04-05-2002, 12:32 AM
04-05-2002, 12:37 AM
dude, if a band is in it to make money, they're in it for the wrong reason. if they truly care about the music, and their music is good, the money will come.
as for my argument, I'll take on anyone, anywhere... any topic, any stance. I WILL WIN! because I am the pitbull of arguing.
as for my argument, I'll take on anyone, anywhere... any topic, any stance. I WILL WIN! because I am the pitbull of arguing.
04-05-2002, 12:47 AM
Quote:While I KNOW you've seen the music business first hand Moron, you can't say that ALL bands make $1 or less. Of course none of them are making all their money on their album sales. But theres some bands that make good damn money from it.then my $15-20 shouldn't matter...
Quote:I am the pitbullI thought I saw maynard staring at your nubian booty
Edited By FNMoron on April 04 2002 at 8:08
04-05-2002, 02:43 AM
this argument is so 2001
04-05-2002, 04:36 AM
The current going rate, on a really GOOD deal, that the artist gets per CD Is closer to 35 cents, not a dollar. A dollar would be phenomenal.
My old band was signed to Century media records and sold somewhere In the neighborhood of 15,000 CD's, In the states and abroad, and the band didnt have enough money to put gas In the van.
We made more selling Cd's and shirts direct at the shows.
My old band was signed to Century media records and sold somewhere In the neighborhood of 15,000 CD's, In the states and abroad, and the band didnt have enough money to put gas In the van.
We made more selling Cd's and shirts direct at the shows.
04-05-2002, 03:40 PM
Quote:hey spit, you ever wonder why indy bands are indy? ya think it's because of their scary talent?GRRR!!!!
OK, let me try to state this clearly...bear with me...
A band usually gets signed to a major label because either they knew someone who helped them get a demo listened to...or they worked their ass off to get there. In the latter situation, they start playing shows in their hometown to get their shit together, record a demo, try to shop it at a label, but then 99% of the time have to go out on the road on their own $$$ to spread their name. Because, you see, if you're not on a label you don't have a record company paying program directors at radio stations or MTV to play your songs...therefore, people won't hear it...and people never like what they don't hear or have never heard ...so it's up to a band to go out there and try to get as many people to go to their shows...so, yes if the band is serious and not too busy working their day jobs at the same time, people will hear their stuff and they'll become famous and sell-out :lol:
Another obstacle to becoming famous: the record companies don't put any stock into rock acts anymore. A rock band is a dime a dozen, just check out the Aquarian and the Voice and see how many there are just in this area. The labels are in search of a trend (ie mall metal/grunge) and sign all the bands they can find. They cannibalize the trend to suck every dollar they can make from it, signing really shitty clone bands in the process. But if the music doesn't fit into a neatly packaged category it's useless to their marketing team. Most albums that come out today are made so a teenage audience will consume them...and it's gotta be catchy. verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-repeat chorus.
And nope my reasons for listening do not fit into your tidy argument. I listen to bands on labels where I pretty much know what I'm gonna get, such as Music Cartel, Meteorcity Records, Relapse, Tee Pee...because the musicianship is high and its got fuzz, man I love fuzz, a groove, and I love the mix of punk, southern rock, and doomy heaviness and each band is pretty different (Btw, Kyuss was on Elektra...QOTSA is on Intersope :p ) Why can't I just like a genre of music that I can't really find in the mainstream? Is that considered a bad thing? And I do pass my music around, a few people here who have open minds and ears have become my victims...
And if you look around the threads, my music taste is extraordinarily ecclectic... I really don't care if it's an indy or commerical if it's pleasing to my ears. You just have to sift through the clutter of crappy music that so predominant out there...
04-05-2002, 04:34 PM
Oh, you're right. Getting signed has nothing to do with talent, it's all about what sells.... PFFFT!!! You're forgetting the basies of the argument. We were discussing the finer points of buying music to "support artists" or downloading it to say "fuck the system".
Whether or not a band gets signed to a label has a lot to do with what is popular, and less to do with whether or not they are talented. Look at Britney Spears...
My contention is that if a band is truly good, they will distribute enough albums on their own, that the majors will actually come knocking. Otherwise, they are good enough to have a loyal following of people, much like yourself (in my eyes), who often like music a little bit more if it's not popular. See, the argument you present is quite reminiscent of people that call a band "sell-outs" when they get signed to a major. You just want to keep the band as your little secret. Which is fine, but don't bitch and moan about the fact that downloading music is killing indy bands. In fact, free music actually helps them out. The reasons are two fold, you can not hear the band on the radio, and most people don't go "diggin' in the crates" at their local record store, just dying to find that new band that nobody heard of... which is normally a mediocre band, at best, but because they are indy and not popular, that makes them sound a little bit better...
Now, I'm no musician and I certainly don't know their trials and tribulations. But, one thing I do know is the chances of becoming a successful band are damn near impossible. So again, it they are in it for that, they're in the wrong business. If they are in it for the music, people WILL hear it and spread the word. And your buying their CD at your local record store isn't going to put them over the top, financially. No more than my downloading their music is going to mean one less burrito at the next truckstop.
Whether or not a band gets signed to a label has a lot to do with what is popular, and less to do with whether or not they are talented. Look at Britney Spears...
My contention is that if a band is truly good, they will distribute enough albums on their own, that the majors will actually come knocking. Otherwise, they are good enough to have a loyal following of people, much like yourself (in my eyes), who often like music a little bit more if it's not popular. See, the argument you present is quite reminiscent of people that call a band "sell-outs" when they get signed to a major. You just want to keep the band as your little secret. Which is fine, but don't bitch and moan about the fact that downloading music is killing indy bands. In fact, free music actually helps them out. The reasons are two fold, you can not hear the band on the radio, and most people don't go "diggin' in the crates" at their local record store, just dying to find that new band that nobody heard of... which is normally a mediocre band, at best, but because they are indy and not popular, that makes them sound a little bit better...
Now, I'm no musician and I certainly don't know their trials and tribulations. But, one thing I do know is the chances of becoming a successful band are damn near impossible. So again, it they are in it for that, they're in the wrong business. If they are in it for the music, people WILL hear it and spread the word. And your buying their CD at your local record store isn't going to put them over the top, financially. No more than my downloading their music is going to mean one less burrito at the next truckstop.
04-05-2002, 05:06 PM
Think about this though k1d. If you BUY s local/unsigned/underground band's record at the record store, it WILL help their career. Nowadays, everyone and their mother is making albums at home. And having them printed and distributed. Now, if you download said local bands record, you are making one less album that shows up on their sales sheets. if 10,000 people download instead of buy, thats a huge dent in their sales. Now, if I'm a record company, looking for unsigned talent, I will certainly take a look at their sales. If they sell 10,000 records as opposed to 1,000, then maybe they're worth a shot.
By downloading from a small band, you may just be taking their shot at being signed out of their hands.
By downloading from a small band, you may just be taking their shot at being signed out of their hands.
04-05-2002, 05:12 PM
5 Pointe O
04-05-2002, 07:01 PM
OK, anyone ever hear of a band called Crash Palace? Nah, I didn't think so, they are my "little secret." In fact, that's what I renamed my computer. It's my inside joke with myself. Now that I told you all about the band, I hope they don't "sell-out." Actually, I just saw the cd in the store one day. I never heard their music.
Now while I support Kid's argument on several levels, I also realize he is having way too much fun with this.
The part about how much money a commercial artist gets per cd being as some say between $.35 - $1.00 (I believe Zooty, Moron, Kid and Spit) vs. $1 Plus (Maynerd) is where the problem lies.
First off, I will say that I agree with the $1 or < argument. But that's neither here nor there what I think.
The whole problem, to me, lies with the GAP between what the artist makes (per cd), and the Suggested Retail price, that all of the Sam Goodies etc.. charge at or even above -- Per CD)
This was a huge issue with Tom Petty back in the late 70's
Now all well and good, 8 tracks, cassetes, and records did have their SRP jump higher after that, but Compact siscs were actually supposed to bring that cost down again. Tapes and 8 Tracks have many moving parts, and the production cost between manufacturing Tapes, and manufacturing CDs are miles apart.
However, when Compact Discs firs came out they were $4 - $5 higher than their mechanical tape counterparts. The industry said it was to make the money back based on the technology they had to introduce to their production plants, and that once CDs started selling as well or better than tapes/Records, the price would drop significantly, if not, lower than what the consumer was presently paying. Has anyone seen that happen? Tapes, if you look run about $12 SRP and Compact discs roughly $20 SRP.
Problem 2 is the difference in price, from store to store, for the same CD. How can 1 store sell the same CD Regular price @ 12 bucks, and another store have the regular price at $20 with a $3 off now sticker on it and make it appear like it is a great deal?
Indy records, for the most part, cost a little more. It has to be understood that if the production count is lower per title (because they sell less of said title) that the purchase price will be a bit higher. When an Indy label purchases manufacturing equipment, it is priced ala carte, when a major label purchases manufacturing equipment, it is a buffet. When a Indy label has a machine go down, they pay out the ass for a service contract or replacement. When a Major label has a machine go down, they threaten the machine company that they will take their buisness elswhere.
When I buy cds, most often I buy them at the cost of $7 - $12 a piece (new). Of course, I am talking about single disc cds.
About the argument that Indy people like to keep it their little secret, and when they get signed to a major label they have sold out. I have seen both sides of that coin.
I had a friend who was really into the older Midnight Oil, and when their 1987 breatk through cd "Diesel & Dust" came out all of a sudden he hated them. This guy was really into music, but it was a running joke that he did that to bands that got radio airplay that he previously liked.
Kyuss & Quotsa got signed to a major label and never sold out. Was this because they never got the opportunity to cater to the masses, or was it because they were unbending in the type of music they wanted to put out. Or was it just a combination of both? I'm thinking the former, especially with Kyuss. Kyuss came out in the early 90's, and could have easily threw on some flannel, long johns, and cut off shorts to fit the MTV image of Grunge. Then again, maybe the california desert is too hot for flannel and long johns, and I am just talking oiut of my ass.
With that said, in good conscious, I must agree with 2 other member's statements...
and
umm
ughh
Fuck it...
Now while I support Kid's argument on several levels, I also realize he is having way too much fun with this.
The part about how much money a commercial artist gets per cd being as some say between $.35 - $1.00 (I believe Zooty, Moron, Kid and Spit) vs. $1 Plus (Maynerd) is where the problem lies.
First off, I will say that I agree with the $1 or < argument. But that's neither here nor there what I think.
The whole problem, to me, lies with the GAP between what the artist makes (per cd), and the Suggested Retail price, that all of the Sam Goodies etc.. charge at or even above -- Per CD)
This was a huge issue with Tom Petty back in the late 70's
Quote:Petty ran into record company trouble again when he and the Heartbreakers prepared to release Hard Promises, the 1981 followup to damn the Torpedoes. MCA wanted to release the record at the list price of $9.98, which was a high price at the time. Petty refused to comply to their wishes, threatening to withhold the album from the label and organizing a fan protest which forced the company to release the record at $8.98.
Now all well and good, 8 tracks, cassetes, and records did have their SRP jump higher after that, but Compact siscs were actually supposed to bring that cost down again. Tapes and 8 Tracks have many moving parts, and the production cost between manufacturing Tapes, and manufacturing CDs are miles apart.
However, when Compact Discs firs came out they were $4 - $5 higher than their mechanical tape counterparts. The industry said it was to make the money back based on the technology they had to introduce to their production plants, and that once CDs started selling as well or better than tapes/Records, the price would drop significantly, if not, lower than what the consumer was presently paying. Has anyone seen that happen? Tapes, if you look run about $12 SRP and Compact discs roughly $20 SRP.
Problem 2 is the difference in price, from store to store, for the same CD. How can 1 store sell the same CD Regular price @ 12 bucks, and another store have the regular price at $20 with a $3 off now sticker on it and make it appear like it is a great deal?
Indy records, for the most part, cost a little more. It has to be understood that if the production count is lower per title (because they sell less of said title) that the purchase price will be a bit higher. When an Indy label purchases manufacturing equipment, it is priced ala carte, when a major label purchases manufacturing equipment, it is a buffet. When a Indy label has a machine go down, they pay out the ass for a service contract or replacement. When a Major label has a machine go down, they threaten the machine company that they will take their buisness elswhere.
When I buy cds, most often I buy them at the cost of $7 - $12 a piece (new). Of course, I am talking about single disc cds.
About the argument that Indy people like to keep it their little secret, and when they get signed to a major label they have sold out. I have seen both sides of that coin.
I had a friend who was really into the older Midnight Oil, and when their 1987 breatk through cd "Diesel & Dust" came out all of a sudden he hated them. This guy was really into music, but it was a running joke that he did that to bands that got radio airplay that he previously liked.
Kyuss & Quotsa got signed to a major label and never sold out. Was this because they never got the opportunity to cater to the masses, or was it because they were unbending in the type of music they wanted to put out. Or was it just a combination of both? I'm thinking the former, especially with Kyuss. Kyuss came out in the early 90's, and could have easily threw on some flannel, long johns, and cut off shorts to fit the MTV image of Grunge. Then again, maybe the california desert is too hot for flannel and long johns, and I am just talking oiut of my ass.
With that said, in good conscious, I must agree with 2 other member's statements...
Quote:Maynerd posted:
Think about this though k1d. If you BUY s local/unsigned/underground band's record at the record store, it WILL help their career. Nowadays, everyone and their mother is making albums at home. And having them printed and distributed. Now, if you download said local bands record, you are making one less album that shows up on their sales sheets. if 10,000 people download instead of buy, thats a huge dent in their sales. Now, if I'm a record company, looking for unsigned talent, I will certainly take a look at their sales. If they sell 10,000 records as opposed to 1,000, then maybe they're worth a shot.
By downloading from a small band, you may just be taking their shot at being signed out of their hands.
and
umm
ughh
Fuck it...
Quote:Keyser posted:
I dig the album art. Sometimes I just like have a legal copy, call my a kooky bastard.
04-05-2002, 07:04 PM
Quote:By downloading from a small band, you may just be taking their shot at being signed out of their hands.Um, no. First off, I don't go out looking for small bands to download. But, if I did, I would certainly check out a show if I really liked them. And then, I might buy a cd at a show.
OVERstand this, I don't really consider myself a fan of any band, artist, group, celebrity, or team. I do like some of the above, but I don't consider myself a fan. Therefore, I feel no obligation to "help" them make it. If they do, that's great... if not, no skin off my back.
Let me give you a scenario:
When I was about 15, a friend of my crew had a birthday party. He was rich, so his mother hired a band. That band was the Red Hot Chili Peppers. At the time, they had one album out, and I don't know if it was on a major label. But, they were playing a party, so how big could the label have been? Anyway, we liked their music and began to dub the one copy someone had, until everyone we knew had it. Well, it doesn't seem to have affected their success much, now does it?
So, to say that downloading music is going to make or break a band is just silly. If you think that buying 1 cd is truly helping a band, well go 'head wit yo bad self. I'm not buying into it.
For my money, I'd rather spend my $13 on a DVD and get some real entertainment. And when the price of DVD blanks comes down, I probably won't buy those anymore.
You see people, nobody's putting money in my bank account, but me. You think Kyuss is gonna have a college fund set up for spit because she's a big fan?
I'll live you with this thought...
"Stopped givin' juice to the Raiders, 'cause Al Davis never paid us." - O'shea Jackson
04-05-2002, 07:16 PM
Quote:For my money, I'd rather spend my $13 on a DVD and get some real entertainment. And when the price of DVD blanks comes down, I probably won't buy those anymore.
But, Kid, how many times can you watch the same movie before you get sick of it? Plus, you can't watch it "everwhere" like you can listen to music everywhere.
You would rather give money over to the Movie Buisness than the Music Industry, and that's fine.
watch the movie 5 or 10 times, and tell me you stil enjoy it just as much on it's 11th view.
And yea, that friend who bailed on Midnight Oil also bailed on Red Hot Chili Pepers that played at your friend's party.
04-05-2002, 07:22 PM
Music is my hobby...buying music is an addiction
I don't tell you that having 5 monitors around your computer is fucking lame... :p
I don't tell you that having 5 monitors around your computer is fucking lame... :p
04-05-2002, 07:24 PM
Quote:I don't tell you that having 5 monitors around your computer is fucking lame...Touche`!
But, I don't buy SLASH's Omega VII monitors and claim that I am helping to support a fledgling hardware manufacturer, either.
04-05-2002, 07:31 PM
Quote:You see people, nobody's putting money in my bank account, but me. You think Kyuss is gonna have a college fund set up for spit because she's a big fan?
Quote:I don't tell you that having 5 monitors around your computer is fucking lame...
Yea, Kid, does Sony have a college fund set up for you because you are a big fan of their Trinitron monitors?
04-05-2002, 07:33 PM
actually, my trinitron is a hand-me-down. so in a way it's bootleg. 
04-05-2002, 07:35 PM
Lets be perfectly honest here. There are people who try to perpetuate a certain image by only listening to music outside the mainstream and adopt the culture that goes along with it. I'm not saying Spit or anyone else here falls into that stereotype but its definitely predominant on college campuses across the country.
04-05-2002, 07:39 PM
Quote:actually, my trinitron is a hand-me-down. so in a way it's bootleg.
So, that's what your people calling stealing these days, huh? :roflmao:
04-05-2002, 07:41 PM
yeah man, my cousin climbed in the back window and "handed-me-down" the monitor.
04-05-2002, 08:31 PM
It always digresses to ethnic or gay jokes doesnt it. :roflmao: