Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

Board index : Music Talk : Rock/Pop

Author Message
 Post subject: Thoughts: Free music makes more sense
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:41 pm 
Offline
May contain Jesus.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:43 pm
Posts: 12275
Location: The Already, Not Yet.
http://derekwebb.tumblr.com/post/13503899950/giving-it-away-how-free-music-makes-more-than-sense

I really respect Derek Webb, both for what he does musically and how he is constantly questioning how a musician can make a living. He's a co-founder of Noisetrade, and is a constant fixture on the road with his wife, Sandra McCracken (another brilliant songwriter). He recently went on the offensive against Spotify through twitter. Today he published this blog on his thoughts. What do you all think?

Quote:
Giving it Away: How Free Music Makes More Than Sense
Music matters. It’s so integral and pervasive in our culture that it almost feels invisible. It’s even hard to imagine walking into almost any store without hearing music overhead. Culture provides a constant soundtrack to our lives. So it’s no wonder there’s so much discussion and debate about the business of music. It feels like a matter of life or death. And maybe it is.

Lately, there’s been a surge in that debate as pioneers begin planting flags all over the Wild West that is the current music industry. I believe that all of these creative attempts at healthy disruption and problem solving are very good things. Ultimately, the best and most effective ideas and businesses will not only survive, they will be the blocks upon which we build the new music business, and this upon the wreckage of the one we’ve been watching go down for over a decade. As an artist and a music-lover (an owner and a client, if you will), I have a lot at stake in these discussions.



There has never been a better moment to be a middle-class or an independently thinking artist making and performing music than right now. The costs and complications of creating, recording, manufacturing, and distributing music are at an all-time low, enabling more music to be made and more artists to make a living than ever before. If your ego can bear not being rich and famous, you can make a respectable and sustainable living as a blue-collar musician. The problem used to be access; now it’s obscurity. And this brings with it a completely new set of problems and opportunities.



The History

More than 50 years ago, Sam Philips stood in the doorway of Sun Studios in Memphis, blocking Johnny Cash from entering unless he could conjure something worth the legacy of that historical room (without which Cash might have gone on to be an unknown and mediocre Gospel singer). Today, anyone can get sufficient resources to record and distribute their music, all from a Mac laptop. While this might mean some artists never receive the shepherding that could drive them to their potential greatness, I believe the net result is still preferable to having the old gatekeepers still in place, deciding for everyone what is truly great. The tools are democratized and as a result, the market is flooded. The problem goes from having the chance to be recorded at all to that recording having the chance to be discovered and listened to.

But as it tends to do, the market is adapting. The whole business used to be focused on the head of the sales curve, the handful of artists who were selling records in the millions of copies. But as music sales have sharply declined and fewer artists than ever are winding up at the head of that curve, attention is drifting to the “long tail” of the curve where thousands of niche artists live, none selling more than a few thousand records each. The power of the “long tail” is in the fact that its combined record sales are more than the combined sales of the top-selling artists occupying the steadily narrowing head of the curve. While there will always likely be a “hit” market resulting in a precious few artists moving records in the millions, the business is shifting to service these niches.

As I have navigated the business, especially over the last decade as a solo artist, I have noticed several gaps in the services available to blue-collar artists like myself. This is how NoiseTrade was born in 2008, a service I started with several friends seeking to help artists find and meaningfully connect with their fans by trading free music for information and viral promotion. NoiseTrade has enabled thousands of artists (including myself) to have and cultivate direct relationships with their fans rather than having to depend on proprietary third parties such as Facebook, Twitter, and not so long ago, MySpace, and therefore, to have a job.

These connections are not only meaningful, they’re also valuable.



The Details

On Twitter, I recently said, “I make more money giving records away on @NoiseTrade (in exchange for info) than selling those same records on iTunes (let alone Spotify),” which resulted in some pretty interesting discussions. I said that in response to questions I received after criticizing streaming services like Spotify, which claim to offer a viable alternative to “piracy,” when in reality they offer artists almost no meaningful revenue or fan connection. And while iTunes is certainly a better financial model and more equitable for artists, it does almost nothing to connect the fans to the artists in a way that yields any long-term benefit.

For example, I am paid $0.00029 per stream of a song on Spotify, and even this amount depends on whether the song is being streamed by a paid user or someone using the service for free. This means it will take upwards of 3,500 streams of a single song on Spotify to earn $1.00 versus that same revenue for one iTunes song purchase (not to mention the fact that Spotify refuses to pay the same amount to independent artists as they pay major labels, unlike iTunes).

Most would argue that it’s apples and oranges (no pun intended): iTunes is a digital storefront for artists while services like Spotify are about discovery. People will argue that low-cost streaming is good for the market, that it’s good for the artists, and that it’s still better than people taking your music for free from BitTorrent. But I tend to disagree on almost every point, mainly because it’s just not that simple. It’s true that iTunes is a place for people to purchase music, but it offers all the same benefits of Spotify in terms of discovery. And while Spotify is claiming to occupy the discovery space, it’s clear that the service is operating functionally as a storefront, since people are streaming music as an alternative to purchasing that same music.

I’ll go even further to say that I actually prefer illegal downloading over Spotify because when you get music illegally it’s at least implicit in the transaction that what you’re doing is potentially harmful to the artist. But with Spotify, your conscience is clear because you’re either enduring ads or paying to use the service and access the music. But from the blue-collar artist’s perspective, they’re not receiving any meaningful payment (there’s little discernible difference between $0.00029 and $0.00) and they are learning nothing about their fans, not to mention that music readily available on Spotify for little to no payment completely poaches the record sales upon which middle-class musicians are depending for survival (which is why I will withhold any new releases from Spotify in the future).

But this is about much more than just revenue, which brings me to why neither iTunes nor Spotify can really compete with free music, in either relational or monetary value.

If someone buys my music on iTunes, Amazon, or in a record store (remember those?), let alone streams it on Spotify, it’s all short-term money. That might be the last interaction I have with that particular fan. But if I give that fan the same record for free in exchange for a connection (an e-mail and a zip code), I can make that same money, if not double or triple that amount, over time. And “over time” is key, since the ultimate career success is sustainability. Longevity. See, the reality is that out of a $10 iTunes album sale, I probably net around a dollar. So if I give that record away, and as a result am able to get that fan out to a concert (I can use their zip code to specifically promote my shows in their area), I make approximately $10 back, and twice that if they visit the merch table. I can sell them an older/newer album and make approximately $10 back. The point is, if I can find some organic way to creatively engage them in a paid follow-up transaction, I increase my revenue 10 times on any one of these interactions.

This is all an equation of scale. I might be able to outright sell 20,000 albums for $10 each (again, netting around $1 each). Or I can remove any barrier from someone hearing about or discovering my music by giving it away, which will result in an order of magnitude more albums distributed, maybe around 100,000. If I can then convert 20% of those free downloads into paid transactions of any kind over time, I have probably well over doubled or tripled my money. And I can do this repeatedly as I continue to grow, and learn more about and invest in my tribe, to whom I now have a direct connection (rather than having to go through Facebook, Twitter, or Lord forbid, MySpace to access them).

And all of this by giving the music away for free.



The Conclusion

When you talk about free music, people who work in the music business will tell you you’ve gone too far. They’ll say you’re devaluing the art itself, and that once you go there, there is no coming back. I suppose I would agree if I thought that music’s only value was monetary. But I don’t.

Music does have monetary value. But more than its monetary value is its emotional value, its relational value, its artistic value, even its spiritual value. When you make meaningful connections with people based on artistic self-expression, I think you’re actually increasing the value of that art based on the many ways it’s valued.

That said, I believe all of the aforementioned services will play some role in the emerging music marketplace, that artists should have every tool at their disposal when it comes to applying their creativity as much to the marketing and distributing of their music as to the making of it.

But any model claiming to be good for the music business that is bad for the individuals that make up that business isn’t really good. At the end of the day, blue-collar artists aren’t interested in propping up some nebulous idea of a “music business” so much as they’re seeking to build and sustain a career for themselves that enables them to make art honestly, without unnecessary and outside manipulation or consideration (like what people will buy or what will play on the radio). So the model that is preferable and most beneficial is one where the individual artists win, therefore causing the collective survival and health of the “music business.” If those individual artists survive, the whole business survives.

So please buy my music. Or take it for free. I’m honestly just grateful to have your attention. But this only works if we work together.

_________________
It's Baltimore, gentlemen; the gods will not save you.

Baltimore is a town where everyone thinks they’re normal, but they’re totally insane. In New York, they think they’re crazy, but they’re perfectly normal. --John Waters
Image


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: Thoughts: Free music makes more sense
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:25 pm 
Offline
Fluke Breakthrough Single
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:51 am
Posts: 2484
Location: Central PA
While Webb's comments make sense from an artist standpoint, they are impossible from a major label stand point. Which is why Spotify is an important step right now. Is it the be-all, end-all of free music listening? Probably not. While a label won't get the same kind of financial boost from one person listening to one album on Spotify as they would if that person had bought the album outright, there IS money going towards the major labels. As such, I can listen to a major label album on Spotify, legally, for free when there is no way that there would be a free download of same album in simple exchange for email/zip-code the way Noisetrade works.

Which is why you won't see Derek Webb's major label albums on Noisetrade.


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: Thoughts: Free music makes more sense
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:32 pm 
Offline
frostingspoon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:35 am
Posts: 14323
Location: cincy
Pretty nice article. If only there were some independent music source that paid artists a higher percentage. (Google music is supposedly paying out 70%. Is he saying iTunes is down around 10%?)


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
 Post subject: Re: Thoughts: Free music makes more sense
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 6:41 pm 
Offline
May contain Jesus.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:43 pm
Posts: 12275
Location: The Already, Not Yet.
TheTheory--I think his point is more towards the independent artist. Major label artists presumably have a PR team, access to a network of promotions and bookings, etc. But the idea that there is a disconnect is the interesting point he makes. How does an artist convert a listener to a paying fan? Many of us here are atypical of the average person using spotify. We buy music, go to shows, buy merch, etc. He's not talking about us. He's talking about converting those people who read about his record on a blog, and then go directly to spotify to listen to it. I can see his point in that.

TJ--I don't know hard evidence, but I think that's what he is insinuating. And the magical source that pays artists more is buying direct from their sites. Everything else is going to take bites out of the profits. Have you ever pondered why there are more preorders for records now? I have, and the best explanation I can surmise is that artists want to maximize their profits before it hits the web and is free*.

*free being streamable, or pirated

_________________
It's Baltimore, gentlemen; the gods will not save you.

Baltimore is a town where everyone thinks they’re normal, but they’re totally insane. In New York, they think they’re crazy, but they’re perfectly normal. --John Waters
Image


Back to top
 Profile WWW 
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

Board index : Music Talk : Rock/Pop


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Style by Midnight Phoenix & N.Design Studio
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.