[Trombone-l] Church music, tbn solos

[Chris Tune]

True.  What you need to analyze in order to have some FACTUAL basis to work 
with is an instance in history where something similar has happened.  Then 
you can look at the beginning, middle and end result of the similar change. 
You should look at the history of Telegraphy, Radio and Movies, and TV.

This history  is very similar, but not exactly so, to what is likely to 
happen to all publishing industries in the 21st century.  Mostly it depends 
upon how much penetration occurs and the costs and benefits of the various 
alternatives (i.e. pre-printed stuff vs. home printed or viewed over a 
network)

HISTORY
If you go back into the second half of the 19th century, you will see as it 
winds to a close that Telegraphy over wires is the main "modern" 
communications method.  Telephone takes hold gradually.  Much infrastructure 
is built for telegraphs. Systems and standards develop and the lines tend to 
run along with the right-of-ways of railroads.  By the close of the 1800's 
radio is in experimental stages with some workable solutions coming and 
telephone has not yet penetrated very deeply (1884 a long distance exchange 
opens in New Haven, CT. . .allows comm between Boston and NYC), Telephone is 
really starting to gain interest.  Telegraphy is still the 800 lb gorilla 
and people doubt that modern phone and wireless will ever completely 
supplant telegrapy.  Well, substantial inroads ARE made against telegraphy, 
but the standards such as Morse Code still exist and still are in use in 
some isolated contexts, even today in a modern digital era.

What it seems to show looking both at the first layer (telegraph to phone 
and radio), the second layer (phone, radio to movie cellular/ TV) is that 
the first method retrenches removing many from the business, with those 
remaining adapting to certain specialized contexts.  The good news, is that 
WITHIN those context areas the businesses continue to exist and some even 
thrive.   An example is wired telegraph networks which specialized in 
transmitting sports scores in the heydey of gambling (e.g. the roaring 
twenties and forward somewhat).  These companies achieved a degree of 
monopoly presence and were very profitable even during a time, when more 
conventional uses of telegraph were winnowing out.  Also note that multiple 
avenues (e.g. telephone AND radio take over functions of telegraph; movies 
TV and cellular take over aspects of phone and radio) substitute for a 
single previous technology.

Radio is still with us even though many predicted that Television would wipe 
it out.  You have to remember that in some trends the cost structures become 
very important.  With TV, the costs are too high (engineering and 
production) to have many producers and production facilities everywhere 
(although this seems to be changing).  Costs have come down, but they also 
have for radio.  Radio will generally tend to have a more favorable cost 
structure than TV.  Radio is now becoming more specialized.  Stations, each 
have a unique identity, where many seemed to be "general purpose", when I 
was a kid.

DIGITAL
Now, one weird thing about the digital revolution is that the digital 
versions replacing analog versions actually have more favorable cost 
structures (i.e. cheaper to produce, cheaper to distribute).  Also, the 
"reach" of the technology and its ease of development is superior to some of 
these earlier revolutions.  I can put together a digital recording studio in 
a farming community for much less money than I could put together a city 
facility.  It is cheap and easy to develop digital versions of analog 
facilities.  Still, there will be a place for the older versions, since 
there will probably never be 100 percent penetration of computer technology. 
PC tech is pentrating very deeply (I heard a figure of 40 million broadband 
connects in America), as more persons realize they can communicate very 
easily using PCs, but there will be some who never bite.

We have mp3        vs. records and CDs (and this seems to be maturing quite 
a bit)
We have blogging    vs. conventional news and magazines (and this seems to 
be moving even faster than mp3)
We have Podcasting    vs. conventional radio programs (ditto. . while small 
presently. . .the growth here is incredible)

I, myself have a website with mp3s on it,  a Blog with journal entries on it 
and are considering putting on a radio program a la Podcast fairly soon. 
Most of this stuff costs almost nothing (at least compared to "making 
records", printing a newsletter and mailing it, and making a radio program 
and airing it) .  The most expense is the loss of time as you try to gain 
attention to what you are doing.   I.e. MARKETING.  Maybe, for some, the 
other expense is training to get used to web development, networking and so 
forth.  I see lots of ads for small schools teaching technology and tech 
certifications like A+, MCSE and so on.

I'm not advocating panic, here, but I'd certainly suggest that businesses in 
these industries (persons publishing brass music, strictly on paper) get to 
know what is going on and truly pay attention to the trends and the way 
stuff actually is occuring.  Who knows, if you keep your eyes and ears open 
you may spot a great opportunity somewhere. .

Chris Tune


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Holland" <briar at rcn.com>
To: "Trb. List" <trombone-l at server5.samford.edu>
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Trombone-l] Church music, tbn solos


> John Burton wrote:
>
>> I'm not  an arranger or publisher, but I'm wondering if on-line
>> publishing might be a profitable answer to the small-time (low-volume)
>> publisher.
>>
>> For example, selling a PDF of your arrangement, collect via PayPal.
>> All you need is a bank account to work with to collect the money.  An
>> on-line store is quite inexpensive to set up, and naturally depending
>> on how much you charge for your charts may pay for itself with one or
>> two sales per month.
>
> Someone trots this idea out on the list every year or so. I've
> responded before and will reprise just a couple points.
>
> The physical medium of the score and parts, like a book or magazine,
> has some value over a sheaf of loose papers from your printer.
> Similarly, the paper version of a piece of music has some value over
> the electronic stands folks are trying to develop and market. Whereas
> the mp3 version of a recording may be worthwhile as a portable version,
> the physical package with the cover art, lyrics, liner notes, etc. has
> some value over the electronic version inside an iPod.
>
> No one can predict the future all that well. Those who have observed
> the presumed death of the recording industry -- or at least a radical
> transformation in its mode of delivery -- may be correct, but I rather
> doubt it. The same goes for traditional modes of print publishing.
>
>> Just a thought, but from the standpoint of a consumer, I much prefer
>> on-line sources of arrangements.  It satisfies my need for "right now"
>> service and allows me to search with e-tools much more effectively.
>
> What may be desirable for the consumer may not be so desirable for the
> seller in terms of cost and profitability. Sure, people these days love
> to shop in their pajamas from home and have something either delivered
> to their doors in a few days or delivered to their computers
> instantaneously. The shift away from the public sphere is often called
> "cocooning." As a business model, the warehouse stores and virtual
> media sellers can get it done more cheaply in many respects, but we've
> clearly lost something in the process. Brick and mortar specialty
> stores that maintains select inventory and employ knowledgeable staff
> may still be worth some extra cost.
>
> Robert Holland, Publisher
> Briar Music Press
> briar at rcn.com
> www.briarmusic.com
> _______________________________________________
> Trombone-l mailing list
> Trombone-l at maillists.samford.edu
> http://maillists.samford.edu/mailman/listinfo/trombone-l
>