Sending CD's to record labels?

[gtrbass]

BTW - cybersecretary, you rule!!!

 

That's the truth in a nutshell. Art should be made by artists and not interfered with by people with MBA's who should be working for Proctor & Gamble.

 

The revolution is virtual. You might not get rich, but you can be heard.

[becomingfinal]

 

Originally posted by DonaldDemon True, I guess now would be a good time copyright our songs:D I was once told by a studio engineer to NEVER copyright anything because of the great publicity you would get out of a lawsuit. It would actually make it look like your songs were worth stealing! I don't know if I agree but he did have an interesting point.

 

 

 

dont original recorded works technically gain copyright the moment they are put onto media of some sort?

 

from the MPA website

 

5. How do I register my piece for copyright protection?

The Copyright Act provides that copyright protection begins at the moment the work is created. Registration with the Copyright Office is not required in order for a work to be protected under US copyright law. The copyright must generally be registered with the Copyright Office in Washington, DC before the copyright owner can sue an infringer (from AAP, NACS, and SPA brochure entitled Q & A on Copyright for the Campus Community).

[BlueStrat]

 

Originally posted by becomingfinal dont original recorded works technically gain copyright the moment they are put onto media of some sort? from the MPA website 5. How do I register my piece for copyright protection? The Copyright Act provides that copyright protection begins at the moment the work is created. Registration with the Copyright Office is not required in order for a work to be protected under US copyright law. The copyright must generally be registered with the Copyright Office in Washington, DC before the copyright owner can sue an infringer (from AAP, NACS, and SPA brochure entitled Q & A on Copyright for the Campus Community).

 

 

You're right . When you register with the copyright office, you are only registering a copyright that already exists.

 

From the US Copyright office:

When is my work protected?

Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

 

Do I have to register with your office to be protected?

No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section

[MrKnobs]

I would add to all this that you should embrace filters. There are probably 10,000 CDs released a day, you need to distinguish your CD somehow and raise it above the masses so it will be noticed.

 

There are many sorts of filters. A simple but novel filter is www.garageband.com . If your music is good, likely it will be reviewed by hundreds of strangers on this site and move up in their "charts." That will get you noticed. Our band was named by Clear Channel as one of the "Top 50 Unsigned Bands in America" simply because they asked garageband to send them their top bands.

 

Another sort of filter is a music attorney, publicist, publishing company, program director at a radio station, etc. If one of these people believe in you and pitch your CD to a record label it might actually get heard, as opposed to what happens to it if you just mail it in cold. Network, network, network!

 

Yet another filter is what others have already mentioned: sales. If you demostrate solid regional sales you've already done some of the record company's marketing research for them. Even selling a thousand copies on CDBaby will help you get attention.

 

Filters! Embrace them, as they separate you from the herd.

 

Terry D.

[joestanman]

 

Originally posted by becomingfinal dont original recorded works technically gain copyright the moment they are put onto media of some sort?

 

 

yes. everyone on this forum refuses to understand that.

[MrKnobs]

 

Originally posted by joestanman yes. everyone on this forum refuses to understand that.

 

 

Strictly speaking they do, but then there is the matter of proof. People tend to have differing memories of who wrote what.

 

It's a subset of the "Success has a dozen fathers, failure is an orphan" observation on human nature.

 

Terry D.

[Lee Flier]

 

Originally posted by becomingfinal dont original recorded works technically gain copyright the moment they are put onto media of some sort?

 

 

Recordings, yes. The song itself is technically copyrighted the moment you write it - but of course, if you don't record it or write charts for it, and nobody's seen you play it live yet, it would be tough to prove you wrote it should your ownership be challenged.

[vanlatte]

Originally posted by Hardtailed 3- in 2006, a CD-R with marker on it screams UNPROFESSIONAL. You can get stick-on labels for next to nothing, so there's no excuse. I just bought an Epson printer for next to nothing (99$CDN) that print directly on CDs, the results are amazing.

 

You would be surprised at how many bands actually SELL cd's like this at their gigs. Set up a table and talk about "buying their CDs". I get over there and $5 gets me a CD-R with Sharpie smudges on it.

[Psychotronic]

 

Originally posted by cybersecretary don't scrap it, do the record, try a bit longer. you will look back on it in 15 years and say wow, "I Got Better " play for life no mater whether you make it or not. a true artist will do their art whether they are recognized or not... they have to do it to express themselves... to live i am working on a second round.. took a break kind of to raise a kid and work but it was always there i am 40 now just can't stop playing and living the dream. can you say adiction? obsessed? i can tell you that in the 80's we got real close to getting bigger and better gigs.. 2,000 people was the max... with my husbsands all guy band. i helped with $$$ for rehearsals and recording, i did the photos and ran around with posters in the middle of the night for |"The Cat Club"did a record, got a manager, big buz.. nyc philly..offered a 50-50 publishing deal (what ever that means) turned it down because the suits wanted them to ax the drummer... bla bla bla... stories like tis are a dime a dozen... great foder for stories, films... so now i am 40 husband died of 'AIDS, and just finished my own "Album" it is not a demo ...14 songs.. it is Indie in it's true form.. i did it all my self, art in photochop, labels, mac, ableton live5 gibson fender tele... if i can't make it with a story like that then.. hey .. it's a f uped world..the U.S. Europe subidized artists! what am i to do with it? take it to the 1/2 dozen local stores, hope they sell make 30.00 or 40.00 bucks from each.. CD baby? give aways, i accomplished something and i think it is good. that is what counts. .... till i get on with my next project. lets backk up a bit.. 6 years ago i co produced a compilation cd with other womens cuts on it and 3 of mine. used 2 studios.. inexpensive/friend discount. pressed and printed at Oasis.. i did the art..photoshop gods! i took it to the local stores. made the invoices, played low playing crappy taverns and free benifits .... few big i sAID, I LOVE TO PLAY AND WILL DO IT FOR FREE IF ASKED. well now i need to get paid. i would love to at least support my self with music. i live on less than $19,00.00 a year at my crappy jobs..(up from 14 grand a few years ago but now that i don't want to work anymore except at my art i am sure to be strugglin unless i keep at it and treat it like a biz.) i went to college.. if you play 3 nights a week for 100$ well thats the poverty level... i am used to that! if you do what you love..... well i did it all by myself, worked hard, everyday on the computer, no sleep no food... going to SXSW again and try to meet people.. hey ya never know.. what i do want to know is...... who do i need to blow... Make Art Not War peace

 

 

What band were you in? I'd bet we were on the circuit at the same time.

[guitarmook]

Nobody spends money on something they think 'sounds great'. If you get a label to give you money based on your rough-mix demos, you better hurry, 'cause that label is going under quick.

 

Every label A&R man that I've talked to, heard at a panel discussion, or read an interview with said the same thing. "They" are only interested in bands that have already proven they can sell product. Not just bands that have a great sound and a well-mixed CD, but probably more importantly to the label, that band also has a very engaging live show, and has worked consistently and long enough to build not just a good local following, but a strong regional following.

 

If the label can't see a strong opportunity to quickly see returns, they're not interested.

 

 

So if you don't have money to finish your recording, work on your local crowd, and turn it into a regional crowd. Play more gigs, work up to bigger gigs, and start ranging farther from home... Develop a reputation for a great show, or some reason to keep bringing the peeps out. If you're successful there, you'll make money and can finish the CD.

[BlueStrat]

 

Originally posted by guitarmook Nobody spends money on something they think 'sounds great'. If you get a label to give you money based on your rough-mix demos, you better hurry, 'cause that label is going under quick. Every label A&R man that I've talked to, heard at a panel discussion, or read an interview with said the same thing. "They" are only interested in bands that have already proven they can sell product. Not just bands that have a great sound and a well-mixed CD, but probably more importantly to the label, that band also has a very engaging live show, and has worked consistently and long enough to build not just a good local following, but a strong regional following. If the label can't see a strong opportunity to quickly see returns, they're not interested. So if you don't have money to finish your recording, work on your local crowd, and turn it into a regional crowd. Play more gigs, work up to bigger gigs, and start ranging farther from home... Develop a reputation for a great show, or some reason to keep bringing the peeps out. If you're successful there, you'll make money and can finish the CD.

 

 

I don't know why this is so hard for so many to grasp.

 

Earth to musicians: The days of getting discovered in a club or sending a rough demo into a record company and getting signed to a profitable deal are over.

 

 

[vanlatte]

Originally posted by BlueStrat I don't know why this is so hard for so many to grasp.

 

C'mon, BlueStrat, you know exactly why: It's the same force that rips bands apart, burns bridges, destroys relationships and whispers in the delusional ear "You are so much better than the rest". It's one word that starts with E and ends with O.

 

 

( I know your statement is rhetorical but I couldn't resist )

 

Originally posted by BlueStrat Earth to musicians: The days of getting discovered in a club or sending a rough demo into a record company and getting signed to a profitable deal are over.

 

I believe it.

 

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know *why* this doesnt work anymore, and when it actually stopped working?

[Lee Flier]

 

Originally posted by vanlatte Just out of curiosity, does anyone know *why* this doesnt work anymore, and when it actually stopped working?

 

 

1) Labels and radio stations are no longer run by people who give a crap about music; they're run by shareholders who only care about next quarter's returns. Almost no one is allowed to develop an artist based on their personal judgement anymore.

 

2) For a variety of reasons we've discussed on this forum before, local music scenes are declining. There's a real shortage of good venues for bands to build local fan bases, and venue owners who are able to build loyal clientele based on (again) their good judgement as opposed to popularity contests.

 

Situation #1 started in the early 90's when regulations on radio station ownership were loosened. #2 seems to be a more recent phenomenon, like the last 4-5 years.

[guitarmook]

 

Originally posted by vanlatte Just out of curiosity, does anyone know *why* this doesnt work anymore, and when it actually stopped working?

 

 

 

A couple other things, too...

 

In the 50s, 60s, and early 70s, several record companies, especially smaller ones, were owned by people who were both passionate about, and knowledgeable of, music... they were more inclined to 'invest' in artists, and find a way to get the genius out there for the people... a small version of this particular approach was shown quite well in 'Ray'...

 

In the 90s, the record companies were generating LARGE profits mostly through the reselling of their catalogs in the new format (CDs) they had relatively low investments (sometimes remastering), and high profit margins on CD reissues. So companies like Sony, Seagrams, etc. saw the potential for moneymakers and bought the labels... Now, the concern is quarterly and annual profits... Working with an artist over the course of 2 or even 3 full-length recordings to find the particular formula that works in the marketplace can't happen anymore...

 

 

Also, there are many, many new things competing for teenager's attention... and teenagers are by far the largest market for music - except now they're also busy with computer games, Xbox, etc and their time and money that's available for music is smaller.

 

Finally, the fact that record companies and artists are rushing product to market because there's less money available for development results in (IMHO), fewer quality tracks in any given full-length release - couple that with the ease to download and trade music files, and the market perception or 'value' of music has gone down... "Kids today" don't necessarily believe that music is 'worth' the same that we used to think it was...

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by vanlatte Just out of curiosity, does anyone know *why* this doesnt work anymore, and when it actually stopped working?

 

I find Lee's reply a little idealistic, bless her beautiful heart.

 

My take (consider that I'm currently under contract to the evil Clear Channel!) is that why would any record label or conglomerate of radio stations go to any more trouble to make money than they have to?

 

Much, much safer and efficient to let the bands do the hard work of making their first record, promoting and test marketing it. The only risk the record companies take by doing this is the possibility some other company will snatch up a really great band before they do.

 

What percentage do record labels bat these days? .010? Do they make 99 records that fail for every one that goes platinum? I don't have any idea of the actual number, but I know their hit rate is still very low.

 

Back when I had my small label, I learned to get a thick skin. Artists complain that the label doesn't do enough and takes too high a cut, but it's the label taking the vast majority of the (considerable) risk.

 

So my answer is the labels don't do that anymore because they don't have to. Back in 1960 nobody was making their own records and marketing them, and there were a lot fewer original bands. It's a buyer's market for the labels these days.

 

Terry D.

[BlueStrat]

Originally posted by MrKnobs I find Lee's reply a little idealistic, bless her beautiful heart. My take (consider that I'm currently under contract to the evil Clear Channel!) is that why would any record label or conglomerate of radio stations go to any more trouble to make money than they have to? Much, much safer and efficient to let the bands do the hard work of making their first record, promoting and test marketing it. The only risk the record companies take by doing this is the possibility some other company will snatch up a really great band before they do. What percentage do record labels bat these days? .010? Do they make 99 records that fail for every one that goes platinum? I don't have any idea of the actual number, but I know their hit rate is still very low. Back when I had my small label, I learned to get a thick skin. Artists complain that the label doesn't do enough and takes too high a cut, but it's the label taking the vast majority of the (considerable) risk. So my answer is the labels don't do that anymore because they don't have to. Back in 1960 nobody was making their own records and marketing them, and there were a lot fewer original bands. It's a buyer's market for the labels these days. Terry D.

 

Yup, you just stole my thunder (and saying it better than I ever could). Every swinging dick with a guitar can make a record (and is) these days, and because of it, are willing to take more and more responsibility on themselves as a means of gaining a competitive edge. Just look at al the guys on this site who defend playing for free as a means to get an edge over other bands. The ironic thing is that for a band starting out today, by the time it gets to "the top", there's likely to be no top left.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by MrKnobs So my answer is the labels don't do that anymore because they don't have to.

 

This is true, but it's really just another way of saying the same thing I was saying.

 

I will add though that labels did used to go through the trouble of developing artists, because long term, it paid off more than today's formula. A band was not really expected to do well immediately, the idea being that if they are allowed to develop under the tutelage of a good team of producer, promoter et al, they would eventually pay off and have staying power. Now, they don't care about staying power, they care about who can have a hit single immediately and if the next record doesn't do as well as the first, or if the first one doesn't do well at all, the band gets dropped.

 

So the labels have always been about making money of course, but the difference is really short term vs. long term thinking.

 

I will add that if the labels had a clue they would realize that many artists are good at making music but not very good at marketing themselves. Again this used to be a foregone conclusion. Now the bands that "make it" are the ones who, as you say, are best at doing most of the hard work on their own. This may leave a lot of extremely talented folks out in the cold, and again, if the labels had a clue they would develop these bands and likely make more money in the long term. The current model is exactly like the local venues who expect that the band themselves is going to bring in the whole crowd, and the venue has no responsibility to earn a reputation for booking good bands, promote their venue aggressively, etc.

 

Luckily there are former label execs and independent producers now scrambling to take up the slack, recording bands they believe in on a budget and trying to do some of the work the labels used to do in the past. I expect this group to grow, seeing as the labels have dropped the ball.

[BlueStrat]

Originally posted by Lee Flier This is true, but it's really just another way of saying the same thing I was saying. I will add though that labels did used to go through the trouble of developing artists, because long term , it paid off more than today's formula. A band was not really expected to do well immediately, the idea being that if they are allowed to develop under the tutelage of a good team of producer, promoter et al, they would eventually pay off and have staying power. Now, they don't care about staying power, they care about who can have a hit single immediately and if the next record doesn't do as well as the first, or if the first one doesn't do well at all, the band gets dropped. So the labels have always been about making money of course, but the difference is really short term vs. long term thinking. I will add that if the labels had a clue they would realize that many artists are good at making music but not very good at marketing themselves. Again this used to be a foregone conclusion. Now the bands that "make it" are the ones who, as you say, are best at doing most of the hard work on their own. This may leave a lot of extremely talented folks out in the cold, and again, if the labels had a clue they would develop these bands and likely make more money in the long term. Luckily there are former label execs and independent producers now scrambling to take up the slack, recording bands they believe in on a budget and trying to do some of the work the labels used to do in the past. I expect this group to grow, seeing as the labels have dropped the ball.

 

Part of the reason for long term vs. short term is that the exponential growth in niche marketing and splintering genres into ever-smaller definitions makes audiences smaller and exposure to other musical genres less likely, resulting is a much lower shelf life for a band. Everyone wants to come up with a new trendy term to describe themselves and set themselves apart form everyone else, but it actually leads to a musical Balkanization and genre isolationism. Where a band may have once been listed as "rock" or even "Hard Rock" or what have you, many people would be curious to check them out. Today, when I see descriptions like "neo-thrash screamcore" or "post-industiral cow-punk", I already know I'm probably not going to like it, and so I don't bother checking it out.

 

Back when "rock" was being defined as anything from Elton John to Black Sabbath, and record companies controlled who recorded and when, the shelf life of a band may have been several years. Today, shelf life of a band with a song on the radio is often measured in months, and there are more one-hit wonders than ever before. There are just simply too many bands going after too specialized a market to make much of a dent in the business these days.

[Outkaster]

I do not think there are that many bands left.

[MrKnobs]

 

Originally posted by Lee Flier if the labels had a clue they would develop these bands and likely make more money in the long term.

 

 

There's still some of that going on, and not all of it in a good way.

 

I know a guy here in Austin who is currently getting a lot of label attention. He has been in several locally successful bands before, which also got label attention but ultimately no contract.

 

Right now he has a band in NYC and also one in Austin. He uses the NYC band when he plays up there, which is pretty often, and of course the ATX band when he's down here.

 

Recently the label that's interested in him asked him to do a showcase both in NYC and in Austin. They instructed him to use the NYC band here in Austin also. They also want him to get rid of several of his current band members for no other reason than paring down to four members.

 

The only reason I post this is to illustrate how the labels are so completely in the driver's seat they can call all sorts of shots before even signing an artist development deal.

 

Another extreme example was a female fronted band here that was incredibly popular in Austin and regionally. They played funk and packed out every place they appeared.

 

Then they were signed to a label and the label informed them they needed to change their look and genre. Their first label released CD was pop. A huge change, but not bad at all IMHO.

 

Still, it caused tensions and ultimately the group broke up. They went from playing the music they love and making a good living at it to broke and broke up.

 

Not that I wouldn't do exactly what any label told me to do, but I'd never do that without a contract and some $$$.

 

Terry D.

[Lee Flier]

 

Originally posted by MrKnobs There's still some of that going on, and not all of it in a good way. .... Then they were signed to a label and the label informed them they needed to change their look and genre. Their first label released CD was pop. A huge change, but not bad at all IMHO. Still, it caused tensions and ultimately the group broke up. They went from playing the music they love and making a good living at it to broke and broke up.

 

 

Yep... and this is exactly why pursuing a major label deal isn't always as good an idea as it may seem. In fact a lot of times it's a downright crappy idea.

 

When it comes to artist development, there's good and bad ways of doing it, and you have to have a certain amount of trust in the specific people you're working with. And realize those people may be gone tomorrow and their job taken over by somebody whose artistic sensibilities may not be conducive to yours.

[gtrbass]

I've seen at least five bands who had something unique about them, sign a label deal (indie and major) only to have every bit of their uniqueness stamped out in the process of being groomed and/or "molded" by the label.

 

I've also seen a number of bands sign to label deals and get the royal shaft through utter incompetence or sheer malevolence.

 

It's the "best of times and the worst of times" to be pursuing music. It's a very frustrating endeavor. On one hand you now have better access than ever to the resources needed to create a record and do some basic grassroots marketing of it. One the other hand, so does everyone else, so there is a glut of choices for the consumer, and the industry at large. The supply of bands absolutely outstrips the demand.

 

What's the best answer? For starters accept that you're probably not gonna get rich or even be able to make a decent living from music. Once that's out of the way, you have to ask yourself why you're doing this. If it's because you feel you genuinely have something to say, keep going. If it's because your good at it and people like what you do, keep going. If it's because it's fun and you enjoy it, keep going. You cannot "will" superstardom.

 

If you're doing this because you "have" to be rich and famous, you'd better rethink this music career and possibly get your head examined because a) you will have to sell your soul and b) there's heartbreak that comes along with that. I've seen more good bands fall apart because there's one joker who's got some big idea that he's the second coming and wants to perpetrate some utterly stupid and financially suicidal strategy to fast track his rise to world domination.

 

Everybody's always looking for or postulating the magic answer. You want the magic answer? There isn't one!!! Form a band, write some songs, record them, put out a CD, go play shows, and that's about it. Don't worry about what the Beatles, The Stones, Led Zeppelin, Green Day or whoever did to get famous. If anything, learn how they went about making great music.

 

If you have several hundred grand you can afford to lose, you can attract and hire the necessary people to put you ahead in line. If you don't have that money to throw around, you wait in line and maybe somebody will come along and help you get there. Just know that 99% of the time, anybody who does come along wants to make money off you and doesn't give two sh*ts about you or the music.

[elbow]

 

Originally posted by gtrbass I've seen at least five bands who had something unique about them, sign a label deal (indie and major) only to have every bit of their uniqueness stamped out in the process of being groomed and/or "molded" by the label. I've also seen a number of bands sign to label deals and get the royal shaft through utter incompetence or sheer malevolence. It's the "best of times and the worst of times" to be pursuing music. It's a very frustrating endeavor. On one hand you now have better access than ever to the resources needed to create a record and do some basic grassroots marketing of it. One the other hand, so does everyone else, so there is a glut of choices for the consumer, and the industry at large. The supply of bands absolutely outstrips the demand. What's the best answer? For starters accept that you're probably not gonna get rich or even be able to make a decent living from music. Once that's out of the way, you have to ask yourself why you're doing this. If it's because you feel you genuinely have something to say, keep going. If it's because your good at it and people like what you do, keep going. If it's because it's fun and you enjoy it, keep going. You cannot "will" superstardom. If you're doing this because you "have" to be rich and famous, you'd better rethink this music career and possibly get your head examined because a) you will have to sell your soul and b) there's heartbreak that comes along with that. I've seen more good bands fall apart because there's one joker who's got some big idea that he's the second coming and wants to perpetrate some utterly stupid and financially suicidal strategy to fast track his rise to world domination. Everybody's always looking for or postulating the magic answer. You want the magic answer? There isn't one!!! Form a band, write some songs, record them, put out a CD, go play shows, and that's about it. Don't worry about what the Beatles, The Stones, Led Zeppelin, Green Day or whoever did to get famous. If anything, learn how they went about making great music. If you have several hundred grand you can afford to lose, you can attract and hire the necessary people to put you ahead in line. If you don't have that money to throw around, you wait in line and maybe somebody will come along and help you get there. Just know that 99% of the time, anybody who does come along wants to make money off you and doesn't give two sh*ts about you or the music.

 

 

I think I am probably well past the point of changing my look or sound a whole lot for anybody.

 

For better or worse, technology has given the tools to many hobbyists to crank out a *decent* product... in many fields, not just music.

[vanlatte]

 

Originally posted by gtrbass If you're doing this because you "have" to be rich and famous, you'd better rethink this music career and possibly get your head examined because a) you will have to sell your soul and b) there's heartbreak that comes along with that. I've seen more good bands fall apart because there's one joker who's got some big idea that he's the second coming and wants to perpetrate some utterly stupid and financially suicidal strategy to fast track his rise to world domination.

 

 

It's funny; the people that need to hear this wake up call the most are usually those that just refuse to accept it...

 

And speaking of suicidal strategies, that sort of thing always scared me. I always had in the back of my mind "Well, what if we need to go for broke? What do I do then? Do I quit my job, put my family in jeapordy to try to make it"?

 

Thank God I will never have to make that decision now.

[dougb415]

 

Originally posted by DonaldDemon Is it worth the time to send local record labels demo/self-produced CD's?

 

 

Only if those labels have said that they will accept unsolicited demos. Otherwise you may as well just throw your CDs in your *own* trashcan and save the labels the time. So it goes.