PledgeMusic and the future of the music industry...

IanSavage

....I haz gone done and written a comment piece about how making recorded music is changing and the direction I think it might go in, feel free to read, share and discuss! http://www.themidlandsrocks.com/?p=23167&preview=true

DiscoStu

Ginger nailed the PledgeMusic format.

My mate is a massive Wildhearts / Ginger fan and has been following his Pledge page from the start, and telling me all about it.

New models are fine as the industry has changed. My friend was down in Glasgow last week and found herself helping her mate play a paying gig... online in Second Life! WTF???

RocknRollDave

Interesting point there about the power being back in the hands of the fans, in that if a band goes through a duff period or plays a rubbish show or such like, fans will lose faith in them and the funding will stop.
OK, this is also true of the old model - how many bands were dropped like hot potatoes as soon as they put out an album that didn't sell as well as the last or the tides of musical taste changed and left them stranded? - but still, it highlights that the pledge model isn't an instant/ guaranteed gravy train for artists.

And as mentioned in your piece, the artists still needs to gain an audience before they have an audience willing to pledge music - Where is the money in this model for early development of artists? They need to slog their way around the country, getting gigs, picking up fans one by one..That's a hard thing to do, we all know how disheartening the originals scene can be..How many good artists will be put off before they have a large enough fanbase to fund their album?

Maybe record labels were a necessary evil after all, in some senses?

musicegbdf

Interesting , and am sure a number of business models can live side by side.
A couple of points . First the big money will not give up easilly , and labels may be replaced by different models.
The second point is going beyond your borders to an International level to the big markets like the US.

As an example my daugther has a "production" deal. The producer and the studio have funded the first five tracks and are now in discussion with a music rights managment company to protect her globally including downloading and streaming deals.

They paid for her to work in the studio iin LA and serious money spent already without any financial commitment from her. The deal is complex (our UK based lawyer had never seen a deal like it before), but in essence the studio (not the label) is now getting distribution deals , etc set up. They are now funded showcases in London, ,New York and LA .
In short what I am trying to say is the launch of a new artist is expensive and complex

Heartfeltdawn

musicegbdf said:

As an example my daugther has a "production" deal. The producer and the studio have funded the first five tracks and are now in discussion with a music rights managment company to protect her globally including downloading and streaming deals.

They paid for her to work in the studio iin LA and serious money spent already without any financial commitment from her. The deal is complex (our UK based lawyer had never seen a deal like it before), but in essence the studio (not the label) is now getting distribution deals , etc set up. They are now funded showcases in London, ,New York and LA .
In short what I am trying to say is the launch of a new artist is expensive and complex

When you've got the online world, it seems pointless to talk about 'the big US market'. Geographical boundaries don't matter like they used to.

The deal your daughter has got sounds like the same bullshit that happened before, just with more fingers in the artist pie. The producer and studio take their cut, the rights management company take their cut...

So what genre does your daughter fit in? 

musicegbdf

Not sure what Genre she would fit , but I suppose it would be the Adele market.

The problem with the web is how do you get yourself above the millions of other people. This is where the "machine" fits in. Just see what the publicity machine can do for people without talent ! We can all list them.

It would be nice to believe talent alone is all that is needed. If you are going to make a living in music you soon realise this is not the case.
The industry is evolving , but it still takes big money to produce and launch someone.

My daughters contract is a new type which Riihanna was the first to sign. My lawyer was surprised at how much control she has. I am a novice at this and have been reading up, and from what I am begining to see is the serious money is in the writing . The deal she has on her writing seems fair.
Again it would be nice to think the web will make the difference ,buut this is a billion. Dollar industry and can,t see that changing.
is

Heartfeltdawn

^^

Adele's been a lesson in marketing, not ability. Vocally she has a lousy range. 

Nobody believes talent alone is enough. Luck, hard work, some promotion, sure.

The serious money has always been in the writing. 

It only takes big money to produce someone if you insist on hooking them up to the usual songwriting and producing crew, throw them in with typical stylists, and then pay to get them on the usual slots. That's not exactly artistic freedom the way I see artistic freedom. 

I hope your daughter does make it but I'm not hearing that much that is revolutionary.

musicegbdf

I suppose more evolution than revolution.
Marketing is a big part of the industry.
The difference is in the deal itself and the fact the masters already exist without the label, so no advance needed.
My daughters friend is already a well known Pop singer, and my daughter has had a couple of big UK companies try to sign her. She did not want to go down the same road as her friend, as she wanted control.
So we signed with US company run by "creatives" rather than "suits". It may come to nothing , but it has not cost us ,and if nothing else she has had a great time working with multi grammy winning people helping her produce her songs. She told me somehow the producer gets the sounds in her head onto each master. If it does take off she owns 70 per cent of the masters , 40 per cent of the writing (she is part of a team of 4) and 95 per cent of the 360. Right now she is a minimum wage waitress !

monquixote

Heartfeltdawn said:

^^

Adele's been a lesson in marketing, not ability. Vocally she has a lousy range. 

Don't agree with this. 

Sinatra had a shitty range as does Bruce Springsteen. Marketing can only put music in front of people it can't make them like it and if you were going to choose a talentless wanabee to turn into a pop sensation you would hardly choose Adele. 

geepers0677

We funded our last EP with a pledge campaign. It was great, we raised enough for all studio and production costs including mixing and mastering and reproduction of 200 copies of the EP. After the event, we still had enough left from the campaign to pay for at least half of the current studio adventure. Well worth it.

PolarityMan

DiscoStu said:

Ginger nailed the PledgeMusic format.

My mate is a massive Wildhearts / Ginger fan and has been following his Pledge page from the start, and telling me all about it.

New models are fine as the industry has changed. My friend was down in Glasgow last week and found herself helping her mate play a paying gig... online in Second Life! WTF???

Lol is second life still going?

monquixote

Just got around to reading the article.

Good stuff @IanSavage ;

It's a great idea, but I do wonder if it's only really going to work for bands that have already gone the major route, but then been dropped despite having a committed fan base, That being said even if that's all it does it's still a massive win for people who want to hear new albums from bands that have dropped out of the industry machine. 

digitalscream

monquixote said:

Just got around to reading the article.

Good stuff @IanSavage ;

It's a great idea, but I do wonder if it's only really going to work for bands that have already gone the major route, but then been dropped despite having a committed fan base, That being said even if that's all it does it's still a massive win for people who want to hear new albums from bands that have dropped out of the industry machine. 

Not necessarily - something I think would make a good follow-up article (maybe, @IanSavage?) would be the rise of the small PR companies - ones like HoldTight etc, which focus on music PR. If you've already built your band a decent reputation, maybe got yourself 1000 FB fans (not difficult to do, as long as you have decent online content), and you've recorded enough tracks for an EP, then hitting up a good PR company to get your crowdfunding campaign some attention has to be the first port of call.

monquixote

One thing that I do like about the modern world is that musicians now seem to understand that if you want to make a living being a musician you have to treat it like a business.

 

Ten years ago there seemed to be this pervasive attitude amongst musicians that all you should expect to do was write some songs and labels should seek you out and throw money at you, find you an audience etc and the fact that this didn't happen was some kind of great injustice. 

The attitude to starting a band now seems more like bootstrapping a small business. I'm sure people would rather devote all that energy to making music, but it does mean that when people do make it big they will actually get to keep what they make rather than having to settle for a pathetically small piece of the pie.

ICBM

monquixote said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

^^

Adele's been a lesson in marketing, not ability. Vocally she has a lousy range. 

Don't agree with this. 

Sinatra had a shitty range as does Bruce Springsteen. Marketing can only put music in front of people it can't make them like it and if you were going to choose a talentless wanabee to turn into a pop sensation you would hardly choose Adele. 

No, you'd choose Pixie Lott.

I think it's hard to put a finger on which exact talent (or talents, it's not always the same) it takes for someone to be successful - but it's not vocal ability alone, for sure. With Adele I'd guess it's a way people can empathise with her songs.

musicegbdf

Funny you should choose to mention Pixie. Have known her since she was 11, she is nothing like the image she has had been "given".

She is actually a very clever girl , with straight "A" 's in her exams , and is very friendly and caring to her friends. A number of them you will see dancing in her video's. Even after hitting well in the industry and making a lot of money from a young age , she still keeps her friendships from a young age.

I can also tell you she has a very good vocal range , and a lot of power in her voice. In school musicals her voice always stood out. She has to play the game and fit to the image given to her.

I wouldn't class her talentless , she has worked hard and is a very good dancer.

In my mind is people like Jordan , and the TOWIE mob. Celebrity for the sake of it makes me sick when there are hard working talented people not making it. Though agree with ICBM , what is talent?

That brings me back to the original point , it is also about marketing. Rory Gallagher was one of my favourite artists , was he just pure talent or was he just marketed as a raw artist.
I suspect a bit of both. I still think if you want to make a living it is tough without the "machine".

Let's say a band of 5 people need to earn a living wage. Say £35k before tax, that is £175k a year after paying all their expenses. From what I recall itunes pays around $1 per 300 downloads. I think Spotify pay more , but you need a huge number of hits to earn anything like a living. So if you rely on this alone you need a audience that only strong marketing can provide.
Earning from Gig's. After expenses again hard to make a living. So yes the professionals take cuts (Managers, performing rights, etc.), but a lesser percentage of a big pot could be better than a big percentage of very little.

In my daughter's case (and from what I heard is usual) I expect she will earn very little for the first two years and on the first Album ( if such a thing still exists)... but thereafter things do improve provided she survives.

 

frankus

musicegbdf said:

Again it would be nice to think the web will make the difference ,buut this is a billion. Dollar industry and can,t see that changing.

Paper is a billion dollar industry, buut thanks to the web (email rendering the letter almost obsolete, faxes too, photocopying often the same, eReader downloads rendering books mostly obsolete), it is worth markedly billions less.

Don't deal in absolutes; the web isn't going to destroy anything but it will create opportunities sometimes outstripping those offered by record industry... who're frantically re-inventing their business model to retain the "gate-keeper to the proles" profile - I personally think that'll be their downfall - the difference between a crowd and a mob is resentment and their business model will only engender resentment... roll on crowd sourcing

musicegbdf

Mmm we will see. The problem with most business today margins are cut to the bone and too many chase volume to compensate.,
At the low revenue to the artist from streaming huge volumes are needed to earn a living. Other revenue streams also remain limited .
From a personal viewpoint I really dislike this volume chasing , but I like most still buy from Amazon or Tesco . The current Tesco model to suppliers is awful. Though I suspect they are copying the modell started by Walmart.
It would be great if music could buck the trend , but I suspect this will not be the case. During these difficult times it seems the big just get bigger , and the small disappear.

ICBM

musicegbdf said:

Funny you should choose to mention Pixie. Have known her since she was 11, she is nothing like the image she has had been "given".

She is actually a very clever girl , with straight "A" 's in her exams , and is very friendly and caring to her friends. A number of them you will see dancing in her video's. Even after hitting well in the industry and making a lot of money from a young age , she still keeps her friendships from a young age.

I can also tell you she has a very good vocal range , and a lot of power in her voice. In school musicals her voice always stood out. She has to play the game and fit to the image given to her.

I wouldn't class her talentless , she has worked hard and is a very good dancer.
 

I'd give you that, and she must have some talent, as I said earlier... she wouldn't have made it without. And I'm sure she's a nice person, and has worked hard. But talented as a musician/artist? Her music is incredibly derivative and formulaic, every song is a fairly unmemorable near-copy of something else, and she does come across as a completely manufactured product. (Hence why I chose her as the example.)

But if she knows what she's doing and has chosen to do that and make the most of it, good luck to her.

I think there are other even more successful artists whose talent is not actually in music, as such - it's in knowing how to work the system, work with the right writers and producers, the right marketing people etc. I know this offends a lot of 'real' musicians.

musicegbdf

Actually we agree . Pixie is more talented than her manufactured image would let you know. She was only 15 when she was put through the machine . My daughter has learned from her experience , and is taking a slower process as she has rejected offers of being put through the same machine. I can tell those people put her under a lot of pressure , offering her the moon.
She has now gone with people that are aiming at a different market and she has total creative control . She also has made it clear she will not sell herself with short skirts and bra tops.
However, at the end of the day she will have to sell units , and will in some sense still just be a product.
The good news she is being offered work as a writer as well as a performer.
I suppose it is the difference between being a musician and a performance artist. There are a number of great musicians that actually cannot put on a good show.