17 Indie Artists on Their Oddest Odd Jobs That Pay the Bills When Music Doesn’t (not a poll)

These days it's almost impossible to remain completely unheard. At least one advantage with the current way is that you can always get a couple of hundred of people to hear your music anyway even with minimal promotion.

― mirostones

man there are whole programs written simply to play music that has never been heard, show videos that have never been seen. there are a lot of them.

permaban capitalism

The likes of Tusk, The Dark Side of the Moon, Abbey Road, Low, Avalon or any impeccably produced album you could care to name would not have been anywhere near the same without the financial backing of the band/artists record company.

Likewise, a lot of the smaller acts on - say, Mute - would not have had money invested in them - recording/touring/promotional budgets - without the revenue generated by the bigger selling acts on the roster.

So no, I disagree.

*sigh*

People clunking on Turrican is really annoying, I don't agree with exactly what he's saying but I don't think he's entirely wrong either-- there is a black-and-white discussion here about something that is more complicated

Clunking on "capitalism" is missing the point, also. 75% of music will still be not-worth-the-investment-of-your-time even if capitalism is eliminated, and the musicians creating that music will still be out here lamenting the fact that nobody wants to listen to their music

These 'Ban Turrican' posts are getting tiresome tbh. I don't agree with his points either but nothing he's said itt is even remotely beyond the pale so far.

― pomenitul, Saturday, April 13, 2019 2:54 PM (twenty-four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Thank you :)

I forget some of you can't grasp the concept of enjoying doing something

Clunking on "capitalism" is missing the point, also. 75% of music will still be not-worth-the-investment-of-your-time even if capitalism is eliminated, and the musicians creating that music will still be out here lamenting the fact that nobody wants to listen to their music

― flamboyant goon tie included

ok but that 75% is a completely made up number, first off

i also agree with you that abolishing capitalism will not keep people from complaining that nobody wants to listen to their music, if that's the crux of the issue to you then yes, no answers there

i'm more concerned with people like maggie roche, who isn't one of the made-up 75% nobody will listen to, who literally died due to the failures of american capitalism

man there are whole programs written simply to play music that has never been heard, show videos that have never been seen. there are a lot of them.

― Jaki Liebowitz (rushomancy), Saturday, 13 April 2019 16:09 (six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

True actually, now that you mention it I remember http://www.forgotify.com

Some of the stuff on there is pretty good.

I will amend what I said slightly, I think it is easy to have at least a couple of hundred people listen as long as you do some promotion. I think the big mistake is to just put stuff up there and hope that's enough.

But that is a long way from making a career out of it of course.

I do agree with Turrican in that I definitely miss the grand money pit records that were made possible by classic rock's imperial period

we'll definitely not see those again, but in the scheme of things it was more a 15 year blip than the norm

@ rush, respectfully I am literally the best person in the room to guesstimate a percentage of musicians who exist who make work that is saleable enough to provide them with an living wage, so, yes it's a made-up number, but it's the best made-up number

I don't know the circumstances of Maggie Roche's death, but if we're talking about Why Americans Die then any conversation with me will always come back to "y'all don't have single payer health care" and "y'all have CCWs" so it is a pretty boring convo the 20th or so go-around

I do agree with Turrican in that I definitely miss the grand money pit records that were made possible by classic rock's imperial period

we'll definitely not see those again, but in the scheme of things it was more a 15 year blip than the norm

The entire record industry as we know it was a blip (or, more accurately, a bubble).

I don't think rushomancy can solely blame the recording industry for the lack of success of The Roches. Some things take off, and some things don't. This was the case back when there was less competition and a lot of money in the industry, and it's even harder now that there's more competition and fuck all money in the industry.

I think not having single payer health care falls under the "failures of American capitalism"

Then you’re using “capitalism” pretty darn loosely.

Key word is 'American'.

As usual.

xp @ ums, oh for sure, I just felt as if rush was attributing Maggie Roche's death as being specifically an issue with the music industry, which I see he wasn't, but I read it as such

Key word is 'American'.

Doesn’t contradict my point, but ok

fgti, oh, certainly, if anybody is going to know what that percentage is it's going to be you - i'm just not sure that number is something that's knowable right now!

and yes, discussing the failures of the us healthcare system is tedious and redundant, but to me it's a significant enough ongoing failure that it makes discussing macro-level political, social, or economic issues an exercise in futility

which i guess explains my avoidance of the political threads and my tendency to, whenever a thread does turn political, to respond with "lol abolish capitalism". it's as much a distraction as shifting the thread to be about one particular strongly disliked long-term poster, but i try not to channel my negative feelings into personal animosity, deserved or no.

mirostones: to me i feel like anybody can make a "success" of themselves if their goals are modest enough and they're comfortable with self-salesmanship, and i guess it's also true that the herbie nicholses of the world will never be truly well-known. it's this absolute requirement, in today's world, that the artist self-promote that i find odious. i sympathize more, in principle, the people who have zero pageviews to the people who constantly promote their music to everyone they know and have 342 pageviews.

honestly, i see the "music industry" and the way it works now as the future of capitalism

The self-promoter formerly known as the artist is indeed a vile phenomenon.

no, i don't hate the artist themselves. i hate the system that rewards unhealthy behavior and punishes failure to behave in that manner.

Sorry, that wasn't entirely clear. The phenomenon is vile, I don't hate the artists themselves either.

yeah i got that after i posted, i'm gonna try to slow down and read more :)

Sometimes what you think you want isn't the same as what you actually want. For instance, you might think you want to play to lots of new people who haven't heard your music, but then when you actually do a couple of those gigs you realise that playing in a basement to 20 friends can be more fun and rewarding in some ways.

I think many of the “indie” artists I’ve liked in the past 10 years or so haven’t necessarily had to do a lot of “self-promotion,” though. Parquet Courts (to choose a random example) make a point of not even being “online” (or at least they used to, I haven’t checked lately, not so into them anymore). I guess those guys have passed the threshold where they don’t need day jobs, don’t need to hustle because the label does it for them, etc.?

That's the thing though, even if they're not doing it themselves, someone else is probably doing it for them, so they're still benefiting from that sort of promotion.

But that isn’t new(?) Artists have usually had to hustle themselves (flyers, social media, handmade demos, etc.) when they’re young & hungry; and then maybe be lucky/talented/whatever enough to get signed and have professional PR? Maybe I’m missing the finer point here tho

There really isn't much correlation between being cool-and-online and actual ticket/record sales; certain examples definitely exist, but it's not really the case anymore. If anything I would argue that it's proven to be a better business model for a musician to mind one's business. I only post here still because the Canadian government subsidizes me $10 per otm

Why didn't you say so earlier?

fgti otm x10

Selling records is more of a challenge though. T think the trick is you have to be a regular presence on social media, which is a shame in some ways but necessary if you want to sell records in 2019, unless you can enlist someone else to do this stuff.

otm, and there is a mental health aspect to this that I think is too often overlooked: the history of recorded music is full of brilliant but awkward, shy, and in many cases mentally ill people who could never have been expected to utilize / exploit social media the way, err, famous artists do now. I mean, a ton of those people were scared to death to even perform live, much less have to engage in what is basically a daily virtual meet-and-greet with every stranger who imposes themselves on you

Yeah but folks from Skip Spence to Cat Power to Jandek still “made it” in their way

I guess your point is they wouldn’t “make it” now b/c they wouldn’t do social media and that’s become de rigeur?

yes, that was my point.

But I guess that just doesn’t ring true to me. I think those particular artists could have just as much success if they emerged now — maybe even more — without doing anything different.

It also goes the other way — Will Seat Headrest would have been just an unknown kid with a bunch of home tapes if he were born 20 yrs. earlier, but the Internet existed and so he built up a big following just by putting his stuff online.

A big difference to me, though, is the loss of the “music press” as a central source of promotion/info about small artists. I bought the first Cat Power album, which was on a small Italian label (IIRC), because I read a review of it in CMJ. I don’t where I would hear of such a thing today (or I guess where a 19-y.o. equivalent of me hears about it today).

The likes of Tusk, The Dark Side of the Moon, Abbey Road, Low, Avalon or any impeccably produced album you could care to name would not have been anywhere near the same without the financial backing of the band/artists record company.

Sure, but the technology has changed so much that now you can make Low with a near-zero budget, if you have the time and creativity. A Four Tet or an Arca can make a relatively popular record with a laptop and Ableton, same for most radio rap (sure, expensive mix and mastering engineers are usually involved in that stuff, but don't necessary have to be if you have a producer who knows what they're doing).

Another thing that feels really different today is how important it is for an artist to have a strong visual aesthetic to go along with their music. If they happen to be a graphic or video designer along with being a musician, or have amazing personal style, great. If not, then that's where it takes money to work with people who will do that for them.

I guess that's not a new thing, but when you combine it with the new DIY social media approach, it often gets overlooked I think.

It also goes the other way — Will Seat Headrest would have been just an unknown kid with a bunch of home tapes if he were born 20 yrs. earlier, but the Internet existed and so he built up a big following just by putting his stuff online.

if your intention was to suggest that the new model has been a boon to savvy but dull people making mediocre-at-best music at the expense of shy and awkward geniuses who might be creating the next Tusk, Dark Side of the Moon, Abbey Road, Low, or Avalon, then we are definitely on the same page

Also, wasn't indie superstar Lou Barlow "just an unknown kid with a bunch of home tapes?" Wasn't the exalted Bob Pollard "just an unknown Midwestern middle aged jock with a bunch of home tapes?" They did alright thanks to the patronage of labels with dough!

I suppose the artist gets the self-indulgent thrill of creating something, but only in the short term. Of course, lack of recognition and lack of financial success can be demoralising and lead to apathy and a "what's the point?" attitude.

for some reason this is making me laugh ...

I forget some of you can't grasp the concept of enjoying doing something

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Saturday, April 13, 2019 8:23 AM (three hours ago)

otm x 10,000 -- being American, I know that matt does not get otm government subsidies

I Don't Enjoy Making Music

Paul, you’re making my point for me... Bedroom artists had ways of “succeeding” in the past, and they still do today (your pointless snark around CSH notwithstanding)

Also, FWIW, Barlow already had a rep from Dino Jr., he didn’t come out of nowhere

Sure, but the technology has changed so much that now you can make Low with a near-zero budget, if you have the time and creativity.

I would argue that you couldn't, and that one might try and set out to make Low with a near-zero budget, but what you'd end up with is the kind of characterless "in the box" sterility which characterises the music of this decade which already sounds stagnant and, dare I say it, cheap. The fact that you then go on to list artists using the laptop-and-Ableton combo says it all. I personally think there's a world of difference between music made "in the box" vs. what Daft Punk did on Random Access Memories.

Indeed. If a painting is commissioned and not sold or even looked at, then it has been a waste in the long term, no matter how enjoyable the process of creating the work was in the first place. If the work wasn't commissioned, then I suppose the artist gets the self-indulgent thrill of creating something, but only in the short term. Of course, lack of recognition and lack of financial success can be demoralising and lead to apathy and a "what's the point?" attitude.

Please feel free to GTFO. Painting, speaking from the perspective of a completely unsuccessful painter in terms of sales or even exhibitions, is something that is a lifelong pursuit and the means by which I come to terms with what consciousness is, how I organize thoughts and in fact the very act of perception and cognition. It is not a self-indulgent thrill, it's hard fucking work that sometimes pays off in unexpected ways but just as often is completely demoralizing strictly on its own terms, to say nothing of showing them or selling them. Yet somehow, for some reason, I continue to pursue it because it is a way for me to engage creatively with being a person. It's sad that you can't understand it but it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

many xposts

As for the notion that Skip Spence "made it", I would argue that he didn't. The small fame that he has in music critic circles is all based on the fact that he didn't "make it", and the small fame surrounding Oar is entirely based on natrative ("hey dudes, listen to this recording made by someone who was totally mental!") rather than the music itself.

*narrative

Jesus.