Yes it is hard to keep a job, but those that don't have jobs to support their music should not be in a band.
wut.
THOUSANDS of popular musicians were in dirt poverty while trying to get their careers of the ground. Tom Keifer was ravaging dumpsters for a meal. Look a the stories of Metallica and Anthrax. Elvis. Johnny Cash, for God's sake. And the greatest story of them all, for me, is Jimi Hendrix.
Also, 'dumb' and 'irresponsible' are synonymous. If someone is pursuing something dumb, they are being irresponsible since that activity that has perceived consequences that could prove negative.
It is extremely lame to have your audience pay for your album outside of buying it upon release. I couldn't care less how many bands have been successful with it. Since the first day I heard about bands doing this I thought it was horrible and I still do.
Okay, everyone, can we just STOP for a minute and remember that the music industry as a whole, indie or upstairs, is a business that emulates, in America, the fundamental concepts of capital venture? It's basic investment principles: an investor sees potential, throws funds into the project, awaits the finished result. This is how independent movies are made. Securing financing beforehand is a common and economically sound funding option. Will some bands fail at it? Of course, just as some business fail to deliver, the investor risks loss. But bands have been very successful at this and many of the artists we listen to have done the same thing outside of or without the internet.
Yes it is hard to keep a job, but those that don't have jobs to support their music should not be in a band.
wut.
THOUSANDS of popular musicians were in dirt poverty while trying to get their careers of the ground. Tom Keifer was ravaging dumpsters for a meal. Look a the stories of Metallica and Anthrax. Elvis. Johnny Cash, for God's sake. And the greatest story of them all, for me, is Jimi Hendrix.
Also, 'dumb' and 'irresponsible' are synonymous. If someone is pursuing something dumb, they are being irresponsible since that activity that has perceived consequences that could prove negative.
And they pushed on IN SPITE of what seemed was going nowhere because they had a passion and a belief in what they were doing.
But, hey, in this world where everyone else should always pay for whatever you wanna do I guess this fits right in.
Yes it is hard to keep a job, but those that don't have jobs to support their music should not be in a band.
wut.
THOUSANDS of popular musicians were in dirt poverty while trying to get their careers of the ground. Tom Keifer was ravaging dumpsters for a meal. Look a the stories of Metallica and Anthrax. Elvis. Johnny Cash, for God's sake. And the greatest story of them all, for me, is Jimi Hendrix.
Also, 'dumb' and 'irresponsible' are synonymous. If someone is pursuing something dumb, they are being irresponsible since that activity that has perceived consequences that could prove negative.
And they pushed on IN SPITE of what seemed was going nowhere because they had a passion and a belief in what they were doing.
But, hey, in this world where everyone else should always pay for whatever you wanna do I guess this fits right in.
I don't see how this is relevant. Many artists do the same thing in the modern age. Many still push on even if their living situations is either crap or nonexistent. I know a gentleman who's living out of his van trying to make his music work because he can't land a job; does that mean he lacks passion and a belief in what he's doing if he employs the services of angel investors?
It is extremely lame to have your audience pay for your album outside of buying it upon release. I couldn't care less how many bands have been successful with it. Since the first day I heard about bands doing this I thought it was horrible and I still do.
Okay, everyone, can we just STOP for a minute and remember that the music industry as a whole, indie or upstairs, is a business that emulates, in America, the fundamental concepts of capital venture? It's basic investment principles: an investor sees potential, throws funds into the project, awaits the finished result. This is how independent movies are made. Securing financing beforehand is a common and economically sound funding option. Will some bands fail at it? Of course, just as some business fail to deliver, the investor risks loss. But bands have been very successful at this and many of the artists we listen to have done the same thing outside of or without the internet.
An investor sees potential profit by putting money into something. Established bands are asking their FANS to pay for the HOPE of someday hearing new music.
It is extremely lame to have your audience pay for your album outside of buying it upon release. I couldn't care less how many bands have been successful with it. Since the first day I heard about bands doing this I thought it was horrible and I still do.
Okay, everyone, can we just STOP for a minute and remember that the music industry as a whole, indie or upstairs, is a business that emulates, in America, the fundamental concepts of capital venture? It's basic investment principles: an investor sees potential, throws funds into the project, awaits the finished result. This is how independent movies are made. Securing financing beforehand is a common and economically sound funding option. Will some bands fail at it? Of course, just as some business fail to deliver, the investor risks loss. But bands have been very successful at this and many of the artists we listen to have done the same thing outside of or without the internet.
An investor sees potential profit by putting money into something. Bands are asking their FANS to pay for the HOPE of someday hearing new music.
Can you really not see the difference?
On a monetary level, sure. But angel investors grant money as well if there is an incentive at hand. AI's and VI's don't always just look for a monetary ROI. They have the option of receiving something of interest.
And yeah, bands are asking, but that's what entrepreneurs do as well (I had to). And the fans see potential in the band, and put their money into it, looking forward to great music and extra swag.
The only people really complaining about Kickstarter are folks whose business models are stuck in the last century.
We will really see where people's music appreciation is when they have to pay for the recording for every band if the kickstarter model becomes the norm.
When I saw this bunch of spiky haired 80's obsessed God loving types, I immediately thought of you guys!
They have a Kickstarter project finishing in a few days and look like they could do with a little help getting across the line. The cash is for a new album produced by that Oz bloke from Stryper.
Thanks, I just heard about these guys from one of my rare visits to the Christian Metal Realm. The video sounds quite amateur, but I have hope that Oz can bring the band to a new level. It's my favorite style of music, so I'll try and contribute.
stormspell Heart of Metal
Number of posts : 1593 Age : 54
Subject: Re: Kickstarter rant? Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:10 am
Or that obscure demo band Malisha which wanted $30,000 to "transfer the original demo tapes" and make a cd re-release of their arcane album originally pressed in 100 copies and thus a hot collectors item nowadays (almost as hot as Killen
I've pledged twice for video games 3-4 years ago. Both games are not yet released, and both games were supposed to be 100% fan-funded and independent. Yet one of the games has signed a major distribution deal already... pfft!
Runicen Heart of Metal
Number of posts : 1598 Age : 40
Subject: Re: Kickstarter rant? Wed Jul 30, 2014 9:35 am
I'm pretty much on board with the venture capital argument for Kickstarter. Where it gets lame is when you have bands actually meet their goals and deliver nothing. Hell, in the era of personal studio as professional studio, you could probably afford to BUY your own pro-level recording rig and hire out some kid with an audio engineering degree to run it if you couldn't figure out how to book studio time.
For my part, I've only had successes with Kickstarter and every product I've backed has been a delight once I've received it, so it may also be down to picking the right horse to back.
I paid $10 for the new Babys cd. I got a digital DL with 2 bonus tracks, an autographed hard copy and sold it for $15 2 days later. And, btw, the album KICKS MAJOR ASS!!!!!
I have issue when a band asks for say 35,000 bucks and get over 100,000. Regardless of how Kickstarter does or doesn't work, you meet your goal and end it. I've seen bands end the campaign "early" due to lack of interest. So why can't a band end it "early" if they reach their goal before the allotted time ? I guess accountability means nothing to some bands.
I'm with Shannon and Cliff on this, work hard and do it yourself. If that's too much to ask, find another hobby. Maybe I can do a kickstarter to get me a mid 40's knucklehead rolling chassis (basket case) and have them pay for the parts I'll need to get it up and goin. I can send them video of me wrenching on it (call it educational) and it will have music too. Cause I always listen to music when wrenchin.
Quite a few Kickstarters I've gotten on board with, you get the sense that they low-balled what they were asking for and were actually putting up the majority themselves. In one case, it was a relatively unknown session vocalist who'd done video game soundtrack work putting out a CD that needed help with studio costs and more expensive session players on some rather outlandish instruments. That can't be cheap, but the end total being requested seemed low for everything being done.
Also, most bands, if they REALLY go over, seem to be big into stretch goals (i.e., if we pass our goal by X, everyone paying more than Y gets new reward Z). Those are always groovy.
Where it seems to work best is for people who've gone 75% of the way already on their own and are offering something unique to people for, essentially, investing capital in the completion of the project.
Without exception, I believe every project I have backed was done in such a way that special rewards were given to backers BUT the intention was to print more CDs or records than were needed just for those backers. I'm totally ok with that if I'm behind the music.
In the download age, it's the best way a fan can really get behind their favorites, so long as the artists deliver the goods.
Quite a few Kickstarters I've gotten on board with, you get the sense that they low-balled what they were asking for and were actually putting up the majority themselves. In one case, it was a relatively unknown session vocalist who'd done video game soundtrack work putting out a CD that needed help with studio costs and more expensive session players on some rather outlandish instruments. That can't be cheap, but the end total being requested seemed low for everything being done.
Also, most bands, if they REALLY go over, seem to be big into stretch goals (i.e., if we pass our goal by X, everyone paying more than Y gets new reward Z). Those are always groovy.
That's what happened with the Swimming Pool Qs Kickstarter I supported. Originally, only contributors at a certain level would get a T shirt but when they exceeded their goal, everyone who contributed got a T shirt.
_________________ "The cat is the most ruthless, most terrifying of animals." - Spock in the "Catspaw" episode of ToS Season 2.
I think that the idea is dying due to bands not getting on board with the original DIY ethos.
I was looking on Pledgemusic and saw the new Black Veil Brides album listed. Black Veil Brides are signed to a major label, their funding was in place and the album will be released in the usual way amid a major marketing campaign, but the album is there for pre-order as a way to rip off to 'involve' the fans with a hunk of other crap that you can over pay for.
When it's become just another marketing ploy by the labels, it's dead.
Yeah, that sucks. It started as a way for bands not signed to a major label to get funds but when bands who are already signed to a label start hitting up fans, that's BS. Way to ruin it for all the other bands...
_________________ "The cat is the most ruthless, most terrifying of animals." - Spock in the "Catspaw" episode of ToS Season 2.
I've done pledgemusic and kickstarter. I like both. I think its a great way to get some things you might not be able to get elsewhere. I like autographed stuff and most bands will have it when they do these. If they don't I won't pledge and just wait for it to go on sale at best buy or wherever. There really has to be something good offered to me to do it.
I had one bad experience with Timo Tolkki and still never got my money back. They don't take your money if the project doesn't get fully funded or if the artist cancels it. Timo cancelled both of his projects. He gave the option to keep the money in towards his other project so I did and actually emailed him a few times to make sure what I was keeping my money into but I ended up getting nothing. Even emailed him about it and it was suppose to be taken care of. If it was I never saw my money back.
I've done Dog Fashion Disco, Polkadot Cadaver, Ghost Ship Octavius (which isn't done yet), Flotsam and Jetsam (2 times) I forget who else, but I've been happy so far. Also did one for Rifftrax where they wanted to Riff the movie Twilight. It got funded but they weren't allowed to do the movie (which was a possibility) so they did a different one. I was still happy.
There basically isn't any way for a band to make money, not even touring. If this helps our favorite bands stay around, I'm all in. If the bands go way past their goal, thats even better for them. The people are still getting what they pledged for and the band is making extra money to hopefully make another new album.
_________________
Runicen Heart of Metal
Number of posts : 1598 Age : 40
Subject: Re: Kickstarter rant? Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:47 am
For every major label shit toucher muddying the water on these sites, you have Arthur Brown's Zim Zam Zim (which kicks immeasurable amounts of ass) and Devin Townsend's Casualties of Cool (didn't do much for me, but I still dig the guy so whatever).
I think, on balance, the idea hasn't been torpedoed yet.
We need to place blame on the bands themselves, not Kickstarter.
Trying to understand why people still have a negative view of Kickstarter, a fundamental and long-surviving concept which has only one modernized component: the internet. Other than that, it's something that startups have been doing for ages, and bands have also been doing in some form or another. My band held car washes and sold tickets to raise money for gear and a recording (which never actually surfaced). The elements had a different order but it was still the same concept.
What Kickstarter needs to implement is some sort of safeguard against bum investments, even though they happen as well in other markets. Perhaps more thorough profiling--public investment is still highly research-based in order to be viable, so prospects need to be able to fully investigate these bands, their tiered goals, available resources, third-party personnel (studio, engineer, etc), and waaay beyond. But no matter how far it goes, there'g going to be risk involved. One band hands out million dollar checks, another faults on their incentive. The artists need to be held accountable, plain and simple.
Kickstarter is a respectable venture. The vilification of artists choosing to employ its benefits needs to stop. Especially considering that no money is spent until the goal is met.
I have issue when a band asks for say 35,000 bucks and get over 100,000. Regardless of how Kickstarter does or doesn't work, you meet your goal and end it. I've seen bands end the campaign "early" due to lack of interest. So why can't a band end it "early" if they reach their goal before the allotted time ? I guess accountability means nothing to some bands.
I'm with Shannon and Cliff on this, work hard and do it yourself. If that's too much to ask, find another hobby. Maybe I can do a kickstarter to get me a mid 40's knucklehead rolling chassis (basket case) and have them pay for the parts I'll need to get it up and goin. I can send them video of me wrenching on it (call it educational) and it will have music too. Cause I always listen to music when wrenchin.
What about something like Reading Rainbow who wanted only $100,000 and got over 5 million!
Subject: Re: Kickstarter rant? 
Fri Sep 06, 2013 4:54 pm
