THESHADOWBOX.NET

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

One of the most important things you will ever do (as a fan of AFP, at least): Sign up for THE MAILING LIST!

Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: the recording industry  (Read 4644 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

CeeGBee

  • Too o-o-old to rock & ro-o-oll, but too young to die...
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18563
    • Facebook, website, what's the dif?
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #15 on: January 10, 2009, 03:10:51 AM »

The birth of the internet is pretty much making record companies obsolete. Not in a piracy way, but in a "people can market themselves" kinda way.
People have the technology to make their own albums and videos, too.

which seems like it would be in every way positive,

but I fear that the average audience will become even more jaded. what if bands don't have a following devoted enough to sustain themselves?
They get day-jobs...
Logged
Is it bad that what she said made perfect sense to me?

Tomatoes and Radiowire

  • The Angel Islington
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 823
    • this is my band and I'm the pimp...
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #16 on: January 10, 2009, 07:16:08 PM »

The birth of the internet is pretty much making record companies obsolete. Not in a piracy way, but in a "people can market themselves" kinda way.
People have the technology to make their own albums and videos, too.

which seems like it would be in every way positive,

but I fear that the average audience will become even more jaded. what if bands don't have a following devoted enough to sustain themselves?
They get day-jobs...

it's impossible to get enough money to pull off any real touring on a minimum wage job, most good musicians aren't very good at anything else.
and it's kind of impossible to get a group of people willing to toss money at a tour that probably won't change anything.

or better yet...


no.

renegadeoptician

  • Laser Haiku Surgery
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 363
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #17 on: January 10, 2009, 09:14:20 PM »

Way Back in the Eighties
The ONLY Known Way to Get Your Music
To Potential Fans was to Get Signed

Band Meeting Were Held
To Discuss Who Would Suck, Fuck
Or Take It Up the Ass for
A Contract with Virgin

Nowadays a DIY Band
Can Keep Control of All
The Money Flowing
In And Out

All that's Necessary
Is a Cell Phone, Internet
And One Sane Member

The Recording Industry
Has Fucked Over Too Many
Great Musicians

It's High Time to
Grab Them By the Tie
And Fuck'em Dry

We Owe It to Our Own

Boycott Labels

Logged
Rules not Meant
To be Bent
Must be Broken

colordeaf

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
  • New! Chicken of the Galaxy Dolphin Nuggets
    • Gallery of Questionable Taste
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #18 on: January 11, 2009, 01:22:06 AM »

They say entertainers are overpaid, but it's really just a pay imbalance betweeen entertainers...back to the starving artist, eh. I read an article where a "rockstar" said he was glad the recording industry was going down so people would listen to more local bands.
Logged
Dude...  I'm getting high just from being in the same room with you...

CeeGBee

  • Too o-o-old to rock & ro-o-oll, but too young to die...
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18563
    • Facebook, website, what's the dif?
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #19 on: January 11, 2009, 02:28:17 AM »

The birth of the internet is pretty much making record companies obsolete. Not in a piracy way, but in a "people can market themselves" kinda way.
People have the technology to make their own albums and videos, too.

which seems like it would be in every way positive,

but I fear that the average audience will become even more jaded. what if bands don't have a following devoted enough to sustain themselves?
They get day-jobs...
it's impossible to get enough money to pull off any real touring on a minimum wage job, most good musicians aren't very good at anything else.
and it's kind of impossible to get a group of people willing to toss money at a tour that probably won't change anything.

or better yet...

no.
For starters, I think you sell "real musicians" short; a lot of them are very good at a lot of other things,
including occasionally things that will pay the bills between those big checks from the record company.   O0
Ian Anderson (of Jethro Tull) is a salmon farmer... (just for example...  I love that example.)

Secondly, there are plenty of musicians (I would speculate the majority of them) who get by, but never reach
a point where they go on a "real tour".  If you can draw a consistent crowd in your own town, you might look
at a weekend gig an hour or two away; make a respectable showing of that, and you may achieve some sort
of "regional" recognition...  maybe open for a national act on part of their tour (which, if I understood AFP's
remarks on the subject, is something that costs you more money than it pays)...

I believe the term is (or at least used to be) "paying dues"...

I think, however, that Astica's original point is fairly accurate: unless recording companies start showing
that they are willing and able to get the word out in some amazingly effective manner, musicians are just
gonna do it for themselves.  Even if every paid-sale gets pirated ten times, the band still gets a far better
cut (of their own work-product) by doing it themselves.  The 'net goes a long way to cutting off the old
record-company/radio/promoter club that used to control exposure for new bands.
Logged
Is it bad that what she said made perfect sense to me?

Tomatoes and Radiowire

  • The Angel Islington
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 823
    • this is my band and I'm the pimp...
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #20 on: January 11, 2009, 10:28:15 PM »

well, I didn't say "real musicians" I'm not like that.

I'd like to point out... 10% of 50,000 is still more than 100% of 20

CeeGBee

  • Too o-o-old to rock & ro-o-oll, but too young to die...
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18563
    • Facebook, website, what's the dif?
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #21 on: January 12, 2009, 02:18:50 AM »

well, I didn't say "real musicians" I'm not like that.
My bad... you said "good musicians", but my point stands.



I'd like to point out... 10% of 50,000 is still more than 100% of 20
First, you have to sell 50K copies...

Once you've done that, well...   maybe....

Anybody know a musician who's getting 10% of his/her CD sales?

Anyone?

Speak up, don't be shy....

Okay, AC/DC and the Eagles might have gotten that by making an exclusive-distribution
deal with Wal-Mart.... 
Logged
Is it bad that what she said made perfect sense to me?

Tomatoes and Radiowire

  • The Angel Islington
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 823
    • this is my band and I'm the pimp...
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #22 on: January 16, 2009, 03:44:36 AM »

and don't forget, you can always sell your brand... especially if you're a solo artist.
i.e. people will actually give a shit about the other stuff you do.

did anyone know who Albert Hamond Jr. was before The Strokes? but know he get's recognition and people will actually buy into his band (which I might add is a fucking lot like the strokes.)


but that doesn't really even apply here, we're talking about indie musicians... I think I may have said something just for the sake of it... and when you think of it that's kind of why we're all posting here...

 but any rate, what's the consensus? I know where some of you stand, but do you think the new wave of digital distribution is a good thing or not?

armyoflarry

  • and army of names
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1361
  • a human, lyman sinister, jupiter or japan
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #23 on: January 16, 2009, 09:54:14 AM »

You know, fuck the industry is all well and good. The internet as a tool for bands to DIY the whole way is great.

Every band has a web page and a myspace page now, but the problem still exists: how the fuck do you get people to come to your site and how do you get them to buy your shit? You need promotion and a team of people getting the word out.

Promotion still needs money, and a shit-ton of it. If you want to be big, you still need a label or a very rich buddy with good connections.
Logged
Also, oh my God I could eat your family pets right now. GNNFFGH!!

CeeGBee

  • Too o-o-old to rock & ro-o-oll, but too young to die...
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18563
    • Facebook, website, what's the dif?
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #24 on: January 16, 2009, 03:05:35 PM »

You know, fuck the industry is all well and good. The internet as a tool for bands to DIY the whole way is great.

Promotion still needs money, and a shit-ton of it. If you want to be big, you still need a label or a very rich buddy with good connections.
Yes, cuz who among us would ever have heard of this band without RoadRunner's tireless
promotional efforts....


but any rate, what's the consensus? I know where some of you stand, but do you think the new wave of digital distribution is a good thing or not?
...and Liz says take the money and run
Bjork says take the money and run
Tori says take the money and run...




But seriously, more than any time in the pre-social-networking-site era, the only bands that "get big"
are the musical equivalent of fast-food... They have that "oh yeah, I'm familiar with this" appeal, but
by definition they lack individuality.  What's "changed" is that acts which would have been "underground
sensations" in the 60s/70s/80s or even 1990s can actually reach a wide audience without having to
spend a shit-ton of money on pay-for-play promotion.  Not that they don't have to spend money,
but (for example) instead of having a staff to hang tour signs in record stores around the country, and
tens of thousands for custom printing, bands can create a simple sign and fans will spend the buck fifty
to run off some copies and hang 'em up around their various towns.  The moey still gets spent, but
several steps get skipped, and a number if intermediaries ("middle men" if you will) get cut out.
(Then, after a certain point, you supplement the home-printed signs with custom silk-screened art
which you don't actually use to advertise, but rather you sell to fans at the show...  Yay!)

Of course, if your songs suck, and you can't play your instrument, and you've got no charisma,
you still might not be able to make it in the music biz.  (Or if your style only appeals to a small
sliver of the music-listening public.  If that's the case, you still get to be an underground sensation.)
Logged
Is it bad that what she said made perfect sense to me?

Tomatoes and Radiowire

  • The Angel Islington
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 823
    • this is my band and I'm the pimp...
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2009, 03:39:15 AM »

THAT is very true, and it's much easier to get gigs now.
if your band has a myspace and you find a local band that suits your style enough and is already doing stuff independently, you can actually just message them about getting in at one of their shows.
now paid gigs might actually have gotten harder to come by since there are few venues that need or want to pay for music when so many people would do it for free.
but if you're a showgaze band you can always get corporate gigs
so really that sort of filters out all the half-in musicians who are only kind of into it, since you have to work for nothing for so long before you get anywhere at all

armyoflarry

  • and army of names
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1361
  • a human, lyman sinister, jupiter or japan
Re: the recording industry
« Reply #26 on: January 17, 2009, 10:22:30 AM »

You know, fuck the industry is all well and good. The internet as a tool for bands to DIY the whole way is great.

Promotion still needs money, and a shit-ton of it. If you want to be big, you still need a label or a very rich buddy with good connections.
Yes, cuz who among us would ever have heard of this band without RoadRunner's tireless
promotional efforts....

Really bad example, because The Dresden Dolls are not really that big for one, and they are the exception to the rule in what success they have achieved. Not to mention that Amanda doesn't really want to be that huge of an artist anyway. I also think they made it so far the old fashioned way(hard work and word of mouth) but that is not enough to get you in the door completely. If you think Roadrunner has done NOTHING for the Dresden Dolls, I think you are being delusional at best. I would agree that they have done nothing for WKAP, but there are many people who never would have heard of the Dolls if they did not join a label. I do think they have not done enough, and are mistreating Amanda in a big way. Yet, you have to admit that they have done SOMETHING. Also, Roadrunner has a few big artists, but are hardly the big mover and shaker on the block. They rule the metal world for right now, and frankly that just makes them a big fish in a little pond. Without Slipknot and Nickleback they don't make that much money.

I'm not being a record company apologist here. They have been fucking things up for quite some time. Lack of artist development is a big problem and has been for years. Most great artists that have stood the test of time have had some major bumps in the road on the way to becoming legends. For example: Pink Floyd did great with their first album, but after losing Syd to madness they struggled through 4 albums of experimentation and exploration before hitting with Dark Side of the Moon. We all know that they wouldn't have made it past album 2 in today's music business climate, and that does not only hurt the artists and fans, but the record companies themselves. "Throw it against the wall and see if it sticks" and "One chance to sell millions" practices have buried tons of great talent that could have gone on and created legacies. As long as the record companies drop bands like this, there will never be new artists like Floyd, Genesis, The Who, Bruce Springsteen, Tom Petty, Peter Gabriel who all have long periods to gestate, and room to solidify their legacy.

Yet, to think that a band with a myspace page and a self-produced album is going to be able to do the same thing? It CAN happen sometimes, but it will be an exception to the rule. Nirvana would have been a footnote in a small Seattle history if not for a big label. I'm glad that I got to find out about them, and I never would if it was not for a big evil label.

What needs to happen is not the destruction of big labels, but a change in thinking by big labels. Popular music does not have to suck so bad. There has always been shit on the charts, but we have been blessed with art on the charts too thanks to some visionary people working for major labels. Unfortunately, these labels change hands at the top and then greed takes over. That will always happen as these labels get bigger. It doesn't have to be this bad though. I just think that there has been much talk about how record companies are falling and how music will benefit by artists selling their own shit and seeing all the profits blah blah blah.

The artist must first get people to their product. They must find the money to record and mass produce the product. They must find a way to distribute the product. So far, all of that needs a shit load of money that most artists can not muster themselves.
Logged
Also, oh my God I could eat your family pets right now. GNNFFGH!!
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up