Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Murder Of Music
GMC Forum > Discussion Boards > PRACTICE ROOM
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
Emir Hot
My friend and an awesome neoclassical shredder Borislav Mitic has recently signed for Lion Music which is the metal label from Finland that also released my album.

Just before he released his new record he posted a very seirous story about "The Murder of Music" on the Lion Music's website. Some of other Lion Music artists (including me) also gave their input on this subject.

CHECK IT OUT HERE!

I would be interested to see comments on Borislav's text from GMC community.
Santiago Diaz Garces
Let's take a look......
audiopaal
I agree with him for the most part, and it's true..
Some artists will stop releasing albums,
and music as we know it today will be altered because of downloading music for free.

Although I think it's written in a very "brutal" way,
and I don't necessarily agree on all of the comparisons he give,
I do believe he's right and I support the message he's getting across smile.gif

I've always bought albums, and that's why I need a larger apartment soon dry.gif biggrin.gif
I must admit however, I sometimes download albums to check if I like them or not.
We only have one (yes... ONE!) music store in downtown Stavanger,
and it's not a joy to be standing in line for a long time, just to skip through an album.

Although some might mean this is a bad thing,
I believe I can justify it with my ever growing cd collection smile.gif

You should tell your friend to keep on preaching,
and hopefully many more understands that making an album is expensive and time consuming!
I'm soon done recording the demos for my first album,
and although it's gonna be a while before it's done and hopefully released,
I really hope someone's gonna buy it when it's out smile.gif
gibsonmatte
Really strong words from your friend Emir, and I agree to some extent. "Stealing" someones work or production isn't ok in any way. However, the way I see it , the record companies aren't really up to date with the current "music situation" and the way the internet has changed how we look at music and the way music is accessible to us. Like mentioned, it is not ok to "steal" music but since record companies still totally rely on profits coming through record sales I think they need to adapt to current situation.
And for musicians I believe that the biggest income should come through ticket sales, merchandise and stuff like that when playing live.
Artists will continue to sell records but not in the way that they used to and I believe that those days are over. Back in the days, pre-internet, selling records was the biggest way of getting an income. But this isn't how things work today and I don't think it should either. Income should be come through legal downloads, ticket sales, merch and of course album sales. However the main income can't be record sales like we're used too. And this is where I believe the core issues is. Companies and artist still believe that record sales shoudl be the main source of income, but like mentioned those days are over. There gotta be other ways of adapting to the current situation and development.

And regarding "legal downloads" lie iTunes or similar sites this today only seem to be a weak replacement for the loss of album sales. Downloading an album from iTunes isn't really that much cheaper than buying the actual album. I guess the reason for this is that the big record companies are trying to make up for the loss of "real" album sales...

Ok, this is a bit cynical but hopefully you get my point.
I also realize that this is not really what your friend wrote Emir and sorry for stepping on any toes here smile.gif
audiopaal
QUOTE (gibsonmatte @ Dec 9 2009, 09:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Really strong words from your friend Emir, and I agree to some extent. "Stealing" someones work or production isn't ok in any way. However, the way I see it , the record companies aren't really up to date with the current "music situation" and the way the internet has changed how we look at music and the way music is accessible to us. Like mentioned, it is not ok to "steal" music but since record companies still totally rely on profits coming through record sales I think they need to adapt to current situation.
And for musicians I believe that the biggest income should come through ticket sales, merchandise and stuff like that when playing live.
Artists will continue to sell records but not in the way that they used to and I believe that those days are over. Back in the days, pre-internet, selling records was the biggest way of getting an income. But this isn't how things work today and I don't think it should either. Income should be come through legal downloads, ticket sales, merch and of course album sales. However the main income can't be record sales like we're used too. And this is where I believe the core issues is. Companies and artist still believe that record sales shoudl be the main source of income, but like mentioned those days are over. There gotta be other ways of adapting to the current situation and development.

And regarding "legal downloads" lie iTunes or similar sites this today only seem to be a weak replacement for the loss of album sales. Downloading an album from iTunes isn't really that much cheaper than buying the actual album. I guess the reason for this is that the big record companies are trying to make up for the loss of "real" album sales...

Ok, this is a bit cynical but hopefully you get my point.
I also realize that this is not really what your friend wrote Emir and sorry for stepping on any toes here smile.gif


Income may very well come from legal downloading, as long as the music industry wakes up and sees the current situation.
The legal downloads is too expensive today, and they need to see that all the "middle men" like cd covers,
printing, shipping, distribution is not a concern with online distribution and mp3's should therefore be cheaper.

Also, artists can sell their albums online themselves like Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails and Pogo Pops and make money without the help of others and therefore make even more money.

This is at a very early stage now, and the music industry have to change with the times.
But it's not ok to steal because their living in the past, so until a better alternative comes along, I will continue to buy my cd's smile.gif
jafomatic
QUOTE (audiopaal @ Dec 9 2009, 03:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Income may very well come from legal downloading


Jack Conte is a decent example of this. Plenty of free content and cheap songs offered online via his own website. His promotion tool? Youtube. You've maybe seen him linked here, some folks seem to credit him with the "invention" of the videosong genre and he's made some popular ones with his girlfriend.

Jack's Youtube Channel

Jack's Wikipedia Entry

Embedding for impact:

ItsMe
Nice article, strong words. I agree absolutely that illegal downloading is stealing. I always purchase the music I need and try to convince everybody else to do the same. However there is no way that the music business will be profitable and booming like in the old days. Loyal music buyers, like most of us here on the forum, are not the norm and since it is possible to download for free it will always happen. But if you reach enough of the rather thoughtless downloaders and convince them, you might regain enough revenue streams to create a liveable environment for musicians. Still there are many changes in the business and problems that will remain. A change that hurts me a little is that physical copies of albums will become more and more obsolete. Digital copies are the future. This means digital distribution is the most important part of selling an album. Platforms like i-tunes, amazon, musicload and all the other download vendors are where the sales will be created. Problem is that this kills record stores and therefore a big part of the whole world of music that appealed to an elderly guy like me. I loved hanging out in the store, listening to music and carrying a physical copy with the great cover artwork and the booklet home. For me a CD also had some advertisement function. Like a flyer or something similar. A physical representation of the music itself. But the younger generations don't know that anyway and since they are the future buyers they dictate how the business develops. Another problem are flat rates. Most of the younger people I know that are big music geeks and don't want to download illegally still don't buy records. They use some legal flat rate like napster. You can listen to and get most mainstream music there, for 9 Euros a month. Perhaps that’s the real future of the business, but it means that there is no real margin that allows paying decent money to the musicians after everybody else took its share out.
On the other hand there are many positive sides to the development. Independent musicians can distribute their music more easily and reach an audience that was limited to musicians with major label contracts. Everybody on every corner of the world can get the music they want and therefore everybody can participate in the wonderful world of music.
In conclusion I think that the music business we knew is dead but not the music. In the future the musician will not be able to rely on a label to help them with the administrative part of the music making process. From organising a studio, finding distributers to concert booking. This means there will be fewer publications by single artists because they have to carry all the risk and invest allot of time. Time they don't have then for composing, recording and all the rest but on the other hand there will be many new artists popping up all over the place. Creativity of the single artist may suffer because of the pressure on the single artist but other ways of creative expression will develop because of the greater and more global impact. Think of some great youtube acts. In addition I believe that purely internet based labels will be the future. They will help you getting your music on the download platforms and help you with the licensing and perhaps send your music to radio stations. The rest will be up to you. I had a couple of business ideas based on this, but failed to get them done because of financial issues. Now this all exists and I am a little sad sometimes. Anyway all my musicians’ friends live from selling tickets, merchandise and 99% of their album revenues come from i-tunes/amazon/napster or whatever downloads. They can make a living but on the other hand they make rather commercial (they would kill me since they make indie pop, (which by the way is the new mainstream pop smile.gif ) music that has a rather large market even though it tries to appear to be non commercial. So I guess it depends also allot on your style of music. But nevertheless the great penetration of the internet based music business should help everybody. Lets hope that if you raise enough awareness many people will pay for their downloads. But again I think the times when you could get really, really rich with making music are over. If you want to make money you have to be some kind of franchise phenomenon with allot of commercial appeal for other business sectors.
CathShadow
I don't pirate, neither music, nor games. period.. purely because I don't think it's right, and I know the effort that goes into making it.

that said, I think prices are "the Murder of Music", as are the fact that when an album is realeased "World Wide" its not available in all digital stores:

Case in point: Flyleaf. Released world wide. available in itunes. except itunes netherlands.....

Now if I want it, I must import it... at more than double the price...

Now I'm just outrite not gonna buy it. LEAST of all from itunes.

Until I get home to south africa. MAYBE they have the CD there.
Keilnoth
Ah well, I wrote a big text but then deleted it. Personally, I am pretty tired of this debate. I don't agree with pirates but I don't agree with distributors either.

Life change, things change and people have to adapt. Majors were unable to adapt to new technologies, now they are paying the price of their incompetences.

It's sad that small independent artists and distributors suffer from this as well but we have already many examples of people who can get their money in good business models on the internet. And I mean good FREE business models with FREE advertising.

But perhaps you will have to forget the big companies doing everything and selling a 10 songs CD for 25$ and giving 1.5$ to the artist. People don't agree with that anymore. It's a revolt.

Piracy existed before the internet and will still exist after the internet. The internet only show and share the truth. Truth about quality, truth about talent, truth about prices, etc...

And in the end, talent is rewarded, anyways.
Gus
Piracy is always a delicate topic. I remember Marcus Siepen created a topic about that with a lot of different opinions...

There is an even worse version of piracy: hard copy pirated CDs. In developing countries, there is still a lot of people who do not have broadband Internet access and therefore they do not download songs. But they do buy pirated versions of CDs. So that means that they pay something, but the money goes to someone else other than the artist/label...

But I do consider that the business model for music industry has to be revised. In my dream world, I would like to be able to pay a fixed amount of money for subscription (of all labels) and be able to listen to any music, any time any where... And the artists would get properly payed by how many times I listen to them...
MirkoSchmidt
hey, i have 42 Gigabyte Music ripped from Internet on my computer. i get them from a friend a year ago and do you know what? i never liste to something of that stuff. sure there is great music, but i want to have a original cd, i want to read the lyrics in the little booklet, i want to see pictures of the band and stuff like this. ripped music is without soul for me, i dont like it.
if i need space on my computer i will delate it woithout a second of relutance...


ps: please dont call the cops... huh.gif
Fran
QUOTE (Gus @ Dec 9 2009, 07:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
... In my dream world, I would like to be able to pay a fixed amount of money for subscription (of all labels) and be able to listen to any music, any time any where... And the artists would get properly payed by how many times I listen to them...


That's a pretty cool idea.

I have a LastFM subscription, and that's what I listen to most of the time to discover new stuff. If they made it possible to select the exact songs, make playlists etc. and even download your favourite tracks it would be even cooler, and I wouldn't mind paying more for it.

I also used to listen to Pandora back when it was available for those outside US. Loved it.
Emir Hot
I would agree with Mirko that ripped music has no "soul" if that's the right word for what we mean. I also like to have lyrics, pictures and a product worth the money. This way I not only enjoy what I bought but also rewarded the artist for his hard work which is what he/she deserves.

I can't really say wether internet is better for music these days or not. It is true that the music is easily accessible to buy with 1 click which is great but at the same time it kills motivation in many artists because of illegal file sharing. According to reviews of my album, number of fans on myspace/facebook, distribution and many other facts, I can predict that there are around 20.000 or more pirated copies of my album. If I got the money from half of it I would have had the third album released by now. This way I am not thinking of doing another one as I only got about 7% in return which is not fair at all. That was nearly 2 years of hard work and in the end it was all pointless. This is how an artist loses his motivation to move on and that's an awful thing in my oppinion.
MirkoSchmidt
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 9 2009, 08:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I would agree with Mirko that ripped music has no "soul" if that's the right word for what we mean. I also like to have lyrics, pictures and a product worth the money. This way I not only enjoy what I bought but also rewarded the artist for his hard work which is what he/she deserves.

I can't really say wether internet is better for music these days or not. It is true that the music is easily accessible to buy with 1 click which is great but at the same time it kills motivation in many artists because of illegal file sharing. According to reviews of my album, number of fans on myspace/facebook, distribution and many other facts, I can predict that there are around 20.000 or more pirated copies of my album. If I got the money from half of it I would have had the third album released by now. This way I am not thinking of doing another one as I only got about 7% in return which is not fair at all. That was nearly 2 years of hard work and in the end it was all pointless. This is how an artist loses his motivation to move on and that's an awful thing in my oppinion.


hm, i think i have to buy your cd emir! i hope there is a cool cover and nice words in the booklet! im sure your playing is worth that money!
ItsMe
QUOTE (Gus @ Dec 9 2009, 07:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
In my dream world, I would like to be able to pay a fixed amount of money for subscription (of all labels) and be able to listen to any music, any time any where... And the artists would get properly payed by how many times I listen to them...



QUOTE (Fran @ Dec 9 2009, 07:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
That's a pretty cool idea.

I have a LastFM subscription, and that's what I listen to most of the time to discover new stuff. If they made it possible to select the exact songs, make playlists etc. and even download your favourite tracks it would be even cooler, and I wouldn't mind paying more for it.

I also used to listen to Pandora back when it was available for those outside US. Loved it
.




I don't like it but its a legal flat rate for $ 5 http://free.napster.com/subscribe/
its 9 Euros in Europe as I wrote in my earlier text
Emir Hot
QUOTE (MirkoSchmidt @ Dec 9 2009, 07:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
hm, i think i have to buy your cd emir! i hope there is a cool cover and nice words in the booklet! im sure your playing is worth that money!

The purpose of my post wasn't to make someone buy my album smile.gif It was just my oppinion about illegal downloads. But I appreciate whoever buy is smile.gif Of course there are lyrics, cool cover, some pics etc...
Keilnoth
Emir, I am really interested to know the policies of the contract you signed with Lion Music.

For example, are you allowed to create your own distribution system on emirhot.com ? Are you allowed to add a "Click here to donate" button on your website ? Or to give some free sample of your album ? Or perhaps even to create your own "shop" ?

Do you know how many visitors you have on your website ? And did you ever asked them if they would be happy to give directly to you a few bucks for what you do ?

Because, you know your songs are everywhere on the web, for free, then what's the matter in selling them on your website, DRM free, subscription free ? The people who are not ready to pay 20€ for your CD are perhaps ready to pay 10€ for it.

Another question, where can I buy the MP3s of your album on Lion Music ? I cannot find that. smile.gif

I went to legaldownload.net and made a search with your name. I got one result, clicked on the link and fall on a full page of artists I don't care about...

Perhaps, what all those guys need is a good Internet consultant. You know what I mean ? wink.gif

No offense. But perhaps your product is not very well advertised and sold as well.

PS : There are no link for your old albums, if you have the MP3 of those, why not selling them ? smile.gif
ItsMe
Emir what do you think about streaming flatrates. How much do you earn. I guess its like radio royalties ?
Emir Hot
QUOTE (Keilnoth @ Dec 9 2009, 07:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Emir, I am really interested to know the policies of the contract you signed with Lion Music.

That's the contract similar to what every signed metal artist have. Lion Music is one of 5 biggest metal labels in Europe.

QUOTE
For example, are you allowed to create your own distribution system on emirhot.com ? Are you allowed to add a "Click here to donate" button on your website ? Or to give some free sample of your album ? Or perhaps even to create your own "shop" ?

There is BUY NOW button below the CD picture on my website. That takes you directly to Lion Music web store. You also have some 1 min samples from the CD to listen. I am not allowed to sell it myself but I can get the special price from the label to sell it when I am on the tour and take all the profit. I did get free number of copies when the album was released. Every 6 months I get share from sales plus other stuff like sublicencing, publishing etc...

QUOTE
Do you know how many visitors you have on your website ? And did you ever asked them if they would be happy to give directly to you a few bucks for what you do ?

Yes I do. There are average about 3000 visitors per month. I never asked for few bucks smile.gif I don't think I will do that. My label paid me initial fee when I got the contract which covered some costs of the studio work.

QUOTE
Because, you know your songs are everywhere on the web, for free, then what's the matter in selling them on your website, DRM free, subscription free ? The people who are not ready to pay 20€ for your CD are perhaps ready to pay 10€ for it.

Well it costs around 14 EUR and I think that's the normal price for the metal album. I pay that money for everything similar I buy. On some sites you can get it even few euros cheaper. Mp3 is less then 10 EUR on many sites. Try Itunes.

QUOTE
Another question, where can I buy the MP3s of your album on Lion Music ? I cannot find that. smile.gif

CDbaby, Itunes, Amazon, Lion Music, Guitar9 and many many more... Here is the direct Lion Music link. The regular distribution of hard copies is done in about 60 countries worldwide. The label is doing a great job with distribution. Also the promotion was done in all famous metal magazines worldwide. I've done about 200 interviews for those. I found my CD in shops in London when the album was released. I don't think they are in shops anymore but I received emails that people bought it in normal CD shops in Australia, USA, Brazil, Europe ...

QUOTE
I went to legaldownload.net and made a search with your name. I got one result, clicked on the link and fall on a full page of artists I don't care about...

I don't know about that website, sorry.

QUOTE
PS : There are no link for your old albums, if you have the MP3 of those, why not selling them ? smile.gif

Those are 10 or more years old albums. They are out of print and even I am not able to buy them anywhere. Also those labels don't exest anymore.
audiopaal
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 9 2009, 09:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Those are 10 or more years old albums. They are out of print and even I am not able to buy them anywhere. Also those labels don't exest anymore.

Don't you have any mp3's of them? smile.gif
I'd buy them if you had, would be very interresting to hear smile.gif
Keilnoth
legaldownload.net seems to be the site use by Lion Music to sell MP3s of their music. smile.gif
Emir Hot
QUOTE (audiopaal @ Dec 9 2009, 08:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Don't you have any mp3's of them? smile.gif
I'd buy them if you had, would be very interresting to hear smile.gif

No, I only have a couple of original CDs and that's all. That stuff is really early days. I don't mind giving these for free smile.gif Check torrents maybe someone has them.

QUOTE (Keilnoth @ Dec 9 2009, 09:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
legaldownload.net seems to be the site use by Lion Music to sell MP3s of their music. smile.gif

Well I don't know about that but the link I gave you doesn't take you to legaldownloads. It takes you to my label's site with paypal checkout system.

QUOTE (ItsMe @ Dec 9 2009, 07:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Emir what do you think about streaming flatrates. How much do you earn. I guess its like radio royalties ?

Well I don't earn much for sure but maybe big pop stars do. I have heard the stories that the companies like Itunes earn more than the artist which is not fair either.
Ctodd
I would rather give my money directly to the artist than have some record label dip their hand in.

Also, a few weeks ago I had to reformat my computer due to viruses and stuff. I lost ALL my music (which wasnt actually that much that I had on my computer), but it was all music that I had paid for. So what did I do to get back what I had already paid for?

guess...
audiopaal
I checked some torrent sites but couldn't find it I'm afraid, which is a good thing smile.gif

Could I tempt you into burning them for me on cds and ship them to me?
I'd pay for it of course smile.gif

I'm really interrested in how much better your old stuff is compared to my new stuff laugh.gif
Emir Hot
QUOTE (audiopaal @ Dec 9 2009, 11:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I checked some torrent sites but couldn't find it I'm afraid, which is a good thing smile.gif

Could I tempt you into burning them for me on cds and ship them to me?
I'd pay for it of course smile.gif

I'm really interrested in how much better your old stuff is compared to my new stuff laugh.gif

ok we can do that via PM. This is free of charge smile.gif
gibsonmatte
QUOTE (Fran @ Dec 9 2009, 07:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
That's a pretty cool idea.

I have a LastFM subscription, and that's what I listen to most of the time to discover new stuff. If they made it possible to select the exact songs, make playlists etc. and even download your favourite tracks it would be even cooler, and I wouldn't mind paying more for it.

I also used to listen to Pandora back when it was available for those outside US. Loved it.


There are some sites where you can listen to music from lots of different labels like grooveshark.com and lala.com. In SE we also have something called Spotify. Similar to grooveshark but you have to download a client. These are all free but you have to either listen to commercials or see the "banners" on the sites. For a small amount you can register and get rid of the commercials, like a subscription.
Mandos
Just a little side note. Take a look at this labs.timesonline.co.uk.

QUOTE
An even more striking thing, perhaps, emerges in this second graph, namely that revenues accrued by artists themselves have in fact risen over the past 5 years, despite the fall in record sales. (All the blue bars in the chart above represent revenues that go directly to artists. As you can see, the ‘blue total’ has risen noticeably.) This is mostly because of live revenues, but also because of the growing amount collected by the PRS on behalf of artists, which accounts for a much bigger chunk of industry revenues than most people realise.
Keilnoth
Very interesting Mandos, thanks for the link ! smile.gif
Staffy
Since this seems to be a "hot" topic, I will give my response to the issue. I have some experience from the industry as well as beeing a musician and a studio owner back in the old days.

In my opinion, things are evolving very fast at the moment, and makes radical changes on the market for record distrubution. The only one's who really looses this battle is the big record companys, who cant make money for nothing anymore. Internet is really improving the link between the musicians and their audience, without a big company taking all the revenue. The sales of music has to be reformed in a way where the musicians get a decent percentage of the revenue instead of peanuts from the companies... (Michael Jackson had some 5 % on "Thriller", which is considered to be high....) Also there will be more room for small indepndent labels to make great music as well as artists selling directly to the customers - which is good.

More positive things:

1. The musicians have to benefit from playing live and hence selling their records on the concerts. This is good for both the music itself and the musicians, since all the "plastic" artists will disappear by nature since they are not performing live.

2. The competition amongst musicians will increase - this will enhance the quality of music.

3. Since the musicians will put a lot more effort in to their live act - we are supposed to find a larger number of artists on stage, and the range of venues will increase imo. Also it will be much more attractive to listen to music live, rather than just buy a record.

4. The record business itself will suffer hard from loosing their revenues - but in contrast, the power and the rights management will be handled by the musicians, which is incredible good!!!

This is my opinions in the topic and since the Record Company's have behaved like bloodsuckers against both the customers and the musicians, Im not taking bout the small and indepedent one here, they really had helped to build up this situation by themselves!!!

//Staffay
Daniel Realpe
We live in a world under the monetary system that "rewards" work/value with money. So if you think you are getting value out of music then you should pay for it. But as so many things in the system they get corrupted.

We should cut the middle man and pay the artists directly that would motivate people I think. Something like NIN did.
Ivan Milenkovic
The industry has changed upside down simply put. What was once charged (carrier media with music), now is completely free. It's just a matter of accepting that and finding other ways of earning money as musicians and artists. The record companies are finished story, nothing more to tell there. Money is today made out of author rights payments (broadcasting TV and radio payments, although when the Internet really kicks in, no more of these as well), gigs, band merchandise, other band jobs (advertising, private gigs etc..). This is the only way of incomes for the band.
The rule of the game is still the same tho: make a hit song, spread out your music, be famous and you will get the opportunity to use the fame to gain profit.
Emir Hot
I would dissagree on some of these since I felt it on my "own skin". No offence Staffy, just my oppinion

QUOTE
1. The musicians have to benefit from playing live and hence selling their records on the concerts. This is good for both the music itself and the musicians, since all the "plastic" artists will disappear by nature since they are not performing live.

I partly agree here. It is good to play live as much as possible, we all enjoy that, but we also have to have time for some private life. I understood that you're saying that music should be like job from 9am 'till 5pm everyday in order to make enough for living. I am supporting the idea of playing one 2 months tour in a year plus some festivals. That would make you profit for the next 6 months and the proper album sales for another 6 months until you release new album. We have to find some time for ourselves as well as for writting music at home, not on the road. You said people should buy our albums on the tour. How can one come to see the show if he doesn't know the songs from the new album. I would first buy the album then go to see the show. Just my oppinion.

QUOTE
2. The competition amongst musicians will increase - this will enhance the quality of music.

Well, because of the situation, many don't play proper live shows. There is no competition anymore. I am seeing legends like Neil Murray from old Whitesnake as well as hundreds of famous guys all over London playing pub gigs for £70 per evening. That's really sad. How can I enhance the quality of my music if I don't have money to make good stuff in the studio? Studios are really expensive if you're going for something that can compare with top trends.

QUOTE
3. Since the musicians will put a lot more effort in to their live act - we are supposed to find a larger number of artists on stage, and the range of venues will increase imo. Also it will be much more attractive to listen to music live, rather than just buy a record.

It is always cool to see your favorite band live but I hardly see my favorite ones. The ones that used to play in front of 100.000 people are now playing in front of 1000 or less people. The real examples are Deep Purple, Uriah Heep, Whitesnake and rock legends like that. These bands are all from the UK and only 5% of people in this country nowadays know some of their songs. Because of the new "modern music revolution" no one is buying their concert tickets nor the albums. They can only have 5000 of more thousands of people in countries where they never played. That was proved in Serbia, Bosinia and Croatia where they had 10.000 people in each country a couple of years ago. I am 100% sure if they come again next year they wouldn't have 1500. That's more than sad. 7 days ago I saw Gary Moore in front of 300 people.

QUOTE
4. The record business itself will suffer hard from loosing their revenues - but in contrast, the power and the rights management will be handled by the musicians, which is incredible good!!!

If I was trying to promote music myself (without my label), nobody would ever hear about me. For example in my case - my label's power, contacts, distribution, promotion etc... is something that they have been building for the last 15 years. There is no way I would be reviewed, interviewed and distributed in all world famous rock/metal magazines/webzines and countries without their help. I've tried this before and everytime my CD finished in a rubbish bin. When these guys send an email or a phonecall, things are done in a second. I wouldn't be able to manage that myself, that's just not possible.


To conclude. These independant labels with some history are a great help for artists. They do it all for you. You just cannot dream of getting publicity and distribution the way they can do it. The problem is that people don't buy stuff. People illegaly download music and artists suffer. I am not against internet distribution but please tell me, what does Itunes have to do with my music and why people have to buy stuff there? Just because Apple made good commercial campaign and now taking billions from artist's hard work - all that just because they're called Itunes. They didn't exist when Beatles were making music, now they are taking profit because they are selling their songs. I will never agree with that and that's why I will never buy an Ipod or an Apple Mac - even though I think their computers are great.
jafomatic
This is a perfect time to mention again that musicians that are succeeding now are using alternate promotion tools. Go look at Orianthi's career which took a HUGE swing up because after michael jackon's death she kept herself visible. Where?

Facebook and Twitter. I'm sure there's also a myspace following as well.

Or you can look at pomplamoose (jack conte & his girlfriend) plying their trade, successfully, on youtube. They abandoned myspace and have doubled their following by covering popular (not necessarily "pop" but some of that too) songs on youtube so they'd show up in searches. Then you also get to see that "oh, they have some originals" and bam, they become featured.

The lesson in all of that poorly-written monologue is that the WHOLE point is to look beyond the magazines of the 70's and 80's. They're not the only tool.
Emir Hot
QUOTE (jafomatic @ Dec 11 2009, 02:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This is a perfect time to mention again that musicians that are succeeding now are using alternate promotion tools. Go look at Orianthi's career which took a HUGE swing up because after michael jackon's death she kept herself visible. Where?

Facebook and Twitter. I'm sure there's also a myspace following as well.

Or you can look at pomplamoose (jack conte & his girlfriend) plying their trade, successfully, on youtube. They abandoned myspace and have doubled their following by covering popular (not necessarily "pop" but some of that too) songs on youtube so they'd show up in searches. Then you also get to see that "oh, they have some originals" and bam, they become featured.

The lesson in all of that poorly-written monologue is that the WHOLE point is to look beyond the magazines of the 70's and 80's. They're not the only tool.

I said I am not against internet promotion and distribution apart from some companies that are making money for doing nothing (if you read my previous post about Itunes).

If you believe that what you've said can make an artist make a living of music by himself then try this:

1. Spend a year writting songs/lyrics/arrangements
2. Spend a month or two recording a demo for it
3. Spend 2 months rehearsing songs for the real recording
4. Call some good musicians to play on your real record and pay them (In my case I needed a good drummer and singer if I wanted some genuine rock stuff, because of these famous guys I actually sold something)
5. Find a good studio and spend another 3-4 months for the recording/mixing - and of course pay for it
6. Put your songs on Twiter, Youtube, Myspace etc...

Please tell me after 2 years of hard work how much did you earn and how much did you spend?
jafomatic
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 10 2009, 09:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
6. Put your songs on Twiter, Youtube, Myspace etc...


They put covers on youtube, properly tagged, for marketing. They played and recorded everything themselves in their bedroom studios and they're selling mp3's of their originals through their own website.

There's the way that those two (the pomplamoose folks) learned to embrace the new tools. Here's how I'd do it if I were you:

1. Sign up to do a few of the "famous song" lessons for GMC, especially shreddy ones that people would search for on youtube
2. Properly tag the videos that you copy to youtube
3. Frequently update the social networking feed of your choice with relevant stuff "In the studio recording new blah blah, here's a link to a pic of us jamming, blah blah"
4. more importantly, also update those streams with "we're going to be playing at such-and-such club this weekend."
5. Email jack conte and ask how he set up his one-page e-commerce site to sell his own music.
6. Do that.

You have an edge on that Conte guy, in that you are a better trained musician and more able technician on your chosen instrment. He may have an edge (or two) in that he seems to have no day job and can play a ton of instruments. He has a small disadvantage that his girlfriend's voice gets really annoying after a few songs. smile.gif

The point is that they appear to have found a way to "make it" work. I'm sorry that they didn't go through the same amount of pain that you did. I respectfully disagree that your posted list is "the only way" but in any event, I really hope that I didn't tick you off.



blindwillie
I have the greatest respect for you Emir but I disagre with this part:
QUOTE
If you believe that what you've said can make an artist make a living of music by himself then try this:

1. Spend a year writting songs/lyrics/arrangements
2. Spend a month or two recording a demo for it
3. Spend 2 months rehearsing songs for the real recording
4. Call some good musicians to play on your real record and pay them (In my case I needed a good drummer and singer if I wanted some genuine rock stuff, because of these famous guys I actually sold something)
5. Find a good studio and spend another 3-4 months for the recording/mixing - and of course pay for it
6. Put your songs on Twiter, Youtube, Myspace etc...

Please tell me after 2 years of hard work how much did you earn and how much did you spend?

This implies that you expect that _anybody_ following your plan should be guaranteed big success.
I think you know very well that's not the way things work. As in _any_ profession, you have to find a big enough group of customers that's appealed by whatever you are selling. The fact that you have a plan and have or have not certain skills in an area and have put in a certain amount of effort is in no way, and have never been, a guarantee to success, not even enough to get a descent job. Put it in perspective to other professions. It's not important what you want or how you want to do it. What's important is how the guys with the money wants it.

It is not a matter of if I can succed with your plan or not. The point is that there are artists that HAVE succeded indepent from the big labels. (Well, success is in the eye of the beholder. They don't have their own Neverland, but themself consider it a success)
Maybe there is something wrong with your plan? Maybe you have to change your musical style?
Being a succesful, rich, famous guitarist in a world that isn't really into guitarbased music is a tough task. And with thousands and thousands and thousands of great, very skilled guitarists it will be very hard to find your own space out there.

And there is nothing special with ex-superstars playing on pubs for a living. Should a relative short time of success guarantee you to live the rest of your life in welth? It's very sad to see, I agree with that, but that's the outcome of the short life cycle of everything now. We think we have to get new things and distractions all the time. Buy ourselfs happy. This way of living is a disadvantage for the "good" artists, the ones with skills. Those who gain from it are the "shooting stars" that fade away as quick as they appeared. We just want the very very latest, give me something new all the the time, more and more and more.
Staffy
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 11 2009, 02:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I would dissagree on some of these since I felt it on my "own skin". No offence Staffy, just my oppinion


I partly agree here. It is good to play live as much as possible, we all enjoy that, but we also have to have time for some private life. I understood that you're saying that music should be like job from 9am 'till 5pm everyday in order to make enough for living. I am supporting the idea of playing one 2 months tour in a year plus some festivals. That would make you profit for the next 6 months and the proper album sales for another 6 months until you release new album. We have to find some time for ourselves as well as for writting music at home, not on the road. You said people should buy our albums on the tour. How can one come to see the show if he doesn't know the songs from the new album. I would first buy the album then go to see the show. Just my oppinion.


Well, because of the situation, many don't play proper live shows. There is no competition anymore. I am seeing legends like Neil Murray from old Whitesnake as well as hundreds of famous guys all over London playing pub gigs for £70 per evening. That's really sad. How can I enhance the quality of my music if I don't have money to make good stuff in the studio? Studios are really expensive if you're going for something that can compare with top trends.


It is always cool to see your favorite band live but I hardly see my favorite ones. The ones that used to play in front of 100.000 people are now playing in front of 1000 or less people. The real examples are Deep Purple, Uriah Heep, Whitesnake and rock legends like that. These bands are all from the UK and only 5% of people in this country nowadays know some of their songs. Because of the new "modern music revolution" no one is buying their concert tickets nor the albums. They can only have 5000 of more thousands of people in countries where they never played. That was proved in Serbia, Bosinia and Croatia where they had 10.000 people in each country a couple of years ago. I am 100% sure if they come again next year they wouldn't have 1500. That's more than sad. 7 days ago I saw Gary Moore in front of 300 people.


If I was trying to promote music myself (without my label), nobody would ever hear about me. For example in my case - my label's power, contacts, distribution, promotion etc... is something that they have been building for the last 15 years. There is no way I would be reviewed, interviewed and distributed in all world famous rock/metal magazines/webzines and countries without their help. I've tried this before and everytime my CD finished in a rubbish bin. When these guys send an email or a phonecall, things are done in a second. I wouldn't be able to manage that myself, that's just not possible.


To conclude. These independant labels with some history are a great help for artists. They do it all for you. You just cannot dream of getting publicity and distribution the way they can do it. The problem is that people don't buy stuff. People illegaly download music and artists suffer. I am not against internet distribution but please tell me, what does Itunes have to do with my music and why people have to buy stuff there? Just because Apple made good commercial campaign and now taking billions from artist's hard work - all that just because they're called Itunes. They didn't exist when Beatles were making music, now they are taking profit because they are selling their songs. I will never agree with that and that's why I will never buy an Ipod or an Apple Mac - even though I think their computers are great.


Nah, Im not sticky... smile.gif Its an interesting discussion, and we all have our thoughts about this... but I still dont agree to some of Your arguments, with no offense... tongue.gif

I can see the point in some of Your arguments, but I think the situation I speaking of will occur in the future, it has already begun here in Seden imo. My friends that was completely out of work in the 80's started to earn money again on just live gigs, playing "sophisticated" music like jazz & blues. And they even get paid! When I was touring back in the 80's we had lousy wages, we had to play the latest hit songs - which was impossible because of all fake production in the studios and no one was happy, nor we, nor the audience. If we shall speak of what really killed live music back then, its MTV. The music scene in my area has never been so active as at the moment, there is plenty of concerts with good bands. Deep Purple was here a while ago, playing in a small town, that would never happen 20 years back since they were just doing the arena gigs.

I think the main issue here is what You expect from music - there is really one big important question:
Are You playing music to be a millionaire or for the love of music? To do the first, You must be extremely lucky and have a good timing with the actual trends, even that You might be a superstar on Your instrument. Also music evolves much faster today than before, and You won't probably last for that long the "old" artists done. But if You are satisfied with putting food on the table, feeding the kids and have a decent living - then there is more opportunities than ever before in the music business imo.

To comment what You said in the beginning, I dont mean that it shall be like a 9-5 job, it has never been and will never be, but the musicians must find new ways to sell their music and new way's to make a living out of it. You are talking bout the "old" situation where bands tour a little, record an album and then had a vacation and then went from the beginning again. This is really obsolete imo. and must change, a musician today must be ready to play whenever its necessary in order to promote the music - otherwise there will be no record sales or tickets sold. The bands You mention is really bad examples imo. since they got out of date many years ago... (even that I personally love them and think its sad that a great guitar player like Gary Moore have to play in front of 300 people) I was trying to broaden the discussion to music in general and its future role in society.

The fact is really that the kids are downloading music for free, I dont personally support it - I buy the records I like in order to support the artists, but I'm thinking of sending the money directly to the artists instead of buying their records since their record labels are eating the money anyway. And i disagree with You about first buying the record and then see the band live - I believe that the kids today are most likely to see some cool vids on Youtube, download some songs illegaly and then watch the band. Maybe then at the concert they will buy the record.....

Also its not a big issue anymore to record a great album since the studio costs gone down drastically the past 10-20 years, in the 80's You paid bout 800/hour for a top-notch studio. Today You can get it for much less! I will say that it is possible to record an album for some 2-4000$ and that is peanuts today compared to what the marketing will cost. But hey! If we record the album, give it away free at the internet to promote our coming tour, maybe then would some people come and see us??? I think thats the way its gonna be, it wont suit everybody but at least there will be one unnecessary link removed - the big record companys.

I agree to You about the small independent labels though - and there will be much more room for them in the future, there's no need to have some Sony/CBS or Warner Brothers label to make a success, just some hard work, talent and good music. The future is to me very exciting and I see the Internet vs. the record industry as a big issue that will change the way music is consumed forever.

//Staffay
Emir Hot
QUOTE (blindwillie @ Dec 11 2009, 08:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This implies that you expect that _anybody_ following your plan should be guaranteed big success.

No, I didn't say that smile.gif That was my reply to Jafomatic's post where I understood that if you're selling stuff yourself, using youtube and appear in search engines would have a better result that being a signed artist where someone else is helping you with promotion and the rest. Then I suggested the list of things to try and see if that's a real formula for success. I think it is not.

QUOTE (Staffy @ Dec 11 2009, 09:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The bands You mention is really bad examples imo. since they got out of date many years ago...

smile.gif I mentioned the ones that I think are worth mentioning if we're talking about rock legends and the quality of music. Unlike Nirvana and similar bands that killed everything that was good in 90's, these bands know how to hold C major chord at least smile.gif The point is that they are all from the UK and I got shocked when one of my guitar teachers at university in London didn't know that Smoke on the Water is Deep Purple song. The guy has masters degree for guitar. If I had to learn to play guitar from Nirvana-like bands, I would have never become a guitarist. All you hear in my playing comes from the bands I mentioned. That's of course in my case.
Keilnoth
QUOTE
It is always cool to see your favorite band live but I hardly see my favorite ones. The ones that used to play in front of 100.000 people are now playing in front of 1000 or less people. The real examples are Deep Purple, Uriah Heep, Whitesnake and rock legends like that. These bands are all from the UK and only 5% of people in this country nowadays know some of their songs. Because of the new "modern music revolution" no one is buying their concert tickets nor the albums. They can only have 5000 of more thousands of people in countries where they never played. That was proved in Serbia, Bosinia and Croatia where they had 10.000 people in each country a couple of years ago. I am 100% sure if they come again next year they wouldn't have 1500. That's more than sad. 7 days ago I saw Gary Moore in front of 300 people.


Don't really see the point here.

Young people listen to hip hop, rap, rnb and those kind of styles. It's pretty normal that Gary Moore and Deep Purple can't fill the concert halls anymore. And I am a fan of Gary Moore. smile.gif

But U2, Radiohead and Pearl Jam still play in front of 100'000 people and do live concerts on YouTube...

The modern music revolution came because of the majors and other money makers who want more bands, more music, more concerts, more money... Internet is a tool which help to broadcast easily and share information. But the majors forgot that people were able to speak to each other easily and to broadcast as well.

Majors are trying to make the people pay to broadcast and share. But that's old fashioned. You cannot do that the same way you ask a supermarket to pay licence to broadcast music in front of the butcher shop.

People have to re-think the way they are earning money *with* the internet.
But you have to stop thinking of the good old days. They are over.

All the big old media companies are complaining today. Newspaper, book sellers, TV stations, guitar teachers ?, etc... The day they will all be bankrupted (except the guitar teachers obviously wink.gif) the market will perhaps be much more sane.
Emir Hot
QUOTE (Keilnoth @ Dec 11 2009, 01:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Young people listen to hip hop, rap, rnb and those kind of styles. It's pretty normal that Gary Moore and Deep Purple can't fill the concert halls anymore.

Exactly smile.gif So what are we doing here with 10 hours of practicing everyday? Shall we start making hip-hop music or there is a way to make a living of music that we spent years learning? I think that decision to be musician nowadays is the most risky move you can make. All these posts in this thread are actually showing what I was hoping to see and that's why I am not even trying to continue with music professionaly. I like my guitar and I am happy to play small clubs and teach but no way I can live of that. I wish I was a plumber smile.gif These guys are making serious money.
audiopaal
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 11 2009, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
All these posts in this thread are actually showing what I was hoping to see and that's why I am not even trying to continue with music professionaly.

That's unfortunate, as I believe your songwriting skills (from hearing your album) is amazing.
But you'll record another album hopefully!? smile.gif
Emir Hot
QUOTE (audiopaal @ Dec 11 2009, 01:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
That's unfortunate, as I believe your songwriting skills (from hearing your album) is amazing.
But you'll record another album hopefully!? smile.gif

No more loans for investing in that mate smile.gif We need to eat.
Keilnoth
QUOTE
So what are we doing here with 10 hours of practicing everyday?


Actually, I am working 8 hours a day and practicing 2 hours so I make serious money. wink.gif

But well, I agree, it's a sad story. I'd say, what's important is to enjoy what you do but that certainly sounds a bit romantic. tongue.gif

Emir Hot
QUOTE (Keilnoth @ Dec 11 2009, 01:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
what's important is to enjoy what you do but that certainly sounds a bit romantic. tongue.gif

And that's all we can have smile.gif
Ivan Milenkovic
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 11 2009, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
No, I didn't say that smile.gif That was my reply to Jafomatic's post where I understood that if you're selling stuff yourself, using youtube and appear in search engines would have a better result that being a signed artist where someone else is helping you with promotion and the rest. Then I suggested the list of things to try and see if that's a real formula for success. I think it is not.


I agree with Emir here, although the situation is not black & white. Today, labels are still strong and can advertise artists better than they can do for themselves. But as the time passes by and times are changing, some artists emerge and become famous solely on the means of internet free self promotion. This was not possible before, and labels understand that they have no control over that area, they never did because that area doesn't give them what they are after - profit. As they get less and less money from record sales, they are signing many more artists with less sales to increase profit. This watering down will produce greater number of signed small artists, and they can soon become equal to the artists that choose for the indy label. The labels of the future will shift their interest to Internet and battle will continue there. It has already started, as big labels are trying to kill the free services. They are not doing this just to eliminate piracy, they are doing this to create monopoly once again. But this time, I don't think they can succeed. Internet is way to open to control it.
jafomatic
Apparently the labels can't advertise well enough. I think that's what all this compels me to believe. Deep purple can't fill a hall? Then deep purple didn't adapt. Some guy only wants to fill a club instead of using his songwriting ability to sell popsongs back to those labels? Someone else not adapting!

It just seems like more proof that it's always been better to adapt than to hold fast and die.

intemperateControl
Hard to come up with a solution to that problem.
Anything you can listen to or view on-line is
recordable using certain software. Making it less
accessible without a purchase might help some,
but then again there's a file sharing issue.

Perhaps only selling the demo, and making the
album accessible to concert attendees only (or
to be included with the purchase price of the
ticket sales), along with whatever other band
memorabilia is available. Pirating might then
be more conspicuous to any one releasing any
illegal copies on-line or otherwise. I don't
know, maybe it's impossible to fully prevent
pirating, but am sure there is an intelligent
solution that could tip the scales more
favorably to the musicians. Anyway,
sorry to hear that. dry.gif
Ivan Milenkovic
QUOTE (jafomatic @ Dec 11 2009, 03:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Apparently the labels can't advertise well enough. I think that's what all this compels me to believe. Deep purple can't fill a hall? Then deep purple didn't adapt. Some guy only wants to fill a club instead of using his songwriting ability to sell popsongs back to those labels? Someone else not adapting!

It just seems like more proof that it's always been better to adapt than to hold fast and die.


It depends my friend. The labels do a lot in terms of advertising, what independent artists simply cannot afford. TV and radio commercials being one part of that. No way independent artist could get a TV ad by himself, it's too expensive. I'm no expert in the record label business tho, but I think they can do better for the signed artists in present time. On the other hand, I said clearly that they are monopolists with profit on their mind, so that explains WHY they put so much effort. Artist sign because they want promotion, and promotion is easily get via labels, with some guarantee, as opposed to little guarantee when choosing to go alone. It's a hard road that artists will rarely choose. I think most artists would join big label if they had a chance, because they understand that promotion is there, and they can spread out their music without needing to do that job for themselves.
Regarding Deep Purple, they are an old band, that was on top of their career a while ago. People are interested in a bit different music today, it's the way things flow. Constant change is important for humans, the music is not holding place, it's changing form all the time. This is why they cannot fill the halls.
audiopaal
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 11 2009, 02:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
No more loans for investing in that mate smile.gif We need to eat.

I know what you mean...
Still unfortunate though sad.gif

I can record everything I need at home, except for drums..
So hopefully the studiotime won't be too expensive when I decide to lay down some real drums smile.gif

Hehe, I already know I'll never get back the money I spent on studiogear but hopefully some people will like what I write.
If not, I'll just have to release a Hip Hop album laugh.gif
Audiopaal & the 2 hip 2 hops feat. Emir Hot & the stringbenders tongue.gif

Jokes aside though, I really hope you'll make some money off your music in the future!
You deserve that much smile.gif
Staffy
QUOTE (Emir Hot @ Dec 11 2009, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
smile.gif I mentioned the ones that I think are worth mentioning if we're talking about rock legends and the quality of music. Unlike Nirvana and similar bands that killed everything that was good in 90's, these bands know how to hold C major chord at least smile.gif The point is that they are all from the UK and I got shocked when one of my guitar teachers at university in London didn't know that Smoke on the Water is Deep Purple song. The guy has masters degree for guitar. If I had to learn to play guitar from Nirvana-like bands, I would have never become a guitarist. All you hear in my playing comes from the bands I mentioned. That's of course in my case.


I will definitely agree to this, Steve Lukather said in an interview in the late 90's that "I haven't heard a new band with a good guitar player since 1982...", but the point here is that if You wanna make the "big" money, song-writing and beeing member of a band that hits the top 40 is the way to go. I think there's still room for great guitar playing in the new styles that are emerging, but as someone else said here: the old days are gone! But it is also a question of trends, maybe in some years we will have a 70's revival or 80's ... (which I personally NOT longing for sad.gif ) Everything is really a balance between Your own imagination bout music and the commercial aspects. All musicians have to "sell out" themselves a little bit, it's just a question of how much..... Personally I quitted working professionally long time ago since I felt like a prostitute - just playing what people wanted to hear, not what I was liking myself. Its all about to find a balance really.

QUOTE
I agree with Emir here, although the situation is not black & white. Today, labels are still strong and can advertise artists better than they can do for themselves. But as the time passes by and times are changing, some artists emerge and become famous solely on the means of internet free self promotion. This was not possible before, and labels understand that they have no control over that area, they never did because that area doesn't give them what they are after - profit. As they get less and less money from record sales, they are signing many more artists with less sales to increase profit. This watering down will produce greater number of signed small artists, and they can soon become equal to the artists that choose for the indy label. The labels of the future will shift their interest to Internet and battle will continue there. It has already started, as big labels are trying to kill the free services. They are not doing this just to eliminate piracy, they are doing this to create monopoly once again. But this time, I don't think they can succeed. Internet is way to open to control it.


I couldn't have said this better myself, but in my belief the battle has just started, we're gonna see drastic changes in how music is to be distrubuted, consumed and spread through the internet. And this will benefit the really GOOD musicians in my belief, such as Emir smile.gif The one's who can't play or sing and has been pitch-shifted in the control, they will simply be gone in the future. Thanks heaven for that!!!! biggrin.gif

//Staffay
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.