Comments on: Quick Thoughts On “Obscurity”

By: Particles: a creative journey | rotas»sator

Particles: a creative journey | rotas»sator — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 05:18:14 +0000

[...] Many moons ago, a young band recorded an album. An EP of such epic silliness that was destined to be shunned/ignored by the public. Yes, yes, it's been done before. Many, many albums have been made that never saw the light of day, or at least were heard in the light of day. Such is the life of musicians living in Obscurity. [...]

By: Jenny Lasserton

Jenny Lasserton — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 02:52:27 +0000

A really interesting article, and I appreciate all the great comments. I confess I don’t know much about how music gets counted, but I know what I like and if that counts for anything, I’ll buy albums, digital downlaods, and concert tix for my favorite indie friends. Part of my is happy that they remain ‘obscure’ although I do have one friend who has a song all over t.v. these days. I am happy for him and his family, but kinda miss the small coffee shop concerts.

By: Don’t be held hostage by labels | Audiosmith

Don’t be held hostage by labels | Audiosmith — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 20:22:20 +0000

[...] that restricts your ability to make music seems live a very bad idea to me. I was recently reading a Steve Lawson post on “obscurity” which highlights the brokenness of the record industry and how little there is to gain for an [...]

By: About 1,500 artists break the “obscurity line” each year. Less than 1% do it on their own – Tom Silverman | IndieLab - Promoting Independent Indie Music in the UK and Beyond

Sun, 31 Jan 2010 20:10:57 +0000

[...] reporting systems like soundscan etc. For a really good considered response then check out Quick thoughts on obscurity from Steve Lawson and How people use neilsen to hurt musicians from Jeff at [...]

By: Peter Wells

Peter Wells — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:25:55 +0000

Bingo! That’s the democratization of the music industry. There will ALWAYS be superstars, and always be people who never make a dime. Sometimes that’ll even coincide with those whose music is good and those whose music is just awful. But with real access, real freedom, and letting people in on fair terms, it can sort itself out in a fair way.

Thanks again!

–Peter
peter@tunecore.com

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 07:45:25 +0000

Thanks Peter, I was a little unfair to you guys – Jeff was answering the post on its own terms and recognising that even there it fails. Excellent point that I’m really grateful to you for making. Thanks very much. That post is possibly the most damning I’ve ever read for the nonsense statistics that get touted about the ‘state of play’ in music. You guys (and everyone else making it possible for artists to sell their music and make it available in ways that avoid ‘the machine’) are helping to change the rules massively, and the end result will be a much more gradual incline between poverty and riches in music, rather than the cut-off point sitting comfortably right between Elton John, and some homeless drunk dude with a broken guitar…

By: Peter Wells

Peter Wells — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 03:40:29 +0000

Actually, we modify the idea of “success” by leaving it alone. It’s up to the artist to decide what success is. TuneCore’s always been about access, freedom, choice, easy infrastructure, the kinds of things that in decades past were shrouded in mystery and behind locked doors.

But let me put my spin on Jeff’s argument, given your ideas of success. Okay, let’s buy the definitions of “success” as Tommy was presenting them: there’s STILL plenty of that happening and being completely missed by SoundScan.

It’s the very fluid nature of “success” that’s changing how people buy music, how they make it, and what they want to do with their lives around music.

You’re questioning the arbitrary nature of the stats as they’re handed to us by the legacy industry–that’s a great impulse, and this was a really fun read.

Thanks!

–Peter
peter@tunecore.com

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:55:24 +0000

Hi Ben,

thanks for the reply – I’ll actually revise my statement about Soundscan, in that don’t think *any* of my sales are recorded by them – a few are reported, but I’m pretty sure Soundscan don’t have the info to turn whatever data they get about me into anything meaningful… And it means so little anyway, that I couldn’t ever be bothered to register it…

Re: ‘free’ I REALLY like the ‘pay what you want’ model – giving listeners the chance to express their gratitude direct to the artist – I’m unsure how well that would work on a 3rd party site. It might, but I’m not sure. the reason I’m using Bandcamp as my main platform for digital and physical sales right now is that the page is skinnable so that the links from my site take my listeners to somewhere that is still recognisably my own space…

The big value I’ve had from cdbaby over the years has been the internal search – CDbaby has brought me a whole load of listeners/Cd buyers that would never have found me any other way… that community aspect has been really strong…

By: Ben Hubbird

Ben Hubbird — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:43:25 +0000

Quick notes:

a) Awesome post. I think the case needs to be made more often that it is always possible to make a living doing what you love (be it music, visual art, social work, teaching, whatever) if you’re willing to work at it. One of the great lies of the music “industry” is that you need to be famous to make a living at music. You don’t need to be Jay-Z to make a living rapping any more than you need to be Mr. Holland to make a living teaching music.

b) FYI: your CD Baby sales (of physical cds) ARE reported to Soundscan.

c) I really like the idea of 10,000 listeners and no sales. We’ve just started being able give away your music for free as downloads, FYI. Give it a shot and let us know how it goes!

By: Howlin' Hobbit

Howlin' Hobbit — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 01:24:23 +0000

Fabulous post, and chewy comments too.

Keep ‘em coming!