Rick Rubin, Radiohead, and the record industry
 |
The record industry has been foundering for a while, but two recent news bits forecast further storms ahead. The first is Columbia's hiring of Rick Rubin (this New York Times article is long but extremely, extremely interesting). Of course, he's an ace producer, but hiring a co-chairman who insists on "never wearing a suit, never traveling, never going to an office" would normally be corporate suicide. Sony/Columbia/BMG/etc/etc/etc. are desperate.
Interestingly, the idea seems to be that Rubin will help create better content. Which may work, to an extent. Give people what they want, and the dollars will follow, right? People are fed up with shitty content. Now they go to iTunes to buy an album's one good song. There's no artist development anymore. Labels are pushing short-term product for short-term profits. None of this is news.
Radiohead's new album, In Rainbows, puts all this in a clearer light - how to sell content matters as much as content itself. The band is offering the record as: (1) a download, for which fans can pay anything they want, and (2) a deluxe box set which includes two CD's, two LP's, and a hardcover book - all for 40 pounds, which is steep, but which hordes of Radiohead obsessives will gladly pay. The band is doing all this from its website, with no record company.
 |
Label execs should be shitting themselves over this. The biggest alt-rock band of this generation is saying, "We don't need you." Sure, Prince gave away his new CD in some crappy English newspaper, but this is next-level business (and Prince is a nut to begin with). Of course, Radiohead has the leverage (and financial security) to pull this off. Many smaller bands give away entire albums as downloads now, so this practice isn't exactly new.
What's new is the visibility of the fact that (1) the music world has shifted to digital, and (2) the role of labels in that world is increasingly in doubt. What are labels good for? In the past, their budgets allowed them to do promotion and distribution that artists couldn't do on their own. But the Internet has bridged that distance.
Labels, of course, are also brands. Major labels do a horrible job of branding these days. What does Sony/Columbia/BMG/etc/etc/etc. mean now? Nothing. People have no allegiance to those words. People wear Nike shirts, but they don't wear Sony shirts. I have no idea what a Sony release will sound or look like. Of course, that's a function of Sony's size, and niche labels like Deathwish Inc. or Norma Evangelium Diaboli naturally have an edge in branding.
I believe branding is the new role for labels in today's digital climate. Labels, of course, can shift more physical units than individual artists can. But CD's will be a niche product, if they aren't already, if their prices remain high. How could Tower Records call a $14.99 CD "on sale"? Absolutely ludicrous. Unless the iPod goes away - which it won't - CD sales will keep dropping and digital downloads will increase.
In a digital world where they lack an edge in promotion and distribution, labels are going to become less purveyors of product and more assurances of quality. Sure, band X can build up its fanbase (and merch dollars) without a label, through MySpace, touring, and giving away its albums as downloads. But if label A signs band X - and bands Y and Z that sound similar - then label A has an identity. I know what I'm going to get with a Deathwish Inc. or a Norma Evangelium Diaboli release. That's brand reliability.
 |
Norma Evangelium Diaboli |
Of course, labels have always done such branding. But if they're smart, they'll focus on it more. That's all they'll have going for them in the future (no one depends on Sony to download their releases from torrents). Well, that is, unless they change how they operate. Here are, in my opinion, some better ways for labels to do so.
1. Provide better content.
This should be a given. HBO has all the good TV shows, and now business is booming for those shows on DVD. People flock to quality. Of course, people flock just as enthusiastically to shit - but the shit model ain't working.
How to provide better content? Stop running record labels as bean-counter operations. Hire more Rick Rubins. Yes, now labels are publicly held, blah blah blah, but you don't have to sacrifice the bottom line for quality. BMW and Volvo make long-lasting, quality machines. They weren't built on searching for "the next big hit."
2. Package content better.
Otherwise, I won't pay for it. There is no way I am paying $14.99 for your one-good-song CD with skimpy liner notes and half-assed artwork. There is no way I am paying $9.99 for your shitty bitrate download with DRM and no artwork. I realize people do this in droves on iTunes - but that's because they've had no real alternative (more on that in a bit). Make your CD's special. They're niche products now, so treat them as such. Make the liner notes fold out into cool posters. Insert vouchers with the CD's that you can turn in for free schwag. Probably half the people that bought Ozzy Osbourne's new CD did so for the free Ozzfest tickets inside.
Digitally - no more 192 kbps crap. I realize people have tin ears and don't notice the difference, but I will always put my foot down on this. 192 is not "CD quality." 320 isn't even "CD quality." Only a CD is CD quality. I can definitely tell 192 from a CD, and I bet normal people in careful listening tests can do so, too. If you're going to offer crappy bitrates, the prices should be lower. The RIAA-hated, user-loved allofmp3.com had a tiered pricing system based on bitrate. I bet they raked in the dollars/euros/rubles.
Also, make your download not so damn disposable. Otherwise, people are going to treat it as such, and look for it for free. At least include some artwork. Make the digital release an experience. Include lyrics and better quality videos than crappy YouTube ones. Make a special website that corresponds to the release, that works hand in hand with the music. Maybe issue the release serially (one track a week, singles club style) - that might deter downloaders, at least for a bit. Otherwise, I have little attachment to a bunch of bytes.
3. Every label and every band should have a digital store.
You're going to let Apple get all the money? Now Amazon competes with iTunes, which is an extremely necessary first step. But a digital store isn't as costly as your physical operation, so undercut iTunes and Amazon, and take your full cut. Give people the option of buying directly from you. On your site, people should be able to buy MP3's with just a few clicks. Make it easy. I'm constantly astonished at how byzantine the shopping carts are for distros and label websites. Make it PayPal, make it quick. I don't want to "create an account." People want instant gratification, so give it to them.
I welcome any thoughts, comments, etc.
9 Comments:
Good piece, Cosmo.
If this generation doesn't get over the 'physical cd need' the next one will be born without it. You can see what happened to AversionLine dude when he bought his iPod, and he's been telling everybody they're poseurs and idiots for listening predominantly to mp3s for years. This isn't being a traitor, this is smart thinking. Cd cases are only about nostalgia. I'm not saying drop artwork and lyrics completely, in fact I'm saying the exact opposite. Play this stuff up, digitally. Just forget the plastic.
I don't give a shit if the music industry that Rubin is trying to save survives. Technology has moved on to the point where artists (whose art I'm interested in) are able to record on their own, publish on their own, promote on their own and live on their own. Fuck the middle man.
But even for pro-active digital-selling artists to survive, I agree, make digital releases special, make them mean something. Lyrics, artwork, liner notes, essays explaining artistic intent (how few people do this, and how much more do we need it than idiotic thanks-lists and such) But for this to happen, the band/artist that is putting out their work must MEAN SOMETHING with it to begin with. Eventually the internet will reward substantial music (at least in our Heavy Metal field) and the shit will be left to fester. This a good thing. People can listen before they buy, people can understand before they commit. Fuck mediocre metal. If it makes "festering drinks of face-breaking cocksucker" disappear, I'm all for it.
So all in all, my comment is, let them rot, be happy, we (Heavy Metal crowd) are in absolutely no danger through all this.
Here's the thing...this isn't about US (niche music fans who find what we want via our own channels) but pop music consumers who don't look to their music the same way we do.
Us telling these people to listen to "better" music is like an architect telling people to live in more interesting houses. Why? The house I have works fine. So for those people who aren't looking for music to be an important device in their life, pop music is fine. Which is where this conversation lives: in the mass population.
So that said, I applaud Radiohead. They're in a unique position. 1) they can afford to record a record on their own, and 2) have an existing, large, ravenous fanbase that will circulate the information about their new record like wildfire. Right there they've negated the two largest expenditures: production, and marketing.
But the "pay what you want" model isn't going to work for Johnny & The Fucknuts or some other starting-from-zero band. (and again...I'm not talking about metal bands, indie bands, or bands that are never going to have mass appeal. I'm talking about the bigger picture here).
It's easy to rebuke the system when the system already propagated you to the level you're at. Pearl Jam was another such band that did this same thing. They "rebelled" against making music videos, only after music videos made them into stars. (another site made this point, I'm just reusing it).
So how do new, MAINSTREAM musicians navigate these new waters? Unfortunately, the "old channels" are still the primary means of exposure for mainstream acts. Radio, press, etc etc. And those are EXPENSIVE channels to play in.
Insert major record label here.
They're essentially a bank that only lends money to artists (and collects in rather interesting ways).
I'm in no way saying this model should be propagated or supported. But it IS reality for mainstream artists. You could say that Feist might be the current example of a mainstream artist not working that model, but still generating a "hit". But she still has Interscope in her corner, a major label. (read: money)
I don't have any answers...but I'm tired of people saying "Radiohead is genius! Fuck labels! Doing it on their own!!" which I'm reading everywhere. Not that you're saying it, but plenty of people are. And the reality is that RADIOHEAD USED A MAJOR LABEL FOR 10 YEARS TO GENERATE THEIR POSITION.
Of everything you said, I think the QUALITY argument reigns supreme. In an era where people can buy songs isntead of albums, the industry needs to give them a reason to buy 12, and not just the single. Or they need to redefine their model in a way that resembles something like the 60s, when everyone bought singles, not albums.
But what I REALLY want to see...even more than label branding...is a store front branding itself through editorial. I don't know about you guys, but where I grew up there were record stores that catered more to punks, and others that were more metal, and still others that were more indie rock. Where's this differentiation in the digital space? I know you don't have the stocking limitations of a physical store, so you just "stock" everything...but how about some attempt to make your store look different?
What will replace the grisly dude behind the counter at the local indie record store in the digital era? It's gotta be editorial. I'm sure we all have an example of being turned on to some life changing record becasue some dude at the record store was all "Hey man...if you like X, you should really check out Y". And yeah, blogs play that role now...but imagine marrying that idea to a store font.
Ok, at this point I'm just rambling...but just stuff I think about....
So Radiohead leveraged their major label-fueled position to get to this point. But take, say, Job for a Cowboy. Maybe their debut EP was semi-decent, but their live show sure didn't make the band. MySpace made that band. Metal Blade didn't. JFAC went viral on MySpace, and Metal Blade won what was presumably a bidding war and now reaps the benefits. So this no-label thing is becoming an increasingly viable option.
Actually, this all does affect the metal world. Everything's just more scaled down. Illegal downloading hurts small labels just as much, if not more, than it does larger labels. You see these pitiful 1st week sales numbers in metal where, like, Akercocke sold several hundred CD's, and Divine Heresy sold 2700...which is like 50 people in each state. This is because everybody downloaded the album beforehand. Sure, probably a lot of people decided the album wasn't worth the buy - but I'm sure the download is substituting for the album in a lot of cases.
So metal labels need to deal with downloading as much as majors. Of course, if labels become irrelevant, then who cares...
But Andy, you're right. Labels/stores need to brand more and be more selective. I think Willowtip, both the label and its distro, does well at that. Techno has a huge digital distro (beatport.com). Metal could very well use one, too.
"Actually, this all does affect the metal world. Everything's just more scaled down. Illegal downloading hurts small labels just as much, if not more, than it does larger labels."
I don't think we're going to miss any good metal because the industry will go through trouble. The people that make the good metal are just crazy about it and they have zero hopes that they'll ever see returns from labels for their efforts. It's all the live show and merch selling, and that ain't going anywhere (unless companies do get their way and demand 50% of those profits).
Look back to your favourite metal albums. Ask yourself if the bands that put those out are anywhere near being well-off for having made them. I'm sure those artists if asked would grumble about how they'd love to have made more money for their stuff, but when it comes down to it, they will still make it for nothing, because they love what they do and because HM is validated on a very different level than pop entertainment.
The metal that will suffer through this is the mainstream vapid stuff, and if we go through a second - and permanent - 90s sorta situation where mainstream metal dies and it's all back to the underground, that's probably the best thing that could happen to HM right now.
This model wasn't built for HM, it suffered through it, it was exploited as much as it could be, milked and branded and aesthetically neutered, good riddance.
First off, great article
The way I see it is that CDs are gonna get more and more disposable as technology progresses, just like vinyl (sadly as my parents were great vinyl collecters in their younger days) and will eventually become a collectible curio rather than an essential purchase. I'll come out and admit that I download albums a lot illegally, but I do it in order to get a taster of said album, and I agree totally with this theory on why would you buy an album for one good song? I mean I own well over 500 cds, they're sitting behind me as I write this and I like to own them for the artists who go ahead and put effort into their package, not just musically but artistically as well. Personal favourite of mine is Converge, and Jacob Bannon's artwork; you don't get this on iTunes and thats just one of countless examples. Maybe if the legal download sites start to offer such things I'd be more inclined but the way I see it, the non-mainstream metal industry runs on sales, and thats why I purchase cds, merch and go to gigs, otherwise we lose top quality music to history when their members have to quit due to lack of funds.
Unfortunately this won't affect some of the more mediocre bands signed to big metal labels because they play the 'current' sound and therefore are pushed, given the budgets and paychecks that they possibly don't deserve. Kudos to them for being out there and talented enough to gain such exposure, I sure as hell ain't musically talented to be able to do it, but you know, trimming of the herd may not be such a bad thing.
Concluding thought is that if labels are willing to support bands who can produce those essental albums where you can't miss a track, whose artwork and presentation smacks of dedication rather than a little Paintshop copy and paste collaboration and the effort is actually tangible, then maybe we'll see a renaissance of the CD. If not, well I'll be sad to see it and the labels disappear but it wouldn't be unavoidable...
Sandy, thanks for the nice words and thoughtful comment. A lot of us music listeners are saying the same things, I wonder if labels will actually listen to us...
Helm already mentioned my COMPLETE 180 on this topic, but I gotta tell ya, it's not as easy as it should be to have a "digital store". Admittedly I haven't done as much research as I should have, but... to do it the "right" way (instant gratification, as you've mentioned) doesn't seem like an easy task, and to try to go through the channels that most digital listeners/buyers already use (iTunes, eMusic, etc.) seems almost as painful as securing good ol' record store distribution, especially for small labels with small catalogs. Having bought about as many mp3's as I have CD's since my "revelation", I've been thinking more and more about digital sales, but... thus far it hasn't been half as promising as I'd have hoped.
Not to mention the fact that, at the end of the day, for smaller labels, it's gotta be just fucking HARD to get people to buy mp3's. I mean, give me any album released in the last 6 months and I can probably go find it for free in less than an hour 75% of the time, if not more. That's a hell of an enticing option for people, you know? Finding a solid digital sales option that would give you the flexibility to set your own inexpensive rate, your own sound quality compression level, lack of DRM... that's one hurdle. Then you've gotta convince people to bother USING it. It's pretty damn scary... and definitely makes me really wonder where the hell things are gonna end up down the road.
And if you've never seen it, check this dude's site:
lefsetz.com
Some GREAT rants on these types of topics...
Andrew, thanks for the extremely thoughtful comments - nice to hear from an actual label owner on this subject. I've seen Lefsetz's site - it's an interesting read, though I haven't had the time to peruse it thoroughly.
I recognize that dealing with iTunes and Emusic can be a pain in the ass, as with physical distributors...but it seems to me that setting up shop on your own site, you'd at least cut out dealing with those middlemen. And, if you offered a good enough product, I'd sure as hell buy MP3's. Earache's metaltracks.com had shitty 192 kbps downloads, that's why I didn't buy from them. But if they had 320 kbps MP3's, I would have gladly paid for the convenience and instant gratification.
Post a Comment
<< Home