What do you want to change in the music industry?

muzikengineer

muzikengineer

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
Location
Dallas Ft Worth TX
Hi Guys!!

I am trying to do research on the subject of ways to improve the music industry so its more profitable for musicians. I will be using it for my musician consulting business. might put it in a book I am writing......I basically want to know what he average inspiring musician thinks and wants. I am targeting musicians who want to be in a full time career.

What do you think should change about the industry. How radio plays music. store sales and stuff like that.......

Personally I am all for more power for musicians. All the wealth is going to 3 companies. Those companies sacrifice talent for profits...Push mediocre products fast and heavy...Get a fast return then move on......My goal is to find a way to help musicians eliminate the status quo in the industry.....
 
I don't really know much about the music industry, but we had to read an article in one of my anthro classes about covert censorship. It had to do with how Walmart alone is responsible for the majority of a musician's music sales--something ridiculous like 70%. So if Walmart refuses to sell you because they don't like your material, that's the majority of your sales out the window. So artists sometimes have to censor their material before it even gets made in order to get approved.

I honestly can't remember the specifics of the article, or when it was written, so this whole situation might be a little outdated, what with the advent of Itunes and music piracy. But it really struck me at the time as totally uncool :)

You might be able to find the article, I'll look through all my notes and see if I can find out who wrote it.

muzikengineer said:
Personally I am all for more power for musicians. All the wealth is going to 3 companies. Those companies sacrifice talent for profits...Push mediocre products fast and heavy...Get a fast return then move on......My goal is to find a way to help musicians eliminate the status quo in the industry.....
Click to expand...

I think it might be interesting to check out the flip side of that--super talented musicians who aren't overexposed, who have small fan bases but like it that way. Is superstardom the goal of all musicians? It also becomes something of a status thing among the fans...like "Do you know this person? Well I do, and..." The monopoly of giant music companies on mainstream music has opened up a really interesting "fringe" space that some great people are taking advantage of.

I feel like modern technology, particularly the internet and youtube, are also really interesting in how they're affecting music. Colbie Caillait got signed off her MySpace, Esmee Denters got signed off her Youtube, etc etc. It's really cool.

I'm not sure if that was what you wanted, anthro major will be quiet now :D
 
Last edited:
austin1 said:
I feel like modern technology, particularly the internet and youtube, are also really interesting in how they're affecting music. Colbie Caillait got signed off her MySpace, Esmee Denters got signed off her Youtube, etc etc. It's really cool.
Click to expand...

I agree. Check out "Ladyhawke" who has this pretty cool retro faux-80's sound. I was listening to her on myspace 2-3 years ago, now she's winning awards all over the place and her songs are being covered/remixed by far more established artists.

I think there needs to be a business model in place that works for artists, content publishers and consumers, and it needs to be balanced. 99.999% of income from a track arriving at one of the big three is not fair. And artists need to be encouraged to engage with the communities that follow them.

Take a look at some of the indie labels (I'm a fan of Ipecac, simply because it's Mike Patton's label) and some of the online experiments of the likes of Radiohead and Trent Reznor/NIN. Trent has done some really cool stuff with engaging his listenership online, especially the remix site.

And watch some Larry Lessig for some further inspiration, this is a good start:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q25-S7jzgs
 
muzikengineer said:
Personally I am all for more power for musicians. All the wealth is going to 3 companies. Those companies sacrifice talent for profits...Push mediocre products fast and heavy...Get a fast return then move on......My goal is to find a way to help musicians eliminate the status quo in the industry.....
Click to expand...
I worked for one of the major labels for ten years, so I know a little bit about how the industry works, although I'm sure some things have changed a bit since then. ;)

One thing a lot of people don't realize is that 90% of releases don't turn a profit or break even. It's the money made off the top 10% (superstars) that basically funds new and developing artists at the majors. Sometimes labels will stick with an unprofitable artist for many years before they "break" or the label finally gives up on them.

It's also possible for a "hit" record to not turn a profit for a label due to advances, expensive studio/producer costs, tour support, promotion, etc. Without this kind of power behind them, many bands have to continue to work their day jobs while they sell CDs recorded on a shoestring budget at local gigs.

Labels often get caught up in bidding wars. Don't quote me on this, but I seem to recall a rumor that David Bowie was guaranteed $12M on his contract with EMI America. Great deal for Bowie, but up to that point he was basically a fringe artist. Luckily for the label, he broke big (by going for a more commercial sound) and sold millions of records.

And an artist with a hit record may never see any royalties, due to many of the afore-mentioned expenses being deemed "recoupable." The artist makes nothing until the label has recouped its investment.

Of course, this is apart from anything an artist who is also a songwriter may receive from mechanicals, performance royalties and concerts.

But I think these are exciting times for independent musicians. As mentioned, with youtube, myspace and other avenues of self-promotion open to them, it's possible to develop a good following on the net that can translate to major success. :)
 
There are a hundred ways the record labels could change to make things more profitable for the artists. But why should they do so? They're in it to make money too, and as long as attention-hungry musicians keep lining up outside their door to sign up for the musical sharecropping that is the standard major label deal, there is zero incentive for the labels to change.

The best way for an artist to make more money in the music industry is to focus on being a musician first, a businessperson second, and a "star" dead last.

These days, most artists will see more profit in selling and marketing their own music than in delegating most of that process to a label that will keep the lion's share of the sales. They might not wind up as famous, but the larger percentage of the smaller amount they sell will probably beat a label deal 9 times out of 10. (And they'll own their own dang masters too!)

Labels might have been necessary back in the days when music was expensive to record and distribute. Now? Not so much.

JJ
 
itsme said:
I worked for one of the major labels for ten years, so I know a little bit about how the industry works, although I'm sure some things have changed a bit since then. ;)

One thing a lot of people don't realize is that 90% of releases don't turn a profit or break even. It's the money made off the top 10% (superstars) that basically funds new and developing artists at the majors. Sometimes labels will stick with an unprofitable artist for many years before they "break" or the label finally gives up on them.

It's also possible for a "hit" record to not turn a profit for a label due to advances, expensive studio/producer costs, tour support, promotion, etc. Without this kind of power behind them, many bands have to continue to work their day jobs while they sell CDs recorded on a shoestring budget at local gigs.

Labels often get caught up in bidding wars. Don't quote me on this, but I seem to recall a rumor that David Bowie was guaranteed $12M on his contract with EMI America. Great deal for Bowie, but up to that point he was basically a fringe artist. Luckily for the label, he broke big (by going for a more commercial sound) and sold millions of records.

And an artist with a hit record may never see any royalties, due to many of the afore-mentioned expenses being deemed "recoupable." The artist makes nothing until the label has recouped its investment.

Of course, this is apart from anything an artist who is also a songwriter may receive from mechanicals, performance royalties and concerts.

But I think these are exciting times for independent musicians. As mentioned, with youtube, myspace and other avenues of self-promotion open to them, it's possible to develop a good following on the net that can translate to major success. :)
Click to expand...


I agree with you 100% I am trying to work out ways to cut out a bunch of that corporate B.S and give the powers back to the musicians. I would like to see a day where musicians wouldn't even think about lining up at the labels door. Personally i don't know why they would now....It seems that you are basically at the mercy of a few idiots with big desks...lol...

Musicians deserve the rights to their material. They deserve more say in what happens in the industry...and most of all..They deserve the majority of profits made.......

If labels do become obsolete there is a good chance we won't see these one hit wonders anymore. It'll take talent, character and persistence to be successful....We won't see any or as many of those manufactured entertainers......

Also, I think this will help independent studios (not labels) but regular studios. As much as people like protools and home recording. We need professional studios to record in......Most people don't realize how important the engineering side of music really is......a Crappy audio master can kill a great song.....

Those are just my thoughts....I want to get ideas from alot of other musicians out there to see what they think.....They are the ones who matter in this.
 
muzikengineer said:
I agree with you 100% I am trying to work out ways to cut out a bunch of that corporate B.S and give the powers back to the musicians. I would like to see a day where musicians wouldn't even think about lining up at the labels door. Personally i don't know why they would now....It seems that you are basically at the mercy of a few idiots with big desks...lol...
Click to expand...

I think that's part of the beauty of the internet, technology, and youtube, it seems like now, through the various mediums, musicians can claim power over their music, because they are literally the ones recording and distributing it. good stuff!
 
I'm gonna read this thread after I post my response...

Kill the radio. The radio sucks. Radio hosts suck (they talk too much and are paid to say things that make people relate to them, but it doesn't entertain me). The songs on the radio suck. Correct me if I'm wrong, but some guy gets paid to decide which songs get played on the radio, and what's popular is basically "decided." And I think that system sucks.

But how would I change that? I don't know. I don't expect it to change. I just watch YouTube and listen to my own CD's in the car.
 
beeejums said:
I'm gonna read this thread after I post my response...

Kill the radio. The radio sucks. Radio hosts suck (they talk too much and are paid to say things that make people relate to them, but it doesn't entertain me). The songs on the radio suck. Correct me if I'm wrong, but some guy gets paid to decide which songs get played on the radio, and what's popular is basically "decided." And I think that system sucks.

But how would I change that? I don't know. I don't expect it to change. I just watch YouTube and listen to my own CD's in the car.
Click to expand...

Don't even get me started on that!! Saying Radio sucks is a compliment! LOL.....You are 100% right..The guy who decides what songs are being played are the ones who set trends. to me its all artificial.....If you put a song on the radio and Play it to 50 million people. Regardless if it stinks or not. People will buy it...Thats the law of averages in Marketing...50 million listeners hear it. You'll get at least 2-5% of those people to buy it. 2.5 million. That doesn't mean its good. That just means it out there. Thats why you see a lot of these Disney artists selling millions of records. Regardless if they can sing or not. Anything with Disney behind it will sale millions whether its good or not....

It probably won't change until this model is no longer profitable for radio...Radio is lagging right now. Mostly because of Ipods and other avenues to get music..They need to change before its too late though....They can't just lag around doing the same thing and expect profits like the past. Their advertisers will follow new trends. Whether radio is there or not its up to the radio people......
 
muzikengineer said:
Don't even get me started on that!! Saying Radio sucks is a compliment! LOL.....You are 100% right..The guy who decides what songs are being played are the ones who set trends. to me its all artificial.....If you put a song on the radio and Play it to 50 million people. Regardless if it stinks or not. People will buy it...Thats the law of averages in Marketing...50 million listeners hear it. You'll get at least 2-5% of those people to buy it. 2.5 million. That doesn't mean its good. That just means it out there. Thats why you see a lot of these Disney artists selling millions of records. Regardless if they can sing or not. Anything with Disney behind it will sale millions whether its good or not....

It probably won't change until this model is no longer profitable for radio...Radio is lagging right now. Mostly because of Ipods and other avenues to get music..They need to change before its too late though....They can't just lag around doing the same thing and expect profits like the past. Their advertisers will follow new trends. Whether radio is there or not its up to the radio people......
Click to expand...

Heh.. I'm a fan of Jon Lajoie, but haven't checked for updates for a while. So I checked earlier today and this is related (parental advisory: language)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0Gs4xGw1Eg

it's not the first time he's made commentary via music, e.g.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz-DJgxUeB8

Radio needs to be displaced by a popular way to discover music. Sites like Pandora and Grooveshark have autoplay/suggest features that go some of the way...
 
whetu said:
Heh.. I'm a fan of Jon Lajoie, but haven't checked for updates for a while. So I checked earlier today and this is related (parental advisory: language)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0Gs4xGw1Eg

it's not the first time he's made commentary via music, e.g.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz-DJgxUeB8

Radio needs to be displaced by a popular way to discover music. Sites like Pandora and Grooveshark have autoplay/suggest features that go some of the way...
Click to expand...

Now thats funny! :biglaugh:
 
I think musicians should get rid of the record companies and sell their music by themselves.
The record companies just want profit, not talent. Also, the radio does suck. Party in the USA is always playing 24/7. It is really annoying.
 
The "album."

I think things were more dynamic for the industry and musicians had more of a chance when a "record" was two songs. Nobody had quite as much vested in a "record," and you could put out a good one and be successful but a bad one was not an expensive, career-damaging failure.

I thought the whole mp3 downloading, one song at a time, "buy a song" type of idea would fix the damage the LP did to the industry, but I'm still waiting.
 
it's kinda funny for me to read what you americans (i guess most of you are) say about the music industry.
when i talk about music with people here in italy, we always say: think about bands like primus, all mike patton's project, tool, the mars volta (just a few bands that come into my mind), all the heavy metal bands and especially older stuff like the mothers of invention, grateful dead, red crayola and also jimi hendrix, santana, all the british bands i didn't mention...music like that can't exist in italy. i mean, it can exist, but nobody will ever produce your stuff and you won't get the chance to sell a single record, because you don't even have any advertising.
all the few "alternative" bands that came out in italy are unknown to most of the people because you will never listen to them on the radio or in tv.
if you play that music nowadays, you'll be poor for the rest of your life.

that's why i still think that you, on the other side of the ocean, are regardless way ahead on this subject.

so, keep on hating the radio, but don't complain too much. ;)
 
FrankBungle said:
it's kinda funny for me to read what you americans (i guess most of you are)...

...music like that can't exist in italy. i mean, it can exist, but nobody will ever produce your stuff and you won't get the chance to sell a single record, because you don't even have any advertising.
all the few "alternative" bands that came out in italy are unknown to most of the people because you will never listen to them on the radio or in tv.
if you play that music nowadays, you'll be poor for the rest of your life.

that's why i still think that you, on the other side of the ocean, are regardless way ahead on this subject.

so, keep on hating the radio, but don't complain too much. ;)
Click to expand...

We had the same problem here in NZ, our government put in place a voluntary code (at the threat of industry regulation) where radio broadcasters are encouraged to play a certain percentage of NZ based music link, link. Also the local RIAA type organisations got together and they promote something called NZ Music Month. Problem solved, we now get a good mix of NZ and international music.

This of course assumes that your local music scene is up to the task of generating quality music, which isn't the case for all countries - so this kind of approach won't necessarily work just anywhere

p.s. you mentioned Mike Patton, and you're from Italy. Did you know about the connection (i.e. he speaks/sings fluent Italian, lives there, had an Italian wife etc) and about the Mondo Cane concerts with the Metropole Orchestra? I'm hanging out for the Amsterdam taping to come out on DVD :)
 
Last edited:
whetu said:
We had the same problem here in NZ, our government put in place a voluntary code (at the threat of industry regulation) where radio broadcasters are encouraged to play a certain percentage of NZ based music link, link. Also the local RIAA type organisations got together and they promote something called NZ Music Month. Problem solved, we now get a good mix of NZ and international music.

This of course assumes that your local music scene is up to the task of generating quality music, which isn't the case for all countries - so this kind of approach won't necessarily work just anywhere

p.s. you mentioned Mike Patton, and you're from Italy. Did you know about the connection (i.e. he speaks/sings fluent Italian, lives there, had an Italian wife etc) and about the Mondo Cane concerts with the Metropole Orchestra? I'm hanging out for the Amsterdam taping to come out on DVD :)
Click to expand...

your government did something great for your music...while, you know, let's draw a veil over the italian government. it's something i'm ashamed of. but that's another subject.

anyway the problem here it's not the we don't get italian music played on the radio, it's just that we only encourage and give money to radio-friendly artists.

p.s. as for mike patton. i saw him several times, also with mondo cane that was amazing. i really owe him for that.
he also played with a roman band called "zu". (check them out if you're into his stuff)
as for his italian...it's very funny (funnier than my english). obviously his speaking is mainly based on cuss words. when he came here he also showed a "talent" in roman dialect and roman profanity and he knew a lot of typical roman aspects. i almost died laughing.
i'm glad to meet a mike patton's fan!
 
muzikengineer said:
Hi Guys!!

I am trying to do research on the subject of ways to improve the music industry so its more profitable for musicians. I will be using it for my musician consulting business. might put it in a book I am writing......I basically want to know what he average inspiring musician thinks and wants. I am targeting musicians who want to be in a full time career.
Click to expand...

Biggest change will be being able to record just about anywhere. No special engineer required. Not special room just out in the open. Which means no need for a contract which opens up distribution.

Now what kills music for me personally and why I really stopped listening to stuff say post 1995 is that,

A. Autotune sucks
B. Goto to line A. Loop 10000000 times.
C. You need a real drummer. Even I can play witha click track.
D. At some point you need to be able to play competently live, you know where the money actually is.
E. Singles are great if produced correctly, I wound rather have one or two good songs at say 2$ then a whole album full of filler.
F. STOP TRYING TO WIN THE LOUDNESS WARS. Or at least release a radio MP3 mixed version and a actually listenable version.
G. The two major players in the concert marker need to be broken up, period. They are the new labels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jopatm
Change my Kanile'a tuners.
Replies
1
Views
98
Ukecaster
Ukecaster
K
Strings When to change strings?
Replies
12
Views
550
UkingViking
UkingViking
Wiggy
Got Change in My Pocket Goin' Jing-a-Ling-a-Ling
Replies
13
Views
536
Wiggy
Wiggy
C
KoAloha Tenor Tuner Change?
Replies
7
Views
390
CPG
C
ukeclass
How long can I expect to need to change strings now that I’m playing considerably more?
Replies
19
Views
1K
man0a
M
Top Bottom