Online record labels

[dogbiscuit]

Hey guys.
I'd really like to get a record label now. I'm a solo artist who records from home. I don't gig, everything is online, so I am looking for record labels to target who specialize in online only stuff. Anyone know of any, or lots?

 

[Steve Henningsgard]

Honestly, my experience has been that these days if you're not willing to promote yourself, nobody else is going to invest any money in promoting you either. That said, the tools are all there for you to spend a couple of hours a week (or a day if you're really into it) promoting yourself online.

The question you need to answer is: what is your goal for your music? Are you trying to make money, or do you just want as many people as possible to hear it? Are you trying to get "discovered" so you could maybe tour on your music someday, or just trying to get local gigs?

Once you've answered this question (or series of questions I suppose), it will be easier for you to decide how to go about distributing your music.

Hope this helps!

-steve.h

 

[splooiesir]

Hey guys.
I'd really like to get a record label now. I'm a solo artist who records from home. I don't gig, everything is online, so I am looking for record labels to target who specialize in online only stuff. Anyone know of any, or lots?

So you're looking for somebody to provide a website for you to host your music and take a percentage of your money?

Honestly, you are better off doing this yourself. If you're thinking being part of a label will get you promotion or whatever, to an extent you're right, but it's nothing you couldn't do a better job of yourself.

The question I think you should ask yourself is what you think/expect a label to do for you, especially considering most of the time what they do is take care of the whole distribution and creation of physical goods and/or provide some money for touring.

 

[dogbiscuit]

Well guys, I do have a website which I have made myself, and I do a lot of online promoting myself. I've spent many hours and days doing this. I have my limitations though and I'm sure a decent label would perhaps have some useful experience to help with all this. This would free me up to concentrate more on music making. As much as I enjoy taking everything on myself I realise that often I get a bit too carried away promoting and find I haven't produced enough music.
So basically I could do with someone experienced to add another dimension to my promoting and help me actually sell the music which is already available for sale on my site.
I dig what you're saying though, as I think a big obstacle one faces in this situation is being sure of exactly what you want to get out of it.

 

[Steve Henningsgard]

Well guys, I do have a website which I have made myself, and I do a lot of online promoting myself. I've spent many hours and days doing this. I have my limitations though and I'm sure a decent label would perhaps have some useful experience to help with all this. This would free me up to concentrate more on music making. As much as I enjoy taking everything on myself I realise that often I get a bit too carried away promoting and find I haven't produced enough music.
So basically I could do with someone experienced to add another dimension to my promoting and help me actually sell the music which is already available for sale on my site.
I dig what you're saying though, as I think a big obstacle one faces in this situation is being sure of exactly what you want to get out of it.

I feel your pain! I've found it's very hard for me to "switch gears" from creating to managing, both when it comes to managing/writing for my own band, and for engineering/producing other bands. Part of me feels it's a great challenge to try to push yourself to be the creative force, the manager, and the promoter, but when it comes down to it, two heads are almost always more than twice as efficient as one (as long as they're the right heads!). Perhaps it'd be more in your interest to try to convince somebody you trust to manage/market you, so you can focus on the creative aspect. This is why CEO's of major companies get paid so much to seemingly do so little: it's them that finds the right people for the individual jobs in the company to keep it running at maximum efficiency. Get the right people on your side, and you'll be busy enough just writing music!

 

[Sir_Matthew]

new paradigms

Opinions abound, but it's becoming increasingly obvious that record labels as we know them now won't exist in 10 years or so. In the absence of distribution hurdles (online distribution, to whom the future belongs, is a snap), what artists are going to need are three things:

- Money and resources for pro recording (either themselves or otherwise)

- Publicity

- Placement

Somehow there will need to be a revenue stream developed such that a company (maybe a publisher) could make the initial audio and publicity investments, throw it out there for distribution, and with careful placement, make their money back.

I don't know that such a company would even be called a label, but maybe it would, for throwback aesthetic. They certainly won't be able to sink in the kind of money that labels did in the 20th century and continue vainly to do now. Not sure if maybe publishers will step in and fill the void or if another beast entirely will rise up.

In the meantime, though, DIY is an independent artist's best chance of getting noticed by people who are looking to bring about whatever's coming up next. As far as I know. We're playing in a very different world these days, and some of the old conventional wisdom may get tossed out in the fruit basket turnover...

 

[Steve Henningsgard]

Opinions abound, but it's becoming increasingly obvious that record labels as we know them now won't exist in 10 years or so. In the absence of distribution hurdles (online distribution, to whom the future belongs, is a snap), what artists are going to need are three things:

- Money and resources for pro recording (either themselves or otherwise)

- Publicity

- Placement

Somehow there will need to be a revenue stream developed such that a company (maybe a publisher) could make the initial audio and publicity investments, throw it out there for distribution, and with careful placement, make their money back.

I don't know that such a company would even be called a label, but maybe it would, for throwback aesthetic. They certainly won't be able to sink in the kind of money that labels did in the 20th century and continue vainly to do now. Not sure if maybe publishers will step in and fill the void or if another beast entirely will rise up.

In the meantime, though, DIY is an independent artist's best chance of getting noticed by people who are looking to bring about whatever's coming up next. As far as I know. We're playing in a very different world these days, and some of the old conventional wisdom may get tossed out in the fruit basket turnover...

The only issue with this is you REALLY need to step back and look at the big picture here. Yes, many people are using the internet to find new music to listen to, but the vast majority of people are still listening to the radio as their primary source of new music, and while the labels control the radio, the labels control the masses. Why do you think so many shitty generic bands still get huge these days? Nickelback? Seether? Breaking Benjamins? Etc. etc. etc., as long as people listen to the radio, big Labels will stay in business.

 

[DavidK]

I'm a solo artist who records from home. I don't gig, everything is online, so I am looking for record labels to target who specialize in online only stuff. Anyone know of any, or lots?

Since you dont gig, you really dont have anything to offer a label. It's not what "they can do for you", it is "what you can do for them".

I'm not sure why you want one. Do you have a record completed, or are you looking for financing from them? If you have the record done or a way to complete an album, CD baby and tunecore are probably your best bet. There is also Magnatune. http://www.magnatune.com/

I dig what you're saying though, as I think a big obstacle one faces in this situation is being sure of exactly what you want to get out of it.

What you will get out of it is 10% of what you would have made on your own. Granted, 10% of a zillion is great, but if you make 1000 bucks worth of profit, you will only get 100 bucks. And making 1000 bucks worth of profit is a herculean task, that would be a very successful album these days.

Before you go further, figure out what you can offer any label. It has to be something. Put yourself in their shoes: A guy comes to you with no gigs, no following, and expects you to invest money. Nope. Perhaps if you had a significant presence via Podcasts, Myspace, youtube, blah blah. Good luck.

 

[Sir_Matthew]

The only issue with this is you REALLY need to step back and look at the big picture here. Yes, many people are using the internet to find new music to listen to, but the vast majority of people are still listening to the radio as their primary source of new music, and while the labels control the radio, the labels control the masses. Why do you think so many shitty generic bands still get huge these days? Nickelback? Seether? Breaking Benjamins? Etc. etc. etc., as long as people listen to the radio, big Labels will stay in business.

People are turning away from commercial radio in droves, though, thus the growth of satellite radio and music sharing on social networking sites. Certainly there will always be mass tastemaker markets, as there will always be big media, but I don't think they'll be record labels. They already aren't. They're banks, beverage manufacturers, cable moguls, they all just happen to own the remnant of a record label, which used to be able to stand on its own. Mass music marketing is now and will be a function of the larger mass media, not an industry unto itself.

What we've seen, though, in the last 20 years is that as media becomes massive, niches sprout in exponential relation to that consolidation. What we haven't seen is the monetization of those alternative channels (man, I don't even have an MBA, forgive me the jargon). That's the missing link.

In the 1950s, five labels controlled well over half the industry. By the end of the 1960s, indies controlled that share and more through innovative promotion and taking risks that proved popular with consumers. By the mid-1980s, the biggies had caught up, and consolidated well enough to sustain a two-decade chokehold on the industry.

But every one of these biggies, as shown by their clinging together in the life-raft of the RIAA and their running behind corporate overlord skirts at every new media threat, are completely clueless in the new market. They are still a vestigial force, but there's a massive vacuum that waits to be filled in the public appetite. Steve Jobs (and dare I say Al Gore?) helped fill part of it, and what the rest will look like is pretty high up in the air at this point.

My main thrust, I suppose, is not to look at the status quo and assume there aren't fatal fault lines, or even cracks in the pavement where hardy weeds can grow, and one day split the damn thing apart. The new phase of the music industry will no more unseat the next batch of boy bands than the Sex Pistols could unseat Donny Osmond. But that doesn't mean there isn't a massive market waiting to be served.

 

[Sir_Matthew]

For further reading...

 

[Mindset]

Truthfully, nobody is turning away from radio. Satellite Radio isn't going no where, and there's dozens that shut down yearly. Sales of satellite radio have declined dramatically.

Record labels have been around forever, and labels won't ever die out as long as there's ANY business going on in this business. Labels do their thing and license material out, and/or individual writers compose for other companies. They are not banks, or beverage makers. By the end of the 60's Indies didn't control as much as you think. Just because Atlantic became the biggest indie then, doesn't mean any other substantial amount of indie labels did much of anything.

Then

a trillion dollar industry
so...
I doubt majors are clueless in the industry. Much of anything is many many many of us that are really clueless.

Then there are those who think the "industry" is a certain companyish. This industry is just that, an industry like any other. It takes more than just a record label to get you up there once your signed. It takes a team of companies along with a label to allow you to 'shine'. Something most of us can't do even close within' the 100 x power of a major can do.

Just because some of us don't like labels, doesn't mean you have to change your business practices. Since the beginning of written music, it's been working, and I don't believe it will stop any time soon, and I don't believe that the "indie" artist has any chance in the game by themselves unless they are well into it already. Name 1 nobody that has.

People are turning away from commercial radio in droves, though, thus the growth of satellite radio and music sharing on social networking sites. Certainly there will always be mass tastemaker markets, as there will always be big media, but I don't think they'll be record labels. They already aren't. They're banks, beverage manufacturers, cable moguls, they all just happen to own the remnant of a record label, which used to be able to stand on its own. Mass music marketing is now and will be a function of the larger mass media, not an industry unto itself.

What we've seen, though, in the last 20 years is that as media becomes massive, niches sprout in exponential relation to that consolidation. What we haven't seen is the monetization of those alternative channels (man, I don't even have an MBA, forgive me the jargon). That's the missing link.

In the 1950s, five labels controlled well over half the industry. By the end of the 1960s, indies controlled that share and more through innovative promotion and taking risks that proved popular with consumers. By the mid-1980s, the biggies had caught up, and consolidated well enough to sustain a two-decade chokehold on the industry.

But every one of these biggies, as shown by their clinging together in the life-raft of the RIAA and their running behind corporate overlord skirts at every new media threat, are completely clueless in the new market. They are still a vestigial force, but there's a massive vacuum that waits to be filled in the public appetite. Steve Jobs (and dare I say Al Gore?) helped fill part of it, and what the rest will look like is pretty high up in the air at this point.

My main thrust, I suppose, is not to look at the status quo and assume there aren't fatal fault lines, or even cracks in the pavement where hardy weeds can grow, and one day split the damn thing apart. The new phase of the music industry will no more unseat the next batch of boy bands than the Sex Pistols could unseat Donny Osmond. But that doesn't mean there isn't a massive market waiting to be served.

 

[Mindset]

btw Sir Matt. You need some studio time?? I can get you into the Labs in Los Colinas for cheap (w/ engineer)

 

[Sir_Matthew]

btw Sir Matt. You need some studio time?? I can get you into the Labs in Los Colinas for cheap (w/ engineer)

Got my studio at home, thanks. Las Colinas is nice, though, bet there's a couch and everything...

The assertion that satellite radio is going nowhere is merely an assertion at this point. Dozens can't be going out of business yearly, as there are only two major competitors. Terrestrial music-programmed radio, however, is losing listeners at a rapid rate, some going to talk radio and their iPods and some to satellite.

Independent labels such as Matador, and indie artists like Ani DiFranco have been plowing a space for indie artists for quite some time now, and while niche artists may not make it to the Top 40, many fans (including myself) appreciate the difference between slick major label product and warmer indie sound.

My initial point, however, was that as physical product sales become nonexistent (and they will), the future is more fluid because those existing product distribution systems will no longer be held by the majors. An independent artist can be distributed on iTunes just as easily as a major label artist, so the difference now becomes publicity dollars. But as the current independent music market suggests, targeting small amounts of dollars in niche outlets can get results, and the amount of profit required to make back your investment is considerably smaller than the haul a major has to make back from mass media hype dollars. Majors have flopped on big pushes before, and indies have scored on word-of-mouth.

But my big point is that none of us has any idea what's going to happen, any more than someone in 1950 could've known what the next decades would look like. And as long as the industry model is in flux (ask your local RIAA rep for confirmation of that), there are opportunities for new thinking. Shutting it out based solely on past events is short-sighted, and yields no innovation.

 

[Mindset]

Programmers still end shows etc regularly, I know that for sure as one of my family friends work as the Director & another friends works as the manager for XM. I agree with most below somewhat. The medium of which music is delivered changes every decade, being CD no longer exist to digital downloads, would just be another change & adaptation by labels. Take for instance, since digital downloads, say last year, labels lost around 200-300 million less profit (to around $600-700mil) however, digital downloads then brought in $500mil. So no lost in profit, only increases.

They do say the best way to tell the future, is to create it, hence those in the 50's knew what the future of music would be, it would be created in a studio during a magic moment.
Though some of us may not like the 'new' music, it is still innovative or creative in a sense.

BUT, I'm not saying majors are better than indies (being a indie label ourselves) or vice versa. I'm saying that the thought line that an indie artist is "better off" being an independent artist, is not realistic.

Radio itself, won't die out like what I'm thinking your meaning. Not anytime within the next 100 years at the least.

Got my studio at home, thanks. Las Colinas is nice, though, bet there's a couch and everything...

The assertion that satellite radio is going nowhere is merely an assertion at this point. Dozens can't be going out of business yearly, as there are only two major competitors. Terrestrial music-programmed radio, however, is losing listeners at a rapid rate, some going to talk radio and their iPods and some to satellite.

Independent labels such as Matador, and indie artists like Ani DiFranco have been plowing a space for indie artists for quite some time now, and while niche artists may not make it to the Top 40, many fans (including myself) appreciate the difference between slick major label product and warmer indie sound.

My initial point, however, was that as physical product sales become nonexistent (and they will), the future is more fluid because those existing product distribution systems will no longer be held by the majors. An independent artist can be distributed on iTunes just as easily as a major label artist, so the difference now becomes publicity dollars. But as the current independent music market suggests, targeting small amounts of dollars in niche outlets can get results, and the amount of profit required to make back your investment is considerably smaller than the haul a major has to make back from mass media hype dollars. Majors have flopped on big pushes before, and indies have scored on word-of-mouth.

But my big point is that none of us has any idea what's going to happen, any more than someone in 1950 could've known what the next decades would look like. And as long as the industry model is in flux (ask your local RIAA rep for confirmation of that), there are opportunities for new thinking. Shutting it out based solely on past events is short-sighted, and yields no innovation.

 

[Sir_Matthew]

It largely depends on what is classified as "radio." Mass media, of which terrestrial radio is a part, will certainly not cease to exist, it will merely take on different forms, which terrestrial radio (or terrestrial television, for that matter) may no longer be a part of. There will always be a pop culture, and a media to broadcast it in one form or another.

But to quote one of my favorite music historians, the history of music is not the history of the charts. Innovations take place on the outskirts of major media business (bean-counting label MBAs are scared to death of risk-takers), and artists with more of an eye towards making those innovations than making big cash off of public infatuations of the moment may be better suited to stay independent, or at least associated with smaller companies.

Certainly there are moments of synergy where an artist's vision and the occasional weirdo A&R guy come together and move into the mainstream. I fear those moments are becoming fewer due to current label woes, but time will tell. I know several bands who were booted when the big mergers hit in the late 1990s and the corporate godfathers thinned the herd of anything that wasn't selling gold (and later even some that were, Wilco, etc.). Labels are signing fewer artists, and those they're signing are obviously calculated to bring the most bang for the buck. This is nothing new in the industry, it's just been exacerbated by tightening rosters and bigger profit requirements to recapture investment.

As always, it depends on what your goals are, and what sort of odds you're willing to face. Someone attempting a style off the beaten path may have longer odds of getting label attention than having moderate success as an indie. Whereas someone who wants to be a rockstar at any cost may find a major label receptive, as they can mold them how they like. But for artists facing the former situation, the opportunities are greater now than ever.