Is it worth recording new albums?

[JJ88]

It seems to me that in Britain, Oasis' peak in popularity circa 1995-7 or so, was really the end of something. I was very young then but I remember them being *everywhere* at the time- making news headlines, hobnobbing with politicians, huge concerts. That certainly hasn't happened to another rock band since. Coldplay never really defined any era like Oasis (and also bands like Blur) did, and Nirvana before them in the US.

The nu-metal era I look back at and recoil in horror. Awful, just awful, never bought any of it. So was the so-called 'new rock revolution', all those bands in skinny jeans who couldn't 'rock' if their lives depended on it.

[dgtlman]

Wow! Was Don McLean right?

[Jacob Holm-Lupo]

First off - great to see Pixel mentioned here, Kelman. Any self-respecting prog fan needs to check them out.

On to the actual business at hand. First of all, you can make albums for a number of reasons. If you make them to make money and you ran out of creative juice a few decades a go, then sure, I see no point in making them. But the whole "we used to sell millions now we only sell 100 000 so why bother" argument is moot, since that's how far record sales have declined. Any record that sells 100 000 today is a qualified success and will make you a decent amount of money if you have adapted to the new music market and kept your expenses in check. But personally I think the GOOD reason to make an album these days is simply for the love of it. And the fact that it's hard to make money out of physical releases today makes it a labour of love for most artists. Personally, I find the process of making records magical and incredibly satisfying, much more so than live playing. So I will keep doing it regardless of sales.

As for what prog albums sell - most of the artists discussed on this site, outside of the obvious "big ones", will be lucky to crack the 3 digit limit. That's the harsh reality. With our label we usually do crack that limit, but sometimes we don't. The trick is to know and understand your particular market, so that you can predict with some degree of certainty the ballpark figure that a release will sell. You do everything surrounding that release based on prospective sales. If you think it will just sell a few hundred, you keep the promotional costs to a minimum, you keep the cover/packaging expenses down, you keep recording costs down et cetera - so that even with limited sales you still make a little profit. That's how you stay in business these days. In Norway, and probably internationally as well, 90% of all releases do not turn a profit. In Termo Records this is reversed - 90% of our releases do turn a profit. Simply because we know the market and never spend more than we feel we safely can. I suspect most other prog labels with a survival wish do the same.

[tallliman]

Other things to consider:

-- It is the musicians/vocalists/songwriters themselves that prefer physical product - having a tangible medium in their hot little hands that contains songwriting or instrumental performance gives an artist a sense of immortality all contained in an actual physical product. JJ French is definitely speaking from this point-of-view. In regards to talking about releasing an "album", the "album" is a construct favored by musicians/songwriters, not the music-listening public in 2014 because......

-- (with the exception being young listeners into the vinyl trend that seems to be popular at the moment....it just hasnt been around long enough to know if its just a passing phase or not, see below)

The younger generation (below 30) do not care about physical product. So, its back to "singles releases" like some of the 1960s was with 45RPM records that had no album counterpart...In 2014, an artist puts a song up one at a time up for download (The New Business Model suggests it be free and a band should concentrate on merchandise/tix sales for income but thats a whole other can of worms discussion)....The idea of an"album" has gone by the wayside for a lot of younger listeners ....If the idea of the album has evaporated, then many attributes -- such as the "concept album" approach are also disappearing

I think this may be true of the vast majority of younger people buying music but most of my friends have a music collection that they've bought and we're all still under 30. I may be the crazy one with nearly 2,000 albums but that's me.

It sounds like we're mainly agreed that there is still a need for new albums but things to my mind are limited by the "greatest hits" problem whereby people seeing the Stones want to see certain songs and so new music is passed over. The fact that there's also a vast amount of music around that is easily heard and unanimously rated by "The great and the good" as great music doesn't help people want to explore or generate a buzz like perhaps occurred in the late 60's. I can't comment for that decade or the feelings around it though.

Lastly, a comment from Danny Baker on the Beeb is something I'll always remember. It was on a show discussing the album by decade with a panel of people. He said in the 60's and 70's, people wouldn't care that you had wide range of music in your collection, it was all good music. He commented that (perhaps after punk) it doesn't necessarily seem to be the case now.

[Esoteric]

Funnily enough I think that those numbers for Ian Anderson given what I know would probably be about right over a 2 year period, however Ian has charted and has good international appeal.

TFK - they are very talented and well meaning but I ain't buying it. I think I'd apply that 'off by a factor of 10' mentioned earlier.

I would bet the new Ian Anderson would be hard pressed to come anywhere close to those numbers.

[Plasmatopia]

TFK - they are very talented and well meaning but I ain't buying it. I think I'd apply that 'off by a factor of 10' mentioned earlier.

I would bet the new Ian Anderson would be hard pressed to come anywhere close to those numbers.

LOL, well, I'm not trying to sell anything. I have no reason to doubt the numbers as they were mentioned by more than one band member at a time when they weren't necessarily all in agreement on a lot of things. Also, anytime these numbers discussions have come up they were in terms of total sales since the release of each album not on a per year basis or anything like that.

[Esoteric]

End of the subject but when it comes to numbers , I do know some bands also have included their streams to us in their sales numbers and these are pretty irrelevant unless they are in the absolute millions. Streaming is not only pretty crap for bands in terms of actual money in the bank, (apart from quite bizzarley anyone in Sweden , who tell us on here they do ok from it--they seem to be a total exception) it's also pretty insignificant revenue for indie labels too at the average level--it is mainly used as a marketing add on. Numbers to be counted as "sold" for the purposes of setting advances etc can only really be physical, legal paid for digital "album" downloads and single paid for "track" legal downloads. What I will say as a final comment is that I think these days unless you are still selling 10,000 units plus and even then can keep costs relatively low, you really have to want to make an album for reasons other then pure cash.

[Jacob Holm-Lupo]

Well, Sweden and Norway sort of have their own model for streaming revenues, and my understanding is that the "Scamdinavian model" will eventually be adopted by the rest of the world. We are early adaptors up here, partly because of Spotify.

[NogbadTheBad]

How is the Scandinavian model different?

[battema]

Well, Sweden and Norway sort of have their own model for streaming revenues, and my understanding is that the "Scamdinavian model" will eventually be adopted by the rest of the world. We are early adaptors up here, partly because of Spotify.

I've never visited Scamdinavia...other than being overpriced, I've heard it is rather nice

[Jacob Holm-Lupo]

To be perfectly honest I don't know about the technicalities - I was just discussing this with the head of one of the major labels here in Norway the other day. I think it partly has to do with how the labels treat the revenues from streaming services, and partly it has to do with the streaming services here in Scandinavia themselves. What makes Scandinavia such a unique market for streaming is simply the fact that so many people stream - rather than use more "old fashioned" download services. The label head I was talking to said that he is getting a lot of interest from colleagues internationally who want to approach the Norwegian/Scandinavian model.

All I know is that compared to for instance US labels we know, we seem to be getting more bang for our streamed bucks than they do.

Here's an article talking about some of it: http://musically.com/2014/02/27/stre...s-scandinavia/

[undergroundrailroad]

If I think I have something worth saying musically, and I feel comfortable that within our limited audience there'd be interest, then it is worth trying to make an album. At the same time...there are so many bands now, and so many small groups in the same market...perhaps it is stupid but that notion of actually having something worthwhile to say above all that noise is harder and harder to justify.

You've said what I've wanted to say, but couldn't find a way to express it. As a person who has put out three solo albums and two with a band, it has gotten very hard to return to the mode of creating for the sake of creation. It takes enormous effort to make an album, even a really bad one. But lots of people are making really amazing albums and they're putting them up on Bandcamp where I can listen to them legally and free. Oh, they only put up one track as a sample? Then I'll check out that track and go on to the band that can give me more free stuff. If I get bored of that bottomless supply, then I can bring up Spotify and listen to the entire history of recorded music prog and otherwise free of charge and legally.

Tossing a new album into that feels a little like taking a grain of sand out of my backyard and driving to Miami Beach to deposit it there. Even the act of listening to an album seems like picking a blade of grass out of a field. I'm struck by how many times I feel pity for the bands for going to all that trouble, because there's almost always their unspoken ambition for a reward that they're never going to get.

There are 1 or 2 prog albums coming out every single day according to the newprogreleases blog. Some of them are astounding, others are pretty good, and all but the worst of them would have been well worth a listen at one time. The Best of 2013 thread on this forum after 15 pages made note of what couldn't be more then 5-10% of what was released in just this one genre.

Releases in the past year by Big Big Train, Not a Good Sign, miRthkon, Sean Moran and many others stand at the top of their genres. The standards are being raised even as the rewards are constantly being lowered. There will be more even more amazing albums in the coming years by people with full-time IT and accounting jobs who somehow accumulated musical expertise somewhere along the way and nobody will quite know why. At this point, any money that is exchanged is an alms and a lovely token of respect.

The flip side is that we now have an awesome perspective on how much musical beauty mankind has produced in recorded form over the last century or so. It towers and spirals into the great beyond, a vast, swirling ocean of musical thought and technical bravura, everywhere inviting you into little caverns that reach right to the depths of the human soul. Music has to be the most compelling argument for how very special and magnificent humans are. I think the best reason for making new music is that it puts us on the plane of a creator, which is a very different feeling that we normally experience in an overwhelmed society.

[mx20]

You've said what I've wanted to say, but couldn't find a way to express it. As a person who has put out three solo albums and two with a band, it has gotten very hard to return to the mode of creating for the sake of creation. It takes enormous effort to make an album, even a really bad one. But lots of people are making really amazing albums and they're putting them up on Bandcamp where I can listen to them legally and free. Oh, they only put up one track as a sample? Then I'll check out that track and go on to the band that can give me more free stuff. If I get bored of that bottomless supply, then I can bring up Spotify and listen to the entire history of recorded music prog and otherwise free of charge and legally.

Tossing a new album into that feels a little like taking a grain of sand out of my backyard and driving to Miami Beach to deposit it there. Even the act of listening to an album seems like picking a blade of grass out of a field. I'm struck by how many times I feel pity for the bands for going to all that trouble, because there's almost always their unspoken ambition for a reward that they're never going to get...

Well said, and I share many of these sentiments.

[the winter tree]

To save money on production costs and time on my next album I'm thinking about doing a concept album called "41:10", an homage to John Cage's "4:33".
I can do the mastering myself and won't have to put in all those tedious hours of tracking,editing and mixing. I plan on having minimalist cover art and not much text in the booklet. Hopefully I'll break even or maybe even make a bit of cash...

[Plasmatopia]

Only until the content-less reviews start being published.

[Trane]

Well, Sweden and Norway sort of have their own model for streaming revenues, and my understanding is that the "Scamdinavian model" will eventually be adopted by the rest of the world. We are early adaptors up here, partly because of Spotify.

A Freudian slip, maybe, Jakob??

[bondegezou]

Read somewhere that Aerosmith's last album peaked at 60 000 Stateside so even the biggies don't shift many!

Yes's Fly from Here had worldwide sales of just under 100k 7 months after release, I was told. That appears to be broadly around what everything since Keys to Ascension has sold. In comparison, Talk back in the early 1990s sold about 300k in just the US.

Henry

[NogbadTheBad]

Have to admit that I find that kind of depressing given the /100 most new artists I'd digging are getting.

[bondegezou]

Prog (and prog listeners) will all be dead, but today's kids will be middle-aged and they'll still be listening to rap. Rap will play on all the "classic" or "oldies" radio stations. Whatever the new kids are listening to will be all over -- judging by the decline in music from 1970s to 2000s (nobody sings anymore, beats are all 4/4 drum machines, lyrics are F this and F that -- I predict in 15 years music will be kids hitting the ground with rocks and howling.

It is an inevitable part of growing old that one comes to think that today's kids have lousy music. It is, of course, not true.

Not that I listen to much music by today's kids. I guess the last such album I bought was Lily Allen's It's Not Me, It's You. Great album... For comparison, there's an album that was top ten in the UK, US, Canada, Australia, Ireland &c. -- overall, 10th best-selling album of 2009 in the UK and 148th best-selling album of 2009 in the US -- which euqates to 2 million total sales worldwide (first year sales).

Henry

[Adrian]

There used to be more room in the industry for bands like this to continue to produce music, and the fans would show their support and buy merch and the new records. Now people just download everything for free, and the bands are supposed to just go along with it and pretend like it is ok, or you are just in it for the money. FUCK THAT. It isn't just about the money, but what happened to investing in the the music you believe in? People say they are too broke to pay for music, yet they have all the money in the world to pay for netflix, cable, crappy cell phone apps, and the latest i-phone/pad/thingy that does a little bit more than the last version that came out 6 months ago. Pay for your music, or you are stealing it. You are not sticking it to the man. YOU ARE THE MAN. Record companies have been stealing from the artists for years, but that is no excuse for you to steal also. If you are downloading out of some sort of twisted principle, then when is the last time you sent a check directly to the artists you download? Walk the walk.

Just because I am an artist that cares about what I do with all my heart, that does not mean I am a jerk for putting a value on it. Are you a fan? Don't tell me, SHOW ME! Pay up, or at least help spread the word or something, but don't just take from me and expect me to be happy about it. It isn't ok.

Standing ovation! Thank you. People can try to rationalize all day long why they think it's OK to not pay for the music they listen to, but this is the bottom line. These freeolader "fans" are as much to blame for the current state of music as the music industry itself. It's self-evident in seemingly every other walk of life that we don't have the right to take the fruits of other people's labors without offering compensation in return, yet when it comes to music it almost seems expected as if it should all just be free for the taking. I don't get it, and I probably never will.

[squ1ggle]

Tossing a new album into that feels a little like taking a grain of sand out of my backyard and driving to Miami Beach to deposit it there. Even the act of listening to an album seems like picking a blade of grass out of a field. I'm struck by how many times I feel pity for the bands for going to all that trouble, because there's almost always their unspoken ambition for a reward that they're never going to get.

An excellent thread, and I've enjoyed reading so many well considered and insightful responses.
We find ourselves asking this question whenever the cycle returns to the point where we start work on "the next one".
The answer tends to take on a number of dimensions:
- Artistic: Is there something you want to say or add to what you've done before?
- Personal: Given the amount of time & effort required (writing, rehearsing, recording), are you up for it?
- Financial: Given the amount of investment in recording and pressing an album, is the likely financial reward worth it?
- Spiritual: A bit wishy washy, this one, but generally are you doing more good than harm? Are you giving something back to the world, or just contributing to the noise?

The first two are clearly personal, but the second two are worthy of general comment.

It is certainly possible to release a good sounding album for less money these days. We tend to view the band as a 'not for profit' kind of concern and scale the recording budget to match the likely (or previous) sales. There's min and max limits here. If there's not likely to be enough sales to cover the minimum costs then you're in the realms of vanity publishing, and that doesn't feel right. If your income is such that you need to start hiring choirs and orchestras for a month at Abbey Road in order to not make a profit, then that's a different problem

The spiritual dimension is more difficult to tie down. Clearly, the relative merits of a piece of art is problematic, but making an album contributes in other ways too. In thinking about this I've come to realise that, when we make an album, we are routing funds to a variety of musical professionals and form a part of their revenue stream. The studio engineer/owner; the session musicians; the cover artist; the cd manufacturers; the guy who hand crafts my guitars ... there's a whole bunch of people who benefit from one's artistic efforts. So, over and above the (obviously) debatable relative merits of your art, you are still giving something back in the very act of making it (even if it's a crock of the proverbial and nobody likes it). This is handy if you're a sensitive sort and worry about the implied hubris of daring to release music you've created

When it comes down to it, you can't possibly know the impact that a piece of music you've written/recorded will have on others. If you've sold a fair few, odds are that at least some of them will have liked it, and a small number may even have been influenced by it ... you may never get to find out, but you can't rule it out.

Just after we released our first album, I found myself on a work trip to the States and I got to hook up with a US Prog band and attend one of their rehearsals. I was quite simply blown away. The band seemed to have pulled off a trick I'd been striving for myself, artistically, combining complex composition and musicianship without sacrificing beauty or elegance. The bar had been raised, and their albums have been a source of inspiration ever since. I am a different artist as a result. That band? The Underground Railroad.

So, for the record, thank you so much for releasing your albums .... even if I'm the only one, you've given something back to the world

Phil.

[jkelman]

I've never visited Scamdinavia...other than being overpriced, I've heard it is rather nice

I've spent 24+ weeks there since 2006.... It's beyond nice...it's stunning geography, populated by people who don't see problems as obstacles but as opportunities (I've stories to back that feeling up). They also have a totally different idea about the value of art and intellectual property. It doesn't surprise me that they would have different/better model for streaming compensation....there are a lot of things about how they approach cultural support from which North America, in particular, could learn a thing or ten....

I'd live there if it weren't for the long, dark winters....but feel so privileged to have had access to the music scene there for the past 9 years.


...but yes...it is incredibly expensive...leslecially Oslo. You learn to scout out reasonably priced restaurants...