Jump to content

Another big name artist advocates free music


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Tom Delonge of Blink-182 did a video interview for Guitar Center - the link is at the end of this post. I saw this link in hypebot.

 

Tom talks about the same stuff we've rehashed here ad nauseum - you can sell concert tickets, you can sell merch, you can build an online portal and leverage that somehow into money, and you should give your music away for free to get yourself out there and get known.

 

Every time I see or hear about this idea I'm really torn. In my own little teeny universe, music sales are probably 20% of my income, with performing money being the other 80%. So let's say that in a week I make $100 - that's $80 from ticket sales, or tips, or the venue paying me, and $20 from CD sales. If I were to give away my music like MAD to everyone I possibly could... would that result in me at least making that $20 back? Would I see more than a 20% boost in my performing money? Because let's be blunt, the merch thing is BS. You don't sell merch unless you are already a big name or you've got some type of unique merch angle. So the question is, would it result in a 20% increase in the number of bookings, or the fees? Hmm. Um... it might. I have no idea.

 

Anyway, here's the link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

None of these big names would promote free music without being where they are. They can afford to have that business model as they all have very large fan bases already established, and large amounts of income already produced. They can rely on giant tours and merchandise. Small bands, and bands trying to make it cannot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

To tack more onto my own thread...

 

I think that in order for free music to work, there HAS to be something about your music that makes people want to come and see you perform. Meaning either your music has to be the type that people want to experience live... classical comes to mind but is a bad fit for this discussion... or you need to have a killer live show where people have a blast or at least have an experience that they can't easily get elsewhere.

 

If a band like KISS came out now, with the costumes, bombs, confetti, all that stuff, they'd be a prime candidate for this strategy. But, um, the first album that KISS put out was a collection of good solid rock songs (sorry haters, but they were.) The stuff they put out NOW is crap... if they'd given the crap away, vs. selling it, they'd have had the same number of people end up owning it, ie only the hardcore hardcore fans. The strategy would work for a band like KISS if they came out now AND released something as good as their first album now, maybe, because word would spread way way faster if the music were free and they'd end up doing way more shows. The bigger the shows, the bigger the ticket prices.

 

I live near Tampa, and there's an interesting thing I've observed. A lot of the bands that have success here are way better live than they are on CD. Blues, Rockabilly, stuff that sounds like Jerry Lee Lewis, you name it - I hear these bands on the radio and I'm thinking "This is all boring rehash" but these dudes get all the prime gigs. Their music is trite old hat but their live shows are high energy and a lot of fun.

 

You listen to Gordon Lightfoot's recording of "If You Could Read My Mind" and it's a classic song... you can still listen to it now. If you were to have seen him in concert, it would be cool to see him, and it would sound good, but in his case, you'd almost be listening to see how close he can come to the album. But in the case of some of the blues bands we have here... you hear them on the radio and you think "This is the same stuff I've heard a million times." But put them on a stage with a 10,000 watt PA and it's way better. It's way more fun.

 

So maybe the idea is that for bands who are awesome live but maybe their music isn't something you'd put on and listen to over and over... maybe for those bands, giving away music makes total sense. Maybe their music is designed for live performance and the recordings are pale comparisons. Maybe for other artists, like singer/songwriters, the opposite is true, or at least the emphasis is really on the recorded material and the live show tries to live up to it. And maybe for those artists, they really need to keep selling music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

None of these big names would promote free music without being where they are. They can afford to have that business model as they all have very large fan bases already established, and large amounts of income already produced. They can rely on giant tours and merchandise. Small bands, and bands trying to make it cannot.

 

 

+1 !

 

But he's got a point - You can use free music as a form of promotion. See it as a resume of your work, a free way to promote yourself.

 

Of course, I completely disagree with the idea you should give it all away! Give a single or two, use them to gain new fans/mailing list members, and sell them the rest of your cds, special editions and other stuff.

 

Marketing costs a lot of money. Making a song available for free download on the web costs almost nothing. If the song is good enough, it will at least move a little and gain you new fans.

 

But NEVER give it all away! Bad idea IMO! And you will only contribute to the devaluation of recorded music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Of course a successful recording artist won't mind advocating distributing free music. There's nothing really to lose on his part. He's already made his bundle. It's probably not the best idea for small artists who don't have any name recognition where the profit value of giving away for free starts to "stick". However, if you're going to give it away where it can be distributed and shared easily without royalties, might as well sell it first on a flash drive like the ones they talk about in the article I put on this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I don't understand why harmonycentral can't control the spammers better than they do. In the new software, I think it will be better, from what I've read.

 

 

It can be a bit of an arms race - I mean you have intelligence on the black hat side too (I imagine HC is a pretty nice target considering its traffic too)

It's always kind of a balance between making a secure vetting process and making that process convenient and low-cost

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I don't understand why harmonycentral can't control the spammers better than they do. In the new software, I think it will be better, from what I've read.

 

 

They just need to send an mail confirmation link that you have to click when you register! The spam level here is unacceptable!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Perhaps we would be sucessfull, even in the present environment , if we concentrate on writing and songcraft . Like you said , a G. Lightfoot song is pretty timeless and will have unlimited staying power . Artist will still want to perform songs of that caliber years from now . Kiss... well maybe not so much ...... Although "hard luck woman " was pretty decent.

 

If people who write songs like those can't get tracktion ( and an income) now , even with all the supposed advantages of the web and home studios , then were in for a real dry spell until it gets sorted .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

flatfinger,


If G.Lightfoot was born in 1979, and just put up his first great song on MySpace today, do you think his song would become a classic without major promotion, only on its own?


I don't think so.

 

 

there is ambiguity in your point - As soon as any artist starts thinking in whats now considered by many to be "obsolete terms" from corporate label syllabus (ie. record deal, distribution, management, royalties off sales and publishing, blah,....), that artist is setting himself up for disappointment

 

Ive been in many discussions about "new business models" here on the forum - I dont have any answer to any theories, nor do I propose any solutions...the only think I can add to any of those discussions is that there isnt any 'one' answer....Atrists need to think outside-the-box

 

Classic? It seems that with rap and nu-R&B dominating charts, and a million unknown bands of all types of genres all jockying for some type of 'net popularity, the days of 'classics' will be few and far between....However, a great song will always be a great song, regardless of when it was written or if considered a 'classic'..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That is so nice collection.Well after finding your this comment there is no need for any book reading search of last few years.I like your idea for distributing the books by years.Thats so nice attempts with links.Please continue this type of activity.Thank you for sharing such a nice comment. ans sources

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

i'm not sure if this is a defense of annalingus or blink 182. either way, you disgust me.

 

Whatever, skippy. :wave:Since evidently English is your second language, I'll explain it to you: I responded to a ridiculous post that contributed nothing to the discussion by posting one like it to make a point. I don't know how you could miss that point, but you apparently did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...