Loren
Jewkes
Paul Berg
English
102
7
July 2014
The Changing Value of Art in a
Technologic World
The year is 1801 and Ludwig Van Beethoven
has just published his first six string quartets. They are beautiful in a style
with roots to Mozart, yet distinctly Beethoven’s own. He has put many hours, creative
energy and his personal musical fingerprint into the compositions. The six
string quartets’ sheet music is available for purchase and a percentage of
sales goes to its composer, Beethoven, in order to support his continued
compositions. With such elaborate interwoven harmonies created by four string
instruments a minimum of four skilled musicians are required to perform
Beethoven’s pieces (Martin). This necessity creates a scarcity in production,
as no recording equipment has yet been invented. Beethoven’s quartets have a
very finite supply dependent on the possession of each composition’s sheet
music, the ability to afford an admission ticket, four skilled musicians
playing at the exact same moment in the same physical location, and an audience
that must be present to enjoy the experience. Art experience is the physical
sensory results of being in that situation. Art value is the financial value
consumers are willing to pay for a product or service. These variables in 1801 create an environment
where experience and value are intricately intertwined. When experience and
value cannot be separated, one can never reach its full potential at the
expense of the other.
Flash forward, the year is 1877 and
Thomas Edison finishes his newest invention, the phonograph. His was the first
device that could both record and
recreate sounds (Braun). Though very expensive, Edison’s invention detached a
few welds between the experience and value of an art piece. Based on his
invention of the phonograph, new scientific developments in industrial
production capability, and time for public knowledge to spread, the phonograph
matured. No longer referred to as a phonograph but as a record player, it
becomes the most prolific recording format through 1985. A physical change from
cylindrical tubes to today’s recognizable disk shape is developed making
production less costly than past cylindrical designs (Daniel).
Cylinder records require more material
and more tolerant machinery in the production process. Sound quality is also
greatly improved over the phonograph. Decent quality sound makes the value of
prior technologies less valuable due to the more pleasing results with less
financial cost. Adding to the record player’s value is the invention and mass
adoption of the transistor radio in the 1950s. Not only can a record’s value be
shared with all within hearing range of the record player, it can also be
transmitted for miles to any radio within its tower’s signal strength (Braun).
Through advancements in radio technology, the value of one single record
plummets. New markets are opened to potentially hundreds of thousands of
individuals where they can all enjoy that one record within a geographically
large area. Scarcity of the record is only controlled by the individual’s
access to a radio, and being within a large specified area at the correct time.
The art’s influence is expanded in many ways. First, from a small audible area
to a large area within radio wave signal. Second, from complex scheduling and
timing between musicians and their audience, to convenient scheduling based on
the audience and radio station. Third, from a large capital investment for
every performance to a small one-time fee for equipment. Lastly, from talented
musicians performing together multiple times, to those same musicians
performing once to have a significantly larger potential audience. The value of
one single record to producers is dealt a deadly blow, while the experience of
listening to music is more comfortable, convenient and accessible to audiences.
When the Compact Cassette tape is
introduced in 1964, Sony puts pressure on Philips to license the format free of
charge (Daniel). Philips bows to the pressure publicly announcing the license
for all to use. The cassette tape has a new advantage over other technologies;
cassette tapes can be used to record radio transmissions with acceptable audio
quality (Braun). These recordings can be copied to other cassette tapes
relatively cheaply, quickly and easily then distributed as pirated copies
(Daniel). That vinyl record being played through radio, received by audiences
and simultaneously re-recorded, then copied to other cassette tapes and
distributed to non-present audiences creates a potentially exponential cycle of
copied tapes. The value of these pirated tapes is very low due to a high supply
and low cost. Through the cassette medium art’s influence is again expanded.
First, from a large radio signal level, to a worldwide distribution of physical
items then through other radio stations. Second, from convenient scheduling
based on the audience and radio station, to cassette player access at any time.
Third, from a small one-time equipment fee to a simple existing hardware
upgrade. Lastly, from those same musicians performing once and having a
significantly larger geographic audience, to a potentially worldwide audience
in cars, at home and on the go with a Walkman. CDs in the 1990s continue the
cycle of innovation and iteration exhibited by most technologies. Where
cassettes opened massive amounts of pirate copies to be made, CDs opened high quality pirate copies to be
distributed physically and digitally.
The addition of digital distribution to
traditional distribution of art has a very simple result. Anyone with an
internet connection or a physical connection to a supplier can receive a
pirated copy for cheap or free (Patel). Thus, a plethora of file-sharing tools
come to mass adoption. Napster, LimeWire, torrents and an unquantifiable number
of other peer-to-peer services are created. Though these services can transfer
information between users, the users need a way to be played by the receiver.
Personal computers with speakers can play locally stored music to a small
audible location directly replacing the musicians. Where a complex and costly
system of variables must come together for live performances, a computer simply
needs to have the necessary files, hardware and be powered on. Many consumers
already have the required equipment. The hardware is a sunk cost they already
have to pay for work, school and entertainment. Those same song files can be
shared to anyone else with a computer and internet connection. Computers with a
CD drive capable of both reading and writing can also make additional physical
copies further increasing potential audience penetration. As a portable
personal player, the iPod is born. It can carry hundreds of songs on a hard
drive increasing demand for high-quality digital music copies.
Digital copies have to be contained on
device, until the iPhone is introduced. Smartphones have constant internet
connections allowing any file to be downloaded without access to a physical
connection. Today with the rise of Google Play Music, Spotify, Beats Radio,
Soundcloud and Grooveshark, any and all music is instantly available for a fee
of $10 or less to anyone with a smartphone, tablet or computer and internet
access. With my own personal music plays over a one year period of 40,000 songs
in twelve months, each song is worth an average of $0.0024 (Jewkes). This
number will fluctuate between each person, but the concept is the same. As
Nilay Patel eloquently states, “[this demonstrates] the disquieting idea that
art itself might be worth nothing –
the prices we pay for it are entirely set by distribution and scarcity.” In a
digital world art is virtually worthless to consumers. Technologic advancements
in art of all kinds, not exclusively music, has two results. The first result
is art value becomes unlinked from art experience. Without being tied together,
art value freefalls to debatable worthlessness whereas art experience has
growth potential.
Consumers have an infinite supply of art
that can be perfectly replicated with no additional cost. Artists’ bulk of
“earnings total comes from touring, merchandise sales and endorsements, not
album or single sales” according to Zack Greenburg, a senior editor of Forbes magazine. The artists benefit
from increased exposure, as the potential for audiences seeking an art
experience increases. This is where they make the ‘bulk’ of revenue helping
support their continued creation of new art. The only organization not benefiting from a transition of art value to art experience are record companies.
Equipment manufacturers have a whole new set of amateur artists to sell to. Musicians
have an increased touring audience. Consumers have enriched art due to art with
no financial cost and instant access. Record companies have slipping revenues
with no foreseeable new source of income (Nielsen). The effect of art’s
transition to a digital realm is the death of one entity for the life of many.
Uncoupling art value from art experience has one simple effect; record
companies die and everyone else’s lives are enriched.
Works Cited
Braun, H.-J. Music and Technology in the Twentieth Century.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2002. 160-63. Print.
Cassady, Neal. "Art Is Good When It Springs from
Necessity." Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com, n.d. Web. 9 July
2014.
Daniel, Eric D., C. Denis. Mee, and Mark H. Clark. Magnetic
Recording: The First 100 Years. New York: IEEE, 1999. Print.
Jewkes, Loren S. "LSJewkes Music Scrobbles." Last.fm.
Last.fm, n.d. Web. 9 July 2014. <http://www.last.fm/user/lsjewkes>.
Martin, Robert. The Beethoven Quartet Companion. By
Robert Winter. Oakland, CA: U of California; Illustrated Edition Edition, 1994.
151-52. Print.
Patel, Nilay. "Can You Answer These 4 Questions and save the
Media Industry from Taylor Swift?" Vox. Vox Media, 7 July
2015. Web. 9 July 2014.
Nielsen Entertainment & Billboard's 2013 Mid-Year Music
Industry Report. The Nielsen Company,
18 July 2013. Web. 8 July 2014.
