|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Jun 19, 2014 18:41:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by drtrey3 on Jun 20, 2014 8:59:43 GMT -5
My friends who are making a living as musicians tend to multitask. They play guitar for someone in their touring band, do session work, kickstart their own recordings, and do home concerts and such. Some give music lessons as well. The thing about kickstart is that you have a set number of people who have bought the album before you even record it. The last such album I bought, Jeremy Cassela's Death in Reverse, is a gem!
Something I have been doing is working to support the people I know who are talented and working in the field. I buy all their music that I can, and offer encouragement, listening sessions at my house (I am trying to turn them into audiophiles truth be told) and give them records and cds that I am done with. That is really a lot of fun and I heartily recommend it to you all!
Trey
|
|
stiehl11
Emo VIPs 
Give me available light!
Posts: 7,261
|
Post by stiehl11 on Jun 20, 2014 11:47:50 GMT -5
As a former musician I can tell you it was hard before 2000 to make a decent living. I got tired of working my a$$ off that's when I got in to something easier, like back-breaking labor and eventually engineering in the automotive sector. I'm also way less neurotic now.  |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 20, 2014 13:02:38 GMT -5
There is a local band we are fans of. Honestly each of those members have more talent than any modern popular musician/band I've heard. Excellent stuff. I remember it was during one exceptional performance the bar gave them their takings for the night. It was forty bucks - for 5 hours - for the entire 5 person band. They divided up a few dollars IN SINGLES between each of them - one who had driven over an hour and a half to be there and went home. Very sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Jun 20, 2014 13:14:57 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2014 13:50:01 GMT -5
There is a local band we are fans of. Honestly each of those members have more talent than any modern popular musician/band I've heard. Excellent stuff. I remember it was during one exceptional performance the bar gave them their takings for the night. It was forty bucks - for 5 hours - for the entire 5 person band. They divided up a few dollars IN SINGLES between each of them - one who had driven over an hour and a half to be there and went home. Very sad. I hear ya - been there and done that. It's a shame because when you consider how long it takes to properly learn an instrument (school, lessons, etc.) - the amount of time and effort given for the craft rarely ends up in dollars earned. It can take years to be 'competent' on your instrument, and I'm not referring to the pickup a guitar and demand to be a rockstar in 2 months kind of guys (of which there are far too many of). You would think the amount of training it takes, musicians should be making six-figures, but that's not the culture we live in unfortunately; so love what you do first and foremost. For me I quit when it was no longer fun. Part of the equation also lies where you live. Some areas of the country have better work for musicians than others i.e. Nashville, etc. Another observation is that the art of songwriting is dead. We used to play large venues with all original music and we did well. A big part of the love of music lies with creating. The trend has gone to smaller clubs playing cover tunes for most. If you enjoy this, that's great. There's some money to be made here -women who go to these clubs like to dance and dance to something they are familiar with, so the repertoire is pretty limited. As a musician you end up playing music you wouldn't necessarily listen to or enjoy at home, but tolerate it because that's what people want to hear. To me this is not enjoyable. I enjoyed playing music that was challenging to perform. Traditional rock/pop doesn't have enough substance to keep me happy as a performer. We've also seen quite a change in the music industry in general over the years. Prior to the mid 80's, there were extremely talented musicians in the mainstream. That's not to say there's no talent today, but not the mainstream. For example a listen to a rock station might include bands such as Rush, ELP, Yes, and many others. Each of these bands and others contained musicians that were extremely talented and well-educated musically. The music was more complex and interesting. Problem is (or became) that once the mainstream became video-orented, these bands didn't transform well to this new media. (they are musicians first!). So we see a transition to the musician/performer as 'product' or 'brand'. Basically a face that is marketable who can generally perform music that was written by someone else and put together by engineers. When the product has run its course, it's disposed of and another is marketed. Thus the longevity of any one brand is limited, and done so by design. Now before I get flaming posts, note that there IS some talent out there, it's just the industry has really changed over the years and talent takes a backseat to marketability most of the time. The end result is cookie-cutter music by 'products' with little or no music education, albums with one decent song on them, and the one-and-done artists. This is tailored to the mass-market iPod generation and therefore highly compressed and over produced without regard to sound quality or musical performance. Ask yourself where are the Keith Emersons, Karl Palmers or Neil Pearts of today. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 9,929
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 20, 2014 14:29:07 GMT -5
It would seem to me that, as entertainment moves more and more into things like Internet streaming, there might be room in the model for something based on a combination of live music at the local bar AND the Internet. It seems that an obvious fusion of the two would be a "virtual bar" (in the form of a website) where, every Friday between 9 PM and 3 AM, you could see "live" bands perform - just like at your neighborhood bar. I suspect that a charge in the form of a subscription, with all previous concerts archived and available, might prove compelling to many people. (A one-time payment would get you in for the evening; a subscription would get you unlimited access to the archives. Obviously, each band would get a percentage of the revenues. Since everything done on the network can be tracked very accurately, you could even divide up the money based on how many viewers were online while a given band was playing.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2014 14:40:41 GMT -5
I think Keith is correct. Musicians need to move away from the traditional label model and more to an internet-based marketing model. The labels really are not doing us any favors in terms of what they offer. We're already seeing this to some extent, but it needs to go a direction independent of the labels. This is what they and the RIAA fear the most, just as they feared digital distribution.
Thankfully technology has provided musicians today with some great, inexpensive tools to achieve this. With a relatively inexpensive PC and some software and outboard gear, one can produce amazingly good results at home, better than some studios I've worked at in the past, and the price of entry has never been lower.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 20, 2014 18:13:53 GMT -5
The best thing to ever happen to musicians in recent digital times is youtube imo. It's still not a solid revenue model but I find myself more interested in online musicians than the popular ones. Bands like pomplamoose have started what is essentially a version of kickstarter for musicians called patreon where fans "encourage" the musicians by paying a minimum $1 per month charge to help musicians keep producing online music. Things are boosted with goodies depending on how much you pay (like sheet music, behind the scenes videos, free downloads,) and even better as there is no commitment period. I can only assume it has lots of potential. Sort of like the old times where the nobility would pay people to keep the arts alive.
|
|
Timster
Sensei
Posting from Scarsdale, Vic, Australia
Posts: 140
|
Post by Timster on Jun 21, 2014 18:15:47 GMT -5
;This is tailored to the mass-market iPod generation and therefore highly compressed and over produced without regard to sound quality or musical performance. Ask yourself where are the Keith Emersons, Karl Palmers or Neil Pearts of today. The "loudness war", where everyone is trying to outdo each other how loud they can make their music, compressing the life out of it, running at 0dbfs with 1 or 2db of range absolutely ruins any fidelity and emotion. Thankfully I think some are getting the message, and with outlets like HD tracks offering not only hi-red versions, but more dynamic versions as well is a good sign. My 1980 and 90s CDs of artists like Toto, Enya, Basia, various GRP recordings, Iron Maiden, and yes Rush are all wonderfully dynamic.... I can't imaging how much better in total they could now sound if they had access to today's recoding tech as well. What is frustrating is the labels can make concert releases on blu-ray amazingly dynamic, but not it seems the studio releases..... As for Emmerson, Palmer and Peart..... They are out there, just not so mainstream. Toto still beats around (their Live in Paris Blu ray is awesome),. I have gravitated to where their still seems to be amazing rock musicians..... And that is to Progressive Rock and Metal. Check out Dream Theater, Transatlantic, Planet X, Threshold (their latest release, March of Progress, is amazing) and many more. And there is plenty out there across all genres I'm sure. You just have dig a bit harder! Cheers Tim |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 21, 2014 20:23:37 GMT -5
There is a local band we are fans of. Honestly each of those members have more talent than any modern popular musician/band I've heard. Excellent stuff. I remember it was during one exceptional performance the bar gave them their takings for the night. It was forty bucks - for 5 hours - for the entire 5 person band. They divided up a few dollars IN SINGLES between each of them - one who had driven over an hour and a half to be there and went home. Very sad. I hear ya - been there and done that. It's a shame because when you consider how long it takes to properly learn an instrument (school, lessons, etc.) - the amount of time and effort given for the craft rarely ends up in dollars earned. It can take years to be 'competent' on your instrument, and I'm not referring to the pickup a guitar and demand to be a rockstar in 2 months kind of guys (of which there are far too many of). You would think the amount of training it takes, musicians should be making six-figures, but that's not the culture we live in unfortunately; so love what you do first and foremost. For me I quit when it was no longer fun. Part of the equation also lies where you live. Some areas of the country have better work for musicians than others i.e. Nashville, etc. Another observation is that the art of songwriting is dead. We used to play large venues with all original music and we did well. A big part of the love of music lies with creating. The trend has gone to smaller clubs playing cover tunes for most. If you enjoy this, that's great. There's some money to be made here -women who go to these clubs like to dance and dance to something they are familiar with, so the repertoire is pretty limited. As a musician you end up playing music you wouldn't necessarily listen to or enjoy at home, but tolerate it because that's what people want to hear. To me this is not enjoyable. I enjoyed playing music that was challenging to perform. Traditional rock/pop doesn't have enough substance to keep me happy as a performer. We've also seen quite a change in the music industry in general over the years. Prior to the mid 80's, there were extremely talented musicians in the mainstream. That's not to say there's no talent today, but not the mainstream. For example a listen to a rock station might include bands such as Rush, ELP, Yes, and many others. Each of these bands and others contained musicians that were extremely talented and well-educated musically. The music was more complex and interesting. Problem is (or became) that once the mainstream became video-orented, these bands didn't transform well to this new media. (they are musicians first!). So we see a transition to the musician/performer as 'product' or 'brand'. Basically a face that is marketable who can generally perform music that was written by someone else and put together by engineers. When the product has run its course, it's disposed of and another is marketed. Thus the longevity of any one brand is limited, and done so by design. Now before I get flaming posts, note that there IS some talent out there, it's just the industry has really changed over the years and talent takes a backseat to marketability most of the time. The end result is cookie-cutter music by 'products' with little or no music education, albums with one decent song on them, and the one-and-done artists. This is tailored to the mass-market iPod generation and therefore highly compressed and over produced without regard to sound quality or musical performance. Ask yourself where are the Keith Emersons, Karl Palmers or Neil Pearts of today. Wow I didn't realize you were a performer. Very nice. You have any stuff to see? I completely agree with you about songwriting and talent. Where the heck is that. I am a little tired of just sticking a face to corporate music. Very annoying. I'd rather know the guys playing it came up with it or were competently playing it etc. The "loudness war", where everyone is trying to outdo each other how loud they can make their music, compressing the life out of it, running at 0dbfs with 1 or 2db of range absolutely ruins any fidelity and emotion. Thankfully I think some are getting the message, and with outlets like HD tracks offering not only hi-red versions, but more dynamic versions as well is a good sign. My 1980 and 90s CDs of artists like Toto, Enya, Basia, various GRP recordings, Iron Maiden, and yes Rush are all wonderfully dynamic.... I can't imaging how much better in total they could now sound if they had access to today's recoding tech as well. What is frustrating is the labels can make concert releases on blu-ray amazingly dynamic, but not it seems the studio releases..... As for Emmerson, Palmer and Peart..... They are out there, just not so mainstream. Toto still beats around (their Live in Paris Blu ray is awesome),. I have gravitated to where their still seems to be amazing rock musicians..... And that is to Progressive Rock and Metal. Check out Dream Theater, Transatlantic, Planet X, Threshold (their latest release, March of Progress, is amazing) and many more. And there is plenty out there across all genres I'm sure. You just have dig a bit harder! Cheers Tim Man new stuff has nothing on the old stuff. What always amazes me is this though. The MAJORITY of people and I do mean the vast vast VAST majority listen on really crappy sound systems. So I'm always amazed that when I hear a recording where I'm able to pick out a really professional hi-resolution production! Because for me, nobody would care about it so it's just that recording engineer doing what he is supposed to be doing despite knowing that nearly everybody will never hear it like it should |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2014 10:01:45 GMT -5
The "loudness war", where everyone is trying to outdo each other how loud they can make their music, compressing the life out of it, running at 0dbfs with 1 or 2db of range absolutely ruins any fidelity and emotion. Thankfully I think some are getting the message, and with outlets like HD tracks offering not only hi-red versions, but more dynamic versions as well is a good sign. My 1980 and 90s CDs of artists like Toto, Enya, Basia, various GRP recordings, Iron Maiden, and yes Rush are all wonderfully dynamic.... I can't imaging how much better in total they could now sound if they had access to today's recoding tech as well. What is frustrating is the labels can make concert releases on blu-ray amazingly dynamic, but not it seems the studio releases..... As for Emmerson, Palmer and Peart..... They are out there, just not so mainstream. Toto still beats around (their Live in Paris Blu ray is awesome),. I have gravitated to where their still seems to be amazing rock musicians..... And that is to Progressive Rock and Metal. Check out Dream Theater, Transatlantic, Planet X, Threshold (their latest release, March of Progress, is amazing) and many more. And there is plenty out there across all genres I'm sure. You just have dig a bit harder! Cheers Tim Funny you mentioned Dream Theater - we did a gig with them on their Images and Words tour. Very nice guys and loads of talent. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2014 10:10:52 GMT -5
Hi garbulky. As far as stuff to see I think the guitarist posted some video on Youtube. Search for Alcazar. Keep in mind these videos are old and most often recorded on someone's handheld video recorder, so the audio is far from great.
|
|
|
|
Post by cardiffkook on Jun 22, 2014 14:12:10 GMT -5
The focus of music is to entertain consumers --us.
We have never had it better. Each year we get everything new available as well as everything ever written or recorded previously. This is as good as it has ever been for us. For musicians, the competition will continue to get tougher. For me to listen to you, you need to be better than Glenn Gould, Frank Zappa, Elvis and Coltrane. Next year it will be even tougher.
That said, there will be no shortage of people choosing it for their love of the muse. Power to them. Don't count on getting rich though.
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 22, 2014 14:36:27 GMT -5
I think youtube is the best thing to happen to amateur musicians. I am somewhat tired of production grade stuff and just want to see live somewhat raw stuff that an individual has done. And youtube has no shortage of those. I like the idea of somebody sitting at their house just playing around with stuff and coming up with new creative ideas. For instance Lauren O connel. She seems to do everything all by herself - fascinating. More interesting than something with tons of money infused into it or separate producers, writers, arrangers etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by SticknStones on Jun 22, 2014 15:41:37 GMT -5
Yes, I was part of an alternative band after college and we all worked in hi tech with music as a hobby. We would make about $150 a night with some exceptions. Other musicians would comment and say your are not full-time musicians are you? And, I would ask what makes you think that and the answer was always the same in that we had every gadget you could have (expensive and new) plus our own mixing board. We made a CD in 1991 and I made my peace with the rock ambitions and sold my equipment to buy a sailboat. Never looked back but always will miss playing live.  |
|
