In our continuing discussion of intellectual property, music, and the question of what art is worth in general, I've received some very insightful and oftentimes profane comments about the subject. It seems as though you all are somewhat heated by the subject. Pay too much for that sub-par Dixie Chicks album?
Here is a portion of one comment, posted by one gdragon:
"What a*^-hole decided that any musician's song is worth 10 cents a play, no matter what!? I mean seriously, ten cents!? That means, in the marketplace, Bob Dylan receives the same amount per play as does Nick Carter. . .that sh*t's f*cked up!"
I can certainly see where you are coming from, gdragon. You are correct that the marketplace in the music industry is indeed, f*cked. If Bob Dylan is a classic Ford from the 60's, and Nick Carter is a 2005 Saturn Ion, why would anyone consider paying an equal amount for the two cars? You would have to be truly loony toony to actually consider that.
In the case of the music business however, our government has decided to extend the long arm of the law into a business sector where it has no place, where the free market could certainly work things out naturally.
Just like the Patriot Act or the drug war, the Feds will certainly claim they are just trying to "protect" you.
It is true that the 10 (actually 9.1) cents that gdragon speaks of, known as the statutory rate (stop giggling, that's not funny), does prevent many musicians and songwriters from getting royalty screwed (pun intended). But in the grand scheme of things, placing a price, any price on art is devaluing its potential worth. As soon as anyone decides that a song is worth more that 10 cents, the law has effectively prevented the worth of that art from going up.
Obviously Bob Dylan would like to receive more than the statutory rate, and probably deserves to do so. Then again, will I be happy when I receive my first royalty check for $.45? You bet your booty I will.
I welcome any/all comments/questions about this subject, it really does torque some people off. What any musicians reading this should know, is that your chances of generating revenue are decent when performing live, somewhat conceivable when selling your music, and virtually impossible when solely depending on royalties. This is largely because of the increasing irrelevance of radio, maybe next time we can dive in to that...
Frogs Gone Fishin' just finished a three-day run over the weekend to the mountains and Boulder. It was great to play a college town during the school year, something FGF really hasn't done because we've all been at school in different locales. The kids at CU really know how to throw down a party (especially after a CU win over CSU, the big state rival). We are also selling our old trailer in order to buy a bigger, better, sexier trailer.
If you're in Denver, come check out FGF at Wash Park Grille this Friday. And regardless of where you are, have a safe and happy week!
Saturday, August 30
Tuesday, August 26
The Feds and Pandora's Box
I received a very eloquent comment from a reader after my last post which I'll re-post in its entirety:
"Why does the gov't f&%k the scene!? Music tax is killing the music! Why?! WHY!?! HOW DO YOU STOP IT!? But seriously. . .why does gov't f*@k Pandora. . ."
Thank you Tony B for your inspiring questions! Tony also sent me the following link which he is referencing in his commentary:
< blog.wired.com
For anyone who has not yet discovered the musical wonder that is Pandora.com, you better hurry! The headline of the article which Tony B is so peeved about is titled "Pandora Could Be First Major Casualty of New Royalty Rates". If you are one those who don't know, Pandora is a free online music radio which plays stations that are customized to listener's musical preferences. Type in The Bob Marley Station, and the result is a constant stream of reggae-influenced songs, not necessarily the African Herbsman himself, which the listener can then approve or shun. These "I Like It"/"I Don't Like It" ratings put forth by the listener are then applied to an algorithm of over 250 musical variables and bam!: a radio station perfectly tailored to your aural palette. Pretty neat. It's so neat that I can see why Tony B is all torqued off about The Feds raising royalty rates for artists. Then again, I am an artist and stand to make a whopping 10 cents every time one of my songs is played online!
At the outset, it seems that us songwriters have a clear-cut choice: to support rising royalty rates. Then again, Pandora is a just about the best promotional and marketing tool for a new artist that could be imagined at this point in technological history. A short discussion of exactly what intellectual property is might help us decide what we really think...
You see Tony, the federal government has in place protections for people who are the copyright owners of something we like to call intellectual property. Because art and entertainment are largely intangible concepts, it is hard to ascribe value to a product which is not monetarily standard. Art means something different to everyone and therefore has a different price depending on who you ask to value it. As we all know however, most people are greedy and will gladly enjoy music or a book or a movie or a sculpture for free, given the chance. I know I fall into this category! As much as I would love to put up an esoteric, uber-artistic front of strictly paying for the art I enjoy, the pragmatic considerations of my post-grad musician's budget prevent this entirely. (I have earned 98 cents from Google AdSense writing this blog; I'll need an accountant in no time!)
So as the Feds decide what to do about online royalty rates, Pandora-listeners and songwriters alike anxiously await the decision. As of now, according to above article on wired.com, there is "no specific day on which Pandora will go offline, assuming rates are not changed" according to Pandora founder Tim Westergren.
So chill, Tony. Pandora is not going anywhere anytime soon. They are financed by venture capital and advertsing. Given their listenership, I think they will figure things out. As for us musicans, any royalty issue will come down to the simple economics of whether the promotional return on a song played outweighs the 9.5 centavos we stand to earn from the Copyright Board's legislation.
Personally, I would love to give my music away for free if it meant that the person listening would then come to multiple shows (which earn higher revenue for artists than albums, anyway), buy a Frogs Gone Fishin' t-shirt and matching lighter-holder along with the two-disc DVD box set....
Until that day, all one can do is write solid songs and try to play outrageously fun shows. Focusing on that is a lot more fun than fretting over 10 cents.
A very good article by David Byrne:
www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_byrne
"Why does the gov't f&%k the scene!? Music tax is killing the music! Why?! WHY!?! HOW DO YOU STOP IT!? But seriously. . .why does gov't f*@k Pandora. . ."
Thank you Tony B for your inspiring questions! Tony also sent me the following link which he is referencing in his commentary:
< blog.wired.com
For anyone who has not yet discovered the musical wonder that is Pandora.com, you better hurry! The headline of the article which Tony B is so peeved about is titled "Pandora Could Be First Major Casualty of New Royalty Rates". If you are one those who don't know, Pandora is a free online music radio which plays stations that are customized to listener's musical preferences. Type in The Bob Marley Station, and the result is a constant stream of reggae-influenced songs, not necessarily the African Herbsman himself, which the listener can then approve or shun. These "I Like It"/"I Don't Like It" ratings put forth by the listener are then applied to an algorithm of over 250 musical variables and bam!: a radio station perfectly tailored to your aural palette. Pretty neat. It's so neat that I can see why Tony B is all torqued off about The Feds raising royalty rates for artists. Then again, I am an artist and stand to make a whopping 10 cents every time one of my songs is played online!
At the outset, it seems that us songwriters have a clear-cut choice: to support rising royalty rates. Then again, Pandora is a just about the best promotional and marketing tool for a new artist that could be imagined at this point in technological history. A short discussion of exactly what intellectual property is might help us decide what we really think...
You see Tony, the federal government has in place protections for people who are the copyright owners of something we like to call intellectual property. Because art and entertainment are largely intangible concepts, it is hard to ascribe value to a product which is not monetarily standard. Art means something different to everyone and therefore has a different price depending on who you ask to value it. As we all know however, most people are greedy and will gladly enjoy music or a book or a movie or a sculpture for free, given the chance. I know I fall into this category! As much as I would love to put up an esoteric, uber-artistic front of strictly paying for the art I enjoy, the pragmatic considerations of my post-grad musician's budget prevent this entirely. (I have earned 98 cents from Google AdSense writing this blog; I'll need an accountant in no time!)
So as the Feds decide what to do about online royalty rates, Pandora-listeners and songwriters alike anxiously await the decision. As of now, according to above article on wired.com, there is "no specific day on which Pandora will go offline, assuming rates are not changed" according to Pandora founder Tim Westergren.
So chill, Tony. Pandora is not going anywhere anytime soon. They are financed by venture capital and advertsing. Given their listenership, I think they will figure things out. As for us musicans, any royalty issue will come down to the simple economics of whether the promotional return on a song played outweighs the 9.5 centavos we stand to earn from the Copyright Board's legislation.
Personally, I would love to give my music away for free if it meant that the person listening would then come to multiple shows (which earn higher revenue for artists than albums, anyway), buy a Frogs Gone Fishin' t-shirt and matching lighter-holder along with the two-disc DVD box set....
Until that day, all one can do is write solid songs and try to play outrageously fun shows. Focusing on that is a lot more fun than fretting over 10 cents.
A very good article by David Byrne:
www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_byrne
Sunday, August 24
Scene Building
Over the past year or so, I’ve realized that my music and our band fit into a multi-tiered system of clubs, promoters, fans and musicians that makes up what most people refer to as "the music scene". Before, I always conceived of a scene composed solely of bands and their "groupies". I was naive to the business aspect of the music business at that point in life, and have come to realize that the everyday club owner has as much to do with the music scene as the next band or musician.
But it is how different bands and musicians coalesce, coexist, break apart and reform inside a given scene that really interests me. Right now I can count approximately twenty-five musicians I know, spread amongst 6 or 7 bands in Denver/Boulder, who are all between the ages of 21-25, went to all the same high schools and universities, and most importantly, have all played with each other in various projects for the last eight years or so. It is great to think that the same kids I grew up with, playing music in basements and garages, are now cutting albums and playing at festivals.
A case in point occurred last week when a good friend and highly visible member of the scene, let's call her Whitters for anonymity's sake, turned 22 years old. It was decided that a birthday party BBQ and backyard jam were in order. Several of the aforementioned 25 musicians were contacted by telephone and before we knew it, most every band in our scene was represented in the backyard, jamming aplenty.
This is a great example of what I refer to as "scene-building", an oft-overlooked aspect of the music business. The fact that Whitters herself is a musician and adept poet demonstrates that creative people tend to gather together. It is the friction between creative concepts in these settings that produce an even more fertile scene for bands to grow up in.
We would have had a party for Whitters the other night, regardless of any "scene" that anyone is involved with. In fact, that is one underlying prerequisite for a scene itself: that its members share more commonalities than just the qualities the scene is identified as having. In other words, we would have been in the backyard drinking beer even if French Moustache Art of the 1970's was our bag.
Unless your favorite pastime in life is being lonely, you gotta love your scene.
But it is how different bands and musicians coalesce, coexist, break apart and reform inside a given scene that really interests me. Right now I can count approximately twenty-five musicians I know, spread amongst 6 or 7 bands in Denver/Boulder, who are all between the ages of 21-25, went to all the same high schools and universities, and most importantly, have all played with each other in various projects for the last eight years or so. It is great to think that the same kids I grew up with, playing music in basements and garages, are now cutting albums and playing at festivals.
A case in point occurred last week when a good friend and highly visible member of the scene, let's call her Whitters for anonymity's sake, turned 22 years old. It was decided that a birthday party BBQ and backyard jam were in order. Several of the aforementioned 25 musicians were contacted by telephone and before we knew it, most every band in our scene was represented in the backyard, jamming aplenty.
This is a great example of what I refer to as "scene-building", an oft-overlooked aspect of the music business. The fact that Whitters herself is a musician and adept poet demonstrates that creative people tend to gather together. It is the friction between creative concepts in these settings that produce an even more fertile scene for bands to grow up in.
We would have had a party for Whitters the other night, regardless of any "scene" that anyone is involved with. In fact, that is one underlying prerequisite for a scene itself: that its members share more commonalities than just the qualities the scene is identified as having. In other words, we would have been in the backyard drinking beer even if French Moustache Art of the 1970's was our bag.
Unless your favorite pastime in life is being lonely, you gotta love your scene.
Monday, August 18
Guitar Hero DS
Over the top of my computer I'm watching my first hand-held Guitar Hero game across the room and it looks awesome. The Hero is deep in concentration, tapping her plastic pick against the colored screen at all the right moments. I think this is the second most important rock phenomena to come along in recent times.
The USA Air Guitar Championships (www.usairguitar.com) takes the prize as the most influential (albeit totally non-musical) rock guitar competition of the last decade. Since 1996, contestants have been judged on "airness", among other all-important characteristics.
To me, playing rock guitar can be divided into two major stylistic categories: shredding and wailing.
Shredding involves a high level of technique executed at an oftentimes high speed, made ubiquitous by dudes like Van Halen and those guys in Metallica, perfected by Joe Satriani, Steve Vai and Eric Johnson. Wailing focuses less on technicality and more on feel, sometimes with an asthetic that mirrors the way a human voice sounds while singing.
My favorite players: guys like Jimmy Page, Jimi Hendrix, Derek Trucks and Trey Anastasio, all have a sense of both of these conceptions. They understand that while ultimately the sound of a voice will connect with human emotions (wailing), there is an undeniable element of showmanship and technique involved with being a guitar player (shredding).
Either Jimi Hendrix was truly a voodoo-child connecting with satan onstage by lighting his Strat on fire, or he understood the production value of the effect it would have on his audience. I think both possibilties are equally likely.
As much as I would enjoy sitting and pondering the idiosyncracies of rock legends all day long (while watching the Olympics), we are busy in Frogs Gone Fishin' promoting our upcoming Denver shows and booking Fall tour, not to mention improving the planned line-up for Mountainside Mardi Gras (brought to you by For/Sure Productions LLC). If you have even more time on your lunch break after reading this blog, please search the iTunes store for our album which just became available.
After playing two gigs last weekend (Boulder and scenic Basalt, CO) and sitting in on bass with our friends Hustle, it's time for a busy week.
The USA Air Guitar Championships (www.usairguitar.com) takes the prize as the most influential (albeit totally non-musical) rock guitar competition of the last decade. Since 1996, contestants have been judged on "airness", among other all-important characteristics.
To me, playing rock guitar can be divided into two major stylistic categories: shredding and wailing.
Shredding involves a high level of technique executed at an oftentimes high speed, made ubiquitous by dudes like Van Halen and those guys in Metallica, perfected by Joe Satriani, Steve Vai and Eric Johnson. Wailing focuses less on technicality and more on feel, sometimes with an asthetic that mirrors the way a human voice sounds while singing.
My favorite players: guys like Jimmy Page, Jimi Hendrix, Derek Trucks and Trey Anastasio, all have a sense of both of these conceptions. They understand that while ultimately the sound of a voice will connect with human emotions (wailing), there is an undeniable element of showmanship and technique involved with being a guitar player (shredding).
Either Jimi Hendrix was truly a voodoo-child connecting with satan onstage by lighting his Strat on fire, or he understood the production value of the effect it would have on his audience. I think both possibilties are equally likely.
As much as I would enjoy sitting and pondering the idiosyncracies of rock legends all day long (while watching the Olympics), we are busy in Frogs Gone Fishin' promoting our upcoming Denver shows and booking Fall tour, not to mention improving the planned line-up for Mountainside Mardi Gras (brought to you by For/Sure Productions LLC). If you have even more time on your lunch break after reading this blog, please search the iTunes store for our album which just became available.
After playing two gigs last weekend (Boulder and scenic Basalt, CO) and sitting in on bass with our friends Hustle, it's time for a busy week.
Wednesday, August 13
Big Sammie/Fall Tour Preview
Frogs Gone Fishin' will play a very special show on September 11 at Dulcinea's in Denver with one of my favorite artists from New Orleans! Big Sam's Funky Nation, consisting of big Sammie on trombone and the rest of his funky nation, will funk you up all night long in a way that only a NOLA band can. Us Frogs will be working on our funky tunes until then... maybe we could have a Big Sam's Froggy Nation Jam, hmmm???
We will be visiting NOLA on our FGF Fall Tour, after Texas and before a run that will stretch up through Tennessee, Virginia, Washington DC around election time, and back to Colorado via the Midwest. Although I already know that our time in New Orleans will be short, I can barely stand the anticipation of absorbing every minute of it. I miss that city and its beautiful people every day.
"Do you know what it means to miss New Orleans?
And miss it each night and day?
I know I'm not wrong... this feelings gettin' stronger
The longer, I stay away..
Miss them moss covered vines...the tall sugar pines
Where mockin' birds used to sing
And I'd like to see that lazy Mississippi...hurryin' into spring"
-Louis "Satchmo" Armstrong
We will be visiting NOLA on our FGF Fall Tour, after Texas and before a run that will stretch up through Tennessee, Virginia, Washington DC around election time, and back to Colorado via the Midwest. Although I already know that our time in New Orleans will be short, I can barely stand the anticipation of absorbing every minute of it. I miss that city and its beautiful people every day.
"Do you know what it means to miss New Orleans?
And miss it each night and day?
I know I'm not wrong... this feelings gettin' stronger
The longer, I stay away..
Miss them moss covered vines...the tall sugar pines
Where mockin' birds used to sing
And I'd like to see that lazy Mississippi...hurryin' into spring"
-Louis "Satchmo" Armstrong
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)