Why (not) pay for music?
smyck.net>> "Don’t even care to get on streaming platforms in the beginning. They are all more or less under the control of the labels and you would be the luckiest person in the world if you can buy a box of beer from the revenues after a year or two."
When you can get your music on iTunes, Amazon etc. and all the streaming platforms for $50 (CDBaby) there is no reason not to. I really don't understand the authors reasoning here. It seems to go against everything they said about making your music available legally because people will steal it otherwise. Why withhold from any platform?
Also the advice on recording yourself isn't great. Sure you can pick up a book or look on YouTube but recording and producing music well is difficult. Mixing is difficult, especially without high quality equipment. The only way to get good is through lots of experience I've found, there isn't a shortcut.
>> "Yes you will need some money for equipment"
You will need a lot of money for equipment if you want to sound good. I use an Apogee ONE (pretty basic I/O device/preamp) and that alone is £300. A Shure SM58 mic (for vocals) is £100. An AKG 451 for recording acoustic instruments is £300. All this not to mention the recording software, a decent computer, and your guitars, drums, etc.
If you record in a studio all this is provided (and they provide much higher quality stuff than you could ever afford). They also usually have an assortment of high quality musical equipment (amps, guitars etc.) which you are free to use.
Unfortunately, what you list as required recording equipment is barely enough for a demo, let alone finished track. A good recording mic for vocals is about £2K, good converters will set you back as much.
>> Also the advice on recording yourself isn't great
It's borderline terrible, in fact. It's the same one as "build your website on your own, there are plenty of PHP tutorials on the internet, how hard can it be?".
You absolutely don't need to spend thousands on mics, pres and AD converters to get good recordings, there's plenty of top quality options that are much more affordable. I'd put money on 95% of the music listening population not being able to tell the difference between a £2k mic and a £500 one in blind tests.
Obviously you'd have to be willing to put an exorbitant amount of time into getting good, but that's another issue.
So get on kickstarter, use the money to pay to rent a recording studio and for an audio engineer to fix the recordings. Pay 50 bucks to get on CdBaby. Assuming 10k to rent the studio and pay the sound guy then you need a thousand true fans to pay 10 bucks and that should be doable.
Exactly that's what I would recommend. The only catch is what if you're just starting out and don't have 1000 fans?
Work a real job and live frugally putting your savings towards your dream job. That's how most startups get launched.
Work harder and figure out who the gatekeepers are, then get on reddit and/or youtube. Grow your subscribers to 10k and that should be enough to get 10% to back you with money.
I am not saying it is easy, but given that you have spent years learning to play, you should be able to spend a couple months to get noticed.
Well, find an agent that likes what you do and willing to bet some money on you... like... wait! A record company!
No you don't you can go to studios or rehearsal rooms where you can rent all the stuff you want and pretty cheap. Even if you spend 5-10k you will have spend A LOT LESS than any label. You get the money back directly, if you are break even you get to keep all the money. Its a much better bet than hoping to win the record label lottery. Its no guarantee to be successful but along the way you will get a good grasp what your chances are and if its worth recording a smurf death metal techno album. :)
Lets say you pay 10$ for Spotify and you only listen to my music for a whole month then Rihanna, Lady Gaga and Beyonce will get 99.999999% of your 10$. Its because all the money, be it advertisement or subscriptions is thrown in a huge bucket and divided by play count. It will take you a looooong loooong time to get even one single dollar out of this model.
>> "Its because all the money, be it advertisement or subscriptions is thrown in a huge bucket and divided by play count."
Source?
Also, that's still not a reason not to be on it. Lots of people use Spotify and if your music isn't available on it they either won't listen at all (you lose) or will download it illegally (you lose).
In this case people from indie and major labels. You have to trust me there but it might be even in their terms and conditions. On the web you will also find plenty of artists complaining about that model.
Furthermore you can't just be on Spotify. You need a middleman to be allowed in the labels domain. Like I said, most streaming services are controlled by the labels. Now there are some cheap proxy companies that will publish you on Spotify and sure, you can do that but in the beginning of your journey - which I was referring to - you don't need to bother. It just won't give you anything. Later its surely nice to be there but even then you won't get anything out of it money wise.
I still respectfully disagree about Spotify :) With CDBaby you can pay $50 and be on all online retailers including paid and free streaming services. With so many services out there (and so many people choosing to use different ones) I think it's best to be on them all or you risk people not being able to listen to you.
I am pretty much saturated with free music from the many netlabels and happy "amateur" musicians who release music because they make music for music's sake, not money. If somebody wants recommendations, name a genre and I will see if I can drop some links. There is a lot of negative prejudice against free music which is a real shame.
I do think there is a "negative" connotation to free music. Free does not mean bad, or less good, than expensive music, when it comes to art.
As a musician, it is significantly harder to produce an entire album by oneself. But, thats the great part of releasing something into the world, its all mine. No one else's imagination touched what I wanted to create.
Set Up::: I use a synthesizer, a midi keyboard, and an APC 40. A decent pair of studio monitors, M-Audio BX5 D2s. I sometimes borrow a microphone for a friend that works in a music studio. I record everything on Ableton 8 or 9.
I always share my music for free, and give the listener the option to pay if they want. I am about to release a three track EP, you can listen the first track here. http://fantasmafigueroa.bandcamp.com/album/afuera
EDIT: It might not be everyone's cup of tea. I grew up listening to Chicago house/acid house. Influences: Brian Eno, Max Richter, Boards of Canada, Efdemin, Stars of the Lid... lots of ambient stuff.
Your definition of free is not the same as mine. I mean music that is freely licensed so everyone can share it as they like. Creative Commons licenses are the great standard here. Your music requires at least giving you/Bandcamp an e-mail address (a personal gripe of mine and instant tab closer) and says "all rights reserved".
Requiring email, instant tap closer, huh? I never had any feedback regarding this. Bandcamp was just an easy place to share. I just changed the setting.
Hi! since there is no email jaddress on your profile, I'll ask here. please share some psytrance/Goa and the like artists if you don't mind: )
Yay, jackpot! :D
http://www.ektoplazm.com/section/free-music will overwhelm you. The great thing is that it aggregates pretty much all good free releases are there. When you find something you like, try the netlabel it comes from. Often they focus on one particular style.
Randomly recommending http://www.ektoplazm.com/free-music/trinodia-unknown-space as I really like that oldschool Goa. If progpsy is alright, try http://www.ektoplazm.com/free-music/cyandroids (Meller - Nothing). http://www.ektoplazm.com/free-music/quantica-astrobiology is some blend with DnB.
Could you share your favorite free extreme metal?
I don't know what "extreme metal" is nor have I found a Metal netlabel yet but the site with the worst redesign strategy in the free music world has some great ones. Might not be the style(s) you are into.
http://www.jamendo.com/list/a41418/whispers http://www.jamendo.com/list/a37727/the-awakening http://www.jamendo.com/list/a27926/darkshine http://www.jamendo.com/list/a42180/coma-circle-lp http://www.jamendo.com/list/a76571/angelic-asylum http://www.jamendo.com/list/a43370/anno-domini-mmix
Thanks, I'll check them out and play around with jamendo. Here's a nice site for distinguishing subgenres of music: http://www.furia.com/misc/genremaps/engenremap.html
> Compared to the analog world, where it would take ages to copy hundreds of Tapes or CDs
I think you mean the `physical' world. CDs aren't a part of the analog world; they're digital. Analog has to do with the signal type, not the medium.</pedantry>
Oh yes - thank you :)
Don't do any of that nonsense, it's a complete waste of time. Go out and play gigs. Even if you do become a megastar, most of your revenue will come from live performance. We're in an age where most people won't pay $6.99 for an album, but they'll happily pay $69 to see a band from row Q of an arena. Why spend any time or effort on the least profitable part of the enterprise, when you can get straight to the meat?
Recording an album in your bedroom is almost always a cop-out. It's a way of being able to tell yourself that you tried to have a career in music, without taking any real emotional risk or doing any real work. It's a way of "getting your music out there" that doesn't require the courage to stand up in front of a bar full of strangers and play it. Unfortunately, it doesn't work. Musicians with internet-based careers are still absolutely the exception rather than the rule, they're still a rare aberration.
If you want to be in a rock and roll band, then be in a rock and roll band. Don't buy yourself a bunch of recording equipment, buy a rusted-up old Econoline. Don't overdub your guitar tracks onto a drum machine, put up a flyer in your local music shop and find a drummer. Take whatever crappy gigs you can get and hustle like a mofo. At the very least, you'll end up with far better anecdotes.
Actually his advice is a pretty good start and yours is terrible. You don't get to the $69 arena concerts or even the festival circuit by doing smaller gigs, you get there by having videos on YouTube that get popular. Small gigs at bars are a waste of time. Even at the small venues that aren't a complete waste of time you still need an Internet presence to get booked.
Very easy to say, "Work hard, don't take the easier path, it'll be more rewarding ultimately."
Much harder to actually do. The number of people picking up instruments and really learning how to play vs. cranking through a fruity loops tutorial so they can do minor alteration remixes isn't surprising.
Yes, this is good advice. Will anyone really follow it / see the wisdom in it? Debatable.
To quote the great Ronnie Coleman:
"Everybody wanna be a bodybuilder, but ain't nobody wanna lift no heavy-ass weight."
Well you can definitely do all that stuff which I would file under my promote yourself and think for yourself section. But these days the labels got so desperate that the will only give out contracts that grant them shares of all revenues - even concerts, merchandise and all the other things. In the good old days you always had certain money streams which you could keep for yourself - thats pretty much over now.
This is excellent advice all around. As far as learning goes, a couple of bad gigs will teach you far more about music than months of jacking around with a computer.
This is probably the future. Artists will learn to record on their own (they already are), and the good ones will end up with patrons, who will (as patrons do) pay for them to continue working.
The underlying premise that labels are there solely to "promise" artists riches via hit albums is invalid. Perhaps for the mega labels that's the case, but there are a heck of alot of small labels who have honorable intentions and can and do provide quality assistance (of many different kinds) for artists.
Yes and no. First of all there are no real indie labels. If a label gets successful enough a major label will come by and make it a sub division. Even the labels with the best intentions need to get their money back at some point the market for them is the same as for everybody. If you are in the right niche at the right time there are of course exceptions - but well these are exceptions
Do you know anybody running indie labels? I do. You are only talking about major labels and "mainstream" music in your article. But, it's hurting EVERYBODY.
Some of the reactions here are silly. If you love an artist buy their record, tell your friends, go see them in concert. Blaming labels (big or small) as a justification for illegal downloading is [ insert descriptor of your choice ].
Supporting your favorite artists is cool and the right thing to do. Let them deal with their labels whether they wish to have one or not.
Yes I know people from indie labels and as I have stated earlier - there are no true indie labels which surprised me as well when I found out. The successful ones usually belong to another major label.
I don't encourage illegal downloads, quite the opposite. But the labels deserve blame as well as artists who are sitting on their faces, waiting for the labels to figure it out somehow. In the book »Appetite for Self-Destruction« its described pretty extensively how that is unlikely to happen.
To resolve the dilemma we need a revolution, coming from the artists and the consumers and I hope I inspire some people to wake up, use their brain and make things better without the labels.
The one problem with this article: citing The Beatles as a group that won big in the business. Not true at all. The Beatles were terribly mismanaged, their manager sold the rights to songs for pennies or even gave them away. Money troubles inspired the song "You Never Give Me Your Money."
Hmm I will read up on this and correct it if true. Thanks for pointing that out!
>> "Some won’t even download it illegally, instead they will just listen to music through streaming services like Spotify which are free to a certain extend and which yield so little profit to the labels or the artists that it is almost like downloading it for free."
This is totally inaccurate. The music industry grew for the first time since 1999 due to digital streaming services:
http://ifpi.no/9-forsiden/43-ifpi-publishes-digital-music-re...
That is good for the labels but not for the smaller artists. I talked to people from indie labels and major labels from the digital divisions - they said all the same. If you are not already big you will get little to nothing out of Spotify etc.
I'll pay for music that I can get in FLAC or ALAC for a reasonable cost (say, $1 extra than the cost of the WAV). I'm trying hard not to buy physical CDs, but it's difficult.
You basically get lossless music left and right these days - that is if you look beyond iTunes & Co.
Quobuz, Boomkat, HDTracks, Bandcamp, Bleep and others all offer lossless music - obscure and indie music, as well as major artists.
I won't buy anything that isn't lossless and can't remember the last time I had trouble finding an album in my format of choice.
Gladly availability isn't a problem any longer.
You're lucky - Anjunabeats and Armada still won't sell FLAC and WAV at Junodownload and Beatport doesn't count - look at the markup!
Really? It's been a good decade since I listened to that kind of music, but considering that their target audience are probably a good share of DJs, who should care about lossless quality, this is quite disappointing.
I'm pretty sure all music on www.bandcamp.com comes in FLAC and ALAC for no extra charge. It's mostly independent artists but there are a few major names (e.g. Sufjan Stevens). www.beatport.com also offers high quality audio for a little extra (not sure on the format or extra charge though).
Unfortunately, Beatport are the worst for surcharges on WAVs.
> For over a decade now the music industry is struggling.
And that's where I stopped reading (which is unfortunate, because this is also where I started reading).
Why not? Because I'm able to find all of the music I'm looking for on Soundcloud. Plus it's a great platform to discover new talent.
And they fail horribly to enable artists to make money. Soundcloud, sadly - is just a fancy and mostly free data store for audio files. So yeah - you nailed it pretty much :)
I'll consider paying when the copyright lobby stops taking away my liberties (which is probably never).