What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
61 Comments
- StigNordas, on 11/06/2009, -0/+23I'd challenge the idea that "Stairway to heaven" generated the most cash. Nickelback got 5 albums out of 1 song, so it's gotta be up there.
- SSPink, on 11/06/2009, -0/+22Record contracts are relics from an age when artists needed access to factories to produce physical media and physical retail outlets to sell it. Which is, or course, why the "I own the rights to your music" industry is fighting so hard against (legitimate and illegitimate) digital distribution and so many intelligent artists are embracing it.
- EmprZurg, on 11/06/2009, -0/+18No man....Apparently, the real money is in owning a musician like a pet....
- meandnips, on 11/06/2009, -0/+14I worked for a music publisher for 5 years. The only way to really make money in that business is by owing your publishing (or as much of it as you can negotiate) and keeping an eagle eye on the record companies. If you don't the record and publishing companies will take as much of the songwriters money as they can make off with.
- Subcrtical, on 11/06/2009, -0/+9I would love the see the breakdown of the recoup'ed costs that would leave only $150,000 left over for an album that sold over 10 million copies.
- DaviDTC, on 11/06/2009, -0/+8That's why people say if you want to support the artist, go to their concerts.
- serif69, on 11/06/2009, -0/+8Have you noticed that restaurants all have their own birthday songs now? It's been enforced.
- AmazingSteve, on 11/06/2009, -0/+8When it was made, the video for "Waterfalls" cost north of 4 million dollars. Nonetheless, TLC's example is a prime illustration of how artists get raped by the labels. There's no way "the machinery" eats like 97%. No way. There was an article on Zeropaid.com a long time ago about what artists end up with. Usually somewhere in between 5 and 10 cents per unit with the exception of bands like Aerosmith which got the rights to it's back catalogue and sees roughly 25 cents per unit. Don't hold me to that, I read it YEARS ago. At 5 cents per unit, 10 million albums only bags you 500 grand in the end. TLC was likely seeing 2 or 3 percent TOPS. You sweat, I get rich. Nice work if you can get it. No wonder the internet makes them ***** themselves blind.
- portnoy, on 11/06/2009, -0/+8Sounds good to me. Let them all self record and publish it all on iTunes. There is no reason for record companies anymore.
- Maddie69, on 11/06/2009, -1/+8TLC is a little loco, but I kind of love that they did that. Hmmm... Guess that makes me crazy too!
- Rockyn, on 11/07/2009, -0/+7I was willing to bet my left testicle that the first comment would have been ***** the RIAA. Good thing I didn't!
- tacotacotaco, on 11/06/2009, -0/+7"Few people realize just how little money their favorite artists make off their own music, and the industry is only more paranoid and controlling now that digital piracy is rampant."
Artists can still make money touring. The industry knows the only way they can make money is leeching/skimming off the artists. No wonder the industry is paranoid, they add minimal value and take the maximum, at the expense of artists. The present system needs to be blown up. If piracy achieves that end, then good for piracy. Do not feel bad about cheating a system that itself exists to cheat artists.
Because the artist doesn't see any money until the record company's expenses for the album are recouped and the album becomes "profitable", it's common that artists never see any money from the sale of their albums. The recording industry's accounting system makes the movie industry's accounting look honest and respectable. (Think of all the movies that made hundreds of millions of dollars and then the studios refuse to payout a percentage of the profits because the movie was "unprofitable". The music industry is worse.) It's not unheard of for each sold album putting the artist further into the red due to unethical music accounting practices. In other words, the artist will never see a dime no matter how many album she sells.
Many musicians are indifferent to music piracy because it's not like they saw any of the money from album sales anyways. Youtube, artists websites, direct marketing, touring - there will be a new model for artists to make money. We're still in the experimenting stage of what that will be.
Read Fredric Dannen's "Hit Men" if you want to know more about the sickness that is the recording industry. It's entertaining reading and you'll understand how completely corrupt the business is. - DiggieDarko, on 11/06/2009, -1/+8"Happy Birthday" copyrighted? Youtube could loose 5,000,000 toddler videos overnight if that was enforced.
- sedatedbylife, on 11/06/2009, -0/+6No, just the lawyers.
- kevro, on 11/06/2009, -0/+5TLC was the last band I expected to have gone straight up gansta in real life. There where crazy , sexy, cool.
- deviationer, on 11/06/2009, -0/+5hmm I remember there was an arstechnica or wired article a couple years ago about how most artists get $1 or less per album sold and they make much more from touring.
- diblasio, on 11/06/2009, -0/+4I vaguely remember things about stuff as well!
- Gr1nch, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3You just blew my mind.
- ninjaofpatience, on 11/07/2009, -0/+3Yeah, but creed got six albums off one pearl jam song. I think they take the lead.
- s73v3r, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3There was an article floating around the internet a while ago (can't find it right now, sorry) that shows what happens with new artists and the contracts they sign. Basically, they are given a pittance for royalties on album sales, and everything to do with renting the recording studio to manufacturing the product, to marketing people having meetings were taken out of these royalties. And if their first album didn't sell enough to cover all that (out of their royalties, not out of net sales), then they would be pressured into doing a second album, and the "losses" from the first album would be leveraged against the royalties of the second one, in addition to the costs of the second one.
- portnoy, on 11/06/2009, -0/+3I don't pay for music because I bought everything I want decades ago. I see no reason to continue to rebuy when I can just rip the disks and store the files on a NAS.
- AmazingSteve, on 11/07/2009, -0/+3So it's just better to grease up and take it in the ass from what has become all but a useless entity them. Brilliant thinking. At least artists are embracing the internet. They're smart enough to see where their payday is in the future and it's not in some douchey A&R guy's office. The labels are also smart enough to see this and the fact that there is no place for them to serve ANY function at all in the new marketplace. They don't whine to protect the poor artists, they whine to protect the obsolete middle man and the huge profits he can no longer reap because he has been cut out entirely. They hedged their bets on a very different future and lost. Cry me a ***** river. Go ask Trent Reznor about how much money he's losing by selling his music on the internet sans record label. He'll probably answer you. As soon as he's finished counting the money he's raking in hand over fist.
- Amadeus2490, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2Real musicians also produce. If you're a one-hit wonder, you won't make much of anything. . BUT, if you use "I made a hit song!" on your portfolio and produce, or even manage other artists, then you'll make money. . .even if you never record your own album again; You'll still make all that money the article talks about from your clients.
Many artists who've been in the industry for awhile now produce their own albums. If you can write and produce your own work, you'll get to keep a LOT more money, and have more rights/control over your work. If you want to get an idea of how it works, imagine the artists up front being the cashiers at Wal^mart, and other people within the industry being the managers, executives, etc who earn anywhere from 2-10 times their salary. The people who do the most work up-front ALWAYS make the least amount of money, unfortunately. If you're smart and capable, you'll advance your career.
. . .and will invest/save your money wisely; The more money you have, the more you have to spend. - DonAlfred, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2yes i want them all to lose their jobs. All the lawyers and greedy folks should go and ***** eachother with their penis foreskin.
Then we might get some honest and trustworthy people instead and the artists whould get more freedom and the creativity would blossom. - SeanRockCity, on 11/06/2009, -0/+2I look at it like this:
I don't care how you get your hands on my music, if you like it come to a show, and if you really really like it then buy a tshirt. - allisonaxe, on 11/06/2009, -4/+6This is why I don't pay for music.
- Rockyn, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2But what about the great artists with families that cannot go on tour? Why should they lose out because these industry ***** think that they can bleed the artists dry.
- jeremynoonan, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2I don't pay because then its free.
- Rockyn, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2I only pirate Nirvana songs.
- allisonaxe, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2the day that I can download a whopper over bittorrent without depriving someone else of enjoying their own, I stop paying for them. hell, we need to get on this, we'll solve world hunger!
- Amadeus2490, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2They called her "Left Eye Lopez", because she gouged out people's eyeball if they didn't give her what she wanted. Bitch was cold. . .that's why they killed her.
/s - inactive, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2"Few people realize just how little money their favorite artists make off their own music, and the industry is only more paranoid and controlling now that digital piracy is rampant."
Another dumb ass divince caroline sentence. Pretty much EVERYBODY knows this. Those that don't are not interested in music. - AmazingSteve, on 11/07/2009, -0/+2You've failed. Give up. Ole' Trent's not exactly feeling the pinch. He says so in his own blog dumbass. Looking at the situation and embracing it has only been good for the artists that have done it. Also see Radiohead. Try actually LEARNING something about what you're trying to debate before wading in because as it sits, you're coming off as, a) a clueless toolbag, or b) an industry shill. You decide. In the meantime, I'm going to sit here and eat your tasty lunch for you.
- bdbr, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1This is why I avoid big labels. This kind of stuff is rare with independent labels. A common indie contract gives all the money from album sales to the label until the expenses are recouped, then the label & artists split the gains 50/50. They don't have armies of lawyers going around suing people. Its all about the music.
"We're all in the music business, but it's like we're two different businesses." - Mac McCaughan, founder of Merge Records - allisonaxe, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1the music industry is down to a pretty set formula, there's very little actual risk involved in most starting acts anymore, because they force their music into the public airwaves and popular culture consciousness. the successful acts are made successful through a blend of marketing, and media presentation.
oh, and thanks for calling me an idiot! I really appreciate that you go around winning my argument for me. since you have to resort to calling names, its quite clear how little material you have to argue with.
if it wasn't so easily piratable, I'd just listen to it on the radio like I did before napster came along. hell, because of music piracy, I've heard many great things that *don't* get radio playtime. I don't mind supporting the artists, but I have no interest in feeding the businessmen who sit back on their laurels, taking the money, doing very little actual work. - robwhite1979, on 11/06/2009, -1/+2I remember hearing about the "Bittersweet Symphony" issue back in the day. That song is awesome and no one has ever heard the original. Richard Ashcrofts solo stuff is pretty good too BTW.
- DownIsTheNewUp, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1Asobi Seksu is seeking relief from tour debts in an interesting way:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/549811469/on-t ... - Rockyn, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1I heard, though I'm not sure where or even if the source was credible, that it was like $1 per album these days.
- iptunnell, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1Ha! Didn't think about that... that's hilarious! Good call out!
- robwhite1979, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1You didn't RTA.
- xtc46, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1and how would you feel if somone really liked one of your songs, stole it, and then published it themselves, then made millions of dollars on it becasue they had better marketing or were just in the right place at the right time?
Theft of music occurs a lot between artisists, and copy rights protect against that as well. - Rudymoman, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1SHOW ME THE MONEY!
- jimpbblmk, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1They shouldn't have to, but they do.
- portnoy, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1There's nothing that I can think of, other than the obvious. Guy goes to the bar and picks up some chick by telling her how beautiful she is, and how special she is. He takes her home and frells the crap out of her and then tosses her out. Record companies do the same thing to get the "artists" and that results in basically the same thing. Both the "artists" and the chicks get totally frelled and then tossed aside. When I hear about how the "artists" aren't getting paid it generates the same level of pity as those stupid bar chicks. Let's face facts, you go out to get frelled you're pretty much asking for it.
- iptunnell, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1As a serious songwriting hobbyist, I've studied the music law as it pertains to songwriter royalties, artist royalties, etc. for several years. My findings can be summed up quite simply... the record companies and the RIAA are WAY out of control. Right now, I get great enjoyment out of playing and singing the songs I write (as do others I pay them for), but I'm afraid selling my material will damage my passion for songwriting. Not to say I won't, but I haven't submitted anything I've written over the past 5 years to anyone so far. If I were to pursue it further, my mission would be to bring that enjoyment to others. Making a modest supplemental income to my main job would be a motivator as well, but a distant second to the true spirit of music... creativity and sharing. Given the current music licensing trend, we'll have to figure out who invented music. Then, all royalties will go to the heirs of his estate! Somebody's going to be REALLY rich!
- sproket, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1A musician is the wost job to have in the music industry.
- titoelgato, on 11/06/2009, -0/+1I need to become a musician!
- Braxo, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1Why don't they do that now if that was a viable option?
I makes complete sense to me, they produce the work and reap all the benefits (minus Apple's hosting and banwidth take), but there must be something of value that the industry gives artist and that's why they use them. - SeanRockCity, on 11/07/2009, -0/+1The first thing I learned in the music business is to get a good entertainment lawyer. The second is own your own masters.
If all else fails, then i'll just create another song. - inactive, on 11/07/2009, -0/+0Esceptthat bands that have low CD sales wil not tour nearly as much and will liekly not come to a tiny club near you.
And of coruse, people will just buy the $10 knock off t-shirt rather than the ridiculosuly priced #35 official one. -
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is