So, what?

[trmckenz]

Alright so I've read a ton of these threads.... you all have a lot of valuable information and experience which I appreciate and respect. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. However, it seems about 90% of posts are about how the industry sucks, what is NOT working. Yes, things are changing. Yes, there's more music than ever. Yes, labels are collapsing. etc etc etc. What I see is a great opportunity to lead the way for the new skeleton of the music industry, so let's throw out the negativity and pessimism.

 

I wanted to talk a little about:

1- where the industry is headed

2- if you were a young original rock band, what steps would you be taking to grow your brand?

[JohnMCA72]

1. That's a tough one. Nobody really knows. Some people think they do, but nobody really does.

 

2. I'd write a book about it. Seriously, I'd chronicle everything that was done, discussed, discarded, tried, etc. I'd analyze the heck out of it, figure out what worked, what didn't, & why. Even if I never made it as a successful musician, maybe I could sell a few books!

[trmckenz]

haha thats a good idea for #2

 

I think the industry is headed to private enterprise. meaning a band is no longer a group of dudes who play music, but rather a group of dudes who can market and be innovative with ways to maximize the return on their product WHILE playing music. the live show needs to be an experience much more so than simply live music.

 

I'm torn on the free music thing. I dont want to jump on that train just yet. Any thoughts on that?

[Next Direct]

Well, funny you mention the word book, because I'm actually writing a book about this whole topic (although it could be another 2 years before I finish it as I have a TON of psychology books still to read). My self-interest here (and I will be totally up front and honest about this) is because it allows me to test the water with some ideas and gauge feedback (which is also why I want to engage with people who disagree as well as those who already agree with my premise).

 

A good scientist will always try and disprove his theory and so I'm looking for counter-arguments that I haven't thought about, because as people we do tend to look for information that supports our own biases. Discussing this with others helps me see the “other point of view”.

 

With this book, my aim to lift the veil of misconception people currently have regarding the music industry and to empower young musicians, giving them a realistic perspective without meaning to crush their dreams either. This isn’t about me getting an ego boost but rather, it’s me saying, I’ve learned a lot of things through education and first-hand experience and I wish to share that body of knowledge with other people. I want to give something back.

 

My hope is that bands and artists will achieve a greater level of personal satisfaction from their musical ventures, than if they were still running around “chasing the dream” and coming up short.

[trmckenz]

write as fast as you can man, I want that first copy, signed. I'd be happy to spread the word about it (assuming it helps)

[Next Direct]

Appreciated, but I'm certainly no messiah; I don't have the “inside secret” or any arcane knowledge that will give you the winning edge.

 

It's just going to be my own observations and what I've learned and experienced, with some grounding in psychology and what motivates humans, and what makes them do stupid irrational things.

 

I will say this much:

 

The people working in the music industry (record labels in particular) are very clever.

 

1. They know that most musicians think they're really good and have what it takes.

 

2. They know that nearly most of them will probably fail commercially.

 

3. They know that people don’t like admitting they’ve been had or have made bad decisions.

 

4. They know that most people will slink away quietly after an unsuccessful attempt at becoming a professional musician; or will rationalise it in a way that doesn't hurt their self-esteem; or become so deluded to the point where they never give up even when the writing is on the wall.

 

5. And they know that most of their applicants don’t know how to investigate the ‘industry’ and prepare accordingly and know what's ahead and what they might have to sacrifice.

All in good time.

[daddymack]

Part of the current issue with the music industry in general is that the tradiotional label system still works, but is rapidly losing cache, and $, to the incessant onslaught of digital technologies they don't truly understand, and can't find a means by which to control. They could, in the past, rely on the cabal between the labels, player manufacturers and the broadcasters to control what got heard, where it was heard, who heard it, how often and for how much. That tried and true system has been almost completely undermined by the advent of the digital age (the internet, the availability of inexpensive recording and reproduction equipment and the lowering of audio standards). It is not only the music industry, but the entire entertainment complex that is being forced to re-evaluate its processes, positioning and powerbase.

 

I think it is rather naive at this juncture to think that one can accurately predict the future direction of such a vast conglomeration of corporations, organizations and individual interests. Certainly one can posit potential outcomes, but we are still in the theorem stage, there are no postulates as yet.

 

This is not to be taken as negativity, rather, my position is one of, if nothing else, total unbiased interest. I see several areas where the future is definitely going to require skillsets that are yet to be developed, and methodolgies that we can't even begin to contemplate. I have said here many times that the best financial outcomes will likely be for those who can find a way to mass market entertainment effectively from the ground up via the internet. That to me is clearly the first great hurdle.

[BuildingCastles]

 

Alright so I've read a ton of these threads.... you all have a lot of valuable information and experience which I appreciate and respect. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. However, it seems about 90% of posts are about how the industry sucks, what is NOT working. Yes, things are changing. Yes, there's more music than ever. Yes, labels are collapsing. etc etc etc. What I see is a great opportunity to lead the way for the new skeleton of the music industry, so let's throw out the negativity and pessimism. I wanted to talk a little about: 1- where the industry is headed 2- if you were a young original rock band, what steps would you be taking to grow your brand?

 

 

 

 

This forum is pretty bad when it comes to actual useful advice. Too many bitter people with too few answers. That's why I don't bother with this forum much. Go listen to the CD Baby DIY podcast, read the blog, and don't worry about this forum unless you're desperate or bored.

[sventvkg]

It's not that everyone is bitter and can't give any advice. It's just that nobody knows whats going to happen as we are literally in No Man's Land as far as teh industry goes. The only thing that is for certain is the old business as it used to run before the current age of FREE is over.

[trmckenz]

@daddymack I really agree with you on the online marketing. we're currently constructing our online portal, should be interesting to see how all of our ideas work once implemented.

 

question- how much do drugs play a part in the music industry?

[Dancebass]

question- how much do drugs play a part in the music industry?

 

Not enough in my opinion.

 

I don't know man, here's my take on the industry:

 

They've been decimated. The product price is now universally zero and the old guard no longer controls distribution in any real way. That's a problem!

 

There are ways to cash in on fame but not on music. This is the only key they still hold and they mean to use it to sustain themselves. That's why 360 deals are all there's going to be soon. Trading on the fame is the only revenue stream left and they still hold the keys to making people famous. Sure blogs have replaced magazines but that's never really moved real units.

 

What makes fame? The television makes fame. You want to sell enough tickets, merch, or product endorsements to make a living? Well then you better have your ass on Saturday Night Live, David Letterman, Late Night, yadda yadda, whatever the few remaining outlets are for music on the tube.

 

Want to play Saturday Night Live or get a slot on a major tour? You're on an indie label and your killing it on itunes. Great!! {censored} You kid!

 

You've got a billion youtube views? Great!! {censored} You kid!

 

Get it? All they have left to leverage is influence. Influence and access. You want the big time? 360 it is. You want to be famous kid? Fine fine, will give you fame, but we want 99% off the top!

[flatfinger]

You can go over to TopSpin and read all the marketing stuff ;WARNING: lots of high level jargon and acronyms !!!!

 

 

My only thoughts to offer up at this juncture ....... ( And I'll stipulate that I don't know {censored} really !!)

 

 

 

 

1.) The "viral" neo-tech paradigm seems to rely heavily on examples of bands that have managed to pull the big trick ; MONETIZE IT ..................

However , it seems that the lions share of these examples have had previous label backing in there not so distant past , and thus, already had a brand and a following of some sort .

I have also seen a trend in that many lesser players in this group are really Dependant on using publicity stunts of all sorts to get traffic to there sites and boost their ALEXIA ratings . I'm not a statistician , but if you look at the graphs at Alexia and then correlate the news stories and bloggs you can make a connection between a recent {censored} storm of some sort and the websites hits !!!!!!

So this brings to mind the theory that th web is a very , very busy and competitive place to try and get some attention and rise above the noise floor!!

 

2.) HOWEVER!,

 

The "empowerment part of the new tech frontier is there , but you just have to approach it from a more realistic , less "rags to riches " point of view . There are plenty of regional acts that are using the web to help them build a better relationship with their fans and to keep them in the loop .

But you have to be carefully not to become a pain in the ass spammer about it or you end up in the blocked senders box !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

3.) So basically , I think that despite all the whiz bang appeal of the web , you still have to approach it from a local backyard , grassroots point of view . Build it one fan at a time and concentrate on what matters the most ; entertaining and connecting with your music .

If you can't get that going locally I think your only buying into what the Industry sells; the home recording/Internet rags to riches fairy tales stuff.

 

 

4.) Focus on the music ......... Focus.

[Grubgoat]

Why write a book? That is what the internet and these forums are, people talking about making music, expressing opinions, etc. about making it, rather than doing it (and I say this as a reformed "talker", it takes one to know one).

 

I've come to view this as an excuse to not be doing the things that you need to do to "make it". Its like armchair football coaches, thinking that by talking about it all the time, and thinking about it all the time, and extracting theory out of it, somehow that's going to affect the outcome of the game you're watching. Meanwhile the REAL coaches are actually running the show.

 

What rock musicians need to do is watch what guys like the Wu Tang Clan and Jay-Z did. And I don't even mean running 15 companies along with your music label. Bottom line, these are people who flouted contemporary and community AND music industry standards and morals, sold drugs (i.e. did ANYTHING they had to do) to get the money to keep the thing going. These people are straight-out unashamed, unabashed hustlers and self-promoters, and they would push their product on EVERYONE they came across (it also helped that they were in a genre that was exploding, and that their "product" is world-class - most bands don't put that kind of quality control into their "product", because that's "interfering with their art, that's being commercial"). And you can't be rude, and, for instance, walk up to a person at the club and push your CD or t-shirt on them - you have to leave it at the merch table and be polite as people ignore you, stay in your place. I mentioned to my band the other day, "hey lets put a guitar case out in front of our stage, put some dollars in it, and ask for donations". "No dude, that's not cool" was the reply. These people are not hungry.

 

I personally think rock music is gonna have a resurgence soon (meaning, it will be a hot genre as I was mentioning before), and whoever spearheads that is going to be informed by what hip-hop did in the 90's-2000's, even if they don't consciously realize it. I might even venture that there will be a rise of rock and roll "beat-maker/producers" just like people like Just Blaze and Kanye West, for instance. (There already are, but they're still behind the scenes.)

 

But in reality, the answer is, and always has been, WORK, WORK, WORK, and put your time in, to the point of starving and having no family life or creature comforts. Some people get lucky and hit right away, but ANY band or artist that's been doing it with quality for long enough will get their shot and will have a following. The problem with many people entering the music industry, is we want the riches and glory RIGHT NOW. But ANY OTHER business that is successful, its common sense that it may take 10 years of suffering and barely getting by to be on solid financial ground (and historically, even the "successful" artists have often been in debt for that long, even as they are "stars").

 

I don't even care about the internet anymore. It AN outlet, but its not the penultimate one, that's a fantasy that we like because it equals less work for us, the artist. The guys who get out there and PUSH, without any safety net, these are the guys who make it, really in ANY industry. And they deserve it, this is a law of nature.

 

How hungry are you? How willing are you to do whatever you have to do? Those are big questions with pretty serious consequences, but the bottom line is, if you're standing around asking what to do, you're already a goner. If you're dreaming of being signed by some company instead of being your own boss, you're probably a goner.

 

When they were buying keys of coke, knowing they could go to jail but also knowing that they were on their way to being media moguls, those rappers I mentioned weren't asking anyone. They were fumbling in the dark just like you or me. But they weren't asking for help OR permission, and weren't making any excuses, and they weren't waiting around wasting time talking about it on the internet. They were doing it.

 

Any "advice" that media people will give you, its pales compared to this. Like Jay-Z says in one song, everyone can tell you how to do it, none of em done it. Middlemen are gonna act like they know (i.e. hustle YOU), cause they need YOU to survive. Just like in the lending industry. Like, its a TERRIBLE idea to borrow money, really EVER, but they have us believing that if our credit score is bad, we're bad people. That's called being hustled. That's what you, as someone who wants to eat off of your art, have to do. Do you have the stomach for that?

[Kramerguy]

 

2- if you were a young original rock band, what steps would you be taking to grow your brand?

 

 

I've looked at a few bands that have achieved moderate successes without any labels.

 

What I've found is that there's a lot of things they all have in common-

 

*old school techniques, such as postering (fliers), street-team style promotions, talking to people!! Chasing down college radio jockeys to grant short interviews and to promote shows.

 

*Doing EVERYTHING yourself. Every band-mate has to take a solid, active role in booking, promotions, managing myspace/FB/Twitter.. the whole online presence; setting up meals, hotel rooms, campsites, etc.. you name it, it needs everyone on the same page.

 

*brand and music - if the music sucks, nothing can help you. If everyone dresses like they are slobbing it up on their day off at home and not in a coordinated format - it's just as bad, if not worse, than the music sucking.

 

* having a SOLID stage show/presence.

* having reachable and outlined goals

* everyone being open to change and new ideas - the ability to identify problem areas and the steadfastness to change them

* The ability to tolerate the same annoying people around you 24/7 for months on end. Bad habits and all. Now imagine the same people all haven't had a bath in a week.

 

So much more..

 

there's plenty of possibility still, IMO.

[JohnMCA72]

 

... I'm torn on the free music thing. I dont want to jump on that train just yet. Any thoughts on that?

 

 

To paraphrase another, pretty smart, regular on this forum: The really cool thing nowadays is that anybody can produce & distribute their own music. The trouble is, that anybody can produce & distribute their own music.

 

I think that sooner or later there's going to be some sort of backlash against "commoditized" music. With everybody & his brother trying to write, produce, & distribute music there's a lot of mediocre stuff - or worse - out there. I think people are going to eventually get tired of it, raise their standards of what they'll accept, & willing to pay (more) for a better-quality product. "Good" is still open to everybody's personal interpretation, & maybe some technical advance will help separate the nuggets from all the tailings. Also, the novelty of being able to set up your own "record company" in your basement is liable to wear off & a lot of people who really shouldn't be bothering anyway lose interest.

[Next Direct]

 

Why write a book? That is what the internet and these forums are, people talking about making music, expressing opinions, etc. about making it, rather than doing it (and I say this as a reformed "talker", it takes one to know one). I've come to view this as an excuse to not be doing the things that you need to do to "make it". Its like armchair football coaches, thinking that by talking about it all the time, and thinking about it all the time, and extracting theory out of it, somehow that's going to affect the outcome of the game you're watching. Meanwhile the REAL coaches are actually running the show.

 

 

Of course, the Internet is invaluable for free information but books are hardly obsolete are they? I have read some brilliant books on the music industry that I didn't find anywhere on the net, or were only being discussed years later. Newspapers have taken a hit because of free information online, but the book will still be in mass circulation for the next 100 years in society, at the least.

 

I have noticed that of all the music industry books out there on “making it” or whatever, they are all lacking in something very important, and I intend to fill that niche. That's my ambition, so writing a book is how to go about doing it, not talking about writing a book.

 

Do you know what I mean?

 

Edited for clarification.

[Grubgoat]

Next Direct, I didn't write all that for you, when I jumped in the thread, the "book" thing was the most recent post, and it got me thinking about MY OWN situation/lessons I've learned, so I started there. The OP was asking about what a young band should do. I was more talking to him, because that's what interests me, too. (And I hope you are right about books still being en masse in 100 years, because I personally feel that everything that is "on the net" will eventually disappear. Like, physical photographs from 100 years ago still exist, you can hold them in your hand - but putting your family pictures up and trusting them to some "cloud computing" nonsense? Don't be mad when your great-grandkids never get to see them...)

 

On another note, one thing I think about the "book" business, and also the newspaper and magazine business (and I think this applies to the internet and radio, too), is that just because people are out there and you've got some "media guru" projecting some random number, doesn't mean they were ever going to be actual customers. I think, for instance, that the magazine and newspaper businesses have sold investors false readership vs. actual buyer numbers, meaning that just because some "expert" has projected those numbers, doesn't mean they are real. Here's what I mean (and I'm not an industry guy, I just have a gut feeling about this, and I've been around a while so I'm basing this on what I've experienced in my own life)...

 

I have almost NEVER bought a newspaper, or any magazines. I work in a factory, and there are lots of people who leave their newspapers and mags sitting around for the rest of us to read. In the minds of the publishers, they think I should be buying the thing. But in reality, I was NEVER going to buy it, and if it wasn't sitting around, I wouldn't read it. The ONLY real customer the publisher can count on is the ONE GUY who bought it (even though there might be 15 other people like me who will read it second-hand). And I think that ONE GUY is actually a pretty reliable customer, that can be counted on to constantly buy. But, for instance, here in Detroit there are TWO major newspapers (both owned by the same company, conveniently), both basically printing the EXACT SAME THING (and its almost all AP feeds anyway). That's idiotic business, and suddenly when no one is buying both of these duplicate publications, "OMG THE INDUSTRY IS DYING!!!" No, you just made a really bad investment, and don't want to admit it, so you have to justify your failure somehow.

 

Same with many songs on the radio, and lots of the BS on the internet. If there's some song that happens to come on when I'm driving to work, I may listen to it, it may even get lodged into my brain (so that 15 years from now I'll still recognize it if it comes on). That DOES NOT mean I was ever going to purchase it, and I think that for the entire history of the music industry, this has been true - there are LOTS more people people who are "aware" of some song/band than actually ever paid money for it. And the music industry should know this going in (I think they do, but again, they have investors to fool).

 

I don't think its so much that "print is dead" or that music is dead, rather, the "print industry" bloated itself and pretended that everyone was going to buy their stuff, which was just some expert (I.E. some *middleman* who needed a reason to justify his paycheck) talking out of his ass. At one point I read that there were like 20,000 monthly publications out there in the U.S. alone. That doesn't mean there was a market for all of those magazines - so when all those magazines that no one wanted in the first place started to go bankrupt, the "experts" started saying "print is dead". But getting back to my newspaper at work thing, there is always that one guy who IS going to buy the thing. I know several women at work who ALWAYS buy the newest STAR magazine or whatever gossip rag - then us guys read it to look at the chicks, or because the line is down and we're bored. But we'll NEVER buy that crap, so don't include us in your projections.

 

Same with music. There are ALWAYS going to be SOME people who will buy and foster music. THOSE are the people you need to market to. The rest of society, say 95% of it, are NOT your customers, and telling yourself that they should be (which is dreamy idealistic bull{censored}), or pretending that they ARE going to pay for it (and using that to sell your "product" to some record company, i.e. "our research indicates...") is just asking for failure...

 

A book about the music industry is probably going to be outdated before it gets published. I got one for Christmas last year, it was a year or so old then, I think it was called "the future of music", and these guys sounded like they knew what they were talking about (although it was some hippie, "everything is going to be great" {censored}). But in the time that it took to print it, and for me to stumble upon it, things like Myspace and YouTube popped up that they had no idea about. And in ten years, that book will be so obsolete - its only value will be in that the authors hustled a few hundred thousand copies before people realized it was worthless, and anyone who's planning a music career based on that book's predictions will still be sitting around, whining that "no one is buying my music, the industry is dead".

 

Because you shouldn't be waiting for some book, or for some expert, to tell you what to do. Figure it out for yourself, just like Jay-Z and the Wu-Tang, and all the other successful rappers of the last 15 years, did...

[Next Direct]

Hey Grubgoat, I know you weren't just addressing me, but I wanted to answer that question.

 

The Future of Music was published in 2005. I've read that one, decent enough, but I know what you mean, it's obviously of its time.

 

Nevertheless, while books about the music industry are going to be out of date as soon as they hit the shelves, some things are just never going to change about the industry and more importantly, human nature. I'm focussing more on these kind of things, not the practical elements of the industry (the quick fix tactics that musicians seem to want to know), which nobody can predict – hence why I would agree with you on the whole middleman talking out of his ass about what's the best method for making waves.

 

Nobody has that kind of insider secret, and if they try and tell you they do (like many self-help industry authors), they're usually full of it.

 

I stopped buying magazines along time ago. I finally came to the realisation that all they were selling me was more and more adverts (I guess they have to pay the rent). But books, certainly are here to stay for a while. Doesn't mean the market for them is going to be massive (I hear young people's attention spans are dropping and they can't concentrate for long periods) but niche markets are more common now anyways – which Chris Anderson made abundantly clear in The Long Tail. Look at how varied music is; so many genres and sub-cultures than ever before.

[Scafeets]

 

Alright so I've read a ton of these threads.... you all have a lot of valuable information and experience which I appreciate and respect. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. However, it seems about 90% of posts are about how the industry sucks, what is NOT working. Yes, things are changing. Yes, there's more music than ever. Yes, labels are collapsing. etc etc etc. What I see is a great opportunity to lead the way for the new skeleton of the music industry, so let's throw out the negativity and pessimism. I wanted to talk a little about: 1- where the industry is headed 2- if you were a young original rock band, what steps would you be taking to grow your brand?

 

 

 

#1: The "industry" was never a monolithic thing going in one direction. It is headed in a number of different directions, as it always was, and still doesn’t stray too far from the original business model. Back in the day, separate industries (labels, distributors, publishing companies, booking agencies, concert promoters, broadcasters and, oh yeah - artists) formed partnerships, cabals, federations, "arrangements," truces, conspiracies and joint ventures. They were often at odds with each other: The most obvious love/hate symbiotic relationship was the label vs. broadcaster thing. Labels supplied free entertainment while radio provided free promotion. Business pressure and ethics being what they are, both sides act greedy and artists get caught in the cross-fire.

 

Moving forward, labels and broadcasters are less important but still dominate the mainstream. For all the discussion about new media and marketing paradigms, the big numbers are still generated by organizations that take the initial buzz an artist creates and turn it into a big buzz. Broadcast TV still sells tons of recordings and concert tickets. Terrestrial radio has lost some impact, but satellite and internet radio are filling the gap. 30 years after MTV and the proliferation of cable, digital media and the lower barrier to entry for recording and distribution, major labels still sell 95% of the recordings (atoms) and 90% of the online sales (bits).

 

“360 deals” notwithstanding, the music biz is still fractured into disparate competing industries. Artists have a better selection of alternatives, but management, marketing, manufacturing, publishing, distribution and live performance still require that artists be as selective in their business dealings today as they were in the past.

 

Today, there are more bands trying to get gigs in fewer performance outlets while trying to sell recordings to a diminished market. But that market is pretty much the same as it ever was.

 

#2: If I were in a young original rock band, I wouldn’t change the modus operandi much from what has worked in the past. The Stones, the Who and the Beatles started out as cover bands for two reasons: They needed to play in front of decent-sized audiences that weren’t all friends and family to find out what works and what doesn’t in live performance. They also knew they didn’t have enough great original material for a full set or album. One could argue that for every band like that, there’s a U2, Radiohead or Tom Petty that did it all with original music. I think you’ll find most of those artists made their bones in other bands first, doing covers. If your band is still playing to the same 75 camp-followers at every gig, you haven’t really tested your material.

 

A young, original rock band will need great songs. This means original music and lyrics. I used to listen to 40 demos a week, and it always amazed me how similar 99% of the “original” stuff really was. If you don’t have great songs, cover great songs that fit the band’s personality. There’s no crime to starting with a mix of both and gradually introducing more originals as they start to generate positive crowd response. If you’re not prolific (and few bands really are) find original songs from other songwriters who are looking for an outlet.

 

If you’re not good at talking to promoters and other “industry types” get representation. And don’t sign anything without getting an expert legal opinion. This does not mean the lawyer who helped your dad close on the house or get out of a DUI. Find an entertainment lawyer you can afford and trust.

 

In the 70s, bands started to generate buzz by doing clubs in their home town, then going regional. They sold merch, including recordings, They learned how to court the media and other tastemakers. They loved their fans to death.

 

“Things are more like they are now than they ever were before.”

- D. Eisenhower

[Khem1cal]

I'm glad the old way is falling by the wayside, due to sites like grooveshark & programs like limewire/frostwire, etc. I have been able to listen to what "I WANT" when I want it...If I enjoy the band I buy their cd or Ep, see them live if they are in town, etc. If i think they suck, I delete their song(s) and move on. I have found some many awesome artists this way, if I was restricted to what the labels(who control the keys to mainstream radio, tv, etc) wanted me to hear, I would have never have found so many awesome, extremely talented musicians/bands.

 

I posted this vid up yesterday and it really hits home, and it's why I want majors to die off.

 

[YOUTUBE]HOkEMs-p_d4[/YOUTUBE]

 

I'm not trying to be some single hit pop star, nor are the majority of bands(especially in my genre which is Death & black metal influenced), but that's how the labels wanna play you...We have the ability to promote ourselves cheaply without labels.

 

The labels still have a strangle hold on major radio stations, but I am hoping this is where internet based stations can kill them off next.

 

they control TV for the time being too(Videos/interveiws/behind the scenes, etc)....well internet based streaming TV is coming up quick, and again we can give ourselves worldwide exposure cheaper without a label.

 

We can record ourselves with higher & higher quality, cheaper & cheaper with each passing year...again the labels are becoming more irrelevant.

 

Everyone is complaining about this or that, but IMHO it's allowing bands that never would have been seen or heard in past decades to "BE HEARD" and that's what matters to you as an artist/band.

 

You also have to compete with video games(other entertainment as well, but games are the juggernaut) which is the rave nowadays and will be that way indefinitely IMO..People don't sit in their rooms jamming tunes like they did before. If they are jamming out a song, they are most likely playing a game or on the computer, etc. at the same time. Of course artists like ourselves, will sit down more often than not with just a good song jamming, but we're not important, the consumer is what makes or breaks you, and the consumers & future consumers(kids) will not listen to music the same way we do/did.

 

The economy is in toilet, so no one en mass is going to see live music right now, although metal always consistently draws and is showing growth not sure about other genres, maybe others can chime in on that.

 

In the end, the situation is getting BETTER for bands, and WORSE for the labels...Seeing is how they monopolized music and have until recent years, force feed us garbage,and played what THEY wanted you to hear, I will not be crying when they finally dissolve into the abyss.

 

I'll have a nice warm lump for their grave

 

The labels wanna scare artists that they are in danger, but we're not...THEY ARE, and that's why they are all screaming bloody murder.

 

Don't let the labels dupe you, Artists will be more independent, mobile, connective, in charge of their destiny, etc than ever before...and that's a GOOD thing!

 

that's my .02 cents your opinion may differ..

[flatfinger]

 

if I was restricted to what the labels(who control the keys to mainstream radio, tv, etc) wanted me to hear.......

 

 

I'm not wanting to burst your bubble so believe what you want ;..... The company called Clear Channel isn't beholden to the monolith (not)known as "the labels ". In fact , they thumb there noses at them with great regularity . Clear channel holds focus group after focus group and the plays the same thing again and again in order to try and come up with data to please the advertisers.

The reason that you never hear anything of consequence on the radio anymore is there are no more local or independent D.J.'s. Blame it on the easy straw man target known as "the labels "if you want to , but it's not so simple as that. There are a significant groups within the big three and the Indie sector of music companies who know that radio isn't what it used to be and don't even bother at all with it as a promotional method .

[Khem1cal]

Yes i've heard of clear channel as well....but again you don't need them either, If you have the talent, drawing power, and entrepreneurial savvy you're not beholden to any segment of the industry(labels, distributors, marketers, whatever)...make your own path, doesn't mean any type of mainstream success, but many people here and on other boards I frequent, make a nice living with music and make what they want, how they want it, when they want to.

 

A good buddy of mines band was recently signed to a major, they took 2 1/2yrs making their first album and have 6-8mths to release their 2nd under a major and it sounds rushed & cliched unlike their first self-recorded release...Every band I really enjoy that seems to release good album after the next, takes 2+yrs between releases. They are doing this album because they have too and bouncing and going back to an independent produced act after the contract is up, because they hate the baggage that comes with a label.

 

Self-released & promoted bands is what I like to see. YMMV

[Bare Bones]

If I was an original rock band, first & foremost I would work on my live show. It will be the primary source of income for a long time and will get people talking.

 

Off the top of my head, I'd also do the following:

 

1. Make use of street teams to promote gigs

2. Make a high quality video of live performances and use as a promotional tool

3. Share an mp3 of a good original with the music blogs/websites/etc.

4. Find out the local tastemakers/influencers (e.g. college radio, local bloggers) and invite them to your shows

5. Build a strong social media presence where fans can find you & interact with them on a regular basis

6. If you do sell an album, giving something extra that will encourage fans to purchase (instead of steal)

7. Make friends with similar bands in other cities (gig trading, etc.)

8. Offer to do in-store shows, etc. if promoting an album

9. Work on your live show some more

[Scafeets]

 

I'm glad the old way is falling by the wayside, due to sites like grooveshark & programs like limewire/frostwire, etc. I have been able to listen to what "I WANT" when I want it.... that's my .02 cents your opinion may differ..

 

 

 

I agree with most of what you said, including the part about fringe artists having an easier time recording and distributing their music. However, the star-making machinery in 2010 is not all that different than the one in 1970.

The big difference, as you pointed out, is that Grooveshark, Limewire, etc. have replaced taping clubs, off-air recording and the like, where maybe 20% of the "unit sales" were siphoned off in the past. Now, estimates base the piracy rate at anywhere from 60 to 90%. So there's less money in selling little pieces of plastic. BFD.

Your "I have been able to listen to what "I WANT" when I want it..." statement is the consumer mantra and rationale that changed the record business -- but it won't alter the music business landscape much for the performing artist. The OP was asking for opinions on where the "Industry" is headed and what he, as an artist in a rock band, can do to move his career forward.

Fixating on the big, bad record company as a culprit isn't just misguided: It's distracting. I understand that today, as then, a lot of artists just want to eke out a living playing the music they love with integrity and peace of mind. Believe it or not, that's not much different than the way jazz, punk, folk and even a lot of metal artists approached things 40 years ago.

OTOH, if you aspire to create mass-appeal pop music in any genre, the fundamentals remain the same: Learn your craft, create a local buzz, make it regional, and don't get stupid along the way.

Many, many artists have taken the indie route and this is just history repeating itself. Ahmet Ertegun and Jerry Wexler were renegades working against the system when they introduced fringe jazz, blues and R&B artists to the mainstream at Atlantic in the 40s and 50s. Seymour Stein paved the way for the Ramones and Talking Heads at Sire when major labels wouldn't touch them in the 70s. Megaforce brought Metallica, Anthrax and many other metal artists to market as an indie and subsequently made a deal with Sony to bring marketing and distribution strength to their artists.

There are dozens of examples, and in every one of them, the majors bought or aligned with the indies, bringing a much larger audience to the indie labels' artist roster.

That system is still in place and will probably be the typical way any band will sell enough recordings or tickets to be a viable business for a long time coming. There will be exceptions (there always are) but there are no seismic shifts in the best approach for young musicians.

Thinking that online piracy brought Sony or Warner Brothers to their knees is pretty naive. The worst downside wasn't the hundreds of jobs it eliminated in A&R, artist development and promotion: It's the hundreds of artists who are no longer considered for developmental deals every year.

Those artists will still make bad deals -– now with smaller labels, promoters and other assorted “industry types” – and they will get ripped off in equal numbers. This will happen because of desperation, inexperience, stupidity, booze, drugs, egos, lack of education, etc.

So, what I’m saying is: Your ability to listen to other people’s music for free doesn’t significantly change your ability to sell your own music.

[michael_B]

 

Alright so I've read a ton of these threads.... you all have a lot of valuable information and experience which I appreciate and respect. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. However, it seems about 90% of posts are about how the industry sucks, what is NOT working. Yes, things are changing. Yes, there's more music than ever. Yes, labels are collapsing. etc etc etc. What I see is a great opportunity to lead the way for the new skeleton of the music industry, so let's throw out the negativity and pessimism. I wanted to talk a little about: 1- where the industry is headed 2- if you were a young original rock band, what steps would you be taking to grow your brand?

 

 

1. The music industry is (and has been) headed towards the control of the user. Notice I didn't say consumer. Music and film can be seen more as a commodity than individual works.

 

2. Write good songs, play, play, play (in front of people, anywhere), practice, repeat and rinse. Beyond that, let anyone use your music for remix, copying, or anything they want. If there is one thing to be learned from what is happening it's that people want the freedom to be able to do anything they want with music/media. You can't stop that, and in fact, it will be more help to you than "big label support".

 

Tie in other media/artists to your brand. Work with other local artists (and I don't just mean musicians, everyone from digital artists, painters, photographers, comedians, performance artists) to create something unique, something people will want to watch/listen to/talk about, then use that networking system to keep going.

 

Are you going to be rich? No, probably never. Can you make a living? Doubtful. Can you create something interesting that will far outlive you? yes.

 

That's what music is all about.

 

I would add the creating the local buzz is great, but it entirely depends on where your "local" is. If you are a metal band from Upper Michigan, or a jazz funk trio from Sandpoint ID, then you have your work cut out for you.