5 ms·

Speaking strictly to my tastes, David mentioned something that caught my eye: "With the exception of a few lottery winners, the independent artists that seem mo

Speaking strictly to my tastes, David mentioned something that caught my eye: "With the exception of a few lottery winners, the independent artists that seem most successful under this new digital model seem to fall into two categories: "1.Established recording artists recently freed from major label contracts. "2.Artists playing to a specific non-commercial niche. For example Black Metal." Perhaps I'm being a little selfish here, but is that /really/ such a bad thing? While bands on average may sell less now, how many active bands are there now than there were in, say, 1998? While sales numbers dropped, has the pool of musicians grown? (That's the impression I get from reading random interviews.) And if so, why should it? If the economics are so bad, then why would more people bother getting into music? Other stuff - Cost of professionals: I wonder sometimes whether all this expensive top notch talent is really necessary. Like, if we're talking about trying to sell to the mass market, we're talking about selling music that's played through stock ear buds on loud CTA train rides. There's no appreciation for dynamics, the choice of amplifier, mic placement, etc. to be had. So why make this a sticking point when practically none of your customers care? Just how valuable can those skills be when practically nobody notices? Put another way, if we tolerate companies putting together dodgy applications with shoestring and duct tape, why doesn't the same idea of cheaper means extend to music production? We're not talking film scores here, so what's wrong with a bedroom mix? (Refer to yewweitan's mentioned act, Animals as Leaders.) Sales -- direct vs. via iTunes, Bandcamp, etc.: One definite turnoff to buying directly from the artist (via foomusic.com) is the possibility of a, er, suboptimal payment processor and web host, not wanting to create yet another account somewhere, unwanted mailing list subscriptions, etc. Ever visit a merch page, add something to your cart, and then discover the SSL cert long expired, page pulls in insecure content, etc.? Did you follow through with the purchase or just turn away? Traffic phagia: I understand YouTube. I _don't_ understand Facebook. As in, yeah, I expect Facebook to be one of the first place someone looks, but assuming Facebook users are getting to the tracks via the band's FB page, not via user submission (haven't seen FB since 2009-2010), what's wrong with a simple link to the Bandcamp page? After streaming a few things, are FB users just not clicking through?

anigbrowl 14y ago
Perhaps I'm being a little selfish here, but is that /really/ such a bad thing? While bands on average may sell less now, how many active bands are there now than there were in, say, 1998? While sales numbers dropped, has the pool of musicians grown? Well, it's great as a consumer since there's an endless flow of new stuff, though some critics have wondered whether there's a tendency towards the ephemeral. But people don't get into music or film or any of the other creative arts because of economics; they get into it because they have some degree of talent and a great deal of passion. The economic aspect is a secondary necessity if you want to do it full time. But a lot of people will do it for very little, hence the stereotype of the Starving Artist. It's rewarding on other levels besides the financial. why doesn't the same idea of cheaper means extend to music production? We're not talking film scores here, so what's wrong with a bedroom mix? It depends on who's doing the mixing. This is a particular skillset I happen to have, but it's not one that was developed easily or overnight. So the idea of cheaper means most certainly does extend to music production (and indeed film scores and so on), but you still need skill to exploit the means. If I give you a Ferrari for $5, it doesn't automatically make you a good driver, does it? Likewise, you can get instruments for fairly cheap - I've got a bass guitar that cost me only $150 that I like very much. Unfortunately I'm a pretty terrible bass player, so if I was making a recording that required some great bass skills, I'd have to pay someone who had them. The low price of my guitar doesn't make it any easier to play than an instrument that costs 10x as much. suboptimal payment processor and web host Couldn't agree more. (haven't seen FB since 2009-2010), what's wrong with a simple link to the Bandcamp page? After streaming a few things, are FB users just not clicking through? I don't use FB much anymore either, but my understanding is that yes, they don't click through. Avid Facebook users want their content within Facebook's standardized UI and relatively well-curated system. Like AOL, Facebook is the online equivalent of the mall - somewhat bland, but fairly clean, safe, and above all well-organized. Myspace was just as technically impressive as Facebook back in the day, but because it included a host of customization options it wound up looking like a shopping district that had gone to seed and was covered in bad graffiti and flyposters. You could tell it was doomed when some people were making a business out of selling sparkly animated gifs as page backgrounds. Myspace was so freely customizable that browsing and navigation ended up becoming a chore for visitors; you'd go to someone's page, loud music would start, and you'd be frantically looking for the transport/volume controls - like multimedia Geocities. With Facebook you never get lost as a visitor, and if the site limits a page owner's visual expression somewhat, the same is true for everyone else so you're not at a real disadvantage.

anigbrowl 14y ago

Perhaps I'm being a little selfish here, but is that /really/ such a bad thing? While bands on average may sell less now, how many active bands are there now than there were in, say, 1998? While sales numbers dropped, has the pool of musicians grown? Well, it's great as a consumer since there's an endless flow of new stuff, though some critics have wondered whether there's a tendency towards the ephemeral. But people don't get into music or film or any of the other creative arts because of economics; they get into it because they have some degree of talent and a great deal of passion. The economic aspect is a secondary necessity if you want to do it full time. But a lot of people will do it for very little, hence the stereotype of the Starving Artist. It's rewarding on other levels besides the financial. why doesn't the same idea of cheaper means extend to music production? We're not talking film scores here, so what's wrong with a bedroom mix? It depends on who's doing the mixing. This is a particular skillset I happen to have, but it's not one that was developed easily or overnight. So the idea of cheaper means most certainly does extend to music production (and indeed film scores and so on), but you still need skill to exploit the means. If I give you a Ferrari for $5, it doesn't automatically make you a good driver, does it? Likewise, you can get instruments for fairly cheap - I've got a bass guitar that cost me only $150 that I like very much. Unfortunately I'm a pretty terrible bass player, so if I was making a recording that required some great bass skills, I'd have to pay someone who had them. The low price of my guitar doesn't make it any easier to play than an instrument that costs 10x as much. suboptimal payment processor and web host Couldn't agree more. (haven't seen FB since 2009-2010), what's wrong with a simple link to the Bandcamp page? After streaming a few things, are FB users just not clicking through? I don't use FB much anymore either, but my understanding is that yes, they don't click through. Avid Facebook users want their content within Facebook's standardized UI and relatively well-curated system. Like AOL, Facebook is the online equivalent of the mall - somewhat bland, but fairly clean, safe, and above all well-organized. Myspace was just as technically impressive as Facebook back in the day, but because it included a host of customization options it wound up looking like a shopping district that had gone to seed and was covered in bad graffiti and flyposters. You could tell it was doomed when some people were making a business out of selling sparkly animated gifs as page backgrounds. Myspace was so freely customizable that browsing and navigation ended up becoming a chore for visitors; you'd go to someone's page, loud music would start, and you'd be frantically looking for the transport/volume controls - like multimedia Geocities. With Facebook you never get lost as a visitor, and if the site limits a page owner's visual expression somewhat, the same is true for everyone else so you're not at a real disadvantage.