JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Industry Message Forum Technology is making music almost free

Hello JPF

This is the last line In the essay of newsweek. First Prince distribute his new songs in the newspaper but the band Radiohead distribute their album free to download. What next? If someone predicted that in the next few years Ipod will mutate into 1 terrabyte of memory space all song recorded in the entire lifetime will be all fit in at the palm of ipod owner hand. Then the big question there is what is the role of the collecting organization like ASCAP or BMI? Extinction?

Here in our country CD burning is everywhere. In one shop you can choose what song to burn and pay 1.20 dollar for a set of 16-20 songs it depends on how you can fill up the 750mb CD. In case the song you looking for is not on the list give them one day they will have it in silver platter.

WE have to mutate any idea guys???

Lynman

Maybe everyone envolved with music should go on strike until they come up with a way to fairly compensate all those that produce the music that the public loves so much that the steal it.

Focus on building a fanbase that will support you.

This is old news.... Since day one I have always marveled at the fact that we look to the internet to sell songs... The internet the easiest & number one place for stealing things in the world. Anyone can take any song at any time PERIOD! If you can hear it you can can record it.

Kids have grown up excepting FREE things from the internet... It is the norm.

I would rather go back to the old days completely The Hardest Way of getting a record deal or any exposure. It's the same anyway before you were unkwown and broke and now you are amongst a billion other people on line so you may as well be unknown and your broke!

Who sells one CD a day everyday 365 days a year?? at $10 a CD?
Can't even accomplish that and even if I did I would starve to death....

It works out just fine when your Prince or Madonna

And technology is killing the industry in more than one way.... We can't leave anything alone when it was working. Greed has no end.

If you wanna make any money be something else

and yet Carrie Underwood's debut CD sold 6,000,000 copies.
Go figure.

Well, I refuse to knowingly support any country that allows Terrorism, People smuggling, the drug trade, child abuse, and creative rights theft to happen.
Oh yeah. I forgot dasncing bears.
I don't know if it helps, but I feel better knowing I am doing my best to not be a party to the above crimes against society.
Graham

Everett

Strike is a good idea. But who cares even George W. Bush have no idea of this problem we all facing. I have a feeling that some recording company are behind in promoting the use of peer to peer sharing like the best one is the azureus. They really maximize the power of the internet. MAybe the collecing organization have come up with technolgy in monitoring this sharing, or create some form of a virus that check every ipod content and charge the user for every song that play in his private moment with his gadget.


Scott

That is true, your idea is the starting point of every songwriters or artist like all of us here. When the recording company notices you they will signed you right away. YOu fan base will support all your concert or CD's that will be release under your name. But I noticed the probability approximately a billion song in the world wide web, thousand of genre, a million artist, its like betting in a lottery. I am not pessimist or some kind of cynical in point of view, but how can I compete with madonna, prince, radiohead, or artic monkeys who give away their songs in the internet. Good luck brother and thanks for your input.

Mike
Nice avatar... The shot is classic. Producing music nowwadays is so fast, affordable, and attainable. No need to hire a banjo session player from Nashville or pay a fare of an indian Sitar player to lay tracks in your song.WE have everything at the click of our finger. Finding a better way or to outsmart this technology is like competing with Elvis or the Beatles on the top of their career.

Bill
Carrie Underwood sold 6 million copies but her album was downloaded 10 times. Im not sure but her CD is everywhere in every stacks of pirated stores here in the Philippines.

Graham

Thanks for your advocacy.

Lynman

Lynman, what do you mean it's a "starting point?" Shouldn't it also be the end goal? Actually, shouldn't building a fanbase be a continual task?

It's not about "competing" with Radiohead. It's about building a foundation of listeners who support you as a real live *person*, who will be willing to give you support when you ask for it. Radiohead can't compete with you on a micro level, so use that to your advantage.

Learn to perform live. That's music. The recording industry destroyed live venues. Now the net is destroying the recording industry. Learn to preform live, recordings are only the ads for your performance. If you can't do that then try some other field of work.

There is truth in this (overall) Although the recording industry did not kill live venues.
The thing is usually there is that perfect time period where every
thing about something is just right. Then WE as a society or the powers at large ruin it. we have no sense of history & can't leave well enough alone.

Live venues were the only way people could hear music at one time until radio..
But for a nice while selling & promoting you Album brought TONS more people to yout concerts... Haviing tons of people at your concerts sold many more Albums.

Recording didn't kill the live venues that Zeppelin played, Or Springsteen who sells out Giant Stadium for 3 nights in a row even till this day. And many many others.

Now if your talking about LOCAL venues? Us small guys? The recording industry has nothing to do with that what so ever.

Performing music in venues to the people who are not your family and friends means 4 things .

Checking out live music - Drinking -Smoking- Spending Money!

All of the venues in my town serve alcohol and are finished because if you go to bar and have 2 drinks and get pulled over later you lose your car & go to jail.

You can't smoke.... IN A BAR

Money - Gas is $4 bucks a gallon over here ands everthing costs a fortune, drinks and food. So going out is never cheap. Many people are finding entertainment on Big Screen TV's, DVD's, Video games,Computers Internet, [b]Cell Phones[/even the the automobiles are an amusment parkb]

See if the first 2 things were the case in the 40's 50's 60's 70's 80's when live music venues were booming.

As for the industry it needs to go back and look at itself to see why and how it worked best. Maybe look into what the movie industry who also deals with lots of technology issues and internet issuses does......

Good Thread Lynman

I agree with Sub, but I would also add that there is more to music than just playing it live, so to advise people to stick to live performance cuts a lot of talented people out of the game.

Truth is, I get always get bored at some point when listening to live music...I always want to DO something, but we end up standing and watching. Sure, dancing and drinking, too...but...

Scott

I agree it's also the end point. But I noticed recently that this super rockstar is suing Ebay for providing a store for his mugs and t-shirts and other things posted by his loyal fans wanting to earn a small amount from his own collected treasures in the past. And Ebay is having difficulty removing "illegal" items. I hope you will not be like that when your name etched in the stars of hollywood walk of fame.

Doug

PErforming live is not good at these time. Here in our country you are being victimized by the production company. They allow you to perform in a bar but you have to sell tickets. Imagine you performed for free, of course you need to eat in the bar but you have to pay for it (no free meals or free beer), and the worse you have to invite your freinds or relatives to be a part of conspiracy of screwing each and everyone of you. Internet is good to showcase your career. Maybe make your own MTV and post it in Youtube. But the main dilemma here is the system or technology that bring us more hardship.

Lynman

Well, that rockstar is being stupid. Why would anyone want to sue their fans for re-selling collectibles? Unless they're counterfeits, or if someone slaps their logo on a mug without licensing it. Otherwise, re-selling is legal.

Playing live doesn't mean you have to play a bar. Bars are okay sometimes, but you're beholden to their needs (alcohol sales). I play lots of non-bar venues and it's always much better. I make and keep more money and have more control over the show.

Some local artist friends and I are talking about renting a yacht and throwing our very own "Rock Boat" show. It's more risk, more money up front, but I have a feeling we'll do really well because it's SO different and special. We are not rockstars, but I wouldn't be surprised if we sell out, or close to it.

We also have been thinking about throwing a prom. Yes, like a high-school prom, except our bands will showcase. Rented hotel ballroom, gowns and tuxes optional. It's a gimmick, yes, but look: we'll control every aspect of the show. No grumpy club owners complaining about beer sales, no conflicts with opening acts we've never met, etc.

That's just a few of many ideas we've had. The concept is to GO AROUND the club scene and do our own thing. Make every gig an EVENT. Make it fun and unique so your fans won't want to miss out. Make it a little crazy so the press will pay attention.

Anyone can play a club. So, maybe don't?

Just in response to the first post, I think that the record companies are beginning to wise up with the decline in sales.
But it still rings true that it is going to be the one with the connections and who has the bread that is going to leave the impact on the masses.

I recall my mother back when I was a kid being a maid in a Holiday Inn.
She happened to strike up a conversation with Brian Setzer, whose room she had.
He is very modest.
He said he never thought he coud sing and would be washed up in a couple of years.
That was 1987, and he is still going strong..

The point I am getting at with that is that the indie, home artist is always going to think that the top musicians have everything more handed to them.
But it definately is'nt a walk.
I would like to have someone like Prince at this forum posting amongst us.
But that is an entirely different realm.
Big clebraties like that are never alone at all times. Even in their own homes.
If anything, the internet medium might be a real positive change of pace.
I think these acts kick out something on the net just to get away from the hoopla.

I hope I'm not getting too philisophicol or off topic.
But going from the last post, the live scene does'nt have to mean a live situation with a band or club.
I have had the suggestion that I should pass around recordings of me on karoake nights in bars.
Some have done that and have found headway.

When I feel I have a good enough crop of songs to choose from, I may try that.

But I look at acts like Prince and Radiohead coming to the net as a positive thing.

Recordings do'nt have to be expensively made anymore to sound like studio productions.

Prince did 1999 all by himself and out of his own home.
He has always in my own mind been a type of godfather of the indie scene.
I heard he wanted to get away from the stuffy way of producing albums and go morwe back to his earlier conventions.

Yep it did. Take one small town in rural N. FL. Pop less than 5k for the whole county, in 1937 9 venues with live music, today 0. It wasn't planned but along about WW2 recorded music got good enough quality that people would listen to it. Along came jukeboxes.

True that today venues are being killed by drunk driving enforcement and no smoking laws, and DJs and Karaoke. But the big cut down was in WW2. There were as many as 4 times the venues in 1939 than there are today, with less than half the people.

There are some songwriters that don't want to be performers,maybe because they don't like the limelight or lifestyle,or maybe because they are not great singers.How do they get their songs heard?Recorded?Make money?

For me, it's not about the money, because I have a day job that I love, in education. For me, it's about getting people to hear my music. In this day and age, it's no longer a question (to me) about "how much money can I make online?" It's more a question of, "Can I get anyone to give my stuff a listen?"

I know I'm not alone... sometimes I feel like I'm sitting on the side of the road with a card table, selling water for $1 per bottle, and when I look down the road in both directions as far as the eye can see, I see other people selling water for $1 per bottle. And there are even some people giving their water away, but you can't even see them among the hundreds of thousands of people sitting at card tables selling their water.

Oh well. You put your music out there, you market it the best you can, and you've at least DONE something, rather than sit around doing nothing. That's how I look at it.

Funny, I quit going to bars because I couldn't stand the cigarette smoke. Same with most of my friends (other than musicians, I know virtually no one who smokes).

Smoking is still allowed in bars in Florida the last I looked. Most of us who quit going to bars because of the cigarette smoke have now adapted our lives so they are quite full without having to go to bars. Besides, there is still the concern of getting pulled over and the cost. So, if smoking were outlawed in bars in Florida, I doubt that nonsmokers would suddenly start going to bars again.

A few points I would like to make. In the UK there is a total smoking ban in all public places so all bars, clubs, theatres and restaurants etc etc are smoke free. There is now a PC brigade who do not like noise pollution and slap orders on a lot of pubs and clubs preventing any loud music. A lot of folk have stopped going out and now watch TV or DVDs or use a PC instead. PLACES ARE SHUTTING DOWN. Fuel is over �1 a litre not like the States at 4$ a gallon. In the sixties there were countless live venues where bands could perform 7 nights a week. Now there are only a few places left most are discos with little or no live music. They are struggling and pay very poor rates for live performances prefering cheap Karaoke or discos. Most of the old haunts have been knocked down or turned into discos or bingo halls. Yes recorded music, anti smoking and various bad legislation has killed the live scene. There is still a living to be made but it is tough.

The Music industry has always been a tough business. Before there was huge buses outfitted with everything under the sun most bands used a couple of cars to carry equipment to places the were booked to play at. The roads were mostly two lane and a lot of delays between dates. Most artists didn't make huge amounts of money and a lot barely survived. There were probably a lot less distractions as there is today so it is still tough to survive as a live Artist/band. But there is still Artists/Bands booking and playing dates and fans enjoying live music as there will be for some time to come.

I for one think recorded music should not be relegated to support for live performance. Recorded music can be an art in itself. Think of Les Paul's harmony guitar tracks, Steve Miller's "mult" vocals, Stevie Wonder playing drums on some of his tracks, Todd Rungren playing everything, Substudio's wonderful one-man studio band. Why should people who can do amazing things in the studio be forced to give their music away for free while less talented individuals with good teeth and pretty hair (or feet) be able to make a living playing live?

I think the solution is education. In the few short years I've been on this earth, I've seen attitudes change about several different things. People no longer think water is free. More folks use seat belts.

I'd like to see ad campaigns educating the public about paying the piper. Even if the piper is piped in.

Interesting take, Mike. That's not really being done - you're right. The only press I've seen is people getting sued for file sharing. I might recall seeing a commercial on TV once where a bunch of famous millionaires were telling people not to illegally share files.

But convincing everyone that something they can get for free is worth paying for is going to be an uphill battle. Only real fans are going to do that. Casual fans will not. So as was pointed out earlier, the trick is to develop a fan base.

Live music is music recorded music is a snapshot. Not even close to the same thing. Look a the Grand Canyon and look at a snap shot.

If it's not live music it's just dribble.

I don't think I could use a town of 5k to deteremine stats for a statement like recording killed live venues... And because some town had 4 times the venues in 1939 compared to now proves what?? What does that have to do with recording and making albums? bad example I think

When I hear "live venues" I think of concerts as well as small pubs etc...

So by those calcualations "Woodstock" should have had NO One There

In the much more recent days the 1980's my little island had 20 clubs on one street that bands could play at.
They are all closed now but one. The police would sit on that street and pull over everyone all night long every single night. Business closed- period! Recording or the record industry had ZERO to do with it.

Artists Making Albums never stopped fans from going to concerts....

And Local unknown bands have never lost fans or following because of recording...

Mike I agree with some of what you say but regardless of what or who is to blame the live music industry if not dead is receiving the last rites. There are fewer places to play live and the pay makes it not viable for a living for most.

Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band = Just Dribble?

If you say so...

Hi Jim

Actually I'm not the one who determined live music was dead or not, all I said was That the recording of music and making albums has nothing to do with live venues closing down. Talk to Doug about that
Concerts sold albums - Albums sold tickets! is what I was pointing out.
You make a record you tour the record....
And let me say again - that where I live music is DEAD compared to what it used to be. I agree with you Jim

Now, live music may be suffering because the curtain got pulled back from the wizard.

While a young foot, we'd have to sit in the bedroom and drop the needle on vinyl records time and time again to learn a riff. Nowdays, kids get on the internet and get tablature for the riff, then they get a midi copy, then they watch the YouTube version of the musician playing the riff, and after assimilating all this, they get on a forum and discuss nuances of the riff.

The average high school guitar god would have been a big phish in a small town when I wore a smaller sandal. Folks don't want to go to a bar to hear someone who can have rings played around them by their nephew.

So, at least in part, the technology of education has made an advanced player less "special."

Mike

Not counting the introduction of karaoke machine by the japanese. The audience or the patron in the bar can croon entertaining him/her self.

Another cool stuff is the guitar hero in playstation 2 or in some arcade shop the drummer arcade game where the player can follow the drum pattern on the screen hitting the touch sensitive interface similar to the drum set.

At least songwriter can still get some sundry royalty over that kind of technology.

Maybe the prediction of 1 terrabyte of ipod memory may not materialize probably with some better technology that still support some of our rights might surface in a few years.

Something like no wires, no memory storage spaces and its everywhere. If you want to access the said music you are given a series of choices that in the end will benefit the creator of that copyrighted material.

Lynman

Playing in bars is not the music biz...it is the club biz..

In L.A. and Nashville with few exceptions many bands,acts did themselves in by undercutting the other guy ,just so they could be on stage ,hoping to be seen and heard.
The cost of running a club has gone nuts.
I know many acts who will perform for nothing.Or next to it.

Clubs are far different today. We are overwhelmed all the time by entertainment , or so called ...
Our tastes are a bit harder to satisfy. Seeing someone on stage who is not polished brings no joy.
After you have paid a door fee of 20 bucks or more and then 20 bucks or more per drink , for a bad drink , you are not likely to run out again next week to see some lousy to awful act.
We have been spoiled by slickness and perfection on stage.

Record companys have very little to do with clubs.
If anything the record companys might pick out a place that they like to go to, for a while, but they are fickle.A few exceptions of course.
Record comopanys used to have a coming out party at a club for an act they were set to release an album with...
Not anymore, no reason to.

The problem is an over abundance of talent.
So many good players, to outstanding players and nowhere to play.
It doesnt pay.Club owners are in a bind, advertising ,PR is over the top.They cant afford it.

When I used to check out acts in clubs, it was many times a nightmare.
'Oh we are going on at 10"...uh huh..right..12:30 , they would go on...In the meantime I would leave cuz I had to see another act at 12, 25 miles away.
But that has nothing to do with record companys.
Record folks used to go and see how the audience would react to an act..then they soon learned it didnt make any diff at all.

A lot of people thought the net would be the answer to thier dreams...
Hasnt worked that way for most music folks.. a few yes ..but mostly No. A big NO..
Folks still have to know you are there..thats the hard part.
Then you do not get paid...
How the hell are going to make a living playing/making music? by being ripped all the time?

Parts of the business still work ...But it is still a big struggle.

End of my ramble

Dude...


http://songconsultant.com

And that's a key problem I've long found.

After touring Europe the last 7 weeks and seeing literally ZERO live music that wasn't either cover bands for tourists or traditional ethnic music for tourists, and speaking with the locals who explained that the cost of putting on live music is staggering, not to mention that the clubs in Europe (minus some large dance clubs) are tiny compared to their American counterparts.. and the staple of the US music scene, Bars and Restaurants, are microscopicly small and can't accomodate even a solo performer. Add to that the practice of European PRO's who further stagnate people using live music with the cost they charge for folks to do so. I was told multiple times of bills being presented because someone had a boombox playing a CD they had purchased that was loud enough to be heard from the street and thus generated a live music bill which they'd have to pay. Forget playing music at parties (i.e. such as all those college parties with bands that used to be common) because the bills are too much. Ironic that effective PRO collections trying to compensate musicians actually kill it. (Sounds like the same argument here right?). A big difference is that in Europe, they've always paid royalties to the performer as well as the writer. So if people thing license fees are high now, imagine if they instantly doubled. (Actually I can... because I support forcing radio to start paying musicians as well as songwriters.. but that's another topic). The verdict, in my opinion, is that live music is far worse off in Europe. Add to that the fact that there are few original music styles coming out of Europe. Most of it simply parrots US/UK/Australian pop and rock music. Even the local artists write and sing more often in English than their own language.

All that said, artists in the US have very little chance to improve their talent by simply practicing in front of live artists. It's true that there's just too many talented folks making music willing to give it away. But that problem doesn't translate into live music as much. Sure.. people can play well and sites like ours and others have offered resources to learn how to write songs better etc. BUT... few artists are compelling live. And if anything, as more people can make better and better sounding records right from their laptop in their bedroom, reciprocally, their live performance ability gets worse and worse. People may know how to play perfect licks on a guitar.. but they invoke no excitement among their audiences. They don't make them laugh or cry or swoon. They bore the hell out of them or make them cringe with ease however.

Aside from just the simple lack of practice, the expectations have significantly increased. Every fan has everything at their fingertips now. Any music you want instantly. Any video you want instantly. Sound systems at home that blow away the audio listening experience of any venue are common. You can drink and eat at home for a micro fraction of the cost of a venue. Though venues are now going to non smoking, which contrary to Bob's comments are actually a rare plus for venues, people can choose to smoke or not smoke at home as well.

So how do you combat this? You have to be a lot smarter and a lot more focused than you used to be. Being a great band isn't enough. Having great songs isn't enough. You have to be a great showman and you have to be a great marketing mind. You need to carefully target who your audience really is and you need to find ways to reach them. You have to make people feel like if they don't catch your show, they are losing out on the most interesting thing they could be doing that day. You have to compete with video games and DVD's and cable on demand and surfing porn on the web and eating and drinking whatever you want at home and you have to make it worth getting dressed and driving to a venue and finding parking and spending a lot of money just to GET to the venue in the first place. You need to target a venue that has an atmosphere that will please your audience as well. Good food.. good drinks.. good seating.. friendly staff... then you have to learn how to reach the folks who ARE your audience and make they aware, not once or twice, but enough times to overcome all the other marketers who are vying for their time.

In short.. you have to be a professional in all areas of the business. You need skills far beyond those of musicians in the past. You need gimmicks for short term interest spans and you need depth of talent and presentation to keep folks coming back once the gimmick is gone. It's not easy. It's very very hard. If you aren't willing to tackle these issues with as much creativity as you put into your lyric or guitar riff then our era of live music may have passed you by. If, however, you really DO tackle all these issues and do them well.. you'll have little problem finding your audience. Just like anything else in life. If you just DO it and do it relentlessly and with a never ending persistence while others give up and fail around you.. you'll find some success. But as we all get lazier that gets harder to do. So are you willing? Only you know the answer.

Brian

I'd like to expand on the point that the majority of technically good musicians are not compelling entertainers.

Entertainment is not objective or quantifiable.

For one thing, what entertains me, may not entertain someone else. A performer who can electrify 900 our of 1,000 people, when auditioning for a small club, may have an audience of 20 people, most of whom are not moved by the performer. Then, this potentially "great" entertainer doesn't get the gig.

Also, the audience brings a lot to the performance. Take a room full of folks who've just shared the same experience, as in a wedding party or at a sports bar immediately following a heartbreaking loss or amazing win. They can be, alternately, an "easy" audience or a difficult one.

One of the best live performers I've ever witnessed was an old buddy of mine named Jim Post. Jim's shows were an experience. Often, people who were introduced to his live shows, would bring back friends, just to watch them be transpored, for the first time, on Jim's wild, musical journey. As a single act, he broke the attendance records for Amazingrace coffeehouse, a venue that showcased Steve Goodman, John Prine, Asleep at the Wheel, Odetta, Peter Yarrow, and many other stars. Jim and his guitar outdrew all of them.

But Jim didn't appeal to everyone. Some folks didn't care for him at all. I wonder if you, Brian, in a room alone with Jim, would find his performance entertaining. Many wouldn't. But Jim's shows, back then, were a "happening" as the hippies would say.

One of the biggest secrets, I believe, to being a good entertainer is this: audiences want you to like them. Like your audience, love them, show it.

Mike,

I think one of my points were that there isn't as many opportunities for performers to learn any of this. Some of the best performers I know can work just about any type of room. I saw Sekou (tha Misfit) transform everything about himself to deal with 4 very different types of audiences who would never have liked the same performance. But like a seasoned chameleon, he became what the audience wanted and enthralled them all. From Gangsta Rap audience and all it's trimmings, to a lily white non urban country music loving crowd to a room full of mesmerized musicians of all styles and backgrounds to a room full of enthusiastic women who found him overwhelmingly sexy in that Barry White sort of way. Oh.. and the fifth performance I saw from him was on National TV on ABC's world news tonight doing a spoken word give and take with another spoken word artist dressed in a conservative suit and moving an entirely different type of audience once again. To me.. that's the type of performer you should strive to be. Find a way to make YOUR art accessible to any potential audience. I bet you Mike could adjust to a crowd who just saw their team lose a football game as well as one who was celebrating a win (and as usual it's a great observation on your part that those same people can essentially be 2 different audiences likely to react completely different to the same show just based on 1 shared outside circumstance). The reality is that not only do most artists not have the experience in performing to adjust their shows, most would never have it occur to them that they needed to. Too many think "this is my art.. take it or leave it." To me, that doesn't show great artistic integrity, it shows me a serious lack of wisdom and experience in reaching an audience.

Perhaps the answer is that artists may have to start showcasing their live talents via shows on the net. Virtual coffee shops if you will. Figure out ways to get dozens then hundreds of people around the world to tune in. Be so good that venues who inevitably will one day simply provide broadcasts/content coming in through the web for entertainment in their clubs will tune into your performances. But if you're going to broadcast something.. it may have to depend more on your entertainment ability than your technical ability or artistic vision.

Brian

PS: And the wisdom of your last comment is once again dead on Mike.

While we have drifted off the subject of Artists giving away their music to being able to "Put on a Good Show" it is important to keep honeing your act if you want to continue being sucessful.

Bob Hope, Milton Berle, and Jack Benny didn't start out being sucessful from the beginning. They continued to refine their performances until it was like second nature. You just have to keep at it and it will probably keep you in demand as you get more accustomed to performing.

What works for another act may not work for you so you need to develop your own style and keep repeating it until it seems natural.

If you come off too cute before you are very sucessful it will turn people off very quickly.

Hey Lyman,

Yep, the seling of music is dead in the water. No money there, when every recording known to man is available for free.

Live gigs ? , yeah great if you can get them, but where are the venues ?

The only 2 viable revenue streams that I can see for the small indie are PRO royalties from commercial broadcast, and commercial musicianship from licencing and work for hire one offs.

Hmm, wonder why I gave up making a living from it.

If I get the answer, I'll let you know. No! I'll keep it all to myself

cheers, niteshift

We can talk about lack of venues, smoking bans, videogame distractions, etc. until we're blue in the face; it doesn't change the fact that WE are the ones who have to rise to the challenge.

If something isn't working anymore, you have to change your approach, or be prepared to fizzle out, like the dinosaurs or New Coke. It's not fair, but it's really not a matter of fairness.

No one owes us their attention. And no one owes us to keep everything the same forever.

Think different. Brainstorm. Share ideas. Be unique. Find your audience and GO TO THEM, not the other way around.

A side note: I was talking with my engineer last week about how, when artists get serious about their work and see some success, they tend to distance themselves from their peers. I used to think it was snobbery, but now I think it's because they realize that a lot of people are pessimists with lots of negative energy. It's rare to find people who see challenges as opportunities instead of insurmountable barriers.

They tend to be the ones who draw a crowd when no one else seems to be able to, sell records when no one else is, etc. And nine times out of ten the reason behind their success is they're adapting to changes, celebrating the small victories, and trying new things, while their peers continue to gripe and keep doing the same stuff over and over.

Charisma is a strange critter..

I have worked with many artists who if you met them in a room you saw nothing...on stage they grew into a monster of entertaiment.

Being a popular act is a subjective thing...if you sold 10 million albums and had another 10 million stolen that is 20 million people who like you. Cool how I can add ,right?...but that also means that about 280 million in this country do not like you or never heard of you...So what..

I dont know the answer here in this country...or any other country..Venues need you to have marqee value..if no one knows your name, not all that many will show up.

In the meantime CDs etc are still selling regardless of all the free stuff.

Soon we will have another new media that will take out the CD..

Cost for everything is a problem..

Songs are still being recorded for all kinds things ,from movies to TV to CDs to ringtones, to mobisodes, to niche songs for kids, or special groups...etc...A market is happening.

Dude...

http://songconsultant.com

Niteshift

We have a publishing company here and the our main objective is to maximize all the advertisement potential in the cheapest way so our songs will reach the public. One is grabbing the opportunity of being a recording company. WE compile all the artist and we make sure our songs are fully produced by them under our supervision. The performing songwriters are the frontline helping each and everyone in the compilation. MEanwhile we scout possible company (a vector) who will help us to spread our music all over the country without the radio station tour because I beleive that is the most expensive part of marketing.

If you visit here there are so many venues in Manila at least some of our signed artists will go to their respective venues sell their album then helped others in the album along the way. It is similar to multilevel marketing or pyramiding stratedgy. Like if 10 band will perform today exponentially they all promoted a hundred times. If one fan bought the album all the artists in the compilation will benefit from that sale.

Maybe you can share your stratedgy...

Lynman

Lyman,

You are very fortunate that you have the venues to place your artists. Manila sounds like a fun place.

I'm not a great fan of compilation albums, but in this case, selling these at the different shows is good for all the artists.

It sounds like the way things used to work here, 10-15 years ago.

An agent would pick up 5 or 6 acts, put together a prentation package, and then foot slog around all the venues, picking up work.

After securing maybe 6- 10 venues, those artists were then rotated around those venues, so that the audience would get a new band every 6 weeks. It provided variety, but also built up a fan base when a particular act returned.

Pick solid acts, and pick solid venues, be selective, and I think you may be on to something.

cheers, niteshift

YEP! It's a gratitude attitude of them just being there to play to in the first place that should always be in mind,,,and as you say, to show that to them.

Singers could be singing to each one out there, while making eye contact, (if lights permit), and find those happily participating
in the exchange, then finding another and so on. I learned that by being told to do that before playing solo for the first time, (thanks Cindy). If not,,,,I might have just been looking down, or eyes closed, or just looking at one spot in the back of the room. Boring. I noticed as I looked around, some were responding with their smiles and hand claps to the beat. All I did was to shake my head in a yes motion at them, and once pointed to one person, and the rest of the people got into it even more. It wasn't me singing good, for I was maybe average. It was mainly because of what Mike said,,,to like/love your audience. It's a gathering of like minded people and all is to be shared while playing.

Good points too, throughout this great thread.

John

It must be something else for a performer, when a big majority of the audience indicate they think the song is being sung to them for sure.
Getting back to the subject.
It isnot so much technology making muscic, or anyrhing free.
It is people thionk it is alright to use that technolgy to get something for nothing that is the big problem.
We see it time and time again.
Even among artists who should be giving other creators the same rights they expect themselves.
Look at UTube any time and see videos made up of footage with no credits given saying the outside material has been legally used, as would be required by the mechanical rights body, if it wqas indeed done legally.
Some sites are trying to clean this caper up, and it is good to see there is some action in this quartere going on now.
Some are moaning about the majors moving into this sort of promotion, but at least, they are most probably doing it with material they have the right to do so with, where as the kid down the road is not in most cases.
Most of us would not be here without technology.
Supporting only legal, is in our own best interests.
Graham

Niteshift

Thanks for the idea. By the way There was a talent search here in the Philippines entitled Sutasi. One of the judges there that I remember is Simon Henderson. Hes from australia. It hink he is related to Graham, a distant relative maybe.

Actually I performed and audition one of my collaborative songs with Stan Good entitled I Will COme Back. It is a disco genre with a tinge of ethic music. I dont know he stop me at the middle of my performance maybe he think my song is a cover one. Or probabaly they didnt like my arrangement where the main idea of the contest is to come up with asian sound to be marketed in the whole world.

Lynman

Graham

You are right its always a double edge sword.

Without technology we are still searching our colleuges in the dark.

But on the bright side!!! I saw the latest and coolest invention in the Time magazine this week. The invention over that might benefit all of us is the SOng tracker. It is a small device that can detect every song from all portable player.

I dont have the idea how they can scan it but according to the 2 paragraph text that this tracker can identify the song through a certain signature like a bar code.

We can benefit from this gizmo because later on music can be downloaded anywhere and maybe this little baby can detect where is the source of the song that the copyright owner can collect a form of performance royalty.

WE should keep writing songs!!!! The future is still bright for all of us!!!

Lynman

The musician's union tried so hard during the late 70's to discourage clubs using DJ's, seeing the writing on the wall as to how it would impact the music business.

At that time, the DJ's managed to take some gigs from musicians but they had to purchase every song they had on their playlist. Today, ... download it for free and make money off of musicians and songwriters hard work and creativity.

I think what is so sad is that musicians, songwriters are expected to have all this great talent and recieve nothing for this. A great high school athlete can expect a full scholarship to college and a chance to make bucks in tthe pros. What does a great high school musician get?

What makes it worse is how we, aspiring songwriters, often are willing to go beyond expectations in order to be recognized for creativity and talent.

Well.. the problem is that Athletes good enough for the Pro's won't work for free. Musicians are the first ones to sell out and give it all away if anyone shows the least bit of interest. Hell.. they are happy to PAY some scam artist just to lie to them and stroke their ego. And as long as that happens.. musicians will always get screwed.

But how does that stop file stealing? Easy. If musicians weren't so willing to sell their souls.. they'd ban together and insist on laws to protect them. As a voting block, there's enough musicians in the US along to literally swing the national election if they worked together. Between Pro, Hobby, Amateur and Student musicians in the US there's a gigantic voting block. But sadly musicians can't band together in this way because there would always be ample numbers who would turn and give it away for a pat on the back and a hardy hand shake.

Sad but true.

Brian

Brian

Didn't the courts rule that the file sharing sites are not responsible for the files being shared?

Perhaps it might help if the folks who teach our kids would let them know that file sharing our music is illegal and immoral. But I doubt the current generation gives a damn one way or the other from what I have seen.

You can go on Limewire and get any song for free that you have to pay for on I-tunes or Napster or any of the pay sites.

As long as sites like Limewire are allowed to exist we would be wasting our time trying to stop it.
I think Limewire gives a vague warning that it is illegal but does not prevent it.

And the Ipod and MP3 player companies certainly don't care. The new ones hold 800 Gigabytes. Even at 8 MB per mp3 that's a lot of songs.

A unified musician community COULD get congress to make laws that say the hosts (i.e. limewire) are responsible. The courts interpret laws. If new laws are written, the courts would enforce them. But many high profile musicians themselves are advocating that sites like Limewire etc. are good and therefore illegal file sharing should be allowed. How anyone can advocate forcing someone to give away their work is beyond me.. but many do it. Some that post here do it. They make arguments that say it's a great promotional tool etc. That's fine and could be 100% true. But it still doesn't mean people should be forced to give it away. No one else gives away their work and possesions and the fruits of their labor like Musicians seem to. Sad.

I'd have less problem with it all of there weren't OTHER people making money off of it. Like restaurants and bars that make more money by having music. Or radio and TV and movies that rake in the money. Musicians get the least respect of any tradesmen. Garbage collectors.. napkin makers... the electric company... produce makers... you name it.. everyone gets paid. Not musicians. And folks have no idea how much of their life is positively enhanced due to music.

Brian

Guess I never thought of it quite this way. As a lay person, before I got interested in making music instead of just listening, I always assumed the Musicians got paid.
We all see the high profile stars and their lavish lifestyles. I guess most folks don't think about the average working musician.
For the ones that want to give it away I say, good for them, but I don't see why that should mean everyone has to give it away.
I wonder what it would take to get a Senator or Congressman to push a bill through that would put a stop to file sharing music.

I know, lets get all the musicians to send an E-mail to Hillary about it.
Or maybe there should be a songwriters Union. TV has a writers Union. Heck the musicians have a Union. I wonder if songwriters can join the Musicians Union? Or would they? That might be scary.

There are lyric writers that are giving their lyrics for free to singers just to have them recorded,especially in Christian music.
Intellectual property seems to mean nothing to some people.If a song is the means of an artist selling thousands or even millions of copies,the songwriter deserves his/her share.Without the song(s)the artist would have nothing to sing and nothing to sell.

I tend to think the main reason musicians have a hard time making money these days is supply and demand. There are an incredible number of musicians and songwriters today, many very talented, compared to anytime in the past. The supply very dramatically exceeds the demand. And most all are into music because they love it and would, and do, do it for free just to be doing it. When you have at least 10 million people in the US alone going after maybe 200,000 possible gigs any given week, how are you going to make money? There aren't enough potential customers in the US population to attend all these gigs if all these musicians were working and making reasonable money.

The only way for this to change is for there to be very considerably less musicians and songwriters. But that probably isn't going to happen in the near future. I know I don't want to quit writing and playing. I love it too much! How about you?

PS: The above numbers are just my best guess from my observations. Anyone have better numbers?