The music industry and signing bands

[Linus27]

Been talking to a few friends recently who are in the music industry about the current state of play and what seems to be going on at the moment with signing bands etc.

In my day, back in the 90's when we signed, we basically gigged everywhere up and down the country, recorded a CD, promoted it, got some interest from record companies, did another 101 gigs and finally got a deal. It was hard work but the main objective was to gig like hell and build a fan base. It all seems to be very different these days. One friend told me that a few years ago, the majors signed 200 bands, the following year 100 and last year only 8. They seem to be more interested in your business model and if it can work rather than, is this band good, have a following, good song etc. I've been told that labels won't touch bands unless they have proved their product works. So they are looking for artists who are doing it for themselves and they will then act as business development managers rather than labels. I was also told that nobody listens to CD's sent on from bands anymore. The route in is via showing that your business model works or if really lucky you have a label approved artist manager on board who can convince the label to take them on early (very rare at the moment)

So, with bands having to do everything for themselves, I have been told that they need to spend at least £15k on their business model. This is the minimum to get on the radar. This breaks down to around to 7K minimum on an album (13 tracks), a Video 4K (and needs to be good for that), Photoshoot £500 (needs full makeup and clothing and location - you can see when things are done cheap and it doesn't work) plus PR £1500 a month for three months. Now to me, this is pretty shocking as where do unsigned bands find that sort of money. As said to me though, you need to invest in this business model and show you are serious or accept you are just doing it for fun. With regards to the album, You need to have a half decent studio and engineer/producer on board to get anyone interested. There are currently only about ten people with genuine inroads into labels at the moment, 7 are producers and 3 are managers. I then questioned about these home studios and the increase in modern technology but I was told that home recording is a complete load of crap. Fine if you are a DJ but no artist is actually signed on the fact they did the album in their bedroom or garage. That material never gets released to the point where it can achieve anything. It's hype pure and simple and it's been used twice so it will no longer get anybody a deal or a inch of press space.

Now I am sure that some bands will be able to have a percetage of success by doing stuff themselves, home recording, promoting, gigging etc but to what level I don't know. I'm sure some very clever people will be able to put the time and effort in to really promoting themselves but taking it to the next level might involve bigger investment. However, if they can show that their business model works, then they may be onto a winner.

I then asked about is gigging still as important. I was told yes and no. You have a better chance at getting seen at events if you are there but in reality to get to the ones where the people that matter are you need to have been on the circuit for a year slogging away until you have a two to three thousand strong following. Then the right people will turn up. You'll meet lots of 'industry' people along the way at gigs but they are the bottom feeders who actually can't do alot for you and work in the admin dept looking for a band that might get them noticed internally. Labels don't really have A & R guys travelling the country looking for bands these days.

So, not really sure what to make of it all. In some ways, it does make lots of sense. The band has a proven business model, then why not invest in it as both artist and label should come out good. However, there must be so much missed opportunities and spending a minimum of £15k must be impossible for most artists/bands.

Anyone have any experience of this or found things to be different??

[johnnylager]

It's not called the music [i]business[/i] for nowt, indeed it was a lot easier in the late 80's / early 90's.

[Stylon Pilson]

If what your friend says is true, then the music industry is in even worse condition that I thought. Once upon a time they would put a lot of effort into promoting bands, and take all the profit for themselves. But what your friend has described suggests that they still want the profit, but they want the band to do all the hard work themselves.

I don't know why anyone would even want to be signed to a major any more.

S.P.

[OldGit]

All of those points assume that signing to a major is the way to go.

The fact that the charts and concert halls and festivals are full of bands suggests that being signed by a major isn't the way to be "successful" these days - of course it depends on what you call success.

[Linus27]

[quote name='Stylon Pilson' post='491416' date='May 18 2009, 02:46 PM']If what your friend says is true, then the music industry is in even worse condition that I thought. Once upon a time they would put a lot of effort into promoting bands, and take all the profit for themselves. But what your friend has described suggests that they still want the profit, but they want the band to do all the hard work themselves.

I don't know why anyone would even want to be signed to a major any more.

S.P.[/quote]

The impression I get is there are lots of different business models, ranging from the artist being more like a product with their name on foods, cars, phones, bikes etc right down to the band doing everything apart from manufacture, distribution and some marketing. Lots of different models inbetween though.

[maxrossell]

Yeah, all the smart-arses who started stealing music ten years ago and swearing blind that it wouldn't have any effect can go shove it.

Labels won't sign bands on a standard recording contract anymore because the minute a record is released it gets pirated and everyone has access to it for free.

Record labels are now trying out other tacks to keep the cashflow happening, like with their existing roster drawing up new contracts where in exchange for more royalties and marketing support, the label gets to take percentage on things they normally wouldn't get, like merchandising and endorsements. But because they're having to put more work into bigger acts, they're putting far less into smaller acts.

We all understood a few years ago that labels would drop anyone who didn't score a direct hit with their first record. Now it's plausible that labels will only sign people in the first place if they've already proven they can actually shift numbers.

Anyone who picks up a guitar today better understand that he has a better chance of winning the lottery than making it big as a recording artist.

[Linus27]

[quote name='OldGit' post='491424' date='May 18 2009, 02:51 PM']All of those points assume that signing to a major is the way to go.

The fact that the charts and concert halls and festivals are full of bands suggests that being signed by a major isn't the way to be "successful" these days - of course it depends on what you call success.[/quote]

How true is that? How many bands playing at festivals and in the charts are actually not signed to a major and are making a living or success at what they are doing? Would be interesting to see.

[El_JimBob]

I can't see any sense in wanting to be part of the game - the whole diy ethic appeals far more to me - we've recorded and produced a cd for very little and without owing anybody money, we're promoting our own shows, our product is on sale on iTunes and we can play where we want when we want without some industry bod looming over us saying yay or nay. Music remains for us a wonderful executive hobby with enough of an income to make it worthwhile, and we have the time to pursue far more meaningful careers that guarantee and deliver far, far more, without the one thing we enjoy becoming 'hard work' for us....

The 'business' itself looks to be exploiting this current fad of self sufficiency amongst bands - doesn't that make the whole thing seem even more sinister? We do all the hard work for them, then they cherry-pick what they want.

Pah, it aint worth it bro - get a proper job

[OldGit]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='491429' date='May 18 2009, 02:53 PM']Anyone who picks up a guitar today better understand that he has a better chance of winning the lottery than making it big as a recording artist.[/quote]


That's not changed.. There were always millions of weekend warriors for every one hit wonder.

[Linus27]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='491429' date='May 18 2009, 02:53 PM']Yeah, all the smart-arses who started stealing music ten years ago and swearing blind that it wouldn't have any effect can go shove it.

Labels won't sign bands on a standard recording contract anymore because the minute a record is released it gets pirated and everyone has access to it for free.

Record labels are now trying out other tacks to keep the cashflow happening, like with their existing roster drawing up new contracts where in exchange for more royalties and marketing support, the label gets to take percentage on things they normally wouldn't get, like merchandising and endorsements. But because they're having to put more work into bigger acts, they're putting far less into smaller acts.

We all understood a few years ago that labels would drop anyone who didn't score a direct hit with their first record. Now it's plausible that labels will only sign people in the first place if they've already proven they can actually shift numbers.

Anyone who picks up a guitar today better understand that he has a better chance of winning the lottery than making it big as a recording artist.[/quote]

Surely, if an artist uses his noodle, works hard and comes up with a good business model and shows its a success by showing sales, packed gigs, website hits etc, then they have a good chance of getting backing from a label?? Is it like cutting out the old fashioned A & R man where instead of them trying to work with you and convince the label to sign you, your basically doign it yourself or via a manager.

[Earbrass]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='491429' date='May 18 2009, 02:53 PM']Anyone who picks up a guitar today better understand that he has a better chance of winning the lottery than making it big as a recording artist.[/quote]

But maybe that's no bad thing. Imagine a world where people only made music because they loved making music, instead of seeing it as a way to achieve celebrity and riches. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one... ;-)

[WILD FROG SHOT]

[quote name='Stylon Pilson' post='491416' date='May 18 2009, 02:46 PM']I don't know why anyone would even want to be signed to a major any more.

S.P.[/quote]

I gather it's like the worst loan you never signed up for...

[maxrossell]

[quote name='OldGit' post='491439' date='May 18 2009, 03:01 PM']That's not changed.. There were always millions of weekend warriors for every one hit wonder.[/quote]

No, I mean literally.

Now we have weekend warriors like myself and plenty others on here, and who else? Oh, yeah, thirty thousand annual X-Factor contestants, who by the sole virtue that they're prepared to make cretins of themselves on TV will get more of a look-in than people who write original songs and would rather not start their careers with being publicly spat on by management.

It sounds like a glib thing to say, but if you look at it in job-market terms, it's the equivalent of having a hundred extra applicants for every position, most of them prepared to work for half the salary you want and no holidays. Then factor in that there are far fewer vacant positions because the sector doesn't make anywhere near as much money as it used to.

[maxrossell]

[quote name='Earbrass' post='491444' date='May 18 2009, 03:05 PM']But maybe that's no bad thing. Imagine a world where people only made music because they loved making music, instead of seeing it as a way to achieve celebrity and riches. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one... ;-)[/quote]

The problem is that the majority of people still getting into the business are the ones doing it for the celebrity and the cash. Those of us in the business who do it for the love of the art are fewer and further between than ever before.

Edited May 18, 2009 by maxrossell

[chris_b]

[quote name='Linus27' post='491440' date='May 18 2009, 03:02 PM']....Surely, if an artist uses his noodle, works hard and comes up with a good business model and shows its a success by showing sales, packed gigs, website hits etc, then they have a good chance of getting backing from a label??....[/quote]
No.

Bands are a pain to the music business because they have to talk to, and get agreement from, several people. As a general rule the labels only want to deal with one person. If you have a singer with a good voice who writes he'll get signed and you won't. Your P45 will be in the post. But if he doesn't fit the current look or "shape" he won't get signed either.

Of course some bands do get signed but most do not!

Read this. It sheds some light on how the Arctic Monkeys "made it"; [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Monkeys"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Monkeys[/url]

[MacDaddy]

re. the bit in the OP about home recordings. The band with 'CCTV' in one of their album titles, lists where the album tracks were recorded, and it was mostly home done, but professionally mastered.

There will always be exceptions to the rule, and new bands will make it. And this will still give the false glimmer of hope to the rest of us.

Edited May 18, 2009 by MacDaddy

[JakeBrownBass]

[quote name='Linus27' post='491393' date='May 18 2009, 02:26 PM']Been talking to a few friends recently who are in the music industry about the current state of play and what seems to be going on at the moment with signing bands etc.

In my day, back in the 90's when we signed, we basically gigged everywhere up and down the country, recorded a CD, promoted it, got some interest from record companies, did another 101 gigs and finally got a deal. It was hard work but the main objective was to gig like hell and build a fan base. It all seems to be very different these days. One friend told me that a few years ago, the majors signed 200 bands, the following year 100 and last year only 8. They seem to be more interested in your business model and if it can work rather than, is this band good, have a following, good song etc. I've been told that labels won't touch bands unless they have proved their product works. So they are looking for artists who are doing it for themselves and they will then act as business development managers rather than labels. I was also told that nobody listens to CD's sent on from bands anymore. The route in is via showing that your business model works or if really lucky you have a label approved artist manager on board who can convince the label to take them on early (very rare at the moment)

So, with bands having to do everything for themselves, I have been told that they need to spend at least £15k on their business model. This is the minimum to get on the radar. This breaks down to around to 7K minimum on an album (13 tracks), a Video 4K (and needs to be good for that), Photoshoot £500 (needs full makeup and clothing and location - you can see when things are done cheap and it doesn't work) plus PR £1500 a month for three months. Now to me, this is pretty shocking as where do unsigned bands find that sort of money. As said to me though, you need to invest in this business model and show you are serious or accept you are just doing it for fun. With regards to the album, You need to have a half decent studio and engineer/producer on board to get anyone interested. There are currently only about ten people with genuine inroads into labels at the moment, 7 are producers and 3 are managers. I then questioned about these home studios and the increase in modern technology but I was told that home recording is a complete load of crap. Fine if you are a DJ but no artist is actually signed on the fact they did the album in their bedroom or garage. That material never gets released to the point where it can achieve anything. It's hype pure and simple and it's been used twice so it will no longer get anybody a deal or a inch of press space.

Now I am sure that some bands will be able to have a percetage of success by doing stuff themselves, home recording, promoting, gigging etc but to what level I don't know. I'm sure some very clever people will be able to put the time and effort in to really promoting themselves but taking it to the next level might involve bigger investment. However, if they can show that their business model works, then they may be onto a winner.

I then asked about is gigging still as important. I was told yes and no. You have a better chance at getting seen at events if you are there but in reality to get to the ones where the people that matter are you need to have been on the circuit for a year slogging away until you have a two to three thousand strong following. Then the right people will turn up. You'll meet lots of 'industry' people along the way at gigs but they are the bottom feeders who actually can't do alot for you and work in the admin dept looking for a band that might get them noticed internally. Labels don't really have A & R guys travelling the country looking for bands these days.

So, not really sure what to make of it all. In some ways, it does make lots of sense. The band has a proven business model, then why not invest in it as both artist and label should come out good. However, there must be so much missed opportunities and spending a minimum of £15k must be impossible for most artists/bands.

Anyone have any experience of this or found things to be different??[/quote]

Another very common alternative is to just record a 5 track ep with one lead single. You record all this yourself, print & press it and get the entire package together. Forget about a video for now. Then you approach an Indie label to sign you on the single/ep deal so the only responsabilty they are taking is the PR of it.
If this is a success, its much easier to then take this proven package to a major label, and then they'll be more confident in the product (band) and see that it works. If you can't get through the indie single & ep, there's no way in hell a majors going to look at you, unless your scouting for girls

But then again, in these times, you don't want to sign to a major label, majors are falling while indie's are booming and that alone says it all.

Almost all established bands have been doing this for years once they have had a bit of success, they record & do everything out of house, then take it all to the majors where they distribute it. Oasis did it on the last album, nickleback have been doing it for years.

Then you have McFly, who had all their major success, then when they were established enough they left the label, created their own label and now release everything out of their pockets.

-Jake

[Stylon Pilson]

[quote name='MacDaddy' post='491468' date='May 18 2009, 03:30 PM']re. the bit in the OP about home recordings. The band with 'CCTV' in one of their album titles, lists where the ablum tracks were recorded, and it was mostly home done, but professionally mastered.[/quote]

Hard-Fi? [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_of_cctv"]Stars Of CCTV[/url] is the album that I think you are referring to.

S.P.

[MacDaddy]

[quote name='Stylon Pilson' post='491475' date='May 18 2009, 03:34 PM']Hard-Fi? [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_of_cctv"]Stars Of CCTV[/url] is the album that I think you are referring to.

S.P.[/quote]
that's the fella!

[ashevans09]

[quote name='WILD FROG SHOT' post='491446' date='May 18 2009, 03:06 PM']I gather it's like the worst loan you never signed up for...[/quote]

Too true. A guy I know's band got offered a deal a while ago and apparently it broke down to something like this:

They give you so many thousand for equipment and recording etc as a loan
They do this with about 10 bands
Once the records are made they'll promote maybe 1 or 2 of them and do nothing for the others
They drop whoever doesn't come up with the goods

This then leaves the majority in the position of no record deal and thousands of pounds worth of debt.

Not to mention the whole idea of pay to play. I was reading an interview which said back in the day you used to pay $150K to get onto the Ozzfest tour. Crazy amount of money.

It seems it isn't worth being in a major nowadays unless you're already in a well established and big band (U2, Coldplay etc).

Bah.

That said though, does anyone have info on how the indie labels operate?

[ashevans09]

[quote name='jake_tenfloors' post='491469' date='May 18 2009, 03:31 PM']Then you have McFly, who had all their major success, then when they were established enough they left the label, created their own label and now release everything out of their pockets.[/quote]

Perfect game plan. Nothing but respect for them

[MacDaddy]

[quote name='ashevans09' post='491482' date='May 18 2009, 03:42 PM']Perfect game plan. Nothing but respect for them [/quote]

I remember the ads when the band was being formed. The fat blond guy was left over from when the management formed Busted, so they formed McFly around him. The ads were in The Stage and the NME. I was way over the age limit but thought it might have been a laugh to turn up.

[OldGit]

[quote name='maxrossell' post='491450' date='May 18 2009, 03:09 PM']No, I mean literally.

Now we have weekend warriors like myself and plenty others on here, and who else? Oh, yeah, thirty thousand annual X-Factor contestants, who by the sole virtue that they're prepared to make cretins of themselves on TV will get more of a look-in than people who write original songs and would rather not start their careers with being publicly spat on by management.

It sounds like a glib thing to say, but if you look at it in job-market terms, it's the equivalent of having a hundred extra applicants for every position, most of them prepared to work for half the salary you want and no holidays. Then factor in that there are far fewer vacant positions because the sector doesn't make anywhere near as much money as it used to.[/quote]


Not changed at all.

Used to be Opportunity Knocks, now it's X factor and Britain' got some talent, really.
These are lrgely different markets to bands that get signed through building a following and proving they can do it on a stage in a pub rather than on telly.
It's just different ways to get noticed and for someone to reckon they can make money out of you. Today it's Simon Cowell, back then it was Paul McCartney or Micky Most or Stock, Aitkinson and Waterman, or Chas Chandler or Brian Epstein

Bobby Crush and Mary Hopkin both converted Op Knocks winnings into one hit wonders and pretty good pensions .. millions of others auditioned and got nowhere.

Ever since the Rock Island Line and the skiffle groups in the 50's showed that it was easy to make a song that topped the charts, and you no longer had to play as well as the jazz bands, kids have been strapping on guitars and thinking that will make them Elvis, or Lonnie or whomever..

The problem I can see here is that people are still thinking that signing to a big label is the only way to be a success.
That's clearly rubbish and the alternative ways are much better now.

[Linus27]

[quote name='OldGit' post='491494' date='May 18 2009, 03:55 PM']Not changed at all.

Used to be Opportunity Knocks, now it's X factor and Britain' got some talent, really.
These are lrgely different markets to bands that get signed through building a following and proving they can do it on a stage in a pub rather than on telly.
It's just different ways to get noticed and for someone to reckon they can make money out of you. Today it's Simon Cowell, back then it was Paul McCartney or Micky Most or Stock, Aitkinson and Waterman, or Chas Chandler or Brian Epstein

Bobby Crush and Mary Hopkin both converted Op Knocks winnings into one hit wonders and pretty good pensions .. millions of others auditioned and got nowhere.

Ever since the Rock Island Line and the skiffle groups in the 50's showed that it was easy to make a song that topped the charts, and you no longer had to play as well as the jazz bands, kids have been strapping on guitars and thinking that will make them Elvis, or Lonnie or whomever..

The problem I can see here is that people are still thinking that signing to a big label is the only way to be a success.
That's clearly rubbish and the alternative ways are much better now.[/quote]

I was of the understanding that Indie labels all pretty much died out some years ago and all thats left is the Major's who are struggling. Is this not the case. Is the indie label scene pretty strong still?

[OldGit]

[quote name='Linus27' post='491501' date='May 18 2009, 04:04 PM']I was of the understanding that Indie labels all pretty much died out some years ago and all thats left is the Major's who are struggling. Is this not the case. Is the indie label scene pretty strong still?[/quote]


I was thinking more of the DIY approach.