The Student Room Group

Why do people still pay for music

Poll

Do you pay for your music?

Due to the increasing advancement of the Internet, it's become easier and easier to download music for free.
Despite this, you still see songs selling over a million downloads on iTunes charged at near £1 per copy when there are many websites that offer these same songs free of charge. If you think about that, someone may have a 2000 song library on their phone so would have "wasted" around £2000 that could have been used for something better like paying their bills.

I would like to know who and why you pay for your music if you do so

Scroll to see replies

Out of interest, what would happen to the music industry if everyone was able to consume it for free?
Reply 2
Most of the time I use YouTube converter since I don't want to waste money on something that isn't a necessity. I think selling songs for £1 is quite expensive and should be reduced by half - I may actually use iTunes more often.
Reply 3
Original post by just a dad
Out of interest, what would happen to the music industry if everyone was able to consume it for free?


South Park did an episode on this. Basically artists could only live a life of semi-luxury. For example instead of 4 private jets they could only afford 3.
Original post by K_o_46
South Park did an episode on this. Basically artists could only live a life of semi-luxury. For example instead of 4 private jets they could only afford 3.


I think he meant what would happen in reality
I pay for some of the songs if I really like the band / singer I will buy the album. If it's just casual listening it's converter time.
Original post by K_o_46
South Park did an episode on this. Basically artists could only live a life of semi-luxury. For example instead of 4 private jets they could only afford 3.


So theft is ok if the person you steal from is rich?
Original post by K_o_46
South Park did an episode on this. Basically artists could only live a life of semi-luxury. For example instead of 4 private jets they could only afford 3.

Talk me through how that works.

No-one pays anything for music, yet the artist is still able to run "3 private jets" in "semi-luxury".

Clearly I am missing something.
seriously though imo it's not even that bad for the music industry, especially for smaller acts since they're much more likely to get coverage through free music. people also buy tickets to gigs and paraphernalia etc. and money comes in through licensing.
I think most artists make their money from concerts and selling t-shirts rather than their music downloads anyway. So even if nobody paid for music, it would only be a problem for the record labels.
if I find a CD for £2-£4 then I'll happy buy it if it's a CD I've already heard online and enjoyed (e.g. CEX, ebay, etc)
*however*, CDs, based on the comparison of the market (e.g. the altnerative being free of charge!), are not worth their price tags today (e.g. £10~)
and I have no sympathy for the chief retailers of CDs who are obviously losing money, because they only have themselves to blame with these ridiculous prices
and I say this as a person who owns over 100 CDs; the most accurate guess in terms of the number I own would be about 130; most were bought for the extortionate rates
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by zippity.doodah
if I find a CD for £2-£4 then I'll happy buy it if it's a CD I've already heard online and enjoyed (e.g. CEX, ebay, etc)
*however*, CDs, based on the comparison of the market (e.g. the altnerative being free of charge!), are not worth their price tags today (e.g. £10~)
and I have no sympathy for the chief retailers of CDs who are obviously losing money, because they only have themselves to blame with these ridiculous prices
and I say this as a person who owns over 100 CDs; the most accurate guess in terms of the number I own would be about 130; most were bought for the extortionate rates


I don't really blame the CD industry because I think there are enough people who will solely buy CDs so that they're still better off. If they went down to £2-4 you may buy it but I reckon most would still prefer it free so they'd actually make less

Don't know if its the same where you live but my local CD store selling them at high prices still gets decent business
Original post by Autistic Merit
I think most artists make their money from concerts and selling t-shirts rather than their music downloads anyway. So even if nobody paid for music, it would only be a problem for the record labels.

Is this a variation on the "it's OK to steal from record labels and rich artists" excuse?
Original post by ttankzhang
seriously though imo it's not even that bad for the music industry, especially for smaller acts since they're much more likely to get coverage through free music. people also buy tickets to gigs and paraphernalia etc. and money comes in through licensing.

Wow, and now we're trying to justify theft from artists trying to establish themselves.

I'm sure that if the artists were happy to give their art away for free ... they would give it away for free.
I buy albums of current artists, because I want to support them. But I don't buy old music, I just download it.
Original post by just a dad
Wow, and now we're trying to justify theft from artists trying to establish themselves.

I'm sure that if the artists were happy to give their art away for free ... they would give it away for free.


If you go and have a look online many new artists do give away their music for free as they're picking up publicity, it gets them better coverage and a lot only actually care about having their music heard. Some have even gone on public record as saying they encourage P2P sites.
Original post by ttankzhang
I don't really blame the CD industry because I think there are enough people who will solely buy CDs so that they're still better off. If they went down to £2-4 you may buy it but I reckon most would still prefer it free so they'd actually make less

Don't know if its the same where you live but my local CD store selling them at high prices still gets decent business


yeah but I at least would value physically owning the CD, the case, the artwork, the lyric book etc for that price, while you wouldn't get that stuff with online music. the £4~ is probably worth those things materially, whereas £10 is just a rip-off when you consider how many people are going to be put off (e.g. me) and I'm sure I'm not a rare part of the CD-purchasing market because I'm merely thinking about what I'm getting for the money and how they're giving me something that the other distributors (e.g. the pirates) cannot
Unless it's something I know I will listen to a lot I just stream it from youtube or spotify.

Eg I got The Killers Direct Hits Deluxe Version from HMV for £5, it hasn't been out of my cars CD player since! At home though it's easier just streaming through spotify, I guess the artists do get some money for allowing their music to be listened to via spotify.
I generally download music for free. If I find an artist/album that I really like, I'll buy it just to support them. Personally, I either pirate because I just want free stuff or to try before I buy.
Original post by zippity.doodah
yeah but I at least would value physically owning the CD, the case, the artwork, the lyric book etc for that price, while you wouldn't get that stuff with online music. the £4~ is probably worth those things materially, whereas £10 is just a rip-off when you consider how many people are going to be put off (e.g. me) and I'm sure I'm not a rare part of the CD-purchasing market because I'm merely thinking about what I'm getting for the money and how they're giving me something that the other distributors (e.g. the pirates) cannot


But you also have to factor in that the industry spends more money if it charges a lower cost since it needs to make more CDs. As you go down from £10 more and more people will decide to stop pirating and buy CDs, whereas at £10 they get the whole market who will buy only CDs, so it just makes more sense for them to all stick at the high price

Quick Reply

Latest