January 18, 2008 4:00 AM PST

Don't miss lessons Radiohead, Trent Reznor offer

Musicians aren't merchants.

We certainly learned that through Radiohead and Trent Reznor's separate experiments with choose-your-price album promotions.

Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails

(Credit: Rob Sheridan)

In October, Reznor, the leader of the band Nine Inch Nails, and Radiohead attempted to promote and distribute albums online without the help of a major record label. Both offered fans the opportunity to obtain the music for free. Both saw some success.

But they also illustrated that the music business is probably better left in the hands of businessmen. Musicians are not the new labels. Artists need someone to provide financial support and business acumen. If we end up ridding the world of labels, we'll only have to re-create them--in some other, probably more nimble form.

Last week, I interviewed Reznor about the online promotion of rapper Saul William's album The Inevitable Rise and Liberation of NiggyTardust. In that interview, Reznor said he was disappointed that only 18 percent of the more than 150,000 people who downloaded the album paid for it. He and Williams offered two options: pay nothing or obtain a higher-quality audio version for $5.

By backing Williams with his money, name, and know-how, Reznor essentially thrust himself into the role of a music label. That is, a music label with a lot to learn. The first lesson was that you don't always back a winner. A music company's fortunes can often rest on its ability to discover superstars. Profits generated by a few marquee acts have always kept the companies going while all the other performers break even or lose money.

EMI said this week that only 5 percent of its acts are profitable. This kind of prospecting requires a huge investment.

Reznor said he didn't get involved with Williams to profit, but acknowledged that he spent too much making the album and said he hasn't yet recouped his money. A record company can afford to make bad bets once in a while, said Chris Castle, a music industry insider who has worked as a vice president for both Sony Music and A&M Records. Musicians, even successful ones like Reznor, probably can't.

"Trent thinks that (150,000 downloads) is bad?" Castle asked. "I'll tell you bad. Bad is zero. Bad is when you spend $100,000 on marketing and tour support and you got nothing. Do you know how hard it is to go from a cold start and just get 1,000 people to listen to an album? Welcome to the music business, Trent."

Does that mean, gasp, that record labels aren't entirely evil? Well, maybe. Charges of musician exploitation and plain old bad taste aside, they certainly have a purpose. The music business is primarily about promotion, Castle said. You build name recognition through all sorts of methods: radio play, getting write-ups in music magazines, making sure a CD is prominently promoted in record stores. That takes money. Castle offered this example.

"Finding music at record stores has always been tough," Castle said. "If you go into a store knowing what you want, or you're a music aficionado, it's easy. For the superficial buyer it's harder. Those are the people that are going to be influenced by displays at end caps of aisles or the stuff that's featured at listening posts. You don't get that spot because you're a nice person. All that stuff is paid for."

"What's unsettling is that you can't help fall into a familiarity with what works and what has worked. As much as one structure of a record deal is unfair and how little you get is bad, there was some comfort in knowing that things would work, that things like promotion and marketing would work."
--Trent Reznor

Then there is all the heavy lifting to worry about. In the telephone conversation I had with Reznor, he sounded like a guy who had been working too hard. He said he poured 18 months of his life into helping make NiggyTardust. Not only did he put up his own money, he produced the album, performed on it, oversaw all of the business tasks right down to the writing of the text on Williams' Web site.

Artists who sign with a label don't perform these chores. Executives packing MBAs and years of business expertise do. Is that a good thing? Not necessarily, but that division of labor helps.

"I'm spending a lot more time being the business guy than the musician and I really don't like doing that," Reznor said. He found the role of record executive more difficult than he had expected.

"What's unsettling is that you can't help fall into a familiarity with what works and what has worked," said Reznor, who left Universal Music Group last year. "As much as one structure of a record deal is unfair and how little you get is bad, there was some comfort in knowing that things would work, that things like promotion and marketing would work."

It's not going out on a limb to say the current music industry business is broken and that's why the likes of Radiohead, Reznor, and Madonna as well as consumers are revolting against it, said Jerry Del Colliano, professor of music industry at the University of Southern California. Nonetheless, he said that companies like the labels are needed to help develop talent and help the public discover that talent.

"The labels aren't going anywhere," Colliano said. "They're just going to have different duties in the future."

What about Radiohead, you say? Many argue giving away the digital version of In Rainbows was a wild success for the British supergroup. The band hasn't revealed the album's Internet sales figures, but last week more than 122,000 physical copies were sold, making it the No.1 album in the U.S. Nearly everybody on the Web credited the online promotion for the booming CD sales.

But Radiohead is one of the world's best-known acts. The vast majority of musicians have more in common with Williams, a little-known rapper, poet, and filmmaker. Their name recognition, unlike the British superband, doesn't count for much outside a small, loyal following.

It's also interesting to note that Radiohead's manager, in an interview with The New York Times, said he doubted the choose-your-price promotion would ever work again.

Even so, Castle said Reznor and Williams shouldn't give up the good fight.

"I like Trent, I like his heart," Castle said. "So he shouldn't get down. He should get Saul on the road and keep him on the road touring. He shouldn't come off until they can figure out where his core audience is."

And who does all that? "If you're going to market someone, you're going to have to have a publicist," Castle said. "And you're going to have to have tour support, somebody to care about you while you're on the road."

Perhaps an old-fashioned record label doing all the behind-the-scenes work isn't the best idea for the future of music. But someone has to do it.

Originally posted at News Blog
Recent posts from Crave
Build a better photoblog this weekend with Pixelpost 1.7.1
'Wrath of the Lich King' looking good, 'WoW' fans say
Burning it up in 'Far Cry 2'
Win a PC on YouTube
Zen Stone goes big, flammable
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 14 comments (Page 1 of 2)
This article totally misses it
by sethhale January 18, 2008 6:35 AM PST
Just because two bands did not make the impact and sales that major records have is because it is a new business model. Others will see their mistakes and places were Radiohead and Trent did well and improve upon them. The significance of these two bands efforts is that they did not use the record labels. NOT that they failed.

It disappoints me to see articles that crush efforts to do things in new ways, and in this case a better way.

Everyday small businesses are started across America, most of them fail while others become Starbucks.
Reply to this comment
This article totally misses it
by sethhale January 18, 2008 6:35 AM PST
Just because two bands did not make the impact and sales that major records have is because it is a new business model. Others will see their mistakes and places were Radiohead and Trent did well and improve upon them. The significance of these two bands efforts is that they did not use the record labels. NOT that they failed.

It disappoints me to see articles that crush efforts to do things in new ways, and in this case a better way.

Everyday small businesses are started across America, most of them fail while others become Starbucks.
Reply to this comment
New business model helps artists as a whole
by ShinobiKoushaku January 18, 2008 8:24 AM PST
This article neglects the many artists who will never even be considered for a label large enough to offer this kind of support. What do you say about the independent labels that artists themselves start? Is that any different? Why can't an artist be their own label? I don't see that many of them have a choice.

Labels are going to exist because there are viable superstars to be taken advantage of, but for the non-superficial listener, I can't think of a better model than what these artists are offering.

Admit it, some artists are just never going to take off...at least this offers them control and avoids getting bogged down in contract mumbo-jumbo and all the other messes labels have traditionally stuck artists with.

As a musician, I think music should be free...and then the people who actually wish to support something that is decent will make the effort to ensure that they can continue to enjoy a good product. The thing is, that good product has to be made available and I think this will, in time, turn into a viable means of distribution and marketing in its own sense.
Reply to this comment
New business model helps artists as a whole
by ShinobiKoushaku January 18, 2008 8:24 AM PST
This article neglects the many artists who will never even be considered for a label large enough to offer this kind of support. What do you say about the independent labels that artists themselves start? Is that any different? Why can't an artist be their own label? I don't see that many of them have a choice.

Labels are going to exist because there are viable superstars to be taken advantage of, but for the non-superficial listener, I can't think of a better model than what these artists are offering.

Admit it, some artists are just never going to take off...at least this offers them control and avoids getting bogged down in contract mumbo-jumbo and all the other messes labels have traditionally stuck artists with.

As a musician, I think music should be free...and then the people who actually wish to support something that is decent will make the effort to ensure that they can continue to enjoy a good product. The thing is, that good product has to be made available and I think this will, in time, turn into a viable means of distribution and marketing in its own sense.
Reply to this comment
Why is it always either or?
by pmoosh January 18, 2008 9:34 AM PST
Big band such the Rolling Stone will always sell albums. It is just too convenient to walk through aisles at Target/Walmart and pick up an album on the way out - just like candy. And there will be always big promotions by big companies (EMI etc.) behind it - the whole package (new album - a tour - a TV appearance and and and).

(One side note here. I went to the radiohead website back then and didn't download anything because they asked to many "dumb" questions. And with Trent's thing, I downloaded the album and decided not to pay for because it's just not my thing. So in both cases it didn't have anything to do with cheating my way out of paying.

Other groups that "cater" to a smaller audience can make a living by using the internet. Take a look at www.realvast.com. You go there pay and get the album, just as simple as that.

Trent and Radiohead were already part of that package and try to get out of it - why?

Where the internet can help is with new artists, artists that fall through the screening of the big companies. The internet can be one big demo tape. And one big screening room. Problem is there is no way of knowing what's out there, unless it is promoted in one way or the other, which is what the "industry" did.

This is the problem, where do I get new stuff from, without having to search for it. The "My Music" at my fingertips thing - the internet always promised. One way that worked for me is internet radio (Never tried lastfm). Listen to it in the background, until I hear something exciting. Internet Radio is the better radio - I think.

In short: Having an album sitting out there on internet to sorta free is not good enough, to rake in the big success.
Reply to this comment
Why is it always either or?
by pmoosh January 18, 2008 9:34 AM PST
Big band such the Rolling Stone will always sell albums. It is just too convenient to walk through aisles at Target/Walmart and pick up an album on the way out - just like candy. And there will be always big promotions by big companies (EMI etc.) behind it - the whole package (new album - a tour - a TV appearance and and and).

(One side note here. I went to the radiohead website back then and didn't download anything because they asked to many "dumb" questions. And with Trent's thing, I downloaded the album and decided not to pay for because it's just not my thing. So in both cases it didn't have anything to do with cheating my way out of paying.

Other groups that "cater" to a smaller audience can make a living by using the internet. Take a look at www.realvast.com. You go there pay and get the album, just as simple as that.

Trent and Radiohead were already part of that package and try to get out of it - why?

Where the internet can help is with new artists, artists that fall through the screening of the big companies. The internet can be one big demo tape. And one big screening room. Problem is there is no way of knowing what's out there, unless it is promoted in one way or the other, which is what the "industry" did.

This is the problem, where do I get new stuff from, without having to search for it. The "My Music" at my fingertips thing - the internet always promised. One way that worked for me is internet radio (Never tried lastfm). Listen to it in the background, until I hear something exciting. Internet Radio is the better radio - I think.

In short: Having an album sitting out there on internet to sorta free is not good enough, to rake in the big success.
Reply to this comment
It does work
by MadLyb January 18, 2008 11:18 AM PST
I own a Production company that provides Audio, Video and Lighting production for a lot of smaller music festivals and trust me, there are lots of bands making a healthy living without a label in the mix and the Internet has done nothing but help them.
One particular band that I have worked with had been together for almost 7 years, released 4 independent albums and made enough money that the band was their full-time job and then they signed with a label a couple years ago.
Very first thing, the label wanted to take their music in a different direction to enlarge their audience and brought in several 'consultants' to work on their image and marketing. Then, they were 'required' to use a label selected Producer for their album.
The album was released and sold almost 10 times as many copies as their previous indie work, but because of the extra costs introduced by the label, the revenue was half that of their last release. As to the money made touring, the label didn't want them playing in 'dumps' and raised their minimum charge for a show and they went from over 150 shows a year to about 60.
The end result is they are struggling financially and trying to get out of their contract.
If you are a RadioHead or NiN, then you are going to have the volume to absorb the extra costs introduced by a label, but for smaller groups, it doesn't really work.
Reply to this comment
It does work
by MadLyb January 18, 2008 11:18 AM PST
I own a Production company that provides Audio, Video and Lighting production for a lot of smaller music festivals and trust me, there are lots of bands making a healthy living without a label in the mix and the Internet has done nothing but help them.
One particular band that I have worked with had been together for almost 7 years, released 4 independent albums and made enough money that the band was their full-time job and then they signed with a label a couple years ago.
Very first thing, the label wanted to take their music in a different direction to enlarge their audience and brought in several 'consultants' to work on their image and marketing. Then, they were 'required' to use a label selected Producer for their album.
The album was released and sold almost 10 times as many copies as their previous indie work, but because of the extra costs introduced by the label, the revenue was half that of their last release. As to the money made touring, the label didn't want them playing in 'dumps' and raised their minimum charge for a show and they went from over 150 shows a year to about 60.
The end result is they are struggling financially and trying to get out of their contract.
If you are a RadioHead or NiN, then you are going to have the volume to absorb the extra costs introduced by a label, but for smaller groups, it doesn't really work.
Reply to this comment
Was it any GOOD!
by Papachair January 18, 2008 4:38 PM PST
I think it's funny how the whole issue revolves around the marketing and sales
figures. I haven't seen an article yet that suggests the difference in success
being related to the quality of the material. I think the Radiohead album did
better because it was a better product. Maybe people didn't pay for the "Niggy"
album because they came, they downloaded, and then they deleted!
Reply to this comment
Was it any GOOD!
by Papachair January 18, 2008 4:38 PM PST
I think it's funny how the whole issue revolves around the marketing and sales
figures. I haven't seen an article yet that suggests the difference in success
being related to the quality of the material. I think the Radiohead album did
better because it was a better product. Maybe people didn't pay for the "Niggy"
album because they came, they downloaded, and then they deleted!
Reply to this comment
1 | 2 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

I Crave

advertisement
Crave home

Crave

Switch background color:
A Blog from CNET

A Blog from CNET

Visit other CNET Networks sites: