How much do musicians really make - article

[ProfD]

Everything about the music industry points to the new reality...Do-It-Yourself. Musicians have to return to grassroots. Building their fanbase one person at a time.

 

Prior to Y2K, the music business was a gravy train for labels, studios and those who managed to make hit records and successfully tour. Crumbs fell off the table but otherwise, everybody else had to grind it out on the gig circuit.

 

Again, I'm a huge proponent of the jamband scene for this very reason. The musicians, promoters, labels, etc., are more realistic in terms of costs.

 

Independent entities can more easily adapt to the market. They can build connect directly with a fanbase which maximizes profits. The musicians enjoy better pay and artistic freedom.

[Tonysounds]

What about the groups like Heart, Hall & Oats, Yes, REO & Pat Benetar as a few examples, making more money now than 10 or 20 years ago? I saw Hall & Oats. There were maybe 4000 people. They played 90 minutes including encores and off they went to the next town.

 

Id be curious if that were truly the case, but if it is, its because these acts are no longer touring to promote records theyre not making money on, now theyre touring to earn money, a big difference. And of course theyre touring in a capacity where there is low overhead: theyre not carrying huge productions (if any), and are working the chains like House of Blues, or festivals/state fairs.

 

I think I read somewhere that U2 played 30 some shows and had not broke even.

Their show is ridiculously expensive to put on: 127 trucks haul the gear, I dont know how much crew/staff are on the payroll, but you can be sure its enormous. They basically have to build the rigging to construct the stage/set, then tear the rigging down once the claw is assembled so they can then construct the staging, then after the show tear down the staging so they can build the rigging to disassemble the claw. Factor in union costs (the trucks cant be pulled into the venues by the drivers, at least in Chicago; same for electric, rigging, heavy equipment operators needed for this stageset construction), insurance for all personnel, per diems for all personnel, lodging for all personneland then realize that it takes A WEEK!!! to build that set, and you have a lot of downtime that is being paid for.

 

Tom Petty is on tour. I would assume this guy has enough money to last a lifetime. Or maybe he doesn't ??

Touring generally is an earnings loss at that level but is promotion for the album; however, for a legacy artist like Petty, the numbers are much different as the fanbase is built (and is older and in theory more affluent and can afford the $125 tickets).

 

How many major acts have started their own labels to overcome the pay outs illustrated by the article ?

 

Starting your own label is easy: getting distribution is not, and promotion is expensive. Those costs remain the same and might be even higher due to non-bulk buys. Most labels are vanity labels (and tax write-offs as business failures), but the channels of production, manufacturing, distribution and promotion remain the same. The internet helps.hopefully.

[richwhite9]

Starting your own label is easy: getting distribution is not, and promotion is expensive. Those costs remain the same and might be even higher due to non-bulk buys. Most labels are vanity labels (and tax write-offs as business failures), but the channels of production, manufacturing, distribution and promotion remain the same. The internet helps.hopefully.

 

Even at the most successful level scams get played. The rumor persists that Warner bailed Madonna out of Maverick as she was getting fleeced by her own management. A buyout was the only way to get rid of them.

 

>>

 

In its suit, Warner Music dismissed that claim, citing the label's $64.2 million in losses over the last six years. It says Maverick's suit is a bargaining chip in negotiations over the 12-year-old partnership's dissolution later this year.

 

"Maverick has invented and asserted trumped-up and baseless claims of fiduciary breach and breach of contract against its long-term partner," Warner Music said in the suit.

 

The joint venture that owns Maverick is scheduled to dissolve in December and Warner Music has the right buy the 60% of the label it doesn't own at that time, according to court papers.

 

Madonna and other investors in the label must reimburse the world's third-largest record company for $92.5 million in losses, loans and fees to have an option to buy Warner Music's 40% of the label.<<

[Outkaster]

I think the stage designer for the Stones and U2 is the same person. Both tours leapfrog and have two identical stages to set up. I know on steel wheels in 1989 there were 52 rigs.

[Cygnus64]

The Courtney Love quotes are interesting.

 

I've read them many times before:

 

Here's a chick who is probably a millioniare even without her hubby's money. I'm not aware that she has any musical talent whatsoever. For her to write that article is not only ironic, but it lacks credibility simply because she wrote it.

 

The opportunities given to this lady have been overwhelming. She's had movie roles, show appearances like "Nightline" and Letterman, all kinds of trash TV, on and on. The system worked for her. It doesn't work for most talented musicians, yet she was about to parlay the cult of celebrity into an actual career.

 

Every opportunity in music can open another door. In that respect, I give her a lot of credit. But her tirade against the record industry reminds me of people who go on a show like "Idol", get a career, and badmouth and disparage the show. If she actually knew how to tune a guitar, play an instrument or sing, I would be praising her lil essay. As it is, she's not the solution and she's a big part of the problem. To me, she's not much different than the Octomom or that Kate chick, parlaying a freak coincidence of celebrity into an actual career.

[Tonysounds]

If she actually knew how to tune a guitar, play an instrument or sing, I would be praising her lil essay. As it is, she's not the solution and she's a big part of the problem. To me, she's not much different than the Octomom or that Kate chick, parlaying a freak coincidence of celebrity into an actual career.

 

Uh, yeah. Granted, shes not a great guitarist (either is Bob Dylan); shes not a great vocalist (neither is Lou Reed); shes not everyones cup of tea. Funny how some art is created by artists with no craftsmanship, but it is. While not a huge fan, I can say that she actually has an interesting body of work, and Live Through This is a pretty damn good recordeven without the timing of Cobains death which adds import to the sound and writing of that record. (Her later stuff is much more polished, but aside from a couple singles, doesnt resonate as wellfor me.) Yeah, shes had a career most would kill for. Shes a mess (whether shes a hot mess is for you to decide), but shes very smart and very creative. She had a real music career before Cobain, and Hole already had one critically acclaimed and successful (for punk) album before she ever met him. Her bands former members started Babes In Toyland, and I think L7 as well.

 

Railing against her for criticizing the money structure of the music business seems pretty strange. For someone inside whos benefitted to some extent from that business, I find it refreshing that she would open her mouth and say something. Sort of like bitching at Pearl Jam for wanting to fix the Ticketbastard debacle, or Metallica for pursuing Napster after their album was stolen and disseminated before they were even done recording it.

 

Your not liking her musical abilities (or lack thereof) should have no influence on acknowledging the truth of her essay. It certainly doesnt change it.

 

I think its incredibly unfair to compare her to Kate Gosselin or the Octomom: Courtney actually has a body of work. And again, thinking she has a career because of a freak of celebrity is mistaken. She was putting out records before she was a famous widow/trainwreck. And you yourself know, being a hot mess doesnt ensure a career: just ask Lindsay Lohan. By my accounting, Courtney has actually done a lot more.

 

[Bottom End]

I'll stay on the "Mess" side of the Courtney Love question.

 

Here's a review from a recent show:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/clicktrack/2010/06/in_concert_hole_at_930_club.html

[Cygnus64]

Tonysounds,

 

We'll agree to disagree on creativity and talent issues with her. It's not like I have the complete Courtney Love collection. Instead, I'll ask you this:

 

If one had a time machine and prevented her from meeting Cobain (IIRC she was a stripper at that point), what do you think the odds are that we would be talking about her right now? Personally I would say 1 billion to 1. I do understand that she had met some other people before him and had some limited degree of success, but it was (IMO) small potatoes compared to what happened to her career after his death.

 

Do you agree?

[Tonysounds]

I'm not disagreeing (prior to reading the review).

 

I imagine this is what Iggy Pop reviews were like.

It ALMOST makes me want to see the show now.

[richwhite9]

There are those that just plain hate her.

 

The death of her bass player a couple months after Cobain was considered conspiracy rather than murder

 

http://www.justiceforkurt.com/kristen_pfaff/news_reports.shtml

 

She has some talent. She also had some powerful songwriting and arranging help on her two biggest albums: ghostwriting/arranging by Cobain on 'Live with This' and Billy Corbin on the follow up.

 

I found her acting to be natural and projecting a warmth not expected in something like the Andy Kauffman flick.

 

Anyone who knows addicts (the whole story not just the downside) knows what she's gone through. I doubt she'd tell you she's proud of having her daughter taken away so many times. If she wasn't mentallly ill when starting to abuse drugs she is now. Dysfunctional and crazy with just enough sobriety and lucidity here and there that friends don't give up completely. And yes, a suicidal fame whore as part of the dysfunction.

[Tonysounds]

Dont discount the fantastic upbringing by a somewhat noted female psychologist and a father ordered by the courts to have no contact with his daughter. Imagine how great the parenting was that the courts emancipated her from her mother as a teenager.

[Cygnus64]

There are those that just plain hate her.

 

I don't care for what little I know about her, but that wasn't my point. My point:

 

She seems to have benefited greatly from the system she heaviliy criticized. She had doors opened for her that would remain closed for most people, most people do not get known "ghostwriters" to work on their disc. She didn't have the acting resume to be remotely considered for a big role like the Larry Flynt movie, yet her connections and infamy opened that door as well (and I thought she did a decent job in the film).

 

My analogy: she reminds me of a farmer who is whining about "socialism" yet enjoys a big fat farm subsidy. The record industry was extremely good to her, she's coming off as very ungrateful with her essay.

[Dan O]

I think there are many examples of musicians who have had parenting issues. Michael Jackson comes to mind.

 

Is it safe to say that jazz artist do not make alot of money ?

[B3bluesman59]

Here's a chick who is probably a millioniare even without her hubby's money

________________________________________________________________

It wasn't too long ago that Courtney had to sell a whole lot of the Cobain publishing and catalog as she needed the money. She controls all of Kurt's music and Dave Grohl and Kris N. are always in legal battles with her regarding Nirvana music. Anything she has she got from being married to Kurt. And the way she goes thru money it won't be long until she is totally broke.

[Cygnus64]

Anything she has she got from being married to Kurt.

She probably got more from the Larry Flynt movie than the average Joe makes in ten years. Scale for a talk show is probably 1K a pop, she does stuff like that all the time, and she wrote a book. She has the ability to make money, she just lacks the ability to keep it.

[Marzzz]

I think the stage designer for the Stones and U2 is the same person. Both tours leapfrog and have two identical stages to set up.

 

It most definitely was for the U2 Popmart tour '97 and the subsequent Stones tour a few months later. I saw them both at Soldier Field in Chicago and it was absolutely uncanny how identical their shows were. They only thing that would have made it more so was if U2 had played "Satisfaction"