Comments on: Rick Rubin, and Columbia’s lesson for indies

By: Panama Hoteles

Panama Hoteles — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:02:33 +0000

post – and nifty domain by the way!

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:41:20 +0000

Good article. However, I think Labels WILL follow the path of the Dodo, because in the age of Youtube and Myspace, even promotion can be handled at the grassroots level, away from the corporate bastards who ruined everything in the first place.

However, I’d take that futher and apply the Movie vs. DVD analogy – that the actual film appearing in theaters serves merely as a promotional tool for the REAL money maker: the DVD. In other words, recorded music will be available (for better or worse, for the artist’s sake) for next to nothing, because it will promote the real money makers in the music context: the tour, the merchandise, the concert DVD. In the past, it worked in the opposite direction.

The good news is that Artists CAN still make a living – but say goodbye to the era of the millionaire rock star (unless his/her image can be used to license merchandies bearing his/her likeness or name, a la Gwen Stefani.)

By: johnsonic

johnsonic — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:03:47 +0000

Why subscribe when it’s free and you learn of new music through your friends in the first place? Making money selling (or renting) music is going to be a hard thing to do. It’s tertiary goods / services and licensing where money could still be made. Labels used to have distribution, promotion, and production to offer the artist. Now, they only really have firepower in promotion.

Labels can/will survive, but it’s not going to be at the size they currently are. Seems to me they should concentrate on what they can still offer (promotion) and figure out a way to make money on that.

By: Zac

Zac — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 19:41:25 +0000

Great NY Times article and great comment here on the article.

In the article, Rubin mentioned the subscription model as the way forward, but I don’t think it is, and the recent upsurge in vinyl sales lends weight to that argument. People are buying vinyl because it feels good; it’s an “indie” thing to do and it gives them a huge sense of value.

There’s a certain something about digging through a record shop to find an awesome track you’ve never heard but fall in love with on first listen, then in later years looking at that record and thinking “Wow, I remember buying that.” Subscriptions can’t match that.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:14:22 +0000

Great stuff. I don’t really blame the labels. Once they were bought up in the late 80’s during the CD “boom” any creative control they may have wanted to exercise was gone to be dictated by larger corporations and shareholders. Corporations aren’t in the business of making art. They only want to find the most efficient means for making money, whether that be marketing the Spice Girls or laying off a third of their workforce – whatever benefits the bottom line and increases market shae.

By: poorsod

poorsod — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 08:20:34 +0000

Really great article. The main thing, I think, depends precisely how you define ’success’. Is getting a signing at all ’success’? Is getting championed by your indie station’s new-music show ’success’? Do you want one song to get played nationwide?

You get my drift. Only a few of these definitions can be reliably fulfilled by creating content of quality – if you want to infiltrate the nation’s cultural consciousness I think you still need to be James Blunt. The Internet hasn’t changed the state of affairs yet.

By: Darren Landrum

Darren Landrum — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 05:56:03 +0000

Maybe I’m just too young, but please tell me again who Rick Rubin is?

Or did I just prove your point?