Slashdot Mirror
Download Only Song to Crack the Top 40
nagora writes "The BBC is reporting that next week's UK music chart may have the first sign of the end of the recording industry as we know it. From this week (7th Jan, 2006), all downloaded music sales are counted in the official UK chart, not just tracks which have had a physical media release. Now, an unsigned band called Koopa is poised to enter the top 40 without any old-world recording, distribution, or production deals. Band member Joe Murphy says "If someone comes along and gives us an offer, we'll talk to them." before continuing on to add the words the recording industry has been having nightmares about since the introduction of the mp3 format: "If we can get enough exposure and get in the top 40 by the end of the week, do we necessarily need a large label? Probably nowadays, no you don't." Is this finally the crack in the dam we've all been waiting for to wash away the entrenched monopolies of 20th century music production? Or just a sell-out waiting to happen?"
...keep moving forward by working to repeal laws that instill any form of anti-market monopoly, such as copyright. I promote and produce for a few bands in the Chicago area, and I've worked hard to get them to repudiate monopoly. The bands that do make more money! Why?
Small bands want their music out their -- the CD sales aren't where the cash cow is. Live venues can be very lucrative for even a small band -- getting 300 people to a show can net you $1 a beer or $2-$4 per head. Also, you can upsell your new fans on items they can't easily copy, such as T-shirts, autographed posters, etc. My brother's band Maps & Atlases just received a major article in Guitar Player, and they're moving forward with picking up sold-out shows, all without any representation. They do just fine on cover charges, new T-shirts every month or so, and autographed screen-printed show posters. If they can do 50 shows a year (1 a week), there's no reason that each of them can't make a very respectable 5 figures a year, after expenses.
Sure, CD sales account for some profit, especially on tour, but there is little reason to think that a band needs a label just for radio exposure or MTV. Both are great for the rare groups that can break 50,000 albums a year or sell out to 3000+ crowds -- and the chance of being one of those bands is so rare that it is almost impossible. Even worse, the labels utilize the force of copyright against even the bands that "succeed" by wrapping up all their future income in the form of residuals and management fees.
If you're a small band that wants to make it big -- tour. If you're a medium-sized band that is starting to form an audience -- get a street team. If you're a large band, make more products for your consumers to buy that isn't easily copied. Sometimes that 5 minutes you spend with a fan is worth a lifetime of them wanting your products, even if they get the easily-copied products for free.
The best form of marketing is piracy -- if you're part of the 99% of the artists out there who can't get into the big industry because you have no clout or nepotism pull.
Is it easy either way? NO. Simple laws of supply and demand will show you that most artists won't cut it -- it is very easy to get into the market (financially). The skills can mostly be learned. The production tools are getting cheaper and cheaper. There is a near limitless supply of people who want to get into the market. Surely, few are talented, but the simple fact that there is SO MUCH SUPPLY and so little demand means that most bands will make nothing (or worse, lose a ton of time and money trying). Still, the web will surpass the radio and MTV as the prime networking engine, and I do believe that collaborative filtering engines such a CRITEO will really take off when more small sites start utilizing them to get their microcosm of users to collaborate on what they like and don't like.
Sidenote: If any bands are out here that are interested in trying this theory, and have any touring experience beyond a few local shows, hit me up with an e-mail, we have some money to invest in those who repudiate copyright in exchange for the free promotion that torrents and fileshare offers.
Congrats to KOOPA for proving that you don't need might -- or force -- to be more than a starving artist.
Unfortunately, now that they've gotten this extra publicity due to not being part of a big label, the results are largely meaningless. Much as I'd like to say that this signals the end of the big labels, this almost proves that you do still need them for the halo of hype that surrounds the industry. When a song or album is hugely successful for no reason other than the quality of music, then we will finally have moved on from the artificial reality created by the big music labels.
Of course, the RIAA would never agree to legitimizing downloads like that...at least not until several more management changes happen and they get someone in their leadership who's actually owned an iPod.
...making artists *believe* that they (the record labels) are the only way to make it big. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts.
Well, at least I told a young BMW-driving yuppie from a major label. It was back in the mid 90's. "Adapt or die" I said. "Hah! You don't know what you're talking about," he repied. "We filter out all the crap music you don't want to hear!"
Yeah, right. I now repeat: Adapt or Die!
SLM
main() {1;}
God, what utter SHITE!
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
"If we can get enough exposure and get in the top 40 by the end of the week, do we necessarily need a large label?"
No - if you've got $25-$50K laying around to get a few thousand cd's printed, and have a marketing team ready to burn shoe-leather talking the stores into putting the cd's on their shelves, and a management & accounting firm to press the retailers for your receipts.
Or - hire some grunts to run a print-on-demand setup, and a flunky to run a website and take orders paid by paypal while you cut tracks for a 2nd cd.
Cloned foods give the statement "We had that last week!" a whole new meaning.
I keep reading these articles and it always seems to come down between greedy, callous, paranoid record labels on one side, and greedy, sanctimonious, flippant music fans on the other side, with the bands in the middle trying to figure out how they can be rich and famous and retire at age 26. It's all self-serving bullshit on all sides.
There is no music industry unless someone, somewhere pays for the music, and there better be a fair number of someones to make the money worthwhile, at least for the winners of the game. You can and will get inspired amateurs willing to work for nothing, or for gig money, but you won't get the explosion of creativity that comes from lots of talented people working their butts off for years trying to reach stardom.
a download would be the only song to crack the Top 40.
What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
And yet Zappa managed to make a living as an independent in the days of vinyl discs while getting virtually no radio play of his wholly uncommercial product. He paid Capital, in advance, to distribute his records.
Now you don't even have that hurdle.
Top 40 is itself is a record company scam. Part of their "buzz" machine. As an artist what you looking for is to make a living, not make the Top 40. Keep your eyes on the prize, lest someone apply missdirection and head you off on the wrong path, while keeping all the money.
KFG
But the Top 40 is not about gauging popularity. It's about gauging sales.
... and then they built the supercollider.
And now? With the .mp3 format and the internet and the whole "information age," what big independent act is around to follow in those footsteps? Koopa? Sure, there are independent "jam" acts all over the place trying to fill that void (Umphrey's McGee, Gov't Mule, Tea Leaf Green, String Cheese Incident as well as smaller acts like Soldiers of Jah Army and The Bridge) but, even with the help of the information age and the internet, have yet to really take off.
"...do we necessarily need a large label? Probably nowadays, no you don't." No, you don't. The Dead proved that over 30 years ago. Also proved you don't need the internet or any fancy information age form of communication, either.
Don't get me wrong. The most powerful way (especially for independent musicians) to get your music out is word of mouth. And sure, cell phones and the internet and sites like the Internet Archive all help, but likely it will still take a friend to tell you they saw [insert band here] and really liked them for you to do anything about it or to take notice of said artist. Great, so bands have websites and people can go there and possibly download music, or buy their CDs, or read all about them. People still need to have some motivation to go to that website.
Plagiarizing from works already in the public domain is legal. That's one of the things that makes a work public domain: you don't have to say who did it first or where it came from when you borrow from it. It can be unethical, but it is legal.
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
The rules started last week.
Several singles whose CDs are not on sale anymore cracked the top 75 including "Mad World" from Donny Darko, a former number 1 which is now used in the Gears of War ad which at #58 made its first chart appearence for 3 years.