Why Red Bull Might Save Music
I wanted to buy Green Day's new album 21st Century Breakdown. I could have downloaded but I desired to touch it, look at the CD art, and own a hard copy. I'm old school sometimes.
Also, I didn't want to wait for shipping from Amazon.com. No, I needed it now. Suddenly, I felt like a complete moron. Where can I buy a CD in Los Angeles? Tower Records on Sunset Boulevard went under, as did the Virgin Megastore. Amoeba Records, the only independent record store -- actually the only record store period still in business in was too far for me to drive to. Oh no! Oh no! I had to go to Best Buy! I panicked. Until now, I had managed not to give in and purchase music at Best Buy.
I bowed my head, sucked in my pride and went to Best Buy. I found the music easily at the front of the store. I didn't fall prey to expensive electronic gadgets beckoning me to buy. I ran out of the store, CD clenched in my hand. I was happy sad. Yes, I do believe there is such an emotion. Happy I had the album. Sad I was lame enough to need a physical copy. Sad my beloved recorded music business was falling into the toilet. Happy that out of the ashes can come new models. Or maybe old ones can be revived?
A quick history lesson: RCA Records, home of Elvis Presely, was initially launched in the 1930s not to sell music, but to sell phonographs, specifically the famous "Victorla." Fast forward to 1999 when Starbucks got into the music business by purchasing Hear Music. The Starbucks honchos put music in stores to sell coffee, not music. They were trying to create Starbucks as the ultimate lifestyle brand; music was simply a part of that. Music executives however thought Starbucks could be the salvation of the music business. That dream came to an abrupt halt McDonalds and Dunkin Donuts started boosting their 'gourmet' coffees. Starbucks had to refocus on their core and cut their entertainment initiatives almost to nothing.
Itunes. Yes. Music sells iPods. Best Buy is not in the business of selling music, they want to sell flat screen TVs. Music is a lure -- a lure that is not working. Big box retailers are such as Best Buy, Target and Wal-Mart have dramatically cut music retail space. Some will use mobile devices and gadgets at front of store to seduce customers instead of music.
What is recorded music worth? Note I say recorded music. Sales are plummeting -- both digital and physical. In part, this is due to the economy -- if a consumer has to choose between dinner and a CD, most will choose dinner. Also, an entire generation of music lovers do not value recorded music as a product to buy. They grew up stealing it off the internet and became accustomed to poor sound quality. Musicos take great care in the perfect mix, the perfect sound quality, and the perfect equipment to get the perfect sound. However, the average consumer could care less. They are accustomed to listening to music on mobile phones, cheap MP3 players, or through computer speakers. Nothing fancy. Nothing hi fi.
Fact: Artists need to make recorded music. An act lives to make their art and have people hear it. Fact: Artists need to make money to live. Do artists need to make their money off of recorded music? Not necessarily.
Let's take a developing band looking to make it in today's marketplace. They have to be good. This may sound like a silly caveat, but it's surprising how many mediocre and often downright horrible acts are signed to record labels. The band has to be able to play live. Gone are the days of made-up over produced bands, fans want the real thing.
Despite the current downturn in ticket sales (stay tuned for another blog entry devoted to ticketing), smaller venues, booking good bands, offering affordable tickets are selling out. Those same fans are buying tshirts because they want everyone to know they were at the show. True fans may even subscribe to an online fan club if they could get tickets before the general public, video blogs from the band, and yes, FREE recorded music to download.
Or, what if Coca-Cola were to become the new "Victrola"? A brand could pay an artist to record music and then offer the tunes for free to all the consumers who purchase the product. Why not give away free downloads with cans of soda pop? Artist makes money. Fans get free music. More people are drinking soda pop.
This model can work, but there are few requirements: the artist has to actually like the soda pop, the artist has to be very active with fans online, the brand has to allow for the artist to grow slowly and not slap logos on everything. There is one company that is trying this model -- Red Bull. Yes, Red Bull has a record label and they are developing a few artists under the radar.
Once upon a time kings and queens commissioned artists like Mozart for musical masterpieces. Perhaps, brands will be the new patrons of the arts.
Follow Tamara Conniff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/tamarastar
Connie Bennett: Speak Out Against Ill-Advised Coke-Doctors Partnership
For a doctors' group to take a six-figure sum from Coke is like accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars from Big Tobacco to create a physician-approved website claiming cigarettes are part of a healthy lifestyle.
Marion Nestle: Why Are Doctors Selling Out to Coke?
A new partnership places the AAFP in an embarrassing conflict of interest. I gather that members were not consulted. They need to make their voices heard.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Thanks Tamara, great story and I agree with you. I posted a Note sometime back here on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/peter.albrecht?ref=profile#/note.php?note_id=63586661535
The industry is in transition to HD Audio - meet the future today - 96/24 FLAC format which I personally like - the CD it self is basically dead at this point. It would be nice if your Dad's music would be re-released in 96/24.
96/24 is available here:
http://www.hdtracks.com/
Sincerely yours
Peter Albrecht
P.S. I would be very happy if you would be so king and accept my friends request @ FB
The reason the music business is in trouble is pretty simple IMO and has little to do with the economy. The business has been almost completely ruined by an emphasis on mass marketing, videos, production, everything except creativity and real talent. And the idea that this can be solved by having Coke sponsor bands is laughable.
Understood. But what if Coke actually backed a good band? An underground band? That's what Red Bull is doing.
Since you didn't mention who they are sponsoring I'll have to take your word for it that its a good band. I think there is something fundamentally inconsistent with a corporation sponsoring a legitimate artist. No corporation wants controversy, even an "edgy" company like Red Bull. And any great artist will be challenging people with new and controversial ideas. Everyone loves the Beatles and Dylan now but I remember when I was a kid they were considered controversial and even revolutionary. Also, any artist who is honestly commenting on the world we live in today will include references to all the evil done by large corporations, no big corporation will pay for that.
Uh, Amoeba records is like half a mile from where Tower and Virgin Megastore used to be. Too far to drive? Baloney. No excuse for going to the rapacious mercenary Best Buy, which rips off labels AND artists. Boo!
I also agree with previous posters. It's the "using music to sell something of perceived actual value" which is degrading the value of music. Let's give away Coca Cola and Red Bull for free when you buy a CD, not the opposite.
What do you expect from someone whose qualification to write about music is "Musical expert judge on the ... series "Starmaker"
I totally agree. I should have driven to Amoeba. And Amoeba sells used albums and promos, which rips off artist too. But I LOVE AMEOBA. Just being devil's advocate. And i wish we were in a world where we could give Red BUll and Coca Cola away free when you buy a CD. I think that would only work with concert tickets.
Touring is where the future of music is.
But having said that, if your music career depends solely on the USA market, you are doomed. However, true interenational music stars can still sell 3-4-5-6 million copies of their CD's worldwide. In the US, most are lucky to get near GOLD status now.
Why does everybody say that, considering how much time and effort it takes to set up one concert in one location in the first place?
People would support up and coming indie bands if they had an opportunity to hear them. That's hard to do in our current Clear Channel dominated radio environment which makes the payola of the 50's seem tame and innocent by comparison.
One of my heroes is Little Steven Van Zandt. His syndicated Underground Garage radio show is one of the only outlets where these indie bands can get a hearing without selling their souls to big labels or corporations. Believe it or not, there is still good music being made today. Look for his syndicated radio show locally or check it out online at his Underground Garage website.
There's still hope for good non-corporate bands to find an audience. Help 'em out.
Steven Van Zandt is amazing. Not only a great musician but a great actor on the Sopranos.
I think that in the long run making music downloadable will take power from the corporations and give it back to the artists. We may not have as many superstars like Michael Jackson (no real loss), but we will have more real music with creativity and talent behind it, although we may need to do a bit more work to find it. But I wouldn't expect someone like this author who thinks the future of music is RedBull, BestBuy, and Coke to have a clue about any of that.
100%. I love Little Steven! For a short time i convinced him to write a column for BIllboard when i was editor! It was great. And I was able to give ink to great new bands.
Good music officially died in 1992 with the rise of grunge. That's when someone figured out that you don't need talent or skill to make it big in music, that you only have to play incoherently and scream into the mike. Further, the labels became much more cutthroat, giving you one album instead of the original three to become #1 with a cruise missile before kicking you to the curb.
you don't have a clue.
Then educate us, O Great Expert Of Music.
I think that's kind of extreme. I would give Michael Jackson, Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, and every "boy band" more credit for killing music than grunge. A lot of grunge was cookie cutter power chords and screaming but most popular music is lame with a few gems shining out. The 60's brought us the Stones and the Beatles but they also brought us the Monkees, Neil Sedaka, Sonny and Cher.
My point is that it was roughly around that time when music stopped being about tracking down the people with long-term staying power (such as Michael Jackson) and started being about finding that short-term cash cow whose popularity is based more on image than actual talent (such as Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake, who started out in a boy band) who'll crank out maybe one hit single and then disappear just as quickly. Lately I've been prowling the jazz compilation sections of what music stores remain more than any other section, with Kenny Wayne Shepherd probably being the last post-1992 musician I've invested in.
Tara - only a fraction of bands are willing to align themselves with brands such as coca cola. Red Bull happens to have a little more credibility and historically does not put there logos all over the place. They're about the product, and getting consumers to experience the product.
My point is - the notion that brand sponsorships can effectively provide revenue to recording artists is doubtful. Many artists won't sink to that level.
I think it can provide some revenue. The real money is in merch and touring.
"Gone are the days of made-up over produced bands"
You could have fooled me.
You hit the nail on the head Count. The biggest problem today, in fact, is how much control industry execs assert over the acts they sign and market so that it all comes out as pablum for eight year olds. You want a poster child for all this nonsense? Jessica Simpson. No way she would have ever even been looked at seriously in the 1970's by any A&R person. She would have been a career waitress.
"The biggest problem today, in fact, is how much control industry execs assert over the acts they sign and market so that it all comes out as pablum for eight year olds" I agree. And it seems to me that trend would be increased by having corporations sponsor acts as this author suggests.
If the big record companies are going under, I say fine by me. Musicians have always gotten the short end with regards to recorded music sales. The new paradigm is to go independent, tour a lot of smaller venues, sell directly to your fans online and at those small venue concerts. It may not make millions, but can be a nice comfortable living. Music is going back to the people where it belongs, and as it does, more creativity will come out of it. Time for the dinosaurs to move on.
Brands becoming patrons of the arts will only further devalue the "instrinsic" worth of music.
You'll just get artists/bands/songwriters going after the same demographic and thinking demographics - NOT good songs.
That's some of what's happened now. (Recalling the brand name dropping that was vogue in hiphop).
Live will not be the saviour of many indie bands either. That won't be enough to cover recording costs (it's not just about the artist/band but the producers, engineers, songwriters and additional musicians often used). Heck, live gigs will barely cover the overhead of the gigs (gas, advertising, travel, food, possibly sound and additional musicians). Not only are ther smaller venues, but this has become a DJ culture, further lessening the venues available for play.
No, artist/bands will need to make good songs that touch people and they will buy - as is - no other product need be attached. That income and songwriting income will be needed to make ends meet for the professional artist.
Adaptation is the key in recording on a recession budget. You'd be amazed at the beautiful music that can come out of a simple home studio, or the recording of a live event with minimal equipment.
Ever think recording to sell products (reminds me of the phase where hip-hop artists were name brand dropping to get endorsements) and not because of any artistic worth may be the cause of the music seeming to lack value?
When you say "artist" making money off of recorded music, the recording artist may need to pay other musicians, engineers, producers...it's not just the artist/band involved in a recording. Many don't write their own songs (even if they get credit for writing). That's a skill that many a great singer or musician doesn't have.
Live? Not only are the venues smaller but you need to advertise your date, get to your date, possibly pay for sound or additional band members singers for the date. COSTS MONEY! A band has to split the money. And most of all - this has become a DJ culture, further reducing the places for bands to play "live".
An artist and people working to make the artist succesful will need to make money off the recorded product...it's the calling card for the live gig.
People will always buy a song that touches them or they like.
If artists want to sell their music, they need to make it worthy.
Old school is when you want to look at the LP cover art, not those postage stamps on CDs.
Old school for me is going to a bar and hearing a live band that may not be all that polished but is still putting everything they've got into their music.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
