If you don't know who the UK band Tubelord is, you do now.
Check 'em out.
Tubelord on MySpace
These semi-geeky looking yet totally rocking set from Kingston, UK feature a fantastic song "Feed Me a Box of Words" that starts out hardcore (almost screamo-ish) then tunes itself into fine English indie rock.
They're funny to boot. Under their Sounds Like section: "It sounds like a Mark David Chapman scenario to me..." They also encourage fans to make their own Tubelord gear, as it "saves us money, saves you money, it stimulates an active state of consumerism within the self and will make you feel ever more appreciative of that shirt you spent 6 hours on designing and printing."
Love 'em.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Random 10: February 22, 2009
10 Random Tracks from my iTunes.
10. "Don't Ask For The Water" Ryan Adams (Heartbreaker)
9. "The Sound of Settling" Death Cab For Cutie (Transatlanticism)
8. "This Time of Year" Better Than Ezra (Deluxe)
7. "When The Sun Goes Down" Arctic Monkeys (Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not)
6. "Dirty Second Hands" Switchfoot (Oh! Gravity)
5. "Our Lawyers..." Fall Out Boy (From Under The Cork Tree)
4. "Changes" Common (Universal Mind Control)
3. "Attention" The Raconteurs (Consolers of The Lonely)
2. "Echo" Incubus (Morning View)
1. "Autumn" Paolo Nutini (These Streets)
10. "Don't Ask For The Water" Ryan Adams (Heartbreaker)
9. "The Sound of Settling" Death Cab For Cutie (Transatlanticism)
8. "This Time of Year" Better Than Ezra (Deluxe)
7. "When The Sun Goes Down" Arctic Monkeys (Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not)
6. "Dirty Second Hands" Switchfoot (Oh! Gravity)
5. "Our Lawyers..." Fall Out Boy (From Under The Cork Tree)
4. "Changes" Common (Universal Mind Control)
3. "Attention" The Raconteurs (Consolers of The Lonely)
2. "Echo" Incubus (Morning View)
1. "Autumn" Paolo Nutini (These Streets)
Sunday, February 15, 2009
From Web-Only Labels to Radiohead: The New Indie Scene
Looking back on my previous blogs (I know it's been a while, sorry), one of the options a new band has is being released from their label and going "underground". While the indie/underground scene has evolved significantly from where it was ten, even five, years ago; it is still essentially the same type of people, just slightly more technologically savvy.
A few years back, an "indie" band would self-promote through the use of street teams, their original hometown crowd, and buzz around campus with colleges that have a good campus radio station. I know for me, if it wasn't for WIDR (Kalamazoo-WMU) and WDFM (E. Lansing-MSU), I would have NEVER found some of the bands I listen to now.
Now indie bands can promote still through street-teams, and college rock stations, but now with the explosion of "myspace, facebook, and fuckface" (to quote Raine Maida) bands can essentially have a huge following without ever leaving their basement in Iowa. While I prefer the old-school method of playing dive bars and college festivals to "make it", a good mix of the new school can't hurt either. And if you're anti-major label like I am, this method seems to be the best way to make a decent living with your music.
Most bands nowadays will post their tunes on myspace, develop a groundswell around their hometown which subsequently makes it was to the local university, where its played on the radio station. If the band is good enough to develop a fanbase through the radio, they will play as many of the bars, clubs, and festivals around said university. If they make enough money for themselves (and the bars, clubs, etc) they will develop through word of mouth with promoters and universities (a local fraternity might tell a chapter from another university to book this band and so on) and be able to "tour" the college scene. After a while, these same fans will be clamoring for an album; which if you're smart, you'll stay away from a label with this one and DIY all the way.
So you head to a local reputable studio, record your album, have a release party at a local bar (usually the first one you played at or one you've played on a regular basis) and proceed to sell the living crap out of it at your shows, local record shops (they do still exist) and the trunk of your car. If you are lucky enough to have someone you know with some web finesse, you can put your album on iTunes and other music sites such as that in order to boost some sales and hope that more people stumble upon your little hidden gem. But what if you don't know anyone such as that? Well friends, that's where web-only labels might help you.
A web-based label works almost the same way as a regular label, except you generally can keep the rights to your music, you won't get a much (if any) upfront money, and they usually can only help promote in an online capacity (less employees means less overhead=more profit). You still keep your artistic integrity, make a little cash, and have some help in the web-world with boosting sales and obtaining new fans. But what if your band is already successful, has some cash, and simply doesn't want to be anally probed by your label anymore?
Finally there is the "Radiohead Method". Essentially, it boils down to 1. You hate your label (or all labels), 2. You want to prove to Major labels that they are an unnecessary and evil function in the art, and/or 3. You want to stick it to them by accomplishing as much if not more via the "evil" internet and download society we live in. You see, major labels are afraid, in essence of being phased out by the napsters and limewires of the world. While I am aware that file-sharing is technically considered pirating and is therefore illegal. What Apple has done with iTunes is basically provide you the ease of file-sharing and the labels the benefit of a few bucks for all their "hard work". Artists are 50/50 on this. Some say that Napster is bad and they don't want people to hear their music unless they pay to do so (see Metallica). Usually, these are bands who are rediculously rich already and need a new house in Cabo for the weekend. The other side of the fence are artists who embrace file-sharing and think that it is a great way to gain new fans who will then buy tickets to concerts (which is where artists truly make their money if you remember) and keep them in the coin. That side has it right. They have essentially said "screw the label, I can record a track in my basement, post it for the world to hear, get them to fall in love with the new (self-financed) album and thus pay to see the tour that promotes said album." Take the band Radiohead (whom this method is generally attributed to). They recorded In Rainbows with their own money and released it as a web-only downloadable album. In addition, they told fans to name their own price. And even with $0.00 as an option, the AVERAGE person paid $8.00 for the album. Basically, Radiohead turned PayPal into a glorified tip jar. It proved to the labels that not only a) they were not needed to finance, produce, and promote and album, b) people would still pay money for albums, even when they were not forced to. Stick that in your empty suit and smoke it Sony.
A few years back, an "indie" band would self-promote through the use of street teams, their original hometown crowd, and buzz around campus with colleges that have a good campus radio station. I know for me, if it wasn't for WIDR (Kalamazoo-WMU) and WDFM (E. Lansing-MSU), I would have NEVER found some of the bands I listen to now.
Now indie bands can promote still through street-teams, and college rock stations, but now with the explosion of "myspace, facebook, and fuckface" (to quote Raine Maida) bands can essentially have a huge following without ever leaving their basement in Iowa. While I prefer the old-school method of playing dive bars and college festivals to "make it", a good mix of the new school can't hurt either. And if you're anti-major label like I am, this method seems to be the best way to make a decent living with your music.
Most bands nowadays will post their tunes on myspace, develop a groundswell around their hometown which subsequently makes it was to the local university, where its played on the radio station. If the band is good enough to develop a fanbase through the radio, they will play as many of the bars, clubs, and festivals around said university. If they make enough money for themselves (and the bars, clubs, etc) they will develop through word of mouth with promoters and universities (a local fraternity might tell a chapter from another university to book this band and so on) and be able to "tour" the college scene. After a while, these same fans will be clamoring for an album; which if you're smart, you'll stay away from a label with this one and DIY all the way.
So you head to a local reputable studio, record your album, have a release party at a local bar (usually the first one you played at or one you've played on a regular basis) and proceed to sell the living crap out of it at your shows, local record shops (they do still exist) and the trunk of your car. If you are lucky enough to have someone you know with some web finesse, you can put your album on iTunes and other music sites such as that in order to boost some sales and hope that more people stumble upon your little hidden gem. But what if you don't know anyone such as that? Well friends, that's where web-only labels might help you.
A web-based label works almost the same way as a regular label, except you generally can keep the rights to your music, you won't get a much (if any) upfront money, and they usually can only help promote in an online capacity (less employees means less overhead=more profit). You still keep your artistic integrity, make a little cash, and have some help in the web-world with boosting sales and obtaining new fans. But what if your band is already successful, has some cash, and simply doesn't want to be anally probed by your label anymore?
Finally there is the "Radiohead Method". Essentially, it boils down to 1. You hate your label (or all labels), 2. You want to prove to Major labels that they are an unnecessary and evil function in the art, and/or 3. You want to stick it to them by accomplishing as much if not more via the "evil" internet and download society we live in. You see, major labels are afraid, in essence of being phased out by the napsters and limewires of the world. While I am aware that file-sharing is technically considered pirating and is therefore illegal. What Apple has done with iTunes is basically provide you the ease of file-sharing and the labels the benefit of a few bucks for all their "hard work". Artists are 50/50 on this. Some say that Napster is bad and they don't want people to hear their music unless they pay to do so (see Metallica). Usually, these are bands who are rediculously rich already and need a new house in Cabo for the weekend. The other side of the fence are artists who embrace file-sharing and think that it is a great way to gain new fans who will then buy tickets to concerts (which is where artists truly make their money if you remember) and keep them in the coin. That side has it right. They have essentially said "screw the label, I can record a track in my basement, post it for the world to hear, get them to fall in love with the new (self-financed) album and thus pay to see the tour that promotes said album." Take the band Radiohead (whom this method is generally attributed to). They recorded In Rainbows with their own money and released it as a web-only downloadable album. In addition, they told fans to name their own price. And even with $0.00 as an option, the AVERAGE person paid $8.00 for the album. Basically, Radiohead turned PayPal into a glorified tip jar. It proved to the labels that not only a) they were not needed to finance, produce, and promote and album, b) people would still pay money for albums, even when they were not forced to. Stick that in your empty suit and smoke it Sony.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
I'm Giving EMI the "Hootie" Treatment....
Continuing my assault all that is corrupt and wrong with the music industry, we move on to phase three. But first, let's recap. We've made our major label debut album, toured the globe to promote the living hell out of the thing to boost sales, and FINALLY broke even (and made a little cash) to cover our fronted money from the label. So...now what do we do? Since the band is still under contract for a few more albums it's time to record some more. This is the make or break point for many bands. Most times, it'd be the "sophomore slump" thing that pressures bands into getting more fronted money from the label and you're back to step one and repeating the process all over again. But there are alternatives.
OPTION 1: I'M GOING UNDERGROUND. Your first album was SO bad that the label decides, now that you've broken even, that you aren't worth any more of their time and money, and drop you from the label. In many aspects this could be a blessing in disguise. For instance, let's say that commercially, the album sold terribly and was critically torn down; but the kids LOVE it. You have quite a few songs that are played all over college radio. There is still the groundswell of fans you had before the deal, and now you've added the music snobs (like me) and college kids who have found a home fitting in with the indie crowd. So you stay indie and underground, and use the residuals from your album and subsequent self-funded, small bar/club "tour" to record a new album without the pressure of the label on your neck. You sell your albums as online downloads only and make quite a nice living....more on this option in subsequent posts. The downside is that you aren't a rich rock star and you have to deal with music snobs who want to talk about the comparisons between your new album and The Beatles "Sgt. Pepper" album.
OPTION 2: THE "FAIRWEATHER JOHNSON" METHOD. You make a HORRID second album (see Hootie and The Blowfish's second album Fairweather Johnson) that is so bad that you are dropped from the label and try to reclaim what fans you had before the release of the album with a tour of intimate venues playing NOTHING from the crappy album. You can claim that the album was you and the rest of the band attempting to experiment with new influences or that you were paying homage to. Most intelligent people will call bullshit, and realize that the album just sucked; but you will find a few people who are thinking "wow, I loved said 90s indie band, even though this album was lackluster, I'd still follow this band". The plus side is you have another album whose residual checks will keep you flooded in RV gas money and Taco Bell for the next year until you record your next album. The negative is that your RV money and Taco Bell rations are about all you have to show for all your hard work and you risk being labeled as "has-beens" or "never-weres".
OPTION 3: READ YOUR CONTRACT!! If for some reason you're legally savvy and in a band, read your contract! If there is no clause indicating exclusive rights to publication (not the rights to the songs themselves, those almost always belong to the album), just work a 1 album deal with a different label that provides better terms and more creative control over your music. You will be sued by your original label, but you've read your contract and you're safe, so fuck 'em, take the money and run.
OPTION 4: HONOR THE DAMN THING! What better way to take down the man than from the inside. Record your next album, make it better than your first, gain more fans, money and artistic acclaim. In this business money=power; if you're making the empty suits money, then you have some power. This option, like all the others, has pros and cons. Pros: hmmm, you're a rock star now....you figure out the perks. Cons: You could stand to lose some of your original fans and a piece of the hardcore indie crowd who have now labeled you a "corporate slave". But who cares? You're rich now, sellout.
In the next few blogs we will look at the options and where your band is headed with each one.
OPTION 1: I'M GOING UNDERGROUND. Your first album was SO bad that the label decides, now that you've broken even, that you aren't worth any more of their time and money, and drop you from the label. In many aspects this could be a blessing in disguise. For instance, let's say that commercially, the album sold terribly and was critically torn down; but the kids LOVE it. You have quite a few songs that are played all over college radio. There is still the groundswell of fans you had before the deal, and now you've added the music snobs (like me) and college kids who have found a home fitting in with the indie crowd. So you stay indie and underground, and use the residuals from your album and subsequent self-funded, small bar/club "tour" to record a new album without the pressure of the label on your neck. You sell your albums as online downloads only and make quite a nice living....more on this option in subsequent posts. The downside is that you aren't a rich rock star and you have to deal with music snobs who want to talk about the comparisons between your new album and The Beatles "Sgt. Pepper" album.
OPTION 2: THE "FAIRWEATHER JOHNSON" METHOD. You make a HORRID second album (see Hootie and The Blowfish's second album Fairweather Johnson) that is so bad that you are dropped from the label and try to reclaim what fans you had before the release of the album with a tour of intimate venues playing NOTHING from the crappy album. You can claim that the album was you and the rest of the band attempting to experiment with new influences or that you were paying homage to
OPTION 3: READ YOUR CONTRACT!! If for some reason you're legally savvy and in a band, read your contract! If there is no clause indicating exclusive rights to publication (not the rights to the songs themselves, those almost always belong to the album), just work a 1 album deal with a different label that provides better terms and more creative control over your music. You will be sued by your original label, but you've read your contract and you're safe, so fuck 'em, take the money and run.
OPTION 4: HONOR THE DAMN THING! What better way to take down the man than from the inside. Record your next album, make it better than your first, gain more fans, money and artistic acclaim. In this business money=power; if you're making the empty suits money, then you have some power. This option, like all the others, has pros and cons. Pros: hmmm, you're a rock star now....you figure out the perks. Cons: You could stand to lose some of your original fans and a piece of the hardcore indie crowd who have now labeled you a "corporate slave". But who cares? You're rich now, sellout.
In the next few blogs we will look at the options and where your band is headed with each one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
