Posts Tagged ‘music industry’

Kevin Blechdom and Blevin Blechdom do Jackie

Thursday, July 15th, 2010

Just heard this on Do or DIY’s latest podcast which as usual is amazing and wonderful *shelves current podcast and starts again ;-) * and it’s great to hear some new music from Kevin Blechdom (of Bastard fave cover ‘I Will Always Love You’ with Dsico), also reunited with Blevin Blechtum as Blechtum from Blechtum where it all began (or bleched?). Watch for a whole load of beautiful blechdumb.

They both deserve to be a lot more known…amazing that the US creates wonderfully quirky electronic musicians and experimental musicians which actually have wider appeal, and mostly they get ignored at home unless they’re hipsters like Animal Collective, MTV like Devo or just MEH like Girl Talk (thinking people like Matmos, Negativland, Residents, ECC, Cex, Venetian Snares – ok he rarely has wide appeal, Chicks on Speed hey they’re nearly all in SF/Bay Area…or had to move to Europe. Hmmm.).

I’m guessing unless the quirks fit into some branding strategy the US media and music industry will want to lop them off, whereas here the quirks and non-homogeneity is what makes it cool.

Anyway enough ranting and more blech:

Love the plants and beekeeper masks, LOL.

Bookmark and Share

Twitter Facebook Google Email to a friend Subscribe to RSS feed

Death of the single, Music Industry is dead right?

Monday, April 19th, 2010

Well what with all the file sharing and like it must be hitting sales.

What? No? Who says? The British Phonographic Industry? The same ones that wrote the disconnection clause in the Digital Economy Act? Fed spiked and overdramatic info to MPs that influenced the debate?

And the ones that went loggerheads with MI5 and MI6 over serious security concerns (which could cause a lot more damage than a few people download an MP3s – all of which incidentally doesn’t seem to be impacting sales, more the opposite.

Physical               Digital                                               Total Sales

2002                       43.9m                   -                              43.9m

2003                       30.8m                   -                              30.8m

2004                       26.5m                   5.7m                      32.2m

2005                       21.4m                   26.4m                    47.8m

2006                       13.9m                   53.0m                    66.9m

2007                       8.6m                     77.9m                    86.5m

2008                       4.9m                     110.2m                 115.1m

2009 YTD              1.6m                      116.0m                 117.6m

(BPI’s own quoted figures for singles sales. Source: The Official Charts Company.)

Eh? So who/what are they trying to ‘protect’ if they doing so well? Fergal & co. are just greedy, that’s what I think.

Bookmark and Share

Twitter Facebook Google Email to a friend Subscribe to RSS feed

How much does music really earn?

Thursday, April 15th, 2010

Answer: Depends on where you buy it from BUT that’s not the question you should be asking…

The infographic from Information is Beautiful to the left has been doing the rounds recently, and causing some debate (there’s also  been mucho discussion previously over at GYBO about digital distribution models vs streaming and physical CDs which this drops quite nicely into).

Steve Lawson says quite rightly it’s comparing different things, that streaming services such as Spotify isn’t about selling but promotion…I would take that further and say the problem with the graph – or more likely those who read it  -is there is an implied top to bottom causal relationship, that a comparison is taking place which doesn’t happen in the real world.

One namely of ‘footfall’ – how does one discover something? – but also that the categories aren’t exclusive – a streaming service could lead to a CD or digital sale, a CD sale could lead to streaming revenue cos the person has left the CD at home or lent it to a friend who’s given it back. Spotify although small in revenue is the way things are going, as Steve points out not as a primary revenue stream but a promotion stream, but as the millions go into 10s or 100s then of course revenue will be higher – we may scoff at 4 million views needed at the moment, but I’m thinking in the future that’s going to be seen as small-fry as the US & other areas get Spotify and other services.

When the world gets Spotify, it’s going to be touching the billion for a very popular track, as people listen to it more than once….

Also not included is the likelihood of a purchase. Yes a self-made CD-R from the artist WILL create the most profit for the artist… but how many people will either get the chance to do that or want to – the perception that the music or object has some worth is quite intangible & hard to graph but it’s part of the sale. Yes a hand-drawn scribble from some unknown artist MIGHT be worth millions in future years – but how many people would plunk down the change to buy it? That’s not to diminish CD-Rs or napkins – because the old adage is ‘if you like it, buy it’ is very true – but the mental marketing perception that it’s a good well-made packaged thing be it a house, desk or a piece of music – is ever-present in everyone’s head. Is it quality? So cheaper modes of production do not always win, which is why 7″ vinyl and special limited edition digipaks and handmade covers still survive. Also the personal/limited aspect is part of it, that can also imply value (even as a future eBay sale) in the mind of the buyer.

The future will be a blend of these, and yes some people will always want a physical product, some will prefer digital, some will prefer streaming services. It’s a multichannel approach,  and to say ‘ooh this means I’m going to put out only CDs and not use Spotify’ is blind to the fact that new discovery of music comes across many channels now – not just the old radio/broadcast model. And streaming services, along with YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, podcasts, blogs et al are part of that.

Interestingly the original post the first graph comes from was intending to debunk the theory that artists can make a living from digital revenues as stated in the Digital Economy Bill, to I’m guessing point out the Act is protecting no-one and that the piracy fight is a pointless one. A far more useful graph for doing that is this one of music industry income. So even though album sales are down the industry is still making massive profits, and now $4.2 billion on online sales alone, with only 10% of piracy even being a problem? Piracy, what piracy? Look at that graph when the industry claims it’s being destroyed by pirates and filesharers, it’s actually in rude health, has been for years.

Bookmark and Share

Twitter Facebook Google Email to a friend Subscribe to RSS feed

Music Industry is Killing Music

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

Great new video from Dan Bull ‘Home Taping is Killing Music’.

BTW the subject line comes from this graphic which I did for a Second Life t-shirt or an LJ avatar 3 years ago originally, it seems to have spread *ahem Jeb* so here you can have it at higher res ;-)


Bookmark and Share

Twitter Facebook Google Email to a friend Subscribe to RSS feed

Music and Your Message (In the Hour of Chaos)

Friday, February 19th, 2010

Been thinking about posting an article about Music Marketing 101 for ages, in two minds to post it. For one, marketing and advertising as Hicks said IS the devils work – and I should know I work in this world. Why should I help Satan’s Little Helpers?

The other is that as someone who hasn’t marketed his own music is liable to get people saying ‘but you haven’t been at the coalface’ which I accept. I have though been promoting my own stuff (events, podcast, mashups, talents) online for years and been heavily involved with social media, and have been a rabid music fan since 7 years old.

The reason I am posting is the whining from record labels, industry staff, PR people etc. that music doesn’t sell, traditional formats don’t sell, it’s all going to hell in a handbasket – and this is used as a reason to clamp down on ‘illegal’ practices like sharing and mashups and the like. This pisses me off, as I can see most of ‘em are severely missing a trick with social media and interactive media, and blatantly not doing their job and blaming their ineptitude on others (talking mostly corporates here, although I think indies could also learn a little). So if the Lamb lies down with the Beast and listens to it’s iPod for a while, so be it.

So this is an open letter to the music industry managers and marketers and such bods. Doubt they are listening, and some of it seems obvious but is well worth restating, but anyway here goes:

1. Time of the season

In this age of 24 Hour news and ecommerce, why does it take 3-6 months to release a track or album? OK I know lead times for traditional press and getting a physical product out there are immovable (something like 6 weeks for magazines, and dunno about CDs/vinyl now but guessing 1-2 months or more depending on artwork/specialties), but when you’ve got iTunes and digital releases there’s no reason to create all that buzz for a track you cannot even get or legally download…this feeds Hype Machine and music blogs such delays – as the longer the delay, the more likely the fans will get bored of the track or go find it illegally. Why not have the track/album available digitally immediately? Why tease for months, this is the old way of thinking – we want stuff we can listen/share NOW.

2. Oh so special

‘Physical formats don’t sell’. BULL. SHIT. I’ve bought physical formats recently, special imports I’ve hurried to buy and awaited eagerly for the postie to deliver. Now I admit amongst a younger age group the physical CD holds less sway, but 30+ age bracket still prefers it…and those CDs I bought? Special limited editions – one was a CD of an album I already had on MP3 but with a hand-sprayed 7″ collectable – the handmade part is important. Make your releases special in this age of digital cloned conformity, make them artworks, make them unique, handmade, craft objects. Limited edition and special – totally the way to go. I thought the music industry KNEW this? Seemingly not in most cases. Create a boring physical product that conforms and looks like everyone else’s CDs and guess what? No-one will care much for it. Artists know this (both visual and musical) – listen to them.
And even the MP3s can be made distinct and have thoughtful nice touches – one of the things I loved about NIN’s free Ghosts LP is Trent commissioned a unique graphic for each MP3 of the album from an artist. That is cool.

3. Live n’ direct

Buying direct from the artist gives a warm, fuzzy feeling…there is NO reason why artists can’t sell direct in this age, and it’s a major plus. All fans would rather give their money to the band/artist they love rather than some spotty chimp who just put the CD in a rack and doesn’t really care if it’s The XX or Michael Buble in the box. NIN knows this, St Etienne knows this, Shut Up and Dance knows this, even Radiohead did this once before wimping out. No reason why unestablished acts can’t do it either.

4. Everybody wants a piece of the action

In this Web 2.0/Social media world it amazes me that media companies still tell people to want a passive experience. Or give them a token interaction (no, texting inane comments or competitions or a token remix competition for a record voucher does not cut it anymore). Talking about DJ Hero recently on GYBO reminded me of this – Activision and Freestyle missed a trick there, they could have used their deep pockets to license and involve the DJ/mashup community by licensing existing popular mashups for the game or releasing some of the parts into the wild and including those as downloadable content for the game with credit to the mashers – who of course will be so pleased with the attention they will promo the game for free. Or doing what Frets on Fire is doing and allow people to create their own levels, and share them (even without the tracks if that was a problem, but just instructions for which track/album to use).

The top-down idea of entertainment is so 20th century, and is changing. So do what Lily Allen did and include your album parts on your album (and thus had loads of free advertising in mashups everywhere), make your videos remixable (how I go through hell to find high quality vids for my mashes) or create forums for people to remix your work as NIN has – and then don’t sue/threaten them if they use the work in unexpected ways, because that will happen, but will probably be to everyone’s benefit.

5. Everybody’s free (to feel good)

Free is not evil – free is good. Singles do not sell in the main unless you are Taylor Swift or Justin Bieber or some such crap – so why not give them away for free to promote the album? Or at least don’t snap at the blogs posting MP3s giving you free publicity – they are music fans too and would most likely want to see the album and band/artist do really well – especially if they are actually posting tracks with permission! Also pay what you want seems to work well, like the direct model (or in tandem) people want to see the artist do well – what they hate is the money going up exec’s noses or for people who add very little to the chain – they are not stupid, the excess and waste (and high CD prices) of the industry hasn’t gone unnoticed. Neither has the money thrown at frankly terrible projects and bands that anyone with sense, an ear and not directly related to them would’ve not given the time of day.

Oh and Creative Commons is your friend.

6. Release Me (and Let Me Love Again)

Following from the last point is the hardest part – releasing something good. Now I’m not going to fall into the old fogey trap and say pop music is crap today (it was ever thus, sadly – with some notable and honourable exceptions) but producing music that people care about, rather than something for ringtone or advertising sales, pays dividends. Treat all music as throwaway and guess what: your audience will do likewise. This doesn’t mean serious singer-songwriter bores need to rise apparent but meaning in music has been lost somewhere in between all the branding meetings; lack of risk taking and the one-album syndrome mean artists never develop beyond the surface; concentrating on one niche ADHD demographic will not only lose everyone else, it will probably lose that too because ‘giving people what they want’ only works so far until those people get bored and listless – people don’t KNOW what they want until they hear it. The shock of the new, and all that.

Sticking with what they know and a tried and tested formula is short-sighted and just leads to disinterest and apathy. Try behaving more like a mashup artist – mix up the genres, fuck it up, put the country next to rave next to electro next to death metal and see what happens. Feed stuff to the ‘wrong’ audience and see what happens. I just know people will love and buy music that moves them, you just have to surprise, shock, woo, involve and connect with them, resonate with them. I think a lot of that is to break down the walls between artist and audience – Twitter is already doing this in it’s inane way – and take out the marketing bumpf and production fluff, which adds nothing.

I hope these comments come of use to provoke a few thoughts…it does seem from the outside the creativity and innovation in promoting bands is lacking – especially in the realm of social media, bar a few key people who indeed ‘get it’. A lot of this is corporates acting as corporates do – and still not heeding Cluetrain Manifesto that came out over 10 years ago – the principles of transparency and letting people get direct access to those people they need to talk to and not letting bland marketing smokescreens get in the way are still not there.

Bookmark and Share

Twitter Facebook Google Email to a friend Subscribe to RSS feed