From the “statements that I pretty much agree with 100% file, so there’s not much else to add to them” file comes Ryan Catbird’s rumination on the “all music should be free” model: “I still think the more important question is: ‘What if an artist that hasn’t already built a career on the label system released their work directly, gave it away for free, retained their rights, etc. Would it matter?’ The answer, sadly, to that one is “no, it doesn’t matter.” Myriad small unheard-of bands are out there posting their albums for free every day, but there’s still no good way for them to get heard. For all the chatter about how new technology/Music 2.0/viral marketing etc. has the power to ‘break’ new artists, there are precious few examples of this actually occurring.” A related thought that’s probably an extension of my “future of Coachella” post : Is the push for free recorded music going to result in mass music culture turning into something that’s even more fossilized than classic-rock station playlists, which at least add one or two new artists to their rotation every year? [F.U. & The Blog You Rode In On]
Re: Mass Music Culture
So? I mean, does that really affect what we listen to and our ability to access it anymore? I haven’t listened to radio, barring a few instances on vacation or in other people’s cars, and I don’t miss it a bit. I assume you’re hoping/suggesting that there is another business model waiting to be found that’ll replace the whole corporate patronage scheme that’s going on right now? The other path is a repeat of the early-mid nineties as far as I can tell. Anyhow, exciting times to be living in.
yeah, but that’s where publications like this one come in, right? Well, this and the millions of others collectively popping up to expose new artists. I think we give it time and a few independent entities will rise above the chatter and provide the filter labels used to offer (and they’ll be beholden to their readers, not a specific artist that someone else signed). It’s happening; it’s going to take awhile…
@Dick Laurent is dead.: The more I look at this culture of niches the more I think that it’s important to have *some* semblance of a center somewhere, and that said center should be something that’s looking forward somewhat. Because those little bits of shared culture, no matter how lame/awesome you may think they might be, are important to bridging gaps between people and different cultures. If anything a big part of my frustration with indie rock right now comes from the insularity that’s bred by the ever-shrinking mass — it’s so informed by itself and only itself that it’s sometimes speaking a dialect full of really really boring words.
God, I don’t mean to sound so fucking Hands Across America. Sorry. This is what happens when you watch Oprah while blogging I guess.
That makes sense, but why can’t there be several major centers that aren’t beholden to actual artists, but to different types of listeners? (It’s just the long-tail model stretched in a new way). I totally see how artists could do what they do now, the trolls and OCD bloggers and such find their stuff, and then “re-release” it through their sites. The key would be establishing entities that are influential enough to really break unknown artists. Artists gets donations, the host gets ad revenue, and listeners get better music way cheaper. I mean, look at the illegal full-record download blogs - those things are doing enormous traffic. Legalize that model and you’ve got a good thing going. I think the problem is, everyone expects this all to happen over night so they’re misreading the effectiveness of a process that’s in its infancy.
@Maura Johnston:
No no, I see where you’re coming from, and agree to an extent. I think a more spread-out or relevant center would help deflate some of the elitism and seeming impenetrability of the indie scene (which daily gains another inch in the journey up its own collective ass). Oh yeah, and the importance of common cultural touchstones and shots-in-the-arm to mass taste/culture.
I for one think that if we all–by whom I mean bloggers, fans, and chatterers–stopped worrying about business models and “breaking” artists and the state of “the indie scene”, well then we wouldn’t have the impression that anyone’s head is up their ass nor would we be thinking of the music we love in terms of success and failure, hype and backlash.
This whole conversation about the music business is beginning to feel like waxing and waning diet fads. There’s no trick to dieting: eat less, excercise more. There’s no secret to saving the music industry: enjoy what you listen to and pay for it.
@TheBeard:
So, Beard, given (1.), we could also assume (2.)
(1.) Artists do what they do now, bloggers “re-release” the “free” music thru their sites, artists get donations, host gets ad revenue.
(2.) Painters do what they do now, gallery owner takes the “free” paintings and hangs them in a gallery, leaves a cup out on the table for artist donations, while charging every customer $20 to come in and look.
I mean, I’m all for thinking outside the box and figuring out a model for the future, but that scenario you just outlined doesn’t fly for me. It’s like if you went to a restaurant, and instead of paying the chef and tipping the waiter, you did the exact opposite.
@scott pgwp:
I don’t disagree that we’re all too self-aware, but that is sort of ridiculously reductionist. CDs aren’t a viable model anymore and most record labels are too bloated/close-minded to survive. That’s just fact. So the answers are a little more elusive. I mean, pay who for what?
@TheBeard:
“Pay who for what?”
How about pay the >artistwork<
*Artist* for their *Work*
@Catbirdseat:
Not saying I have the perfect plan (If I did, I sure wouldn’t post it here — I’d do and make a bazillion dollars). I will say that I think the model I’m talking about is infinitely better than what exists now (the exact same thing except artists are generally unaffiliated in any way with the people giving away their music). I mean, these blogs are going to continue to grow and grow, and the potential to use those readerships in a way that helps instead of hurts will become more and more apparent. Obviously this model wouldn’t offer most artist’s a complete source of income (but I don’t thing any new-millennium model is going to allow that).
@Catbirdseat:
doesn’t that take us back around the circle. Can’t pay an artist I’ve never heard of for anything… right?
The thing is, the very small number of artists who are making it in the “give it away for free” model are also finding places (blogs and print and youtube) to get their music in front of people who will listen to it, finding their own places to play where people will show up, and working with a community of other artists whose success reinforces their own — the one thing Clive Thompson missed in his piece on the Internet music model that focused on Jonathan Coulton was that Coulton gets a *lot* from being John Hodgman’s BFF, and also vice-versa. So on a certain level, you have people acting as their own label, which is extremely time consuming and difficult, and probably to this day still only works for the sort of music that will appeal to nerds who sit in front of their computers all day and think nothing of whipping out the five millionth fan vid for “Code Monkey.” Not that I haven’t had that song stuck in my head for like a year, but still.
I agree with Catbirdseat in a way, I tend to respect less artist who are giving away their music for free. And I have a netlabel, wich seems contradictory. But over the years some artist have conquered me, after a lot of downloading I now own vinil by Go Home Productions and I´m waiting for his record to come out, and I will definitelly pay for it. And If I lived in a country where he performs I will so go to see him live.
Now, I know he´s not making millions nor is a superstar, but I bet he´s making a living with music. And to me that´s a lot.
Of course, I live in Venezuela, living only off music is not an option over here. All the shows my netlabel Fan Zinatra produces are full of people and in some of them we still lose money. And we give away the music for free, so there’s not much of a business model there.
@Maura Johnston: The more I look at this
culture of niches the more I think that it’s important to have *some*
semblance of a center somewhere, and that said center should be
something that’s looking forward somewhat.
Was trying to think of a good answer to this yesterday and failed a
bit — this point is clear, and yet…well, to be blunt, taken on the
broadest possible terms rather than simply indie, the ‘center’ for
popular music in terms of mass media consciousness is still something
like American Idol, slipping ratings notwithstanding. And it’s hardly
forward looking!
@Ned Raggett: Exactly, Indie may be in diminishing returns right now (at least until the lid gets blown off again) but I don’t think that’s a reason to crave the security blanket of soulless, mass culture mediocrity. Not that the mainstream can’t have great art (witness the past decade of TV) but that it’s model for music is clearly not evolving. Hell, how many records have come out in the past five years that wouldn’t have existed ten years ago? Of those, how many have had any mainstream impact? You probably don’t need both hands to count either of these. The model is evolving but the music isn’t.