I frequently discuss internet business with a writing and advisory colleague of mine from Twitter [www.twitter.com/infinitestylez ...]. We're of the same creed, meaning intellectual, but with opposing views on the subject of music business. Actually, I wouldn't say opposing, I'd much rather say similar up to a certain extent. Said extent being the internet being a positive or negative impact on the current, and future, state of the music industry. He's all for it while I'm leaning more toward the opposite.
The key observations:
Pro (R.VE.)
1. Free enterprise
2. Broad exposure in shorter time
3. More personal on a regular bases
4. Eliminates certain middle-men
5. Saves money
Con (Me)
1. Draws away actual talent
2. Weakens the music industry itself
3. Security risk
4. Destroys mainstream opportunities for powerful artists
5. Lowers profit margins
I understand everyone's stance on free enterprise, it'll stimulate the economy so it's necessary. Now understand mine, everyone can do it, it becomes a trend. What happens to an industry where there is too much competition and not enough consumption? It fails. Big business distracts the actual talent from doing what they join the industry to do...showcase their talent.
Prime example:
50 Cent has made a circus out of rap beef. He used to end careers with battle bars [Ja Rule...] but now, instead, he encourages the infamy of his adversaries by poking fun on YouTube. Where is he gaining profit rather than spending idle time instigating a potentially violent situation? We used to make fun of these internet beef's almost 10 years ago.
50 should be making an album every year, instead, in only 7 years he's only working on his 4th solo STUDIO album and finished his second G-Unit album. Even if you count the collaborative albums as legitimate contract fulfilling projects he's still one album shy, should his contract be for one album per year. What has 50 been up to for nearly a decade? I'd be bold enough to say he's been distracted by things that take his passion out of his music.
Every type of business has it's role as part of a growing and constantly developing civilization. Diversity of this calibur is simply bad economics. Monopolies form and shatter the markets so that depressions, like the current one, last longer than they should. It's not all Congress's fault, nor is it all Bush's fault...they're just the scapegoats. We've been just as responsible, if not more, all along. We used our vote to put them in those positions.
Next example:
I get it, everyone wants that miracle Myspace or Youtube deal and are willing to Get Rich or Die Trying, but where's the value in the music hustle? What do you have to talk about in the end? You want to be a star so that everyone will finally see that talented little girl shining...until she wakes up one day and can't perform. Her first impulse is to rapid tweet about it on Twitter so people she won't even speak to will make her feel better about her vocal handicap.
The fans notice, as they THINK, they're getting to know her inner artist when they're really just learning how flakey she is after her success. Music artistry becomes a popularity contest and political stance as she stands off with her peers prepared to debut her knew auto-tuned single while lip syncing in front of an audience of judges waiting for the next hottest thing out to steal their hearts by casting a cruel glare at the competition.
The twisted face of big business has finally shown itself. The ego-maniacle mogul has bared her talons and slighted someone she once called friend or sister to be the best at what she no longer does well. There is no love for the melody or passion behind her words...no eroticism in her tone or joy in her soul...it's just another club song...and the fans are getting bored with the lack of depth.
The artists die and the art dies with them as consumers dive deeper into Youtube and contribute to the destruction of another genre. Soon enough no one will make music anymore, they'll just tweet idle thoughts and make stupid a$$ home videos [He's a cynic...].
Third example:
This is the hacker era. Being more personal with fans with more intimate interests is dangerous, ask Tyrese. Simply giving an excited fan more friendly attention can cause a lot of, rather large, problems. Remember, you don't know the person sitting at the other screen nor do you know what they're doing. They could be installing tracking software on your smartphone's GPS right now [SCARY!!!].
You think that's all? Think again. Your IP address [Both your phone AND computer have one...] can be traced to an exact location. The phone number attached to your accounts, login information phished, your bank account could be receiving mystery bills or your family could be stalked as you think you're connecting with a true friend.
The FDA's firewall was hacked and the experimental cure for AIDs was leaked. Within two years that exact same method was finally made public [I guess a 10 year plan was drastically shortened by some very persuasive people...]. Is all this internet really that safe when you're rich and famous? I'd like to reveal someone comfortable and popular might not agree as he has suffered at the hands of these people...sxephil. Watch his channel and you'll find his rant about it.
Fourth:
I'll admit it, Suge Knight and Irv Gotti are horrible people. However, not everyone is like that. Diddy and 50 went through their tyrades and hurt some people, Babyface had his run is a scumbag but everyone isn't like that. 50 grew up, Irv did time and resurfaced a changed man, Suge faded away, Diddy focused more on other business affairs, and Babyface is...whatever happened to Babyface [Who cares...]? Meh.
Some people, like myself, need the investments of these middle-men to jumpstart out national and international acts. A label is essentially a philanthropic group with a shared interest in a profitable return--wait that's a loan shark--either way, we need them. There's a lot of good that comes with their association, an example of which, is the best promo you don't have to pay for up front.
Do it yourself is good but either very costly, very time consuming, or both. We don't all have that kind of time. I sure don't. As I get older and lose more of my hair and watch the DIY option shorten my career and decrease my my chances of making it in this industry. It can be a liability I can't afford. I don't have much money either and making the connections is a rather difficult task when I have to work so I can eat and pay bills. A starving artist can only starve for so long.
Finally:
Scared money doesn't make money. The US economy is based on the magnitude of over consumption, we're gluttonous by nature. We have to follow the trend in order to meet the performance quota we set for ourselves. If we discount everything and continue to penny pinch we'll make no progress. The more you save the less you contribute to economic growth.
Furthermore, the more you do yourself the more harm you do to an already struggling economy. People have jobs to do what you refuse to hire them to do. Imagine if every single artist took the private enterprise route? The entire music production industry would crumble without any jobs left to support it. People produce projects, engineer sounds, record vocals, manage artists, print disc copies, encode streams, trademark and copyright, coordinate events, create wardrobes, etc. These jobs are needed.
Face it...these ideas are great but just before their time and could kill businesses and dissolve entire industries. Iraq, for example. They left the dispute with the US alone for over a decade and were attacked by surprise. We stripped them of everything they had. It's human nature to steal, kill, and destroy. It's just not the American way, and I don't like it but I'm okay with that because I'm used to it [And the world keeps turning...].
Anyway, the point is this, in the world of business, or anything at all, you reap what you sew. If you sew a single seed expect not an orchard for your troubles, expect only a single tree.
My mind is mad deep and you just jumped in. Electronic devices prohibited!
My colleague's take on internet music business (still a good and strong point):
http://virtualmusic.tv/2009/11/musicians-brands-endorsements-partnerships-part-2/
Basic economic principles:
http://www.slembeck.ch/principles.html
Someone actually found Babyface:
http://www.mahalo.com/answers/music/listenin-2-the-waiting-to-exhale-soundtrack-whatever-happened-to-babyface
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for posting this—I linked up to it from my post. I like the 50 cent example, and I'd like to find some stats on music consumption, because I would think that it is at an all-time high. For me, the benefit of easier communication outweighs the privacy issue but everyone is different. Production and other jobs are still there, but true there may be less, or at least they may be more spread out. I definitely don't think all artists are after the money either. That was a big point in my next article. The musicians that are doing it for reasons beyond money are the ones that deserve my attention. @ryanve
ReplyDeleteInteresting points. I read the original discussion on Ryan's site.
ReplyDeleteThis part really struck a chord with me:
"Some people, like myself, need the investments of these middle-men to jumpstart out national and international acts. A label is essentially a philanthropic group with a shared interest in a profitable return--wait that's a loan shark--either way, we need them. There's a lot of good that comes with their association, an example of which, is the best promo you don't have to pay for up front.
Do it yourself is good but either very costly, very time consuming, or both. We don't all have that kind of time. I sure don't. As I get older and lose more of my hair and watch the DIY option shorten my career and decrease my my chances of making it in this industry. It can be a liability I can't afford. I don't have much money either and making the connections is a rather difficult task when I have to work so I can eat and pay bills. A starving artist can only starve for so long."
I've spent the last few years educating myself on the changes in the music industry and how I can use these for my band. This led to me releasing our album totally DIY last month rather than bothering with any labels. I've been advocating this way of working for a while now but I think I'm starting to change my mind.
Releasing music and distributing it is simple. Its hard work but the actually act of releasing a body of work is simple. And yeah as you say it is MASSIVLEY time consuming.
Ryan, you make a good point about musicians not being only motivated by music but for many the motivation is to make enough to live off through a music career. We've released an album but we’re a long way from breaking even and we may not ever do so. Touring is not really an option at the moment due to the effort needed in organising one ourselves and the fact that as a DIY band we don’t have that much clout. I’m not too bothered about the money right now but I do want to be moving towards a time when I am earning enough money from my music to survive on it.
Many of the old gatekeepers may not be there any more but there is no denying the mark of approval that musicians get when a label works with them. I think the best option for bands like mine (we’re in the rock/stoner rock genre) is to get on a label for a release or two (where the sole motivation for the label is to shift about 1000 units) and use this as a jumping off point so that once you’ve got the fans and contacts etc. you can then use this to kickstart your DIY career.