Power for Deal, no good

  • Thread starter Thread starter musicsdarkangel
  • Start date Start date
M

musicsdarkangel

New member
Well, i've written a post thats very similar to this before, but i guess I didn't say this, so I might as well now. If I have nicely NICELY written stuff, nicely arranged, and lyrics too, good vocals, good everything, but I suck at recording, how much will it effect me? Is it hard to get a record deal through mixing by sending a demo?? I have a cd of my band, and its really nice, but pretty crummy quality and some bad stuff, however you can hear the sweet notes and everything. Would they care that much?? What should I do, is there a way? yeesh.
 
500 bucks will get you into a studio, and no "record deal" required.

Isaiah
 
If you're looking for a songwriter deal (or publishing deal) it's possible that the quality of the recording would not matter "as much" - but only if the person listening is more of an artist than a lawyer/accountant.

If you're looking to land a recording contarct as an act - then yes the quality of your recording matters alot (as does you marketing material). Label people want "radio ready". If they don't have to send you back in the studio it saves money (or at least if they can limit the studio time to a re-mix, rather than tracking everything).

Keep in mind that the people making decisions are business people, not musicians. They need to hear what you can do. When you consider that with luck 1out of 20 acts on a label may sell enough to support the 19 that don't sell - you can understand why it's so hard to land a deal.

Nothing will ever replace playing thousands of gigs in hundreds of crappy bars, developing a following (maybe selling a few thousand CD's from stage) to prove you can make the label a buck.
 
crap

sorry what i ment, was great arrangement, writing, EVERYTHING but recording.
 
My theory on this is that there are two types of executives that work in the music industry, the 'artist turned exec' and 'the businessman'

I think 'the businessman' likes to be presented with a polished well mixed demo, one that he listens to and goes 'Wow, this sounds great, I can sell this'. If you give 'the businessman' a rough bad recording he will probably dump it cause it sounds like shit.

On the other hand I think the 'artist turned exec' is basically a creative person and if you give him a rough simple recording of a guy playing the song in his bedroom on an acoustic guitar his imagination will fill in the 'blanks' with what can be done with the song. If you present him with a polished 'semi - finished' demo he will look at it as a piece of art that he either likes or hates, if it's a badly done finished song he will hate it.

Of course I could be totally wrong. :D
 
vox,

Here's another question along the same lines. One too few people ask. I haven't been that involved in session work, but once a long time ago I was in some session work for a album. I was fortunate enough to be there at the very start. The executive brought in a small group of people who re-wrote a lot of the material, changed chord progressions, re-aranged lyrics, hired session musicians as needed, and basicaly re-did everything from ground up. When they were done about all that was left of the original were the vocal melody and lyrics over some similar chord progressions.

So in your scenario who's more likely to wind up having their material totally re-aranged, they guy who hands in a rough demo with a lot of promise to it, or the guy who hands in a nearly completed polished product? It seems to me if the "artist-turned-producer" thinks your material needs work he may very well assign people he can trust to re-work your material.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top