music for beginners

 ntroduction: The Highest Art Auction in HistoryRecently a Christie's art sale became the greatest auction in history. The sale included works by Jackson Pollock, Roy Lichtenstein and Jean-Michel Basquiat, and others and as a whole generated $495 million. The sale established 16 new world auction records, with nine works selling for more than $10m (£6.6m) and 23 for more than $5m (£3.2m). Christie's said the record breaking sales reflected "a brand new era in the art market" ;. The very best lot of Wednesday's sale was Pollock's drip painting Number 19, 1948, which fetched $58.4m (£38.3m) - nearly twice its pre-sale estimate music for beginners. Lichtenstein's Woman with Flowered Hat sold for $56.1 million, while another Basquiat work, Dustheads (top of article), went for $48.8 million. All three works set the greatest prices ever fetched for the artists at auction. Christie's described the $495,021,500 total - which included commissions - as "staggering" ;.Only four of the 70 lots available went unsold. In addition, a 1968 oil painting by Gerhard Richter has set a brand new record for the greatest auction price achieved by a full time income artist. Richter's photo-painting Domplatz, Mailand (Cathedral Square, Milan) sold for $37.1 million (£24.4 million). Sotheby's described Domplatz, Mailand, which depicts a cityscape painted in a mode that suggests a blurred photograph, as a "masterpiece of 20th Century art" and the "epitome" of the artist's 1960s photo-painting canon. Don Bryant, founder of Napa Valley's Bryant Family Vineyard and the painting's new owner, said the work "just knocks me over" ;. Brett Gorvy, head of post-war and contemporary art, said "The remarkable bidding and record prices set reflect a brand new era in the art market," he said. Steven Murphy, CEO of Christie's International, said new collectors were helping drive the boom. Myths of the Music-Fine Art Price Differential When I came across this informative article I was stunned at the prices these artworks were able to obtain. Several of them would hardly evoke an optimistic emotional response in me, while others might only slightly, however for almost all of them I truly don't know the way their costs are reflected in the work, and vice versa. Obviously, these pieces weren't designed for people like me, an artist, while wealthy patrons certainly see their intrinsic artistic value clearly. So why doesn't music attract most of these prices? Can it be even feasible for a piece of recorded music, not music memorabilia or perhaps a music artifact (such as an unusual record, LP, bootleg, T-shirt, album artwork, etc.), to be worth $1 million or maybe more? Are all musicians and music composers doomed to struggle in the music industry and claw their way up into a career in music? If one painting may be valued at $1 million, why can't a song or bit of music also be valued similarly? Apparently, the $.99 per download price is the greatest price a song can command at market value, no real matter what its quality or content, and the musician or composer must accept this value as such. The financial equation looks something like this: 1 painting = $37 million 1 song = $.99 Sometimes people say that the song may change the planet, but no body ever says that about paintings. So theoretically, if people want change $.99 is the purchase price we must purchase it. Now here really are a few statements which should help us clarify what the monetary or value discrepancy between painting and music is based upon. (1) There are fewer painters than you will find musicians. (2) Musicians are less talented than painters? (3) It is simpler to create music than it's to paint. (4) People values paintings more than music. (5) Paintings tend to be more beautiful than music. (6) Paintings are impossible to copy unlike music. (7) Painters work harder than musicians and composers. (8) Blah, blah, blah. Hardly anyone will follow many of these statements and yet all, or at the very least some of them, will have to be true for the price tag on paintings to so greatly exceed the cost of music. Moreover, I doubt that art collectors and great painters have to cope with as much legal red tape as do musicians when releasing their work into the public domain, why aren't the rewards equal, or even greater for musicians who have to work almost as much protecting their are in producing it. Musicians and composers, however, actually must do more than authenticate their work and obtain accurate appraisals concerning what their work is worth, but they receives a commission less. The apparatus costs alone for musicians is a lot greater than it's for painters. Maybe it's fame, and not money, musicians are after? That would explain why most musicians accept the low pay they receive from record deals and digital downloads. Perhaps, that's also why many of them are touring more frequently to improve their fame and not their fortunes. But wait a moment, that's where musicians actually make most of their money from live performances and the selling of merchandise, but not the music. I guess this is the reason many musicians see themselves not as composers, but instead as performers and entertainers. So what can musicians do, who don't see themselves as entertainers, but rather as composers who create music as a fine art? Since they too have a strong need to earn a full time income to aid themselves in their chosen profession, thus there has to be a specialized approach whereby they present their work to music lovers or art collectors looking for assets and curators for unique pieces to place in their private galleries. Suppose, a recorded bit of music that few have have you ever heard which is displayed and played only on a specified music player in a personal art gallery or collection. In considering how a musician can follow the example set by painters in the fine arts, I've isolated 4 principles which should help to help make the spectacular financial rewards they've reached feasible for the musician. So let's analyze some of the characteristics that govern the marketplace for fine art and observe musicians can apply these concepts to their creative, production, and marketing processes. The Ideal Vehicle for Music as Fine Art Here are 4 principles and practical recommendations for musicians who would like to elevate their music to the realm of fine art by after the exemplory case of the painters of days gone by and present. 1) Strive to make unique music or music collections. The composer must design experiments with sound or compositional techniques. Some music belongs in the realm of the public, while other music solely belongs in the realm of fine art. It's really not that difficult to share with the difference. The difference is clear when one compares the environmental surroundings of the nightclub and the music one finds there with the elevated environment of the ballet or opera and its music. The difference is certainly not one with regards to kinds of music, but instead in the composer's sonic fingerprint. Put simply, not everyone thinks Jackson Pollock was a good painter, but everyone acknowledges that it took him years of development to reach a point where his style might be born. It's the style of the artist or composer that will call out to the eye of wealthy patrons, the respect of peers, and the exclusive admiration of the music appreciator. In music, the style of the composer, no matter genre, I call 'a signature sound.' It's the signature sound that music and art collectors would want to own and for that they could be willing to pay or bid up the cost of ownership to a greater price. 2) Create a music gallery. This could be modeled following the art gallery where one or several artist put their work with display. The difference with the music gallery is that you would have a hall full of listening rooms or stations. These showings would not be live performances, but rather will soon be in effect sound installations. You might also separate one hall into several compartments for different composers. The music showing would be an exclusive event provided to serious music and art collectors who actively search for sonic experiences and buy what they like. The objective of the music gallery is the same because the art gallery - to offer the public an example of the artist's talent, to offer critics something to publish about, to have other composers discuss the work of a peer, and to create buzz in the art world. Always remember that it shouldn't be the function that drives the buzz, but the music that produces the event. 3) Turn your music into a real asset. Well-known difference between a painting and music is this one is a real artwork and another is not. Put simply, one of the defining characteristics of a painting is that the medium and the art are one. Unlike music, where in fact the music must be transferred onto another object such as a cassette tape, vinyl, CD, or mP3 player before it can be perceived, whereas with a painting (or sculpture) a subject has been transformed into art. So how would it be or can it be even feasible for a cassette, CD, or download to be transformed into art? The cassette and CD tend to be more comparable to a photograph of a painting, rather than true expressions where in fact the medium and the art are one music for beginners.