3 ms·

I'm all for this model. But a major challenge remains, and it's this: Trent Reznor, Radiohead, and even Louis C.K. were all hugely popular and successful befor

I'm all for this model. But a major challenge remains, and it's this: Trent Reznor, Radiohead, and even Louis C.K. were all hugely popular and successful before they employed this model. Can the model work for lesser-known artists attempting to capture an audience? In theory, sure. If anything, I could see this model's working out quite well for the proverbial little guy. But first, that little guy faces a big challenge: how to get himself noticed. How to turn himself into a Radiohead without the tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars that EMI spent marketing and promoting and touring Radiohead, over 20-odd years, prior to the band's online release of "In Rainbows." How to turn himself into a Louis C.K. without two major HBO series deals, a bevy of TV roles, sponsored tours, and a movie role or two. In looking at the majorly successful artists in pop culture today, we see that 99.99% of them were "made" by a big company or series of big companies. They were self-made in the sense that they quietly worked in the trenches, perfecting their craft, sometimes for decades, before they hit their big breaks. But big breaks were necessary conditions of becoming superstars. And becoming a superstar seems to be a necessary condition for big success in this model. [I don't want to get onto too wild of a tangent, and start discussing the philosophical meaning of "success." For some, success might mean simply making a living as an artist. I get that, and I respect that. I'm putting that aside for the moment, however, and focusing on the top of the game.]

absentbird 15y ago
Well there are also people like Jonathan Coulton (the guy who sings "code monkey") who started with nothing and built a fan base. Also he did the ending song for both Portal games.
- eli 15y ago
  No doubt there are examples of people who built a fanbase online from nothing. But I'm sure it helps a lot if you happen to write songs that appeal to nerds and then get featured on slashdot as a sort of novelty act. I don't see that working as well if you write earnest alt-folk love songs instead of songs about Mountain Dew. Incidentally, there was a story about Coulton on NPR not long ago [1]. [1] http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/05/14/136279162/an-internet-rock-star-tells-all http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/05/14/136279162/an-inter...
  - shawnaroo 15y ago
    The internet is not restricted to nerds anymore. Sure, your average musician isn't likely to get a mention on Slashdot, but there are about a zillion different forums/blogs/etc out there covering a zillion different topics, and if your music appeals to even a small subset of them you can get some pretty cheap advertising. And if your music is good, you can start to build off of that.
  - Goronmon 15y ago
    But I'm sure it helps a lot if you happen to write songs that appeal to nerds and then get featured on slashdot as a sort of novelty act. Isn't that kind of the whole point though? You can't just be a no-name, release some music that is very similar to a large number of artists in a popular genre of music, and then expect to hit it big.
    - lookhard 15y ago
      But he worked so hard, don't you get it?
onemoreact 15y ago
The current model does not work for less popular artists, so I have trouble seeing the downside.
- jfruh 15y ago
  The current model doesn't work for most less popular artists. All the artists who came up through the system and are now superstars were less popular once, and the promotional machinery had a big part in making them popular (and rich). This is sort of how I feel about the traditional publishing industry. The way it's worked traditionally is that can't quite tell which authors are going to be big sellers, so you take a chance on a bunch, and the more successful ones subsidize the less successful. Now the successful ones for obvious reasons resent this and can shift to a self-publishing model. The problem is they never would have gotten successful had some publisher taken that initial chance on them. Where's the next generation coming from?
  - _delirium 15y ago
    An interesting angle is that the current model actually works quite well for the least popular artists: someone else pays for the cost of recording, usually at least a small advance, and tour, and if the record ends up selling nothing and the tour is a bust, the label eats the expenses. Such people would be quite a bit worse off if they paid for the recording/tour out of pocket and it went nowhere. The people who get screwed are those who do moderately well, where the record company takes most of the profits.
    - wnight 15y ago
      But this is a symptom of one-size-fits-all solution the labels cram people into. Like VCs, they don't care at all about moderate success, anything less than phenomenal success is failure to them. So they'll burn your band/company out trying for unreasonable goals instead of helping you achieve whatever you can. Your band could have been poised to be a very successful mid-level act and have been mispositioned, because mid-level acts aren't hugely profitable, and thus seemed to be a failure in a market you weren't wanting to compete in. The small bands don't need a ton of financial support, especially these days. Recording a song can be done, professionally, for just a few thousand dollars and traveling to nearby concerts is pretty cheap. If you drop the idea of trying to sell an album in stores (payola!), and doing continent-wide tours, it's not all that expensive to spread your music to fans and enjoy a moderate return on investment.
larrys 15y ago
"quietly worked in the trenches, perfecting their craft, sometimes for decades, before they hit their big breaks. But big breaks were necessary conditions of becoming superstars" Right and I would add that the model also worked because the supply was constrained on talent by the those offering the break. It's possible that we will hit (and are already hitting) a talent saturation point there is only so much entertainment pie that an individual will pay for or needs to consume. I mean my time reading HN takes away from the time that I used to spend reading other sites.
rgoddard 15y ago
I think the important fact is that this worked. If this did not work even for someone with a sizable reputation and fan base, then the outcome would be bleak for those who do not. Plus as more people follow this path with success, even those who do not can benefit. The studios and other agencies may have to compete with this model, and in the process hopefully improve the current model for those who are still under it.
nathanlrivera 15y ago
Just look at Markus Persson. He was a relatively unknown indie game developer until Minecraft.
- electromagnetic 15y ago
  This is exactly what I was thinking. No one knew who he was, and I'm still seeing Minecraft as one of the most popular apps on the iPhone. It's currently the 25th highest grossing app, 12th if you exclude all the free games that rely on in game purchases. The fact that my wife knows what Minecraft is speaks worlds, when I barely get her to pick up an xbox remote, let alone think she'd find an obscure indie developer.
mitsche 15y ago
I had never heard of Pomplamoose before stumbling upon them on YouTube. They seem to do well. Jonathan Coulton has been mentioned, who I knew before Portal came into existence and made him even more famous. Can't remember how I found out about MC Frontalot, but I bet I never would have heard about him at all in times before music production and distribution became virtually free. Novelty acts? Sure. But they're proof that it's possible to become reasonably successful without the help of traditional media outlets if there's an audience for your work out there (I think most artists are–understandably–delusional about this one). Anyway, I think curation is becoming more important and influental nowadays. And curators used to be much more (totally?) dependent on what the industry decided to provide them with. It is no more so. I see no reason to worry about that (being a recording and performing artist myself).

absentbird 15y ago

Well there are also people like Jonathan Coulton (the guy who sings "code monkey") who started with nothing and built a fan base. Also he did the ending song for both Portal games.

eli 15y ago
No doubt there are examples of people who built a fanbase online from nothing. But I'm sure it helps a lot if you happen to write songs that appeal to nerds and then get featured on slashdot as a sort of novelty act. I don't see that working as well if you write earnest alt-folk love songs instead of songs about Mountain Dew. Incidentally, there was a story about Coulton on NPR not long ago [1]. [1] http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/05/14/136279162/an-internet-rock-star-tells-all http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/05/14/136279162/an-inter...
- shawnaroo 15y ago
  The internet is not restricted to nerds anymore. Sure, your average musician isn't likely to get a mention on Slashdot, but there are about a zillion different forums/blogs/etc out there covering a zillion different topics, and if your music appeals to even a small subset of them you can get some pretty cheap advertising. And if your music is good, you can start to build off of that.
- Goronmon 15y ago
  But I'm sure it helps a lot if you happen to write songs that appeal to nerds and then get featured on slashdot as a sort of novelty act. Isn't that kind of the whole point though? You can't just be a no-name, release some music that is very similar to a large number of artists in a popular genre of music, and then expect to hit it big.
  - lookhard 15y ago
    But he worked so hard, don't you get it?

onemoreact 15y ago

The current model does not work for less popular artists, so I have trouble seeing the downside.

jfruh 15y ago
The current model doesn't work for most less popular artists. All the artists who came up through the system and are now superstars were less popular once, and the promotional machinery had a big part in making them popular (and rich). This is sort of how I feel about the traditional publishing industry. The way it's worked traditionally is that can't quite tell which authors are going to be big sellers, so you take a chance on a bunch, and the more successful ones subsidize the less successful. Now the successful ones for obvious reasons resent this and can shift to a self-publishing model. The problem is they never would have gotten successful had some publisher taken that initial chance on them. Where's the next generation coming from?
- _delirium 15y ago
  An interesting angle is that the current model actually works quite well for the least popular artists: someone else pays for the cost of recording, usually at least a small advance, and tour, and if the record ends up selling nothing and the tour is a bust, the label eats the expenses. Such people would be quite a bit worse off if they paid for the recording/tour out of pocket and it went nowhere. The people who get screwed are those who do moderately well, where the record company takes most of the profits.
  - wnight 15y ago
    But this is a symptom of one-size-fits-all solution the labels cram people into. Like VCs, they don't care at all about moderate success, anything less than phenomenal success is failure to them. So they'll burn your band/company out trying for unreasonable goals instead of helping you achieve whatever you can. Your band could have been poised to be a very successful mid-level act and have been mispositioned, because mid-level acts aren't hugely profitable, and thus seemed to be a failure in a market you weren't wanting to compete in. The small bands don't need a ton of financial support, especially these days. Recording a song can be done, professionally, for just a few thousand dollars and traveling to nearby concerts is pretty cheap. If you drop the idea of trying to sell an album in stores (payola!), and doing continent-wide tours, it's not all that expensive to spread your music to fans and enjoy a moderate return on investment.

larrys 15y ago

"quietly worked in the trenches, perfecting their craft, sometimes for decades, before they hit their big breaks. But big breaks were necessary conditions of becoming superstars" Right and I would add that the model also worked because the supply was constrained on talent by the those offering the break. It's possible that we will hit (and are already hitting) a talent saturation point there is only so much entertainment pie that an individual will pay for or needs to consume. I mean my time reading HN takes away from the time that I used to spend reading other sites.

rgoddard 15y ago

I think the important fact is that this worked. If this did not work even for someone with a sizable reputation and fan base, then the outcome would be bleak for those who do not. Plus as more people follow this path with success, even those who do not can benefit. The studios and other agencies may have to compete with this model, and in the process hopefully improve the current model for those who are still under it.

nathanlrivera 15y ago

Just look at Markus Persson. He was a relatively unknown indie game developer until Minecraft.

electromagnetic 15y ago
This is exactly what I was thinking. No one knew who he was, and I'm still seeing Minecraft as one of the most popular apps on the iPhone. It's currently the 25th highest grossing app, 12th if you exclude all the free games that rely on in game purchases. The fact that my wife knows what Minecraft is speaks worlds, when I barely get her to pick up an xbox remote, let alone think she'd find an obscure indie developer.

mitsche 15y ago

I had never heard of Pomplamoose before stumbling upon them on YouTube. They seem to do well. Jonathan Coulton has been mentioned, who I knew before Portal came into existence and made him even more famous. Can't remember how I found out about MC Frontalot, but I bet I never would have heard about him at all in times before music production and distribution became virtually free. Novelty acts? Sure. But they're proof that it's possible to become reasonably successful without the help of traditional media outlets if there's an audience for your work out there (I think most artists are–understandably–delusional about this one). Anyway, I think curation is becoming more important and influental nowadays. And curators used to be much more (totally?) dependent on what the industry decided to provide them with. It is no more so. I see no reason to worry about that (being a recording and performing artist myself).