 Skilos
join:2000-08-19
Astoria, NY | id pay Personally, i would rather pay the artist directly. Sounds like an interesting model.
But that still leaves the little guys "small bands" to fend for them selves it terms of getting gigs, and shelling out cash for studio time and putting out CD's.
Still interesting times ahead for music. |
|
|
|
| said by Skilos: Personally, i would rather pay the artist directly. Sounds like an interesting model. But will you, if you can get his songs for nothing?
Trent Reznor may change his tune after a couple years without any income except for concerts - that is if he can actually book any without label backing. And after his pay if you like it internet plan draws minimal money.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
 hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greedPremium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1 | said by fAcEtIOUs:said by Skilos: Personally, i would rather pay the artist directly. Sounds like an interesting model. But will you, if you can get his songs for nothing? Trent Reznor may change his tune after a couple years without any income except for concerts - that is if he can actually book any without label backing. And after his pay if you like it internet plan draws minimal money. Why that's how artists survive. U think they make a living off of the pennies the lables give them? HA. It's all in the concerts and T's.
If you are an artist in the music business looking to make only $$$, then you are in the wrong business.
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
 djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1
 ·Verizon Wireless..
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·VOIPo
·PHONE POWER
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
What I'll be very interested to see is if Reznor can get radio play without label backing. People still primarily look to radio or TV to hear new songs.
In a lot of peoples' eyes, music hasn't really "arrived" until they've heard it on the radio somewhere. As a DJ it's interesting to watch people thumb their nose up at new music until it's "popular".
Every once in a while, it takes much longer than usual for a label to start heavily promoing something. So I'll have some "hit new song" I've had from my record pool sitting in my CD case for months (sometimes over a year!). Or some song will suddenly go into high demand because it was on some commercial. |
|
 AtlGuy
join:2000-10-17
Marietta, GA | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:But will you, if you can get his songs for nothing? I'm not a NIN or Radiohead fan personally, but one of my favorite bands several months ago made their latest album available for free download. The band pretty much said download it, and if you want buy the cd. If you don't want to buy the cd, enjoy the downloads.
I will fully support bands that I like, so after downloading the songs I without hesitation bought the cd. Apparently many other supporters/fans went the same route as me, buying the music to help support the band (as well as to enjoy the tunes). The band said they were overwhelmed at the amount of people that bought their music, even with it being available for free download.
The lead guitar player/main songwriter stated he had made some distribution deals in the recent past when he released a solo cd, and I recall him saying 3 different companies owed him a pretty large sum of money (which he's fighting to get). After reading that specific post, I can understand why more and more artists/bands are getting sick of the music and distribution companies.
Personally, I find it refreshing that more and more artists are taking the record companies out of the equation and doing business directly with their fans. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
NO one is going to pay for it in this bunch. What's the difference, to these people, for paying for a song to a label or an independent. Free/charity is the same to them.
If there was such a push for it, the DRM free music sites would be putting Rhapsody and Napster out of business already.
Amazon.com anyone?
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
"But will you, if you can get his songs for nothing?"
I will. Just on principal. I am sure he has put a lot of thought into this and he is probably in a position that if he were to stop making music today he would be able to live a very comfortable life the rest of his days. |
|
| said by battleop:"But will you, if you can get his songs for nothing?" I will. Just on principal. I am sure he has put a lot of thought into this and he is probably in a position that if he were to stop making music today he would be able to live a very comfortable life the rest of his days. Money he made under the system he says doesn't work.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
 Toguro
join:2003-10-23
Ottawa, IL | I know from first hand it does not work, that is why T.L.C had to file bankruptcy the label ripped them off. Unless your Madonna,Prince,Rolling Stones ext. you don't make a dime off of record sales. |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to Skilos
said by Skilos: But that still leaves the little guys "small bands" to fend for them selves it terms of getting gigs, and shelling out cash for studio time and putting out CD's. Yes, but not really.
By the time any small band has been signed by a label, they've been doing this themselves, anyway.
If this continues, the labels are going to have to really earn their keep.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report. |
|
| reply to hopeflicker
Artists are about at break-even on concert nets, after show expenses and production costs. They make their money through merchandising. There's some big money in tshirts. |
|
| reply to AtlGuy
Keep in mind that record companies are nothing more than banks for new artists, giving loans for their first record, and distribution. With home recording and digital production having brought down production costs so much, and with the internet waiting to be truly used as a distribution medium, all that leaves is promotion, which as long as the artist pays up, the independent promoters will take care of.
The first #1 album released independently on the Internet will be a watershed moment. It's coming. |
|
jp10558Premium
join:2005-06-24
Willseyville, NY | And as I understnad it, not being a musician - they suck ass as a bank. It would seem you'd actually get screwed less going to your Financial Institution of choice for a small business loan or personal loan. Amazing... The traditioanl banks won't ask (I would be surprised if they did) for any IP rights, just interest and payments on time.
I guess the problem is the payments - if you flop you are screwed pretty bad - but what do the lables do if you can't repay your advance/loan because you flop? |
|
| said by jp10558:And as I understnad it, not being a musician - they suck ass as a bank. It would seem you'd actually get screwed less going to your Financial Institution of choice for a small business loan or personal loan. Amazing... The traditioanl banks won't ask (I would be surprised if they did) for any IP rights, just interest and payments on time. I guess the problem is the payments - if you flop you are screwed pretty bad - but what do the lables do if you can't repay your advance/loan because you flop? What do they do? Write it off on their taxes. And not pick up your first option. |
|
Skilos
join:2000-08-19
Astoria, NY | reply to funchords
yes, but not really.
Yes big labels can make the next big teeny bopper happen overnight, and make millions for them selves and a few more for the artist, but remember "a light that burns twice as bright last half as long" great quote by the way. todays labels just put out one hit wonders just to make a buck, just look at American idol.
small bands don't really need big labels any more given the ease of distribution of there music by way of lets say torrent technology, also a nice website. and maybe a good PR person and/or manager.
and "yes i would" to a post further up i would pay, even if i could get it for free. i know that artist have to eat so they can make there music.
thats how record labels got in this mess to bigin with. charging $25 $30 or what ever. they just got greedy. people just found a better way to get there music. if more artists go at it on there own they may not be the next super duper mega stars that the world knows all over, but i bet they sure will have a cult following provided they are good and in the end that is better than any label.
man im tired of typing. |
|
 bigunkGort, Klattu Birada Nikto
join:2001-02-10
USA | reply to AtlGuy
What, oh pray tell, is the name of this band? What type of music do they play? I would support them if I liked their material. |
|
 Combat ChuckToo Many CannibalsPremium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA | reply to jp10558
said by jp10558:It would seem you'd actually get screwed less going to your Financial Institution of choice for a small business loan or personal loan. Amazing... You're not borrowing actual money for the most part, they're fronting money for studio time, promotions, production, and basically providing you contacts in the industry which gets you radio time. They're fronting the money anticipating that you'll sell enough albums which is why they're so concerned about piracy. Realistically, unless they really think you'll hit big, the money they front if you're a new artist, isn't that much; it's a lot for an 18-25 year old who's spending a lot of money on equipment but it's not that much. You can sell what would be considered a meager amount of albums and they've probably made their money back. The biggest help a label can be is getting your name out there on the radio, opening for other bands on tours, and promotions.
The more I think about this I get the feeling that Trent basically stuck his foot in his mouth and has basically made it so no one will work with him for a while. There's plenty of small/indy labels that would have been glad to have him without most of the BS, but if he's going around telling people to steal his music having him on your label becomes a bit of a problem. Luckily for him he's well known and likely has the money and contacts to produce and promote his stuff on his own.
--
Mooooooo!!! |
|
1 edit | reply to hopeflicker
The main problem I have with the "support the artists where it counts: go to their concerts" argument is that it strongly discourages acts that don't tour, or tour infrequently. If someone wanted to be like the post-1966 Beatles and stop touring altogether in order to make adventurous, non-conventional works that can only properly exist in a recorded medium or at least would be very difficult to reproduce on the stage, I think they might have a hard time under today's model. I wonder how many people would've paid full price for Sgt. Pepper, the White Album and Abbey Road if it had been widely free on the Net back in the '60s. Of course they were already very rich by then, but you get my point. |
|
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
This is in response to TCH:
I think the real question is why not? If I like the artist and what he or she puts out then as far as I'm concerned they earned my money and I'll buy the album, regardless if I listened to their music for free or not.
Want to know the reason why? Well it's quite simple. I will financially support the artist to continue to create the music that I like to hear. All the others, I can care less about.
Oh and BTW, most artists make their fortunes from concerts. They make next to nothing on albums they put out.
--
True Happiness Must Come From Within |
|
 PolarBear03The bear formerly known as aaron8301Premium
join:2005-01-03 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
You think that NIN would need label backing to book a venue? Most venues would LOVE to have an artist like NIN grace them with their presence. |
|
