I think this blog talks just as much about succeeding as a new band as it does the future of the industry and music itself. The only two things I (or anyone else) know about this are 1) the old paradigm has broken down, and 2) the new model has not emerged yet.

While some artists like yourself have figured out what works for them – everything you’ve written here – this is not a model for the new music industry, because it’s only viable for a certain type of artist. What you’re suggesting here is not a new paradigm for which bands to use to break in, you’re suggesting that the future of music is primarily for the indies. And you’re probably right.

I think there are two areas to look at within your blog – first, there is the approach of using “unconventional” means for an artist to get their music out and connect with their fans, and to make new ones. Twitter, webcasts, etc. Who can argue with this? The fact is, these methods (which labels still refer to as “viral” marketing”) are not viral – they are the fucking mainstream, or soon will be. It’s how this generation is not only communicating but is getting its information. As Michael Crichton predicted in “Electronic Life” decades ago, the old way of information is leaving us. We are now witnessing the final stages of a terminal illness for the mainstream media – newspapers, CDs etc. So I couldn’t agree more with your first point, which is to wake the fuck up and recognize we’re in the midst of a technological revolution, and utilize it to your full advantage.

Your second point deals with the way in which bands are to conduct their business, which I understand to be “give your music away, and try to earn money on special collector’s edition merch.”

To me this is where it breaks down, because it will only work for a certain kind of band. No, I’m not giving you the standard bullshit reply of “it’s great if you’re already established,” which you’ve addressed in this blog. What I’m saying is more complex than that.

First off, this does seem like a good way for a band to start out and get a fan base. But what I don’t see in your blog is an answer to the question “Then what?” You seem to imply to continue on merrily giving away your music and selling collector’s editions. The major argument I have against this is that very few bands have the kind of fans that will pay for this. Sure, I had no problem dropping a couple hundred bucks on the “Ghosts” edition when it came out. NIN is the kind of band that has fans like that. Beastie Boys is another. So is Radiohead. But what if you’re The Fray? Or OneRepublic? These are bands selling shitloads of records, but they just don’t have the kind of fan-base that’s going to blow money on collector’s editions or even really give a shit about them. It’s the soccer mom in the car humming along to “Apologize” that’s going to go ask her 13-year-old how to download it on iTunes that’s buying their records. I just don’t think your method will have longevity for straight-up pop bands – bands with good songs that people want to hear, yet don’t have the intrigue of a NIN or Radiohead, that will transform an ordinary music listener into a militant fan. While it may be a great way for a band like that to start out, what do they do next? I’m saying I think your idea will only work for a specific kind of band, with a specific kind of fan, one that will follow the band’s every move. There are only a handful of bands around today that command this kind of power, and yes NIN is one of them. The best evidence of this, sadly, is American Idol. Why do some of the actual *winners* of the shows dissolve into obscurity, while the second and third place finishers go on to massive stardom? Because people give a shit about Chris Daughtry for more than five minutes, unlike Taylor Hicks.

Furthermore, since there is very little money coming in and essentially no labels, your blog only speaks to bands with the capacity to produce themselves. How realistic is it for every band to be self-produced?

This takes me back to the beginning of my post, where I said the picture you are painting is one of independent, self-produced bands becoming the mainstream, because that’s the only kind of band that will be able to thrive with your suggested methods. Will that happen? It might. Because those are likely the bands best equipped to reach the new generation, but not necessarily the best bands. That’s a scary thought, but not any scarier than the old system.

The question all this begs to me is does this preclude any real musical revolution from happening? The mainstream trends have always been easily followed. In the 80s there was…well, 80s music. This morphed into cock-rock and then there was Nirvana and Pearl Jam. Somehow we backslid into the Backstreet and Britney Spears era, and then there was Dave Matthews and mother fucking Blues Traveler and the Rembrandts and Bare Naked Ladies and Matchbox Twenty. Next? Linkin Park. Alien Ant Farm. Limp Bizkit. And then the American Idol era began. Nickelback was invented. Santana started getting artists to put their songs on his records while he obscenely soloed over every goddamn section. Alongside that was a quasi-R&B fad with Timberlake and Outkast. Enter piano rock. The Fray. Five For Fighting.

You can question the exact timing of these last few eras, and that is my point. Most of these last few trends have been running parallel to each other. Music is more eclectic now than at any other point in history. And it’s because the media is changing. Everything and anything is available at all times. Previously, dominant musical trends were driven by a machine, a mainstream machine. Whatever the labels put into the machine came out neatly packaged and force-fed to a generation, clearly defining an era. That machine is now broken. Whereas there used to be one major highway that became what we call a trend, there are now a thousand arteries branching off in every direction. So the question becomes, is it possible for there to ever again be a single, easily definable musical mainstream era? Or is the new mainstream by definition an eclectic melting pot?

If this is the case, then we can be happy the playing field is somewhat leveled and we won’t have to be force-fed whatever the major labels have bestowed their blessings on. But there’s still a machine isn’t there? This one looks different and acts differently, but it’s still a machine. It’s still marketing. It will be the bands that know how to use the new media that will succeed, and this doesn’t mean it will be the best bands, just the craftiest ones. Is this really any better? I’m sure some will say clearly, yes. But it will really be no different. In the old system great bands were never heard of because they couldn’t break through the bullshit system, and they had no other way of getting heard, while shitty music was everywhere. In the new system, great bands will never be heard of because they don’t know how to utilize the new media, and yes, shitty bands will still be everywhere.

I don’t think a blog like yours can be written without discussing the consequences of what it purports. Because what you are talking about is not just a way for bands to break in, but a new vision of the music industry, and a complete make-over of music itself. I think there has to be an avenue other than this, alongside it, because otherwise all we’d have in the coming years are tech-savvy, self-produced indie bands.

What I see happening is basically a revolution, a churning over of the old system into something that will look very much like its former self. It’s essentially a passing of power from one pair of hands to another.

It won’t be indie bands that will be taking over, it will be indie labels. While more and more bands will become self-produced as music technology gets continually dumbed down, you’ll see less of the big-name producers, engineers and mixers and studios around (I mean, we already are). But rather than the bands themselves being the ones to take matters into their own hands, it will be independent labels that are able to embrace the new market. They’ll provide 360 deals for these new bands and a platform from which to launch (read: $$$). Unlike their major label predecessors they won’t be shelling out half a million to make a record anymore. They’ll expect the bands to make the records themselves, but they’ll likely lure them with more lucrative advances, tour support, etc.

Some of these indie labels will be more successful than others. And eventually those indie labels will become? Major labels. They will look different but that’s what they’ll be: an entity that was best able to master the current media. Just a new machine.

RG

phattedcalf posted:

Your second point deals with the way in which bands are to conduct their business, which I understand to be “give your music away, and try to earn money on special collector’s edition merch.”

To me this is where it breaks down, because it will only work for a certain kind of band. No, I’m not giving you the standard bullshit reply of “it’s great if you’re already established,” which you’ve addressed in this blog. What I’m saying is more complex than that.

First off, this does seem like a good way for a band to start out and get a fan base. But what I don’t see in your blog is an answer to the question “Then what?” You seem to imply to continue on merrily giving away your music and selling collector’s editions. The major argument I have against this is that very few bands have the kind of fans that will pay for this. Sure, I had no problem dropping a couple hundred bucks on the “Ghosts” edition when it came out. NIN is the kind of band that has fans like that. Beastie Boys is another. So is Radiohead. But what if you’re The Fray? Or OneRepublic? These are bands selling shitloads of records, but they just don’t have the kind of fan-base that’s going to blow money on collector’s editions or even really give a shit about them. It’s the soccer mom in the car humming along to “Apologize” that’s going to go ask her 13-year-old how to download it on iTunes that’s buying their records. I just don’t think your method will have longevity for straight-up pop bands – bands with good songs that people want to hear, yet don’t have the intrigue of a NIN or Radiohead, that will transform an ordinary music listener into a militant fan. While it may be a great way for a band like that to start out, what do they do next? I’m saying I think your idea will only work for a specific kind of band, with a specific kind of fan, one that will follow the band’s every move.

If I may, I think this is where some people might be missing part of the picture. No, not every band will have the kind of appeal and kind of fan base that would be interested in the type of "collector's edition merch" that NIN fans are rabid for. Not only that, but every artist is going to have some fans who are very, very loyal in addition to a whole bunch of casual fans who will just listen to the music and not connect any further. I don't think Trent's trying to suggest that every band could successfully cultivate a huge, batshit-crazy-loyal fanbase with enough people willing to buy $300 collector's packages to make the endeavor financially profitable. A band has to assess their fan base to figure out what their really loyal fans really want and what they would be willing pay for and appreciate. It could be anything.

And, you know, he DID say that "if you are looking for mainstream super-success" that you probably won't get there doing this shit yourself.

Read opening post and no more...

I'm just thinking how much things have changed in the way of getting yourself out there as an artist in even the last five years. It's never been a realistic "goal" to try to get out there as super mainstream...that's like winning the lottery. If it happens, it happens. Or you gotta be in right place at right time and usually end up getting bunched in with other similar artists/acts, of which, only a couple of them will truly "make it"...whatever that means anymore.

The next 20 years will see artists of all genres (or "new" genre - gasp!) that will be mainstream or "the alternative" that didn't come up playing a shit-ton of club gigs and CD handouts. They'll have all put in a few shows and offered up music online and slowly built a fanbase of true fans that may not rely on radio play.

This was rambled...no time to make it make too much sense. Just posting a thought.

I can understand the point with JT, Lady GaGa, Coldplay (not so sure), but, U2? Please!
We are talking Rock Royalty here. They have been collaborating for 33 years in the music business, and still going strong. All four original members! That's a remarkable
achievement. So, they should be left out of this discussion.

Great advice right there, thanks for opening my eyes to a few things i never really would have thought to consider Trent, adding to the fantastic post you write up, with the internet available to pretty much everyone in the world, getting your music out there and making a name for yourself is just too easy compared to like 10 years ago. especially if you follow that TR walkthrough of things
I personally haven't released a song in a while, but i found (mind you this was a few years ago), that sites like soundclick, were a great source to spread your music. I wouldn't really bother with myspace all that much personally, as i found its dying out a bit.
Use twitter as Trent said, link every update you do through that, whether thats a link to your myspace/soundclick/bandsite with a new song upload, or a new video, etc.
If your building a fan base, big or small, keep em updated with whats going on, never let them think the bands 'died' or even question "so what the fuck is going on, new song, are doing anything?!"
Now, if your doing live shows, this is where you can also really spread a name for yourself, obviously practice alot, and make yourself unique, and do shit that will make people talk about your performance. Obviously don't do something dumb like hang your dick out before you do a guitar solo or something (though, that may work in spreading your band name?! :\), but really get the crowd into your music. Everyones different with their live show, put your heart and soul into it (obviously), get the crowd going, interact, and do as many shows as you possibly can.

Once again, great advice TR, with the way music is these we need people like you giving people like us a hand getting our music out there lol. Real music!
Sorry for the long post everyone *group hug* just thouhght i'd throw my 2 cent in too, even though trent through his 100 dollars in lol

Thnxs...

Trent,
I was wondering why there isn't more support for young bands, in general. There are grants for writers, grants for artists, fully paid artist retreats for writers or visual artists to go and live work for a month in a secluded community...

Couldn't established artists pool their resources to offer grants to young bands? Grants for gear, for creative retreats, for studio time, for touring...There are millions of dollars out there that could be offerred to help musicians sustain a living wage.

Support in this form would reduce the need for bands to rely soley on their music sales or on the much needed record label's financial backing.

I do know of this group [www.feedthebands.org] started by a 16 year old girl. "Feed the Bands is a non-profit organization to help bands just starting out on the road or that are struggling to survive. Our main goal is to keep these bands alive and moving and to help them stay more comfortable and happy on the road." Imagine what many wealthy musicians could do to support an organization like this or set up similar foundations.

Maybe there are resources like this and I'm unaware of them?

Thank you a million times over Trent for taking a little time out of your hectic schedule to provide valueble information. I want our music to be free. The way I look at it, free music being a click away is a great marketting technique. If you put your heart in soul into a project that has something for everyone you have nothing to worry about. It stops these bands mainstream and Indy from rushing out terrible albums with no soul or thought for a quick buck. Now days they have to earn your business. If I hear a solid album online i'll pick it up. Some of these bands have gotten away with too much, just for having a great single. Doesn't mean the cd is going to sound that good. I was just wondering what your thoughts are on demo's. Passing ut free Demo's seems like a thing of the past. It seems artists give you a code and you just get your demo online. I feel holding an actual Cd demo would encourage people to purchase what is put out. I just need to get this going. I know rich and famous may not be in the cards but I would rather be enjoyed by as many as possible and make enough to get by rather than put out a shit cd full of filler and uninspired lyrics, and music. How do you set a new genre. We sound like nothing out there. Bands that go balls out and break new grounds and new genres catch my attention. We've all heard it all or have we? Thanks for said post up above. Very helpful information for a guy and a few very talented friends who's soul burn for music. No skip button necessary.

Someone should snatch these up! Good redirect....

nothingrecords.ca $12.99/yr
nothingrecords.info $0.89* BEST VALUE!
nothingrecords.net $8.99*/yr SALE! SAVE $4.00!
nothingrecords.org $14.99*/yr
nothingrecords.me $19.99/yr
nothingrecords.mobi $7.99* SAVE $7.00!
nothingrecords.com Backorder Now† $18.99

TRENT PLEASE READ THIS!!!!

STARTUP COMPANY TRYING TO FIX THE MUSIC BUSINESS!!!

As a musician of 12 years and a former audio engineer, I care deeply about this topic and want to see things get better for everyone in this industry, as I can tell you do, too.

I am working to improve the business model for independent artists using the power of social media, and have started developing the technical backbone behind many of the theoretical concepts you discuss in your blog posts. We launched a version of our site kicknote.com (keep in mind: it's very early beta and we are still developing) a few months back and the first problem we're tackling is market fragmentation. Artists cannot hope to communicate with fans through a variety of mediums (AKA anything other than their Myspace) when it's impossible to find and easily browse these channels. Thus, we've dubbed our first product a music browse engine.

Here's how the NIN page on Kicknote works: http://kicknote.com/artists/nineinchnails

As we gain momentum moving forward, we will take this large amount of organized information and make it useful to fans, helping artists get to market with a unified brand image; they will be able to reach all of their fans in a methodical and organized way. Once we have market traction and have successfully organized the mess of online music and given artists a simple, systematic way to engage fans, we will unveil a business model that will allow artists to make money in several very novel and innovative ways, some of which you have mentioned in your post. The key is that we are making these methods simple and available to all artists, and helping even a technical novice achieve a stellar musical presence online.

We have assembled a fairly large group of Angel Investors from the technology industry to back us in our endeavor, so we are adequately funded, and we are currently searching for a board of advisors with a great deal of music industry expertise.

I know you are outstandingly busy and working on 10,000 things, but I truly believe we could act as a conduit to execute a lot of the complex technical ideas that you have to fix things in music. I would be honored to at least discuss our idea further so you could get a better grasp on exactly how we plan on going about this massive endeavor. It's not going to be easy, but it needs to be done.

If you are at all interested, please contact me by email: brian.erickson@kicknote.com

Thank you again for reading this,

Brian Erickson
Founder, Kicknote.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 09:44AM by kicknote.

Do you think that sending out demos to various labels is a fruitless effort if you can just distribute the music yourself on your own terms? Because I would want my music to sell but like the idea of having complete creative control as opposed to label execs breathing down my neck on what my music should sound like.

edit erase



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 11:16AM by snaapz.

[myspace.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 10:35AM by My_Filthy_Heart.

feeblemind posted:

Another thing I want to ask Trent: you mentioned that it devalues your art when you ask fans to pay for it what they want. You made a very convincing point there. I just wondered, Amanda Palmer who I regard very highly is thinking that the new way of selling music/art is through asking tips. Like street performers do. Maybe this sounds a little blunt, but: is she wrong? 'Cause I think it's a very sympathetic way to operate. Also, she did this on her solo tour by asking people to donate whatever they wanted to support her theatre ensemble who she couldn't pay but asked to come on the road with her anyway - and it worked very well.

Which might be another case of "you're not Radiohead"-- neither are you AFP, whose connection to fans (via Twitter especially) is far above and beyond anything I've seen before. In some ways it's also a matter of opinion, and don't forget that Amanda was a busker before she toured as a musician with the Dolls or solo.

Great advice, and somewhat applicable to other types of performing as well. I've always appreciated what you had to say about the business side of things, Trent, because a lot of us are doing this on our own and really don't know much about the business side. Good point about Myspace as well. MyShit is kinda in a limbo when it comes to use by artists where it's trashy at this point but artists/performers still use it for networking. A backup site always seems like a good idea.

One thing that is both cool and frustrating is how quickly we cycle through the social networking sites nowadays. I guess we all just have to roll with the punches on that one.