Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

What's Wrong With The Music Business


Recommended Posts

Leading off from the Michael Jackson fiasco (which is all about money, BTW), I thought about how unfair the music biz really is. To compare with Hollywood: Imagine a top Hollwood star - say a Tom Cruise or Julia Roberts - instead of being paid $20 million for their services and talent are told: "We will lend you $50 million to make your movie. You will get a small share of the profit once you've paid back that $50 million PLUS 50% of the promotion costs. Oh, and by the way, even when you pay it back, we will retain all rights to the movie. Also, you can only make movies for us. Oh, almost forgot - if there IS a profit, we'll hold back 50% of your money in case your next movie bombs!" Actually, the movie business used to work very much like this until the actors unionized, went on strike and forced a change to the way we know it now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Good analogy. I think that the California situation is making a lot of artists consider unionizing in some way or another, moreso that they do now. Thing is, there are too many folks that don't mind being indentured servants to the record labels. The labels will do whatever they need to in order to preserve the way they do business. Other than keeping this independent thing alive, there really aren't too many recourses, are there??

Yamaha (Motif XS7, Motif 6, TX81Z), Korg (R3, Triton-R), Roland (XP-30, D-50, Juno 6, P-330). Novation A Station, Arturia Analog Experience Factory 32

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like the list would be A LOT shorter if the question was: "What's right in the music buisness?" I study music at college, and a teacher I had, who is a pretty well known songwriter/arranger and producer here in Scandinavia and probably far beyond, said this when telling me stories from the music biz: "If you want some advice about the music biz, I'll give you some advice: Stay away from the music biz!" Well, I really want to get into the music buisness, but it seems like it'll be very hard to do so without "forgetting" some of ones principles. And that's something I won't do. Seems like I'm going nowhere :(

-Joachim Dyndale

--------------------

 

Einstein: The difference between genius and stupidity is: Genius has limits

 

My Blog...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the music business as far is the fact that the general public is force fed to purchase a product. The public is so used to watered down entertainment that they are no longer capable of judging what is goo dna what is garbage. As far as I`m concerned, Janet Jackson and Brittany Spears are pretty hot dancers who sing. Neither one of them writes good music from what I have heard. If it weren`t for Janets last name she would be a 35 year old woman, married with three kids, working like the majority of folks. She can`t sing and she can`t write. Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis are the "Janet Jackson Machine". If Brittany Spears didn`t look like a porno star, she`d be married to a distant cousin by now with three kids. Without a doubt both women have worked hard but they are the product of songwriters/producers/choreographers/ and make up artists who mold them into WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN FORCE FED TO WANT. What can be fixed is the publics low standards of what they call "music". The majority of the buying public (17 - 30) are not interested in lyrics, singing and playing. But they are into looks, how well a "singer" can dance and what they look like. This is whats wrong with the music business. The record labels are performing a duty to stay in BUSINESS. In order to do this they must provide the public with what the PUBLIC wants. Asking whats wrong with the music business is like asking whats wrong with porno flicks or drugs? Nothing is wrong with porno/drugs. As long as people are willing to purchase films, mags, cocaine etc... the business will continue to grow. There is nothing with this. The general public dictates what record companies, drug dealers and "professional" pimps sell. There is no such thing as wrong or right, its just what it is. Of course there are exceptions to this but not many. Even Madonna has her own MACHINE working 24/7. She has made a career selling sex. What are you selling? Ernest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by ernest828@aol.com: [b] What can be fixed is the publics low standards of what they call "music". The majority of the buying public (17 - 30) are not interested in lyrics, singing and playing. [/b][/quote]But then, people go ape over Radiohead, U2, The Beatles, traditional/bluegrass music, Lauryn Hill, etc. and it makes you think that maybe the public actually prefers lyrics, singing, and playing but aren't getting it. So which is it? I personally don't like to constantly write off the public. The public has clearly shown that if you give them quality music, they'll like it AND they'll buy it (or at least download it! ). What they don't usually do is dig real deep for their music, but if they're presented with good quality music, they'll gravitate towards it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Ken/Eleven Shadows: [b] [quote]Originally posted by ernest828@aol.com: [b] What can be fixed is the publics low standards of what they call "music". The majority of the buying public (17 - 30) are not interested in lyrics, singing and playing. [/b][/quote]But then, people go ape over Radiohead, U2, The Beatles, traditional/bluegrass music, Lauryn Hill, etc. and it makes you think that maybe the public actually prefers lyrics, singing, and playing but aren't getting it. So which is it? I personally don't like to constantly write off the public. The public has clearly shown that if you give them quality music, they'll like it AND they'll buy it (or at least download it! ). What they don't usually do is dig real deep for their music, but if they're presented with good quality music, they'll gravitate towards it.[/b][/quote]Hence, the dilemma. It's not too often that the industry presents something with real heart and soul. What the records companies are failing to realise is that those who are willing to dig deep will do so by any means necessary, whether it means going down to the local ma and pa record store, supporting a good local band, or booting up their modems.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the music business is the "business" part of the equation. Business is business -- it's about money. Music is music -- it's about emotion, catharsis and expression. The two oughta be mutually exclusive, but unfortunately, businesspeople have found a way to make money with music. Thus we have the music biz. As Musicworkz mentions, there ARE alternatives to the big boys out there -- independent record labels tend to be more labors of love with less focus on sales and more focus on putting out the music that the artist wants to make for the people who want to hear it. Whenever anyone aske me how I think they shoud try to succeed in that game, I usually tell them not to play it -- don't look at a major label. Or don't court a label at all. Do it yourself. Sure, you'll work harder and suffer more, but it's all YOURS. What can a label do for you that you can't do for yourself? Not much. Sure, they can provide a big budget, but honestly, that money isn't yours, and your likelihood of ever seeing even the slightest profit from your efforts is slim to none. Make your own records. Sell them yourself. Book and play your own tours. Do your own promotion. If you fail or succeed, at least you know where all the money went, and you only have yourself to blame or thank.

\m/

Erik

"To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."

--Sun Tzu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by ernest828@aol.com: [b]If Brittany Spears didn`t look like a porno star, she`d be married to a distant cousin by now with three kids. Without a doubt both women have worked hard but they are the product of songwriters/producers/choreographers/ and make up artists who mold them into WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN FORCE FED TO WANT.[/b][/quote]I'm pretty sure it wasn't the public that force fed me to want a blonde bimbo with big titties. I think it evolved naturally starting when I turned 12. :D Seriously, though, I do agree with you, Ernest. It seems like it's not about good music as it is about money. It used to be that radio stations played the records that the public wanted to hear so advertisers will give them money to sell products to their many listeners. Nowadays, it seems an artist's management has to pay the radio station to get airplay. Then only the artist with money representation get played to the public and enough times that the public starts to like it. Instead of the public telling radio what they like, radio is telling the public what to like. How do you change it back? Can a radio station that will play what the public requests survive? Many college radio stations do this but advertisers won't pay too much because of the limited coverage area. It sucks that the radio station I listen to have planned out their playlist at least a day in advance (except for an hour at 11 pm). I had a friend whose band had two songs on their playlist and I requested them. Two hours later, I still didn't hear the song. Later, my friend told me about play lists being set already and chances are, they never played my request. How dumb is that? Why take requests when you're not gonna honor it? The guy on the phone should've told me, "Sorry, that song's not on our play list today so I can't play it for you." I guess that would actually take some balls and some common decency! :mad: Instead, I get "I'll try to get that on". Try my a$$!!!

aka riffing

 

Double Post music: Strip Down

 

http://rimspeed.com

http://loadedtheband.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's wrong with the music biz? It's a mystery inside an enigma trapped inside of a riddle. The public, the artists, and definitely the Record Companies don't know what to do in this crazy business. After reading all of the previous comments, it's obvious there is a bit of a paradox. The Record Companies flood the market with lowest common denominator music creating a low standard. A lot of people buy into it, and go and run and buy the latest Nelly(not trying to pick on the guy just an example). There are probably a lot of people out there like us that say to that "Fuck that shit." Unfortunately, many of these "Fuck what the radio plays" people probably don't dig nearly as hard as we do to find great music. Music is not their lifeblood like it is for us. The biggest problem is WE DON'T KNOW. Yes, I have figured it out. WE DON'T KNOW. Real artists don't know jack shit. We don't know how many people there are out there that is ready and waiting for an authentic sound. And if by chance, there are masses of people who are NOT blindlessly following the latest force fed TRL act, WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO REACH THEM, TO FIND THEM. All of the channels to reach this average Joe who hates the music scene as much as we do are all pretty much clogged up. You've got to spend atleast $100,000 on a video for MTV to even look at it, and then THEY DON'T PLAY VIDEOS MUCH ANYMORE. Commercial Radio, forget about it. In my heart, I feel that their are a lot of people that will pay for "good"(honest) music, but how in the HELL Do You get over the WALL. Just my stream of conciousness, ;) Jedi

"All conditioned things are impermanent. Work out your own salvation with diligence."

 

The Buddha's Last Words

 

R.I.P. RobT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Madonna, Fred Durst, Steve Vai, Robert Fripp, are just a few of the artists who have been through the mill, said `fuck this^ and started their own labels. Fred Durst started a label and the first band to have a record on it (Puddle of Mudd) sounds better than Limp Barcode-whatever-ever did. IMO the wall is not really there. What^s there, in case of the majors, is the money to let you turn on a radio or TV anywhere, and within two clicks of a remote or preset button, hear what they^re selling. It`s like, yeah alternative energy`s a great idea, but I wanna be able to flick a switch. I wanna be able to terrorize the neighbors with my battery powered car. Those media channels are like a millionaire`s club. They don^t give a crap who you are. If you have the dollars you can play. So yes, it`s all about money. I can`t even afford to record my owm damn music. But keep in mind that wherever big money goes some very unpleasant people are sure to follow. You just don`t see them in the videos.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a mystery inside an enigma trapped inside of a riddle. dblackjedi, Sorry dude, this sounds very creative but you did not say it first. Nice try. I believe it was Winston Churchill describing some country or something. Skip, You make no sense. Ernest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by MusicWorkz: [b] Thing is, there are too many folks that don't mind being indentured servants to the record labels. [/b][/quote]Therefore, I mentioned the number of artists who have had that experience-of recording for major labels and not had a good experience-who have started their own labels, to give new artists an alternative. Are you with me so far?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by dblackjedi: [b]What's wrong with the music biz? In my heart, I feel that their are a lot of people that will pay for "good"(honest) music, but how in the HELL Do You get over the WALL. Just my stream of conciousness, ;) Jedi[/b][/quote]And what I said to this is that there is not a WALL per se-anyone can incorporate themselves and start a label, record their own music, distribute it. What is hard to do, as dblackjedi said, is get it into every home, onto every radio. It costs a fortune, and that`s why music seems be such an oligarchy-among a few corporate warlords. Still with us?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Ernest, I apologize, I thought everyone knew that line from JFK(the Oliver Stone Movie) where Joe Pesci says when asked who killed the president," It's mystery inside an enigma blah, blah, blah.......The shooter's don't even know." I loved JFK, and thought it was obvious that I was taking from that. Next time, I'll use the "" for sure. Jedi

"All conditioned things are impermanent. Work out your own salvation with diligence."

 

The Buddha's Last Words

 

R.I.P. RobT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by CMDN: [b]The problem with the music business is the "business" part of the equation. Business is business -- it's about money. .[/b][/quote]and I said, yup. Not only that (I said), but it`s BIG business, and as such there`s a certain amount of-if I may be so bold-criminal activity around some aspects of the business. Shipping, distribution, manufacturing, and other establishments are owned, in some cases, by groups with ties of dubious origin. That makes it more difficult for independent entities to do well, without even mentioning promotional and other `gratuities` necessary to keep the wheels rolling. Hope that clears things up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skip said: [b]But keep in mind that wherever big money goes some very unpleasant people are sure to follow[/b] You said a mouthful; and it's the absolute truth. In one of the other posts one mentioned that payment from the artist's management seems to dictate the play list nowadays... perhaps this is a side effect from the demand for commercial-free listening on radio stations. People got tired of hearing more talk that music and eventually commercial advertisers were edged out by stations opting to take the buyouts from the music business execs. When ratings on the radio stations began soaring because they were able to play less talk and more listening to music; other stations had to take drastic measures to stay afloat... they began to follow suit. I must admit that it was very annoying to hear commercials every two or three songs and the introduction of non-stop music was very appealing; unfortunately it allowed for manipulation of airplay by the sponsors and public opinion was taken out of it.

You can take the man away from his music, but you can't take the music out of the man.

 

Books by Craig Anderton through Amazon

 

Sweetwater: Bruce Swedien\'s "Make Mine Music"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Skip And what I said to this is that there is not a WALL per se-anyone can incorporate themselves and start a label, record their own music, distribute it. What is hard to do, as dblackjedi said, is get it into every home, onto every radio. It costs a fortune, and that`s why music seems be such an oligarchy-among a few corporate warlords. Still with us? [/quote]Yeah Skip, that's the wall I'm talking about. The get it into the home, onto every radio "wall". Like you said, it takes MONEY, MONEY, MONEY, and on top of that it takes ENERGY and TIME. Very hard to do as one person, or even a small band of four. Something has got to give though. My M.O., bust your ass and when you fall atleast you know what doesn't work. After a certain amount of "failures" a way should become apparent, and you'll start to recognize what works by experiencing what hasn't. Just my 2. Jedi

"All conditioned things are impermanent. Work out your own salvation with diligence."

 

The Buddha's Last Words

 

R.I.P. RobT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dblackjedi Ya, one thing about any attempt do do something you love as a living is, you can`t do it just when you`re in the mood, and then say `the system`s unfair!` when it doesn`t succeed. anifa- Someone was mentioning on another thread, how management now has to pay radio stations to MENTION THE ARTISI`S NAME when their song is played. That just kills me. I don`t know how many times I^ve been about to smash my radio, cause the idiot station played a song I like-for the fifth time-and won`t say who the artist is. Unbelievable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, the AFN (Armed Forces Network) radio station in Japan is commercial-free. but they interrupt songs in the middle, or anywhere at all, with announcements. And there`s the question of how many `today in the history of blowing somebody`s head off` segments you can take...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me it's because the industry is centered in the US. The US seems hell bent on being about one thing: money. It's a disposable country. Nothing is made to last. Something that lasts can't be built anew and sold for profit. So one of the by-products that is disposed is art and anything truly aesthetic, beyond disposable kitch. So what becomes the great strong arm of the money country? Marketing and advertising. People have sheep mentality. They'll BUY what you SELL them. Let them buy kitch. Great art is difficult to quantify and produce. You need great artists for that. Less control, less profits. Smarter public; less profits. Invent put down phrases and images for people with cultivated tastes: snobs. Innundate them with a fusillade of bad taste in ads, music and art; billboard after billboard, TV, radio, CDs, internet. It's all money. That's the purpose here. Why would the "record industry" be any different? They're here to SELL music and make a PROFIT, not to create art or cater to artists. Of course they've got the cart in front of the horse and I think they know it. That's as it's intended. As re Janet Jackson and Brittany Spears in Ernests post -- I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with an entertainer doing music of songwriters. Nothing new and was the way things went before Buddy Holly and the Beatles in particular. Since then everyone felt they could write music. I don't WANT to hear any music Frank Sinatra wrote. I wish there were more avenues today for some of our great songwriters. Jam/Lewis are fine songwriters; maybe more on the production side of songwriting. I agree with Skip. I think the best thing to do for the INDUSTRY is to walk away from it. Form your own label and find your own distribution. I wouldn't suggest distributing it yourself, then you are really a label/distributor and you'll never have the time to write/perform another note in your life.

All the best,

 

Henry Robinett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yo crew... I think another BIG part of the problem with the music biz is that artists think they need to be involved with some kind of larger entity in order to be "legit." Also, artists erroneously believe that signing with a record label will solve all of their problems -- they'll just be "set" and simply be able to focus on music full-time. These are both patently false. First of all.... Wanna be "legit?" POW! I just made you all legit with my magical powers. No musician needs to be affiliated with a label to be granted creedence or legitimacy. If you're playing, you're the real thing. Being a product-producing employee of a business (which is basically what you are when you sign with a label) doesn't make you legit -- it makes you a grunt. Labels don't make the bands -- the bands make the bands. The labels just exploit them. You don't need them to be "real." So many artists believe that they need a business machine behind them to justify their existence. Guess what? That's pure bullshit. Secondly, signing on that dotted line does not "set up" an artist. Most often, signed artists (even on majors) still need to maintain day jobs in order to make ends meet... and if their albums tank (which most do), they need those day jobs. Guess what? Back when they were holding down a day job and gigging at night, they were actually in better financial shape. After they're signed, they're basically in the same position they were BEFORE they were signed (they still gig at night and work during the day), except NOW they see NONE of the gig money, and all all of their merchandise and CD sales go to someone else. Does that suck or what? The point is, of the 30,000 CDs officially released in the average year, only about 500 sell more than 10,000 copies. Only about 200 sell more than 50,000. Only about 50 sell more than 100,000. The average artist on a major label doesn't begin to recoup the label's expenses until it sells more than 60,000 copies. See the problem here? You're basically fucked before you begin. The music industry is like a giant shit sandwich that you're forced to take a bite from if you wanna be involved. Eventually, if you have enough bread, you don't have to eat as much shit. The answer: DO WHAT YOU LIKE. Work at it. Enjoy it. Do it because you love it. If people like what you do, they'll come to see you, and they'll support you by buying your music. You can actually pay for your music expenses with your profit from this.... What more do you really need? The people who think they'd be SO happy if they spent all their time playing and writing are sadly out of touch with themselves. Have you noticed how many artists lose touch with reality and their fans when they are wealthy enough to focus completely on music all the time? They can't relate to real people because they're not dealing with reality anymore. Artists need to wake up... this is it -- your life. Live it, write about it, sing about it, bitch about it. Have as much of it as you can stand, but don't just auction off your art to some entity because you buy into the "rock star" myth of fame and fortune. The reality is that is only out there for a VERY VERY few people. Everyone else gets screwed. Sorry for the long-ass post, but this is a passionate subject for me.

\m/

Erik

"To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."

--Sun Tzu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by skip: [b] [quote]Originally posted by MusicWorkz: [b] Thing is, there are too many folks that don't mind being indentured servants to the record labels. [/b][/quote]Therefore, I mentioned the number of artists who have had that experience-of recording for major labels and not had a good experience-who have started their own labels, to give new artists an alternative. Are you with me so far?[/b][/quote]Definitely with you, Skip...

Yamaha (Motif XS7, Motif 6, TX81Z), Korg (R3, Triton-R), Roland (XP-30, D-50, Juno 6, P-330). Novation A Station, Arturia Analog Experience Factory 32

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by CMDN: [b] Wanna be "legit?" POW! I just made you all legit with my magical powers. No musician needs to be affiliated with a label to be granted creedence or legitimacy. If you're playing, you're the real thing. .[/b][/quote]"Hey, could someone make me a sandwich?" "POOF!" Okay, you're a sandwich. :D You're absolutely right though, CMDN...
"Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Ken/Eleven Shadows: [b]But then, people go ape over Radiohead, U2, The Beatles, traditional/bluegrass music, Lauryn Hill, etc. and it makes you think that maybe the public actually prefers lyrics, singing, and playing but aren't getting it. So which is it? [/b][/quote]Well, it's both. That's what people don't really consider. The people who buy Britney Spears are not the same people who buy Radiohead, but there is certainly a market for both. Bob Ohlsson gave me an enlightening figure a while back, which certainly gibes with my experience. We all know how that "Thriller" broke all sorts of sales records, right? It sold what, 40 million copies worldwide? Well, according to Bob, there was a survey done which revealed that of the people who buy one CD a WEEK, only 8% of them bought "Thriller"! I believe it because at the time I was one of them. When "Thriller" came out I was buying at least one CD a week and I did not buy "Thriller", nor have I since. You just can't make any generalizations about "the public" based on what a few million of them buy. If something sells five million copies in the U.S., there are still 265 million people in the U.S. alone who DIDN'T buy it. Many of those people still buy CD's though! Therefore I think there is a market for anything of quality - enough of a market for the artist to make a nice living - if you can actually FIND the people who would buy your stuff. That's the problem right there. MOST artists are not good business people. In my band, our bass player and I are currently handling the business and promotion but our time would be much better spent writing more songs and gigging and recording, and leave the business part up to somebody else who really is good at that. Erik, your post was totally right on. We don't need a label to be "legit". What we do need though is people with promotional and marketing experience. That's the main service that artists need these days, and it used to be the job of labels, but could just as easily be an independent management or promotional company. You're definitely right Erik that artists need to stop thinking of "the record deal" as being the Holy Grail for a band. --Lee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier You just can't make any generalizations about "the public" based on what a few million of them buy. If something sells five million copies in the U.S., there are still 265 million people in the U.S. alone who DIDN'T buy it. Many of those people still buy CD's though! [/quote]Excellent observation here, Lee. :thu: A theory I've been bouncing around in my head deals with perspective. I would love to get you guys opinion on this. Observation: I've noticed that in perfomances or just when people hear some of my music lately I'm definitely making an emotional connection with my audience. I honestly believe my art is being felt. Theory: I believe the perspective of the average audience in regards to local/independent artists is that they're not really the "real" thing. You're not on MTV, you're not on 99.WETF(Whateverthefuck), nobody is around making you look like you're really important. I'm beginning to think that a person's perspective may/can have an affect on how they receive/interpret your music. To put it simply, some one might here my records with an attitude of he's an amateur even if the music is felt and enjoyed. I understand a person might think a recording is coming from amateur because well it sounds pretty "amateurish." But I also believe that a record can sound damn good, but a consumer might put "he's not the real thing" tag onto it because you're not signed and promoted on the Majors. Question: Do you feel that a person's perspective of where you are in your career affect how they veiw your music? If so, what are some ways to get past that perspective, and into their pocket for a CD sale? Just something I've been observing. I could be totally off my rocker, but even if it's not completely true, I do believe their is some truth. Another quote from JFK for you Ernest, "There's a lot of smoke there, but there is some fire." Jedi

"All conditioned things are impermanent. Work out your own salvation with diligence."

 

The Buddha's Last Words

 

R.I.P. RobT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jedi, I'm not following your observation/theory. Are you saying that a persons perceived success is directly proportional to marketing? Because MTV says it's good the "public" perceives it is good? Or are you saying the ARTIST perceives it is good and therfore the "public" reads it as good? I don't think that's what you were saying. I think people DEFINITELY think about where the artist is and where they're hearing him/them/her. If you hear something on WETF there's the consideration that that artist has arrived at some level. If you play a "cassette" for somebody there's the consideration that this guy's struggling, talent or not. There's no "star shine". This is why MARKETING becomes so important, especially here in america. Money = success = power = popularity. The road to it all is marketing, in other words letting people know about it and perhaps with a little/lot of BS thrown in; a little smoke and mirrors to make you think this is the real deal.

All the best,

 

Henry Robinett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I totally agree Jedi, a lot of times it IS about perception. Even Jesus said "No one is a prophet in his home town". He got dissed by the people he grew up with because to them, he was just some carpenter guy that they'd known forever, no big deal. :D Likewise if you're a local artist and anybody can come to see you on a regular basis at some little club, they take it for granted. But if you go and play out of town, and only play at a given town once every 6 months, all of a sudden you're "The Latest Sensation From [insert your city or country name here]" and no one will know whether there might have been 10 people at your last hometown gig. :D People think that's cool so they show up. Then if you start building a following and get "signed" and start getting major radio airplay and selling records, you go back and play your hometown and everybody goes completely apeshit and embraces you as "our" band... LOL. People are funny. That's why promotional muscle is so imperative. There need to be people who are working hard to create that "perception" and know how it works. Brian Epstein, Andrew Oldham, Kit Lambert understood that and worked tirelessly to create a mystique and a particular public perception around their clients. It sucks but it really does change people's thinking. --Lee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...