They may never buy your album, yet they’ll live-stream you eating breakfast. It’s the ever-changing, younger music fan of 2013, and the focus of a just-released report from MTV Research.
Here are 7 attributes of this young, still-emerging, and radically different audience group often dubbed Millennials. Depending on who you are, this may be just a part — or 100% — of your fanbase.
(1) They Crave Mundane Intimacy.
“Millennials crave intimate glimpses into the mundane daily activities of their favorite celebrities,” Allison Hillhouse of MTV Research states.
53% of Millennials say the more an artist shares online about themselves, the closer they feel to them.
91% say it’s OK if an artist has some flaws – it makes them human and likeable.
(2) They Crave Co-Creation.
“A fan-artist symbiosis has emerged, with the two working together on social media as one another’s branding machines.”
1 in 4 Millennials has made a parody.
64% relish the role of ‘tastemaker’ for friends.
58% say that feedback and connectivity are huge motivators for posting and sharing music.
(3) They Need to be Fed Daily; They Need to be Fed Differently.
Obey the tenets of now-established social networking platforms.
Facebook is the most “formal and official outlet” for tour updates and information.
Twitter offers a “blow-by-blow feed,” and highlights interactions with other celebrities.
Instagram provides a direct line into their literal world-view, like “seeing the world through their eyes.”
Tumblr is the more intimate glimpse into an artist’s psyche/spirit.
(4) If They Don’t Buy Your Stuff, Don’t Take It Personally.
Fans, especially younger fans, have an expectation of free. In fact, many younger listeners have never been forced to pay for music in their lives; furthermore, many beleive music should be free on principle.
In that context, if they’re buying your stuff, they’re generally regarding it as a major gesture. Indeed, 68 percent of Millennials interviewed by MTV said they only buy music out of respect for the artist, and they believe music should be free.
Just one in four had purchased music in the last week; 30 percent in the last month (all of which actually sounds high).
(5) They’re Comfortable at a ‘Zero Distance’.
This we already know: there’s an expectation of being ‘constantly accessible,’ especially on social networks. Intimate details shall be shared.
(6) They Shuffle.
“A Millennial list of ‘fave artists’ might be as diverse as One Direction, Etta James, Lil Wayne and The Supremes.”
(7) There’s No Such Thing as Selling Out Anymore.
Millennials “understand that the system of getting free music/streaming means artists have to make their money somewhere.”
68% say there’s no such thing as selling out, as long as the artist isn’t being fake.
But there are limits: 61% say they think less of an artist that releases products that don’t fit the image or reputation.
They also crave shiny things. If you are not hot, you don’t have much of a shot.
Thom Yorke is not stereotypically hot. Neither is Adele. And yet….
both are insanley famous
Who would ever want to be an artist under those conditions? You’re suppsoed to be busy constantly feeding personal stuff to your fans, and then no one buys your music? Sure doesn’t sound like a sustainable model to me. In truth, I think most young people are much more sensible than depicted in this article. (I make this observation as a middle-aged person.)
I agree 100%! Where did all this come from? As a teenager growing up in the late 60’s-early 70’s, I was always in a record store with friends getting the latest album or single from groups like The Beatles, Stones, Deep Purple, ELO, etc. I honestly could not have cared less about what the guys in these groups did in their personal lives. I was a fan of their music and that was all I cared about. Yes, it’s nice to have autograph sessions or a meet and greet after a show, but I can’t imagine The Beatles getting anything done in the studio, if they were constantly tweeting or re-tweeting. I would not have held my breath waiting for a reply from Mick Jagger to a fan letter I had sent. Let’s just keep it about the music. Geez!
I grew up in the 70’s and 80’s and I did my first professional work as a recording artist at age 17, 31 years ago. I remember those days of going to the record store with my allowance to purchase 45’s and the excitement of my father bringing home the latest album releases on his payday. But the reality is, those are days gone by. I still want to operate in my craft, so that means that I have to roll with what’s happening NOW, or either get out of the game. It’s simple. I have a varied fanbase from young millenials to seniors and I’ve changed my whole outlook towards it and God is blessing my music ministry in a mighty way. I still market the old fashioned way to my niche that responds to that and Ialso market with the latest technology as well. I guess it all depends on what you want and how you look at the glass. Half empty or half full.
Bands back then had to energetically and consistently nuture their fanbase/fan clubs. It was essential! And it had more to do with female fans who DO want to know about their idol’s personal lives. Remember 16 magazine and the whole stable of fan/celeb mags? It’s always been a huge industry.
I’m 59, I have a hotel house gig playing my music, and little kids and teens like it and buy my CDs as much as adults of all ages. They want to get a feel of who I am. CDs must ALWAYS be signed, and people are always striking up little get-to-know-you conversations. It’s the way of the world. I accept it, try to understand it and work with it. I’m a fullltime professional selling to all ages and I’m friendly and accessible to them. That openess never gets abused.
This very useful article is about selling music in the internet age. Comparing 2013 to 40 years ago is kinda dinosaurial.
If there’s a lot of artists refusing to adapt or come to terms with modern conditions, that makes for less competition with those who want to be successful NOW. ‘ The past is just a good-bye’ – CSN. Get with it, man – tune in.
But that was before internet! Times are a changin’! It’s still about the music! And you don’t do the tweetin’ yourself, your alter-ego does it!
With the exception of the last 50 or so years, this is how music and artists have ALWAYS been – you play for the art of it, you make friends in the tavern, and a nobleman decides they like you enough to be your patron. Being an artist hasn’t ever been about making a living; it’s about connecting with humans, creating, doing what you love, and hoping that people will enjoy your art enough to support you.
Well said Pete! I’m glad someone understands.
Really? The last 50 years? That would put us in a time when rock-n-roll was emerging as the dominant pop music and a year before The Beatles hit the stage on The Ed Sullivan Show. So prior to that, Frank Sinatra, Bing Crosby, Louis Armstrong, Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, Benny Goodman, Glenn Miller, etc; none of them did it to make a living?! It was just to connect with other humans? Not to mention that Beethoven and Mozart gave piano and music lessons to earn money between composing. We probably should skip classical music because most operas and symphonys were done on commission where the composer was paid in advance of a work to be delivered. And by the way, those giants of music history were just as concerned then about having their intellectual property protected as writers are today. Each person chooses their profession because it’s something they love to do, but that doesn’t mean musicians/writers work for free. You are confusing hobby and profession. To agree with your last line though, we always hope people will enjoy our work.
Pete! Man! Thank you for articulating this reality so clearly and susinctly! I am 54 now, still playing, and seriously hoping to be supported in the way you mention. However, I realized way back that you can’t be successful (at least in your heart) if you think you are in it for the money. Maybe some can, I just haven’t known any players who can produce quality work and have the priority be the money, pulling them away from the art of it.
Every musician I’ve known, and those from the past whom I have studied, all had to do something else to make a living, even if it was some other angle of the music biz. David “Honeyboy” Edwards, who played pro from the 1930s until last year; God rest his soul, said he had to gamble on the side and he didn’t gamble on the square. He said, “Had to cheat to eat! If I didn’t cheat, I didn’t eat!” The blues in the south I guess. Anyway, thanks for your clarity and I will continue with writing and playing music until I can’t no mo!
Being an artist has always been about making enough to eat and to raise our children and put food on the table just like everyone else. Like everyone, we are trying to do it the best way we know how. It just so happens that artists are best being artists, and not executives or journalists or mathematicians or nurses. Everyohne contributes what they do best as much as they can because that’s what makes all humans feel useful and well, human. Also they tend to be better at whatever that is than the person standing beside them so they’d be the logical choice to do that job, to offer that service.
Yes, being an artist can be amazing and beautiful and perhaps people feel jealous because they think that artists get to do what they want all the time. If so, I invite them to go through the rigors of practicing 4-8 hours a day and tell me it’s not work. No, not all people get to do what they wish they could do all the time, hence Beethoven giving music lessons and George Sand writing 20 pages a day to 18th century magazines to support herself and Chopin and her children while she also wrote her novels. Art takes work. A lot of work. A lot more than most people are willing to put in, even though EVERY human is creative. Time equals money, but when you’ve been labelled an artist it seems people expect you to eat air and live in the clouds.
Please think twice before you perpetrate this sort of poverty-thinking and lack of respect on someone who is trying to make a living the best way they know how, and who has worked long and hard to do it.
You are actually completely wrong. Musicians have made livings in a variety of ways going back over 2,000 years, and only a very small percentage were court musicians.
Your view may justify stealing other people’s hard work and investments, but it is not based on fact.
Calling someone çompletely wrong is…uncool. It makes me uninterested in what you have to say because it’s so mean-spirited. Puffing yourself up by putting someone else down.
Answer: The true artist who only cares about the music and their love of music….
The egotistical maniacs competing for the same magazine covers might not want to be an artist under such conditions…
Bands never made money selling their songs, the record companies that arranged their concerts did. It was the fee for arranging the big shows. Go to a concert and buy a shirt if you want to support the band.
I am an old and am saddened by the spectacle of my contemporaries who grew up in the 60s/70s telling young people who grew up in the 90s/00s that their lives and desires (which exist as a result of how we raised them both individually and societally) are not worthy. No wonder they tune you out.
I listen to my daughter just as I listened to my Grandma who died at 93. I learn plenty from both.
I agree with your logic. At the same time, every generation will get some things wrong. One pattern that I can’t stand is this tendency to think that the “new kids” have something more worthy to offer the world just because their young and modern. “Little Tommy plays with that gadget all day. My how smart he is.” That’s why we see so many older parents jump to get tattoos and piercings to keep up with their way cooler children. This only teaches kids that they have nothing to achieve to prove the merits of what they value.
Parents don’t teach their kids manners anymore either. I can’t remember the last time a child looked me in the eyes and spoke to me like the young adults most of my generation were at those ages. I can’t remember the last time I saw a young person helping his parents in the yard raking leaves or mowing the lawn.
Advertisers have pitted generations against one another which you constantly see in cereal commercials where Dad is always a goofy guy out of touch with what cool cereal is and isn’t. Mom is caught red handed when doing the laundry for wearing one of her daughter’s sexy dresses. Come on, you ALL know what I mean! It’s comical and yet there is a prevalent tendency to model ourselves from such social cues without pondering the reasons why those cues exist in the first place (ie, to sell us more stuff we don’t need via the spoiled brat child who actually controls the purse strings of the family).
Yes, it’s reminds me of how my parents groused about our 60’/70s cultural world back then. I’m a fulltime musician-songwriter for 40 years now and I have the good fortune of working with mostly people from 18 to 30 in my job as a house musician in a hotel. I’m open to them, they’re open to me, and it helps me to face the future and not stall in the ever-receding past.
The negativity in a lot of these posts leads nowhere. Regretably, that statement is also negative. So…face the future brightly and leave the past to fade.
Time to shock the modern kids into reality. There would be no music, without artists working hard. Some, work too hard to be busy with Social Media. Any Musician who does Social Media well, either has another person doing it for them, or lacks some of the creative time that artists and musicians need to produce. If today’s fans want to be close to their celebs, mow their lawn.. for free.
I expect to buy music, to support the artists, that provide me with infinate hours of enjoyment. I pay more for one movie for 90 min of entertainment, than a CD costs to last a lifetime of enjoyment.
This is why we have struggling artists, because everyone thinks FREE harms no one.. it harms us all, our music, our choices. If you get enjoyment from their music, support it.
I don’t totally disagree with what you’re saying but I sort of do. For one, “doing” social media really isn’t that much time. You don’t have to be Ricky Gervais who tweets 4000 times a day. You can send out a few random thoughts, respond to a couple fans and people will be happy at the engagement. If you tweeted, instagrammed and said somethings on Tumblr or facebook a couple times a day, it’s not much time at all. Artists have free time like anyone else. And musicians are in the entertainment business. If you can’t handle 45 minutes of talking to fans online, you’re probably not cut out for the 2013 music industry. It’s arrogant and dumb to think your music can and will stand alone to bring in fans. You’re selling yourself as an artist, not a collection of 10 songs anymore.
Also, as much as the free mindset does create struggling artists, there’s also just way too many delusional hacks out there. It’s so cheap and easy to get off the ground (which is great) it just gives everybody the chance to claim poverty as an artist. I can’t tell you how many people I’ve talked to who have a nominal fanbase and complains about not making money. If you want to show me a band with 100K fans that scrapes by, then sure, that’s sad. But most of the time it’s some asshole with 800 “fans” on Facebook, who even if they all bought the record for $20 would still be broke. It’s always someone elses fault you’re not rich and famous.
A lot of what you said in this and in your next post is, unfortunately, true. However, I have a different opinion on one of your statements; ‘selling yourself’, you said. Yes, but not as an artist. You mentioned in your other post, Justin Beiber and Lady Gaga. They are in the news all the time, but almost never for their music, usually for some bad behavior, but it does keep their names in print. I also strongly disagree about music standing alone to bring in fans, even in this day and age. An artist, as I see it, is tied to their music. You cannot separate them and the music SHOULD be able to stand alone, if it’s good enough. Paul McCartney, who still tours and does shows; his music can stand alone. Bruce Springsteen’s music too, can stand alone. What about Adele? She is one with her music and her songs can stand alone. She is truly the one artist today who is always in the news for her music. The problem with today’s manufactured and over produced music is that it cannot stand alone. It is disposable music, much of it, in my opinion and that’s why artists have to sell themselves. A lot of artists have music that can stand alone, both the well known and the yet to be discovered. I don’t think it makes anyone arrogant or dumb to think they’re music alone is enough for them to succeed. Whether they are right or not, time will tell.
I agree with pretty much of all this, but my point was more if you think that can happen easily in 2013, is where the arrogance and being dumb comes in. There’s no reason to not interact with fans via social networking. It’s really not that hard to do. And again, if you wanna be a performer you should probably want to interact with fans. The age of mystery, the age of musician being a god to people is over. Artists need to be approachable, or at the very least put the illusion they are, which social networking is great for. It almost makes you seem like you’re up on a high horse and some snobby prick if you are so anti this stuff. God forbid you talk to some random person for 140 characters…
There’s plenty of popular indie bands that aren’t particularly active on social networking, so it’s not a necessity of keeping fans. People certainly still just like music for music. But there’s just very little reason not to keep being even just somewhat active. I’ve been on tour busses and vans for hours on the road, and waiting in some shitty venue for 5 hours before a show. Musicians have time.
Hey GGG, good conversation. I see a little more what you mean. Yes, the days of being rock gods (Zeppelin, The Who) are over, but it was really their fans who made them gods in the first place. There is still a lot of arrogance to go around these days particulary in certain genres and it seems to me, the less talent, the more arrogance. I think what you’re getting at is just plain old common courtesy. Even though, I am not big on social networking, I do have the basics, a web site and a Facebook fan page. I respond to each person who may take the time to drop me an email or send a message regarding my music. I get a fair amount of, ‘Hey, just heard you guys on Pandora. (or some other place) Very cool.’ Then I reply with a note of thanks and answer any question they may have asked. As you said, any artist these days has the time to at least do that. That kind of interaction is OK, but I’m not looking to become pen pals with anyone. I actually think having a little mystery about yourself as an artist is a good thing. If people like what they hear, they will take the time to learn a little more about you and what you do. I would much rather have people seek me out because they heard something we did than have me screaming all over social media, “Hey check out my new single!” Why be just another one of 50,000 people doing the same thing? One more thing about social media, and I fall into this category; some people just aren’t comfortable using something that they don’t know that much about (Twitter, Tumblr, etc.) and I’m not one who constantly wants to be in someone’s face talking about all the cool stuff I’m doing and why they should get it. By the way, what type of music do you play? Good luck in your endeavors.
Thanks for the tips. I may look into giving something like that a try. Also, thanks for sparing me the genre thing. I just love the genres that have sub-genres and then they all have sub-genres. I often wonder what ever happened to just rock-n-roll. Anyway, I don’t play out anymore, either, but when I did, I was a keyboard player in my rock band days. Try not to laugh, but now I just write songs for a group of young girls I found, or should I say who found me. We do it just for fun with no illusions of glory, but it is so cool because this group is something else. And with them, it’s all about the music and their singing; no prima donnas, egos or drama. I write for them and practice with them and then we record. I’m a fair keyboard player, but my recording engineer/producer is an out of this world guitar and bass player and he makes our tracks shine. We’re just about to go into the mastering studio to have the tracks mastered for their third CD, the one they did in the eighth grade. Yeah, eighth grade. If you enjoy the girl groups from the 1960’s, you may like this group. By ages 14 they are sounding very much like The Shangri-Las, just younger. I make sure to keep it fun for the girls and keep things age appropriate for them. I’ve gotten a good bit of email from people who say they could listen to them all day, so I guess they have an appealing sound. If you have a minute, you can see them at jellybeansongs.com. Thanks again and good luck with your groups.
I have a hard time believing this list is some kind of universal truth among “Millennials” – seems to me the research group may be cherry picking the internet addicted side of the coin – sounds more like celebrity culture then music culture to me
For mainstream music and the MTV audience, which is probably what MTV research targets, music culture and celebrity culture are the exact same thing. Think Justin Bieber would have made it if he was a weird, ugly looking kid? Think Lady GaGa would have made it if she stayed normal Stefani Germanotta? Think any of these people are actually the top tier of musical talent? I think John Mayer is the only mainstream artist of the last 15 years who has displayed an actual knowledge and ability of music. And he only got there because he played into the celebrity culture. And he, too, happens to be not ugly. Music is pretty much the secondary, tertiary or even worse for most mainstream “musicians” these days. (yes, I’m sure you can name exceptions)
Would you consider Daft Punk attractive?
I have a robofetish, so yes.
The “music world” loves attacking its clientele.
Napster was one of the greatest things to happen in the digital world. Don’t like it? You can fight it or you can find a different way to profit. Radiohead did it. NIN did it. Hell, even Psy managed with YouTube.
The older demographic just doesn’t get how the internet works.
Yeah, about that…
video killed the Radio Star
& Facebook killed the the Video Star
just sayin 😉
I wonder whether there is a cross-over between this article and the article discussing whether broadcasters should be required to pay artists. What if internet sources of artist material were subject to similar obligations to pay?
Anyone else notice the underlying trend? It seems that what the average young “music fan” is looking for is the feeling that he’s “in” with some celebrity. Of course, this makes the term “music fan” a complete misnomer.
In short, faced with a list of “demands” such as this I have no choice but to cackle into my beer, ‘coz there’s absolutely no reason to pay any attention to it. Unless such “fans” are willing to pay for snaps of my coffee+cigarette breakfast.
Let’s keep our eye on the ball here: if someone isn’t paying for your music, they aren’t a fan. Period.
Eh…what if they for a $75 concert ticket. Or even a $30 concert ticket and some merch?
cue steveh’s anti-music for t-shirt rant.
Agree. Nothing wrong with earning a living selling recordings only. Last I checked, stealing is illegal and all generations need to understand this and stop making lame excuses for it.
Whine all you want. Not going to get you anywhere.
I don’t think anyone has ever said earning a living from selling recordings is bad. The point is that it’s obviously very rare these days, so if you choose to attempt to live ONLY on record sales, you just can’t bitch when your career fails. If you choose to not tour, not sell merch, not license your music, etc, you have nobody to blame but yourself if you don’t sell enough records to live.
I think it’s safe to say that people who steal music without remorse feel that we should not be earning through recordings.
Also safe to say that record labels(including indie labels managed by SteveH) make their revenues solely from recordings.
Since you enjoy always having the last word, I will let you have it again.
I only get the last word because you always say the most ridiculous things I can’t no respond. You have a brain issue where you can’t understand larger points.
1) Pirates don’t actively wish labels to not make money, they just care about not spending money more. I’m sure if you ask a pirate who stole Daft Punk if he was upset they sold hundreds of thousands of copies, they wouldn’t be mad.
2) We were talking about artists, not labels.
So basically according to this, they want you to be their friend. Tell them all your secerts. Make them feel special and apart of what you’re doing. Be popular but assaible and be grateful if they buy your music because they really don’t have too.
Ha Ha Ha they sound like a bunch of spoil brats to me. You’re better off not doing music at all if they’re your fan base!
WhoRyde don’t play that!
….and now back to the discussion, which is already in progress.
Great article. Nailed it.
Those who dont “get it” should also try fitting some wooden wheels to their cars – oh, wait, they dont make wooden wheels for cars any more….Wonder what happend to that industry….?
So you’re just fine with all Bieber, all the time, then.
Get off my lawn!
Younger music fans are used to having everything in their short young lives being handed to them of a silver platter; so why should they pay for music?
No substance, spoiled and with an arrogant elitist attitude.
No wonder the new music business is so screwed up!
John Dudley, Esq.
“…68 percent of Millennials interviewed by MTV said they only buy music out of respect for the artist, and they believe music should be free…”
I know from first hand exprienece that most MTV executives believe music should be free, especially for corporations like MTV.
Lets help the African Music industry build a digital music store that will help push the limits of consumers choice and pay royalites to artist http://igg.me/at/nettusmusicafrica
As upsetting as it is that things have gotten this way, and it sounds like the sentiment in general is that this description is revolting to many at best, it’s the way things are. As a college student, I get to see the younger generation moving and asking for things that are so different than any other generation. They do want connectivity. They want, I think, almost to be able to live the life of a superstar vicariously through the artist. It’s like a woman reading a romance novel or a guy watching a war movie. We have a tendency to place ourselves in the story. It gives us a sense of importance and of adventure. Sometimes I wish things could go back to the way they were, but then again, the major reason that the industry is struggling is because of that very sentiment. We need some flexibility, a willingness to engage the consumer where they are. Let’s put that old “sell physical copies and get up on the charts” mentality to rest and put together something new.
All of this is actually true. we are a record label from 7 years.. CD sales dropped from 500 copies in the 1st year to a mere 20 copies in this year.. more and more fans prefer to get our music for free (we realised this and now give away compilations for free and only charge for full length artist albums).. however the scene has moved on towards monetizing in events. events have become much much more compared to before as social media and internet enables artists to reach out to tons of more people on a more personal basis. no1 really passes up an oppurtunity to see our artists even if it means they have to pay 50$ in a country like India to see a fairly unknown underground music artist. that itself is like a tribute of paying for 5 albums!
Everyone’s so mad that young people don’t buy music….
If you are worth it, someone will pay you for it. Truth.
If you are really good, they’ll pay you a lot. If you’re not good…
And it’s not just about music, it’s about ENTERTAINMENT.
I think it’s a shame everyone here focusses on the negative. My first recordings were on cassettes and vinyl, they sold out in our city but never got heard outside Australia. We didn’t make any money from the vinyl, we made profits on cassettes and t-shirts, because they’re cheap to make, and we worked our butts off playing shows seven nights a week.
Now, because of the internet, people in France, Romania, California, the Philipines, Guernsey, all over the place are listening to my music. I can record my demos at home, I can create my own videos and upload them for public viewing.
I still don’t make any money, but at least my stuff is ‘out there’. I can distribute world-wide, and not have to chase up record stores for my money when I do sell. I don’t even play shows now, but I probably have a far wider audience than I ever did back then.
Stop grumbling people, if it’s the music you’re into (and not the money) this is a golden age!
OK, music isn’t free, someone has to pay.
Who is going to teach this nieve generation that music is not free, the same as your mother washing your clothes isn’t free.
everything else is the same as it ever was.
Social media has added ways that artists can communicate with fans, but how many really successful artists communicate with the fans daily? ( or is it someone else from the team who does that job )
Young people are far more switched on than this.
One thing that has changed is the generation gap, you know the
opinion ( that noice is not music ) young people today listen to music from all era’s and are very knowledgeable, thanks to youtube.
As far as income for artists, this will come by new ways but we will have to fight for it.
Higher percentage of advertising capital, because the content provider is more important than the service provider, when this is fair then artists will be able to earn a reasonable living from the content they provide and the relationships they forge.
At the moment though artists are being targeted by everyone.
Fans want music for free
Facebook wants money for exposure
radio wants money for airplay.
ok world, give us a f******** break will ya! lol
Thanks for listing the 7 reasons these spoiled brats can go fuck themselves.
Thank you for article. I think the industry has done a great job educating everyone that music is not free, that bands need money to do what they do.
As a photographer I think that people don’t even think they need to pay for usage to use images or that photographers need money to do what they do. If they do think about it, they think the creators of images are being payed by some entity but not them.
I would be interested it seeing a similar study of what millennials and other people think of using images and graphics for free. I bet it would be even a greater amount of people who never even thought to pay the creators for such content.
Images are being used on all social media platforms and websites and I get a feeling that no one, millennials or other, even give it a second thought.
I was going to with the article because I thought it would be stereotypical crap but it’s not. To be honest I fit into most of those catagories, I definitly like to mix and match music, which is why I stream it (I use Torch Music for that) and I guess I crave mundane intimacy, though I guess it’s kind of weird…
My boyfriend, 31 yrs old, just showed me this article and I think it’s great. I’m 23. As proactive musicians trying to make a living and our mark in history/present/future, neither of us necessarily like that this is how it is for the younger generation who are (at the very least) some of our potential listeners/buyers, but it’s wise to acknowledge and accept. We can sit around and complain that things “aren’t the way they used to be” or we can embrace that technology & the modern age have shaped things differently; adapting to understand the nature of your audience without sacrificing the core of what you do will only give you the upper hand.
This relates to every aspect of young people these days:
They expect everything and give nothing.
I grew up with those who commented on how things were in the late 60’s and early 70’s and followed the grunge to indie era in the 90’s with my son, and people were still buying albums in the 90’s. My dream was to be a recording artist and I released my first album in 2012. I’m offering statistics to this discussion. I manufactured 1000 copies of the physical CD and sold 20 in person. 23,000 people heard the music on internet radio and 400 plus chose to push the little button that said become a fan. I sold 3 downloads of the album and 1 download of an individual song. I want to emphasize that 400 people called themselves a fan and 3 actually downloaded the album.
When I was in my twenties if 400 people said they were your fan you’d have 400 album sales. The good news for musicians is that it’s really easy to get your music heard these days. The bad news is that you’re even less likely to make any money from it, even when people clearly like it!
[…] The 7 Attributes of Young Music Listeners […]
[…] The 7 Attributes of Younger Music Fans… […]
[…] to “The 7 Attributes of Younger Music Fans,” written by Paul Resnikoff for Digital Music News, Millennial music […]
[…] acuerdo con “Los 7 atributos de los fans de música más jóvenes” escrito por Paul Resnikoff para Digital Music News, los […]
[…] to “The 7 Attributes of Younger Music Fans” by Paul Resnikoff, millennial music […]
[…] I am so incredibly excited about the photobook! My first musician photobook! It is also going be my first ever Best of Album music release purchase since I hardly ever buy […]