The other day I read a blog post about a new site that wants to do for Radio what the DVR has done for Television. The blog proposes that people could really benefit from recording radio content, either for later listening of for sharing through social media.
The site is called DAR.fm. The blog mentioned primarily talk radio, but when you visit the site you have several other choices that include music and sports. While every radio station isn't yet available, there is a catalog of about 5,000 stations to choose from.
The sites founder, Michael Robertson who is also the founder of Mp3.com, hopes to make Radio visible to the internet. He says that most of the content on radio just fritters away into space. He's hoping to change all of that by giving individuals a chance to record their favorite Radio programs for use to share with others like you would a video or music file.
I wondered how this would work so I went to DAR.fm. Once there, I registered my email and started an account. The site really pushes talk radio, but you can find stations that play your favorite music even if your local station is not yet listed. after I started my account, I went to upper right of the page to the menu bar and clicked on record. This gave me a drop down menu that listed talk, music, and local guide. I clicked on music and got a list of alternatives and genres. Next I clicked on Jazz and a list of stations from around the country opened up. I chose WYEP out of Pittsburgh. After clicking on it, two recording options are given, you can either record for a specific amount of time and start the recording manually, or you can establish a day and time for the recording to start in the future. There's also a dialog box to add the email address of a friend that you might want to send the recording to.
It's an interesting concept. Clearly, it's geared toward talk radio, but there are a lot of music station on that 5,000 station list. If someone should record and share a musical event that was something new and refreshing, I could see how this could really catch on. However, if it's used just to post negative comments made by talk show hosts, I could see how the internet might be given it first "Jerry Springer," moment. And, just when the internet was doing so well. The best way to know for sure is to visit DAR.fm and try it out for yourself. Who knows? This might just be, a big deal.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
There And Back (Part VI)
The early 1990s saw Rap and Hip Hop reach to new heights as the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences continued to add new Grammy honors to it's growing list of presentations. After giving Rap it's first Grammy in 1989, the door was wide open for the sound of the street to flow freely across the air waves, as cash registers rang all around the globe (ca ching!). Rap got an additional boost from award winning Producer Quincy Jones. His album, Back On The Block released that same year, seemed to serve notice that Rap was not only worthy of greater attention, but was also a viable musical entity within the recording industry. It wasn't long before established artists from almost every genre were incorporating Rap into their own sounds.
The hard sound of Gangsta Rap soon made it's way up from the under ground and into the mainstream. Fueled by an aggressive rhythmic attack and explicit lyrics, the music quickly grew in popularity as a conflict loomed in the background. Over time, a supposed rivalry between East Coast and West Coast Rappers boiled over, culminating in the death of two of it's biggest stars, Tupac Shakur and the Notorious B.I.G
The feud was said to be just media hype designed to sell more records. However, the Black community was not amused and filed protests with the recording industry over what it felt was exploitation of urban misery and violence in the name of profit.
Needing to keep it real, the industry began to recruit and sign Rap artist who were still very much a part of the Rap subculture, but whose approach was more musical, with lyrics more reflective of who they were and where they were from. But, what's more, the early to mid 90s saw the introduction and rise of the Boy and Girl bands.
Some of the more familiar names are Backstreet Boys, Nsync, 98 degrees, Spice Girls, Expose, and All Saints. What made these groups different from their 50s and 60s counterparts is the way that some of them came to be. Many of the Boy and Girl bands of the 90s were the result of ads placed in news papers or large trade publications by producers who were looking to form such acts. Those that answered the ads would audition for a chance to be chosen, in the hopes of achieving stardom. Several members of the Backstreet Boys actually met while auditioning to be a part of other such acts. Here at last was the very situation that the music industry big wigs had been trying to get back to since the days of Disco.
Members of acts formed in this way more often then not were hungry for stardom and eager to sign on the dotted line. They no doubt had no qualms about what rights they may have been signing away. Once they were signed, they were fast tracked to the top.
The sound was a mix of Pop, R&B, and Hip Hop blended into a homogenized confection designed to catch the attention of the target audience of 14 to 24 years old. A strong emphasis was placed on appearance. It's just my opinion, but having good looks appeared to be more important than having the ability to sing, write, or play an instrument. Once signed to a major label, in house writers and producers went to work on designing a sound to fit each band's image. Big money from the majors insured that they would be guaranteed to get their fair share of media exposure.
By the mid 90s, these groups were hot, though rarely did they appear in public performance playing instruments. The Economy was booming, as the nation was in the middle of it's longest period of economic growth in it's history. Many people had jobs who never had them before. Disposable cash allowed potential record buyers within the target demographic to indulge in their favorite bands. Over time, the sound of the music began to exhibit a certain bland and repetitiveness that left it less than memorable. Some critics even considered it to be as "disposable," as the money that bought it.
But, this is what Disco had become, before it's demise. Mass produced like fast food and just as easily disposed of. However, music fans and consumers were behind the revolt that lead to the fall of Disco. While by the late 90s the blandness of Pop music was being called into question, most of which remained as just questions. Questions as to why the bands were having such huge success while no one within the bands were writing or playing on any of their major hits. There was a low rumble but nothing near the revolt that lead to the demise of Disco. The machine produced hit after hit until sales peaked in 1999. Some have said that the decline that followed into the 21st century, was due in part to the mass produce mind set. This may or may not be true, but there are some other factors that came into play as well.
Once again, the Rap and Hip Hop merry-go round was employed as a new group of stars that included P-Diddy, J Z, and Kanye West came onto the scene. But, by the late 90s, just as the major labels dreams had come true, a new nemesis for the music industry would arise in the guise of the Mp3 and internet file sharing.
The hard sound of Gangsta Rap soon made it's way up from the under ground and into the mainstream. Fueled by an aggressive rhythmic attack and explicit lyrics, the music quickly grew in popularity as a conflict loomed in the background. Over time, a supposed rivalry between East Coast and West Coast Rappers boiled over, culminating in the death of two of it's biggest stars, Tupac Shakur and the Notorious B.I.G
The feud was said to be just media hype designed to sell more records. However, the Black community was not amused and filed protests with the recording industry over what it felt was exploitation of urban misery and violence in the name of profit.
Needing to keep it real, the industry began to recruit and sign Rap artist who were still very much a part of the Rap subculture, but whose approach was more musical, with lyrics more reflective of who they were and where they were from. But, what's more, the early to mid 90s saw the introduction and rise of the Boy and Girl bands.
Some of the more familiar names are Backstreet Boys, Nsync, 98 degrees, Spice Girls, Expose, and All Saints. What made these groups different from their 50s and 60s counterparts is the way that some of them came to be. Many of the Boy and Girl bands of the 90s were the result of ads placed in news papers or large trade publications by producers who were looking to form such acts. Those that answered the ads would audition for a chance to be chosen, in the hopes of achieving stardom. Several members of the Backstreet Boys actually met while auditioning to be a part of other such acts. Here at last was the very situation that the music industry big wigs had been trying to get back to since the days of Disco.
Members of acts formed in this way more often then not were hungry for stardom and eager to sign on the dotted line. They no doubt had no qualms about what rights they may have been signing away. Once they were signed, they were fast tracked to the top.
The sound was a mix of Pop, R&B, and Hip Hop blended into a homogenized confection designed to catch the attention of the target audience of 14 to 24 years old. A strong emphasis was placed on appearance. It's just my opinion, but having good looks appeared to be more important than having the ability to sing, write, or play an instrument. Once signed to a major label, in house writers and producers went to work on designing a sound to fit each band's image. Big money from the majors insured that they would be guaranteed to get their fair share of media exposure.
By the mid 90s, these groups were hot, though rarely did they appear in public performance playing instruments. The Economy was booming, as the nation was in the middle of it's longest period of economic growth in it's history. Many people had jobs who never had them before. Disposable cash allowed potential record buyers within the target demographic to indulge in their favorite bands. Over time, the sound of the music began to exhibit a certain bland and repetitiveness that left it less than memorable. Some critics even considered it to be as "disposable," as the money that bought it.
But, this is what Disco had become, before it's demise. Mass produced like fast food and just as easily disposed of. However, music fans and consumers were behind the revolt that lead to the fall of Disco. While by the late 90s the blandness of Pop music was being called into question, most of which remained as just questions. Questions as to why the bands were having such huge success while no one within the bands were writing or playing on any of their major hits. There was a low rumble but nothing near the revolt that lead to the demise of Disco. The machine produced hit after hit until sales peaked in 1999. Some have said that the decline that followed into the 21st century, was due in part to the mass produce mind set. This may or may not be true, but there are some other factors that came into play as well.
Once again, the Rap and Hip Hop merry-go round was employed as a new group of stars that included P-Diddy, J Z, and Kanye West came onto the scene. But, by the late 90s, just as the major labels dreams had come true, a new nemesis for the music industry would arise in the guise of the Mp3 and internet file sharing.
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
One Nation Under A Groove
When I set up my first Facebook artist page, I found a link to an app that offered me an opportunity to establish another artist profile that would sync to my Facebook page. That app was for Reverbnation. It seemed like the thing to do, as it was aimed at helping me spread the word about my music.
Reverbnation is a website that offers artists tools to help them with everything from social networking to getting an artist's music into e-music stores. The site went online in October of 2006 and today is home to some 2.6 million artist. The site is young, but growing. I find that it has a lot to offer artists and other music industry professionals as well. For the artist, you can link your main networking accounts, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Myspace, and send valuable information to all sites at the same time. As an artist, the site offers Fan Reach to send email to those who follow your music.
You can also get widgets to stream samples of your songs. You can start a blog or use their site builder to custom design your Reverbnation profile. And as I said before, an artist can have their music distributed to e-music stores such as iTunes, Rhapsody and Amazon.com. There's also the ability to purchase ads on Facebook. And, like Myspace, you can even add a link to your YouTube videos.
The feature that I have found the most interesting is their charts. Artists are ranked globally among all genres, then globally within a genre. After that, an artist is ranked nationally and then within a specific region. While making a chart might not seem like much, it can give your promotional effort a boost when your chart position begins to show some upward movement, especially within a specific region.
There's a lot more to Reverbnation than I've mentioned above. If you're an artist, the best way to know if the site is for you is to go and check it out. If you're a music fan, though it's just my opinion, I can easily say that the site will make you take notice. There are lots of artists there from every genre. There's music to suit every taste. In a way, you could say that Reverbnation has put it in all into one nation, under a groove.
Reverbnation is a website that offers artists tools to help them with everything from social networking to getting an artist's music into e-music stores. The site went online in October of 2006 and today is home to some 2.6 million artist. The site is young, but growing. I find that it has a lot to offer artists and other music industry professionals as well. For the artist, you can link your main networking accounts, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Myspace, and send valuable information to all sites at the same time. As an artist, the site offers Fan Reach to send email to those who follow your music.
You can also get widgets to stream samples of your songs. You can start a blog or use their site builder to custom design your Reverbnation profile. And as I said before, an artist can have their music distributed to e-music stores such as iTunes, Rhapsody and Amazon.com. There's also the ability to purchase ads on Facebook. And, like Myspace, you can even add a link to your YouTube videos.
The feature that I have found the most interesting is their charts. Artists are ranked globally among all genres, then globally within a genre. After that, an artist is ranked nationally and then within a specific region. While making a chart might not seem like much, it can give your promotional effort a boost when your chart position begins to show some upward movement, especially within a specific region.
There's a lot more to Reverbnation than I've mentioned above. If you're an artist, the best way to know if the site is for you is to go and check it out. If you're a music fan, though it's just my opinion, I can easily say that the site will make you take notice. There are lots of artists there from every genre. There's music to suit every taste. In a way, you could say that Reverbnation has put it in all into one nation, under a groove.
Monday, May 21, 2012
How Tweet It Is
It took a while before I got a Twitter account. I wasn't sure that I had enough going on to set one up. Once I did, I was amazed at just who had one. You can follow me @Nprogram or @JohnHughley.
I set up the second account after considering to give the music done in my name as much of a separate identity as I possibly could.
Twitter is an interesting concept in communication. I'm sure by now everyone knows that you have to say what you want to say in 140 characters or less. While this may sound easy enough, this constraint forces a tweeter to be as concise and to the point as possible. As an artist, I thought that most other artists would be tweeting constantly. But, what I found is that what works best for just about every artist at every level, is that tweeting only when it's informative, entertaining, or promotional is really all that's necessary.
Anyone can set up a Twitter account, having something meaningful to say is entirely up to each tweeter. In fact, some tweeters are having whole conversations just tweeting to each other. The site offers direct messages, but you've really got to pay close attention to your personal email if you want to keep up.
My first few months on Twitter were very interesting. I tried to follow back everyone who followed me. Slowly, I found that some who will follow you will tweet very interesting bits of information and some tweets will make you wonder. It wasn't until I read the blog of a fellow tweeter who writes for a magazine, that I found out that if you're following a lot of tweeters, you're stream could become congested with tweets that may be of little value.
This tweeter suggested unfollowing everyone and starting over, only the next time around, follow only those whose tweets hold some significance. This tweeter also said that it was a very difficult decision for them to make, but one that made their tweet stream not only more manageable, but also more informative. Personally, I didn't want to start all over, and the idea of unfollowing everyone who was following me was a little difficult to digest. That was, until Twitter cut off my ability to follow others. When you reach a certain number of people that you are following, and if you aren't being followed by at least a third of that number, then Twitter blocks you from adding any new tweeters until your followers increase.
I like to follow music, technology, science, and news tweeters, so I was forced to go through my list and look for anyone who was first of all, just having fun, or maybe not even tweeting at all. From there, it was a matter of relevance to my interests. I didn't carve away as many as I thought that I might. But, the result was the loss of some followers, who were followers of those whom I had unfollowed. I was sure by this time that this wasn't the way that Twitter was supposed to work.
As time has gone by, I found that improving the content of my tweets has brought followers back to my account. That, and replacing those that had been unfollowed with tweeters more in line with my interest. I'm certain that, depending on who you are and what you do also makes a big difference in your ability to grow your following. If you're national or international at what you do, it's very likely this will provide you with ample opportunity you add followers. Access to Radio or Television doesn't hurt either. However, some tweeters appear to be able to add followers, just by the use of provocative subject matter within their tweets.
One of the most interesting things I've observed while on Twitter is the accounts of those who seemed to have a small number of tweeters when compared to who they are and what they do. But, as I've read their tweets, I discovered, and this is just my opinion, that this is probably due to a close connection to their audience or peer group. Or, perhaps it doesn't matter who or how many tweeters are following them. Maybe what they do or how they live, is what it's really all about.
I set up the second account after considering to give the music done in my name as much of a separate identity as I possibly could.
Twitter is an interesting concept in communication. I'm sure by now everyone knows that you have to say what you want to say in 140 characters or less. While this may sound easy enough, this constraint forces a tweeter to be as concise and to the point as possible. As an artist, I thought that most other artists would be tweeting constantly. But, what I found is that what works best for just about every artist at every level, is that tweeting only when it's informative, entertaining, or promotional is really all that's necessary.
Anyone can set up a Twitter account, having something meaningful to say is entirely up to each tweeter. In fact, some tweeters are having whole conversations just tweeting to each other. The site offers direct messages, but you've really got to pay close attention to your personal email if you want to keep up.
My first few months on Twitter were very interesting. I tried to follow back everyone who followed me. Slowly, I found that some who will follow you will tweet very interesting bits of information and some tweets will make you wonder. It wasn't until I read the blog of a fellow tweeter who writes for a magazine, that I found out that if you're following a lot of tweeters, you're stream could become congested with tweets that may be of little value.
This tweeter suggested unfollowing everyone and starting over, only the next time around, follow only those whose tweets hold some significance. This tweeter also said that it was a very difficult decision for them to make, but one that made their tweet stream not only more manageable, but also more informative. Personally, I didn't want to start all over, and the idea of unfollowing everyone who was following me was a little difficult to digest. That was, until Twitter cut off my ability to follow others. When you reach a certain number of people that you are following, and if you aren't being followed by at least a third of that number, then Twitter blocks you from adding any new tweeters until your followers increase.
I like to follow music, technology, science, and news tweeters, so I was forced to go through my list and look for anyone who was first of all, just having fun, or maybe not even tweeting at all. From there, it was a matter of relevance to my interests. I didn't carve away as many as I thought that I might. But, the result was the loss of some followers, who were followers of those whom I had unfollowed. I was sure by this time that this wasn't the way that Twitter was supposed to work.
As time has gone by, I found that improving the content of my tweets has brought followers back to my account. That, and replacing those that had been unfollowed with tweeters more in line with my interest. I'm certain that, depending on who you are and what you do also makes a big difference in your ability to grow your following. If you're national or international at what you do, it's very likely this will provide you with ample opportunity you add followers. Access to Radio or Television doesn't hurt either. However, some tweeters appear to be able to add followers, just by the use of provocative subject matter within their tweets.
One of the most interesting things I've observed while on Twitter is the accounts of those who seemed to have a small number of tweeters when compared to who they are and what they do. But, as I've read their tweets, I discovered, and this is just my opinion, that this is probably due to a close connection to their audience or peer group. Or, perhaps it doesn't matter who or how many tweeters are following them. Maybe what they do or how they live, is what it's really all about.
Monday, May 14, 2012
Like It Or Not
A few short years ago, while posting music at a site where artists review each others music, I got an invitation in my in box from Facebook. The site was just beginning to grow and they invited me to come and put up an artist page. It seemed like a great way to give my music some further exposure, so I did just that.
I posted a photo and several tracks and waited to see if anything would happen. In the mean time, Facebook was continually changing the look and functionality of their site. After a time, they began to offer access to apps that made artist pages look a little more personalized. Then, at a certain point, certain features could only be accessed if you agreed to create a profile as well. I balked at first, but only because I was only interested in promoting my music. A few months went by, and those certain features started to look more than promising to me, so I created a profile and began to make friends.
Around this time the site was growing very fast and things were changing all the time. I wasn't sure if the site was something that I really wanted to be a part of so I deactivated my account. Some of the friends I had made at the site were into music and after a few weeks I began to wonder how they were doing. I reactivated my account to find that I hadn't lost a single one of them. At that point I decided to try and find some balance between what I was doing with music on my artist page and what I was doing personally on my profile. Facebook answered by allowing members to suggest their pages to their friends. Cool, huh?
That feature was short lived, as the number of members joining your page increased, the less access you had to that feature. I think at about that time the site did away with the Join button and went with the Like button. I can only guess that Facebook has gained it's nearly 900 million users by continuing to innovate and try new things. When they put Like buttons on all artist and fan pages, it's just my opinion, but I think that they may have given some members reason to think a little deeper about their choices. What I mean to say is that where members were ready and willing to join a page, clicking the word like may be making them a bit reticent when making what would seem to be an otherwise easy choice to make if you were only adding a page.
It's just my opinion, but I can imagine that more than a hand full of members have hit the Like button on a page that at first blush appeared harmless, then thought about who might see what their choices were and quickly went back and clicked Unlike. I'm not going to suggest that the site do away with the Like button. No. I propose that they give members who post pages a choice of whether they want a Like, Join, or Add button at the top of their page. This may or may not cause confusion among members, but I think that some members would hesitate less if they could choose to add a page as opposed to liking a page.
As an artist, I click Like on the pages of other artists all the time. I feel that it's just a small way to show my support for their efforts. However, the word like may seem a little strong for having a limited knowledge of, or casual acquaintance with someone.
Rest assured that as Facebook approaches it IPO there are probably more changes in store for the site. Of course none of those changes will be put before the site's members for their approval before they are made. Most members will barley bat an eye as they share their baby pictures or photos of the kittens or puppies that their pets just had. We all make use of the site to communicate with friends and family. And, change is a part of life, just like Facebook.....whether we like it or not.
Monday, May 7, 2012
What's In A Name
Some time ago, I was at a website that allowed artists to post their songs for review, when I read a comment from an artist who said that he went by his real name because it was the only name he had. At first I thought what he said was funny. But he also said that he wasn't able to think of anything cute or clever to call himself.
Up to this point, I had never really given much thought to what name to release music under. If a name came to me that had what I thought had a nice ring to it, then that's what I went with. Since I was always thinking that I would be part of a band, names came really easy. I got the name Nprogram while I was working at a local TV station in my area. As far as using my given name, it just never occurred to me to release music as myself, John Hughley, until recently.
What the artist above said brings up a very good point though. Some of the best music you've ever heard has been made by some of the most memorable artist with some of the most memorable names. Names like, the the Beatles, Rolling Stone, Earth Wind & Fire, Commodores, Eagles, Led Zeppelin, and the list goes on. When it comes to using their given names, artist have either used them or changed them. If you're going solo, the choice is yours. I think that what really matters as a solo artist is whether or not the music you intent to release is something that you want people to associate with you, when ever your name comes up.
For artists and bands, what you call yourself can become a brand name, if your music is memorable enough. Building a brand is something that takes a good deal of time. Many artists and bands will begin most likely by performing live. This gets your name and music in front of as many people as possible. In today's DIY world, you might think that all you would have to do is put up a website. It's true, you can reach a great deal more people at one time, but people need some way to find out that you do music online. And, while the web is a natural, it can make you appear as a little fish swimming around in a very big pool. If you choose this way to begin, be prepared to spend countless hours networking and connecting. Be sure to try and get your band posted to as many sites as possible.
If you play live, you may have the opportunity to sell merchandise which carries yours or your band's name or logo on it. This is a great way for friends and fans to remember your you. And, it's also a good way for people who've never heard of you to find out about you. Merchandise can also be sold from your website as well. Of course, friends and fans can be asked to to join your mailing list so they can stay informed about new releases or live performances.
I'm not an expert on building a brand by any means, and I'm sure that there's a lot more to it than what I've mentioned, like having a good, solid PR campaign or some means of getting information about you or your band to the media. While all of what I've said helps, the one thing to remember is that building a brand takes time. It's more likely that you could become well known for good music, and then discover that your name has be come synonymous with that, and "boom" you have name recognition.
If you have a good logo, though you don't have to, you may want to have it registered as a trademark so you can have the exclusive right to use it to represent all things created that relate to you or your bands music. That way everyone will be able to distinguish you from brand X
Up to this point, I had never really given much thought to what name to release music under. If a name came to me that had what I thought had a nice ring to it, then that's what I went with. Since I was always thinking that I would be part of a band, names came really easy. I got the name Nprogram while I was working at a local TV station in my area. As far as using my given name, it just never occurred to me to release music as myself, John Hughley, until recently.
What the artist above said brings up a very good point though. Some of the best music you've ever heard has been made by some of the most memorable artist with some of the most memorable names. Names like, the the Beatles, Rolling Stone, Earth Wind & Fire, Commodores, Eagles, Led Zeppelin, and the list goes on. When it comes to using their given names, artist have either used them or changed them. If you're going solo, the choice is yours. I think that what really matters as a solo artist is whether or not the music you intent to release is something that you want people to associate with you, when ever your name comes up.
For artists and bands, what you call yourself can become a brand name, if your music is memorable enough. Building a brand is something that takes a good deal of time. Many artists and bands will begin most likely by performing live. This gets your name and music in front of as many people as possible. In today's DIY world, you might think that all you would have to do is put up a website. It's true, you can reach a great deal more people at one time, but people need some way to find out that you do music online. And, while the web is a natural, it can make you appear as a little fish swimming around in a very big pool. If you choose this way to begin, be prepared to spend countless hours networking and connecting. Be sure to try and get your band posted to as many sites as possible.
If you play live, you may have the opportunity to sell merchandise which carries yours or your band's name or logo on it. This is a great way for friends and fans to remember your you. And, it's also a good way for people who've never heard of you to find out about you. Merchandise can also be sold from your website as well. Of course, friends and fans can be asked to to join your mailing list so they can stay informed about new releases or live performances.
I'm not an expert on building a brand by any means, and I'm sure that there's a lot more to it than what I've mentioned, like having a good, solid PR campaign or some means of getting information about you or your band to the media. While all of what I've said helps, the one thing to remember is that building a brand takes time. It's more likely that you could become well known for good music, and then discover that your name has be come synonymous with that, and "boom" you have name recognition.
If you have a good logo, though you don't have to, you may want to have it registered as a trademark so you can have the exclusive right to use it to represent all things created that relate to you or your bands music. That way everyone will be able to distinguish you from brand X
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
YouTube
Some time last year, I read a blog that advised musicians to get their music on YouTube. At that time, I hadn't spent much time at YouTube. The most that I'd watched is an occasional vlog. I figured that a really good video for a song would cost a lot or it would also be time intensive. That was until I started searching for some of the indie artists that I had been listening to on Myspace. That was about the time I discovered that there was everything but the kitchen sink on YouTube.
The only problem I had with this, is that what I was looking for was often not available. Of course, if an artist or musician was with a major label, most likely there was something up there, even if it was a homemade live version of a song. I don't have a problem with this, but it took a long while to understand why so many bloggers were making such a big deal about getting your music on YouTube. In fact, I found that a lot of indie artists were only posting vlogs or small samples of their work, with maybe an occasional full track. Most likely if a song was there it was a live version. I also found that artists were more likely to post demonstrations or interviews as opposed to songs.
Then I heard that it was possible for videos to be downloaded and the music separated from from the video. Of course that had copyright violation written all over it, not mention the loss of a sale to someone who was able to do that. But, even so, the possibility of reaching millions is still enough to get many artists to post a video, even if there are only photos or a slide used.
For an artist who is primarily a songwriter and doesn't do a lot of live performing, YouTube is still the way to go. I've posted my own attempts at video making for several of the songs from the Work The Program album and they can be seen on the
Nprogram Video Channel.
The only problem I had with this, is that what I was looking for was often not available. Of course, if an artist or musician was with a major label, most likely there was something up there, even if it was a homemade live version of a song. I don't have a problem with this, but it took a long while to understand why so many bloggers were making such a big deal about getting your music on YouTube. In fact, I found that a lot of indie artists were only posting vlogs or small samples of their work, with maybe an occasional full track. Most likely if a song was there it was a live version. I also found that artists were more likely to post demonstrations or interviews as opposed to songs.
Then I heard that it was possible for videos to be downloaded and the music separated from from the video. Of course that had copyright violation written all over it, not mention the loss of a sale to someone who was able to do that. But, even so, the possibility of reaching millions is still enough to get many artists to post a video, even if there are only photos or a slide used.
For an artist who is primarily a songwriter and doesn't do a lot of live performing, YouTube is still the way to go. I've posted my own attempts at video making for several of the songs from the Work The Program album and they can be seen on the
Nprogram Video Channel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)