i think a good way of making people pay for your music is adding the vinyl platform to your netlabel. i've been doing that myself lately and i'm quite positive about it so far. this way you can expand your 'target group' and attract more people to download your free releases.
i'm also quite happy that there were quite some donations via thinner and realaudio for my few rktic releases. so payment on an optional level works fine as well - plus it doesn't distract those rather 'working' with your releases (such as dj's).
'pay-for-play' netlabels sort of have a strange attitude for me. actually, from those that exist i never bought any tracks, even if there were some i'd like to play myself. i don't see why they're any better than the others out there whose music i can download for free. and regarding format improvements, lame vbr is just fine, i don't get the point of 256k and above mp3s anyway. technically it's a purely subjective improvement, so i don't see much point paying for additional quality which is close to none. .wav is another thing, but that's already too size heavy for me. plus i have the feeling that pay-netlabels absolutely lack exposure in the scene - why going that way then?
looking back on the early netlabel days i think the biggest improvements were the invention of fasttracker II, the mp3 format as well n.i. traktor. especially traktor absolutely lacks support in the scene, if you want to improve your netlabel you should offer traktor-ready files, striped and fully tagged. that way you'll probably make much easier friends than charging money for your music.
to make it short. we need exposure to move on. and i doubt charging money will improve the situation at all. if you want to make some bucks, see above.
Paying netlabels?
-
Ronny Pries
- mnml mmbr
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:52 pm
- Location: hamburg|germany
- Contact:
its like that:
a nice guy sells tomatos on the street market. then, another guy comes and offers some red balls that look like tomatos but are not, and he gives em for free. and people (being the silly bunch they are), get the free stuff and they are happy cuz its free and red and round. it takes TIME for people (the silly bunch they are) to realize these were not tomatos.
by the TIME people realize that they were not getting real tomatos, the guy with the real tomatos almost bankrupts, and having no income (money to continue growing the real tomatos) he is forced to lower the quality of his product, as he simply cant afford anymore to grow so nice and tasty tomatos (something he loves and devoted his life to).
meanwhile, the quality of the fake guy's product slightly improves and he decides he should be charging some money (maybe even as much as the 'real' guy charges). by that TIME tho, lots of other guys are on that street giving out red balls for free, just because its cool to be the 'tomato guy', everybody knows and loves him.
its called lowering the standard. this is exactly what net labels did. just because they were eager to be like the big guys, before they were good enough. simple as that. IT IS OK, IT'S FINE. time will pass and people will understand and realize that quality is important.
BUT HOW THE fck DO YOU HAVE FACE TO COME AND COMPLAIN ABOUT BEING POOR, AND ASKING PPL TO SKIP SMOKES TO GET THE 'NOW ALREADY REAL' STUFF YOU MAKE ??? D'OOH !!!
no wonder michael mayer told sublabels not to release jay haze's tracks.
peace, d.
a nice guy sells tomatos on the street market. then, another guy comes and offers some red balls that look like tomatos but are not, and he gives em for free. and people (being the silly bunch they are), get the free stuff and they are happy cuz its free and red and round. it takes TIME for people (the silly bunch they are) to realize these were not tomatos.
by the TIME people realize that they were not getting real tomatos, the guy with the real tomatos almost bankrupts, and having no income (money to continue growing the real tomatos) he is forced to lower the quality of his product, as he simply cant afford anymore to grow so nice and tasty tomatos (something he loves and devoted his life to).
meanwhile, the quality of the fake guy's product slightly improves and he decides he should be charging some money (maybe even as much as the 'real' guy charges). by that TIME tho, lots of other guys are on that street giving out red balls for free, just because its cool to be the 'tomato guy', everybody knows and loves him.
its called lowering the standard. this is exactly what net labels did. just because they were eager to be like the big guys, before they were good enough. simple as that. IT IS OK, IT'S FINE. time will pass and people will understand and realize that quality is important.
BUT HOW THE fck DO YOU HAVE FACE TO COME AND COMPLAIN ABOUT BEING POOR, AND ASKING PPL TO SKIP SMOKES TO GET THE 'NOW ALREADY REAL' STUFF YOU MAKE ??? D'OOH !!!
no wonder michael mayer told sublabels not to release jay haze's tracks.
peace, d.
rock beyond believe
-
DJ L'embrouille
- mnml maxi
- Posts: 1509
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:52 pm
- Location: Loperhet
- Contact:
hello d-rokc, perhaps it's because of my bad english, but i'm not sure to understand what you mean with your tomatos. you mentionned jay Haze, so let's talk about him. he's the nice guy who sells music via contexterrior label. then comes a bad guy who give music for free in a netlabel called textone. but he's also called Jay Haze. damn ! is he double ?d-rokc wrote:its like that:
a nice guy sells tomatos on the street market. then, another guy comes and offers some red balls that look like tomatos but are not, and he gives em for free. and people (being the silly bunch they are), get the free stuff and they are happy cuz its free and red and round. it takes TIME for people (the silly bunch they are) to realize these were not tomatos.
...
BUT HOW THE fck DO YOU HAVE FACE TO COME AND COMPLAIN ABOUT BEING POOR, AND ASKING PPL TO SKIP SMOKES TO GET THE 'NOW ALREADY REAL' STUFF YOU MAKE ??? D'OOH !!!
no wonder michael mayer told sublabels not to release jay haze's tracks.
...
i find the quality as good in his netlabel than in his label. i've listened to electronic music since very long time and i'm sure that the quality in netlabel is very good (do you listen to lot of netlabel's tracks ?). i'm not talking about ideal, politic, money just music. lots of artists who release on netlabel also do it on real label.
anyway, that's your point of you. i respect it. it will be a lost of time to explain you why i feel involved in netlabel scene. and i'm not sure it's necessary to shout here...
d-rokc wrote:i
BUT HOW THE fck DO YOU HAVE FACE TO COME AND COMPLAIN ABOUT BEING POOR, AND ASKING PPL TO SKIP SMOKES TO GET THE 'NOW ALREADY REAL' STUFF YOU MAKE ??? D'OOH !!!
no wonder michael mayer told sublabels not to release jay haze's tracks.
I think you need to scroll back and read the whole thing because there's something you probably missed at one point. I am not charging for mp3 but soon, some netlabel will.d-rokc wrote:Pheek: As music, for all of us, is not about money but when you pay to do music and everyone else benefits of it for free, then there's something wrong.
then why did u give it out for free in the first place?
My reaction to some people's quotes were in regards of how they see musicians and the music industry. I believed some people needed a reality check.
Regarding why I gave my music away (and still will in the future) is a way to share good things of life and also for promo. Thats why. It is not a tomato thing of making fake music. Whatever you said.
I'm not sure I misread your post, but you sounded unnecessarily rude.
i like seeing this...i find some innate pleasure with providing techno forpheek wrote: Regarding why I gave my music away (and still will in the future) is a way to share good things of life and also for promo. Thats why. It is not a tomato thing of making fake music.
free...whether or not i plan on trying to release the track.
i guess i see a critical part of art to be the action of presenting it to others.
d-rokc wrote:
its called lowering the standard. this is exactly what net labels did. just because they were eager to be like the big guys, before they were good enough. simple as that. IT IS OK, IT'S FINE. time will pass and people will understand and realize that quality is important.
okay, so netlabels might lower the standards... i'm wondering if you are an musician (electronic or accoustic) and would you try hard if knowing you won't ever make and income out of your music and live with the fact that you need to work something you really don't feel or stand for just to make a living? sure, some people might, but the majority of us involved in music wouldn't since we all dream about the breakthru. um, please don't crucify me because of my statement now, but it's a fact...sadly, only listeners benefit from netlabels which started to grow and grow and not bringing quality releases! Every eagar crew can open a netlabel, which leads to the point where netlabels sacrificed themselves and is also a contradiction to my previous sentence but it was done for YOUR pleasure and for the love of music and promotion, so i guess you need to chill out and see the bigger picture and people involved in the making process. take it easy.
- even i wrote this, i'll always be open for making music and giving it to netlabels...same like jpls said.
Drop the idea of becoming someone else, because you are already a masterpiece.
ok, first of all i would like to say this:
Pheek, i like your music very much and my respect towards you as an artist is big. i dont want any misunderstanding on this. but thats where it ends. music industry? you said it.
thing is, good artists are very rarely good businessmen. giving out music for free is absolutely fine, but there is one problem - after you once give something to the masses for free, then its very hard to start charging for it. its just the phylosophy of markets. so you say, a few netlabels (be it the strongest or most respected ones) will make an agreement and start charging per mp3. let me tell you, they are bound to fail. why? because if 10 netlabels start charging, 200 new ones will appear and give it for free. ofcourse there will be difference in quallity, but not that big that the mass will make a difference.
my point - artists should do music. let businessmen handle the rest. this way everyone will be happy. obviously michael mayer knows very well what he is doing, because thanx to the platform he created (im temted to call it an empire), lots of musicians/artists actually get paid for what they do and live off music. he managed to keep a high standard and still get it going, same goes for lots more smaller independent labels. yes - 10euro for 2-4 tracks, black vinyl. if you think your tracks are worth less (let alone nothing) then you aint good enough period.
dont get me wrong - i also like sharing good things in life. but here comes the controversy, and you dear Pheek already found out about it - the simple truth goes like this: In order for one artist to continue doing what he does, develop, and push the quality of his work further, he must have the freedom to do it (understand 'get paid for it'). otherwise, he simply can not continue doing it, let alone improving. after all, its hard to make music when you are starving.
every rule has exceptions. to those of you who take the 'tomato' example literally, i have nothing to say.
to plaster: if you 'know' you will never make an income on your music, you seriously need to work on your philosophy. have more faith in yourself.
to pheek: yes im a rudeboy. maybe its because i wasnt so lucky to be born in a 'polite' country like canada. well, thats the risk of international communication, so please excuse me for my french
Pheek, i like your music very much and my respect towards you as an artist is big. i dont want any misunderstanding on this. but thats where it ends. music industry? you said it.
thing is, good artists are very rarely good businessmen. giving out music for free is absolutely fine, but there is one problem - after you once give something to the masses for free, then its very hard to start charging for it. its just the phylosophy of markets. so you say, a few netlabels (be it the strongest or most respected ones) will make an agreement and start charging per mp3. let me tell you, they are bound to fail. why? because if 10 netlabels start charging, 200 new ones will appear and give it for free. ofcourse there will be difference in quallity, but not that big that the mass will make a difference.
my point - artists should do music. let businessmen handle the rest. this way everyone will be happy. obviously michael mayer knows very well what he is doing, because thanx to the platform he created (im temted to call it an empire), lots of musicians/artists actually get paid for what they do and live off music. he managed to keep a high standard and still get it going, same goes for lots more smaller independent labels. yes - 10euro for 2-4 tracks, black vinyl. if you think your tracks are worth less (let alone nothing) then you aint good enough period.
dont get me wrong - i also like sharing good things in life. but here comes the controversy, and you dear Pheek already found out about it - the simple truth goes like this: In order for one artist to continue doing what he does, develop, and push the quality of his work further, he must have the freedom to do it (understand 'get paid for it'). otherwise, he simply can not continue doing it, let alone improving. after all, its hard to make music when you are starving.
every rule has exceptions. to those of you who take the 'tomato' example literally, i have nothing to say.
to plaster: if you 'know' you will never make an income on your music, you seriously need to work on your philosophy. have more faith in yourself.
to pheek: yes im a rudeboy. maybe its because i wasnt so lucky to be born in a 'polite' country like canada. well, thats the risk of international communication, so please excuse me for my french
rock beyond believe