. What about money for artist's development and the other stuff the label does, they say? Riiiiight. The post-Nirvana years have proven that the industry simply wants to grab onto to the zeitgeist and pound out clones until it collapses. Why do think we are where we are? Nirvana happened as a big-ass surprise; the label only expected to sell 50,000 copies. When they blew up, they brought other bands with them because kids suddenly realized there was a whole world they hadn't heard before. In fact, that "alternative" actually buried a lot of other "alternative" acts because say, Jesus and Mary Chain or Lush didn't sound enough like their Lolla2 tourmates Pearl Jam and Soundgarden. By the late '90s, we slid back into a morass of teen pop, so much so that the industry had to create Avril Lavigne as their own manufactured backlash. Unless something drastic happens, Nirvana is the last time you'll see a big unexpected out of nowhere explosion again. The surge of "The" bands in the last couple of years doesn't count; they are several good ones, and they sell decently, but they don't have the kind of runaway success that will alter the industry.

Here's my theory on REALLY supporting music, and it's a good one.

1) Support your local scene. Spend your bucks on discs by local artists. Spend your bucks on their shows. Spend your bucks on compilations from local labels. EVERY area has them; just look.

Granted, I know this won't help if your tastes run toward Christina or Justin or Kelly (and God save you if they do), but it works just fine for singer-songwriters, rock bands, and hip-hop acts. EVERY area of the country has a thriving, diverse scene aching to be noticed.

2) If you don't have a scene, help create one.

Don't think you can? Look here. This resource page at IndianapolisMusic.net contains links to scenes all over the country. There's Arizona, Austin, Omaha, Milwaukee, Chicago, Florida, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Seattle and St. Louis. There are specific cities in Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio and more. There are regional bases for the Midwest, New England, and the East Coast. These sites and scenes exist through effort. They must be created.

Look, I know it's the dream of every guy in a garage band to stand on an arena stage and rock thousands. The dream is getting rich and getting chicks and being famous. And some actually do. And they get that from hard work, touring, hard work, touring, merchandise, and maybe, if they're super-lucky, some cash from their records. The record industry does not nurture you. Witness the exorbiant ticket prices, the lack of drop-off in CD prices, and the effort they put in to trying to keep me and you from downloading an obscure '50s track that I can't find in my area outside of scratchy vinyl.

Maybe the industry will revert to something more artist-driven in the future. I doubt it. So why not use some of that disposable income and lay it down to help out people in your backyard, people who are probably just as, if not more, talented than the people being hocked on MTV. Sure it requires a little bit of work to get out there and find out who you like. Isn't that worth your time and money?


Troy Brownfield is the Editor-in-Chief of Shotgun Reviews. He manages Samsell, whom you should also support. Email Troy at psikotyk@aol.com

shotgun reviews | the big question | review rack | feature forum | rasslin' ring | comics convention | shotgun press | contact | links home | masthead | sponsors | email: psikotyk@aol.com © 1999-2002 Shotgun Reviews - All rights reserved.