MySpace
myspace music

Just Jack Blog

JUST JACK>> ON TOUR OCT/NOV!!!



Last Updated: 11/22/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Status: Single
Country: UK
Signup Date: 1/19/2006

Who Gives Kudos:


Thursday, September 24, 2009 

Current mood:  contemplative
I sent this to Lily Allen but apparently the blog thing has been closed, so I'm thought i'd put this up here...


Hi Lily,


Thanks for your e-mail and thanks for raising this issue.


I agree that illegal file-sharing is reducing the revenue of artists and record labels and I understand your concerns about the damaging effects this could have on emerging new talent. I also agree that there should be a better system in place for young people without credit cards to download music legally.


However, I believe the music industry would continue to shrink even if the issue of illegal file-sharing were to be addressed.  The way people buy music has changed; a lot of people who download legally choose not to buy whole albums but only individual tracks and this also reduces overall revenue.  The fact that we are in the midst of a worldwide recession must surely have a part to play too.


The more I think about this issue the more I have come to realise that any discussion of the future of British music needs to be broader than just a single-issue argument. I feel that the file-sharing issue is just another stage in the ongoing development of the music industry as it attempts to evolve in line with new technologies. 


To ‘save’ the British music industry I think it is just as important to look at how the record labels spend their money on developing artists in the first place.  The notorious bidding wars to capture new talent often descend into glorified pissing contests.  A band was signed recently for £800,000 after the usual scrum. They had one good song and a few successful gigs under their belt. Needless to say nothing much happened when their record was released. With this kind of money, the label could have signed up to EIGHT bands and even more solo artists, providing them with just enough money to live while they recorded an album.  Paying less money upfront is just one way of making the signing of new artists less of gamble and it would maybe allow A+R’s to take more risks. A certain amount of belt-tightening and streamlining is not necessarily a bad thing; I believe that a whiff of the stupid excesses of the 80’s/90’s still lingers in the music industry.


It’s worth remembering that we are the privileged minority. We make a living from art while millions of others continue to express themselves purely for enjoyment.  The industry itself is not ‘music’. Music as an art form will continue to exist with or without the injection of vast sums of money.


All the best,


Jack


.. ..

steven2009.

 
yeahhh i totally agree, most people are picking the songs they like or have been released from albums and not buying the whole album, saying that most of my friends i talk to use 'spotify' they listen to any track they like for however long they like without paying, so they think why buy the songs if they can listen to it for free?
 
Posted by steven2009. on Thursday, September 24, 2009 - 6:20 PM
[Reply to this
The C

 
This is a brilliant point - Many bands are being sold purely on image and not on music which only pushes them so far; about an album's worth of music. The worst case is when a band is sold only on image but continues to have an elustrious career, shadowing the more meaningful bands.
I believe that local music should be promoted more as well. Many local bands don't get nearly enough coverage and often give up on pursuing a career in the arts due to the lack of support and also the fact that many untalented (but image conscious) artists are signed up. With the huge swells of cash that are injected into these bands they are made to become listenable (poor choice of wording there, sorry) but there's no soul or life in the music - just a performing husk with a huge team of writers and artists behind them.

The money is not distributed fairly in any way. We pay for everything else - why do people not pay for music? Buying singles as a download is fair enough (There was never a great selection of physical singles to buy in my town) BUT a whole album should be bought, not just single tracks - it was never like this before and it never should be.

 
Posted by The C on Thursday, September 24, 2009 - 6:42 PM
[Reply to this
Stu...
Stuart Wilson

 
Well said JJ.

 
Posted by Stu... on Thursday, September 24, 2009 - 6:44 PM
[Reply to this
Kirstie
Kirstie Slade

 
Boo-yeah Jack I love you more every day. Obviously it would be better if one didn't think that Ms. Allen wasn't so egotistical that it would actually be taken on board. I doubt it. It's funny how it's always the less talented "fly-by-night" that always seem to have these download issues (I'm thinking Metallica) who never seem to have enough faith/respect for their fans that they will still purchase their stuff if they maybe don't like the 2nd single but love the 1st & 3rd. Why is it no matter how much MTV I watch (sadly too much) I only find out that you've a new single out but hunting around my V player. It shouldn't be so hard to find such great music. Love ya. Kirstie
 
Posted by Kirstie on Thursday, September 24, 2009 - 7:57 PM
[Reply to this
Rachel

 
Well said. Bout time someone raised this point.

 
Posted by Rachel on Thursday, September 24, 2009 - 11:33 PM
[Reply to this
Gabrielito

 
That was REALLY well said Jack!  You've made some really valid points.  I think everyone in the industry could be making more money from music if it was more accessible to everyone.  Your new album has yet to be released here in the US and I know some friends that have it only because they found it on a file sharing site.  They've told me they didn't want to wait for it to be released here in the States.  Money lost there because they decided to go the illegal route to get the album now instead of waiting for it to be released on US iTunes or domestic CD.

With the invention of iTunes and other digital music stores I don't see any reason why it can't be available worldwide on the day of its release.  I do understand the concept of different record companies in different territories obtaining the rights to the album/singles for release, but maybe that's part of the problem?  Record companies that aren't the parent company the artist is signed to don't always tend to put their best effort into promotion of that artist and their media.

So why not just make the music available worldwide as a way to help combat the problem at hand?  Just a thought...  
 
Posted by Gabrielito on Friday, September 25, 2009 - 12:06 AM
[Reply to this
SAZ

 
you tell 'em jack!!
I think the problem is that its far too easy to file share, and people take advantage of that because they know they won't get into trouble and that won't need to spend any money.
so why doesn't someone clamp down on applications like Limewire etc? that would solve a few problems right?
And also theres programs now where you can rip the audio off videos on youtube within a few seconds. So if someones uploaded say a track from an album then many people can get it for free.



And also while we're on the topic of music..
Bands like Mcfly don't get given enough credit for what they do. They write all their own music. Play their own instruments, and never mime. Then theres bands like JLS who don't get me worng are good! but they don't write their own songs, and never sing live etc, even thought they won a singing talent show!!  and then theres people that can't even sing that are in the charts, like Britney Spears.... its all computerised her voice is. and arrrrrrrghhhh sometimes i hate the music industry!! hahaha


but i have to say Jack, you're a pretty awesome artist. and I've been playing your new album in the car with my college friends, and they really like it, and they're coming too see you in Birmingham with me! haaa, new fans :) yay!!



 
Posted by SAZ on Saturday, September 26, 2009 - 3:50 PM
[Reply to this