HIPSTER RUNOFF

It has been a widely accepted indie (especially mindie) strategy to 'sell digital albums' on the cheap for a pricepoint between $0.99 to $4.99 upon debut. It can help a buzzband pick up more sales 2 cool dads who just want to legally purchase an album at a chill price. Now it seems like Billboard, the 'Chartkeeping company' will no longer include sales of albums that cost less than $3.49 in their chart numbers.

Lady Gaga and Amazon Cloud basically ruined the game because they teamed up and sold her last album for 99 cents. Although I would rather purchase a burrito / taco / gordita crunch wrap at Taco Bell, many lamestreamers will jump at the chance to get a 'sweet ass deal' on some mp3s.

Starting next week, the publication (which tracks album sales via Nielsen SoundScan) will overhaul their sales rules. There are a handful of new rules, but the juiciest one is the fact that albums priced below $3.49 will not be included in sales tallies.

Should they have raised the pricepoint? 4.99? 6.49? 9.99? How much is an album worth, yall?

You have to think that many indie record labels are 'pissed' at this development, hoping to 'chart big' by selling albums on the cheap. Mainstream indie buzzbands who are looking to debut at #1 could be put at a disadvantage with this new development. Some indie purists are at peace with the new rule, hoping that the cost of music is priced at its critical value, not its production value.

Is Amazon being a good competitor so we don't have to buy albums off iTunes for $9.99?
Do indie bands 'cheat' by selling their albums on the cheap, or is it a good way to encourage 'mp3 window shoppers' to impulse buy their album?
Is this bad news 4 indie bands who were hoping 2 chart?
IS all music overpriced?
Should all mp3s be free?
How much would u sell ur buzz album 4?
How much is music worth 2 society/an individual consumer?
Do u miss the days when a CD cost $17.99?
Should we all just 'support our local record stores' or chill on iTunes?

The Hype Machine is a music service website that aggregates blogs that post MP3s, then make it easy to search for MP3s, 'legally' download the MP3 at the blog, then u NEVER have to visit the crappy blog again because you already 'blew ur load' so there is no reason to build a relationship with some random ass blog that has no editorial voice but just posts obvious mp3s and remixes to get hits from Hype Machine. It's a krazie cycle, but the Hype Machine made itself more relevant than any MP3 blog when MP3 blogs 'mattered', aggregating the long tail.

Anyways, the Hype Machine reached 1 million users. I guess that's a massive accomplishment for any website, because then you can sell your site to some one who wants to eff it up by trying too hard to monetize it. Sorta like when Rupert Murdoch bought Myspace so that he could hack in2 people's accounts.

The Hype Machine tracks a variety of MP3 blogs. If a post contains MP3 links, it adds those links to its database and displays them on the front page. Users can then search through The Hype Machine for latest tunes in the blogosphere, most popular artists, songs posted on Twitter, songs other people are listening to on the site, or they can tune into a monthly radio show. The Hype Machine’s founder Anthony Volodkin, a Russian entrepreneur living in Brooklyn, “wakes up in the morning to get people excited about music.”

The Hype Machine tries to be all like 'WE ARE WHAT IS RIGHT WITH EVERYTHING IN MUSIC SHARING!', riding evangelical waves. However, I am not sure if ppl vibe to it that hard any more. Most people can just use 'google' as a Hype Machine, except u can just download the entire album illegally. Other ppl vibe to services like Spotify that make Hype Machine 'completely retarded' because no1 even cares abt tracking blog buzz any more.

I don't even know what kind of music is on there any more. I will go once every few months and see 'random ass shit' in the popular section, like remixes + mashups involving the 'hot artist' of the month and/or a recent mindie mainstream release that 'just leaked.' At the end of the day, u gotta give them props for exploiting the long tail of bloggers who dream that 1 day they will 'become as big as Pitchfork' and slave away trying to make enough ad revenue to get them to 1 music festival per year.

Remember the old HypeMachine, back when there were only like 1,000 blogs that all posted the same MP3s, not 1,000,000,000,000 blogs that all posted the same MP3s?

It's hard 4 me to 'honor' the 'history' of any blog or blog-related service, since every1 is just a slave to hits, then you just get to a point where u let obnoxious ads take over ur site and it is all about making $$$$. Congrats to HypeMachine on 'mad users', and hopefully they can make 'mad bank' off an upcoming sale of the site instead of trying to act like 'getting ppl pumped abt sharing & discovering music' is something worth pursuing forever.

Did the Hype Machine change ur life?
Is it still 'innovative', or is it like a washed up buzzband of yesteryear that we still have fond vibes 4 bc of its place in the evolution of our relationship with indie music?
Is Hype Machine still a valuable alt service?
Do buzzbands still care abt 'being popular on hypemachine'?
Did Hype Machine 'ruin' music blogging?
Remember 'remixes' before Hype Machine made them lamestream?
Did it end the era of 'great music writing', or did it 'spare us' from bitter d-bags writing abt music?
Are music blogs/Hype Machines 'dying' or 'more important to the open discourse abt music than evr'?
Does the blogosphere 'have its head up its own ass' [via self-importance]?
Did Hype Machine 'ruin' electro music by encouraging remixing 4 the sake of SEO?
Do you h8 Hype Machine because Foster the People openly credits it for their success?

Did God really only create Hype Machine 2 create Foster the People?

Hype Machine

Company

Lists:

Read more>>>>

Anthony Volodkin

Alternative Entrepreneur

Anthony Volloddy is the creator of the Hype Machine.

Lists:

Read more>>>>

In recent years, blogs have enabled this 'National Alt Holiday' called Record Store Day. Basically, you are encouraged to go out and support your local record store by purchasing your buzzband's vinyl records thru these dying record stores. I think bloggers have been really into it because they feel 'guilty' for changing the music industry so much, so feigned nostalgia for 'supporting small biz owners' seems like an authentic thing to do.

Anyways, some dude who STARTED Record Store Day just went out of business. "If only we could find a way 2 make Record Store Day every day..."

The man behind Record Store Day has been forced to shut up shop.
Eric Levin, who founded the day to help promote independent record stores, will close Criminal Records in Atlanta, Georgia in November (11), according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution.
Levin says, "We've been underwater since the economy became distressed. We've been on a rescue mission for three years. I'm done paying for it by myself.
"I gave myself until the 20th anniversary and if I was still drowning by August 2011, I'd pull the plug."

It is definitely always sad when some1's 'passion project' business goes out of business bc of evolving technology/business standards & practices/etc... But at the same time... KINDA FUNNIE/IRONIC... right? :-P

The man who came up with the last great record store gimmick finally 'came up short'. :-(

Do u support Record Stores, or is 'every day Record Store Day on iTunes/Spotify?'
Do u feel bad for this bro 4 going out of business, or does this happen in every line of work if u fail 2 push your business model 2 evolve?
Do u h8 Record Store Day?
Do u think this bro still gets $$$ for 'inventing' Record Store Day?
Is it 'too crowded' when u try to purchase ur fave band's limited edition vinyls?
Has Record Store Day become 'too commercialized' anyways? [via buzzbands piggybacking it 4 press]
Do u support ur local record store, or just stream shit / buy it off itunes / steal it / Spotify it?
Would u rather just order ur vinyls 'totally cheap' on the internet so that artists get 100% of the profit?
Were Record Stores always overrated anyways?

It seems like the internet is on the search for the perfect infographic that depicts the state of our current music industry, and what it used 2 look like so that we can predict what it will look like in the future. They can't just write "Totally Effed. Digital Singles on iTunes" on a .jpg because that is not interesting. Above is some infographic that says ppl don't buy vinyl, cassette, and CDs any more.

Do u think INFOGRAPHICS will help us 2 solve the problems of 2morrow/2day?

The music industry 'still makes the majority of their money' from full length albums.

This infographic demonstrates the sharp decline in ppl 'buying real albums'. (Confused)

Here are some trends in 'how the industry is making money' via random crap like ringtones, subscriptions, and streaming radio.

Downloaded albums & singles have grown nicely, but we’ve already established that is not nearly enough to offset the loss of the physical equivalents.

Mobile, which includes “Master Ringtunes, Ringbacks, Music Videos, Full Length Downloads, and Other Mobile”, hit its peak in 2007 and has actually been in decline the past 2 years. Looks like the death of the ringtone - and possibly the birth of the iPhone?

Subscriptions – presumably Rhapsody, Zune Pass, and the like — have also drifted downward the past 2 years.

Here is a graph that says 'digital singles are s0 hot right now.'

I feel like after looking at these infographics for the past 5 minutes, I feel like I finally 'get' the state of the Music Industry, like I went to a specialized college that gave me a 'Music Business Degree.' Maybe I'll come up with a new webservice that 'saves' the industry, delivers revenue to the artists, and helps users to discover new buzzbands based on their listening history.

Do yall <3 infographics?
Can we save the music industry now that we have these sweet infographics?
Is the music industry 'effed'?
R u tired of reading abt how 'effed' the music industry is?
Did u learn anything interesting from these infographics?
Do yall believe that there are only 'lies, damn lies, statistics, and 'infographics'?

Did yall know that 'the music industry' is 'going down the shitter'? Ya. Obvi. It doesn't really matter 2 me because most of the bands I listen 2 are just lofi buzzbands that know their shit is gonna get leaked or else they won't have any fans/buzz. Anyways, here is some graph that shows album sales from 1973-2010. "What an alarming trend!" [via graphical analysis]

Sorta wish I coulda been a buzzband from 1993-2000. Even if we were a 'one hit wonder', we probably still woulda made more bank than we would have made now. Would yall rather be a 'crappy alt rock band who had a hit that sold 3 million albums' or a modern buzzband getting 'tons of buzz'?

Good news though, yall. Here is a graph of 'singles' sales. As yall can see, the 'digital single' is selling 'like hot cakes.'

"Vinyl is totally back, yall!" -some indie cool dad

I guess it's a good thing that we can buy mp3s 'a la carte' instead of having to go 2 Blockbuster Music/Sam Goody/Suncoast 2 purchase an $18.99 CD full of crappy songs.

Have digital singles 'ruined' the music industry?
R u sad abt 'the death of the album' or is it a good thing 4 consumers?
R u sad that the music industry is 'dying'?
Would yall rather be a modern indie buzzband or get a standard 9-5 job?
Do consumers on the internet have more power than evr b4?
Do yall miss the 1990s?
Do yall h8 product placement/co-branding as the final attempt 2 'monetize' music?
Do u think tweens with iTunes gift cards 'fuel' the music industry?

Shazam is a popular 'app' that you have on ur phone, and when u hear a song playing and u wanna know what it is, u turn on Shazam, then u let it listen to the song, then it tells u which song it is. It works 'like magic.' One minute, u don't know who a buzzband is, then SHAZAM!... u know exactly who it is...

But have u ever wondered how they are able 2 catalog so many rare indie buzz mp3s? Sure it is easy to find mainstream and classic songs... but how do they stay on top of the rapidly evolving indie buzzosphere?
What if I told u that there was one man 'behind it all' who uploads rare indie buzz mp3s into the Shazam system?

Sure, Shazam, the popular music-spotting cellphone application, can identify that Rihanna track. But what about the new song from the Sandwitches, a Bay Area folk-rock band?

Before the Shazam service can find a song, Mr. Slomovitz or another sourcer must locate and input the recording. That is where Charles Slomovitz comes in.

Mr. Slomovitz was roaming the aisles of a record store here recently when he spotted a flame-haired clerk. It was Grace Cooper, one-third of the Sandwitches, which had just put out a single that was getting attention on music blogs.

“She’s got that sound that’s getting to be big,” he said as she handed him a copy of the song, “so I’ve got to have it.”

S00 jealous of Charles Slomovitz.... Wish I had his job... #alt_dream_jobs

So ur telling me there is a job out there where I can basically scan the Hype Machine and MP3 blogs and then upload them into Shazam, and I will be a 'relevant part of the music tech industry'? Feel like my parents would be proud of me if I worked for a 'startup' that was 'shooting for an IPO in _ years.'

The article really tries to take the angle like 'The music industry has totally changed yall [via technology]'

Mr. Slomovitz, a music industry veteran, spends his days tracking down hot new artists — but not for a big record label. Instead, he works for Shazam, maker of the application of the same name that can figure out what song is playing in a bar, a clothing boutique or a TV commercial.

“It’s like a scavenger hunt in real time,” said Mr. Slomovitz, 42. “It never stops.”

Mr. Slomovitz’s job is one of the more unusual in the new digital music era, as he and the dozen or so other “music sourcers” at Shazam try to ensure that any songs the app’s users might want to identify are ready and waiting in the company’s database.

Do yall listen 2 'internet mix tapes' and 'college radio'?

At Shazam, the music sourcers’ challenge goes beyond just getting a copy of the latest single from Kanye West. Shazam also wants the latest club tracks, Internet mix tapes and whatever is playing on college radio, anything that might inspire curious listeners to pull out their phones and fire up the app.

It seems like this job is rlly hard. Do yall think u have what it takes?

The hunt keeps Mr. Slomovitz on his toes. Every morning, he skims dozens of music blogs, checking for new releases he might have missed, as well as the iTunes, Amazon.com and Billboard charts, and blog aggregators like the Hype Machine.

Most weeks he also goes to local record stores to see if there is something in stock he has not heard of, or if older albums are being remastered or reissued. And he listens to local radio stations, especially near universities.

Really feel like this job fits in perfectly with my current lifestyle... Really angry at this Bromovitz bro.

Do u listen to mp3s + bootlegs that are way too alt 2 be Shazam-able?

Shazam executives say their mission is to catalog every song in the world. But it would be impossible to feed the machine with each and every song released by a tiny label or a bedroom studio.

Instead, Mr. Slomovitz has to try to think like a music tastemaker, guessing which songs might get attention and potentially stump Shazam’s servers.

“They’re our A.& R. to find anything that might be played,” said David Jones, a vice president at Shazam.

Is Shazam the ultimate entry level music discovery tool?
Has Shazam always found the bands ur looking for, or does it consistently let u down because ur too underground?
Do ur friends call u "Shazam" because you are able to identify every mp3 in the world?
R u more alt than Charles Slomovitz?
Do u think this bro is 'hella legit' or does he only listen to overground crap?
Does he deserve a New York Times profile piece, or should they save those 4 world leaders?
What do yall use 2 discover music?
What do u have to major in to work for Shazam? Do u think they drug test or can u blaze hard while u discover indie mp3s?

If you’re red-green color blind then this is going to hurt. Based on estimated traffic data from Compete, this visualization depicts web-based music consumption in the U.S. in 2010. Included are websites where music is streamed and/or downloaded. Due to accurate sample rate availability (and in the interest of sanity) websites with less than 100,000 monthly visits are omitted. The map is to scale. Larger map areas represent higher website traffic. Green indicates positive growth in 2010. Red indicates negative growth in 2010.

I just looked at this infographic that attempted to demonstrate how many hits some of the most popular music sites on the internet get. It makes me kinda sad that there there aren't very many music blogs on this infographic, maybe demonstrating how music listeners would rather 'discover music' based on an algorithm.

Anyways, what do u think of this infographic?
What music streaming service do u use?
Is Rhapsody 'alt'? eMusic? Should I get a new Napster account?
Is Soundcloud 'legit' or do they just allow illegal streams on their site?
Do u think all of these 'successful' sites will eventually just get purchased by iTunes and exist outside of the browser?

Also here is an 'infographic' that represents how many more hits youtube gets for streaming music purposes than every other service on the internet. Also 'pandora' is way more popular than a lot of these sites.

Then they talked abt how popular Rolling Stone, NPR, Pitchfork Media, and the Pirate Bay are.

Bonus tracks: Right now The Pirate Bay gets as much traffic as MTV.com. Based on its current trajectory Pandora will soon surpass The New York Times. The most popular music magazine online is Rolling Stone—2.2M visits in December 2010. The most popular music blog is Pitchfork—1.4M visits in December 2010—like two Hype Machines. NPR is in the same ballpark as Last.fm.

What can Pitchfork do to 'get more hits' than Rolling Stone, or will it lose its 'indie cred' [via 'going mainstream']?
Should all music just be free?
Has Hype Machine 'gone down the shitter'? [via too many crappy remixes + blogs]
Has NPR 'taken over' the indie music marketplace?

So many hits... So many users searching 4 an authentic streaming experience.

Would u rather start a 'music blog' or a 'streaming music discovery service'?
Are all of these websites 'stealing money from artists' or do they legitimately help artists reach wider audiences?
Do u hope every music site on the internet 'goes under'?
Who is going to 'win' when more Walmart-core people start streaming music instead of buying it at Walmart?
Are there enough hits on the internet for every1?
Do yall use spotify, pandora or last fm?
R u sad that iTunes purchases Lala?
What streaming app do u use on ur iPhone / android / blackberry?
Do u just stream videos on youtubes?
Do u just illegally download rapidshare + mediafire + megaupload indie leaks?
What music website will 'win the internet'?

Just watched some videos of some 'panels' of some ppl talking about topics that are 'relevant 2 the indie music industry.' I remember this kind of stuff used 2 be interesting back in 2k4-2k6, back when blogs were 'emerging' and 'kewl, new places 2 find mp3s', but now even blogs + the state of music journalism kinda 'is what it is' and no1 really cares and the large blogs are 'just a part of the machine', 'don't do anything for truly independent artists' and 'musicians can't make money.'

There are 2 panels of interest. One is about 'Are bloggers more important than record labels?' and the other 1 is "Has music journalism gone down the shitter?"

Here is some panel called "Debate: Bloggers vs. A&R's: The Smackdown" where some bloggers and some A&R ppl talk abt who is more important. Bloggers are probably all like 'we find artists and promote them and record labels aren't even necessary. My blog gets tons of hits and has an organic fan base that is more powerful than any record label.' Then the A&R ppl are probably like 'bloggers are lamestreamers who don't add anything to the_conversation. Bloggers need 2 get their heads up out of their asses. We actually make money (theoretically).'

In this corner: Bloggers. In the other corner: A&R's. Who finds bands first? Who influences who? Who listens to more music? Are bloggers doing the work of A&R people?

Moderator: David Prince (Billboard/The Daily Swarm)

Bloggers:
Matthew Perpetua (Fluxblog), Bjorn Jeffery (Discobelle), Ryan Catbird (Catbirdseat)

A&R:
Nick Catchdubs (Fool's Gold), Dean Bein (True Panther/Matador A&R), Gordon Conrad (Relapse)

I have no idea who these blggrs are, what they blog abt, whose careers they helped, or what they contribute 2 the scene, but I guess it is 'interesting' 2 hear ppl talk abt a pseudo-industry that they are very proud of. Whose side are u on? Are bloggers more important than A&R ppl? What does A&R even 'mean'?

Does n e 1 know if bloggers are important 2 the music industry?
Do they talk abt progressive ideas that can help every band 2 monetize in our zany internet music scene?

Who are the true 'thought leaders' in the music industry?
Does n e 1 even care abt u and ur lil blogspot?
Should they have invited Carles?

Here is some series about 'the state of music journalism.' I think they basically say "THE INTERNET HAS ITZ POSITIVES AND NEGATIVES. MORE PPL HAVE A VOICE NOW, SO IF U SEARCH FOR IT, THERE IS QUALITY WRITING. HOWEVER... THE_BLOG_MACHINE IS S00 BORING AND REPETITIVE."

The rise of blogs provided a vehicle for a new generation of music writers and made music critics at mainstream publications need to prove their relevance. As print publications have had to defend why they are not obsolete, they’ve also seen their ad revenue, budgets and page counts shrink. But what most online music writers can’t, or don’t, do is go out and report stories. They aren’t observing or getting the facts about the cultures and places that create the music. Long-form journalism and big pictures currently don’t translate digitally, but are there just other, better, ways of doing music reportage online?

Moderator: Eric Ducker (Malbon Farms)
Panelists: Maura Johnston (Idolator), Michael Reich (Videothing), Rob Harvilla (Village Voice)

There are like 100 parts 2 this but they just kinda keep saying like "things are sooo different. A lot of blogs suck. eff the

Each of these videos have like 100 more parts [link], but I think they are probably pretty boring bc I didn't even watch these 4 that I embedded. Just sorta assumed no1 had anything innovative 2 say bc they are active participants in 'the_problem.'

Who would be ur 'dream panel' of music bloggers/relevant online music journalism personalities?
Is the music industry 'effed'?
Does n e 1 even care abt music journalism any more, or do ppl just want to DL free MP3s and 'decide 4 themselves'?
Do u think it was really nice of Scion 2 sponsor this 'intellectual summit' or should they have just wasted money throwing a huge partie with free alcohol + free car giveaways?
WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH INDIE ARTISTS, THE MODERN MUSIC INDUSTRY, THE INTERNET, MONETIZING UR BUZZBAND + BLOGSITE, TWITTER, SOCIAL MEDIA, ITUNES, MAGAZINES, AUTHENTIC JOURNALISM AND ____________?

From what I have read on the internet, vinyl sales 'surged' in 2k10, since people no longer buy CDs, but they want a more authentic experience than just 'purchasing an mp3 from the internet.' Some people are really in denial abt the future of the music industry, so they are just trying their best to 'be authentic' by purchasing bulky packaging + outdated technology 2 play on their outdated record player just so they can be all like "U can really tell the difference, this sounds amazing!"

Anyways, bc of those types of cool dads with too much money, vinyl record sales are 'at an all time high' or something like that.

Though overall album sales dropped 13 percent in 2010, sales of vinyl increased by 14 percent over the previous year, with around 2.8 million units sold. This is a new record for vinyl sales since 1991, when the format had all but disappeared in the wake of the CD boom, according to a report released yesterday by Nielsen SoundScan.

This really isn't a big deal if u 'look at the numbers' because it is just cool dad music, mainstream indie, and boring old bands like The Beatles and Michael Jackson. People probably thought they were 'purchasing a collector's item' or something.

Top Ten Vinyl Albums, 1/4/2010 - 1/2/2011
1. The Beatles Abbey Road (35,000)
2. Arcade Fire The Suburbs (18,800)
3. Black Keys Brothers (18,400)
4. Vampire Weekend Contra (15,000)
5. Michael Jackson Thriller (14,200)
6. The National High Violet (13,600)
7. Beach House Teen Dream (13,000)
8. Jimi Hendrix Experience Valleys of Neptune (11,400)
9. Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon (10,600)
10. the xx xx (10,200)

Top Ten Vinyl Artists, 1/4/2010 - 1/2/2011
1. The Beatles (36,700)
2. Black Keys (36,000)
3. Radiohead (30,500)
4. Arcade Fire (28,600)
5. Jimi Hendrix (26,400)
6. The National (24,600)
7. Pavement (24,200)
8. Vampire Weekend (21,900)
9. Metallica (20,000)
10. Bob Dylan (17,000)

Are the Black Keys the ultimate cool dad band?
Are the Beatles 'overrated'?
Did people just buy Beatles + MJ albums to use as 'posters' in their roomes?
Should indie record labels pointlessly sink tons of funds into pressing vinyl records instead of releasing CDs + MP3s 2 the general public?
Can some1 do some research on 'cassette sales' 'booming' in '2k12'?
Do these stats mean anything?
Will there be enough mainstream indie bands who release vinyl records in 2k11 to keep this trend moving upwards?
How many vinyl records were sold in 1977/some other random year b4 8-tracks/cassettes/mini-disc players existed??

From what I understand, some bands expect to be paid 'in real money' for making MP3s, so there are a few retailers who sell MP3s. Much like physical stores, they are kinda like some sort of 'place where u buy shit', and they compete against one another by having gimmicks/price cuts/etc.

Anyways, a lot of ppl were wondering 'Is Amazon's MP3 selling business catching up with iTunes?' Amazon offers DRM free mp3s, and iPods MP3s are all protected and shit, and sometimes Amazon offers 'low deals' on entire MP3 albums, bc if u rlly think abt it... How much is an MP3 worth? Should all MP3s really 'cost the same'? Is an MP3 hidden on a CD worth more than an MP3 u buy from a retailer?

Amazon will do this thing where it 'drastically reduces prices' on new/old albums just to get customers 2 buy the album from them. Apparently Amazon MP3 'still blows' and 'iTunes is kicking ass.'

On the day Apple Inc. rolled out the Beatles' catalog on its iTunes Store, Amazon.com Inc. fired back with a digital exclusive of its own: The latest album from rap-rocker Kid Rock—whose music still isn't available on iTunes—for just $3.99.

Such steep discounts are a cornerstone of Amazon's strategy to gain traction in a market in which iTunes remains the dominant player. At the same time, a debate has arisen among music labels about whether such discounts risk undermining the value of their products.

Do bands get to decide their pricepoint?
Should bands even sell mp3s on iTunes/amazon?
How much do $$ do artists even see when u buy their music from megaretailers?
Have u ever purchased an album 'at a sweet discount' [via bargain bins]?
Should MP3s rise/fall in price depending on the market for them?

Amazon's share of the paid digital-download market rose to 13.3% in the third quarter, from 11% the year earlier, according to estimates from research firm NPD Group. Meanwhile, iTunes' share rose to 66.2%, from 63.2%.

Am I a lamestreamer if I buy music from iTunes?

How does album selling even work? Seems all confusing...

But when Amazon promotes a high-profile album as its daily deal, it typically pays the full wholesale price for the album—generally $7 to $8—and eats the loss, according to people familiar with the matter. That was the case with another recent high-profile special offer, Kanye West's "My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy," according to people familiar with the matter.

In contrast, Amazon's monthly promotion of 100 albums for $5 each generally involves the cooperation of record labels and distributors, according to people in the industry. After haggling over what titles will be included in the promotion, the labels will temporarily cut their wholesale prices for the promotion. The process is similar to promotions at brick-and-mortar retailers like Best Buy Co.

Don't even rlly care, now that I think abt it.
Basically steal all of my music [via rapidshare/mediafire/etc]...
Whatevz
Hope all those mainstreamers have fun buying music from iTunes/Amazon.

Do yall miss Lala?
Do u 'listen 2 pandora all day'?
Is iTunes 4 tweens, cool dads, and lamestreamers who own iPods & iPhones?
Is itunes 'a brilliant product'?
Should Amazon stick to selling _________ [evrything]?
Should Amazon open up physical stores so we can go in and browse what they have?
Is 'selling MP3s' funnie because it competes against 'selling physical units' so both sides are kinda effed?

It's so sillie living in the modern world where every1 steals music and entities that create/sell music can't really make as much money any more. However, some businesses/humans/online websites still try to 'sell music' even though it "isn't as profitable as it should be." Sorta 'dont' rlly care' abt who is making money via the music industry just as long as I get free, buzzworthy MP3s.

Some website made a list of 100 'not so fucked' music companies. Just the usual 'listing' gimmick to 'open up discussions' by throwing as many famous humans/services/websites on a list then letting people be all like "oh yeah this is interesting I rlly care abt musicians being compensated 4 creating art."

Well, here’s a list of companies (or divisions of companies, entities, performers, innovators, etc.) that are not-so-f*ked. In fact, they're likely to still be here in five years – and quite possibly, they'll be shaping the next-generation music industry.

Here is the list + analysis

1. Apple -heard they invented iPods and iPhones and 'screw over' artists
2. Apple Corps. - wonder what the difference between APPLE AND APP CORPIE is
3. Spotify - Not sure if they have this in America
4. Pandora - "I love listening to the _____ Pandora Station. It is s000 g00d at identifying similar hits."
5. BMG Rights Management - Who the eff is this
6. Frontline Management Group - Nvr heard of them
7. Universal Music Group - Sounds like a major label. Bet they are effed.
8. Google Music - Hope Google Music pays artists 90% of profits/replaces iTunes and continues to 'screw ovr' artists/labels
9. YouTube - Really enjoy streaming songs from youtube 1x instead of buying the mp3 for 4evr
10. Facebook - Great service for discovering buzzbands via ur friends via wall-2-walls
11. Kanye West - Do u think this is because he has tons of buzzbucks [via 10.0]?
12. EMI Music Publishing - Sounds like a major label. Bet they are fucked
13. BigChampagne - Sounds like some dumb internet service that does something stupid
14. Sirius XM Radio - 'This is a great product. Check out HIPSTER RUNOFF blog radio every Monday at Noon and Midnight Eastern.'
15. Topspin - Sounds like some online company that will eventually just be acquired by google/apple/pandora/myspace/lala/imeem.
16. Clear Channel Radio - <3 driving around listening to the mainstream radio
17. Android - Hope there is an Android platform on the new iPhone
18. MTV Networks - Not sure MTV is really into 'music.' Think the future of music is Jersey Shores and Poor Teens Getting Pregnant.
19. Twitter - Can't wait for twitter to let me 'add a song to my profile'
20. ReverbNation - sounds like a message board 4 lamestreamers.
21. Anonymous - is this the 4chans?

Pictured: Graph abt the music industry that may or may not be relevant but is supposed 2 look interesting

22. Berklee College of Music - One of my bros went there to 'master' the [dumb instrument] and now he is unemployed but is really good at [dumb, obscure instrument]
23. Rightsflow - Sounds like something that is supposed to keep albums from leaking.
24. CD Baby - Sounds like an iTunes portal that is 'so simple, even a baby can use it' [via mp3s for babies sales]
25. Music Reports, Inc. -- Sounds 'really serious', like Reports abt Music
26. Smule - Wonder if this is a human or some sort of bullshit service
27. Sonicbids - hope this is like some sort of 'ebay for mp3s' where u bid on mp3s
28. Pitchfork - Feel like it is way better to be a 'blog/website abt music' than to actually be a musician
29. The Hype Machine - Feels like it is better to be an 'aggregator of blogs' than 2 be an actual blog
30. Fuse - I think I have this crappy music channel
31. Vevo - wonder if they have effectively monetized youtube videos
32. CBS Radio - The Radio is the future of music
33. Disney Music Group - Heard they invented high school musicals
34. Avid Technology (Pro Tools) - I used Pro Tools 2 record my buzzyband
35. Rovi - Sounds like the name of a little Jewish boy
36. TuneCore - is this the new MP3 streaming browser created by WinAmp
37. Amoeba Music - sounds like a kewl
38. The Agency Group - sounds like an agency group
39. Antares Audio Technologies (maker of Autotune) - Wish I had invented autotune :-(
40. Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) - Sounds like unchill bros who police leaks
41. Creative Commons - not sure what this is, but sounds like it doesn't make money
42. Trent Reznor - heard he is in a buzzband
43. Sonos - Sounds like the knickname
44. David Shapiro Lewit & Hayes - Sounds like some 'high powered Jewish Lawyers'
45. The Copyleft - is this a kewl mtv2 alt rock buzzband?

Pictured: Graph abt the music industry that may or may not be relevant but is supposed 2 look interesting

46. SXSW - heard this is where buzzbands are invented every year
47. Merlin - sounds like a 'music discovery wizard' that has a long white beard
48. Domino Records - Must be because Animal Collective is on their label
49. Goldenvoice/AEG Live - wonder if they do sweet '360 deals'
50. Coachella - Wish I had started a relevant music festival 10-20 years ago
51. The Michael Jackson Estate - 'We have been making Money off MJ for the last _ years.'
52. Bonnaroo - heard this is like Coachella 4 hicks who like jam bands and alt rock bands
53. Arcade Fire - Bet they are gonna 'try to pull a radiohead' and release albums 4 free/donation 2 haiti in the future.
54. TDC's Play (Denmark) - no idea
55. Festival Republic (Reading & Leeds Festivals)
56. The Metropolitan Opera - 'Boring music is still relevant
57. Howard Stern - not sure what he has 2 do with music any more
58. Amazon MP3 - Great way 2 impulse buy DRM-free music
59. Metric - Do they mean the band Metric or is this some sort of
60. KCRW - some radio station that is 'respected' by cool dad markets like NPR or something
61. Big Machine Records - No idea what this is
62. Sony/ATV Music Publishing - sounds like it is gonna fail
63. Electronic Frontier Foundation - sounds pointless/dumb
64. UStream - thought this was for tweens to get naked on
65. Ford (see #4) - Might buy a Ford Truck 2 support the music industry
66. Concord Music Group -is this the company that makes Shazam?
67. Naxos - sounds like the name of a small Greek Boy
68. Taylor Swift - as long as she keeps dating famous ppl then writing songs abt the breakup she'll be fine

Pictured: Graph abt the music industry that may or may not be relevant but is supposed 2 look interesting

69. INgrooves (see #7) - is this the company that makes Shazam?
70. Music Hack Day - wonder if 'Record Store Day' is
71. The PROs: ASCAP, BMI, SESAC… - sounds like Garbage management companies
72. [Insert Torrent Tracker Here] -
73. Rapidshare - great place 2 illegally download albums. Might be more into mediafire though [via no wait time]
74. Radiohead - 'They released in_Rainbows 4 free and still made money!'
75. iBiquity - onder if this is the company that makes Shazam
76. Snoop Dogg - Probs just another rapper with a major label deal
77. Touchtunes - wonder if this is iTunes for the iPad
78. Chop Shop Music Supervision - no idea wtf this shit is
79. Bob Lefsetz - Some 'music industry insider/critic' who says obvious shit and doesn't even have a blog, just has a 'mailing list'
80. Soundcloud - great way to embed illegal mp3s
81. New Orleans - 'They play jazz music there'
82. Weezer - 'They are rlly innovative and reaching tween markets by appearing in youtube videos'
83. Gathering of the Juggalos - 'Juggalos are gonna be a really marketable meme going forward' -Jersey Shore's 1.4 season lifespan
84. ISPs - wtf does this even mean? Think they send u mean emails threatening 2 sue u when u download something illegal

Pictured: Graph abt the music industry that may or may not be relevant but is supposed 2 look interesting

85. Gibson Guitar - 'We make gitties, yall. We sell them 2 ppl who think they are going to be rock stars'
86. Musician's Friend - Wonder if this means 'the bff of every1 musician in the world'
87. NPR Music - 'They are a great way to reach an audience of cool dads who buy shit off iTunes'
88. Getty Images (Pump Audio) - Not sure what images have 2 do with mp3s
89. Outside Lands - sounds like a place for dead buzzbands 2 go
90. Gene Simmons - heard 50% of KISS is gonna die in 2-4 years
91. Glee - 'such a progressive way to introduce mainstreamers 2 kewl music'
92. AT&T - Can't wait til Apple is like 'we dont need u' and iPhones go 2 tmobile
93. Music Choice - is this the thing where there are 'radio stations on ur TV'?
94. ClickandBuy - sounds like an innovative online service
95. Gracenote - is this a way 2
96. RoyaltyShare - 'sounds like a great way to divide profits 4 buzzbands'
97. Music Mastermind - wonder if this is the company that makes Shazam
98. Ultimate Guitar Tabs Archive - 'I learned the tabs 2 TEARS IN HEAVEN' [via would u know my name if I saw u in heaven?]

99. Sennheiser - heard they make 'really sweet headphones'
100. The Consumer - 'U HAVE SO MUCH POWER' - a magazine trying 2 make u feel like u have power

Do u think these companies will all be around in 1, 5, 10, 50 or 100 years?
Are all of these companies/humans 'relevant'?
are they all 'rlly stupid'?
Is iTunes a digital music cyber bully?
Is PING going to be 'successful'?
Can GROUPON sell mp3s at discount prices for local bands?
What are the most innovative music companies?
Is Last.fm 'pissed' 4 being left off the list?
Do all large social networks have a great chance to take ovr the music industry?
Are 'major labels' effed?
Is Radiohead 'overrated' as a digital music pioneer?
Are all new buzzbands (post-2k9) completely 'fucked'?
Do u like graphs that show 'trends' in 'digital music'/'the music industry'?
Is this list 'mad stupid'?

Amazon MP3

Company

So far unsuccessful effort to compete with iTunes by cutting prices. Some artists & labels accuse Amazon MP3 for hastening the destruction of the music industry. Kinda sad to have your new album sold for $3.99. Others claim that super cheap albums distort the billboard/charting process.

Lists:

Read more>>>>

Pitchfork Media

Company, Blog

Pitchfork is a popular indie blogzine that does reviews and gets mad hits.

Lists: blogs and magazines

Read more>>>>

SXSW

Alternative Event, Company

SXSW (South By Southwest) is a relevant music, technology and film conference/festival that takes place in Austin, TX.

Lists: Texans, music festivals

Read more>>>>

From what I understand, bands can no longer make money by 'selling albums', and they must do things to get attention of humans on the internet. Even if u get ppls attention on the internet, it doesn't guarantee that u will make money, so ur best bet is basically to find some corporate sponsor with tons of money to feel like they are 'sponsoring' ur viral product/video/mp3. Even though it cheapens ur product to have a corporate sponsor attached [via Mountain Dew / Converse / Taco Bell], I guess blogs will blog abt u and talk abt the state of the modern mp3 industry.

Anyways, OKGO is some band that went viral in the infancy of youtube video streaming, and unfortunately, ppl have paid attention to them since then, even though they are forgettable alt rock. I think they don't have a record label any more because they wanted to focus on viral videos, so now they had to get Samsung 2 sponsor their viral videos.

Feel sad that the embedded video has less that 7K views.

Hope they help Samsung sell some cameras 2 tweens who want 'HD Content' that 'goes viral'. I think they still resonate with 'the youtube generation', but I don't think those ppl rlly buy music, they just sorta sit on youtube all day and watch tweens covering their favourite songs.

Do u h8 OKGO?
Does OK GO 'get' the modern music industry?
Do u feel bad for them/will they die soon?
Should they just become filmmakers instead of continuing on as a 'band'?
Do u think musicians deserve to make money for viral videos, or just 4 making music?
Should Barry Obama ban Napster/leaked mp3 files?

From what I understand the traditional record industry is 'going down the shitter' because people don't buy records any more. Instead, they use the internet to steal albums, mp3s, and youtubes viddies. Some New York Times article just 'profiled' the state of the modern music industry, and how so many lifestylebrands are trying to appeal to young adults by 'curating mp3s' / funding buzzbands / helping artists 2 'create art.' Really tried to make it seem like they are 'saving the music industry', and helping artists to 'do what they love--create mp3s.'

Do u buy into brands as the new record labels? I thought blogs were the new record labels [via the opinion of a pseudo-progressive journalist in 2k7]. Might have to start a brand to re-establish my position as a 'tastemaker'/'sharer' of music.

Here is the 'opening' hook, where they tell u that Converse is buying a studio space, and they are going to let bands record in there 2 seem 'kewl' with consumers.

RIGHT now it is just a shell, the peeling remnant of an old dry cleaner on a graffiti-covered block in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn. But soon the 5,200-square-foot space will be transformed into a sleek new recording studio in the heart of the underground-rock capital. And in the latest twist in pop’s relationship with Madison Avenue, the struggling bands making music there will already be encountering corporate America: the studio is being built by Converse, which will let them record free.

A shoe company giving away studio time might seem peculiar. But with its new project, Converse — whose sneakers have been worn by generations of bands, from the Ramones to the Strokes — wants to become a patron of the rock arts. The company is not alone: lifestyle brands are becoming the new record labels.

Good think I am in a chillwave, lofi, bedroom-recordings based artist, and Converse can't really help my band.

Wonder if it is 'worth it' to record at Converse studios. Wonder if a 'recording studio' is a good investment by Converse, or if they should just 'open up a new sweatshop' in the same space in Brooklyn.

Seems like brands are just starting to buy the rights to albums instead of wasting money on tv/internet ads. Every time a relevant MP3 is released, a blog is forced to mention the name of the brand. Seems like they are 'winning' even if no1 really cares, the brand doesn't resonate with consumers, and every1 is just picking up some free MP3s.

Looking to infiltrate the lives of their customers on an ever deeper cultural level, they are starting imprints, scouting for talent and writing checks for nearly every line item on a band’s budget. And as the traditional record industry crumbles, plenty of musicians are welcoming these new rock ’n’ roll Medici.

Apparently, real record labels suck/take all of a band's money anyways, so buzzbands would rather just do a 'one and done' deal with a brand that has more money to pay them, and does't view them as some sort of 'golden calf' that they have to keep milking for 5-10 years, stealing money from it on the reg.

Artists and talent managers say that the music deals offered by brands can be fairer and more favorable than traditional label contracts. These days major labels want bands to sign so-called 360 or extended-rights agreements, which give the label a piece of nearly every dollar a band makes, from concerts to merchandise. On the other hand, most brands offer short-term deals with few strings.

Here is Best Coast being all defensive, and saying she hasn't sold out/isn't stupid 4 taking huge dollars from brands.

Ms. Cosentino’s band has existed for barely a year, but she is already a branding vet. Well before she signed a proper record deal, with the small label Mexican Summer, she released a single through a boutique headphone company. And when Converse asked her to collaborate with the rapper Kid Cudi and Rostam Batmanglij of Vampire Weekend on a song that would be given away on its Web site, she didn’t hesitate. “It was an amazing opportunity,” she said by phone recently from a gig in Iowa. “If I said no it would have been stupid.”

Makes sense that she took a $500 gift card from Taco Bell [link].
Do bands just not make that much money so it is impossible to 'say no' when some1 just wants to give them money without claiming too much ownership over them? Are companies just 'cooking the books', investing in abstract goods + services to offer buzzbands, and not really doing much to help their brand?

Here is some 'expert' dude saying why brands are doing this record label bullshit.

“Indie-inflected music serves as a kind of Trojan horse,” Mr. Rabinowitz said. “Consumers feel they are discovering something that they believe to be cool and gaining admittance to a more refined social clique.”

Here's something I didn't know, Motel 6 offers free rooms to buzzbands:

Motel 6’s Rock Yourself to Sleep program, for example, gives free rooms to touring groups.

Might 'go on tour' and just show up at random Motel 6 locations, and say to the dude at the front desk, "Hi, I'd like the buzzband room. It is the 1 with the jacuzzi/whirlpool tub."

Seems like life as a buzzband is rlly lucrative.

They interviewed the CEO / CFO / CTO of Pitchfork, and he was all like, "Consumers need to effing question these brands instead of just taking their mp3s for free. So many companies doing shady ass shit, eff em all. U can't blind us with free MP3s."

Chris Kaskie, the president of the music Web site Pitchfork, noted a lack of debate about the implications of bands’ working with brands. When Nike makes a cool mix-tape, he said, there is little comment in the indie-rock world about the company’s labor practices, which have drawn criticism in the past.

“Young bands are growing up in a culture where there’s less off that discussion happening, less of those underlying issues being addressed,” Mr. Kaskie said. “But the experiment that these bands are doing is important to see where it goes.”

From what I understand, Mountain Dew, Converse, Nike, and Taco Bell are all created in sweatshops and hire 3rd world labor to create their products.

Are lifestyle brands saving the music industry?
Do consumers really 'respond' to this type of marketing?
Have u bought Converse / Mountain Dew / Taco Bell since they teamed up with ur favourite buzzbands?
Is this the type of thing that just 'gets the name of ur product written on a blog' and makes brands feel 'young' even though they are sorta just running in place?
Are buzzbands 'abusing' brands that have large budgets?
Is 'music' even supposed 2 make money?
Are brands 'saving' the music industry, or is this just some marketing fad that they will realize has lost them too much money/didn't return any finite results?
Should all these brands just buy a commercial during the Super Bowl instead of this buzzband bloggy crap?
Do yall h8 the blogosphere?
Should all blogs boycott mp3s that are commissioned by brands?
What brand will be the next to launch a 'record label' 2 appeal 2 alts?
Should HIPSTER RUNOFF hire a buzzband to write an mp3 just to get 'mad coverage' from other blogs?
Should BP release the next Vampire Weekend/AnCo album to 'get on the good side' of the blogosphere and re-brand after the oil spill?
Should I buy a Scion, wear my Converse, and wash down my Taco Bell with some Mountain Dew 2 prove I <3 buzzbands?

Green Label Sound

Record Label, Meme

GLS is the record label of Mountain Dew. They pay a buzzband to write an MP3, then release it to blogs in order to get buzz.

Lists: record label, companies that are trying to reach alternative markets

Read more>>>>

From what I have heard, 'touring' is the only way for a band to make money because no1 buys albums any more, and when they do, retailers basically take all of the money. U have to 'tour hard' and hope u sell a lot of t-shirts so that ur band makes money. It seems like some website made an INFOGRAPHIC abt how much money acts make per gig. Feel 'jealous' of most of these acts, because they are making so much money.

Here is the mainstream version of the 'graphic', which tells us boring stuff.

White people honky bands make mad bank
-Tween sensations make more than u will make over the next 3-5 years per night
-Hootie bro from Hooting at the Blowfish still makes mad bank
-People will still pay to see rock n roll bans that dress up as clowns
-U should start a Christian band

Anyways, that is boring. H8 white people music. Coulda at least thrown some rappers in there (besides Darius Rucker).

So I decided to make an INFOGRAPHIC that illustrates how which indie artists makes the most buzz dollars per gig. Not sure if this is based on any sort of real fact / analytic, but it seems 'kewl.' If I had to guess, 'buzz dollars' are some sort of unit that measures the amount of tweets, blog buzz, and high resolution photos that are generated at your shows, along with attendance numbers + t-shirt sales.

Seems like some bands make 'tons of buzz bucks'. What bands were omitted, and how many buzz bucks do yall think they make? Does Phoenix make more buzzbucks than any1 in the world?

Do yall think this buzz chart makes sense?
Do indie bands even make money?
Does it suck 2 be a modern indie band?
Do bands deserve to make money?
Should bands make more money off album sales?
Would yall rather be a mainstream band or an indie band who is trying to earn 'buzz bucks'?
Do yall know much a top tier indie band makes per show?
Is it a 'solid' figure, or 'depressing'?
R u sad that J Bieb makes more money in a year than u might make in ur lifetime?
Would u rather be a billionaire in 'real money' or with 'buzz dollars'?

I am still kinda confused about 'how important radio play' is when it comes to the success of an unsigned band. I remember hearing stories about how bands would 'get a single on the radio', then they would get rich/become rock stars. Not sure if that romantic model still exists, or if blogs have replaced 'independent radio stations' as the official breeding ground of underground/independent music.

Do yall think blogs have replaced 'indie'/'college' radio?
Is radio 'totally irrelevant'?
Will NPR 'go under', or is their business model going to be all about being a bloggy NYTimes gimmicky content producer?

N e ways, some blog newspaper did an article about 'how to get ur band featured on a relevant radio station.' They interviewed 'the dude who listens to CDs that bands submit.' He just dished out some tips, wanting to help buzzbands 'get discovered' by him.

Have yall met Eric K Lawry?
Does he seem like 'a pretentious ass hole'?

Meet Eric J. Lawrence. If you're a musician, he can be one of the most important people in your life.

Lawrence is in charge of one of the most critical avenues to an independent rock band's success -- getting your songs played on KCRW-FM (89.9).

As the music librarian at KCRW, his job is to dive into the hundreds of albums sent to the Santa Monica station every week and surface a handful of CDs to place on a row of compact wooden shelves in his library. And it is these shelves that the station's 25 DJs and producers turn to to figure out what to play next.

Seems like a 'high stakes', make or break environment 4 the future of rock n roll.

Do yall know if this radio station is 'legit'? Is it a 'tastemaker'? Do u have a better chance of getting global fame if u get written about on Pitchfork, or should I just submit some CDs to local + college radio stations?

For indie bands, getting their music played on KCRW is a sign of success -- and not just because of the estimated 375,000 people per week who listen to the station's music programming, both online and over the air. That's because the public radio station has a reputation for being a tastemaker, with its fingers on the pulse of independent music trends poised to be the next big thing. It's one reason why music directors in Hollywood troll the station for new music to include in their television shows and movies.

As a result, the station gets anywhere from 200 to 400 unsolicited albums each week. Lawrence listens to every album and makes a record of whether it is added to the library or rejected. Of those, only 30 to 35 albums are chosen.

Here are his 5 tips for making sure he listens 2 ur shit.

1. Make it personal
2. get experienced
3. Make sure the songs are "Radio ready."
4. Include relevant (and legible) information
5. Send a CD

Not sure if I own any blank CDs. Might hire a 'manager' to make sure we get written about on pitchfork + get played on the radio.

Worried that my lofi project might not be 'produced' well-enough for radio play. Wish I could make indie rock that was as 'polished' as the Arcade Fire, Spoon, and the Hold Steady.

Don't send tunes that are recorded in a garage with an ambient mike from Best Buy, unless that's part of the sound. "Audio quality is the key," Lawrence said. "When we play our sets, the songs all have to flow together. If your song is thin and skeletal, it will sound underproduced next to the other songs around it that are more polished. It doesn't have to be big or loud. It just has to have good audio quality."

Just want to impress this bro. Get mad radio airplay. End up on a soundtrack. Release an album. Tour across the world. But it all starts with this bro. The gatekeeper 2 the buzz economy.

Is Radio Play 'important'?
Do people who are 'relevant tastemakers' listen to the radio?
Is the radio inefficient as an mp3 evaluation service because u can't 'fast forward' whenever a song starts 2 suck?
Have blogs 'replaced radio'?
What will replace blogs as buzzband tastemakers/incubators?
Are blogs 'the perfect format' for niche bands to expand their audiences?
Do u think buzzbands 'huddle around the radio' to hear themselves the first time they are played on the radio?
Do u have any advice for a band who wants to submit their music to a blog? Should they send a CD? Should they send a link to their bandcamp/myspace?
Do u think radio stations are 'bad for the environment' cuz they have such a big carbon footprint?
Do u hope terrestrial radio 'goes under'?
Do people still listen to radio?
If u were in a band, would u 'even bother' with 'the radio'?
Is 'radio play' a sign of pseudo-success for bands that aren't 'connected/aware' enough to realize that the 'indie music scene' is 'taking place on the internet'?
Are buzzbands born on the internet, the radio, or in 'relevant venues in a live setting'?
What is the best way for a band to 'make it'?

Might just give that bro a call, and 'demand to know' why his 'goddamn radio station' hasn't played my chillwave fuzzy buzz lofi sound project.

As a reward for reading this far, we have a bonus tip! You can always try to follow up with Lawrence either via e-mail or a phone call. His "office hours" are noon to 3 p.m. every Wednesday. Calls are cut off at 3 sharp, and the hold times might be insane. But if you get him on the phone, Lawrence can personally relay the status of your submission and perhaps why it did or did not make the cut. The number is (310) 314-4640

Laters, this bro

In our modern world, indie bands must do 'whatever it takes' to compete with mainstream bands. Indie bands are in a battle with alt rockers to become 'the best selling guitar rock bros in the world.' Not sure if it will happen in our lifetime, but mindie bands like Vampire Weekend and Arcade Fire are doing their best to sell mad units at discounted prices.

Is this an 'ethical' way to sell albums, or is there no such thing as an 'ethical way' to sell anything?
Do u think the $3.99 discount price 'appeals' to random cool dads who want to vibe out legally to buzzband jams?
What is a more powerful impulse purchasing tactic: the $3.99 digital sale or the $9.99 physical copy sale?
If u were a mainstream bro, would u be 'pumped' to see an album 'on sale' for such a low price?

Will the Arcade Fire 'chart' at #1?
Will they 'blow the competition out of the water'?
Is this a 'great accomplishment' or have they 'cooked the books'?
Will Lady Gaga sell her album for $1.99 to set Billboard chart records?
Are people who buy complete albums for 9.99 'fucking chumps'?
Will iTunes file a 'lawsuit' against Amazon for reverse price gouging?
Did the Arcade Fire steal their cover art from suburbia?
Do we know that indie bands are 'seeking amazing first week album sales numbers' when they sell their album on the cheap?
Which band will be next to use the $3.99 amazon sales technique?
How much is an album 'actually worth'? $17.99? 9.99? 3.99? ~.99 per mp3?
Do u prefer bands who accidentally 'give away their albums for free' [via leaked rapidshare file]?

Arcade Fire

Buzzband

The Arcade Fire is a 2k0s indie band that went mainstream because their songs sound like meaningful anthems. They pretend to be Canadian but Win Butler (lead singer) is actually from Houston, TX.

Lists: mindie (mainstream indie), Members of the Arcade Fire, indie bands that debuted in the Billboard Top 10, Canadian

Read more>>>>

Merge Records

Company

Lists:

Read more>>>>

Amazon MP3

Company

So far unsuccessful effort to compete with iTunes by cutting prices. Some artists & labels accuse Amazon MP3 for hastening the destruction of the music industry. Kinda sad to have your new album sold for $3.99. Others claim that super cheap albums distort the billboard/charting process.

Lists:

Read more>>>>

From what I have heard/read, bands 'don't make money any more' because every1 just lives on the internet and steals music. I have heard 'rumors' that the best way to support a band is to 'go see them live', and possibly to 'buy some of their merch.' N e ways, not really important to me, since I think most bros in bands should 'get real jobs'/go 2 technical college.

Anyways, just saw this facebook note where some bro in a band 'bitterly' tells the state of his band's financial situation. Worried abt him. Feel like 'being in a band' and 'touring with ur bros' might not be a good career move/good for ur mental health.

Hey Everyone,

For the past 5 years my brothers in Oh, Sleeper and myself have sacrificed our lives, our time, relationships, birthdays, holidays, health(haha) to travel around and play shows for our fans. Not to say that isn't been a fun ride!

I would just like to bring a few things to our fans attention:

I would like to show you guys an average day in finances for a "mid-level" band like us. Im going to breakdown the average monetary in and outs of a day on tour.

On tour bands have two ways to make money. Guaranties, and Merchandise.

On tour bands have big bills. The biggest are: Managers, Booking agent, Merch Rates, Merch bills, Food, and of course.. the Gas bill.

Our last headliner tour was an east coast run with 3 other bands. The average guaranty per band was 300$ per band, and around 300$ in merch. This was the average for all 4 bands, for the entire tour.

So we have a 600$ gross income per night. Now lets break this down.

Merchandise is bough, printed, and shipped on the bands dollar. We print most our shirts on American Apparel. They obviously offer the best fitting shirts, and kids are smart about looking good now days. They wont sell unless you have slim fitting, soft shirts. The demand for better quality shirts from bands is higher in last few years.

American Apparel shirts are very pricey to print. usually $7.50 a shirt. More for v-necks, 3/4 sleeve shirts, etc.

We sell our shirts for 15$ at our shows, UNLESS we are on tour with a headliner that demands we price match them.

SO $15 - $7.50 = $7.50. So half is profit. So out of the 300$ the band made in merch, they owe 150$ to the printer.

BUT HOLD ON! Merch rates!

Most nice venues have merch rates, we have seen them be as high 32% gross. Usually they are 25%.

-----

So out of the initial $300 in merch the band made. 25% goes to venue. Thats $75.

$300(gross) - $150(merch cost) - $75(merch venue rate) = $75 (Net profit for the band.)

BUT the breakdown doesnt stop there. If the band has a manager, he takes 15% of Net profit of merch.

SO MERCH TOTAL PER NIGHT:

$75 X .15 = $11.25

$75 - $11.15 = $63.75( TOTAL Net profit in merch for the band.)

--------

Guaranties:

The breakdown in deductions from this money is: 15% to Manager, 10% to booking agent.

$300(gross guaranty) - $45(managers cut 15%) - $30(booking agents cut 10%) = $225

Average Gas bill is around $150. some days way better some days way worse. We have done 17 hour drives..leaveing show and showing up to next one right before we play...many times. Those are a bit more expensive. Most west coast tours we do the average gas bill is around 200-250...but ill use 150 for this example.

$225(guaranty after manage and agent deductions) - $150(gas bill) = $75

We have 6 people on tour, our 5 Guys, and our merch guy "The maze". We give everyone $10 bucks a day to eat on. (This isnt enough when your 6 4 and 200lbs like micah and i by the way)

6 people x $10 = $60

$75 - $60 = $15

$15 Total net profit in Guaranties.

-------

$63.75(Net merch) + $15(Net guaranty) =

$78.75 for the band for the night. out of $600 gross.

if you divide that 6 ways its $13.12 a day per band member.

-------

This doesnt include hotel costs. which are usually 50-60 bucks. Most bands dont get hotels or shower to save money to pay for phone bills.

This does not include Tires/Van payment/Oil changes/Van upkeep registration bla bla/Trailer tires/Gear/etc.

This doesnt include taxes. This doesnt include ROAD TOLLS. Which in the northeast can add up to 20-40bucks a day.

Thanks for reading.

MERCH RATES HAVE TO GO.
STOP STEALING OUR CDs PLEASE.
WE DONT MAKE MONEY WHEN YOU BUY IT FROM STORES, COME TO SHOWS.
WE DONT MAKE MONEY FROM LABELS.
BUY MERCH FROM US AT SHOWS IF YOU LIKE WHAT WERE DOING.

thanks for reading.

Worried abt these bros. Feel like they might have to start 'flipping burgers' or something like that. Maybe working at a local call center for $10 an hour.

Worried about merch costs. Worried about booking + managerial costs. Worried about toll roads. Worried about rising cost of gas. Worried about Am Appy t shirt prices.

Seems like everything costs soo much money these days. H8 having to pay 4 things. Wish we could all just live on the internet, stealing mp3s, and being happy 4evr.

Do bands deserve to make money?
Are 'indie bands' misguided abt how they deserve to make money?
Whenever u hear about a band from ur local scene 'going on tour', do u 'laugh a lil bit'?
Do true indie fans 'steal music'?
Should we just 'pay tidings' to buzzbands to keep them afloat [via paypal]?
When do indie bands deserve 2 make money?
How much money should indie bands expect to make per year? $1 million?
Should Obama provide tax breaks 4 buzzbands?

Have always wanted to start a buzzband, but didn't really know if it was 'worth it' cuz of the state of the modern music industry. Feel like there is some sort of 'effed up' system where bands don't even get paid, and even if u go mainstream, tons of entities are 'stealing ur money' cuz they market + distribute ur music. Mad bummed. Thought being a rock star would get u mad rich, but feel like this chart illustrates that bands 'don't make that much money.'

Feel like if I had a band, I wouldn't have a manager, bass player, or lead guitarist. I would avoid signing to a record label, and would try really hard not to use a distributor. Might outsource an 'album sales website' to a web design firm in India. Just gotta maintain all my profits, avoiding 'legal counsel' and even a 'producer.' So weird that bands have to spend money on all of this stuff.

'Solo project' without any sort of band / marketing infrastructure seems ideal. Wonder if chillwave/lofi/being Radiohead is the best possible band business model, since you can minimize 'bullshit costs' and really focus on exploiting your tribe.

Really just want to keep all of the profits, knowing that my art belongs to me, and no1 can use it without my consent.
H8 how the music industry is so effed up, and it doesn't even allow us to make art any more. Even Larry Gaga is a 'slave' to the horizontally integrated corporate structure.

Do artist 'make money' from album sales?
What type of band would yall be in?
What staff would u have if you had a band?
What are some good ways to 'cut corners' and save ur band budget?
Will I make more money in my life if I have a mediocre 9-5 job for 35 yea, or if I have a buzzband that has 2 albums that sell moderately well?
Does this mean I'm never going to be a rock star / blog star?
Is the music industry 'swirling down the shitter'?
Do musicians deserve Health Insurance?
Do record labels 'steal' tons of money from artists, or are bands 'worthless' without relevant record labels?
Do musicians/bands waste tons of money on goods and services that they don't need?

Not sure what the popular 2k9 buzzband is 'trying 2 do.' They are selling their album for $2.99 when the popular price point is $9.99 for a digital album. I feel like the market rate for an actual CD is $17.99 [via Virgin Megastore/Blockbuster Music circa 1997]. Really unsure what I'm paying for when I purchase music--maybe it is just the jewel case, album art, and shipping costs. Making music seems really easy these days, so feel like it should be free.

I feel like I am on the 'frontline' of tastemaking, so I usually deserve a free copy of every album for 'evaluation purposes' [via rapidshare leak]. Really difficult for me to wrap my head around what is going down in the music industry in the digital age.

Does n e 1 know what the strategy is when these album prices drop? Do they sell more albums? Does the band get any of the proceeds of this sale? Who determines what the price is supposed to be? The band management, or the retailer?

Is amazon the only chill bro service that reduces album prices?
Can some1 explain the digital sales revenue model for me?
Can u 'liquidate' mp3 inventory, or is there an infinite amount of disc space in our modern world?
Should all indie buzzbands 'sell' their albums at a low price in the first week of their release to 'cheat' on the charts? Can we assign a name to this common practice, like 'Vampire Weekending' or something like that?
Who buys mp3s from amazon/itunes?
What is 'worth paying 4' in the music industry? Concerts? Festivals? Digital albums? Physical albums? Vinyl?
Does the XX make money off album sales, or are they 'stuck touring 4 the rest of their lives'?

Apparently no1 is buying albums any more, and artists aren't even really bothering 2 release new albums.

Combine the downward trend of album sales with a week of no major releases and what do you get? The fewest number of total album sales, 5.3 million, in a single week since Nielsen SoundScan started its tracking in 1991.

I am not sure what this means. I feel like you could either say 'music is worse than ever', or that 'people just download music illegally now.' Maybe people finally realize that 'mainstream artists release crappy records that aren't worth buying.' I feel like the indie band chillwave buzzosphere is 'strong', but I don't always know how that translates into album sales. Older mainstream indie bands seem to have the most success.

I read that the indie band The National 'charted' at #2 with their debut. I think they are one of those generic guitar bands with a singer bro who has a deep voice.

The top new album was “High Violet” (4AD) from the National, selling 51,000 copies, good enough for No. 3. Other new releases in the top 10 were Dead Weather’s “Sea of Cowards” ( Warner Bros. ), and Charice’s self-titled album (Reprise). “The Oracle” (Universal Republic), by the metal band Godsmack, dropped from its top spot last week down to No. 9, with sales of 43,000, 63 percent less than the week before.

Feel confused about 2k10 being the year of 'mainstream indie bands' charting with their efforts, even when the albums are mediocre. Maybe the people buying the albums aren't influenced by 'reviews' and just trust magazines that say everything is cool. I don't really feel like 'indie' bands can outsell the most popular rock & hip hop acts, but it does feel like indie band fans have grown into middle aged professionals and are willing to buy songs for their iPhones in order to reconnect with their past. There seems to be a demographic of 'wannabe indie bros/cool dads' who don't know how to download leaks for free.

Everytime u download a leak, are you taking a loaf of bread out of a band's mouths?
Why do u think 'indie bands' are charting so high now?
Less mainstream competition?
The rest of the world 'finally understands indie music'?
Do indie musicians have more marketing dollars than ever?
Is it important to 'support indie bands' so that they get more resources by selling tons of iTunes albums/digital singles?
Is Middle America is starting to have 'refined taste'?
Are older indie bands forced to dumb down their sound in order to write an album for the entire country/world?
Will MGMT's flop make mainstreamers more reluctant to purchase indie band albums that are marketed down their throats?
Whenever there is a headline about an indie band 'coming in at #1-20 on the billboard charts', should we take it with a 'grain of salt' because it really isn't that hard to sell that many records if you are moderately covered by 40% of the biggest music blogs in the world?

The NOW that's What I Call Music series is some sort of gimmick where you sell CDs to mainstreamers that contain a compilation of relevant hits from the past several months. I think the concept behind it is that people don't want to buy the albums of performers when they only have 1 good song, they'd rather buy 1 album with 10-20 hits on it, even if they are from 20 different artists. Sorta like 'listening to the radio' except it is on CD.

NOW That's What I Call Music has tons of commercials, and they probably trick people into overpaying for shipping & handling costs, plus other miscellaneous hidden / subscription fees. Not sure how it is still alive in the post-Napster era, but seems to be 'going strong.'

Not sure if people even still buy CDs. Maybe just like minorities and poor white people who shop at WalMart. From what I understand, NOW CDs still 'chart' pretty high, since mainstream a-holes / the poors who listen to the radio still buy these CDs.
He seems chill enough, like a bro who is down to 'get real' in a brainstorming session.

Bob Mercer, a music executive who signed the Sex Pistols, helped Jimmy Buffett set up his own record company and oversaw the popular compilation series “Now That’s What I Call Music!,” died on Wednesday in Los Angeles, where he lived. He was 65.

Does he seem like a chill bro who capitalized on a 'good idea'?

Should I pick up a copy of Now: 75?

Does mainstream music get 'shittier' or 'better' every year?

Or was it more authentic when NOW first came out in the 70s/80s, back when people still 'bought hard copies of music.'

So much great music. maybe this bro was 'on to something.' Maybe he is a genius. Maybe he is in heaven, not hell.

Sorta just want to come up with an idea that changes the music industry / makes me a lot of money, even if the idea is sorta obvious/low-risk.

What is the ultimate NOW compilation of all time?

Should Pitchfork start releasing NOW compilations of indie bands, or does every1 already own every relevant mp3 for free?
Would U Buy NOW That's What I Call Indie?
Should I just buy Kids Bop CDs for my kids?
Is NOW the ultimate mixtape?
Do u feel sad that the inventor of NOW died?
Do u think Bob Mercer is chilling in heaven/hell with John Lennon/Charles Manson/____________?
Have u ever purchased a NOW CD?

Andy Rooney speaks about contemporary music and how he is losing touch with today's popular artists. Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga and Usher? It's All A Mystery To Andy!

Andy Rooney is an anchor on the popular TV show 60 Minutes, and they basically give him a few minutes per week to 'say something insightful or funny.' He seems like the type of bro who they gave a job to back when they had tons of money to throw around, but now he just keeps showing up, so they have to pay him as some sort of 'memorial' to the way the industry/journalism/television used to work. Feel like even if his pieces were once insightful, his segment has probably just turned into the vlog of a person who is slowly dying, and becoming less culturally aware/significant by the week.

In this recent vlog, he starts out by claiming he is 'a very mainstream American' because he is white, has a family, served in the military, and other normal ass stuff that makes you a generic American consumer. Then he says he read Billboard magazine (not sure if he knows how to use a computer), and he said he didn't recognize any of the top 200 artists. I think he was trying to probably make the point that 'dumb kids don't know shit abt good music.'

He went on to name drop Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga, and Usher, then laughs in disbelief because he is 'just an ordinary American', but these popular artists don't resonate with him. Think he forgets that he is a senior citizen and doesn't use the internet, probably. Even Larry King does his best 2 tweet.

I feel bad for this bro. Like if his kids loved him, they would 'keep him in touch' with pop music, and give him a preloaded iPod.
Do old people who try to make a point just sound like they are just 'bitching' that too much stuff has changed?

Feel like it is naturally that old people listen to old ass boring music, and tweens listen to shitty, inconsequential new music. Think this bro should 'get over it' and quit 'bitching' on national TV. Overall, this content 'made me sad' because I just get kinda sad whenever I see an old person do anything because it reminds me that one day I will be old, unhealthy, irrelevant, and abt 2 die.

Is Jim Carrey the most authentic 60 Minutes anchor of all time?

The show 60 Minutes seems like a terrible national extension of the local news, or something, but I guess the people who still watch TV are old and about to die, and probably related to this segment.

Do u feel sad when old people talk about new music?
Are the bands that I like now the bands that I will like forever, or will I continue searching for buzzbands until I die?
Is it 'worth it' to be culturally connected if u just find out abt shitty music?
Should I become a journalist and get a job on 60 minutes / 48 hours / nightline / Anderson Cooper 360?
Do you have any good buzzband reccs for Andy Rooney?
Do 'talking head' journalists who are trying to shed some light on a cultural phenomenon that they are unqualified to talk abt just make u kinda sad?
Do u hope u get dementia / Alzheimer's when you get old so u don't have to worry about remaining mainstream, alt, or culturally relevant?

Pitchfork Media is a popular music website which as evolved into the most influential music media outlet in the modern world. The site is famous for reviewing albums. Recently, it wrote some article about Irony and the State of the Music Scene. The article kinda mentioned stuff about LCD Soundsystem and James Murphy, and talked about some other stuff, probably dropping metaphors, similies, and other journalistic tools.

Eventually, the article 'got to the good stuff' and started talking about HIPSTER RUNOFF, a popular weblog:

This idea of knowingness, though-- our relationship with it can get complicated. Right now, one of the internet's most successful bastions of knowingness is a blog called Hipster Runoff, a performance that's almost nothing but knowing: It shrugs, it takes an arch, pseudo-scientific tone, it puts every other word in scare quotes. Here you go, it seems to say: Here is your weird market of hipness and cool. The end. You can take it as withering satire, if you want to, because its skewers are dead on target. Of course, if its pseudonymous author really thought the market of cool were that pointless and vacuous, why spend so much time thinking about it-- why know it well enough to be savvy? It's not so much a satire as a whole performance of knowingness. And even if I don't often have the stomach for it, I can't pretend the performance isn't an immaculate one: it's knowingness raised to the level of poetry, free of the burden of "intent" or sincerity or any point beyond what the reader reflects out of it. It goes beyond "the author is dead" and turns the author into some kind of zombie.

Not even sure what the message of the article is about, just feeling 'incredibly culturally relevant' after reading the HRO blog name in Pitchfork. Feel like a bro in the 1970s who got blurbed about in Rolling Stone Magazine. So many buzzbands try their best to be analyzed / reviewed / blurbed / memed by Pitchfork, but I am just a blog, dropping memes, and I 'made it.'

Can n e 1 read this article and tell me what it is abt? Got super confused, like it might be too 'high level' for me, like writing that belongs in a book or magazine--not on the internet.

The article continues, then mentions HRO again in a closing paragraph:

Hipster Runoff uses the internet to make the old knowingness into performance art.

Kept scanning the page everywhere searching 4 a 'rating.' From what I understand, Pitchfork is famous for giving ratings, so feeling disappointed that I didn't get a 10.0. Not even a 1.0.

Do u know what this article is about? Something about irony and knowingness?
Is 'knowingness' a real word? Spell checker kinda freaking out on it, saying it doesn't exist.

Is HIPSTER RUNOFF 'performance art'?
Is HIPSTER RUNOFF 'an mp3 blog'?
Is HIPSTER RUNOFF 'another blog that is a slave to indie artists / the blogosphere'?
Do u 'get' HRO?
Has HRO 'gone down the shitter' recently?
Is HRO 'better than ever?
Is the Alt Report better than HIPSTER RUNOFF?
Is the Alt Report Robot better / more influential than Carles?
Is HRO 'in bed' with Pitchfork Media?
Is Pitchfork/HRO 'killing' the music blogosphere?
What is the best music/mp3 blog on the internet right now?
What is the worst music/mp3 blog on the internet right now?