Every edm consumer will soon be a producer and world star with 5 fans!
Old 15th December 2012
  #31
Gear interested
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottdavidson View Post
love it!.. in the space of a generation we've gone from a vibrant and freakish counterculture movement dancing in feilds and warehouses to ..."EDM consumers"

nurse!! bring me my sick bag
I resist myself to believe so, but........
Old 15th December 2012
  #32
Banned
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmNMusicman View Post
And this is bad because....??

If success comes enjoy it...

If it doesn't enjoy the time you had making your sound.

I think the creation is the fun part, it's the ART.

The rest to me is just business.

I hate dealing with the marketing part.
hmm i am not sure if art is supposed to give you fun and pleasure to make...

even when this wouldnt hurt its most definitely not enough to call it art just because you got warm feelings while doing it.. that is toying around....

so toying around is your art and enjoying success your business?

sounds comfortable :-) ..
Old 15th December 2012
  #33
ozy
Lives for gear
 
ozy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
It's not called fans, it's called mum and your friends. And your friends are lying, so it's really only one person...
your girlfriend:

"oh, yeah... uhm... er... fine..."

Old 15th December 2012
  #34
Gear addict
 

As a pro mixing and mastering engineer and also music producer/writer im getting tired of all the moaning.

Every edm consumer will soon be a producer and world star with 5 fans!
Every photo consumer will soon be a professional photographer and world star with 5 fans!
(why not if you have a camera in your phone)
Every movie consumer will soon be amazing movie director and world star with 5 fans!
(why not if you have a camera in your phone)
Every rock music consumer will soon be a professional guitar player and world star with 5 fans!

and so on...
Old 15th December 2012
  #35
ozy
Lives for gear
 
ozy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by artech909 View Post
and so on...
uhm...

try becoming a professional athlete by buying some app on the web.

I think I'll remain in my line of business. Job feels safer
Old 15th December 2012
  #36
Gear addict
 
pearlywhites's Avatar
 

i could list all the pub bands that went on to be great

bob dylan for one
Old 15th December 2012
  #37
Lives for gear
 
John The Cut's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottdavidson View Post
love it!.. in the space of a generation we've gone from a vibrant and freakish counterculture movement dancing in feilds and warehouses to ..."EDM consumers"

nurse!! bring me my sick bag
What we have here is progress happening too fast as to outpace the natural rhythm of human life..

The new generation are backing up because there isnt enough space to accomodate everyone. The last generation arent even finished yet - some arent even properly started yet and already they need to move over.

EDM has disappeared up its own arse in a cloud of ego. Its not about great music, its not about vibe or HAVING FUN!

Its about ego. Its about how technically great you are because thats what the noobs equate talent with.

My kick is better than your kick etc..

**** off. 909s are 909s and a whole ****ing GENRE of music erupted around that why? cos its only one eLEMent in a great song, track, choon, experience.

So much good stuff is going to waste as producers battle to get heard in the tide of software technology enhancements.

The first rule of production is case you havent heard is leave your ego at the door. Enjoy the music. Not the technology. The technology is the means. Not the end.

EDM is dead. The future is Electronic. Electronic music is the only form of true expression and artistry left for the electronic musician. It doesnt have to be for the dance floor cos the dance floor is a shit place to be right now..

How can you have an X-Factor every year!? Doesnt that mean as soon as its finished you're yesterdays news? wtf??

So yea, everyone will be a shitty EDM producer pretty soon. It doesnt matter. Art will go on. The cream will rise. And if you stay true to yourself you can die happy.

From Fantasia to Bob The Builder dance mixes in 1 generation.
Quote
1
Old 15th December 2012
  #38
Lives for gear
 

If I detune two EDM consumers, than what?
Old 15th December 2012
  #39
ozy
Lives for gear
 
ozy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alekto View Post
If I detune two EDM consumers, than what?
Quote
1
Old 15th December 2012
  #40
Gear nut
 
80sClash's Avatar
 

Electronic music. What we believed for a long time was that anyone with a bit of talent had a chance at a career of about ten years before eventually retiring from the circuit. Of course there are exceptions for whom this does not seem to apply. Francois Kevorkian has probably had the longest career here (unless we count Kraftwerk as part of our little world); and it’s hard to imagine techno or house without Richie Hawtin, Jeff Mills or Laurent Garnier. That’s the good news: it does not necessarily have to meet a predetermined end. On the other hand, artists emerging now face the hardest times ever to establish themselves. The lifespan between breaking through and being laid off seems to have reached a historic low point of half a year. The reasons behind this “haircut” to artistic longevity are the radically lowered barriers to participation, as well as the hectic marketplace discovering today’s new talent and abandoning yesterday’s new talent.

Let’s clarify “barriers”: in the old days of the music business, which was basically before the end of the 1970s, the main barriers to “making it in music” were studio time and access to distribution. Whoever wanted to be heard adequately needed well distributed releases. That is, having recorded material in the first place. The means for producing such recordings were so expensive that at some point only big corporations could spare the funds to pay for the required studio time and personnel. The effect of this economic barrier to resources was that a couple of hundred artists and bands gained access to an audience of millions. Once a recording was produced it enjoyed a long life in the market due to the lack of competition that otherwise would have pushed it off the store shelves. Only under these conditions did the huge, continuous investments in promotion and distribution actually make economic sense in those times and circumstances.

This model experienced a serious challenge with the advent of the affordable 4-track recorder, which enabled home recording that could deliver marketable results for the first time ever. For instance, the whole late ’70s/early ’80s New York downtown scene can be pretty much explained by this piece of technology. Progress in affordable music equipment in the form of synthesizers, drum machines and samplers gave birth to a plethora of innovative styles in music, including hip hop, house, techno and drum ‘n’ bass. At the same time independent distribution was born, conquering channels previously serviced exclusively by major corporations. The new distributors were capable of connecting with ever smaller target groups. Fueled by enthusiasm, small businesses could survive on small quantities of product previously considered not to be worth the effort. Tango from Finland and death metal from anywhere found comfortable niches with worldwide followings.

These enabled artists and the people around them to become professionals, i.e. to make a living on the music instead of funding a hobby through an undesirable day job. That was the core economic feature of the independent music culture: no riches, but still sufficient funds to avoid wasting time on activities not related to music. Anyone busy generating income from 9 to 5 wouldn’t be able to gain the deep skills necessary to sustain a career in music and hold an audience for long. By the way, this comfortable indie-constellation was never really threatened by the majors, who only occasionally dropped by to sign away the most successful artists of any niche. Working within your own artistic preferences became a pretty comfortable thing to do back in the ’80s.

The next level was reached when it took nothing but a standard PC and a microphone (if required) to render an entire production. The software that emulated the previously needed pieces of gear came mostly for free thanks to piracy. Therefore, production costs practically hit zero and the record sales you needed in order to sustain a release fell almost to the cost of the manufacturing of the records themselves (with a few bucks for promotion). At that point, at least in dance music, sales figures of just around 5,000 physical units were considered a “hit,” whereas a bit earlier it would’ve required a few hundred thousand units. Many soon realized that even the expense of pressing up records or CDs was not really necessary. A digital download has no costs at all. The logical outcome was distribution that granted any piece of music total availability, with the downside of being the most inefficient way of distribution ever: what should I download when there are five billion files to choose from? Whom should I bless with my attention? Do I have any attention to spare?

Contrary to public perception, this didn’t affect the majors all that much. Their problems were mostly in their inability to maximize the advantages they already had instead of wasting resources on trying to revive an overthrown order. Soon enough it dawned on them that big artists (i.e. those with the biggest turnover) can generate reasonable income through so called 360-degree-deals, covering live gigs, publishing rights, merchandise, etc. all under the control of one company. Even the smallest labels engage in a similar policy nowadays. But the required resources to participate in the game of filling stadiums, really cashing in on movie and advertising deals today are almost exclusively in the hands of majors. Interestingly, the so called “democratization” of music production and distribution didn’t change this allocation of relevant income to the majors’ detriment at all.

Others fell victim to it. Absurdly, the complete disappearance of economic barriers to distribution (offering a free download doesn’t cost more than the time to upload the file) hit the wallets of the “indies” first, stripping a substantial part of their income. This mostly affected the artists and the personnel around them: designers, engineers, studio musicians, promotion and label professionals, music journalists, et al. The mass of competition they encountered meant anyone with a limited marketing budget had a difficult time surviving in the market. With the same promotional tools available to almost anyone, they lost their efficiency. The professionals listed above basically lost their income. In 2000, an average vinyl single generated a return of a couple of thousand Euros, while in 2011 the same single generates a loss of a couple of hundred Euros, even without what were formerly known as “production costs.” Anything on top, like a bigger production, a decent mastering, or proper sleeve design became factors of deepening material loss. That area of the craft gets subsequently cut off and replaced by an undiscriminating routine of two-step-distribution: “save as” and “upload to.”

Fleeing to a purely digital distribution doesn’t look that much better in general: only an established artist backed by a strong physical release experiences significant digital sales. The overwhelming majority goes by unnoticed. The average “digital only” dance single generates around 100 Euros of profit, for both artist and label, now most often being the same person. And these figures go down, too. Today a couple millions artists try to reach a few hundred people. Or like the contemporary pun puts it, “In the future everyone will be world-famous for 15 people.”

The result is a wide spread de-professionalization. If an artist regularly loses money on her efforts, she faces an economic end to her endeavors sooner or later. Being a “musician” is increasingly becoming a profession for those coming from inherited wealth or being mercantily exceptionally clever. It’s less then ever a question of the intrinsic quality of the music. What used to be done by professional enthusiasts now becomes the domain of the artists — turning them into designer, PR dude and distributor. It all subtracts from the time spent actually creating music. This puts additional pressure on the remaining professional environment. Nowadays it is increasingly harder to get hold of well executed services. Mastering, manufacturing vinyl, music PR — no one qualified enough is willing to tolerate the miserable working conditions and hilarious paychecks of these jobs for an extended time. Whoever has the chance seems to flee the music industry for something more prosperous. The error rate in manufacturing and distribution grows exponentially and actually feeds the market with ever shabbier products in content and execution.

There’s this die-hard belief that income, at least for the musicians (but not for the professional environment), will come from the fees for live performances instead. But how do you get live performances in the first place? Well, press helps. The problem encountered there is that the media has adapted to the state of the music industry. In electronic music that means whoever succeeds in producing two singles may find himself covered by all relevant press and booked throughout the club circuit, just to be replaced by the next “lucky fool” (a term from stock speculation) about three months later. New artists get “pumped and dumped.” What about a year old break, a production that takes longer, or time for having a baby? Two weeks without a release are perceived as a career flaw for those who had their breakthrough in the last three years. A longer shelf life in the media and on the circuit seems to be granted only to artists who started before the big flood came, which is pre-2005 approximately (if I were to spend a year on the beach, most likely I’ll be able to continue exactly where I had stopped). Or to those who buy their coverage — although that only works over a longer period of time on a five-figure budget. Most others face the high probability of approaching music as something you do between college and some dull job.

The artists’ disillusionment leads to ever lamer results in music — why bother? A single produced hastily in two hours work sells 500 units, while a delicate masterwork moves 800 (plus a bit of beer money from Beatport). These figures are in constant decline, too. The market average first pressing of a vinyl 12? is 300 units now, which regularly indicated sales below this figure (deduct records given away as “promotion” and to friends).

What have we learned here? The so called “democratization” didn’t work. Everyone did believe they gained access. This access by itself is stripped of value, though, because no one cares that DJ XY from Z has that new record out. Through any available channel I get dozens of requests per day to listen to somebody’s track. That’s after a spam filter and a disclaimer that I don’t want to receive files. The result is that I don’t listen to files at all — I do buy vinyl regularly. DJ XY doesn’t get the gig. If he does by accident, that’s for the cab fare. In Berlin, with its conspicuous population of 50,000 DJs, promoters and club owners don’t have to try hard. There’s always someone who will play for free if asked. Hey, that’s free promotion for the new DJ XY record. Meanwhile in the provincial town of Z, the locals “practice” for free, so they develop the skills they’ll need to “make it” in Berlin one day. That’s where things come full circle. No proper gigs, no record sales, no income. Anyone who is not already “there” doesn’t seem to arrive anymore.

The propaganda that the future will have us all giving away music for free in order to make a living on gigs has been proven wrong by reality. Because basically everybody does exactly this and still doesn’t get booked all over (or not often enough, as with most “mid career” artists). The exception being Radiohead, of course, but only after a decade on the million-dollar budget of a major. The only profiteers here (and biggest fans of piracy and Creative Commons) are the stock holders of the Nasdaq 100. If you want to make a living on music, buy the relevant stock and live off the dividends. That’s where all the money goes that used to pay musicians and music professionals some time ago. It says a lot about the other side of “democratization,” too: the individual in search for music experiences no upside. He pays for the returns of Apple, Google, Beatport and the speaker fees of Larry Lessig and Chris Anderson by being lost in a flood of irrelevant, crappy music and the feeling that others had more fun before (hence the retro obsession in today’s music). The total de-motivation doesn’t manifest itself only in the musicians’ under achievements, but also in the annoyance of everybody else. A frustrated DJ plays lame tunes in front of people bored to tears. That’s the average event out there. Alternatively, a collective nostalgia for some era of “old days” prevails. Everyone keeps doing the same thing out of the fear that the slightest deviation from the norm will scare away the small remaining, yet patient audience who goes along because of a lack of alternatives (we dance either because we paid or because the drugs kicked in).

Did that depress you? Now, here comes the good news: exactly because everyone seemingly performs to the lowest still acceptable standards, all you have to do as an artist is to unleash disproportional waves of creativity. Since nothing promises secure success anymore, all considerations to what “works in the marketplace” can be freely dumped and forgotten. The more out there you get, the better. It’s the only way to stand out in a totally dull environment. The advantage is, put cynically, that the old channels are jammed. Whoever tries to break through them following “proven” old ways (which usually means emulating other people’s career paths) is wasting time and energy. We can’t learn much from studying the careers of Carl Craig or Ricardo Villalobos anymore because the conditions that enabled them don’t exist any more. The channels that do work are found elsewhere and are open to those who possess endurance, individuality and substance — the values that are disappearing most rapidly now.

To an extreme extent, success in the arts is subject to random factors (we see many successful people who have no clue how they got there, how to stay there or how to repeat it). The more radically and frequently you stand out, the more often you get exposure to those factors, thus increasing the probability of channels opening up for you. That is not spamming the Internet but creating radically individual great music in the first place. Once you enter the channel, you allow more factors to work for you, since these tend to add up (path dependency). Art always had to be great (whatever that is) and move people in order to succeed, too. But now there’s that third dimension of having to create a wide gap between you and the competition, even if that’s just within one genre. If you can implement this idea in your work, the flood is not threatening at all anymore since it works against itself. “Unique” is the most valuable word in a crowded environment of generic ideas and overwhelming redundancy. Striving for this quality is also exactly what is most rewarding artistically. Besides screaming fans and free drinks, that is.

A very odd example for creating stand out events: I had that funny experience when I recorded an album for cassette last year. No one involved expected anything more than to have some fun with it. Still, I spent a lot of effort on this one, specifically on getting my head around the question why to use a cassette at all. No one else would have put more work than necessary into such an obsolete format. And just that brought in a lot of attention, which any file on Beatport, regardless how good it is, wouldn’t have done at all. And there was no free lunch involved. On the contrary, distribution was severely cut down to a very few sources. Today it’s actually so much easier again as long as you can get your head around the notion that “anything popular is wrong.” Especially in mainstream media like Germany’s Der Spiegel or UK’s BBC (in features, not the usual playlists), I’ve only been covered because of totally odd projects. For the same reason new opportunities follow, which artists who cling to functionality and marketplace consensus never encounter. I don’t play techno clubs exclusively now, but also find myself scoring a ballet, performing in museums or getting calls from classical performers for collaboration — my techno background makes me stand out in these settings as well. In return, crossover encounters of this kind add that edge to the artist’s profile which feeds back into the club scene. It’s definitely more rewarding than spamming the internet with “listen to this track” emails.

Highly individualized, lightly advertised work is way more attractive nowadays than consensus-style work, advertised to death (short, unsustainable hype is the most one can hope for there). People are starting to realize this. Many top labels stopped promoting their new singles for instance. It just appears in the shops and that’s it. It’s not unlikely that artists will increasingly lose their interest in having their output available all over and seek for a more intimate exchange with the audience. Why plaster the Internet with files? Who finds that valuable anymore? Imagine an incredible piece of music available only once — on dubplate. Or let’s consider falling back in history — music only in the presence of its creator. No release. Come to the concert. Enthusiasm will be back when you get this feeling of attending something really special. How to create this feeling for the audience is the core task of the creatives, if they deserve that name.


Stefan Goldmann

Does that make sense?
Quote
3
Old 15th December 2012
  #41
Gear Head
 

Anyone else remember tape, outboard gear setups or midi 1.0... I love how technology has made it easier but I also cherish the memory of learning how to make a production without a computer... Old school Cheers!

ps buy a condenser microphone )
Old 15th December 2012
  #42
Gear nut
 

80s clash/Stefan-
Your post was very informative and well-written. Thank you.
Old 15th December 2012
  #43
Lives for gear
 
maisonvague's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sClash View Post
Did that depress you?
Yes, it did.

Quote:
Now, here comes the good news: exactly because everyone seemingly performs to the lowest still acceptable standards, all you have to do as an artist is to unleash disproportional waves of creativity. Since nothing promises secure success anymore, all considerations to what “works in the marketplace” can be freely dumped and forgotten.
Couldn't agree more. There's simply no excuse anymore for not being exactly who you want to be, and making exactly the kind of music you want to make because for most people, that's all they're ever going to get out of it: themselves... and their music.

Quote:
Does that make sense?
Yes, it does. Excellent article. Thanks.
Old 15th December 2012
  #44
Trying to tie Creative Commons to piracy is incredibly underhanded dishonesty.

CC allows me to give stuff away without losing the name of the author. What I put on Soundcloud is there for the taking: if you insist I charge for it and let my great-grandchildren sue for compensation, it merely shows how deluded that way of thinking is. Why do I want to keep my name attached to it? Because I don't mind giving my stuff away for free, but I do mind some twit taking something from the public domain and pretending it's theirs, with all the strings and manacles attached.

If CC work undercuts pros, it merely means that the pros aren't the hot shit like they think they are. "All rights reserved" has no clue about altruism whatsoever, so CC licenses are pretty great for that purpose.

Also: think of all the advice you got for free. Now think of what you would have learned if each piece would've cost you money up front.

edit: 80sClash, you could've just linked to http://www.littlewhiteearbuds.com/fe...mocratization/ instead of that wall of text.

edit 2: haha, copying an article about copyright and not even linking or attributing it to the actual author, oh the irony. 80sClash, your FB name is not Stefan.
Quote
3
Old 15th December 2012
  #45
Top Gear addict
 
audslu's Avatar
 

Quote
1
Old 15th December 2012
  #46
Gear maniac
 

The ratio of people with guitars to people with EDM setups is probably 500:1 or more.
Old 15th December 2012
  #47
Lives for gear
 
cryophonik's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowbie View Post
The ratio of people with guitars to people with EDM setups is probably 500:1 or more.
Depends on your definition of "EDM setup.". Conceivably, an iPhone app could meet that definition.
Old 15th December 2012
  #48
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pearlywhites View Post
i could list all the pub bands that went on to be great

bob dylan for one
Bob Dylan was a thief.
Old 16th December 2012
  #49
Gear interested
 

i like the original thought that started this thread a lot. it mirrors warhol. except that now, in the future, everyone will be famous for 15 people.
Old 16th December 2012
  #50
Gear nut
 

In the future, innovative and talented musicians will press a single copy of a record, and sell it on the merits of their reputation for $100K or more to a single, wealthy buyer, who can choose to hoard it for their own pleasure, leak it on to the internet, or play it for a select few at their exclusive parties for the rich. Bill Gates will have the only copy of Aphex Twin's next album, Carlos Slim will have the only copy of Boards of Canada's next album, etc. The rest of us will be left with music from years gone by, and the unpolished demo material from musicians trying to gain enough notoriety to attract the attention of millionaires and billionaires.

The problem is it doesn't matter how widespread and readily available the technology becomes, because talent, determination and innovation aren't so easy to come by.
Quote
3
Old 16th December 2012
  #51
Gear nut
 

5 fans? wow, that would be an expansion for me and my music!

i would like it. why not? it's so much better to play in front of just a handful people, as long as they are interested and listen to you instead of feeling physical and psychical crowded by those swarming masses that are just following the hype.

Old 16th December 2012
  #52
Lives for gear
 
FilmNMusicman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by maisonvague View Post
You and me BOTH. I'm actually blessed with talent, but I'm a terrible businessman. I know that. I'm also very unambitious. That combination means I will likely never become "rich and famous".

But you know what? I'm okay with that.

I only need three GENUINE fans to feel successful:

Me, myself, and I.

I'm my number one fan!
Haha, maybe we should join forces hahaha
Old 16th December 2012
  #53
Gear nut
 
ross9999's Avatar
 

I don't get it.... Can someone explain this whole thread to me, I just can't get my head around it.....
Quote
1
Old 16th December 2012
  #54
Lives for gear
 
maisonvague's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ross9999 View Post
I don't get it.... Can someone explain this whole thread to me, I just can't get my head around it.....
leMel42 nailed it. It's classic self-deprecating Warholian ironical humor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leMel42 View Post
it mirrors warhol. except that now, in the future, everyone will be famous for 15 people.
"In the future, everyone will be famous for fifteen people."

Brilliant!
Old 16th December 2012
  #55
Gear nut
 
ross9999's Avatar
 

ohhhhh : )
Old 16th December 2012
  #56
ozy
Lives for gear
 
ozy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by maisonvague View Post
"In the future, everyone will be famous for fifteen people."
One of the best Italian writers (Manzoni), in the 19th century wrote a masterpiece novel which established the modern Italian language.

He said he expected to reach "25 readers".

he meant: 25 worthy people who could understand what he was writing and why (his style and his politics) were enough.

It depends who your 5 listeners are.

If I knew that Chick Corea has one of my tunes in his "favorites" mp3 list when jogging, and nobody else cared about my music, I could die a very proud man.
Old 16th December 2012
  #57
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozy View Post
LOL I did, and I never LOL
Old 16th December 2012
  #58
ozy
Lives for gear
 
ozy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cuckoo.old View Post
and I never LOL
me neither. Never have.

But I sure chuckle a lot.
Old 16th December 2012
  #59
Lives for gear
 
godphaser's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by riphead View Post
does "work harder" help? i dont think so. the kids copy your work within some days (no matter if you worked harder or not).
In that case "you" don't work THAT hard, sorry.

Lil youtube ignorant kids are gazillion miles away from sounding like Daft Punk or Amon Tobin for example.
Old 16th December 2012
  #60
Lives for gear
 
Lenzo's Avatar
So from a business perspective you want to be the one selling loops...although most of the EDM I hear seems to use only one or two per song...per 6 MINUTE SONG.....sorry, just trying to get past 1000 posts.
L.
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
DeadPoet / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
28
Nu-tra / So much gear, so little time!
40
amfortas2006 / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
3
zemlin / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
10
gatekeeper / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
1

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.