Thursday, March 21, 2019

All Music Should Be Free

by nhemerson (writer), Portland, March 06, 2008


Why Music Artists Would Benefit From offering Their music Free Over The Internet

I am a jaded, cynical bastard. I'll be the first to admit. But my cynicism is not the usual pretentious, disgruntled angst that rages in many others that never got their "Shot in life." No, my cynicism is focused on the realities of what I and all things music related. From bands, to the records, to the labels, to my own attempts at making music I have spent most of my adult life obsessing and pursuing a phantom dream. The dream of creating something people would like. That would move people. Something that would change the world and at the same time loving others that are already doing it.

Think back 5 years ago. Napster was making a name for itself, the iPod had found its market and techie music nerds everywhere had found something that would revolutionize the way music is distributed. It was during this time that a radical idea's seed had been planted. To use the internet to exchange and market music. I had just moved to Los Angeles when all this was happening. I had gotten lucky enough to meet a group of musicians through mutual friends the first week I moved there. I was even luckier when I found out they were connected to the music industry and actually knew what they were doing. On top of that, their visions of wanting to use the internet to market music were very similar. We would brainstorm for hours on how to use the internet to get people into the music we were making. How to get our music into people's hands so that they could hear it and would want to come to our shows. We always ended with the same idea:

Give it away for free...

At the time Apple had started to get iTunes together and we could see as a group where this was going. As my luck would continue to have it our second guitar player (I was the other) was also an accredited sound engineer who had worked on many pro projects. He had invested in buying Pro Tools and we also had an electronic drum kit. We weighed the costs and realized that creating a record in our own apartment would allow us to not worry about recording costs and therefore feel the need to recoup any of it through sales. This lead to us simply giving CD's out for donation only.

Was the music we made good? I am biased so I will say it lacked but was very ambitious. Did people like it? Let's just say we never found our "niche." Did the cold, hard truth of Los Angeles' music scene murder my dreams under its bloody axe of superficial, oversaturated crap? Let's just say music is back to being a hobby. But one thing I found through all of it was the power of the internet and marketing.

Flash-forward to today and we can see this concept in full swing. MySpace is the "Come listen to our new CD!" capitol of the world, there are more places to put your band's music then I can even comprehend and iTunes is the all ruling god of it all. Still, there is a lacking element of today's internet music marketing. The shit is still for sale.

If I learned one thing from Los Angeles it is that the world has come full circle with technology and knowledge. Long gone are the days of mythical rock bands, the LCD drenched recording sessions and the famous producers. Turns out they were all regular people who had a knowledge base about something normal people couldn't afford. But now we can and now everyone knows how to get a CD together and put it up on there blogs, fan sites and god knows what. So considering this obvious tidal wave of competition along with the increasing resistance from music lovers getting sick of being bombarded with music solicitation via email, why wouldn't all musicians give everything away for free? What are we really trying to accomplish here? Do we really think we will make it through this ever populating world of mediocrity by selling our unproven worth? You may be great, but who cares if I have pay before I like?

Radiohead released "In Rainbows" earlier this year to critical and commercial success. I personally do like the record but what I loved the most about it was the marketing scheme. You see, Radiohead is one of those bands that are always victim to the pre release album leak over the internet. It is a perpetual thing and common law lately had been to push the release date up and rush the product out. Major labels continue to cross there fingers instead of using some foresight that they are not going to be able to stop this. So what did Radiohead do? They put the entire record on the internet for free 2 months before the release. You could still pay for the record. You could literally pay anything you wanted, but you could also pay nothing and download it. Why was this brilliant? Because it circumvented the internet music leak scene and pushed everyone into a nice corner to download and enjoy. They controlled it. What was the need to go rummage the internet for the bootleg when the band was offering it right there?

"BUT ALBUM SALES WILL BE AFFECTED!!!!" says the major labels.

Yep they were, because Radiohead debuted at #1 on the Billboard charts. They were affected in a very positive way. This was proof that a band has the ability to control each aspect of there music, including people getting it for free.

So what are the benefits for people who aren't Radiohead? How about considering that if you have invested in a basic recording set up and have the ability to get a CD onto the internet that any purchase you do make is entirely profit. Does that sound good? You have to put in perspective. If you are offering music for free and people are taking it you are getting amazing promotion for next to nothing. There are no costs for materials, all the sites for promotion are free and you don't have to worry about a distributer. On top of that allowing a donation for the CD is a much softer way to solicit a purchase then demanding a sale. People love the choice and they love the fact that they may be actually willing to give you something for it but on their terms.

If bands considered this opportunity it could greatly benefit both fan and musician. This way taking pressure off the band to recoup financial loss and let the listener choose what they want and if they want to spend money on it. You may find that giving out a few things for free now could help you sell many more things in the not so distant future.

About the Writer

nhemerson is a writer for BrooWaha. For more information, visit the writer's website.
Want to write articles too? Sign up & become a writer!

4 comments on All Music Should Be Free

Log In To Vote   Score: 3
By Umbrae on March 06, 2008 at 02:39 pm

I completely agree with you. Massive changes are taking place in how music and art is being distributed within the digital realm. Seeing these changes take place and witnessing the small steps being taken by artists to regain control of their art is a wonderful thing.

It reminds me of some time back when you had web sites like (before the reformation), iuma and vitaminic which were literally a huge burgeoning community of upcoming artists. Everything on those sites in their golden age was a discovery. People would communicate with eachother, you can post entire albusm on there free for people to hear. As a hobbyist musician, it was an amazing door into creative expression and freedom. Not to mention that I ran into some of the best music I've ever heard in my life... from people in their basements to their bathrooms just doing their  thing.

Unfortunately, those days are over - at least from what I've seen. Not even the MySpace thing, which is so popular today, can hold a candle to the gushing community that those sites had.

The sad demand for revenue, versus the cost of running a huge output of bandwith eventually brought it to a halt. But that was a time when good music was free. You can even say that sites like that (Napster included), heralded the coming of a very dangerous but special type of knowledge to the artistic community - "We can actually have control over this shit?"

Kudos on a great article.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 2
By L DeSilva-Johnson on March 07, 2008 at 04:32 pm

Giggity giggity. I really enjoyed this article, and it is very much in tune (oh, painful pun!) with my own thinking about the possibilities in open source culture and other user/creator generated/shared/aggregated movements.

All too often the positive aspects of these shifts are subsumed by the consumer culture/culture industry components of the attraction swells that occur whenever people motivate around an idea/sound/m.o. etc... those wanting to capitalize on these trends are close behind... however, we have more power than ever to influence how things turn out, the direction things go, and what big brother (and his newer, viral little brother) spends his attentions on...

Lots to think on..... I think I'll grab a beer.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By Paulie Connor on January 31, 2010 at 01:28 am

the music industry has become a very DIY place for bands. we can't just sit back rip the bong and let the big label executives pay for everything. Those days are over. Your so right about recording your own album and distributing/uploading to the internet yourself. This will make an album less of an investment, which i guess is a good thing? Yea it not have to pay 50,000 for an album is great right? Yes i think so. 50 years ago, a typical life span for a successful band would probably be to record and release about 10 albums and make a couple million, but bands now will probably record and release 50 albums and make more in the thousands off them. Thats ok though because we'll make out money from our live shows that we put, which better be good.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By Credo on January 08, 2014 at 11:49 pm

Free music on the internet, now that's an innovative idea..


 Report abuse

Add A Comment!

Click here to signup or login.

Rate This Article

Your vote matters to us