General Music Chat

PRACTICE

Your ability to play exceeds social networking.

Your chops are more important than your social skills. Frequently the best musicians are near mute, they speak through their music, which brings adoring fans to them.

First learn how to play. Everything else comes next.

WRITE

You can make it with other people's songs, but it's hard to sustain. Consider writing another club in your bag, not only does it give you more options it also makes you more attractive to labels and other investors.

RECORD

A great song translates with just you and your instrument on YouTube. But if it's someone else's song, you're not going to go far. We all pass around YouTube covers, but none of the acts ever stick, because imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but it's not the way into our hearts.

RECORD 2

Yes, if you hire name people and record in a top-notch studio your track will sound better, but ultimately it's about the song. Slick means nothing if the song sucks.

DISTRIBUTE

Put your music everywhere. Starting on SoundCloud. It's the default home of the wannabe. If you get any traction thereafter, get it on iTunes and Spotify, et al.

YOUTUBE

Comes after SoundCloud. A lyric video is good enough assuming people want to see it.

But if someone comes to your clip and the count is low it's going to work against you, especially if you told people to go there.

HYPE

You start with your friends. And try not to burn out your friendships. Seed them with material. Listen to their feedback. Don't lean on them to spread the word, if they like your material they will. If you give it to them and two weeks go by and you're not hearing from other people, especially those you barely know or don't know at all, your track wasn't good enough. Maybe good enough for you, but not good enough to make it.

MAILING LISTS

Retain all the contact info of anybody who contacts you about your music. You want to know who your fans are.

MAILING LISTS 2

Put yourself in the shoes of your fans, look at it from their perspective, not yours. You may be frustrated you're not more successful, but that's not their problem. Only contact people when you think they'll be thrilled to hear from you, when they're interested in what you've got.

MAILING LISTS 3

If you're getting positive feedback, feed information on a regular basis. If you're seeding people and getting nothing back, the problem is you. Back to the drawing board. Yes, you may want to tell everybody they don't get it and you're misunderstood, that's your prerogative, but that won't help you make it.

TWITTER

Almost meaningless unless you're already a star. Then it's purely the cherry on top. And sundaes taste quite fine without the cherry. The problem with Twitter is most tweets go unseen. But if you notice retweets and feedback feeding the system is not a bad idea, as long as it doesn't take your focus away from your music.

FACEBOOK

A home for looky-loos before you can afford your own URL/website. But don't expect any virality on Facebook.

PLAYING LIVE

Comes last. It's after you've learned how to play, practiced, written and recorded. If you put it first, you're probably gonna be in trouble. Especially if you don't know how to play and make mistakes. Yes, road chops are the best. But that's assuming you've got somewhere to play. That's the problem today, live music is not everywhere. Venues don't want to pay and certainly don't want to alienate their patrons. They'd rather spin records. So don't beg anybody to play at their venue unless you're going to make them money. That's the cardinal rule. It's your responsibility to bring people in, not theirs. Certainly if you're completely unknown.

Having said all that, it's not a bad idea to start out as a cover band. But use originals sparingly. And if people stop dancing and/or leave the room, pull them.

If you can get places to play, more power to you. But don't put the cart before the horse.

BLOWING UP

It's gonna happen slower than your wildest dreams. It's gonna be long after your buddies have graduated from college and have careers and are starting families. If you're not willing to risk it all and fail, music is not the business for you. And if you do fail, don't complain, either get out or go back to the drawing board and work harder.

BLOWING UP 2

Your one big break is never the one you think it is, and is oftentimes a series of mini-breaks.

TV CONTESTS

Are about the shows, not the talent, about advertising, not music. At first, they were such a hit surprise this wasn't completely true, but Kelly Clarkson made it a decade ago. Contests are short cuts that usually lead nowhere. They tar your resume.

MERCH

Assuming people come to see you, and like you, they'll want to buy something from you, to evidence both their support and their identity. T-shirts are great, but make sure they're well-designed and made with good materials, otherwise people will buy once, if that, and never again. As for CDs...this is what they're made for, live gigs. They're souvenirs. The music is available easily online. But personalized, signed product is not.

A MANAGER

No act makes it without one. Don't sign a contract if you can get away with it. If you do, give up no more than twenty percent, hopefully fifteen. And hire a MUSIC BUSINESS LAWYER to negotiate the deal, not your dad's attorney buddy. Whatever you spend will be a pittance compared to how screwed you will be if you actually make it and have signed a bad deal. The bottom line is when you start no one good wants to manage you, and chances are you're going to leave your initial garage manager for someone more experienced. It's gonna cost you, remember that.

AN AGENT

More important than a label these days. Agents work on commission, usually ten percent. And they don't like to work for free. So if you're not making any money, an agent isn't gonna wanna represent you. I know it's a conundrum. You need an agent to get work, but you can't get an agent unless you've got work. Figure it out. Oftentimes it's the drummer who both manages the band and gets gigs before professionals get involved. As to why it's the drummer, we're still trying to figure that out.

A LABEL

You might feel good you're signed, but that don't mean diddly-squat if it's an indie who neither distributes nor promotes you. Give up rights commensurate with how much you're being paid. Up front. Upon delivery. Guarantees of marketing and promotion are worthless, even if they're in the contract. If you're not getting any money, you want it to be a one or two album deal, with a hefty royalty rate and a return of rights upon termination of the deal or shortly thereafter.

A MAJOR LABEL

You give to get. Your deal will be lousy unless you don't need them. If you're pulling in thousands of people a night and tracks are flying out of the iTunes Store the major label will cut you a good deal, otherwise they won't. And just because you have the deal don't expect the label to break you. The hard work is just beginning. Give them tools, i.e. music. And play nice. Otherwise the label will blackball you, they don't need troublemakers, unless they're guaranteed revenue makers. And major labels only want acts they can easily market and profit from, i.e. radio acts. Remember that. If you're not one of these, a major label deal is worthless, furthermore you won't get one.

TRACTION

Comes slower than you expect once you've got a deal. It's all work with very little reward for a very long time. In other words, if you're not willing to enter the Ironman competition, don't be a musician. Just when you've scaled one hill, there's a mountain range looming in the distance.

HITS

You need more than one to sustain a career.

MONEY

Comes long after you think it should. Not only does the label take most of it, what you deserve isn't rendered for eons, that's the nature of royalties.

GETTING SCREWED

It goes with the territory. You're never going to receive what you've earned. You just hire the best people and try to get the most you can.

SUCCESS

Won't be as sweet as you think it'll be. But don't freak out in the middle of it. Because we need neither you nor your act. Do your best to be humble and sustain. Otherwise, you'll be replaced.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE ABOVE

Exist. But they're rare. Do you want to bank on being the exception?


--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1

In other words, 'don't quit your day job!'

The PS (Buble) and other things on that page are interesting reading, too.

I don't always agree with what Lefzits says, but I think he is spot on with this. Of course he's talking about making it to the "big time" and an indie doesn't really need that to make a comfortable living.





I have found another great resource for keeping up with trends and current biz models of music biz success at

http://www.tommydarker.com/music-talks/archive/


check out what Johnny Dubber has to say. Really good info.


I especially loved these quotes:

"your problem isn't piracy, it's obscurity"

"the way to make a name for yourself online (and offline) is: Be f-ing amazing!"


and he points out that with the internet today a secret doesn't remain that way for long, so if you really are something people want to hear, that news will spread without a lot of marketing expertise.

A good post Ted and a very real look at making your living with music.

I agree with 90% of what was written but I think the author misses the value of playing live and playing covers even when you are not fully ready, to learn the craft and understand what attracts people with music. Elvis, Ray Charles, The Beatles, The Stones, Bob Dylan, The Yardbirds, Van Halen, Jimi Hendrix, Elton John, SRV, Dire Straits, Santana, and many others honed their craft for years playing mostly other peoples music live. This is where you get instant feedback from an audience who are not your close friends or your mom. Once you learn how to attract and hold a crowd, you are ready to explore your own music live.

The notes and lyrics are important, but it won't happen without connecting and communicating with an audience. JMHO

A good post Ted and a very real look at making your living with music.

I agree with 90% of what was written but I think the author misses the value of playing live and playing covers even when you are not fully ready, to learn the craft and understand what attracts people with music.

I don't think he's trying to address anyone that isn't looking to be recording artist, which explains why he put recording even before live gigs!?

Cover songs are great for paying dues, but you can't sell them so no label/manager/publisher is interested in a cover band whatsoever.

Cover songs are great for paying dues, but you can't sell them so no label/manager/publisher is interested in a cover band whatsoever.

Mmmmm, I respectfully disagree. The Rolling Stones 1st US tour and 1st album were mostly cover tunes. The Beatles 1st album was mostly covers. Some of Hendrix most famous recordings were covers. Even the Sex Pistols early live shows were covers. No I think an audience is more interested in musicians who know how to connect with them through music and the actual musical choice is secondary.

I have great respect for songwriters as it is a skill I do not possess, but cover songs will always have a huge presence in both live and recorded music at the highest levels. Great songs are simply great songs. Right now Garth Brooks has a cover tune climbing the charts (Fishin' in the dark) that was originally recorded by the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band and written by someone we both know. His label is interested in music that sells and doesn't really care who wrote it. Garth understands how to connect with an audience because he played covers to live audiences for a very long time. This is the point I think the blog author in the OP misses.

When Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga, and Christina Aguilera were first discovered, they were all doing covers. Labels (if there are any left) definitely pay attention when performers attract an audience first, and songwriting second.

You've got to have the "goods" yeah you have to plan, prepare, practice perform... But in the end you have to write really good songs. Well if you want a career doing it. If your songs don't cut it nothing will sustain for very long.
My .02.

When Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga, and Christina Aguilera were first discovered, they were all doing covers. Labels (if there are any left) definitely pay attention when performers attract an audience first, and songwriting second.

Exactly. It is all about making money. The fans that follow you bring their wallets. The wallets bring the owners producers and the rest. It is all about money..... no not yours.... theirs. If you can't pull in the money and can show them that you can, you're nothing to them, no matter how good you are. Tight asses go a lot further than raw talent these days, or so it seems.
Many a truly good good musician is in it for the joy of the performance. Many of them have publicly said that they would do it for free if they weren't paid. The money is just the cream. Most of the guys that I know just want to jam and show off their chops where they will be appreciated.

Oh-so-true, it all boils down to dough as does everything else in modern society. It should always rate somewhere lower on the list of things that make life worth living but sadly it is stuck on the very top annoying the hell out of all of us who know better. Might write a song about it except I'm a lousy lyricist.
It would be great to make it as a musician, all that glorious fame and adulation so must brush up the couple of originals I've put together and put them to creating future fortunes for my dotterage which looms dangerously near the horizon.

I think an audience is more interested in musicians who know how to connect with them through music and the actual musical choice is secondary.

Labels always wanted the publishing because that is where they make big money. So many in the 60s were straight ripping off old American blues artists and bringing them back to Americans who had never heard them, so while they were cover songs, they were brand new to audiences, and therefore "original" to the artists who covered them.....and the biz folks stole the publishing because no one but the suits understood how that worked. Page/Plant were some of the worst.

But that's quite a different thing than going to see a band who does familiar covers....like playing Roling Stones better than the Stones do.

Seen any of those on a record label ever? Can you name a single band that does mostly covers and is signed to a major or even a major indie label?



.

I think an audience is more interested in musicians who know how to connect with them through music and the actual musical choice is secondary.

Seen any of those on a record label ever?

Can you name a single band that does mostly covers and is signed to a major or even a major indie label?

Ummm, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Van Halen just to name a few who got signed while doing mostly covers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rolling_Stones_(album)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Please_Please_Me

Well, major record labels are effectively extinct so this all may be a mute point but... Yes there were hundreds of cover songs on major labels and indies. 1892 cover song recordings on this guys list:
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/music/c ... ist-082009

Wait, heres 50 more on major or indie labels:
http://farofftraveler.blogspot.com/2013 ... -this.html

And...
Def Leppard did an album of 100% cover songs on a major label in 2006. Go check it out.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... ovpro07-20

Lest we forget Mylie Cyrus "Wrecking Ball" is a cover song. And you can bet it will sell by the metric ton.

In fact most major recording artists on major labels do covers of their favorite songs from other artists from time to time and make them their own. They sell lots of records/mp3s/CDs, and everybody makes money. But we digress...

Back to the OP. The writer believes that practicing, writing songs, recording those songs, and then playing those songs live is the formula to "making it". I think he missed a big piece in that most highly successful artists over the last 50 years did not do it that way. Nearly all of them played live covers, learned the ropes, got discovered because they were really good at what they did, and only then wrote and recorded magnificent original music that was accepted by their audience. History is very clear on this.

Playing cover songs live needs to be in the mix if you want to hone your craft, attract and keep an audience long enough that they will give your original music a fair listen. Get some great cover songs in your mix, make them your own instead of just a tired note-for-note knockoff, get out and play them live and be AMAZING! There will always be the rare exception, but this is how most of the top selling recording artists in our lifetime "made it"' .

Perhaps we need to turn this question around: Were there any major recording artists who were not playing cover songs live when they were discovered by a major label? Let's rule out the pip-squeak, two-bit bands and just focus on major acts. I am sure there must be a few exceptions out there but I can't think of any. Even Steely Dan was doing covers live. This may require some digging. Anyone?

Am I making my point yet?? Is this thing on??

Things were a lot different back in the early days of rock (Beatles, Stones, etc) - and there were record labels interested in making money from those bands. Even to the early 70s (Van Halen).
Doing cover songs IS necessary to establish yourself, but once the 'labels'/producers grab you these days, originals (not necessarily written by the artist) ARE required.

Doing cover songs IS necessary to establish yourself, but once the 'labels'/producers grab you these days, originals (not necessarily written by the artist) ARE required.

Yes, of course Mike. We are in full agreement. Covers first to get established and build an audience, and then songwriting original music for recording and distribution. I think historically this is how most recording artists actually got discovered and what was omitted from the OP. I think playing cover music live is an essential step in "making it".

I think an audience is more interested in musicians who know how to connect with them through music and the actual musical choice is secondary.

Seen any of those on a record label ever?

Can you name a single band that does mostly covers and is signed to a major or even a major indie label?

Ummm, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Van Halen just to name a few who got signed while doing mostly covers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rolling_Stones_(album)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Please_Please_Me

Well, major record labels are effectively extinct so this all may be a mute point but... Yes there were hundreds of cover songs on major labels and indies. 1892 cover song recordings on this guys list:
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/music/c ... ist-082009

Wait, heres 50 more on major or indie labels:
http://farofftraveler.blogspot.com/2013 ... -this.html

And...
Def Leppard did an album of 100% cover songs on a major label in 2006. Go check it out.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... ovpro07-20

Lest we forget Mylie Cyrus "Wrecking Ball" is a cover song. And you can bet it will sell by the metric ton.

In fact most major recording artists on major labels do covers of their favorite songs from other artists from time to time and make them their own. They sell lots of records/mp3s/CDs, and everybody makes money. But we digress...

Back to the OP. The writer believes that practicing, writing songs, recording those songs, and then playing those songs live is the formula to "making it". I think he missed a big piece in that most highly successful artists over the last 50 years did not do it that way. Nearly all of them played live covers, learned the ropes, got discovered because they were really good at what they did, and only then wrote and recorded magnificent original music that was accepted by their audience. History is very clear on this.

Playing cover songs live needs to be in the mix if you want to hone your craft, attract and keep an audience long enough that they will give your original music a fair listen. Get some great cover songs in your mix, make them your own instead of just a tired note-for-note knockoff, get out and play them live and be AMAZING! There will always be the rare exception, but this is how most of the top selling recording artists in our lifetime "made it"' .

Perhaps we need to turn this question around: Were there any major recording artists who were not playing cover songs live when they were discovered by a major label? Let's rule out the pip-squeak, two-bit bands and just focus on major acts. I am sure there must be a few exceptions out there but I can't think of any. Even Steely Dan was doing covers live. This may require some digging. Anyone?

Am I making my point yet?? Is this thing on??

There is a big difference between "did covers" and "a cover band". I thought we were talking about the latter.

Songwriting is a different discipline than performing. Yes, there have been bands who were great performers but not such great songwriters. Still, they have to bring some publishing revenue in for a label to sign them. Maybe they do covers of songs the label owns publishing on already? Whatever the case, publishing is what makes the recording industry go 'round.

Buddy Holly set the standard for singer/songwriters. Lennon/McCartney studied him to get out of the cover bars and on to the greatest songwriting duo ever.

Until this year, I had never recorded a song that I didn't own at least a piece of. That's 8 albums since the mid 90s and another 5 albums in the 80s

What Lefzits is saying is that you don't own anything if you're a cover band. That's different than a band that does a few covers on their records.

There is one important element I've not heard mentioned - that's 'sparkle.'
A session player I used to have a side band with identified that attribute - and it really worked to describe a certain type of artist.

We'd see some guy strolling along with twenty other guys, but number 1 would stand out because he was sparklin' hard! A lot of things go into 'sparkle' - can be clothes, attitude, strut or just raw charisma. But you when you see a fellow with sparkle, you'll know it.

We've all known very hot players who had everything but sparkle - it usually meant they weren't going too far. Astounding expertise can sometimes invoke of sparkle of it's own - lucky for Mark Knopfler!

Are we born with it? Is it a learned thing? Can you teach yourself to sparkle? I really don't know.

Last time I was up north, sadly for a funeral, I ran into Chris Sherlock - my favorite drummer. To my amusement, everyone figured out who he was immediately. He had to be a musician. Chris has sparkle. Always has. He gave me a copy of his latest CD.

Sparkle doesn't guarantee success but you need it to get very far. Mick Taylor is no longer with the Stones but Ron Wood is. Ron sparkles!

Talbot