Music stars unite to seek control

Originally posted by vox2442
I was just about to post that.

It should be photocopied and handed out free with every purchase of a guitar, bass, keyboard, or drum kit (I'm sure the drummer can find someone to read it to him).

I agree. I remember around the time actually seeing this stapled on the walls of rehearsal rooms. Not to put people off making music, but just to make them aware of the A&R guy's lies.

why dont they just start their own labels.

reply to post by Missing Mosquito Man


That's what Trent Reznor from Nine Inch Nails did.

But not all artists want the worry of having to organise and run their own agency, there is a lot of work involved and ultimately, for many, it would detract from their work and suck away much useful time needed to actually create the music.

reply to post by vox2442


i saw on mtv onetime that left eye from TLC was explaining how they get paid for their music.


she broke it down like ten bucks a cd or something

and they get a dollar per cd.

then if they sell a million then they have a million dollars

but then divided three ways. and i dont know if the labels [ay for recording or what.

but left eye said that the artists are usually in det because of recording costs and all that other stuff.


but that could be some elaborate hip hop hoaxe to deviate people from doing anything and or scare tactics. i dont know what it is but i hear enough BS coming from the tv I just turn the thing off because its like they have destroyed humanity with all their nonsense.

It's not just the record comapnies/producers/advertisers either...

Take, for example, the most famous and most controversial story that surrounds the sleeve for the 12" single, Blue Monday by New Order.

The story goes that New Order actually lost money due to the production costs of the sleeve.

Well I've done a bit of digging on this and here's a few snippits...

A popular story about "Blue Monday" holds that the single's die-cut sleeve, created by Factory designer Peter Saville, cost so much to produce that Factory Records actually lost money on each copy sold. It is unlikely that Factory Records could have sustained the losses implied, and the sleeve was soon changed to a similar non-die-cut design that would cost no more than a regular sleeve.

www.metafilter.com...

Q: I hear that Factory lost money on Blue Monday because of the floppy sleeve, is that true?
A: [Anonymous] "[...] this is incorrect and a common misconception. The sleeve of the 12" cost so much that it denied Factory an extra profit of just under a penny (UK) on each copy sold. Peter was determined to keep the 'floppy' sleeve and convinced Factory to go with the idea. However, demand and production cost and timings meant that the sleeve became progressively more simple with each repressing. The profits from the sale of 'Blue Monday' were large to say the least [...]"

www.niagara.edu...

The sleeve for the single does not display either the group name or song title in plain English anywhere. Instead, the legend "FAC 73 BLUE MONDAY AND THE BEACH NEW ORDER" is represented in code by a series of colored blocks. The key enabling this to be deciphered was printed on the back sleeve of the album Power, Corruption And Lies.

www.songfacts.com...

So what happened? was it a bad call or was it business getting in the way of art?

At the time Factory went tits-up, I was in a relationship with a woman who actually worked for Factory. The short answer to your two questions is that it was typical of Factory: ideas got in the way of realistic management.

Generally though, I'm not really sure how useful Factory is an example in all this as it was an independent which notoriously operated outside of regularly industry practice.

I miss the days when my weekends away were financed by the sales of ex-promo Factory stock!

reply to post by Extralien


I think the factory guys were just really impractical with their business dealings , and in turn they went bankrupt, but I guess it can be an early example of creative freedom whithout the backing of a major label. Although I would imagine that they must have had a some sort of distribution deal.
They sure had some great bands that probably would not ever been signed to a major.

Didn't Tony Wilson let the artists keep the rights to thier music and have a even split of the profit? Or is that a myth?

Oh and Terriman, that factory stuff is worth a lot isn't it I have a few friends who sold thier collections of Factory stuff on ebay recently and made insane amounts of money.

[edit on 5-10-2008 by drock905]

reply to post by drock905


Just emphasises the point of the artists having a greater say in the details of their work.

These corporations have got away with so much for far too long. It's about time they had a taste of their own medicine and relinquished a bit of themselves in favour of the artists.

Otherwise these companies just might find they are signing bankruptcy forms instead of getting contracts signed..

The Featured Artists' Coalition campaigns for the protection of performers' and musicians' rights. We want all artists to have more control of their music and a much fairer share of the profits it generates in the digital age. We speak with one voice to help artists strike a new bargain with record companies, digital distributors and others, and are campaigning for specific changes.

Artists who have signed up include…

Billy Bragg
Boilerhouse Boys
Chrissie Hynde
Craig David
David Gilmour
Gang of Four
Iron Maiden
Jazzie B
Jools Holland
Kaiser Chiefs
Kate Nash
Klaxons
Radiohead
Richard Ashcroft
Robbie Williams
Sia Furler
Soul II Soul
Stephen Duffy
The Cribs
The Verve
Travis
Wet Wet Wet
White Lies

The Featured Artists Coalition


[edit on 5-10-2008 by Extralien]

Originally posted by drock905
Oh and Terriman, that factory stuff is worth a lot isn't it

I have a few friends who sold thier collections of Factory stuff on ebay recently and made insane amounts of money.

[edit on 5-10-2008 by drock905]

It probably was, but other than a few cds, I never actually kept any of it. It was just a case of selling stuff off that was lying around at the time rather than keeping anything as an investment. It just tended to be promo copies of cds and occasionally vinyl rather than anything else really. A case of 'easy come, easy go'.

reply to post by Merriman Weir


You've maybe unknowingly hit on a very good point there Merriman.

Just how much promotional stuff gets wasted or thrown out at the last minute in favour of another sample? How much does all this bumpff cost the companies and how much of that is not going back to the artists?

You're effectively using the bonus of one good artist to help finance the promotion of a new artist, who may never make it.

If a record company does go bust, who pays the royalties to all involved?
Do the artists have to sign up with another record company to be 'on the list' for royalties etc?

Get my drift?

Heck Yes!!!! As an 18 year old and one of the "young listeners" this is extremely good news.

As you all know quite well, my generation has been offered some of the crappiest music to ever exist. There is no creativity, everything sounds the same, and all of the stupid lyrics are about some dumb relationship that these singers have never had. The artists have to cave in their creativity to producers in order to get them to sell their art.

One of the bigger ones that makes me mad is "modern rock." It is horrible. You all probably know what I am talking about. In modern rock, the drums all have the same beat, it sounds like there is a thousand guitars that all blend in together, and every song gives you a headache. Its hard to listen to the whole song.

Another thing that has been a recent trend over years is the dimishing sound quality because of MP3s. Yes I am young and I still buy CDs and recently I am buying vinyl. Unfortunatley, whenever I start to listen to a new CD, I get a headache withink 10 minutes. Producers amp up every instrument in the band in order to make it better to listen to on MP3 through those little earphones.

The music industry is one of the big players in this obviously. Hopefully they will fall for good and music will be in the hands and minds of artists, not corporate producers looking to make a big buck. I know that there have been some successful indie labels that have come out with some good music recently though.

Long live creativity!!

I know a guy who's onto his 5th deal now. Every deal he did so far he got ripped off, the last couple of times he even hired lawyers to check the contracts, but they still cheated him through the stealth accounting. He finally thought he had a good contract, but they pulled some nonsense again, he was supposed to get £200,000, but is likely to end up with only £50,000. He makes more money from his online merchandising (t shirts etc), which he has never given up any rights on, than on his albums.

A few people have told me that for many companies, this is the standard model, find talent, rip them off, (maybe) get sued, make confidential settlement. Most times people don't bother suing, and when they do settle it's usually for paltry amounts, so it works out fine for the record company.

reply to post by drock905


I would have to respectfully disagree. Most artist sign these contracts because if they didn't they would be locked out of recording by the executives. This new tech allows artist a lot more freedom to distibute their music without the help of record company's.
There are numerous bands that sell out and make money without the help of record labels pushing their music. Take Tool for instance. They recieve very little air play, yet they continually run a profitable tour. There are numerous bands that are not main stream, yet make an awsome living promoting themselves. Like Wookiefoot, Spoonfed Tribe, Michael Franti just to name a few.
The problem with the record industry is tha they lump all artist together when it comes to music writes and profit. People like Brittney Spears do not write their own music so whether they retain their rights its not really important. But when groups like the Beatles loose writes to their music that is a cardinal sin. The music industry is no different than any other corporation, the executives take the majority share of profits with little regard for the artist themselves.

A bold move by those artists.
I hope they succeed.

Big Music Labels started off with wanting to profit from distribution of records betwwn the artist and the potential customer.
Now has developed to something more sinister.
Big companies want to control what we hear.
What music we make.
Even what music we can make 10 years from now.

With music, songs and good lyrics you can even tear down a goverment.

THEY were allowed to control the music and now THEY control much more than just the music!

Think about it!

Big Music labels might have become an indirect tool of a massive system of mind control.
They certainly act this way since with their actions they are not only indirectly supressing freedom of expresion but also dictate as well! They stand in the way of a musicians interaction with the broader audience.

[edit on 5-10-2008 by spacebot]

[edit on 5-10-2008 by spacebot]

Originally posted by Extralien
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

You've maybe unknowingly hit on a very good point there Merriman.

Just how much promotional stuff gets wasted or thrown out at the last minute in favour of another sample?

How much does all this bumpff cost the companies and how much of that is not going back to the artists?

In terms of actual units, I can imagine it's a fair amount but probably not as much as you'd think. Most record companies engage subcontractors to deal with promotional stuff (or rather did when I was familiar with this) and it's these firms that deal with radio, television &c who are supplied the promotional material. It's a given that half this material is going to end-up in second hand shops at some point or other as someone along the supply chain is going to sell it at some point or other. If not the record company then the plugger, if not the plugger then someone at the receiving end.

However, the costs of promotional material are usually covered in advances &c which, of course, are recouped before royalties, so the artist is losing out. Keep in mind the promotional model in 2008 is very different from when Factory folded as it was a few years before the world wide web really exploded. It can be argued that, back then, it was more difficult for an artist to not only record and release their own music, but also to promote it on their own.

You're effectively using the bonus of one good artist to help finance the promotion of a new artist, who may never make it.

This has always been a problem in the industry as a few artists on a label will take up the bulk of a label's promotional drive and general resources.

If a record company does go bust, who pays the royalties to all involved?

That can be really, really complicated. I'm not an expert at all, but I think much of this depends on the actual contracts and who owns publishing rights &c. Sometimes, if a label has gone under, another label might cherry pick the roster and some of the royalties might be transferred over. This is similar to normal buyouts like when Virgin sold to EMI and some bands were just left without recording contracts overnight. Whether or not royalties go back to the artist also depends on the type of advance anyway, as usually there's no royalties to be had until the label's advance is paid off due to it being just a form of loan.

[edit on 5-10-2008 by Merriman Weir]

Originally posted by Kanati
reply to post by drock905

 

I would have to respectfully disagree. Most artist sign these contracts because if they didn't they would be locked out of recording by the executives. This new tech allows artist a lot more freedom to distibute their music without the help of record company's.
There are numerous bands that sell out and make money without the help of record labels pushing their music. Take Tool for instance. They recieve very little air play, yet they continually run a profitable tour. There are numerous bands that are not main stream, yet make an awsome living promoting themselves. Like Wookiefoot, Spoonfed Tribe, Michael Franti just to name a few.
The problem with the record industry is tha they lump all artist together when it comes to music writes and profit. People like Brittney Spears do not write their own music so whether they retain their rights its not really important. But when groups like the Beatles loose writes to their music that is a cardinal sin. The music industry is no different than any other corporation, the executives take the majority share of profits with little regard for the artist themselves.

I agree the new tech makes Majot labels irrelevant, were saying pretty much the same things, but if someone wants to record in this day and age it really is fairly cheap and split between members of a group its even cheaper. Signing a deal just to get in a studio is an old idea.

I have to say that I don't think bands like Tool apply. The fact that they get any radio play at all puts them in the 1 percent of big artists not the working musicians. These guys have huge budgets when in comes to recording and promotion. Think of all the magazines bands like tool are in when they put out a record. The promtion budget is pretty large. Like Radiohead they are guaranteed to sell, i woud guess a minimun of a million records pre release maybe more. Lou Reed recorded an album of distortion and static and it still sells.

The last 10 years have completly changed the game for the better. So the majors are broken? I say good I hope they go down in flames. They don't matter anymore its not the 70s.

Originally posted by Dances With Angels
Heck Yes!!!! As an 18 year old and one of the "young listeners" this is extremely good news.

As you all know quite well, my generation has been offered some of the crappiest music to ever exist. There is no creativity, everything sounds the same, and all of the stupid lyrics are about some dumb relationship that these singers have never had. The artists have to cave in their creativity to producers in order to get them to sell their art.

One of the bigger ones that makes me mad is "modern rock." It is horrible. You all probably know what I am talking about. In modern rock, the drums all have the same beat, it sounds like there is a thousand guitars that all blend in together, and every song gives you a headache. Its hard to listen to the whole song.

Another thing that has been a recent trend over years is the dimishing sound quality because of MP3s. Yes I am young and I still buy CDs and recently I am buying vinyl. Unfortunatley, whenever I start to listen to a new CD, I get a headache withink 10 minutes. Producers amp up every instrument in the band in order to make it better to listen to on MP3 through those little earphones.

The music industry is one of the big players in this obviously. Hopefully they will fall for good and music will be in the hands and minds of artists, not corporate producers looking to make a big buck. I know that there have been some successful indie labels that have come out with some good music recently though.

Long live creativity!!

Good for you!!! don't ever give up searching for new music. For the 100s of albums you listen to there is always that one that connects and moves you and that is one of the greatest feelings out there.

Don't cut this generation short though. It is the most exciting time in music ever, because anyone can record what they want, the rules are out the window it's totally open. Just dont buy into mtv's version of music.

Vinyl is much better, it sounds better and playing a record tends to be more of an experience. Its almost a ritual, to be shared with friends as opposed to the solitary act of listening to an ipod.

What i always wondered was why don't Majors, if there so concerned with pirated music, just stop releasing albums digitally. Return to vinyl and then just having a computer wouldn't allow people to burn music. Not saying they should, but it seemed a reasonable solution. Most people wouldn't bother copying stuff in real time.

The over compression of instruments is a huge problem and more engineers have started embracing older techniques and shunning "the volume wars" that have become the norm. Everybody wants to be louder because they think that means "radio quality" when its just ear fatiguing. With that approach comes unessecary prodction and it stops being a band playing together in room and becomes just a bunch of people overdubing to a click track.

"The Machine" (The RIAA) controls the industry. They support whoever they think will make them richer. An organisation like the one proposed here is a good thing. It could help free artists from "The Machine". We also need new independent labels to take greater interest in independent artists.

Recently, Myspace shunned the independent artists and record companies who got them the traffic that helped them get sold to Newscorp, by changing Myspace Music to support four major lables and their artists. Are any independent labels and artists part of that deal? NO. That is just one more reason why we need more than one organization designed to help artists get and keep creative control of their product. I'm producing and distributing my own music. To heck with "The Machine" (RIAA).



[edit on 10/5/2008 by Mirlin11]

reply to post by Extralien


Control of what?

They can't even control their own lives...poor things...
It's from rehab to rehab, and then back again.

Online radio stations should give them air time, or can be set up to do so, and there are car radios now that pick them up. Others are strapping laptops on their dashboards, or converting their cell phones, like here:

radio.about.com...

I needed an adapter to go from the 2.5mm stereo/mic jack to a common 3.5mm (1/8") stereo jack. Sprint didn't carry them at the time, but luckily I was able to pick one up from the local Cingular store.

Adapter in hand, I connected the phone to the car, typed the Groove Salad url into my media player, and blammo, I had high-quality, untethered, Internet radio right in my car! The quality was even better than most XM Radio channels and I didn't have to pay an extra subscription.

Jackson isn't the only person to turn his cell phone into an Internet Radio provider. At sampublishing.com, Kulvir Singh Bhogal "...shows you how to set up your Treo 600 or Treo 650 smartphone to tune into those deathless Internet radio broadcasts....


I have been listening to internet radio in the car for 4 years. Easy to do. Go get a laptop and get an air card from many cell phone companys. Then put an mp3 or fm modulator and transmit it to an fm channel that is not being used. A lot of people tune them to the end of the dial. People are acting like this is something new. Many of us have been doing it as far back as 1999. Need to get the big car companies to install into the new cars on the passenger side of the car or the dash board. Think about it. The internet, internet radio and a gps all in one.

Because self marketing is such a liberating idea, but they need air time too!