I've come to the conclusion that a studio sound is only found in ... a studio

Most "home rums" go over the fence only because there was someone with the connections who actually got to hear the swing. You can be the best musician or songwriter in the world, but if nobody of any weight gets to hear it, it's like a tree falling in the woods and making a sound no one hears. Channels like meSpace can help, but if you have no one referring or vouching for you - i.e. no real network or reputation - you're just another one of a unknown million folks out there who has to have either an astronomical amount of talent or of luck just to get noticed.

Oh...so true...you need to establish the right connections...but my point is, if you are looking to hit a home run...you ain't gonna do it with some “shoegazer drone crap” as bongolation put it. :D
If you target the fringes...there are no home runs to hit.

I'm not really looking to slam anyone's music tastes...I think everyone should do the music they like, but at the same time, don't be mad at the paying market for not buying what you are selling.
I also think that a lot of guys really DO give up before they ever try...and they just adopt that "I don't care about making it" attitude as a crutch.
I'm not saying all do...but meSpace is full of guys who threw up some half-ass attempts at making music....and then they comfort themselves by saying they never really wanted to "make it" in the first place.

Like DrewPeterson7 was saying...I think a lot of folks secretly DO want the Ferraris and supermodels. ;)
 
Oh...so true...you need to establish the right connections...but my point is, if you are looking to hit a home run...you ain't gonna do it with some “shoegazer drone crap” as bongolation put it. :D
If you target the fringes...there are no home runs to hit.

I'm not really looking to slam anyone's music tastes...I think everyone should do the music they like, but at the same time, don't be mad at the paying market for not buying what you are selling.
I also think that a lot of guys really DO give up before they ever try...and they just adopt that "I don't care about making it" attitude as a crutch.
I'm not saying all do...but meSpace is full of guys how threw up some half-ass attempts at making music....and then they comfort themselves by saying they never really wanted to "make it" in the first place.

Like DrewPeterson7 was saying...I think a lot of folks secretly DO want the Ferraris and supermodels. ;)

I'm sorry but I don't agree....

There wouldn't be markets for many types of music if artists didn't stick to their guns..There's been times, early to mid nineties, where shoegazer crap was di rigour and had a strong market...many bands populating the top hundred don't sound formulated and weren't put together by some record label..

you may have to polish your performance but you don't have to completely adapt to the norm to be successful, it's just the easier way...hence the term "sell out"


As for guys on myspace..good...its getting too easy to record and perform music, its too easy to have access to tools previously out of the reach of most musicians..it shouldn't translate into great music, the passion, talent, and drive cant be recreated with software..who cares whether they think it the industries faulty...its been like that since the dawn of popular music
 
There are indie artists out there who sell thier own stuff without a label...example Julianna Hatfield...this lady sells 100,000 units a record...and doesnt share with any company...she is a millionaire...there are many like her.
And that's what I want to freakin' do myself.

Granted if you start selling in the tens of thousands you may need to hire a staff or two to handle distribution issues, but then in essence you have your own label.
Lorie Line is another one famous for doing it all herself (well, with staff, as Seafroggys says). That takes a whole 'nother set of skills, and some money; these people MARKET themselves actively and constantly though extensive snail mail mailing list promotion with slick four-color offset pamphlets and such, almost constant touring on the Altoona Circuit, plenty of newspaper ads, etc. "Build It and They Will Come" is only in the movies here ;).

I still remember way back in the late '70s or so - I don't remember the exact year - taking a train home from downtown one day seeing a matchbook laying on the seat next to me advertising some kid named "Johnny Cougar". This was well *before* he signed and scored it big, and the matchbook was advertising an indie album of cover songs by him.

Of course I, in my infinite wisdom, having never heard of this guy yet, looked at this punky-looking kid on the matchbook cover with the stupid fake name and the album of cover songs and thought, "Good luck buddy, you'll never make it." D'OH! Now I'm wishing I actually still had that matchbook :P.

G.
 
There wouldn't be markets for many types of music if artists didn't stick to their guns..There's been times, early to mid nineties, where shoegazer crap was di rigour and had a strong market...many bands populating the top hundred don't sound formulated and weren't put together by some record label..

you may have to polish your performance but you don't have to completely adapt to the norm to be successful, it's just the easier way...hence the term "sell out"

Not talking about markets...talking about "hitting a home run". Talking about staying power.
Though if you manage to kick out a couple of hits, you could see a good amount of financial rewards from them, but again, if the “hits” don't continue to get air play for some years later...you are not going to see any long-term rewards.
Plus, if those hits were in the top 100...well, technically, you were commercially viable and selling to the masses....so it becomes semantics as to what you want to call it.
I think we then just get back to the whole notion of "if I like it, it's good music, and if I hate it it's bad music” kind of arguments.

And sure...you can also work to a point where you are selling a few thousand or even a hundred thousand records out of your own "label"...and making a “comfortable” living, but that’s not the “home run”, that’s just a job.

Bottom line...we can all make the music we want....and then one day when we look back, we can see how many and what type of rewards we got. I'm saying, it's VERY EASY to make the music you want...no one is stopping you. But, if you also want to get paid well for it...you then step into another world, and I guarantee, someone will be calling you a "sell out".
You can't be an underground sensation and avoid commercial success for too long...not sure who managed to pull that off and maintain it.

Besides, I think too much is made of the whole "sell out" thing...you can make good music that has mass appeal and sells well...without doing bubblegum pop or boring R&B…or some such thing.
 
Ok, allow me to clarify. Would I like to have Nickelsack Kroeger's financial means? Hell yeah. But my point was, that fact has nothing whatsoever to do with why I can't stand his music. Mick Jagger could probably buy Nickelback with the change buried under his couch cushions--do I hate the Stones out of envy? Not at all; in fact I'm a pretty big fan. That's right, when I talk about how crappy I think Nickelback is, I'm saying it for no other reason than that: because I think they're crappy. I'm baffled at how many people find this scenario to be so implausible that they search for some underlying meaning in what I say. Not saying you're one of these people Drew, but having encountered so many of them over the years is the reason I made the post in the first place.



I'm not so audacious as to claim that my opinion on what music should reap the big rewards is better than anybody else's. Again, this is reading too much into a simple statement that needs to be taken at face value. Me, I knew music would always just be a hobby, so I went to university for 6 years. Therefore, I find no point in comparing myself to Nickelback.

First, thanks for not taking that personally, man, and apologies if I did read too far into it. :)

I think the thing that sets Nickelback apart here is, say what you will about their music (and to be fair I do like their first album rather a lot, and tolerate the rest of their stuff just because it's so exquisitely produced), they KNOW they're churning out accessable hard rock/pop albums for mass consumption. They've admitted as much in interviews - paraphrasing, "sure, we could do something heavier or more musically complex or challenging, but why? We're selling millions of albums, we're filling arenas night after night, and we're making a lot of money doing something we love - every night, getting up on stage and playing guitar. If it ain't broke, why fix it?"

Paradoxically, I can respect this.

I'm in the same boat - I went to college, graduated, got a real job, and just record as a hobby. I enjoy it, but I don't "envy" Nickelback in any tangible, concrete sense, but rather as a "gee, that must be nice" living the dream sort of thing.
 
If home recording is to live up to its promise, and there's no technical reason why it can't, it will require networking of specialized, competent amateur talent working in concert with each other to match the professional-grade outcomes the big-$ acts have with their army of specialists. The Internet makes this freely possible, and that's the greatest thing in terms of potential -- you don't have to reinvent the wheel every time you take up recording.

But this isn't what I see happening. What I see is the predictable one-man-does-all (badly) situation where the guy has ten cents worth of anything to contribute to music and a million-dollar load of defensive ego, and instead of seeking out those who will work with him to get something done, he gravitates to what are effectively social-networking forums for those just like him to mutually support that awful mindset.

You know, I was thinking about this while cleaning my "studio" (bedroom), and while by and large I agree with you, bongo, I don't know if I quite see eye to eye with you on "division of labor."

To a point, you're probably right - a guy whose sole focus is doing one thing and one thing only in the complex process from a song idea to a finished product on sale at Best Buy in the new releases bin is going to have an edge over a guy who's trying to do everything, or even most things (say, all aspects of tracking and mixing). But I don't know if I agree that this is the biggest reason why almost without fail home studio guys don't churn out pro results. Take the example of your friend with the Tele and Pod in his home studio, who working basically solo was able to produce commercially viable results. It's clearly possible for one guy to do everything.

I'm not sure why this was running through my mind while I was cleaning my room, but it occured to me that I'm a pretty good guitarist. Not amazing, I've got some areas I need to improve, but I can hold my own. That shouldn't come as a surprise, though, because I've logged thousands and thousands of hours practicing, rehearsing, performing, recording, or just noodling for my own enjoyment. It's something I do a LOT, of course I've gotten good at it.

And that, I think, is the biggest difference between your typical home recorder and a pro. Guys like me and, I suspect, the majority of the board, are hobbyists. I get up in the morning, grab a cup of coffee, roll into the office, and in the downtime when I'm not fucking around with data for my clients, I read music and recording boards to try to teach myself a bit. I then go home, and either hang out with friends, practice guitar, take an evening off to cook a nice meal, or, maybe every week or couple weeks, fire up the studio and record something. Recording is something I enjoy doing, and I'm, if hardly brilliant, than at least kind of proficcient at, but I just really don't log that much time doing it. I don't "practice" much - I'm like that guy who picks up a guitar and strums a few John Mayer songs every once in a while at a party.

A pro, meanwhile, recording IS his job. I'll log maybe 8-10 hours a month recording and mixing - he'll do that in an average day. Like anything there's a learning curve, and a pro not only is more likely to have been instructed (either formally at a recording school or informally at an internship or apprenticeship with an established studio), and has then logged countless hours recording and mixing, all of which have trained his ear and his instincts such that when he's put into a mixing situation, he'll have a fair idea what steps he has to take it without even really having to consciously think, just as if you throw a riff or a set of chord changes at me in a jamming situation I'll, without really thinking about it, know what scales or arpeggios I can play over it without stopping to work anything out.

Less than "division of labor," I think the biggest driver is just labor, plain and simple. If you're constantly doing it and have been for years, then you're simply going to be better at it than a guy like me who records a couple nights a month, after work, before it gets too late to play plugged in, and generally mixes with a bourbon in hand because fuck it, I'm not at work. A plug-in or a tip or two or better pres and a locker full of awesome mics won't immediately turn me from a hobbyist to an expert, which I think is the real problem.
 
Not talking about markets...talking about "hitting a home run". Talking about staying power.
Though if you manage to kick out a couple of hits, you could see a good amount of financial rewards from them, but again, if the “hits” don't continue to get air play for some years later...you are not going to see any long-term rewards.
Plus, if those hits were in the top 100...well, technically, you were commercially viable and selling to the masses....so it becomes semantics as to what you want to call it.
I think we then just get back to the whole notion of "if I like it, it's good music, and if I hate it it's bad music” kind of arguments.

And sure...you can also work to a point where you are selling a few thousand or even a hundred thousand records out of your own "label"...and making a “comfortable” living, but that’s not the “home run”, that’s just a job.

Bottom line...we can all make the music we want....and then one day when we look back, we can see how many and what type of rewards we got. I'm saying, it's VERY EASY to make the music you want...no one is stopping you. But, if you also want to get paid well for it...you then step into another world, and I guarantee, someone will be calling you a "sell out".
You can't be an underground sensation and avoid commercial success for too long...not sure who managed to pull that off and maintain it.

Besides, I think too much is made of the whole "sell out" thing...you can make good music that has mass appeal and sells well...without doing bubblegum pop or boring R&B…or some such thing.


I dont think anyone in this thread is arguing those points in truth...to me, not that I ever hope to achieve anything but my own enjoyment, but hypothetically my goal would be to be able to earn a living in the lower regions of the charts with a strong fanbase and the ability to still call the shots with my own creativity..how much creative freedom do less established newer bands have obviously depends...very few can sustain mass popularity and push the boundaries creatively, that's not to say there aren't those that do but in the great scale of things it's very few

My friend, although has had a fairly comfortable life, has done nothing else musically for over 25 years and he looks at people who have regular jobs with more and more envy as he grows older..


Selling out is a generalisation, that's why I put it in quotes...success is not "selling out", deliberately making music to the lowest common denominator to sell as many units as possible, especially when it goes against the artistic style that built your fanbase in the first place, is imo..

nothing to do with success
 
...but hypothetically my goal would be to be able to earn a living in the lower regions of the charts with a strong fanbase and the ability to still call the shots with my own creativity...

I'm not even looking for stardom as a performer....I gave that up when I got past my 20's...and I can always perform locally.

My main goal is to sell some music...some songs...and then remain low-profile.
So...I can write stuff that will be amied more at the commercial markets, while at th4e same time do other things that will not be "ready for prime time"...this is all I'm saying.
You can churn out a few hits (if you are lucky)...and still maintain plenty of artistic freedom and integrity. There are countless major stars that kicked off their carreers doing pure MOR music.
IOW...you don't need to try and aim "small"...it's hard enough as it is to "make it".
I say, aim big...and then take what you get.
 
A pro, meanwhile, recording IS his job. I'll log maybe 8-10 hours a month recording and mixing - he'll do that in an average day.

Yeah...but with the home rec guys...you have to go with cumulative time...especially if you work alone.
The album I just wrapped up has taken me a VERY LONG TIME to complete.
I could have "finished it" awhile back...but I know if I did, it would have still been at the "demo" level.
Because I don't spend 10 hrs/day in the studio...I have to make up for it over time.

Heck...I'm even doing my own CD graphics and layout, though I do have a lot of background with that stuff, so it's not difficult...it's just time consuming.
 
hypothetically my goal would be to be able to earn a living in the lower regions of the charts with a strong fanbase and the ability to still call the shots with my own creativity.
And, as attractive as that may sound to you and I, kc, that will most likely remain a hypothetical on this planet. The unfortunate mature of the human race is one where diversity and eclecticism in personal taste will always be a small minority percentage of the consuming public. Very, very few people on this planet have a wide and deep enough musical palate to follow an artist on the creative journey that is their life if that journey takes them too far out of a narrow comfort zone.

You get a strong fan base by offering a particular sound that the fan base can rely upon. It doesn't have to be a popular style, but whatever style it is had better remain fairly constant, or you'll loose your fans faster than Sarah Palin can lose an election.

Some major artists can play around with the various genres and get a bit creative, but only after they have built a name for themselves by offering a signature style *first*. And even then, they can only get away with so much (See the Bob Dylan Christmas Album).

Even someone like Elvis Costello, who was probably one of the more successful folks I can think of - creatively *and* commercially - when it comes to really mixing it up from album to album, lost virtually his entire fan base when he went the Burt Bacherach route. He's trying to come back to more of his roots now, and isn't doing a bad job of it, but much of his fan base have already moved on to other interests.

G.
 
And, as attractive as that may sound to you and I, kc, that will most likely remain a hypothetical on this planet. The unfortunate mature of the human race is one where diversity and eclecticism in personal taste will always be a small minority percentage of the consuming public. Very, very few people on this planet have a wide and deep enough musical palate to follow an artist on the creative journey that is their life if that journey takes them too far out of a narrow comfort zone.

I agree completely with what you say, but as has been mentioned, some artists actually find a decent level of lasting success by doing largely what they want.

A prime example that comes to mind for me is Jack White. He first made big waves back in the early 2000's with dilapidated, raucous garage rock albums, and look at him now. In the time since, he's managed to maintain a solid fanbase despite having ventured into almost anachronistic rootsy music, piano based stuff, recording an album with Loretta Lynn, doing Dolly Parton covers, and all kinds of things that are night-and-day different from what made him famous in the first place. Now he owns a label and a studio, maintains full decision making power over everything he releases, and is worth several million dollars. Think what you want of him, but not too shabby of a career, I must say.

You get a strong fan base by offering a particular sound that the fan base can rely upon. It doesn't have to be a popular style, but whatever style it is had better remain fairly constant, or you'll loose your fans faster than Sarah Palin can lose an election.

Some major artists can play around with the various genres and get a bit creative, but only after they have built a name for themselves by offering a signature style *first*. And even then, they can only get away with so much (See the Bob Dylan Christmas Album).

Even someone like Elvis Costello, who was probably one of the more successful folks I can think of - creatively *and* commercially - when it comes to really mixing it up from album to album, lost virtually his entire fan base when he went the Burt Bacherach route. He's trying to come back to more of his roots now, and isn't doing a bad job of it, but much of his fan base have already moved on to other interests.

G.

Another example that comes to mind is Rush. They went from being a glorified Zeppelin cover band in 1974 with their debut, to being a pretty dominant proto-metal force in 1976 with 2112, to breaking into the FM consciousness and going platinum in 1981 with more accessible music on Moving Pictures, to reaching the pinnacle of a synth-based metamorphasis in 1988 with Hold Your Fire, to dipping into near grunge territory in 1993 with Counterparts, and on and on. Yet, here we are 35 years after they first rocked the chords to Working Man and they can still sell out stadium tours.
 
I'm not even looking for stardom as a performer....I gave that up when I got past my 20's...and I can always perform locally.

My main goal is to sell some music...some songs...and then remain low-profile.
So...I can write stuff that will be amied more at the commercial markets, while at th4e same time do other things that will not be "ready for prime time"...this is all I'm saying.
You can churn out a few hits (if you are lucky)...and still maintain plenty of artistic freedom and integrity. There are countless major stars that kicked off their carreers doing pure MOR music.
IOW...you don't need to try and aim "small"...it's hard enough as it is to "make it".
I say, aim big...and then take what you get.

Cant argue with that, if you can earn from what many choose as a hobby then you are doing OK imo....

I'm a "small achievable goals" kinda guy, but neither approach is correct or incorrect
 
And, as attractive as that may sound to you and I, kc, that will most likely remain a hypothetical on this planet. The unfortunate mature of the human race is one where diversity and eclecticism in personal taste will always be a small minority percentage of the consuming public. Very, very few people on this planet have a wide and deep enough musical palate to follow an artist on the creative journey that is their life if that journey takes them too far out of a narrow comfort zone.

You get a strong fan base by offering a particular sound that the fan base can rely upon. It doesn't have to be a popular style, but whatever style it is had better remain fairly constant, or you'll loose your fans faster than Sarah Palin can lose an election.

Some major artists can play around with the various genres and get a bit creative, but only after they have built a name for themselves by offering a signature style *first*. And even then, they can only get away with so much (See the Bob Dylan Christmas Album).

Even someone like Elvis Costello, who was probably one of the more successful folks I can think of - creatively *and* commercially - when it comes to really mixing it up from album to album, lost virtually his entire fan base when he went the Burt Bacherach route. He's trying to come back to more of his roots now, and isn't doing a bad job of it, but much of his fan base have already moved on to other interests.

G.


Its a great hypothetical though :)
 
And, as attractive as that may sound to you and I, kc, that will most likely remain a hypothetical on this planet. The unfortunate mature of the human race is one where diversity and eclecticism in personal taste will always be a small minority percentage of the consuming public. Very, very few people on this planet have a wide and deep enough musical palate to follow an artist on the creative journey that is their life if that journey takes them too far out of a narrow comfort zone.

You get a strong fan base by offering a particular sound that the fan base can rely upon. It doesn't have to be a popular style, but whatever style it is had better remain fairly constant, or you'll loose your fans faster than Sarah Palin can lose an election.

Some major artists can play around with the various genres and get a bit creative, but only after they have built a name for themselves by offering a signature style *first*. And even then, they can only get away with so much (See the Bob Dylan Christmas Album).

Even someone like Elvis Costello, who was probably one of the more successful folks I can think of - creatively *and* commercially - when it comes to really mixing it up from album to album, lost virtually his entire fan base when he went the Burt Bacherach route. He's trying to come back to more of his roots now, and isn't doing a bad job of it, but much of his fan base have already moved on to other interests.

G.

I agree...Disco is a good example...Elton John and Rod Stewart both had great careers before they tried to change to disco....And Billy Joel had a great career before that blonde lady took his balls away.
 
A prime example that comes to mind for me is Jack White.
Agreed. I'd be tempted to put him in the folder that I described of those that had already made a name and built a hardcore fanbase for himself. I mean, after "Seven Nation Army" he could have probably robbed banks and gotten away with just a year's probation ;).

The thing about he, and others with similar wing spreads, is they tend to be firing on all cylinders in both brain lobes. They have the creativity that is unique unto themselves *and* the intelligence to smartly know where to go and what to do with their level of overall talent, which is usually a step above the average. I suppose a similar thing could be said about Rush, though I haven't really followed them much after the sequel album to 2112.*

It's kind of like the best actors are not only great actors, but have the sixth sense to know which scripts to take and which ones to pass over.

G.

* My personal theory, though, is that they keep people coming to them just out of the pure fascination over the size of Geddy Lee's gym shoes. ;) :D
 
Long thread. :P

I wanted to just poke my head in between all this mumbo jumbo and introduce something you may or may not have seen.

On the youtubes, there are 2 things to check out, https://www.youtube.com/PomplamooseMusic and https://www.youtube.com/jackcontemusic

They both specialize in a new medium they created. VideoSongs! They usually list the rules on all the videos.

1. What you see is what you hear (no lip-syncing for instruments or voice).
2. If you hear it, at some point you see it (no hidden sounds).

It's pretty neat to hear AND SEE how they recorded it for the most part. Sure the music isn't a "studio" feel, but it really REALLY works. :)

~Bill
 
i agree!!!
i have a day job, been to 3 college, play in 2 touring acts. run a small studio, do session work...

don't be lazy, it's 9:30 pm, i got up at 6 am. i am at a coffee shop writing lyrics after a 2 hour voice lesson.

i am 25.

don't be lazy.

tv makes you lazy.
american culture makes you lazy

hard work bring success

you need to have the drive and desire of every successful entrepreneur
 
Agreed. I'd be tempted to put him in the folder that I described of those that had already made a name and built a hardcore fanbase for himself. I mean, after "Seven Nation Army" he could have probably robbed banks and gotten away with just a year's probation ;).

It took me a LONG time to either admit that I liked the White Stripes, or realize that I liked them (I'm not sure which), but I totally respect that guy. He writes with this crazy energy, and I'm convinced he's actually a really legitimately good blues guitarist, who tries his damndest to hide it because that's just not what he wants to do.
 
It took me a LONG time to either admit that I liked the White Stripes, or realize that I liked them (I'm not sure which), but I totally respect that guy. He writes with this crazy energy, and I'm convinced he's actually a really legitimately good blues guitarist, who tries his damndest to hide it because that's just not what he wants to do.

This doesn't surprise me given your love for Nirvana. :p
 
Back
Top