Top iPad Music Apps (a/o February 8th):
(
"Indie cred" used to stand for something. It meant selling 7-inches at local record stores, not paying radio stations for spins, and not watering things down for mainstream acceptance. But these days, everyone has direct access to the fan, major labels are weaker than ever, and traditional endpoints like terrestrial radio are losing influence.
Meanwhile, the worlds of indie and major seem increasingly blurred. So-called indie bands are often upstreamed into the major label world (for example, Interpol onto Capitol), and so-called "indie distributors" like RED are often owned by majors (in this case, Sony Music Entertainment).
So, what does "indie" really mean anymore? And, is it dead? That was the smart question asked by Paste writer Nick Purdy, who chatted with A2IM chief Rich Bengloff on the matter. Bengloff pointed to continued access issues involving traditional brick-n-mortar retailers and radio stations, offering a reminder that old-school formats still wield considerable influence. But Bengloff is stumping for many of the same issues as the RIAA, including anti-piracy objectives (A2IM supports 'graduated response'); demands for recording royalties from terrestrial radio plays, and even DMCA-related concerns (A2IM is working to appeal the outcome of Veoh v. UMG).
So what is the difference then? In the digital sphere, Bengloff also pointed to issues getting exposure on platforms like the iTunes Store. But anyone can upload and chart on iTunes these days, and an artist website is a dedicated showcase and retailer unto itself. In that light, is the term "indie" just another relic of a not-too-distant past? It's a question worth asking...
Comments Closed
Simon Adams - MyMusicSuccess Monday, July 26, 2010
I think that in the past, Indie was a euphamism for the entrepreneurial spirit shown by those willing to jump in and take the risks that the establishment couldn't neccesarily take without asking a couple of tiers of people for permission.
Increasingly entrepreneurialism is back in a big way in the music industry, and more and more people are happy to continually experiment on an ongoing basis, and if it works, it works, if it fails, they tried it, it didn't work, they moved on. The risks are diminishing quicker than the ideas are being generated, which in my opinion can only be a good thing for everyone
Not everyone handles change as well as others, but those that embrace it are the ones that will come out on top in the not too distant future...
Simon Adams
Co Founder
MyMusicSuccess
http://www.mymusicsuccess.com
Chris at Red Admiral Records L Tuesday, July 27, 2010
This is a fun discussion, but is there really anyone out there that can put their finger on the real and serious answer. No!
Perhaps Indie has become a too broad description as in "independent from the majors" or "a musical movement to try and be different" or "to stick fingers up at the establishment".
The BBC and copyright collection societies have their own descriptions for Major, with fully registered releases or based on the number of releases or acts signed, so our label is both indie and major, not a Major Indie but also not DIY.
There are millions of releases are out there from DIYers without the support of a music industry recognised label or publisher, no mechanical and performing royalty collections in place. Can they call theselves indie? I call it Wild.
Our music publishing dept. gets a lot of calls from these lost souls as those Wild DIYers wake up and ask themselves "where is our money?". In most cases they don't know what they are entitled to or where it comes from. Split-up bands arguing about who owns what and who wrote and performed what. No interband agreement and nothing on paper apart from a receipt from an aggregator in the name of a member of a band or messages to some hotmail address and money to a paypal account. This situation is not indie, just idiotic.
Should we call majors such as EMI dependent or independant as they now survive only on money lenders and shareholders not profitable sales?
Perhaps it is time for the industry to re-define itself, for itself.
NathanJE Monday, July 26, 2010
An org like A2IM relies on this emotional "indie" thing to keep it going. Also, I think that Bengloff and the indies are more focused on having a club or feeling that they are really different than having real goals that they need to pursue. the article essentially shows so much overlap with the RIAA it's amazing.
keithmohr Monday, July 26, 2010
Indie to me means "independent".. in that the artist is self funding their music mission. They are not paying back an unrecoupable loan by loan sharks who cook the books and steal money, nor signed to 360 deals that stick it to em in the front and the back.
Seth Keller Monday, July 26, 2010
Indie refers to skinny dudes in ironic t-shirts playing hipster music in Williamsburg and Silverlake. It does not mean independent in today's world. It's a lifestyle tag, a genre of music.
There are plenty of musicians in other genres that are more "independent" than Yeasayer, Waaves and Band of Horses, but they're not hip so they're not considered "indie." Look at Blues, Jazz, Smooth Jazz, New Age, Christian Pop. Mostly independent artists self-releasing or on labels far outside the mainstream, yet they would never be considered "indie" because those who control the blogs, NPR, itunes, music supervision, etc. are hipsters and, with the exception of Jazz, don't consider any of those genres cool enough to be "indie."
"Indie" artists can be on majors or independent labels as long as they have the right look and sound and are perceived as cool and cred-worthy, the label applies.
NathanJE Monday, July 26, 2010
...well articulated. so, back to my question: Is A2IM just a club then or does it have any meaningful business purposes that arent mostly redundant?
CrowfeatheR Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Seth nailed it.
Independent and DIY are now different from "indie", which is why we now use the term "DIY". To be labeled and considered "indie" you need to conform to a certain look, sound and hyper liberal political outlook. I would wear my independent, DIY label on my sleeve like a badge of honor as it reflects hard work and self reliance. The "indie" label however has a tinge of hipster-er than thou snobbery and a negative energy connotation. The "indie" label these days conjures up an image of a bunch of 20 somethings at a coffee shop in black jeans, ironic t-shirts and chuck taylors complaining about how the major labels should all be bankrupt while looking down their noses at those not in the clique. When they play, they play way too loud, slightly out of tune and every song sounds some what the same. That is an image very few of us would like to have associated with our music except those "indie" people.
I AM A DIY MUSICIAN! Don't call me "indie"!
~ CrowfeatheR
http://www.myspace.com/crowfeatherproject
chuck Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Maybe all this (major labels shrinking, terrestrial radio losing influence, basically the collapse of big-business music) doesn't mean that "indie" (in the old sense of "independent") is dead, maybe it means indie has won.
Mumra Tuesday, July 27, 2010
"So, what does "indie" really mean anymore? And, is it dead? That was the smart question asked... "
I don't mean to bash here, but come on, smart questions??
More like common sense questions. I agree with Seth on this one.. Today, it's more an image/lifestyle thing.
PartlyCloudy Tuesday, July 27, 2010
ummmm....
why does a2im even care about radio rec. royalties? Not like so-called indie really get much big radio time anyway.
an indie Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Independently owned music gets about 10% of AM/FM radio play in the U.S. Industry estimates suggest that a performance royalty in the U.S. at terrestrial radio would result in approx $60 million distributed to independent artists and independent master owners. It would also open recipricol rights - meaning that all of the foreign radio stations that currently do pay performing artists and labels would begin paying U.S. indie artists and indie labels (they currently do not because there is no such "right" in the U.S. which means that U.S. artists and indie labels are missing out on a LOT of money since we DO get more airplay overseas than at home).
RamseyD Tuesday, July 27, 2010
A corporation is a corporation; I've worked for both indie and major,
you walk in each morning, leave your morality at the door, and then push
brand by any means necessary - just like any other industry. In the
case of the indie sector, the chickenhawks who run these labels have
found that waving the flag of "integrity" and "credability" a very
efficient way obfuscate product flaws, lower costs, and increase
profits. It is an ironic system that puts brand ahead of artist, and
money ahead of music, where their "passion" is clearly limited to the
corporation's need to feed. The level of unprofessional behavior and
defalcation in indieland far exceeds anything a major label is allowed
to do because at a major, there's a board and bylaws that provide some
moral compass.
At best, independents were an oxymoronic way to
build genres by lumping similar artists under a brand but systems like
MySpace and Pandora are far better and more democratic. Indie as a
culture is dead, we probably won't see another trend (like the
long-in-the-tooth "emo") because the internet is killing off that
segregated mentality; artists are judged more on talent than brand, and
that's a good thing for music. So-called "indie" people can make all the
excuses they want, but after being part of this farce for many years,
I'll say this sector is about as relevant as a CD.
Keep "fighting the good fight."
chad Tuesday, July 27, 2010
"A corporation is a corporation"
the non-commercial radio I worked for where I had no set playlist, and barely any suggestions ("we wouldn't mind it if you found local or texas artists to play that fall within your show's musical scope, if you'd like") and promoted local artists, gave space to the progressivesfor their monthly community meeting and helped volumes with giving a 'voice to the under-represented.' Tired of the auto-coporate hate.
presnikoff Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Hi Everyone, Rich Bengloff of A2IM has responded to this discussion here.
@AddamBongg (via Twitter) Wednesday, July 28, 2010
@digitalmusicnws BEING A MUSICIAN AND BEING A MERCENARY ARE TWO DIFFERENT ANIMALS ... AND BESIDES, DIGITAL RECORDING IS SO EASY. .PEACE
Bricks and Mortar Media (via F Thursday, July 29, 2010
100 pts. to the person who can define what "Indie" means. Extra credit if you can explain "indie rock" and "indie label" too
facebook.com/bricksandmortarmedia
@droybal (via Twitter) Thursday, July 29, 2010
Indie has just become another genre. Most "indie" bands are an major labels, isn't that the opposite of indie?
@P455 (via Twitter) Thursday, July 29, 2010
indie's just the new pop now.
OUR SPONSORS
© 2011 All Rights Reserved
Follow Us