Some General Questions

[Anderton]

I have a few questions myself...the first one being: How does releasing an ALBUM online differ from singles? The reason I ask is I have an album where many of the songs crossfade together...it's designed to provide a single, cohesive listening experience. While some tunes could easily be "singles," the first three tunes, for example, have song > transitional piece > song > crossfades into next song.

 

How do you handle something like that? Do you distribute the three songs as one "piece," or break them up into three songs, or re-edit the album to eliminate the transitions, or...?

[Anderton]

One more question: Are there any online services that allow "bundling" other material with the music? For example, I have a song that's based entirely around loops that I made. Would it be possible to sell the song for, say, 99 cents and a "deluxe musician's version" that includes all the loops for, say, $4.95?

 

Same goes for other ancillary material. Is it possible to "release" a song that also includes perhaps some photos, an MP3 interview with the musicians, lyrics and extensive liner notes, that sort of thing?

 

Thanks for any advice you can give Peter!

[The*Ataris]

This is a subject I've done a lot of thinking about in the last couple of days. My band is releasing an EP in April and I'm pretty sure we're not going to replicate 1000 CD's like last time. Yeah, we made our money back, but I just don't think it's the right medium to release material anymore. I believe a lot of independent artists are going to start seriously experimenting with digital releases in the near future.

 

Yet, we can't completely abandon a physical product either. There are newspapers, magazines, and blogs that will all be receiving this release. There's also radio, promoters, publicists, festivals--all sorts of elements in the music business that aren't going to bother downloading our music. They need a physical product, and we're going to deliver it; however, we'll be duplicating a couple hundred CD-R's this time to accommodate this need instead.

 

We're also interested in appeasing the vinyl crowd too, who are surprisingly strong in number in recent years. Though, if we end up pressing vinyl, there will be a digital download coupon included as well (best of both worlds). A small run of 7" vinyl might be pretty fun...and profitable.

 

Ultimately, the most important thing I think we need to do is create a real website. Our band has been together for a little over a year (this will be our second release) and we've gotten by with a Myspace account all this time. Though, I doubt we'll be giving up on Myspace any time soon, I feel a really full-fledged, interactive website will be the key to distributing online music. It's a place where we'll share lyrics, artwork, document our recording process, share demos and live videos/recordings, etc. Our EP will be available with a promotional code (acquired with a physical release) or a donation set up through a paypal account. Yeah, we'll have stuff up on iTunes and whatnot, but I want our music distributed through a central media hub where we can immerse our audience in more than just a couple mp3's.

[The*Ataris]

 

And in fact, I have a few questions myself...the first one being: How does releasing an ALBUM online differ from singles? The reason I ask is I have an album where many of the songs crossfade together...it's designed to provide a single, cohesive listening experience. While some tunes could easily be "singles," the first three tunes, for example, have song > transitional piece > song > crossfades into next song. How do you handle something like that? Do you distribute the three songs as one "piece," or break them up into three songs, or re-edit the album to eliminate the transitions, or...?

 

 

This is another issue I've thought a lot about, and I've pretty much concluded that the music industry is reverting back to what it was in the 50's and early 60's, when 45's dominated music sales. Bands didn't release LP's until they had enough success with their singles to justify it.

 

I can definitely see such a model becoming popular again. Of course, certain bands will keep album-oriented releases alive, but I can't picture it being it being popular in mainstream music or with new bands, for that matter.

 

I love segues between songs, but I think online music sales with dictate clear edits between songs in order to be effective. If you feel strongly enough about the cohesiveness of your three songs, perhaps you should release them as one mp3?

[PeterTuneCore]

Thanks for the introduction and the warm welcome, Craig. And thanks for kicking things off with questions! I'll tackle them one at a time:

 

We're stuck with the word "album," and there seems no way around it. Even when digital retailers call them something else (iTunes calls them "playlists"), everyone seems to think of them as albums. That's both a good and a bad thing, because the word is loaded.

 

The general rule for almost all major digital retailers is that the basic unit of music isn't the song, it's the album: a "single" is just an album with one song. An "EP" is an album with a few songs. They do this because songs don't have UPCs, only albums have UPCs. The UPC provides the "translation" between how the stores track sales and how they report them to the distributors and to places like SoundScan for the "charts." Even though iTunes, for instance, has their own internal number for all albums, they still match that number to a UPC, and just like in a brick-and-mortar store, you can only put a UPC on a package, a physical disc.

 

Songs, on the other hand, have their own tracking number the ISRC. Some stores (GroupieTunes is one to which we distribute) don't even bother with UPCs, they only track ISRCs and thus individual song sales--but how, then, do you group a bunch of songs into an album? That shows the problem on the other side, especially when people want to sell a song only as part of an album sale (like those who have enormous, 60-minute single-track songs that would totally be unfair to give away for $0.99).

 

So we're stuck, damned if we group things into albums and damned if we don't. So the industry in general has replicated the music business of old, where everything was on a physical product, so everything gets a UPC and individual songs also get ISRCs.

 

To combat the unfairness of tracks selling for one price only even if a track can be 2 seconds or 60 minutes long, most stores institute a cutoff. iTunes, for instance, has a policy that any song over 10 minutes is automatically set UNABLE TO SELL as an individual track at any price: the only way to get the song is to buy the whole album, and the album is automatically priced at something normal for an "album's worth" of music ($9.99).

 

It's not a perfect solution. At TuneCore, we've distributed albums by folks who make sound effects that can have 300 or more tracks but only 74 total minutes of music! The cutoff model generally makes it so that X minutes of music costs about Y dollars all the time, give or take.

 

That means how you split up your music is up to you: if you were to send your album through TuneCore for distribution, you simply rip the files however you want. Put in the break points where you'd like, or not at all! Feel free to send it all as one enormous file, but then you'd have a "single"--an album with one song, albeit an hour long. Few people do that. They'd rather put in break points and upload individual files, trusting that people who buy the whole album will play the tracks back in order and set their players so there's no gap.

 

It's up to you, and choice is a good thing!

 

--Peter

peter@tunecore.com

[PeterTuneCore]

 

One more question: Are there any online services that allow "bundling" other material with the music? For example, I have a song that's based entirely around loops that I made. Would it be possible to sell the song for, say, 99 cents and a "deluxe musician's version" that includes all the loops for, say, $4.95? Same goes for other ancillary material. Is it possible to "release" a song that also includes perhaps some photos, an MP3 interview with the musicians, lyrics and extensive liner notes, that sort of thing?

 

 

I've seen that before, but rarely as "bundling." It's generally set up as a whole new product. They seem to be replicating the way movies used to be sold: you can buy one version, or you can REBUY the whole thing as a "special edition" with cut scenes and commentary and more.

 

An interesting parallel is "clean" vs. "uncut" versions of songs. Almost everywhere, you have to buy them both to hear them both: you can't save any money by buying just the one and getting the other "bundled" with it, but then, the presumption is that no one really wants the clean AND the uncut version of a song, so it might not be the best way to predict things to come.

 

As for other things, that's catching on big time! RIGHT NOW, you can have a .PDF booklet delivered to iTunes with your album. It's pretty cool! We do it all the time.

 

--Peter

peter@tunecore.com

[PeterTuneCore]

 

This is a subject I've done a lot of thinking about in the last couple of days...Ultimately, the most important thing I think we need to do is create a real website.

 

 

There's a lot to quote in your response, The*Ataris, but this one sentence is key. The great thing about where the industry is going lies just in this: you can ASSEMBLE parts you need from individual providers, so you get what you want and no more. Once you had to go to a label and then they did it all, but they took a huge cut and your rights.

 

Want digital distribution worldwide? Great, here's TuneCore and some other companies, do what you want. Need CDs made? Here's another company for that. The actual LABEL SERVICES a band needs to succeed are themselves becoming more and more distributed, which means competition, lower prices, no monopolies and the chance for you to tailor your efforts to your needs on your own terms.

 

--Peter

peter@tunecore.com

[Standard8]

To me, buying music online means going to Amazon and buying the CD. For me, the world of mp3's and ipods and all that is a shark tank. When the house gets struck by lightning, or a virus destroys the computer, or the laptop gets knocked over, $1000's in music can be vaporized. This happened to my old roomate when her Mac fell off a coffee table. Years of photos and music, gone. I have another friend in a similar situation due to a virus. There's something about having the CD in your hand, then ripping it to your music player and going from there. Sure, CD's get scratched or "borrowed" forever, but when you can rip it once and then put it away into your collection, you are a much more powerful consumer. Sure, Itunes I think has something where if you've paid for the song, you can download it again any time if something happens, which you can't do with a CD if it gets scratched or lost.

 

Just about everyone I know would rather have the CD in their hand than on their hard drive.

 

I do see the greatness of it, being able to sell an album to someone in Japan without a record company to make it happen. And it's good for mass exposure opportunity for bands. But I don't see how it's a big money-maker, in a way that replaces CD's. Maybe in the next 10 years or so, with this new generation coming up, but right now, I just don't see what all the fuss is about. But I'm looking forward to keeping up with this thread to maybe change my mind, I am open minded about it all. Thanks for taking your time to participate for all of our benefit.

[wagdog]

 

To me, buying music online means going to Amazon and buying the CD. For me, the world of mp3's and ipods and all that is a shark tank. When the house gets struck by lightning, or a virus destroys the computer, or the laptop gets knocked over, $1000's in music can be vaporized. This happened to my old roomate when her Mac fell off a coffee table. Years of photos and music, gone.

 

 

This is a very real hazard, and I wonder how many people have lost music due to computer malfunctions.

 

Fortunately there is a solution, and that is of course to back up your collection. I do it every once in a while, but I seriously doubt most casual users do.

 

And this brings up a point that I think online retailers are missing; they can sell this ability to deliver your music back to you if you lose it. Do any of them do this now? I don't know of any, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen - I haven't heard of it.

 

It's an interesting concept because I've bought numerous "albums" (sorry) as vinyl and then again as CD's (way back before downloading was popular). Is it fair to me, as a consumer to have purchased this music twice?

[PeterTuneCore]

Standard8's distrust is difficult to address. In the end, everything one invests in requires protection. I don't know if it's been tested in a claim, but if you bought $1000 worth of music from iTunes, then your house burned down taking your computer and drives with it, but you were insured--could you claim that back?

 

I honestly have no idea. It'd be an interesting test case!

 

--Peter

peter@tunecore.com

[Anderton]

Peter, I have another question about distribution. I know the "internet standard" is stereo, 128kbps MP3. Does any site offer the option to provide multiple versions of the same tune? In other words, if you submitted, say, 128kbps MP3, 320kbps MP3, and 320kbps WMA, would the company pick only one or could you let the consumer make the decision?

[Poker99]

1- People don't buy music from bands they don't know.

 

2- You need radio airplay and standard promo to be known.

 

3- Distribution, on the web or elsewhere, is useless if you are unknown.

[sabriel9v]

1- People don't buy music from bands they don't know. 2- You need radio airplay and standard promo to be known. 3- Distribution, on the web or elsewhere, is useless if you are unknown.

 

I can back all of your statements, but for number one I'd say people don't buy music from bands they haven't made a connection with. Which can require two, radio airplay and standard promo (this includes live shows). And for number three I'd say distribution is not necessarily useless, but it's much harder...but in the end it kind of can be futile if you don't market yourself at all

[PeterTuneCore]

 

Peter, I have another question about distribution. I know the "internet standard" is stereo, 128kbps MP3. Does any site offer the option to provide multiple versions of the same tune? In other words, if you submitted, say, 128kbps MP3, 320kbps MP3, and 320kbps WMA, would the company pick only one or could you let the consumer make the decision?

 

 

Actually, that's true of iTunes. Right now, iTunes sells music both in their "traditional" 128 kbps .AAC (stereo) format, which includes DRM, and at their "iTunes Plus" format, which has NO DRM, and is 256 kbps .AAC files. You can choose which one you want (note, if you don't go with 'iTunes Plus,' you can't take advantage of iTunes's Ringtone program).

 

I suspect more stores will go for that as time goes on.

 

--Peter

peter@tunecore.com

[John Ellis]

I've thought hard about the post show CD sales but after reading this thread it occured to me....

 

 

What if your cover charge included a normal ticket stub that has a serial number. The serial number allows you access to download that particular show.

 

After maybe 2 downloads that serial number no longer works.

 

It would give you time to clean up some of those not so niceties that are inevitable in a live setting.

[sabriel9v]

I've thought hard about the post show CD sales but after reading this thread it occured to me.... What if your cover charge included a normal ticket stub that has a serial number. The serial number allows you access to download that particular show. After maybe 2 downloads that serial number no longer works. It would give you time to clean up some of those not so niceties that are inevitable in a live setting.

 

This sounds like a great idea for bands that rely heavily on their live performances to boost their reputation and sales

[smross]

Peter, my band is about to release an EP. Why should I use Tunecore instead of CD baby to distribute?

 

If used Tunecore to digitally distribute the CD then how long would it take from the time I submitted the songs to when they were available to buy on itunes?

 

Also, one of our songs from the CD has swearing in it, does Tunecore or any of its partners offer a service to edit explicit songs so that people that don't want swearing can buy the entire CD?

 

Thanks

[PeterTuneCore]

This is tough, guys, I don't want to do a blow-by-blow comparison between TuneCore and CD Baby. We're very different companies in many ways, but even so I couldn't do it without ultimately sounding like a big TuneCore booster. I'm not on this forum to promote my company, but to help folks answer questions about digital distribution, the stores, the industry.

 

All that having been said, you and all musicians have to decide what "success" means to you. For some folks, just selling a few albums to friends and family is fine. Others only want to be in iTunes for the thrill of it (it is the 3rd largest music retailer in the world, including brick-and-mortar stores!). For others, nothing less than being the next Madonna or Kanye West defines "success."

 

So it's a question of what you want. The rest is gamble. That is, you don't have to gamble at all, if "success" for you is hanging out with your friends in the garage rocking out some tunes, or playing a club twice a month. The only investment there is your time and the cost of the instruments. If you want to tour, you gamble a lot more of your time and money, in the hopes that touring becomes a lifestyle you can sustain--live off your music.

 

TuneCore costs about $30 to get your album up on iTunes, and as I reported, on average people are getting $365 back (that's over about 18 months, by the way). For a LOT of people, an AVERAGE of a tenfold return on investment without signing away any rights is a dream come true. Very little risk, huge reward.

 

If that level of success isn't enough, no company but a major label is going to do for you--and the risks there are huge, the rewards very high, the chances of becoming a massive star are slim. HOWEVER, you can still go with TuneCore, get on iTunes and the other stores, take your sales results and use them to invest in the band--make posters, set up gigs, put gas in the van's tank, or even use the sales data to prove to labels that they should sign you.

 

It's your choice what path you want to take!

 

--Peter

peter@tunecore.com

[Anderton]

I've thought hard about the post show CD sales but after reading this thread it occured to me.... What if your cover charge included a normal ticket stub that has a serial number. The serial number allows you access to download that particular show. After maybe 2 downloads that serial number no longer works. It would give you time to clean up some of those not so niceties that are inevitable in a live setting.

 

 

Great idea...another example of innovative thinking.

[Anderton]

This is tough, guys, I don't want to do a blow-by-blow comparison between TuneCore and CD Baby. We're very different companies in many ways, but even so I couldn't do it without ultimately sounding like a big TuneCore booster. I'm not on this forum to promote my company, but to help folks answer questions about digital distribution, the stores, the industry.

 

And that paragraph is a perfect example of why I'm happy that you agreed to do this thread.

 

However, those checking out this thread should know that I will be releasing some music via TuneCore in the future and will report back on the results here - good, bad, or indifferent. Of course, we welcome feedback from those who've tried different companies, and your experiences with them.

 

As to the $365 - I remember all too well lines like "recoupable against royalties" and starting off well in debt to a record company before an album even got released. I think one advantage of something like TuneCore may not be so much that everyone's going to make a lot of money, but that people aren't going to go into debt trying to make it.

 

Ultimately (and this was true back in the days of monolithic record companies, too) success is totally up to the marketing skills of the artist. Record companies only did so much, and today, distribution only does so much. What makes the difference is people who like your music so much they send links to their friends and talk about it online...they create a buzz. That's all that matters these days, and it seems that more often than not, the cream does rise to the top...or at least, doesn't sink like a stone to the bottom

[BlueStrat]

 

There's also radio, promoters, publicists, festivals--all sorts of elements in the music business that aren't going to bother downloading our music.

 

 

Actually, most radio stations are now going to a hard drive format if they haven't already. One radio station that plays my stuff downoads stuff off the internet for airplay for their local/indie artist features.

[BlueStrat]

 

Of course, we welcome feedback from those who've tried different companies, and your experiences with them.

 

 

I've used CD Baby for a couple or years now, and seem to sell 1-2 CDs a week without lifting a finger to promote myself. (I probably should, I just don't have a lot of time and it's really about number 22 on the top 20 things I have to do every day).

[PeterTuneCore]

I won't try to predict the future of radio play technology, but one thing is certain: radio stations will shift to whatever is easiest, least expensive, gives them the most control and data, and which improves efficiency. That's something computers are very, very good at. So if pressed, I'd say that an all-digital, hard-drive (or distributed virtual storage system "data cloud") system is in the cards.

 

--Peter

peter@tunecore.com

[Anderton]

I think a lot of radio stations are pretty much like that now...some Central Scrutinizer devises a playlist, which are obtained via satellite and broadcast locally.

 

I certainly wouldn't depend on radio airplay (in the conventional sense) to get exposure, except perhaps on some college stations.

[slight-return]

 

I have a few questions myself...the first one being: How does releasing an ALBUM online differ from singles? The reason I ask is I have an album where many of the songs crossfade together...it's designed to provide a single, cohesive listening experience.

 

 

It's kinda funny, when you think abt the origin of "album" how weve broken stuff up, then "glue" them back together (but on the gripping hand, performance has been sectioned pre-recording...I wonder if the diff now is that we, maybe think in terms of hard time limits that were imposed by some of our media)

- and it sure doesn't fit every model...Like petertunecore was saying, some systems now use "album only", I saw some surbahar alaps at a track-price and now notice theyve gone to album pricing (As we are looking at 30min tracks)

 

Same challenges, I suppose with music-based distro models for audiobook/audiodrama (specialist like Audible don't use a flattened-pricing model so it's a non-issue) where a single program can exceed 20 hours

 

 

Artistically, if you feel it's a cohesive unit...maybe think about it as a "suite"