TheCapitalClinic

Well, I don't think the traditional industry model can sustain itself. I'm sure they'll spend some time co-opting grass roots marketing and tossing around phrases like "DIY" in hopes of capturing some of that independent spirit. I really don't know what will ultimately come of it. Seems to me like artists in general are taking more control of their work or learning to be record execs (Jay-Z, Kanye West). Seems to me the future would have to be artist-friendly labels and greater artistic control. Probably less expensive production costs and marketing campaigns as well.

Yes! Greater artistic control and fewer "transaction costs" are the solution.

I have been planning to write separately about the notion of bloated transaction costs in managed hierarchies.

Obscene corporate compensation, class-action lawsuits, governmental tax structures, health care programs, unsustainable disparaties between haves and have/nots, are just a few egregious examples of "transaction costs" running amuck due "disfunctional systems". The need to change such things [which really gets back to basics in capital formation] constitutes the driving premise behind the work of thecapitalclinic for many moons [hence my penchant to use the odd-sounding cure-all term, "disaggregation", in the firm profile and active involvement in Fuzz - look even at the top of this page! :-)]

I really would like to parse out the subject of how to minimize "transaction costs" based on the hard realities of the life of the independent artist and input from this community so musicians at all stages of their careers can have something concrete to put in their personal tool-kit for survival first, and just maybe, artistic prominence later [if that is the artistic imperative - for some].

As somewhat of a side note - I wonder if we could be talking about an entire breakdown of celebrity as we know it. You think that at the height of his popularity, Michael Jackson could sell 25 Million records. Even N'Sync sold in the tens of millions. However, the options available to fans were dramatically less than they are now. What I could see happening is a breakdown of the emphasis around one star and instead around a community of artists. We see this idea of community with rap and indie rock labels. Interactive communities - indie labels or sights like fuzz - combined a less expensive, more DIY approach to marketing.

Breakdown of [fake] celebrity and build-up of [real] community as a solution. I like it.

I like it too. Hell Yeah!

I don't think hugh Pop Stars are going away. I'm sure that what's left of the Majors, once the industry stabilizes, will be solely focused on Commercially viable pop stars.

I also don't think they'll be focused on moving CD/Downloads as the Artist will more so just be the popular face that sings before, after and during Pepsi/Coke commercials and helps to sell and endorse other products. I for see the NEW wave of Pop Stars as the ones who will have every bit of revenue possible coming into the Labels hands 1st as the majors will be forced into becoming Mega-Boutic one stop shops for an artist and will control the artists careers fully, much like American Idol does for the length of the performers contracts. Safe Pop music will always be around.

On the topic of communities and site like Fuzz... I agree, communities built out of Blogs, podcasts, editorial or basically any other outlet that acts as a Filter for it's audience will truly be the most effective and most powerful way for any artist to reach wider audiences. Taste Makers, Real Fans and Die Hard Music Lovers will hold a lot of power in getting the word out on new music and indie artists.

Apropos our discussion about the Major Labels and the red ink announced this week, I know some of you read bob lefsetz who calls it like he sees it

For those who don't read this no-holds-barred music observer [and you should, even if you might not always agree with him], I thought I would share just a few sound bites from one of his pieces this week [in the interest of fair use you should go directly to his site referenced below for the full magilla]:

"Now the financial community thinks the labels suck too."

"...the albums contained... filler...Only one problem! You couldn't buy the single!...Fuck you customer!"

"...Anybody can make music. And now, more than ever before in the modern era, they don't want to make it for a major label."

"... the head honchos at labels...believe they can pull a rabbit out of the hat...and one of these evanescent no-talents is gonna sell ten million copies of his vapid album."

"Yup, they truly believe. It's astounding the crap being thrown..."

"...People don't have to listen to major label releases... new touring bands are making it without a major label! Their fans are happier, and whatever music they can sell...they get to keep the lion's share and NOBODY TELLS THEM WHAT TO DO!"

"The labels can double-talk all they want...But they've devalued music.." http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/

Whew!

I think we're starting over. Once upon a time people played instruments and entertained each other in communities. Then the music box was created, and musical works could be captured and re-enjoyed by those who could afford the mechanism. Live music still happened. Then radio and phono recordings evolved, people who could afford the technology could use it, and live music still happened. Technology continues to evolve, and now music distribution doesn't require brick and mortar stores. That doesn't mean all the records or cd's go away, but less of them are sold, and they become niche' markets. Live music still happens. Back before Glenn Miller sold a million copies of "In The Mood" nobody thought Major recording artists were possible. Singles were released to radio, prior to concept rock albums, and as a result of the converging elements of demograhics, marketing and radio promotion, pop stars happened. Album releases became more common, singles were still released to radio, live music still happened. The Major labels happened because visionary record producers, and artists created independent labels and music that eventually got bought up because of the revenue streams attached. Major labels got greedy, and began manufacturing stars when possible, and moved farther and farther away from visionary record producers and artists. Because it's not about the music, or the communities that enjoy the music, it's about the money, and commercial interests. Now were looking at revenue sharing models between labels, distribution, radio, internet, artists with production companies, and advertisers. I believe it's about community. Communities of artists, fans, and live music happening will continue to drive it, and the artists that resonate, will build communities of fans. The fans already know that they get incredible benefits from the communities of artists that they love, and they hopefully realize that for artists to continue working they have to be able to sustain a living wage for the effort. If we are not good stewards of these communities, then the major label type perversions will happen over and over again. They rose up from the truth being offered in art of the past, and they perverted. Not by design or intent, but through greed little by little over time.
Live music still happens, true artists still create. Now we have distribution opportunities to help build communities, so we better be diligent, so it doesn't get hijacked. I think we've started over.

Here is a October 4, 2007 article by Resnikoff of Digital Music News on Why Major Labels Just Lost even tho' the RIAA scored a victory in suing an alleged file-sharer.