Sharing Music For Free

[richardmac]

we'll never know what music would have been like without the advent of a high-rolling music industry, but my personal belief is that we would be hearing a lot more diversity, there'd be a greater appreciation of a wider range of styles, there would be a larger number of highly skilled performers, and there would be less people in the industry that are not musicians - meaning music would be owned and operated my musicians...

 

 

If we did not have the music industry, what would things REALLY look like? In a way, I think things would look like they do right now! You'd have a hundred million amateur and semi-pro musicians out there, all doing music as a hobby. The public has always been "sort of" interested in music. It does not mean as much to the general public as it does to musicians. It might mean a lot to the 16 year old girl who is struggling with her self image and finds that one artist that makes her feel like everything is going to be alright, but for the vast majority of people, music is simply a neat soundtrack. And this is becoming more and more true every single day. How many people used to sit down on their couch, in front of their stereo, where both speakers were set up to provide stereo imaging, and listened to a complete album? How many people do that NOW? I don't mean musicians, I mean general public? Music is competing with ALL media now, and it's getting its ass kicked. It's been reduced to commodity status, like water or electricity.

 

Getting back on point, I think things would have been far worse without the music industry. Without a mechanism in place to spread the word about great artists, you would never have heard of them. I would only know about local acts, probably. That would have been terrible.

[made of stone']

I agree with Richardmac, records nowadays are being bought mostly by those people who really care about music. Most don't care enough to actually sit and listen, let alone PAY for it.

 

I've been in the music business for a few years, and I've seen how indie records sales have been plumetting. Many labels have gone under and many more will. It's sad.

[Poker99]

If we did not have the music industry, what would things REALLY look like? In a way, I think things would look like they do right now! You'd have a hundred million amateur and semi-pro musicians out there, all doing music as a hobby. The public has always been "sort of" interested in music. It does not mean as much to the general public as it does to musicians. It might mean a lot to the 16 year old girl who is struggling with her self image and finds that one artist that makes her feel like everything is going to be alright, but for the vast majority of people, music is simply a neat soundtrack. And this is becoming more and more true every single day. How many people used to sit down on their couch, in front of their stereo, where both speakers were set up to provide stereo imaging, and listened to a complete album? How many people do that NOW? I don't mean musicians, I mean general public? Music is competing with ALL media now, and it's getting its ass kicked. It's been reduced to commodity status, like water or electricity. Getting back on point, I think things would have been far worse without the music industry. Without a mechanism in place to spread the word about great artists, you would never have heard of them. I would only know about local acts, probably. That would have been terrible.

 

 

I agree. I would like to add something though... The industry made a big mistake marketing singles instead of bands. People are losing interest in bands. They want the hot new single, then they get tired of it and want another one. They have no loyalty. Major labels contributed to this by not letting bands enough time to develop.

[richardmac]

I think part of that is because the more media saturated we get, the more instant gratification entrenched we become. The idea of listening to an entire CD now is sort of becoming like the idea of sitting down for an hour and listening to a radio broadcast - you know, mom, dad, kids all sitting around the radio listening to a variety show in 1942 or something like that. I think that's one reason why the industry has been so into singles and I think that's more true now than ever before.

 

The difference is that we still listen to music (or talk radio) in the CAR, so those 30 - 40 minute drives are prime time for listening to entire CD's. But I'll be honest - I don't even do that much nowadays. I set my iPod to "random" and it's like having my own radio station that doesn't suck. And I've got 800 songs in my "radio station" playlist, unlike the real radio stations here in Tampa, where I'm fairly convinced that they only have like 50 songs that they rotate all week long.

 

But ironically I buy more music NOW than I did 10 years ago, because iTunes and the Internet make it so darn EASY. I buy music via iTunes, and if they don't have it, I go to amazon and send away for it.

 

People will always "like" music, but just like radio took a back seat to TV, so is music taking a back seat to the media overload combination of Cable, Gaming, The Internet, and all that stuff. That's one reason I don't understand why some people bash open mics - a good open mic is a gathering of people who love music and play music for each other. But now I'm waaay off topic.

[1350]

Richard, you bring up some interesting points though some remind me of beating a dead horse for the better part of the last 30 years or more. It isn't a bad thing, it just reminds me how music industry leaders still have a stranglehold on what people think is available to them.

Media saturation as you described (maybe not quite as accurately as you would have liked) leads to a more selective process, not generalized one. It is precisely why singles lead to more sales of full CD's or downloads of entire collections vs individual selections rotating out faster than one changes their mind. It is why you say you buy more music now than you did 10 years ago just on a different platform - but you probably still rip a couple of disc's from time to time. We all do. We don't want to drag around our CD's everywhere we go but we have them, bought and paid for.

In respects to Cabsy and his take on "how to" is what I see most often as of late. It would be great to see the old generation of those of us who did listen to an entire LP from start to finish find new ways to market music. It is passion based and humans are not devoid of passion, in fact, I see people who have tapped back into a passion based life for the first time in over 30 years. We have new ways of accessing it and maybe it is time to see the monoliths of the record industry rethink what this industry is all about.

[richardmac]

Well, I can't speak for other folks, but here's how, for example, I ended up buying a CD - in this case, Imogen Heap - Speak For Yourself. I was on iTunes checking out what was popular in genres of music that I don't normally listen to, and I stumbled onto her song "Hide and Seek" and I was blown away by it. Totally different than anything I normally listen to. So I found the whole CD and the 30 second song samples sounded just interesting enough for me to want to buy the whole CD, which I did. I've since grown to love most of the songs on it, but there are a few I don't like at all. I made a play list for my iPod that had the songs I liked (skipping the ones I didn't like.) And my iPod sits in my car connected to the stereo.

 

This led me to explore her other work and I found her first CD (didn't buy it because it sounded like it sucked) and her "Frou Frou" project (which I bought, and which is really good.)

 

So in a way, yes, a single prompted me to buy a CD, which prompted me to explore and buy another CD, and now I'm a fan. In terms of putting a playlist together for my iPod, skipping the songs I didn't like, I used to do that in the old days - with my cassette deck.

[jr81212]

How many people used to sit down on their couch, in front of their stereo, where both speakers were set up to provide stereo imaging, and listened to a complete album? How many people do that NOW? I don't mean musicians, I mean general public?

 

 

I don't think most non musicians did that ever. How many used albums and tapes had the "hit" track just about worn away from playing and replaying and the rest untouched. Lots in my experience. At least now I can sell my own CD on Amazon and through forums let the world know that it exists.

I really like the OPs Idea of writing a 1 min song every day , what a great exercise! I used to try to write one a week with a colaborator but now I just wait for inspiration and try to record it when it comes!

[BlueStrat]

 

I don't think most non musicians did that ever. How many used albums and tapes had the "hit" track just about worn away from playing and replaying and the rest untouched. Lots in my experience.

 

 

I don't know. My parents used to have one of those giant 27 inch TV/stereo consoles, and they'd put a stack of LPs on the thing and let it play all day. Not sitting around all day, but it was an entire album side playing at once. And then when cassette tapes came out, it was even harder to skip over son gs because it was so hit and miss, it was easier just to let the darn thing play.

[richardmac]

I never said MOST people did it, jr. I said "how many people used to do it compared to today?" I knew tons of people who did listen to music that way and they weren't all musicians.

 

My grandparents had one of those all in one monsters, too - and eventually I inherited it. It was a beautiful piece of furniture - real actual honest to God wood - they didn't do particle board back in those days. AM/FM, record player, and color TV, and stereo speakers.

 

On the other hand, I will say this - I have never seen so many iPods and iPod clones in my entire life. EVERYONE seems to have one. So maybe people are listening to just as much music, but they're listening in different ways. Maybe I'm wrong about how important music is to people.

 

I actually own two iPods - the iPod mini, which I take in my car and to the Y, and the iPod Touch, which I use in my day job as a Palm replacement. I had to get my tire fixed today and I sat in the dirty waiting area with two hicks watching NASCAR on TV. I was watching "The Corbomite Maneuver" on my iPod Touch. Which has nothing to do with this thread. Sorry...

[Barry Wuthrich]

 

but doing things for money is what has put music in this {censored} state... when no money can be made, true passion comes forth... not prostitution

 

 

I don't agree that making $ on something you are passionate about is prostitution.

 

Most people don't pick their job or career. They ask themselves or their guidance counselor, "What does the world need that I can learn to do to put food in my belly, clothes on my back, and a roof over my head?"

 

If the world needs engineers, we study engineering. If the world needs computer programmers, we study that....etc. etc.

 

In my opinion, that's the wrong question. The question you should ask is, "What am I passionate about?", because, what the world needs is more people who are passionate about what they do everyday to make $$. Then work is more than just a place you go to everyday so you can wait around for 5 o'clock, or for Saturday, or for a paycheck at the end of the week.

 

It's not prostitution. It's capitalism! Capitalizing and making money doing something you are passionate about. Capitalism is not a dirty word, it's what makes America a country where you can live the American dream.

 

When you run out of money and try to pay your rent with passion.....That's called prostitution. Money is not evil. It can actually motivate you to further develop your passion for music to a point where people will gladly pay you for an opportunity to hear your songs. If they aren't willing to do that, you need more passion, not less.

 

The big labels have a recipe they want you to follow and a mold they want you to fit into. That could be considered prostitution if it doesn't fit your passion.

 

But you don't need a record company to sell your music anymore. You just need someone with 80 cents to spare and similar taste to yours.

 

No offense. Just my opinion.

[music_4_music]

i would suggest taking the best ones and putting them up

[BlueStrat]

 

but doing things for money is what has put music in this {censored} state... when no money can be made, true passion comes forth... not prostitution

 

 

 

No, everyone and their cocker spaniel being able to record, make CDs and give their music away for little to nothing is what has made it a {censored} hole.

 

When no money can be made...it becomes a hobby like building birdhouses or model airplanes, a completely amatuer endeavor.

[richardmac]

It's really, to me, a matter of value. I'm fairly convinced that it's still possible to sell CD's. I'm convinced because I'm doing it. Not in large quantities, mind you, but then again I don't play to large crowds. I'm a solo singer/songwriter with backing tracks.

 

If people like your music and your CD is inexpensive (I sell mine for $5,) you can sell CD's. If you can sell CD's for $5, then it does not make sense (to me) to give them away. I also allow free downloading of a few of my songs online. That's not a problem at live shows... they hear me, they like it or they don't, they buy a CD or they don't, they toss some money in the tip jar or they don't.

 

I've considered giving away my music before, but now that I've gotten better at pitching it and presenting it live, and I'm selling CD's, I would not give it away (aside from a few free downloads on my site.)

 

BlueStrat is right - Everyone and their dog can make a CD. But my experience has been that if people like your music, you CAN still sell CD's. Maybe not for $15 (in the circles that I play,) but you can still sell them.

[Fallacy]

Viral Marketing. Like said above, attention to your art is the new commodity, and the self-promotion is a battle against the musicians in the first place.
Self-Promotion takes so much time and effort away from your art that you get lost or misplaced within it.

You could always hire a PR firm, or marketing company. Create a viral video for one of your best songs and try and go from there.

But honestly, do you think a new disposable song every day is the answer towards our A.D.D generalized society? Most don't put forth the effort to try and listen to a variety of new music, instead they listen to what they know.

I ask because i'm curious, not asking to mock.

It seems like a lot of hit and miss, if you don't capture the disposable audience with your "pop hit" can you try and lure them back every day with a hit/miss equation? I've found standing up on a soap box and screaming LISTEN TO ME doesn't work either.

WHile I admire the dedication it takes to make a song every day, as it'll teach u the art pretty quick, I question about using such disposable mantras that are used as a basis for your song.

[space gargler]

 

"unique developments" may not be helpful in general enhancement of musical culture as, being unique, they arent disseminated

 

 

why would that be?

[music_4_music]

while i agree with

[music_4_music]

Barry Wuthrich if you are passionate about something then start doing it for a living it take away the passion. its like before your 16 and you really want to drive well once your 16 or older you want others to drive its our nature to want to do things that we can't do or can do really well for money but in the end its the same out come

[HKSblade1]

There's a difference between passionate hobbyists and passionate professionals.

 

Photographers- some like to just shoot some footage, some are pro's and very good at what they do. They are just as passionate and skilled but also have experience in a very PRO marketplace. They DO NOT work for free, but to say they are not passionate or driven is just stupid.

 

Recording artists and production specialists are as passionate as well and charge for their services.

 

Car drivers- anyone can drive, but the PRO's do all the stunts, drive at incredible speeds, no safe distances.

 

Pro athletes all start as kid dreamers. They are not less passionate but professional level players understand the profession is also a business, and more career ( job).

 

I don't see why music does not get the same respect. You can mix tracks in audacity all day long. It does not make you a pro engineer or pro recording artist. THE BEST usually get the rewards for their craft. It's the public that does less to reward artists these days.

 

You won't find Dale Jr running a race for free or Peyton Manning playing for the Colts for free. They work hard, train and constantly have to worry about their career lifespan which is not always that long since the guys on the other end are paid to not make the quarterback so successful.

 

Should sound familiar with most recording artists. A few have taken advantage as long term record touring pro's, now wanting to stick it to the man ( the ones that MADE their success ). Easy to do when you already had the right business model and the pre defined audience as a recording artist with a label.

 

But Yes, there is a difference between PRO and amateur, hobbyist, enthusiast. But just like any other career, if you have no drive or passion, it shows.

[music_4_music]

by all means that is very true i understand

[tocs100]

I thought this thread was going to be about "How many songs should I post for free?"

I think if you have a back-catalog of unreleased stuff--as long as it represents where you're at now--is good to post for free.

My band, Revealer, has got one song up (see sig) that was recorded over a year ago with a different drummer and bassist. It's good enough for a "taste," and the newest, 2008, version will be different enough to warrant selling.

[Tribute2Johnny]

a song a day?

 

sounds like this guy's project: http://www.paleo.ws/

[ciperlone]

Interesting post...

You should check for Tom Cosm, and follow his way of doing things, if you want to make music for free.
If you noticed, he doesn't make 1 music per day. And no one wants to hear an artist that made 365 songs in one year. One wants to hear a great song, even if it took one year to made. But what it is a great song? Well, that's another issue. But if there is voice in the song, it usually helps.

I can also make a song per day, but I don't think that is useful for me and/or for the people who want to hear my music. I noticed that a good song usually takes a lot of work and a lot of time, even if it starts with a simple (or lame) melody. Actually, that are many great hits that start with lame melodies, but the arrangements made that song look good.

No good music should ever be for free.

If good music is for free at the start, and it goes viral, it will eventually generates money.
The problem it for us musicians to know... what is actually good music?

P.S.: I know, I sound like a greedy person that only thinks about money. Well, I concluded that, in order to survive, and in order to following my passion, I have to make my passion creates money. Because I'm not a rich guy, and I need to eat and a place to sleep. Oh, and I also need to buy a new midi keyboard and new strings. (Too late to ask santa to offer that to me...) When money falls from the sky, I promise to change the way I think about money and music!

[slight-return]

 

why would that be?

 

 

by definition and nature of "unique" - it's a superlative

there is no "kinda unique", or "very unique"

 

root of unique is "uni" - one -- there is only one of em

[Instrospection]

 

but doing things for money is what has put music in this {censored} state... when no money can be made, true passion comes forth... not prostitution

 

 

And doing them for no money has made music lose it's value. Most artists don't have to spend anything, and the audience is reacting to that. Alot of the productions, themselves, have not done most bands any favours, because if it's just the song that people are reacting to, and not the production, the overall package....then why haven't four track demos lit up the charts? It should be ultimately about the song, but music is also about the behind the scenes things, too, as they say, it's who you know. But getting top notch production and engineering and a top flight mixing and mastering engineer costs alot of money, because there is a reason they do that and not us, and dare I say that DIY productions have had people unwillingly do the recording or mixing work themselves. I've heard it many times before and it actually sounds contemptuous of an audience, because recorded music was supposed to replicate the live experience, but with multitracking, it became about studio recording, too....which is great. I'm a big fan of overdubbing, obviously. But to me, it sounds like musicians are becoming more and more contemptuous of the production, and you just can't get the sound that someone else did by buying a Marshall amp, a Gibson guitar, this and that and that and then expecting to get good. I've heard Marshall amps that sound great....and then some terrible. It could be as simple as a bad tube or some bad capacitors. But you can never afford to coast on what your ears tell you.....and in that sense, I have to ask alot of bands if they really believe in what they've released, or whether they're "just happy to have it out there".

 

And i've always been a proponent of DIY---but educated DIY. I'm a firm believer that it's always about what your ears do for the recording and the equipment, rather than the vice versa. You can take some less expensive equipment and make great albums....if you're committed. Look at Jason Falkner.....his home studio releases could compete with any big major budget recording. But he's studied up on how to get better, and it shows. I don't like it when people say "oh, you can throw up an SM57 for anything"....because it's a good live mic for live sound (drums, and loud guitar), but i've found that for vocals and acoustic guitars, it has such a lifeless, nasally midrange that becomes MORE difficult to get a good mix from, because you're fighting what was never there from the mic itself. Then it becomes cliche to slap brickwall limiting or trigger everything, and this has also become a lazy way to make records. At some point, it becomes the bad habits that are popularized.....even in budget recordings.

 

If you eternally want to offer free and not get paid anything, then fine. If you eventually want to attach a price tag to what you are doing, then good luck in elevating "free" to "paid". For everyone who tries to offer higher quality music by investing in better gear, pressing up records, paying for art design, going into bigger studios, and trying to do everything, most of us can't really justify too much of free. Free doesn't pay for much of that. I've never ran anything like the majors did on any sort of major budget, but if you saw even the low budget costs in pressing up vinyl and plating and mastering shipping and trying to promo and do it the old way (sending out promos to zines, newspapers, campus radio, specialty markets) instead of doing it the EASY way....well, the easy way hasn't sold people a particular amount of records. My releases always do better in real stores, that's because people read the reviews and interviews and hear the radio play, and that's the old way of doing things.

 

Good luck trying to promo places with MP3's. Alot of places don't even deal with MP3's as a valid submission. It's the easy way out....critics and the industry and alot of music buyers still prefer the physical release.

 

Myself, alot of times I wish that I was naturally better at what I want to do. I'm still not where i'd like to be as a player or writer. Most of us are in that state....some seemingly put in no effort and they're great. But i'd like to see more ambition from DIY recordings---I throw all the instrumentation that I can into things (weird four part vocals, various guitar textures, glockenspiels, melodica, organ, weird panned reverbs....often 30-40 tracks per song). And i'd like to believe that there are artists that truly throw 110 percent into it, instead of thinking that it's just "good enough". Every time that I finish a song, it's an exhaustive battle of "is this good enough?", various mixes, various layers, and enough scrutiny to often make me wonder why the hell i've done it. Sure not everyone wants to go through that ordeal, but to be truly great--or at least attempt to be great--you've got to almost consider every idea bad until proven great, every idea to really question why it's there and what function it serves. Whether that leads up to greatness or not, it doesn't always. But at least the intention is there.

[danosongs]

You need to start a blog on your own domain and predominately display the rss/email sign up.

 

Then write keyword-rich blog posts that show up on Google. Bookmark them on Digg, Propeller. Write articles for EZA.

 

Hint: Forget the "music business", that's old news... learn "Internet Marketing" bro from ProBlogger, John Chow, and other masters in this arena.