Fun Stuff > BAND
Do you buy music?
Hat:
--- Quote from: Statik on 02 Jan 2008, 06:16 ---To kind of consolidate:
Younger bands don't sell as many CDs, so they go on tour with someone who has (sold a lot of CDs) to get their name out, and make some money (but not much). As they sell more CDs, they move from opener, to second opener, to headliner (all while making more money).
--- End quote ---
I like how this kind of makes it sound like one of the games in the Transport Tycoon series instead of a hard uncertain slog with no guarantee of reward.
Hat:
Oh Westinghouse, when will you invent a joy to food converter for the modern post-punk band?
a pack of wolves:
--- Quote from: Anyways on 02 Jan 2008, 07:23 ---Except the joy of music!
Which sadly doesn't put food on the table.
--- End quote ---
It does if you use it to distract stall-holders while your street urchin accomplices pilfer their goods.
Statik:
--- Quote from: a pack of wolves on 02 Jan 2008, 07:09 ---No, most bands still don't make money touring. You're basically only describing the experiences of bands on large independent or major record labels who are gunning for the big time and have management, PR, label etc backing on this, but this is not the case for most bands. Also, the bands who are on that route frequently don't make money from gigs since pay to play has become more and more prevalent, so getting that 'second opener' slot often means the band shelled out a ton of cash rather than made any.
And what's a 'local band' anyway? How do you define such a thing, and why is it always used as a term for a band that is generally positioned as being of less worth than a 'national' band (another meaningless term)?
--- End quote ---
Yes, I know its not the case for "most" bands, hence why I specified it down to national acts. If someone felt you are good enough to get a record deal, then you are hopefully at the point where you are making a living making music.
Also, because a "local" band is of LITERAL less worth. (Any number of local clubs can pay LESS money to get a local unsigned act over a big name national act. Less inherant worth/value.) And the term "local band" holds quite a bit of meaning IMO. The local bands where you live are not the local bands where I live. They are "local" to a region... get it? Hardly meaningless terms. Quite adequate terms actually.
And a friend who is in a local band makes a decent bit of money playing shows only in the general area. However, they also do a cover band on the side, and actually make more money doing that than playing their original music. I'd be curious to know what national tours have had pay to play opener acts. Because while pay to play for smaller acts makes sense for something like: Milwaukee Metalfest (which the smaller acts do pay to play), it wouldn't make sense in a touring format.
What no one seems to get is that, many of you seem to be describing this world where NO ONE MAKES MONEY OFF OF MUSIC EXCEPT LABELS. Bands don't make money off of CDs, and unless you are superstar act, they either Pay to Play, barely make enough to make it to the next show, or lose money touring. I KNOW this isnt true, from TALKING WITH BANDS IVE WORKED WITH. If there was no money in music, we would see a lot less shitty acts* out there. There is obviously money to be made, do artists and bands miss out on a lot of it that is made off of their talent? Sure. Maybe. Did they read the contract they signed?
*Edit: A lot less shitty DERIVATIVE acts...
Jackie Blue:
--- Quote from: Statik on 02 Jan 2008, 07:39 ---If someone felt you are good enough to get a record deal, then you are hopefully at the point where you are making a living making music.
--- End quote ---
This is hilariously untrue, unless you're still only talking about the absolute 1% upper echeclon of bands, or by "making a living" you mean "living in a communal house with 12 other people and subsisting on bread you dumpstered from Panera and handrolled cigarettes".
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version