In a fan based industry we pay the salaries of the rich and famous musicians based on popularity. Where is the line between popularity and good music? After earning one platinum record as an artist you should be required by law to sell that album for free to the public. Everyone enjoys a likeable image and if changes aren’t made money will drive away the passion. The world runs on music we don’t need the world to stop running.

When an artist books a show whether they are famous already or not the money they make is their money. The venue hosting them claims very little to none. Typically the venue has a promoter/ recruiter who will search for talent willing to come and perform on a given night. Right then he makes his offer to the musician. Depending in the promoter’s reputation the artist will rely on him to make sure it’s close to sold out as possible. The money generated after the performance is divided remotely in the musicians favor but still pays out to the venue/ promoter. In most cases musicians make double or triple what the promoters make. Music is an edgy industry for that fact that you either perceive performing as work or as simple fun. Heading out to your open stage with the lights flicked on and the hundreds of faces peering at you through the dust can be looked at as the scariest moment of a certain person’s life. On the other hand to the typical rich celebrity performer this is so engraved into their lifestyle that it’s their job and if they are good at their job more likely than not they are extremely wealthy. Since music is constantly growing we are trying to reduce the amount of easy cash these musician pocket each year. Think if you produced a platinum selling record. It’s already platinum meaning a million copies have been sold to your fans, fans being the key word here. We want free music and a humbling attitude towards their movement as an artist. Post platinum income is to easy and doesn’t require any work. Cut this money away and artist soon find themselves more passionate and devoted to their movement providing better music in the long run.

 Good music is impossible not to become successful. If your sound is likeable, enthusiastic, pure, and promoted you have every opportunity you could ask for right in front of you. Many big names in the industry reach their pinnacle but their quality suffers greatly. Free music is like gold to a listener, it brings out a warm attachment between them and the artist. The artist is now perceived as a man/woman who loves what they do leaving money as a perk in the particular job field. Yes everyone wants the money as quickly and easily as possible but what our era of musicians lack is passion and focus. We want to see a more ‘throw the fans on my back’ attitude which will spice up the dedication from the fans ultimately reviving a money based industry.

We want more famous artists to be put back in their places in order for music to be made passionately. These superstars now days are truly over paid… but it’s all self-worth and straight cash sent to their name so you can’t really blame them. You can on the other hand blame the industry. --Charging for a cd that’s already sold a million copies is preposterous. Being he or she has sold so many copies the musicians tours make their selves. Every city the stop at generates anywhere from 25 to 50 thousand a show if your major. Clothing companies will give away samples to you like Halloween candy just because of the attention drawn to you. Restaurants and clubs provide perks for the same simple reasoning. You’re treated like royalty because of your fan base and the money they are willing to dish out in your honor. Don’t you think a little decrease in income from an area that basically hands you checks would set some morals straight?  

In the world we live in today money is everything, strikes are an easy last resort, and actions speak louder than words.  This rule being put in today could cause uproar amongst the artists. I know for a fact certain money collectors in the industry that would take action to pose against this reform. In the eyes of the public we may be helping out morals but based on how they react determines if this solution truly revives passionate music. One faulty comment or one mishap displayed by the egotistical media could result in a fan to artist disagreement. This could really set us back farther from where we are now, but as dedicated fans we are slaves to the talent as it is.

One thing no fan wants to loose is the sentimental value of an album. Selling your album for money puts a physical and mental price tag on the record. Dropping that after going platinum might cause fans to lose interest because getting it for free just isn’t the same. As a buyer you get filled with that ‘hard copy feeling’ the privilege over everyone who doesn’t have what you paid for. This feeling has a strength that only hard copy buys know about a strength that propels the revenue for musicians. Most people can and do download albums for free illegally but yet artists aren’t hurting, they simply hit the road on tour and make up for their loss and then some. Dropping the album expense to free after hitting platinum sales will cause artists to re think their marketing tactics which would be beneficial for a smooth change in the game. If you’re an ‘album buyer’ you love the value you’re receiving and the support you’re providing and your still getting that being one of a million others to have the hard copy. If the musician is extremely popular think about how fast they could hit platinum and have that guaranteed bench mark met. Then it’s all for the love and dedication every night on tour. I love the possible outcome and change that could take place only for the better.
Music is a multi- million dollar industry so changing even the slightest of phases may not be for the better. The world runs on music we don’t need the world to stop running. We could leave it the way it is where artists earn too much money to handle but both themselves and those who pay for albums will be satisfied. This could cause to much of a worldwide controversy, leaving the industry alone might be the best for music let alone it truly is a flourishing section of the economy. I think this proposal would benefit music because of how positively it could spread from artist to artist. For example if Bon Iver tests out the proposal in order to humble his image even more and become one with the fans and one with his movement imagine how just his image could blow up through the media. Everyone enjoys a likeable presence. Then someone successful yet local like Bight Club sees this, like this, and tests the proposal fans would be brought together from all genres solely on the fact that an artist dedicated to what they love to do is backing them up. The quality of music would only increase. The musician is always going to be striving for money because yes this is typically their job. But this is such a minor and believable change which is only shooting for the better. If this proposal was imposed are the fans going to be happy even if their particular artist may not be? It is something to think about but a mass fan reaction is hard to test document accurately without proper testing the proposal.

What we could impose is a two period trial where first we take away all illegal downloads forcing every artist into the production and sale of albums causing a mass put out amongst every kind of artist. We warn the public of the switch beforehand. Then the next year we take the platinum artist from that previous year and make their music free to the public. We document the changes, negative/positive effects, and the public’s reaction. The answer therefore should be self-explanatory.