music & money | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 167 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614155
Today 0
Topics 127544
  
 
Messageboard index
music & money
 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 05:15 [#01518458]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator



would you say that the goal for most musicians is to make
money with music?


 

offline Raz0rBlade_uk on 2005-03-02 05:16 [#01518462]
Points: 12540 Status: Addict | Followup to tolstoyed: #01518458 | Show recordbag



yes


 

offline Taffmonster from dog_belch (Japan) on 2005-03-02 05:17 [#01518465]
Points: 6196 Status: Lurker



most..... yes
me........ yes


 

offline Bob Mcbob on 2005-03-02 05:21 [#01518472]
Points: 9939 Status: Regular



no its to make a good reputation, get famous, make people
want them....

id imagine most musicians didnt become musicians as their
first job, they already had jobs to bring in the money to
get the equipment to make the music...


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2005-03-02 05:22 [#01518475]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker



No. For me, I would say making money from it is more of a
means to an end. I don't want to make a living off it
per-se, but I would love to see it paying for its own
upgrades.


 

offline Taffmonster from dog_belch (Japan) on 2005-03-02 05:22 [#01518476]
Points: 6196 Status: Lurker



i once was told the only reaso i did music was to get
girls.........

if anyone could direct me to them id be very happy ive heard
they are supposed to be around here somehwere!


 

offline -crazone from smashing acid over and over on 2005-03-02 05:27 [#01518483]
Points: 11234 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



for me it is..but i'm not a musician..for real musicians? i
think not..


 

offline Matvey from Kiev (Ukraine) on 2005-03-02 05:38 [#01518494]
Points: 6851 Status: Regular



no.
i still think they are good people, their minds open and
clear, and they do not need money at all, they just need
some love, musiek and happiness.
well, most of them.


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2005-03-02 05:41 [#01518497]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to Taxidermist: #01518475 | Show recordbag



S'true. I don't want to make a living off it (it'd be work
then and hence, stressful and less fun), but it'd be nice
for it to pay for itself in terms of gear/software.

Same with DJing, enough cash to cover the cost of buying
records would be great.


 

offline Skink from A cesspool in eden on 2005-03-02 07:36 [#01518589]
Points: 7483 Status: Lurker



I think that i would like to make a living from it.

But what are the chances???

I am not in it for the money though.


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 08:33 [#01518644]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular



here's the thing - it's not a black and white question.
yes, there are those just in it for money, just in it for
fame, or those who want nothing to do with either.

but many artists, many of the ones whose records we own,
know that one can still make art and keep business separate.
the trick is you have to make sure you don't compromise
your art (or ethics) for money. that's the dreaded "sell
out". there's nothing inherently wrong with making money
from your art, but can you be happy with yourself if you've
just made something for the money? i couldn't, personally.
and it's usually reflected in the work, i think. when an
artist is just cashing-in, others can usually tell.


 

offline marlowe from Antarctica on 2005-03-02 08:36 [#01518648]
Points: 24590 Status: Lurker | Followup to r40f: #01518644



Once you're released and a commercial success, it seems much
harder to maintain your integrity and your judgement - not
because you want to 'sell out' or sound more commercial, but
simply because it puts you on a different level to where you
were and it's hard to listen with the same ear than before.
Same goes with writing. It's not impossible, of course, but
it's harder.


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 08:40 [#01518656]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to marlowe: #01518648



there are many different levels and measures of commercial
success. what is it exactly?

it's possible to be on a major label and circumvent all the
nasty compromises everyone else has to make (the melvins did
this for three records on Atlantic). so i think what it
comes down to is willpower. these bands are tempted by
being rich and famous and they cave in and change the things
they do to appease the Label. nobody ever forces anyone to
become famous. that's for sure. the reason the people we
hear on the mainstream radio and see on mtv are there is
because they played ball.


 

offline virginpusher from County Clare on 2005-03-02 08:42 [#01518662]
Points: 27325 Status: Lurker



I dont ever plan on making money off the music i make. I
just like to do it and i like to get feedback. that is money
enough for me


 

offline magicant from Canada on 2005-03-02 08:43 [#01518664]
Points: 2465 Status: Lurker



i don't play music for money.

I DO IT FOR DA POOTIE.


 

offline marlowe from Antarctica on 2005-03-02 08:53 [#01518684]
Points: 24590 Status: Lurker | Followup to r40f: #01518656



Yes. But, if a band is signed up, then they are open to
Inner pressures, not only External. You were talking about
the external pressures, I was talking about the internal.


 

offline magicant from Canada on 2005-03-02 08:54 [#01518686]
Points: 2465 Status: Lurker | Followup to marlowe: #01518684



pressure on THE LADIES.

THE LADIES' VAGINAS.


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 09:03 [#01518700]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to marlowe: #01518684



no, i'm thinking about internal as well. you mean between
members of the band or within the artist themselves?
there's all sorts of conflict. i agree it does get harder
the more one is tempted. but i still think you just have to
have the fortitude to not give in.


 

offline Opto on 2005-03-02 09:06 [#01518705]
Points: 1016 Status: Addict



not for me. i make music for me. i would rather give it for
free than sell it. and its not true that you need money to
develop music - those who say that are those who never have
ideas and thats what music really is - if you have
ideas you dont need expensive gear and shit, so yeah,
thats the thing. i bet that afx at early age didnt had most
expensives synths and samplers and stuff. and he got famous
anyway, so heres the proof.


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2005-03-02 09:11 [#01518711]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



I'm not in it for the money.

buy my latest album!


 

offline hobbes from age on 2005-03-02 09:16 [#01518713]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker | Followup to tolstoyed: #01518458



NO, at least not at first.

on another note: are you mad at me? :)


 

offline earthleakage from tell the world you're winning on 2005-03-02 09:27 [#01518724]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular



i wanna be on top of the pops!


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 19:17 [#01519486]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to r40f: #01518656



"the reason the people we hear on the mainstream radio and
see on mtv are there is because they played ball. "

not always though..apperantly..who knows whether he speaks
the truth or not :)
i wonder if he ever compromised his music to be more
successful..

"RICHARD: Well, I'm not into the big media effort. It was
good for a while, but I'll never do it again. I might make
other videos, but I'll never make another that gets into the
mainstream.
MEREDITH: Those tracks got into the mainstream?
RICHARD: Pretty much. Come to Daddy was going to go well
massive — not in America, but over here. It got to about
16 in the charts, and it was on the way to the top. I had to
withdraw the record for a week, just so it would drop out
again. I just about kept a lid on it.
MEREDITH: Why would you do that?
RICHARD: I think it's bad to be really well known, because
you end up in people's faces whether they like you or not.
That's a really horrible thought. The shittiest thing about
famous people is that they just assume everyone wants to
listen to them or look at them all the time. "


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 19:17 [#01519488]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to hobbes: #01518713



is it that obvious? :)



 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 19:24 [#01519502]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to tolstoyed: #01519486



i'm eager to mention that rules don't always hold up 100% of
the time. there's always special cases for things.

i don't know the truth about aphex. he had the luck of
being at the forefront of a movement. and when things like
that happen, exceptions are made and things get a little
unpredictable. so i can't comment because i don't know what
actually happened.

but it's a good point - there are occasional exceptions.
perhaps these exceptions are more common in other countries
besides the us due to the industry differences.


 

offline adam from londonidium (United Kingdom) on 2005-03-02 20:03 [#01519572]
Points: 209 Status: Lurker



Everything is motivated by the desire to feel loved, one way
or another..



 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 20:27 [#01519611]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to r40f: #01519502



yeah, it probably varies from country to country..we have a
complete mess on our music scene so it's hard to say
anything.. also our market is way too small to not try and
make something more likeable because otherwise there's no
chance one could make a living with it - most of them earn
money with gigs and not record sales as it is.

i don't like to see artists going mainstream for the money
and fame sake, but i don't have a problem if they make a
commercial release here and there..money just makes it
easier for them to be doing their own stuff after that,
unless they like the fame and money part too much :)
mike patton is a nice example how to turn from a pop star
into something less mainstream..it gets much easier to do
what you're into once you have all the time and no other
worries.. shame there are very few to do this, because i bet
some of the people in mainstream could do great music..or
not, what doi i know :)

adam, i don't really agree :)


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2005-03-02 20:30 [#01519615]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator



for most musicians the goal is to make money, yes.

for me, it isn't. that is, I never will. and I still keep
doing it. how dumb is THAT!?


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 20:32 [#01519620]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to qrter: #01519615



not dumb at all..listen to adam; "Everything is motivated by
the desire to feel loved, one way or another..".


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2005-03-02 20:35 [#01519623]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to tolstoyed: #01519620



so even my desire to feel loved is motivated by the desire
to feel loved!?


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 20:36 [#01519625]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to qrter: #01519623



i couldn't say..we'll have to leave that one for adam to
say.


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 20:37 [#01519626]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to tolstoyed: #01519611



patton is an interesting example. he actually started out
singing for mr bungle. as a fan of most of his newer work,
i am more than willing to look the other way when it comes
to his other life in faith no more (a band i absolutely
can't stand). so this proves that to me (and probably to
you), artists are capable of "redeeming" themselves. i
think we should look at the album itself, the music itself -
not the artist. let's judge the art, not the person who
made it.

to draw a conclusion, it seems to me that it really comes
down to how the artist percieves himself and how everyone
else percieves the artist. what sort of compromises are you
making as an artist of your art for the sake of other goals
and is it worth it? can we as an audience completely enjoy
something we know has been tainted by the pursuit of money
or the compromise of the art? these are rhetorical
questions, of course, meant to examine this point. the
conclusions we all draw will be a matter of personal choice
- it's completely subjective.


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2005-03-02 20:38 [#01519627]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to tolstoyed: #01519625



lets hope he's motivated enough by the desire to feel loved
to answer our question.


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 20:41 [#01519630]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to qrter: #01519615



to me, there is nothing wrong with that... i just would
point out that i also don't think that any of these paths
(the artist who never engages in business, the artist who
engages in business on their own terms, the artist who seeks
only to make money) are inherently ethically-superior or
inferior points of view.

what i'm saying is ethically-questionable is when the artist
makes compromises of their art.


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 20:45 [#01519635]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to r40f: #01519626



yeah, to look at each album individually is the best i
think..im not really concerned about this whole money
question, it's just that i was debating about it with some
people, and wanted to see more views on this matter..

there really isn't many answerable questions in music are
there..i mean no definite answers at least, most of it is
completly subjective and up to every person to decide for
themselves :)

qrter, if he isn't we'll bribe him.


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 20:47 [#01519636]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to tolstoyed: #01519635



i think it's been a good and interesting discussion!


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 20:50 [#01519641]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to r40f: #01519636



same here, always nice to read some xltronic people view on
music :)


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2005-03-02 20:52 [#01519644]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to r40f: #01519630



most people who live off their musicmaking are compromising
in a way though - they're playing music they don't like that
much for the money.


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 20:56 [#01519651]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to qrter: #01519644



"they're playing music they don't like that much for the
money"

could you explain this a bit further please, i can't quite
get it? :)


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2005-03-02 21:00 [#01519656]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to tolstoyed: #01519651



I'm talking about all the people that are session-musicians,
or play in an orchestra.

they mostly just see it as a job, play what's on the page
and go home.


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 21:04 [#01519660]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to qrter: #01519644



that's just not true. you can play music you love and
believe in and attempt to get gigs with it and/or sell it on
record. if other people happen to like what you like,
you'll be able to sell more of it. i read all sorts of
interviews with my favorite bands where they say they
wouldn't put up with all the rigors of touring and lousy
relationships and the disgusting business end of it if the
music wasn't worth it.

if you make the music you yourself enjoy, there will
probably be a market for it. that market may be very small
or incredibly large or anything in-between. but there's no
inherent compromise made there.


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 21:05 [#01519662]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to qrter: #01519656



i see, it has confused me a bit because you said "people who
live off their musicmaking" before that, and session
musicians don't really apply to that :)


 

offline r40f from qrters tea party on 2005-03-02 21:05 [#01519663]
Points: 14210 Status: Regular | Followup to qrter: #01519656



session-musicians are another story. my last post wasn't
about that.

i would never be a session-musician, personally. it takes
all the art and enjoyment out of it's just skilled labor.


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 21:08 [#01519666]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to r40f: #01519660



yes, there will most likely be a market for it..but that is
much easier in a country with +200 milion poeple :)


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2005-03-02 21:16 [#01519670]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to tolstoyed: #01519662



why not? they make music don't they?

there is a much larger group of people who are just a cog in
a musicmaking machine than there are people who play in a
band (and actually make money of that).


 

offline tolstoyed from the ocean on 2005-03-02 21:23 [#01519672]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to qrter: #01519670



they perform music, not really make it imo..

as for these musicians, they can't really compromise what
they're doing since they only play stuff other people
wrote..not sure im getting this right :-)


 

offline weatheredstoner from same shit babes. (United States) on 2005-03-02 22:31 [#01519703]
Points: 12585 Status: Lurker



I do it for the music first. If I could dump my real job and
make a living doing music, I wouldn't hesitate.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2005-03-03 00:29 [#01519752]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker



I don't know. I know quite a few session musicians, and they
have quite a bit of respect for themselves and I have a very
high reguard for them. They are not selling out, or anything
like that, because they are not sacrificing something they
believe in for money. The are at work, making a living.

A good example of a sell out would be Moby. He used to bitch
about the music scene and people selling out all the time,
and all the drama queens and showboats in the music
industry, untill he finally got a hit record, and then
stopped doing all the stuff he was known and respected for,
and made another hit album identical to the last.


 


Messageboard index