Thursday, 15 January 2004

Subscriptions - Pt. 2 Thanks for your comments. Yes, I too think that there needs to be a multi-tier system and it could look like this: 1. Members (by subscription) get access to most material. This could include rough mixes, works in progress, alternate versions and such. Basically a thorough access to the artist's process. I have seen painters at work and sometimes I love a painting more before the artist can stop himself...in other words, I would prefer the work in progress over the final result. The members/subscribers would have a similar opportunity here. They would have access to, and hear, rough mixes or live recordings they might actually like better than the official release. 2. The official release, on CD or whatever medium the future might bring. A complete package that is exciting to hear, but also exciting to unwrap and look at. Maybe a limited edition album, because people who don't want the package could always download the songs from something like iTunes - especially if HP delivers the iPod and therefore iTunes to loads of PC people. In other words, there would be a choice between buying the limited edition album or downloading the songs - and there would be no need for having a "cheap package" that people just rip and put in the cupboard. 3. Freebees. Nothing wrong with putting up some work for free. It hopefully entices people to either subscribe to the membership program or to buy the album package or to download a song or two..... Does this cover it? 8:39:32 PM    comment []; Sellers 3:20:31 PM    comment []; Billy Corgan and subscriptions The current talk available on Integral Naked is between Billy Corgan of Smashing Pumpkins and Zwan fame and Ken Wilber. Billy describes his dream scenario in which people subscribe to an artist or group of artists. He envisions subscribers each paying $5 per month - $60 per year for which can download as much of the annual output of the artist or artists as they like. 1. I think this could be brilliant. There are artists whose every recording I purchase and this might encourage them to make recordings available that a record company or radio station might not find commercial enough...or live recordings that are not of commercial quality, but to me as a fan they would be very exciting. This would be especially interesting if it is a group of artists who make their collective annual output available. If one artist takes a year off to study this or that, the others could take up the slack. 2. Doesn't this sound like the musician/composer working for a king or prince or baron of old? In effect this is why Bach, who worked for a church, Mozart and many, many others were able to follow their intuition....yes, they had to please their lord, but they had more time to follow their ideas than the average composer who had to sell his works to publishers to survive. This hits me like a modern version of that....makes me wonder whether an arts collective like that could be tax-exempt - almost like a virtual museum. I pay an annual fee to the MoMA for a membership and this could be similar if set up right, yes? Please let me know your opinions. No essays, please, as I am spending most of my day in the studio and won't have time to read long comments. 3:09:41 PM    comment [];

© Copyright 2004 Ottmar Liebert. Last update: 01.02.04; 6:16:36.