The independant artists/internet revolution

[Poker99]

Is that it?

 

In the last 5 years or so, we had those articles about how the music business would change for the better : How internet would give more power and money to independant and small artists.

 

Every day there is a new website telling us how they can connect you to fans and how you can make money and build a fanbase by getting your music on their websites.

 

I think we can safely say right now that all this was bull{censored}. Big artists still get all the attention and people are not willing to look for much music : They want to get it easily and they have more musical choices than they can handle.

 

I can count the numbers of emails I got from people giving me techniques about how to become successfull without label support.

 

But where are the sucess stories? When you find one, there was always someone putting money to give them a first boost.

 

Its still the same old system. You need money to make it. Nothing changed really.

[jaxn slim]

 

Its still the same old system. You need money to make it. Nothing changed really.

 

 

Of course you need money to make it to the top 0.1%, but it's definitely gotten easier to float around in the large pool below that.

 

Sure, it's hard to get people's attention when they have music coming at them from every direcion, but we have more opportunities now than we could have imagined 20 years ago. For example, you can call a booking agent/venue owner on the other side of the world and he can listen to your demo and view pics, etc. on myspace in a heartbeat. That's gold, man.

[Poker99]

And what's the point of having an owner at the other side of the world listening to your music? To book a gig?

 

[voodoochild89]

 

Of course you need money to make it to the top 0.1%, but it's definitely gotten easier to float around in the large pool below that.

 

 

Well to me, it being easy to float around seems like a bit of a problem. I mean anyone can set-up a myspace, and there's so much stuff floating around it seems really hard for a band to get noticed.

 

Granted the communication aspect is great, but how do you set your music apart from everything else going on? Even if your sound is unique who's going to hear it unless you personally search them out?

[Cygnus64]

But where are the sucess stories?

 

If you can get a total stranger, one who has never seen you in a concert, to buy one of your songs, you are a success story. You couldnt do that 10 years ago, other than at the most local level.

I can count the numbers of emails I got from people giving me techniques about how to become successfull without label support.

 

Yes, they all say the same thing: send US money. One thing the internet has done is given birth to it's own cottage industry, scammers who promise the world and can give you nothing that you can't get on your own.

 

Unfortunately, oversaturation has really killed the market. Since every bozo can tape his farts and sell them on -iTunes, its now like getting your name in a huge phone book. At least the label system had SOME built-in quality control. They weren't all masterpieces but you didnt go into the record store and find records of 13 year olds with 30 dollar usb mics.

 

Society has made a wrong turn in the past ten years. We didn't have a Paris Hilton before: famous for being famous. American Idol intentionally puts bad people into the finals for ratings. Ashlee Simpson doesn't know how to sing, nor do lots of "famous" teenyboppers, just stick em in a short skirt and add Autotune. We reward mediocre people. When a bad musician has as much chance as a good one, the system collapsed.

[soundwave106]

 

But where are the sucess stories? When you find one, there was always someone putting money to give them a first boost.

 

 

I think the Internet *has* boosted the careers, in a way, of the "next tier down": cult artists on major labels and large indie artists. That seems to be the impression I'm getting from articles I've read.

 

Music is increasingly getting *very* specialized and scene-specific. It still seems very possible to have a decent career by being a "next tier down" leading artist. Major labels tended to shuffle artists that weren't blowaway Top 10 successes all the time, which is extremely difficult to do consistently. The next tier down seems to hang onto bands a bit longer. This makes for longer careers. The Internet has allowed fans increased access to labels that were the "next tier down", that lacked a lot of the marketing channels majors had. The playing field for labels has been, to a degree, leveled.

 

Label support is still important because, even with physical media becoming less important, you still need people to help manage and market the brand. Bands of course can do this on their own to a point (and seem to be expected to these days), but it's always better to have someone *dedicated* in this helm. I see very few *Internet-only* success stories, but there seems to be several stories floating around where Internet buzz led to a record deal.

[Poker99]

 

Well to me, it being easy to float around seems like a bit of a problem. I mean anyone can set-up a myspace, and there's so much stuff floating around it seems really hard for a band to get noticed. Granted the communication aspect is great, but how do you set your music apart from everything else going on? Even if your sound is unique who's going to hear it unless you personally search them out?

 

 

People need a buzz... They need to hear about the artist from other people than the artists themselves! That's why independant marketing sucks so much. People don't take it seriously when it comes from the artist directly.

 

Most people are sheep. They follow the trend : If they feel some band is really hot or cool because someone told them so (even if they, in reality, suck and are not popular yet), they will check them out. They buy the HYPE. That's what labels are good at.

[daddymack]

the only thing the internet has done for musicians is remove the cost of distribution of hardcopy materials, and cut the gatekeeper control of the labels as to what can be heard. However, it has also created this giant cesspool of terrible recordings (I also have to hold the software people culpable here) by bands that should never have been able to be heard outside their respective garages.

[sabriel9v]

 

the only thing the internet has done for musicians is remove the cost of distribution of hardcopy materials, and cut the gatekeeper control of the labels as to what can be heard. However, it has also created this giant cesspool of terrible recordings (I also have to hold the software people culpable here) by bands that should never have been able to be heard outside their respective garages.

 

 

+100 In addition, the whole "indie artist" phenomenon has helped to produce tons of shady producers, distributors, managers, and business people of the sketchy lot that want to exploit and prey upon ignorant musicians.

[masterbuilt]

I have been involved with website development since 1992 and that is from the very dawn of the "world-wide-web" and I can tell you that all of the dreams of "leveling the field" basically were thrown out the window when groups like BMG and SONY started buying online sites to STILL control what gets played. The thing that sucks is that a lot of "internet radio stations" are making people file waivers for payment of royalties because they don't want to deal with ASCAP, BMI, SECAN, and all of the other performance societies out there.

 

The web is not much different (in reality) than what we had before. MySpace and other social networking sites have not done much to impact a market run by the Big Five and that is not likely to change any time soon.

 

Yeah, you can be heard, maybe more than before the web, but, now file sharing is ubiquitous and kids don't buy records like they did in the 1960s when all of your rock heros started in the business.

 

We still need to work things out and we need a cooperative effort to get things moving.

[soundwave106]

 

+100 In addition, the whole "indie artist" phenomenon has helped to produce tons of shady producers, distributors, managers, and business people of the sketchy lot that want to exploit and prey upon ignorant musicians.

 

 

Shady producers, distributors, managers, and business dweebs never existed in the so-called music industry before the Internet?

 

Honestly, on *these* fronts, nothing much has changed. Except the "terrible" recordings these days usually aren't quite so bad technically. And yes, the Big Four labels pretty much still dominate, for what it's worth.

[sabriel9v]

 

Shady producers, distributors, managers, and business dweebs never existed in the so-called music industry before the Internet?

 

 

Let me rephrase what I said. The Internet has helped to produce MORE shady managers, etc.

 

 

MySpace and other social networking sites have not done much to impact a market run by the Big Five and that is not likely to change any time soon.

 

 

...I'm not sure if I agree with that. Myspace and social networking sites have changed how major labels can and are willing to market their artist roster.

[daddymack]

Terrible recordings by bands that never should have been able to be heard outside their garage never existed before the Internet?.

yes, bad recordings have existed since the first Edi-phone tubes...but my point was there was not a giant cesspool of them accessible by nearly everyone on the planet...

[Cygnus64]

Terrible recordings by bands that never should have been able to be heard outside their garage never existed before the Internet?

 

Not in the numbers they do now. 15 years ago, making a CD took a relatively serious financial commitment. It also took some engineering ability. Today, its a cracked copy of Cubase and a CD burner. A "distribution deal" is 40 bucks to get it on the internet.

 

Shady producers, distributors, managers, and business dweebs never existed in the so-called music industry before the Internet?

Not in the numbers they do now. With myspace having millions of musicians, and bots, the opportunity to contact a potential "victim" is thousands of times greater. Who hasnt got a message from A+R select?

 

Honestly, on *these* fronts, nothing much has changed.

 

EVERYTHING has changed. Again, none of this stuff was possible 15 years ago. When CD burners came out they were 20 grand. Today they are 40 bucks. Multitrack recorders were thousands and thousands. Today they are basically free.

[daddymack]

Multitrack recorders were thousands and thousands. Today they are basically free.

And digital...

 

The computer revolution and the expansion of the internet ruined the music 'industry'. We are seeing the erosion of the control exerted by the big 5 labels as they spiral into the throes of reorganizing. Eventually, they will re-emerge, but they will never have the level of brute force in the industry they had when they virtually owned all the means of professional production and distribution. This is the dawning of the age of lowered expectations, where the playing field has not been leveled, it has been dug up and moved, spread thinly over a much larger surface.

[soundwave106]

 

Not in the numbers they do now. 15 years ago, making a CD took a relatively serious financial commitment. It also took some engineering ability. Today, its a cracked copy of Cubase and a CD burner. A "distribution deal" is 40 bucks to get it on the internet.

 

 

Sure, which means the music in the underground sounds pretty good these days. No more {censored}ty four-track demos and tape-trading, where you hope that your music can get past the poor quality. (Sometimes it actually did.)

 

And simply getting your recording on the Internet means jack {censored}. Just as pressing CDs back 15 years ago didn't mean jack {censored} without the marketing, buzz, and talent.

 

A lot has changed, but it's more a paradigm change versus something to bitch and moan at that goddamnfangled new technology. It's a great time to be a hobbyist musician. It, of course, is much harder to make it in music as a business before, but the Internet is not the only thing at fault there.

[Cygnus64]

Sure, which means the music in the underground sounds pretty good these days.

 

That is highly subjective. The early Genesis albums were god awful fidelity-wise but had some fabulous music. Lots of old classical albums sound horrible but had the greatest performances ever. I would go with a performance WAAAY before the sound quality. Its the same with classic movies and TV: they might look bad by todays standards, but they had the substance.

 

Technology cannot change music for the better, only the human spirit can do that. Digital recording is just another canvas to work with. Sure, its great not to worry about tape hiss. I remember ye olden days very well, when we overdubbed by hooking two tape decks together , with craptacular results. But the music was good.

[soundwave106]

 

That is highly subjective. The early Genesis albums were god awful fidelity-wise but had some fabulous music. Lots of old classical albums sound horrible but had the greatest performances ever. I would go with a performance WAAAY before the sound quality. Its the same with classic movies and TV: they might look bad by todays standards, but they had the substance.

 

 

I too, would prefer performances over substance -- having the technology to make okay recordings every time helps the bands that can perform but can't afford to record top-notch.

 

As far as "musical quality" goes, songs one likes or dislikes is a highly subjective thing. For me, I see a lot of "musical quality" out there.

 

I see a whole lot less "musical quality" in radio these days, but the Internet is not at fault here. We are in an era where radio playlists are mechanized, boring affairs and DJs have absolutely no say over what they can play, with rare exceptions. That's the consolidation of the industry for you -- become big giants and make lowest-common-denominator music. DJs in the old days were critical for bringing quality bands out from the underground -- I don't see viral popularity as a complete replacement for this, and if anything has "killed" music, it's the replacement of the DJ with the marketing department hand-picked computer playlist.

 

Underneath the surface, there's plenty of bands with the technical prowess of a Genesis, albeit not the same style. (These folks mostly seem to lurk in the metal field these days for some reason.)

 

And there's plenty embarrassing 1970s music too. Remember, the year Genesis's "Selling England By the Pound" was released, the top song in the US was Tony Orlando and Dawn's "Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Old Oak Tree".

[Cygnus64]

As far as "musical quality" goes, songs one likes or dislikes is a highly subjective thing. For me, I see a lot of "musical quality" out there. .

 

I do too, at least in real life. I am a pro musician and do a lot of shows, musicals, back up people etc. The quality of playing is very high, lots of terrific players out there.

 

However, when I click on links to stuff at places like CD Baby, I am finding CDs that have no business being for sale, and simply wouldnt have existed 15 years ago. Recordings that cost 15 grand in 1990 can be made for $0 today, and that encourages every bozo to think he/she can put out a record. It's not that there isnt good stuff out there, there is. But the oversaturation is making it harder to find.

 

And there's plenty embarrassing 1970s music too. Remember, the year Genesis's "Selling England By the Pound" was released, the top song in the US was Tony Orlando and Dawn's "Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Old Oak Tree".

 

Well, it has a good melody, good arrangement, is very catchy etc. Compare that to Gimme More by Britney Spears or London Bridge by Fergie. It's like comparing Shakespeare to Archie comics.

 

Sure, there were tons of crappy hits throughout history, but that's a different subject. My point is this: the "record industry" has now turned into a sort of "Wayne's World". But instead of amateurs making TV shows in their basement, they make CDs and can sell them at the same place (iTunes) as major pros. There is zero quality control. A concert pianist in Carnegie Hall, or a 3-year old drooling on an untuned piano in Daddys den are placed in the same category. That aint right.

[eca]

Is that it? In the last 5 years or so, we had those articles about how the music business would change for the better : How internet would give more power and money to independant and small artists. Every day there is a new website telling us how they can connect you to fans and how you can make money and build a fanbase by getting your music on their websites. I think we can safely say right now that all this was bull{censored}. Big artists still get all the attention and people are not willing to look for much music : They want to get it easily and they have more musical choices than they can handle. I can count the numbers of emails I got from people giving me techniques about how to become successfull without label support. But where are the sucess stories? When you find one, there was always someone putting money to give them a first boost. Its still the same old system. You need money to make it. Nothing changed really.

personally, I believe that the disadvantages of the new face of music biz are it's advantages. 5 years ago you could never even dream of the possibility of exposing your music to so many people. It's a lot easier (forget easier, it's actually possible) for a young indie artist to be heard by a huge amount of people, without being approved by an industry representative first. the problem is, that it gives a lot of people that same possibility. the competition got harder. But still, as a SELF- promoting indie artist, I feel like I have as much chance as any self-promoting artist.

Besides, like it or not, that's how it is today. so we have to adjust. i'm trying to benefit as much as I can from the way things are.

If you can't fight them, join them. you can't win them if you don't play the game...

[Poker99]

 

I see a whole lot less "musical quality" in radio these days, but the Internet is not at fault here. We are in an era where radio playlists are mechanized, boring affairs and DJs have absolutely no say over what they can play, with rare exceptions.

 

 

TRUTH. Its so frustrating.

[soundwave106]

Recordings that cost 15 grand in 1990 can be made for $0 today, and that encourages every bozo to think he/she can put out a record. It's not that there isnt good stuff out there, there is. But the oversaturation is making it harder to find.

 

True, but filtering is the labels' job, really. After all, I don't exactly see too many (any?) records on the Billboard charts that are sold only at CDBaby.

 

Well, it has a good melody, good arrangement, is very catchy etc. Compare that to Gimme More by Britney Spears or London Bridge by Fergie. It's like comparing Shakespeare to Archie comics.

 

Heh. Pro hip-hop for the clubs has basically turned into a contest on who can come up with the catchiest sexual innuendo, damn the melody. It sells. That being said, I kind of liked "Gimme More", at least if I don't listen to the lyrics and pay attention to the production. The synth arrangement isn't too shabby.

[Cygnus64]

True, but filtering is the labels' job, really. After all, I don't exactly see too many (any?) records on the Billboard charts that are sold only at CDBaby. .

 

But the conversation isnt really about charts. Lots of people made comfortable livings selling records and werent remotely close to a chart.

 

Filtering is now impossible, internetwise. Any schmoe can have mp3s at iTunes. CDbaby accepts CDRs.Unmastered CDRs. That really brings everyone down.

 

AFAIK, CDBaby and i-tunes et al have NO quality control built-in whatsoever, maybe I am mistaken. That's just wrong and it hurts everybody. It makes a mockery out of the whole process. You can tape your Dog's birthday party and sell it on i-Tunes. You can use a 32kbs mp3 and sell it. And it makes YOUR CD much harder to find.

[germs]

It's not just a filtering problem though.

 

These days, people are SO much more able to produce quality packaging and designs that it makes the rest of us DIY'ers look like amateurs by comparison.

 

Any idea how long it takes (if one has the ability) to go through the cycle of (in order) complete with pro-quality design and packaging:

 

form a band

design a myspace

record an album

distribute said album

book first show

promote first show

play first show

break up

 

About 2 weeks. THAT'S the problem.

[CLOCK13]

Why not just make the most out of what you have? The internet is not going away.