How much do 'successful' indie bands make?

mrx

New member
Many recent discussions have been thematically tied to the 'craft' of writing, and the differences between writing to a specifc market 'formula' (trying to get published) versus writing as an artist (writing in the context of a band and a record deal, etc.)

Thinking about the latter, I keep coming back a question that the vast resources of the internet can't seem to answer: How much money (and where does it come from) is generated by bands like Wilco, Guided By Voices, Roger Clyne and the Peacemakers, etc., who don't sell enough CD's to recoup (Jeff Tweedy from Wilco has said he's never seen a royalty check), and even when touring appear in joints that hold 200 people?

Robert Pollard (GBV) and Paul Westerberg (Replacements) don't seem to have day jobs - where does the money come from? Clearly there's a way to make a living as a writer, yet everyone I talk to that is a 'working musician' either gives lessons or traffics in dope.
 
from what I gather

I'm guessing that some of them could by thier own house, a decent, but not extravagant place, some could pay the rent, & some even working pretty hard, might still be having a hard time making rent, maybe keeping some sort of ad hoc day job ... My conclusion - no riches, but perhaps a living
 
hmmm . . .

that's a good question really. how do icons like John Cale continue to live off piddly alnum sales and undersold tours?

my guess is it's all to do with communities. Someone like Paul Westenberg or Jeff Tweedy may not have a lot of international celebrity, but they have a lot of cultural collateral in a certain community. This community wants the artist to continue making music for pure reasons, so they are supported by labels and the general community. What indie wouldn't sign Wilco to add cultural value to their company?

also, the larger community wants to support these "pure" musical ventures as it adds cultural value to their larger community, from morale to national/regional pride to tourism - what would nashville be without country music? (although admittedly Country is a cash cow)

this is especially true in New Zealand where I live. They are various government schemes to support NZ music and even an 'Artists allowance' that allows you to get paid for not working as long as you can prove you're pusuing an artistic dream - it's not much but it's enough to live off.

having said all that, it's still a mystery how some artists can EAT, let alone make music :confused:
 
I wonder about tours sometimes. Live performance is supposed to be where musicians make thier money, but what with paying for hotel rooms and plane tickets for the musicians, I just wonder how people break even.
 
A lot of Indie bands ,"Guided by Voices" for instance, don't get caught in the trap of owing thier record company tons of money for studio time, promotion, and other shit because they have done it themselves hence the Independent part. Therefore when some money does finally come in they are more likely to keep it than a teenage band signed to a Major for thier first Album and end up owing thier souls. There is this great article by steve albini on the subject but I don't know where to find it, Anyone know?
 
Oh yeah, and they did have day jobs they're first few albums in. I believe one of the Pollards was a High School English teacher.
 
A lot of them (especially members of wilco) run their own studios, have started their own labels, and work for record companies now. They spend their time finding new music and recording it.
 
a good book on the subject: $30 MUSIC SCHOOL. It's not incredibly well-written from as literary perspective, but its got alot of good advice on the whole do-it-yourself indie style recording/promoting/touring. I've done the whole foot my own bill on the road thing for a few months back in 2001, and i really wish that i had read this book before i had tried that the first time.
 
I've read the Albini article, but he's a strange bird pretty convinced his vision of the world is correct. For those that haven't read it, he basically breaks down the finances of a band that sells 250,000 copies of a debut album for a major label and ends up (including advance, touring, merchandise, etc.) making less than if they worked at 7-11.

The 'own studio'/'work for a record company' explanation given above has some merrit. I recall an article from the 80's where Stan Ridgway (former 'Wall of Vodoo') got a deal for a solo album and took the advance to build a studio, figuring he could make his record AND have something of value left over. The Tragically Hip did something similar, taking the cash from an unexpectedly successful first album to build a facility that would generate income. Maybe through producing, A&R work, sound tracks, etc. the guys in my original post make the whole thing work.

There's still something else going on, though. Pollard was a school teacher, but I believe he was able to quit that gig well before GBV got anything resembling a 'major label' deal. I asked a similar question at an industry seminar - specifically how some bands could sell 400K copies and get dropped, yet Ministry could sell half that and do very well - Denis DeYoung from Styx was on the panel and made some smart ass remark - probably because he was one of the guys who would be dropped at 400K...

I guess it's all the Dave Mathews DIY ethic - play what you feel is right, build it fan-by-fan, and when someone comes offering a contract, bend 'em over a barrel!
 
Well there are many “hidden” fees with the big corporate labels. One of the guitar magazines did a great article 7 or more years ago about the pros and cons of being signed. They had a pie chart that showed all the people a band had to support: CEO’s, Managers, A&R people, secretaries, talent scouts (no doubt looking to replace you), graphic artist, the studio and their costs, the costs to make the CD’s, the Videos, tour support. Add to the fact that a lot of acts get their advance and go buy their dream equipment (Les Pauls, Marshall Amps, top shelf stuff) and you can see how many hands the buck passes through before the artist sees it. And I wonder why I see Method Man and Redmen on “Best Sports Show” complaining about not getting royalties.

There was also another article about the contracts that the “American Idol’s” have to sign. Not only do they have to sign any creative control they might have, but also they are even worse off financially than those artists who didn’t have to go through the process of being insulted every week.

Just looking at things if you never get signed. Let’s say you’re a popular draw that can get $2000.00 a show. Lets take $300 out for travel, food and lodging (which any savvy band will find a accountant that will use that as a tax write off) and $250.00 for the sound guy. (which again, he’s the band’s employee and can be written off.) And before you question if the right guy can get you all these tax breaks, before they were signed Hootie and the Blowfish had the band members and crew all on dental plans.

So that leaves the actual 5-member band $1450 to split. $290.00 per guy. Playing 4 gigs a month that’s $1160.00. One year, $13,920 for 48 gigs. There are full time musicians who probably do 2 to 3 times that amount, even locally.

Let’s say band puts out a CD. After Studio cost, production fees (printing, graphic artist etc…) you clear $5.00 a pop. Let’s just say the band is pretty popular and sells 10,000. $50,000, 5 man band, $10,000. (That is if there aren’t any arguments over royalties or songwriting credits) So now the band members are up to $23,920. Depending on where you live that could be decent money or just a drop in the bucket. LA & NY probably nothing, but in smaller markets maybe not too bad. What some schoolteachers make. (Which explains why Gene Simmons and Sting got out of the profession.)

Of course the real savvy bands find the best way to make money is on merchandising. T-shirts, Bumper Stickers, Key Chains, etc.. If it’s cool enough people will buy it. And most of those products have a high return on investment depending on what the band wants to charge. I’ve heard of bands getting T-shirts as low as $2.00 and selling them for $10.00. $8.00 profit isn’t bad.

Of course I'm sure it varies from band to band, market to market. I met a guy last year who plays in a popular disco cover band. They play 250 shows a pop getting from 2000 - 4500 a show. He complained that it was more an job than adventure. Of course he complained in a new Esclade he paid cash for. So I guess there is proof that you don't have to be "signed" to make a living playing music. But I doubt you'll be on cribs.
 
The best book I've ever seen on the subject is called "Confessions of a Record Producer." It has many real number examples and if you are curious, I highly recommend you check it out. I bought mine for $10 at Half-Priced Books.

The most surprising thing I learned from this book is regarding publishing.

Even though royalties on album sales might not be coming your way, what most people don't realize is that there is money to be had in publishing. Since a song is considered a copyrighted work Congress has set a rate that you must be paid on sales of an album if you are the copyright holder for the song. I think it is something like 5 1/2 cents a song. This money comes to you from a publishing company, who takes half of it for the service of making sure that you are paid the amount you are actually owed.

For this reason, songwriters make the most money in the music business according to the author. For instance, and this is a really good example because it is current, The Matrix, who wrote most of Avril Lavigne's hit songs like Complicated and Sk8er Boi, made a lot of money off of Avril's debut CD. If the album hadn't sold well, Avril would have made less than The Matrix because The Matrix has to be paid the 5 1/2 cents per song whereas Avril isn't paid for the first however-many albums sold since those albums count only towards recoupment of the label's expenses to make the album.
 
yeah . . .but

the edzell said:
.

Just looking at things if you never get signed. Let’s say you’re a popular draw that can get $2000.00 a show. Lets take $300 out for travel, food and lodging (which any savvy band will find a accountant that will use that as a tax write off) and $250.00 for the sound guy. (which again, he’s the band’s employee and can be written off.) And before you question if the right guy can get you all these tax breaks, before they were signed Hootie and the Blowfish had the band members and crew all on dental plans . . .

edzell makes some good points, but aren't you missing the much larger cost of marketing your product/album/show? the thing is, production costs etc are always low, for indies or majors, but the difference is in promotiuon.

most majors don't even break even until they sell a million copies, because they spend so much on videos, ad campaigns, and all forms of promotion. they make huge losses on 90% of their artists, but they one in 100 that hits it BIG makes up for the other failures.

indies meanwhile, invest less capital at the start, and so start making money sooner, which is what edzell is saying. if you are unsigned and you do it all yourself, you keep more of the money you make, but you also need to foot all the costs - for instance, how are you going to draw this $2000 crowd if they don't know you're playing? - you need to promote your gig, even if it's just by posters around town. same with CDs - the cost of producing CDs is VERY cheap, but promotion is the big cost. . . that's why, like edzell says, the smartr bands take advantage with merhcandising at their gigs - you spent all this money to get the people there, you might as well cash in - sounds ruthless, but I guess it is . . .
 
Good points…

I was never in a band that played too far away from our base. I knew
Bands that would go to Los Angeles, New York, Jacksonville and do nation wide tours in order to make it to the big time.

I guess the strategy my band used was start small and build slowly. We started at a college talent show, then to frat & college parties, then to warming up for other more popular bands at clubs in cities we wanted to break into.

This at first didn’t look like a major step up from playing the college parties. I know anyone who has been in a band that was the opening act has horror stories of playing to the bartender and the other band’s girlfriends. If you’re lucky the crowds will start showing up halfway to ¾ of the way through your set. Well that often happens, but there are certain tricks of the trade that sometimes work.

Sometimes we would get in good with the headliner and tell them about some new material but we hadn’t had a chance to try it out. A lot of the times they got paid the same whether they played 2 sets or three so they would let you have a little more time so you could still be playing when people showed up.

Another trick we used was to have some of our fans travel with us & deliberately show up late. We would play a couple of our popular songs early before they got there. When they got there they would get up front and yell out the songs we already played and we’d play them again. If the promoter or club owner would get onto us for going over we would go “Well your beer buying customers who paid the cover demanded to hear the songs. Could we say no?

We prefered warming up going into a new market then just jumping right in and trying to take over right away. Because sometimes people aren't going to give the new band a chance no matter how slick the flyers and posters are. The local music paper can give you the best write up and people will still shurg their shoulders. Club owners aren't going to give a prime slot to a band that they know their customer base has never heard of. If your warming up you benefit from the name recongistion of the headliner and their promotion. If you can make a name for yourself and the owners see that the crowd likes you, they'll give you your shot.

Eventually our circle of being known went from 10 miles, to 50, to 100, to 200 etc… before the band imploded for the usual reasons. We never got that record deal but we felt like we came a long way from where we started and had fun doing it. This probably isn’t a popular theory with a lot of acts who want to be signed and on the radio yesterday, but it works for a lot of bands.

I guess what I’m saying in a longwinded sort of way is that there are a lot of Big fishes in Small ponds out there doing well for themselves. And doing it on their terms. After talking to some very talented bands who went for the big time & either went unsigned or get signed and got caught in corporate limbo and became a became a goldfish in the ocean, most of their favorite days (and sometimes most profitable) were playing "local hero." It's not what anyone dreams of when they start out, but it's not a bad place to be.
 
the edzell said:
Eventually our circle of being known went from 10 miles, to 50, to 100, to 200 etc… before the band imploded for the usual reasons. We never got that record deal but we felt like we came a long way from where we started and had fun doing it. This probably isn’t a popular theory with a lot of acts who want to be signed and on the radio yesterday, but it works for a lot of bands.

I guess what I’m saying in a longwinded sort of way is that there are a lot of Big fishes in Small ponds out there doing well for themselves. And doing it on their terms. After talking to some very talented bands who went for the big time & either went unsigned or get signed and got caught in corporate limbo and became a became a goldfish in the ocean, most of their favorite days (and sometimes most profitable) were playing "local hero." It's not what anyone dreams of when they start out, but it's not a bad place to be.

You make some greate points, and I think that explains quite a bit how some of these bands make it work. I mentioned Roger Clyne & the Peacemakers in my original post - they formed from the ashes of the Refreshments and Gin Blossoms and concentrated on building a live base around the American Southwest and self-producing their own CD's. I heard that they pull about $12K per gig - nice living for playing your own music!

On the flip side, I saw an interview with a guy who manages a bar, but also plays in what was a 'famous' punk band. He said 'name' acts that come through town on that circuit are making 300 bucks a gig - barely surviving but doing it for the love of the music.

I saw a Canadian band called Crash Vegas playing at a street festival in the early 90's. They were amazing and I started talking to the bass player after their set - here was a band signed to a major label, getting Canadian airplay, and he said the record company might give them a little gas money for the van, but they basically needed to make friends in town to find a place to sleep.
 
the edzell said:
Another trick we used was to have some of our fans travel with us & deliberately show up late. We would play a couple of our popular songs early before they got there. When they got there they would get up front and yell out the songs we already played and we’d play them again. If the promoter or club owner would get onto us for going over we would go “Well your beer buying customers who paid the cover demanded to hear the songs. Could we say no?

QUOTE]

genius idea :D

I think it's an attitude that allows you to make money from anything. you have to be willig to be flexible and learn (and create) little tricks like this which give you the edge on the millions of other pub bands running the circuit . . .
 
Back
Top