I’m making a few cutbacks to old content and since I’m gearing up for a focus on studies/work next year, so will be focusing less on my blogging and creative pursuits
22
Nov
09
Cut-backs
With the internet allowing all music to be displayed almost on a level playing field, perhaps music will be more like a big competition, a tournament, if you will. So I suppose you’ve got to be in it to win it, as they say.
I’ve only been in one sports competition in the last few years, and that was a Korean martial art (when I was living in Pusan, Korea). I didn’t get past the first round, but I was somewhat of a hobbyist who practiced a few times a week after work, where as I was up against some pretty fit, competitive uni students. But it was a great experience, and I learned a lot about myself (and how unfit I really was -after 1 minute of sparring in the comp I was breathless).
I guess if you want to make money from your music in the ‘music biz’, you’re either just supernaturally talented and gifted, or you’ll have to be fiercely competitive, hardworking, dedicated (and talented).
Think about sportspeople who make a living: they have to be competitive, hardworking and dedicated, right? These days it seems pro sports has the training and lifestyle down to a science -even knowing when and how to rest for muscle development.
But arts people don’t like to see things that way sometimes, and sure, art is more about self expression, how can it be competitive? But if you watch successful artists, whether they be of paintings, novelists, songwriters, directors or what have you, they usually go the extra mile to come up with something worth the public attention. They’re often visionaries who know that to realize their vision they’ll have to break through a few barriers.
But back to the internet -as songwriters we see things like Myspace and Youtube and they offer ways for us to ‘compete’ in the great online tournament. Sure, for songwriters it’s not an even playing field when major bands have publicity machines and good production behind them, but I think there are also people searching on the internet for something inspirational. I, for one, like to check out the ‘cottage songwriters’, but that’s because I am one. And even if a few hundred or a few thousand listen to your song, that’s a privilege.
And it’s motivating to keep going, to write a song that just might connect with people, or inspire someone to cover it etc… And it’s interesting to see which songs may be more popular compared to others, though on something like Youtube you don’t know if it’s because of the song or the tags etc… But it’s still a great way to get feedback.
I’ve been busy looking into jobs and/or studies for next year, went for an interview and working things out, thus not much writing on the blog. Will have a bit more time over next few weeks for some updates though.
Cheers…
… is that it can get very distracting. For DIY musicians how do you divide the time between all your social networking jobs and actually practicing and doing music? I think it’s better to practice your music first and maintain a minimum presence on the net, updating only when you need to, rather than get distracting by the ‘marketing’ aspect of the net.
If you can provide good music, do something remarkable, write a great song or perform something well, then you can let people online do the recommending for you, rather than be focused on self promotion that sucks precious time needed for developing your own talents.
I’ve put a view more vids up on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/donakrv), and the great thing about Youtube is that everyone and everything is on Youtube. Music-wise it has both established artists and bands as well as all sorts of ’struggling musos’ and hobbyists.
And it means that we’re moving into a ‘prosumer’ society, where we’re less content to be passive absorbers of culture but rather creaters and consumers. We can participate more in the music and media and we’re becoming more aware of the creative and production process.
I guess it’s got good and bad news for struggling musos. The good news is Youtube and other sites offer an avenue of expression and public display of their work. That also allows them to gain feedback and keep trying and improving, and they can grow a grassroots fan-base in the process.
The bad news (and in a sense good news for listeners) is that since the barriers of entry are lowered, making music as a business is going to get more competitive and potential consumers are going to demand more in quality and quantity, for less of the price (depending on the selling model of the future, like Spotify etc…).
And another aspect of the bad news, for DIY musos anyway, is the amount of time needed to promote online to develop a good fan base. (Even if a song goes viral, is it going to be remembered after the next viral thing comes along 15 seconds later?). How much time will you have for music compared to updating profiles, writing blogs, posting pics and vids, answering fan-mail, twittering, joining in discussions etc etc? Perhaps it’s going to require skill time-management. But that’s another post…
01
Nov
09
Small cartoon about media barons
Andrew Dubber has written a responce to an article about Myspace showing some ‘love’, and I must say I agree with what he’s saying. His post is here:
(http://www.musicthinktank.com/blog/happy-quit-myspace-day.html)
Is it that News Corp don’t understand what Myspace is about? Are they just comparing it to Facebook? If you compare other free services like WordPress and Youtube, who provide all kinds of stats and info because the owners undstand the type of tools they are, Myspace seems to be losing the plot.
27
Oct
09
Comparing 2009 to 69
Interesting article I originally found in the Sydney Morning Herald, but the link led me here:
http://blogs.sunherald.com.au/whoweare/archives/2009/10/tribal_beatles.html
It gives the stats on the top sellers in music for these years with the observation of how dominant pop is. But the whole media environment has changed and it seems to be like comparing apples with oranges. The ‘top sellers’ mean less these days because people choose their own music and don’t have to follow the trends. This kind of pop seems almost irrelevent, like the remainders for those who just have no taste in music. If you aren’t particular about the food you eat, a big mac will do. It’s probably the world’s most eaten food item, but so what? It still sucks.
23
Oct
09
Three Zones of Musos
So some struggling muso says “this is my art. It’s a matter of opinion if you think it’s crap. I don’t need input, I don’t want it to be more commercial, it’s about self expression.”
Sure you can say that. There’s always that problem of finding that balance as a songwriter or artist, isn’t there? Should you make changes to your precious work to make it more ‘accessible’, more ‘in style’? Isn’t that selling out?
But don’t you want to make money from your music? Don’t you just dream about making a living from the thing you most love? Aren’t you underrated? Aren’t you ignored by those greedy and ignorant industry executives?
Actually, sometimes you may need to make changes to your song. Maybe those lyrics don’t do anything for listeners, only you. Maybe the melody is just too average. Maybe you need to work on your vocals. Maybe as a band, you’re just not tight enough. You can’t get the attention of your punters down at the pub because they’re too busy rudely indulging their private conversations.
As a ’struggling muso’ myself, I’ve been thinking about some of these issues, and I’ve come to the conclusion that there are three ‘zones’ of music creators, or three ‘types’ of music maker. For want of better labeling, I’ve called them the ‘B zone’, the ‘A zone’ and the ‘X zone’.
Let me deliver the bad news first. As struggling musos or ‘hobbyists’, we’re in the ‘X zone’. And the unfortunate main characteristic of this zone, is that we don’t make money from our music creating. But there is an upside, and I’ll get to the later.
The ‘B zone’ is the Business success side of music making. It’s basically what we consider 99% of the ‘music industry’. It’s music that’s economically viable, whether it’s Britney Spears, the Beatles, Metallica or some good-looking classical violinist who wants to sell us Vivaldi’s Four Seasons all over again. In fact it really covers all of popular music that can support an industry with pretty much no government assistance.
The ‘A zone’ is the Arty-farty side. It’s the starving musicians who have something profound and artistic to say but can’t get the traction of a big enough fan base to allow them to live so some organisation supports them with a grant. Maybe it’s a government grant or some cultural organisation, it doesn’t matter. What matters is some intellectual or cultural opinion leader thinks they deserve to be supported because of their contribution to society. They could be playing shards of glass, but if those in cultural circles appreciate and support them, they’re part of the ‘A zone’.
Often we in the X zone like to claim we’re in the A zone because we can’t get in the B zone. “Oh, I make really deep and insightful music, so insightful in fact that people just haven’t cottoned on to it yet”. We may not say that, but we think that.
Yet in all honesty we don’t really qualify for the A zone because we don’t suffer or starve for our art, and we don’t really have anything terribly profound to say without being awfully contrived. Secretly we just want to be popular, like a rock star.
Now was popular music ever really about artist integrity anyway? Only for those commercially success first, and even then does it really sell? Who really listens to John Lennon’s ‘Number Nine’ from start to finish anyway? That’s the track left out when you play the album.
The B zone is built on an industry, and without that industry, the artists are nothing. Commercial success is a necessity. And it’s not even the quality of songwriting, it’s the perceived quality of songwriting and performance that matters. It’s entertainment, and it has to be good enough to entertain the masses, otherwise there’s no money in it.
So it’s back to the X zone. But the good news is, the whole culture of the internet and social networking is affecting our culture of art and entertainment. We’ve becoming ‘prosumers’, proactive and interactive in our cultural pursuits. We don’t have to sit in frustration wondering why the music industry ignores us, because we can get out and publish/perform/express our music online anyway.
And the limit is only down to us and our dedication. There’s always room to improve, to write a better song and stick it up on Youtube, to make a better mix, record a better solo etc… Maybe one day people will want to buy it, maybe not. It probably depends on whether you persevere or not.
Or maybe they want the songs you least like –if it’s not your career you can be self indulgent anyway. If you want to do a 10 minute atonal metal solo, who’s to stop you? And there’s probably a tribe out there somewhere who appreciates your atonal solos anyway. Let’s glory in our X zone!
