How Free Has A Greater Value

Chris Anderson's latest Free (which finally came out in paperback in the UK) is an essential read for anyone involved in the new music industry. He positions the psychology of the £0 price tag in the digital economy, dissecting the reasons why media has rushed towards a free price.

The tension that exists between the artist and free is often not based on the gross margin of their material. In fact very few discuss (or even understand) the full potential earnings from making music. It is complex - with a myriad of revenue streams, collection agencies and stakeholders, all of whom are usually managed by someone else (the label). The primary concern of the artist is that free "de-values" their work.

Anderson explores many arguments that counter this perception of free. Primarily he points out that an artist's true intention should be to deliver their work to as many people as possible - and that free, if used correctly, offers the best strategy to acheiving this. If this is the case, free holds a very high value.

I've held this belief for quite some time (here's something I wrote in March 2009), which has lead to another question that I don't think many people have gotten to grips with - how do we measure success in a free economy? Our belief of an artists stature has been related to chart position and sales - this seems no longer relevant.

I noticed a recent Independent article stating that Microsoft's share value has slumped below Apple's - prompting Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to state that despite this his company will "make more money than Apple". It strikes me that this mark of success - the total amount of cash you bring in - is now less important. The need to "win" by selling more is not a building block of a great 21st century business. Apple has value because it is a brand that is loved passionately within it's community - and that community is growing bigger. I don't think I've ever met someone that was a zealot of a Windows product.

The lesson here is not that artists need to sell more, or accumulate more fans. They must set their own measures of success and work towards building a strong community that will support them. The liberation and opportunity that "free" can offer, along with the potential of the Internet to connect artists with millions of fans around the world, should be welcomed as a foundation of a new start for the industry.

Image on Flickr by : : w i n t e r t w i n e d : :

Independent Record Store Day

Johnny Marr blogged this week regarding record stores in support of Independent Record Store Day. His opinion is quite different to what I posted earlier this week. On two levels ...

Firstly he argues that the record store has been forced off the high street by major retailers. I've always felt this is difficult to defend. Consumers make choices based on what they want. Great record stores - like Rough Trade - still exist and are doing just fine. They have built a strong business with clients who keep returning. Other stores - like Pure Groove - have decimated their retail stock in favour of a bar and performance space. I'm not sure many people wander past the meat markets into Clerkenwell to browse their selection, but they have a place in the community through the great free live shows they put on.

It seems to me that no one in this debate - like many other discussions about the music industry - is listening to the consumer. When we get nostalgic about record stores, we are thinking primarily of the experience that shaped our youth. Kids are clever - they don't need a high street to find great stores. Simply put, their high street is becoming digital and they choose where they shop.

Marr's second argument is that records are a great piece of art. We really need to move away from this mindset. Music is art, and the musician is an artist - who often works with great visual artists to create a beautiful experience. The CD you purchase in Tesco is not art - it is a commodity, just like the cereal and pizza you also put in your basket. Downloading an MP3 of music that creates a change inside of you - gives something back to you - is still art. We don't need a physical form with a store/label/distribution network attached to it in order to experience the art of music.

Tracey Thorn made a great comment in yesterday's Guardian. She reflected on the influence record stores have had in our lives, but then noted that we mustn't look back. Today's celebration should be less nostalgia, and more a vision of where we are going.

But in respect of today's observance, I'd like to give thanks to South Side Sound and Sound Connection in Edmonton, along with all the amazing shops on Seymour Street in Vancouver. And to the Music & Video Exchange on Berwick Street in London. But I'd like to give a giant thank you to the internet, my new independent musical universe, for connecting me to so many brilliant people and musicians over the past decade. I can't wait to see what's in store for our future!

Relics

I had a request this week for some of our music on vinyl.

We pressed only six of the Gaymonkey singles/EPs to vinyl. Each was a labour of love - carefully designed cover sleeve, selecting high quality paper stock and finish. Choosing the tracks to be included that would work best on the format.

Not many remain from the pressing - most that weren't sold initally were lost when our distributor went bankrupt. As I found the requested copies from our archive, it felt great to hold them again - memories of achievement.

It also reinforced the reasons why I have become opposed to the physical format. These relics reminded me of the past, but not so much the music contained on them.

Primarily, they are unsustainable, taking up resources and energy to produce that exceed their value. The investment in vinyl and CDs for an artist/label is massive, and a huge barrier to getting your art to the world. Digital formats have revolutionised this.

Physical formats also take control away from the artist. They dictate the use of distributors who retain stock and mark up the retail cost for the consumer. With this in mind, the format actually becomes a barrier between the creator of art and the listener.

And in the digital age, where our music collections are accessed instantly, these relics simply collect dust. Vinyl may look impressive, but CDs lack any aesthetic charm. Vinyl may be recycled and collected, but unwanted CDs tend to end up in landfill. It is sickening to think of the millions of unwanted records that have become waste.

The industry must take responsibility for this - while vinyl has found a niche, the time has come to move away from the CD format altogether. Not only for sustainability reasons, but as part of a journey to align how we see music in our lives - from commodities and things we consume to art made to enhance our lives.

If you don't want to spend the time reselling your old CDs, its good to know that they can be recycled - this is a good resource for facilities in the UK.

Image on Flickr by swanksalot

Why Did We Break Up With MySpace?

Unless you are a musician, you probably aren't maintaining a page or connecting with others like you used to on MySpace.

A spot poll of your nearest and dearest will no doubt give you the following insight: no one is using MySpace any more. In fact our own research last autumn found that about 20% of friends connected to our artists had inactive profiles - with around the same figure not having logged in for 6 months. Add in the huge volume of band profiles, and you aren't left with many punters.

But we all used to cherish our love of MySpace. So what happened to the relationship?

You Stopped Making Me Feel Special

When it started, being friends really meant something. Those early years of social networking saw us collecting friends like they were badges of honour. But then everyone wanted to be your friend, including christain metal bands from Utah and a folk singer in Croydon. Suddenly being popular wasn't so special anymore. Proof that quantity alienates and that really, all we want is to feel like a special part of a community - no matter how big our digital universe gets.

You Just Weren't Yourself Anymore

Bands started using MySpace to connect directly with fans and build audiences. But once it got too much, the labels and PR took over. Soon an intern was posting comments and answering the post. With Twitter we can usually tell it's the real person behind the tweets (note: I suspect that @iamjonsi isn't really our favourite Icelandic boy...). Twitter works on this instant gratification principle. Being genuine and investing time in the community is crucial.

You Were a Lazy Lover ...

It all felt so subversive and fresh and new. But then everyone started to do it all a bit better. And Facebook came along and did the simple things with more whizz-bang and MySpace was (and is still) left playing catchup on functionality.

... And then you slept with Murdoch

MySpace showed us we could all have our own little place on the web and connect - and even use our space to be something fabulous. Then our world was sold to the media equivalent of Darth Vader. No surprise that trust was eroded - and when the 'space started to feel more like the Death Star every day, we knew it was time to leave.

It's a shame really. We had fun.

Image on Flickr by WebRanking Pictures

Can the Industry Change Its Spots?

This is a syndication of an article written today for the ever brilliant musicOMH

As an artist and owner of an independent music label, my intention and focus has been in making brilliant electronic pop music. We welcome any opportunity to help not only the creation, but also the promotion of our work. Over the years the internet has been a complete revolution for what we try to achieve – in fact many milestones in our success has been due to the web. It is no surprise then that I completely disagree with Warner Music's statement this week that services like Spotify are "not positive for the industry".

The "controversy" over music streaming services has very little to do with the two most important components in the debate - the artist or the music fan. In fact this argument, driven by the major labels, has rarely involved these two stakeholders at all; the recent missive from Warner indicating it may remove their catalogue from services like Spotify is testimony to this. Note that the consumer is not mentioned once in the rationale over music streaming, which is clearly becoming increasingly popular. What other business would get away with ignoring what the customer wants?

The central issue here is an industry resisting change, which is not about music piracy or the often cited devaluing of art - but rather a transition from commodity to experience.

Music enriches lives - this is experiential. Owning a piece of plastic does not fulfil this primary need. The desire for music in our lives has not decreased, and a new generation of listeners has arrived hungry for great tunes. It is simply the physical medium that has become irrelevant. Technology has allowed us this freedom and this realisation.

Music fans are continuously wanting greater access to musical experience. The internet offers this on a global scale. Like all content across the web, we habitually want it - and want it now. And in return, like never before, the artist is able to express themselves to a mass audience almost instantly. Music streaming - be it via MySpace, YouTube, or Spotify - has played an important role in allowing us to sample almost any artist's material, whereas previously we were restricted to hearing whatever the industry decided was worth marketing. With the massively increased bandwidth offered by the internet, every artist can find an audience. Not to mention the connections that artists can now make with each other! For an industry supposedly built upon creativity, this can only be seen as a positive asset.

In fact this democratisation of access is what scares the big labels the most. In the old industry he who shouted the loudest - via buying popularity through advertising spend - often reaped the greatest reward. Now anyone can broadcast their talent via services like Spotify. And the consumer has the reciprocal benefit of ultimate choice - no longer subject to being force fed content by the majors. When Warner restricts the audience access to their artists, which they have also previously done for content on YouTube, they are creating a massive competitive disadvantage. It is beyond belief how they could justify this decision to their artists.

Those leading the debate continue to stress that they are losing money and that giving away their content for free will bring the weakened industry to its knees. In fact streaming music is not given away for free - artists receive royalties per play. It might not amount to much for a single play, but it is a quantifiable and fair system. And as for the dying physical format, music revenue is not confined to the sale of a single product. There is licensing to advertising, games, film, live performances, clubbing, radio & TV broadcast royalties, publishing, merchandising ... all offering the potential exploitation of the artist and their craft.

Warner may not feel that "ad supported free services are a sustainable business model" - but there is clearly nothing sustainable about creating a business around a commodity that your customers are not interested in. Deserting new media because it has challenged your strategy is not a failure of the consumer - but of your own inability to adapt to the changing needs of your audience. It has become increasingly clear that sustainability in the new industry will involve nurturing talent and finding the best opportunity to connect it to an audience, not through the manufacture and sale of plastic discs.

Still Paying for the Naughties

The piracy debate took an interesting twist today when the Independent on Sunday revealed that those that spend the most money buying music are, in fact, the same individuals who are most likely to download music illegally.

It's not really rocket science to think that people that are very passionate about music would use the convenience of the internet to gain access to what they wanted to hear. Analysis of the survey finds that those that file share do so as a "discovery mechanism"; something that most artists and labels have come to rely on in order to spread the word about their work.

After my blog on the proposed new anti-piracy legislation earlier this week, I thought I would research any current studies on the psychology behind file sharing. For me part of the answer to this issue lies in the reasons behind why people genuinely do not seem to have a problem with downloading and sharing music. I didn't get far before discovering this article from Esquire from last year.

Author Chuck Klosterman raises one of the most intriguing perspectives I have heard in the debate. By raising the question of where the billions not being spent on the music industry have gone from the economy since file sharing became a norm, he has come to a simple conclusion.

We're still paying for the music we bought over the past decade.

It's true. Think of all that cash you slammed onto your credit cards during the boom at the turn of the millenium. I used to spend £100 a week on vinyl alone, some of it which still sits unplayed in my record boxes. The reality for many is a big fat balance on credit cards - only now they choose to pay off their debt rather than rack up more CDs.

We were addicted to music consumption. Getting the last single by a new or favourite band was a symbol of status and part of a shared cultural experience. We needed to acquire music as much as we wanted to actually listen to it.

That passion hasn't died - music is just as popular as ever - but with the digital era crossing over to a new generation, the need to consume has begun to vanish. The physical relic of the plastic medium no longer required for a new audience that has access to digital content. Downloading is fast, convenient and readily available - even accessible on-the-go through mobile devices. So why wouldn't a music fan take advantage of the best resource that gives them access to what they love?

Lord Mandelson Declares War!

Interesting piece on Channel 4 news tonight about Lord Mandelson's anti-piracy proposals.

And my first introduction to the Featured Artists Coalition - a lobbying group set up by musicians (such as Ed O'Brien from Radiohead - featured in the interview) who are campaigning for changes to copyright.

While most of their argument centres around the way royalties are controlled and split between labels and artists, O'Brien was on hand to face Jon Snow's questions regarding the government's proposed legislation, which involves threatening those that upload files for sharing. Three nasty letters, and you could be barred from the net.

O'Brien spoke with clarity when he admitted that new artists rely on the internet to get noticed, and "build their profile". I wonder how Lord Mandelson would classify bloggers who have become our new broadcasters - spreading the word through their recommendations, and helping to launch the careers of many artists? Are they criminals, or an essential element to a new industry?

The report is below. Thanks to the internet, I can share the film clip with you. If you enjoy it, you must just watch Channel 4 again. Or tell a friend about it.

That's the joy of new media.

The Artist - Customer Relationship

You - the listener - are being blamed for the death of the music industry.

Every time you download something for free, a big giant finger is pointed directly at you. You are stealing - taking the hard earned pennies straight from the hands of the artists who slaved away to create what you selfishly devalue. Your activity should be monitored and any infringement noted and penalised.

How about another perspective?

You are the customer, and the musicians are working for you. You are the saviour of music.

In days of yore, music was not a commodity. It had no physical form, so it could not be bought and sold in the same way. Composers had patrons - the wealthy lovers of the arts who sponsored the creation of new works. It was very much a B2C relationship - with the composer selling directly to a customer.

This worked for centuries, until we discovered that you could capture sound and package it up in plastic.

The music industry was born, and suddenly the relationship changed. Composers needed companies to make the plastic that would carry their works. And those companies wanted big returns on their investments. They saw that they could create a whole network of money making opportunities. They needed distribution to ship the plastic all around the world. And they needed shops to sell the plastic to customers.

The relationship changed from B2C - to B2B. Composers now had no business relationship with their listeners. The plastic was all that mattered - pressing it up, shipping it around, selling it in stores.

Fast forward again. A digital world realises it dosent need the plastic anymore. Suddenly the entire network is under threat. The business relationship that relied heavily on the physical manfiestation of the music no longer has context.

Its time we went back to the B2C relationship.

Artists are working for the listener. They make their art for a global patron - their community - which they must build, get to know and demonstrate a commitment to. In return they are supported for their efforts by their community. This is the key - like any business, the artist must find out what their customer wants to pay for. Some communities might still want a plastic souvenir to take home and own - which they will create demand for. As (thankfully) the joy of experiencing music has not changed over the centuries, the artist will always have something else to sell - the live experience of their music. And now that we have a global method of broadcasting - the internet - with a more reliable way of keeping track of what is being performed, the artist can continue to expect royalties for how their work enriches the experience of other businesses - the element of a healthy B2B relationship that still remains.

So in the end, it is the plastic that not only created the music industry, but lead to its downfall. And as you - the customer - now have the power back, you should be respected for the part you play in helping musicians to bring their art to life.

Deal With God - A Video

More proof of why the internet has revolutionised music.

Last year Buffetlibre DJs contacted us about doing a cover version for their REWIND2 project. They found us via MySpace (I think ... or maybe it was through our email newsletter via Gaymonkeyrecords.com). They are based in Spain - we've never met, but we're virtual mates.

We of course covered "Running Up That Hill" by Kate Bush. The Buffet boys then create a fantastic site with the rest of the cover versions - essentially a digital album.

It is offered free to anyone. They promote it, gaining the kudos of cool, and we get some promotion to a new audience. We are introduced to their community.

Months later, a guy named Martin in Peru (!) gets inspired and makes his own music video for the track. He posts it up on YouTube, and a new community of Kate lovers is introduced to us.

A decade ago this would have been impossible.

Nine Inch Wails

The Quietus has a great story today on Trent Reznor's withdrawl from the 2.0 universe after encountering "too many idiots". 

Is this a case of biting the hand that feeds you? Our new virtual world has allowed unprecedented interaction between artist and fan. How you use that power is up to you - but throwing your toys out of the pram if you don't like how you are being perceived isn't doing yourself any favours.

Musicians have always created a story around them to make them seem more interesting. Liam Gallagher is a tough northern prat. Lilly Allen hates everything and hits people. And James Blunt - well, he's mainly boring. But these are just roles they play. 

The internet is simply a medium for people to connect. The "idiots" on the web are the same fools that come to Reznor's concerts and buy his music. Only now they can get that little bit closer to him - albeit virtually. His fear is insecurity - maybe they'll see that he's not such a dark gloomy goth afterall.

Cloudbusting

I was perusing Gareth's Bleeps and Booms blog today and read about his recommendation for creating artist and tag clouds from your Last.fm profile.  Very exciting indeed. 

Not as visually stimulating as Wordle - though it does pulse and morph after you have created it - and limited to 50 artists/tags, the concept is still enjoyable nonetheless. And a great way of examining your listening habits.  

 

Mine is a bit messy. According to the code's creator, this is because I tend to listen to similar musical styles - and therefore my cloud is dense, with the relationships between the artists/tags being too tight. Apologies. Old habits die hard.

It reminds me of the old Ishkur's guide - which apart from the brashness of the editorial and the hideous logo font - has often provided me hours of explorational joy.

OurSpace

While I waxed on yesterday about MySpace losing its mojo, the BBC confirms that only 25% of people polled in a recent survey find the networking site to be their favourite place on the web for music.

That is a shocking statistic - considering I would hazard a guess that most people see the brand as being geared towards bands and their fans. But it backs up my thoughts that the platform isn't really working anymore.

The headline of the article is equally perturbing:

"Almost 75% of music pirates would stop if told to by their ISP"

Two points here:

1.) The poll was conducted in a survey of 1500 people. Who out of the sample have NEVER downloaded music without paying? And out of those, who would admit to it? I'm not sure I know anyone in the 20-35 category that haven't downloaded music (or perhaps even a film) for free - whether they would admit to it, is another point. Those in the "pirate" group must then be quite a high percentage.

2.) The fact that it would take a third party company - even one with no legal authority, such as your ISP (in my opinion they are merely a conduit of information - the crime is between the end user and the copyright holder) - to deter the theft, is very interesting. It says a lot about our society's acceptance of being monitored vs. our value for copyright.

Psychologically we do not process the act of downloading music without paying for it as theft - UNTIL we are caught doing it by someone else. Those polled might confess to the illegal download - and thus they recognise that it is "wrong" to do so, but this knowledge alone is not enough to have them change their behaviour. It is too easy to get away with the act, so morally we do not consider it wrong. Much like speeding - if no one is there to see it happen, is it really a crime?

Image by asboluv

InterNetworking

A recent visit to Facebook this week got me thinking about the role of social networking in our modern busy lives.

First off - what a mess Facebook has become.  I have been avoiding it for months now - primarily because the functionality of it was tiresome (have I ever really wanted to be "poked" by anyone I didn't know? or turned into a zombie? hmm). Seeing it this week I was amazed anyone can be bothered with it - the "new" design is a truly shameful cluttered chaos.

For Gaymonkey, social networking has been an amazing tool.  I remember the first time I heard about MySpace - I didn't quite understand why I would need another home on the web when our own was doing so well. However, the direct marketing potential quickly became very clear. Finally we had a platform to interact with lovers of music - and potential fans! The dream of the Long Tail was born ...

But as more social networking sites have popped up, MySpace's power has diminished. Facebook has proven to be more appealing to the less-music conscious masses, and it feels that no one is using MySpace to interact - it is now simply an easy way for a band to have a website.

The big winner at the moment for labels and their fans is Last.fm. Gaymonkey artists have always been involved with the site - and while they started out as more of a digital radio service, their expansion into social networking has been very slick. Here we can actually see who has been listening to our tracks, and then interact with them directly. The potential to build a community of like-minded individuals, passionate about our niche, seems very real. And the library is massive - providing the ultimate on-demand resource. Who needs radio at all anymore?

Whenever I mention Last.fm on this blog, someone emails me about imeem.com, boasting about its superiority. Imeem has nothing that interests me - certainly it caters to a more mainstream american market as it has no presence in the UK. 

A new kid on the block is SoundCloud.  Based around peer-to-peer sharing, the site could prove to be very useful for labels and artists to swap music without using FTP or services like YouSendIt. Although it is a member site, i'm wondering how they will get around potential copyright infringement by joe public ...

The synopsis? as social networking becomes increasingly a part of our lives, the scope for the niche communities to find their own corners of the web to hang out in becomes even more possible. The Long Tail will support those sites to thrive and grow.  And hopefully we won't all lose the ability to interact with each other in the real world ...

Image by rabinal

Wordle

Wordle is a little bundle of java joy that set the studio buzzing today.

It analyses your site/blog, and constructs an instant cloud, assigning hierarchy to your most used words. The fun the continues as you get the opportunity to select from a choice of layout, font and colour options.

A glance at my own musings seems to indicate that the words "never" and "bit" are most prominent. Surprising - I thought I was one of those "never say never" people ... 

It does amuse me that "Adele" gets a prime placing top right ...

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

On a rainy bank holiday jaunt today we came across a church in Kent that has a collection of Chagall stained glass.  I've always liked Chagall - perhaps because he uses a lot of blue, or maybe because his work has that childlike fantasy quality - easily allowing you to just get lost in it and find your own meaning.

The tiny church was deserted and deathly silent, leaving us to explore on our own and stare undisturbed at the haunting images.  Even though there wasn't much sun, the light captured and delivered the painting's intense colour through the glass.

To the side of the nave there was a table full of postcards, books, cds - which anyone could buy.  It was all priced - but as the church was unattended you just had to put your cash in a little slot on the table.  We couldn't believe that this merchandise just left out for anyone to possibly plunder.  But then we realised this was insignificant compared to the invaluable art that was left unguarded - which, if in a gallery, would be under high security.  

Churches are institutions of respect.  We are all familiar with the code of conduct - silence, honesty, humble behaviour.  

Our modern world revolves around one new institution - the internet.  Still finding its place in our society, it lacks a strict code.  Individuals behave in ways that they wouldn't do in the real world - in the anonymous web they can easily resort to antisocial behaviours like hiding behind pseudonyms, making irresponsible comments to others, and taking what they want without paying for it.  But like the church the internet is largely unguarded.  Perhaps in time we will grow to respect it and evolve a standard of behaviour - hopefully soon before the great freedom the internet is built upon is taken away.