Scott Henderson Sounds off on Internet/Music Business

[degenaro]

and as far as Hollywood....I'm not sure if any royalties are going to the writers

I remember when the argument was that the artists didn't make all the money, the record label did and if you weren't the big, big name talents, you succumbed to that system or you didn't get signed. I know the artists got some cash, but the bulk went to the label. Don't the labels own the songs?

So, I guess when has any artists ever owned their own songs and made money off them?

Song owner ship is shared between the writer and publisher, has nothing to do with labels.
What it used to be like was...
You got fronted money to record, living expenses, plus if you were lucky tour support and advertising.
If you sold enough to break even then you made about a buck per CD. If you didn't it ended up being a tax write off for the label. You also got an advance against your publishing if you were the writer. That was recouped by use of the song...as in air play, movie placement, covers, etc...
The internet made way for the indie approach change where you net somewhere between 5 and 10 bucks a CD and end up if you're lucky selling enough to break even. No tour support, no advertising...unless you pay for it.
I remember pay to play in the late 80s/early 90s. Which never bothered me, as long as you hustled you made a couple a bucks pre-selling those 300 tickets you paid 1500 bucks for.
I saw this with the Country band, when we played bars or casinos we packed the joint and made mad bank. After I left it split into 2 bands, still the same draw as the one band before. And each of them started playing the same places we did for 2500 a night for 700 bucks. Because by that time you had enough other bands willing to do it for even less than that.

 

[degenaro]

Things have changed forever. Just wonder whats next ?

Licensing fee's on Tribute bands??
Royalty fee's for Cover/Top 40 bands?

There was a lot of lawsuit talk last year regarding music on Juke boxes and the places they are in too..

Always has been there...just happens to be the venues responsibility. I love this entitlement shit...you're perfectly happy to make money off some one else's work, but have an issue for them to get paid?

Who said anything about entitlement?? certainly not me...

I am at your bitterness towards people playing for free though..

Where am I bitter? I have an issue with guys be willing to not charge or under cut others. For the live of me I can't see why any one does any job for free...

As for entitlement, your OP was "what's next royalties on Top 40" which implies they shouldn't be paid. Now that IS entitlement.

I wasn't implying anything other than suggestion of what would be next.
I know the jukebox thing has always be done but apparently some of the other stuff is already being done also...

So what if some one wants to charge, charge a lower price or play free,
Every one has the freedom to either do it or not do it..
A long with the Consumer/Audience having the freedom to chose which to go see

No one has yet answered my question about their day gig...
So I ask again, if some one that was almost as capable as you would be willing to do your gig for free and you would be out of work would you work for free?

The idea that musicians shouldn't get paid is coming exactly from where?
As for let audiences decide...charge 5 or 10 bucks at the door, if nobody comes you don't make money. If you have a draw give me the door...you keep the liquor sales. But no it's just more profitable to keep the door and liquor sales and not pay the artists, since there will be always some willing to do it for free. Imagine bartenders, waitresses, cooks, etc not being paid, how long you thing that would go?

 

[kasperjensen]

I don't see anything wrong with people undercutting if the situation calls for it.
That's the situation in all other business, and I don't see why music should be an exception.

By day I am in commercial real estate. I charge a certain price for my product, which is justified because it is a good product that people just can't find other places.
Many of my competitors are undercutting something rotten, some are even giving their shit away for free. But are all my customers running to them? No. Because I deliver a better product. Simple.
If however someone came along and offered the exact same product, in the same location, for half the price, I would have a problem. If that person could ride it long enough, I would be out, and he would just have doubled his business. Real shitty, but that's business.

It is no different for a band. If you can guarantee the venue $20.000 extra in their till the night you play, then it stands to good reason you can charge $10.000. (just an example)
Now, if there are 4 bands in your area that can generate the same amount of income for a venue, you got yourself a race. The one that wins that race, is the one who can effectively wipe out the other 3 bands. And you can do that by either generating more income for the venue by raising their turnover, or by reducing their costs. Or both.

Rant over.

 

[OldSkoolNJ]

Things have changed forever. Just wonder whats next ?

Licensing fee's on Tribute bands??
Royalty fee's for Cover/Top 40 bands?

There was a lot of lawsuit talk last year regarding music on Juke boxes and the places they are in too..

Always has been there...just happens to be the venues responsibility. I love this entitlement shit...you're perfectly happy to make money off some one else's work, but have an issue for them to get paid?

Who said anything about entitlement?? certainly not me...

I am at your bitterness towards people playing for free though..

Where am I bitter? I have an issue with guys be willing to not charge or under cut others. For the live of me I can't see why any one does any job for free...

As for entitlement, your OP was "what's next royalties on Top 40" which implies they shouldn't be paid. Now that IS entitlement.

I wasn't implying anything other than suggestion of what would be next.
I know the jukebox thing has always be done but apparently some of the other stuff is already being done also...

So what if some one wants to charge, charge a lower price or play free,
Every one has the freedom to either do it or not do it..
A long with the Consumer/Audience having the freedom to chose which to go see

No one has yet answered my question about their day gig...
So I ask again, if some one that was almost as capable as you would be willing to do your gig for free and you would be out of work would you work for free?

The idea that musicians shouldn't get paid is coming exactly from where?
As for let audiences decide...charge 5 or 10 bucks at the door, if nobody comes you don't make money. If you have a draw give me the door...you keep the liquor sales. But no it's just more profitable to keep the door and liquor sales and not pay the artists, since there will be always some willing to do it for free. Imagine bartenders, waitresses, cooks, etc not being paid, how long you thing that would go?

You are delusional, I do not see where you are getting any of these supposed claims you are making by reading any of the posts here..

Welcome to a Free Market...
Learn to compete in the Music business or go do something else for a living..

 

[degenaro]

Things have changed forever. Just wonder whats next ?

Licensing fee's on Tribute bands??
Royalty fee's for Cover/Top 40 bands?

There was a lot of lawsuit talk last year regarding music on Juke boxes and the places they are in too..

Always has been there...just happens to be the venues responsibility. I love this entitlement shit...you're perfectly happy to make money off some one else's work, but have an issue for them to get paid?

Who said anything about entitlement?? certainly not me...

I am at your bitterness towards people playing for free though..

Where am I bitter? I have an issue with guys be willing to not charge or under cut others. For the live of me I can't see why any one does any job for free...

As for entitlement, your OP was "what's next royalties on Top 40" which implies they shouldn't be paid. Now that IS entitlement.

I wasn't implying anything other than suggestion of what would be next.
I know the jukebox thing has always be done but apparently some of the other stuff is already being done also...

So what if some one wants to charge, charge a lower price or play free,
Every one has the freedom to either do it or not do it..
A long with the Consumer/Audience having the freedom to chose which to go see

No one has yet answered my question about their day gig...
So I ask again, if some one that was almost as capable as you would be willing to do your gig for free and you would be out of work would you work for free?

The idea that musicians shouldn't get paid is coming exactly from where?
As for let audiences decide...charge 5 or 10 bucks at the door, if nobody comes you don't make money. If you have a draw give me the door...you keep the liquor sales. But no it's just more profitable to keep the door and liquor sales and not pay the artists, since there will be always some willing to do it for free. Imagine bartenders, waitresses, cooks, etc not being paid, how long you thing that would go?

You are delusional, I do not see where you are getting any of these supposed claims you are making by reading any of the posts here..

Welcome to a Free Market...
Learn to compete in the Music business or go do something else for a living..

What claims am I making?
Delusional? Hardly, I just seen enough guys end up choosing a gig stocking shelves at Home Depot than going on the road because the money isn't there.
As for me competing? How do you think this is about me, my day gig is VP at THD Electronics, I have no worries about "making it".
However I just as you have your take on it, so do I.

 

[degenaro]

I don't see anything wrong with people undercutting if the situation calls for it.
That's the situation in all other business, and I don't see why music should be an exception.

By day I am in commercial real estate. I charge a certain price for my product, which is justified because it is a good product that people just can't find other places.
Many of my competitors are undercutting something rotten, some are even giving their shit away for free. But are all my customers running to them? No. Because I deliver a better product. Simple.
If however someone came along and offered the exact same product, in the same location, for half the price, I would have a problem. If that person could ride it long enough, I would be out, and he would just have doubled his business. Real shitty, but that's business.

It is no different for a band. If you can guarantee the venue $20.000 extra in their till the night you play, then it stands to good reason you can charge $10.000. (just an example)
Now, if there are 4 bands in your area that can generate the same amount of income for a venue, you got yourself a race. The one that wins that race, is the one who can effectively wipe out the other 3 bands. And you can do that by either generating more income for the venue by raising their turnover, or by reducing their costs. Or both.

Rant over.

So...same product, same location for free...that's ok then?
I have no issue with competition, but driving the wages down to free is BS.

 

[squealie]

No one has yet answered my question about their day gig...
So I ask again, if some one that was almost as capable as you would be willing to do your gig for free and you would be out of work would you work for free?

When there are enough people who will do a 'job' for free, it ceases to be a realistic way to earn a living.

Ed, I'm not trying to get under your skin here. Just playing the part of a pragmatist.

Technology, and/or fashion can make any occupation or art obsolete. You said it yourself about the saxophone. Shit evolves and changes. A guy willing to go out and perform music for free, ain't even new.

I'm a network engineer by trade. If every nitwit with a cable modem suddenly stopped using their cousin to hook up their wiFi router....and paid me $100 an hour to do it instead, I'd be pleased indeed. But that is NOT the reality. It's up to ME to offer a service that is beyond what Goober is able to perform.

 

[MOAAH]

As I said in another thread, rock bands in Vancouver play for nothing unless they already have a big name for themselves. Sometimes little guys get to keep part of the cover charge, rarely do they get all of it, and then only if they have a good local following and beer sales are great. That's just the way it is.

I'd rather play solo in a small club and get decent money than play with a band, break my back moving all the gear in, put up with the drunks, tear down and start over, all for nothing. I don't know anyone in my years of playing that don't have a real job in the day time. When I was young I had a crazy time paying off my PA and still eating properly.

Times are no worse today, just people like to bitch a lot more. It's almost like they think the world owes them a living. What a joke we are, comparing today to yesterday. As if Joe plumber could get a record contract so easy back in the day, or Jane Doe record her own album in her basement back then. There are plenty of reasons why we have it actually better today than ever, too bad we're all like a bunch of lazy kids, expecting fame to somehow fall out of the sky and make us the next EVH.

Rant just beginning.

 

[degenaro]

No one has yet answered my question about their day gig...
So I ask again, if some one that was almost as capable as you would be willing to do your gig for free and you would be out of work would you work for free?

When there are enough people who will do a 'job' for free, it ceases to be a realistic way to earn a living.

Ed, I'm not trying to get under your skin here. Just playing the part of a pragmatist.

Technology, and/or fashion can make any occupation or art obsolete. You said it yourself about the saxophone. Shit evolves and changes. A guy willing to go out and perform music for free, ain't even new.

I'm a network engineer by trade. If every nitwit with a cable modem suddenly stopped using their cousin to hook up their wiFi router....and paid me $100 an hour to do it instead, I'd be pleased indeed. But that is NOT the reality. It's up to ME to offer a service that is beyond what Goober is able to perform.

Fair enough, but take a look at what happens around here at the suggestion that Rock is dead...
How many musos do you know that don't support other musos? I refer to as friend rock, I have friends play out...I go to see them, and pay.

 

[mixohoytian]

the real enemy is the marketing manager who 1st thought..."hey why don't you get a hotter singer?"

 

[kasperjensen]

I don't see anything wrong with people undercutting if the situation calls for it.
That's the situation in all other business, and I don't see why music should be an exception.

By day I am in commercial real estate. I charge a certain price for my product, which is justified because it is a good product that people just can't find other places.
Many of my competitors are undercutting something rotten, some are even giving their shit away for free. But are all my customers running to them? No. Because I deliver a better product. Simple.
If however someone came along and offered the exact same product, in the same location, for half the price, I would have a problem. If that person could ride it long enough, I would be out, and he would just have doubled his business. Real shitty, but that's business.

It is no different for a band. If you can guarantee the venue $20.000 extra in their till the night you play, then it stands to good reason you can charge $10.000. (just an example)
Now, if there are 4 bands in your area that can generate the same amount of income for a venue, you got yourself a race. The one that wins that race, is the one who can effectively wipe out the other 3 bands. And you can do that by either generating more income for the venue by raising their turnover, or by reducing their costs. Or both.

Rant over.

So...same product, same location for free...that's ok then?
I have no issue with competition, but driving the wages down to free is BS.

Is it OK? I won't be the judge of that. But if someone wants my business then that is how they would do it. Once they have taken me out, they are sitting on all the honey, and can then chose to do business at whatever price they should so chose. Until someone else comes along, and the whole thing starts over again. And then you get conglomerates, who seek to own everything. And they will eventually succeed.
"I don't like it anymore than you folks..." but that's just the way it is. And you can either stand your ground and fight, or go home.

Think also of chefs... They work for free for years, in order to get a name for themselves and gain experience and contacts, so that they can one day charge the big bucks.

 

[degenaro]

I don't see anything wrong with people undercutting if the situation calls for it.
That's the situation in all other business, and I don't see why music should be an exception.

By day I am in commercial real estate. I charge a certain price for my product, which is justified because it is a good product that people just can't find other places.
Many of my competitors are undercutting something rotten, some are even giving their shit away for free. But are all my customers running to them? No. Because I deliver a better product. Simple.
If however someone came along and offered the exact same product, in the same location, for half the price, I would have a problem. If that person could ride it long enough, I would be out, and he would just have doubled his business. Real shitty, but that's business.

It is no different for a band. If you can guarantee the venue $20.000 extra in their till the night you play, then it stands to good reason you can charge $10.000. (just an example)
Now, if there are 4 bands in your area that can generate the same amount of income for a venue, you got yourself a race. The one that wins that race, is the one who can effectively wipe out the other 3 bands. And you can do that by either generating more income for the venue by raising their turnover, or by reducing their costs. Or both.

Rant over.

So...same product, same location for free...that's ok then?
I have no issue with competition, but driving the wages down to free is BS.

Is it OK? I won't be the judge of that. But if someone wants my business then that is how they would do it. Once they have taken me out, they are sitting on all the honey, and can then chose to do business at whatever price they should so chose. Until someone else comes along, and the whole thing starts over again. And then you get conglomerates, who seek to own everything. And they will eventually succeed.
"I don't like it anymore than you folks..." but that's just the way it is. And you can either stand your ground and fight, or go home.

Think also of chefs... They work for free for years, in order to get a name for themselves and gain experience and contacts, so that they can one day charge the big bucks.

Which chefs work for free? Unless you're talking about going to cooking school, they do get paid.

 

[Meathead]

I feel bad for musicians these days because music is free now and there is no going back. The only way to make money is playing live now...

Steve

When you play out live, your audience is right there in front of you. Do what some smart artists are doing, get their money!

A CD is real cheap to make. Add an extra $5 - $10 to the admission price and hand out a CD to everyone that has paid to see you play. If you play to a lot of people in a year you'll sell a ton CD's.
Then let Billboard know how many albums you've sold and watch your CD shoot up the charts.

Because of pirating Concert tickets have jump into the 100s if not 1000s for good tickets.
FYI I dont know of anyone who tours as much as Scott does.
People should pay for tunes or subscribe to Rhapsody. They are the property of the musician

It used to be you toured to sell more albums...now you make albums to go on tour.
The internet is here, mp3's are here, there are too many holes to plug to keep that old, bloated record company ship of yesteryear afloat.
Record companies believed at first that mp3's were too inferior of a format and people would still pay for the uncompressed CD...turns out mp3 is fine for most people and every artist's work is splattered all over the internet for free.

I agree that people 'should' pay for the music. It would be great to see buying an album become a little more affordable as the money goes almost exclusively to the artists.
I don't see a need for record companies taking a big piece anymore. I don't see a need for record companies at all...except for the manufactured pop stars.

 

[OldSkoolNJ]

What claims am I making?
Delusional? Hardly, I just seen enough guys end up choosing a gig stocking shelves at Home Depot than going on the road because the money isn't there.
As for me competing? How do you think this is about me, my day gig is VP at THD Electronics, I have no worries about "making it".
However I just as you have your take on it, so do I.

Because some of your random statements out of no where appear Delusional to me..
Complaining about people Hobbyist's playing for free or Non Union gigs just makes it look like you feel you are more entitled to a gig than someone else...

 

[skoora]

Unfortunately with music you don't need training or schooling to go out and compete for time and money in the professional arena. It's art, there are no rules. Unlike many of the bad correlations being made here to other industries, like Real Estate. It makes me glad I no longer pursue making a living in a band as I never did come close in the first place and just doing music for fun is all I can handle in my 39, over the hill, state. Plus my day gig pays pretty good and I'm too old to go for long drives in close quarters for no reward anymore. Now any yahoo with a PC and $200 interface can "release" product. How is a potential consumer meant to find real art/talent amongst this sea of MySpace minutia.

Plus having to deal with the utterly self absorbed, work ethically challenged tools called musicians I knew over the years is not something I miss.

 

[squealie]

Fair enough, but take a look at what happens around here at the suggestion that Rock is dead...
How many musos do you know that don't support other musos? I refer to as friend rock, I have friends play out...I go to see them, and pay.

Good point.

I've played a few (very few) 'multi-band' gigs where the other bands went as far as to take all their friends and leave after their set. Then they wonder why there is no 'scene'.

The 2 dozen or so guys who do what we do, in this area, understand that a RISING TIDE LIFTS ALL BOATS, and make effort to support other bands (and pay). We show up at each other's gigs when we can, and support new bands, and recruit our fans to go with us. Of course, I'm not talking about 'high-art' here. I'm talking about rock-bar party bands. But I think the sentiment still holds.

 

[Shonuff]

Right or wrong the floodgates are long open, so adaptation seems to be key. And to ever wrote the bit of having to audition for joining the musicians union is talking through their hat, all you need to do to join the musician union is fill out a form and send them a check, been that way as long as I can remember.

 

[Meathead]

Right or wrong the floodgates are long open, so adaptation seems to be key. And to ever wrote the bit of having to audition for joining the musicians union is talking through their hat, all you need to do to join the musician union is fill out a form and send them a check, been that way as long as I can remember.

True...they'll take anyone's money, no test or hoops to jump through there.

 

[MOAAH]

Right or wrong the floodgates are long open, so adaptation seems to be key. And to ever wrote the bit of having to audition for joining the musicians union is talking through their hat, all you need to do to join the musician union is fill out a form and send them a check, been that way as long as I can remember.

Best first post I've evar seen by anyone!
Welcome aboard

 

[stephen sawall]

The old Buddhist saying "do on to others as you would have them do to you" can also be interpreted as "if it is not yours leave it alone".

As far as stealing goes I believe it is about the only wrong. I see rape and murder as only stealing. So I guess if someone or anyone else has raped or killed someone or anyone it is alright for me to rape and murder people in your family ?

Stealing no matter how it is done puts you in this group.