TheCapitalClinic

The human condition is indeed governed by what we have come to call the “darkness and the light”. Most of the musicians I have known have been on the side of “the light” more often than not, regardless of the genre they choose to follow, or their gender. My thoughts on the issues you outline here are as follows-

1) I have always thought that if a musician or group is able to complete their album, CD or EP, then half the battle is won right there. That their works do not achieve commercial success can be considered a failure, but only in a business sense and not an artistic one. I also keep in mind the fact that if the musician or group owns the rights to the masters of their works, that with today’s internet there is always an opportunity to find a niche market for those works and therefore achieve some level of commercial success. Even if it takes years to get to that level.

2) In our modern web environment, I have found it most important, even imperative, for an artist to seek out the niche audience and fans of their music. Since the web has exploded even further in the realm of music over the last five years and has resulted in a sense of chaos, an artist has the opportunity to narrow the places where their music can be heard and raise their chances of sales and success. Doing so will more than likely help with the creation of a persona that will attract more listeners.

3) Quite the question posed here! At the root, most musicians are driven by an artistic imperative, and most understand the reason to develop a strong media package that helps underscore their artistic works. Whether it is based on the “Hollywood-inspired” type or not is left to the artist to decide.

4) An easier question for me to answer here. Personally, I prefer to sleep deeply at night. I would much rather live a life of being honest with the public who chooses to listen to or purchase my music. To use a “sleight-of-hand” maneuver or outright lie to the fans and listeners seems to come back around and bite life at the most inopportune moment. Although the articles I’ve read surrounding Ms. Digby have stated that she remains insistent on the side of her being a “grass roots artist”, even with evidence showing the contrary of input and assistance from a major label and publisher, it is her alone that will deal with “two distinct paths” and outcome it brings in this music industry. Thank goodness that this industry offers more alternatives than the high road/low road lose/lose ones mentioned here. And thanks TCC , for offering a forum to air our views, and speak about the positive win/win steps we can all take, with a little help from Fuzz.

BB

I agree with you BB, I prefer to sleep well at night. The real issue is getting exposure in a business where there is 'clutter' and plenty of product available from artists of all types and skill levels, with widely varied techniques (and investment), different styles and genres, great, good, average, poor and downright awful songs, each of which can be yours for 99 cents.

Because of the technical advances of the last decade or so, the barrier to entry in the music business has been eliminated. This allows us all to have our voice (good or bad). Ultimately the market will decide, and its up to the artist to make their market. It'll be interesting to see how the market responds to Miss Digby, now that she's been exposed. I always suspected this would happen with apparent full collaboration from a label. It's just validation that the viral networking works, and that marketing and facts often have little to do with each other.

Thanks BB and drummercous for your comments.

I'm with you that I prefer to sleep at night, although when I was younger and in a hurry, without proper guidance, I too may have been tempted to script a story that "sold" rather than one that consigned me to doing it the hard way and abject failure.

I was kinda surprised at how "gentle" the Lefsetz Letter was on Miss Digby, although Lefsetz did characterize the actions, rightly or unfairly, attributed to her as "career killing." I must say that I still don't know myself, who called the shots and how this will all play out.

The main point of my blog and what led me to set out the questions above as Lesson 1 in the Nightschool for Enterpreneurs, was that this case appeared to be on its face similar to the classic, lose/lose, prisoner's dilemma where you compromise [rat on your partner/others] to optimize your own position because your minders lead you to assume that others will do the same thing to you in a "dog/eat/dog" world. In this way, all parties lose [lose/lose], whereas if all parties just kept quiet [did not rat on their partners but co-operated] everyone gets the best "balanced" deal [win/win]. In the environment established by the minders[jail-keepers] everybody loses but the minders whose main job is to keep you in jail.

In the end, of course, Miss Digby's long term career will depend on how resilient Miss Digby is herself in surviving lousy advice from her minders and being just a bit too naive, vulnerable, and maybe too willing to go along with the "marketing" strategems that those who were supposedly "in the know" as experienced pros scripted for her. Maybe she thought that this was the way her particular "playbook" was put together by her minders to get her out in front of her public. Maybe she thought, look at Tila's "playbook" - at least I sing some.

Next time Miss Digby will know better and, if she has a thick skin and a strong backbone, she will survive. Let's watch to see how this plays out while we try to develop better, "balanced" win/win, solutions [rather than a "winner-take-all one], where marketing and facts have more than just a little to do with each other.