Is it possible for an Indie artist to make a living and NEVER go major?

[Mr.Noobyman]

I'm talking indie artists doing it all themselves... are there any examples of indies that have done this? Like.. really done WELL on their own? If so, how the heck did they do it?

[Benmrx]

Originally Posted by Mr.Noobyman

I'm talking indie artists doing it all themselves... are there any examples of indies that have done this? Like.. really done WELL on their own? If so, how the heck did they do it?

You need to define "well" in your statement. If it means not having a day job, living in a decent house and driving a decent car, there are TONS of examples. If you're talking about private jets and colliseum shows, I'm not so sure. Also, what's a "Major". Would Subpop be considered a major label at this point? How about Merge?

[Never1]

Without getting too far into the specifics of it, AFAIK, Dave Matthews was indie for a very long time and did very well before they got really involved with a major. That would have been throughout the early and mid 90s. He built a very big following all on his own, mostly because he focused on the college market and let fans tape and distribute his live performances.

not sure how it would do today

[Mr.Noobyman]

Originally Posted by Benmrx

You need to define "well" in your statement. If it means not having a day job, living in a decent house and driving a decent car, there are TONS of examples. If you're talking about private jets and colliseum shows, I'm not so sure. Also, what's a "Major". Would Subpop be considered a major label at this point? How about Merge?

By "well" I mean a little better than just a decent house and decent car, but not quite in the ball park of private jet. By "major", I mean something like Virgin, Atlantic, Interscope, etc.

[Tony Shepperd]

Is it possible? Yes.
Is it probable? No

[dpianomn]

O.A.R. and Dispatch come to mind. Although O.A.R. is now on a major, the height of their success was while the lead singer's brother ran their DIY label.

[audiovisceral]

A great article on indie economics.

http://cria.ca/news/200906_n.pdf

Short answer, not likely.

[tysonviolin]

I mix live sound for people on a regular basis who prove it is possible. Does a musician have to make more money than a nurse or a physical therapist? NIMHO!!!

[equallyscrewed]

Enter Shikari is proberly the biggest unsigned success in the UK. Personally i think thats down to great marketing and management.

Personally, i see major labels as banks. Yep, you can get the capital from them, and yep, they can provide you with people who know exactly what theyre doing and have enough contacts to get things done quickly. But at the end of the day, if the people you have working for you know as much as the majors, theres no real difference apart from the money aspect.

xcx

[steelyfan]

No, no. You're going about it all wrong. Check our Dave Freidman, you build a beautiful studio, record and maybe produce the band, play on the albulm, mix it, make your $$ up front........then take a little break and do it again with a different band, never leaving the studio!
Let the big record companys pay you the big bucks to get their MAJOR BANDS sounding great, let the bands go out on their own and become big shots. ....
At least that's my dream. he.he.

steelyfan

[CapnMarvel]

Not usually, no. It's as good of a life as most poets, painters, and sculptors have, though. Probably better than most journalists and writers. Teach some students here and there for extra cash, take a temp job during lean times...that's what being an artist IS. It's like being a priest - you give your life over to ART. A few people make Bishop and crap on golden toilets, and most people toil in semi-destitution simply because that's how they're designed. This whole make music > make money > become rich and famous > be knighted and buy your own tropical island fantasy is an aberration.

[fhames]

Who cares? Make your music that makes you happy.

[Benmrx]

Originally Posted by CapnMarvel

Not usually, no. It's as good of a life as most poets, painters, and sculptors have, though.

All's I can say is that I know more musicians making a living without the help of a major than painters or sculpters that don't have day jobs. By the way, I think location can get lost in translation here. Earlier when I said live in a decent house that's running in the $800,000 range here. I don't know a single poet nor artist without a "regular" job that even owns a house at all. I know plenty of indie musicians that do.

[dangoudie]

As far as I know Katie Melua has never been on a major and she's managed to sell millions of records. She makes a point of being independent.

[KevWind]

Possible yes ... But It seems to me that, like any other form of self employment how well you do, depends on how good you are at what you do and how hard you are willing to work

[audiostout]

I reckon a good manager would help.

[Mr.Noobyman]

Originally Posted by fhames

Who cares? Make your music that makes you happy.

I care, therefore I asked.

[AllAboutTone]

Originally Posted by fhames

Who cares? Make your music that makes you happy.

agreed...

[XHipHop]

Check out this artist's E(lectronic)P(ress)K(it)

Pretty much answers your question definitively.

[Steffmo]

Ask Ani DiFranco.

If the answer is...make a living doing music , yes. If your definition of "a living" is
"Yanno like the stones....." no,

[mu6gr8]

Also ask Jonatha Brooke.

[u b k]

Originally Posted by Mr.Noobyman

are there any examples of indies that have done this? Like.. really done WELL on their own?

as many others have said, yes.

Originally Posted by Mr.Noobyman

If so, how the heck did they do it?

there are as many stories of 'how' as there are people who've done it. but there are common denominators in most or all of those stories:

1) determination and action. there is a drive to succeed that separates them from those who merely dream or wish; c.f. "refusal to quit". action is everything in this world, intention and motivation count for little. a dream/vision expands what is possible, but the number one factor in any person's success is the simple fact that they did it. many do their thing and still fail, but no one succeeds without the doing.

2) networking, helping, being helped. no one, not one person anywhere, is 'self-made'. you can do a lot, but you can never do everything, and successful people are always surrounded by and connected to other successful people. everyone got to where they are with the help of other people, often a *lot* of help. btw, the best way to get help is to be helpful. it comes back around at the right times.

3) charisma. you have to be magnetic, you have to hone your ability to get people excited by your mere presence, to leave them feeling better than you found them, to generate more energy than you drain. people have to believe in you; at times, they will believe in you more than you believe in yourself. but you do have to believe in yourself.

4) talent. i listed this last on purpose, because it is actually the least important factor in success. charm, magnetism, an inspirational presence, the 'x' factor... these are all much more irresistable and potent forces for artistry than talent. talent is great, but it's merely a tool, not a determinant, certainly not a guarantee or certificate of entitlement. this fact more than any other is what trips good people up, and it's immovable truth causes a lot of bitterness and resentment in the world. witness the number of musicians who feel animosity or hatred towards successful artists based on judgments about their talent or lack thereof. they miss the boat entirely.

I tell you what you seek is possible and incredibly difficult. so get to work. now.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

[unit7]

Originally Posted by u b k

as many others have said, yes.






there are as many stories of 'how' as there are people who've done it. but there are common denominators in most or all of those stories:

1) determination and action. there is a drive to succeed that separates them from those who merely dream or wish; c.f. "refusal to quit". action is everything in this world, intention and motivation count for little. a dream/vision expands what is possible, but the number one factor in any person's success is the simple fact that they did it. many do their thing and still fail, but no one succeeds without the doing.

2) networking, helping, being helped. no one, not one person anywhere, is 'self-made'. you can do a lot, but you can never do everything, and successful people are always surrounded by and connected to other successful people. everyone got to where they are with the help of other people, often a *lot* of help. btw, the best way to get help is to be helpful. it comes back around at the right times.

3) charisma. you have to be magnetic, you have to hone your ability to get people excited by your mere presence, to leave them feeling better than you found them, to generate more energy than you drain. people have to believe in you; at times, they will believe in you more than you believe in yourself. but you do have to believe in yourself.

4) talent. i listed this last on purpose, because it is actually the least important factor in success. charm, magnetism, an inspirational presence, the 'x' factor... these are all much more irresistable and potent forces for artistry than talent. talent is great, but it's merely a tool, not a determinant, certainly not a guarantee or certificate of entitlement. this fact more than any other is what trips good people up, and it's immovable truth causes a lot of bitterness and resentment in the world. witness the number of musicians who feel animosity or hatred towards successful artists based on judgments about their talent or lack thereof. they miss the boat entirely.

I tell you what you seek is possible and incredibly difficult. so get to work. now.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

Amenthumbsup

[usefullidiot]

Originally Posted by Mr.Noobyman

I'm talking indie artists doing it all themselves... are there any examples of indies that have done this? Like.. really done WELL on their own? If so, how the heck did they do it?

I play in an independent band that only has distribution...they do a lot of festival gigs in the summer and turn over between $150-200K per year..

They life simply and do nothing but their band.

[salkin red]

Originally Posted by u b k

as many others have said, yes.






there are as many stories of 'how' as there are people who've done it. but there are common denominators in most or all of those stories:

1) determination and action. there is a drive to succeed that separates them from those who merely dream or wish; c.f. "refusal to quit". action is everything in this world, intention and motivation count for little. a dream/vision expands what is possible, but the number one factor in any person's success is the simple fact that they did it. many do their thing and still fail, but no one succeeds without the doing.

2) networking, helping, being helped. no one, not one person anywhere, is 'self-made'. you can do a lot, but you can never do everything, and successful people are always surrounded by and connected to other successful people. everyone got to where they are with the help of other people, often a *lot* of help. btw, the best way to get help is to be helpful. it comes back around at the right times.

3) charisma. you have to be magnetic, you have to hone your ability to get people excited by your mere presence, to leave them feeling better than you found them, to generate more energy than you drain. people have to believe in you; at times, they will believe in you more than you believe in yourself. but you do have to believe in yourself.

4) talent. i listed this last on purpose, because it is actually the least important factor in success. charm, magnetism, an inspirational presence, the 'x' factor... these are all much more irresistable and potent forces for artistry than talent. talent is great, but it's merely a tool, not a determinant, certainly not a guarantee or certificate of entitlement. this fact more than any other is what trips good people up, and it's immovable truth causes a lot of bitterness and resentment in the world. witness the number of musicians who feel animosity or hatred towards successful artists based on judgments about their talent or lack thereof. they miss the boat entirely.

.

That's a nice way of summing up the band Fugazi....

[mxeryus]

Yes, but most of them have created a dedicated following during their "major" years.
Ask David Sylvian - { samadhisound.com } the official SamadhiSound website

[djejnyc]

I have to say yes, of course! Bu it is alot of work, as is any worthwhile endeavor. I was in a band that put out four albums on indies (the late great Touch and Go) and was making a comfortable living. We then signed to Geffen for a big contract and had some money for awhile. The thing is that as we burned out on the whole process of commercial entertainment and stopped pushing (see determination in UBK's above post) we started to fade. I wish I could have seen that then. Being on a major doesn't mean you can stop working your ass off AT ALL, it just means someone is investing in you. Now I'm back to producing and mixing, I always tell the young bands I'm working with that the amount of work they put it into it will reflect exactly how far they will go. I don't think there are really any "overnight successes". Fugazi worked their asses OFF to make their success happen, they toured and toured slept on people's floors, the whole bit.

Besides majors aren't really doing much better than indies selling rock these days.

[planet red]

There are indy bands grossing over 10 million a year.. They just aren't making tons off record sales. Its all in staying on tour and never stopping.

Being on a major you gross more but generally get a much smaller net. I know some guys in band getting close to go gold on there first record (on a major) and they are broke. I also know guys in indy bands selling about 100,000 records buying a house and a car, living very comfortable lives.