The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
What is the current way to distribute music and get paid?
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2461
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
No. The other problem was 1990 was very different from 1987. A heavier and angrier music was picking up speed. People wanted more grit to their music.That record was not it.
Rubbish.
Edie Brickell actually launched a style that continued into the 90's - Alannis Morisette etc.
The record wasn't even recorded in 1987, let alone released.
Again, you like to post 'facts' while not really having a handle on the detail.
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2462
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
I remember the second album. I even had a copy on cassette. It wasn't as good.
Thank you. Exactly! You've agreed with my point 100%.
The first album was a hit because it was good, it had great songs.
The second album wasn't as good. The 'pretty girl' factor had very little to do with either album's success or failure. It was about the songs and the connection they made with the public (or didn't with regards to album 2).
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2463
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by boomonceame ➡️
unless I'm wrong as surely no artist wants to push anything they don't wholeheartedly believe in. I damn sure wouldn't release anything I don't believe in.
I think it's much more nuanced than that. This 'decisive mindset' - a phrase I'm coining just for this post - is particular to certain people and image of a person, much like how stereotypical business training depicts. Very wrapped up in certain cultures like self-help book America ( quite opposite to perhaps some European laissez-faire attitudes to art). The "music biz" promotes it too.

I think a large proportion of artists do not "believe" in their art. they just do it. Then they have it there.. and when they look around for income, it's what they have to hand to sell. The next step is to get it out there for earning money and just see what happens.

The great thing about the world is that even if you think your own work is crap, there will be numbers of people who think it's great. The work itself has no inherent merit, it just *is*. It's the observer who then imparts worth to it.. The world is full of opposite and equal tastes in everything, none of those tastes are truth, you either can relate personally or cannot, that's all. The reverse is true too - when your work is different to what most people like, if you like it, there will be others like you out there also (as Freda Kahlo said once

I find this all the time from ceramics to carpentry - people impressed or pleased with things I've made that are terrible. i learn to accept their opinion as valid and try to neutralise my own. And so I let it exist .

Therefore there is not even any *need* to believe in your work. That part should be dropped from the artistsic mentality, that sefl-judgement. Just let it flow.. your personality will come out more easily and perhaps then in very creative and unexpected ways.

P.S. that creative process also includes a form of judgment as part of the flow, but a different kind to one of the work being good or bad or meaningful at the end.
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2464
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by IM WHO YOU THINK ➡️
You've resigned to either I let Spotify take the $$$ , and I get none, or I twittle my thumbs and do nothing.
You're utterly confused about streaming.

*Labels* take the $$$ and you get none. The labels make $10 million profit whilst you're left with your $150,000 advance and never recoup. (Those figures are roughly correct from the likes of Tom Gray and equates to the artist getting 1.5% of profits).

*Streaming services* give out 70% of their revenue and take small percentages of ALL the income to pay staff. Daniel Ek et al have large incomes via investors and shareholder rewards for performance, *NOT* from artist generated revenues.

See how this upfront money just whitewashes the whole scenario? $$$ in the eyes and you don't see the tiny percentage you're really getting. Meanwhile streaming services are much more transparent, give back 70% of revenue... but because there's no up-front lump sum to wow you with, it's seen as worse..

Crazy isn't it?

And it's a completely seperate issue from earning a living as an musician in the streaming era - the conflation utterly confuses some folks.
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2465
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
Thank you. Exactly! You've agreed with my point 100%.
The first album was a hit because it was good, it had great songs.
The second album wasn't as good. The 'pretty girl' factor had very little to do with either album's success or failure. It was about the songs and the connection they made with the public (or didn't with regards to album 2).
No he didnt.


Prove that it was a hit because it had great songs. Prove that it wasn't all due to promotion.

Prove that the pretty girl factor hadn't worn off by the second album because of competing "prettty girl factor" promo for new acts.

Just because some thing correlates to your thoughts, doesn't mean it was caused by that theory.
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2466
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nat8808 ➡️
You're utterly confused about streaming.

*Labels* take the $$$ and you get none. The labels make $10 million profit whilst you're left with your $150,000 advance and never recoup. (Those figures are roughly correct from the likes of Tom Gray and equates to the artist getting 1.5% of profits).

*Streaming services* give out 70% of their revenue and take small percentages of ALL the income to pay staff. Daniel Ek et al have large incomes via investors and shareholder rewards for performance, *NOT* from artist generated revenues.

See how this upfront money just whitewashes the whole scenario? $$$ in the eyes and you don't see the tiny percentage you're really getting. Meanwhile streaming services are much more transparent, give back 70% of revenue... but because there's no up-front lump sum to wow you with, it's seen as worse..

Crazy isn't it?

And it's a completely seperate issue from earning a living as an musician in the streaming era - the conflation utterly confuses some folks.
I really see it no different than how things used to work. If you had a contract, you would hardly see any money back from the sales of the release due to very creative accounting practiced by label. Those creative accounting practices continue to this day by labels as well as various other 3rd party entities that fit themselves between you and your revenue stream.

You can't do anything about it other than chose to not release your music via those channels. Just put up a website with your music on it behind a paywall and play live and try to get people to go there. Its a futile business idea. you really stand no chance. but worth a try. the business model of streamers is based on masses of people uploading their content for free. if everyone stops doing it, their business *should* collapse.
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2467
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nat8808 ➡️
No he didnt.


Prove that it was a hit because it had great songs. Prove that it wasn't all due to promotion.

Prove that the pretty girl factor hadn't worn off by the second album because of competing "prettty girl factor" promo for new acts.

Just because some thing correlates to your thoughts, doesn't mean it was caused by that theory.
The pretty girl factor did not wear off. She went on to make solo albums that were better. She still makes good music IMO. She still very good looking.

They were on Geffen. I think by the 90s Geffen was going down in free fall.
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2468
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostman ➡️
FYI
re: adele


It is certainly disappointing that MOBO music in England is still fully appropriated at the top level of the british music industry IMO....

and personally, i often encounter "underground" singing talent in London's soul live music nights and rap talent amongst my social and work circles that are simply the best talent in London.

Ed sheeran and adele do not represent the finest talent our city has to offer.....

However, its unquestionable that adele worked hard
adele, FKa twigs.....amy winehouse....lynden david hall (Rest In Power) , rizzle kicks and many many others received great encouragement and support all at the same performing arts school...The Brit School.

I owe it to The Brit School to write this , i know how hard they work to help support talent..as I have family and friends in the Brit school...and it is a prized institution for many families and young people here in our community.

i know some of Adele's classmates, as i do FkA twigs.

Adele's journey is exactly the kind of journey we need to see for more musicians......which speaks to the point / question of this entire thread i believe.

Adele's school is very proud of her and all of their alumni and importantly, Its funded partly by the British Record Industry too.....and that's a special relationship creating an amazing opportunity for kids of all backgrounds IMO.

It is the only free to attend Performing Arts school in england , .....and its audition process to get in, is very very tough....kids come from all over the country.....rich and poor.

Everyone at that school works hard every day, including the teachers...who i know first hand and anyone coming out of that institution has worked hard i guarantee you. So,

...its a shame to see her being objectified in this thread....
Adele, despite the cultural appropriation of soul music in the UK has worked hard.

and like all of us....is a normal person, she moved from north london to south to attend the brit....and caught a hard time for doing it.

She deserves her flowers

As does the brit school.

(FWIW our underground music scenes in London are thriving and proud and theres bucket loads of great new music being made here daily ...we just need to kidnap the distributors ......joke! )
Personally, "school" for talent repels me, same for "training" given at art school. They appear to teach you how to package yourself and sell yourself. It's far from organic artistry. Much like if a school prepped you for office jobs as demanded by the government of the day, not natural organic paths people choose.

I'd like to see this kind of thing discouraged.. but instead what it creates is a package pool for an industry to then go and seek out new products they can shape up and sell.. and the better trained they are, the less they need to find talent out in the wild.

And there are then gatekeepers to those schools - much like AI has in-biuld prejudice bourne from that of the creators, so will such schools (or will try to over-come that prejudice via plastic and unnatural rules for selection).
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2469
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by telecode ➡️
I really see it no different than how things used to work. If you had a contract, you would hardly see any money back from the sales of the release due to very creative accounting practiced by label. Those creative accounting practices continue to this day by labels as well as various other 3rd party entities that fit themselves between you and your revenue stream.

You can't do anything about it other than chose to not release your music via those channels. Just put up a website with your music on it behind a paywall and play live and try to get people to go there. Its a futile business idea. you really stand no chance. but worth a try. the business model of streamers is based on masses of people uploading their content for free. if everyone stops doing it, their business *should* collapse.
I think they would survive due to the sheer amount of back-catalogue music not owned by the artists but people looking to monetise their investments.

That would shift all the money to majors essentially (plus some investment capital organisations).

I'm not sure if it would diminish subscriptions *that* much.. most people want mainstream stuff anyway.
Old 5 days ago | Show parent
  #2470
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by nat8808 ➡️
I think they would survive due to the sheer amount of back-catalogue music not owned by the artists but people looking to monetise their investments.

That would shift all the money to majors essentially (plus some investment capital organisations).

I'm not sure if it would diminish subscriptions *that* much.. most people want mainstream stuff anyway.
yes, but i suspect it would totally throw out of whack the model. the most expensive part of running the streaming service is the high costs of back catalog licensing. you have to license tons and tons of stuff for which you have no idea how many listeners are there for it. but if you don't license it, you risk running a crappy service because every time someone feels like looking up an obscure release and they dont find it you look bad and they think your service sucks. my guess is new artists and new releases that are cheap play a large role for younger listenrs that don't listen to boomer music but you want them on your platform.
Old 4 days ago | Show parent
  #2471
Quote:
Originally Posted by nat8808 ➡️
Personally, "school" for talent repels me, same for "training" given at art school. They appear to teach you how to package yourself and sell yourself. It's far from organic artistry. Much like if a school prepped you for office jobs as demanded by the government of the day, not natural organic paths people choose.

I'd like to see this kind of thing discouraged.. but instead what it creates is a package pool for an industry to then go and seek out new products they can shape up and sell.. and the better trained they are, the less they need to find talent out in the wild.

And there are then gatekeepers to those schools - much like AI has in-biuld prejudice bourne from that of the creators, so will such schools (or will try to over-come that prejudice via plastic and unnatural rules for selection).
......worst case , scenario

I don’t disagree with you , (fair comment defo, )

Best case scenario ,

You have a Nadia Boulanger, Ecole normale , teaching a Quincy Jones composition type scenario.

......and thriller for example, is still a pop masterpiece to this day IMO in no small part due to its brilliant arrangements , such that Quincy learnt in those classes as much as at the shoulder of count Basie with his trumpet
Old 4 days ago | Show parent
  #2472
Lives for gear
 
s wave's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nat8808 ➡️
I think it's much more nuanced than that. This 'decisive mindset' - a phrase I'm coining just for this post - is particular to certain people and image of a person, much like how stereotypical business training depicts. Very wrapped up in certain cultures like self-help book America ( quite opposite to perhaps some European laissez-faire attitudes to art). The "music biz" promotes it too.

I think a large proportion of artists do not "believe" in their art. they just do it. Then they have it there.. and when they look around for income, it's what they have to hand to sell. The next step is to get it out there for earning money and just see what happens.

The great thing about the world is that even if you think your own work is crap, there will be numbers of people who think it's great. The work itself has no inherent merit, it just *is*. It's the observer who then imparts worth to it.. The world is full of opposite and equal tastes in everything, none of those tastes are truth, you either can relate personally or cannot, that's all. The reverse is true too - when your work is different to what most people like, if you like it, there will be others like you out there also (as Freda Kahlo said once

I find this all the time from ceramics to carpentry - people impressed or pleased with things I've made that are terrible. i learn to accept their opinion as valid and try to neutralise my own. And so I let it exist .

Therefore there is not even any *need* to believe in your work. That part should be dropped from the artistsic mentality, that sefl-judgement. Just let it flow.. your personality will come out more easily and perhaps then in very creative and unexpected ways.

P.S. that creative process also includes a form of judgment as part of the flow, but a different kind to one of the work being good or bad or meaningful at the end.
This is KEY to understanding - of artists 'material' put out there.. EXPERTS and incredible artists often MISS what is a hit song - (the list is mind blowing!) One major criteria of artists releases- is how THEY want/think they want to be viewed 'as' by the masses/critics - (LOL - ego)

"unless I'm wrong as surely no artist wants to push anything they don't wholeheartedly believe in. I damn sure wouldn't release anything I don't believe in." (Not said by you but I will address it too) I don't agree with this statement I think most artists/people are not that smart as in 'will full ignorance' Most say they support freedom and equality yet they support major political and heavy agendas and companies - regimes that are doing the exact opposite of it. The list is big, hypocrisy ltd. And why? They want da money in dere pocket now. The flash fire phrase 'a slave is no better than their master' is a wise saying here. Same could be said 'A worker is no better than their boss or the company they represent.' or 'If you gain monies from a company (in which your ideals differ) regardless, you are NO better than the company.... or the boss you say you hate... lol so much wisdom here IMO.
Old 4 days ago | Show parent
  #2473
Lives for gear
 
s wave's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nat8808 ➡️
Personally, "school" for talent repels me, same for "training" given at art school. They appear to teach you how to package yourself and sell yourself. It's far from organic artistry. Much like if a school prepped you for office jobs as demanded by the government of the day, not natural organic paths people choose.

I'd like to see this kind of thing discouraged.. but instead what it creates is a package pool for an industry to then go and seek out new products they can shape up and sell.. and the better trained they are, the less they need to find talent out in the wild.

And there are then gatekeepers to those schools - much like AI has in-biuld prejudice bourne from that of the creators, so will such schools (or will try to over-come that prejudice via plastic and unnatural rules for selection).
Yes there are gate keepers all over these schools and alumni - and some very invisible - but they get their reward.. Can not does not match the organic brainstorming and creation get togethers with NO parameters. Agreed. Look at the Actors and Singers/musiciansPainters/inventors etc... that came out of the creation lofts and bohemian get togethers in southern part of NYC in the 50s-60s... can not recreate that with 'RULES' of a an institution or school.
Old 4 days ago | Show parent
  #2474
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quite honestly the thread has just devolved into a few bitter types with no knowledge lecturing everyone else.
So a record is a hit because of the pretty girl. The same pretty girl's next record is a flop because it's not such a good record?

Seriously you should read your own posts, they are hilariously hypocritical and nonsensical.
Now people are attacking performance colleges and music schools because they 'package product' for the industry??????

It's soooo sad how bitter and twisted a couple of you are. You should move on with your lives and be happy for what you have instead of dwelling on your artistic disappointments.
Byeeeee.
Old 4 days ago | Show parent
  #2475
Lives for gear
 
jbuonacc's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
Quite honestly the thread has just devolved into a few bitter types with no knowledge lecturing everyone else.
So a record is a hit because of the pretty girl. The same pretty girl's next record is a flop because it's not such a good record?

Seriously you should read your own posts, they are hilariously hypocritical and nonsensical. ...
man, gtfo... yeah, Tiffany, Debbie Gibson and the rest of the “pretty girls” who flopped after their first big record (which the success of can surely be attributed to their looks). like anything we’ve said is “wrong” or “nonsense”. image sells.

Quote:
... It's soooo sad how bitter and twisted a couple of you are. You should move on with your lives and be happy for what you have instead of dwelling on your artistic disappointments.
“sad, bitter, and twisted”? might as well be talking about yourself. as “talented and successful” as you are, you haven’t really done much since c.1990, and it shows. get a “real job” and quit complaining about the “industry”. it’s over, move on with your life.
Old 4 days ago | Show parent
  #2476
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
Quite honestly the thread has just devolved into a few bitter types with no knowledge lecturing everyone else.
So a record is a hit because of the pretty girl. The same pretty girl's next record is a flop because it's not such a good record?

Seriously you should read your own posts, they are hilariously hypocritical and nonsensical.
Now people are attacking performance colleges and music schools because they 'package product' for the industry??????

It's soooo sad how bitter and twisted a couple of you are. You should move on with your lives and be happy for what you have instead of dwelling on your artistic disappointments.
Byeeeee.
Huh?? Stating that the music industry sells music using images of beautiful women and in some cases sexualizing them makes one bitter and twisted? Since when?
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #2478
Lives for gear
 
s wave's Avatar
TY for sharing this is fantastic!!! better than MOST things out there by far... and I see tons of talent and future stars in there bless...

Last edited by s wave; 1 day ago at 05:10 PM.. Reason: spelling
Old 3 days ago
  #2479
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
@ nat8808 I'm only against when people within academia in music fail to tell students that they should have a personal definition of "making it" so that they don't leave their institution(s) bitter and disillusioned. Ditto for audio engineering schools. I would have given up any body part to have attended IU or IU Jacobs had I had tons of exposure to music in a formal sense growing up.
Old 3 days ago
  #2480
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
@ s wave I believe that inspiration can come from anywhere.
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #2481
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
Quite honestly the thread has just devolved into a few bitter types with no knowledge lecturing everyone else.
So a record is a hit because of the pretty girl. The same pretty girl's next record is a flop because it's not such a good record?

Seriously you should read your own posts, they are hilariously hypocritical and nonsensical.
Now people are attacking performance colleges and music schools because they 'package product' for the industry??????

It's soooo sad how bitter and twisted a couple of you are. You should move on with your lives and be happy for what you have instead of dwelling on your artistic disappointments.
Byeeeee.
Haha... You're the most bitter person on this thread Chrisso!

Most of your posts start with "Utter Rubbish!! " Or "Nooooo.... " as you go on to tell someone how wrong they are and that they have no business even expressing themselves if they're not industry insiders with long careers. And you don't state you simply disagree... no, they are wrong in totality.

I'm quite positive about the future of music and the possibilities new tech brings.

You meanwhile have been saying for the last 50 pages how it's going to hell in a handcart and it's all now run by pirates and crooks.

I don't think you could find a more bitter outlook that that expressed by your posts..
Old 1 day ago
  #2482
Here for the gear
 
M8, I hate to break it to you, but you're almost definitely never going to make enough money as an artist to support yourself, much less get rich. And I'm not trying to be a dick here, that's just a fact, none of the people reading this are likely to ever get famous, because it's a borderline statistical impossibility for anyone to get famous. Now VOULD it happen? Sure. Pretty much anything could though. You'd have about as much chance of finding out you have a previously unknown relative who died and left you a fortune. Now, we can all increase our chances a bit by writing and releasing a LOT of music, in a LOT of genres, but it's still almost impossible to make a meaningful amount of money unless you're really, reeeeally good, and reeeeeeeeeally lucky. Or someone decides to promote you for free or something. Imo, the best way for musicians to make money is to do something music-adjacent. Like audio engineering. Something that's related to music, but not reliant on producing or playing music. That way you learn valuable skills, and at least work with sound or something that improves your skill as a musician/composer/whatever you do.
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #2483
Lives for gear
 
vernier's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
When I hit the bigtime (which should be next year) I'm having a swimming pool built in the shape of my drum kit ! !
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #2484
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by vernier ➡️
When I hit the bigtime (which should be next year) I'm having a swimming pool built in the shape of my drum kit ! !
Yeah.. well, when I hit it big time, (which will be next year for sure!! ), I am gonna hook up with Doja Cat and marry her.
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #2485
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbuonacc ➡️
you haven’t really done much since c.1990, and it shows. get a “real job” and quit complaining about the “industry”. it’s over, move on with your life.
I'm still a full time professional in 2021, paying my bills.
The comment 'bitter and twisted' just shines out of your personal attack above^^^



October 2019 (pre-pandemic)

V V V V V V
Attached Thumbnails
What is the current way to distribute music and get paid?-ea6af181-198d-4862-9fbb-2c0973a31a58.jpeg  
Old 1 day ago | Show parent
  #2486
Lives for gear
 
telecode's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso ➡️
I'm still a full time professional in 2021, paying my bills.
Fair enough. Then I am in complete shock how your outlook on the music industry is the way it is. Maybe I need to re evaluate my own views. Something is really out of whack.
Old 7 hours ago | Show parent
  #2487
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Yeah, re-evaluate your own views.

There is no silver bullet.
No guarantee of success with command of social media. No guarantee of success with 'a pretty girl' regardless of the quality of the music.

I think my view is more balanced than most posting in the thread.
Differences between Music Biz 1.0 and Music Biz 2.0?

1.0 = income from recordings, gatekeepers were often music fans, especially at independent labels.
2.0 = no income from recordings, gatekeepers are exclusively money driven, many gatekeepers are inexperienced, unqualified 'influencers'.

Where the internet could have been a massive boost to musicians and creatives, it has largely decimated their chances of a full time career.
📝 Reply
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump