Note : BTW, TIDAL had some news too

 

There is no business model for how to make money from recorded music anymore. Different people are trying different things, but right now, unless you are a touring musician or a big star, nobody seems to have a handle on how to market music and get the artist paid fairly. David Byrne's book-"How Music Works" discusses a few different approaches, but it's not very encouraging. A lot of luck is involved, most of the time. Even more so than ever because of so many people with so many tools available. More static to cut through.

 

And they call us pirates!!

Love Portishead btw.

 

It seems like we're dealing with the new kind of leeches here. They keep the majority of profit for themselves and give artists peanuts. It's "perfectly normal", isn't it? The Q is how to deal with this situation? Exclude as much leeches in the process and still get some normal kind of income from your music. The problem is that the world is full of leeches and they know how the 20th century system works. "Oh just give them a few cents, damn it!" The industry has changed but not so much for the better. The previous leeches have just traded places with the new ones.

If I put my hard work, and it was also an expensive investment - the studio, for sale somewhere, I expect no less than 70-80% of income to finish in my pocket and pay for my investment of time and in the equipment. But it's again, like in the 20th century, in reverse. They can't justify the 70-80% of profit being spent on the Internet bandwidth, really. People just love to make money of somebody else's work. "those stupid artists, drug addicts and alcoholics, fuck them. They would spent it all on drugs anyway."

Hell, I would, and it's my fucking right to spend my money the way I want! Fuck all the "righteous" cretins. And they spend money on making babies. As if that's so much better? More idiots and leeches to fill our poor, dying planet with. And they spent it on huge cars to pollute our air we breathe, so we could have more and more diseases and spend our hard earned money for doctors. I know this kind of people well, and detest them wholesomely. :puke:

Love Portishead btw. too.

 

The reason why Spotify, et al., are getting away with paying next-to-nothing per stream is that musicians are submitting their music to such services, and thereby justifying and enabling the services' existence. Big-name musicians who have already made their fortunes or built their fan-bases prior to, or in spite of, a streaming service's existence complain about the pittance paid-out; some oh-so-demonstratively withdraw their music from the service. Do they not know, in a advance, how little revenue they stand to earn from it? It's those very musicians - those with "draw" - who should be boycotting Spotify (and the like) from the outset. Their absence would be felt.

On the other hand, musicians of all "levels" need publicity, and for their music to get heard. The world-wide ubiquity of Spotify, YouTube, Soundcloud, and other online venues is so promising that it seems foolish to deny one's music their potential - and the competition for the eyes, ears and time (if not also the money) of people, across a broad but glutted market, has become terribly daunting.

Myself, I'd love to earn $2,500 (or so) in a year from my music. If I weren't making music out of some physiological and spiritual necessity, the financial non-returns, and other deficient appreciation by others, would have driven me to suicide by now. I love music; I love my music; it's out of my love for it that I keep on with it. I had never started making music (decades ago) with the idea that I could, would or should make money - let alone make a living - from it. Young people get into music-making now with the idea that it's something to try to make money at/with, and with the means of self-publicity now as readily-available as the means of production (as it hadn't been decades ago), how can they not be drawn into that expectation? At the same time, quite ironically, it's never been both easier and more difficult to do so.

 

Why don't the organisations responsible for collecting royalties on behalf of artists set up a streaming service?

 

what the artis makes per stream and what the publisher/record company earns per stream is 2 different things.
artist just keeps getting the shaft. they are making BAD DEALS with the publisher. thats the bottom line.

So the real solution for us "everybody" is to create thier owne company/label/entity/strawman and earn the money directly from sportify/itunes etc. - the drawback this as i see itis, we would need to spend more time on the administration/label part and less time creating music. aka more work!

like it isnt enough work to be an artist already

i'll continnue on my path and go realease my music on bandcamp. it doesnt costs me money to put out music that way.


cheers

 

He said it, too :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHNiigP0ck0

Create your own tours, label, merchs and more.
Because labels and companies are just thieves.

 

Surely this is the oldest story in rock n roll.....Artist's and bands getting ripped off?

What's new here? You know? Same shit different day if you ask me

 

Absolutely WELL SAID. Especially " I love music; I love my music; it's out of my love for it that I keep on with it.". U R Someone Who Is Truly In Touch With What Makin' Muzik Iz Really & Should B All About.

If The Profitz Come So B It. But It Iz Most Important Not 2 Forgo Your Love Of Muzik With The Expectation Of "Makin' It Big", or "Makin BIG Money". Because We Have Found That The Best Muzik Comes From Those Who LOVE MAKIN' MUZIK. There Iz Such An Obvious Smooooth Flow 2 That Muzik, Az Opposed 2 The Forced Sometimez Harsh Degradin' Soundz That R Around These Dayz.

U R Spot On Friend. Thank U. *yes*

 

"Make money with music."
Always same refrain, hu ?

I'm musician, composer and producer. Living by what I've decide 20 years ago to be my full time job as musician, composer, then when time has come producer too. Touring almost everywhere, with several bands, artists, projects…

That just peace me off to read again and again same scenario. To hear here and there this same situation expressed by many deferent people. To obviously see myself in this same position. As independent level, not like big stars like P or Jack White etc …

Please read this for french speaker or here as googled +/- translated. for english.

That reflect excessively well detailed what I 've seen since times went more and more different, difficult for someone (who wasn't born with a gold spoon) who decide to leave from his art, his creation and decide to at least
let it go or distribute or sell as he wants to give him the ability a return to investment. Let the artist to re inject this money for further project and so one.

I'm actually producing and mixing an album of a friend of mine who writes f***g great songs . What the hell is it to find a way to make this project leave is life ! So , BandCamp ? Search extra money for paying last end mix process + mastering, by Kickstarter or KissKiss BangBang ? Built a label ? Pay someone to work on communication ? Pay for press CDs, Vinyl ( yep we still believe on this …
Then comes the editor part. So what the deal ? Are we decide to do it ourselves in extra time of a journey of 28 hrs after rehearse, mixing, have a gig somewhere, check kids etc… Or are we going to have another bad editor deal ?To let it do it by someone who editor it's his job but it just put you in his catalog and that's all. In exchange of an joky advance (which is a really bad deal) as a nice finger in our ace ?

I'm not complaining like hell be aware. I know that I work in music beside many doesn't have anymore, or yet, at least. But what it's peace me off, it's the fact that keeping this passion/job( because it is, too.) begins to be really hard as independent, father. Many guys around me decide to take not another job beside their music career, but 2 others. So what the point if you cannot live by your work ? What the point when you work for free 2 years for an album which makes another 2 years to be release 'cause the conjoncture is so bad that you have to wait for having extra money to finish this album, release it, pay this, pay that etc … Then finally see your tracks play streamed on Spotify, itunes etc… Cool ! And read the what you've earn of this… While you have earn almost peanuts for 2-4 years of work on this album. That just an example.

Well, it's a bit hard to explain all this in a bad english, but read my links please, it do it for me.

cheers.

 

I'm happy you still make art ...because most already left
I totally see your point about difficulty to manage all by yourself.
The biggest point is to OWN (as composer/performer) your music. When you sign with a label, you GIVE them your music, and get only royalties, with obligations to do albums, concerts...

If you listen to "wil i am" video i posted, he talks about virtual music being only a mean to make money with "bricks and mortar" approach.
Selling gigs places on tour, t-shirts...things that can't be virtual.
Everything virtual just get you NOTHING apart visibility.
So you can sign with a label for production, streaming and such...and still manage your own tour and merchs because you didn't put this in the contract.

If you base your approach on virtual,streaming and such...you're dead. Plain and simple. Because you use a service provided by someone else.

Of course, ppl will speak about "good" labels (my fav is MuteRecord), but how many ppl earn their life with this kind of approach ?
Business men. Because music is business. Take a look at Metallica's attitude with their fans, milking them to the bone.
And you will see (unlike what most ppl say) being talented and making good music is not enough to earn your life making music.
Like "Love's not enough in itself" :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYbgWs7KFlc

I know hundred ppl making amazing music, and close to be homeless...

 

I started playing live gigs in the late 60's with a 7 piece band; horn section and all. I was 16yrs old, making between $200 and $600 a gig per person in the band. High school proms and mixers was where it was at. They had the money, and we were glad to get it. I continued on with 3, 4, or 5 piece bands into the 70's, and could usually make $200 - $300 per band member in the clubs, even just taking the door only. THEN......along came disco & the great sounding audio systems & lighted dance floors. Even then, I could get $500 for the whole band. DJ's popped up from hell and started stealing band revenue. Club owners would pay the DJ's $200-$300 a night, but would only offer $100 per band member. The owners felt that the band members didn't deserve any more than $100 a piece per night. THEN......Karaoke!! If you ran karaoke for a club, they would pay you $200 for a week night, and $400 on weekends. Why anyone would pay that much money to someone for playing lousy cover music for a drunk tone deaf wannabe singer is beyond me, but the trend killed live music. But the trend also emptied clubs after a fer short years. DUI crackdowns and economy concerns also killed the clubs. There are still clubs doing well, but they will not pay live musicians well because there are so many musicians needing work & most sell out cheaply just to get to play. The music business as a whole is fucked. Sony should have opened their minds to Napster instead of fighting the trends. They, of all businesses, should have embraced the future. Instead, they fought it, and lost. I have played with several big names in the music world, and it is hard for them too. Gigs have always been their money source, and that part of the music business is also drying up. We are now seeing "name" bands playing selective weekend gigs at mostly festival type settings. It is more economical to play a few of those type gigs instead of embarking on a full "tour". The point of this endless rant is, albums, 8-tracks, cassettes, and cd's have always been the vehicle to sell seats at live appearances. Some have made money on the recordings, but most of the money went to the pockets of the Label Execs. Live gigs have always been the money source, but that source is very rapidly disappearing. I fear that much of the future music we hear will be like much of the one-hit trash albums that stagnate the air waves now. And, the really great music coming up from the local music scenes will never be heard, thanks to greedy club owners, greedy music labels, and the nearly extinct live music scene. Of course, there is always "The Voice", LOL!!

 

in our small city...there was a club for acoustic nights..for bands/artists it was 5000 bucks a night @2 hours in 2003..i was 18 years old then...now the club has a resident DJ and a mp3 player..nobody pays to watch live gigs they say...

 

the first gig I ever played when I was 16 in 1992 I got paid £200. Unfortunately music seems to of become de-valued over the years.

I very much expect the promoter would probably say something along the lines of "sorry we can't pay you , but it will be great "exposure" for you" if it was the same gig today...and I would of quite rightly laughed and told him to do one!

It's definately got harder to make money from music over the years and I'm glad I managed to make some decent royalties before the shit hit the fan (circa 2005 IMO)

 

I have never made money at music. Been playing semi-professional since I was 17. I've been doing it for 42 years anyway. Any money I ever made went back to expenses for more drums or more audio (audiophile disease, live, recording and my stereo). Has to be love...Playing is all I am doing now, but my income is supplemented by some money from all those years of working "real jobs". And I don't have to support anybody but myself. I spent all my money on music, women, and booze and drugs. The rest I just wasted!

 

A complete busness model!