The Future of Recorded Music

Flex, with Bomarc's grace and goodwill, to clarify:

I was simply trying to say what selection between some of life's apparently banal little options ultimately --and cumulatively (as a consequence of many selecting whatever option)-- can mean.

Selection between these contributes in determining the palette of available options for others in the long run. Given today's pace of change, the "long run" is more often than not well within our lifetime. So these determine choices for us as well - everyone goes for iTunes, iTunes undergo explosive growth, becoming a dominant option. Or: everyone tunes in to Fox, CNN and MTV and that kind of info[tainment] becomes staple, while other kinds of information (options) become waysided. The same applies to IT (instant M$ gratification and convenience vs. free OS's with better build but less convenience) but also to more important phenomena, say in the social-political sphere.

As for your Q'n: the issue is I believe not about the conditions of emergence and growth, where I will wholeheartedly agree as they say, that pecuniam non olet (hence there exists a strong correlation between size of endowment fund -- or equivalent -- and quality of research in educational and other institutions). Rather it is about the conditions of access, use, and distribution, what kinds of conditions -- restrictive or free ("free" as in "free speech" and not as in "free beer") -- apply to these. Imagine if vinyl (or: CD's) could only be played on TT's (or: CDP's) made by XYZ (and associates) but not on any other kind: the horror, the horror. Note: the source (LP, CD etc) can be (even: terribly) expensive, but it would still be "free" in the sense meant.

No one is claiming that good musicians -- or anyone else with anything to offer society -- should not earn a king's ransom. Even if there have been generously bankrolled efforts to associate supporters of some notions of free/freedom with idealogies gone historically awry, these, at best, dissumulate. I daresay even casual observation of the world will reveal that systematic legal, social or other curtailment or restriction of creative or other goods (ranging as implied from music, to information, or even to ideas themselves) is a surefire recipe for mediocrity and worse.

"Rather it is about the conditions of access, use, and distribution, what kinds of conditions -- restrictive or free ("free" as in "free speech" and not as in "free beer") -- apply to these. Imagine if vinyl (or: CD's) could only be played on TT's (or: CDP's) made by XYZ (and associates) but not on any other kind: the horror, the horror"

- Ahha. One week after the vinyl or cd format appears that can only be played on one player, there will appear something called 'licensing', which ensures that everyone for a small fee can produce a similar player which will play that format.

Is it the best format? Not necessarily, but there is a basic point here. There is always a need for standards in order that everyone can make equipment or software or OS's that communicate. Jumping in with your own format is an attempt to preempt the standards process and cash in. Sometimes, not always, it is a good thing. As in my dvd-a example, standards by committee can be problematic. Sony/Philips after all cashed in with the redbook format and did quite well.

I do believe that commercial recording is out of hand in having too much control over artists and music. However the choice of format and OS are insignificant unless they kill the quality of what can be done with music.

I suspect you "got it" all along. It's the thin edge of the wedge. I think it is fair to point to the wedge's existence and possible to do so without being a prescriptivist.

Unfortunately even open standards are not immune to muscle flex. Take the web, for example. IIRC, the various web mark-up specs are hammered out by the W3 via RFC's. Even so, these have to be implemented to mean anything in practice. Netscape, a great product in early iterations, like many others, was, as we all know now, doomed against the proverbial 800lb gorilla implementing -- or not implementing -- standards at will.

Along such lines, it is unlikely -- but also not impossible -- that one day, for all intents and purposes, viewing A'goN web pages, and other activities on the web will be only possible using de facto pay-per-view browsers. That -- and similar ways in which gatekeepers emerge exerting direct or coercive force on players old and new -- would be, candid[e]ly, considered the "best-of-all-possible-worlds" by some. It's not a vision to whose realisation, in whatever form, I will willingly contribute.

I saw this thread a few days ago; and thought that I should mention that anyone who is seriously interested in the future of the music industry should take the time to read the current issue of "Mix" - which is largely published for those in the recording end of the music business.
The current issue - which I received on thursday - has numerous articles devoted to various aspects of the music business - including equipment, studio operations, the major labels, broadcast radio, concert promotions, DVD-A and SACD formats, and lots more. Many of the aspects of the music business - particularly profitablity, recording contracts, independent labels, and more - which are rarely discussed in this forum are given a good airing.
If you want to get a much better "read" on what is happening in the music industry - other than what the audiophile rags mention - get a copy of "Mix" and get a few fresh perspectives.

Avideo - thanks for the reference.
Bomarc - sorry for hijack. I (actually) cheer for Apple inasmuch as it contributes to (real) diversity (not a semblance thereof).
Generally, I will go for the format(s) that public libraries choose, using that as a reasonable index of staying power - sort of like reading news at the end of the year rather than consuming spin minute-by-minute.