GolfHos

Long read but worth it for a glimpse into the minds of these clowns.

Wired: Universal Chief Doug Morris (http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/15-12/mf_morris?currentPage=all)

What a knob.  How much of that $9-10 (or $16-20) does he give the artist?  Poor, picked on martyr trying to save his $7 billion company.   

LOL.  these dinosaurs thought they could keep their strong arm mafiapoly  running forever (or at least to their graves).   Not one to advocate illegal activity (on either side of the isssue)..... but also not realyl sympathetic to their 'losses' either.

Two questions:

1) What do these record companies offer artists that they can't get elsewhere?

2) What percentage of sales do artists earn from these companies?

1.  A lot less than a decade ago. 

2.  I don't know if there's an across-the-board answer but I've read on multiple occasions that it's ~$1 per CD.  And that's after recoupment. 

Oooh a buck a cd.  Ouch.

Let's not forget all the alcohol, drugs, *humid grotto*, and the intangible:  "Living like a rock star".

I'm not a fan of Callaway's pricing structure, either, but (a) I wouldn't boost a set of irons off the tailgate of a delivery truck outside Golf Galaxy, and (b) I'd have even less respect for a guy who did boost a set in that manner.  At least Callaway is playing (aggressively) by the rules.

ASCAP was set up as a coalition of the people who generated the music product.  How hard can it be for a similar web-based commerce idea to be implemented by them and for their benefit?

Seriously on #1--I'm sure its less than a decade ago, or even a year ago. 

What can they offer artists NOW that artists can't do on their own or elsewhere?

that $1/cd or so is typically about after an album goes platinum.

the studios front the costs for recording/mastering/production ($1M-$10M  depending on the artist, time involved, etc)  yada yada blah blah that matters for shiny clean pop music sound.  after X cd sales they consider that money recouped and from there the artist can get anywhere from $.50 to $1. ... maybe $2-$3 for the complete biggest name stars in the world ...   

then they do the same thing with tours, front all the costs, take all the revenue until some profit level is achieved.  which is why bands are so big on selling merchandise on the road-  where all the $ is for them in the grand scheme of things.



blader-  only the biggest name artists with already established bank accounts could front the costs for recording/production/manufacturing/touring.    otherwise, they would simply revert to another lending scheme (possibly through a bank or investor group)... which would arguably probably be better than the current studio model treats the artist.

the difference is that while callaway might be playing by the rules,  the RIAA certainly isn't.  extortion lawsuits, falsified evidence, bogus complaints, misinformation campaigns against the public, etc.

That's what I'm getting at.  I think I have an idea, too.  But I'm so clueless about the industry, I don't know if its being done. 

Put it this way, I asked my daughter (15)--who lives for music--if CD's and radio were important sources of music for her collection, and she looked at me like I'd just fallen out the door of a spaceship.

let me qualify my earlier statement-  only the biggest bands already out there could afford to front the costs for recording 'quality' and touring 'quality'  at the level it currently exists today.  there are tons of  much more affordable avenues possible that offer significant quality, but not quite the 'shine'  most mainstream fans are accustomed to.

Radio (FWIW these days anyway - not as much IMO).  An up-and-coming artist is no way going to get radio play without industry help.  Radio leads to single sales leads to album sales leads to better contracts. 

That's all what I figured.  There is hardly a pro-golfer out there--and the vast majority have failed-- who hasn't started out with an investors syndicate. 

Seems to me that young artists are still sort of habituated to viewing the record label contract as the brass ring, when it sounds like nothing has really changed and its little more then the cleverly disguised ball and chain.  The labels were a necessary technology bottleneck (albums and later CD manufacturing) and perhaps marketing expertise...but is any of that necessary in a digital age?    I know a group of kids who recorded a CD on their own as 8th graders.

 

In the new paradigm where the product can go straight from the artist to the end user with the click of a mouse, what possible benefit could such an organization be to the artist?

they don't want to move to online only because they realize it's not as profitable as the physical media world was (in the past). they cling to the idea that they can maintain it as THE mainstream vehicle.  unfortunately,  people are voting with their $1 (and their illegal downloads) that  they despise this.   even the undiscerning j6p music afficinado is rejecting the 1-2 single 8-10 track filler   'album' that is cranked out nowadays.  they instead go to itunes and buy the 2 singles they like.  the studios know this, and have no idea how to fix it.  the writers/performers can't make enough 'good songs'.    they know that making the album downloadable as a single continuous file only (in place of singles) will be rejected as well unless it's priced at only $1-$2 more than the singles. (say $6 total).  Even with the significnatly lower distribution and manufacturing costs, they are scared to go this way because if sales are mediocre it's harder than ever to recoup the upfront recording/producing/mastering costs.  Especially if they give in and start paying the artists fairly from sale #1.   The current method of flooding the market with mediocrity would have to *gasp* be abandoned.  [sm_shock]





the average 'band' could make a recording about 75% as 'good sounding' (to j6p via mp3)  with anywhere from 10-30% the budget   as a big studio (depending on the music style)

the question yet to really be determined is whether the fanbase in particular would 'accept it'
 

Many bands have their own websites, and some offer audio clips to full downloads. Theoretically, they could set up their own online store as part of their site. The main problem is getting recognition. (That's the same problem small golf equipment companies have.)

Unknown musicians would benefit from a music download service that does the marketing for them. Then the question is who owns the service, who gets to manage it, and who profits from it? Would it run as a co-op of the musicians themselves? You have to remember that in the "old way of doing things", many of the record labels were started by artists themselves. How would an online version of this be any different?

I think the main benefit of a record label is getting you in bed with the media conglomerates.  You got to be on a major label to be played on Clear Channel, Top 40, MTV, CMT etc.  And you have to be on the mediums to become "big".  But you generally must sound like watered down piss to be mainstream as well.  Of course there are exceptions but to a band a major label is a necessary evil.  You can only sell so many records and get so much exposure through college radio, myspace or word of mouth.  Not that any of this is new with the digital age IMO just look at Aerosmith.  They have sucked balls since the 70s but even then you couldn't turn on the radio and not hear it. They were pumped into our stupid skulls so much they became famous. 

I saw TBone Burnette and Robert Plant on Charlie Rose not too long ago, and they seemed to feel that the 'New Paradigm' is that the money will now be in live performance, with the recorded music done solely to support the tour.

This is 180 degrees from the way it was done for decades, with tours being done to drive record sales, often at a loss once the accounting was done.

If you think about it, this makes sense: The one thing an artist has almost 100 pct control over is the quantity and quality of their live gigs.

They also noted with a fair amount of amusement that record companies hate this model, and successful performers across genres have been thriving for decades doing tours with mininimal record sales.

this and limited edition / special rleases, etc   is what has driven undergournd music since forever.

Isn't that required if you're her father?

Then again, knowing you, maybe you had just fallen out the door of a spaceship.

Speaking of Robert Plant, how many damn compilation albums does Led Zeppelin need to release?

My half-baked thought was that the composers, authors and publishers could band together and offer the services and capabilities of a record label.  Not every label is The Top Label In Music -- if there's room for second-tier labels, there's room for an artists' group with the same capabilities as that second-tier group.  The Artists' Group would have to have decent media clout right out of the gate (and certainly generate some free press, just by their creation and membership).  Pool resources and offer studio facilities/mastering/whatnot services directly and at lower cost.  Geez, MFAWG isn't the only one who can advocate communism!

Consume the capabilities of the next actor up the chain, and then offer it yourself.  I learned this strategy from watching Blow.

LOL, I hadn't considered that it was 'Communism'.

In terms of artisans (Marx' word) selling directly to the consumer unfettered by middlemen that serve no real purpose other than to inflate the cost and take a resulting cut, Marx and Engels never had a problem with it.

That said, it's still not communism, but the sort of utopian capitalism that some folks would have you believe all capitalism is, all the time.

Well, you peddle either communism or fascism.  I don't have to know what they are to know that about you, right?


Be that as it may ... artistic and creative workingmen of the world, unite!  You have nothing to lose but your labels!

I really wish I could find the email dialouge and friend of mine and I had on this about 5 years ago.  We were debating copyright laws and how to 'fix' them; and I worked out how the industry would likely change - even with the current copyright laws (with their rediculous term lengths and limitations).

To answer Bladers 1st question - the Irish fool was right, its radio/marketing.  This is finally becoming less important, but its certainly not unimportant.  You need to get your product to the masses, and the recording industry has a stranglehold on radio and the money to keep it that way.  Even if your daughter doesn't listen to the radio its damn likely that the song a friend of hers turned her onto was heard on the radio by someone, who told someone, who told someone, who told the someone that told your daughter' friend - who then told your daughter.  Make sense?

Anyway - another generation will make radio even less important to the point that its no longer important at all.  Perhaps then bands will finally realize they do not need the recording industry at all, but the deep pockets will keep them around well beyond their useful life.

It has become very easy to get pretty high quality recordings done in the home or by small production outfits that would do it at a rate, and not embezzle your copyrights from you in the process.  This will only become even easier and cheaper in the future.  Bands can produce their own music, distribute it as they see fit (iTunes, Napster, give it away, etc.) and use the attention to book gigs/tours.  Small up front costs - and they get to keep all the money they make (as well as retain their own copyright).  Its been removed from most sites, but there was a great clip from *8==>* Dale that encourages new bands to do something similar to this.

The Internet is/will be the marketing tool and the recording industry cannot control it like they do radio.  So, how will they survive?  Many will not - they are not smart enough to.  The ones that are smart, or are forced to finally get smart, will become premium production studios.  They can still make money by providing premium production services - but nothing like they do today, which is why it will be a slow and painful process as they are beat into submission.

I spent 20 years in the music business, specifically on the distribution side.  The crap that went (and still goes) on is unbelievable.  I had a wine cellar almost filled from "Hootie and the Blowfish".  Did they know about it?  Of course not, the head of the label took me and my wife to Napa for a weekend, loaded up my car (and his) with cases of wine and wrote it off to "marketing expenses" for their CD.  I got millions of stories just like this.  It's one main reason why bands never recoup their advances and see next to nothing.  The only chance you have of making money from a label is to go multi-platinum.  Of the 30-40K releases every year, less than 200 achieve this status, and that total is getting increasingly smaller.  The old guard is trying to protect what they had, they don't give a rat's ass about the artist or the music, sad, but true.

Contrary to popular belief, the labels get nothing from artist's touring and merchandising.  That's really the only source of real income for the band.  That's why you see the new deals being pushed, i.e. Madonna, whereby she will give up a piece of touring and merch for a HUGE cash advance.  It's what the labes are all pushing for right now.  They can't make money selling recordings, so they want a piece of publishing, touring receipts and merchandise sales.  It's why the labels will go the way of the dinosaur.  No band in their right mind will get any benefit from this type of deal.  As others have suggested, they can do it on their own just as easy, with more upside.

Radio (especially terrestrial) is a joke.  Playlists consist of the same 100 songs that are played over and oer and most people don't give a *feces* about the crap that's being played. 

True music fans will find a way to get new music.  Today's youth are much more technolgy oriented than anyone gives them credit for.  It's where the money needs to be spent.  Not in litigation and lawsuits, but giving the consumer what they want.  Why is this so hard to understand.

Had the industry recognized Napster for what it could be, instead of suing them out of existence, they could have created a win-win for everybody.  License the P2P sites.  At the time they first became mainstream they had a chance, but blew it.  Wouldn't most of you have paid a modest fee per month to download and own all the DRM free tracks you wanted, especially if it were legal?  10.00 month times how many millions would have killed the rampant illegal trading that still proliferates and will continue until they all get their head's out of their asses.

Boy, ain't that the truth.

I'm fortunate enough to live in a market that's large enough to support not one but TWO stations that manage not to follow this pattern.
Ones an 'AltRock' station that also has heavy helpings of regional indy recordings and vintage punk and new wave, another one manages to not follow any real programming guide that I can figure out. One day they followed a Clash tune with a vintage Madonna cut, which was entertaining if a little bizarre.

But 99 pct of what's on is crap or noise so bad I don't think it even comes up to a crap level.

Let's make sure we're all on the same page here.  Aerosmith have sucked balls since 1979 or so.  That's what you mean... right?   [sm_mob]

Toys in the Attic and Rocks are both in my top-40 album list.  [sm_headbang]  :lighter: [sm_headbang] :lighter: [sm_headbang]

well, i know my tastes aren't really mainstream so it isn't the most fair comparison and all that... but   hell, i would have paid a lot more than 10.00 a month for unlimited high quality legal downloads.  hell, i mean  there are times I spent more than 100$ for a single album.

then again, i'm not j6p.

 :sad3: :'(

My point, exactly.  There is some "magic number" that the public would bear for the service.  Most true music fans spend at least that much on average/month to feed their habit, ipod or whatever.  A few million subscribers would go a long way to revitalize the business.  It's probably not gonna happen until a few more labels bite the dust.  It WILL happen at some point.

 :o :o @ j6p user