Members Lurko Posted September 21, 2007 Members Share Posted September 21, 2007 From the Washington City Paper this week: http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/display.php?id=8081 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ZigZagWanderer Posted September 21, 2007 Members Share Posted September 21, 2007 Yeah, man. I can't help but think that all that legwork is doing more harm than good. The more promotion you do, the less you can work on the music. That's why I think that in the long run, this DIY idea of bands promoting and recording themselves is going to hurt music more than help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevilRaysFan Posted September 21, 2007 Members Share Posted September 21, 2007 Change and adapt: I say the days of the billionaire rock star selling $$$ of recordings are over....I say give away your music and make your money on live performances Oh yeah, I live in Florida: a rite-to-work dont pay-to-play state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Volitan Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 The {censored}ing internet ruined it for everyone. This {censored} {censored}ing sucks. I hate this stuff. It's just the worst possible thing you can hear, when all you wanna do is play music for a living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Badside Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 Let's all blame the internet! But the thing is, it's quite probably that 10 years ago, this band would've probably never had any success at all... But yeah, it's getting harder to convince people to buy CDs... but mostly: we found a new excuse for having difficulties selling our music... The industry sucks, but has it really ever been that much better?We're simply giving more visibility to the less successful artists... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Volitan Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 I sorta wanna know how these rappers are making it. It seems that every couple weeks, a new rapper is out, or on MTV Cribs showing off their new houses or whatnot. How are THEY making money? Everytime I read an article like this it's about a rock act. If a rock act was given the same attention/exposure as a rapper, would they be as successful??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ihateyouguys Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 Change and adapt: I say the days of the billionaire rock star selling $$$ of recordings are over....I say give away your music and make your money on live performances That will work well for the songwriters who don't perform live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DBnewyork Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 songwriters who don't perform live, but who write songs that are performed live, will earn public performance royalties. and synchronization fees when their songsa get popular and are included in TV and movies and commmercials, and income from sales of sheet music from fledgling performers that need to learn how to play their songs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Keith SIO Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 Weird...I have played a show with hotspur, they got themselves from nobodies to played across America and gained tons of fans...Hardworking band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ihateyouguys Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 songwriters who don't perform live, but who write songs that are performed live, will earn public performance royalties. and synchronization fees when their songsa get popular and are included in TV and movies and commmercials, and income from sales of sheet music from fledgling performers that need to learn how to play their songs But they won't get their CD royalties when everyone is stealing songs. And you only have to do a search to see how many people hear bitch about ascap to see how musicians are generally their own worst enemies when it comes to the music business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HEPNOTIC Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 i cant believe that band borrowed 10 grand to record a DEMO. morons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevilRaysFan Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 That will work well for the songwriters who don't perform live. Im sure working trombone players in the early 60s were all bummed out when that wave of guitar-based "Yeah yeah yeah" music came across the Atlantic and all of a sudden, they were out a job.......trust me, Im a fulltime musician and I can act begrudgingly towards DJs spinning booty music in clubs that used to have bands OR I can put together a band that uses sequencing and sampling and compete at that level...Im not saying thats my only option, but what I am saying is that I will do what I have to do to stay working -- being complacent and bitching about 'change' doesn't help one's position - being active and being able to conform does....... Songwriters? C'mon, youre supposed to be creative -Think outside the box: theres plenty of other formats besides traditional record companies/recording artists/labels that you can try to make money with that would require your services (movie industry, video games, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevilRaysFan Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 This is a repost from the "too old" thread: What I like to call "The great corporate backfire" ( basically, the industry trying to change formats several year ago that resulted into easily accessable MP3s and illegal downloads) has done nothing more than level the playing field for everybody - regardless of age. I think the OP is looking at this backwards: "Making It" is over - in the future, the millionaire rock star is going be few and far between, but rather an enteprising individual with initiative, business sense, and well-versed with the web can easily carve out a little niche for themselves and release music independently without the need for a label behind them telling him/her that they are too old for the industry and I think that applies to most facets of the industry. Personally, from a creative level, I think this is the best thing that has ever happened. If I can have a small following and make a little money selling my own music - on my terms - then great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WoodsIDIB Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 great article.it's impossible to deny the effects the internet/myspace.com on the industry.it does as much harm as good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wagdog Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 I read this article, but I didn't go any further, like go to their myspace page and hear them. Question: Do these guys deserve to "make it"? Are they THAT good? Do they do anything that sets them apart from the other gazillion bands that work their butts off? I understand that they WANT to make money, but if they aren't producing something is that compelling, should they? As others have pointed out here, the Internet has changed things. Back in the day we probably would never have heard about these guys unless you lived in their local market. I'm sure back in the day (actually very sure) there were plenty of pretty good bands that didn't go anywhere because they weren't a)GREAT and b)lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lurko Posted September 22, 2007 Author Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 I'm thinking that music for 99% of folks will become an expensive hobby. That's what it is for me already, and I'm fine with that, 'cause I'm a family man in my mid-thirties, but it sucks for the young'uns.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wagdog Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 I'm thinking that music for 99% of folks will become an expensive hobby. That's what it is for me already, and I'm fine with that, 'cause I'm a family man in my mid-thirties, but it sucks for the young'uns.... I'd say for 99.99% of musicians it already is an expensive hobby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 I say give away your music and make your money on live performances Great, then you can compete with the thousands of bands already playing for free to "get their music out." And really, at the bottom level, who's going to pay you a living amount of money while you tour if no one has heard of you? That's why bands depend on CD salesat shows to help offset the money they lose touring. Selling 10 CDs can make the difference of having enough gas and burritos to get to the next gig. When (and if) you get to the higher levels, yes, your CD starts promoting your live performances. But for young bands, it's the opposite. How about this: No one puts out a CD without doing some market research and finding out if A) there's a demand for what they're doing and B) it's a quality production performed well. That's what record companies used to do until us peasants decided they weren't necessary anymore, and several babies got tossed out with the bathwater. I don't have figures to support this idea, but from what I've experienced, the vast majority of indie CD put out today fall under one or both of those categories-either poorly produced with mediocre to bad songs, or there's no demand for what they're doing, or both. As with anything, once the gatekeepers are overran, we thought we were going to get nirvana, but what we ended up with so far is chaos and anarchy and no one has anything. There are so many guys making CDs, and bands willing to play for free to promote their CD and themselves, it's become almost not worth it. So many of us (myself included) thought that once the evil record companies were out of the way, we could go directly to the public and they would see what they've been missing at the hands of the corporate greedmeisters. Turns out, making good records that people will buy, and getting them marketed, distributed, on the air and sold is harder than it looked. A LOT harder. Initially, in the mid to late 90s, I thought it might work: if I could sell a couple of thousand CDs a year at 15 bucks each, I could pay for a lot of promo and gig expenses. And for awhile, it did work- I sold 1000 CDs in just under 7 months in 1999. But soon, everyone and their dog was making CDs, and by 2004, a lot of bands couldn't give them away. Fortunately, I did a lot of festivals and concerts with access to large crowds. How many bnds are that lucky? And even at that, I was lucky to sell 20 CDs at a show with 5,000 people because either one guy would buy one and burn it for his friends ( I actually overheard a guy say he was going to do this) or, because every band at the show had at least one CD out, and usually 3 or more, you just didn't sell that many. I can't think of another art form where someone works at it for a year and decides to enter the marketplace. I'm trying to imagine hundreds of thousands of art students with a rudimentary paining set, a few canvases, and a few paintings under their belt sending their "work" to prestigiious galleries and museums trying to get their work sold and displayed. Sounds ridiculous, but that's exactly what musicians are doing today. And unfortunately, it isn't money that is the currency of the day, it has become fame. Everyone seems to want to promote, promote, promote, get their name out, get website hits, be a success on Youtube and Myspace, and that seems to be the new measure of success, not how much money an act brings in. And so now bands seem to be moving toward achieving the goal: known by everyone, paid by no one. There's a reason record companies used to turn down 98% of what they were submitted. Yeah, they had their problems, and got way too greedy, but the effect of their loss of gatekeeper function in the music culture can't be denied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RadiationNation Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 I understand that they WANT to make money, but if they aren't producing something is that compelling, should they? Dude, the guy does a keyboard handstand. Someone give them a record deal quick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevilRaysFan Posted September 22, 2007 Members Share Posted September 22, 2007 Great, then you can compete with the thousands of bands already playing for free to "get their music out." And really, at the bottom level, who's going to pay you a living amount of money while you tour if no one has heard of you? That's why bands depend on CD salesat shows to help offset the money they lose touring. Selling 10 CDs can make the difference of having enough gas and burritos......... snip You missed my point in the other posts above that Im of the opinion that the days of the millionaire rockstar are few and far in between, and perhaps the days of the creative musician making a living - at least an artist with present criteria-mindset and unwillingness to change with the times - are also drawing to a close ....and Im not gonna complain about it the way the horse-and-buggy maker complained about those new-fangled automobiles taking his business....... Thing is that you are still talking CDs...It seems to me that the only people actually interested in a physical format anymore are the artists themselves and people who benefit to make money off the physical format - in this case, CDs. Why do musicians and songwriters seem to favor it? Who knows? Maybe they like seeing their name on a credit ( I know I do). Maybe it somehow reflects that their art has been immortalized and that perhaps a copy of their CD would be dug up 5000 years from now by archaelogists who will try to give it a listen... All I know is that, for the most part, the present record-buying ( record-stealing) public -- who a lot of them happen to be non-musicians -- really do not give two {censored}s about the CD anymore. MP3-type formats, via trendy and sleek iPods or MP3 player-of-choice, is becoming the favored format...there are now new cars being made with docking stations instead of a CD player ( I would call that a hint). A lot of MP3 players have a broadcast radio adapter to wirelessly transmit music to car stereo via radio waves. They can hold a kagillion songs. I can think of a million reasons why a 'music listener" would favor it (including 'EZ-to-steal' music') Hence my posts above......... The irony is that a lot of musicians welcomed the change from analog to digital as the recording "input format" with open arms but want to keep status quo on the output format. It didnt take long for the recording/editing capabilities of the expensive 1980s Fairlight and later Atari systems to become affordable and accessable to home computers. Artists embraced digital technology as they realized that they can forgo paying a recording studio (effectively ending the long era of stand-alone recording studio business) and achieve the same professional results in the privacy of their home for way less money - - yet, for some reason, a lot of artists don't want to change the 'output format' from physical to "cyber" because, amongst other reasons, they think (under present conditions) they may lose money.....The same technology that benefited indie artists financially to create music is now biting artists in the ass to sell it....I wouldnt be surprised if former career minded audio-engineers everywhere are having a chuckle over this As far as the live performance you mentioned? Keep in mind Im the guy that started the "Death Of The Working Band" thread...Im well aware of the demographics and Ive been worried about it for a long time...It was posts by you guys in that thread that logically stated to "change and adapt" that actually shedded some light... So what are ya gonna do about it? I would say start by asking a former working career studio engineer what he did to survive.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Volitan Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 So the abridged version of that is........ CD's are no longer preferred (with MP3's taking their place) and should only be used to promote live shows, where the artist will make most of their money..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 You missed my point in the other posts above that Im of the opinion that the days of the millionaire rockstar are few and far in between, and perhaps the days of the creative musician making a living - at least an artist with present criteria-mindset and unwillingness to change with the times - are also drawing to a close ....and Im not gonna complain about it the way the horse-and-buggy maker complained about those new-fangled automobiles taking his business....... Thing is that you are still talking CDs...It seems to me that the only people actually interested in a physical format anymore are the artists themselves and people who benefit to make money off the physical format - in this case, CDs. Why do musicians and songwriters seem to favor it? Who knows? Maybe they like seeing their name on a credit ( I know I do). Maybe it somehow reflects that their art has been immortalized and that perhaps a copy of their CD would be dug up 5000 years from now by archaelogists who will try to give it a listen... All I know is that, for the most part, the present record-buying ( record-stealing) public -- who a lot of them happen to be non-musicians -- really do not give two {censored}s about the CD anymore. MP3-type formats, via trendy and sleek iPods or MP3 player-of-choice, is becoming the favored format...there are now new cars being made with docking stations instead of a CD player ( I would call that a hint). A lot of MP3 players have a broadcast radio adapter to wirelessly transmit music to car stereo via radio waves. They can hold a kagillion songs. I can think of a million reasons why a 'music listener" would favor it (including 'EZ-to-steal' music') Hence my posts above.........The irony is that a lot of musicians welcomed the change from analog to digital as the recording "input format" with open arms but want to keep status quo on the output format. It didnt take long for the recording/editing capabilities of the expensive 1980s Fairlight and later Atari systems to become affordable and accessable to home computers. Artists embraced digital technology as they realized that they can forgo paying a recording studio (effectively ending the long era of stand-alone recording studio business) and achieve the same professional results in the privacy of their home for way less money - - yet, for some reason, a lot of artists don't want to change the 'output format' from physical to "cyber" because, amongst other reasons, they think (under present conditions) they may lose money.....The same technology that benefited indie artists financially to create music is now biting artists in the ass to sell it....I wouldnt be surprised if former career minded audio-engineers everywhere are having a chuckle over thisAs far as the live performance you mentioned? Keep in mind Im the guy that started the "Death Of The Working Band" thread...Im well aware of the demographics and Ive been worried about it for a long time...It was posts by you guys in that thread that logically stated to "change and adapt" that actually shedded some light...So what are ya gonna do about it? I would say start by asking a former working career studio engineer what he did to survive.......... The problem with MP3s over CDs is that, in a word, they sound like ass. Maybe someday the technology will be there, but right now, it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wagdog Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 The problem with MP3s over CDs is that, in a word, they sound like ass. Maybe someday the technology will be there, but right now, it isn't. True, they sound like ass. But for most of the population, they sound good enough. And unfortunately, "most of the population" is who any artist is targeting as their audience. My point is; most people don't care that they sound like ass, they can be had for free and sound good enough. Also, at some point in the near future there will be a distributable music technology that sounds as good as a CD. Whether it's because people will have 1 terrabyte ipods and compression becomes a none issue, or compression gets to the point that its lossless. It will happen. So I think at some time in the future, music distributed in any other fashion then electronically may in fact go away. What will we do then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kurdy Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 What will we do then? Stop making music? That could be a viable solution. If we stop making it, we won't have to worry about who's gonna play it, who's gonna buy it, who's gonna market and distribute it, who will attend shows. We can all just go on living our lives, and it'll be a huge weight off everyone's shoulders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevilRaysFan Posted September 23, 2007 Members Share Posted September 23, 2007 The problem with MP3s over CDs is that, in a word, they sound like ass. Maybe someday the technology will be there, but right now, it isn't. Although I do think CDs sound better all the way around, MP3s with a resolution of 128 kbs and above sound decent, and ones encoded at 160 kbs sounds good.....for some reason, a lot of people do not encode at those higher resolutions. As a matter of fact, I see a lot of MP3s with bit-rates below 128kbs, usually as low as 64kbs, which suck soundwise......an analogy would be recording in a digital format with a sample rate of 28 khz as opposed to a CD standard of 44.1 khz. Similar difference...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.