[ Below is a transcript of an email discussion that took place amongst members of the Tech House List. ]
www.techhouselist.org
March 2004
"DIGITAL LABELS"
I'm just curious to know what everyone thinks, or what everyone knows about these. There is somehting to be said for having your tunes pressed on wax, but let's be honest...things are changing, and at a rapid pace. Any thoughts or opinions from a marketing/financial/credibility standpoint?
Brian Ffar
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yeah im not so sure about those 'digital labels'... from what bruno @ UCMG said about iTunes sales (on a 'big' album only selling 150 mp3's) it seems like something for more of the beginner rather than the pro.. a good way to get started.. but in my opinion, definitely not a solution to our declining sales in vinyl
Joshua Collins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think digital labels are ok. I don't have any ties to vinyl myself, so i'm looking forward to the day when it's standard to see at least 2 CD decks at every gig. When that happens you can be sure you won't see ME lugging around crates or huge record bags anymore! The only problem I can see with digital labels is that people will be more inclined to "release" a whole lot of CRAP. I mean, more than they do now. As long as labels are just as picky about what they release as they are when they have to fork over wads of cash for vinyl pressing/printing/distribution/etc I think it'll be just fine. Labels can charge the customer less money while still making more money per track. It's the future, you can't fight it. Now...if they can just figure out a way to stop those pesky file-swappers we're in business! I'm sure that will happen in time...
Jacob London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yeah but i think the reason u see so much crap is because it has become so EASY to put out crap... if people are doing digital labels there's alot less 'risk' involved which means who cares if i put out a piece of crap i'm not going to lose any money on it... whereas, if you are spending 2-3000 dollars to promote, press, and release a record on vinyl you better be damn sure you are putting out something worthwhile and that you know you can make some money on, or at least break even. thats the main problem i see with all the crappy P&D labels as well.. people runnign the P&D's could give a shit because its not THEIR money thats being lost. the most they lose is their label, but what do they care they have nothing invested in it other than some crap tunes.
Joshua Collins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah remember mp3.com? There were tons of highschool kids with their "labels"... Yeah. It'll be like that. However there is one half-way decent reason to start a digital label. Jacob London just got the "rejected" shpeil from Beatport because Beatport only deals with record labels and not with artists directly. And since MP3 sales are not covered by most of the contracts we sign with labels, and a lot of the stuff is no longer under contract, the only option for us is to re-release that stuff on a digital label and then sell the music to Beatport. Something they suggested to me as a way of dealing with them as an label and not an artist. Kind of a weird formality.
Dave Pezzner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think digital labels are ok. I don't have any ties to vinyl myself, so i'm looking forward to the day when it's standard to see at least 2 CD decks at every gig. When that happens you can be sure you won't see ME lugging around crates or huge record bags anymore! Abso-lutle. Having lugged vinyl from New Zealand to London (and back) on several occasions, I'd bin the black stuff in an instant. Or at least leave it at home. It causes some serious backache. Tom Middleton gave up on vinyl several years ago, and simply made sure everyone knew they needed to provide CDJ's. Tom has always been an innovator, having thrown out most of his gear 4+ years back in favour of Logic. A mean nose for a good Burgundy too... Wink The only problem I can see with digital labels is that people will be more inclined to "release" a whole lot of CRAP. Hell yes. It's a worry. There's little that can be done about this, apart from distriution channels (like Beatport) being really picky about who they work with. But then, if they can get a retainer from labels simply for signing on, well, they're not gonna say "no" very often... Labels can charge the customer less money while still making more money per track. It's the future, you can't fight it. Now...if they can just figure out a way to stop those pesky file-swappers we're in business! For sure. Then it'll be fair prices for music... more for the artist, less for the end purchaser, and diddly squat for the frieght forwarders, vinyl pressers, etc. Not so great for record stores though. In fact, several people I know who've been in the business forever have sold up in the last 18 months, having gauged the trends and decided it's a no-win. With the unstoppable change in music continuing, there will be room for a much reduced number of physical outlets... End of story. It pays to be realistic. My advice to store owners: either diversify, work out how you're going to be the one left standing (and be *very* sure you've done the homework), or work out your exit strategy.
Phil Williams
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIGITAL LABELS = BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD
DIGITAL LABELS = WWW.MP3.COM amateur BS
some of the biggest problems our industry is facing now:
1) too many labels. just because you love house doesn't mean you have to run a label. it's too easy to "start a label" - digital labels will make this worse. maybe it's too easy to get P&D's too... most labels now aren't real businesses. they're not making money. they're not incorporated. they're not paying mechanical royalties. they're not paying taxes.
2) artists doing tracks/remixes for free. because there are too many labels (read "no sales") many labels can't afford advances if you can't afford to pay the artist - you shouldn't be running a label. when artists work for free, they devalue you their work. this hurts other artists (because some other guy will do the same work for free) this hurts other labels because everyone has to devalue their product. again, labels are business, being an artist WAS a business (hope it still is...) but it seems like being an artist is becoming 'being a chump' sometimes these days.
3) technology is too easy to get everyone who has Reason thinks they're a producer i think it's great that people love the music so much that they want to make it too and you should go ahead and try. why not? but just because you can make a 6 minute track in Reason or Logic doesn't mean it's worth putting out on vinyl. there are hundreds of high school kids in rock bands - but only a tiny group of people making real records played on MTV, etc... just because you can make some tracks in Reason and nobody will release it IS NOT ALWAYS AN EXCUSE TO START YOUR OWN LABEL.
Digital Labels have no overhead cost, but their profit margin is ridiculously low too. So, now Digital Labels are another group of people running "non-business" labels (unincorporated, non-tax paying, non-royalty paying, non-artist paying) that will drag down the few honest "REAL LABELS." mp3.com is an example of a Digital Label. they let anyone of any calibre of production upload tracks for other people to download. you could offer your tracks for free or you could charge something for it. I think proper digital distribution is OK (Beatport, I-Tunes). but at this point in time, Digital Labels sound like a joke to me. it's just another way to oversaturated a bloated market. I don't want to sound like i'm being elitist here either, but we have to start weeding out the crap. Remember a few years ago the joke in our scene was EVERYBODY'S A DJ. Well, now everybody's a DJ, everybody's a producer, and everybody runs a label. What the fuck is that? It's so masturbatory........ i know people who run 2 or 3 labels at a time and can't afford to pay artists on one of their labels. why not consolidate everything into one brand that you can try to develop over time? focus on a little bit so we can raise the bar. make the new producers work extra hard to be better than the current bunch of guys. labels, don't sign so much middle of the road stuff... you don't have to release a record every 6 weeks. or every month... and if you produce and run a label, you don't always have to be the one remixing it. or if you produce, you don't have to run a label just to release it. i'm sorry, but if you're tracks aren't getting signed, then maybe you need to go back to the drawing board and make something that WILL get signed FOR MONEY. don't produce for free. don't release your tracks for free. and i'm here to say honestly, i'm guilty of many of the things i mentioned above. but i'm starting realize that i was also contributing to the problem. (i've done tracks for free, i've had other remix for my label for free, etc...) we are all guilty of these things. but i think there are solutions, and i think some of my comments above (as harsh as they may seem) might help the current state of things.
Marky Star
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
man... marky just completely summed up our problems in one post!!! whew... i couldnt agree with him more, and i know i'm guilty as well... as well as quite a few of us. i think the problem lies maybe more outside of this list, in the distributors realm... the distros that are ACCEPTING all these labels and not really caring whats being released. to them, why not have 100 labels selling 600 copies rather than 40 labels selling 1200? its just a stupid numbers game, that needs to be stopped... which i think it already has been... i remember being @ SHR and it seemed like their solution to generate more income when times were down, was to just keep making more labels... kinda of like flailing your arms when drowning reaching for anything and everything u can get your hands on and release it just to generate more sales. sad Sad
Joshua Collins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had another thought to expand on my first post… When people come to me and ask “I’m starting a new label. Can you give me some advice?” (and believe me I get asked at least once a month), if I know them well, the best advice I can give them is this: “If you love house music, don’t start a label. It’s the worst thing you can do for the scene right now.” New labels come and say “Hey, we’re a new label so we can’t afford to pay a lot. Can you do this record for cheap?” A lot of us, because a small amount of money is better than no money at all, will drop our prices and compromise --- or worse yet, do the track for free! But what needs to happen is artists need to hold their ground. If the new label does 3 released and realizes they are losing serious money, they’ll stop the label and move on. This is sad, because I don’t really want any label to shut down, but that’s business. If you can’t afford to be in business, than try something else. We can’t all be A&R, especially if no one is making any money. It’s like people are “playing house” or “playing label” in this case. They’re not really running a business, they’re dabbling and it’s fucking things up for the real companies that have approached this market seriously from the beginning. If a label can’t afford to pay for tracks, then do some serious soul searching: “why are you running a label?” If the answer is “because I love house music” – then keep going to the club, keep buying mix CD’s. Keep DJ’ing at home. Keep buying records (or digital downloads thru Beatport. Try throwing parties, maybe… Honestly, people don’t look at the economic reality of our situation: We are living in an age when every person buying house music can also be creating it. I don’t know what this is called in Economics, but basically it’s a stalemate between supply and demand. I’m not singling out anyone here, and I’m not saying I haven’t ever contributed to the problem, but I am saying, I’ve come to recognize these factors and I think everyone else should take note of them. Nobody here wants to hear this either... I have probably come across like a major asshole even saying these things, since everyone in the scene is so PLUR, whether they admit it or not. Anyone who knows me, knows I’m all about supporting the scene pro-actively. But this is a critical time and we all need to check ourselves and re-evaluate what we are doing and why we are doing it. Record sales of 500 units maximum and things like Digital Labels are really compounding the problems. And when people say “record sales are just low” that’s not true. Subliminal can still sell 10,000 units of their product. Maybe you don’t like Subliminal, but what are they doing that your label isn’t? Look at the success stories and take note. whew... i need a glass of water and chill pill...
Marky Star
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Altho I generally agree with what you're saying in reference to saturatingthe market, I don't fully agree. New labels and new projects coming up areoften exactly what is needed instigate change. Be it thru the evolution ofthe music, or maybe just helping to open people's eyes to something theywere blind to. I'll stand back and give it to you that there are established labelsexploring almost every aspect of what's currently going on. But how many of those established labels waver from their normal routine? How many of them are willing to put new and exciting on the table - potentially getting their hand slapped back and taking a loss over putting out what they are known for and and sure to succeed with. How many of them take a chance on new artists, or venture outside of their camp on a regular basis? This isn't to slam those labels in any way, a lot of them are quality time and time again, and I think it's great that they are carving out their sound and able to continue to release, but rather to raise the idea of newer labels being necessary on more then one level. So - there could be an artist out there that is really doing sometime fantastic, that doesn't get picked up by other labels because it just doesn't fit the mould. The only real way to push that new sound could very well be for that artist to start a label and do it himself/herself. Now if someone does that - I salute them for putting the time and effort into it, I salute them for being brave enough to put it all out on the table, and I salute them for taking a chance to put something forward that they're passionate about. Having said all that - there are far too many clone labels that pop up. Instead of putting up innovation and quality... a lot of new labels are shadowing old ideas. Taking what's already being done and just trying their hand at it. I don't know if it's because people think it's cool to run a label, or if they just don't realize how many carbon copies are coming out -but it's THIS sort of new project that I identify your opinion with – not all new labels. To use a label as an example - list member affiliated label Listen To Reason. I've brought every release thru my shop and am very excited about what's going on there. Some very distinct and fresh sounding tracks, that regardless of the fact they can be categorized alongside many vet labels (the general deep tech bin), have a unique edge to them that is quite apparent. This is the type of new project that people can take a look at, and move forward in music with. Even if the label doesn't make it in the end (and I sincerely hope that they'll be around for a while), they most likely have instigated a few people to re-examine what their doing and how they're doing it. Maybe I'm just babbling on a bit here .... but in the end my opinion is that there should always be room for new projects, expansion in the industry etc.etc. etc....
Ryan G
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don?t know what this is called in Economics, but basically it?s a stalemate between supply and demand. Anyone looking for a good concise description of the problem that Marky is talking about should go here: http://crucial-systems.com/dmbr/the_glut This whole site is great, actually. What's most interesting about this explanation is that I believe it predates much of the current debate about digital downloading and file sharing - the problem goes beyond that and has been around for awhile. The best quote on that page is this one. The key phrases that Marky is looking for are "monopolistic competition" and "low barriers to entry." "It looks like a classic case of monopolistic competition. That is a mix between monopoly and perfect competition (or just plain competitive markets). The technology for music (and for publishing) seems to be moving towards small scale entry. Monopolistic competition is a situation where each seller is unique and has some price setting power (i.e., won't lose all customers if the seller raises the price a smidgeon). In that sense it is like monopoly. But there is also free entry as in perfect competition, and the free entry eventually pushes profits down to zero. (Free entry just means that it is easy to enter the industry--there are no barriers and it doesn't take a large investment.) So even if the industry starts out with people making profits, eventually they disappear. The other thing that is going on is that profits for 'hits' are made when a lot of people buy the same disk. But with so much being produced it is probably difficult to disseminate information on all disks. So sales get diffused among more disks. There is probably some 'informational externality' going on whereby the addition of one more disk to the market makes it less likely that people are going to know about an existing disk or whether it is good or not." Anyway, see you (some of you) all in Miami.
Eli Bingham
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIGITAL LABELS = BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD
DIGITAL LABELS = WWW.MP3.COM amateur BS
Uh-huh. Right. So just because somebody puts up the money to press a record it's not "amateur BS"...? There's no reason that Digital Label can't be just as good or better than a traditional Vinyl/CD Label. What if, say, Perlon decided to go all digital and still maintained the same level of quality? Why is that so bad? It's just a new format and distribution method. It might suck that it's really easy for "kids" to pump out a bunch of crap and release it onto the Internet, but how much of that are you REALLY going to hear? Sites like Beatport aren't going to be selling it. That's one of the natural failsafes built in to this business model: if people have to wade thru a bunch of crap on your MP3 site to find the good stuff they'll just move on to one of the other 500 MP3 sites that are being set up. I really don't see this changing anything at all, especially with so many people shopping for vinyl online already. There's no difference, except that instead of waiting for your records to come in the mail you wait for a download. I really think that the ONLY thing really stopping this from blowing up is the pirating/file-swapping issue. Once they fix that - it's ON.
Jacob London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Ryan. You just summed up my feelings. People that urge others to not start a label for the sake of "the scene" are being short-sighted, in my humble opinion. I remember 10 years ago people saying "there are just waaaaay too many DJs, the newbies are hurting the scene...these guys playing for little or no money are ruining it for the rest of us." As well all know, the number of DJs has increased exponentially. (In fact, i'd bet over 90% of the people on this list weren't DJs 10 years ago.) I always thought, if you're so concerned with the little guys you're not focusing enough on yourself and making your own game better. I personally think that the li'l no-name undiscovered 14-year old somewhere in the mid-west playing his dad's records is the next Larry Levan, Danny Tenaglia, or ____(your favorite hero DJ/producer), and that kid could be the guy to start up the next equivalent of West End or Salsoul records....all digital of course. Wink How could anyone take that sense of excitement and passion away from someone just because they're younger or picked up on something a few years later than you did? my 2 cents,
Jason Edwards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well then, i'm guilty of starting a Digital Label - but i'm here to stay. ...i'm also guilty of some of the other things that have been mentioned - but I don't really care. Exactly how many Digital-ONLY labels do you people know off??? Most of the labels releasing digital downloads at the moment are those that already have a vinyl catalog...Digital-ONLY labels? - i can only think of 2. I honestly can't imagine making huge profits from this venture - but again I don't care, i'm going to do it anyway. AND i'm going to do it properly – I plan to run it just like a label releasing vinyl, the only difference is the lack of "physical product", the reduced start-up costs and the reduced risks involved. I will be putting my own money into promotion, and right now that means working outside of this industry to get that money. I'll also release whatever the fuck i want, and if you don't like it - too bad. Given the way things are right now, I couldn't think of a dumber thing to do than to start releasing vinyl (which i almost did). Having said that, I may well release vinyl in the future, but right now - it's digital all the way. This is in no way an attempt to try and "hurt" this industry and i feel very sorry that some of you may feel that way.
PJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for marketing, a digital label faces the same challenge(s) as a 'physical' one - getting the word out for starters. Pumping out tunes, whether by vinyl, cd or otherwise, without the requisite promotional effort is a fruitless endeavor. Too many labels expect the distros to push their stuff - which is not their job. There is so much product coming out weekly that the overhead in dealing with just the physical flow of goods is massive. Distributors are there to get the disk in the hands of retail, and that's about it. If you've tried to start an imprint recently and gotten rejected by more than one distributor on the first try, you're in good company. It's YOUR job (as a label head or PR person) to create demand at the retail level, by (brace yourself, scary b-school term coming next) *marketing* to the music shops, DJs, punters, radio programmers, ad producers, film scorers, and anyone else you can think to tell. Making great music is all well and good, but running your company half-assed is not so great. Do not underestimate the commitment needed. As for legitimacy, we're in unexplored territory here- MP3.com aside. I don't know of anyone else even attempting this yet aside from list member Infamous Light. With quality music and a lot of noisemaking, who says it can't work? The majors are getting in to downloads while kicking and screaming, but they are hedging their bets against the inevitable demise of the CD/wax/DVD-A etc. too, no matter what is said publicly. Might just be that the future has arrived while everyone was busy dusting their records (myself included). Financially there is an obvious advantage - no manufacturing costs. But that savings could be easily disappear in the marketing push needed to
1) brand yourself
2) promote your (probably new & obscure) artists
3) get people to buy your music in a relatively new way (at least for DJs)
Even at $0.99 per track, who is going on iTunes and searching for Listen to Reason? I'd say nobody yet; plus you might find it free on Soulseek (won't bother with the ethics here). And should a small label join a mainstream download service, it is unlikely to get editorial coverage. So what do you do? Manage the push (distribution) AND pull (retail & consumer demand). I run my label for fun but not vanity. Can't speak for the rest but I'm in it because I love the music and want to give something back to a scene that has given a lot to me. I also love vinyl and still have all my old records from childhood, but selling 1,000 (or even 5,000) units at a clip isn't going to make my artists or me rich, or allow me to quit my day job any time soon, all of which are high on the agenda. Will I be releasing CDs in the future? Yes. Will I sign up with download services? Yes. Will I forgo all manufacturing in favor of downloads? Yes, if that's where the market is headed. It's about the music, not the medium. I still think the RIAA were fools to kill the original Napster, for a rather obvious reason. There was ONE service where all the users got their downloads - convert it to a pay site and *boom* - many fewer Kazaa's. Some clever 15 year-olds would probably have made alternate pirate services anyway, but what a golden opportunity squandered. Too late for the spilt milk now, bust out your spyglass and navigate the Beatports & Buymusic.coms & iTunes of the world. But they'll still have to pry the vinyl from my cold dead hands even so Wink
Chris
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distributers that tend to have a dodgy A&R policy don't last long. Prime tried it. They started off with great labels. Then they seemed to take on a new mantra... "If You Throw Enough Shit Around Some it Will Stick To The Wall"... They ended up having so many labels and so many "man in a Van" salesman that they had a new release sheet 3 times a week. Poor old (you might say weak) Shop Keeps would get battered (lied to) into taking loads of shite that just stuck around on their shelves. To the detriment of Primes good labels. Something had to give...Prime went bust. P.S. what I'm saying is, A&R is essential for a label, a distributor, a producer or mp3 label P.P.S. mp3 is dead, long live mp4
Stevino
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very well said Chris. ...let's just wait and see how many people get off their arses and actually start a "digital-ONLY label". Vinyl sales keep dropping and dropping - surely trying out something different is better than doing nothing at all and hoping the problem disappears. It's all about the music, and i am VERY passionate about the music. Having said that, i neither have the ear nor the talent for it - ha-hah! But you know what, this is what i do, it's a part of my life and i'm just gonna keep doing it (and I don't care how many people try to convince me otherwise). Right now, the greatest challenge in doing something like this is changing very negative stagnant attitudes that are taking us nowhere. I'd like to think that discussions like this could start to break down these attitudes. Promotion for such a venture is very difficult - some promo companies will not even deal with me because i don't have vinyl promos. Things need to change. I recently made a post about Digital Promo Services - this is something that hasn't yet taken off but really does need a lot of dj support. If done properly, the financial benefits for djs and ALL labels (digital or not) could be enormous. These are things that people in this industry need to start addressing more seriously. Telling people who want to run digital labels to go away is not a solution. Fuck off, fuck off, and then fuck off again.
PJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I won't be at Miami this year- and my label representative has pulled out due to unforseen circumstances. But, if you are going to be there, and you feel about this stuff as strongly as i do, please try and spread the word about the whole issue of digital distribution and digital promotion. Many thanks,
PJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow, it must have taken a whole lot of time to figure all that out. too many djs, too may producers, now too many labels, too many people wanting to 'be the man'. I'm sorry, but for me, that's bollocks. It's an evolving scene and the only way it dies is if people stop going to clubs, getting off their heads and dancing allnight long. That's what it's about. Does it matter if some of us lose money on our projects, sell ourselves cheap or god forbid, go and fund our projects by working outside of the industry? It's all very well highlighting the issues which confront someone trying to make a living in house music but the irony of what you're saying is that it's the commercial struggle which is 'killing the scene'. If a label starts up, it takes a profitable ditribution company to give them a p&d and they're only interested in the money whereas I would say that the label start up is only interested in getting good music out. Why lay the blame on the label? What puzzles me is that all of the points you make are about the love of house music. Where does that include the 'economics of supply and demand'. If you're worrying about that then you need to maybe... "– keep going to the club, keep buying mix CD’s. Keep DJ’ing at home. Keep buying records (or digital downloads thru Beatport. Try throwing parties, maybe…" Why is this apparent technology driven democratization of the scene a bad thing. A bad thing for established pros maybe, but not necessarily for 'house music'. I still hear amazing new music everytime I go to clubs and it's better than it was two years ago and two years before that......I think digital labels are just an extension of this process and like all new takes, there'll be good and bad but how can you say the whole idea is bad bad bad. Some djs will download and burn / traktor, some won't, it's what comes out of the speakers that matters to me. All this whining about the economics is so fucking boring.
Arthur Trousers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All I can offer to this discussion are these two comments:
1) Good work PJ, all the best with your digital-only label I'll be keeping my eye out.
2) In this industry, as in 99% of others, if you stand still, its a one-way ticket to oblivion...you have to keep abreast of changes, technology & your market & ensure you cater for it. Things have a habit of sorting themselves out, & only the strongest will survive.
Daniel Filipovic
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously, Mr. Cotter has been taking our personal conversations to heart as his comments closely echo my own sentiments. The days of starting a label, 'anonymously' releasing a 12", and expecting your distributor to 'work' your record for you are _largely_ over. In fact, how you are going to market your record is becoming more and more important, even with vinyl singles (and even more so with CD releases). It will affect what kind of order your distributor will make with you. The more effective and comprehensive your marketing plan is, the more likely their order will increase, especially if the release is good. On the digital side, it is a new format and unexplored territory for labels probably more so than the consumers. Just like with any new format, it is going to take the industry (and consumers) time to (continue to) adjust and re-learn how to market their releases in this manner. We're all here 'cos we love the music and are passionate about spreading the gospel but at the end of the day, this is a business and as a whole, losing money is not an option.
Oscillate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amen! - JJ
JJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i tried to stay out of this, i really did, but i can't stand it. So here goes... from an economic standpoint, monopoly is not the problem here. monopoly usually has two implications. first, prices under a monopoly tend to be higher than they would in a competitive market. second, the monopolist can often lower prices enough so that someone new entering the market is forced out of business, but that occurs when there are HIGH barriers to entry. there is no microsoft of electronic music. second, low barriers to entry are generally good for the end consumer. why? because the lower the cost means more competition which drives down the price. that means artists get paid less. now this usually means more variety for the consumer and overall increased consumption. if you take a broad look at electronic music generally, there is a tremendous amount of variety. it is only when you examine particular subgenres (e.g. techhouse) that one notices a rather static amount of variety. the bottom line is that economic conditions in the electronic music industry, from the consumer's perspective, SHOULD be fairly pro consumer at the moment, which economists would say is a good thing. in some respects it is, but the undercurrent to this converstation is that there isn't overall increased consumption. why? probably a number of reasons. first, economic downturn. second, change in trends. third, barriers to entry are so low that the risks involved are near non-existent. it's this final point on which people seem to focus. honestly, i don't really think its an issue (let the flaming begin), for a few reasons. first, its often part of the business cycle that an industry gets flooded with competitors. eventually, the bad ones drop off, even when the risks are low. industries often go through periods of expansion and contraction (e.g. internet bubble). second, artists and labels that innovate and/or meet a consumer demand will continue to exist, regardless of whether barriers to entry are low. as someone pointed out, there are labels that are still doing relatively well, despite a decrease in consumer interest in electronic music. finally, artists are more likely to be signed when there are more labels, not less, but they'll be paid less (see explanation above). however, artists will be paid more based on demand for their work. if you or I aren't getting paid as much or signed as often, its because people aren't buying our product, they're buying someone elses. so my last point. the fact that the market is saturated does cause a problem, even for those who meet consumer demand. that is, it becomes more expensive for the consumer (in terms of time) to shuffle through all the available products (artists/labels). but fundamentally, this seems to me to be a marketing issue. smart labels with good artists need to be smart about how they reach potential consumers, not complain about other crappy labels or artists. if your product is better and meets a demand, you have an advantage. its up to you to be smart are marketing yourself or your label. that means not accepting less money than you're worth, forcing labels to provide an accounting, etc. the legit labels who take the business seriously will take such request seriously.
Paul Petrick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
one question... not to be a bastard, but: why would you want to be digital ONLY!? why are you ruling out 12" and other 'media' like CD's...
Joshua Collins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so how are you digital-only guys 'marketing' then? posting on some message boards? from what i've seen / heard... 12" charts, reviews, promo lists...havent been making too much of a dent in sales. (as they used to) whats your solution with mp3's if vinyl cant even be promoted successfully as well anymore? and can somebody come up with a number of sales for a 'digital ONLY' mp3 release... it just seems like anything released on mp3-only would never get above selling 150 or 200 'copies'. (from what i've heard from multiple people on the lists) i'm not trying to make it a money issue.. but if you are an artist wouldnt you rather have 2000 people hear and like your tune rather than 200................
Joshua Collins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Joshua. You have to start somewhere, and i've decided to start of this way. I have not ruled out releasing 12inchs/CDs in the future - but right now i'm focussing on digital releases.
PJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which digital-ONLY guys are your referring to? ...Me?! Well, despite all the advantages of running something like this i'll freely admit that marketing/promtion is just as difficult if not MORE difficult than for a vinyl label. I don't claim to have the answers to everything! ps: i'm sorry if i've offended anyone with my outbursts.
PJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ps: i'm sorry if i've offended anyone with my outbursts.
there's no reason to apologize. i think this is a great discussion, actually. it's obviously a subject that hits the very core of all of us. i've got some more ideas to throw out there, but i'm about to head out for the night, so i'll try to get to it tomorrow...
Marky Star
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I look forward to hearing them!
PJ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kind of a weird formality. a weird formality that's gonna be a shitload of effort and paperwork, not to mention play hell with your tax circumstances. if you find a way round all that, let me know yeah?
Dave
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacob London just got the "rejected" shpeil from Beatport because Beatport only deals with record labels and not with artists directly.
I find it a bit strange that Beatport will not work with producers. Our new site Digibag.com will only sign producers and then feature their label projects if applicable. We started Digibag.com as a way to help protect the producers from the labels bosses that did not pay them for their tracks, and/or used their labels to promote their own DJ careers instead of the creative forces behind it. We have already had to have Beatport take two tracks off their site due to licensing issues with the label Beatport had signed. The label never finished paying for the tracks that came out on vinyl and then never contacted us to ask if they could license for internet use. -- shady. I would recommend to all producers to watch these digital sites closely. If you see tracks that you were not paid on and did not give expressed internet away, have the tracks pulled. There is no reason for the labels to make more money off you!
Benjamin Connelly