

The Problem With Music - fallentimes
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

======
Prrometheus
I see the traditional record company being replaced by two sets of firms: 1)
Online commission-based digital distribution firms and 2) Firms that handle
tours, preferably also commission-based.

1) hasn't been done well yet. I know Amazon lets bands list and sell MP3s, and
amiestreet.com offers music from indie artists with a funky pricing model.
However, there's not really a "go-to" place right now with a large amount of
traffic from people looking for independent music. Amazon is dominated by the
majors, and no other site is very popular.

There are a number of popular places for a band to distribute their music for
free, such as Myspace, but these places don't provide their bands with a
revenue source. I can understand how bands would like to get paid if people
love their music.

Some bands have resorted to selling their music themselves straight from their
website (NIN, Radiohead, Girl Talk, etc.). However, it ought to be possible to
automate this process to allow bands without technical skill to list and sell
their own music (maybe make an embeddable music store?). Also, a central site
off the band page could allow less popular bands to get some exposure.

Does 2) exist? I don't know. I have heard of some firms that manage tours for
famous independent bands, the kind that have been around forever and have
fulfilled their initial sodomizing major label deals. I don't know if any
exists for mid-level bands.

One thing is for sure - the record companies are dinosaurs. They are glorified
middle-men who connect bands with CD printing and distribution firms. Digital
distribution means that they no longer serve a function, outside of marketing.
That's the one downfall of online distribution - there are millions of bands
on the internet and it is hard for fans to find new stuff they like.

There's been a number of startups that have tried to help people find new
music, from the big guys like Pandora (dominated by majors), to new little
guys like thefeelgood.com. I don't think anybody's gotten it right yet, and
none of them mix the marketing with the monetizing well.

Honestly, if Myspace let bands sell MP3s on their profile page, it would
probably be good enough and 10x better than anything currently out there.

So, what do you say Hacker News? Is anybody out there working on burying the
record companies? What are your ideas, and how are you doing?

Anybody live in San Diego and want to do it with me?

~~~
aston
Even if the major labels were only useful outside of marketing, that would
make them a pretty big deal. The consumption of pop music hinges completely on
how well your image and sound is sold to the general public. It's hard not to
like "Umbrella" when it plays 10 times a day on top 40 radio. When Madonna's
album is at eye level right when you walk into BestBuy, you can bet it's going
to sell a lot more copies than similar (better?) ones that are just sitting
alphabetized under "Pop / Rock."

If your aim as a musician is to earn enough money to make your full-time
effort worthwhile, distributing music through MySpace alone might get you
enough cash to survive. If you're shooting for worldwide fame or the type of
money that lets you live like a rock star, you pretty much can't do without
the connections and money the majors provide.

edit: The point of all this being, no matter how cheap it gets to produce and
distribute music, you'll never beat the majors (in pop music) if there's not a
cultural shift away from consuming the music served out to the public by
expensive marketing campaigns.

~~~
Prrometheus
The article would suggest that most of the bands that "make it big" don't make
a lot of money, unless they're like Madonna and have stayed popular past the
initial sodomizing. So, making a living off of Myspace would be better for
many bands than selling 500,000 albums one year.

~~~
aston
Part of my argument, which I didn't explicitly state, is that most artists
would rather their work be widely appreciated than it make a lot of money (any
money?).

~~~
jamesbritt
"... most artists would rather their work be widely appreciated than it make a
lot of money (any money?)."

On what do you base this claim?

------
coglethorpe
This article was apparently written in 1993
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Albini#References>) and has made the
rounds on Reddit more than once, but it's still a great insight into how
record companies work and big companies take advantage of small producers of
content.

~~~
SwellJoe
I think one could look at some of the VC industry in the same way, though most
entrepreneurs I know are not quite as wide-eyed or ignorant about the industry
as most musicians. And, of course, VCs don't ask for 85-90% of the companies
they fund...which is roughly the deal record labels offer bands.

------
Kinimat
It just so happens, this is my playground. I'm working on a suite of business
tools for independent musicians and small labels to manage their online
presence, marketing efforts and digital distribution.

It will eventually be here: www.kinimat.com, but I'm in the early stages at
the moment. Hope to launch a beta sometime in September, if all goes well. I'm
working on this full-time so it should be do-able.

I'm a little rusty on the tech side of things (c/c++ ten years ago! yikes.)
but Python and Django are now my friends.

Fortunately, I won't be short of beta testers; my entire extended family are
independent musicians. I've already got a huge network of potential customers,
hopefully that will give me a leg up.

I'm an electronic musician/dj myself, designer by education, and hacker by
hobby. This project is tailor made for me. Now I just need to get'er done.

-Peter

------
mynameishere
I can see all the hangers-on trying to skin bands, since they can vanish in an
instant, but you'd think that companies would want to cultivate groups. Give
them a free-and-clear 75 cents per album or whatever. How hard is that? And
then if they become big, they won't jump ship out of hatred.

------
KaiP
Interesting article, very thorough in its explanation of all the ways bands
can get screwed financially. I'd be interested to see more hard data as to how
common this case is, where it fits in on the spectrum (percentile-wise) of
band signings.

~~~
dhs
Very common. Extremely common. Albini isn't even saying much about publishing,
and the zillion ways for musicians to get screwed there (never sign away your
publishing rights!). For a good introduction, try Donald Passman's "All You
Need To Know About The Music Business".

------
radley
I won't go into stuff on what's wrong with the industry, etc. But do want to
share that there's a really good resource that has been embraced by the
industry for many years called "All You Need to Know About the Music Business"
by Donald Passman:

[http://www.amazon.com/Need-Know-About-Music-
Business/dp/0684...](http://www.amazon.com/Need-Know-About-Music-
Business/dp/0684870649)

It has been revised recently (i.e. for the "internet age") but may require
another update soon.

Nice find on the ol' Negativland tho =)

------
AndyKelley
Awesome. Now I'll know, for when I drop out of college and start a rock band.

~~~
palish
My girlfriend did just that. The band's first show is this Saturday at
<http://www.creepycrawl.com/> (her band is called Mondair).

I hope that it's still possible to "make it" in today's music world.

~~~
SwellJoe
_I hope that it's still possible to "make it" in today's music world._

It's more possible than ever, but the definition of "make it" has changed
dramatically. 20 years ago, "making it" meant "millions of albums sold"--think
David Bowie, Michael Jackson, Fleetwood Mac. A few others eked out a decent
living, but the people getting rich had to sell a lot of records and fill a
lot of stadiums. And there were only a handful of artists that got that
chance.

Now, it's possible for someone to sell a few _tens of thousands_ records, fill
a few mid-size concert venues, and make an excellent living. One can entirely
skip the music industry BS. You still need to book shows, and you still need
to promote, and you still need to work hard...but it's now possible for a
middle tier act, with recordings to sell, to come to the end of a tour and be
in the black.

Superchunk are a great example of just this shift in the industry. They
started indie, signed to a major, and went back to being indie because they
made a lot more money that way (and now they own/run Merge, one of the more
successful truly indie labels--Spoon, Arcade Fire, She & Him, Destroyer, etc.
are all Merge bands). A lot of acts since then have followed their lead. The
second and third generation of punk rock bands, as well as independent hip hop
acts, kind of paved the way for this and there are now plenty of examples of
acts that make a good living and don't have to answer to a major label. So
far, it doesn't seem to work for pop (in all its forms...country pop,
electronic pop, rock pop, etc.) and those genres still require a sales channel
that can be stuffed and a hype machine in order for anyone to make any money.
That'll probably die eventually, as the mainstream buyer strays into more
widely varied territory due to ease of access on the web, and good riddance to
bad rubbish.

~~~
rms
Girl Talk is an artist from Pittsburgh that has "made it" by the new
definition. He doesn't sell very many records, because they are kind of
illegal so he intentionally stays under the radar, but he can sell out 2000
person venues. His new record came out -- it's a meticulously edited pop/hip-
hop mashup album. It is as mainstream sounding as something solidly outside of
the mainstream can get.

[http://74.124.198.47/illegal-
art.net/__girl__talk___feed__th...](http://74.124.198.47/illegal-
art.net/__girl__talk___feed__the__anima.ls___/)

