What's Wrong With The Music Business

[The Bear Jew]

Jedi... I think I know what you're getting at: The majority of average listeners don't think an artist is "legit" unless they can walk into Tower Records and buy the artist's CD or turn on the radio and hear their songs. In their eyes, unless you have those things happening, you're just a hobbyist. However, if you add some hype generated by a few well-placed ads, radio appearances and energetic publicists, suddenly a former "nobody" artist an become a sought-after commodity. Hey, if whatever Jackass-Of-The-Minute VeeJay on MTV says a band is the hottest new thing out there and there are corroborating ads or airplay, the public will start to believe it. Give a radio promotions company enough loot, and you'll start hearing that artist's music on every Clear Channel station across the nation. People love hype. But then again, how many people bought pet rocks, acid-wash jeans, beer cozies, pump-up sneakers, etc? Those items were still crap, but when they started showing up in ads everywhere, folks bought into the hype rather than be left behind and risk being considered "unhip." Know what? Fuck 'em. Don't play that game. Who cares what the sheep of the world think? Let 'em follow the hippest music trends, wear stupid trendy clothes and take regrettable pictures that they can be embarrassed about in five years. Don't worry about 'em. Like Lee said, even though 40 gazillion people bought [i]Thriller[/i](I'll admit I was one of them, but I was only like 12 or something), there were still plenty of people who didn't -- folks who said, "Ya know, I don't want that record, and I'm not gonna buy it even though everyone else I know has it." I agree that the biggest problem independent artists face is promotion -- getting in the ears of people who are really interested in what we do. If they know who you are and what you're doing, they're likely to support you. It's hard to reach everyone, and there are tons of other things vying for everyone's attention at any given time -- the Internet, cable TV, Video games, movies, V-Coke. So what's the answer? How do we reach everyone? Well... you can't. Not with our limited budgets. The best you can hope to do is inform as many people as you can with the resources available to you -- the internet, word of mouth, cheap magazine ads, flyers, etc -- and hook whoever shows up with your sincerity and music. Then hope they'll come back again with a friend or two. It takes a long time to build a following that way, but at least it's all YOURS. Not to brag, but my band does this... it's a lot of work, but the benefits are great. The people who love us LOVE us... they open their homes to us and mark the days on their calendars until they see us again. Yeah, the money ain't great, but we pay our van insurance and recording costs with our gig money. There are folks up and down the East Coast who honestly appreciate what we're doing and support us. I personally know a few signed bands from my area who can't say the same thing, and they never will.

[spigotsaol.com]

Great discussion! Random thoughts... The "Music Biz" is so corrupt and mis-manged on so many levels I really believe it's going to implode soon. Then the artists will take over. And things will be different, and better. But slowly, the weasels will move back in, and in XX years time, the cycle will repeat. As P2P continues to spread, artists will have to put more than just music on CDs in order to give the public reason to BUY their products instead of downloading it for free. Or, maybe things will return to the way they were before record labels existed. You're a musician; you play in front of people to make your living. What's wrong with the music business? The people who create the work make the least amount of money from it. Which is pretty much how corporate america works, so why's everybody complaining?

[KenElevenShadows]

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b] [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.[/b][/quote]Yes, and I think that the market is much larger for "quality" music (whatever that is) than people think it is. Certainly, it's larger than what the record companies think it is. I wrote previously, "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." [/qb][/QUOTE] 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..[/QB][/QUOTE] And Holger Czukay has a quote as well, saying that if Michael Jackson sells 20 million copies of "Thriller", that's still 6 billion people who could care less! [/qb][/QUOTE] Erik, your post was totally right on. We don't need a label to be "legit". --Lee[/QB][/QUOTE] It's definitely right on. The problem is that I think that people innately want to feel legitimized, and the most obvious way to do that is to be on a major label. Fortunately, it's not the only way.

[Sylver]

This is a pretty good thread with some very pertinant observations. I'd like to add: I'm not sure that the quality(or lack there of) of music is completly the fault of the record industry or the public. Two people are directly responsible(Though accidently) for the decline of quality in western popular music. Frank Sinatra and Les Paul. Bear with me, I'll take each in turn. In the beginnings of popular recorded music, there were the folk music and later, big bands . Recording technology allow popular music to be available to everyone, not just those in big cities. For a few years, as every household in the US saw the phonograph as the must have luxury item, artists that had basically been confined to the jazzhouses and vaudevillian theaters now had a new audience. People started taking Mics and putting them in front of musicians and then made some money selling the records. Radio helped a bit too. Artists started making names for themselves, but noone really had a superstar status. Al Jolson, and a few others were popular, but in a familiy sort of way. People started really getting into jazz and swing and blues and big band, and acts got popular, but nothing like what was about to come. Old Blue eyes. No one had that kind of effect on music before. Women screaming, crying, throwing themselves at him. Stellar record sales. Lot's of money. Now, an industry that before was a niche market was the big time. Women wanted to do Frank and men wanted to [i]be[/i] him. And everyone saw the cash flowing and wanted a piece of the pie. An entire industry was spawned because of him. The was a record industry before Frank, but he changed things completely. Everyone was looking for the next Sinatra. Enter the capitolist influences and the cookie cutter approach to manufacturing popular artists. Until Elvis hit, how many record executives used the words "The Next Sinatra"? A whole lot, I bet. He was the first music superstar. The problem this caused? Now, everyone wanted to play music so that they could have money, power and fame. Everyone wanted to be the next Sinatra. Fortunately, the cream mostly floated to the top. Worthy artists found work and got on records and got laid. Again and again, good stuff got spit out, and people bought those records. Those that sucked, are not remembered, or ended up doing 3 shows a night in Vegas(Read: Wayne Newton). And if you wanted to be a professional musician, you had to be SMOKIN'! Then came Les Paul. The multitrack recorder. This lowered the musicianship bar. It happened slowly because studio time was expensive and no record company would pick you up if your chops weren't there, but it eventually allowed players to take several shots at recoding a part if they got it wrong without getting replaced or kicked out of the band. This wasn't so bad for a lot of years because the recording equipment was pretty pricey and you still had to be pretty good to get access to the studio. But in the 70's and 80's the equipment prices became a lot less prohibitive, and small studios with competive prices started springing up all over. Acts that wouldn't have had a chance back in the day could now play their part over and over and over until they got it right. Punching in added to the musical mediocraty. Now, you didn't even have to be able to play your part all the way through. you could play bits and pieces until you got it right and then slap them all together. Drummer can't keep a beat? Give him a click track. Bass player or guitarist have a lousey tone? Throw some chorus on it. Vocalist flat and no lung power? Compress the shit out of him and bury it in reverb and other effects. By the mid 80's everyone had a demo, and were shopping it. Made it easy for the record companies, who by now had the formulas down. Pick the bands that had the "look" of the minute and put them together with a producer and an arranger that could pull any kind of mess into a hit song(with a little marketing savy). Sure, true artists continued and still continue to surface, and sometimes even make the industry follow them, but as soon as they appear, there is a methodical onslaught of clones, capitalizing and watering down whatever had been gained. Giving all but a lucky few no chance at gaining any kind of foothold. Add to that the fact that %90 of the people getting recording deal(majors and indies) now are far too lazy to actually learn how to play. Want to be a start, pick up a guitar. You don't really have to know how to play it, Kurt didn't, as long as you can make it make cool sounds, and you have the look, you're in. And some synths, a dj, and some lame-ass-white-boy-no-rhythm rapping(Don't get me wrong, I like some rap and hip hop, but I think it suffers from the same problems as rock and pop), you don't even have to know how to sing. EVERYONE CAN BE A STAR! Funny, at this point, I'd be happy just to have a gig once in a while. That would be fun.

[ernest828]

I completely disagree with those of you who say "walk away from the industry". I don`t think the music business will change but I do KNOW the public want to be healed and they want a connection with others. This is something music does on a personal level and on a grand level. As a singer-songwriter who just finished writing material for my 1st CD, for the first time in my life, I have music I am at peace with. For the first time, I KNOW I have written music that can heal and that connects. I just did two open mic nites this week and got really great feedback. I KNOW MY MUSIC IS ON PURPOSE. Its impossible for me to walk away. Anyone who thinks to walk away, should not be making music. Walking away from the "business" of writing recording and performing does not help anyone. Yes, I agree that it is a tremendous challenge and task to go about a career alone but I also know if you have something TRUE to say and it BETTERS someones life or view, your work will not go unnoticed. My frustration lies with the FACT that someone like Janet Jackson can not sing for her life, nor can she write. Brittany Spears is a pretty face and her songs (which she doesn`t write) absolutely SUCK. Watching these artists spread nothing but IMAGE is discouraging. I realize it is hard work to keep up this IMAGE and yet at the same time, there is no quality in it. I don`t mean to pick on these two "artists", but they are performers we are all familiar with. I could say the same for people like Eminem, Ludicrous, any band with a # in it. Peace, Ernest

[The Bear Jew]

Ernest... I can't speak for everyone else, but I never said anyone should "walk away" from the industry. I said that you don't have to play the industry's game by its rules. All the things you want to do (connect with others, heal with music, etc) can be done outside of the major label structure. I don't think anyone here is saying we should stop making music -- we're saying folks should stop thinking that the label system is the only way to do it legitimately.

[henryrobinett]

Ernest, I don't know that picking on artists is on target. It's not the artist. It's the INDUSTRY (meaning their respective labels) who picks them as products to market and sell. What *I* was talking about re walking away from THE BUSINESS wasn't walking away from MUSIC. Not in the least. I mean walk away from the industry, IF it has beleaguered you. There's no reason an artist today should be the effect of an industry hostile to them or their music. In years past there was little recourse. Not today. Write, perform, record your own music, sell it yourself. Don't let anyone run tire marks down your back. That's all I was saying. I've been a part of both sides.

[spigotsaol.com]

[quote]Originally posted by ernest828@aol.com: [b] My frustration lies with the FACT that someone like Janet Jackson can not sing for her life, nor can she write. Brittany Spears is a pretty face and her songs (which she doesn`t write) absolutely SUCK. Watching these artists spread nothing but IMAGE is discouraging. I realize it is hard work to keep up this IMAGE and yet at the same time, there is no quality in it. I don`t mean to pick on these two "artists", but they are performers we are all familiar with. I could say the same for people like Eminem, Ludicrous, any band with a # in it. Peace, Ernest[/b][/quote]uh.. actually Janet CAN sing. So can Britney. They don't have chops like Celine or Shania or Barbara et al, but they both have a pretty amazingly high level of talent. Fortunately for both, they work with amazing production teams that often use their lack of power to their advantage, processing and shaping the subleties of their voices into sounds that, quite frankly, have made the collective pants of American teenagers go crazy. I have a confession to make. Last night I was flipping around the box and saw MnM's video for the Eminem show. What ever the hit is, the one where he's Robin. Damn, what a great song. And a great video. Funny, at times clever, and as rappers go, he was dead on. There. I said it. Now I have to go kill myself :p

[Jedi]

Henry, Lee, and Erik, Thanks for the replies to my vague almost incoherent observation. The Music Biz is so crazy you don't know what is what sometimes, but you guys definitely gave me some clarity to keep my head on straight. As a side note, I have an acoustic Cd of three cuts I've just recently made. I went to an open mic tonight, and sold my first one. It's the first Cd sale I've had in three years! The Music Biz is looking up. :thu: Jedi

[Eliot]

[quote]Originally posted by dblackjedi: [b]Henry, Lee, and Erik, Thanks for the replies to my vague almost incoherent observation. The Music Biz is so crazy you don't know what is what sometimes, but you guys definitely gave me some clarity to keep my head on straight. As a side note, I have an acoustic Cd of three cuts I've just recently made. I went to an open mic tonight, and sold my first one. It's the first Cd sale I've had in three years! The Music Biz is looking up. :thu: Jedi[/b][/quote]Bless you, sunshine. Just do what you do, be a relentless self-promoter and you don't need those exemplars of a dying paradigm, the Majors. Remember, the only thing that ever got the likes of those pretenders Oasis into the public eye was sheer bl**dy-minded persistence and a wholly misguided belief in their own musical worth. And yes, before anyone says anything, 2 weeks of you guys (and thank-you-God, girls) and I'm no longer the nice, kind self-effacing fellow I was. O tempora, O mores, or words to that effect. Don't rag me about my bad Latin............at least i've heard of it :(

[Skip_dup1]

Back again- I have said elsewhere, that while marketing and promotion is not something I`m all that crazy about, someone who is talented and creative (not such a contradiction) about it should be your best friend and secret weapon. I mean, the way the majors do it is to put well-paid teams together to create hype campaigns. My approximation of that is to try to get my name on everything possible, whether or not it`s directly connected with the music. I`m waiting now for a batch of beer with personalized labels (which I actually helped brew), which were offered by a brewery as part of their tour-should make neat gifts.. I have written articles, been on goofy T.V. variety shows, gotten my name in the local paper for making a contribution to the Sept. 11th fund, anything that will increase my visibility. for those who say `but I`m a musician. that`s what I do.` I would suggest that, if you want to be able to get a good living from music, that must be the BEGINNING of what you do, not the end. Just my 2 yen`s worth.

[lrossmusic]

[quote] [b]What's Wrong With The Music Business?[/b] [/quote]Too many cars, not enough parking spaces. :D

[Skip_dup1]

A friend of mine, who`s a psychology major, had a great insight about dealing with the `velvet rope treatment`. I mean, many of us feel like, we`re not the perfect pinup from central casting type, maybe we don`t want to be either, but those are the types the majors are typically looking for. Whenever my friend runs into this kind of attitude, at a party or whatever, like he`s being blown off by someone, he just retreats to a nearby spot and strikes up a good time with a few people. Not in a forced way, but he just gets into a good social vibe. So now this is a space where things are happening, and the offending jerk is out of the loop. That`s what I think henryrobinett and a few others were trying to get at. Rather than pawing at the window of someone else`s party, start a scene of your own, be at the center of a space where things are happening, musical or otherwise. If you can do that consistently, THEY will find YOU. Or at the very least you`ll get a devoted following, which is often the first requirement for getting signed anyway.