Letters That Cross in the Mail

Do you know where there is a record store around here?

If you hang out enough on small-town street corners, tin cup and pencils in hand, you will be asked for directions or suggestions. I do pretty well, but I am one of those sad sacks who inevitably remembers a quicker route or a better tattooist a minute after the seeker has tottered off. Ah, but this morning? For the first time in my life, I was asked if there was a record store nearby. My initial reaction? '<snort> A *record* store?'

I'd wager that right this minute that fellow is blogging about the rumpled Davis denizen who let loose with a deafening geeze alarm.

**********

After a long day portraying the local eccentric mendicant (I'm really just doing research for a book I'm writing, you see), I'll arrive home to even more questions, in written form. To wit:

Q. Don't you think Justin Bieber is boss?

A. Actually, MacKenzie, I prefer the Beach Boys. But I must admit, Justin does sound pretty good when slowed down 800 percent.

You think I'm funnin,' don't you? I actually like this a lot. Very inventive. The sound and the dynamics remind me of Constance Demby's works. (If that link is working, try on 'Novus Magnificat.' You'll know soon enough whether you like it or hate it.)

Q. What's your favorite album right now?

A. Geez. For this readership I'd love to say, 'Oh, either Zanzibara 3 or one of Bob Brozman's collaborations; I just can't decide.' In actual fact, though, it's Workers. Best stadium rock I've heard in quite awhile. My only criticism would be that they stray a bit too close to Bono/Edge territory on occasion. Otherwise, aces. And obscure. Not only can I not find this album anywhere in the AllMusic site, it isn't even available on Amazon. In fact, I had to resort to MySpace for online linkage. Start at the top of the playlist. You'll know soon enough whether you like it or hate it. Don't make no nevermind to me; my credibility is in the dumper now, anyway.

Q. Did you see NPR's list of oddest musical pairings?

A. I did. Had some thoughts, too, none of which will make any sense here unless you see the list for yourself. 

Yeah, Bowie and Crosby was wrong in so many ways. But that was a novelty, like Bono and Sinatra. And it could be that some of the pairings shown seem less odd with 20/20 hindsight. Dylan and Cash? Of course. Run DMC and Aerosmith? A signpost to the whole mashup craze. Laurie Anderson and William S. Burroughs? Almost obvious, in a way. William Shatner and Ben Folds? OK, nutty, but any Shatner musical offering must be filed in comedy. (Although, to be fair, this classic stands alone. Joe Jackson steals the show.)

The one that really caught my eye was Nick Cave and Kylie Minogue. One could view this as just another of those beauty and the beast pairings, a la Isobel Campbell/Mark Lanegan or Alison Krauss/Robert Plant or Nancy & Lee, all of which work beautifully. But Minogue/Cave is odd because of the wide disparity in their CVs and reputations.

This gets my vote for most unlikely musical pairing:

Q. If you could wake up tomorrow morning with complete command of any one musical instrument, which would it be?

A. The electric bass. What could be better than to stand motionless off to one side, enjoying the antics of the microphone-tossing lead singer, the windmilling guitarist, and the loony-tunes drummer?

Q. Last week, in response to your iTunes/Amazon/eMusic shopping comparison, Main Figurehead seemed to appeal to music consumers' sense of fair play. Care to comment?

A. I think he has a valid point. Without editorial comment (except perhaps in an oblique manner with his final sentence) he pointed out that artists and labels likely make a fraction via eMusic versus iTunes.

Only the most callous of pirates would begrudge an artist's efforts to profit from her talent. Professionally recorded quality material deserves to be heard and paid for.

However, I think history should have a voice in this debate.

In spite of the long-forgotten accusations of price-fixing at the star and superstar level, the major labels were forever tinkering with developing artist pricing. They'd mess around with royalty structures, move costs around, and come up with what they considered to be a more appealing 'impulse' price for the customer. So, while REM albums, say, would carry a suggested retail price of $17.98, a baby band might have an MSRP of $9.98. It was all about trying to find that sweet spot to get music into the hands of more people and establish track records for up-and-coming acts. And you could be sure: as soon as one of those acts got traction, the price went up, way up. You could also be sure that such an act would never be priced at a 'developing artist' level with future releases.

eMusic is simply an update of that formula. Their bread and butter is indie acts trying to get a toehold and, let's face it, there's a million of 'em. Look around the site, though. You won't find Justin Bieber or Jay-Z or U2. There is no reason for them to be represented at such a cut-rate site. They are destination artists.

While concern for artists is right and even noble, other considerations must be taken into account:

1) eMusic is legal. Actual money is changing hands, even if only fractionally compared to way back when.

2) These days, a huge number of physical CDs are being sold in the secondary market, used. Labels and artists see nothing from these transactions. Full 99 cent prices are outsized compared to per-track pricing of most used CDs. eMusic's pricing structure is more in line with the secondary market and, again, actual money gets into the hands of the artists.

3) An argument could be made that the best, most egalitarian, pricing methodology would be for label and artist to release material as a sort of IPO: set a price that will strike the best balance between supply and demand and let the market set the daily value. Of course, in the digital world supply is unlimited, but the concept has validity. Start at 20 cents, say, and if a track catches on keep raising the price until the bell curve tops out. A site called Amie Street does something like this. But in lieu of that, eMusic tries to strike a balance between extremes.

4) And let's remember the file-sharers. Whether we like it or not, huge numbers of a whole generation believes music should be free. Whatever it takes to change their minds, whether morals or free time or just plain age, a valid and reasonably-priced capitalistic enterprise must be there to greet them when they're ready.

5) One genius bit about eMusic is that money is exchanged for 'credits.' This allows for elastic pricing, but more importantly, like gambling, it separates the payer from the physical money and turns that money into units, which seem less dear as they're spent.

6) Finally: it is probably safe to assume that the deals cut to get all that music onto eMusic were not consummated at gunpoint. Both sides evidently saw beneficience and signed the dotted line. That tells me all I need to know.