New Record Label Will Give Out All Its Music For Free; Wants Fans To Subscribe To The Label
from the interesting-ideas... dept
Jay Frank wrote the book FutureHit.DNA a few years back, and it's really a fascinating look into the music business. Frank, who formerly was the Senior VP of Music Strategy for CMT (part of MTV) as well as VP of Music Programming at Yahoo! Music, basically tried to scientifically breakdown what it took to be a "hit" song in the modern digital age. Of course, some might dismiss this as formulaic (and perhaps cynical), but I can't recommend the book enough. It's not just about "oh this is what makes a hit song," but it takes a look at how listening habits change in the digital era, and how even that may impact what makes a hit and what doesn't.It appears that Frank doesn't just want to write about this, but he's about to put his theories to the test. Today he's announcing a new record label, called DigSin, that will be focused on releasing singles for artists rather than full albums. But here's the interesting bit: all of the music will be released for free. What he's looking to do is build up a base of subscribers who will want to be pushed new great songs that he's releasing. In effect, rather than a "label" in the traditional sense, you can think of it as a "tastemaker," or even a filter or trusted friend.
I have to admit that I've been fascinated by this concept for a little while. I've written in the past about how I've paid a small label/distribution company a yearly subscription in the past for a "CD of the month" club, because I trusted the guy who ran it to find me awesome CDs. In that case, it was a small operation, where the guy who ran the label would take into account each of the subscriber's tastes and try to match music to what they liked. It was like having the guy at the record store who knew your tastes picking out what you should listen to. It was fantastic. In this case, Frank is trying that on a larger scale... and not charging for it.
In this case, it appears that Frank is going to be looking at alternative revenue sources. If he can bring together enough music fans, that's certainly an opportunity. I would bet there will be some sponsorship opportunities that make sense, but I could also see some more creative efforts, such as upsell opportunities for merch or concert tickets.
The timing of this is interesting, as he's launching it at the same conference where Ian Rogers, the head of TopSpin -- and also a former Yahoo! Music exec -- gave a talk on the race to be trusted, noting that he believes that's the next stage of the music business. Basically with so much content out there, finding the right content for you is key, and that's going to be a trust issue. If you trust someone to bring you good music, that's a powerful connection.
Of course, it's worth noting that Rogers, in his speech, tells the record labels that they cannot be that trusted partner, because people will always doubt their sincerity on whether or not the musician that they're pushing, who's signed with them, is really that good. It is an interesting question. I think it's possible for a label to be trusted, but it's difficult. Though, I actually go back to an open letter that Ian himself wrote to then head of EMI Music, Guy Hands, about why he should turn the label giant into a trusted filter based on affinity groups around existing big name artists (i.e., build a mini label around... The Beatles, for music that Beatles-lovers would like and then build out that brand as a trusted brand). It's possible. It's just difficult.
On the artist side, DigSin is also focused on being a better partner -- an enabler rather than a gatekeeper. It's signing artists to very short term deals, with agreements around songs, not the artist. That is they'll share in the monetization of the specific songs. And the songs will still be available via traditional channels -- iTunes, Spotify, etc. -- for people who want them that way. But the real focus is on DigSin's ability to bring together a core group of people who are really into hearing the next great song first, and to help connect those people with musicians making those songs.
It's definitely a big challenge -- and one where there may be many hurdles. But if it's done right, it could be quite useful. I'm intrigued that Frank is attempting this, and if his notions on what makes a hit are correct, and he's able to execute on that with the artists who release singles through DigSin, it could become a very interesting model to pay attention to.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I'mma sign up, this sounds like a great idea!
Actually, I'mma admit, I'm spending more on music than I was before I started reading techdirt, and a lot of it is due to techdirt. Artists you've highlighted, (Color Theory in particular. Currently, he's selling all his music, ever, recently remastered and put on a USB key in lossless formats. He's currently surveying his fans to figure out a price point, and I'm figuring it's worth about $100 to me), sites you've pointed out, and other little things that pop up in the comments, (Talco comes to mind; I hadn't heard of them before someone mentioned them in the comments. And fortunately, their music is available on jamendo for me to check out).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I like the concept of the artists not being bound for life to the new gatekeeper trying to cash in on being cool.
And the idea of focusing on the song rather than the album churn...
He deserves to succeed, it might not be perfect but this might disrupt the current gatekeepers even more than sharing ever did.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Love this
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Connecting the dots … (#Trust_Us)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I mean, a top 40 is a collection of 'the most popular'. A label releasing singles . . . well, a label can, and will, whether it likes it or not, release more popular and less popular songs.
Similarly, while the top 40 will never veer too far from the familiar, a label must constantly veer from the familiar in order to continue being relevant and profitable.
And digsin is just a label focused around singles . . .
And in that they aren't keeping the artists, or the copyrights on the songs, it seems to me to be very far from a top 40, and will have to be constantly focusing on new stuff.
And hey, it's free, what am I going to lose if I don't like the service?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
However; I couldn't see paying and being limited to a specific label. Why don't they just do this like Cable TV? A number of companies can offer access to a variety of recording companies and their media...
The RIAA and it's lackeys make this SO much harder than it needs to be.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's always about MONEY not music, isn't it?
What I hope is the site is laid out so that I can easily scrape MP3s. Doesn't take me long to decide on a tune, maybe fifteen seconds. I can go through 50 in fifteen minutes. (I frequently have: have you guys noticed there's a LOT of legal free music out there? Download.com seems to have closed the music section, but used to have some great music.) Anyway, I figure that my speed and accuracy on picking tunes will make me a great "customer" IF I can just scrape the tunes and not have to look at ads or wade through pages. That's the way I want it, and this new site had damn well better give it to me that way, or I'll just go elsewhere. -- But how's it going to learn of my most excellent taste?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You have it backwards. It's actually "giving a whole lot of people something for nothing in order to get a few people to want & pay for something". And that's quite different from "give it away and pray" - it's more like "give it away and pursue a strategy"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: It's always about MONEY not music, isn't it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I signed up too
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I have yet to see anyone explain this in a manner that is truly sustainable. It all preys on a small percentage of people doing something comparatively stupid and paying way too much for the "special" product in order to support all the freeloaders.
Stepping over dollars to pick up pennies, it's the new business model I guess!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
You say this, but I don't think you realize my grocery store does this. Except not with caviar; the brand of crackers that they sell (2 packs/cust/visit) are in the middle of an aisle filled with jams, and peanut butters, and cheeses and soups, and mixes like brushetta mix, and that aisle is also right beside the produce section, with all those fresh veggies and fruits.
Just an interesting note, it's really quite irrelevant.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I might also note that as a university student, the crackers were one thing that attracted me to that grocery store, and this IS a university town, so they're probably capitalizing on it in many different ways.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
lol
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Using the infinite to sell the scarce, working for religion since 39,000 BC.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: lol
Go for it.
Find a company that techdirt endorsed a year or so ago that failed. Heck, find all the ones that TD endorsed last year that have since failed.
No, go on, please.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: lol
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Makes me sad
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Makes me sad
I considered this briefly for a second, but if artists want to make the most money, they'll probably want to make albums all the same, and use the extra attention from DigSin to sell the albums.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Makes me sad
Artistically, and philosophically, I see no reason why a single song cannot be just as much of an artistic accomplishment as a completed album. I also anticipate a future in which musicians start experimenting beyond those two concepts - for example I think we'll begin to see something I'm quite excited about which is "living albums", where a band announces a project (like "we want to record some really bluesy stuff" or "we just bought a new synth and we want to base a bunch of songs around it") and, instead of fans waiting for the disc to be finished, they sign up to receive new tracks from that project as they are done.
I guess what I'm saying is in part I feel your pain, because I love well-constructed albums, but I think it would be pretty arrogant of us to assume that the death of that one particular format is also the death of creativity and quality in music.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
like the entire recording industry has been since...forever?
actually, you might be right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
So I think (again, hope) that this guy will find the really good songs and promote them because he is relying solely on trust, whereas the current labels don't, so they can promote whatever act they want to be in the top 40.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Until you can address the sunk costs, your "infinite distribution" deal is all bullshit anyway, and you know it.
Music isn't infinite. I would think that a talentless schmuck like you who clearly labours for weeks to try to turn out one wretched verse of self-defeating beat poetry would know that it takes time and effort to make music - even sucky, crappy music like yours. Unless you time is someone infinite, there is always cost.
Grow up and join the real world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If the artists are on short term deals, what happens after they do well for one song here, then move over to EMI, for example. Will the site make any money off them at all then?
It is however a wonderful concept and I hope it makes the artists on it a nice living wage which their work entitles them too. If I thought any decent music had been made in the last 10 years I'd be sure to check it out.
As for the single vs album debate - I have to say I like albums. They are a work of art in themselves, tracklisting alone is an under valued art. But such is the way of things.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Or, to put it another way, we've gone from an era of few sources (organised but increasingly uninspiring content) to one of many sources (some good but disorganised and hard to find content) and are now heading back to one of few sources again.
This isn't to say it's a bad thing. I think it's fair to say that the top 40 worked pretty well for a while, but it has become increasingly irrelevant to the tastes and desires of many people today. Introducing a personalised top 40 (based on the tastes of people or brands I trust) sounds pretty good to me.
In a sense, the model hasn't changed that much: we still have a small number of brands / companies / people providing music to us. But they should be working with us as enablers, not working against us as gatekeepers. Here's hoping. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Makes me sad
For example, let's say Artist A is dipping his toes in the water, and creates a really good song. He puts it out there, it's a hit. He feels good, and creates another, puts it out there, people going wild.
After a while, he's got 12-15 songs out there individually. Will this service allow him to compile all of that into a single album and sell it on his own website? Would they expect a cut?
What about someone that created music in their spare time? Let's say they have been, for the last 10 years, creating stuff at home. Let's pretend they have compiled 3 albums on their own. Now they see this service, and send one of their songs over. Will they be bound to hand over all of their music?
I don't think this service will make the album go away....unless they handcuff the artist....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Makes me sad
Wait, I mean as soon as scrolls were dropped in favor of bound books, storytelling creativity went the way of the dodo.
Hold on, I mean as soon as bound books were replaced with ebooks, storytelling stopped completely.
Let me back up, as soon as art moved from cave walls to animal hides, art has never been the same.
Uhm, I mean as soon as art went from animal hides to canvas, painting creativity dried up.
No, I mean that as soon as art went from canvas to digital, art stopped being good.
Err...Oh I know, I'll go with music. As soon as music went from paid court musicians to random people, quality dropped.
I got it this time. I mean as soon as music stopped being about entire concertos and more about individual pieces arranged in an album, musical genius stopped dead.
Give me one more try. I meant that as soon as music went from albums to individual songs, the artistry in the industry went on the decline.
You know, I'm going to go lie down and think about this some more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's just more proof that everything you say is bullshit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The algorithms they used to suggest songs were much more accurate at picking songs I would like than netflix is at picking movies(which is pretty accurate).
If they are using anything even remotely like that this is going to be a huge success because it will match the artists to people that like their particular style.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
and the most prominent "give it away and pray" strategy I can think of right now is in video games. microtransactions, in which they give a game away for free, then they count on a small percentage of the users to pay money for in game items. many games are using microtransactions these days, a lot of people consider it a better way to make money than a monthly fee, they consider it the way of the future. and it's clearly working for the video game companies that are using it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Grocery store samples & video game micropayments are proven strategies - I suppose there was a little bit of prayer at the beginning, but that's more like "give it away as an experiment". If the experiment works, or at least hints at what might work, and you continue improving on it until it starts making you money - well, then it all just becomes a business model.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Every business model I have ever seen is based on the same premise - investing money first and then getting enough customers to cover the expenses. Making a reliable profit only happens after a customer base is fully established. And to do that it is necessary to offer 'free' samples. Sometimes those samples are offered to the public at large (such as bread samples in the new bakery), other times they are offered only to executives and agents (such as music samples by a new group). Always they are given away for free with a prayer.
So, yes, "give it away and pray" is a perfectly normal opening business model and they are using it to that extent. What's your point? Why do say that like it's a bad thing? Do you really believe customers will buy the product without a sample? Would you?!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You can't explain why your music sucks so bad either. Yours is perhaps the best example of why it should be given away for free, because nobody in their right mind would actually pay for it. The only shows you seem to be doing are those created by your talentless buddies, using quite names like "festival" to explain away the small rooms with 100 people in them, most of them laughing at your total lack of talent.
Go away Marcus, you are just being an asshole at this point because you don't want to lose any more arguments here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Y'know, I can't understand it either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Now, where's your creative output? Oh right, you have none, or if you do you are far to embarrassed by it to share it. I make shitty music for fun, and I'm proud of it, and happy to hear whatever mockery you can come up with! (I wish you'd be a bit more inventive about it, though - your insults are tired.) I'm rather flattered by your 100 estimate to be honest - I doubt I've ever performed in front of a group bigger than 50, maybe 75. You, on the other hand, are the epitome of a coward, hiding behind anonymity to avoid admitting that all you do with your time is troll blogs and curate porn.
You seem to be having a really, really hard time getting this through your head but: some people create for absolutely no other reason than that they have fun doing so. The fact that you still don't understand that says a lot more about your lack of a soul than it does about my lack of talent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I think everyone's missing something here
My question is simple: with no contracts, no artist development, and no income guarantees, why would anyone in his right mind want to sign to this "label"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
I think that might be where you're wrong. There are many types of 'hits'. I think it's too early to tell what the catalog of the label will look (or sound) like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I think everyone's missing something here
Considering how contracts have been criticized by musicians as unfair for them since the begging of labels, and how most musicians are leaving the labels because of the shitty contracts, I do believe you may be incorrect in your knowledge of the relationship of musicians and labels (most of them anyway).
"no income guarantees"
There is no such thing as a guarantee, in any job. Especially these days
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I think everyone's missing something here
I meant why would I choose this over, say, some indie label with good distribution (say, through the Orchard or IODA) and a commitment to develop my career over the course of more than one song? Or just do the whole thing myself?
Perhaps the word "guarantee" was not well chosen. But wouldn't I rather go with someone who is at least guaranteeing to sell my products for actual money?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The music, that is fine, since what you want to sell is tickets, contracts and merchandise.
The music is irrelevant for sales it isn't praying.
I still won't buy though, because of the license.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Is like sending coupons to others hopping they will come buy at your store.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
So I don't really see how giving away music has any impact on revenues, people didn't stop buying merch, people didn't stop going to concerts although if they keep hiking up the prices soon nobody will go, and I don't see people not wanting access, in the age of interactive, crowdsourced, why are bands not selling access to live videos of themselves? why are they not endorsing some products?
Oh they are and they are making millions doing it too.
If giving away music was so bad, radio would have killed them long ago.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: lol
I want to see your face when you do realize that all labels are already doing this because lets face it, music is free whether you like it or not, people are spending money because they want too, not because they have too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Hint: it is not from free music that people can find ANYWHERE, so where it is coming from?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: I think everyone's missing something here
They are entertainers, they don't sell music they sell feelings, they sell experiences and if you look at an MRI from the brains of people enjoying music or cocaine your probably see similar patterns.
Those things can be embodied in variety of physical products where the least of them today is a plastic disk, but they can still sell T-Shirts that incredibly give the same margin of profits, they can still deliver that music in great boxes, they can still make live concerts, people still pay for tickets.
So I don't see how giving away music, which is basically what radio does harms them in any way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
YOU LOSE AGAIN.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Makes me sad
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: lol
It doesn't make itself particularly navigable, going back in time, but it's possible.
Here:
http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?start=3150
That link will put you 3150 posts back into the archives, which is actually only back to Dec 23rd, 2010 right now. Yeah, I know, that's an insane amount of articles.
From there, just keep clicking 'older posts' until you've scanned all the stories from the year.
I suppose you could also use a good google search. Go into advanced searches, and search specifically for hits from techdirt between 2009, Jan 31st and 2010, dec 31st for whatever search terms you'd like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: I think everyone's missing something here
They found out about half-way through about an unavoidable experimental error that meant the (positive) results were worthless :p
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You "create" nothing. But you do make a lot of noise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Makes me sad
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I wanted to come up with a response to what you said, but I felt your own words were perfect. You do indeed make a lot of noise. None of which is remotely relevant to the article. Insulting someone who creates. You're a real big man anonymously aren't you? It's cute. In a sad way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Digital Music Labels
You provided a very interesting perspective and enlightening summary on the concept behind the new record label, DigSin. Considering my interest in the current transformation of the music industry, I find myself speculating what impact such a unique business model will have and the results it will generate. I am particularly drawn to your discussion on releasing singles for free and the label’s plan to “build up a base of subscribers who will want to be pushed new great songs.” In the past, music professionals such as Bobby Owsinski have argued for the economics of free and encouraged content owners to give away their music in order to increase market size. It appears to me as though Frank will be utilizing this model as part of a larger marketing plan to expose his artists. Although the economics of free have proven to be beneficial to an array of artists, concerns have arisen regarding the overall effectiveness of the model and the results it produces for the music industry. In particular, analyst Mark Mulligan recently argued that despite recent developments, the digital music market continues to face an impasse because the “economics of free don’t yet add up.” How do you perceive this philosophy and the role it plays in the music industry? More specifically, how do think this philosophy can be effectively integrated into Frank’s business model and used to build a loyal audience?
You also touch upon the relationship the new digital music label will have with artists stating that “on the artist side, DigSin is also focused on being a better partner—an enabler rather than a gatekeeper.” I am drawn to this statement because artists are continuously taken advantage of by record labels through long term deals and agreements designed for the advancement of the label. DigSin have developed a more artist-friendly model that signs artists to short term deals based around individual songs rather than the artist. I believe this is a huge step in encouraging better business practices and contributing to the prosperity of artists. I noticed that the digital music labels, RCRD LBL and Green Label Sound, have been partaking in similar non-traditional deals with artists for several years now, and success stories such as Kid Cudi have arisen from them. In the long run, do you think such deals will become the norm and shape the music industry for the better? The co-founder of RCRD LBL, Peter Rojas has expressed that his company is making artists more comfortable about distributing their music, because the terms of their contracts ensure that they get paid and are “in a way in their own best interest.” I believe DigSin will also achieve this relationship with artists, hopefully changing the way labels conduct business and influencing the music industry for the better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
im a young artist im 15 years old
[ link to this | view in thread ]