Unpopular (?) opinion...

Since I don't/refuse to/am averse to listening to main stream radio music, I don't buy any.
Now the stuff I will listen to are mostly non-rock star types and I will NOT rip them off... I will always buy the music from the ones making it...usually directly, even if it could be had for free. Yes I have marks jams too and yes I did buy them. I support the musicians that are trying to make a go of it. NOT radio, jam it down the peeps throats til they think is good type o crap.

So I guess this thread doesn't really apply to me :wink:
 
GomezAddams said:
Buying recorded music does not directly support the artist, and it never has. Unless you are buying directly from the artist, they simply aren't getting any money from CD sales. Artists make money from performing. For them, recorded music is only a mechanism for promoting their performances. It has always been this way, and it probably always will be.

All of the anti-Spotify rhetoric out there is coming from the record companies and the RIAA - not the artists (well, other than a couple of weathly old-guard rockers). Most artists have no problem at all with streaming.
Click to expand...

What you're saying here simply isn't true.

If you sell 10,000 records through retail, iTunes, major labels, etc., then you end up with somewhere between $3K-$10K. That might sound like nothing, but compared against 100,000 Spotify listen, that's really great pay, and enough to pay some bills.
 
Flamencology said:
What you're saying here simply isn't true.

If you sell 10,000 records through retail, iTunes, major labels, etc., then you end up with somewhere between $3K-$10K. That might sound like nothing, but compared against 100,000 Spotify listen, that's really great pay, and enough to pay some bills.
Click to expand...

I recall reading somewhere that a per-stream average royalty in Spotify is 0.0084 cents.

That's 840 dollars per 100,000 streams.

As tempting as it is, I have resisted the temptation to subscribe.
 
Flamencology said:
What you're saying here simply isn't true.

If you sell 10,000 records through retail, iTunes, major labels, etc., then you end up with somewhere between $3K-$10K. That might sound like nothing, but compared against 100,000 Spotify listen, that's really great pay, and enough to pay some bills.
Click to expand...

But you aren't going to sell 10,000 records unless you are in bed with a record company, and in that case, you aren't going to see a penny until you've sold a million records. Google "RIAA accounting practices" for lots of stories about how artists sell hundreds of thousands of albums only to be told by their label that they haven't even broke even.
 
GomezAddams said:
Yes, but if that were 201,412 CDs sold, she'd be presented with a bill from her record company for the money they hadn't recouped from the CD sales.
Click to expand...

Well, I am working under the assumption that if you are going to enter an agreement with a record company, that you at the very least have a lawyer that understands the difference between an "advance" and free money, what distribution costs are, percentages, etc...
 
jacopo_belbo said:
Well, I am working under the assumption that if you are going to enter an agreement with a record company, that you at the very least have a lawyer that understands the difference between an "advance" and free money, what distribution costs are, percentages, etc...
Click to expand...

Artists (and their lawyers) understand that the record company is going to screw them royally, but they are the only game in town. Since the artist depends on getting CDs out there to generate paying customers for their concerts, they sign up anyway.

Again, it has been like this for a LONG time. Long before streaming music, or even the Internet. It may very well suck, but it is the way it is.
 
GomezAddams said:
Artists (and their lawyers) understand that the record company is going to screw them royally, but they are the only game in town. Since the artist depends on getting CDs out there to generate paying customers for their concerts, they sign up anyway.

Again, it has been like this for a LONG time. Long before streaming music, or even the Internet. It may very well suck, but it is the way it is.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree with what you are saying, but I think the main argument here is that even with the older model that you are describing here (and again, no one is forcing artists to take huge advances which they then realize gets discounted from CD sales), if you sell enough numbers then you can make a living.

Currently, with streaming, you can hardly afford a meal at McDonalds.
 
jacopo_belbo said:
Yes, I agree with what you are saying, but I think the main argument here is that even with the older model that you are describing here (and again, no one is forcing artists to take huge advances which they then realize gets discounted from CD sales), if you sell enough numbers then you can make a living.

Currently, with streaming, you can hardly afford a meal at McDonalds.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the people making that argument are naively thinking that if you are moderately successful selling CDs, the record company will give you your fair share. That just isn't how it works. Artists who record for a label start off in a pretty deep pit, financially. Remember, an artist doesn't earn a penny until the label recoups their expenses. An artist that sells 10,000 records hasn't even put a dent in the "expenses" in the contract - let alone the advance.

The reality is that 99.99% of artists who ever get a record contract will never see a penny from the sales. And it isn't just the advance that creates the problem. The record company will throw enough miscellaneous expenses and legal fees in so that even a million selling album won't "break even".
 
I've worked for a record company AND major artist management, and I learned quickly what kind of shit are in these contracts. Crazy, crazy shit.
 
Spotify and Pandora do pay artists. Not much, but a little bit.

It's all related to market and demand. Heck, I wish my set of skills were worth five times as much as they really are, but sadly, no one will pay me that much.
 
I was under the impression that the only way to make money with music is to get a commercial deal. I'll bet that guy who sings "Like a Rock" is rolling in Chevrolets. . .

I've never really gotten into any of the streaming services, because the only place I get a chance to listen to music I like is in my car. So I buy mp3 albums and put them on my phone or iPod. When possible I buy from the band website or whatever, but amazon/itunes almost make it too easy.
 
Punchy said:
I was under the impression that the only way to make money with music is to get a commercial deal. I'll bet that guy who sings "Like a Rock" is rolling in Chevrolets. . .

I've never really gotten into any of the streaming services, because the only place I get a chance to listen to music I like is in my car. So I buy mp3 albums and put them on my phone or iPod. When possible I buy from the band website or whatever, but amazon/itunes almost make it too easy.
Click to expand...

These days it's been flipped on its head.
The way to actually make some cash now is starting your own label/company and do all the hard work yourself. That means you need to start thinking and behaving like a business, and pay for everything yourself. Be smart and work insanely hard and it can be done if you can get the right people on board. Unless going for the pop star thing, a traditional record deal these days is pointless. Be your own boss.
 
Dexter Inferno said:
These days it's been flipped on its head.
The way to actually make some cash now is starting your own label/company and do all the hard work yourself. That means you need to start thinking and behaving like a business, and pay for everything yourself. Be smart and work insanely hard and it can be done if you can get the right people on board. Unless going for the pop star thing, a traditional record deal these days is pointless. Be your own boss.
Click to expand...

That's kinda what I was saying, I didn't mean commercial deal like record company, I meant commercial deal like license your song for use in a commercial, or tv series, or movie. Some sort of advertising. I should have clarified that :embarrassed:
 
Dexter Inferno said:
These days it's been flipped on its head.
The way to actually make some cash now is starting your own label/company and do all the hard work yourself. That means you need to start thinking and behaving like a business, and pay for everything yourself. Be smart and work insanely hard and it can be done if you can get the right people on board. Unless going for the pop star thing, a traditional record deal these days is pointless. Be your own boss.
Click to expand...

This is even a relatively old model. Ani DiFranco did this and was the Queen of Indie music for a while. Very few artists followed in her footsteps though. And of those that did, few got anywhere near her level of success. It takes a HUGE commitment not related to the music, which is my so many folks still get in bed with the enemy. A fair percentage of musicians do it to avoid "work" or a "real job", so the independent/self-contained model is not intuitive for them. It is definitely the way to go if you can. In a case like Ani's, it helped that she started handling everything and creating her team when she was a teenager...pursuing a route that allowed her to do what SHE wanted. Too many wannabe musicians really just want to famous and think that music might be their best chance. They might as well try being actors or the talentless famous types (reality TV folks and the like).
 
Dogsinotpalc said:
This is even a relatively old model. Ani DiFranco did this and was the Queen of Indie music for a while. Very few artists followed in her footsteps though. And of those that did, few got anywhere near her level of success. It takes a HUGE commitment not related to the music, which is my so many folks still get in bed with the enemy. A fair percentage of musicians do it to avoid "work" or a "real job", so the independent/self-contained model is not intuitive for them. It is definitely the way to go if you can. In a case like Ani's, it helped that she started handling everything and creating her team when she was a teenager...pursuing a route that allowed her to do what SHE wanted. Too many wannabe musicians really just want to famous and think that music might be their best chance. They might as well try being actors or the talentless famous types (reality TV folks and the like).
Click to expand...

It's definitely the hard way of doing it. Upside is you're not shafted economically by record companies and such if you manage to do well. Having a team working for you is key though, or it's instant burnout. For most musicians these days the age of just writing, recording and touring is over. You need to learn the paperwork shit as well as planning, promotion, in some cases accounting, distribution and all sorts of tedious stuff. :embarrassed:

The model itself can work, but it requires an all in approach, no halfway anything.
 
Dexter Inferno said:
The model itself can work, but it requires an all in approach, no halfway anything.
Click to expand...

That's it in a nutshell. The traditional big label route has never really been the only game in town, but it used to be the easiest game if you had solid label support. No everyone is disposable except for those few that are cross marketed. Disney is one of the biggest players there in that all of the their "talent" either does or is made to do acting and music. The quality of either is pretty low for my tastes, but damn if most kids don't eat it up and get sucked into it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top