catapult magazine

The internet, Courtney Love, Ani Difranco and certain technological advances present challenges for a music industry that’s still structured according to a fifties and sixties model.

Labels typically act as loan companies that help artists pay for studio time, as long as it promises a return. This gives the label, which often cares only about profit, too much say in the final product. But now there are more Mobys, artists who can record anything they need to in their bedrooms or basements without needing a big budget or financial support from labels. Labels are still needed for mass-marketing, of course, but look what the marketing machine turns out these days: phonies like Alicia Keys while the real deals like Wilco get cast off.

The question is not IF the music industry has become irrelevant or WHEN it will crash and burn; the real question for Christians is how the industry should be structured now? Christians should be way ahead when it comes to reforming the industry, since Christian musicians and many Christian music listeners have been complaining about the limitations of Nashville’s CCM industry for decades now. What should an alternative to CCM and the broader music industry look like?

I just wanted to mention the model Bill Mallonee has used to record his last two albums. Essentially, fans pre-ordered the albums [i:3f269c3cd1]before they were even recorded[/i:3f269c3cd1] to allow the Bill the freedom to work without an official label. I think this fits into what you are talking about.

In Bill Mallonee’s case, he already has a fan base that will buy his record because they know his track record. I’m trying to meet the young artists’ needs, the ones who need financial support as they’re developing themselves. It seems like many other types of careers or businesses have support systems built in, like educational loans for biology students etc. But the principle of pre-ordering is similar. The difference, and this is the big difference, is that such a pre-ordering scheme still follows the “music as product” model. I want to change the model to more of a “music as process” model. I want musicians to be treated as craftsman, which means they will be payed for the time and energy they put into the product, not just for the product. Investors will be investing in people, not in products. They will believe that these people they are investing in will continue to make exciting artistic decisions album to album. I think, underneath it all, this is what Bill Mallonee’s pre-orderers believe, but I want the system itself to express that.

Nate, I bought a few books by a Berkeley professor, Spellman? I think. I will check out this other book you’re mentioning. Thanks.

40,000 do you know what that number represents? The number of ?christian? artist not signed to a label and that only represents the artist that want to be labeled christian. I spend my life looking for the best indie bands out there and to be truthful in the ?christian? music industry it is like finding a needle in a hay field. As for investing in artist we do when we buy their records.
As a radio promoter every waking hour of my day is spent looking for great bands. but the truth is even after twenty one years in the industry I cannot predict what the listener wants for sure and neither can the labels. For every top selling band the labels will go through twenty or thirty that flop. In the music industry christian or secular labels look for one thing bands that can make money. Not the most talented or the best sounding and they are not looking for long term either. The truth is the bands that make the most noise get the contracts those are the bands that are smart in business. The problem is most bands are full of artist and artist are bad at business. To make it they must surround themselves with people that can help them succeed.
As for christian music. No artist has sold 1 million albums on a christian label, ever. The christian music industry is not set up to sell that type of volume. They may act big but they are a clown fish in an ocean of sharks.
Yes the music industry is corrupt but they also are the reason we have most of the music so readily available in this instant satisfaction world. Its funny we hate them for what they do and love them for what they give us doing what they do.

I don’t hate the idea of an industry. Yes, bands need an industry. It just seems that the industry as it stands is operating on a model that doesn’t know how to handle mp3’s and the internet. If the internet meets its potential, people’s specialized musical needs can be more easily met. There will still be Britney Spears and Ludacris types, BIG BIG BIG, but I think people will increasingly be looking to internet organizations to point them to the bands to “invest” in. This can only help the industry. What I’m suggesting is that an industry based only on product will continue to find itself in a bind if it can no longer make money just on the product (I’m assuming of course that people will continue to be able to get free music rather easily on the internet). It seems like “subscription” models are doing well and becoming more popular. Which is why I suggested my particular idea.

The point of this discussion is to see if it might be possible to transfer the notion of music industry as “marketing a product” to “marketing people”. This could be seen as merely semantics—after all, the industry does market people and their image, but as product. I think U2’s success ought to wake up the industry to the power of trustworthy artists. The current industry might like to define U2’s success by the fact that U2 is just really good at selling albums, but that’s why the industry does not understand what art is really all about. And that’s why they continue to produce many acts that only make them money for a few short years. They’re investing in products, which is much more short-sighted than investing in people.

I just can’t see how it can work. The biggest problem is the artist themselves. Maybe if the artist had to match dallor for dallor investments then they would show an investor something worth investing in and bands that can’t aren’t worth it. It is to easy for them to breakup or change their name. Today the average band has a life span of 5 years then they breakup but it takes almost that lone for most bands to develope into something worhtwhile.

That’s one of the big obstacles for this idea, as I see it too. It’s such a risky investment because bands don’t stay together. But I wonder if some of the reason bands don’t stay together are the financial and relationship pressures that occur because being in a rock band is not a legitimate business. People can’t keep putting their heart and soul in a band and work one or two part time jobs and be married and have kids all at the same time. At least not for long. But if making music could be a more consistent job like other businesses, perhaps people could stick with it. I just don’t see why making music should be such a unique and utterly incomparable form of work. Classical musicians, painters, film-makers all seem to have more stability than musicians in rock and pop music. There may be some built-in reasons for that, but I think one of the main reasons could be that the music industry is structured more poorly than other models for other kinds of artists.

Hey, are we still talking about this? I check in too rarely, meaning I want to respond to a million things at once. I have, as a Christian and a person who considers himself a businessman at least from the theoretical perspective, have thought of this idea of investment for a long time. I, from a different angle, want to borrow money so that I can go into what I believe is my calling, that being a cafe-owning barista who has close connections with a farm/artist community. But this, like releasing an album, takes a crap-ton of money which I don’t have.

So the alternative is, like you have suggested, convincing fellow Christians to buy shares. We all know people with money tied up in the stock market or what have you, so the question is why to the give their cash to some slick haired suit instead of us long-haired rebels? One big reason is, as silly as it sounds, trust. People don’t trust that they will get a return on their money. Now, I could put out a laundry list of problems I have with this, not beliving in a perpetual growth economy, the fact that God forbade the charging of interest, etc, but the fact of the matter is that people want at least relative certainty that they will get a return on their money.

So you have to make them trust you. There are three steps that I have thought about that can increase the trust level. First, now, in the pre-commune days, I live a life of frugality. I work hard and am trying to save money, so when the time comes, I can say to people, "look, I am responsible with cash, now give me yours…please." Second, you need to come up with a good written business plan that you can present to people. This means figuring it out for yourself. Will your band ever be financially sustainable where people will actually get a return or is this more of a Waterdeep missions idea where return can be placed more on the back burner? (On a side note, Waterdeep is perhaps the most talented band to come out of the CCM scene ever. I’m not surprised they didn’t make it). And third, you need, as you are doing, to foster communities. You will do a better job convincing people that you know to trust you with their money than total strangers with whom you have no relationship.

And on a final side note, it isn’t just the artists who are suffering because of lack of community and worship of the green calf. The fact that members of a church body shop at Walmart instead of with the hard-ware store owner who is a deacon in their church, and then give him "benevolence" when his shop goes out of business is appalling. The business norm of meeting and focusing on the bottom line of efficiency etc. is important in running any business, but as Bob Goudzwaard points out, Christians must strive for simultaneous normativity. Answering to all the norms presented us at once, and supporting the members of our community whatever their vocation is.

It is not the artists’ fault. it is a problem of lack of team work . everyone pulling on the artist or each other from different directions and negativity. that I see is the problem, with alterior motives… CIrque du Soleil has an awesome book out that describes what makes them so successful.. How they do it.. It is great reading if you get a chance to pick it up at one of their shows or perhaps even at their website. They remind me of being just like a record label. albeit using acrobats instead. the bpook is called "The Spark" Would love to see the labels work like this. Think it would reinvigorate the entire entertainment industry if the focus shifted away from people taking things, and makkingn it about taking things personally to everyone striving for excellence of the show/brand and considerate and conscious of each others roles and how they are affected by each others actions. I just spoke wiith the mktng head of a major ad he said something about an artist taking the fall for something they did. And that it’s always the artists who if falls on when something goes wrong and they have to pay for it in some way. That seems so upside down. Not necessarily personall to the artist. but to the entire business structure…. if you crush the aritst you spend tons more money trying to bring up a new one. and you don’t learn form the mistake and again the new one too wil be crushed…. but if they support the artist in healthy ways and strive to be sure the artist is up physically, mentyally spiritualyl and emotioalyl and has the ultimate best care , and if everyone takes responsibility for the incidents then the cow will willingly continue to give milk.

jjust my perspective