Curious about the music industry? Find out stuff.

[BonsaiK]

As a musician how do you feel about Piracy?

If i were a famous musician i would be doing it for the love of my instrument and make my money by doing appearances and Live shows and merchandise. I feel art should be free for all.

That's fine, if you're a famous musician who is earning enough from shows and merchandise to cover costs.

If you're a financially struggling musician, and let's face it, most of them are, things are different. Every dollar counts when it means the difference between getting kicked out by your landlord, not being able to pay a mortgage or being in debt to a record company who advanced you a five-digit sum of money to record the album that now everybody is MP3ing instead of buying. However, now that the technology is out of the box, piracy is basically unstoppable, and it's not established artists that get hurt the most, it's the little artists. The label might earn less money overall from sales, so who are they going to drop from their roster? Not Norah Jones, hell no, they're going to dump that obscuro band they signed the other month who just put out their first album that is quite a good record but isn't selling all that well. Or maybe they'll just cut back promotional money - Norah will still sell her CDs because she already has a fanbase, but once again the up-and-coming artist who needs the promotion more to get their name out gets shafted. It sure would be better times in the industry if piracy didn't exist. Unfortunately that isn't going to happen so the industry has to find other ways to cope - the trick is finding ways that are also financially viable for the young artists that get hit the hardest. The piracy question is deep and complicated and there are no easy answers on the horizon.

 

[Kralika]

Thanks alot, BonsiaK!

 

[BonsaiK]

Thanks alot, BonsiaK!

No problem. Going to bed now but I've got this thread bookmarked, so people post away and I'll answer more stuff in about 9 hours.

 

[II2]

What pieces of hardware and software do you lean on the most in composition and production?

Anything you would recommend adding to my kit?

What sort of stuff are you recording, or intending to record?

I've written hundreds of tracks of experimental electronic stuff and after a decade of work decided that my stuff was decent enough to self publish 3 albums (and growing) of really caustic IDM / Industrial / Experimental / Soundtrack -ish material under my solo "band" handle. Skinny Puppy meets Venetian Snares meets Aphex Twin meets Einsturzende Neubauten kinda noise.

I was deeply interested in sound synthesis and digital signal processing, so I sought out hardware I felt would allow me the biggest canvas to work on and learn (like NI Reaktor or Clavia's Nord Modular synths).

I'm pretty good with what I've been pursuing in that regard. What I was wondering from you, specifically, would be what hardware and software you would employ towards more ambitious Foley work and programs to score to video... I heard Nuendo is a popular platform, but I've never tried it...

Just fishing for any hints or general advice on bits of equipment you really liked or expedited your workflow as pertains to your experience with dealing with Microphones / Rack Units for Foley work, or any software platforms you've worked with in video production.

 

[BonsaiK]

What pieces of hardware and software do you lean on the most in composition and production?

Anything you would recommend adding to my kit?

What sort of stuff are you recording, or intending to record?

I've written hundreds of tracks of experimental electronic stuff and after a decade of work decided that my stuff was decent enough to self publish 3 albums (and growing) of really caustic IDM / Industrial / Experimental / Soundtrack -ish material under my solo "band" handle. Skinny Puppy meets Venetian Snares meets Aphex Twin meets Einsturzende Neubauten kinda noise.

I was deeply interested in sound synthesis and digital signal processing, so I sought out hardware I felt would allow me the biggest canvas to work on and learn (like NI Reaktor or Clavia's Nord Modular synths).

I'm pretty good with what I've been pursuing in that regard. What I was wondering from you, specifically, would be what hardware and software you would employ towards more ambitious Foley work and programs to score to video... I heard Nuendo is a popular platform, but I've never tried it...

Just fishing for any hints or general advice on bits of equipment you really liked or expedited your workflow as pertains to your experience with dealing with Microphones / Rack Units for Foley work, or any software platforms you've worked with in video production.

One of the few areas I don't have personal experience in is Foley. I was hired twice to do this type of work but in both cases the project fell through on the other end before I even found an appropriate studio and booked time. The audio/visual industry where I live is fledgling and does not have a lot of work, the amount of people who actually make full-time wages doing Foley and post-production where I live I would estimate at less than half a dozen.

Based on the foley setups I've seen others work on, you can get by with extremely archaic equipment. What you absolutely need are soundproof, "dry" rooms, really good quality condensor microphones, and some sort of basic DSP just to add your ambience. I went to the biggest TV studio in my city to tour their film production setup and was shocked to learn that all they had for foley was one padded room filled with different sandpits, a cupboard full of trinkets to make noises (cutlery etc) two condensor mics that they'd obviously had for decades and a DP4. As far as computer software, I'll eat my hat if every single post-prod studio I've ever seen wasn't using ProTools because that's what everybody uses here, even if it's arguably not the best choice.

If you want to work professionally in this area, computer and rack-mount gear is up to you (the pro stuff all does more or less the same shit anyway, so it's really just down to what interface you prefer, so get stuff that you're comfortable working with), but get the best possible condensor microphones you can afford - that's one area you shouldn't skimp. Of course, you already need to be getting paid work to justify that kind of expense so it's a chicken-and-egg situation. For sound effects I'd recommend a pair of Neumann KM-184s (so you have the choice of mono or stereo recording, although you'd be surprised how many studios are happy with mono) and for vocals a large-diaphragm Neumann like the TLM49 is unbeatable in my opinion. What you've got is reasonable and will get the job done but AT is cheaper for a reason. Oh and pad/soundproof the shit out of the room you're recording in. Ask me if you need soundproofing help and I'll go into more detail, it's not as simple as pouring concrete over everything.

(I haven't talked about recording industrial music etc because you seem to have that already well in hand. Nords are awesome, are they not?)

 

[BonsaiK]

As a musician how do you feel about Piracy?

If i were a famous musician i would be doing it for the love of my instrument and make my money by doing appearances and Live shows and merchandise. I feel art should be free for all.

That's fine, if you're a famous musician who is earning enough from shows and merchandise to cover costs.

If you're a financially struggling musician, and let's face it, most of them are, things are different. Every dollar counts when it means the difference between getting kicked out by your landlord, not being able to pay a mortgage or being in debt to a record company who advanced you a five-digit sum of money to record the album that now everybody is MP3ing instead of buying. However, now that the technology is out of the box, piracy is basically unstoppable, and it's not established artists that get hurt the most, it's the little artists. The label might earn less money overall from sales, so who are they going to drop from their roster? Not Norah Jones, hell no, they're going to dump that obscuro band they signed the other month who just put out their first album that is quite a good record but isn't selling all that well. Or maybe they'll just cut back promotional money - Norah will still sell her CDs because she already has a fanbase, but once again the up-and-coming artist who needs the promotion more to get their name out gets shafted. It sure would be better times in the industry if piracy didn't exist. Unfortunately that isn't going to happen so the industry has to find other ways to cope - the trick is finding ways that are also financially viable for the young artists that get hit the hardest. The piracy question is deep and complicated and there are no easy answers on the horizon.

I feel what your saying but lets say Mettalica is the main focus since they have been, or at least lars, against piracy such as the napster incident. Do bands that are that big and make what 150 for first 15 row seating in their concert really need the 15-20 dollars per CD? I know the whole Overhead or whatever its called. Certain percent goes to different costs so for each CD they sell they only make anywhere between 15 cents to 1 dollar and same with ticket sales. Each ticket sold they only get 10 dollars but a sold out show would give them lots. lol i'm just talking out my ass now but it still stands. Should Bands like Foo Fighters or Mettalica be against piracy so much more so?

Also side note. My Buddy went to California and met some guy there. Cool guy just standing on the corner with a portable CD player playing his music selling his CD's. Do you think thats a good way to get a start?

Guy was probably some muso who made a pressing way bigger than what was justifiable because he thought he was going to "make it" and now reality has hit home, and he's broke and trying to sell all these boxes of CDs no-one wants any way he can. Good idea if you're desperate I guess but I don't know of anyone who got a start that way, poor guy has probably forgotten all about fame and fortune and is just trying to get the money back he spent on the pressing and recording.

Lars fucked up with his crusade against Napster and no-one is more acutely aware of that than Lars himself. He knows better than anybody that the incident cost his band a lot of fans and goodwill, talk to him about it these days and he's like "yeah okay, I got it wrong, no need to rub it in". Obviously a band like Metallica could do every concert from now on as a charity event and still make ends meet, but the fee to book Metallica these days is astronomical. Yes, that's right, really big bands get paid a fee to perform at festivals etc, that's before any tickets are sold or the gig is even advertised! There's not much point bringing a band like Metallica into the debate, they are operating on the very, very top end of the music industry where money just gets thrown around in huge quantities.

So, why did Lars push the barrow so hard on Napster? Probably because he felt that he could set a precedent, and thus claim a victory on behalf of all the smaller struggling artists who didn't have the capital to bring something like that into a courtroom. Once you get a precedent set it becomes "case law", then other people (like smaller struggling artists who might genuinely get hurt by music piracy) can use it to win cases. Of course, the fans saw it as "millionaires squeezing the last drop" but his heart actually was in a good place, if not the right one.

 

[BonsaiK]

I feel what your saying but lets say Mettalica is the main focus since they have been, or at least lars, against piracy such as the napster incident. Do bands that are that big and make what 150 for first 15 row seating in their concert really need the 15-20 dollars per CD? I know the whole Overhead or whatever its called. Certain percent goes to different costs so for each CD they sell they only make anywhere between 15 cents to 1 dollar and same with ticket sales. Each ticket sold they only get 10 dollars but a sold out show would give them lots. lol i'm just talking out my ass now but it still stands. Should Bands like Foo Fighters or Mettalica be against piracy so much more so?

Also side note. My Buddy went to California and met some guy there. Cool guy just standing on the corner with a portable CD player playing his music selling his CD's. Do you think thats a good way to get a start?

Guy was probably some muso who made a pressing way bigger than what was justifiable because he thought he was going to "make it" and now reality has hit home, and he's broke and trying to sell all these boxes of CDs no-one wants any way he can. Good idea if you're desperate I guess but I don't know of anyone who got a start that way, poor guy has probably forgotten all about fame and fortune and is just trying to get the money back he spent on the pressing and recording.

Lars fucked up with his crusade against Napster and no-one is more acutely aware of that than Lars himself. He knows better than anybody that the incident cost his band a lot of fans and goodwill, talk to him about it these days and he's like "yeah okay, I got it wrong, no need to rub it in". Obviously a band like Metallica could do every concert from now on as a charity event and still make ends meet, but the fee to book Metallica these days is astronomical. Yes, that's right, really big bands get paid a fee to perform at festivals etc, that's before any tickets are sold or the gig is even advertised! There's not much point bringing a band like Metallica into the debate, they are operating on the very, very top end of the music industry where money just gets thrown around in huge quantities.

So, why did Lars push the barrow so hard on Napster? Probably because he felt that he could set a precedent, and thus claim a victory on behalf of all the smaller struggling artists who didn't have the capital to bring something like that into a courtroom. Once you get a precedent set it becomes "case law", then other people (like smaller struggling artists who might genuinely get hurt by music piracy) can use it to win cases. Of course, the fans saw it as "millionaires squeezing the last drop" but his heart actually was in a good place, if not the right one.

I can understand how he was trying to do the right thing but it just seems like he was trying to get every penny lol. Thats all i gotta say to that. But again with the guy on the street selling CD's his music, not exactly to my tastes, wasn't bad actually. It was Rap but it wasn't that i am the streets i am gangster crap. My buddy who met the guy bought a CD and spoke with him the guy said he had already sold a couple thousand CD's By travelling around and Selling his CD's in different places. Not gonna say i believe his story 100% but it seems like it might be feasible.

Anything's possible I guess. Doing it that way is a really hard slog though.

Lars gets a lot of stick but he's okay. He just fucked up, that's all. Even he knows that now. He wouldn't be the first person to follow his heart without giving enough thought to how his actions might be perceived by the general public.

 

[Trivun]

Hmmm, one thing that's piqued my interest recently is that following the news here in the UK that singer Robbie Williams has rejoined his old group Take That for a year to work on new material, they recently announced that Robbie's 'Greatest Hits' album will be pitted directly against Take That's new album in the UK in the run-up to Christmas this year. The theory is that the band and their former band-mate agreed it would be best for everyone, because the competition between them would ensure that as they compete for Christmas No. 1, the sales of both albums ill skyrocket and they'll all benefit.

What I want to know is, how likely is it for this to be the case, and do you see it affecting sales (positively or negatively) of either album, at all?

 

[BonsaiK]

Do you think with the advances with technology that maybe some time in the future the idea of a Record Label Company the way we know them now mite become redundant.

I ask cause there is a band from the town i live who have there own merchandise, recorded albums themselves, release albums themselves, and have toured in a few countries without record label support.

Nobody needs a record company. Artists who have business sense, connections, social skills, politeness and efficiency can do anything that a record company does all by themselves (artists who do this often end up starting their own record labels). Record companies exist anyway because:

1. All those skills together is a rare combination.
2. Artists often just want to use their time to create art and would prefer someone else to deal with all that other stuff.

People aren't usually drawn toward creative endeavour because they are hard-working, responsible, upstanding citizens of society. Creative careers tend to attract the dreamers, wishful thinkers, rebels and outcasts of society. Thus, finding someone with an amazing creative mind for music AND savvy business/social sense is exceedingly rare (does happen though, but not often). Therefore, these people generally need help marketing and promoting their talents, and they also need help with the legal, financial and logistical side of things. This is where a record label can help. Record labels will never be obsolete, they'll always be important, because someone has to handle all the unglamourous shit while you shake your ass on stage. The minute that all musicians in bands also become responsible adults with strong work ethics, the ability to organise and network, the will to sit for hours a day every day in an office chair making phone calls and sending emails, the drive to push their own product and enough financial and legal savvy to liaise effectively with lawyers and accountants, no-one will need labels anymore. Looking around at the musicians I know, I think that day is a long way off.

 

[BonsaiK]

Hmmm, one thing that's piqued my interest recently is that following the news here in the UK that singer Robbie Williams has rejoined his old group Take That for a year to work on new material, they recently announced that Robbie's 'Greatest Hits' album will be pitted directly against Take That's new album in the UK in the run-up to Christmas this year. The theory is that the band and their former band-mate agreed it would be best for everyone, because the competition between them would ensure that as they compete for Christmas No. 1, the sales of both albums ill skyrocket and they'll all benefit.

What I want to know is, how likely is it for this to be the case, and do you see it affecting sales (positively or negatively) of either album, at all?

I agree with the logic behind this, I think it's good marketing. When you think of Robbie Williams, you think of Take That, and vice versa, right? I think they'll complement each other and both sides will benefit - people buying the Robbie Williams album as a gift for their partner's birthday or whatever might be tempted to pick up the new Take That album as well. The simultaneous release will also get people talking (like we are right now), which is effectively free advertising, which will also boost sales. Fans of either artist will also be curious to see how the two albums measure up against each other. I think it could work really well, the only downfall I can see being that if either of the albums stink, then the other one might get a flu by association. That's always a risk, but nobody makes a bad album by choice. If there's any quality to the finished products I'd expect to see both do well in the charts.

 

[Trivun]

Hmmm, one thing that's piqued my interest recently is that following the news here in the UK that singer Robbie Williams has rejoined his old group Take That for a year to work on new material, they recently announced that Robbie's 'Greatest Hits' album will be pitted directly against Take That's new album in the UK in the run-up to Christmas this year. The theory is that the band and their former band-mate agreed it would be best for everyone, because the competition between them would ensure that as they compete for Christmas No. 1, the sales of both albums ill skyrocket and they'll all benefit.

What I want to know is, how likely is it for this to be the case, and do you see it affecting sales (positively or negatively) of either album, at all?

I agree with the logic behind this, I think it's good marketing. When you think of Robbie Williams, you think of Take That, and vice versa, right? I think they'll complement each other and both sides will benefit - people buying the Robbie Williams album as a gift for their partner's birthday or whatever might be tempted to pick up the new Take That album as well. The simultaneous release will also get people talking (like we are right now), which is effectively free advertising, which will also boost sales. Fans of either artist will also be curious to see how the two albums measure up against each other. I think it could work really well, the only downfall I can see being that if either of the albums stink, then the other one might get a flu by association. That's always a risk, but nobody makes a bad album by choice. If there's any quality to the finished products I'd expect to see both do well in the charts.

That does actually make a lot of sense. And I can definitely see both doing well, Take That did exceptionally well since their comeback, what with A Beautiful World and The Circus both being high sellers. And the same goes to Robbie, despite his 2006 stage fright on tour. The only thing that concerns me now is how each will fare against the inevitable UK X Factor winner releasing their winning single, if Take That or Robbie put out anything for the singles charts. Ah well, if Facebook managed to beat Simon Cowell last year for Rage Against The Machine, I have no doubt they can succeed this year too .

 

[BonsaiK]

What about when it comes to doing tours or traveling abroad how much does a record label help in means of that way. Like roadies or accommodation and stuff i only ask cause it's something i always wondered about tours.

Depends how big the label and the artist is. Really small labels often won't do a damn thing, some won't even book the shows for you, their role is purely to distribute and promote your music, you wanna tour, you gotta line it up yourself. Bigger labels will either book you stuff or hire a tour manager who has the specific job of hiring and organising roadies, transport, accomodation, etc... kind of like a drill instructor, but usually more inebriated. Really really big bands on major labels will have a whole heirachy of staff like this - one guy to manage roadies and staff, one to manage hotels, a transport manager, a catering manager (for those infamous "riders")... the list goes on. So yeah there's no definitive answer to this it's very much dependent on the size of the label and the amount of money the band is generating.

 

[Ham_authority95]

My band is writing some songs, and if we have more than 5-6 songs by the end of summer, we were planning on recording a demo.

Since I don't want it to sound like it was recorded on someones phone, I need some advice on sound quality and recording techniques.

Also, we're a metal band and will probably need different recording advice because of it.

 

[gl1koz3]

Saw that question about music production software/hardware.

1) Do clunky mixers and many other boxes matter anymore? It's almost as if software is getting to the point of being able to replace all that. What do you use and why?

2) Ever tried Propellerhead Reason? What would you suggest over it?

 

[BonsaiK]

do record labels look at the background of individuals before giving them a deal? If someone got a drug addiction or health problems but is still an amazing musician what do they do?

This question made me nearly ROFL for real! Yes we do look at the backgrounds of artists, but not for the reasons you might think (ahem). We're still going to hire them anyway, of course, I mean, Amy Winehouse got a record deal, right? If we insisted that all artists we signed had no drug or health problems then we'd be choosing from an extremely limited pool of artists.

If someone's really that fucked up that they just can't function enough to record a damn album or tour or whatever, we'll either let them breach their contractual obligations through their own drug-induced negligence and then quietly dump them off the label, or, book them into rehab, depending on how valuable they are to us and how nice or nasty we want to be.