"Music will become regarded as a throwaway item"

[asleepathewheel]

Radiohead is giving away their new album...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/10/01/bcnradio101.xml

not that its a new or revolutionary thing (see thread op ), just interesting. Personally, I've found the last few radiohead albums to be abysmal (at least compared to the Bends and OK Computer), though I will get this one now, I guess.

[DinoDoc]

I don't think it will be worth the money.

[MikeH]

My brother's band are currently full time with their band, making money out of gigs, radio play (Radio1/2/6music/xfm etc) and limited edition record sales. Currently building up single releases/airplay before their first album comes out. Another group of friends of mine have just released their first album on Jeepster (Belle and Sebastian/Snow Patrol's label) and I bought it off Amazon. Things are changing, but if you are good enough, popular enough and hard working enough you can make money off touring and you can still sell records and merchandise.

I'm not interested in the Charlatans record but Radiohead are also making their newest record available for download for free (well you can choose how much you pay from £0.00 upwards) but also selling a £40 version on double CD + Double LP + bonus ****. I love having physical CDs.

http://www.myspace.com/peteandthepirates - Brother
http://www.myspace.com/sixnationstatetheband - Friends

[Kataphraktoi]

Right. And what's the market rate for philosophy ?

For me, that would be the nail in the copyright's coffin. It just shows that whatever copyrighted work it is, it didnt have enough market value to earn money without a government mandated monopoly. Of course, without the monopoly intellectual development may slow, but that is exactly what the copyright exists for. And its the only reason.

The whole point is to promote these things, not to recognize some spurious pre-existing notion of "intellectual property". Copyright is a wholly conventional and legal fiction. It does not, and has never embodied some intrinsic ethical right.

QFT

The labels provide the promotional machine that helps the bands get noticed above the din of the wannabes.

If the band was 'deserving' of being noticed for some perceived superior qualities, it should be noticed without a promotional machine. Maybe the wannabes getting drowned out by the promotional machine are the real quality bands? Who can say?

If agathon can make money by typing drivel, kudos to him

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Kataphraktoi
If agathorn can make money by typing drivel, kudos to him

Indeed. to Agathon. for his students though.

[Kuciwalker]

For me, that would be the nail in the copyright's coffin. It just shows that whatever copyrighted work it is, it didnt have enough market value to earn money without a government mandated monopoly.

No it doesn't. It shows a market failure because, absent that government mandated monopoly, there's no way to create DanS's tollgates and very little content is produced at all.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Kataphraktoi
If the band was 'deserving' of being noticed for some perceived superior qualities, it should be noticed without a promotional machine. Maybe the wannabes getting drowned out by the promotional machine are the real quality bands? Who can say?

This is really completely untrue. We live in a big world. It is very hard to make an impact on anything but your closest surroundings without lots of money. Money != talent.

[MikeH]

At the moment making and recording music is orders of magnitudes cheaper than it's ever been. I have another friend who's producing fully recorded album tracks and b-sides for major label signed bands from his bedroom. He probably has less than £5k worth of kit and software. I think this is why you can hear more music now from all over the world than you have ever been able to. You don't need to do it to make a living, you can make music as a hobby, make money or not make money, and have people hear it from everywhere. It's brilliant.

ps. the "if the band is good enough they'll get noticed without a promotional machine" is bollocks. It doesn't matter whether it's a promotional machine of paid for radio pluggers or a promotional machine of kids who love your music and go out and tell other people about you, you need a promotional machine or no-one will ever hear of you. Millions of people don't randomly stumble upon a band's MySpace and catapult them to stardom. They read about them in online forums or blogs, or hear them on radio stations, or have them played to them by their friends, or see them live...

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by DanS


Perhaps they are merely ineffective middle-men. Apparently, McGee has placed a value on their work that is different than what the labels perceive their own value to be.

And a good example how things can work out without such a marketing machinery by the recording companies would be the "Kelly Family".

For many years Father and Mother Kelly toured through european cities practicaly living in their tour bus, a red double decker bus.
They played mainly in street fstivals (where people could hear them for free) and, so I assume, where paid just enough money by the organnizers of these festival to survive.

But in the end everything paid out, because they were a familiar sight in many festivals and as their music was good, people showed interest in their music, making the Kelly family (especially when the Kelly Kids became older and did most of the work on stage) more and more popular, in the end resulting in them being able to found their own label and becoming rich.

Could they have made it better if from the beginning on they had been in contract with big recording companies and could have used their professional marketing strategists?
I doubt it.

I agree that even unknown bands have to earn enough money with their music to pay for their bills. But maybe it is not always wise to look what money you will earn in the short term with your music.

Maybe sometimes it is a good idea to give at least some of your songs away for free (for example at popular downloading sites) so that people get t know you better (and maybe later moe people pay money to get some other of your songs)

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Lorizael


This is really completely untrue. We live in a big world. It is very hard to make an impact on anything but your closest surroundings without lots of money. Money != talent.

or guns

[VetLegion]

Last.fm? The Long Tail? The future of small/indie bands looks bright to me.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
For many years Father and Mother Kelly toured through european cities practicaly living in their tour bus, a red double decker bus.
They played mainly in street fstivals (where people could hear them for free) and, so I assume, where paid just enough money by the organnizers of these festival to survive.

So musicians should spend years being effectively homeless, pennyless and nearly starving beggars in the hope that it might pay off?

Clearly yes, according to those who are seeking to justify their own mean-spiritedness and desire to steal.

That one-off example is wildly innapropriate for most bands.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
So musicians should spend years being effectively homeless, pennyless and nearly starving beggars in the hope that it might pay off?

If I were to abandon technical writing and go all in as a creative writer, this is what I would face.

[Kataphraktoi]

No it doesn't. It shows a market failure because, absent that government mandated monopoly, there's no way to create DanS's tollgates and very little content is produced at all.

The idea that the market can fail is false, imo. There is alot of content flowing about cheaper than ever. The doomsday expectations that free=nothing has not been coming true. People talk and when things are good, the word spreads. Many times more often than not, i have been introduced to something new by my friends, not advertisement.

The value of anything is the value the market will pay for it, not the value critics and ''higherminded'' people assign it

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
So musicians should spend years being effectively homeless, pennyless and nearly starving beggars in the hope that it might pay off?

I thought that came with being an artist.