Title: Will "live" be the only way to make a profit? Post by: Andy on June 09, 2011, 02:08:43 PM Hi Mark!
Welcome to TalkAWhile. Now that the digital age is upon us and music no longer depends upon audiophiles with pristine vinyl to enable anyone to hear a recording more than a couple of years old, it is obvious whenever an artist or group release a new recording, they are competing against at least 60 years of popular music of all persuasions. Many radio stations now play music from my 'yoof' - I never thought I'd hear Uriah Heep again, but then I switched on Planet Rock! :( A lot of these stations never play a track less than 20 years old, so it'd seem. Anyhow, the way I see it there are (at least) two problems with this scenario. Firstly, the bar is set impossibly high in many genres by the easy availability of so much music, even when an artist or group breaks through, all they do is set the bar even higher for the next release. Second, as the supermarkets and online retailers relentlessly drive down the price of recorded music, it is ever more difficult for any new band to make any profit on recordings. Indeed, there are bands I know who have abandoned formal releases of CDs because the price of production of relatively low numbers means they can't make a profit if they're sold through a retail chain, and just concentrate on profiting from downloads. I realise that TV talent shows have always produced short-term success for their successful artists (long term for the likes of Mr Cowell as he gets the lions share of their income anyhow) so am discounting those. For the majority of artists, it seems the only way to make a living in music is to emulate Fairport Convention (and many others) and be on the road almost constantly? Has the industry swung from live appearances selling recorded music to recorded music selling live music and are those live appearances the only way to sustain a profitable life as a muso? Hope this isn't too long a question, but I'm really interested in what you think the model for successful careers in music will be in the future and whether in fact anyone actually knows where we are heading. All the best Andy Title: Re: Will "live" be the only way to make a profit? Post by: djmahone on June 10, 2011, 12:07:30 PM Hello
I think that you are right to identify the Fairport model. It is relatively easy for anyone with even a relatively small fan base to make money touring and that's rather wonderful. I think that was one of the things that my association with the world of folk has taught me - that there is a whole thriving counter culture which never touched mainstream media - and has all the more staying powere because of that. fashion and trend don't apply. I think, though I don't download myself, that we shouldn;t underestimate how amazing it is that everything is there for kids who might be interested in older stuff. Let's not forget that when cd's were launched in the mid 80's there was tons of stuff that wasn't re-issued for years. Growing up there were names of bands I heard about but there was absolutely no way of hearing then unless you could borrow an actual album. How great for a kid now to be able to sample Grateful dead or whoever for 79p. I think more and more artists will take control of their own catalogue really. I was talking to KT TUnstall about this and she was telling me that though she was touring big-sih venues and had a record deal with EMI - she wasn't really making money. She said that because of all the venture capital machinations at EMI - and album sales revenue getting eaten up in debt servicing etc - she cd make more money selling a tenth of the ammount of records through her own licensed label. That must be the way forward. And she's now touring solo! Which she does brilliantly well I might add. Title: Re: Will "live" be the only way to make a profit? Post by: Andy on June 10, 2011, 02:54:56 PM First, thanks for your reply.
Without meaning to get into an unduly worthy and somewhat boring discussion.... (immediately gets into an unduly worthy and somewhat boring discussion....) The main problem for the majority of artists signed to EMI and other large labels is that they indeed make £bugrall. (Cue discussions of extortionate management deals and studio costs). The temptation is always to say that the mainstream does not include folk or blues or whatever, but then, there are all these vertical boxes which we put artists in, which I though had been busted in the 1960's by Bob Dylan picking up his electric guitar and getting his so-called folk compositions covered by such luminaries as Jimi Hendrix and the Byrds. And by the way, sod the kids, it's wonderful to be able to download tracks on a whim from an artist seen on stage or on the tv, full stop. Suddenly you can discover Philip Glass. Or Rammstein. Or both on the same night. Wonderful for the consumer, troublesome for the artist. |