amon wrote:ElfDude wrote:I want the disc and the cover it comes in. Same with my wife, kids, and friends.
I'm sure your wife, kids and friends are all relieved to know that you want them.
Discuss Kiesel Guitars Endorsers and Professional Players
Question on the topic of new ideas for income.
Assuming one of a musician's top goals is to make as much income as possible from his craft (whether it's from media/mp3 sales or touring or t-shirts or elsewhere), could a solo artist potentially make more money by getting a position in a band that's already famous among non-musicians? In other words, hop a highly commercial train that's already running fast on the rails and has been for years, with a huge audience.
Of course, he'd lose absolute control over his destiny, may have to bow to the demands of a BL or production boss, and so on. But might there be more commercial/financial return because he'd be situated in another band's slipstream?
I've got zero familiarity with FG's genre, so I have no idea what the opportunities would be. I'm just askin'.
I agree with the iTunes thing...Apple should make it so that you can submit your music to the site, they check it to make sure the songs are legit and not random jokes, and then place it on the website and compensate the musicians for the effort (not ALL of it but a little portion and, of course, throw in advertising since their advertising now has everything 'popular' more than actual musicians). Just my $.02
2 AC375 (or AC475; 7-string preferred)
3 Carvin V3412
5 Carvin BX1600
6 DC700C (27" scale)
7 Extended scale or Multiscale 6-string Bass
9 K6CX/SCB6CX/DC6CX (26.5"/27" scale)
Pickup Post that may help you!
I understand the concern about this issue. I'm not really even sure why these torrent sites are allowed to exist, but there's probably not much that can be done about them. The internet is a big place, after all.
It would be nice if some of the unavailable music was made available on Itunes, though. For instance, none of the Racer X albums are available there. I had to buy the CDs and rip them to Itunes to get them on my Ipod. Pretty much everything else Paul Gilbert ever did is on there, so why not that?
Also, I think if you have material to release you might as well go ahead and do it and not worry about the way things are, because you really don't have much control over what people download. Decent people will buy the music if they like it and will leave it alone if they don't.
2x Carvin Bolt
Ibanez RG1570 and Mikro
2x Fender MIM Strat
Quilter 101 Mini Head
Carvin Vintage 1 x 12 cab
Carvin Legacy II 2 x 12 cab
I got my degree in the business side of the music industry, and while it has proven to be pretty darn useless, it does give me certain insights to the industry.
For one, I`ve seen the numbers. Music piracy has had a TREMENDOUS affect on artist`s incomes. The argument has been presented about "dubbed" copies being around forever, and it`s completely invalid. A national band loses less than a dollar a thousand times, it`s hardly noticeable. Turn that into 3 or 4 MILLION times and we`re talking a shyteload of money. No matter how much you`ve made, missing out on a couple of million dollars is going to affect your mood. Imagine the difference in scale with a band on the verge of hitting it big. Not big enough yet to be independednt from the label, barely making enough to get by on with merch sales, hardly breaking even. maybe they`re only missing out on $20K a year from piracy, but that`s $20K that might be every dime they`d see for the year.
For two (as was exposed earlier), it COMPLETELY devalues what we do. Completely. Once people have gotten something for free, they will want it free forever. That`s why I don`t have a single reservation about my lesson fees, and I don`t discount them (well, not publically. I`ve given a few free lessons to some of my best students when they couldn`t afford it, and the alternative was them having to quit). People see my rates and understand that there`s a value there. They see Joe Schmoe on Craigslist offer hour lesson for $20 and a free first lesson and he`s worthless. The very same reason I used to confront other shops in town for whoring out rates when I had my custom powder coating shop. Once they stopped cutting rates people stopped asking them to. It still gives you the option of taking care of someone and having it actually mean something to them, instead of them expecting it.
This whole YouTube thing that has all the independent artists in an uproar could easily be the best thing that could ever happen to the music industry at this point. The big labels aren`t stupid. It was only a matter of time before they figured out a way to roll themselves back on top, which they are. All of the tools in place now will still be there for the indie artists, but without the dilution of the big label involvement. Thigns will go back to how they were 20 years ago, but with distribution exponentially easier for the indie artists....IF we don`t fark it up. The bands willing to do the work will do well for themselves, and the ones that don`t will complain about how broken the industry is and how there`s no money.
The big labels are doing the artists a huge favor by forcing the public to pay for music again. They won`t stop piracy, but they will make it easier to just pay, instead of shirking the system. The consumers aren`t getting "screwed", they`re being put back in a position to pay for intellectual property, something they SHOULD pay for. The artists will be rewarded for it, and again have an industry they can make a living in.
We have more empty, foreclosed on structures in the United States than we have homeless people, yet architects are still making good money designing more of them. The INSTANT someone figures out how to work up a "good enough" blueprint without an architect, someone will panic and start offering their services at cut rates, and it`ll all be over. It`s not a new scenario. I`m just glad the music industry has decided it`s had enough and is taking matters back into it`s own hands.
"Music can heal pains there is no other medicine for."
I agree, people should be paid for something they do. To become a good musician takes a LOT of time and money (I'm still in the middle of my first 3 years of playing and going through stuff that people half my age have already gotten past) and if you release an album, you want to make money off it.
I'll be up front, I HAVE downloaded music before. HOWEVER, after that I went and bought the CDs. I make sure that even if I do download them that the artists still get my money because it's completely unfair for me to take for free what they spent a lot of time and effort creating. Even if I don't open the CD or never use it, that money belongs to the artists.
As for torrent sites in general... Without torrent sites, I wouldn't be able to watch A LOT of tv shows that aren't being aired or are like 2-3 years behind the U.S. broadcasts. I think for an ex-pat like myself, not being able to watch something like Real Time with Bill Maher is tough because I had HBO when I was still in the US and love the show. I think some minor exceptions need to be made in the case of tv shows and ex-pats
I briefly got into downloading music in the mid-2000s, largely from artists that I had already bought CDs of, so I can't say I felt all that guilty. It was just a convenient way to get their tunes on to my computer. I will admit, however, that there were some "one hit wonders" whose one hit I downloaded...I can't say I felt particularly guilty about that. I don't recall paid digital downloads existing back then, and I wasn't about to buy a whole album just for one song that I liked...maybe that's wrong, but...
I haven't downloaded music in years even though - to the best of my knowledge - there are no laws in Canada against it. But nowadays I won't do it simply on principle. I do purchase physical media and/or digital downloads from my favorite artists out of genuine respect and appreciation for the talent and effort that went into composing and producing the music. Someday I may even buy a high-end turntable, tube amp, and high-end speakers and start collecting vinyl...
From a pure business/licensing royalty point of view, the loss of income from pirating, even it is really as broad as some perceive it to be, is minimal. The actual revenue an artist receives from a lost download in minuscule. As in factions of fraction of a cent. Factor in overseas sub-royalties and its a fraction of fraction of a fraction of one cent.
The revenue source in the music industry has changed dramatically and the new business is no longer the song but the artist package. hence the 360 or all in deals which are prevalent these days.
If you want to blame the cause its not the pirating, because free music has been an industry standard forever and in fact most if not all recording contracts factor in a 25% revenue deduction for free bees and promo's, the cause was the current marketing and packaging concepts introduced in the early 80's when overseas interests moved in and took control of the music industry.
Not that the music industry was any better before but it was different. In those days musicians didn't complain about pirating but complained about distribution.
So from a purely business point of view, if Mr. Gambale was one of my clients, I would tell him with all do respect, do not focus on the pirating as the source of his loss of income but the fact that he is now competing in an industry that has evolved and derives its money from marketing an entire package and his loss of income is because he has not properly analyzed his market and effectively targeted it.
Sadly it may also turn out, for Mr. Gambale, and for that matter myself, who is still dreams of becoming like those I represent and who ironically tell me looking back they wish they became what I am, that like , no country for old men, in the music biz, there is no sales for fat bald men.
One last note, Steve Vai gets all of this instinctively. He downloads his own music fro free on youtube. He doesn't complain about not getting a royalty. he gets the free bee promo necessity of the biz and realizes it is marketing for his entire package, which include revenue sources, from his music, but also his performances, his guest appearances, HIS EQUIPMENT ENDORSEMENTS, etc. This is the biz model you have to think of and stop worrying about pirates.
amon - great article, just saw it now and it basically says it all
casual madman, no you do not want the jem, you want the money from the jem sales! Change that, you want the jem and also the money from the jem sales.
I disagree completely with this "promotion" notion. What the heck good does it do me for everyone to know my name BECAUSE THEY GOT WHAT I MADE WITH MY OWN TWO HANDS FOR FREE?
Steve Vai (to use your example) didn't become Vai, Inc. just because he decided to. He had a talent. He applied it, and GOT PAID FOR IT--by Frank Zappa, by David Lee Roth, by assorted record and guitar-type companies, etc.
He didn't start giveaways until well after his brand was established--and YouTube videos are not CD-quality audio. You don't catch Vai, Inc. giving albums--or songwriting credits!--away for free. And I guarantee you that if Vai, Inc. caught someone bootlegging his CDs in any quantity (virtually or physically--even to give them away, much less reselling them), a major prosecution would ensue.
Because his output is HIS. He made it. It belongs to him. You can pay for the privilege of listening to it (in quality audio modes), or you can steal it.
That's right, I said steal. When someone creates a product for sale, and you TAKE IT WITHOUT APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION TO THE CREATOR, you're a thief. You can embrace the immorality of it (as many have), or you can take the higher path.
There is no middle ground.
This like saying that someone who drowns due to incoming flood waters should have adapted and learned to breath under water.
But again, and I've also seen studies that mention this so I'm not alone, but I buy more music due to downloading and being able to "taste" it before buying more.
Also, there are ads on those Vai, Inc. YouTube pages and videos. Just like any other "power user" on YT, those generate revenue (along with marketing ties) for the big Vai machine.
"also, there are ads on those Vai, Inc. YouTube pages and videos. Just like any other "power user" on YT, those generate revenue (along with marketing ties) for the big Vai machine."
My point exactly. He is making revenue from other sources and is using his music which he shares for free as a loss leader. A draw in. Just like a super market will have a weekly sale and sell cherries below cost, just to get shoppers in the door to buy something else. He is smart. He is making money where he can because historically selling just the song has never been profitable.
In fact, not only is he smart but he is finally master of his own fate. He is in control of his own image, and how he uses it. In the past, he would have been indebted to a label for a small fortune and he would have had to assign all his intellectual property rights s recoupment.
Did you know that the typcial profit from a gold record is less than $60k. For all that work, time, and years to achieve gold record status etc, That's after paying back all your costs and if you are a 5 piece band that's 12k each. you have to make income elsewhere because album sales don't cut it. it is like working for free or worse and if I had the choice I would give it away too and prefer to make money on the youtube advertising or tour sponserships, perfeormances etc. Why dio you thinkVai always says he would rather be performing? he is telling you he would rather BE MAKING MONEY!
Typical revenue from a downloand is even less but you save on the costs so in some ways its preferred. The problem is that you can't sucker a buyer in to pay for 14 songs, 12 which are not on par with the two mandatory single releases per album, so you do lose potential mechanical revnue from these other songs and thus a trade off.
The bigger problem is the artist is now stressed to make each single release a hit which is viturally impossble. So many artists release maybe 5 or 6 songs that they have been working on their whole career up to this point but then they do not have a whole career of time to release any follow up and the followup material suffers, their following fades and the artist disappears into an abyss because market entry is so direct and easy these days there are 1,000,000 others ready to fill the space.
But the industry will survive because this has happened before. Anybody remember 45's? We used to get promo 45's ALL THE TIME FOR FREE. Did 45's kill the buseinss? NO.
What is really killing artists these days is their unwillingness to accept that they are in a mature business with low cost of entry and intense comptetion. The artist has educate themselves that this is a business and learn to identify their target market and how to develop a product and plan to reach that market. They have to accept that they are the product! None of this is artistic. Its lady g-ga-101. Or whatever persona (the freakier the better it seems) you want on stage. But leave it on stage and when its over its back to business.
This is not new its the same ole same ole. I learned this when I was in LA back in the late 70's and early 80's and I try and expalin this to acts these days. I learned from the best. My mentor was Al Coury. Check him out. This guy saw it coming way back in 1982! He predicted the Britney Spears (though he didn't name her specifcally) and the stories he would tell of how music was really made would surpirse if not shock you, dissapoint you and make you think about getting another career. I did. I went out there and came back to become a lawyer. In the late 80's I went back and worked with Al again but this time I was representing artists. yes they were signed.
For those Carvinites in MA, Al was a home town boy from Worcester or as we say in Boston, Wistah. This guy started with the Beatles and seen it all. The guy was the music business. Pure business.
BAC--You appear to be a booking agent or some such, from your references above. Say that's your primary trade. Do you get paid for it? Why?
Why not just have your clients pay you a percentage of their merchandising sales?
I am not a booking agent.
I am an attorney who specializes in tax, business and entertainment law. I was a college professor at a prominent Boston business school and may go back part time. I own a commercial recording studio, intellectual property rights, real estate investments, solar fields, anything that makes money, blah blah and at the end of the day and every possible moment a musician.
I get paid get paid a fee and you are absolutely right, by getting a piece of the action. I actually prefer a piece since if the client follows my advice, based on my experiences, we both profit greatly.
Last edited by bornagaincarvinite on Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
Just a side note to the last comment in that article:
Talyor Swift isn't scarce; she seems to be in a lot of different guys' beds all the time
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
The views and opinions expressed on the Kiesel Guitars BBS are solely the responsibility of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect
the opinion of Kiesel Guitars / Carvin Guitars. The KieselGuitarsBBS.com administrators will block all e-mail addresses violating the established BBS rules.
Topics that are not based on Kiesel Guitars / Carvin Guitars gear or experiences with Kiesel Guitars gear may be subject to deletion.