How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
Joebuddha wrote:
It's a tough life being a musician in the 21st Century. I tell my students all the time that they should become electricians, plumbers, carpenters, or contractors or some other job that can't be outsourced to another country and just play for fun.
At this point honestly I wish that's what I had done.
I know, I didn't foresee how little benefit there really is in being a musician. I don't regret it, in fact I'm grateful I was actually able to live off it for several months.
I also count myself as both smart and lucky I didn't burn any bridges, I was able to come back to my menial computer job after the real wave of sales died down. It was then that I fully realized the hideous plight of musicians today, getting ripped off by an overseas distributor (Yesterrock) didn't help either.
Ive found that I love just simply playing guitar, writing, and listening to new cds and music way better than making cds. During my first album I spent far too much time practically begging people to buy the music; this next cd I've granted myself so much more freedom in so many ways, most importantly a lack of care in regard to selling the music. I'm telling people right off they won't like at least the majority of the album due to the more experimental and dissonant parts; heck, I've even gone out of my way to dissuade many of the Purple Rainbow Scorpions fans that follow my news from putting money into it for those reasons.
I have to work for a living, so music is a hobby. I think it is for the great majority of musicians in this hemisphere these days.
Plumbers...now there's some money .
- Dinosaur David B
- Posts: 18624
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:21 pm
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
Plumbers...now there's some money
Yeah, and if you find a good one, hang on to him like grim death! But I digress . . .
There is an interesting phenomenon that occurs when you try to turn your art into your profession. Doesn't matter whether you are a performer, a painter, a writer. Whatever it is, IT BECOMES WORK. And unfortunately, except for a very small percentage of the lucky few, making art just doesn't pay well.
I too, continue to encourage youngsters to get an education and acquire a more bankable skill than musician. Keep your art as a passion for as long as you can. If making GOOD money with your art is meant to be, it will still happen. But if you're among the 99.9% of us where it probably WON'T happen, you won't end up hating your art (think wedding band) while you try to eek out a living.
It's not a restring until I'm bleeding.
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
I have just paid my plumber the equivalent money of 5 hours of drums lessons for a 40mn plumbing job...But I cannot complain because he actually came when I called !Dinosaur David B wrote:Plumbers...now there's some money
Yeah, and if you find a good one, hang on to him like grim death! But I digress . . .
It makes me cringe when I see pro musicians of DRG struggling while some famous rappers and DJ making tons of money just sampling James Brown.
JoeBuddha, I was listening to Awaken this morning in my car and I was thinking that you are fucking good (and this is true, honestly not because of this thread). So if even if you decide to change job and start making big bucks fixing taps, I can tell you at least you are in the top of the game in your art (and this from a hobbyist who knows at least a bit about guitar playing).
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
yngwie666 wrote:
JoeBuddha, I was listening to Awaken this morning in my car and I was thinking that you are fucking good (and this is true, honestly not because of this thread). So if even if you decide to change job and start making big bucks fixing taps, I can tell you at least you are in the top of the game in your art (and this from a hobbyist who knows at least a bit about guitar playing).
+1 and yeah, Joe is a killer player.
I remember being both angry and defensive years ago when I read a prominent player (whom shall remain nameless) saying something like "why can't people just simply listen to music...you know, to just enjoy it for what it is? Why do so many feel as though that's not enough? Sometimes what you feel isn't inspiration, it's just appreciation. Don't confuse the two, and don't clog up the business with what's more often than not going to be either a rehash or an ineptly produced load of crap?"
These days I still feel a little ugly when I read that...but then I wonder :hmm:
Nah, that ain't gonna stop me from doing what I want to do, screw 'im
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
Well I my case I don't play in a band, I don't make records so there's no harm for the pros. It's rather the opposite as I buy music, concert tickets, merch, signature gear, etc...The problem is today it's a bit too easy to record something and access people on the internet (or it appears so) than in the old days when a band was known through word of mouth or because of specialized magazines.Haffner wrote:
I remember being both angry and defensive years ago when I read a prominent player (whom shall remain nameless) saying something like "why can't people just simply listen to music...you know, to just enjoy it for what it is? Why do so many feel as though that's not enough? Sometimes what you feel isn't inspiration, it's just appreciation. Don't confuse the two, and don't clog up the business with what's more often than not going to be either a rehash or an ineptly produced load of crap?"
These days I still feel a little ugly when I read that...but then I wonder :hmm:
Nah, that ain't gonna stop me from doing what I want to do, screw 'im
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
yngwie666 wrote:Well I my case I don't play in a band, I don't make records so there's no harm for the pros. It's rather the opposite as I buy music, concert tickets, merch, signature gear, etc...The problem is today it's a bit too easy to record something and access people on the internet (or it appears so) than in the old days when a band was known through word of mouth or because of specialized magazines.Haffner wrote:
I remember being both angry and defensive years ago when I read a prominent player (whom shall remain nameless) saying something like "why can't people just simply listen to music...you know, to just enjoy it for what it is? Why do so many feel as though that's not enough? Sometimes what you feel isn't inspiration, it's just appreciation. Don't confuse the two, and don't clog up the business with what's more often than not going to be either a rehash or an ineptly produced load of crap?"
These days I still feel a little ugly when I read that...but then I wonder :hmm:
Nah, that ain't gonna stop me from doing what I want to do, screw 'im
I agree, yngwie666. At the same time I'm torn, because I want people to see their dreams come true. It's really a polarizing subject.
- Dinosaur David B
- Posts: 18624
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:21 pm
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
The problem is today it's a bit too easy to record something and access people on the internet (or it appears so) than in the old days when a band was known through word of mouth or because of specialized magazines.
Yeah, but that's an issue that goes both ways. When I was in an original band in the 80s, we payed a lot of money to record 2 songs in a professional studio (getting far worse results than I get now), then we had cassettes made, photos taken, and sent them off as a press kit into the black hole, unsolicited. We had to look up the addresses of record labels and such at the library, and all I ever envisioned in this scenario was my cassette sitting on secretary's desk or trash can in a pile of others that would never be heard. We'd have been lucky to even get rejection letters back, and I don't recall that we did. And the unit cost of each press kit factoring in the studio time, photography, paper and postage added up to over $20 each if memory serves.
These days, with a little digging, you can find the email addresses of loads of decision-makers in all areas of the biz for free, and if you are clever and savvy enough in your approach, they will read your email, and click on the link that plays your music. The problem is that because it is SO much easier now, millions MORE people are doing the same thing, so the decision makers are still inundated, and the chances of a bite is still small.
It's not a restring until I'm bleeding.
- Dinosaur David B
- Posts: 18624
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:21 pm
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
Using Awaken as an example they're signed to an independent label but in order to get signed they had to give away 50% of the publishing on all songs.
I assume this doesn't affect you, Joe, because they never gave you a piece of the songwriting pie anyway, right?
If that is true,
and since you are no longer with them,
allow me to say to the remaining members and songwriters of AWAKEN:
It's not a restring until I'm bleeding.
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
Dinosaur David B wrote:Using Awaken as an example they're signed to an independent label but in order to get signed they had to give away 50% of the publishing on all songs.
I assume this doesn't affect you, Joe, because they never gave you a piece of the songwriting pie anyway, right?
If that is true,
and since you are no longer with them,
allow me to say to the remaining members and songwriters of AWAKEN:
You rule, Dave.
- Dinosaur David B
- Posts: 18624
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:21 pm
How Much Does A Songwriter Earn When Pandora Plays His Song 1.16 Million Times?
Now HERE is an interesting read:
http://variety.com/2013/biz/news/nate-s ... 200586066/
Reproduced below with text I bolded myself
--------------------------
Nate Silver: The Model for Tomorrows Musical Acts
Unlike todays adolescents dominating the YouTube, SoundScan story, Silver wasnt born yesterday, as in hes got a history. Not only is he educated, he did stuff before the Times, which signed him and where he ended up so successful he pissed everybody off.
Now if the New York Times had a television network, then it might have had a chance to keep Silver. But the paper couldnt compete with the ABC/ESPN duality. As for print? Who needs it, when youve got the Web? Yes, Silver walked with his FiveThirtyEight.com domain, hes the star, not the paper.
And this goes against everything weve learned in mass media for eons. This is the oldsters worst nightmare. Because suddenly, talent is doing it for itself.
This is the story of Arcade Fire. Personally, I dont love their music, but enough people do. Same deal with Nate Silver. Not everybody knows his name, but enough do. Thats the goal. To amass your audience and triumph.
Thats what you could never do before. Build and own your audience. You were dependent upon middlemen. This is what is wrong with the major label model of today, they take all your money and give you very little in return, telling you that without radio and their relationships at retail, you just cant succeed. If Silver can succeed without the Times, cant you without a label?
Lets start at the beginning. Not everybody is as talented as Nate Silver. Yes, I know you hate that, you were taught by your parents that you were great and if you just believed in yourself you would succeed, but this is categorically untrue.
And as stated earlier, success is dependent upon education and hard work, something thats abhorred in Snookiville. Todays wannabe musicians can make great YouTube videos, and social network and spam you to death, but they rarely make great music.
You always start off far from the radar screen. Thats what todays wannabe musicians dont get. Recognition comes LAST! Be happy to play the gig most people dont go to, thats where you hone your chops.
And ask for more. This is what people hate about the Eagles, their confidence and their demands, their desire to do it their way. People would rather drag you down into the hole theyre in, they want you to apologize and make like youre just like them. But Im certainly not a statistics whiz like Nate Silver and I doubt you are either.
Nate didnt want to be pigeonholed, he did not want to be limited to the niche the Times gave him. This is no different from an act telling the label they dont want to co-write, they dont want advice; they just want to do it their way. But unlike todays musicians, Nate Silver was willing to walk.
Now granted, Silver did not go totally independent, unlike the delusional Andrew Sullivan, who believed that by tapping his audience for cash, hed grow instead of being marginalized. In other words, theres no harm in selling your wares to the highest bidder as long as it is done on your terms, not theirs.
So where does this leave us?
On the cusp of new superstars. Soon well have more Arcade Fires, and some of them will have mass appeal.
[font=Verdana]Talent is finally king, because distribution is free.[/font]
But in order to truly be king you have to believe in yourself and play by your own rules.
And if youre a label, and you wanna ensnare a superstar?
Offer him exposure in all venues.
Cut him a great deal.
And know that hes boss.
If youre not kissing the ass of talent, if youre not giving it all it wants and deserves, youre destined for the scrapheap.
http://variety.com/2013/biz/news/nate-s ... 200586066/
Reproduced below with text I bolded myself
--------------------------
Nate Silver: The Model for Tomorrows Musical Acts
Unlike todays adolescents dominating the YouTube, SoundScan story, Silver wasnt born yesterday, as in hes got a history. Not only is he educated, he did stuff before the Times, which signed him and where he ended up so successful he pissed everybody off.
Now if the New York Times had a television network, then it might have had a chance to keep Silver. But the paper couldnt compete with the ABC/ESPN duality. As for print? Who needs it, when youve got the Web? Yes, Silver walked with his FiveThirtyEight.com domain, hes the star, not the paper.
And this goes against everything weve learned in mass media for eons. This is the oldsters worst nightmare. Because suddenly, talent is doing it for itself.
This is the story of Arcade Fire. Personally, I dont love their music, but enough people do. Same deal with Nate Silver. Not everybody knows his name, but enough do. Thats the goal. To amass your audience and triumph.
Thats what you could never do before. Build and own your audience. You were dependent upon middlemen. This is what is wrong with the major label model of today, they take all your money and give you very little in return, telling you that without radio and their relationships at retail, you just cant succeed. If Silver can succeed without the Times, cant you without a label?
Lets start at the beginning. Not everybody is as talented as Nate Silver. Yes, I know you hate that, you were taught by your parents that you were great and if you just believed in yourself you would succeed, but this is categorically untrue.
And as stated earlier, success is dependent upon education and hard work, something thats abhorred in Snookiville. Todays wannabe musicians can make great YouTube videos, and social network and spam you to death, but they rarely make great music.
You always start off far from the radar screen. Thats what todays wannabe musicians dont get. Recognition comes LAST! Be happy to play the gig most people dont go to, thats where you hone your chops.
And ask for more. This is what people hate about the Eagles, their confidence and their demands, their desire to do it their way. People would rather drag you down into the hole theyre in, they want you to apologize and make like youre just like them. But Im certainly not a statistics whiz like Nate Silver and I doubt you are either.
Nate didnt want to be pigeonholed, he did not want to be limited to the niche the Times gave him. This is no different from an act telling the label they dont want to co-write, they dont want advice; they just want to do it their way. But unlike todays musicians, Nate Silver was willing to walk.
Now granted, Silver did not go totally independent, unlike the delusional Andrew Sullivan, who believed that by tapping his audience for cash, hed grow instead of being marginalized. In other words, theres no harm in selling your wares to the highest bidder as long as it is done on your terms, not theirs.
So where does this leave us?
On the cusp of new superstars. Soon well have more Arcade Fires, and some of them will have mass appeal.
[font=Verdana]Talent is finally king, because distribution is free.[/font]
But in order to truly be king you have to believe in yourself and play by your own rules.
And if youre a label, and you wanna ensnare a superstar?
Offer him exposure in all venues.
Cut him a great deal.
And know that hes boss.
If youre not kissing the ass of talent, if youre not giving it all it wants and deserves, youre destined for the scrapheap.
It's not a restring until I'm bleeding.