Online radio broadcasting

[Poisoned Youth]

If you want to promote an artist, try writing about them instead of giving away their music for free.

So your premise is that when I (or others) played a song from an artist on an internet radio show that typically had a handful of listeners that we gave away their music for free and cut into their sales? I just want to be very clear what you're suggesting.

[Yodelgoat]

Clarification: My angst is directed towards people who should be paying royalties who do not. I was not upset until the term "royalty police" was used. Should Youtube be paying royalties? Look at their stock value (over 700), look at how high the volume of plays is. Yeah, someone is getting rich off of artists. Artists who are Youtube sensations (which I am NOT) that never see a dime. The laws are pretty clear. People making money off of playing music should pay royalties. Not just claim they are "advertizing".

I think there is a huge difference between bands advertizing themselves on Youtube and/or others simply taking their music and putting it out there without permission. Lets be grown ups here. If an artist gives their permission, or if it is just a guy talking about an artist, thats different. Piracy is like porn. I know it when I see it. Promoting ones own interest over the artists, is a different thing. My music is played on internet radio, but its because I requested it. Its the IMW site in my sig. They actually do make money - occasionally. I have no problem, because I can remove my music by request, and it is there by my request. But Pirate bay (and others), they just take music and they make money (ads) by using music they have no rights to. My ire gets up when people think that the artist has no say, its just all freeware. No, its not! I have been emailed by shows, saying they played my song on such and such a night, and I have always thanked them for it. if you dont see the distinction I am drawing, I doubt I can make the point any clearer.

[klothos]

If it's one thing proggers are good at it's living in the past.

Its not just proggers -- its almost anybody that grew up in the "Old Business Model" age that believes that model should still be applied..........I'm sure the guys in the very late 1800s that sold horses and built Conastoga Wagons had nothing good to say about the automobile when it was invented nor could forsee its impact on the transportation industry

[rcarlberg]

So your premise is that when I (or others) played a song from an artist on an internet radio show that typically had a handful of listeners that we gave away their music for free and cut into their sales? I just want to be very clear what you're suggesting.

Yes. That is why broadcasters pay license fees.

As Yodelgoat so aptly put it, "Those who have just eaten don't need to see a menu."

[davis]

Yodelgoat, you haven't given me your artist name. Is it Yodelgoat? I have no idea. I'm just asking. I want to know if I've even heard your music

[rcarlberg]

As Yodelgoat so aptly put it, "Those who have just eaten don't need to see a menu."

Before you say playing an artist's music on Internet radio promotes sales, consider this: Amazon, iTunes and most other music retailers offer 30-second samples as appetizers, to whet the appetite. They do not serve the full-course meal.

One could theoretically promote artists -- if that was really your intent -- by playing thirty second samples of their music. It'd be a pretty weird radio station, but it might serve the purpose?

[rcarlberg]

Yodelgoat, you haven't given me your artist name. Is it Yodelgoat? I have no idea. I'm just asking. I want to know if I've even heard your music

If you go to his profile, About Me, you find the following:
http://www.indiemusicworks.com/jaug
http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/Jaugernaut

[Yodelgoat]

Before you say playing an artist's music on Internet radio promotes sales, consider this: Amazon, iTunes and most other music retailers offer 30-second samples as appetizers, to whet the appetite. They do not serve the full-course meal.

One could theoretically promote artists -- if that was really your intent -- by playing thirty second samples of their music. It'd be a pretty weird radio station, but it might serve the purpose?

Or you can ask the Artist for permission to play their music. Simple, and direct. They will probably ask that you not allow complete songs to be downloaded in the form of podcasts... But maybe they wont. Just give them the courtesy of being able to control their own product. In essence, don't treat someone else's possession as if it were your own.

I sent my albums to several internet and radio stations, Sometimes at their request, and sometimes after asking them if they would like a copy, but never without contacting them first and with the clear understanding that they use it for promotional purposes only. apparently some of them decided they had enough music already, so they put it up for sale, without even opening it. Now THAT is probably the worst abuse I had to deal with. "why is my music for sale used (but still sealed) on Ebay used when it hasnt officially been released yet?".

All they had to do was to say "no, we have no intention of even listening to your CD" but they either requested it, or responded that they were okay with it. A press kit costs about 8 bucks to produce. So, they request the kit, it goes out, and they toss the promotion material and put the CD for sale out on Ebay. - It happened more than once. Its not just disrespectful, it's pretty much about the worst thing to do, not only to not promote, but to actively and directly compete with the Artist.

Ask someone who does reviews here on PE if they have ever done this - sold promo Cd's without even listening to them. I hope not, but if you're getting hundreds of CD's a month sent to you in the mail, you can make some pretty decent fundage off of artists by doing this. I think this has kind of run its course, and I doubt people are making money off something like this with the demise of the CD. It may not be a big concern now, but It definitely produces cynical old bastards like me.

[rcarlberg]

Ha! Good rant Yodel.

I've been on both ends of this dilemma (both horns?). When I was building up my classical and jazz LP collection I bought hundreds of radio station promo/cutout albums, some still sealed. It was a great way to build a collection with barely-used vinyl for usually $2 or $1 a disc.

A few years later I had a review column, and received a veritable flood of New Age music in the mail. Most of it was utter dreck. None of it went unlistened... But a lot of it never made it past the first 5 seconds. Rather than sell the bounty, which I viewed as unethical, I hit upon the idea of opening up my review column to readers to participate, and put out the call for people wanting to give it a try. I got, in the end, 108 respondees. I sent them each three releases to review.

I got about eight replies back, with reviews, and found I could print maybe five of them.

It was a learning experience for everyone!

[Yodelgoat]

THanks for keeping it real, and doing what is right. I used to live not far from George Winstons Studio, (Olympia) and I actually visited it to meet with a producer. I recall some really nice New age music came out of that era. but the sheer flood of music that came out of that time just overwhelmed me completely. Seems like everyone had a new age album. I still listen to some of it on occasion. Definitely an odd period for music.

Letting others listen to what you could not get to was a very big thing to do. The fact that you got some publishable material out of it is surprising. Of course, this was still the age of "the Label" where almost everyone had a label deal. So it was the labels taking it on the chin and not the individual artist.

[davis]

Ideally, I did want to do a 24/7 streaming station. Barring that, Podcasts are better than nothing.

[Poisoned Youth]

Before you say playing an artist's music on Internet radio promotes sales, consider this: Amazon, iTunes and most other music retailers offer 30-second samples as appetizers, to whet the appetite. They do not serve the full-course meal.

One could theoretically promote artists -- if that was really your intent -- by playing thirty second samples of their music. It'd be a pretty weird radio station, but it might serve the purpose?

We will never agree, so I'm not going to bother any further. I have promoted artists on PE and sales as a poster and a mod for years, often by linking to full songs. I won't apologize for it. I will not contact EMI or the surviving members of L'ouvo di Colombo before hand. And I sleep just fine at night knowing that I sometimes creep over the speed limit too. I did 28 in a 25 in my neighborhood today. I am going to turn myself in tomorrow, I promise.

[markinottawa]

Ideally, I did want to do a 24/7 streaming station. Barring that, Podcasts are better than nothing.

As someone else mentioned. Check out any local college radio stations. They are always looking to diversify their broadcast schedule. A weekly or bi-weekly broadcast may be what you need to scratch that itch. That ointment has worked for a number of us.

[rcarlberg]

We will never agree, so I'm not going to bother any further. I have promoted artists on PE and sales as a poster and a mod for years, often by linking to full songs. I won't apologize for it. I will not contact EMI or the surviving members of L'ouvo di Colombo before hand. And I sleep just fine at night knowing that I sometimes creep over the speed limit too. I did 28 in a 25 in my neighborhood today. I am going to turn myself in tomorrow, I promise.

If the "royalty police" ever do come calling some day, you just stick to your story. "Honest, officer, I wasn't stealing or infringing copyright. I was PROMOTING the artist (yeah, that's the ticket!)"

By the way, you can also promote your local grocery store by giving away food on their sidewalk.

[Yodelgoat]

I'm not that fragged at Poisoned Youth for his radio shows. Its really just about fighting the idea that what you do with someone else's work is no big deal. A single dude, playing music he's discovered is not a problem - in fact, its usually a good thing. But if they are not careful with the product they have legally purchased, or been licensed by the artist. They become a hindrance, rather than a help to the artist. Big radio shows that are skirting royalties, and individuals who have huge "playlists" of entire albums on Youtube, are promoting their own playlists, and dont care that people can easily steal an entire album from a Youtube post. If your playlist gets enough hits, Youtube starts advertising when someone clicks on your playlist. Supposedly someone gets paid for all that, and its not the artist. Yet without the artist, the clicks would never happen. That is personally benefiting the individual and NOT the artist. I'm sorry, but some of that benefit should be shared with the artists. There reaches a point where you violate the laws that you are supposed to follow, and are a part of your agreement when you purchased the music. Just follow the law, and I think you're OK. Just like that traffic ticket. If you want to avoid a ticket, dont speed. By going over the speed limit, you open yourself up to a ticket, be it 1 mph or 50 mph over the limit.

[davis]

I was reading about podcasting today. One bit of advice was that if one is going to do a music podcast, the kbps should be at least 192. I just rebuilt my library at 128 for online radio... so now I'm putting it back the way it was. I shall do podcasts instead. that seems like more fun anyway, since they can be themed.

[davis]

I'm not that fragged at Poisoned Youth for his radio shows. Its really just about fighting the idea that what you do with someone else's work is no big deal. A single dude, playing music he's discovered is not a problem - in fact, its usually a good thing. But if they are not careful with the product they have legally purchased, or been licensed by the artist. They become a hindrance, rather than a help to the artist. Big radio shows that are skirting royalties, and individuals who have huge "playlists" of entire albums on Youtube, are promoting their own playlists, and dont care that people can easily steal an entire album from a Youtube post. If your playlist gets enough hits, Youtube starts advertising when someone clicks on your playlist. Supposedly someone gets paid for all that, and its not the artist. Yet without the artist, the clicks would never happen. That is personally benefiting the individual and NOT the artist. I'm sorry, but some of that benefit should be shared with the artists. There reaches a point where you violate the laws that you are supposed to follow, and are a part of your agreement when you purchased the music. Just follow the law, and I think you're OK. Just like that traffic ticket. If you want to avoid a ticket, dont speed. By going over the speed limit, you open yourself up to a ticket, be it 1 mph or 50 mph over the limit.

since you have no control over whether anybody, radio programmer or fan, legally purchases the music they own, why do you worry about it? I like Buzz Osborne's attitude, which is "oh well, nothing we can do about it if people burn our music for free." he finds ways to work around that and still make money. Not saying I condone downloading w/o paying for it, but I don't see the point of worrying about it.

[arabicadabra]

I recall people asking for camples on this site any time someone talked about a new release or a new band. I also recall people bitching over "sample clips" - or medleys of parts of various songs - because they wanted an entire song or three for free.

[klothos]

since you have no control over whether anybody, radio programmer or fan, legally purchases the music they own, why do you worry about it? I like Buzz Osborne's attitude, which is "oh well, nothing we can do about it if people burn our music for free." he finds ways to work around that and still make money. Not saying I condone downloading w/o paying for it, but I don't see the point of worrying about it.

^ this is key: the artist understanding that the digital music medium is no longer a viable product to profit from and figuring out creative ways to profit that are related to the artist that doesn't necessarily mean the music itself.....This doesn't necessarily apply to a record label, but it does make their M.O. more difficult in modern times and the better understanding a label has of this, the more thay too can figure out more creative ways to profit as well

[Yodelgoat]

I recall people asking for camples on this site any time someone talked about a new release or a new band. I also recall people bitching over "sample clips" - or medleys of parts of various songs - because they wanted an entire song or three for free.

But if they "want" the full copy, is it wrong to ask them to pay for it? If its worth it, they will pay, if its not, then you really dont need their fandom. That's psychotic:

"I love this band, but they freakin' want money for the full version of their songs! - greedy bastards!"

I'd be happier knowing I pissed off the tightwad listener, than I would giving him the music for free. But thats just how I roll. Who needs fans who only like your music if its free?

[rcarlberg]

Who needs fans who only like your music if its free?

But they might "like" you on Facebook?

[davis]

But if they "want" the full copy, is it wrong to ask them to pay for it? If its worth it, they will pay, if its not, then you really dont need their fandom. That's psychotic:

"I love this band, but they freakin' want money for the full version of their songs! - greedy bastards!"

I'd be happier knowing I pissed off the tightwad listener, than I would giving him the music for free. But thats just how I roll. Who needs fans who only like your music if its free?

it's not a matter of being stingy or a tightwad... part of the problem is that there is A LOT of music available online that people want but can't possibly afford all they want, so they just download it without paying. Some artists don't approve of this and some accept it and provide other merch for fans that can't be downloaded. If you're going to be angry with anyone, it should be those who upload music for free downloading. in a drug analogy, you're angry with the users when you should be focusing on the dealers.

Before the internet, when people had to buy music in stores, they paid for it or didn't get it. It's not like that anymore.

[klothos]

But they might "like" you on Facebook?

laugh all you want: you'll be surprised how important that used to be before FB figured a way to get bands to pay for "Likes"....about four years ago, sponsors like Jagermeister or Busch gauged bands to sponsor by the amount of following they had based on FB "Likes"....Even today it still has uses: Non-paid for "Likes", especially arbitrary ones, are also important to some artists to benchmark how their original project and the music itself sits within the global marketplace. How does an artist determine which likes are real and which ones are paid for? Simple: don't buy any

[Yodelgoat]

FB likes dont pay the bills - it doesnt do anything that I am aware of. Now, someone needs to start the Rock and roll hall of likes.

[Gruno]

FB likes dont pay the bills - it doesnt do anything that I am aware of. Now, someone needs to start the Rock and roll hall of likes.

Might as well be you starting that organization. Then you can make money since you have told us (quite a few times) that you do not make much money from your own music...