Slashdot Mirror
Musicians Have Many Money Options Online, Says Talking Head
Time Slows Down writes "Scottish born musician and former record label owner David Byrne says the future of music as a career is wide open and identifies six different distribution models now available to musicians in an article in this month's Wired magazine. At one end of the scale is the 360, or equity deal, where every aspect of the artist's career is handled by producers, promoters, marketing people, and managers. At the other end of the scale is the self-distribution model, where the music is self-produced, self-written, self-played, and self-marketed."
It's the same as it ever was.
sorry...
sig sig sig siggy sig
No visible means of support and you have not seen nuthin' yet.
no wonder peopel still sign with labels, your soul for some easy money.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Great article. Especially with the dig at Pete Doherty towards the end. I think he is making an important point with that example.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Count me in
http://michaelsmith.id.au
movies
seriously, the internet is seriously fucking with the music and movie industry in some really important and earth shattering ways
i for one look forward to a fracturing of culture: where before there were a few number of portals where people can find new music/ movies (a few radio stations, a few movie houses), now we will see a million online portals for all sorts of subgenres
in a way its interesting how this will also reshape culture and a sense of identity: you belong to group a, because everyone in that group shares your interests and knows the same media you consume. everyone knows seinfeld jokes, everyone knows star wars references. whereas in a more fractured world, more subcultres are created, and more borders between groups of people not knowing commonalities between each other evolves
interesting time folks. i look forward to it
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The Almighty Institute of Music Retail cited in the article actually exists. It's like the marketing and promotion part of a record label, but without the label.
...that (actual, talented) musicians could actually be successful without a record label!
I drink to make other people interesting!
I scanned through the article, and didn't see mention of this option:
A subscription and/or ad based supposed set of central sites where artists post their music to from $0 and up, or as I preferred with AllofMp3, per unit of bandwidth -- with multiple codec options. And then said artists play music at concerts, small performances etc... ie. play for their supper. This may reduce the number of hummers that some artists can purchase, but I think it would be worth the loss. Maybe I could actually find new music that I like again.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
And I know a lot of wierd things about his music, like his collaboration with Fatboy Slim - A Musical about Imelda Marcos
the music should be free or nearly free throught digital distribution, and the artist can work for their paycheck through concert, and endorsement deals.
The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity....Calvin
Being born in 1985 and not knowing the band, for a second there I thought this was some easter egg in submissive jesus. Or from that talking head that ran after me in those nightmares I used to get. Perhaps not knowing the band is a good thing for me.
And that is that iTunes (and their ilk) brought the power of the single-song purchase to millions of people who did not have it before. Before iTMS came out, I had not bought any music in several years, close to a decade. Mostly, because, while I love the concept of whole albums--I cut my teeth on Pink Floyd's Wish You Were Here, for example--a lot of what comes out from the majors these days is indeed one or two good songs on an album of cr@p.
So since iTMS came out, I have bought at least 100 songs from albums that I never would have purchased. So those artists aren't getting $1.40 instead of $1.60 because I bought their album on iTMS; rather, they are getting $0.09 instead of $0.00 because I bought a song.
I know my $0.09 isn't much, but neither was my $1.60. And if there are millions of people like me--or even hundreds of thousands--I would guess that the introduction of the a la carte $0.99 song has been a boon for lots of artists.
Another thing to think about is that iTMS doesn't just sell artists from the majors; they also sell independents (search for "Cousin Isaac", a buddy of mine who sells a couple of albums via iTMS). I don't know the details of how that works, but it seems like there are opportunities for artists in some of Byrns' "control your own destiny" plans to take advantage of that infrastructure.
The CB App. What's your 20?
What's really eye-opening is how much the dinosaur labels managed to entrench themselves in the idea that their business doesn't need it. Now that you have a lot of the talented musicians in the industry moving to flexible labels and newer ways to distribute, the relics that continue making plastic pop icons for a quick dollar will (hopefully) wither.
Launchy.net changed my world.
David Byrne's article is well thought out, but quite unimaginative. There are many other ways to produce music and make a living with it.
For instance, since 2001, Einstuerzende Neubauten has been exploring new ways to produce records and interact with their public while producing the album. Their last 3 albums were produced by a subscription (like Mozart used to do in the 19th century!). As supporters, we could attend the recording sessions via webcam, chat online with the band members, or use the forums to discuss about the directions taken by the band ; we obtained early versions of the songs, and attended private concerts. Unanimously agreed as a great experience!
They've been fairly successful so far, though they still want to polish their formula. There is a nice interview about their latest album and the issues they face in going "label-free".
Mod me totally off topic, but this post highlights EXACTLY why the current state of music is where it is (from a pop quality standpoint). Even if you are only 20, how can you have NOT heard of the Talking Heads? Bands like The Talking Heads are what make me right when I argue that 80s music is better than 2000s music.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
(like Mozart used to do in the 19th century!)
Ummm, Mozart spent the entire 19th Century decomposing.
This may not be exactly what you're looking for, but SellaBand.com has a lot of free streaming music from good artists looking to 'make it.' Some music is downloadable as free samples. Other songs are downloadable for $.50 a song, or download a whole album for $1.00 to $3.50. DRM free! There are over 8000 artists on the site. You can make a playlist of what you like, so you can listen to your favorite SellaBand artists whenever you're online. Twelve (12) artists have raised a budget of $50,000 through the site to make/distribute/promote their album. While their may be some duds on the site, the artists pulling in the cash/support of fans are certainly a cut above the rest. http://www.sellaband.com/
I don't know where he got those charts from but they're very informative, assuming they are accurate.
They're going to be great input into our cube discussions at work (that occur while we're meant to be working).
my favorite quote:
from the article:
"Recording costs have declined to almost zero. Artists used to need the labels to bankroll their recordings. Most simply didn't have the $15,000 (minimum) necessary to rent a professional studio and pay an engineer and a producer. For many artists -- maybe even most -- this is no longer the case. Now an album can be made on the same laptop you use to check email."
As much as I used to like the Heads, Mr. Byrne, like most of his ilk, exists in a vacuum. (Not his fault, really)
If one defines "album" as a collection of "sound organizations" (or songs), then the above is certainly true. But he should talk to all the singers, songwriters and musicians out here that want to do "different" things - like have a real string quartet or chamber orchestra, or a really good gospel choir, or record the interplay between a great jazz drummer and an insane guitar shredder, or do an HD video release of the recording session, etc. etc.
Not to say there aren't lots of really great things that actually are produced on a laptop (I've heard some really cool stuff on MySpace, believe it or not), but there are still about as much costs involved if one really needs to take one's endeavor "to the next level" (ugh - I hate that phrase, sorry)
And Byrne correctly sees it in the article.
Music as "product" is out.
Music as "performance" is back in.
You produce CDs as loss leaders for your tour, not the other way around as it used to be.
As I've said repeatedly here and elsewhere, nobody in history has ever PAID FOR MUSIC. They've paid for ACCESS to music - whether it was drinks at a pub or bar, or tickets to a concert. Nobody paid for the music itself. The Grateful Dead realized this with their motto, "The music's free - the concert costs."
Only when phonographs came in was it possible to charge for music. And as soon as reel-to-reel tape recorders could be hooked to phonograph players, and later when cassette recorders with radios built in came into being, that period was over.
When the PC and ripping of CDs became possible, that whole concept of "music as product" was doomed.
The future is live broadcast over the Net by subscription and touring.
Don't tell me it can't be done. It's the only way musicians are going to make money in the future, so it will be done.
Besides, as the Situationists said forty years ago, "Art has been superceded. The only art worth making today is your own life."
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
But people still enjoy MAKING music, and technology has made it easier for folks to make their own CDs. So we're ending up with a glut of amateur and semi-pro music. I do believe, though, that eventually the cream does rise to the top, and if you make good music, people will eventually find you. Maybe not lots of people, but some. Regardless, people who make music nowadays need to be making it because they love to... because there's not a lot of money in it. But for guys like me who already have careers, that's OK. We'll continue to make CD's because we love to make music.
Music - www.richardmac.com