An Album That Costs What You Want It To

[BlueStrat]

 

Huge following? I'd say loyal following -- but, if I heard correctly the other day, RH has never charted an album higher than number 37.

 

 

Anyone who can put 10-20,000 butts in seats has a huge following where I come from.

 

Widespread Panic never charted high either, but I'd say they also have a huge following.

[BlueStrat]

 

And with regard to knowledge of the music biz -- the same type of 'ignorant' folks were every bit as ignorant of how things worked before -- and then compounded the problem by putting themselves in the hands of sharpies and crooks who manipulated the hell out of that ignorance.

 

 

Maybe, but also a good many of them became rich rock stars as well. Do you honestly think guys like Clapton, Hendrix, Springsteen, Hall and Oates, Oasis, etc etc knew {censored} about publishing, producer's points, distribution models, promoting and advertising, getting airplay, etc etc when they were 18-20 year old kids signing to a label? The fact is, it was labels who put them where they are today. Yeah, some guys got ripped off. Always has happened, always will. But not all record guys were or are crooks, and from what I can see, the baby has been tossed out with the bathwater.

[philbo]

 

I'll tell you why not. For bands with a huge following, like Radiohead, they can give away recordings if they want to and write them off as a tax deduction and still be swimming in cash from live shows. For bands like them, CDs are in large part promo for live shows anyway, where for them the real money lies. However, for entry and mid-level bands, it's the opposite: you play live shows for almost nothing in hopes of getting people to buy your CDs so you can buy enough gas, frozen 7-11 burritos and guitar strings to get to the next gig, and God help you if you blow a transmission. But if the big boys are giving CDs away, and everyone's condiitoned to believe that all recorded music is now or should be free, who's going to buy one from Bob and the Unknowns? To me, the whole give away thing (or letting consumers set their price) is just another example of musicians thinking they're watering the roses when in fact, they're merely pissing in their own shoes. The fact that some of it gets on the roses doesn't mean harm isn't being done. Like many things in the music business, such as bands offering to do all the promo and bring crowds for gigs in exchange for the door, or the 5 band a night whirlygigs, or paying to play, the guys who do these things first wind up making some money in the short run, but the long term unintended consequences always seem to have a way of turning out to be disastrous.

 

 

OK, my bad, I failed to distinguish between a label release and a self released album. I do buy CDs at shows frequently, especially from local or regional artists. I don't buy CDs at stores much, maybe once a year or so when something special appears.

 

I've never had issues with making enough from playing live shows to cover expenses & a profit - - if it didn't cover expenses, I wouldn't be playing there.

I don't go out on the road playing without gig commitments & dollar amounts known and agreed on up-front. Who it their right mind would?

 

I've heard it's tough on the coasts - - rumors that bands actually pay the bars to be allowed to play. (Good god, what the hell is up with that?)

[MrKnobs]

As long as 80% of the downloaders paid for it, he'd keep doing it. But of course that didn't happen and they stopped it. .

 

Seeing as how he's really good at starting a story and has serious trouble with the endings (he's admitted that), maybe that was the result he was hoping for.

 

Terry D.