4 ms·

>As odd as it sounds, in music-as-a-business, the mentality needs to be that the music you're putting out is marketing for the actual product, which is the musi

>As odd as it sounds, in music-as-a-business, the mentality needs to be that the music you're putting out is marketing for the actual product, which is the musician themselves. It’s actually the other way around. The music is the product. The musicians are replaceable. Every “music-as-a-business” has shaken up lineups and replaced musicians, front men, dancers, roadies, publicists, managers, everyone.

mjr00 3y ago
In the context of a band with multiple members, the product is the band, which does occasionally have different members. But not the music the band creates, which is going to be available freely on the internet whether the band/musician/label wants it to be or not. Do you think record labels could replace Taylor Swift or Nicki Minaj with someone off the street and have them sing the same songs and be as successful? No, they could not, because all of the marketing and branding has surrounded those two individuals. Even the most amazing song in the world isn't really going to have value if you call it "UNKNOWN ARTIST - UNKNOWN TITLE".
- gabereiser 3y ago
  Spotify has a huge library of covers by unknown artists. The band is the “company” at the execution level. The label is the private equity or accelerator/VC. The music is the product. It may be freely available, but it’s not free. It’s a business of land and expand before you see a dime so you need to establish the scale first. Taylor swift is an interesting choice since her whole music catalog was bought out from under her (she still owns the song but not the masters) and now she’s recording it all again. Just being Taylor swift isn’t enough, she needs her music, in order to be “Taylor Swift - The Band”. Yes, you can’t replace Taylor and still have her music. Just like you can’t replace Atari and still have Atari. There are companies that exist as an extension of the founder (cough X cough) but most don’t operate this way.
  - mjr00 3y ago
    What would make more money: Taylor Swift/Metallica/The Arctic Monkeys doing a concert that's entirely covers of other artists' songs, or me (a nobody) doing a concert that's a cover of Taylor Swift/Metallica/The Arctic Monkeys songs? If you answer that question correctly, you'll understand what I mean when I say the band and the brand/marketing behind it is the product, not the music.

mjr00 3y ago

In the context of a band with multiple members, the product is the band, which does occasionally have different members. But not the music the band creates, which is going to be available freely on the internet whether the band/musician/label wants it to be or not. Do you think record labels could replace Taylor Swift or Nicki Minaj with someone off the street and have them sing the same songs and be as successful? No, they could not, because all of the marketing and branding has surrounded those two individuals. Even the most amazing song in the world isn't really going to have value if you call it "UNKNOWN ARTIST - UNKNOWN TITLE".

gabereiser 3y ago
Spotify has a huge library of covers by unknown artists. The band is the “company” at the execution level. The label is the private equity or accelerator/VC. The music is the product. It may be freely available, but it’s not free. It’s a business of land and expand before you see a dime so you need to establish the scale first. Taylor swift is an interesting choice since her whole music catalog was bought out from under her (she still owns the song but not the masters) and now she’s recording it all again. Just being Taylor swift isn’t enough, she needs her music, in order to be “Taylor Swift - The Band”. Yes, you can’t replace Taylor and still have her music. Just like you can’t replace Atari and still have Atari. There are companies that exist as an extension of the founder (cough X cough) but most don’t operate this way.
- mjr00 3y ago
  What would make more money: Taylor Swift/Metallica/The Arctic Monkeys doing a concert that's entirely covers of other artists' songs, or me (a nobody) doing a concert that's a cover of Taylor Swift/Metallica/The Arctic Monkeys songs? If you answer that question correctly, you'll understand what I mean when I say the band and the brand/marketing behind it is the product, not the music.