4 ms·

Looking for pointers on a music industry question. For an up and coming musician (e.g. Billie Eilish in December 2015, after it was clear she had potential and

by gen220 5y ago

Looking for pointers on a music industry question. For an up and coming musician (e.g. Billie Eilish in December 2015, after it was clear she had potential and after she had signed with an A&R in January 2016, but well before she signed with Interscope Records in August 2016), What is the primary motivation to sign to a record label? Assuming they have a solid understanding of the financial and copyright aspects of the transaction (which I'm sure Eilish had through her brother/producer, who had worked in the industry for years), what are the primary factors that influence the decision? The ones that occur to me are marketing/PR/general exposure, access to artistic collaborators (visual, musical, etc.), and in the case of "advances" on future albums, an insurance/put option against the unpredictability of their future career. But I have never worked in the industry, so I'm seeking wisdom from the HN crowd!

52-6F-62 5y ago
Labels often have established logistics for merchandizing (including design, QC, fulfillment, etc etc), websites, digital distribution through the higher-end channels, physical distribution deals (that one is even more work to get set up), connections to producers, mixing engineers, mastering houses, studios and so on. There are a lot of resources in the industry that are not available to the public. You have to build those connections over years, in some cases decades. When promoters are doing things like trying to pay you in stolen blue jeans (love you, T.O.) it can help to have more people in your corner. The music industry is segmented, and man some parts are the Wild West. Total fun, but you will struggle to make enough for cab fare at times without support.
- gen220 5y ago
  Good insight! Let me zoom all the way out on the abstraction scale of what you said, and let me know if it makes sense. There are some segments of the music industry that are specialized, and capital-intensive or labor-intensive (merchandising, physical distribution, producing/mixing/mastering, studio access). The specialized segments would presumably not be able to exist or sustainably operate without a steady/predictable source of cash flow. The big labels are market makers, connecting talent to these specialized services, and taking a cut off the top of every D2C transaction, in the form of a special variety of IP-licensing. This results in a bimodal distribution of musician outcomes. If you're accepted by a big label, you fit into modality B, which is shifted far to the right. If you're indie, you fit into modality A, which is shifted fart to the left. If you stick it out in A, you keep a higher percentage of lower expected earnings. If you shift into B, you keep a lower percentage of higher expected earnings, and gain difficult-to-price assets in the shapes of fame, connections, and responsibilities. If this abstraction holds, it's kind of analogous to the differences between an indie hacker and a VC-funded startup founder? cool food for thought.
  - 52-6F-62 5y ago
    Yeah pretty much! I like to think more dimension to that scale is possible, but unexplored. That’s what I’m working on figuring out myself. The degree to which you end up in B can differ a lot and depends on the nature of your agreements with whoever you get involved with and that can vary in a big way. We’ve all heard the stories of artists getting screwed out of their publishing rights even if they retain performing rights and all that. The music world seems less rigid to me, expectations are different. And personalities are very different. Maybe the software/tech crossover in electronic music is closer, but I have no experience there. I’m a relic. :)
sickcodebruh 5y ago
In addition to the resources and services mentioned by the sibling comment, good labels also claim to offer legitimacy and provide a built-in audience. If you’re playing in a saturated, competitive field like underground metal, getting released by the right label can get you eyes and ears that you’d struggle to reach on your own. It’s not always a silver bullet — plenty of labels over-promise and under-deliver — but it can save you years of toiling in total obscurity. Another important thing to remember is that many musicians aren’t really dedicated/focused/organized/disciplined (pick as many as you’d like) enough to run Band, Inc. Plenty of bands also have no interest in becoming a brand and are willing to stay a bit more underground if it means they can focus on music. Labels and others who are interested in handling that work can be great partners.

by gen220 5y ago

52-6F-62 5y ago

Labels often have established logistics for merchandizing (including design, QC, fulfillment, etc etc), websites, digital distribution through the higher-end channels, physical distribution deals (that one is even more work to get set up), connections to producers, mixing engineers, mastering houses, studios and so on. There are a lot of resources in the industry that are not available to the public. You have to build those connections over years, in some cases decades. When promoters are doing things like trying to pay you in stolen blue jeans (love you, T.O.) it can help to have more people in your corner. The music industry is segmented, and man some parts are the Wild West. Total fun, but you will struggle to make enough for cab fare at times without support.

gen220 5y ago
Good insight! Let me zoom all the way out on the abstraction scale of what you said, and let me know if it makes sense. There are some segments of the music industry that are specialized, and capital-intensive or labor-intensive (merchandising, physical distribution, producing/mixing/mastering, studio access). The specialized segments would presumably not be able to exist or sustainably operate without a steady/predictable source of cash flow. The big labels are market makers, connecting talent to these specialized services, and taking a cut off the top of every D2C transaction, in the form of a special variety of IP-licensing. This results in a bimodal distribution of musician outcomes. If you're accepted by a big label, you fit into modality B, which is shifted far to the right. If you're indie, you fit into modality A, which is shifted fart to the left. If you stick it out in A, you keep a higher percentage of lower expected earnings. If you shift into B, you keep a lower percentage of higher expected earnings, and gain difficult-to-price assets in the shapes of fame, connections, and responsibilities. If this abstraction holds, it's kind of analogous to the differences between an indie hacker and a VC-funded startup founder? cool food for thought.
- 52-6F-62 5y ago
  Yeah pretty much! I like to think more dimension to that scale is possible, but unexplored. That’s what I’m working on figuring out myself. The degree to which you end up in B can differ a lot and depends on the nature of your agreements with whoever you get involved with and that can vary in a big way. We’ve all heard the stories of artists getting screwed out of their publishing rights even if they retain performing rights and all that. The music world seems less rigid to me, expectations are different. And personalities are very different. Maybe the software/tech crossover in electronic music is closer, but I have no experience there. I’m a relic. :)

sickcodebruh 5y ago

In addition to the resources and services mentioned by the sibling comment, good labels also claim to offer legitimacy and provide a built-in audience. If you’re playing in a saturated, competitive field like underground metal, getting released by the right label can get you eyes and ears that you’d struggle to reach on your own. It’s not always a silver bullet — plenty of labels over-promise and under-deliver — but it can save you years of toiling in total obscurity. Another important thing to remember is that many musicians aren’t really dedicated/focused/organized/disciplined (pick as many as you’d like) enough to run Band, Inc. Plenty of bands also have no interest in becoming a brand and are willing to stay a bit more underground if it means they can focus on music. Labels and others who are interested in handling that work can be great partners.