![jakoblodwick:
catbird: fascinated: Nine Inch Nails released a new record today. It is free (as in beer and speech) and is licensed under a Creative Commons license, according to the liner notes. Trent is answering all those questions we’ve had for years with his actions. What if artists released their work directly and retained their rights? What if their releases were free and remixable? Would it matter? We will find out shortly, thank you Trent. I still think the more important question is: “What if an artist that hasn’t already built a career on the label system released their work directly, gave it away for free, retained their rights, etc. Would it matter?” The answer, sadly, to that one is “no, it doesn’t matter.” Myriad small unheard-of bands are out there posting their albums for free every day, but there’s still no good way for them to get heard. For all the chatter about how new technology/Music 2.0/viral marketing etc. has the power to “break” new artists, there are precious few examples of this actually occurring. This is true, there are precious few examples. Kind of sad — yet I’m optimistic, because I cannot believe that art relies on mainstream media. I am working on this problem. If nothing else, I will give you a valiant attempt in the coming months as I begin releasing great music from (mostly) unknown artists.
I don’t think the question is whether art relies on mainstream media. The issue is rather that art may rely on mainstream media to attain mainstream recognition. If the goal is to develop a niche artist, or a small loyal following (local or otherwise), I’d argue the internet and social media has made it substantially easier to do so.
If we’re talking about making it economically viable to exist as a non-mainstream artist in the current media landscape, I’m watching closely to see how this plays out, I don’t think we have a solution yet.
[This is all based on a definition of mainstream that accepts that any genre of music that could be defined as a major market for the product is mainstream, regardless of how alternative, outre, or anti-establishment the content or audience is.]](http://8.media.tumblr.com/TdSHzuaBO8n39qlpdYFkZ2Ml_500.jpg)
Nine Inch Nails released a new record today. It is free (as in beer and speech) and is licensed under a Creative Commons license, according to the liner notes.
Trent is answering all those questions we’ve had for years with his actions. What if artists released their work directly and retained their rights? What if their releases were free and remixable? Would it matter? We will find out shortly, thank you Trent.
I still think the more important question is: “What if an artist that hasn’t already built a career on the label system released their work directly, gave it away for free, retained their rights, etc. Would it matter?”
The answer, sadly, to that one is “no, it doesn’t matter.” Myriad small unheard-of bands are out there posting their albums for free every day, but there’s still no good way for them to get heard.
For all the chatter about how new technology/Music 2.0/viral marketing etc. has the power to “break” new artists, there are precious few examples of this actually occurring.
This is true, there are precious few examples. Kind of sad — yet I’m optimistic, because I cannot believe that art relies on mainstream media.
I am working on this problem. If nothing else, I will give you a valiant attempt in the coming months as I begin releasing great music from (mostly) unknown artists.
I don’t think the question is whether art relies on mainstream media. The issue is rather that art may rely on mainstream media to attain mainstream recognition. If the goal is to develop a niche artist, or a small loyal following (local or otherwise), I’d argue the internet and social media has made it substantially easier to do so.
If we’re talking about making it economically viable to exist as a non-mainstream artist in the current media landscape, I’m watching closely to see how this plays out, I don’t think we have a solution yet.
[This is all based on a definition of mainstream that accepts that any genre of music that could be defined as a major market for the product is mainstream, regardless of how alternative, outre, or anti-establishment the content or audience is.]
