Hacker News Reader

Comment by BurningFrog | Hacker News Reader

The music business has been massively "democratized" last few decades.

Now anyone can record high quality music at home. Anyone can self publish their music for the world to enjoy. Both were unthinkable a few decades ago.

But there are still a few gatekeepers, and gatekeepers will usually charge for opening their gate. Why wouldn't they?

A megastar can choose to record any of dozens of equally good songs. Whoever they choose will sell 100x more. So in one sense it's fair they get a share of the money they create by adding their fame and talent to the song.

View on HN

> A megastar can choose to record any of dozens of equally good songs. Whoever they choose will sell 100x more. So in one sense it's fair they get a share of the money they create by adding their fame and talent to the song.

I don't think this is actually true, at least if you define "good" as "likely to be a hit". There's a reason top pop performers go for songs written by songwriters with a proven track record, the most famous of which is perhaps Max Martin. Not anyone can write (and produce) songs that consistently appeal to whatever the public preferences of the day are. And no one wants to take unnecessary risks.

Performer do get a share.

The question is if performers should get songwriting royalties for songs they didn't write.

Having the power to bully does not justify bullying. They could negotiate the contract differently. Taking credit for something they didn't do is fraud, no matter how the market tolerates it.

Agreeing to share the song writing income is negotiating the contract differently.

"Now anyone can record high quality music at home."

Eh, to an extent. Audio production is a highly involved process. Few people have the equipment and knowledge to mic instruments & track sound properly, mix audio properly, apply professional-level production, master the tracks properly, master the album properly... It's not as easy as having a computer and some software.

You can get a pretty good sound at home now for sure but for professional albums you still need a decent professional studio. And even at home, getting good mics and hardware is still quite costly.

"A megastar can choose to record any of dozens of equally good songs."

There are famous or well-known (in the industry) songwriters that get chosen time and time again because they can consistently produce hits.

"Anyone" was a poor word choice. I meant more "any supremely talented musician".

A few decades ago, even the greatest talents in the world needed a recording contract to reach a large audience, and that went through a few large companies.

Today that still helps to get the best equipment and the best people working on your stuff. But you can also record in a home studio with better tech than The Beatles ever had access to.

Not a flat playing field at all, but I think a fair amount of people do come up that way.

As for the best songwriters... I don't really know the business, and I don't want to pretend to. You're probably right for the Megahits. Maybe I'm right for the filler tracks?

"A few decades ago, even the greatest talents in the world needed a recording contract to reach a large audience, and that went through a few large companies."

Ah yeah, this I do agree with. With today's tech it's relatively easy to get youtube/soundcloud-grade quality. It's not super cheap but one can get by with a decent camera, a decent usb interface like a scarlett 2i2, and a mic or two depending on the instrument.

It's never been easier to get discovered thanks to soundcloud, youtube, instagram, etc. Very different from having to play gigs at the right places (sometimes for a long time!) and hope one gets discovered by someone there. I was thinking more of professional studio albums.

My macbook pro and a decent USB microphone can produce far more professional demos than the Beatles could produce in 1964. If you listen to, say, the Lost Lennon Tapes, a high-school student can do higher-quality production today, based purely on youtube how-to videos.

Sufficient for a pro album ready for radio play? Probably not. But good enough to monetize on youtube? All day long.

There is a lot more to making good quality recordings then having good equipment. There's arrangement, mic placement, room acoustic treatment, mixing and EQ, mastering.

Never said their wasn't. But there can be no doubt that both the equipment and the knowhow is vastly more easy to access today than it was then.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com