Amazon & TuneCore To Cut Out the RIAA Middleman

CDBaby by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:01 · Score: 0

Similar model. Get into the iTunes store.

Re:CDBaby by eldavojohn · 2009-05-22 01:09 · Score: 5, Interesting

Similar model.
If you read the article, they mention CDBaby:

For TuneCore, the deal expands its primary business helping indie artists get digital distribution through online outlets such as iTunes, Napster and Amazon MP3. TuneCore will now compete directly with CDBaby, the current leader in low-volume CD manufacturing and distribution. CDBaby charges $278 for 100 discs, although it recently lowered its minimum order to just five copies.
I've been a massive fan of CDBaby ordering discs straight from people like Anni Rossi but it has a minimum order those artists have to meet. I don't like the idea of a band having to buy up 500 or 100 or even 5 copies. Instead a flat fee of $31 for the artist makes me excited that this could really be big for indie artists ... I think CDBaby's success is proof that this even cheaper alternative could be a massive success. Let's hope Amazon allows you a 30 second preview and review ratings to quickly separate the wheat from the chaff.

Get into the iTunes store.
While iTunes would be slightly bigger, Amazon is a big leap for Tunecore and I'm happy to see it even on this level.

--
My work here is dung.
Re:CDBaby by Mendokusei · 2009-05-22 01:17 · Score: 5, Informative

While iTunes would be slightly bigger, Amazon is a big leap for Tunecore and I'm happy to see it even on this level.
According to their website, TuneCore already has a deal with the iTunes store, as well as most all of the other digital music services.
Re:CDBaby by Maury+Markowitz · 2009-05-22 01:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

> Instead a flat fee of $31 for the artist makes me excited that this could really be big for indie artists
Wow, yeah.
So this basically reduces the major labels to their back catalog. No one that knows about this service would sign unless they already have major sales - and that's an even STRONGER argument for using this service. You retain all rights, get 40% of the take, and costs you one lunch bill?
What freaks me out is that the labels, after staring this in the face for decades, still can't figure out how to sell their catalog. They have 10,000,000 songs in the database, but the only thing they can figure out is how to sell the newest 40.
Maury
Re:CDBaby by Daengbo · 2009-05-22 01:39 · Score: 3, Insightful

The problem with their model is that 35 of those newest 40 are recycled from that 10,000,000.

--
Put identity in the browser.
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 01:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

No one that knows about this service would sign unless they already have major sales...
Unfortunately this still doesn't provide a good alternative to one important service the major record labels provide: promotion.
Just because you put your independent band up on MySpace and SonicBids and your own website and sell your songs on iTunes and your CD on CDBaby doesn't magically make everyone in the world suddenly know you exist and want to buy your stuff. Somehow they still have to stumble across you in the first place, out of the trillions of other bands who have done the same as you.
This Amazon service is awesome, and it's part of a much larger trend that will ultimately make the major labels obsolete, but there's still more work to be done.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by Neeperando · 2009-05-22 01:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

No one that knows about this service would sign unless they already have major sales
I don't think that's true. People want more than to break even on the cost of a CD, they want fame and success. If you want your song played on the radio or a music video on MTV, you still need to go through a major label.
I'm not saying this is a good thing. It's a pretty strong financial argument against the labels, but some people want to be famous, too.

--
Being a computer scientist means you tell people how computers should work, not that you know how they actually work.
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 01:59 · Score: 1

I've been a massive fan of CDBaby ordering discs straight from people like Anni Rossi but it has a minimum order those artists have to meet.
I'm just curious how this minimum works. Can you provide some more info, or a link to the details? The reason I ask is I've sold albums through CDBaby and wasn't aware of anything of the sort.
Actually, Wikipedia tells me that "CD Baby has no minimum sales requirement for members; an artist who sells only one CD every 20 years would still remain a part of the company's catalogue."

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by altoz · 2009-05-22 02:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

Unfortunately this still doesn't provide a good alternative to one important service the major record labels provide: promotion.
Well, this is the essence of what the future of the Record industry is, isn't it? You have two distinct businesses that are finally getting separated. On the one hand, you have the music sales group which makes money based on sales of the actual music. On the other, you have a marketing/promotion group which makes money off of concerts and the like. The former is a dead business model that'll go away with services like the one mentioned in this story. The latter is something that an agent or a marketing company or a PR firm can do. Really, this is what a record company will eventually evolve to.
Re:CDBaby by Lumpy · 2009-05-22 02:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's called getting off your ass.
Send CD's to radio stations to get air play. Get out and PLAY at better venues. The Intersection in Grand Rapids is a little crap hole bar that a lot of indies got their leap into fame from.
Get out, play for people, get Cd's in the hands of people that will play it on the air.
If you think as a "band" you can sit back and wait for it to happen, you smoked way too much dope.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:CDBaby by u-235-sentinel · 2009-05-22 02:28 · Score: 1

No one that knows about this service would sign unless they already have major sales...
Unfortunately this still doesn't provide a good alternative to one important service the major record labels provide: promotion.
Just because you put your independent band up on MySpace and SonicBids and your own website and sell your songs on iTunes and your CD on CDBaby doesn't magically make everyone in the world suddenly know you exist and want to buy your stuff. Somehow they still have to stumble across you in the first place, out of the trillions of other bands who have done the same as you.
This Amazon service is awesome, and it's part of a much larger trend that will ultimately make the major labels obsolete, but there's still more work to be done.
I would purchase them through Amazon if they didn't have ties to the RIAA. Today I'm careful NOT to purchase new music sponsered by the RIAA however sites like secondspin.con or Amazon provide a means to purchase music that's in great condition AND not another dime goes to the RIAA.
works for me :D

--
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 02:33 · Score: 4, Insightful

Send CD's to radio stations to get air play.
Most stations won't even open the package. College stations might, but mainstream ones aren't interested.

Get out and PLAY at better venues.
That works locally, but what about the rest of the world?

Get out, play for people, get Cd's in the hands of people that will play it on the air.
I'm not saying that it can't be done, and I certainly don't advocate bands sitting on their asses and expecting to become instant multi-millionaires because they recorded an album. But marketing music is hard, especially in a world that has as many bands as this one has. It takes a lot of effort to stand out and get noticed, and you have to recognize that just because you may be good at writing and playing songs doesn't mean you're magically good at marketing those songs. Most bands need someone with knowledge and experience to handle that for them.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by AmiMoJo · 2009-05-22 02:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's called gigging.
You play to an audience. Dish out some flyers. A few of them like you and check your web site or add you as a friend on MySpace/Facebook. Their friends might check you out too.
You even get paid for the gig.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:CDBaby by Mister+Whirly · 2009-05-22 02:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

That helps, but it isn't what really matters. Besides promotion, the biggest thing labels offer is a distribution model. Have you seen the end of the aisle displays at Best Buy and Walmart? You don't get those by being a talented artist, or by "getting off your ass", you get them because they have deals with record labels. If Best Buy wants to sell the big name artists, they will have to sell and advertise some of the smaller bands too. Getting played on the radio is very similar. While there isn't outright open payola as much anymore, there is definitely implied indirect payola. Having talent and working hard will greatly increase your chance for success, but if you don't have someone with some sway behind you, even the best efforts often go nowhere.

--
"But this one goes to 11!"
Re:CDBaby by cyber-vandal · 2009-05-22 02:52 · Score: 1

To be fair who gives a shit about them. They can mime to their crappy cover versions while the world moves on and renders them and their masters obsolete.
Re:CDBaby by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 02:53 · Score: 0

I don't even listen to radio stations anymore. Too much repeats of the same old/boring songs. I listen to Pandora and Slacker. And I find a TON of new bands through them. The songs I really like, I browse over to Amazon.com and buy.
So this is dead simple for any new bands:
1. Ignore standard radio, MTV and the RIAA
2. Get your songs into the mix at Pandora and/or Slacker.
3. Put your songs up on Amazon.com
4. Profit
Re:CDBaby by bertoelcon · 2009-05-22 02:57 · Score: 0, Redundant

The problem with their model is that 35 of those newest 40 are recycled from that 10,000,000.
More like 39 of the 40

--
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
Re:CDBaby by Jason+Levine · 2009-05-22 03:05 · Score: 5, Interesting

Just because you put your independent band up on MySpace and SonicBids and your own website and sell your songs on iTunes and your CD on CDBaby doesn't magically make everyone in the world suddenly know you exist and want to buy your stuff. Somehow they still have to stumble across you in the first place, out of the trillions of other bands who have done the same as you.
This is where I think the future of the recording labels lie. Amazon and iTunes (as well as other services) have shown that distribution is being taken out of the labels' hands. Now Amazon is working to take manufacturing out of their hands also. Recording has been practically out of their hands for awhile now. (Recording artists can buy what used to be thought of as professional level gear for relatively little money now.) The only thing left is Promotion.
The way I see the future of labels (if you'll even be able to call them that) is this: Band X wants to record some songs and sell them. They buy the equipment to record, sign up with Amazon/Apple/whoever to manufacture/distribute, and then sign up with Label A for promotion. Label A gets a cut of the sales, but doesn't own any rights to the music. If Band X is unhappy with how Label A is promoting them, they can drop the label and move on. Label A gets a final paycheck (for work done up to contract termination) and then the next promotion label gets the sales cut paychecks. Labels will have an incentive to treat their bands well and increase sales because otherwise they (the labels) don't get paid. The current labels will fight this tooth and nail, of course, but I think that it is almost inevitable.

--
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Re:CDBaby by Chyeld · 2009-05-22 03:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

So maybe you aren't an instant star. Big Fucking Deal.
Do you think that the guy behind Portal's Still Alive song was picked for that honor because the Valve devs heard him on the radio?
Do you think the reason someone gets invited to PAX every year is because he's got an agent behind him doling out the payola to Tycho and Gabe?
No, you can't find their CD's browsing Best Buy or Wal-Mart. But I bet you they still make enough on their work that they can afford dinner at the end of the day.
Re:CDBaby by Dragonslicer · 2009-05-22 03:17 · Score: 4, Funny

a music video on MTV
Hahahahaha

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

-deep breath-

Hahahahahahaha
Re:CDBaby by Neeperando · 2009-05-22 03:20 · Score: 1

I don't give a shit. If the record labels die I'll join the chorus singing "Hooray, the labels are dead." I'm saying it's not going to happen.
Everyone seems to think that if we just get right combination of technology and business saavy then a company like TuneCore can kill the record labels and usher in a new era of creative freedom. But guess what: people WANT to be told what to like. The 98% of the population that listens to music in their car, at work and in the gym doesn't have time to listen to 99 crappy indie albums to find the one they actually like. And even if they did have the time many wouldn't want to. And even then most people just want to listen to what people like them are listening to so others will think they are cool.
Certainly if recommender technologies keep getting better it will help, but they're not perfect now, and it will be a while before we can go completely without a middleman.

--
Being a computer scientist means you tell people how computers should work, not that you know how they actually work.
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 03:22 · Score: 1

What?!? The labels working for the band?!? Blasphemy!!! :)
What you've described is exactly how the industry should work, and I agree that it will get there. Interestingly enough, while the major labels are fighting this evolution tooth and nail, the small independent labels are already starting to do exactly what you described.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by swordgeek · 2009-05-22 03:24 · Score: 1

I know a lot of musicians. None of them are after fame and success, at least where success = huge sales, tons of money, etc..
People after MTV and commercial radio airplay are not what I would call musicians or artists. Some people who end up on those venues are genuine artists, but invariably that's not their goal--it just happened.
Ultimately, talent, skill, and quality aren't vectors to fame, so if the 'fame' model dies horribly, I don't think anyone will be upset. Well, consumers and artists won't be upset at least. Businesses and shills might be upset that their free ride is over.

--

"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Re:CDBaby by Lumpy · 2009-05-22 03:30 · Score: 1, Insightful

Send your CD to the throngs of Music podcasts and blogs. They will listen and if it's not junk they talk about it. There is a HUGE group of people that listen to Indifeed podcast.
Embrace the marketing system that the RIAA ignores. On the Endcap of Walmart is not where you want to be. Being on the endcap there means you are getting $0.06 per disc sold... No thanks.
Honestly this stuff is not that hard, Stop trying to think the way the RIAA and labels WANT YOU to think.
P.S. It's easy to get past the radio station mail guards. You gotta learn Guerrilla Marketing.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:CDBaby by Neeperando · 2009-05-22 03:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think you're assuming that the majority of consumers care whether a given musician is considered art, or are even capable of telling the difference.
Artists make art that they think is good. Fame/Success/Money-seekers make a product that will satisfy the desires of a large number of people. Do you really think good art will ever replace commercial art? Good art by its very nature challenges people, and most people don't want to be challenged. They want to go out and dance and party and get laid. And that is, not surprisingly, what most of the Top 40 are about.
I would argue that people will be upset if pointless, fun, mind-numbing, easy to listen to music dies in favor serious, artistic music. But we won't ever find out, because the market will always favor what's popular over what's good. If the labels die, the populist musicians will rise to prominence through a different venue and the true artists will still only be listened to by that small segment of the population that cares about artistic music.

--
Being a computer scientist means you tell people how computers should work, not that you know how they actually work.
Re:CDBaby by Aceticon · 2009-05-22 03:51 · Score: 1

Well, a natural evolution of something like this would be for Amazon to have an Internet radio service where music tracks are automatically selected for playing based on user preferences be it by user votes, sales, user contributed play-lists or any other options they might choose - artists that sell via this service would be able to choose if they want their music played on Amazon radio or not.
Actually, such a kind of "automated" Internet radio with a large music catalog backing it could potentially have a near infinite number of channels: just give the listeners "personal radio streams" and a large number of variables they can individual adjust to tweak them (say, music genre, Amazon review stars, year of recording, number of user playlists it is on and more).
Re:CDBaby by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 03:53 · Score: 0

giggity.
Re:CDBaby by Yez70 · 2009-05-22 03:55 · Score: 2, Informative

Tunecore only charges you 99 cents to add iTunes distribution for an album. It's only 99 cents per store actually and you can also put it into Rhapsody, Napster, eMusic, Amazon MP3 and a half dozen other digital distribution stores. The $31 charge is actually comprised of a $20 flat setup fee for the album per year, plus 99 cents per track (10 tracks avg) and 99 cents for the digital distribution store. Tunecore does not keep a dime of what you earn from the online stores, after you pay the initial fee, unlike CDBaby which takes a percentage of all digital sales on top of their setup fees. iTunes pays 70 cents per track sold to the artist who uses Tunecore to distribute their music.
Re:CDBaby by nausea_malvarma · 2009-05-22 04:07 · Score: 1

The folks who work at major radio stations (think clear channel, ect) don't decide what gets played. The playlists are arranged in advanced, and the songs are usually chosen by a higher up - not somebody who works at the radio station. A computer plays the song on cue. All the djs do is talk in between to make the sation feel "local" but in reality, every clear channel adult 40 station is playing the exact same set of songs nation wide, and the same goes for all their other formats. Sending a CD to a radio station won't help at all! They will just throw it out. Besides, record companies have "independent promoters" at every station, paying the radio stations to play what they want.
The big record labels run things like a cartel. Bands have no chance with them, and no chance without them. The only sensible thing to do is boycott major radio and major labels altogether.
Re:CDBaby by cayenne8 · 2009-05-22 04:10 · Score: 1

"Just because you put your independent band up on MySpace and SonicBids and your own website and sell your songs on iTunes and your CD on CDBaby doesn't magically make everyone in the world suddenly know you exist and want to buy your stuff. Somehow they still have to stumble across you in the first place, out of the trillions of other bands who have done the same as you."
Well,if you can perform live...get out and TOUR.
That's how bands like Led Zeppelin did it...they certainly didn't have a ton of worldwide promotion pushing them into the spotlight. They worked...concert tour after concert tour after concert tour.
They earned their reputation, and they were actually extremely media 'shy' (hence the lack of that much live recorded material on them).
I'd dare say they made it pretty big without the 'promotion' of a major label.

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:CDBaby by crazyjimmy · 2009-05-22 04:27 · Score: 1

I don't think the Major Record Lables provide as much as you're assuming. Yes, they provide promotion, but their ability is somewhat limited, as they tend to fall back on the systems they know and understand, and are hesitant to embrace the new ways of communicating. Worse, they tend to market only the music that fits their specific mold. If you're somewhat of a niche artist, they'll have no idea what to do with you.

An Artist with technology saavy will be able to put together a much larger footprint on the internet than the record lables could ever hope for. Using Twitter, a blog, youtube, an active website, myspace (shudder), and now Amazon, it's actually much easier for them to get their music directly to the fans, no major label needed.

A prime example of this is Amanda Palmer. She maintains a very healthy presence online, and is actively seeking to break with her major record label, as they're entirely unable to market her, and make money off of her.

We may be seeing the beginning of the end for the record labels. I can't say that bothers me much. :)

--Jimmy
Re:CDBaby by cayenne8 · 2009-05-22 04:48 · Score: 1

"Actually, such a kind of "automated" Internet radio with a large music catalog backing it could potentially have a near infinite number of channels: just give the listeners "personal radio streams" and a large number of variables they can individual adjust to tweak them (say, music genre, Amazon review stars, year of recording, number of user playlists it is on and more)."
Just curious...on laws/regulations passed in recent years. Don't you have to pay some place (Soundcheck or something) a great deal of money if you are streaming music EVEN IF these are indie artists that give you full permission to play their stuff?
Seems like if you could get past that...just about anybody with a server could play DJ with the indie tunes, and all point them to the Amazon store for purchases....

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 05:07 · Score: 1

Touring doesn't mean you don't also need promotion. As someone who has actually travelled to another city to play in an empty room (literally — the only people there were the staff, and whenever they stepped outside for a smoke, we were actually playing to an empty room), trust me that you need promotion as well.
There are ways to promote yourself, as many in this thread have pointed out. Some artists are coming up with really clever ways to do it through the Internet. Personally, I'm thrilled with the opportunities that the 'Net presents for artists.
But not everyone has figured out how to take advantage of it yet. That's the part that services like this one from Amazon are not addressing.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by EastCoastSurfer · 2009-05-22 05:08 · Score: 1

Radio gets paid through advertising. To get people to listen they play the popular songs. The RIAA can control the playlist all it wants, but eventually some of the more popular songs are going to show up through the non-label medium. At this point the radio will have start making choices about either letting listeners leave or start playing music from the non-label sources.
It won't happen overnight, but this is the direction that the industry is headed.
Re:CDBaby by Peter+Wells · 2009-05-22 05:09 · Score: 4, Informative

We do. It's our bread-and-butter. We've been delivering music to iTunes--half a million songs already--for three years now. :) --Peter peter@tunecore.com
Re:CDBaby by Nerdfest · 2009-05-22 05:11 · Score: 1

For live gigs, start locally ... move up from there. As for radio, I'm not sure many would play your stuff, unless there was a decent local groundswell of support. How about Pandora, Last.fm, etc?
Re:CDBaby by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 05:15 · Score: 0

I doubt many bands can survive one one CD sale to you. There are certain topics that come up here that point out how out of touch a segment of Slashdot readers really are.

Slow Down Cowboy!

Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair
chance at posting a comment.

It's been 2 hours, 49 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
Re:CDBaby by CorporateSuit · 2009-05-22 05:30 · Score: 1

Most stations won't even open the package. College stations might, but mainstream ones aren't interested.
Incorrect. You send them the CD, and then have a few different people call in and request the song over the course of a few days. The typical DJ will get curious and pop it open (or adventurous and play it). Of course, this goes hand-in-hand with all of the other steps my GP was mentioning. None of those points alone would get you in the limelight, typically, anyway. They're a concerted effort where the consolidation is exponentially more powerful than the sum of its parts.

--
I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
Re:CDBaby by iztaru · 2009-05-22 05:46 · Score: 1

They buy the equipment to record, sign up with Amazon/Apple/whoever to manufacture/distribute, and then sign up with Label A for promotion. Label A gets a cut of the sales, but doesn't own any rights to the music.
I see the future a bit different. I would like to pay to the promotion companies (labels?) a fee per service with a clear way to measure the effectiveness. I don't think they will get any where with a business case like: "Give me a fix part of your income and trust me, I am doing what is best for you."
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 05:48 · Score: 1

Incorrect. You send them the CD, and then have a few different people call in and request the song over the course of a few days. The typical DJ will get curious and pop it open (or adventurous and play it).
Unfortunately, that's not how it works. As I said before, it may work with college radio, but mainstream radio doesn't let the DJ just pop in whatever he or his callers want to hear.
They get their music from a central playlist, which is why they won't even open the package if you send them a CD. If it didn't come from the central source, then they're just not interested.
Some stations do have (very limited) "free play" slots, but good luck getting in on those slots. Getting all your friends to call in and request your song is a start, but don't think that you're the only one doing this. I hope you have lots of friends.
I'm not saying it's impossible for a truly independent artist to get on mainstream radio. It's just not as simple as sending in a CD and they'll happily play it.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 05:52 · Score: 0

Slow Down Cowboy!
Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair
chance at posting a comment.
It's been 2 hours, 49 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
Yeah, /. really f'd up the ac posting when they started doing that. They probably did it to reduce the trolling and flamebaiting, but I think they gave up a valuable source of input. I'm sure that there are many people like me who read /. while at work (only on breaks, of course ;) and would post ac but would never log in to an account from work. The loss is /.'s really. It has become slower and less dynamic over the last few years and all the fiddling in the world with the look and layout of the place will never compensate. I guess /. has officially jumped the shark.
Re:CDBaby by Jason+Levine · 2009-05-22 06:26 · Score: 1

By "a cut of the sales" I meant that they would get a small (say 3%) cut on song sales. This would give the labels-turned-promotion-companies an incentive to increase sales. Every extra sale is more money in their pocket. With a flat fee, they would earn the same amount of money if they ran a nationwide TV/Radio campaign or if they sat on their rumps and just did nothing. Granted, I don't think any "no nothing" labels would survive, but they might cut corners on their promotions in an effort to raise their profits.
I do agree that there should be a clear way to measure their effectiveness, though. This way the band can tell whether they want to keep or ditch the label. In addition, the labels could use the effectiveness ratings to sign up new talent. ("Band X saw their sales jump 150% when they switched from Label Y to us.")

--
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Re:CDBaby by AkiraRoberts · 2009-05-22 07:01 · Score: 1

I suppose the question I'd have to ask is: "Why would a truly independent artist want to get on mainstream radio in the first place?" I mean, it's not as though that's the only way to be financially successful making music, is it? And hell, if you're truly independent (whatever the hell that means), I'd be willing to wager that college radio listeners are going to be a lot more interested in your music than people listening to mainstream radio.
I guess it's the mainstream radio + truly independent construction that's giving me a bit of cognitive dissonance here.

--
words, words, words, lemur, words, words words
Re:CDBaby by RailRide · 2009-05-22 07:25 · Score: 1

One of the things the Opie & Anthony Show revealed about "regular radio" in one of their rants about the industry is that most radio stations do not honor requests, even though they solicit them by broadcasting their "request lines". What they do instead is record the caller's request, and if it happens to match up with something already on the official playlist at some point in the future, they play that call as the lead-in to the song, making it appear that they fulfilled a request, but in reality it was something that was already scheduled to appear in the rotation. Needless to say, if your request isn't on the "approved" list, lotsa luck getting the DJ to gamble with their jobs playing an unsanctioned record.

---PCJ
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 08:03 · Score: 1

Why would a truly independent artist want to get on mainstream radio in the first place?
Because it's one way to promote your band. It's not the only way, but it's one way. To be clear, my original point was simply that services like this don't provide promotion. Someone else responded that you can promote yourself by sending CDs to radio stations, and I simply said that this doesn't work for mainstream stations. If you're an artist, it's totally your call if you want to try to get onto mainstream radio. I'm just saying you won't get there just by sending in a CD.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by AkiraRoberts · 2009-05-22 08:14 · Score: 1

Fair enough. We're probably in agreement that this isn't neccesarily the ideal service for someone looking for a cheap way to get on mainstream radio (I doubt such a thing exists). But for a band, such as the one I'm in at the moment, that's looking for a quick and easy way to get some physical albums out there - promotion, marketing, etc. aside - this looks pretty neat.

Sure, it doesn't give you stuff to sell at shows. But hell - make 30 or 40 D.I.Y. copies of some B-sides and demos, slap a link to the TuneCore site on it, and sell it for $4 a pop. As for the promotion side of things, well that's another question. I'd say there's plenty of ways to promote yourself without needing to get played on the Edge/Peak/Rock/GenericMonosyllable 103.3. Maybe those ways won't translate into massive success, but they could translate into a comfortable living. And personally? If I can make a comfortable living playing music, I'd be pretty damned happy.

--
words, words, words, lemur, words, words words
Re:CDBaby by HiThere · 2009-05-22 08:29 · Score: 1

My suspicion is just like FOSS means that there will be no next Microsoft, open access for music means that there will be no next (who's the current superstar?).
N.B.: Joan Baez or Bob Dylan style figures will still emerge, but they won't have the dominance that they did when the media companies controlled who could get published. It may be more like the 1960's when you had the Beatles, but you also had Jefferson Airplane, the Grateful Dead, Country Joe and the Fish, and MANY others. (I listed the ones *I* liked. Others would have very different lists.) Diversity of style, not everyone in lockstep.
P.S.: Copyright laws still need to change. Joan Baez should never have been allowed to copyright folksongs. Technically, I suppose that she only copyrighted a particular arrangement of them, but she didn't list what was new and what was old. This shouldn't be allowed unless ANY change that you make allows you to claim a new copyright. And any would include just changing the key or the tempo.

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Re:CDBaby by Rary · 2009-05-22 08:54 · Score: 1

But for a band, such as the one I'm in at the moment, that's looking for a quick and easy way to get some physical albums out there ... this looks pretty neat.
I agree. I intend to make use of this service as well.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:CDBaby by swordgeek · 2009-05-22 10:02 · Score: 1

Hmm. I think we agree, but are approaching the issue from different angles.
I have no problems with fun, pointless, fluffy music. I have a fair bit of it in my collection at home, and put it on the playlist regularly. I don't really draw a line between 'fun/popular' music and 'artistic' music. I do, however, draw a line between music written as music vs. music generated as marketing. Mostly it's a matter of intent (and yes, ability) for me. Music is written for the want of writing, performing, and reaching out to people; and if that means a song that gets people up DANCING, that's fine. It's when people sit in an office, generate a song via a formula, based on target radio demographics and sales numbers; then assign star status to fame-seekers who can't sing (because you can always fix it up with autotune), THAT'S what I'd like to see die.
Popularity should be about what people want to hear (or see, or read), not what they're told to enjoy. The problem with the system at present is that the charts and radio exposure are so tightly controlled by the marketing agencies and labels that good musicians--either populist or serious--are being marginalised and until recently have been blocked from accessing much of the market that would appreciate them.
Lemme give you some concrete examples. First, assume that the 'target audience' here is the (very broad) 15-35 year old group which actively listens to popular radio (either pop, country, rap, classic rock, or the like). OK, ready? Here we go...
Maybe one person in 50 (or even 500) might listen to and enjoy the Fiery Furnaces if exposed to them. How many are exposed to them now via the existing commercial media structure? Roughly zero. They get zero airplay, outside of public and campus radio.
The B-52s. Fun, airheaded, silly summer pop. I will stand here and claim that if they were a new band now, they'd never get the airplay they did when they started--because they weren't packaged by the industry. There are an endless number of bands out there that are just plain ol' fun (my brother's country band is one of 'em), but can't get airplay because of the mechanisms of the industry.
Conversely, you have "musicians" that aren't musicians at all--they can't write, they can't play, and they can't sing--either lipsyncing (a la Britney Spears), or relying entirely on autotune (nearly EVERYONE - let's pick on Kelly Clarkson for the sake of argument), and performing a song written as a marketing tool (sometimes simply album sales, but often other products or backers--"Hannah Montana" as a musician? She's a Disney Character folks!) Oh yes, and false anger for the sake of controversy and...sales. (Pretty much the entire rap industry.)
The music we listen to doesn't all have to be serious, artistic, complex stuff, but it should be written for musicans and fans to enjoy--and the industry prevents that as much as possible.

--

"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Re:CDBaby by Omestes · 2009-05-22 12:40 · Score: 1

The music we listen to doesn't all have to be serious, artistic, complex stuff, but it should be written for musicans and fans to enjoy--and the industry prevents that as much as possible.
They aren't doing a very good job at it. There is only one band on a major label that I would still buy CDs from (Tool), and I think that they are about ready to pull a Trent Reznor. Everything else is either old, on an independent label, or self-released. I doubt I'm an exception to the rule, either, yes I might be a little uncommon, but not rare.
As for pop, thats how media markets work. You start with a single channel, and eventually is blows up into millions of specialty markets. The B-52s might not have been massive, but they would have had a respectable fan-base and following. There is way to many bands/artists out there now for even a decent fraction of them to become house hold names.
I look at modern popular music as fashion accessories, or lifestyle products. You wear it as a kid to show all the other kids who you are, what you stand for. Big music is a brand, and brands need tons of money behind them to be recognizable.

--
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
Re:CDBaby by SigmundFloyd · 2009-05-23 01:15 · Score: 1

Send CD's to radio stations to get air play.
ROTFL! You really don't know what you're talking about.

--
Knowledge is power; knowledge shared is power lost.
Re:CDBaby by aurispector · 2009-05-23 01:36 · Score: 1

Dear Pete,
Thanks for finally killing the old music industry.
Sincerely, Everyone.
People have been talking for years about how online sales could revolutionize the music industry. Itunes got it partly right, but had to cut deals with the existing music giants to get off the ground and it had no mechanism where musicians could get in without an existing record deal. Working through Itunes AND Amazon (people who bought this ALSO bought...) and giving a fair shake to the artists on sales sounds like the magic combination needed to reduce the old model to irrelevancy. Best of luck.

--
I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
Re:CDBaby by tkw954 · 2009-05-23 10:31 · Score: 1

Unfortunately this still doesn't provide a good alternative to one important service the major record labels provide: promotion.
The other service they provide is financing. Although the cost of recording a professional-quality album has come down in recent years, it is still more than a lot of artists have in petty cash. They need the record deal to finance those costs, since the only bank that will provide business loans for something like this is the "Bank of Mom and Dad".

Copyright infringement by Kurusuki · 2009-05-22 01:04 · Score: 3, Funny

I for one wait to see the lawsuit the RIAA is drawing up to bring down upon Amazon for squelching their draconian business practices by violating their 'copyright' on 'distribution of artistic works of an audio based nature'

At $31 per album by mandark1967 · 2009-05-22 01:04 · Score: -1, Redundant

you'd be lucky to sell 4 copies.

--
Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain

Re:At $31 per album by AlmondMan · 2009-05-22 01:09 · Score: 3, Informative

How on earth do you figure it's 31$ pr album? It's 31$ to get listed. Read the article, how would you ever make it out to be 31$ pr. album when 9 sales is all that's required to get back in the black?
Re:At $31 per album by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:10 · Score: 3, Informative

No, no, no. You, the artist, pay them $31 to get started and have them take you on. Then they sell the albums at a "normal" price. RTFA... Although, I also blame /. for increasingly bad summaries these days.
Re:At $31 per album by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:10 · Score: 0

Reading fail on your part. It's 31$ to list the CD [per year] then they take 60% of each sale.
I didn't read the entire article but that much seemed obvious to me.
It's like Lulu for audio.
Re:At $31 per album by Donniedarkness · 2009-05-22 01:11 · Score: 3, Funny

It was my understanding that the band paid $31 as sort of a "starting fee". After that initial $31, there is nothing more to pay (that is, if I understood what I read correctly). They're not trying to -sell- the discs for $31 a pop.

--
Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
Re:At $31 per album by sopssa · 2009-05-22 01:11 · Score: 1

You sir, failed to understand whats the $31 is about. Thats the cost for getting the album there, not the price its sold at.
Re:At $31 per album by JPLemme · 2009-05-22 01:11 · Score: 1

I don't know. You would have to be pretty committed to music to even know about this service. Committed fans are (I believe) happy to spend more money if they know that a significant percentage is going to the artist.
In some ways it's like being an old-fashioned patron of the arts, where you're paying the band so that they can afford to continue making music you like, rather than paying the RIAA $18 for a CD of songs that the artist has already been paid for. (Assuming it's one of the 95% of albums that never sell enough copies to repay their advance...)
Re:At $31 per album by styryx · 2009-05-22 01:11 · Score: 4, Informative

FTA:

Tunecore will charge just $31 a year in upfront fees to handle a 10-track CD from pressing to delivery, passing all other costs through to the buyer.
And

If one of Amazonâ(TM)s 80 million customers buys your 10-song CD on Amazon for $8.98, youâ(TM)ll receive $3.59
However,

one obvious drawback to this model is that you canâ(TM)t sell an on-demand CD at shows, where enthusiastic fans are most likely to pick one up.
That being said, if anyone here wants to potentially earn some money. Create a mobile (or iphone) app that will allow you to buy the CD from amazon, as well as download the tracks (DRM free) to your mobile device there and then. Perhaps using the barcode apps. This would be the best of both (plus another) worlds.
Re:At $31 per album by Locklin · 2009-05-22 01:14 · Score: 5, Informative

It's a $31 per year "hosting fee" for the artist.
From the article:

If one of Amazon's 80 million customers buys your 10-song CD on Amazon for $8.98, you'll receive $3.59. After selling just nine discs, you're in the black.
emphasis mine.

--
"Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
Re:At $31 per album by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:17 · Score: 0

Double Comprehension Fail: It's $31 just to start, not per album
Re:At $31 per album by BigHungryJoe · 2009-05-22 01:20 · Score: 5, Funny

Maybe they should hire editors to clean up the summaries, verify links, and check for duplicate stories.
Re:At $31 per album by eldavojohn · 2009-05-22 01:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

It was my understanding that the band paid $31 as sort of a "starting fee". After that initial $31, there is nothing more to pay (that is, if I understood what I read correctly). They're not trying to -sell- the discs for $31 a pop.
You're close, it's $31 a year. Which is why there's no "upfront costs" as the quote says at the bottom of the summary but instead a $31/year. Which is still really really cheap. Interestingly enough, Wired uses "upfront" costs to describe it, from the article:

Tunecore will charge just $31 a year in upfront fees to handle a 10-track CD from pressing to delivery, passing all other costs through to the buyer. In other words, the service promises to remove nearly all of the risks of short-run CD manufacturing, which can cost musicians hundreds or even thousands of dollars for discs that rarely sell enough to cover expenses.
I think people are missing the big picture where you don't have to go to multiple services for your music. You'll be able to buy big names like U2 and Weezer right next to little high school rock bands and indie artists. You make that possible so that the people don't know whether they're buying RIAA or not and who knows? Maybe the musician will decide the RIAA route is not really worth it?

--
My work here is dung.
Re:At $31 per album by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:26 · Score: 0

I don't see how this is /.'s fault because this dork can't read and process a summary correctly. I got it right out of the gate.
Re:At $31 per album by JPLemme · 2009-05-22 01:30 · Score: 4, Funny

This is America, my friend. It can't be MY fault that I didn't read the article and misunderstood the summary. The article and summary were poorly written and therefore confused me. The writers should be forced to pay me for the time it took me to reply in error and for the public humiliation of being a victim of their poor writing. ;-)
Re:At $31 per album by mariushm · 2009-05-22 01:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

...as opposed to getting about 50 cents to a dollar on each CD, and that's if you're lucky to be Madonna or someone already famous...
I'd say it's a very good deal.

one obvious drawback to this model is that you canÃ(TM)t sell an on-demand CD at shows, where enthusiastic fans are most likely to pick one up.
I don't think there would be anyone stopping the band from buying the CDs from Amazon for $9 and selling them at the concert for $15, with an autograph and some booklet, or for something like $25-50 with a signed t-shirt and booklet.
They'd only lose about 5$ on each CD, but in the end it may still be better than ordering and paying in advance for a 500-1000 batch of discs at a duplication factory.
Re:At $31 per album by castironpigeon · 2009-05-22 02:02 · Score: 1

Committed fans are (I believe) happy to spend more money if they know that a significant percentage is going to the artist.
Committed fans pay for live music and share the other stuff.

--
mmmm...forbidden donut
Re:At $31 per album by anonymousbob22 · 2009-05-22 02:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

Couldn't you just buy a bunch of your own and sell them at the concert?
Unless there's some evil clause in the contract prohibiting reselling, it seems like it would work.
Re:At $31 per album by stoolpigeon · 2009-05-22 02:21 · Score: 1

At the very worst a musician could buy their own cd at retail and sell that at the show. They'll get a discount when they get 'payed' for the sale. But I'd be surprised if the service doesn't offer some way to order cd's directly - much like Hulu does for authors. This is pretty much the exact same model - except for whatever reason it's much cheaper. (I'm comparing this to the cost of selling a book on Amazon via hulu with an isbn, etc.)

--
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Re:At $31 per album by Rary · 2009-05-22 02:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

I think people are missing the big picture where you don't have to go to multiple services for your music.
Not only does this put indie bands next to U2, but it even opens the doors for a whole new level of artist "below" the indie artist, because you no longer have to drop a couple grand to press a thousand CDs.
Currently, if you want to sell a professionally made CD (ie. not a CD-R), you pretty much have to order at least 1000 of them. But what about bands who know they're not going to sell that many? Sure, CDBaby will take as few as 5 discs into their inventory if that's all you think you're going to sell, but what do you do with the other 995 you had to manufacture in order to be able to manufacture any at all?
With this service, if 5 is all you're going to sell, then 5 is all that will be produced, and the total cost to you is only $31 -- which, to most artists, is worth it even if they don't make that money back in sales.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:At $31 per album by Sfing_ter · 2009-05-22 02:25 · Score: 2, Funny

WTF - are you new here? :D
That would be too much like work and we're here to avoid THAT!

--
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
Re:At $31 per album by JPLemme · 2009-05-22 02:25 · Score: 1

Some committed fans are too old to go out to live shows very often. (Although I took my 9-year old to see Chris Duarte, and he wants to do it again.)
As far as sharing, the best fans buy the CDs (if the money goes to the artist) and then shares the music to help make more fans.
Actually, the BEST fan would just send wheelbarrows of cash and hookers, but that type of fan is all-too-rare.
Re:At $31 per album by Sfing_ter · 2009-05-22 02:30 · Score: 1

Or an "OFFICIAL" bootleg with an extra track of the artists saying "hello to my fans" - that you make on your computer and the roadies sell at the back of the club... heheheheh.

--
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
Re:At $31 per album by marco.antonio.costa · 2009-05-22 02:31 · Score: 1

There's nothing stopping you from buying tons of your own CDs from Amazon, with what's essentially a 40% discount and selling them at your gig at the appropriate markup to make whatever profit you're looking into.
The beauty of the free market. You'd be speculating in your own band/concert!
Better do a lot of stage dives and that thing that guy who played guitar for The Who did too. ;-)

--
Send your spendthrift head of state this
Re:At $31 per album by RingDev · 2009-05-22 02:47 · Score: 1

Yes, but then they would have to hire editors to clean up the summaries, verify links, and check for duplicate stories.
-Rick

--
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Re:At $31 per album by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 03:14 · Score: 0

one obvious drawback to this model is that you can't sell an on-demand CD at shows, where enthusiastic fans are most likely to pick one up.
I could see bands buying their own CDs from Amazon (getting a 40% discount, round-about) and taking those albums to shows.
Re:At $31 per album by foniksonik · 2009-05-22 03:16 · Score: 1

Why would you do that? It's likely far cheaper to get them stamped at a local shop or just burn copies yourself and let people know they're burned copies... sell them for $5 or whatever or even give them away with a note that they can buy a stamped copy at Amazon.

--
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Re:At $31 per album by Rary · 2009-05-22 03:32 · Score: 1

I don't think there would be anyone stopping the band from buying the CDs from Amazon for $9 and selling them at the concert for $15...
...or buying the CDs from Amazon for $9 and selling them at the concert for $9, since they're getting $3.59 back from Amazon anyway. Maybe round it up to $10 since it's easier to deal with 10-dollar bills at the merchandise table.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:At $31 per album by somersault · 2009-05-22 03:44 · Score: 1

In that scenario the artist won't make any money from fans like me who often prefer the clean, well-produced recorded versions to the live versions - although it depends on the band really. Some are great live, most are.. meh. Plus when I have to resort to getting music from P2P networks I have no guarantee that it will be at a decent quality. I've had to torrent the Bleach soundtrack and a couple of Android Lust albums as I can't find them easily on CD or MP3 download here in the UK (okay so one of the Android lust albums was available from a 3rd party seller on amazon, but at about 9 times the cost of buying any other normal album), and they're both only 128kbps MP3s.

--
which is totally what she said
Re:At $31 per album by slapout · 2009-05-22 05:11 · Score: 1

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who
has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was,
since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He
will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:
Knowing when to come in out of the rain; Why the early bird gets the
worm; Life isn't always fair; and maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend
more than you can earn ) and reliable strategies (adults, not children,
are in charge).
His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but
overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy
charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended
from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for
reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.
Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the
job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly
children.
It declined even further when schools were required to get parental
consent to administer sun lotion or an Aspirin to a student; but could
not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an
abortion.
Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses;
and criminals received better treatment than their victims.
Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a
burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to
realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in
her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death, by his parents, Truth and Trust, by
his wife, Discretion, by his daughter, Responsibility, and by his son, Reason.
He is survived by his 4 stepbrothers;
I Know My Rights
I Want It Now
Someone Else Is To Blame
I'm A Victim
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.

--
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Re:At $31 per album by BobMcD · 2009-05-22 05:24 · Score: 1

THIS is what the record labels should fear the most.
Many of us really only have a handful of interesting songs to sing. The rest of it is recycled over and over again.
A model like this, if adopted widely, would destroy the career musician path for all but an exceptional few. One-hit-wonders would be the expectation, and a wonderful variety of good music would be consumed.
Re:At $31 per album by amohat · 2009-05-22 05:37 · Score: 1

Read the summary twice to make sure....wtf is going to pay $31 for a fucking cd?!?
Ooooh, right, the summary is bullshit. The service itself looks to be fantastic, tho.
Re:At $31 per album by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 05:58 · Score: 0

Hell, at that price, if I were the band I'd just BUY 50 of the CD's from Amazon at the $8.98 price (and the 'profit' of 3.59 would just come back to me anyway), and sell THOSE at whatever place I'm playing for $10 each or something. People still get the same quality CD as they would from Amazon, and you're still raking in profit. Sure, you lose a bit... but that's strictly costs for manufacturing. It'd make the most sense to do it that way in my mind anyway.
Re:At $31 per album by mdielmann · 2009-05-22 07:43 · Score: 1

Or you could, you know, buy the CDs from Amazon and sell them to your fans at the show. Sure, you pay full price, but you'll get a 40% kickback, but you can sell them for less than Amazon and still make a profit, and it will be cheaper than doing a small press run.

--
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?

$31 for pressed CDs? by LordKronos · 2009-05-22 01:04 · Score: 0

$31 for pressed CDs? That's pretty darn cheap if you are going to be doing small runs. Granted you can do a lot better than their 60% cut if you get decently popular and sell a lot of discs, but for someone just getting started that's pretty good (and more professional than going the CD-R route).

Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by drinkypoo · 2009-05-22 01:13 · Score: -1

How the fuck is that cheap? Twice as expensive for the customer as when they buy from a RIAA label, and yet there is no advertising or payola? How do the labels manage to put the CD in the store at $16 and still pay for hookers and blow? Massive FAIL

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by Lumpy · 2009-05-22 01:14 · Score: 4, Informative

They are NOT pressed CD's. they are BURNED CD's.
There is no way in hell that for $31.00 they will crank up a pressing process. I've seen those machines, they blow 100 disks just in testing runs.
Granted I can get CD-R's that 90% out there cant tell is a burned CD. They have a beautiful Silver dye system out there that with a silver thermal printing surface looks like the real deal.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by LordKronos · 2009-05-22 01:14 · Score: 1

Upon rereading:

TuneCore passes 100 percent of Amazon's payout to the artist - about 40 percent of the retail price.
So they don't take a 60% cut...that's what amazon takes. However, that makes it sound like they take their $31 upfront and that's it. Nothing per disk. So if you sell 1 million CDs, they just get $31. No way. They've got to be getting something back from amazon. Their take is buried somewhere in that 60% cut that amazon takes.
Still, that's a good deal for someone getting started.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by LordKronos · 2009-05-22 01:15 · Score: 1

They are NOT pressed CD's.
If that is the case, then the article blatently lied:

Tunecore will charge just $31 a year in upfront fees to handle a 10-track CD from pressing to delivery, passing all other costs through to the buyer.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by LordKronos · 2009-05-22 01:17 · Score: 2, Informative

Yes, massive fail...ON YOUR PART. That $31 is upfront, not per disc. Try RTFA.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by flitty · 2009-05-22 01:17 · Score: 2, Informative

Slow down turbo. $31/yr is the Service Cost for the Band. For $31/yr, tunecore/amazon will sell a Physical CD of your music for $8.99.

--
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by lambent · 2009-05-22 01:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

massive read the freaking article before posting FAIL on your part, dude.
kthxbai
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by BorgDrone · 2009-05-22 01:18 · Score: 1

$31 for pressed CDs ? That's pretty darn cheap if you are going to be doing small runs.
Sure, but why bother with physical media at all ? I imagine the margins are even better on digital distribution as there are no costs for pressing the CD's and printing the covers.
Buying content on physical media is /so/ last century.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by drinkypoo · 2009-05-22 01:23 · Score: -1, Troll

Who the fuck reads the article? This summary should never have made it past the fire hose. I blame stupid slashdotters for ranking up stories which are interesting but which don't pass basic journalistic muster. I sometimes use the firehose, but it is WAY too fucking painful these days. What a terrible abortion of a UI.
Sometimes I RTFA. Sometimes I don't, and just RTFS. Too bad RTFS is retarded. Even worse that firehose users are.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by Fast+Thick+Pants · 2009-05-22 01:31 · Score: 4, Funny

from pressing to delivery
Maybe they mean pressing the "burn" button in Nero.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by eldavojohn · 2009-05-22 01:33 · Score: 5, Funny

Too bad RTFS is retarded.
Dear drinkypoo,

As the author of the summary, I would like to respond to your statement of "Too bad read the read the fucking summary is retarded." I assume that you are referring to the quality of the summary although your sentence is a bit difficult for me to parse. In that case, I appreciate your constructive criticism and would like thank you for making me a better person and Slashdot user.

I hope that someday I might become as gifted at using the word "fuck" as you and perhaps I can beat my apparent bout with down syndrome that you so generously apply to every user of this entire site.

I'm sorry my stories don't pass 'journalistic muster.' I read the entire FAQ and didn't see anything about said muster, could you please expound upon that claim that submissions must pass it?

Also, I believe you are misplacing your disgust with the Firehose and directing it at users. This confuses me, as the users did not implement it. What confuses me even more is that it takes an action by you, drinkypoo, to get to said Firehose in order to 'rate' stories. You curse this UI yet you obviously used it and saw my story in Firehose.

As always, I love you dearly with all my heart and remember to tell drinkyurine that I miss him. Please accept my apologies for such a bad summary and don't let this obstruct our friendship which is sometimes as delicate as a flower covered in dew on a crisp summer morn.

Yours in song and dance,

eldavojohn

--
My work here is dung.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by LordKronos · 2009-05-22 01:36 · Score: 1

Digital downloads are a bit difficult to sell at a concert. Yeah, you could give them a flyer showing them where to go an itunes/amazon/whatever, but then you have to hope they actually bother to go make the purchase when they get home. Selling it to them on the spot, while they are still excited about your music, is probably better.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by JPLemme · 2009-05-22 01:37 · Score: 4, Funny

I love to see an artist (eldavojohn) work in his preferred medium (wit). Smartly done.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:41 · Score: 0

Maybe if you had done some simple math, you wouldn't have acted like a pissy 12 year old.
Good day to you sir.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by drinkypoo · 2009-05-22 01:48 · Score: -1, Troll

I'm sorry my stories don't pass 'journalistic muster.' I read the entire FAQ and didn't see anything about said muster, could you please expound upon that claim that submissions must pass it?
Congratulations on living up to the minimum possible standards. Making slashdot grate, one story at a time.

Also, I believe you are misplacing your disgust with the Firehose and directing it at users. This confuses me, as the users did not implement it.
No, no. The firehose sucks, AND the people using it suck.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by BorgDrone · 2009-05-22 01:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

Digital downloads are a bit difficult to sell at a concert. (...) then you have to hope they actually bother to go make the purchase when they get home.
Uuh.. you know it's 2009, right ? You can whip out your iPhone, start up iTunes and buy and download the album right there, on the spot. You don't even have to wait in line at the stall that sells the CD's.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by EnglishTim · 2009-05-22 01:52 · Score: 4, Informative

TuneCore don't do the disk printing; that's done via Amazon's Disk on Demand service, which is actually performed by CreateSpace.
The service that TuneCore provides is that it handles submission of your album to a whole bunch of online music download stores, like Amazon, eMusic, iTunes, Napster etc. I think from skimming its faq it also handles receiving your payment all into one account.
Therefore, as they say, all of the money Amazon pay goes into your account.
They've been doing this for a little while, but now with the link with Amazon Disk on Demand, albums submitted to TuneCore can for the first time be bought on physical CDs.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by eldavojohn · 2009-05-22 01:57 · Score: 5, Funny

Congratulations on living up to the minimum possible standards. Making slashdot grate ...

I can't tell which part of my daily duties you're referring to here, is it the endless sets of metal sheets that I cut slashes and dots into that are later installed in the streets to prevent debris from entering and clogging my fair city's sewer system? Or are you referring to my ability to cause friction between Slashdot and another object/site by rubbing them together forcefully? I must say, I'm guilty of both!

No, no. The firehose sucks, AND the people using it suck.
Something about this sentence is very peculiar considering that in your prior post you say:

I sometimes use the firehose, but it is WAY too fucking painful these days.
I'm not a logician but if all who use the firehose suck ... and you yourself use it ... Wait, I think I've got it but I'm not sure. I shall construct a predicate calculus of these two rules and get back to you once I can conclude something from them.

--
My work here is dung.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by .Bruce+Perens · 2009-05-22 02:12 · Score: -1

I don't think you understand the difference between lying and erroneous reporting.

--

Thanks,
Bruce
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by LordKronos · 2009-05-22 02:28 · Score: 1

Cool. So you've limited your market to people that own iphones. What about EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE WORLD?
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by BorgDrone · 2009-05-22 02:56 · Score: 1

What about EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE WORLD?
There are music stores available on other devices as well. By selling CD's you're solving the wrong problem. Don't sell CD's to people who can't buy music wirelessly, Get wireless music downloads to people who don't already have that option.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 03:01 · Score: 0

I use 'cdrecord', you insensitive clod!
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by drinkypoo · 2009-05-22 03:25 · Score: 0, Troll

I'm not a logician but if all who use the firehose suck ... and you yourself use it ... Wait, I think I've got it but I'm not sure. I shall construct a predicate calculus of these two rules and get back to you once I can conclude something from them.
Slashdot is a whole site predicated on the concept of being different in a crowd — News for nerds. Different, just like everybody else. A unique snowflake, lost in a blizzard of unique snowflakes. Anyway, let me correct my earlier statement; I have used the Firehose on occasion, but I have ultimately found it far too painful to continue. So perhaps I once sucked, but have given it up.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by Bob9113 · 2009-05-22 03:42 · Score: 1

As always, I love you dearly with all my heart and remember to tell drinkyurine that I miss him. Please accept my apologies for such a bad summary and don't let this obstruct our friendship which is sometimes as delicate as a flower covered in dew on a crisp summer morn.
HAHAHAHAHAH -- brilliant!

--
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by thectrain · 2009-05-22 04:38 · Score: 1

I'm not sure you understand the problem. The problem is to make money and sell your music to as many people as possible. Completely ignoring the vast majority of people without phones capable of downloading music doesn't make sense. I would say in this case if you are trying to fix peoples choice of phone, you are indeed solving the wrong problem.
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 04:40 · Score: 1, Funny

Perhaps this is just too easy, but I find I cannot resist the low-hanging fruit...
So perhaps I once sucked, but have given it up.
No, my friend, I don't think you've quite kicked that habit yet. Perhaps a 12-step program is in order?
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by cayenne8 · 2009-05-22 04:56 · Score: 1

"Sure, but why bother with physical media at all ? I imagine the margins are even better on digital distribution as there are no costs for pressing the CD's and printing the covers."
I for one....have never bought a tune 'online'. I always buy the CD so I can rip it to lossy formats as needed, but, have the best format I can get for my home stereo listening. (Yes, I have that good of a stereo).
Now..if they ever start offering online digital purchases, in lossless formats...at CD (hopefully BETTER) fidelity, I for one will be the first in line for purchase. I wouild like to backup my copies of those purchases to CD/DVD for backups.

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by geminidomino · 2009-05-22 05:06 · Score: 1

Cool. So you've limited your market to people that own iphones. What about EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE WORLD?
I dunno about GP, but if my music was only for the type of people that own iPhones... yeah, I'd probably kill myself.
Never too old for metal! \ooo/
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by Abstrackt · 2009-05-22 05:48 · Score: 1

Oh man, I have to wipe coffee off my keyboard... That's the funniest post I've ever read on Slashdot! Ran out of mod points before I got to it though... =(

--
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
Re:$31 for pressed CDs? by TheSpoom · 2009-05-22 09:48 · Score: 1

Well done, sir.

--
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs

Print on demand... by bradley13 · 2009-05-22 01:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

...works for books, so why not CDs?

I know several up-and-coming musicians, and putting out their first couple of CDs is always a financial adventure. If these guys can produce professional-looking packaging on a one-off basis, it could be just what struggling musicians need!

The fact that it shows how irrelevant the big labels are becoming is just icing on the cake.

--
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.

Re:Print on demand... by flitty · 2009-05-22 01:13 · Score: 2, Interesting

The "professional" look seems to be what's missing here from the Print CD's. It looks like you must choose from a set of "templates" to print your cd on, which are all on par with what local demos looked like at my Junior High School, I.E. Photo of random stuff with Super-Photoshop filters applied.

The only other concern here, is what quality of sound is on the CD's. I've never used tunecore, so do you just submit MP3's of your music, or do you submit lossless files, and they convert them to mp3 for you? If this is a CD of mp3's burned to an album, this is the most useless idea ever. Does anyone know? The article doesn't seem to mention this.

--
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
Re:Print on demand... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2009-05-22 01:37 · Score: 4, Informative

From the FAQ

"What format must my music be in, in order to upload to TuneCore?

We have found .wav files to be the most reliable and therefore recommend them first and foremost. Remember that they must be set at a 44.1 khz sample rate, 16 bit sample size and the channel set to stereo. Not sure how to convert your music? - Check out our tutorial.

What format must my artwork be in, in order to upload to TuneCore?

Artwork can be in one of the following file formats: JPG, GIF or PNG. The image must be a perfect square and at least 1600x1600. All artwork must be in best-quality RGB Color mode (including black and white images) and must have a resolution of at least 72 dpi. You may not include: email addresses, URLs, any other contact information or any pricing information. You must include both the artist name and album title on the artwork and remove any stickers or other items from your artwork in case you are scanning it in from a physical CD."

I'm certain that, because people aren't so bright, there'll be a lot of "CD containing audio derived from mp3s that came from ripping a burned CD that was produced from .aacs, that were compressed from the output of a ten dollar ADC connected to a microphone taken from a 'Barbie's Kiddie Karaoke' machine" stuff floating around; but it looks like the service itself supports perfectly sensible upload options.
Re:Print on demand... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:40 · Score: 0

If this is a CD of mp3's burned to an album, this is the most useless idea ever.
No, it isn't. I listen to a lot of indie bands but it isn't fun to listen to it, then give your contact details to some website you had never heard of a week ago, often pay upfront, then begin waiting that you get the CD. It might be anything from partially scratched, home burned CD made weeks after the order in a cheap unlabeled cover to actually something nice. If it ever arrives that is...
Given a choice between that and reading "Buy our CD for 8.99 in Amazon!", I know what I will choose.
Re:Print on demand... by tepples · 2009-05-22 01:44 · Score: 1

The only other concern here, is what quality of sound is on the CD's. I've never used tunecore, so do you just submit MP3's of your music, or do you submit lossless files, and they convert them to mp3 for you? If this is a CD of mp3's burned to an album, this is the most useless idea ever.
If the submission is in MP3, it could be LAME at 256 kbps ABR. Have you been able to ABX that against the lossless source?
Re:Print on demand... by hesiod · 2009-05-22 01:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

You may not include: email addresses, URLs
Thanks for quoting that. Can't contain URLs, WTF? You can't promote your band's website on your own album? That's pretty messed up.
Re:Print on demand... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 02:08 · Score: 0

I couldn't agree more, i was actually thinking about this yesterday as i was in hospital reading a book in the waiting room.
Produce-on-demand services can save so much.
It could be extended to games stores as well, with some slight changes.
But Publishers are probably too pissy when it comes to handing off the production to others, even though it SAVES them money from unsold copies.
And in this way, it isn't even cutting out the middle men, the game stores will still be selling the discs, and the delivery men will still be delivering physical discs to be pressed.
And giving you know how much your store usually sees each day, you could calculate just how many discs you need to order in + a little extra (25%?) in case higher traffic.
Re:Print on demand... by PitaBred · 2009-05-22 03:49 · Score: 1

They're going to put pictures of that on the web, and they want to lock people into being the only communication conduit to the band. If the band's website was available there, people could skip past TuneCore and buy it direct from the band. Or something. Who knows what "logic" goes on in a CEO's head.

--
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Re:Print on demand... by sbeckstead · 2009-05-22 07:54 · Score: 1

No URLS or E-mail addresses on the artwork? I can see that. You probably can put them in the description however.

--
Why bother

What's misspelled? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:08 · Score: 1, Informative

"As an artist, you have unlimited physical inventory, made on demand, with no [sic] upfront costs and worldwide distribution to anyone who orders it at Amazon.com."

What's with the [sic]? 'no' isn't mispelled. upfront isn't misspelled.

Lumping in a prepositional phrase with a noun, verb, and a noun is bad grammer, but I didn't think you used '[sic]' to indicate the bad grammer isn't yours....

Re:What's misspelled? by miket01 · 2009-05-22 01:12 · Score: 1

I believe it is that the upfront costs are $31, but the sentence claims that there are no upfront costs.
Re:What's misspelled? by paulsnx2 · 2009-05-22 01:23 · Score: 2, Informative

Factual errors are not noted with a [sic], generally speaking.
Re:What's misspelled? by robot_love · 2009-05-22 01:26 · Score: 1

While that may be true, it's not really a spelling error, is it?

--
.there is enough of everything for everyone.
Re:What's misspelled? by m.ducharme · 2009-05-22 02:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

Generally speaking, you're right, but there's no reason "sic" can't be used in that fashion. Use of "sic" is meant simply to draw the reader's attention to something that the author wrote, and the editor knows is wrong, but doesn't feel justified in correcting. I would think that factual errors are at least as likely to fall into this category as typographical errors, which should just be corrected without comment by the editor, in most cases.

--
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Re:What's misspelled? by m.ducharme · 2009-05-22 02:03 · Score: 1

typographical and grammatical errors, I meant to say. Off for more coffee.

--
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Re:What's misspelled? by shani · 2009-05-22 02:12 · Score: 1

Indeed. Wikipedia explains proper usage:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic
Re:What's misspelled? by Br00se · 2009-05-22 03:17 · Score: 1

Sure, they misspelled the word "low". They stared it with an "n" instead of an "l" and forgot the final "w".
Re:What's misspelled? by objekt · 2009-05-22 03:32 · Score: 2, Funny

It's spelled "grammar."

--
-- Boycott Shell
Re:What's misspelled? by robot_love · 2009-05-22 04:44 · Score: 1

Indeed, that does seem to be the best explanation. I thought miket01 was wrong, but it turns out he was just much more clever than myself.

Oh well, back to the alcohol for me!

--
.there is enough of everything for everyone.

Could this do it? by Mr.+Underbridge · 2009-05-22 01:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

I could legitimately see this as being the beginning of the end for the RIAA, and I've never thought that before. It makes sense that it would take a big media vendor with a well-established user community, combining manufacturing with sales.

This would be fantastic if I were a musician. No inventory. No worrying about manufacturnig. And you get a percentage of revenue that you won't see anywhere else. The general Amazon community will make marketing a *lot* easier than it would be otherwise. All in all, it seems to make the RIAA meaningless. I really think indie bands might be able to make this work. I'm looking forward to shopping for music on this and know the RIAA ain't getting a dime.

Re:Could this do it? by Chlorine+Trifluoride · 2009-05-22 01:10 · Score: 3, Funny

Of course they still have meaning. We need them to maintain the RIAA equalization standard.
Re:Could this do it? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:21 · Score: -1, Troll

well, I'm glad to see we finally got someone of your calibre onboard, I mean to say, without your support, we'd have been a lost hope!
Glad to see you backing the good team!
Re:Could this do it? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:29 · Score: 0

No, we don't. We can hand that to someone else. RIAA needs to just die at this point.
Re:Could this do it? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

and no marketing......
It would be nice if this helps break the RIAA, but I think it unlikely. All this really does is create the ability to cheaply distribute CDs which are a dying medium. Artists already have the ability to self distribute digital copies. So what is the big deal ?
Producing a quality product that meets a real need at a price that people are willing to pay is only about 30% of success. The other 70% is marketing.
This service does nothing to help with marketing so there will be a million artists that no one has ever heard of or will listen to. Word of mouth marketing is (a) slow and (b) statistically unlikely to succeed. "Word of mouth successes" are really driven by people who are good at self promotion which most people are not. Plus for every successful "word of mouth" story that someone can point to, there are thousands of failures.
Not an RIAA killer, not even close
Re:Could this do it? by Just+Some+Guy · 2009-05-22 01:51 · Score: 4, Funny

We need them to maintain the RIAA equalization standard.
You mean the one that says "set all levels to 90% then compress the crap out of the result"? Because that's the only one anyone seems to use these days.

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Re:Could this do it? by Marcika · 2009-05-22 01:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

Artists already have the ability to self distribute digital copies. So what is the big deal ?
I think it is a big deal for marketing to have a central platform - nobody would look up an artist's site and key in credit card info etc... unless they know and like the band already. An Amazon "indie" bestseller list, and a centralized storefront gives far more exposure to artists with far less work involved. (Just think of the software equivalent: selling on the iPhone appstore vs. a trying to sell the equivalent application for an equally popular Nokia phone from your own website...)
As for the marketing bit - the RIAA sponsored artists are also _statistically_ unlikely to succeed unless they are one of the handful that get picked for payola and million-dollar ad budgets... This just makes the non-top-100 album, which was previously pretty much a loss-making proposition for RIAA artists, a viable avenue. And if you look away from M-TV and ClearChannel, there are oodles of niche magazines and subculture sites which could easily push an unknown artist to 2,000 sales - previously not worth the effort, now generating a year's salary.
Re:Could this do it? by jackharrer · 2009-05-22 01:55 · Score: 1

You seriously underestimate that thing "intertubes" ;)
Just wait for Pandora and such but only for RIAA free music. It will take time, but it will happen. There is a big chance it will even happen with Amazon's blessing, just by checking a box when uploading music "I agree you to use my music for marketing purposes". Amazon get's a big fat cut from selling not RIAA music as they don't need to pay RIAA anymore.

--

"an experienced, industrious, ambitious, and often, quite often, picturesque liar" - Mark Twain
Re:Could this do it? by Mr.+Underbridge · 2009-05-22 02:06 · Score: 3, Insightful

Artists already have the ability to self distribute digital copies. So what is the big deal ?
Amazon. Now it's being sold through a site (Amazon) that people actually go to, as opposed to some no-name. Another difference is that Amazon has the money to possibly decide "You know what? We want to become the new music cartel, which we will do by actually treating musicians well." If bands get the idea that Amazon could actually market them, that might be more attractive than a label contract. What bands have to do is decide that long-term freedom and profitability are better than the lure of the advance they'll get from the label.
You're probably right that the CD itself is less important than the distribution, but if this works I expect they'll figure that out.
We'll see how it plays out, but if they start using their massive data mining capabilities to sell new bands to people the same way they sell new books...seriously, this could get interesting.
Re:Could this do it? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 02:19 · Score: 0

But without the RIAA who would sue your customers for you?
Re:Could this do it? by Marcika · 2009-05-22 02:30 · Score: 1

And if you look away from M-TV and ClearChannel, there are oodles of niche magazines and subculture sites which could easily push an unknown artist to 2,000 sales - previously not worth the effort, now generating a year's salary.
Correction: 2,000 sales would only generate a couple of months' wages, since the artist gets only 40% of the sales price - so at $20 per album that would be $16,000.
Re:Could this do it? by Triv · 2009-05-22 02:50 · Score: 1

I could legitimately see this as being the beginning of the end for the RIAA, and I've never thought that before.
iuniverse didn't put Simon and Schuster out of business; I don't see this service being much of a ding on the RIAA's radar.
Re:Could this do it? by colesw · 2009-05-22 03:40 · Score: 1

Well depending on your salary expectations. That may not be a years salary, but more than a couple months for most people.
Re:Could this do it? by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 04:17 · Score: 1

Correction: $16,000 is above what someone making minimum wage earns for a years work at 40hrs a week. - So it is a years salary for one person.

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:Could this do it? by floorgoblin · 2009-05-22 04:33 · Score: 1

Actually, the article sited a standard CD price of 8.98, so 2000 albums would actually net you about $7,184, certainly not enough for a year. Someone could sustain themselves on 10,000 sales a year, which isn't impossible if you're decently successful (for an indie band). That also doesn't include t-shirts and other merchandising, performances, and sponsorships (if you're lucky). Then again, you and the band would have to split that money, so hopefully you all live under the same roof :)
Re:Could this do it? by cayenne8 · 2009-05-22 05:04 · Score: 0, Flamebait

"Correction: $16,000 is above what someone making minimum wage earns for a years work at 40hrs a week. - So it is a years salary for one person."
LOl....minimum wage is not meant to be a living wage, these jobs are only meant for high school and college students to work at to get some spare cash during school.
If you are a grown adult, and your job involves wearing a name tag saying "Hi my name is..."
You've made some serious vocational errors along the way.
Go work hard and get a 'real' job.

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Could this do it? by anyGould · 2009-05-22 05:18 · Score: 1

This service does nothing to help with marketing so there will be a million artists that no one has ever heard of or will listen to. Word of mouth marketing is (a) slow and (b) statistically unlikely to succeed. "Word of mouth successes" are really driven by people who are good at self promotion which most people are not. Plus for every successful "word of mouth" story that someone can point to, there are thousands of failures.
Not an RIAA killer, not even close
And I'd see it the other way - as Starving Artist X, I can now handle my own production (and at a pretty decent price point). Which means I *only* need a marketer, or at least can hire one independently of my distributor. Still a win for the artist.
Re:Could this do it? by ThatsNotPudding · 2009-05-22 05:53 · Score: 1

...the lure of the advance they'll get from the label.
Also known as a LOAN, from which they will be outrageously charged by that same label for everything, including possibly air.
Re:Could this do it? by Hadlock · 2009-05-22 05:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

Tell that to mall retailers who are employing out of work (laid off) skilled IT people. Tell that to (legal) immigrants with no marketable skills. Tell that to people who dropped out of high school/did not go to college/dropped out of college. People age 18-25 need to eat too. Preferably without working 2+ jobs without health insurance because their employer won't schedule them for more than 39 hours a week to avoid it.

--
moox. for a new generation.
Re:Could this do it? by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 06:37 · Score: 1

It might not be what we consider a livable wage, but it is the yearly salary for a lot of people.

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:Could this do it? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 06:57 · Score: 0

What about when the RIAA goes... "We've been fighting for your cause for X years and have done Y. We're going to sue you for avoiding our fees and lobby until we can make it happen."
Re:Could this do it? by sjames · 2009-05-22 17:56 · Score: 1

If only!! These days they mostly compress everything BUT the crap out.
Re:Could this do it? by SigmundFloyd · 2009-05-23 02:12 · Score: 1

Indy music is selling better and better every year
No, it's not.

and fans are tired of the same old junk being thrown at them over the radio and MTV
The charts say otherwise.

--
Knowledge is power; knowledge shared is power lost.

Kind of like.. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:10 · Score: 0, Troll

The format kind of sounds like Amie Street - but much less efficient, and much more likely to fail.

It's cheap, if you look closely by Ehwaz003 · 2009-05-22 01:10 · Score: 2, Interesting

It's not cheap at first glance, but it couldn't be more obvious that it is cheap, if you take everything involved into account. I'm just a bit afraid of the response from RIAA. They proved time and time again that they start suits with or even without a solid reason, so I guess it won't take long before they will say that this service should be taken down immediately.
Which would be a shame.

--
I give massages and reiki treatments (for real!). More info here: http://www.universele-levensenergie.be

Re:It's cheap, if you look closely by lambent · 2009-05-22 01:14 · Score: 1

hopefully they do sue. amazon would be able to stand up to them in court, and hopefully through the legal process get their objection thrown out. at any rate, what basis does the RIAA have to sue, anyway? if an artist is unsigned, and not part of the industry, the RIAA does not 'represent' them, never had a claim on them, and has no business stinking this up with the fetid zombie stench.
Re:It's cheap, if you look closely by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:21 · Score: 0

I'm just a bit afraid of the response from RIAA.

Don't be. The RIAA may have a history of shitting where they eat, but I have a hard time believing that even they would be stupid enough to piss off one of the most popular retailers on Earth. Remember, Amazon did amazing business well before they started selling music. One false move from the RIAA and Amazon could drop their affiliated labels and still sleep tight in massive beds of cash.

It's missing some elements by erroneus · 2009-05-22 01:10 · Score: 4, Funny

There are lots of elements used in the "Music Engine." One of those crucial elements is radio play. Another is wide-spread marketing. And still another is hiring girls to scream during performances. (Didn't you know? Get a handful of girls to scream during a performance causes other females to start screaming and they begin to believe they "love" this music and/or the performers. I know this flies in the face of common sense, but it works.)

Re:It's missing some elements by red_blue_yellow · 2009-05-22 01:19 · Score: 1

There are lots of elements used in the "Music Engine." One of those crucial elements is radio play. Another is wide-spread marketing. And still another is hiring girls to scream during performances.
I'm sorry, but unless you want to be the next Hoobastank or some such nonsense, those things are completely unnecessary.

--
A neutral communications medium is essential. It is the basis of science, by which humankind should decide what is true.
Re:It's missing some elements by slim · 2009-05-22 01:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm sorry, but unless you want to be the next Hoobastank or some such nonsense, those things are completely unnecessary.
If you want to actually sell enough CDs (or novels, or software, or greetings cards, or whatever) to make anything like a living, you need marketing.
If you write the Great American Novel, put it up on Lulu, and wait for the income to roll in, you'll sell 20 copies if you're lucky. To do better you've got to send review copies to magazines and web sites, persuade them you're worth interviewing for an article, get some viral marketing going for your product etc.
The same would go for a CD, even if you're not going for the mainstream. Get a reputation for live shows. Get written about in the specialist press. Get played on specialist radio shows or net radio. Get blogged about.
The OP's right. Traditional record labels do all this stuff, and that's part of where the money goes.
Still, it's all stuff you can DIY, or have done separately.
Re:It's missing some elements by vertinox · 2009-05-22 02:00 · Score: 1

There are lots of elements used in the "Music Engine." One of those crucial elements is radio play. Another is wide-spread marketing. And still another is hiring girls to scream during performances.
1. No one listens to radio anymore (except maybe NPR)
2. That is what drink tickets are for and "backstage access" *wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge*

--
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Re:It's missing some elements by b4dc0d3r · 2009-05-22 02:13 · Score: 1

A successful salesman once he told me, if that first woman says "I don't know..." he pretty much knew he wouldn't sell anything. but if the first one said "Oh, I want one" everyone was going to get one.
A true libertarian (lower case), he had no reason to lie to me about that.
Re:It's missing some elements by swillden · 2009-05-22 02:20 · Score: 1

If you want to actually sell enough CDs (or novels, or software, or greetings cards, or whatever) to make anything like a living, you need marketing.
Jonathan Coulton is doing well without a big marketing engine behind him. He may never be a millionaire, but he's making a comfortable income doing what he loves to do.
I think the future of music is a lot more people making a living, but at white-collar income levels, not superstar income levels. If all you're aiming for is a comfortable six-figure income, a few thousand CDs per year plus some solid income from live performances can do the trick.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:It's missing some elements by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 02:21 · Score: 0

I know this flies in the face of common sense, but it works.
It flies in the face of basic decency. If you have to use psychological tricks to get people to like your music then what does that say about your skill as an artist?
Re:It's missing some elements by erroneus · 2009-05-22 02:23 · Score: 1

You probably hate all salesmen. Don't blame you either. They use all kinds of tactics to make you believe you like, want, love or even need something. Without people like that, we probably wouldn't have the expression "buyer's remorse."
Re:It's missing some elements by whisper_jeff · 2009-05-22 02:28 · Score: 1

Artists don't make millions of dollars. Marketers do. Artists have long, successful, comfortable careers. Marketers create phenomenons that are able to retire after three years of "work."
Re:It's missing some elements by dkleinsc · 2009-05-22 03:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

Very successful artists have long, successful, comfortable careers.
FTFY.
The vast majority of artists don't have comfortable careers. Or careers in the art at all. There simply isn't enough money going to artists to make that possible.

--
I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
Re:It's missing some elements by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 04:22 · Score: 1

1. No one listens to radio anymore (except maybe NPR)
I don't know about where you live, but none of te radio stations where I live had shut down becaue no one is listening to them.

Sure, There might be less listeners then before because of MP3 players and what not, but radio is not "going out of business" and still plays an important roll in exposing "The Next Big Artist/Albumn/Song"

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:It's missing some elements by vertinox · 2009-05-22 04:47 · Score: 1

Sure, There might be less listeners then before because of MP3 players and what not, but radio is not "going out of business" and still plays an important roll in exposing "The Next Big Artist/Albumn/Song"
Yes, radio is going out of business.

It's no surprise, then, that the radio advertising business recently saw its worst quarter in history. The Radio Advertising Bureau said yesterday that combined national and local ad spending dropped 26% to $2.8 billion during the last quarter. Network radio dropped 13% to $238 million while off-air revenue receded 12% to $264 million.

--
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Re:It's missing some elements by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 06:34 · Score: 1

Adjusting to less revenue then before? Sure. Shutting the doors, going off-air, and out of business, no.

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:It's missing some elements by yerktoader · 2009-05-22 07:22 · Score: 1

I sent this article to a friend who made another good observation:

but if this takes off - the internet music cesspool will expand exponentially - making it almost impossible to find legitimately good music. unfortunately that's the one thing record companies still have - humans telling indy-electro-rapper-rock-opera-metal-head-remixer that his music blows.
However, while I know(having myself been on the fringes of the music industry for most of my life) that these things are important, so does TuneCore, and they address it. Now, on the one hand, if you use iTunes as the distributor, you have the option of creating playlists to display along with the album that can contain music from other bands. As such you can attract people to your music via similar interests. Plus, there are certain channels for any artists who desire marketing:

Amazon Disc On Demand: Basically you get to release physical CDs(doesn't specify if mp3/etc is available through this service, you might have to go both DOD and Amazon MP3 to get both) as opposed to Amazon MP3. The DOD service provides optional inclusion into direct marketing/promo to Amazon customers.

The TuneCore site provides a detailed run down on getting promoted, including how to conduct business with the media(newspapers, magazines, etc), a couple of searchable aggregators of press outlets, a decent list of promotions companies, AND - and this to me is gianormous - TuneCore has a partnership with both oceanparkmusic.com and grayv.com who search TuneCore's vaults and match up music to the needs of people in the following fields: films, TV shows, video games, commercials(all via Ocean Park), major hotel chains, casinos, customized branded physical compilation CDs, restaurants, cruise liners, retail stores(via Gray V). Basically, you can sit on your fat ass after you're done making the music, and WHAM - international exposure. You don't have to accept the opportunity, but if you do, TuneCore and it's affiliates negotiate the rates, track when rights expire and such, make sure the music in question doesn't violate any other copyright, and the artists get 100% of the negotiated rates AND keep their copyrights - TuneCore and it's parters do not retain any rights to whatever you distribute via their service. Now I'm sure they take a fee off the top, but after that it's all yours, and that's freakin' awesome. Maybe there's some hiddin shit in whatever contract you sign when you join/purchase services, but I'm sure if there is it won't be long until someone starts a shitstorm about it.

Now there are some problems I've already thought of:

Pricing via iTunes is structured either by song or by album, and an album must be 11 songs or more - anything like Yes' 'Tales from Topographic Oceans' would be a problem for them. And while the example is extreme in that there are FOUR songs for eighty minutes of music, if this model is successful and dominates the music industry it could pose a problem for more than just self indulgent prog nerds.

If the labels go bye bye, this leaves these people with the final say on morality and obscenity, and removing the human element from doing business in music may prove problematic - there are plenty of warnings regarding obscenity on their site. Now they do accept "explicit" lyrics, but I question how far they will go. Will they accept goremetal bands? Cop killer lyrics? And the music video section also makes not that "obscene" videos can be rejected - it is there business after all. But you and I know that something like the NIN's video for Happiness in Slavery video would likely NEVER see the light of day lest the artist do it their own damn self.

Some of the pricing/distro models of TuneCore's affiliates are either experimental or inflexible. The inflexible ones I suspect will mutate over time and gain new features as customers demand them. The experimental methods, like Amie Street, which price songs very cheaply to start(so as to increase the chance t
Re:It's missing some elements by hguorbray · 2009-05-22 09:29 · Score: 1

Not to mention 'alternative' non-commercial, non-NPR radio.
Here in the SF Bay area we have:
KKUP -Cupertino hippie station
KPOO -independent black SF station
KPFA -Pacifica Free Radio
and the following AWESOME college stations
KALX -Berkely
KZSU -Stanford
KSCU -Santa Clara university
KSJS -San Jose State
KFJC -Foothill College -the wave of the west
KZSC -Santa Cruz
and the former KFAT -now kpig.com from FREEDOM CA
plus the trades follow college playlists -that's how bands like Vampire Weekend and REM get discovered
The college stations also provide a place for genre music like hardcore, surf music, reggae, electronica, etc
-I'm just sayin -because I listen to the radio A LOT and when I get bored with Live105, KFOG, Alice, whatever I have a lot of great choices
Re:It's missing some elements by PiSkyHi · 2009-05-22 17:23 · Score: 1

Here let me fix that for you..
Traditional record labels do all this stuff, and that's part of where a small portion of the money goes.

Too espensive by ianare · 2009-05-22 01:11 · Score: -1

Like most (all?) self publishing services, whether books or music, the problem is that without economies of scale the product can't compete with commercial distributors on price. I find it hard to see much success when you're selling a CD at twice the normal retail price. Maybe a few hardcore fans at best. Still, I suppose any interest shown would be useful in atracting and negotiating with a real record label.

Re:Too espensive by east+coast · 2009-05-22 01:22 · Score: 1, Informative

31 USD is the set up fee, not the cost of the album.

--
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Re:Too espensive by Bill+Dimm · 2009-05-22 01:25 · Score: 1

I find it hard to see much success when you're selling a CD at twice the normal retail price.
From the article: "If one of Amazon's 80 million customers buys your 10-song CD on Amazon for $8.98, you'll receive $3.59."
They are not selling the CDs at twice the normal price. The $31 is the annual fee the artist pays to be included on TuneCore, not the cost of a CD.
Re:Too espensive by sabs · 2009-05-22 01:26 · Score: 1

who the hell modded this guy up?
The cd's are going to be $8.99
SO actually, they'll be CHEAPER than most regular retail cd's.
Where do you get twice from?
The $31 startup cost paid by the Artist/Band?
Re:Too espensive by Locklin · 2009-05-22 01:37 · Score: 1

Ten bucks isn't twice the normal retail price. RTFA.

--
"Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom

FTA by wjh31 · 2009-05-22 01:13 · Score: 0, Redundant

"Tunecore will charge just $31 a year in upfront fees to handle a 10-track CD from pressing to delivery...If one of Amazonâ(TM)s 80 million customers buys your 10-song CD on Amazon for $8.98, youâ(TM)ll receive $3.59. After selling just nine discs, youâ(TM)re in the black."

YOU FUCKING TOOLS by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:15 · Score: -1, Troll

Sure go and sell your shitty music on amazon and bypass the "draconian biz model" as the /tards says but remember

Ultimately the fucking tools here and everywhere will just f'ing donwload it for free anyway as soon as another f'ing tool decides to share his hard drive.

Bottom line, your fucked, get a real career path

Already been done by Silverlancer · 2009-05-22 01:17 · Score: 3, Interesting

Japanese amateur (doujin) artists have been self-publishing professional-quality albums for years now. No RIAA, no middlemen: they set up a booth at a convention and sell it. And then, afterwards, they sell extra copies from their website. It seems to work well enough: some single fandoms have produced hundreds if not thousands of albums.

Isn't it amazing what you can do when you prioritize actually making music over trying to get rich?

And don't think that the Japanese have it easier with regard to music copyright enforcement: the problem is actually so great there that file-traders have been forced to use anonymous P2P systems like Share and Winny.

What's Misspelled or unusual? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:17 · Score: 0

"As an artist, you have unlimited physical inventory, made on demand, with no [sic] upfront costs and worldwide distribution to anyone who orders it at Amazon.com."

What's with the [sic]? What in this phrase is misspelled or unusual? It is a quote, so the noun, verb, prepositional phrase, and noun in a list, though bad grammar doesn't require a [sic].

The phrase "with no upfront costs" modifies everything in the list, not nust the phrase "made on demand", so the comma is justified. It is just bad grammar, and bad grammar doesn't require a [sic] notation....

Re:What's Misspelled or unusual? by tepples · 2009-05-22 01:55 · Score: 1

What's with the [sic]? What in this phrase is misspelled or unusual?
As I understand it, the "no" is unusual. There is an upfront cost of $31 per band per year.

Think of the RIAA! by Drakkenmensch · 2009-05-22 01:18 · Score: 4, Funny

Who's going to feed all of these underprivileged lawyers once they stop being hired to sue students, 10 year old girls and dead grandmothers? Think of the henchmen! Won't somebody pleeeeeeeeeeease think of the henchmen!

Re:Think of the RIAA! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:29 · Score: 0

Teh internets is putting them out of business.
Time to bailout the RIAA!
Re:Think of the RIAA! by hesiod · 2009-05-22 01:52 · Score: 1

Time to bailout the RIAA!
That's probably in ACTA, and the reason we're not allowed to see it.
Re:Think of the RIAA! by geminidomino · 2009-05-22 05:10 · Score: 1

Think of the henchmen! Won't somebody pleeeeeeeeeeease think of the henchmen!
They failed. Feed them to the piranha under the floor in your office
Re:Think of the RIAA! by Brother+Seamus · 2009-05-22 12:51 · Score: 1

Who's going to feed all of these underprivileged lawyers once they stop being hired to sue students, 10 year old girls and dead grandmothers?

Don't worry, they'll all get cushy jobs in the Obama administration.

From TFA by storkus · 2009-05-22 01:19 · Score: 2, Informative

The $31 is per YEAR, basically setting up an account like you would with some of those "work from home" outfits, but for a reasonable price. The TFA states that "all other costs are passed on to the buyer". What those costs work out to I don't know, but if you can sell a stamped CD at $10 and still make a buck or two minimum, then you're not doing bad.

What I want to know is how a major stamping operation can retool so easily between different CD's that they can still do this economically?

Re:From TFA by storkus · 2009-05-22 01:21 · Score: 1

I should have read lower down in TFA:
"As with its digital distribution service, TuneCore passes 100 percent of Amazonâ(TM)s payout to the artist â" about 40 percent of the retail price. If one of Amazonâ(TM)s 80 million customers buys your 10-song CD on Amazon for $8.98, youâ(TM)ll receive $3.59. After selling just nine discs, youâ(TM)re in the black."
Which makes my wondering about how they can turn a profit on such small runs even more pertinent...
Re:From TFA by vertinox · 2009-05-22 02:06 · Score: 1

Which makes my wondering about how they can turn a profit on such small runs even more pertinent...
I would suspect they have a deal with the MP3 distributors above the normal royalties in directing traffic and business to them. If that is really true and what it entails... I do not know.

--
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)

Done years ago by east+coast · 2009-05-22 01:19 · Score: 4, Informative

Used to be called mp3.com.

Aside from that indies have been around forever.

I've always said that artists who cry about this have options but they're too lazy/too talentless to do it for themselves. Oh well.

--
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.

Re:Done years ago by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 04:28 · Score: 1

Yeah, and M.C. Hammer sold ~100K worth of albums out of his trunk before signign with a label.

The difference between mp3.com and amazon is that I, my mother, and my grandfather know about amazon.com. No one worries too much about buyign something through Amazon. Amazon is a distribution method is far better then a website that most don't know exists.

Yes Indies have been around forver, but this offers them an even better way to distribute their music. And even most "Indies" still sign with some label, they just sign with an Indie label.

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:Done years ago by Twinbee · 2009-05-22 05:39 · Score: 1

One other factor is that the indie CD will be available at the same location as the RIAA label CD. Everything's all in one place - great for efficient buying. I don't recall MP3.com selling the big labels.

--
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc

Yuo Fail +It!! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:19 · Score: -1, Offtopic

declined in markeT us the 3ourtesy has run faster

THIS IS AWESOME!!! BAD SUMMARY by oloron · 2009-05-22 01:23 · Score: 2, Informative

If you RTFA you see that the 31 dollars is per-year handling of your disc, you set the prices for your prints and get commision based on that... sheesh guys wake up

$31 IS NOT THE COST PER CD by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:23 · Score: 0

For all the morons who seem to be inferring that from the summary. $31 is the flat one-off fee paid by the artist to get listed. The CDs will cost customers typical CD prices.

Marketing? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:29 · Score: 1, Insightful

I dont like the record labels but people do seem to forget they do some work of value - like marketing.

I put my bands album out on this website and how is anyone going to know its there?

Sure a couple of bands make it from word of mouth and internet activity, youtube etc but the vast majority dont.

Give me a big marketing budget and some pluggers any day.

Re:Marketing? by rkhalloran · 2009-05-22 01:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

Sure a couple of bands make it from word of mouth and internet activity, youtube etc but the vast majority dont.
Give me a big marketing budget and some pluggers any day.
(a) Even given the "big marketing budget and some pluggers", the vast majority of bands don't make it anyway....
(b) Given the typical RIAA-member contract, you're probably clearing more money from the Amazon/Tunecore arrangement, and you haven't mortgaged your souls for a decade in the process.
Re:Marketing? by jedidiah · 2009-05-22 02:01 · Score: 1

I hear this BS about marketing all the time but what have the labels ever
done for any of the bands I listen to. Really? I remember one concert in
particular where a good half of the audience looked like they had no idea
what they had gotten themselves into. Obviously the label's "marketing
machine" had been advertising and they were advertising on the wrong
channel. Meanwhile, those of us with a clue and those of us that were more
the band's target demographic were kind of ignored.
Screw the label marketing machine.
Just bring back real DJs.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.

NMPA/Harry Fox Agency by tepples · 2009-05-22 01:30 · Score: 3, Informative

I for one wait to see the lawsuit the RIAA is drawing up to bring down upon Amazon for squelching their draconian business practices by violating their 'copyright' on 'distribution of artistic works of an audio based nature'

You're thinking of the National Music Publishers' Association, which controls the rights to record cover versions and licenses them through its Harry Fox Agency. Your "RIAA" guess was close because a lot of labels in the RIAA are under the same management as publishers in the NMPA.

Re:NMPA/Harry Fox Agency by Sfing_ter · 2009-05-22 02:23 · Score: 1

I believe he was thinking more along the lines of the 'Distribution' portion which is what the RIAA has been suing over. This whole deal makes the RIAA redundant, and I mean that in the UK sense of the term :D
Cannot wait for their first BIG artist to show up - that is when the big record companies and the RIAA will REALLY worry - they will be shitting themselves.

--
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
Re:NMPA/Harry Fox Agency by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 03:01 · Score: 0

HFA does NOT control the rights to record cover versions, that is controlled by Copyright law, which basically mandates that any musical work that has been performed publically must be available for mechanical license.
HFA acts as royalty collection company for the laws federally set 'mechanical' license fees (a few cents per copy) for those companies that do not want the hassle of setting up their own licensing department.
In this area, the law has it right. Other artists right to use published songs is guaranteed while also guaranteeing payment to the author.
Re:NMPA/Harry Fox Agency by tepples · 2009-05-22 03:24 · Score: 1

Other artists right to use published songs is guaranteed while also guaranteeing payment to the author.
So if I write a song, how do I know whether a substantially similar song has already been published?
Re:NMPA/Harry Fox Agency by zoips · 2009-05-22 04:21 · Score: 1

Trent Reznor (NIN) isn't big?

It would be nice... by XxtraLarGe · 2009-05-22 01:32 · Score: 1

if Apple would do something like this with digital distribution on iTunes, where artists could upload their music and get the same 70/30 split as devs get for iPhone apps. The whole RIAA/ASCAP/BMI paradigm needs a good hard kick in the pants.

--
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.

Re:It would be nice... by notarockstar1979 · 2009-05-22 01:42 · Score: 2, Informative

Tunecore works with iTunes as well. Has for a while now.

No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by atrocious+cowpat · 2009-05-22 01:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

From the TuneCore-FAQ:
"What format must my artwork be in, in order to upload to TuneCore?
[...] You may not include: email addresses, URLs, any other contact information or any pricing information."

Is this a common (or acceptable) limitation?

--
sig? Oh, that sig...

Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:47 · Score: 0

Maybe there is a potential for spammers to game their system and they want to nip it in the bud.
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by hesiod · 2009-05-22 01:55 · Score: 3, Interesting

No it's not common, it's BS. You can't promote your band's website on your band's CD? WTF.
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by Jeff+DeMaagd · 2009-05-22 01:56 · Score: 1

That explains the email and URL part, but no contact information?
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by Xebikr · 2009-05-22 02:12 · Score: 1

It could be a real problem if your band's name is Drinkspit.com or the like.
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by DeathMagnetic · 2009-05-22 02:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

The service being offered depends on them taking a 60% cut of any sales. By providing your contact information, it would enable artists to direct buyers to an alternative location (such as their own website), which could offer the CD at a lower price while still giving the artist a larger cut (100% minus production/shipping costs). They're understandably not interested in offering an unlimited advertising service for a flat rate of $31.
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by zotz · 2009-05-22 02:26 · Score: 1

I was wondering how this interacts with Creative Commons Licenses myself...
all the best,
drew

--
FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 02:26 · Score: 0

It actually seems pretty understandable. Seeing as they don't want to be responsible for any bad website, they don't want false pricing, and they don't want scammed email addresses.
If they took the time to buy your cd, they took the time to find your site.
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by Andy_R · 2009-05-22 02:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

Actually, that's an iTunes restriction that tunecore are passing on, and it only applies to the front cover artwork of the album.

--
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by DNS-and-BIND · 2009-05-22 02:53 · Score: 1

It sounds like they don't want the bands directing traffic to their own websites, where music could be had for less than at Amazon. People can preview the artwork before buying. If anyone finds this restriction too onerous, they have every right to refuse the deal.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by foniksonik · 2009-05-22 03:13 · Score: 1

First Track:
"To find out more about our band, visit 'www.ourband.info'."
problem solved. Nothing in the TOS about promoting in the audio (from the quoted text here).

--
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 04:30 · Score: 1

A source that verifies this would be nice, but either way, this is the most imformational post on the subject of "No URLs" so far.

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by Rary · 2009-05-22 07:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

You can't promote your band's website on your band's CD?
You can't promote your band's website on the front cover. Think about it: Does iTunes want you to use them as a means of spreading the word about your band to the masses, only to have the album cover image on iTunes direct iTunes shoppers to the band's website where they can buy it for cheaper through something like Nimbus? Not likely.
Go ahead and put whatever you want inside the CD jacket, though. Who the hell wants their URL on the cover anyway?

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by Eighty7 · 2009-05-22 07:57 · Score: 1

That's like saying google's rankings are advertising. Besides I'm sure fans will know about Amazon's cut & they'll just google for the band's site.

Hey RIAA by C_Kode · 2009-05-22 01:37 · Score: 5, Insightful

Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Goodbye.

Re:Hey RIAA by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 09:38 · Score: 0

There are no hands feeding the RIAA. That's the result of piracy. RIAA lawsuits are the hand grabbing the pirates by the balls and squeezing.
Re:Hey RIAA by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 11:19 · Score: 0

Trent Reznor, is that you?

Dial-up by tepples · 2009-05-22 01:43 · Score: 1

Sure, but why bother with physical media at all ?

Concerts, as LordKronos pointed out. Also dial-up users, especially if you record in a genre that's popular outside urban areas.

Wow. by EddyPearson · 2009-05-22 01:45 · Score: 1

While I'm not myself, a good number of my friends are activly producing music.

This actually looks brilliant, I will definintly recommending.

--
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.

Re:Wow. by Spatial · 2009-05-22 04:39 · Score: 1

Yeah, it's cheap enough that it's worth the money just to try it for a year. You only need to sell nine copies before bringing in a profit! It's practically too good to be true (probably is).

Most of the artists I listen to give their music away for free, but I'd pay for a physical album with a cool cover for sure.

Cost by Lord+Lode · 2009-05-22 01:46 · Score: 1

Ok, here the fixed cost is $31 and you get 40% of the sales.
What are these values when using RIAA middle man? If there it's also 40% or less of the sales, they got pretty much owned. If you get more % of the sales, then there's a point where it's more profitable to use RIAA than Amazon :).

Re:Cost by SQL+Error · 2009-05-22 02:15 · Score: 4, Funny

Fifteen RIAA execs just died laughing at the idea of giving artists 40% of the gross.
Good work.
Re:Cost by Todd+Knarr · 2009-05-22 02:20 · Score: 1

In an RIAA contract, the artist's looking at maybe a 5-8% nominal on sales.
Note that the artist doesn't get paid that much. There's any advance, studio time, promotional fees, packaging fees, distribution fees, breakage allowance, all sorts of charges the artist is responsible for that come out of gross royalties. The artist gets paid what's left after the label takes all of those out. Most artists are lucky to see 1-2% after all that.
You see now why the labels are so dead-set against any legal electronic distribution of music.
Re:Cost by Lord+Lode · 2009-05-22 03:13 · Score: 1

In that case, is there anything that would make a large band choose RIAA instead of this new system? Because, they still do!
Re:Cost by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 04:38 · Score: 1

Large band like NIN can go off on their own because they have a decent fan following t oallwo them to do so. Most other artists need the marketing team of the RIA. 2% of 10 Million Albums might only be ~200K. But they more then make their money doing concerts or fro mtheir contract itself. If you want to make Millions and be a "large band" you need to marketing that the RIAA and Major Labels have to offer.

Mariah Carey might only get 2% from her album sales, but she gets ~10 Million just to record the album in the first place.

/Yes, there are exceptions that have made money/millions without labels, but there just that, exceptions. Marketing is important.

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:Cost by Todd+Knarr · 2009-05-22 05:01 · Score: 1

One thing: an existing contract. That's how the labels mostly do it. They don't go after the big-name bands. They go after the small bands who're just getting started, and get them into a contract for a certain number of albums. Note that that's for a certain number released, not produced, and the label gets to decide whether an album will be released. That can be tempting because of the advance and access to studio facilities and backup performers and such that new bands can't always get on their own. And if the band is a hit and becomes a big-name band, well, there's still that contract. The label owns all the rights to songs done under the contract, so the band can't even perform their own works without paying the label. If they try releasing anything, the label can come after them because they owe those songs to the label under the contract. The only way out of this once you're in it is to be a big enough hit that the label winds up having to release enough albums for you to complete your contract with them.
One reason the labels can do this is that they've managed to pretty well disrupt any legitimate distribution channel for music that doesn't involve physical production of media. The labels control the distribution chain to stores, so even if a band can afford to press and package their own CDs they have a hard time getting them on shelves without signing with a label. Electronic channels where the band might be able to make money, the labels have either sued out of existence or saddled with such onerous restrictions that consumers aren't willing to deal with it. The only avenue left is for a band to set up it's own Web site with it's own on-line store. That depends on search services like Google to give consumers a way to easily find the band's store, and you'll notice the recent attacks on Google's ability to link to things. Make no mistake, those attacks aren't aimed at keeping infringing material off Google's link lists. You'll notice, for instance, that in the Copiepresse case and others, when Google offered to simply stop listing the plaintiff's material completely the plaintiffs objected vociferously, demanding that Google not be allowed to do that. Their goal isn't to get their material off Google, it's to make it so difficult and expensive that Google can't stay in business at all. Search services are a critical link in an electronic distribution channel that completely bypasses the labels, and they want to disrupt them before they fully form.
Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 05:29 · Score: 0

In that case, is there anything that would make a large band choose RIAA instead of this new system? Because, they still do!
The only legitimate reason would be "ignorance", because this is still a relatively new service and the established labels are... well established. I can think of a lot of other reasons, but they are non-legitimate because they involve what are illicit practices (e.g. payola, etc...) in most of the developed world.
Re:Cost by Rary · 2009-05-22 07:21 · Score: 1

In that case, is there anything that would make a large band choose RIAA instead of this new system? Because, they still do!
Marketing and promotion.
Services like this just provide distribution. Distribution means nothing if nobody even knows your band exists.
It's possible to do it yourself, but bands who either don't know how or don't think they can do it as well will still turn to a label for help.

--
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

You f4il it? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 01:48 · Score: -1, Flamebait

UNCOVER A STORY OF shaRe. *B.SD is

Cover versions by tepples · 2009-05-22 01:49 · Score: 2, Informative

what basis does the RIAA have to sue, anyway? if an artist is unsigned, and not part of the industry, the RIAA does not 'represent' them

Unpaid royalties for a cover version. The National Music Publishers' Association collects royalties for cover versions through its Harry Fox Agency, and a lot of publishers in the NMPA are under the same management as labels in the RIAA. Even if you set out not to record cover versions, you could be writing one and not even know it. Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music, 420 F. Supp. 177 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).

The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Hurricane78 · 2009-05-22 01:55 · Score: 1, Interesting

I don't get the point of pressing a CD. Who has a CD player anyways nowadays? I mean, I can buy a in-car-stereo with a USB connector for 100! It home, most people have their computers hooked to some amplifier or active speakers anyways. And I don't know if anyone even owns a portable CD player anymore.

I should start making band sites, that work like this:
- A basic site and page structure, including tour dates, a "blog", a gallery, a discography, a biography and artist infos, and contact / fan page / forumm.
- A wonderful individual design. Alternatively they could use their own friend- or fan-made design. Doesn't matter. No licensing crap! They have own the whole site.
- A very simple on-site shop with all songs, bundles of songs as EPs or albums, and paypal to buy and directly download the files from the site. In MP3, AAC, OGG, WAV, FLAC, APE, BIN/CUE, etc. With all metadata (even lyrics), cover images, and some bonus stuff too.
- A admin area for the artist, to upload songs (as wav, or an albums in bin/cue), assign cover images, metadata, bonus-stuff-zips, and so on.
- An optional automatic insertion into every music shop on the net.

I would only have to program it once. Then an artist would only have to pay the design, plus a small fee for setup and a tiny part of the initial programming. I bet I could do this for $1100 with design, and $100 without.

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.

Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 02:20 · Score: 0

Yes, you should. And then call it Myspace or Geocities. You may want to come up with your own name, though.
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Alrescha · 2009-05-22 02:29 · Score: 1

"I don't get the point of pressing a CD. Who has a CD player anyways nowadays?"
You're kidding, right? How about "everyone on the planet"?
Sure, there are *other* ways to listen to music, but your question was silly. I have three 'CD players' within reach. If I actually get up and count, I estimate I'll find half a dozen before I start opening boxes. After that, there's probably another half-dozen parked in old machines.
A.

--
...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by stoolpigeon · 2009-05-22 02:44 · Score: 2, Insightful

This was my initial reaction also, at least about buying discs. I quit buying cds a while ago. But then I realized I still buy books - and people are always asking me why.
It's a matter of personal preference and obviously there are still a number of people who want to buy discs. I don't get it - but more power to them.
Then finally, one can't ignore the Amazon part of the equation. Just being visible there could mean a huge boost in visibility for a band and more visitors to sites like the one you envision.

--
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 02:47 · Score: 0

I don't have any ;)
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 03:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

I don't get the point of pressing a CD. Who has a CD player anyways nowadays? I mean, I can buy a in-car-stereo with a USB connector for 100! It home, most people have their computers hooked to some amplifier or active speakers anyways. And I don't know if anyone even owns a portable CD player anymore.
uhm, i think you miss the point.. and lots of people still like albums..
sure, us techies have all the gadgets and gizmos... but cars still come with CD players, people still like flipping through physical albums, people still like cover art and people still like to play CD's... sure they are going the way of the dodo.. but its easier to sell something tangible, rather than just a mp3 file..
i know plenty of indie musicians who press CD's so they can sell them after a show, or order from their website,.. its more about makin that money, and getting the tanglible item out there... the CD's get passed along, people see them in the CD rack and ask about them, etc.. its important, very important.. and always well be... whether is a CD, a laser disc, a cassette tape, and 8 track or a 33...
how often do i look through someones CD collection at a party.... all the time... how often do I boot their computer and snoop through their files... rarely...
plus its in the interest of indie bands to sell a CD to a fan... "you like that song? cool... its on this CD on amazon, buy it, support is"... in turn the musician gets some pay, and the fan gets introduced to more of the music... rinse and repeat..
The business model of big music worked really well, and continues to work... this gives more control and money to the artist, and more money to amazon... works for me, i'll definately be talking to my friends about exploring this avenue of exposure..
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Jason+Levine · 2009-05-22 03:11 · Score: 1

I have (off the top of my head) 6. One in each of my laptop computers. One in my (admittedly rarely used) desktop computer. One in each of our two cars. My new car can play MP3 CDs & has an auxillary input. Our "older" (2003) mini-van just has a CD player. Finally, we have an old CD boombox that we use to play music to help our boys sleep. (This list doesn't count standalone DVD players that can also play CDs.) I buy music both in CD and MP3 format. Yes, CDs get ripped to MP3, and yes, eventually, people will buy digital files instead of CDs, but for now ignoring the CD market completely seems like a bad idea. Especially if the entry fee to said market is only $31. If I was an artist, I'd pay the $31 and take a chance that four or more of my fans wanted to buy a CD.

--
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by noidentity · 2009-05-22 03:14 · Score: 1

And you don't even need to require payment for music, just suggest a donation, which can be easily set up without any programming. Amazon's service would basically be like doing this and having only 40% of people make a donation when they download anyway. And even if you get fewer, it might still be enough (as opposed to as much as possible, which is based on greed).
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by guruevi · 2009-05-22 03:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

1. Downloading and copying original CD's is still considered "illegal" by a large group of people even though it isn't if you paid for it.
2. A lot of people actually like something tangible they can use in their car or they can rip to MP3's themselves.
3. Loss of digital media is still a big problem and easier to do in much more ways than a tangible object (it's more likely to have your disk crash than your house burn down and the hard drive doesn't have insurance).
4. The current digital solutions are still largely unknown and together with DRM they have more headaches than anything. You have to remember to backup your media collection regularly, it takes up space on your hard drive and if you need reinstalling or a new computer, it all disappears. If the vendor put DRM on it and the vendor disappears (even temporarily eg. when their servers are down) the music stops working. It's too bad but that's the way it is.

--
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Hurricane78 · 2009-05-22 04:49 · Score: 1

What does your comment have to do with my comment? I mean... at all!?
Also: copying original CD his what?

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 04:50 · Score: 0

People who collect memorabilia like CDs. Personally, I could live with just MP3s forever, but I have friends who don't use iTunes because they want a disc that's silver on one side with artwork and a track listing on the other side to sit in a plastic case with a little book in their stack of similar plastic cases before ripping the CD to mp3 anyway.
I pay $0.99 for one repeatable song. He pays $15 for 12 repeatable songs and a pretty thing to display in his collection. We both get a fair deal as far as I can tell.
Re:The 90s called! They want their CDs back! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 06:41 · Score: 0

In your original post you were asking who has a CD player today and why one would want their music on a CD; guruevi gave 4 reasons for the latter.

Ditching The RIAA by inhuman_4 · 2009-05-22 01:56 · Score: 1

I wonder how this will work out for established artists? I could see a lot of big name artists wanting to get out of their contracts and run on this service. They are already know, so the exposure and some sales are in the bag. But this way the music is cheaper, they get a bigger cut, and keep the rights. I am sure that established artists can pay for their own recording studio and techs, so I don't see the quality of this going down either.

Am I missing anything here, or is this going to be the future of the music industry?

Cue baseless RIAA lawsuits.

Re:Ditching The RIAA by loufoque · 2009-05-22 03:08 · Score: 1

What about TV and radio exposure?
This is probably more important than the ability to buy CDs online.

Not "The Middleman" by vlad30 · 2009-05-22 02:01 · Score: 1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1122770/ save The Middleman his middlecar and his cute sidekick

--
Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you

Re:*correction* by vertinox · 2009-05-22 02:03 · Score: 1

1. No one listens to radio anymore for music.

I forgot about the traffic, sports, and political commentary, but if even the most poor and uneducated use MP3 players to listen to music these days.

--
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)

TuneCore is great! by Kulaid982 · 2009-05-22 02:26 · Score: 3, Interesting

In law school, a bunch of us formed "The Learned Hands" and laid down some tracks. I had seen an ad for TuneCore somewhere on the web, so we uploaded our album for distribution. Sadly, having graduated school, the band no longer exists, but it's cool to say that our original music has been heard in Germany and the UK (Someone streamed "Ten Point Buck" and "Sleepy Hollow").

My experience with TuneCore was great! The initial costs were very low - I think it's like a dollar per track, and a dollar per online music store. And what do you know, our music is available on iTunes, Napster, Rhapsody, eMusic, all over the world! Depending on the vendor, you get one or two cents every time the song is streamed, and for downloads, it's usually 65% or 70% of the purchase price. Uploaded the tracks in FLAC format too, actually, and everything turned out swell.

This is the type of innovation that is changing the music industry, and I don't think the RIAA knows how to, or even can, keep up.

1. Record your album in your garage/basement
2. Upload your tracks to TuneCore for distribution
3. ???
4. Profit!

The problem for my band has been step three, since we no longer officially exist (Singers are in CO and Philly, bassist in VT, and I'm moving to BFE), but we did sell 3 copies on AmazonMP3 and a few tracks on iTunes, plus about $0.76 worth of streaming on Napster and Rhapsody.

In conclusion, TuneCore allows Joe Sixpack to (sort of) achieve his rockstar dreams, at least in terms of getting the music out there and making it available.

--

Isn't it interesting how you come to recognize posters based solely on their sigs???

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2009-05-22 02:50 · Score: 2, Informative

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Not entirely true in Europe (Belgium: Sabam!) by freaker_TuC · 2009-05-22 02:53 · Score: 2

This is not entirely true in Europe, where licenses are still restricted by the artist copyright agencies. I've got my music distributed through Tunecore, which is an aggregrator and still I am missing a lot of income because my artist rights are not fully defended through exclusive contracts via a private company...

This is managed by Sabam, our RIAA in Belgium, which demands exclusive contracts like many others in Europe. They demand everything or nothing; which will limit the artist to promote and distribute his music without paying blood money.

IF we sign up (Sabam, really for the common?):
1. Our Creative Commons licenses would cost us, artists, creating the works.. money!
2. Any distribution would cost us money, copy to cd is a minimal license of 150 pieces limited to the cd which you have subscribed for;
3. Copy to USB key would cost money too with a minimal amount of blood distribution money;
4. Free licenses wouldn't really be free, because they will collect royalties on the ARTIST NAME (in other words: there is no such thing as free music!);
5. The artists creations will all belong to this agency, even after death ;)
IF we don't sign up: we won't be defended for the music we create, loosing a lot of income which gets paid through Sabam ..
Sabam collects royalties on parties anyways, also on Creative Commons works of artists having a contract with them!

Without our artist agencies backing up true royalty rights of the common artist; Tunecore (or any aggregrator); on-line store or physical sales and sales agreements will limit the artist for full coverage. Billboards, radio rights, artist representation, cd pressing and copyrights are being repressed from the common people as we speak. Children are being limited with their creative ideas because Sabam deletes their creations! It has to stop somewhere ....

By loosening up the copyrights a bit, the artist can choose his own distribution model and domains, while still getting royalty incomes from radio, television and cd-sales; also new artists will have a lot more chance to get on the bandwagon of the media industry. Maybe that's why they are so afraid of it, accepting such model; I don't know...

I've been writing about this extensively in previous linkings and: Music Industry, Wake up call for alternative licensing!. A very good read about this from Jam Young, this article (in dutch!) and many more available through google how they operate ...

In the meantime, I'm still forbidden of using Sabam because I don't want to sign away exclusivity contracts without end or real support towards the artist except limitations ...

--
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..

Sick by tsm_sf · 2009-05-22 02:57 · Score: 1

TuneCore's CEO put it this way: "As an artist, you have unlimited physical inventory, made on demand, with no [sic] upfront costs and worldwide distribution to anyone who orders it at Amazon.com."

'no' was spelled correctly.

--
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.

Not so good for high volumes by Andy_R · 2009-05-22 03:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

While this looks good for low quantities, a lot of people don't like burned CD-Rs which these will probably be (but I'll hold off judgement on that until the service is launched).

If you are selling 1000CDs, the deal isn't so great. If you go direct to a pressing plant you can get 1000 CDs made for $999. If you match Amazon's $8.98 price, your profit will be $7,899 minus postage costs, which will be zero if you sell at your live gigs, or at most $4,000 if you sell them all through a distributor like CD Baby.

In comparison the Amazon deal would give you just $3590 profit (with postage paid), but you won't have any stock to sell at gigs or mail out for promotion unless you buy it at retail, you're limited to just the packaging they support (no gatefolds, digipacks, free postcards, signed copies, 2CD sets etc.), and unlike mailing them yourselves, you don't get to build up a mailing list of fan's addresses, which can be invaluable later in your carreer.

--
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a

Re:Not so good for high volumes by nausea_malvarma · 2009-05-22 04:23 · Score: 1

What problems do people have with burned CD-Rs? Don't they sound the same as regular CDs?
Re:Not so good for high volumes by LandDolphin · 2009-05-22 04:44 · Score: 1

Amazon doe snot have to replace the current method. You want to print and sell CD's at live shows? Go ahead. What Amazon is offering is a way to sell CDs online, through a source that people trust.

The other difference is, it cost $999 to print 1000 CDs. Waht if you only sell 100? Well, if yo usell thme at $10 a pop, you'd have lost $599! Well, that blows now doesnt it... But, if you had gone through Amazon, you'd have made $400.

As you state, it might be better to sel lthem yourself over a certain number. But do you know that number? No, you don't.. So print a smaller number for live shows and then direct people to Amazon so that way you dont have to invest a lot of money in a venture that will most likely fail to begin with.

--
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Re:Not so good for high volumes by Todd+Knarr · 2009-05-22 05:09 · Score: 1

Up-front costs. Yes, it's a better deal to have them pressed yourself, but you have to shell out that $999 up front. At $8.98 each you have to sell 112 copies just to cover manufacturing costs, and then there's packaging and shipping and storage costs. With Amazon, you give up some potential profit but you also don't have to shell out that 1 grand up front. If you aren't sure you'll sell 112 copies, or at least won't sell that many quickly, Amazon's deal may be a good bargain.

No URL :( by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 03:48 · Score: 2, Funny

That's not even the worst of it- My band name (and potentially, our upcoming album's name too) is a URL!

Everywhere I go, I run into this problem. I'm going to have to take my business elsewhere, but I'm starting to think that goatse.cx just wasn't meant to be released upon the world just yet.

Re:No URL :( by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 07:01 · Score: 2, Funny

That's not even the worst of it- My band name (and potentially, our upcoming album's name too) is a URL!
Everywhere I go, I run into this problem. I'm going to have to take my business elsewhere, but I'm starting to think that goatse.cx just wasn't meant to be released upon the world just yet.
Do you have an album cover design? Maybe you could provide a link so we can take a look at it....

People who bought X also bought Y by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 03:52 · Score: 0

Amazon's advertising will kick in for every one of these new bands.

That is the big deal and it is likely more effective than anything except a big-label marketing budget.

Sad state of artists contracts... by GodfatherofSoul · 2009-05-22 03:54 · Score: 1

...when getting a 40% cut is made to sound like a good deal. Sounds just as bad as Handango's cut of mobile app sales.

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!

Re:Sad state of artists contracts... by Andy_R · 2009-05-22 04:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's 40% of turnover, not of profit.
Once you consider the manufacturing and distribution costs it doesn't look so bad. Compare it with CD Baby, who are an independent distributor, they take $4 per CD for warehousing and distribution, and you supply them with CDs which will cost you about $1 a pop to make in 'small band' quantities. You'll make a tiny bit more profit that way, but there is an up-front investment and the strong possibility of not breaking even to worry about.

--
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a

Contradiction in RIAA's argument... by John3k · 2009-05-22 04:11 · Score: 0

I would love to hear RIAA's view on Amazon's MP3 store. After all, MP3 files do not have copy-rigght protection and it is next impossible for RIAA to track, if you just get it from friends instead of downloading. (RIAA uses "borrowing from friends to make a copy" as an example in its argument against DVD backup software.).

Now, Amazon has an awesome MP3 store that is DRM-free with a large selection and often good prices. I am sure they have an agreement with the record lable companies, but it is a big contradictory in the logic comparing to what RIAA is saying about DVD backup software.

On a related note about Amazon, I recently came across, through PC World magazine, an interesting table that details the discounts on Amazon at
http://www.uberi.com

I imagine that's pretty useful for some people.

Must pull fangs first by Weaselmancer · 2009-05-22 04:12 · Score: 3, Insightful

The latter is something that an agent or a marketing company or a PR firm can do. Really, this is what a record company will eventually evolve to.

I agree, your post is spot-on.

The first thing that has to happen though is to get the record companies to not be so damn dangerous. Pull their fangs.

They killed internet radio because of ideas like this, you know. They still have enough power to get insane laws like this one passed (you actually have to pay the RIAA to broadcast your own unlicensed non-RIAA member music if you can imagine that!) And they'll do anything they can to remain relevant.

Free money and piles of it - who wouldn't fight for that?

So good job Amazon (never thought I'd say that) and keep chipping away at these jerks. Eventually they'll go the way of the dodo.

--
Weaselmancer
rediculous.

40% is huge by __aazsst3756 · 2009-05-22 04:20 · Score: 1

The RIAA has not had a reason to exist since the internet come of age. I will use this service in the future since it gives the artists 40% instead of the 10-14% from major labels, and prefer to purchase physical media and rip myself.

Tradition by SmallFurryCreature · 2009-05-22 04:38 · Score: 1

It is the way things are done, you get an agent, a record label and advances. That you pay for everything yourself is in the details and lets face it, musicians ain't the brightest people around.

Also, don't forget the appeal of advances. Sure, you would pay them back if succesful but it is money. Right now, not after you sold copies.

This new scheme is for people who believe in their own music, create their own music and are seeing it is as a job, a career. Not a get rick quick scheme.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:

You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

You got kicked out of business 101 didn't you? by SmallFurryCreature · 2009-05-22 04:46 · Score: 1

You seem to think that the costs of a pressing 1000 CD's is $999 that therefor this is the entire cost of selling these CD's.

What about shipping? Getting the CD's from the plant to your home. Storing them safely as you won't sell them all at once. Setting up a website to sell them. Getting a system to accept payments, which costs money to subscribe to. Shipping to the customers, not just postage but the labor involved in handling the packages. Making the packages. Buying the packages. Handling returns, lost shipments, complaints in general. Keeping track of all your costs for your books.

Can you do all that for 31 dollars? Doubt it. Do you really think you can get better margins then Amazon?

And why can't you make your own CD's as well? This contract ain't exclusive.

No, some larger bands who have a lot of business savy may want to control it all themselves, but if you just want to offer your CD online then this is a very good deal with an extremely payout.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:

You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

Re:You got kicked out of business 101 didn't you? by Andy_R · 2009-05-22 08:32 · Score: 1

I can do it for $4 not $31, and I already mentioned how.
CD Baby charge $4 per CD to do all the warehousing, shipping, website etc. that you listed. Multiply by 1000 and you get the "...$4,000 if you sell them all through a distributor like CD Baby" that I included in the parent post.
You ask why you can't make your own CDs as well... if you are going to be doing that, you might as well skip Amazon's on-demand manufacturing entirely, once you've got past the high set up cost for traditional pressing, the unit cost is far lower than Amazon's on-demand service offers.

--
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a

Re:What's misspelled? What would live be with by davidsyes · 2009-05-22 05:04 · Score: 1

no "downsides"? Things would be "upended". While we would retain backsides, we would be deprived of foreheads (and more people of foreskins).

Life would be downgraded, and some would feel sideswiped, by underhanded, overbearing people who cannot be aboveboard. But, at least we might not have the problem of innocent bystanders.

But, with computers, we would be deprived of throughput... or output.... LOL!

(I think i'll go outside to get some fresh air...)

--
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"

Photoshop disaster? by Magic5Ball · 2009-05-22 05:36 · Score: 1

I hope their in house Photoshop skills are better than those demonstrated in the screenshots of the template page in Wired's article. Someone should inform TuneCore that reflections do not make the objects being reflected translucent, and that design notes ("Black") in the default font should be deleted from the final image.

--
There are 1.1... kinds of people.

You clearly didn't catch the big thing either ... by freaker_TuC · 2009-05-22 06:34 · Score: 1

Shipping, storing and setting up a website for a thousand cd's is not that of a big deal; there are plentoria of services around, ready available for the artist. Package handling and all that jazz is possible using open source software. Nobody told music is a career which starts from the first CD or did we?

It depends all in how far you want to go; since; Amazon is looking to this in a very commercial way for those who like to pay up for it; although those knowing the ropes will be rather selecting the real thing with all links attached instead of hanging with an Amazon solution... Maybe you are one of those people who sticks with Google tools only till something bad happens ;)

Also, Amazon does not offer which a custom e-shop can offer, a custom website, defined towards the artist, integration and all that; which is not that expensive either these times!... Still, Amazon or a custom solution doesn't guarantee your cd will be either succes from the first beginning ...

--
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..

it's depending by the wanted-factor too ... by freaker_TuC · 2009-05-22 06:40 · Score: 1

It's like all those printshops around; small amounts will get you nice prints in return but when you want something printed in large amounts, you will pay less for it with a professional and get often better materials in return; unless they are having their own printing facilities.

When the investment is not known, you can still see how much you really WANT to invest in getting your product on the market. With the physical product local stores and bars could be reached too while this would be out-of-reach with the Amazon solution; unless paying more to Amazon for that; with the Internet product you will get only coverage of those on the Internet. The middle way needs to be set by those who are running the band / the artist / those knowing how wanted they are on cd or on stage...

--
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..

RIAA by emaname · 2009-05-22 06:51 · Score: 1

Personally, I can't even begin to imagine the RIAA ignoring this. They are bound to whine and cry "Foul play" in... 4... 3... 2... 1...

--
An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.

Amazon would love to supplant the RIAA by laburu · 2009-05-22 07:04 · Score: 1

The arrangement between TuneCore and Amazon is certainly an improvement over the current situation, but it doesn't cut out the middleman — it replaces him. Record companies could dictate terms to artists and consumers because they parlayed their control over the distribution of the physical product into a comprehensive racket. This development merely confirms that there is a new distribution channel for music... and that it is dominated by the likes of Apple and Amazon. Jeff Price may have struck this deal because he's a decent fellow who just wants to help music makers and music lovers meet; but I'm pretty sure Jeff Bezos only agreed because he wants to be Caliph instead of the Caliph and, in this space, the RIAA is clearly the Caliph.

What's the RIAA's job again?Oh, is that what RIAA by Chris+Pimlott · 2009-05-22 07:41 · Score: 1

What's the RIAA's job again? I thought the headline meant that Amazon would just the listeners directly...

Awesome debate! by Peter+Wells · 2009-05-22 08:14 · Score: 1

There's so many responses here I literally don't know where to begin. So I'll just say, we're all totally psyched up for this and the initiatives happening now. If anyone has questions, just write me. Thanks for the lively debate! --Peter peter@tunecore.com

Re:Awesome debate! by dfjunior · 2009-05-22 11:59 · Score: 1

Well, if you want opinions, you're in the right place...
You've likely gained yourself a couple thousand customers by being visible here

TuneCore is a great company by rabtech · 2009-05-22 16:24 · Score: 1

We used TuneCore to distribute the album that I engineered and produced, it worked out really well. I'm just waiting for TuneCore to get their widget back up and running and their service will be perfect. Amazon previously used a different on-demand CD manufacturing service which would have left us with almost nothing in the way of royalties and looked like questionable quality, plus we wanted to press Vinyl so we handled all the physical stuff ourselves. I can confirm that both TuneCore and Amazon's CD services (at least as of two months ago) were doing burned CDRs with dye-sub printed surfaces. For about $1,000 you can actually press CDs instead of burn them, so if you can sell any kind of quantity it is totally worth it.

Still, the Amazon Advantage (advantage.amazon.com) program let us get our vinyl onto their site without any issues. We only did a limited run of promo CDs (mixonic) and have pretty much skipped the CD - digital satisfies most people and Vinyl is great for collectors who want the physical item, artwork, etc. Vinyl was pressed locally, which was extremely price-competitive even compared to eastern-european pressing plants.

Full disclosure and shameless plug: http://www.jackwithoneeye.com/ and Vinyl link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001PQN7VM

--
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)

Pair it with Pandora! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-22 23:43 · Score: 0

Get the music analysts at Pandora to include the songs in their music genome database and I'll bet they might even sell some CDs.

Could this do it? by rblight · 2009-05-23 00:06 · Score: 1

The internet will end the reign of the majors. Indy music is selling better and better every year and fans are tired of the same old junk being thrown at them over the radio and MTV. As a musician/songwriter myself, I see this as a good thing.

Slashdot Mirror

Amazon & TuneCore To Cut Out the RIAA Middleman

291 comments