Should you give your music away? (Article by the cynical musician)

[Poker99]

The Guardian Music Blog has just come out with a new series, where “an anonymous musician writes about the trauma of trying to make it in the music industry” (h/t to Hypebot). The first installment is predictably bleak, but that shouldn’t come as a surprise. Making it in the music industry was never easy and I’d say it has only become harder these days – if only because there isn’t much music industry left and no “new industry” has materialised (what little there is – and is continually being hyped by the usual suspects – is a joke). Contrary to popular belief, most musicians are aware of this, but are willing to give it a shot nonetheless. The comments are also predictable – with people rehashing the old canards about “failing business models” and “new pardigms” and “just doing it because you love to”. It doesn’t help that we are aware these people have no idea and we should just ignore them. A few minutes of reading such comments is enough to make one hang up his guitar, if only because making music for such a-holes is too depressing to contemplate. And yet… It is possible to play underground gigs and regularly come out in the black, despite having to pay for the tech staff, transport and promotional costs. It is possible to sell recordings, at the market going rate, to strangers on the other side of the globe. It is possible to get stopped on the street in a foreign land, by a person you’ve never seen in your life, saying: “Hey, you’re that guy from [name of band].” All of those things have happened and keep happening to me – and I’m no Lady Gaga. Hands up if you’ve heard of me as a musician and not merely a Cynical one. It is possible to make money as an original musical artist and it is possible to have recognition as a musical artist, without any X-factor (no pun intended) involved. What is required is some understanding of how things work and I’m sorry to say that the majority of what is published on the Internet will probably do you more harm than good. All of the issues outlined below are really deserving of further elaboration, but I won’t do that here. I want you to simply become cognisant of them. First the sale, then the scale The way to grow any business is to first make one sale, then two, and then hopefully lots. The dumbest idea being perpetuated is that you should first build up a huge fanbase by giving stuff away and then monetise it by… Yep, those three dots are the big problem. The reason why the idea is so stupid is that you aren’t building a paying customer base. You are training your would-be customers to expect your products for free. You have no idea whether whatever you are producing is valuable enough to pay for, because you’ve never put it to the test. What’s worse, once you start charging, you stand to alienate your existing fans, because you’ve been assuring them all the while (even if tacitly) that they’d be getting your stuff for free. Just ask Spotify. The idea of building scale off of a free offering is something that seems to be an Internet-based invention and I think it has been aptly demonstrated that it is a stupid strategy. Seriously. We’ve only to look at the impressive number of profitable businesses to emerge from applying this idea. Incidentally, YouTube still has to turn a profit. That should tell you something. The only way for this strategy to work is if either: What you actually intend to sell is your “customers’” data to advertisers – that’s how Google and Facebook make their money, You are hoping to build up a customer base that you will then sell to someone who intends to do the former. (Here, Google, Google!) Does either of those seem sensible to a musical artist? Thought not. What you need to develop is a paying fan-base. People who consider your music and associated services worth enough to actually reach into their wallets for. If you aren’t doing that, you will fail. The number of your paying fans is the only scale that matters. You are not a supermarket Supermarkets work by offering a wide selection of products at low prices to a huge number of customers. They can keep stock purchase prices low, because their size means they can obtain sizeable discounts. They can keep their margins low because they have such huge turnovers that they can easily cover their fixed costs and make a considerable profit. The iTunes store is a supermarket. Amazon is a supermarket. You are not. If you have tons of products on sale and a huge paying fanbase, you can make a lot of money while keeping your margins low. Bieber and Gaga (or even Radiohead) can probably do this. You cannot. When your fanbase is relatively small and your product offer is limited, you need to maximise marginal revenue. There’s a limit to how far you can go with this – determined by the price elasticity of demand for your work – but remember that the first law of selling is to charge as much as you can get away with. Believe me, in most situations lowering prices will not make you more competitive. Respect starts with self-respect The reason musicians get screwed over and over again by everyone from their business partners, through “digital innovators”, to their own fans is that we don’t respect ourselves and our work. Too often, we grasp at every promise – no matter how fishy – of future fame, fortune and happiness, if only we… The history of popular music is littered with cautionary tales, but musicians – it seems – never learn. Whenever someone asks you for something now, in return for an uncertain payoff “somewhere in the future”, you can bet that they are trying to put one over you. Bonus points if they are telling you they are your friend and they really dig what you do. If you don’t protect your own interests, nobody else is going to do it for you (unless, at the same time, they are protecting their own interests). It is up to you to secure an equitable position for yourself. It may be that your perception of your product’s value is out-of-sync with that of those you are trying to deal with. In this case you can choose to lower your asking price, come out with something better or look for a different buyer. The first of these options should always be a last resort, unless your first quote was intentionally inflated to leave you room to haggle. If you make a fair case for your self-respect, the sensible people will get it and respect you. Those who won’t are assholes you don’t want to associate with. Pay no attention to them. Protect your environment I’ve written elsewhere that the Internet should have been a godsend to the independent artist, but most of the advantages we’ve gained have been offset by its disruptive tendencies. In short, the Net has enabled new and diverse ways of making money from music, except that it isn’t being made by the actual musicians. We are partly to blame for this and it’s now time for us to start caring about the market environment. If we don’t, everything above won’t make the slightest difference. As musicians who aspire to making money from our art, we have certain common interests. Unfortunately, we aren’t doing nearly enough to secure these. Our business partners in the “old industry” have taken advantage of us for years, mostly because we were falling over each other to be taken advantage of. Now the people in the “new industry” are doing the same and we are simply lining up and bending over. This has to stop. Musicians need to speak out with a collective voice: demanding governments to start enforcing our rights – it’s what we pay taxes for – educating our fans that music has value and should be paid for and counteracting the size advantage of the big businesses in order to secure fairer deals. The “New Golden Age of Music” is an impressive sham and it seems amazing that people still believe in it – even though the evidence is there for all to see. I chalk it down to cognitive dissonance and the little voice that keeps assuring us that we have not in fact been conned; that the great new future is just around the corner. It is not. Unless we change our trajectory, we’re going to smack straight into the bedrock. If that happens, we’ll have to take a large part of the blame.

 

http://thecynicalmusician.com/2011/04/working-as-a-musical-artist/

 

10/10

[richardmac]

I do not believe that musicians "speaking out" will accomplish anything at all. However, the rest of his argument is very persuasive. I'd like to hear someone debate it... I can't. It makes too much sense.

[daddymack]

well, I like his reference to the three little dots...

Because, honestly, until someone comes up with a real way to monetize a fanbase built on freebies, then that is all there is: ... (--- ...)

[Cliftonb]

Oh Snap!

[richardmac]

This is the number one dead horse topic around here, and we keep coming back to it over and over... like a tongue probing the hole where a tooth used to be.

 

I've changed my mind on this topic a dozen times or more, and the only thing that never changes is that I DO believe that you need to have some of your music available for free so people can sample it. But the author makes a strong case that converting freebie fans to paying fans is something that very few artists ever figure out, and I agree with him.

[flatfinger]

that converting freebie fans to paying fans is something that very few artists ever figure out

 

Yup , and some folks are getting pissed off too !!

 

Singer Kapranos, backed Murdoch, saying: “Spotify exists for moral hypocrites – those who are too cowardly to steal music, yet too cheap to pay for it – the kind of person who’d never consider nicking a bag of crisps from a newsagent or siphoning neighbors’ petrol, but who still expects to lift the music that brings them joy for nothing. “Either be honest and be a thief in all areas of your life or decide you don’t steal.

 

from, http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/editor-s-picks/who-will-pay-the-bands-to-make-the-music-in-the-first-place-1.1098255

 

 

 

The stuff at the end of the article from the spotfly suit is laughable ; If had any give a {censored} left over I'd link the two articles that I previously did that said they were in the red and losing their investors cash at an accelerated rate .

 

 

The real acid test will come years down the road ; as long as there is a nice juicy legacy catalog to pilfer than the vampire ISP and tech interest aren't going to change a thing .

There are interest who want to monopolize the distribution and the content creation mechanisms so that they have all artist over a barrel.

We'll see what kind of music comes out of that ....

 

Of course I have plenty to keep me happy from the '70's to the mid '90's , and , despite having considerable education and knowledge investments in music , I luckily have options and won't be forced to be a starving artist .

 

 

Of course the socialist will say that I lack the needed dedication and should live on Friends kindness and sleep on a different couch every night so that I may live the "Art for Arts sake " lifestyle ......... Maybe not.

[BuildingCastles]

I like the part where the author described how to keep people from ripping music from your CD's and then uploading them to rapidshare and other places for everyone to download for free. "Don't give your music away for free, and you can keep people from sharing it on the internet by..."

 

I guess he has three little dots to replace with a real explanation as well.

 

Free is here and it's not going anywhere. We can all sit around and cry about it, or we can see how other industries thrive off the concept of free and make it work for us.

[daddymack]

well... ?

I'm still waiting to see how anybody monetizes 'free'... --- ...

[flatfinger]

well... ? I'm still waiting to see how anybody monetizes 'free'... --- ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But wait ;

 

 

There is an answer !!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Poker99]

 

"Respect starts with self-respect The reason musicians get screwed over and over again by everyone from their business partners, through “digital innovators”, to their own fans is that we don’t respect ourselves and our work." I see self-respect is meaningless and senseless if not measured in terms of monetary gain. I know I'm out of context here but self-respect is multifaceted. I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. I give music away - lyrics, melodies, collaborations - and don't give a rat's ass about it. As long as music is broadcast across the air waves, it's free to any listener. Someone pays royalties but not me. It just isn't in my nature to buy music. To me that's like buying air. So, I write, compose and put it up for anyone to take. Free. Have a nut. Use it or don't, I don't really care. I have a lot of fun writing and composing and that's the return. So, I can't see using lack of self-respect as a reason for not gaining monetarily. I'd call it lack of greed, or being a poor businessman, but pointing to a lack of self respect isn't where I'd go. You gotta have a good measure of that stuff to make the effort through self-discipline and a respectable regimen to become a good musician and writer. Out of the gate, though, expecting people to pony up is a bit toward the greed side of the art form; especially when one can go to the nearest tree and shake out a decent musician these days. I would suggest becoming popular. Play a bunch of paying gigs/venues and always have CDs on hand. That's the usual method. If a person is popular around town it stands to reason that will spread quickly enough on it's own legs. Can't force notoriety any more than you can force song writing. You have it or you don't and no mechanism or method is going to enhance it.

 

 

Its ok and I respect that, but recording music still cost money. Recording GREAT music costs A LOT of money. So I ask you, how do you do that when you can't make a dime with it?

[daddymack]

I would suggest becoming popular. Play a bunch of paying gigs/venues and always have CDs on hand. That's the usual method.

All well and good, but the recent trend is that getting paid well for gigs is getting harder, especially for originals oriented bands. So the process has been short circuited. There is no longer a definitive path to making money gigging. Merch sales generally will not sustain a band at the local level, and touring is becoming less profitable by the minute. Sorry for the reality check, but the world has changed, and those who think they are doing a service by not valuing their art are contributing to this decline.

[Westorbust7]

I can't argue with most of what he said. I have a relative on FB that is around 18 years old. She recently posted some youtube tracks of a band she likes. Her friend commented on it and mentioned that she was going to look it up on iTunes. She commented back "who uses itunes? lol. I'll give you the link to download it for free". I reminded her, as a loving relative and a musician that would actually like to support himself, that artists don't get paid when you download their music for free. I comments were met with perplexing emoticons and a resounding silence.

[tim_7string]

This article made me cheer as I was reading it, but it made me cheer like I would watching an idealized scene in a love story or something completely unrealistic (but very cool) happen in a movie. Kind of a feel-good situation that is just not going to happen in reality.

 

I do agree that it is extremely difficult to turn people that are used to getting something for free into paying customers later.

 

The reality is this: most people are lazy when it comes to music. People in general I mean. They want it to be easy to get music. The easier the better. At one time, the only way a small-town guy like myself could get the music I wanted was to make a trip to the big city or send off for it through the mail. Since the gratification factor was more fun with the trip, I usually would buy a bunch of cassettes and CDs on the weekend and listen to them on the way home.

 

How quaint, huh? Now we can simply look for a song on our cell phones and within seconds, boom, there it is. Why buy it when you can just HAVE it like that? So what if it is streaming? You get to hear it almost as soon as you want to listen to it.

 

But there are still people out there that like to buy their own copy of something. So, I think there is still an audience that can become a fanbase for an artist.

 

I'm getting the impression from the writer that an artist having their own website is preferable to iTunes, because iTunes is a 'supermarket'. Well, yeah. But would you prefer to go to someone's house in the hills, after driving 5 miles in the country, on a bumpy road, knocking on their door just to buy an album you can only get from them or would you prefer to stay in town, drive to a record and CD store and look through all of the albums at your own pace, with your own comfort level?

 

Most people aren't going to want to do the former, therefore your fanbase will be very small.

 

Unless there is some sort of way to network millions of artist websites together, the idea of the world knowing about your lemonade stand with your own particular brand of lemonade isn't really practical.

 

When I started to create my own small press comic books as a teenager, the only reason I even followed through with making them available to people was because I knew there was a way to reach others. There was a market for these books, primarily made up of other small press comic book creators but some were just fans as well.

 

I was one of several people that had access to a 'hub' of sorts, a fanzine that came out that talked about these various people that made their own books from all over the place. I knew that if I submitted my books to the reviewer, as well as advertised the book, I would get fans and readers that would know about it. If I had just concentrated on a local fanbase, I would have sold several copies, but not in the hundreds. Once I created the book and made it available and made it known to others, sales followed as did a small fanbase that was interested in whatever I created next.

 

Is there some website or magazine like this for independent artists, people that are without record deals? Maximumrockandroll used to serve some of this purpose, but their scope is more limited to alternative and punk music. I see several sites and books that try to do this, but is there ONE place, one place for everyone to go to, one place to have their work previewed, reviewed, judged, accepted? I haven't found it yet.

 

If someone can make this place, THAT is when there will be a way to make money from sales of recorded music once again other than at gigs and on a local level.

[Westorbust7]

yep, once people get a taste of free music, you are going to have a helluva time convincing them that at some point, they should pay for it. From my experience, the people that are more likely to actually pay money for you music tend to be the older generation, I would say 40+. The model of fanzines and websites reviewing your material and advertising in them is kind of how it was a decade ago when I first released my CD. It did work, to a small degree. Sold CD's from Hong Kong to Europe to Australia, not a huge amount though. That whole system seems to be dead now, as are my sales. lol.

[Kramerguy]

I agree with much of the article, but...

 

The critical flaw in the premise is that there are still 'fans' (formerly some were labeled groupies). Sure, depending on your approach and brand, you might net an appreciative fan here or there, but where did the groupie go? If fans still exist, shouldn't the occasional groupie still surface? There lies the problem.. Once upon a time, live music was one of only a few rare forms of entertainment, and even rarer- it was a form that people once felt they could take a personal ownership of.. And let's face it: today, people have tons upon of tons of bankable entertainment that requires zero effort and zero dollars. The internet itself offers unlimited entertainment and mostly for free.

 

The biggest assumption that is dead wrong is that the same artist who could 'make it' by building a fan base in coffee houses 15 years ago can repeat the same thing today, where the truth is that only 1% of those who would have succeeded can do the same today. If it was a pipe dream before.. Words cant even describe the near impossibility of today.

 

And that's the optimistic version of my thoughts ... :thumbsup:

[richardmac]

 

I agree with much of the article, but... The critical flaw in the premise is that there are still 'fans' (formerly some were labeled groupies). Sure, depending on your approach and brand, you might net an appreciative fan here or there, but where did the groupie go? If fans still exist, shouldn't the occasional groupie still surface? There lies the problem.. Once upon a time, live music was one of only a few rare forms of entertainment, and even rarer- it was a form that people once felt they could take a personal ownership of.. And let's face it: today, people have tons upon of tons of bankable entertainment that requires zero effort and zero dollars. The internet itself offers unlimited entertainment and mostly for free. The biggest assumption that is dead wrong is that the same artist who could 'make it' by building a fan base in coffee houses 15 years ago can repeat the same thing today, where the truth is that only 1% of those who would have succeeded can do the same today. If it was a pipe dream before.. Words cant even describe the near impossibility of today. And that's the optimistic version of my thoughts ... :thumbsup:

 

 

I'd agree with your assessment. From my own viewpoint as a "coffee house" artist, the "scene" is not what it used to be. There are still places where a good scene still exists, though... however, I do not happen to live in one.

 

It could be that the new music gurus are wrong, AND the author of this entry was wrong. THAT would also be consistent with what I've seen... ie, everyone's pretty much wrong.

 

However, I do have a small but paying gig this weekend, so I'm happy 'bout that.

 

The bottom line is, if you need to write songs, write them. You'll drive yourself nuts trying to figure all this out. Might as well write some music and enjoy yourself.

[flatfinger]

 

The bottom line is, if you need to write songs, write them. You'll drive yourself nuts trying to figure all this out. Might as well write some music and enjoy yourself.

 

 

 

+1:thu:

 

 

 

.

[Poker99]

 

The reality is this: most people are lazy when it comes to music. People in general I mean. They want it to be easy to get music. The easier the better.

 

 

The question is... Do we really want those people as "fans". Do we really need them? What gratification/reward do we get from "fans" like these?

[daddymack]

^ excellent point! But let's take it one step further: If they are not willing to pay for your product, and probably not going to attend a live show, or visit your website, are they even 'fans'? Or just parasites?

 

 

My generation grew up thinking music was an 'essential'. I think the succeeding generations see music more and more as 'disposable'.

[Poker99]

Exactly, its like a "like" on Facebook. Means {censored}. They feel like they are doing ourselves a favor... lol

[Kramerguy]

So then ... Who exactly IS a fan? With originals, we've fizzled out. After 2+ years of tireless promo, gigs (both free and paying) and hordes of other initiaves, we find ourselves only having slowly lost fans over time. New fans come less fast than old ones falling off.. The biggest supporters are the venues and industry folks who've always supported us- and most of them just apologize and display exasperation at how EVERY act they support struggles.

 

So.. I guess I agree- guessing what is next is self defeating. Only thing to do is keep at it.

[richardmac]

You know, I was playing an old Dan Fogelberg song on the piano tonight, and I started thinking about how he died, but people are still playing his music... people like me, on this night. And the thought occurred to me... what happens to my music when I die? What happens to all the music I've released over the course of my life? I can't help but think that when you die, it's got to be comforting to know that not only have you pleased people with your music, but that they'll continue to enjoy it, even after you're gone.

 

That's assuming people have heard your music.

 

One might argue that giving away your music, all of it, all the time, is more likely to result in people enjoying your music when you're gone. As opposed to your kids inheriting boxes of unsold old CD's, for example. Not that this would factor heavily into a person's decision-making process about the free route. But it's an interesting discussion point, to me.

 

I don't know which idea is sadder - a person shouting "look at me" at the top of their lungs and being ignored, or a person trying to sell a glass of tap water for 5 bucks and being snickered at. Those appear to be our two choices.

 

And yes, I AM sounding more and more cynical each day.

[Matximus]

Hard times all over. That's all that can be said, really.

[Westorbust7]

 

Hard times all over. That's all that can be said, really.

 

 

I see what u did thar. I had nice rant for a response. edit.

[daddymack]

You know, I was playing an old Dan Fogelberg song on the piano tonight, and I started thinking about how he died, but people are still playing his music... people like me, on this night. And the thought occurred to me... what happens to my music when I die? What happens to all the music I've released over the course of my life? I can't help but think that when you die, it's got to be comforting to know that not only have you pleased people with your music, but that they'll continue to enjoy it, even after you're gone. That's assuming people have heard your music. One might argue that giving away your music, all of it, all the time, is more likely to result in people enjoying your music when you're gone. As opposed to your kids inheriting boxes of unsold old CD's, for example. Not that this would factor heavily into a person's decision-making process about the free route. But it's an interesting discussion point, to me. I don't know which idea is sadder - a person shouting "look at me" at the top of their lungs and being ignored, or a person trying to sell a glass of tap water for 5 bucks and being snickered at. Those appear to be our two choices. And yes, I AM sounding more and more cynical each day.

millions of people have at least heard of Dan Fogelberg. He didn't die in obscurity. His legacy and his recordings are still available.

You or me? Not...yet.

 

Ever sit down and play something an old bandmate or friend wrote? I do that, because if I don't care about their music, that I spent the time to learn and perform, who else will?