What's the point?

[PaulWarning]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1473147560' post='3127266']
And I'd agree with your definition of making it, and about enjoying yourself.

For the rest of it, TBH I don't really know. Right now I'm happy with the situation where the band pretty much pays for itself.

The way I see it, is that the easier it becomes to do things for yourself the more you price yourself out of a "record deal" should such a thing even exist anymore. It might be possible if you were a solo artist who didn't need a band in order to perform live, but as soon as you add up the band members the cost start to spiral. IME in order to be able to take the band beyond the level we are currently at we would need funding to allow us to spend more time being a band and not have to rely (so much) on our day jobs in order to live. Plus a massive amount of promotion and publicity to grow our audience beyond those that are interested in the punk/psychobilly scene and therefore already know all about us.

In the end it comes down to "luck"/persistence (I believe you make your own luck by being persistent and visible as a band).
[/quote]Which in the old days was the record companies job, you got signed, got an advance, got put on tours with established acts and got the record companies publicity machine, oh, for the days of the big nasty record companies, we all thought it was a hoot when the got a bloody nose with the coming of the digital age, the law of unforeseen consequences eh?

[luckydog]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1473147560' post='3127266']Plus a massive amount of promotion and publicity to grow our audience beyond those that are interested in the punk/psychobilly scene and therefore already know all about us.

In the end it comes down to "luck"/persistence (I believe you make your own luck by being persistent and visible as a band).
[/quote]

Much depends on yer ultimate goals I suppose, and you seem well sorted - that's just great. That generally doesn't happen by accident in life, even if one is good. Yes, there's typically a glass ceiling to popularity outside of yer genre/scene, that's probably one of the big breakthroughs on the path to world domination, if that's the aim - I mean, how do we know when to stop ? What drives us, when what we have is already great ? I think one has to enjoy present success, no matter where it fits in with ambitions etc. I can get 'the quest for being 'personally better', but not really the popularity bit, beyond a certain level?

LD

Edited September 6, 2016 by luckydog

[BigRedX]

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1473148849' post='3127281']
Which in the old days was the record companies job, you got signed, got an advance, got put on tours with established acts and got the record companies publicity machine, oh, for the days of the big nasty record companies, we all thought it was a hoot when the got a bloody nose with the coming of the digital age, the law of unforeseen consequences eh?
[/quote]

Indeed! Be careful what you wish for.

And record companies at least had a vested interest in going some way to look for and promote new talent. Now they have mostly been replaced by the digital distributers and aggregators, who simply don't need to do that when there is a steady stream of wannabes lining up with their $50 to get their demos up on iTunes etc.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='luckydog' timestamp='1473149628' post='3127287']
Much depends on yer ultimate goals I suppose, and you seem well sorted - that's just great. That generally doesn't happen by accident in life, even if one is good. Yes, there's typically a glass ceiling to popularity outside of yer genre/scene, that's probably one of the big breakthroughs on the path to world domination, if that's the aim - I mean, how do we know when to stop ? What drives us, when what we have is already great ? I think one has to enjoy the present, no matter where it fits in with ambitions etc. I can get 'the quest for being 'personally better', but not really the popularity bit, beyond a certain level?

LD
[/quote]

Because for me being more popular is a means to an end, not the end itself.

If the band is popular then hopefully by extension it is earning more through gigs and selling downloads/CDs/vinyl/T-shirts etc. That means that we can spend less time doing "conventional" day jobs and more time on the band, which then means we have the time to write more songs (and concentrate more on the "better" ones) and use the money to make better recordings of them and spend more time practicing how to play them to the very best of our ability.

It can be difficult to be a decent band when it's a struggle to get everyone together in the rehearsal room once a week for 3 hours (because of their commitments outside of the band) to work on the new songs and tighten up the old ones for the next gig, and when you've run out of money and could really do with another day or two in the studio to turn that good sounding recording into a great sounding one.

Personally I'm not after "world domination", but If being popular allows me to make the band my day job, I'll take it.

And although it's probably harder now than it ever was I do believe that if you work hard enough at it so that you maximise your chances of being in the right place at the right time playing to the right people, then it is still possible to break out of your genre niche.

[4stringslow]

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1473148849' post='3127281']
Which in the old days was the record companies job, you got signed, got an advance, got put on tours with established acts and got the record companies publicity machine, oh, for the days of the big nasty record companies, we all thought it was a hoot when the got a bloody nose with the coming of the digital age, the law of unforeseen consequences eh?
[/quote]

Surely all that still happens today? There are plenty of artists being signed up and subsequently promoted and toured by record companies. Obviously they won't or can't sign up [u]every[/u] wannabe artist but to suggest that whole model is nowadays broken is simply not true.

I suspect what has changed in our 'digital age' is that those wannabe artists who don't get record deals now have more scope for self-promotion, something almost impossible in the 'good old days', so there are now more wannabes out there trying to make it and everyone more aware about how the music scene is actually a pretty difficult way to earn a living.

[PaulWarning]

[quote name='4stringslow' timestamp='1473151684' post='3127322']
Surely all that still happens today? There are plenty of artists being signed up and subsequently promoted and toured by record companies. Obviously they won't or can't sign up [u]every[/u] wannabe artist but to suggest that whole model is nowadays broken is simply not true.

I suspect what has changed in our 'digital age' is that those wannabe artists who don't get record deals now have more scope for self-promotion, something almost impossible in the 'good old days', so there are now more wannabes out there trying to make it and everyone more aware about how the music scene is actually a pretty difficult way to earn a living.
[/quote]not on anywhere near the scale it used to be, Record Companies are very reluctant to take a chance on an artist these days, and the rewards are nowhere near what they used to be with CD sales falling off a cliff, trouble with self promotion in the digital age is anyone can do it with not much effort which means it's very difficult to stand out from the huge amount of bands doing it

[RhysP]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1473111898' post='3127105']
Indeed. I'm still not convinced a death metal band who stare at their shoes all night would be a particularly enteraining act. Presumably they interact with the crowd in some way.
[/quote]

For lots of people the music is all the "interaction" they need from a band, they don't want or need any more "entertainment" than that.
I'm one of them.

[4stringslow]

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1473152862' post='3127339']
not on anywhere near the scale it used to be, Record Companies are very reluctant to take a chance on an artist these days, and the rewards are nowhere near what they used to be with CD sales falling off a cliff, trouble with self promotion in the digital age is anyone can do it with not much effort which means it's very difficult to stand out from the huge amount of bands doing it
[/quote]

I'd be interested to see some figures on this. Are all the artists queuing up for things like the 'BBC Introducing' and on the myriad similar stages at Glastonbury and other festivals just self-promoting? I've always assumed they were being pushed by the record companies. I know for a fact that they 'sniff around' the various music colleges looking for artists to sign up so have assumed it, a more or less business as usual for the record companies, albeit managing a lower [u]proportion[/u] of artists because of the boom of self-promotion enabled by the digital age etc. I agree that record sales are down compared to the good old days, but doesn't that make it even more important for record companies to sign up new artists and push them out on the road where higher than ever ticket prices can help fill their coffers?

[uncle psychosis]

[quote name='skej21' timestamp='1473006733' post='3125982']


I think you're missing one of the saddest points made by your own observations... The 'next generation' will be more interested in music like electronic music or acoustic material and probably less interested in 'bands'/traditional musicianship.

Covers bands 20 years from now will either be a guy with a laptop and a launchpad blasting out classic dub tracks or a guy with an acoustic and a looper covering Ed Sheeran.
[/quote]

Music is music. The idea that electronic music or acoustic music is "sad" because it isn't four blokes with electric guitars is laughable.

Times change. Music evolves. Art evolves. There will always be music, it just might not be the same as it was when you were a teenager. Happened to the be-bop fans, happened to the swing fans, happened to the New Romantics, happened to the NeoClassicists, happened to the Surrealists, happened to the Beatles. You can still get all that stuff, its just not mainstream anymore. Big deal.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='4stringslow' timestamp='1473153767' post='3127357']
I'd be interested to see some figures on this. Are all the artists queuing up for things like the 'BBC Introducing' and on the myriad similar stages at Glastonbury and other festivals just self-promoting? I've always assumed they were being pushed by the record companies. I know for a fact that they 'sniff around' the various music colleges looking for artists to sign up so have assumed it, a more or less business as usual for the record companies, albeit managing a lower [u]proportion[/u] of artists because of the boom of self-promotion enabled by the digital age etc. I agree that record sales are down compared to the good old days, but doesn't that make it even more important for record companies to sign up new artists and push them out on the road where higher than ever ticket prices can help fill their coffers?
[/quote]

Well strictly from personal experience...

I've been playing in bands which have been releasing records/CDs/downloads/tapes etc. since the late 70s and from my perspective the ratio between band activity/fan popularity and the amount of "industry" interest has never been lower.

My band in the early 80s had major record company interest off the back of a single demo track we had recorded that had been picked up by local radio plus a couple of decent gig reviews in the press, and at that time TBH we'd have settled for pretty much any deal that would have got us into the studio and our music out on vinyl, no matter how small the label.

And the two serious bands I was in after that also attracted a good amount of management and label attention. Although none of it ever amounted to anything that allowed us to concentrate on the band full time, it did see us getting tracks on a couple of compilation CDs with world-wide distribution.

Compare that with The Terrortones - more gigs in the 6 years we've been together than all my other bands put together. A sizeable fan base. Two singles, a mini-album and a full length long player all financed mostly from band earnings and all getting good reviews. And what have we had? A record deal offer that essentially amounted to someone else putting their label on our next release but not actually financing any of it and a couple of publishing deals that offered nothing we weren't already getting by doing it ourselves.

And that illustrates the crux of the problem. AFAICS what little of the record industry that is left won't take chances any more, and by the time they are prepared to look at an artist, said artist is generally so well established that they need a lot of money and guarantees of effort being put in by the record company as regards promotion etc. that the cost is significantly higher than it was previously.

[bassjim]

my 2pence worth.............

back then............i was signed to acid jazz records. we were told where to play by them. they set up the gigs and did the promo. we were part of a scene. if we played at the blue note club or the cafe d paris in london, supporting an act or headlining, it was organised by people that did it for a living. we didnt get involved in this side of it. allways packed with punters that liked the sort of music we played and even if they never heard of us before or ever again liked what we did. they knew prior to arrival that we must be worth a listen because 1. its an acid jazz/ funk jazz/ jazz funk / funky soul ect club / club night and they like all of that. 2. band will be of the same style. 3 . when band/s not playing music will be to their liking.
they sold tickets and took the lions share and we got very little if anything, but did some very good really enjoyable gigs with spinal tap back stage delights.

the venue the OP describes doesnt sound like its offering anything other than a place to check out a band playing their own stuff. If this is the case (apologies if I'm wrong about this venue) then i think there is no point playing at this particular venue. If its made into an evening featuring a style of music with no more than 2 very good bands from the same style of music,doing maybe just 40 mins of their best stuff each with some sort of promo drink going on, free entry ect then i think there is a lot of point to doing it.

we dont have record deals any more like we used to so the goal posts have moved. i dont know what the answer is because i play at weekends in a cover band, g these days get paid and love it. But then I am past it in terms of pursuing a "pop star" type career and the best dream is to get a side man job with an established artist.

So i would be honest with myself and ask if I think I have a shot at getting anywhere with original material. Am i still young and sexy? Do my peers think so? Am I relevant to my peers? Is my music standing heads and shoulders above the rest? Could I get together with like minded individuals and turn this venue around with a special night dedicated to what I belive in musically?

If you think yes then go for it because sadly the folks that used to do it so well aint there no more. I'm talking about the small lables that got you off to a good start.

[luckydog]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1473151322' post='3127314']
Because for me being more popular is a means to an end, not the end itself.[/quote]

You've obviously got a great grip on things - nice - respect that

[quote name='bassjim' timestamp='1473159334' post='3127442'] So i would be honest with myself and ask if I think I have a shot at getting anywhere with original material..(..)..If you think yes then go for it because sadly the folks that used to do it so well aint there no more. I'm talking about the small lables that got you off to a good start. [/quote]

Yup, that's the crux of it. Do what you love, do it well, and do it now !

LD

[4stringslow]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1473157297' post='3127411']
Well strictly from personal experience...
[/quote]

But did the record industry ever take chances? It would be interesting to know their failure rates today vs yesterday. I don't want to be mean, but perhaps your difficulty in getting a record deal was because the big companies felt you were not the right material? Given that you couldn't make it as a full time job, it could be argued that they were right.

Meanwhile, record companies are sniffing around music colleges and signing up the likes of George Ezra and others, then promoting them like crazy for a while. I'm not saying it's necessarily a good thing and, personally, I'm not a fan of one-man-and-a-guitar acts trying to become the next Bob Dylan, but I guess that's the current fashion and the record companies job is to make money not act as some sort of paternalistic guardian of the nation's musical preferences (as if anyone really knows what they may be).

Edited September 6, 2016 by 4stringslow

[TimR]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1473153265' post='3127343']


For lots of people the music is all the "interaction" they need from a band, they don't want or need any more "entertainment" than that.
I'm one of them.
[/quote]

Certainly. However, people come to see a band, not necessarily to listen to a band.

I suspect that people who are not interested in being entertained will come back whether or not te band are entertaining, whereas those who do want to be entertained will not come back if you don't entertain them.

So you will lose part of your audience by only playing and not performing the songs.

If, as in the OPs case, you actually like playing to an audience, the performance part of the music is quite important.

[EliasMooseblaster]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1473161942' post='3127493']
Certainly. However, people come to see a band, not necessarily to listen to a band.
[/quote]

Absolutely - at the risk of being a little [i]too[/i] reductionist about it: why book a covers band when you could just let punter cue the music they want to hear on the jukebox all night? Simple answer is that a covers band worth their salt will create an atmosphere that piped music demonstrably can't.

Even with an original artist playing something incredibly twiddly and technical, there will be some innate fascination in watching them execute these feats of noodly technicality, and so if you have to choose between two such groups, then the group who can apply a little more showmanship to their technoodlesome execution is more likely to be the one that gets your ticket money.

(Though conversely, I often wonder if the one thing worse than a shy band is a band that's too arrogant and just gets on the crowd's nerves. Is a hostile atmosphere worse than no atmosphere?)

[BigRedX]

[quote name='4stringslow' timestamp='1473160608' post='3127467']
But did the record industry ever take chances? It would be interesting to know their failure rates today vs yesterday. I don't want to be mean, but perhaps your difficulty in getting a record deal was because the big companies felt you were not the right material? Given that you couldn't make it as a full time job, it could be argued that they were right.

Meanwhile, record companies are sniffing around music colleges and signing up the likes of George Ezra and others, then promoting them like crazy for a while. I'm not saying it's necessarily a good thing and, personally, I'm not a fan of one-man-and-a-guitar acts trying to become the next Bob Dylan, but I guess that's the current fashion and the record companies job is to make money not act as some sort of paternalistic guardian of the nation's musical preferences (as if anyone really knows what they may be).
[/quote]

The record companies never think they are taking chances, even though they used to do it all the time. They're not going to sign up anyone who they don't think will sell enough of whatever the current format is to make money out of. But my record collection is full of bands that released a couple of singles and an album on an established label without any real success and then disappeared never to be heard of again. Some didn't even make it as far as the album release.

In the 90s my band supported a punk rock/drum n bass hybrid act. They had just signed to Columbia Records and were out on tour to get some live experience and promote their debut single. They turned up with a load of brand new amps and guitars all properly flight-cased and racks full of samplers and sequencers that they needed to play live. The music was pretty impressive and I went out and bought the single the next week. And that was it. I never saw or heard anything from them again (and I've just had a look on-line and AFAICS that single is all that was released). At the very least the record company investment in them was the new equipment, at least enough studio time to record the single with the remixes by well known DJs of the time and actual production and distribution of the CDs plus booking and financing their tour as well as the promotion and publicity need to go with that. And I doubt the label ever saw a penny of that back - it would have been written off, along with a load of other unsuccessful bands, against an artist who was making them money.

And you are perfectly right about my musical endeavours. None of them were the right thing at the right time to warrant record label investment. However what I was trying to say was that in the past it was fairly easy to get record labels sniffing about at the bands I was involved with even if none of them were ultimately going to do anything more than sniff. In comparison The Terrortones, a band with a far bigger following than anything I've been involved with in the past (and lets fact it popular bands is what the labels want) can't even attract a fraction of the interest I've had previously.

[JTUK]

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1473113016' post='3127128']
All this selling tickets stuff, that's part of the originals band scene, right?

Blue
[/quote]

No, not exclusive... you just have to have an act that can sell tickets so you might have a decent outfit that plays a couple of pubs but their core business is parties and events.
They need not be a function band as such..they just need to be able to sell tickets. You will probably find that they stay away from a lot of pubs so as not to get into the argument of why would people pay to see a band when they can see them in a pub etc..which is fair comment.

The ticketed gigs need a different show/mindset and all round better offering as tickets would likely be £10-12. This is also tribute band territory in the U.K.

The economics of this would be the band get a fee of around £700-1000 for a room with a capacity of 350, This is quite a tight margin as typically the venue will get around £3.5k gross but have P.A, Engr etc etc plus security on their bill. They do keep the bar though. A very successful draw-(playing covers) might be able to negotiate a £1500 plus fee but thta would really have to be known and banker territory.

Very few covers bands can do it..or want the deal and perceived associated hassle.. so a lot of the dates are now Tribute acts..

It would also be a tough deal for Originals without a real following, and tbf..those sort of bands can get £600 in a pub much more easily.

Edited September 6, 2016 by JTUK

[4stringslow]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1473166225' post='3127562']
And you are perfectly right about my musical endeavours. None of them were the right thing at the right time to warrant record label investment. However what I was trying to say was that in the past it was fairly easy to get record labels sniffing about at the bands I was involved with even if none of them were ultimately going to do anything more than sniff. In comparison The Terrortones, a band with a far bigger following than anything I've been involved with in the past (and lets fact it popular bands is what the labels want) can't even attract a fraction of the interest I've had previously.
[/quote]

I'd class myself as very much an outsider compared to that sort of experience so I may be talking tosh, but I've always thought that 'making it' in the music business is more about luck than talent, which makes it the tough nut to crack that it clearly is. The old thing about "it's not what you know, it's who you know" and variations on that theme.

[TimR]

[quote name='EliasMooseblaster' timestamp='1473165751' post='3127552']
.

Even with an original artist playing something incredibly twiddly and technical, there will be some innate fascination in watching them execute these feats of noodly technicality, and so if you have to choose between two such groups, then the group who can apply a little more showmanship to their technoodlesome execution is more likely to be the one that gets your ticket money.

(Though conversely, I often wonder if the one thing worse than a shy band is a band that's too arrogant and just gets on the crowd's nerves. Is a hostile atmosphere worse than no atmosphere?)
[/quote]

I went to see a friend play at an originals night. They were second on of three. The first band were excellent the venue was full. They pitched it perfectly. Musically and showmanship.

My friend's band were also superb. Musically and showmanship. However about half the audience left as soon as the first band had finished.

Once my friend had finished the audience halved again but we stayed to watch the last band.

Musically they were competent, they could play their instrument, but the tunes were terribly written. People started leaving. The singer/guitarist was getting more and more agitated as more people left. Eventually launching a tirade of abuse at the audience about not recognising good music.

We left after that.

Aside: I once went for a meal at a restaurant's opening night. Halfway through the meal a band started up. It was a small restaurant and the band were loud, people were there to eat. They were playing original songs. We complained to the restaurant several times about the volume level. Eventually the singer came over and told us we didn't know anything about music and it had to be loud when playing live. All 10 of us looked at her and burst out laughing. We were having a band night out with the 10 piece function band.

[bassjim]

[quote name='4stringslow' timestamp='1473169355' post='3127613']
I'd class myself as very much an outsider compared to that sort of experience so I may be talking tosh, but I've always thought that 'making it' in the music business is more about luck than talent, which makes it the tough nut to crack that it clearly is. The old thing about "it's not what you know, it's who you know" and variations on that theme.
[/quote] when we got signed it felt like we just got off the top rung of one big ladder and were now staring up from the bottom rung of the next even bigger ladder whilst someone was randomly dropping hammers down from the top of it

[PaulWarning]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1473174653' post='3127679']
I went to see a friend play at an originals night. They were second on of three. The first band were excellent the venue was full. They pitched it perfectly. Musically and showmanship.

My friend's band were also superb. Musically and showmanship. However about half the audience left as soon as the first band had finished.

Once my friend had finished the audience halved again but we stayed to watch the last band.

Musically they were competent, they could play their instrument, but the tunes were terribly written. People started leaving. The singer/guitarist was getting more and more agitated as more people left. Eventually launching a tirade of abuse at the audience about not recognising good music.

We left after that.

Aside: I once went for a meal at a restaurant's opening night. Halfway through the meal a band started up. It was a small restaurant and the band were loud, people were there to eat. They were playing original songs. We complained to the restaurant several times about the volume level. Eventually the singer came over and told us we didn't know anything about music and it had to be loud when playing live. All 10 of us looked at her and burst out laughing. We were having a band night out with the 10 piece function band.
[/quote]been there done that, get asked to play on a multi band originals night bill, first time we were told we'd be headlining, we thought great, second time it was "not we're not we're on last, it means they'll be nobody left"

Edited September 6, 2016 by PaulWarning

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='bassjim' timestamp='1473175754' post='3127695']
when we got signed it felt like we just got off the top rung of one big ladder and were now staring up from the bottom rung of the next even bigger ladder whilst someone was randomly dropping hammers down from the top of it
[/quote]

That's now in the 'BassChat Famous Quotes' thread.

Sterling work, Sir

[zbd1960]

[quote name='luckydog' timestamp='1473109987' post='3127082']
Every respect. But the Solti does it for me......!

LD
[/quote]I think the Barbirolli was the first to 'popularise' Mahler 6. The typical Barbirolli grunts can be irritating. I think I'm fond of it because it was the first recording of it I had (it used to be the Gramophone 'rosette' recording). I also have Solti and Rattle

[BigRedX]

[quote name='4stringslow' timestamp='1473169355' post='3127613']
I'd class myself as very much an outsider compared to that sort of experience so I may be talking tosh, but I've always thought that 'making it' in the music business is more about luck than talent, which makes it the tough nut to crack that it clearly is. The old thing about "it's not what you know, it's who you know" and variations on that theme.
[/quote]

But you could also repurpose that old golfing cliche about practice and luck to say that for bands the higher your profile the luckier you get. The more you do the more people you get to know and it's much easier to find yourself in the right place at the right time if you are out there gigging and promoting your band as often as possible.

Unfortunately, from my experience what has happened over the last 10 years or so is that the industry has reverted to something similar to it's pre-punk attitude where it was almost impossible to get noticed if your band doesn't have someone with a proven track record in it, combined with the fact that there seems to be a lot less right places and right times these days.

And to go back to your point about the record labels looking at music colleges for new talent; I imagine these days that music college teaches far more than just how to play your instrument and that the importance of image etc. is also on the curriculum. It makes sense for record labels to target artists who already know how to present themselves, rather than to have to go to the expense of hiring stylists and people to teach them how to get the best out of an interview when this has already been covered in the course.

Edited September 7, 2016 by BigRedX

[luckydog]

[quote name='zbd1960' timestamp='1473190167' post='3127899']I think the Barbirolli was the first to 'popularise' Mahler 6. The typical Barbirolli grunts can be irritating. I think I'm fond of it because it was the first recording of it I had (it used to be the Gramophone 'rosette' recording). I also have Solti and Rattle [/quote]

I don't know which was recorded/released first, but what if the other (Solti/Barbirolli) had heard it and said 'what is the point ?' as per the OP ? Or Rattle on the strength of hearing both of them ?! It's that they each had something to say and present that drove them, probably. Plus competing record labels urgently needed something strong in their catalog. It was Champagne Charlie stuff - classical recordings in the 60's - Mahler 6 on vinyl would have sold for about a week's wages for the average worker.......... the 60's Decca stuff includes perhaps the finest vinyl masterings ever published too........

LD

Edited September 7, 2016 by luckydog