Mexico City and indie rock

Los Dynamite Noiselab Mexico City Rock - New York Times, 5/13/07: "Thanks mostly to the downloadable avalanche of globalization and the rise of MySpace the current independent rock scene is full of artists who may be from Mexico City but sound as if they could be from New York, Stockholm or Paris....

The debut of MySpace in 2003 couldn’t have come at a better time for the Mexico City indie scene. In the 1990s major labels could still afford to be interested in a diverse swath of rock and alternative acts, but by 2003 they were no longer signing bands whose sales weren’t projected to reach gold in their first month or who weren’t easy matches for telenovela soundtracks. In response a string of indie labels emerged to fill the void, and suddenly it seemed that there were more bands than ever. There were more young people making music on home computers, more places to play (galleries and storefronts as much as clubs) and more international acts — like the White Stripes, which made Mexico City a heralded early stop on a 2005 tour — coming to town.

Most in the scene agree that the watershed moment came in 2004 with the appearance of Reactor, a taste-making, state-supported radio station. Unlike previous Mexico City alternative rock radio ventures, Reactor made breaking independent and underground bands from Mexico as central to its mission as playing the latest from Franz Ferdinand. 'If a band has a strong following, we take notice,' said Raúl David (Rulo) Vázquez, the station’s lead programmer.

Everything, then, was in place for an indie explosion. MySpace just struck the match.

'There’s always what we call the Mexico City lag,' said Luis Arce, a member of Chikita Violenta, whose debut album, 'The Stars and Suns Sessions,' was recently released on Noiselab. 'In the U.S. there was the college rock boom — Pavement, Sebadoh, even Nirvana — and now in Mexico City we have our own version of that. This is our own ’90s indie boom, just a decade or so late.'...

'In previous generations the goal was to present yourself as part of the city, to define the city and express the city,' said Jorge Hipolito, a veteran of the Mexico City scene who works at Noiselab. 'Now that doesn’t matter so much.'...

One particularly controversial result of Nafta has been the growing number of young bands choosing to sing in English, even if the members don’t speak it particularly well. Most of these bands claim that it’s not a bid for crossover success, but a direct reflection of their musical upbringing. 'We’re more comfortable singing and writing in English,' said Mr. David of Chikita Violenta. 'We’re proud of being from Mexico, but this is the way we like to do music. It would be dishonest for us to sing in Spanish.'"

Denver indie labels

Denver has seen an explosion of talented indie bands in recent years and this article mentions some of the local labels working with them

The Denver Post - Local bands in tune with indie spirit

The true live music business model

Some of the talk coming out of the Music 2.0 conference is that major labels can't afford to do artist development (including tour support) unless they get a percentage of tour and merchandising income.

Major Label Executives Express Continued Frustration, Mood Sours — Digital Music News: "In a previous era, labels gladly financed marketing initiatives for artists – including tour support – without receiving direct returns from areas outside of the CD. That approach is now becoming a critical problem, though a clear plan has not emerged to broaden the business. 'We’re going to have to get good at all of these ancillary revenue streams and see what works,' said Ring, while Ken Bunt of Hollywood Records pointed to a far broader approach that included 'touring, merchandise, mobile, DVDs,' and a large host of other areas. 'We could monetize file-sharing tomorrow, but it would just be one small part of the puzzle,' Bunt said."

Live Nation is planning to create a music venue site to bring together its own venues and competitors to market to concert goers and offering ticketing. Live Nation, in essences, wants to develop a database of live music goers.

Live Nation Concocts MySpace of Concert Websites — Digital Music News: "Live Nation is now tinkering with a new concept online, one that will give consumers more comprehensive live concert information. The company is now inviting competing venues to not only list their events, but also build their own pages within the site. 'It's like MySpace for venues,' said Live Nation executive Scott Fedewa..."


Here are my thoughts on the matter:

1. Marketing to the current group of concert goers is not enough. If Live Nation and other venues want to make money, then need to find ways to expand the number of people who go to see live music.

2. Major labels and even indie bands don't really have significant experience tapping into live music. Major labels and independent labels have been in the recorded music business. Sure, signed artists and indie artists tour, but both have still focused on recorded music.

From my observation, there is only one group of bands that really understands the live music market -- that's jambands. Their business models have always been driven by live music, tape sharing among fans, and relatively little exposure through radio or music reviews. It's been largely driven through word-of-mouth. While the indie/hipster segment of the industry has generated press about the viability of avoiding the major label system, in reality, their business has been more like a junior version of the major label system than the true DIY model that has existed for several decades within the jamband community.

live music
Music 2.0

The limits of Internet star-making

I have this theory that there's no money in Internet fame, which is going to shoot a lot of business models.

The standard music story these days is that some unknown band or artist posted songs on MySpace or videos on YouTube, generated a million plays, and got signed to a major label deal.

The thinking behind this is that all of this visibility is a sure sign that the masses have spoken: that they really like this band/artist. Labels are interested because the band/artist has already been test-marketed. The same concept was embraced in the early days of MP3.com, but people found out that rising to the top of those charts meant relatively little in the real world.

What we have seen both in the past and now is that when fans are able to listen to music for free or watch videos for free, they often do not then go out to buy an album or go to a show.

In fact, I will postulate that Internet visibility is a negative when compared to more traditional forms of music marketing.

The very fact that there are unlimited opportunities to showcase yourself on the Internet means that the barriers to entry doing so are nil. Sure, only a few attract the attention of millions so it is a small group, but since videos featuring geeky/weird/bizarre subjects can outdraw those involving better bands/artists, avid MySpace/YouTube patrons already know there is often a disconnect between talent and visibility.

Here's an example: Marbles Lost Blender Co Mixes Up YouTube "If anyone doubted the wild, wonderful things a marketer can do with a phenomenon like YouTube, they can suspend that disbelief by turning to Blendtec. A $50 demonstration of sheer blending power attracted six million viewers in just five days.

"After all, who wouldn't want to watch a man in a lab coat and goggles drop 50 marbles, or golf balls, or a crowbar, or a rake handle, into a blender while teasing the viewer with questions about whether those things can really be blended. "

In contrast, appearing on television or radio is not an option open to everyone. Those bands/artists who get the opportunity have added to their status level by having access to a relatively scare commodity.

This then filters down to fans. The higher the status of the band, the better the bragging rights to those who attend the band's concerts. For a fan to say he/she went to a concert of band with 200,000 fans on MySpace means less than to say he/she went to a concert of a band who has been seen/heard on TV. Getting your song in a popular TV soundtrack greatly trumps racking up lots of Internet plays because only a limited number of songs can get played on TV.

The lack of recognized filters for popular Internet bands lowers their cachet. And since increasingly fans seem to go to concerts to increase their own status (through taking photos, sending text messages to friends, and through blogging), they want to associate themselves with high status bands.

So when labels sign popular Internet bands on the assumption that those bands will become gold and platinum sellers, they have it backwards. They need to break bands the old-fashion way (through radio and TV and touring) and then use the Internet to enhance the marketing of those bands. If the Internet popularity comes first, it's likely the fans won't be inclined to take the next step and buy in significant numbers either albums (they'll just listen online or find a way to get the music for free) or concert tickets (because the cool factor won't be there). They will be aware of those bands, but won't necessarily be motivated to spend money in pursuit of them.

In other words, bands that generate attention in an entirely free medium do not necessarily maintain that attention when people are asked to part with their money. Not only has the Internet devalued recorded music (by training people to expect it for free), it is now devaluating status. If anyone can become a "star" on the Internet, it doesn't mean much.

The Internet is for exposure. But exposure without filters just turns the product into a commodity.

MySpace
music promotion
YouTube
radio promotion
indie
live music
record labels
fame
internet marketing

Making a living wage in music

This scenario only works if people buy music, which they may not.

Others can argue that it used to be a better time for full-time musicians because there were more and higher paying live music gigs in every town.

Digital production and distribution has allowed many more musicians to make a small amount of money, and thus reduced the opportunities for full-time musicians to get paid for what they do.

Pandora's Playlist :: Philadelphia City Paper: "Before going off to work, mommy and daddy will load the family station wagon with amps, drums and 2.3 children. On the way to school, there will be no fights over which radio station to play. An intelligent recommendation engine streaming over the ubiquitous Wi-Fi waves will choose music suitable to everyone's taste. Then mommy and daddy will practice at their bandmate's home studio and record music to be sold over the Internet at 25 cents a song, providing comfortable wages for each band member's 2.3 children.

"Is this the future? Probably not, but Tim Westergren, founder of the Music Genome Project and Pandora (a site that recommends and plays music based on your evolving preferences), doesn't think this is too far off the mark.

"'I think what we'll see is the beginning of the musicians' middle class,' he said last Thursday evening at a town-hall-style meeting in the University of Pennsylvania bookstore."

live music
clubs
Pandora

Indie labels thrive in Canada

Indie labels thrive in the Great White North| Reuters.com: "From the windswept island of Newfoundland across the rolling prairies to the northern Yukon province, flourishing Canadian labels are offering an outlet to local traditional and folk-styled artists.

"Although largely unknown in mainstream music circles, these entrepreneurial boutiques are highly visible in their individual regions in mom-and-pop 'variety' stores, gas stations and tourist gift shops as well as such mass merchants as Wal-Mart and Zellers.

"Eight-year-old Avondale Music specializes in Newfoundland's distinctive roots music ... Lyle Drake, co-owner with his wife, Dolores, estimates that 90 percent of sales come from within the island itself.

'There's no stigma here attached to buying local product,' Drake says. 'People buy local product as readily as they do the new Madonna.'"