RecPit

Posted: **November 17th, 2017, 8:43 pm**

So...

https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/15/united-masters/

The entire read seemed interesting. Someone who seemed to understand why labels and streaming services in general are not working for anyone really well, and had some ideas around how to address some of the shortcomings.
Of course, the fact that is financed by Google money makes you rise an eyebrow... but let's let the ball play.
But this part did make rise my other eyebrow...

"But once artists see that they’re not much different from Nike and their songs are like commercials, they realize they need help getting listeners to convert, and turn their passion into a purchase."

So, does this mean that their vision is that the music will no longer be the product, but more of a collateral investment made to sell... something else? What? Merch? Tour presence? Signed posters? Memorabillia?

Discuss.

Posted: **November 18th, 2017, 8:53 pm**

I'd like to request an edit on the opener:

Governments are failing. They haven’t kept up as music evolved from selling CDs to streaming songs.

So today that requires being a technology company, combining analytics with hyper-targeted advertising.

True, I guess, but none of that has to do with being a musician. There's only so much time in the day. If this service could do that for you automatically, maybe it'd be slightly better than what many are doing. Have you been keeping up on your Leah McHenry emails?

It would create unprecedented intimacy between artists and fans, while making artists truly independent.

For example, it could assist alcohol magnate Diageo to market its Puff Daddy-affiliated vodka Cîroc to the rapper’s fans.

Sounds iffy to me. I guess they mean to distribute across a number of platforms, which other services do as far as I know. Then some vague hope of connecting musicians to fans (and their dollars, or 10ths of pennies)...through...uh, targeting? Demographics?

I really don't think 20 superfans can support a lower-middle class life.

Instead of a cash advance, a leash, and a sliver of the revenue, UnitedMasters acts as a partner.

Well isn't that nice?

I have only so many eyebrows.

Posted: **November 19th, 2017, 12:18 am**

What a crock of bullish!t. Apple just bought the largest music and movie catalog in India too. Kill off the old music biz with piracy and then replace it with distribution you can control. The problem is that they assume that music is a commodity. I'm sticking to my old pfart view that some kids are going to record every live gig they do and pull the rug out from under all of these Sillyconman Vallee suits.

Posted: **November 19th, 2017, 2:33 am**

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑November 19th, 2017, 12:18 am What a crock of bullish!t. Apple just bought the largest music and movie catalog in India too. Kill off the old music biz with piracy and then replace it with distribution you can control.

I absolutely agree.

I'm sticking to my old pfart view that some kids are going to record every live gig they do and pull the rug out from under all of these Sillyconman Vallee suits.

How the living fuck could that possibly happen?

Record, okay, but then what?

Got distro? Got promo? Got anything?

Posted: **November 19th, 2017, 3:07 am**

The Beatles and the Grateful Dead both found a way around every conventional concept of music promotion. Live recording no longer requires a truck and storage is dirt cheap so people who are really great no longer need a studio or much money. The only thing is that they do have to be really great.

Posted: **November 19th, 2017, 10:08 am**

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑November 19th, 2017, 3:07 am The only thing is that they do have to be really great.

Unfortunately that bit of the equation seems to be lost on most.

Cheers,
Tim

Posted: **November 19th, 2017, 10:50 pm**

Folks who are actually out playing in front of people stand a chance of learning to be great.

Posted: **November 19th, 2017, 11:59 pm**

At least you might get free beer. Better than waiting for mouseclicks.

Posted: **November 20th, 2017, 5:47 pm**

I still have the feeling that big tech just wants all creators to basically be their employees. Any creation will be handled as commissioned work, you'll get a salary for it, and that's it. Dunno... Europe seems to be handling IP in a much better way than this side of the planet.

Posted: **November 21st, 2017, 2:28 am**

Toonman wrote: ↑November 20th, 2017, 5:47 pm I still have the feeling that big tech just wants all creators to basically be their employees. Any creation will be handled as commissioned work, you'll get a salary for it, and that's it.

I think big tech want your creative output, but have no intention whatsoever to actually pay you for it if they can possibly get away with it.

Cheers,
Tim

Posted: **November 21st, 2017, 2:32 am**

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑November 19th, 2017, 10:50 pm Folks who are actually out playing in front of people stand a chance of learning to be great.

You think bands like KISS are great?

I don't. They give fans what they want, I suppose. Bands like that play live forever but they still suck because their audience is happy with that crap. The audience generally can't tell you a thing. Exceptions are stand up comedy and Country music, which is mostly all the same song except for the story, which the audience can react to.

Creatives have to be able to think for themselves if they want to be great. That's what creative means.

An audience is what tells Trump he's great at his rallies. An audience is what told Hitler he was great at his.

Posted: **November 21st, 2017, 2:34 am**

Toonman wrote: ↑November 20th, 2017, 5:47 pm I still have the feeling that big tech just wants all creators to basically be their employees. Any creation will be handled as commissioned work, you'll get a salary for it, and that's it. Dunno... Europe seems to be handling IP in a much better way than this side of the planet.

Not employees, slaves.

Posted: **November 21st, 2017, 10:03 am**

Tim Halligan wrote: ↑November 21st, 2017, 2:28 am I think the record labels want your creative output, but have no intention whatsoever to actually pay you for it if they can possibly get away with it. ...

Fixed it for you...

But seriously, it's true of all businesses.

Posted: **January 5th, 2018, 2:43 am**

Toonman wrote: ↑November 17th, 2017, 8:43 pm So...

https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/15/united-masters/

The entire read seemed interesting. Someone who seemed to understand why labels and streaming services in general are not working for anyone really well, and had some ideas around how to address some of the shortcomings.
Of course, the fact that is financed by Google money makes you rise an eyebrow... but let's let the ball play.
But this part did make rise my other eyebrow...

"But once artists see that they’re not much different from Nike and their songs are like commercials, they realize they need help getting listeners to convert, and turn their passion into a purchase."

So, does this mean that their vision is that the music will no longer be the product, but more of a collateral investment made to sell... something else? What? Merch? Tour presence? Signed posters? Memorabillia?

Discuss.

What a total bunch of toxic crap!

Let me see if I get this right - I should essentially give away the right to profit from my lasting work so that YOU, Mr Jolly Roger Google, can reap huge profits from it of which I receive essentially NOTHING,. after investing thousands of dollars of my own money in creating the work, er, "PRODUCT"? So that I can receive "exposure" from my own work so that MAYBE I can make enough on tour to perhaps break even - if I'm lucky? Assuming that everybody who creates music can naturally tour endlessly and infinitely, which I, at the age of 67, certainly can not!

Sounds like a bunch of Mafioso's hijacking cigarette and liquor trucks.

Posted: **January 5th, 2018, 2:57 am**

Don Hills wrote: ↑November 21st, 2017, 10:03 am
Tim Halligan wrote: ↑November 21st, 2017, 2:28 am I think the record labels want your creative output, but have no intention whatsoever to actually pay you for it if they can possibly get away with it. ...
Fixed it for you...
But seriously, it's true of all businesses.

Er, no. The rump entities that call themselves "The Major Labels" are not interested in our creative output, no way, no how.

They're interested in cuter, young bodies that are pliable to their agenda which they (suicidally, stupidly) believe it what is the way to make "money".

But it's not fair to say that's true of all labels - just the few big ones that are cogs in international megacorporations. The ones that actually have access to a little money.

We need to support the drive to re-regulate corporations to eliminate monopolistic practices.

We need to liberate the music industry.

Posted: **January 5th, 2018, 2:59 am**

nobby wrote: ↑November 21st, 2017, 2:32 am
Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑November 19th, 2017, 10:50 pm Folks who are actually out playing in front of people stand a chance of learning to be great.
You think bands like KISS are great?

I don't. They give fans what they want, I suppose. Bands like that play live forever but they still suck because their audience is happy with that crap. The audience generally can't tell you a thing. Exceptions are stand up comedy and Country music, which is mostly all the same song except for the story, which the audience can react to.

Creatives have to be able to think for themselves if they want to be great. That's what creative means.

An audience is what tells Trump he's great at his rallies. An audience is what told Hitler he was great at his.

I seriously doubt that's what Bob meant. Probably something more like BB King and Otis Redding.

Posted: **January 6th, 2018, 3:41 am**

Every artist has a unique audience.

Posted: **January 6th, 2018, 8:15 pm**

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑January 6th, 2018, 3:41 am Every artist has a unique audience.

The problem, in these days of no real local or regional publicity, is connecting with it, or capitalizing on it if you do.

The labels and the tech companies are not interested in original art, and they are CERTAINLY not interested in those with outspoken views. They're interested in pliable employees who can make vacuous, glitzy product at relatively minimal investment without rocking the boat. And they control the avenues of publicity.

Posted: **January 7th, 2018, 12:23 am**

Like I keep saying, you need to start in living rooms. The only effective publicity has always been word of mouth.

RecPit

United Masters

United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters

Re: United Masters