Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The history of the music business, or for that matter any other business,
which the music business came of age economically was in the industrialised
world of the C20th. Hence the music business is often referred to as ‘the
music industry’. This reveals much about the music-money nexus. Music is
such a system, where the primary function of all the major firms is,
influenced by the firm's 'reason d’être'. So, when the majors tell us that they
need to make huge margins on the sale of their products because they
invest so heavily in new talent, they’re putting effect before cause. They
make huge margins because the profit motive is inherent to their corporate
they invest in new talent because it’s the strategy they believe will make the
most money. These distinctions may seem subtle but they are important if
we’re to get to the truth. The music industry would like us to believe that the
interests of the music industry and the interests of music are one and the
same. This history shows they’re not. When only a few firms control a big
chunk of the market, and particularly when those firms feel under threat, the
music industry can work directly against the interests of music. This has
This history also touches on the question of what the value in music is, and
where it comes from. Value might be an easy thing to grasp intuitively, but
price is often said to have sentimental value. Music can have great
sentimental value; certain songs really mean something to us. And it’s this
concept of meaning that is the most useful in understanding the core value
in music.
the listener (and the artist) in the act of that communication of meaning.
Getting a handle on the value of music helps dispel a mythology that the
music industry has itself succumbed to on many occasions. The myth is that
it’s the media carrier – the sheet music, the radio, the vinyl record, the
cassette tape, the CD, the USB pen, the digital file – and the associated
technologies, which give music its value. Carrier technology focuses music’s
value at a price - a price which reflects the cost of the media carrier itself.
the musical soundscape. But music’s value has existed as long as music
social impact belies its economic impact; financially the music industry is a
weakling (annually, the total sales of recorded music for the whole world
music as it should; the myth of media carrier value helps calm those fears.
Given the centrality of the artist and the listener to music itself, it is
instructive that the following history refers to them only scantly. As with any
control and methods of ownership that prevail are not unique to the music
industry – they seem inherent to most, if not all, corporate, industrial and
capitalist forms. However, unlike other industries, the music industry is not
exploiting a limited resource. Its trying to monetize the actions of the artist
and the listener. In its struggle to do this it has, during the course of the
recognise that its profits depend upon the artist’s creativity and the listener’s
What it has more trouble coming to terms with, is its own role in the music
recording agencies for their Principles – the Artists. However, in their bid to
thrive they assume the nature of manufacturers that control the production
process rather than agencies that facilitate it. They trade the passion for
music that attracts artists, for the security of income that attracts finance.
They consume competing firms until only the very largest survive. Until
eventually in the first years of a new millennium, they stand astride their
territories like dinosaurs with sensitive stomachs only able to consume the
majors) with musical creativity. The story that follows gives an explanation
of the events and circumstances represented by the ups and downs of the
the proxy used here – new music genres – is a subjective measure. Even so,
to put it plainly, to me it seems both intuitive and obvious that when four
suffer. You, dear reader, are invited to draw your own conclusion.
Part Two
The market for music and music technology precedes the birth of the music
piece; prior to this music existed only in memory. The invention of the
way music itself was to evolve as it gave a clear ‘scaling’ of notes to which
adaptation which also had a social impact, pushing music squarely into the
political arena. The power of music to affect social change was recognised
early on by the state and monarchs who sought to ban those performances
saleable product came at the end of the 19th century with the development
and penny arcades that sound recording’s potential for entertainment was
really recognised.
In the early years of the 20th century there followed a battle of technologies
between the disc and the cylinder. The competitive advantage was with the
disc because 1000's of pre-recorded ebonite discs could be duplicated from a
single zinc plate master recording, whereas the cylinder could only be
complete by 1914 when the patent for the disc, held by the Victor Company,
encourage the sale of gramophones, but now, in the first decades of the
C20th, the potential for the sale of recordings themselves was seen as the
When a song became a hit, this was a lucrative business. Publishers could
easily and cheaply obtain product as songwriters were often poor and would
sell their songs outright. The biggest difficulty and largest expense was the
promotion of the song. Prior to the invention of radio, promotion was done
of radio meant that it became the radio stations (and eventually their disc
jockeys) who needed persuading. Publishers would sell their sheet music
whether the radio station played live music or pre-recorded music; the
the same.
In the first decades of the C20th publishers sought new revenue streams.
The relative decline in their income from sheet music sales made it look
likely they were set to become the poor cousins of the recording companies.
companies that had been set up to collate and collect revenues from the
In the US the situation was slightly different. A similar copyright law had
his song with the intention of profiting from it. However, unlike the British
consent to perform a work publicly for profit was already implied in the
publication and sale of printed copies of the work [sheet music]. The
difference may seem subtle but this provision of the copyright law of 1909
[the right to publicly perform works without extra payment being due] was
to completely alter the way business was done in the music industry. And, in
doing so, was to be the source of often bitter controversy for decades to
come. The problem was one of control. A publisher could not, once he had
sold sheet music prevent, or more to the point profit from, his song being
the developments in the film and radio industries would be difficult to tap as
collecting royalties. Although formed in 1914, ASCAP did not begin issuing
resisted pressure to make royalty payments for the records they played.
Radio it was claimed, had bought the records and so, according to American
law, had a legal right to play them. Besides which, playing records on the
collect its royalties on radio play - which was fast becoming the major
distribution media for music since its coming of age as a major commercial
venture in 1921. And the broadcasters were equally determined not to pay.
was) and after having ASCAP outlawed in several states, eventually in 1939,
ASCAP. Many of the musicians and composers who had been excluded from
Orleans jazz men) joined the BMI and began to get increasing exposure and
called a strike in 1942 that lasted over a year. To put these problems into
perspective, the US music market had the around same value in 1945 as it
Concurrent with the problems of profiting from the new media of radio, the
music industry also saw another key development in the 1930’s and 1940’s.
This was the development of the ‘Star System’. Jack Kapp and Ted Lewis
incorporated Decca Records in 1934. Instead of investing in machinery for
heavily promoted ‘stars’. First among these were Bing Crosby and the
Dorsey Brothers. As well as organising promotion for these artists, Kapp also
records, and perhaps most importantly, halved the retail price of a record.
Jukeboxes had been popular in the South for a long time before they caught
on in the north. One of the reasons for this was that they acted as an outlet
for the music that didn’t get played on the radio (in particular black music).
Prior to World War Two the distribution network for music was reliant on the
was paid for, some of which wasn’t), promotion through film, and jukeboxes.
All of these methods of distributing and profiting from the sale of music had
come about in the inter-war period, but had not translated themselves into
increased revenues. And whilst the technology had developed, the music
itself hadn’t changed much. But that change was just around the corner.
In the ten years from the end of WWII until 1955 the American music
the introduction of the vinyl LP and vinyl single, which reduced production
costs and was less fragile to transport than the old shellac 78-rpm
firms to enter the market place from the early 1950’s and they gradually
chipped away at the market share of the majors. By 1955 their share of the
market had dropped by around 20%, but was still standing at around 75%.
The failure of the major American record companies to develop new music
during the period 1948 to 1955 forms a key part of Peterson and Berger’s
Berger were two American sociologists. They claimed that (i) the market
to 1955, the majors adopted various tactics; these included seeking vertical
the records of other firms, churning out ‘cover’ versions of songs the instant
they became a hit, and reputedly using organised crime to control the
promoters (they were often one and the same person) would act as middle
The payola scandals of the 1950’s have been extensively reviewed in print,
Industry), and books for the general reader like the excellent Rockonomics
by Eliot. Suffice to say here, that payola is inevitable when the distribution
networks are limited and access to them is restricted. Maybe the radio
broadcasters weren’t too far wrong when they claimed that playing records
paying.
The years between 1955 and 1957 are a crucial period in the history of the
music industry and the events surrounding the birth of Rock n Roll are
market and new music. Although the majors held sway in the years to 1955
(as discussed above) there had been some crucial changes in the structure
of the industry. These were to do, at least in part, with the advent of
television as a medium (by 1952 there were nearly 20 million TV sets in use
music, but the events surrounding the growth of television had more
complex effects.
many, quite wrongly, predicted the death of radio. Although the number of
radio sets increased after 1955 (due to the introduction of the cheap
portable transistor radio), the profits of the network radio stations continued
to fall. Throughout the 1950’s radio stations tried to find show formats that
would help stem the decline in their revenues. Eventually, by 1960, the idea
this format targeted the entire output of one station to one group of listeners
format increased the diversity of music that was played over the airwaves
because stations would wish to play music suitable for their audience
popular songs.
significant role in the music market in the period 1956-9. The major impact
on the market was the growth of independents; the market share of the
major's had halved by 1957 (from 75% in 1955). Falling production costs,
and greater access to radio helped the independents. But the real difference
was in the music that they sold. Whilst the older record companies managed
to pick up Buddy Holly and Bill Haley, they missed out on Little Richard,
Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, and most notably, Elvis with RCA Records
paying the independent Sun a release fee of $35 000, a huge sum for the
period. The furore that was created around the sexual connotations of Elvis’s
By 1960 the four largest record companies took a market share of under
30%, and stayed there until 1964. The majors had regarded Rock and Roll
as a passing fad and hadn’t fought too hard to attract successful ‘rockers’ to
their labels. They reacted by price cutting and pushing the more lucrative
LP’s over singles. This was short-sighted as new artists achieve public
awareness through the single. They also tried to learn from the success of
from the ‘star’ system, where a known artist or performer would be ‘turned’
sought out and then placed in a more product congested market. This tacitly
recognised that the real added-value for the record company was not in its
ability to promote and distribute more effectively than its competition, but in
the creative ability of its artists. Put simply record companies began to
realise that they were recording agencies rather than record manufacturers.
Hence they should direct their energies to finding the most gifted and
creative artists.
However, finding nebulous talent is very difficult (if not impossible), and
stories of the blunders of A&R men are well known. The most spectacular of
these blunders is surely the decision by the A&R executive at Decca (in
Britain) Dick Rowe, to turn down the Beatles in favour of Brian Poole and the
Tremeloes. Whilst the UK and European majors had not suffered from the
same distrust of monopoly as had the industry in the US, recovery from the
second world war had made progress for the music industry hard.
Nevertheless two European firms did make strong progress, not least in
America; EMI acquired Capitol (one of the four American majors) in 1955,
The Beatles had come out of the ‘beat’ scene - a British ‘pop’ variant on Rock
and Roll. After eventually signing to EMI, the Beatles began their rapid
Beatles encouraged this trend. The success also altered the balance of power
between the British and American firms. Prior to 1960 American record
companies had been selling large amounts of American music in Europe. The
licensing of the Beatles to EMI’s American subsidiary, Capitol, was the start
The period of the mid to late 1960’s ushered in high growth rates for the
music industry both in the UK and the US. Musical innovation was at a peak,
the latest sound - the days of regarding a form of new music as a ‘fad’ were
gone, new music now represented new opportunities for profit. The LSD-
inspired Psychedelic sounds of 1967 spread around the world very quickly.
Although, born on the American west coast, British artists were very quick to
experiment with these new sounds, which combined with the technological
roll in the success of the British acts that were coming to prominence. The
years 1967 to 1970 were formative times for what were to become some of
the biggest artists, and some of most popular music genres, of all time -
rock music was coming of age. America’s cultural dominance of the recorded
music industry was once more under assault from the British.
Back in the US, Rock and Roll had increasingly divested itself of the black
roots of its music, and turned itself into a mainstream medium supported by
a mostly white audience. But the black music roots of Rock and Roll soon
flourished elsewhere in the form of Soul music. Soul blended itself with pop
success was based on finding and developing local (black) artistic talent.
Amplification was also adopted by the two new black music genres to form a
new genre called Funk. This style relied on the ability to produce a strong
amplified bass that could cut through a band’s sound to change the rhythmic
content of the music opening up a world of possibilities for old and new
artists alike - foremost among the older artists was of course James Brown.
remained very low from the watershed of 1955 right through to 1972, where
less than 50% of the market was controlled by the four largest firms. There
is a popular view which sees the period from the mid sixties to the early/mid
70's as modern music's golden age. Whilst one can quantify sales figures
and market shares to show a picture of strong growth in this period, the
value of the music produced in terms of its musical potential and its
Increased competition meant that firms could not shy away from difficult
and challenging artists. As Peterson and Berger (1975) say, ‘it was not until
the mid-1960’s that the search for new talent became so intense that
companies were also forced by the market to take risks in promoting artists
who had a political agenda. Music became linked not just to rebels without a
cause (as it had in the Rock and Roll years) but also rebels with a cause. Bob
was, according to his fans, responsible for the birth of the Folk Rock genre
when he picked up his electric guitar at the Newport Folk festival.
But in the midst of this huge outburst of new music and hence new found
added-value there was a steady rise in market consolidation through the late
1960’s until around 1975 (with the exception being the dip in levels of
strength of the majors is seen as resultant from the adoption of the ‘federal
the music industry. Flushed with what the firms perceived as the success of
became the old way to do business. Foremost among these new corporate
forms were Warner Brothers. Between 1967 and 1973, Warners acquired the
Atlantic, Elektra and Asylum record labels. Instead of integrating these new
firms into the Warner Music company in order to reduce costs, the firms
centralised. In this way the highest area of risk was hived off to subsidiary
companies, whilst the major firm at the centre attempted to minimise the
risk to its revenue streams. Until the oil crises of 1973, subsidiary firms from
within the same group were allowed to compete against one another, and
this claim Peterson and Berger (1975) ensured that diversity was maintained
In the UK too, the majors seemed to be slowly tightening their grip on the
market place. In 1973 the UK industry formed a trade body, the British
business and legal climate that supports and promotes their members' (the
record companies) creative and financial vitality. Both bodies keep a tally of
unit sales and hand out gold or platinum awards commensurate with an
So, the music industry seemed to be developing nicely, at least as far as its
masters the major record companies were concerned, until 1975, when
another (and some claim the last) seismic shift occurred in the music
industry. The epicentre for the events of 1975 and 1976, was a small shop
called SEX on the King’s Road in London. It was here that the Sex Pistols
the bohemian entrepreneur Malcolm McLaren. The uproar that greeted their
raw, raucous music, and radical politics (or at least the radical politics that
courting controversy and exposure, and getting it, the Sex Pistols became
In fact, the Sex Pistols were too hot for many companies to handle. McLaren
managed to exploit the new form and strategies that the major record
companies had adopted. Constantly on the lookout for the next big thing,
the record companies now noticed a steadying of the huge growth the music
industry had experienced from 1965 to 1972. This wasn’t so bad for the
majors because they had been increasing their share of the market. McLaren
exploited the majors eagerness to find the new musical form. He first sold
the recording rights to EMI, who very quickly (thanks in no small part to Cliff
record of the Sex Pistols. EMI paid McLaren substantial damages and
released the Sex Pistols from their contract - glad to be rid of them. McLaren
then managed a repeat of this lucrative way of doing business with A&M
McLaren had exploited the major record company’s hunger for the latest
Punk did have a strong musical effect in the US making heroes of their own
‘punk’ acts such as the New York Dolls, who had actually preceded the Sex
Pistols. However, commercially in the US punk (at least in its rawest form)
was not hugely significant. And whilst in the UK the effect of punk, and the
consolidation, in the US disco was the new thing. Disco music, which grew
out of the gay night clubs of New York, was correctly perceived as a safe bet
for America’s music corporations. The songs were by and large apolitical,
and the musical sound was inoffensive and certainly easier on the ears than
punk. There had been some success in promoting songs through films since
the demise of the Hollywood musical, but none matched the world wide film
and music success of Saturday Night Fever. The industry was reminded of its
Disco, both in the UK and the US, helped the majors regain market share
because disco had much higher production values than punk, and hence
could not be effectively performed by those with limited technical skills. It
had existed for the less musically skilled (although not necessarily less
of rock music had demanded high musical virtuosity and expensive studio
time.
Nevertheless, music refused to stand still. New music was created in the late
1970’s and early 1980’s whilst the major firms were suffering a diminishing
share of the market. Record companies were worried about the introduction
of the cassette tape, fearing that they would lose money from home taping
and piracy. Although in the end vinyl sales were overcome by tape sales, the
paralysed by fear and more open to the possibilities for music rather than
format, new independent record companies formed around new genres like
New Romantic, Hip Hop, and Electro. Whilst these factors contributed to
majors quickly recovered their position. Since then consolidation rates have
In the UK the majors increased their market share from around 55% in 1985
acquiring or licensing more product from independent labels. This trend was
because decreased costs make all the record companies leaner and more
Although the mythology of it probably tallies with the major's public relations
strategy, the history of the economics of music industry shows the evidence
to form links with independent third parties has been a constant, whether
that be for snatching up new artists who achieve success with limited
exposure (as with RCA’s payment to the new phenomenon of Elvis back in
1956), or for the promotion of records on radio. Back in the 1950’s it was a
need to protect themselves from the payola that was rife in American radio
It is much more likely that growth in the size of the music industry in the
80's and 90's was due to the introduction of the Compact Disc (CD). The
history of the music industry shows that the money-value of the market
increases with the launch of popular new music carrier formats. The CD was
mid 1980’s. The invention and diffusion of the CD meant that the back
collections with CD’s, the music industry boomed until the recession of the
early 1990’s.
After a steadying out of growth, the music industry resumed its upward path
the media companies and the music industry. In the late 1990's buy-outs,
mergers and take-overs have seen the music industry increasingly absorbed
access and control many channels of distribution such as television and film.
acceptance into the power elites. The British Prime Minister invited the music
Street shortly after coming to power in 1997. With (adopted Brits) Sir Bob
Geldof and Bono acting as spokesmen for the poor on a world stage, music's
successful century. This was a welcome distraction from the stagnation, then
decline, in the value of recorded music sales that was arriving with the new
millennium.
The recorded music industry was the most dominant and prosperous sector
of the music business during the 20th century. It helped music affirm its
position as an art form both with mass appeal, and political resonance. But
the industrial mindset is not sufficient to meet the challenges of the new
age. The darkening digital cloud of the Internet may indeed kill the music
industry. But maybe that's what music needs; for its art and for its business.
This work by Jonathan Harris is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative