Interesting conversation. Although, getting back to the original gripe about making money from your music, when I realised that I wasn't making enough money to support a family as a freelance broadcaster and producer because freelancing is unstable I decided to go into another field that could ustilise my skills, teaching. I got new qualifications and I now teach for a living and do some voice-over work, on the side, from home with a pro studio mic and make music. These artistic pursuits became my hobbies and I can do them for little or no pay quite happily. I derive enough satisfaction from recognition from my abilities to make me satisfied. To 'make it', be successful in music doesn't just have to involve money. Do what you love to do whatever it takes and you wil be happy. If you insist on making a career in music and are finding enough reasons to be angry you shouldn't pursue it. But returning to the conversation that was developed out of the original question, if you are focused enogh, and pursue it with a happy heart knowing that you will succeed, you will eventually succeed. You have to stop finding excuses failure. I think that praise for your work on for example YouTube, although it's offered for free is enough to at least confirm your abilities and should spur you on. Start there.

 

I am certainly not one who is complaining about money I'm just wondering about all those people upstream and downstream who are expecting to make money out of musicians, while it's the musicians themselves who are expected to take the financial hit. It just all seems a bit bizarre to me

 

I'm feeling a little bit all over the place today and so my rant mimics my mood. It comes back to topic now and again. I am generally an optimist but am slowing moving into the background and blending, out of focus so hard to make out.

It used to be that as one grew older one would see how great it was to be young, the possibilities, the fresh and exciting outlook for the next 10, 20 or 30 years down the line. Almost without exception someone regulatly would be heard uttering, "What I wouldn't do to be young again!". That statement sadly no longer crosses the lips of anybody, anybody at least that I know, myself included. The few and fewer that weld the power and now hold all the jangly keys to the door of prosperity are gathering and consolidating the money, this as well as even the ability so very soon be allowed to grow your own food (if Beyer has its way and so to make back the incredible debt it took to buy Monsanto). Coming back to music, the masses have been hoodwinked with easy access to everything and soon the option of even owning, buying to purchase music for one's self will be a distant memory. We as a whole let it happen right under our noses and so very, very quickly. Protesting in the classical sense will be next to impossible as future protesters will be squashed like unfortunate insects under the boots of those that wish control for the sake of control...because they can (don't you just love a man in a uniform!). With all the nice and shiny toys technology has bestowed on the police and the military, things like the ability to see through walls, noise weapons and the ability to know where you are, where your friends and family are and the ability to shut you down from access to money and to all communication, these are all part and parcel of the new paradigm that will be implemented in a 365 day a year "emergency plan" to keep us all safe. Which takes me back to the new business model...
if you want to try to make money with your music (I beg someone to show me my errors in thinking as I really wish this NOT to be the case) and reach a new audience in the spoken about future you will need to go through some huge company that won't share nicely in the event that you can sell anything at all. These mega companies are owned by other mega companies that only care for their profits and nothing about art or artists and will feel threatened by protest music protesting them, so any art born of resistance to their paradigm will not be allowed to use their large venues or will be allowed to sell their music through their servers, and those still causing trouble will have to be eliminated from the circle entirely. If you sing songs about puppy love or people shaking their body parts everything will be fine...as long as you "like" all the right things on facebook, go with the idea of giving away 99% of the revenue coming in from your hard work and make not a whimper about anything while eating GMO corn chips and mass produced misery meat tacos while watching your favorite mind numbing internet entrrtainment. Everything is neatly tied together under the umbrella of a one world happy smile. And while we're at it, don't worry my 50,000,000 Bangladeshi friends, you can stay at my house because where you used to live is now under water (the few million now moving northwest is just the tip of the iceberg...oops, there won't be any icebergs. If only the Titanic had waited a few more years to set sail.).

The future is destined to be, so I hope that something shifts and puts it all in a course that will sustain the whole wholistically, but I have come to doubt it. And if you don't already know how to rub two sticks together to make fire I certainly think that you should learn very soon, it might just come in handy if you'll be able to find the wood, if you live in a city.

Hmmm, what I wouldn't do to be young again!

 

@superliquidsunshine if only there were a "wow"-symbol to rate your post. I won't go into details, but so much of what you say is just true - and you put it in a context where everything fits together. I'm afraid you're right.

 

I see where you're coming from, but I look at it differently. As far a I'm concerned, music is my hobby, not my work. I don't buy all that gear to form a factory, but to further my hobby (and the quality of my art - art, not product). People have all kind of crazy hobbies that they invest half their salary in, not expecting to get any payment for doing what they do.

Anyway, no one is forcing you to give your music for free. But if you care about your art reaching to people more than making money, then it's a good idea.

 

I don't like playing the pessimist, but even optimistically my options box me into the corner.

 

@superliquidsunshine was thinking just yesterday I am quite ok knowing.. I have less than half my years left..
have heard even people in their 20's making mention of how drastically things have changed in their lifetime...

Millenials are going to have a rude rude awakening.. if they haven't already..
the weight of all the selfishness of their forbears they will bear !

got a taste just last week when Matthew shut a lot of people down from 24 hrs to 1 week.. just imagine no electrical power
whether from EMP or planned population "control" options, most people would be clueless, and at a total loss

there won't be any safety nor security, and the powers that be will put on their mournful faces , make that "voices",
since you will probably only have your battery powered radio, you will hear them regretfully say we just don't have the
resources, we screwed up... so sorry you have to die now..

I never seriously considered becoming a "prepper" but I am now..

as for music.. meet the new boss, same as the old boss? Hasn't the "industry" always mercilessly exploited
musicians at the release stage? Only the very biggest acts/artists would be able to retain or command healthy royalties
with most of them having to make their money on the road !

all the way down to poor old Tiny Tim.. remember him...? amazing he was hardly even bitter

 

Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2016

. . . and, as a musician, you're "supposed to" perform live, despite the even-more-daunting economics of that, because "that's how musicians make their money now," even though musicians have never, and still don't, make much money at all by live performances unless they have a large following and can book a profitable tour, or have a management company telling them what to do and where to play - but no, wait - selling merch is how musicians make money from live performance, as the audience exits through the Gift Shop.

The public expects not to have to pay for recorded music, anymore, whereas when it was tied to a physical playback medium, the public took for granted that they'd have to buy a record, tape or CD of the music - and thus, recordings were a quantifiable, valuable commodity.

I noticed that people would download the free stuff from me, even though I'd made a point of letting them know that it was free because I considered it inferior and expendable compared to the material which I value as my art and therefore to which I assigned a monetary value. No matter: they download the free stuff, or they rip/download the crappy Souncloud files, instead. If all the plays that my music gets on Spitofy were to lead to or correlate with sales of downloads (as only about 1/10 of my music is on Spitofy) of my albums, I could upgrade my computer, buy another guitar or two, or not worry about being behind in my rent. I have to give some music away as "publicity" for more music for which people have to, but don't want to, pay. They'll settle for what they can get for free.

All the rhetoric about "supporting the artist" is bullshit. Given the choice between spending $5 for a pint of "craft" beer or downloading one of my albums, people generally deem the former worthier of their money. Unless one has publicity building one up as some legend, in which the public participates materialistically by forking-over cash for one's downloads, "physical copy" or t-shirts, one can expect for music-making to be a sorta-expensive hobby which one indulges for the love of it. At least feel forutnate that what you're able to do now, musically, for an investment of $1,000 or so, is what would have required the deep pockets of a record company (and going into debt to it) 20 years ago, and enjoy your artistic liberty and potential.

 

So what other jobs should be done for free? The logic that is in play here could easily be applied to many other business sectors.

 

Wherever the word business is mentioned, the number one ranked sentence that is summoned up to make the lamest excuse for behaving like an asshole and acting the thief in any and every language, and perhaps since the beginning of recorded history is, "Don't take it personally, it's only business", and nowhere more so than in the business of music. "Trust me, don't worry about it, just sign here," is the second.

I loved Tiny Tim. He was the first freak that I was ever conscious of. To this day, his marriage to his first wife Miss Vicki on The Johnny Carson Show is still the record for viewers of a talk show, 40,000,000 strong. He once made $850,000 in one ten month period but had zilch to show for it. See my first paragraph.

 

Absolutely, logically. It must either be that music or musicians are not taken seriously for...I have no idea for what reason, or musicians are just an easy group of people to take advantage of for...I have no idea for what reason. Does anybody understand this strangeness?

 

Possibly related to everyone thinking they can do it? Everyone is a musician, especially a "beatmaker" and when they aren't doing that... they are a professional photographer, etc. Schools invest very little if anything into art, at least in the U.S. Maybe subconsciously it's viewed as worthless aka free. You can pursue your dreams as long as you get a real degree -every "good" parent

 

It's not a "job" in the usual sense.. more a series of contracts, with no real connection or reference to other "workers" in the
same position, sort of a free agency, so you are at the mercy of your agent.. or yourself vs. the company offering the "deal"

there is not a direct comparison with a musician's job situation, compensation, procedural protections etc.
to someone working in a bank, hospital, or department store for example...

every variable is open to negotiation, which opens the door for gross exploitation

e.g. dirt poor black bluesmen in the USA who had not a prayer to have a lawyer or representation, were completely fleeced
and robbed by the studios that recorded them, getting pennies, or very often nothing for the fruits of their talent and art !

another alternate case, is artists guilds such as found in Hollywood, where they can form
a union or quasi union, since they have the benefit of being among of group of people
that are used regularly for movie production, and can pool their interests to look out
for themselves as a group.. including striking against the studios

perhaps someone else can clear up "who" exactly ASCAP and RIAA actually protects,
ASCAP for artists? RIAA for the recording "industry" ?
they ostensibly are there for the sake of the artist, but I sort of doubt it..

 

Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2016

ASCAP and BMI collect money from businesses that use music written and controlled by ASCAP and BMI members. They are administrators. They are not a union. They are also non-profit entities.

They are protecting songwriter's and composer's interests. They are heavily involved in lawsuits against the government to prevent company's like Google, Apple, Spotify, Pandora and Amazon from taking all of recorded music and using it to sell ads and services without fairly compensating the musicians that fuel their "music streaming" businesses.

All sorts of for-profit administrative entities have sprung up in the last 18 months. They are funded by wall street hedge fund money and are cherrypicking the most profitable songs from publishing catalogs and entering deals with silicon valley. This also has the effect of orphaning all of the less profitable songs they didn't pick, eliminating them as a source of income for smaller companies and the artists that created them. Not to mention "dumbing down" or further "inbreeding" the musical culture pool and endlessly serving up the justin biebers of the world and letting the rest of music history disappear into dust.

They are pushing for eroding artists rights and giving more corporate control to enter licensing agreements without the artists permission. Historically if you are in a band or co-wrote a song, everyone that has an ownership stake in the song has to sign off on any deals like using the song in a movie or commercial or licensing to a streaming service like Applemusic.

These new companies like Cobolt are pushing new regulations that only require one person or entity involved to sign off on deals. Even someone with only a 1% stake can approve a deal.

Obviously that kills what little bargaining power songwriters and musicians had if the label or publisher wants to sell out to Apple.

Look up "compulsory license" and "100% licensing" and you will see how unfair and out of date the laws are that Silicon Valley is using to rape the musician culture and leave it for dead. No other industry in the world has had it's prices set by the government 50 years ago except music licensing. They always come back to the argument that they can't raise the rates because the industry is still developing and it is in a delicate state. "Paying musicians more would destroy the whole enterprise"... They have been saying this since 1947!!!!!

Even the woman in charge of this whole issue at the "Department of Justice" just left her job at Google to oversee these issues for the US government. (In case you were worried that it wasn't rigged enough in their favor.)

Bottom line, if youtube wants to use your music for $00.000000001 above free you have no power to stop them. You never did and you never will.

 

Last edited: Oct 16, 2016

@ClaudeBalls .. what is your solotion if there is one. If you lead I will follow.

 

Wait... People can pay for this stuff? Who knew! >__>

 

@superliquidsunshine i wouldn't call it misspelling.. I will call it "poetic license"

now how can we pay you for the new words you are creating?

is there any "solotion"

 

I have been kicking around an idea around "Fair Trade" certified music. I think people would much rather buy/support something that is directly run and benefits the artists that created it.

Even in the gray area of "piracy" I think the general music consuming public would rather go to a website and click on ads or pay a monthly subscription fee for an "all you can eat deal" if they knew the money was going to the creators.

I know I feel a lot better buying someone's album or movie on kickstarter than I do buying it on iTunes.

I don't know what the solution is going to look like. I think it is a philosophical revolution we are going to have to go through. People have to understand the consequences of convenience.

The concept of "to have a green forrest, each tree must be green" has to dawn on the world. We have to understand and improve the effect our actions are having on everyone around us. We are going to have to deal with each other, and avoid monopolistic business transactions. I don't know if it will involve the internet and apps or if it will have to be completely "analog". The "sharing" economy of uber, and airbnb didn't work. It just created tons of money for some and a lower standard of living for the rest. I hope we are learning from it. I hope we can arrive at a new way of looking at transactions. Something long term and ethical.

There was a time in this country where people owned other people, there was a time when women didn't have the same legal rights as men. We have moved past that thinking and I think we can and will have to move past the idea that greed is good. Maybe to good is good. Something transparent and sustainable, like Moog and it's worker owned business. They sink and swim together and they don't make decisions that will kill the company for a few to profit and cash out. I hope that is the lesson the "millennials" are bringing to the table.

In the US there was a fleeting moment of realization when the main streets of America got Wallmarted out of existence. But, because only 5 or 6 companies control everything we see and read the suffering and destruction was never shown in a meaningful way. Then the economy collapsed and people have been in panic mode ever since. The student loan bubble is ripe for popping and there will be another round of currency inflating that will reduce our buying power to nothing.

Now after 15 years of draining war, debt and at least 2 generations growing up hypnotized by the glowing screen I think we are at the breaking point. We will have to snap out of it or be sold into endless debt slavery.

Whatever is going to save the music business is the same thing that is going to save everything else.

If you have ever played monopoly you know how it ends. One person gets everything and everyone else gets nothing. That is where we are right now as a society. That is the purpose of a corporation, that is the nature of silicon valley. It is a bad deal for everyone and it is unsustainable, even for the ones on top. Eventually the villagers will come to the castle with torches and pitchforks and it gets messy.

 

which they are not interested in understanding, they are interested in the convenience itself, hence the huge popularity
and profitability of iTunes , ( of course I never bought anything from them, never liked the interface either )

there is no "snapping out of it" unless you are talking about a global economic reset, $20 trillion in current debt, and
around $140 trillion in unfunded liabilities is a recipe for nothing but tax and debt slavery, financial armageddon, world
war III, or all of the above...

hard words to hear for people who want to make money out of music, but the "music business" (and flying to Mars)
is pretty insignificant in the face of the huge issues the world is facing

people can delude themselves with their particular areas of interest, and then will be completely blown away
when things like electricty, food , and security are no longer available.. the "music industry" will be a laughable memory
and maybe things will get back to real music.. where people make and play it for their own enjoyment in their
own immediate environment... that's all I care about...

you have to be either extremely talented and original , or highly conceited
to think you can make substantial money off cookie cutter, same as everyone else, bedroom produced music anyway

when the mobs and clans with their AR-15's start taking to the streets,
anything that civil society provided before will take a back seat to survival..

 

Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2016

It is true . We are always a bad storm season away from full-on Mad Max.

The Wright Brothers seemed like idiots to most people too.

About 64 summers after that first 90 second flight, the first 747s were landing at La Guardia airport.

The leap forward we have to make in order to be capable to reach Mars is going to be beneficial in ways we can't even imagine from where we are now. Just like the Wright Brothers couldn't imagine that some people would be getting all crazy if their low-sodium meal wasn't on the plane for their 5 hour jaunt across the country.


It is not hard to imagine a shift in understanding that will set us on a sustainable course. We need some longer term thinking to work into the mainstream. Nothing should be made that cannot be unmade. Transition off limited fuels onto sustainables. Educate people to eat and spend properly. If you watch old movies you will see how much everyone was constantly drinking and smoking. They died young and suffered excessively first. I think we have the capacity to learn from mistakes. Aside from nuclear power plants (and probably A.I.) I want to believe that we haven't made any mistakes that we can't recover from as a species.

It is too late for all of us living now, but in a few generations they may have a chance.