Music distribution in a CD-less society

[.:.impossible]

Harols, I think what we'll see (and are seeing), is the decline/fall of bars/restaurants/clubs as the primary source for local live performances, to be replaced by indepenent "venues" (which may or may not function as "clubs") which bands themselves rent for a night, week, whatever. In a sense, it's a succumbing to the odious "pay to play" concept, but on the other hand, if all concerned are shrewd, it can turn into a win-win.

One thing's for sure - musicians can no longer assume that there will be places to play, places that need to have a band in there, nor that people are going to be looking for live music when they go out. So what we gotta do is hustle more to create gigs, and then hustle some more to create an interest. A simple background/cocktail trio w/lounge vocalist on weekends is no longer going to be enough to get it done. Nobody (well, hardly anybody, there's always a niche...) really cares anymore, and when nobody cares, there ain't gonna be no money...

This is gonna affect jazz too. Just getting up there all non-plussed and just "playing tunes"...who cares at this point? Look at the numbers...Cats gotta get more presentation conscious and material consicous. Even with that, it's gonna be an uphill climb, but without that...

Dude, as someone who lives in a small city with a non-existent music scene, this is where its at one hundred percent. The HOUSE model... look at the raves of the eighties and nineties. They were never in "clubs". Not where I grew up anyway.

The musicians that played in the background did it to themselves dammit. I get so fired up about this type of thing when talking to young musicians who complain about scale of pay and venues. ORNETTE COLEMAN DID IT! WHY SHOULDN'T YOU. ORGANIZE. Fuck the bar owners. They've got nothing FOR you. That isn't changing.

[Harold_Z]

I wish this was the case, but at his point (and I live in the NYC metropolitan area) venues that feature live music are at an all time low. there are some- not nearly enough- and the pay is 30 years out of date. I don't see any dynamic coming that will cause bar owners to shell out more bucks, and the truth of the matter is, they aren't doing that well either.

Maybe we should not expect serious music to be made any more in areas which are so expensive. Stockholm is very small in comparsion, but in the suburbs there are more and more places with live music popping up.

I agree. I have had so many conversations over the past couple of years with musicians aspiring to move to Brooklyn, blah blah blah. I say "Grow your own roots! Stop trying to climb somebody else's tree!"

Richmond, VA is a great example of how a local scene can flourish.

“The first time (Steven Bernstein) heard our charts he said it would be impossible to put together a group in New York who could play them,” White says. “There are an amazing group of musicians in Richmond; just because we are a small city doesn’t mean we’re the B-team.”

Source

OK...but what are you guys saying? I'm not a person who believes that all the good musicians are only around the big cities. I know the world is full of good players who never wanted to leave their chosen areas. But is your point that the cost of living is less away from places like NYC, so therefore the musicians can work for less money? If so, I don't see how that helps matters.

[Jim Alfredson]

http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-1030...?ref=technology

Interesting article about Prince.

On another note, there has seemingly been an influx lately of "musicians" who are financially secure (ie, supported by rich parents, uncles, etc.) that do not need gigs as income and thus go into venues and undercut the hell out of everybody, which of course hurts those of us who do need that income. How can you compete with someone when you need to make X number of dollars and they go in for nothing?

[.:.impossible]

http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-1030...?ref=technology

Interesting article about Prince.

On another note, there has seemingly been an influx lately of "musicians" who are financially secure (ie, supported by rich parents, uncles, etc.) that do not need gigs as income and thus go into venues and undercut the hell out of everybody, which of course hurts those of us who do need that income. How can you compete with someone when you need to make X number of dollars and they go in for nothing?

Stop competing I guess. Can they play a b-3 like you? Can they write music like you? Eventually, the truth comes marching in.

What is a fair price to sit down in a chair and listen to someone play music?

[.:.impossible]

I wish this was the case, but at his point (and I live in the NYC metropolitan area) venues that feature live music are at an all time low. there are some- not nearly enough- and the pay is 30 years out of date. I don't see any dynamic coming that will cause bar owners to shell out more bucks, and the truth of the matter is, they aren't doing that well either.

Maybe we should not expect serious music to be made any more in areas which are so expensive. Stockholm is very small in comparsion, but in the suburbs there are more and more places with live music popping up.

I agree. I have had so many conversations over the past couple of years with musicians aspiring to move to Brooklyn, blah blah blah. I say "Grow your own roots! Stop trying to climb somebody else's tree!"

Richmond, VA is a great example of how a local scene can flourish.

“The first time (Steven Bernstein) heard our charts he said it would be impossible to put together a group in New York who could play them,” White says. “There are an amazing group of musicians in Richmond; just because we are a small city doesn’t mean we’re the B-team.”

Source

OK...but what are you guys saying? I'm not a person who believes that all the good musicians are only around the big cities. I know the world is full of good players who never wanted to leave their chosen areas. But is your point that the cost of living is less away from places like NYC, so therefore the musicians can work for less money? If so, I don't see how that helps matters.

I guess I'm thinking that a venue has a much better chance of survival if it doesn't have to pay NYC rents. Paying $100 to a musician in Charlottesville, VA goes a lot further than paying a musician $100 in Williamsburg, NY. Not work for less, but live for less.

Edited November 14, 2007 by .:.impossible

[Morganized]

What do you mean by "distribution has become in large part ubiquitous"?

"The money for the performer will come from llive performances, concerts, dances, etc. We will probably see a step back to the traveling bands, city to city doing gigs....on the road a lot....I think you will begin to see an increase in smaller venue's, including clubs, because the performers will no longer be able to depend on much revenue from record sales. As for jazz, probably less will change. Many parts of the jazz business have been this way for some time. "

Isn't this how it has always been? Dances? That IS back to the future...

Impossible

What I meant to imply is that the distribution goes computer to computer vs. the old model from production to wholesaler to retailer.....Now it may go from artist to student to another student to brother to friend etc. etc. Or from producer to consumer directly, no middleman of any kind. A very fractured form of distribution and difficult to capture profits at any particular level. Apple and others have done a good job of trying but I doubt it will hold forever. Customers are already demanding changes. Thus the need for the performer to make his/her living through live performing. Like in the days of 78's when something much less than a full performance could be captured on record, the recording was often used to generate interest in the performer. A marketing tool so to speak. Performers played at colleges, local gyms, bars, wherever. Later the trend was reversed, at least for the bigger acts who made their living through the sale of records. In that case the performance became the marketing tool. Get out there on the road to sell the record!

Locally I have noticed an increase of smaller venues for traveling bands that cannot fill the large auditoriums or stadiums. You see some new 3-5000 seat venues. Old movie theaters redone that offer 1000 seats or less. Some of the larger bars/nightclubs may have a traveling act in a venue that can accomodate 250-300. And yes, there is a small selection of bars/restaurants that continue to offer some space to the local performers playing to crowds of 25- 100. It seems to me that there has been an increase in the intermediate size venue and even more are in the planning stage. You may see a rebirth in the regional circuits where more promoters/PR firms/Marketing firms have some live acts that he/they book into appropriate venues throughout a particular part of the country. The new "chittlin" circuit. As more musicians make a living through performing, more venues will be needed. Live music could be the beneficiary of the decline in the record companies. Live performances could generate a new interest in music. The glass may be half full instead of half empty. Stay optimistic.

There are not many traveling jazz acts that can command the large venues and thus ,they may in fact, be less inclined to feel the changes.

Edited November 14, 2007 by Morganized

[.:.impossible]

I see what you are saying... still, it isn't like you just put your music out there for free and suddenly the entire world is listening. the market is absolutely flooded. with free water.

about live performance, most people with expendable income and an interest in live music have to work at 8AMdf. whoever is booking these bands is ignoring this simple fact and musicians wonder why twenty college kids and the wait staff from next door show up at 11PM, take shots at the bar and talk through their entire gig.

[Jazzmoose]

I found this particularly interesting (even though I don't necessarily agree with all of what the author has to say)...

http://www.demonbaby.com/blog/

Interesting read; thanks Shane!

[Jim Alfredson]

http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-1030...?ref=technology

Interesting article about Prince.

On another note, there has seemingly been an influx lately of "musicians" who are financially secure (ie, supported by rich parents, uncles, etc.) that do not need gigs as income and thus go into venues and undercut the hell out of everybody, which of course hurts those of us who do need that income. How can you compete with someone when you need to make X number of dollars and they go in for nothing?

Stop competing I guess. Can they play a b-3 like you? Can they write music like you? Eventually, the truth comes marching in.

You're assuming that success and/or making a living is directly related to how good you are. Unfortunately, that's not really the case.

What is a fair price to sit down in a chair and listen to someone play music?

Good question. Considering the proliferation of DJs, many people would probably say "nothing". I tell you, it's a real trip to be playing a tune, people are getting into it, dancing like crazy, laughing, smiling, having fun... and then when you finish the tune, they turn away and sit down. No applause, no recognition, nothing.

It's like they don't realize the music is coming from real people as opposed to a CD.

[Harold_Z]

I wish this was the case, but at his point (and I live in the NYC metropolitan area) venues that feature live music are at an all time low. there are some- not nearly enough- and the pay is 30 years out of date. I don't see any dynamic coming that will cause bar owners to shell out more bucks, and the truth of the matter is, they aren't doing that well either.

Maybe we should not expect serious music to be made any more in areas which are so expensive. Stockholm is very small in comparsion, but in the suburbs there are more and more places with live music popping up.

I agree. I have had so many conversations over the past couple of years with musicians aspiring to move to Brooklyn, blah blah blah. I say "Grow your own roots! Stop trying to climb somebody else's tree!"

Richmond, VA is a great example of how a local scene can flourish.

“The first time (Steven Bernstein) heard our charts he said it would be impossible to put together a group in New York who could play them,” White says. “There are an amazing group of musicians in Richmond; just because we are a small city doesn’t mean we’re the B-team.”

Source

OK...but what are you guys saying? I'm not a person who believes that all the good musicians are only around the big cities. I know the world is full of good players who never wanted to leave their chosen areas. But is your point that the cost of living is less away from places like NYC, so therefore the musicians can work for less money? If so, I don't see how that helps matters.

I guess I'm thinking that a venue has a much better chance of survival if it doesn't have to pay NYC rents. Paying $100 to a musician in Charlottesville, VA goes a lot further than paying a musician $100 in Williamsburg, NY. Not work for less, but live for less.

Agreed, but $100, even six nights a week only comes to $30,000 a year. Rough to get by on anywhere in the US. So the end result is day gigs for musicians - one way or another. And guys can be good musicians and have a day gig. I do it and I still play decently - but not as well as when I worked music full time. Jim S. makes a good point about having to hustle more and (I paraphrase) get past jazz gigs being just a jam session. That's where entertainment and showmanship in one guise or another comes in, but we still need venues and that loss is to the working musician more profound that cds hitting the wall.

[JSngry]

The $100/night would need to be supplemented by other merchandise sales, either in the club or online.

Yeah, it would be a bitch, but frankly, I think we got too many people playing "professionally" now as it is. Just because you can doesn't mean you should...

All I'm saying is that if the net result of all this is to thin the herd, to reduce the ill-effects of "expansion" (just like in sports, the overall bar drops when the talent pool gets too big...), then hey.

Hey.

[Harold_Z]

The $100/night would need to be supplemented by other merchandise sales, either in the club or online.

Yeah, it would be a bitch, but frankly, I think we got too many people playing "professionally" now as it is. Just because you can doesn't mean you should...

All I'm saying is that if the net result of all this is to thin the herd, to reduce the ill-effects of "expansion" (just like in sports, the overall bar drops when the talent pool gets too big...), then hey.

Hey.

Yeah..but about the too many people playing professionally...how do you stop that? I know bandleaders that hire guys that shouldn't be playing - how are civiilians going to weed them out? They're not going to leave voluntarily. To say nothing of bandleaders that are bandleaders because nobody would hire them.

[Morganized]

I see what you are saying... still, it isn't like you just put your music out there for free and suddenly the entire world is listening. the market is absolutely flooded. with free water.

That's what the PR/Marketing Firm/Record Company is for.

about live performance, most people with expendable income and an interest in live music have to work at 8AMdf. whoever is booking these bands is ignoring this simple fact and musicians wonder why twenty college kids and the wait staff from next door show up at 11PM, take shots at the bar and talk through their entire gig.

Agreed!

[Jim Alfredson]

$100 a night is what my dad was making 30 years ago in this biz. I average a bit more ($125 a night) and that's still pretty shitty when you factor in $3 a gallon gas and the wear and tear on your vehicle.

I don't know what the answer is; I do know that since people can get something for nothing, that's what they'll do. So you have to try and make it another way.

[Harold_Z]

$100 a night is what my dad was making 30 years ago in this biz. I average a bit more ($125 a night) and that's still pretty shitty when you factor in $3 a gallon gas and the wear and tear on your vehicle.

I don't know what the answer is; I do know that since people can get something for nothing, that's what they'll do. So you have to try and make it another way.

True. And in the shitty state of this business I consider myself fortunate to have a decent lounge gig on the weekends where I can play a variety of music with a few other good musicians. I feel like the last of the mohicans. The bread is as discussed above and I keep my chops in a state of almost decent. I prefer that to a rehearsed club date band where the bread would be better, but where I would most likely get fired after a few gigs for being a dissident.

[GARussell]

It's not evident to me that all types of music will follow the same model.

In rural areas there seem to be plenty of bars with country bands that play for folks who want to go out and spend the evening dancing. That might be a two nights per week gig, but nowadays the band can easily cut a CD and sell it at the bar to augment its income. Those bands can be as loud as the crowd feels comfortable with, and they won't mind people talking through the music while some dance.

My old girlfriend was a flautist who played weddings and other society gigs. Her day job was teaching kids, but it could have just as easily been something else.

I'm out of touch with the rock scene. The impression I get is that the rock audience is the paying-customer base that the majors came to depend upon and are now losing their grip on. I can't say that I care if the rock scene goes down the toilet; but maybe the model to look at here is what the Canterbury prog rock groups of the past thirty years have been doing. Granted, there haven't been many of those groups, and none of those musicians are millionaires, but they are finding venues to play. In England, the members of Manfred Mann reformed a few years ago without Mann himself and call themselves The Manfreds. They go on tour all the time and play clubs, and have recorded for their own "label" at least three albums. Their singer Paul Jones said, "The music industry doesn't bother us, and we don't bother them."

It seems to me that what has changed is the kids' willingness to pay for and value rock music. Over the decades there have been many rock groups whose members were set for life (if they didn't blow their money) based upon only one hit album and the touring off it. I met a man about 1970 whose son was a member of Iron Butterfly, and he told me that his son was set for life, while the members of Jefferson Airplane blew their money on cars and such.

Now if the biggest change for the musicians is that rock musicians can no longer expect to be set for life because they had one hit album, I don't see that as a crying shame.

I agree with the poster above (Noj?) who said that the world will always want its Britneys du jour. Hannah Montana, here we come. I don't feel that the success of ephemeral teen idols is relevant to any art I might want to listen to.

So that brings us to the music we like, mainstream jazz. What is changing here? The push of the 90s is over, and I don't think downloading has any relevance to that. Few Americans want to listen to it. They don't want to buy the records and they don't want to go to clubs. The trend over the past five years has been toward self-produced albums like Big O Records. I'd like to see the sales figures of CDBaby for such projects.

I think I read in Art Pepper's Straight Life the comment that in the 50s in all of America there were only 400 jazz musicians good enough to record, and they all knew each other. Maybe that 400 figure is still true today.

Anyway, I see mainstream jazz to be the product of starving artists. So I don't see the model for country bands and rock bands to be the same as for jazz bands. Nearly all jazz musicians will need to find a day job because there isn't much of a market for them, not because of changes in the record industry. The few stars will continue to play auditoriums, and record for small labels like Mack Avenue and Cryptogramophone.

Edited November 14, 2007 by GARussell

[BruceH]

What will happen, I wonder, when the consumer can copy anything (any material object) as easily and cheaply as they now copy music?

[Daniel A]

OK...but what are you guys saying? I'm not a person who believes that all the good musicians are only around the big cities. I know the world is full of good players who never wanted to leave their chosen areas. But is your point that the cost of living is less away from places like NYC, so therefore the musicians can work for less money? If so, I don't see how that helps matters.

I guess I'm thinking that a venue has a much better chance of survival if it doesn't have to pay NYC rents.

Yes, that is what I'm thinking as well. There are many kinds of businesses that can't be run downtown in a big city these days.

I'm not saying that $100 a night should be enough for a musician though. But:

Yeah..but about the too many people playing professionally...how do you stop that?

I suppose you can't. If there's too many, some have to stop. And if people can't hear the difference between real and fake musicians, those asking for less money will get the gigs.

[Jim Alfredson]

So that brings us to the music we like, mainstream jazz. What is changing here? The push of the 90s is over, and I don't think downloading has any relevance to that. Few Americans want to listen to it. They don't want to buy the records and they don't want to go to clubs. The trend over the past five years has been toward self-produced albums like Big O Records. I'd like to see the sales figures of CDBaby for such projects.

Waiting For The Boogaloo Sisters

Copies sold on CDBaby: 158

Income: $1771.20

Income from (legal) downloads: $555.05

TOTAL: $2326.25

Cost to record & manufacture the disc to date (including reprints): roughly $10k

This Is The Place

Copies sold on CDBaby: 226

Income: $1925.50

Income from (legal) downloads: $915.58

TOTAL: $2841.08

Cost to record & manufacture the disc to date (including reprints): roughly $14k

Now, obviously we've sold copies at gigs and we sold some via CDUniverse, CDStreet, and Amazon (though we never got paid for any of those due to the companies that were distributing our product for us going out of business and never paying the balanced owed). We're on our third pressing of both discs (we press 1,000 at a time). But most of those go to promotion; radio, clubs, festivals, etc.

Basically, the CD is a promotional tool at this point. As you can see by those numbers above, the proposition of actually making any money or even breaking even is a fool's game. That's why for the next one, we'll be doing it as cheaply as we can. We can't afford to go $10k in the hole anymore because it takes years to get out of it (we're still paying off the last reprints of both discs and we haven't released anything since August of 2005).

Here's the thing about jazz that I have learned, especially from hosting this forum: In general, what small jazz listening population exists is concerned more with the latest BN re-issue than new music. They would rather spend $15-$18 on the latest remaster of Blue Train than buy a new release or even actually go to a show. Not trying to rip on anyone specifically, I'm just being honest.

We've gotten some flack here and there for going after the "jam band" crowd, but you know what? Those kids actually GO TO SHOWS! No, they don't usually buy CDs (they rip from friends or download from the internet, usually illegally) but they come to shows, they buy beer, they tell their friends, and they make club owners happy! And that's all we have now. Live performance is the only thing people cannot steal. Sure, you can record it with those neat-o little handheld digital recorders, but it doesn't beat actually being there, hanging with friends, throwing back some brews, and having a good time!

[Joe G]

Seems like the folks around here are going to hear live music pretty often. There just aren't that many of them!

[paul secor]

Waiting For The Boogaloo Sisters

Copies sold on CDBaby: 158

Income: $1771.20

Income from (legal) downloads: $555.05

TOTAL: $2326.25

Cost to record & manufacture the disc to date (including reprints): roughly $10k

This Is The Place

Copies sold on CDBaby: 226

Income: $1925.50

Income from (legal) downloads: $915.58

TOTAL: $2841.08

Cost to record & manufacture the disc to date (including reprints): roughly $14k

Those sales figures are distressing to me as a listener. Can't even imagine how the band must feel about them.

[Jim Alfredson]

We sell most of our discs on the gig. Sometimes 20 to 30 copies a night. But those are easier sales because you just got done (hopefully) wowing people and they want to take a little bit of that home with them.

But CDs as a whole are dying because people don't want to buy them anymore. The sales figures for the latest RD disc, which has been out about two months and is getting massive radio airplay right now, are downright depressing. And like I mentioned before, the disc has already been ripped and is on the bittorrent sites. Yay! We spent $12k on that one without factoring in duplication or the radio promo.

You have to look at it as a promotional expense and hope that you can use it to get gigs with.

[Dan Gould]

Jim,

I think its natural for you to go after the "jam band" crowd because I've always wondered where you guys might be if you had gone the MMW root earlier.

I think your best business approach is going after the "jam band" crowd to populate gigs and future recordings should actually be limited to home studio sessions, somewhat like the "pay the band" idea that Rooster suggested. What I am thinking of is the band picking some new tunes and some old tunes, getting comfortable with them, and putting them up on the site as a download. I'm not saying you commit yourself to a specific song but if the band is happy with the take, put it up there. You lose control of presenting the music in album format, but I bet there are people who would open their wallets for a handful of Big John or Jimmy Smith covers, as well as lots of other tunes including originals and the band is only out the time spent recording and your own engineering skills. You've done it with other recordings before, I think its time to think of it as a revenue generating opportunity instead of a free promotional EP. When you take out the cost of physical production of the object and as you mentioned before, the cost of using super expensive equipment and a talented engineer, the economics of recording and distributing really change.

[GARussell]

Jim, thanks for your response. It's not often that I feel like I am one of only 158 and 226 (I bought both of my CDs from CDBaby.). By coincidence, I'm listening to This is the Place right now.

I'm going to assume that your sales are higher than most CDBaby jazz acts because of your regional popularity and this board.

I wonder what the expense would be to do something like the Allman Brothers do - record every performance and burn CDs of it after every show for the people there who want it. I wonder if the machinery is too expensive for that to work. In my ignorance I would guess that the machinery would cost less than the $10,000. per CD you have spent.

I wonder if ad campaigns in Downbeat and Jazz Times would put a self-produced group/album on the map. Maybe they too would be just too expensive.

I hope some of us voted for the band in the two mags' Readers Polls. I still think that is an excellent way to put the band on the map.

[Jazzmoose]

We sell most of our discs on the gig. Sometimes 20 to 30 copies a night. But those are easier sales because you just got done (hopefully) wowing people and they want to take a little bit of that home with them.

Makes sense to me; I always bought a CD if an artist had one at a show. I'd much rather have that than a t-shirt as a souvenier!