I have not changed my mind in regard to the rights an artist has – to get paid for what he does – but I see now that the source of the problem and the solution lie far away from the music end-consumer.

Music download can be something positive, and it is! I do believe that viral marketing can have a huge impact on someone’s popularity and therefore further his career. The main question is: how to make a profit and run a business, where there is no real income from it’s main product – in this case the music?

I hear a lot of people talking about merchandise and live shows being the real solutions for the future – I just like to remind everyone that merchandise and live shows already were parts of an artist’s income before the advent of the Internet. Therefore this is not only a weak, but also an absolutely stupid, answer to the problem.

You must now be thinking that I am still against free download and streaming, but no, I am not. I just believe that those who offer it for free should pay for using music as part of their advertising arsenal.

Spotify

Spotify, iTunes, YouTube, Telecom and even mobile phone companies being some of many corporations that take advantage of a product that lacks or has outdated, general and global regulations, simply lobby their way through and around royalties and copyrights, under the “we promote” flag.

Nokia comes with Music and that’s cool. But who does Nokia pay for this great feature? And how much?

Companies, which use 3rd party products, brands or services, pay insignificant amounts of money to Artists and labels, forcing them to either join this “criminal” scheme or to be doomed to oblivion.

A year ago I was talking with a business manager from a known German indie label, analyzing Spotify’s popularity and he told me that it was a necessary evil. The label had to join since everyone was doing it. The label had over a 2 Million plays from 40 different artists.

That Label got £440 for the lot, and after taking their commission (25%) of £110 plus £250 for campaign-advertising. The remaining £80 was proportionally divided, £40 going to the artists. There you can see how much 1 year on Spotify will give you…

Now remember before you slander a record label, keep in mind that not all of them are bad and almost none of them are making huge profits nowadays!

If you take the recent article from The Independent about superstar Lady Gaga, who probably has better royalty rates than the above mentioned label, she got around £108 for 1 million plays.

I am not sure, but I would bet my life that the label invested a slightly bigger amount in order to promote the “Lady” in question.

I believe that digital sales could easily be obsolete in a couple of years, and all music available could be for free to listen to, if artists and labels would get their share from these Multi-billion-dollar companies.

Photo by: Steve Wampler on Flickr

If music is not to be sold over the counter, that is fine – neither will newspapers, movies or books in the future – but those who provide means of mass distribution and also earn billions through advertising and attracting investors should pay their suppliers accordingly, in this case the music industry and the artists.

This is the “Grey Spot” in the music business, leave the end consumer alone. At present, music distribution is a free product for Internet giants who managed for years, to stay away from the spotlight, blaming either the consumer or the labels for something that they are creating: the utter downfall of the artist as a professional worker.

If you have the illusion that indie labels make a lot of money, you are wrong. I see many A&R directors, PR managers working out of passion, driving to meetings in 1997 Toyota Corollas, and sleeping at travelodges.

Indie labels sometimes fight to present new products and even help bands to tour, knowing that this might be a risk investment with no compensation at the end of the day.

The idea of free music is now moving to another level. Some of the big festivals (especially in Europe) offer artists a spot on the festival, telling them that this is a great opportunity for them to promote themselves. Artists go there, play for free and on top they spend a couple of thousands in transport and lodging, so a sold out festivals can put their names on the bill and make even more money.

If this idea of promotion sticks, then we will see the demise of professional agents, managers, crews and artists, who will simply stop working, as there is no more money whatsoever to be made, never mind a living.

Stage production in the last 10 years has never been so bad. If we compare it to the ’80s (OK, they were a bit over the top), even smaller acts would back then offer something for your eyes besides the music.

If no action is taken, soon we shall see music, currently an industry employing thousands of people, becoming a hobby like gardening, or knitting in few years.

Money

Image credit: weheartit.com

Money is often top of the list when it comes to arguments between bands. If one person is responsible for providing the PA system being used, they can often have a lot of leverage in band disputes, so it really is up to the other band members to try and make this person as democratic as possible. If arguments end with, “well I own the PA so if you don’t agree you lot aren’t using it anymore,” you’ve probably got a budding dictator on your hands. Avoid these types of people unless you don’t mind them running the show.

Musicians and money problems go hand in hand, and often one band member has got more then another. The worst scenario is when member of the band begin relying on one member to pay for everything, whether it’s gas to get to a gig, time in a studio, or just being sent off to buy new guitar strings. If this is you, say something now and explain how you feel. Most people are understanding and won’t make you feel bad, but if they do, best find another band to join.

Creativity

Arguments about songs and how each member should play are usually decided through a vote. Well, they should be. But if you have a band leader, or a stubborn member that disagrees with almost everything a member does, eventually someone is going to say enough is enough. This is all part of how bands evolve and get better, so disputes over creativity should not be avoided. But what should be avoided is unnecessarily offending somebody or letting someone have their own way.

Test songs, ask for other people’s opinions, and discuss exactly what sounds right and what sounds wrong. The whole point of a band is to play music together, so if everyone is not happy it is not working. If one person thinks a song is bad but the others don’t, it’s down to that person to play the song for the other members, no matter what he or she thinks. Compromise plays a big part in disputes about creativity.

Image

Now this shouldn’t really ever be a big issue if you are a likeminded band and know exactly what style of music and associated image you want to produce. But saying that, there is the problem of one person being the black sheep. If one person doesn’t want to fit into the image of the band, then it totally depends on what the other band members think. Perhaps someone is too metal for an indie band, or vice versa. Everyone has the right to dress the way they want and act the way they want, so this type of thing really tests how tolerant your band is.

Most of the time this type of problem is apparent soon and can be brought up before it really gets awkward. But sometime people attitudes and style change over time, and before you know it you’ve have a vocalist in all black screaming down the mic at an acoustic gig. Well, that might be an exaggeration, but band image can count for a lot further down the line. The main thing is to try and get everything smoothed out as near to the beginning as possible, and this rules goes for a lot of problems that effect bands.

Commitment

Image credit: weheartit.com

This can be a tricky one, because everyone has different commitments and schedules, so finding a time when everyone can practice can often be harder than you think. Band members turning up hungover and unable to play, or missing practice altogether, causes problem for everyone. One way to try and stop this from happening is to have a forfeit system, where the offending member has to do something because they missed practice. This can be a lot of fun, and the forfeits are best left down to your own imagination.

At the other spectrum there might be a member that is super committed and wants everyone else in the band to have the same dream of making it to the big time as him or her. There’s nothing wrong with ambition, but if they make you feel bad because you don’t have the same inflated dreams as them, say something about it. Chances are the person will see sense, or on the other hand they might want you out of the band. Either way, it’s better to let people know how you feel.

After all is said and done…

The main thing about settling band disputes is to not let things go too far. As soon as a problem is recognised, address it and move on. If the dispute can’t be solved, then the band isn’t working and it’s probably best that you go your separate ways. That’s not to say that you should give up at the first hurdle. Perseverance in a band is important, but bad feelings between members will be the death of the group, so get things sorted and try again until nothing more can be done.

Olivia Lennox is a singer and musician who has worked with and been part of numerous bands. These days, she balances her time writing and gigging with cruise lines like Fred Olsen, MSC and Disney.

Image credit: decaens on Tumblr

He believes his retail chain, famous for its logo of a dog peering into a gramophone, will finish stocking CDs by 2016. “There will be a place for CDs, but it’s difficult to see out more than five years,” he said.

CDs reportedly reached their sales peak in 2004, but with the growing popularity of digital stores like Apple’s iTunes, and illegal downloading, CD sales began to falter.

It is hard to imagine how a high-street store like HMV will keep their doors open when digital stores have already carved a space online, and it could be difficult for ‘traditional’ retailers to enter the new marketplace.

However, HMV have a plan. In preparation for their uncertain future, HMV will re-focus their shelves and increase their stock of MP3 players, headphones and other technology products to account for 25% of their product range.

What do you think? Will CDs and their high-quality audio keep a place on your shelves, and will you keep releasing your music on CD? Or will you drop it all to go digital?

Indeed, the February takeover of EMI by the New York-based Citigroup financial services company was never expected to last and it has come as no surprise that the smallest member of the leading record labels is now up for sale.

However, for the first time since WMG was put up for sale, the music industry Big Four — Universal Music Group (UMG), Sony Music Entertainment, WMG, and EMI — are preparing for the possibility of further concentration of the music market.

The sale of EMI is set to ignite a fierce bidding war, as was the case when Sony pushed Access Industries all the way in the bidding for WMG. The billionaire behind Access Industries — Len Blavatnik — would do well to increase his newfound title of music mogul by adding EMI to the Media and Telecommunications side of Access Industries.

EMI

Whether Sony, whose bid for WMG earlier this year faltered presumably because of the United States’ antitrust laws, can come to acquire EMI is another kettle of fish.

Yet surely the competitiveness of the music industry should be under scrutiny regardless of who should come to acquire EMI. The concentration of market power within the hands of four major players appears to be at odds with the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division and its mission to “promote economic competition through enforcing and providing guidance on antitrust laws and principles”.

That the acquisition of EMI by any of the other members of the Big Four would surely represent an even greater challenge to competition in the music industry cannot be doubted; this would present a direct challenge to the Clayton Act (one of three major antitrust laws in the United States), which is a civil statute prohibiting mergers or acquisitions that are likely to diminish competition.

However, in the world of Lady Gaga albums being sold for $0.99 it is questionable whether the acquisition of EMI by another member of the Big Four is likely to result in an increase in prices to consumers.

Although the scope for debate is huge and the possibility of an outsider’s acquiring EMI a possibility, the question dominating the airwaves is whether the Big Four is to become the Big Three…

Dear Music,

You have suffered. How? Why? What is the culprit at the core that started it all? A thought pattern, “music is free”. We at the Restoring Music Foundation believe the key to valuing you lies where it all began, a thought. The battle ground is in the mind. There is no going back and old thoughts will no longer do. It is time to reThink everything.

We would like to invite everyone in music to become a part of a global conversation for the restoration of music. The crisis has been defined, help us now talk of solutions. Many issues must be addressed, yet the true key to restoration lies in our perception of worth. Give music value once more and we have found our great and elusive tipping point.

Join the Global Twitter Dialogue

#RMFProblems (or #RMFP) – Are problems missing from The Crisis Document?

#RMFSolutions (or #RMFS) – How can we solve the problems listed on The Crisis Document?

This is our chance to rethink EVERYTHING.
THOUGHT LEADERS steer the discussion,
The SOCIAL MEDIA mind participates.

By the Restoring Music Foundation, an LA & Nashville based 501(c)3, and part of a crowdsourced research project for the restoration of the music industry. Since the start of the project in 2007, the issues have been discussed all across Linkedin and in numerous professional music industry circles (most notably within the well respected Music and Entertainment Professionals group). Our intention with this Treatise is to let everyone in on the conversation. Get involved: #RMFSolutions.

With that in mind, let us identify the main problems that have threatened to destroy the vision that was born on the streets of Tin Pan Alley. Here they are, finally all in one place and in no particular order.

Image credit: jessrosas on Tumblr

1. Internet Radio

Internet radio providers can not sustain growth due to the growing licensing fees for streaming music and a lack of clear revenue models. New distribution outlets could provide a new paradigm in radio as a whole if revenue models could be clearly defined.

2. 360 Deals

Music industry sales are down more than 50% from 1999’s record breaking year. Labels, publishers, managers, and other funding partners have adopted a new model of business, The 360 Deal. With this new model, one partner does the job of many, most of which only have experience in one field. The result is less money for growth and less focus for individual partners. In the end, 360 deals strain everything and everyone causing countless problems, yet they are a necessary evil for struggling funding partners.

3. Web 2.0

Social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, ReverbNation, Myspace, Ping, and other web 2.0 outlets provide easy and personal access to fans, yet the growing number of networks dilutes the overall marketing message and dramatically increases the time spent marketing.

4. Apple

Apple has been an incredible innovator in the quest to a brighter music industry. We owe them a great debt. For the sake of being thorough however, their unprecedented market share in digital music sales mixed with their unwavering business models leave no bargaining room for funding partners (labels, publishers, etc..). Growth and innovation in this important industry sector (digital music retail) is therefore stifled without the ability for competitive trials. In addition, Apple’s 30% take on each track sold leaves little for artists and songwriters.

5. Physical Music Sales

Physical Retail stores have lost the ability to turn a profit unless attached to a one stop business model (i.e Walmart, Hastings, Best Buy, etc.). As a result the true music pushers, independent music retail stores, are almost extinct.

Image credit: bricolage.108 on Flickr

6. Traditional Radio

Traditional radio, though still an important promotional front, has lost much of its glory to the on demand world of iPads, iPods, satellite radio, and Internet radio. It has therefore become increasingly more difficult for music marketers to predict buying trends without a standard radio format to follow. The result is a much higher risk/return ratio for funding partners (Labels, Publishers, etc..), which in turn limits the number of acts that ever see a major market entry.

7. Live Music

The recent merger of Live Nation and Ticketmaster has once and for all centralized the live music industry into what could become a monopolizing empire. This kind of power is usually never a good thing, as it limits the market’s growth potential and provides the opportunity to gouge prices due to the simple science of supply and demand. If they account for 90 per cent of the live music business revenue, they control the market. We are not pointing fingers yet, but this music juggernaut could prove to be a problem if left unchecked by a lack of competition.

8. Lawsuits

The RIAA in an attempt to combat the growing number of music pirates, proclaimed war on piracy by means of civil suits with individual copyright infringers. Many average American citizens were made an example of with outrageous and bizarre settlements. The music industries’ minds were in the right place. They had intended to create the perception of risk for stealing music and in turn, change consumer thinking. In the end however, it only generated the image of a “Greedy Recording Industry”. This wall between the consumer and the industry has instead furthered the cause for this viral pirating trend.

9. Media Sharing

Video and audio sharing networks act as a breeding ground for the spread of illegal music in the form of audio and videos. These new networks cut into the profits of funding partners (labels, publishers, etc.), yet act as a wonderful way for independent artists and major artists alike to receive viral promotion. In addition, simple mathematics states that all of the illegal media sharing portals can not be shut down. Lawsuits cost money and the recording industry doesn’t have much. Instead, the industry goes after the major outlets one at a time. But for every 1 that is shut down, 7 more are built in its place. Let us just say that this fire is out of control.

Pirate Bay logo

10. Piracy & Value

Let us not forget that stealing music is still more convenient to the average consumer than buying music. A Twitter search for “pirating music” will result in hundreds of tweets (from just the past week or so), broadcasting their illegal violation to the world. People simply DO NOT think music has any value, they DO NOT feel bad about stealing, and they DO NOT care that it is illegal. The true battle lies in this dilemma.

In addition, the only way to fully shut down music piracy would be to turn on “Big Brother” and violate very important privacy privileges. Therefore, it can never truly be stopped as long as we live in a democratic society. The solution must lie in the consumer’s thought process. Though it may appear that the RIAA is doing more harm then good, they have it right. The battleground is in the mind.

11. An Unclear Future

The music industry is now intimately and infinitely tied to digital and to the Internet. The systems that govern digital music across the web are not yet fully realized by the core of the music industry. A clear vision for the future of these newlyweds (music and Internet), has not yet been defined. The marriage is still rocky and working out its kinks. Without a clear understanding of this it is hard for any organization in music to effectively plan for the future.

12. The Product Of Music

Music has evolved in the US from the Jubilee singers at the turn of the 20th century, to the discovery of jazz and blues across the southern US, to the Rock and Roll King at the center of the century, to the British invasion in the 70’s, to MJ’s invention of the pop machine, to U2’s purification of LOVE from the 80’s till today. In 1999 the pop machine was FULLY realized with record high sales by N’Sync, Britney Spears, and the lot.

Maybe the majors simply lost sight of this rich history of music. They began generating factory made pop revenue vehicles out of highly conditioned Mickey Mouse Club alumni. The industry hit a record high and the system simply broke. “But alas, to err is human.” Let us not make the same mistakes again and remember that music is art before it is a pay check. 1999 is also the same year the market was freed by Napster. Ironic? Maybe…

Also, the masses need to be educated on our country’s rich history of musical genius. The average listener has very little knowledge of what GOOD music sounds like. Help us educate them!

Conclusion

We in the music industry are battling consumer thought. The public opinion has shifted to a place where music simply has no value. The average Joe feels no fear or remorse for breaking copyright laws. People buy bottled water, even though they can get it for free, because there is a value proposition; it’s clean, cold, and portable. We aim to rebuild the value proposition for buying music. At the Restoring Music Foundation, we are not disillusioned by the loftiness of our goal, but rather reconcile with the notion that for every problem there is already a solution. They say it takes 8% of the public to agree on something new to shift the entire pubic opinion in a new direction. We intend to be the catalyst.

Now that the crisis has been defined, let us no longer talk about the problems; let us instead talk of solutions.

By Chris Purifoy, Co-founder of the Restoring Music Foundation, and based upon a crowdsourced research document titled, “Defining the Music Industry Crisis“. Since the start of the project in 2007, the issues have been discussed all across Linkedin in numerous professional music industry circles (most notably within the well respected Music and Entertainment Professionals group). In the end, after thousands of comments and 6 subsequent editions, this article represents the 7th and Semi-Final edition.

Taurean Casey’s article, “The New Music Industry is Not Coming,” on Music Think Tank, expresses, or more so, confirms the frustrations that the majority of music lovers have been expressing. Well intended management of the internet has deflated the business model of selling music. But Casey reasons that with death comes birth. While the internet has become a hub for artists to quickly, easily and cheaply pursue their passions, first and foremost, a framework has been built for a new music industry business model that embraces technology companies.

The question is, are these tech companies paving the fan’s or musician’s road?

The social technology companies of today like Google, Twitter, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Soundcloud and Myspace were the first to “culture-market.” They’ve impacted the thoughts, habits and personalities of the masses to a point where no one with a computer in the music community would not dare to establish a career without an account solely because the fans were already there.

Image credit: crsan on Flickr

Then the blogs came to play and realized that they had an influence over the mass of music fans that Google, Twitter, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Soundcloud and Myspace lack. Blogs like Pitchfork, Stereogum and Pretty Much Amazing walked right into the spotlight and embraced their celebrity. Eventually their entourage grew into a posse of music PR firms, which is undoubtedly a symbiotic relationship; PR companies offer their pick of the crop and the blogs will dance with them, center stage at the go-to ballroom, which make for a closed knit community.

But when you strip these companies of their glamour, what is really left? They’ve made the music community more social and offer fans an easy route to the masses, but really what are they doing to help the musicians whose financial woes are too often overwhelming?

Casey refers to a contest of, “Who’s Going to Shape the Music Industry Showdown,” and expounds on the existence of the challenge with references to Google, Apple and Amazon as being the forerunners to change the music industry. But I can’t agree. The road stopped at iTunes.

Google’s recent release of the beta version of Google Music, which allows music libraries to be accessible via any device, may provide fans an innovative and convenient solution, but musicians are left to fend for their selves. Not surprisingly, Amazon had released their own cloud service in March, while Apple is working on iCloud.

As the larger tech companies chase each other’s tails, they’ve ignored a business model and technology that invests in the musicians themselves as he allure of flirting with music distribution and publishing happens to coincide with the interests of the mass market.

I’m putting my money on the smaller innovative sites like Kickstarter and My Major Company, that have built a successful or innovated business model around the one weakness that artists tend to avoid – business – and they’re piggybacked by a generous social community comprised of believers in musicians music. Companies like these that are dealing with the real issues at hand, will truly be the future forerunners to shape the music industry.

Until the larger technology companies feel pressured to directly partner with musicians, the paper pushing record labels are sadly here to stay and the innovation will benefit the customer’s side of the industry.

Francis Bea is a New Yorker turned Chicago co-founder of Musefy.com (in development) and writes Musefy’s blog Musebox.

The club sits at 100 Oxford Street, London, and is completely immersed in pride due to the musicians, crowds and laissez-faire attitude that have always seen it open its doors and mind to all bands great and small.

A Savethe100club campaign has been launched to raise enough capital through donations so that the team of venue’s supporters can buy “the name, the rights, the goodwill and fixtures and fittings” from the present owner and take over ownership of the club.

The people who donated will become “members of the 100 Club” and will be invited to have their say on major decisions that the board of Trustees make. The club will be run as a not for profit organisation and therefore will be eligible for government funding such as from the Lottery fund and the Heritage fund. The trustees will also be applying for heritage status for the club which will secure its long term future.

When London film maker George McCallum discovered the imminent threat of 100 Club’s closure, he took it upon himself to try and help by creating a mini-documentary which could remind people why, even though we are all so busy, this is something worth caring about and supporting.

It is too late for other great venues like The Astoria and The Metro, but there now only remains a handful of clubs and venues for new bands to play in the heart of London and none quite like The 100 Club. Filmmaker George says, “I hope the documentary helps towards reaching the £500,000 target to turn it into a non-profit organization. It’s an excellent idea and part of the remit for the club is to have a new band night once a week – this is essential to the future of the club.”

Save The 100 Club needs help of the world’s music community today. Even if you don’t can or wish to donate, share a link to this post or to savethe100club.co.uk.

Photo by: Steve Wampler on Flickr

Thankfully for the more corporate enterprises, though unfortunately for the independent musician, the aforementioned big guys have started to see the benefits that can be reaped using the internet. Public broadcasting is a much wider option on the internet than it is in more conventional methods, such as television and the radio. General view counts will usually be lower on the internet, but only as long as popularity is limited. Once a broadcaster reaches a reliable, wide-reaching audience, the potential for reaching even higher view counts than television. One of the main reasons for this is that your chosen piece of music is constantly available, rather than being singularly broadcast. Much less money can be earned by showing off your music online, but once you reach a certain level of popularity the income begins to fly.

In taking advantage of this, some rather interesting stuff has found it’s way on to the internet. My main example here would be things like ‘Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog’. This is a web broadcast musical, forty-two minutes long and released in installments. Rather than just music, the internet allows the perfect tool for anything that can be created, regardless of budget, cast or preparation. Advertising in these manners is usually done entirely through word of mouth. However, since the company making the video or music file already have a considerable amount of capital behind them, they can put their work out for all sorts of international syndication. While they will undoubtedly spend much more money putting their work onto television, it could easily garner a much reduced reward when it comes to the outcome.

Creating music videos, at a low budget, is an incredibly common thing for any band or musician to indulge in. While some promoters are internet based, and can thus advertise your work all across the internet, but there are still limits to it. On the internet, everybody is on an even playing field. You put your work out there, usually in the same places as most of the more popular content, and hope that it draws attention. From there though, it’s out of your hands. The content can be passed, traded and downloaded, regardless of file size or type. This, though, is where the independent musician has an advantage.

For the independent musician, peer to peer file trading is the absolute best thing for their continuing popularity. If it’s just one or two people pooling together to throw out a track, it’s no big loss to have it traded for free between a few dozen people. For the big company throwing it’s weight around, they’re looking at a gigantic loss between the flight of thousands of free copies.

In a digital economy, big business still loses millions, while the independent musician has nothing but gains.

Tom Colohue is a fiction writer and music instructor from Blackpool, England. Though his main works are in the realms of fantasy, he also writes modern fiction for multiple websites, as well as theoretical and practical music lessons for magazines.

Read also: Effects Of The Internet: Musical Mobility, The Effects Of The Internet: Contract Giveaways, The Effects Of The Internet: “Making It”, The Effects Of The Internet: Music Distribution

When asked by Joe Matera, how important the musician thinks is touring these days with the way the whole internet and downloading issue has affected the industry in general, Nick said:

Photo credit: Rudy De Doncker

Selective touring is the name of the game now so it is not about how much touring but about when you do tours, to do more thorough tours.

Do every country and every big city and do them as well as you can so you don’t have to keep on going through them as often. The cost of touring has gone up immensely because of fuel costs and because everyone has increased their fees for everything from airlines to backline companies.

So it is much more expensive to tour today. And for us, because Tim has a family now and Phil is married, we don’t want to go out longer than we need to. On the flipside though, touring has been how we’ve been able to do this band since the early days, by touring as hard as we have in the past. It is what we have to do to make our living from this.

My point is that concerts are as important to musicinas as ever (even more than ever), but the approach is becoming different – especially for the relatevely smaller bands.

You can read the original interview at this location.