Talent increases. Resourcefulness decreases. Are you sustainable?
2009-05-28
A woman came up to me at a music biz conference, handed me her CD, and very proudly said, “This album cost $80,000 and two years to record. Everything is top-notch - we used one of the finest studios in the world.”
She wanted me to be impressed, but once she said “$80,000” I lost hope in her ability to make a living making music.
The music may be brilliant, but for a career to be sustainable, it has to be profitable.
I'd be much more impressed with someone who could make an album for $8000, because that would show sustainability. They could record 10 albums for the price of hers!
I'd be most impressed with someone who could say, “This album cost nothing, and took two months to record, because I used my own home studio, and know how to make it sound great. My next 10 albums will also cost nothing.”
A big hit at the Cannes Film Festival last week was the movie “Colin”, made for only $70. Director Marc Price used volunteer actors, used leftover makeup, and borrowed friends' equipment. American and Japanese distributors are interested. (Read more about it, here.)
There's a similar story behind El Mariachi, made for only $7000, by Robert Rodriguez, who went on to do Spy Kids, Sin City, and I'm sure has decades of innovative filmmaking left in him.
Both are admittedly low-budget, but prove the resourcefulness of the director, and their ability to make a great film despite any restraints.
If I was an investor, I'd invest in that kind of person.
Talent usually increases over time, but the ability to be resourceful usually decreases over time.
It's best for a career to start from a place of absolute resourcefulness.
Here, here. Excellent point Derek. In the new film and music industry, where signing to big labels is now a thing of the past, it's going to be a case of: Be resourceful, or fail.
i love a good shoe-string budget. Some of the best creativity comes out of having no many to get all the fancy equipment, and thus having to improvise
thanks man, this is well timed in my life.
Hey Derek,
I like your thinking.
I started an indy label and represent a band called Scroll, we made an album for 0$, the only cost was the final mastering.
You can listen to it on www.myspace.com/scrollband
Let me know what you think! Thanks!
I completely agree Derek.
These days, I don't think musicians need to spend huge amounts of money on studio time. Decent recording gear is relatively cheap and there is so much free advice out there on how to use it.
I'm sure you will know as well as anyone, what great results can be achieved with "home recording" - you've sold plenty of it!
To your point, this video was made with a budget of $40. Everyone volunteered their talents.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1ANBK93rV8
The album of 14 mp3s, which includes this song, was recorded in my home studio. I did, however, pay for Bill Wolf, who has some of the best ears in the business to do the final edit and mix.
Yes!
My take on this: it's all about what you prioritize, especially for new artists. I'd much rather listen to a great song rendered on inexpensive equipment, than to a so-so song recorded state-of-the-art. But so many times new artists especially focus their energy on the technical side of things (making an expensive recording) before they even have something solid and undeniable to record. A good song will shine through, regardless of how cheaply it may be recorded.
So I think part of being sustainable is concentrating on coming up with music that can speak for itself, without all the bells and whistles -- because the bells and whistles will come later (in the form of an increased audience, which will then provide the material support necessary to up your production values on the next recording).
Ha! I always remember Rodriguez's comment when he got the multi-million dollar budget for Desperado. "Do you know how many El Mariachis I could make for that?"
The video for our signature song was made for free (Friend of a friend):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qMon_1fPLs
The recording was done for £30 odd.
Almost all DonkeyBox band photography so far has been free. (photographers I found)
The web design has been free (I do that)
I have found some graphic design students who are going to do some basic design stuff for free
And guess what? Despite me giving out our debut demo out FREE at every gig, we can still sell them on cd baby and generate a wee bit of revenue, ta Derek!
The saddest words I ever heard: "I spent my kid's college money on this CD."
I so wished that it had been worth this person's investment.
I agree with you on not being impressed because she spent $80,000 on the album but I disagree on being more impressed if she had said she spent $8000.
The money helped pay some musicians and studio engineers, helping them to live off their art and skills, which is a positive thing.
The bigger the investment, the scarier it is but $80,000 spent on a high quality product might be easier to recoup than $8,000 spent on a low quality product.
I'm not advocating that we all go and spend that, but before judging whether someone has a long term potential in terms of a career in music, I want to hear their music.
It depends on what you have done with those $80,000. Personally, I wouldn't know what to do with the money and would probably waste it on useless stuff (ie getting ripped off by a producer, overpriced studio not suitable for my type of sound and so on) but I know some musicians who would use the money very wisely and make the album they can only dream about now.
Great point, Nat! And Alexa, below (comment #20). Thanks! -- Derek
This another reason I love being a web guy. There's so many cheap or free resources on the web to help you deal with most of life's hassles, be them personal, vocational or avocational.
I would not even attempt to convince my wife of the $80,000 outlay because I could never convince myself. I love the music I make as does she and many others.
An advantage to solo guitar is while the market is smaller for resale, so are my recording costs. Superb quality of recording achieved by Tony Geballe in my basement with a decent mic and his suftware and most important his great EARS!
Atrwork design was superb and meaningful. All involved with the process, myself, Joann, Tony,and Pablo Mandel of Circular Studios who did the artwork are still pleased with our efforts nearly a year later.
Sales are trickling in. With a budget of $80,000 I'dtake time to retreat and create, instead of pounding away at my day job and creating as time permits.
Hey Derek,
$80,000 really is a lot though.
This was really good for me to hear this right now. It's so true and we should become more resourceful over time, but that's probably because we are creatures of habit that we become less so, so we need to continually rewire.
Thanks also to Nat. I agree with your points as well. Money makes the world go around!
i was told once by a producer that if we believed in ourselves and our music, then we'd spend $3000/song to have it "properly recorded". he said that's what it costs to get it done right.
in the end we used people with more credentials (and that were easier to work with!), and did it for a fraction of the price.
we believe in ourselves, and our music - but since when does that equal some sort of price tag? music isn't valued by money. and if it is, then that's not something i want to listen to.
Don't forget about that 1st Nirvana album which cost under $1000.
Free,
It's all about getting someone to give their time to you and you do nothing for them.
This is the most simple definition of the American dream.
If you can get a lot of people to do things for you and you do nothing for them, then your rich, again the American dream.Sitting on your ass while everyone works for you has become an embedded mindset, for the American way.Then your a billionaire. I want to be free, but I'm tired of working for free k.w.
I'll agree to a point, but peoples time and skills are worth something. Learning to do things yourself is one thing, but you can only con engineers, producers, photographers, artists, web designers, actors, musicians, etc. into working for you for free for so long before you just become a scumbag.
I always assume people won't do anything they don't want to do. Can't hurt to ask. If they don't want to, they won't. (Or they'll give an excuse like, “Hm. Not sure. Kinda busy. I don't know,” which is safe to assume as a no.) It's not conning anyone. Some people just enjoy it and do it for other reasons than money. -- Derek
My first album cost $350 to record- studio, bassist & drummer, and lunch. I bought a ZOOM 1608CD home studio for $900 and recorded my 2nd & 3rd albums on it playing everything myself. Recorded my upcoming 4th album playing most of it myself with a few parts "flown in" via MP3 files from friends in other cities.
A lot of the best albums and films were done low budget and those works broke the artist into the mainstream. If your ideas are good you can pull it off with a shoestring budget. If the ideas are weak, all the money in the world won't help. I've played with cats that didn't have chops or an ear- their $3000 didn't help.
This isn't an either/or situation. Nat makes excellent points. While your observation that leading with the cost of the album turned you off is one I will remember, I personally don't like not paying other people a living wage. (Frankly, it's almost a character defect because I have trouble getting and accepting free help.) Good professionals in any field are usually worth the cost. I used to work in foreign magazines, and it was often suggested that the janitor could translate highly technical jargon for much cheaper than the experts I had found (who were inexpensive too!). It's easy to WASTE money when you cut corners like that.
The point is, I agree with you that at face value $80k was excessive and well above average for an indie CD. I need more information, however -- did she get to work with someone really amazing, or commission a suite of arrangements from a composer who lives in exile? Be resourceful, YES, but spend money wisely where you need it.
Actually, on closer reading I realize that in addition to the outlandish cost she did name some other non-sustainable things in her elevator pitch to you: finest studio in the world, 2 years to record... so I take it back, you're right.
I produced all bluesbox albums with NO COST.
Well maybe just the money for the beer.
The latest is at
www.myspace.com/thebluesbyrds
The interesting bit is that it has been made between Italy and America.
It sounds GREAT !
Cheers everybody and thanks for sharing your opinions
All of my tracks are self produced and I play everything on them, so my budget is zero. Having said that, I am currently trialling a Facebook ad to point people towards my downloadable tracks on CDBaby in the hope that it might stimulate sales, buth even there I have set a minimal budget.
Songs are here
http://www.myspace.com/bingobrown
Thanks for your regular observations/tips.
Had to comment on this one. My first album happened 'by accident' and cost less than $50 to makeand went 'Gold' in Ireland. The second - still a lowish $1500 but guess which one I prefer.
Derek,
I like your general message about resourcefulness, but I'm concerned that your recent posts are showing signs of ageism. Don't let ill health and decreased ability become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
My first album was recorded in 6 hours as a Christmas gift to my mom. A DJ heard it & before I knew it the album was charting the jazz charts and was being featured (then) in the Gavin Report. Go figure. Maybe I should record more albums as presents.
I agree! My 1st CD cost ten grand to make, but I was able to get my 2nd CD (with the same musicians, producer, studio, etc) for nothing! I sold my 1st lullaby CD to a company for them to include with their Baby's First products. It went over so big, that they ordered 10,000 units for Christmas in April. Since there was so much lead time, I asked them if they would like me to write Christmas lullabies for them. They had me do a demo and loved to the songs. I mixed 6 public domain Xmas songs with 6 original lullabies. With the 10,000 units they ordered, that paid for my recording AND the artwork with still making a profit in the end! And today, when I sell a Christmas CD, I love the fact that after replication costs, that entire CD is pure profit!!!!
The nature of business(and music) in general has changed so dramatically in the past 10 years that I would be wary of anyone who spends more money than they should because it almost always signals an old media type of mentality, which doesn't work these days. If someone is spending $80,000 on an album, they also probably think that money can buy you recognition and success.
Yeah, I agree with $80k and two years being crazy, but don't agree that spending ZERO or a little as possible is best. As a producer for Christian and jazz indies her in Nashville, we've seen pretty proven results from using the music and design pros of this town and paying them accordingly.
This gives the indie artist a leg up on most of the competition for gigs, radio, distro, etc.
But if you're spending over $25k on a 10 song release, you may be spending too much.
EC
Hey Derek,
Love your articles. I am always thinking of ways to attract more fans. I try very hard to be interactive with them and like you pointed out, it can take away from a lot of my creative time. I'll be recording my 5th CD in December in Australia. I figure with the exchange rate, It will cost me a total of about $10 ~ 11,000 US. I will do most of the vocal overdubs and even some of the editing on my own in my apartment. But at the end of the day, I still want a great band and a trustworthy producer to help me out. I thrive off of the energy built by a band sound and believe two or three heads are better than one in most cases.
The great news for me is that all 4 of my CD's have made me a profit. I will not be spending any money from my day job to do the next album. That being said, I sell 90% of my stuff when I perform live. The internet is just a bonus. I'd sure love to be able to tap into it better but I believe consumers aren't really intersted in buying the unknown and that's what I am. I've currently sold close to 4000 of my 4th CD. I'd love to dubble that next time around.
Finally, here's a question: Do you think it's a bad move to share with my fans the budget of my next CD? I've been playing with the idea. If people see how much it can cost, would they be more inclined to spend the $10? While there are a handful of people who can record on a 0 budget, most of us still need to invest a little to get quality results. Not $80,000 though!
Let's not forget that it all stems from a great song!
Thanks Derek.
Kelly, I am not Derek but I think it is a great idea and your truest fans will pay that money to see you flourish for sure.
(I like that interview clip with Ariel where Derek always says "go for it, I think it will sell really well!" - that is a good attitude to have for this stuff
Interesting point, Derek. Before I get to what I have to say, permit me to do some quick math. $80,000 seems like a lot of money, but what it really means is that you have to sell 8,000 copies at $10 revenue each to break even. Now, that comes pretty close to the iTunes per-album price (which bears no additional packaging costs), so adjusting for iTunes' (and any additional distributor's) cut, you'll need to sell about 10,000 copies worldwide (and iTunes is worldwide distribution) to make back the money. Anyone who isn't able to sell this much worldwide really doesn't have much of a career (I'm permitted to say so, because I'm one of those people ;) ) and shouldn't be spending this much. Let this suffice for the numbers question.
What I really wanted to get at is your observations about talent and resourcefulness. I am deeply skeptical of this idea that the modern artist should embody all possible virtues. My proposition is rather that the artist should provide the talent. The resourcefulness should rightly come from the artist's business associates, whose job it is to make the most money possible from the artist's talent. I do realise, however, that this is a viable scenario only if the artist engages in some form of joint-venture with the business. It will have to work both ways, but sadly at the moment it seems to me that the businesses are turning most of their resourcefulness to finding ways of making the most money off artists.
The album I made for $6k sounds better than the album I made for $0.
The catch? Having already invested, I felt compelled to spend $15k on PR and radio... BAD move. there went the budget for my next three records...
Net result: the $0 album made a decent profit, I'll probably never recoup my $21k on the other one. The sweet spot is somewhere in the middle.
Have to say- it's an awesome feeling to be able to work with great musicians and pay them what they're worth.
Did Fleetwood Mac spend too much time/money on Rumours? Speaking as a musician/engineer, I think many artists are short-changing themselves and their careers by going the low- budget/no budget route; it's nearly impossible to learn to be either a musician or an engineer-enough to be competent, at least, in the number of years we have before the music industry decides we're irrelevant.(which is currently about twenty-six, give or take, and and gettin' shorter by the minute) There is a reason the Lord-Alge brothers get paid the big bux. Great recordings can be made for less money, if you have more time and more passion.(you can have it good, fast or cheap, pick two) Great rooms, microphones and ears cost money, and while it's possible with great care and attention to detail and a virtually unlimited time budget, to match the sound quality of some of history's great recordings, it's just dang unlikely.
Of all the recordings and hours of studio time, which recordings of mine are the most popular? The two that were recorded live with 5 minutes of mix down.
Thank you for this.
I dont agree talent is increasing, depends what genre you refer to.
Through technology and software people just throw preset loops and sounds together and expect to become highly acclaimed musicians.
Either way, 80.000 on an album, where was that money used?
Let me guess, rent a studio and studio musicians.
I found out even the mid priced studios or smaller pro studios cant do what I need it to sound like.
Not just a matter of what the studio has for equipement, but also the person there's ability to be openminded and understand your vision/sound.
So yeah, home studio is where its happening, of course if you dont have the ability/knowledge to mix your own music you have to go elsewhere.
A big factor for being sustainable also is however the ability to make more than 1 hit song..
Sebastian: I meant people's talent usually increases with time. As time goes on, a person becomes a better musician, etc. But usually as time goes on, they become less willing to settle for the hassle and discomfort of doing things dirt-cheap, sleeping on friends' couches, etc.
I agree with you. As my guitar teacher said once:
"La carencia genera estilo" (in spanish)
=
"Shortage generates style" (in english)
Meaning that lacking several "standard" resources gets you into getting usable stuff out of your (non-standard) available things. That cane lead you to sound decidedly different from the guys that can afford the "standard" resources...
The greatest example is that nowadays everybody tries to buy the same equipment as Jimi Hendrix (I'm using his gear as an example of "vintage" stuff).
Do you think Jimi Hendrix wanted EXACTLY the gear that he used? I think he didn't. He didn't use a transistor distortion because... he didn't have any. He didn't use a computer because... there weren't any at the time. Could his aims at making his guitar sound more "space-y" be helped by computers? Hell yeah.
He used a stratocaster with single pickups because... that was the "available" thing... He used that cheap Fuzzes... because that was the only thing around... there wasn't any "guitar amp simulator" or such.
Even though, guided by his use of revolutionary use of guitar effects at the time... I think that nowadays, he would be playing with the "newest" things he could get his hands into.
But the "vintage" buyers... would not. Bizarre, isn't it?
Regarding Eric Copelands comment.
Eric, you are a well respected christian producer, and you do right by your clients. However,
You know that many of your clients even with your production and studio musicians will not be sustainable One reason is below.
Christian music has a very narrow
audience where the largest listeners like that typical sound.
Thats why all songs tend to sound the same. The music gets better with independant artists but you have to admit, the mainstream christain media and music has a specific saleable sound. This means there are over a 100 artists today who sound like the artist on the top ACC chart. This is allot of competition.
Also, your services (and they are services not a label) are some of the best in the business. However, Many artists can do excellent sounding prodution, with excellent musicians, and the mastering as well for $10,000-12,000
dallars. The key is to know what your looking for. That takes years of experience.
I consult with artists and I council them to hire a producer who knows what their doing.
$25,000 is very reasonble,
especially for today's pop record, and you have a great room and talent. But I've worked with artist who have been touring and have won awards on music produced for under 10,000 dallars.
Of course, I agree with Eric that often times you don't get allot for that money unless you hire a really experienced producer.
Artist really need to shop around and not take the first deal that comes to them
peace
Derek,
Funny, the longer I've been in business, the more resourceful and sustainable I've become. You could say I've learned from start-up mistakes : )
Craig