The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Billy Corgan - No Money In Music Now
Old 15th March 2012
  #331
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
again robert, with all due respect, here's the 100 albums, they're all bad? they ALL suck? Really?

Apple - iTunes - Browse the top album downloads

trying man, trying...
its a pretty sad list in that top 100 , so many old old albums , so many greatest hits .

while their not all bad , would you honestly say there are any GREAT new albums in there? like dark side of the moon , back in black , zepplin IV type GREAT albums?

albums that would change music , spawn and entire genration of new musicians inspired by the album and still be remembered and actively supported 30+ years from its release?

and if not in that list when was the last time you heard a really really great album that did those things?
Old 15th March 2012
  #332
Quote:
Originally Posted by brightshine View Post

Seems that everywhere in life today, people want fairness.
that's a reasonable ideal isn't it? Do you just accept unfairness in your workplace?

Quote:
Always will be someone higher on the pay scale and someone lower. Come to grips with that and life will go on a little more smoothly. Or, keep looking at someone elses paycheck and you will be miserable. This debate has no end.
Of course.
It amazes me the amount of people in this thread who think musicians don't know that. :face palm:
We've chosen a risky career. We accept very low or no pay at the start of our careers, and many times after that as our careers ebb and flow. No problem. Actually we are much more robust about the ups and downs than the average workforce!
The only problem comes when we can see people consuming our work, but not paying us. Not even a cent.
You wouldn't accept that, nor would anyone in this thread.
You gotta learn the difference. I don't ask to be paid because I'm a musician. I ask to be paid only when you take advantage of my work.
Old 15th March 2012
  #333
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
and the mods...
you give it out heaps

suck it up a little

its all in good humour
Old 15th March 2012
  #334
Lives for gear
tbh, i stopped reading on page 3 or 4, but id like to shere my 2c:

convo between a promotor/label mnger and a well known french techno artist:

P: i thought about a compilation and id like to license a few tracks of yours"
A: cool idea, here they are ! (hands over 3 cds full of finished tracks)
P: ? you give em to me for free ?
A: nevermind, see ya ..(...the next time you book me)

/end

short story long:

if the artist spends the whole week making music, playing out for 2-3k on weekends, 3-4 weekends per month,...
would you call that a career ? would you mind giving your music for free ..., l
ike a business card..?
i speak about edm and its parallel economy... but i think thats the future
Old 15th March 2012
  #335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camera View Post
Then you've got some health problems that need to be addressed.

I wish I could. Not my place to. We didn't win. But I will tell you "Best Contemporary Gospel Album and Best Contemporary Gospel song".

Since you're so into other peoples business, I'll let you figure out the rest.
I figured out it's happening with label support...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camera View Post
Did I say non-label?
I must be mistaken then, my apologies. Seemed you were making a point that all this success was happening without labels... times change, new world, being replaced, machine not supporting them, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah...

seems we're on the same page after all...
Old 15th March 2012
  #336
Lives for gear
 
greatgreatriver's Avatar
 

I haven't read the whole tread, just replying to the OP...

If an artist can't make money on music anymore, then they need to find another job - just like everyone else.

The world is shaky and times are changing -

It's like the "artist" think they are in a safe bubble - especially those who sees the world as "wrong" when they can't sell records anymore...

Peace always!
Old 15th March 2012
  #337
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
I figured out it's happening with label support...



I must be mistaken then, my apologies. Seemed you were making a point that all this success was happening without labels... times change, new world, being replaced, machine not supporting them, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah...

seems we're on the same page after all...
You know what they say about assuming....

And I don't think we're on the same page. Maybe the same book...
Old 15th March 2012
  #338
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I did answer you before, but I'll answer you again.
Not many people are just a singer. Most artistic people have a broad talent.
My comment 'no future' was in response to someone else's post. No, I don't think there is no future at all, but as I said before, if you show an artistic person the possibility of a decent living making music for video games, or working in music therapy for their local government, then show them little chance of ever enjoying a decent livelihood in music performance (live and recording), many will choose the decent livelihood option. And many talented people will be lost from popular music.
Because people want to start a family, want to provide for their family. If the music scene largely stops providing (as it has provided in the past), the brightest talent will migrate elsewhere.
most good singers I know are just singers

most good drummers I know are just drummers

but I don't see how that relates ........

if your a good singer and don't mind doing questionable cover songs (well they are not my style but you might like that sort of thing) you can find tons of work in this town and its quick and easy to find . people will just snap you up , not enough talent to fill the void .

if your good .

and you will make a pretty good living out of it if you work a lot.

if your harbouring dreams of making a comfortable living being a singer song writer playing your bitter sweet brand of indie folk pop or whatever then sorry that avenue has closed now . not that it was ever going to be a massively viable avenue anyway , most people failed taking that and similar paths . but the chances are even less now.
Old 15th March 2012
  #339
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkor View Post
tbh, i stopped reading on page 3 or 4, but id like to shere my 2c:

convo between a promotor/label mnger and a well known french techno artist:

P: i thought about a compilation and id like to license a few tracks of yours"
A: cool idea, here they are ! (hands over 3 cds full of finished tracks)
P: ? you give em to me for free ?
A: nevermind, see ya ..(...the next time you book me)

/end

short story long:

if the artist spends the whole week making music, playing out for 2-3k on weekends, 3-4 weekends per month,...
would you call that a career ? would you mind giving your music for free ..., l
ike a business card..?
i speak about edm and its parallel economy... but i think thats the future
I'd like to ask this question of all the Freehadists...

So if an artist gives their music away for free, because they can't sell it due to piracy, but the artist gets exposure from giving the music away for free and can monetize ancillary revenue that's good?

But if an artist makes a deal with a label who advances the artists money and invests in their career, but the label can't sell records due to piracy, but the artist still gets exposure and can monetize ancillary revenue that's bad?

funny thing about the freehadists... they're OK with pirates stealing from artists and giving them nothing in return while profiting from the artists work, but somehow labels who actually pay the artist an advance and invest in the artists career is bad?

someone please try to make sense?
Old 15th March 2012
  #340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camera View Post
You know what they say about assuming....

And I don't think we're on the same page. Maybe the same book...
you're funny... the success you're so proud of "Grammy Nominated Artists Touring The World" are supported by labels while two pages back you thought labels were out of date and unnecessary (time to move on, etc)... but yet that's the first place you went to make a point about the caliber of artists you are working with in response to a mention of the name brian eno... seriously?

you argue against labels than cite them as the first example of your own success... stunning...

maybe I'm wrong, or you are having difficulty being clear...
Old 15th March 2012
  #341
Old 15th March 2012
  #342
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
if your harbouring dreams of making a comfortable living being a singer song writer playing your bitter sweet brand of indie folk pop or whatever then sorry that avenue has closed now . not that it was ever going to be a massively viable avenue anyway , most people failed taking that and similar paths . but the chances are even less now.
but the chances should be BETTER now... and that's the point... without gatekeepers, without labels, it should be better now and it's not... and that is the failing of the promise of the internet to empower artists in a meaningful way. I believe it can still happen. I believe artist still have the power, but they have to wise up and get active in supporting their fundamental protection of copyright and raise the consciences for the ethical fair trade of labor.

everyone's been hoodwinked into giving up, and giving big tech their power... copyright is the cornerstone of all artists rights, from there all other issues can be addressed.

I don't know how anyone hoping to have a professional career doesn't understand the power they have in copyright should they choose to exert that power.
Old 15th March 2012
  #343
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
but the chances should be BETTER now... and that's the point... without gatekeepers, without labels, it should be better now and it's not... and that is the failing of the promise of the internet to empower artists in a meaningful way.

everyone's been hoodwinked into giving up, and giving big tech their power... copyright is the cornerstone of all artists rights, from there all other issues can be addressed.

I don't know how anyone hoping to have a professional career doesn't understand the power they have in copyright should they choose to exert that power.
I thought you were for the labels and gatekeepers as the nurturers of talent?

the artists have been empowered by the internet , by youtube and myspace and soundcloud . the problem is they have all been empowered where only a select few where empowered before by record labels and media . to be honest this has more to do with pure signal to noise ratio than piracy at this level . that has been the nature of their empowerment
Old 15th March 2012
  #344
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
I thought you were for the labels and gatekeepers as the nurturers of talent?
no. I'm pro-choice. I'm pro-artist. I believe with the proper protection of copyright artists have more choice, more opportunities and the ability to chose multiple paths to a professional career. Right now they have less rights, less opportunities and less revenue all of which means less professionals.

I think labels can develop artists on a level that most artists can not do so for themselves. I think few would dispute this and given the choice most would opt for a label deal to focus on music full time and have the resources of a team to take on the non-music work.

I believe in a healthy ecosystem where artists rights are valued, artists can and will get better deals with labels if that's the path they choose. I believe that artists can benefit greatly from the support of a label, to create better work by having better financial resources.

I believe the majority of the greatest artists and most respected recordings on the 20th Century have been label supported and financed.

I do not believe that labels are at odds with, or in danger from hobbyists but I believe those who unsigned artists who aspire to professional careers are... lady ga ga and edelle are not in danger of being out done by a bedroom artist working on nights and weekends... nor will the hobbyist get radio airplay, professional PR, front line marketing, etc - all the things that build careers and create stars.

artist are slowly learning that access to distribution is a much smaller part of the equation in career building. they are also learning that just because they have the means of production, that their product is as good as that made by skilled professionals (hence 99 thousand threads on gearslutz asking "how do I get my recordings to sound like _________ production).

the artist who believes they are competing with interscope because they have a tunecore account is bound to be very disappointed in the quest of a professional career, but I support them in the choice to do pursue that path. life is full of tradeoffs, chose wisely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
the artists have been empowered by the internet , by youtube and myspace and soundcloud . the problem is they have all been empowered where only a select few where empowered before by record labels and media . to be honest this has more to do with pure signal to noise ratio than piracy at this level .
that's where we disagree, and I'd like test that theory...

you are putting forth the pie is the same size but has more slices, the truth is worse, the pie (for paid sales) is 50% smaller and there are more slices (especially amongst those without label support).

Ideally, the pie would be BIGGER and there would be more slices, that is the goal, but that's not where we are at...

YouTube, MySpace, Soundcloud have not made the pie any bigger, in the aggregate, the pie is still smaller and the reason why is because the overwhelming majority of music being consumed is done so illegally and without ANY compensation to the artist or rights holder.

this is why there is a need for understanding that copyright protection for artists is ultimately a labor issue.
Old 15th March 2012
  #345
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
I'd like to ask this question of all the Freehadists...

So if an artist gives their music away for free, because they can't sell it due to piracy, but the artist gets exposure from giving the music away for free and can monetize ancillary revenue that's good?

But if an artist makes a deal with a label who advances the artists money and invests in their career, but the label can't sell records due to piracy, but the artist still gets exposure and can monetize ancillary revenue that's bad?

funny thing about the freehadists... they're OK with pirates stealing from artists and giving them nothing in return while profiting from the artists work, but somehow labels who actually pay the artist an advance and invest in the artists career is bad?

someone please try to make sense?
1st , i always try to avoid seeing things just black/white...
its not about good/bad, not always
2nd, i dont know what you mean with freehadist ?
"due to piracy" not just piracy !! thats one-sided...

the way i see this (maybe i step on some toes)

consumer behaviour changed big time , young people wanna spend their money in clubs, going-OUT, not in the store and listen to cds at home
i think, its the artists task to pick up the consumer, target group...whatever you wanna call it, where they are....its simple

if a label invests in the artist and dont back up the investments (maybe a cut on gigs), thats the labels/lawyers,.. fault, not good, not bad, just a ragged investment, no ? times are changing fast, "investors" need to step up and look around whats going out, ..

again, dont know what you mean with freehadists (im artist myself)
Old 15th March 2012
  #346
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkor View Post
1st , i always try to avoid seeing things just black/white...
its not about good/bad, not always
2nd, i dont know what you mean with freehadist ?
"due to piracy" not just piracy !! thats one-sided...
piracy is essentially a one sided issue. people steal music without compensating artists and profit from it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkor View Post
the way i see this (maybe i step on some toes)

consumer behaviour changed big time , young people wanna spend their money in clubs, going-OUT, not in the store and listen to cds at home
i think, its the artists task to pick up the consumer, target group...whatever you wanna call it, where they are....its simple
consumer behavior changed with music was able to be consumed illegally for free and without consequence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkor View Post
if a label invests in the artist and dont back up the investments (maybe a cut on gigs), thats the labels/lawyers,.. fault, not good, not bad, just a ragged investment, no ? times are changing fast, "investors" need to step up and look around whats going out, ..
and that's what's happening in these 360 deals... because labels can no longer recoup their investment into an artist on record sales alone... as they have historically... labels are no taking more rights and more revenue from artists in more ways... touring percentages, merch, endorsements, more like a management deal... and managers will still get their cut too...

this is bad, it is a step backwards, not forwards.... so much for the promise of progress and empowerment of the internet...

Quote:
Originally Posted by alkor View Post
again, dont know what you mean with freehadists (im artist myself)
freehadists are artists who believe that giving away music for free is the solution even if it means destroying their own careers in the process (IE Suicide Bombers). these are usually the same people who claim labels never paid artists anyway so why shouldn't music be free for exposure?

of course the lie in there is that labels did and do in fact pay artists, but more importantly labels make capital investments in an artists career to build their brand... this makes the artist identity valuable enough for ancillary revenue streams such as endorsements etc.

of course, freehadist don't believe any of this investment is necessary, that the only requirement for a professional career is to give your music away for free and the rest will take care of itself... there are people who actually believe this enough to defend it irrationally...
Old 15th March 2012
  #347
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
I don't know how anyone hoping to have a professional career doesn't understand the power they have in copyright should they choose to exert that power.
Who said artists don't?
Old 15th March 2012
  #348
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP11 View Post
Who said artists don't?
tell it to alkor a few posts up...
Old 15th March 2012
  #349
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
I'd like to ask this question of all the Freehadists...
I'd like to ask a question of all the psychotic supporters of Hitler and the Taliban...

What sort of medication are you all on?
Old 15th March 2012
  #350
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
that's where we disagree, and I'd like test that theory...

you are putting forth the pie is the same size but has more slices, the truth is worse, the pie (for paid sales) is 50% smaller and there are more slices (especially amongst those without label support).

Ideally, the pie would be BIGGER and there would be more slices, that is the goal, but that's not where we are at...

YouTube, MySpace, Soundcloud have not made the pie any bigger, in the aggregate, the pie is still smaller and the reason why is because the overwhelming majority of music being consumed is done so illegally and without ANY compensation to the artist or rights holder.

this is why there is a need for understanding that copyright protection for artists is ultimately a labor issue.
I don't think anyone is debating that the pie is smaller

the debate is why its smaller

is piracy 95% of the problem or is it 5% of the problem
Old 15th March 2012
  #351
Gear Addict
 

edit - hehe, nevermind :]
Old 15th March 2012
  #352
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
piracy is essentially a one sided issue. people steal music without compensating artists and profit from it.
consumer behavior changed with music was able to be consumed illegally for free and without consequence.
so.., as i understand it, blame frauenhofer in the first place ? the internet ? the enlightenment ? :D
i mean, 20-30 years ago, we swapped tapes, recorded our favorite radio stations,..
all illegally and without consequences...im sure you did that too (dunno how old you are), no offense



Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
and that's what's happening in these 360 deals... because labels can no longer recoup their investment into an artist on record sales alone... as they have historically... labels are no taking more rights and more revenue from artists in more ways... touring percentages, merch, endorsements, more like a management deal... and managers will still get their cut too...

this is bad, it is a step backwards, not forwards.... so much for the promise of progress and empowerment of the internet...
sorry, but to ME, that sounds like blaming BMW for STILL building cars that need so much of that oil dependend fuel


Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
freehadists are artists who believe that giving away music for free is the solution even if it means destroying their own careers in the process (IE Suicide Bombers). these are usually the same people who claim labels never paid artists anyway so why shouldn't music be free for exposure?

not the solution for world peace, but a chance to earn money, no ? again...black/white... and again, i spoke about edm, and not about major xy giving away albums for free to fill stadiums


Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
of course the lie in there is that labels did and do in fact pay artists, but more importantly labels make capital investments in an artists career to build their brand... this makes the artist identity valuable enough for ancillary revenue streams such as endorsements etc.
ok...BUT, what if the label choose the wrong way to build that brand, which is silly enuff in 2012 bc music is the most importent part of the brand,...and if the music stands above the competitors, people WILL notice and come to your gigs



Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
of course, freehadist don't believe any of this investment is necessary, that the only requirement for a professional career is to give your music away for free and the rest will take care of itself... there are people who actually believe this enough to defend it irrationally...
its hard to argument against all your generalisations,
most of the artist i know work their asses off, live it **** it breath it, and have no problem, giving away some music for promotion

edit: sometimes I feel like, the kind of elitism between your lines distract consumers from major things more than piracy
Old 15th March 2012
  #353
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkor View Post
i speak about edm and its parallel economy... but i think thats the future
Yep. I know about EDM, and it shouldn't be the future for everybody.
First you are playing recordings, often from a laptop. Second, yes, many dj's are earning 2,000 to 3,000 a weekend, which is way more than most musicians.
It's cheap to play out with no band and hours of music stored on a laptop drive. You are making high fees.
So no, I don't see any parallels with the rest of the music scene.
Old 15th March 2012
  #354
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Yep. I know about EDM, and it shouldn't be the future for everybody.
fair enuff, only future will tell
but i think edm showed whats possible beside fixed structures
Old 15th March 2012
  #355
It shows what is possible when you can tour as a single person with a small laptop. And when you can dj in front of a few thousand people and get paid a few thousand for doing so.
Completely (and unfortunately) different to most musician's experience.
Old 15th March 2012
  #356
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
no one is disputing that, but 1) ancillary income is not new, 2) recorded music sales are removed from earnings and 3) that's a step backwards not forwards.

artists need to ban together to form an ethical fair trade agreement for musicians, at the end of the day, this is a human labor issue.

read this, report back:
Artist Rights are Human Rights
Oh Bull. This is a money issue, and has only to do with the fact that money was made indispensable and then scarce.

You're never going to fulfill your fantasy of turning artists into a gang that supports playing DMCA whack-a-mole, let's put cash registers on every street corner of the internet. Artists create. Greedy, money oriented business people lust after control.

Your thinking is twisted 180 degrees backwards.
Old 15th March 2012
  #357
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Yes.
Of course people who write music for ads are in the music business.
Make tutorial videos about Pro Tools, design soft synths, license tracks to movies, sell t-shirts of their band and sign perfume contracts.
The evidence I'm getting from everyone I know in the business is that the majority of artists are hurting very much despite all that.
The top echelon are making more money than ever. Achieving more record sales than ever, as well as taking advantage of sell out tours, licensing, sponsorship, sell out tours, acting roles etc....
Most artists below that aren't making up the difference from lost record sales from playing more shows, or sponsorship etc. Except for the artists who can almost exclusively work from home and tour alone with a laptop.
I don't much care for the most commercial music. I've always enjoyed the middle to lower tiers of music, and it's those I'm seeing who are struggling to sign meaningful sponsorship contracts, sell out more shows, license more tracks.
So in my experience the trend outside record sales is almost static, if not dropping...... unless you include the GaGa's and Adele's, where you are right, the trend is shooting skywards.
Here's the thing, if you want to use statistics like "record sales have dropped 60%" that's fine, but when doing that you're summing the entire record industry, if you want to make the same comparison with everything other than record sales you have to sum too.

It's not always easy to recognize the actual cause and effect within trends. But if you're going to pull out individual cases - the ones you're seeing - it becomes much harder to look for cause and effect. Difficulty with contracts and licensing for a great mid-level artist could just as easily be a result of bad mangament. As soon as you narrow the focus you can see anything you want.

If we go back about 30 years to a pre-digital era, in your opinion, was the business model that a top level artist the same model that a mid-level artist should follow?

What about now? Clearly things have changed but do you think that the fundamental business models of mid level and top level artists should still be the same or still be different from each other?

If you choose examples like the Greatful Dead or Steely Dan you're basing thing on exceptions. How about VanHalen and Wilco if they both existed in 1980 and now, do you think the way each one generate income should be the same conceptually and that it's just a case of scale, or are they two entirely different ci concepts?
Old 15th March 2012
  #358
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
why don't you support artists rights for fair compensation? why do you believe that artist are not entitled to be paid?
Said in response to: Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw
"itunes so then people do pay for it? then what actually is your point then?"


Is a blatant Troll attempt. disgusting.
Old 15th March 2012
  #359
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
. No artists these days can cut it on their own. Not because of any other reason than they don't have the massive appeal like the bands from back in the day



Fact of the matter is, if you don't make money in 2012 it's because you don't deserve to.

A lot of what you said I the parts I cut was true, but these two statements overlook a couple of things.

There is a process to building mass appeal. It can involve radio and touring and advertising and all of those things cost money and it's always more money than a band has when they start out.

Start up money comes from banks and venture capital, and in music that has been record companies. The drop in sales has killed the music banking system.if all banks disappeared and there was no credit available for business it would be extremely difficult to make money in any business.

With the weakened power of print, radio and TV, marketing must be done through more channels than ever and that costs way more. Record deals that used to be million dollar deals really should be $3-5 million deals, but no record label can afford to do that.

You're right that most current bands aren't as famous and popular as the used to be, but it's due to the loss of music banking and the diversification of entertainment not the fact that they don't deserve to be successful.
Old 15th March 2012
  #360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid360 View Post
Billy Corgan - No Money In Music Now...

He talks about diversification of skills beyond music, and he's doing it himself by getting paid as speaker at seminars, apparently.

The whole "Marry music to a larger product" sounds suspiciously like working as an advertising agent though... an advertising agent for something other than the music it'self.

Jingles, anyone? Yeah, let's all just sell out.

Unfortunately there were some truth in his words though.

What he's talking about are things like Converse funding 200 albums per year, which they do right now, they are not entire albums, but I know of at least one band that's had an entire 6 song EP that was paid for by Converse with no strings attached.

Levi's annual marketing budget is more than the entire production budget of every major and independent label combined.

There are ways to tie advertising and music together without selling out.

What does selling out even mean? Is there a difference between 1 million customers buying a license to your music for $10 vs 1 customer buying a license for $10 million?
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump