Indietracks - an indiepop festival: Indietracks interview #5: The Magic Theatre. Today we're chatting to Dan Popplewell and Sophia Churney from new Elefant Records signings The Magic Theatre, who will be making their first live appearance at this year's Indietracks! Their debut album 'London Town' (2010) was a time-travelling love story bursting with melodic sunshine/baroque pop, featuring orchestral recordings with The Slovak Radio Orchestra and the Estonian Philharmonic Chamber Choir. They've just put the finishing touches on their second album, to be released on Elefant in the autumn and preceeded by a four track single in June/July. As front people in Ooberman, Dan and Sophia released a string of acclaimed and ambitious albums, enjoyed chart hits and and were championed by John Peel, Blur's Graham Coxon and BBC Radio's Mark Radcliffe .
The Magic Theatre has been going for several years, yet this is the first proper show! How are you feeling about playing the songs live at Indietracks? Sophia: I'm a bit nervous. Dan: Her voice is much nicer than mine. Selling MP3s? You should have stuck with CDs. What’s the difference between selling a secondhand music CD and transferring ownership of the same songs bought from iTunes? Not much, you’d think - except one’s illegal, according to a New York court. Earlier this month, ReDigi.com, which sells “used” digital music files, was found to violate copyright law after record label Capitol Records claimed the web-based service infringed reproduction rights.
While many people are familiar with browsing and buying used vinyls or books, this recent decision hinders methods of virtually sourcing secondhand digital files, even if ownership of a song or track is completely transferred to a different person, and no lasting copies are made. To understand the decision in Capitol Records, LLC v ReDigi Inc. it is useful to review developments in music distribution over the past 30 years and consider how concepts of property and ownership apply to digital copyright works.
Three decades of digital music formats Where does ReDigi fit in? Click to enlarge. Sputnikmusic | Music Reviews, Music News. Writing or speaking about streaming music screwing artists? I really like Aimee Mann’s music, but her recent interview in which she gave her views on streaming music bothered me. “My record isn’t on Spotify,” Mann told the Telegraph. “People may be outraged, but artists don’t make money from Spotify.” Artists don’t make money from Spotify. A phrase that crystallises what may be the most important debate in the history of digital music: whether streaming music services can pay off for artists – and more widely, whether they can turn a profit and build a sustainable business for themselves and the music industry.
It bothered me, because it was just tossed out there with no backup. Leaving that piece aside, though, far too much of the public debate around streaming music services and artist payouts is dominated by gut feeling, partiality and Chinese whispers. So, I gathered some. A quick note before diving into it: this article isn’t trying to prove that streaming is marvellous or dreadful for artists. On with the show! D.A. The Decline and Fall of the Top 10. The impact of technology on the music business is well understood, but it is also having a dramatic impact on the music buying population, which in turn is changing the face of mainstream music. Digital music has so far been a journey for the more engaged, technology savvy music fan.
Some of these have discovered free music, others a la carte, others streaming. All of these behaviours have eaten away at sales of the music industry’s core product: the album. Yet the CD album remains the music industry’s number 1 global music product and in key markets like Japan and Germany it accounts for approximately three quarters of sales.
The problem of course is that CD buyers are steadily falling out of the market (10.5 million people have stopped buying music entirely in the UK and US since 2008). Though re-releases and discounted catalogue sales have helped bump up volumes in some markets, the net result is that new release album sales are dwindling. Like this: Like Loading... Mythbusting: Data Driven Answers to Four Common Assumptions About How Musicians Make Money | Artist Revenue Streams | Page 5. On Thursday, March 15, 2012, Artist Revenue Streams co-directors Kristin Thomson and Jean Cook participated in a panel called Brass in Pocket: Accessing More Musician Income at South by Southwest in Austin, TX. Drawing upon Money from Music survey findings, artist interviews, and the panelists’ personal experience, they talked about a handful common assumptions and myths about how musicians make money.
Kristin and Jean started the conversation by describing the project’s methodology. The research involves three data collection methods: in person interviews with about 80 different US-based musicians and composers, financial case studies based on verifiable bookkeeping data, and a widely distributed online survey. They also underscored that this study is not about label market share, or consumer spending, or measuring an artists’ social graph. It’s about individual musicians’ earning capacity. It’s about what they end up putting in their pocket, and how it’s changing over time. 1. 2. 3. 4. Mythbusting: Data Driven Answers to Four Common Assumptions About How Musicians Make Money | Artist Revenue Streams | Page 4.
Mythbusting: Data Driven Answers to Four Common Assumptions About How Musicians Make Money | Artist Revenue Streams | Page 3. Mythbusting: Data Driven Answers to Four Common Assumptions About How Musicians Make Money | Artist Revenue Streams | Page 2. A short history of the music industry: different formats, familiar names but the same old problems | Music & Copyright's Blog. In the past 20 years or so, all sectors of the music industry have been through massive change. Format transitions, company consolidation and greater scrutiny of copyright and licensing have changed the industry beyond all recognition. But have the changes made for industry improvements, and more important, have the main players learned from their mistakes? The recent discovery of the first issues of Music & Copyright has allowed for a unique look at just how much certain things have changed, and how much they haven’t.
The newsletter’s 20-year anniversary came and went in September, but thanks to a long-standing subscriber, copies of the first 24 issues published have been found and make for interesting reading. Despite containing names that have either long since left the music industry or been swallowed up as part of industry consolidation, the headlines for a number of news stories resonate closely with happenings today.
Lessons learned? Like this: Like Loading... Staff Benda Bilili: where did it all go so wrong? In 2007, Staff Benda Bilili were playing to an audience of vultures and emaciated primates in Kinshasa's desperate zoo in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The band had never left the country, and this was their regular rehearsal space. When we met, most of them were either sleeping rough on cardboard boxes or in decrepit shelters for the disabled and making ends meet by busking or hawking cigarettes on the city's toxic streets.
Last September, the band headlined the Royal Albert Hall in London, the culmination of four astonishing years during which they played more than 400 concerts at every corner of the globe. Back home they bought new houses, Mercs, Bimmers, clothes, trilbies … even a new hotel. There was a documentary film, Benda Bilili, charting their extraordinary success – made all the more extraordinary by the fact that several of the band were polio victims. And how to explain that nobody ever gets paid for doing promotional work? 'Gangnam Style' has sharp social riff, 220M views. SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korean rapper PSY's "Gangnam Style" video has 220 million YouTube views and counting, and it's easy to see why. No Korean language skills are needed to enjoy the chubby, massively entertaining performer's crazy horse-riding dance, the song's addictive chorus and the video's exquisitely odd series of misadventures.
Beneath the antic, funny surface of his world-conquering song, however, is a sharp social commentary about the country's newly rich and Gangnam, the affluent district where many of them live. Gangnam is only a small slice of Seoul, but it inspires a complicated mixture of desire, envy and bitterness. Here's a look at the meaning of "Gangnam Style" — and at the man and neighborhood behind the sensation: Gangnam is the most coveted address in Korea, but less than two generations ago it was little more than some forlorn homes surrounded by flat farmland and drainage ditches. In a sly, entertaining way, PSY's song pushes these cultural buttons.
Online: Psy Makes $8 Million By Giving It Away. Psy's "Gangnam Style" is an international phenomena that only comes around once a decade or so. Artists lucky enough to catch the tiger by the tail tend to become one-hit wonders ("Macarena" anyone?) , and that's why you hope that the artist cashes in - it may be the only chance they'll ever have. In these days of fewer record sales and more streaming, there's an ever greater chance that the revenue from a huge hit will be smaller than ever.
In many cases, the artist (more accurately their management) goes for tight copyright control to squeeze every last dime out of the song, which in these Music 3.0 days can be short-sighted. That's not the case with Psy, however, who's hands-off attitude to copyright infringement has led to at least $8 million, not counting any concert or appearance fees he's collected. Here's how it works, according to an article in the Associated Press: In Korea, subscription music is much more the norm than in the US, and most people pay around $10 per month. Different people have different ears for different needs « The Sentric Music Blog. By Pursehouse – (Follow me on Twitter) We have a lot of artists here at Sentric Music now; and we’re growing every day as more and more come on board to take advantage of our services.
Due to this: I listen to shedloads of music. On my way to work, during work, on my way home from work, when I’m in the flat, before I got to bed etc, basically there is very little silence in my life these days, so much so that when I am faced with the prospect of quietness my brain panics and forces me to generate noise in various forms; singing, humming, drumming, whistling and all the other –ings.
Due to the sheer amount of music I listen to combined with what I do for a living I’d like to think I have a ‘good ear’ for picking out songs that could work quite well on adverts and TV shows. For example I was flicking through the iPod of a friend of mine who is A&R for a major label and I came across the original demo of ‘Time To Pretend’ by MGMT. Fans – What do your fans want to hear? Stay tuned Like this: Music startups aren’t dead — they’re just changing — European technology news.
Making Dollars: Clearing Up Spotify Payment Confusion. First of all, let me tell you that I run a company that distributes and markets albums, mostly for artists that have not signed deals with record companies, but own their own masters. We collect money for them and distribute it out to them (in addition to providing other services). So I actually know what artists get paid. I'm the one that writes their checks. An artist shares some Spotify numbers A recent article in Pitchfork by Damon Krukowski claims that indie artists gets paid .005 cents per stream, then goes on to show his math: $29.80 paid for 5,960 streams.
That's .005 DOLLARS, not .005 cents. I understand that he is saying that he did not get paid even that, but that the songwriters for "Tugboat" were paid a total of $1.05, the amount that was on his BMI statement. The on-demand part of Spotify, the one that most people use and love, is where the $.005 per stream is paid out to the owners of the recording. Okay, back to fractions of cents... How Spotify spilts income Matisyahu. Le scandale silencieux de My Major Company - Musique, théatre, télé, clip vidéo, actu musicale. On nous promettait tout sur ce site participatif de production d'artistes par les internautes, et preuves à l'appui : Qui n'a pas suivi l'incroyable histoire de Grégoire ? C'est vrai que pour le grand public, cela ressemblait tellement à un conte de fée...Ce jeune homme bien sous tous rapports avec une histoire dramatique à vendre, sorti de soi-disant nulle part et qui touche le talent, que dis-je qui embrasse le talent à ce point !
Alors oui, les internautes sont venus, de plus en plus nombreux, essayer de propulser leur artiste favori au firmament de la starification et espérer en plus gagnez de l'argent ! Seulement voilà, My Major Company a commencé à être victime de son succès, avec de plus en plus d'artistes à produire, dont il faut assurer la campagne promotionelle, établir le bon plan média, bref, tout ce qu'il faut pour que l'artiste soit bankable comme on dit de l'autre côté de l'atlantique. Pourquoi les sorties sont elles si lentes à se mettre en place ? Anthony Bowman. Trent Reznor & David Byrne On DIY vs Major Labels. A talk Sunday night featuring David Byrne and Trent Reznor included an interesting discussion of the business options facing musicians today. Due to Trent Reznor's recent deal with Columbia Records for How to destroy angels_ coverage has focused on DIY vs Major Labels.
However both artists shared the stance that the current landscape is not about label deals vs DIY but about choosing the right path and the right deals for the artist in question. Trent Reznor and David Byrne Discuss Major Labels and DIY Trent Reznor's recent announcements that his band How to destroy angels_ had "formally partnered with Columbia Records for our next series of releases" and that he is working with Beats By Dre has some wondering about Reznor's commitment to DIY approaches. The above video is said to capture part of the discussion between David Byrne, Trent Reznor and Josh Kun focused on major labels vs. Trent Reznor on experiencing the limits of DIY marketing and distribution: "There are options now. Music identification technology firm reckons 80% of commercial music usage badly reported | CMU: Complete Music Update. Tuesday 16 October 2012, 11:47 | By CMU Editorial Digital Utilising Shazam-type technology to better report music usage to rights owners or their collecting societies has always seemed like a good plan, if the development and installation of such technology could be priced so not to be prohibitive, and a start-up in New York is basically doing just that with TV, via a fingerprinting system which it reckons can detect the use of music on any television programme, even if said music is in the background and has speech plonked on top.
Whether the use of music in television shows is licensed directly from labels and publishers, or via rights bodies, the reporting of such usage is, to a large extent, reliant on broadcasters being honest and competent, the constant manual monitoring of TV networks worldwide being impractical. But, says TuneSat, the majority of commercial use of music by the television sector is either unreported or misreported, hence the need for its technology, it says.
The recorded-music industry is still a US$40 billion business « Music & Copyright's Blog. Over the past decade or so, the assessment of the recorded-music industry has shifted from retail sales to trade value. The complexities and the growing number of business models involved in the delivery of digital music, coupled with unknown retail markups, make quantifying the retail value of recorded-music sales speculative at best. But the enduring appeal of ring tones and ring-back tones in some less-developed countries suggests that the size of the global retail pie has not changed; there are just more players taking a slice. With the exception of a small number of countries in Asia and Latin America, the digital-music business has primarily become online-based, with mobile access considered a premium add-on. Trade value and the retail markup Quantifying the global trade value of music formats is a process undertaken by the IFPI.
Particularly problematic is the fact that deals between retailers and record companies can often be confidential. Wildly optimistic? Like this: As IFPI releases its ‘Investing In Music’ report, what role do record labels play in 2012? 13 Extremely Scary Things About the Music Industry Today. British music revenue abroad has doubled since 2002. Guest Opinion: The Success of the Online Music Market Will Be Won or Lost in Translation. Music to Our Ears: The Story of MP3s. Next Time Someone Suggests Piracy Will Kill Music, Remind Them That Music Survived The Last Ice Age.
Combien gagne un artiste avec la distribution digitale (Spotify, iTunes, Deezer) ?... C'est l'Hebdo Musique et Web. Music streaming: what do songwriters really get from YouTube or Pandora? | Media. How Spotify Changed Music. Top Analyst Reviews Spotify's Financials, Declares Business "Unsustainable" [CHART] Getting in tune; Samsung to shop for software. Carte Musique Jeune : à vie peu glorieuse, mort sans fanfare. Neilsen Says Music Discovery Still Led By Radio.