If you are as music-crazy as me, try this discovery site:
It is my daily driver to discover new music.
Pretty neat and on point as far as the suggestions I did recognize though. Wish there at least a basic outgoing link for each suggestion
I don't know what to do with this information
Also Women formed another band called Viet Cong, and then after getting rolling had some pushback on the name, changed their name to Preconceptions. Great band, saw them live at Desert Daze last year.
Also one of the band members recently tweeted something about wanting to hear more Women so they might be reforming.
I randomly get these weird urges to build playlists around certain bands or songs, so this sort of service helps a lot. The others I use, which take way more work, are last.fm, rate your music and Pandora.
Listening to the music of: women. Sounds like I’m starting at the very basics.
The other website https://www.music-map.com/ is also interesting. It appears that I'm not very original in my music tastes.
Does anyone have any insight into how this is built?
“If 90 percent of the readers of Douglas Hofstadter also like [Stephen] Hawking, the distance between these two writers in the Hofstadter-Hawking dimension is 0.1,” Gibney says.
My personal attitude (in general, I haven't contributed to this site) is that it's incredibly difficult and even soul-sucking to try and earn a decent living in music performance, let alone composition, so I don't even try. Instead, I have a day job - I work in IT for my alma mater - and in return for reduced time available for music, I get complete freedom to pursue the musical projects I want at my own pace. This way I can be sort of my own patron. Sure, getting paid for music would be nice, but I'm not going to insist on it for a given project unless that was the only way to make said project worthwhile to me, in which case I probably wouldn't undertake it in the first place. I suspect there are a good many freelance musicians nowadays who also take this approach.
That's a bit harsh, but that point is that the supply is very high and the demand is low. Certainly the demand for music is high, but only a very tiny sliver of the music that is popular. There isn't a ton of demand for people to pay much for live small town performances.
And as for the supply, there are tons and tons of people who want to be musicians. So the simple supply and demand economics has it that the people who are willing to sell their services for the lowest price (i.e. free) are the ones who will set the market price.
It's a similar phenomenon to when I was in grad school and those around me would complain about the lack of pay for newly minted PhDs in academia. The pay for postdocs is very low. It's the same problem as musicians (though less severe).
One of the thing that motivates grad students or musicians is the hope of making it big (getting a tenured position or selling out performances). That means people with a high risk tolerance are the ones who will participate in the market. Basically, you have to get yourself into the distinguished echelon of hot commodities, and in this respect, "exposure" is very important. There is no top billboard song that exists but for marketing.
Life isn't going to be the way you want it and you have to adjust.
> Life isn't going to be the way you want it and you have to adjust.
Life is what we make it, and mutely accepting the parts of the world we don't like is what enables those misfeatures to persist.
Personally, while I see a lot of value in capitalism, I also see value in striving for a world where more people are able to make a living and do what they love.
If supply and demand means that musicians can't put food on their table, is that flaw in music, or the supply and demand system?
People aren't paying for music (which has been noted is about as rare as air) but control over music. If you want the money (either through licensing, fee-for-performance, or patronage) you're going to give up your control to the person who is paying the piper. If you want to keep the control, you're probably going to have to give up doing it as a day job.
You can't produce non-alienated craft music like it was a pair of boots and expect people to want it anyway -- the entire value of music to others is in the alienation, the loss of control over the work ("playing to the crowd"), "supply and demand" isn't causing that and can't be reformed to change that.
If the audience is you, that's fine, but why should society value that over any other private activity that makes you privately happy? We should subsidize it as much as we subsidize rock-climbing, marijuana, binge-watching Seinfeld, etc.
Plus, for example, IF it's used in an indie game, and IF said game becomes big, the creators could send a donation or contract in the direction of the creator. I mean take the guy that made the Minecraft music, C418; he started off just posting things on his blog and an indie music forum, but ended up getting in touch with the creator of Minecraft; he kept the rights to the music, I don't know how it works legally but I like to think Microsoft sends him a licensing fee every month to use the music.
People on HN complain about not finishing sideprojects etc... if you can record a song in ableton/logic and export it to a cloud service where its available for public consumption. thats "finished a side project" and gives a nice feeling of closure.
It's extremely difficult to make money selling music.
These also serve as demo reels for commissioned work or to sell licenses that don't require attribution/share-alike/other CC restrictions.
I love it!
PS: thus it would be nice to have several "profiles". Could be also corresponding to different moods in which we don't like the same things.
The business model here is a group of people have volunteered to maintain a shared opt-in repository and indexer so that musicians who want to release their content under a CC license can easily do so. There's no exploitation happening, unless you broadly consider Open licenses like CC or the GPL to be exploitation.
And if you do have a problem with CC licenses in general, it's probably better to take that up with https://creativecommons.org/
People who record music are not desperate. Those trying to be the next popstar might be. Doubt there is huge overlap between those groups. You are more likely to see those on tiktok.
I've published mine under CC here https://flickr.com/photos/patcito/with/84627477/
If music is your career, sure you have to get good fast and sell at every opportunity.
However don’t discount how good you can get just jamming out with friends for 30 something odd years.
There’s like three different licenses needed and I have to magically know many downloads I’m going to need to license beforehand and it’s crazy expensive for even a single track.