Should you give your music away ?

[DannyBlack]

I was just thinking- what are the benefits of having your music on Juno and the likes? The mailing list. So if you choose to do the donation thing, make sure people are put on a mailing list- for releases etc.

[SlavikSvensk]

to be devil's advocate, if more and more people give their music away for free, then there will be fewer and fewer labels. not zero labels, but fewer, as people naturally like filtering mechanisms and labels are exactly that. this could, ironically, have the effect of concentrating more power in fewer hands.

[DannyBlack]

I agree to a certain extent. I think what is killing labels anyway is the fact that you can choose the tracks you want to buy from the EP rather than buying the whole EP. personally I don't like that.

[SlavikSvensk]

well, what's happening is that labels below a certain threshold of popularity are dying. minus, ostgut, ghostly, cocoon, etc. are not dying; they're doing quite well.

that means that the as the means of creating and distributing techno has democratized, the ability to be compensated for making it has gone in the opposite direction. you have to be part of the 'aristocracy' to make money off releases.

that's a good reason for someone to want to give their music away, but i think if that got really widespread quickly, if would just further the above trend.

i like the idea of giving some music away, and supporting labels with other music. like when dr. schmidt gave that electro track away. i had no idea who he was, but now i do. i will listen to his tracks on juno, beatport, etc. now.

[DannyBlack]

+1. What you're saying is a fact. To make money you need to have got your roots dug in before the digital explosion. Before music was easier to make in your home and before the decline of vinyl/rise of digital.

To be honest, I see more success by venturing away from Juno, BeatPort and the others. But and this is a big But; you need to play it clever. Decide on what is free and what isn't. Check out your key demographic, their WIN's (Wants, Interests and Needs) and to a certain extent cater to them a bit more.

Maybe I'm rambling a bit here, I may write a big thing about it later. Techno is a product and as such, should be marketed like one.

[wrong]

Good thread!
I've been running my label for 10 years now and for the last few years although sometimes it might make a little money (mainly with the represses), it pretty much just sustains itself so it's not like i profit from it anyway, if i could press vinyl and give it away for free without losing money then i would, but obviously that's not possible..
I'd completely go the route of giving the ep's away for free as i'm sure it would reach a larger audience (maybe) except for the fact that it would mean going digital only and i do love me vinyl...
I'm sure the day is looming when it will become almost impossible for smaller labels to release vinyl but i'm clinging on to the edge of that cliff by my fingernails waiting for the big man to stamp on my hands .. and i have to say, enjoying the suspense ...

[a X cell]

I took this question out of BOA to talk about it on some boards. I got some interesting answers.

Those are all good possibilities. However, I think this is the kind of thing that will work best for established artists with a dedicated fanbase, which is the case for both Radiohead and NIN. This probably won't do much for relatively unknown up-and-comers. Word of a "free" Radiohead or NIN album spreads like wildfire in all kinds of media. Word of a free Omni or {insert relatively unknown producer here} album probably won't get that much exposure.

While I am all about digital distribution (and even free music sharing to some extent), I can also see one of the downsides of it today. Music today, being either dirt-cheap or freely available (through legal or illegal means), has become a disposable commodity. Today, the "life expectancy" of a good electronic dance music track has dropped significantly from a few months to a few weeks. I think that the price of music, while not being the only factor, has something to do with it. Back when I was playing only vynil, paying 15$ for a track + B-side, that track could remain in my crate for months and sometimes one or two years if I really thought it was awesome. These days, with the same budget and the quantity of music coming out, a good track is often only played a few weeks. There are a lot of aspects to "this problem", but I believe that putting a price on your music, for some reason, seems to give it more value to a lot of people. That is unfortunately the way things are today.

That leads me to a question I ask myself.
We all talk about NIN/Radiohead/Electro right now for this matter. Let's get to the point : this is pretty much easier to get your music known by any means (free or not) when you're already established.

Let's take my case. I'm making some Experimental 135bpm-ish Techno. The only labels I could release on are : Naked Lunch AND Impact Mechanics since it's pretty much the sound that looks like mine. Unfortunately, I get no news for them since... I'm a no-name into this ocean of no-name who postulates for the label. So yeah, what to do now?

1. Give away my music for free but at the same time, struggling on publicity since the internet is fulfilled by music made in an hour by a 12 years old boy (been there, done that) or else, not getting that much of attention like Omni said.

2. Keep sending demos of my EP to labels... but which ones?

Your opinion on this one?

[lunatrick]

personally I'm happy to pay for downloads, it's cheaper than vinyl anyway, and I don't want some dodgy copy, but the proper file in high quality. I think giving 'some' music away free is fair enough but to give everything away free seems a bit like paying to publish your own book really, a bit of a vanity project. If people won't pay for it then is it worth releasing?

There's got to be some mileage in releasing back catalogues, I'd certainly pay to download the whole hydraulix library, amoungst others.

For new comers it's bewildering really.....the latest release pages on beatport for just techno run into the hundreds. hundreds of pages of shite. I think juno and beatport should be just as selective as if they were paying up front for the vinyl.

Does anybody know how the download sites are doing? 909london for example, surely they must be generating some money?

[cossinnelle]

I think there are a few problems falling in an "all free" system :

- Labels make their selection and try to ensure a certain level of quality, that's their work and they have to do it well if they want to sell. Will quality remain if labels no more exist?

- In fact I think quality tracks would still exist, but that leads me to my second point : how will the djs find the music they like? will they have to go from myspace to myspace to listen to three or four tracks each time, making a prayer and hopping each time that they will at least find a nice track? When I see the time I spend on juno to find so few tracks I really like, I can't imagine what it would be if everyone would distrubute his music (even fo free) by himself....

- Last but not least, and that's the logical conclusion of what I've said above, that would be very hard for new artists to get their audience. Now labels can find new artists and bring them to light through websites that reach a large audience such as juno, chemical and so on...
without those interfaces new artists would stay in the shadow.

[davethedrummer]

I think there are a few problems falling in an "all free" system :

- Labels make their selection and try to ensure a certain level of quality, that's their work and they have to do it well if they want to sell. Will quality remain if labels no more exist?

- In fact I think quality tracks would still exist, but that leads me to my second point : how will the djs find the music they like? will they have to go from myspace to myspace to listen to three or four tracks each time, making a prayer and hopping each time that they will at least find a nice track? When I see the time I spend on juno to find so few tracks I really like, I can't imagine what it would be if everyone would distrubute his music (even fo free) by himself....

- Last but not least, and that's the logical conclusion of what I've said above, that would be very hard for new artists to get their audience. Now labels can find new artists and bring them to light through websites that reach a large audience such as juno, chemical and so on...
without those interfaces new artists would stay in the shadow.

I see what you are saying here
and it's true as of now.
But think of where the current networking sites want to be in say, 2 years all linked up sharing friends and contacts ,a total cross pollenation of networking sites
and I don't think you'll have to run round the internet looking for peoples tracks any more.
I think the ones you like will drop into your inbox once you have made contact with the labels or people you want to follow.
it's already happening now really.

interesting point about the artist who already has exposure ie: radiohead
yeah that makes sense, I suppose I have my fans too, so I could do a couple of freebies as pressies for the fans and also maybe to reach new ears too.
maybe a couple of free ones
and then an album or something like that?

it's food for thought

[SlavikSvensk]

I think there are a few problems falling in an "all free" system :

- Labels make their selection and try to ensure a certain level of quality, that's their work and they have to do it well if they want to sell. Will quality remain if labels no more exist?

- In fact I think quality tracks would still exist, but that leads me to my second point : how will the djs find the music they like? will they have to go from myspace to myspace to listen to three or four tracks each time, making a prayer and hopping each time that they will at least find a nice track? When I see the time I spend on juno to find so few tracks I really like, I can't imagine what it would be if everyone would distrubute his music (even fo free) by himself....

- Last but not least, and that's the logical conclusion of what I've said above, that would be very hard for new artists to get their audience. Now labels can find new artists and bring them to light through websites that reach a large audience such as juno, chemical and so on...
without those interfaces new artists would stay in the shadow.

this is where i was going too. right now techno is in danger of becoming an oligarchy, where a very small number of established artists dominate the business side of things. while getting music to fans cheaply or even for free is great, if it becomes widespread, the digital labels will die. if they die, then the ability to reach a certain level of exposure will be completely in the hands of the 'techno aristocracy.'

like them or not, labels provide an essential service in sustaining some semblance of economic viability to techno beyond the stadium packers.

so yeah...henry please give some stuff away but please don't stop helping out the little labels!

[TechMouse]

When I was younger (and poorer) I used to spend most of my money on vinyl and pretty much download everything else. My rationale at the time being "I'm spending more money on music than most people I know, and it's going in at the grass roots level where it will do the most good". I would occasionally buy a high-quality audio file if I was planning to burn it to a CD to play out or something, provided it was DRM free and good quality - I had to ask for my money back a couple of times because a file was really dodgy.

Now I'm older and I have a bit more free cash I've started paying for things I really like. I discovered gofasterstripe.com and started buying some really good comedy DVDs. I've bought several digital albums this year already (the DubFX album, Insides by Jon Hopkins and Caesura by Helios) plus loads of individual tracks. I shelled out for my copy of Ableton. I even bought the full version of WinAMP (why not? I use it every day and it costs next to nothing). I also bought A Midsummer Nice Dream by Ochre on vinyl because Chris repressed it and it only cost £5.

I think my point is that people who really love music are always going to spend as much as they can reasonably afford on it. Those that don't probably don't love it as much, and you can't let those people drive your decision.

I think the donation model is great, but I would occasionally back it up with a value added product - e.g. a vinyl or CD (or DVD) in nice packaging with good artwork and <insert something else novel here>. That guy that gave away a free noise making circuit in the package of the CD was on to something.

[vegim]

while getting music to fans cheaply or even for free is great, if it becomes widespread, the digital labels will die. if they die, then the ability to reach a certain level of exposure will be completely in the hands of the 'techno aristocracy.'

---------------->

[Jay Pace]

Not everyone can do it for free. Most people are trying to get heard. If you haven't got the reputation you need to use the resources and reputations of labels to get noticed.

But if you're in the position where people are actively looking for your stuff, and you already have loads of fans, and platforms to connect with them, why would you ask them to pay an online shop, a distributor & a label for your music when you could just give it to them for nothing and make more money out of it?

[SlavikSvensk]

what about netlabels? these, i think, retain some of the advantages of labels as filters but distribute directly and often for free

[DannyBlack]

Yeah I think the Net labels have a lot of Merrit and could be the way that most go. I think having an option to donate too would be a good idea.

[Microdot]

fcuk giving away music for free. if ppl want it for free they'll find a way to steal it anyway.

And cunts like Radiohead fully realise the damage they are doing to smaller artists and labels by doing so.
A point I made on here at the time, and subsequently supported by artists such as Daft Punk, Wu Tang Clan and Lily Allen in the established music press.
Anyone who doesn't understand why a mainstream act giving their music away free is bad for upcoming acts is an idiot.

[SlavikSvensk]

fcuk giving away music for free. if ppl want it for free they'll find a way to steal it anyway.

And cunts like Radiohead fully realise the damage they are doing to smaller artists and labels by doing so.
A point I made on here at the time, and subsequently supported by artists such as Daft Punk, Wu Tang Clan and Lily Allen in the established music press.
Anyone who doesn't understand why a mainstream act giving their music away free is bad for upcoming acts is an idiot.

it's like everything else...with one hand it gives, and with the other it taketh away.

[Jay Pace]

Anyone who doesn't understand why a mainstream act giving their music away free is bad for upcoming acts is an idiot.

They didn't give it away for free though.
They made much more money, by not asking their fans to pay sales portals and distributors, and just pay them, the band, what they thought it was worth. Some gave them nothing. Others paid them what they though the album should cost.

Nobody is doing up and comers favours by releasing their music, so that it can sit on servers, where nobody hears it because nobody is prepared to buy something from an artist they've never heard. And thats in the event they can even find them in the first place, buried beneath a thousand tonnes of crap.

Nothing stopping labels going direct to fans either. They'd get a hell of a lot more out their artists if they didn't need to pay distributors and sales portals the majority cut just to get stocked and sold.

The main people threatened by people giving stuff away, are the people who offer no real value beyond the ability to sell.

[crime]

fcuk giving away music for free. if ppl want it for free they'll find a way to steal it anyway.

So, you would rather release music which is a compromise on your own vision over giving away stuff which is exactly how you want it to sound rather than have it rotting away on your hard drive with no-one hearing it? How is someone gonna steal something which no label will release because in their eyes it's "too much of a risk"?

and how exactly do mainstream pop/rock acts giving away music for free damage sales of techno music? sorry, I just don't understand how your points make sense.. Techno/electronic music has become less and less popular for years, definitely since the heady days of 1995/1996. There's no point in being bitter (I'm not saying you necessarily are) about the fact it's very very difficult to earn a living from it. Surely if you are making stuff it's better to get it out there in whatever way you can than just be sat on stuff because there are no labels around which consider your music viable to release on conventional formats. I'm seeing this personally as the greatest opportunity ever to be able to break out of any creative ruts I've been stuck in in the past and to do stuff which is really different without worrying about compromising any kind of "Careeer" I might have once had...