This course provides an engaging and methodical insight into the past and present cultural and commercial music industry developments, directions, and trends. It will equip the students with the knowledge and skills necessary to appreciate, understand and more productively participate in today’s music industry field.
Roots: Recording Industry (Part 1)
Loading...
Avis
4.7 (66 notes)
- 5 stars54 ratings
- 4 stars9 ratings
- 3 stars1 ratings
- 2 stars1 ratings
- 1 star1 ratings
MW
Oct 17, 2016
fantastic information with outstanding detail and comprehension- Thank you Professor Velichkovski and West Virginia University!
AA
Jun 16, 2017
Very concise and broad. I enjoyed the challenge, and look forward to revising the materials as I apply them in my business.
À partir de la leçon
Recording Industry
Enseigné par
Darko Velichkovski
Music Industry Program Director
The recording industry dates back to the invention of the first sound recording device by Thomas
Edison in 1877. The phonograph, as it was originally called, was a relatively simple,
cylinder based, mechanical instrument that could have easily ended up as yet another
novelty item, perhaps relatively useful and profitable as a business dictation device,
but not much more. And indeed, many considered it as such in the beginning. But its ability
to capture and preserve not just speech, but music as well, changed all that, and transformed
our music culture and the music industry forever. Music was not confined to a particular time
and place any more, but could now be encapsulated in an object, a cylinder, and a disc later
on, and reproduced anywhere, anytime. This object could be bought and sold and, as such,
it becomes a new revenue source in the music industry. The music business thus grows another
branch, and in addition to live music and publishing, adds the recording industry to
its system.
The first record companies were directly associated with the creation and the development of the
sound recording and reproduction devices they used in their businesses. The Edison Phonograph
Co., the American Graphophone Co. (later Columbia), and the American Gramophone Co. (later Victor)
are among the first such record companies. As their company names imply, they used three
different types of recording and reproduction devices existing and being developed at the
time: a cylinder based phonograph (developed by Thomas Edison), a cylinder based graphophone
(developed by Alexander Bell, Chichester Bell, and Charles Tainter), and a flat disc based
gramophone (developed by Emile Berliner). By the early 1900s the practicality of the
Berliner’s gramophone and its disc records prevails in the market, and all the other
record companies adopt it as the standard.
With those early technical differences removed and the general standards established, the
recording industry begins its rapid expansion and transformation of the American musical
culture and business. Recordings become the way music and its stars enter the homes and
the hearts of the millions across the country, and made music itself ubiquitous. A recording
became the mainstream mode of artistic expression and communication, as well as a major source
of income for many artists and companies.
Led by the cumulative experiences of over more than 100 years long history, the recording
industry have developed structures, components, strategies, methods, and practices used in
the industry today, which are the focus of this module. But before we consider all that,
let’s look at how the recording industry became what it is today.
We already mentioned that the early development of the industry was marred with the problem
of technical standards and compatibilities between different recording and reproduction
systems. Edison had it’s phonograph cylinders, Columbia its graphophone cylinders, incompatible
with Edison’s, and Victor its flat disc gramophone records. As long as each pulled
its way, they were splitting the market and stifling its growth. As hard as it was for
Edison and Columbia to concede the war of standards victory to Victor, they realized
that it was necessary to accept the market’s obvious preference for the disc records and
move on with the business.
Since these first record companies were, as we said, directly involved with the development,
production, and sales of the sound recording and reproduction devices, the initial growth
in the industry comes from getting the public to buy and accept these strange new mechanical
devices as part of their home environment. It was all fine and interesting, even amazing,
to hear this inanimate object sing and play music in some public place or a store, but
to pay money for it and take one home, and have its huge horn become a part of your living
room décor, that was another thing.
The Victor’s record player called Victrola was introduced to the U.S. market in 1906
and it immediately became the best seller in the industry. Mostly because with its lid
closed and doors shut, it didn’t look like a machine. It looked like a nice, polished
wood cabinet, perfectly fit to become a part of a living room without being too obtrusive.
The horn was folded downwards into the cabinet, hidden by the cabinet doors, and it remained
out of site and out of mind. The doors could be opened to increase the volume of the playback
if desired, and the lid only had to be opened when the record was being changed.
In 1907, 7,000 units were sold. By 1913 Victor was selling 250,000 Victrolas per year. By
1917, over half a million per year. At the prices between 150 and 300 dollars per unit,
depending on the model, or 4 - 8,000 dollars in today’s value, that represented some
serious income. By comparison, the upright pianos at the time were priced in the 500-dollar
range, and the grands in the 1000-dollar range, which is around 13,000 and 26,000 dollars
today respectively. Victrola was obviously much cheaper, and you didn’t have to take
piano lessons to play it. Hmmm…Cheaper, convenient, contemporary, cool, plays music
by itself at the drop of a needle, and did I mention no more piano lessons and practicing?
I’ll have one of those, please. Of course they flew out of the stores and Victor gained
a fortune.
Naturally, the competition in the market developed quickly. Just a year after Victor introduced
Victrola, Columbia introduced it’s version they called the Grafonola. Up to this point
Columbia was known for its cylinder player known as the graphophone, thus the name of
their new disc player - the Grafonola. It’s early model names such as the Symphony Grand
and the Symphony Upright, used a marketing term reference to the grand and upright pianos
that were ubiquitous in the middle-class living rooms at the time, suggesting that Grafanola
could be a replacement for pianos.
Edison followed the Victrola trend as well, and introduced it’s version in 1911, called
the Edison Diamond Disc Phonograph. But of course, being Edison, meaning a star inventor
by this time, hardheaded, and not what you would call a good sport, his version was not
compatible with any of the others, as he insisted that his method of cutting disc records with
a vertical groove, verses the Victor’s lateral (or horizontal) groove was superior, and that
everybody should switch to his method. Plus, being Edison, he cut his records with a diamond
head cutter, which of course, being Edison, was the only way to cut it properly, and which,
being Edison, led to his claims that everyone else’s disc records and record players were
entirely inferior to his, and that buying only his disc records, though incompatible
with others, was a small price to pay for such a quality. Plus, being Edison, he never
stopped manufacturing and developing his original cylinder records, trying to prove to everyone
that, as his invention, those were still valid too, which strained his budget even further.
And another, “oh so Edison” thing, perhaps the most crucial of all, is that while Victor
learned early from their music publishing colleagues that popular performers make for
good marketing instruments, and consequently hired stars like Enrico Caruso to record his
records and to use his name in the marketing campaigns, Edison scoffed at the practice.
By the way Caruso made over 5 million dollars from Victor recordings in his career, charging
as much as 4,000 dollars for a single song recording, plus 40 cents per record sold,
at the time when records were sold for 1 to 1 and a half dollars each. To put it in today’s
terms, that would be 58 million dollars in career earnings from recordings, getting about
100,000 dollars for a single song recording, plus 25-40 percent in sales royalties. You
think Victor would allow for such a deal if Caruso wasn’t making them some serious profits?
Edison, on the other hand, refused for a long time to as much as print the names of the
performers he recorded, even on the records themselves, insisting that it is the quality
of the sound and the composition that matters, not the performer. In one of his business
memos from 1912, Edison says something along the lines of: “ We do not care for the reputation
of the artists. It is not our intention to feature artists and sell the records by using
their names. Those that do, engage in promotional fakery. We intend to rely entirely upon the
tone and high quality of the voice.”
Wow. Told you. Such an Edison thing. “So how did that strategy work out for you Mr.
Edison?” “Well, not so good.” “You, don’t say.” By the late 1920s Edison controlled
only 2% of the industry he invented, and is the only one of the Big Three that had to
close its operations in 1929, and the Edison disc business was no more. But what a ride
the recording industry in general had until that point. In 1900, 4 million records were
sold. In 1909, 30 million. In 1920, 100 million. And then, the downturn. Not just for Edison,
but for others as well. Edison simply made the situation worst for himself with his attitude
and bad business decisions.
So to be fair, it wasn’t only Edison’s policies that spelled the end for the Edison
records and players. Though the Big Three - Edison, Columbia, and Victor - led the market
for a long time, by the early 1920s over 150 companies were making records and record players,
and were undercutting each other’s prices and affecting the market. Why so many record
companies? Because it was a pretty good business. Records cost about 20 cents to make, including
the newly legislated mechanical royalty payment to the publishers of the recorded songs, and
including the musicians on the recording. Unless you had a star performer, in which
case the math was different, as we saw with Caruso. But the sales were different too in
that case. The retailer took about 15 cents from the standard record price of a dollar
to dollar fifty. The rest was profits. Nice and clean and usually profitable, unless you
have a total flop of a song on your hands. So the competition grew, and grew, and grew,
and by the 1920s they started lowering the prices, down to 50 cents per record, competing
with each other for customers, and the profit margins shrunk, and the incrementally smaller
and smaller piece of the pie was available to each, and so the crisis begins to occur.
More importantly, though, radio entered the picture in the 1920s as well, and seriously
shook things up. Radio networks soon crisscrossed the nation, and advertising potential and
income became glaringly apparent. These new funds allowed the networks’ programming
to grow quickly, in diversity and quality, which in turn increased the numbers of listeners
greatly, taking them away from their record players and the records market.
It should be said at this point that at this time radio stations generally did not rely
on records for their programming. The shows were mostly live, with live performers providing
entertainment. Even when the records were used, they were not commercial records, but
the recordings of the programs made for radio, produced and used internally by the industry.
So radio and commercial records were, for the time, in direct competition with each
other for the audience, and radio was winning.
The recording industry countered with higher quality records and players, using electrical
recordings, which utilized microphones and newly developed tube technology amplifiers.
Being that radio sound quality was pretty low at the time, this strategy helped a bit
for a while, but when the Great Depression hit, most of the record companies were not
strong enough to weather the storm on their own, as records went from leisure to luxury
in just a few years. Most, simply folded, like Edison, but Victor and Columbia survived.
Not on their own, but survived nevertheless.
The Radio Corporation of America (or RCA) acquired Victor, and the Columbia Broadcasting
Company (or CBS) acquired Columbia. How predictable, isn’t it? That the medium, which expanded
the most and became the most powerful at the time, acquires the medium that was, because
of it, brought down to its knees. So radio both killed and saved the recording industry.
Poetic.
Explorer notre catalogue
Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.
Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde,
en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.
© 2019 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.
