6 ms·

> increasingly difficult, if not impossible, for independent bands to exist at all, he said Uh, no. These old-timers still think a healthy "independent" music

> increasingly difficult, if not impossible, for independent bands to exist at all, he said Uh, no. These old-timers still think a healthy "independent" music scene is one where an infinitesimally small number of garage bands get lucky and land distribution deals with indie labels, and maybe make a couple bucks. What we have now is real music independence - being able to DIY record your band and instantly distribute the sound to the entire planet, for free. You can also DIY record and distribute professional music videos, communicate with your fans in real-time, and take payments from anyone in the world. What a time to be making (and listening to) music! The only people complaining about this are the guys who ran small labels in the 80s and 90s - they're just bitter that they're no longer needed, and that major labels still exist.

k-mcgrady 11y ago
>> "being able to DIY record your band and instantly distribute the sound to the entire planet, for free. You can also DIY record and distribute professional music videos, communicate with your fans in real-time, and take payments from anyone in the world." Not of that matters unless you can get people to discover your music. That's where labels come in. Once you get enough people listening to your music you can get to support someone on a tour and you should grow organically from there but that first hurdle is impossible for most people to get over, regardless of how good their music is.
- brandonmenc 11y ago
  > Not of that matters unless you can get people to discover your music. That's where labels come in. No, that's where curation comes in. Labels are just curators. That role has been taken over by Tumblr, Facebook, Soundcloud, Bandcamp, etc. I've discovered orders of magnitude more bands just by rabbit-holing on Tumblr than I ever did reading an Alternative Tentacles catalog.
  - k-mcgrady 11y ago
    Labels are also marketers. You can pass the curation role off to other people (bloggers for example) but they need to have a way to discover the music in the first place and that is usually pushed to them by labels.
    - TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
      Labels were promoters. There used to be serious shenanigans involved in getting records into the charts - when charts still mattered. DJs would be - let's say - "encouraged in creative ways" to promote music. (I know one band who got airplay after delivering a lawn mower to a DJ. Because he needed one. That was one of the more legal things that happened.) The top DJs could make or break careers. Everyone understood this. I'm not sure how many people realise that labels still exist, and they still do a lot of PR. In fact A&R spending has increased over the last few years. But it's a lot more diffuse than it used to be, and it's no longer as easy to influence the market as it was. So labels take far fewer risks, and they do what book publishers do - wait until they find an artist with a buzz and a following, and then try to hype them.
      - pjlegato 11y ago
        Why the faux-demure attitude, with the "let's say"? Call it what it was -- outright bribery, known as "payola" in the music industry. It's been widely documented -- Google it.
- gozur88 11y ago
  >That's where labels come in. Or youtube or Pandora. If I were trying to get a band going today I'd blanket the internet with my music and try to make money off of live shows and t-shirts. All it takes is one popular video and everyone knows who you are. What the labels used to bring to the table is control of shelf space in record stores and control over what gets played on the radio. You just couldn't get around that cartel no matter how much people liked your music. But shelf space is a commodity of dwindling importance, and people don't go to the radio for new music any more.
  - k-mcgrady 11y ago
    >> "All it takes is one popular video and everyone knows who you are." Totally agree. But you make that sound easy :) The only way that's really going to happen is it you get extremely lucky or make something really gimmicky that can go viral.
    - brandonmenc 11y ago
      > you make that sound easy How was getting signed to a label, even an indie one, any easier? At least now it's all up to you creating something people want instead of convincing a gatekeeper you're worthy. > The only way that's really going to happen is it you get extremely lucky You mean, like getting signed to a label?
      - k-mcgrady 11y ago
        Getting signed to a label seems easier to me. An indie label isn't hard to get your music in front of and if it's good they'll sign you and you can focus on the thing you do well while they promote you. Remove the label and you need to be a good musician, marketer, promoter, you need to make lots of connections a label would have already had access to etc.
    - gozur88 11y ago
      I don't think it's easy no matter what you do. That was always the case, though. There must be thousands of serious musicians for every one that makes it.
tnecniv 11y ago
You forgot the part where you make no money off the record you put out because digital services pay artists crap and the supply outpaces the demand significantly. That being said, the last 60 or so years have really been an anomaly in how much money you can make from music.
- dharma1 11y ago
  True. But the same could be said about almost everything (last 60 years being been an anomaly in how much money you can make for X) - housing, banking, paintings, vintage wines/cars, etc
  - tnecniv 11y ago
    Right, but twice in the last century the structure of the music industry went fundamental shifts in how revenue is generated. Not many industries can claim that.
- brandonmenc 11y ago
  > the last 60 or so years have really been an anomaly Correct. Musicians have to figure out how to make money from ways other than selling recordings, just like they did for thousands of years before recording was invented. Recordings aren't scarce anymore, and that's a major net benefit for society.
  - tnecniv 11y ago
    Except before you either worked for a concert hall, had a patron, or it wasn't your main job. Two of those three options are no longer very viable.
dave2000 11y ago
Well, no, substantially more people are complaining. Bands, because there's no money in it any more unless you are one of the top 10 bands. No, it wasn't always that way - many, many more bands were able to make money from music than now. As a fan, with no credible music press to help discern the good from the shit you'll just never hear about the really good bands because the signal gets lost in the noise of all the shit. The same thing is happening in publishing; endless dross churned out meaning that the good books are harder and harder to identify.
- brandonmenc 11y ago
  > As a fan, with no credible music press to help discern the good from the shit you'll just never hear about the really good bands because the signal gets lost in the noise of all the shit. Throw darts until you find a band you like. Then, go to their Facebook/Bandcamp/Soundcloud/Last.fm page and you'll find a bunch of "if you like this you'll like these" links to other bands, or even a list of musicians the band endorses. This is the modern equivalent of flipping through the radio.
- makomk 11y ago
  Grooveshark used to be really handy for solving the discovery problem. Too bad the record industry managed to shut it down.

k-mcgrady 11y ago

>> "being able to DIY record your band and instantly distribute the sound to the entire planet, for free. You can also DIY record and distribute professional music videos, communicate with your fans in real-time, and take payments from anyone in the world." Not of that matters unless you can get people to discover your music. That's where labels come in. Once you get enough people listening to your music you can get to support someone on a tour and you should grow organically from there but that first hurdle is impossible for most people to get over, regardless of how good their music is.

brandonmenc 11y ago
> Not of that matters unless you can get people to discover your music. That's where labels come in. No, that's where curation comes in. Labels are just curators. That role has been taken over by Tumblr, Facebook, Soundcloud, Bandcamp, etc. I've discovered orders of magnitude more bands just by rabbit-holing on Tumblr than I ever did reading an Alternative Tentacles catalog.
- k-mcgrady 11y ago
  Labels are also marketers. You can pass the curation role off to other people (bloggers for example) but they need to have a way to discover the music in the first place and that is usually pushed to them by labels.
  - TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
    Labels were promoters. There used to be serious shenanigans involved in getting records into the charts - when charts still mattered. DJs would be - let's say - "encouraged in creative ways" to promote music. (I know one band who got airplay after delivering a lawn mower to a DJ. Because he needed one. That was one of the more legal things that happened.) The top DJs could make or break careers. Everyone understood this. I'm not sure how many people realise that labels still exist, and they still do a lot of PR. In fact A&R spending has increased over the last few years. But it's a lot more diffuse than it used to be, and it's no longer as easy to influence the market as it was. So labels take far fewer risks, and they do what book publishers do - wait until they find an artist with a buzz and a following, and then try to hype them.
    - pjlegato 11y ago
      Why the faux-demure attitude, with the "let's say"? Call it what it was -- outright bribery, known as "payola" in the music industry. It's been widely documented -- Google it.
gozur88 11y ago
>That's where labels come in. Or youtube or Pandora. If I were trying to get a band going today I'd blanket the internet with my music and try to make money off of live shows and t-shirts. All it takes is one popular video and everyone knows who you are. What the labels used to bring to the table is control of shelf space in record stores and control over what gets played on the radio. You just couldn't get around that cartel no matter how much people liked your music. But shelf space is a commodity of dwindling importance, and people don't go to the radio for new music any more.
- k-mcgrady 11y ago
  >> "All it takes is one popular video and everyone knows who you are." Totally agree. But you make that sound easy :) The only way that's really going to happen is it you get extremely lucky or make something really gimmicky that can go viral.
  - brandonmenc 11y ago
    > you make that sound easy How was getting signed to a label, even an indie one, any easier? At least now it's all up to you creating something people want instead of convincing a gatekeeper you're worthy. > The only way that's really going to happen is it you get extremely lucky You mean, like getting signed to a label?
    - k-mcgrady 11y ago
      Getting signed to a label seems easier to me. An indie label isn't hard to get your music in front of and if it's good they'll sign you and you can focus on the thing you do well while they promote you. Remove the label and you need to be a good musician, marketer, promoter, you need to make lots of connections a label would have already had access to etc.
  - gozur88 11y ago
    I don't think it's easy no matter what you do. That was always the case, though. There must be thousands of serious musicians for every one that makes it.

tnecniv 11y ago

You forgot the part where you make no money off the record you put out because digital services pay artists crap and the supply outpaces the demand significantly. That being said, the last 60 or so years have really been an anomaly in how much money you can make from music.

dharma1 11y ago
True. But the same could be said about almost everything (last 60 years being been an anomaly in how much money you can make for X) - housing, banking, paintings, vintage wines/cars, etc
- tnecniv 11y ago
  Right, but twice in the last century the structure of the music industry went fundamental shifts in how revenue is generated. Not many industries can claim that.
brandonmenc 11y ago
> the last 60 or so years have really been an anomaly Correct. Musicians have to figure out how to make money from ways other than selling recordings, just like they did for thousands of years before recording was invented. Recordings aren't scarce anymore, and that's a major net benefit for society.
- tnecniv 11y ago
  Except before you either worked for a concert hall, had a patron, or it wasn't your main job. Two of those three options are no longer very viable.

dave2000 11y ago

Well, no, substantially more people are complaining. Bands, because there's no money in it any more unless you are one of the top 10 bands. No, it wasn't always that way - many, many more bands were able to make money from music than now. As a fan, with no credible music press to help discern the good from the shit you'll just never hear about the really good bands because the signal gets lost in the noise of all the shit. The same thing is happening in publishing; endless dross churned out meaning that the good books are harder and harder to identify.

brandonmenc 11y ago
> As a fan, with no credible music press to help discern the good from the shit you'll just never hear about the really good bands because the signal gets lost in the noise of all the shit. Throw darts until you find a band you like. Then, go to their Facebook/Bandcamp/Soundcloud/Last.fm page and you'll find a bunch of "if you like this you'll like these" links to other bands, or even a list of musicians the band endorses. This is the modern equivalent of flipping through the radio.
makomk 11y ago
Grooveshark used to be really handy for solving the discovery problem. Too bad the record industry managed to shut it down.