Showing posts with label Rant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rant. Show all posts

Saturday, February 25, 2012

No Business in Music

So, I just ran across an article; and it has opened my eyes to the harsh reality I have already been slowly acknowledging over the years. 

It's not just this one.  There's a ton of bloggers and articles online and in print talking about the chaos of the music industry; the business of music has completely collapsed and is all but dead.  Today, fewer than 40% of the worlds most renowned studios stand the test of time; and I'm not talking literally.  I'm sure the buildings are probably still there.  However, their facilities, equipment, and treatments have probably disappeared quicker than the experts that ran them.

D.I.Y. killed professionalism.  Internet killed TV, and global commerce killed personal freedom.  If you belong to any of these groups, please stand up.

I'm disheartened at the lack of fight; not by the music industry; not by the film industry...  No, they've been the ones fighting hard to cling to their old business models and trying to continue the way of sucking every last penny they can as the business model - along with them, slowly dies.  I'm talking about you, the uneducated; naive individual.

I just learned a new word today and that word is Googlization. I dare you to post a comment with at least one way you can't get to youtube; and I bet if you find one, that device or method is old and obsolete anyway.

The music industry needs to die already.  I'm serious.  There's no such thing as a patron of the arts anymore.  Hell, there probably hasn't been since the Renaissance.  Let's recognize facts: Businesses don't just give money away. They expect money in return.

It's no surprise then that the music industry has gone belly up.  Music is like ideas.  An idea should be free to share.  Music is either priceless... or worthless. The revolution of sound recording is nothing more than a really, really long fad that's finally reached maturity.  Think about that one long and hard, from your smartphone... while you're on the toilet.  Don't forget that courtesy flush.

I sound pretty cynical I'm sure by now.  I have good reason.  People don't care about ideas anymore, they care about dollars. They care about the bottom line.  There's a war going on, a silent... stupid one.  And by stupid, I mean education.  DIY revolution was instigated by the amazing trickle down effect of technology over time to the point where now not only is software capable of producing sounds for you, but the hardware it takes to run everything is super affordable.  If you need a history lesson, a cost analysis map, or even a comparison: read my previous blog post - Figuratively Speaking.

I share a similar sentiment to Rob Tavaglione, in his article "Music Production Biz in '12" (see first link).
" Major label budgets are now indie-sized; indie budgets are now “go make it yourself and we'll distribute;” and unsigned artists are making their own records with friends on laptops (or tablets, or phones, etc.)."
That empowering freedom has fallen into the hands of the uneducated, unaware, and uncaring.  "Let's all go make our ideas" with little to no respect for the process of how to do so properly.  It's no wonder indie musicians are skeptical about "studios" especially when anyone with a few scraps of recording gear, a room in their house, and an internet connection can advertise themselves as an "affordable studio".


A message to everyone: stick with your own recording gear. You're not going to get signed and the labels are probably going to be all the worse for you anyway.  Stop caring about your music already, no one else does and that's because they're one step ahead of you, probably trying to sabotage your audience and stealing your fans.  You really need to get off your high horse, and get your head out of the clouds about how "the people still do care and love good music".  The club scene has killed traditional venues, no one wants to go just listen to someone play live.  The music business is dying so expect to give away your music for free, at least be happy when people listen to it and actually like it.  Cd's and Vinyl? So last century, they're like Disco; they just don't know it yet.


And lastly, but most importantly... don't give up.

Friday, October 14, 2011

Super-nerd Rant

In today's software saturated, techno-savvy world we use computers at every turn to do just about anything.  Next thing you know, our kids will have shoes that tie themselves and embedded chips in their brains that learn everything for them.

Ok, so these predictions are pretty ridiculous.  However, we spend so much time looking forward to the next big trend-setting leap that we pretty much accept whatever crap is handed our way because a developer slaps a release together and calls it complete.

I'm a windows power-user.  I say that because i know with fair efficiency exactly where and how i want my software to work.  What really gets under my skin is when I have to deal with programs that install whatever they damn well please without so much as a user prompt letting us know

"hey, we need to put this at this location because we feel it's best situated there.
  Sincerely,
      Software Development Team"

Now, I love Windows very much.  I've been open to just about every platform: Linux, Mac, Windows, DOS.  I've grown up using every one of them to varying degrees yet windows is my operating system of choice because:

  • The software I want to use is available.
  • The ability to modify and do just about anything with ease.
  • Open development for 3rd party hardware  (I don't see Apple selling their OS to just stick into any other computer and install...  But we'll save that debate for another argument).

What's my point?  Windows is about freedom.  For the most part, applications always come with a user prompt and we all assume everything is going to the location of our choice, correct?

However, with today's massive software footprints (Ahem, videogames in particular), I'm sure the developers realize that by default the people buying their software must have more than 1 hard drive to install things on.  Except, for users like me who constantly browse through every nook and cranny of our hard drives and notice when things get placed where we don't want them to.

The most popular directory, notorious for filling up with folders of crap from installs is the Documents Directory (formerly, My Documents).  Everything from game save data to factory and user presets to authorization files end up here from videogames to audio, video, imaging, you-name-it we've-got-it software.

Since the advent of 64-bit and the latest OS offerings from Microsoft, we've got a slightly different structure for how data is structured.  A hidden folder at the root of the OS drive titled "Program Data" is the 2nd hotspot for misc file accumulation.  And of course, last but not least, the notorious User directory "/*username*/AppData"  Often filled with redundant files from the Program Data directory.

I'm sure i'm not alone when I say enough with the cluttering already!  There are a few select programs avialable in alternative releases appropriately titled "mobile editions" essentially self-contained executables that don't require registry entries and a ton of files spread throughout your OS Drive to operate.

Personally, i've never had the pleasure of working with any mobile edition of software aside from some tiny misc programs that are meant to do specific little jobs.  I'm talking about big boys like Sonar, or any of the software in the Adobe Master Collection.  These programs attack your OS drive in ways you often have to spend hours searching away in options and configurations menus and even then sometimes don't perform file allocating the way you want them to.

For someone like me who has a lot of data to deal with on a daily basis, I require a level of organization out of my work on the computer that keeps things neat and tidy; so you can understand my frustration when I have to work with software installations or software in general that becomes counter-productive to my organization scheme.

We all remember Stardock's "Gamer's Bill of Rights".  I hereby submit for the review of all power-users and windows gurus, peers and developers alike, a list of the

User's Bill of Rights. 

  1. Paying Users shall have the right to return software that does not work with their computers for a full refund, whether or not the registration of a cd key / serial number is involved.
  2. Paying Users have the right to demand that applications be released in a finished state, hotfixes and patches on release day are unacceptable, even if the application comes with an auto-updater utility.
  3. Paying Users shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for software will mean that the application will perform adequately on that computer.
  4. Paying Users shall have the right to expect that applications won’t install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their consent (this includes anti-tampering and security)
  5. Paying Users shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the software they own at any time.
  6. Paying Users shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.
  7. Paying Users shall have the right to demand that anti-piracy security not intrude on the performance of their computer, software, in any shape or form.
  8. Paying Users shall have the right to demand control over the location of all installation files.
  9. Paying Users shall have the right to demand a physical install log file documenting file and registry alteration.
  10. Paying Users shall have the right to demand that paying for a whole new product version be reasonable in change from the previous product.
Most are pretty self-explanatory.  Some may need clarification, however as I know questions may arise as to the vagueness of some descriptions.  I should point out that I mention PAYING users for a reason.  Money is still a form of the Barter system  developed ages ago, representing specific amounts to quantify a good or service.  In this digital era, with all these legal modifications companies like to embellish their products with, the concept itself hasn't changed.  Users really don't have any RIGHTS to anything when it comes to free software releases.  You can't really demand anything from a product or it's developer that doesn't cost anything.  However, when it comes to a product that you are paying any set amount for, the owner / developer has the intent of serving you the purchaser of that product or service.

Let's take Steam for example which is a very big digital games distribution platform right now, the likes of which EA seems to want to compete with as they move their Origin platform out of Beta into the public as a finished platform.  One thing you will notice when purchasing something online through these platforms is the clauses that state exactly what it means to "purchase" one of these software products, especially through these platforms.  Note there is no brick and mortar store to return a physical box to.  What we're talking about is EULA's or End User License Agreements.  Not only does Steam have one as a purchase policy, but also the software you're purchasing through Steam.

What it comes right down to is the fact that both the purchasing platform and the software developer treat the game as their property 100% of the time, and you are given license to use it as long as you stay within their parameters; which you of course agreed upon when clicking the check box saying i agree before purchasing.

Just like the barter system, human perception is involved.  You either agree to make the purchase or you don't.  What happens now seems completely counter-intuitive to the whole concept.

I know most people don't bother reading them because they figure they understand the general idea of what the EULA is describing.  However, most of these EULA's will state that your purchase is non-refundable, that because of piracy, they have to right to refuse refunds on account that they cannot trust what you or someone may do to the product to tamper with it once it is in your hands.  Therefore, if the software does not work or operate to your expectations, it's your loss.  It gets even more complex when it comes to bundled sales.


Don't get me wrong, i'm an avid user of Steam and I enjoy the purchases I've made on it.  However, I myself have experienced this issue once.  I purchased an Eidos game pack through steam which included a bunch of games for an extremely reasonable price!  Great offer, great games; one issue.  Upon trying to launch a game called Infernal, I get an error: Ageia PhysX SDK not installed. Please reinstall the game.

Well, since i'm on steam i just uninstall and have it re-download.  I am again greeted with the same problem.  Here's where we run into Right #2.  If a publisher wishes to use some feature by a 3rd party developer such as the PhysX SDK, the least they can do is include the deployment of that installation file needed in the installation process or prompt the user with a link to download the latest version from a supporting site.  I spent a couple of hours searching and trying to install said missing SDK needed just to launch the game and the game still to this day still will not launch.

Enter Right #1.  Right now, i'm not completely pissed as all my other games in the pack work fine, aside from this one, but I do find it reasonable as on Steam the bundle pack still considers each individual product with it's own discounted price, therefore I should be able to get a refund for this game in particular and not feel shorted slightly however many dollars and cents it might be.

Steam's Refund Policy:
"As with most downloadable software products, we do not offer refunds for purchases made through Steam - please review Section 4 of the Steam Subscriber Agreement for more information.

Steam Subscriber Agreement
Steam Subscriber Agreement
An exception is made for games purchased during a pre-order period if the request is received prior to the games' release date."
 I dare any of you that haven't actually read anything akin to a legal document before to read through the Steam Subscriber Agreement.  Actually sit down and read it.  It's pretty appalling how "subscribers" are treated to be what they consider fair.

Excerpt from the Agreement page:

"D. Ownership.
All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Software and any and all copies thereof are owned by Valve and/or its licensors. All rights reserved, except as expressly stated herein. The Software is protected by the copyright laws of the United States, international copyright treaties and conventions and other laws. The Software contains certain licensed materials and Valve's licensors may protect their rights in the event of any violation of this Agreement."

I'll try and save face on the topic of copyright and simply sum up my feelings and thoughts on it to the fact that how we view and treat Copyrighting today needs a drastic change.  The ideology behind it is outdated especially in a world that faces issues that completely circumvent it's purpose like piracy and infringement at global scales.  The end result is this - less and less cooperation out of fear and insecurity that someone somewhere is trying to pull one over on you....  Moving on.

Here's another good example of some violations of these rights.  When it comes to Adobe, everyone knows Photoshop, that amazing image editing program that seems prevalent in just about any industry, consumer or professional, and everything in between.  Adobe has really made a profound mark on the world with Photoshop's revolutionary way of working with digital imagery and the like.  However, through the versions and releases it's been notorious for file clutter.

First off, let's take a look at how it installs.  Simple enough when it comes to prompting for a location to put the program itself.  Bare with me as I take the time to explain my particular computer's setup.  I have a solid state drive is my Operating System Drive which has a mere 128gb of space.  I state this because i have this drive to house my Operating system and ONLY my operating system (ideally).  The latest version of Photoshop is CS5.5 which I pointed at a 2nd drive i have installed in my computer: the E Drive which I labelled Programs.

It's a fair 1 terrabyte 7200 RPM drive, it does it's job well.  I choose my location on this E drive for Photoshop and photoshop installs effortlessly.  It's after the installation that I notice stuff all over my C drive (The O.S.) Not only does Adobe go to great lengths to get all their various software to play together nicely, they go through great lengths to clutter up file space.  I will mention this install of Photoshop was part of the Master Collection just for reference.

I can only choose 1 root location to install each of the products in the master collection;  I therefore chose E:\Adobe\ as this root.  Let's take a stroll through the C drive and see just how many different locations various folders have been created with numerous files.

I'm running Windows 7 X64 so let's take a look in C:\Program Files\  and see what's been added.
  • C:\Program Files\Adobe
  • C:\Program Files\Common Files\Adobe

Apparently the first directory is needed to house "common" plugins that can be used across different software: mediacore is a much needed directory to housing after effects plugins by 3rd party software developers like Red Giant etc.  This directory can grow quite a bit depending on how much 3rd party plugin acquisition some production facilities might get into.

The 2nd location, at the current updates released to date for all the Adobe software (including frequent Air and Flash releases etc..) sits at a whopping 179 mb.  What the hell is in this folder?  Apparently just Support files, legal documentation in over 28 languages, various configuration files and xml sheets, linguistics, etc..  Why this all has to be located on the C drive instead of the Root folder of the install the user was prompted for is beyond me, especially when asbsolute paths can be recorded in registry when updates need be applied that require access to these various locations and files.

That's only the tip of the clutter iceberg,  That lovely hidden folder at the Root of the OS drive called "ProgramData" just got hit with an Adobe folder too.
C:\ProgramData\Adobe  which right now sits at about 564 mb. One particular folder stands out here "CameraRaw"  already weighing in at a decent 309 mb.  Another folder just below it at 90 mb titled "CS5" just seems to house a JRE (java runtime environment) and it's license agreement data, which honestly never popped up once during install.  there's a folder for Fireworks CS5.1 which houses 3 folders "EMStorePath", "Extensions", and "PreInstall"; and another folder for InDesign which hold extensions.

But wait, there's more!  I'm sure every photoshop user has an ever growing brush collection, or presets collections of various types for everything from Gradients, Patterns, etc.... 
Just to get there, these don't get installed into the actual program's directory which is the first place one might think to look.  Instead, they end up here:
C:\Users\*username*\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS5.1\Presets
which just up one directory also holds "Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Settings" where your workspaces etc.. are all stored.

This isn't even the worst part, just locating the directory: C:\Users\*username*\AppData\Roaming\Adobe took a bit of navigating to figure out which was actually useful to the application (Local, LocalLow, or Roaming).  In this directory there are 37 folders!  Right now it's not that hefty at just 61 mb but I have absolutely 0 presets, brushes, etc.. on account of not having transfered any of my vast collection in yet.

All the Adobe related Roots:
  • C:\Users\*username*\Documents\Adobe                       3.70 mb
  • C:\Users\All Users\Adobe                                          564 mb
  • C:\Users\*username*\AppData\LocalLow\Adobe          .80 mb
  • C:\Users\*username*\AppData\Local\Adobe                 3.83 mb
  • C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe                                   56.1 mb
  • C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe Story                          8.98 mb
  • C:\Program Files (x86)\Common Files\Adobe           955 mb
  • C:\Program Files (x86)\Common Files\Adobe AIR   37.5 mb
  • E:\Adobe                                                                     10.4 gb

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't like all that clutter on my C drive.  I most certainly don't appreciate having to use an external location to install presets, brushes, etc... into OUTSIDE of the main program's directory.  It just doesn't make sense.  If they wanted to make it friendly to multiple Users on 1 PC, then create a directory structure within the application based on who runs the software each time.  Is it really that much harder to do that instead of locating a zillion different files and directories in obscure places that only us power users would notice without having to resort to scouring the web / forums or calling technical support?

Enter Right #8.  Adobe should be smart enough to still get their programs to cooperate nicely together even if all the necessary miscellaneous stuff were located in the root directory, hell clutter the crap out of that root directory wit JRE folders and License support files and Common Paths for whatever you need, but please just keep it in the root folder.  OR, even better, ask the user where to store common presets and plugins etc...  That would be great!  I'm not trying to insult anyone, but this really would make digital life a whole lot easier.

Another aspect of the afformentioned Adobe insanity has to do with Premier Pro and media-caching.  by default after installation media cache files are put into a single folder no matter what your project is.
  • C:\Users\*username*\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Premiere Pro\5.5\Metadata Caches
  • C:\Users\*username*\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Common\Media Cache
  • C:\Users\*username*\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Common\Media Cache Files

Currently, when you launch Premier Pro and create a new project, you've asked about general settings, and then your Scratch Disks for Captured Video, Captured Audio, Video Previews, and Audio Previews.

None of these deal with the media cache that gets created when Premier conforms imported material.  Unless you've navigated your way around Premier, they clutter up your C drive pretty quick ESPECIALLY when working with HD media.  After just a couple projects My 128 SSD drive would have been filled to capacity.  However, I took the time after installation before creating any projects to go to Edit > Preferences and take a look at the Media Tab.  Here is where the user can select a specific location for all media cache, and/or whether or not to save the cache files next to the originals when possible.  By default that checkbox is unticked.  The media cache Database also gets quite hefty as well, and thus I specified a location for it off of my OS drive.

The final quirk to file organization with Premier is not with the project creation, it's the project's file structure.  You can do a lot inside of Premier to tidy up your project, adding "bins" like folders to nest objects however you wish.  However, you have to use the dialog for scratch disks to change and indepently specify the location of where to place the various files involved in a project.  Most users that want to get started quick will most likely choose the "Same as Project" folder option.  Which results in a cluttered project folder.  I usually end up doing this as I need to start capturing video right away when a project comes in.  I then spend minutes to an hour or so after the project has been created going into the folder and manually moving files around and re-locating them inside of the project at a later date. 


I use Cakwalk Sonar extensively for my audio productions, and their project creation scheme is one I agree with and like.  I wish Premier would act more like Sonar in this way. Sonar by default lets you select the project folder as the root folder for holding audio data, but it automatically assumes you want a directory to hold the audio in, while the project file itself resides in the home directory of your choice.  It would be equally as awesome to see Adobe adopt that school of thought.

This tyrade could go on and on, i'm sure.  But my final one is the age old CD prompt, and anti-piracy schemes that force online activation etc...  Most of these have to do with PC games.  I am one of those believers that the anti-piracy methods companies employe on their software are the reason PC gaming has gotten as shitty as it has.  I've been an avid PC gamer and collector since I was little.  My first computer was an i386 running DOS and my first game was a silly 2d ape vs ape where you type in the coordinates in X/Y and try to hit the opponent with a banana that exploded bits of buildings if you missed.

Game companies are so huge and so invested in giant projects now that their only leverage to gaining any profit off of their expensive investment is an equally expensive investment in security measures to keep their stuff from getting pirated, which is usually circumvented.

Enter Rights #6 and #7.  We all remember the whole controversy of the Rootkit, and all the fuss about Watermarking and discs being required to be in the drive to authenticate.  There's some anti-piracy security so full-proof they actually keep you from USING the software you purchased.  These are the ones that irritate people beyond all measures of sanity.

If you're software is that prone to attack and has such a viable market, i can understand the necessity to want to protect your product and your business, but ultimately the business isn't about being a business it's about catering to others.  You as the company are providing something specifically for someone else's enjoyment / utilitarian purpose, or otherwise.  Don't treat your customers, neigh, your friends by association like they're potential scum who don't even care about your product, they just want to rip you off.  Or, you may do so at your own company's peril.

I definitely am a firm believer that software companies invoke a lot of piracy out of user frustration (at one point).  I won't get into the semantics, that's just unnecessary.  I don't disagree that Piracy is causing a lot of issues, nor am I defending it.  However, back in the days when sites that catered to gamers could go download a NOCD Patch for their game in just about every game on the planet wasn't just helping pirates get their hands on games they didn't pay for; I admit I've spent a fair share of my time scouring those sites for No-CD patches for the games I legitimately bought just so I wouldn't have to stick a damn disc into my drive to play it when I wanted to instead of having to hunt through a cabinet full of games.

I know I can't be the only one with these concerns.  Please leave comments on similarities, arguments, or differences with anything I've discusses.  Hell, make your own Bill of Rights and post it up in the comments below, I thank you for any and all.  Even flamers!

-END RANT-

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Figuratively speaking...

I've been perplexed by the plethora of music "wannabes" that are claiming fame to their names and have no following and no exposure (like myself, except I don't carry that delusional ego).  I've also noticed a growing number of self-titled critics of music and the industry and noticed they have no experience in music whatsoever other than they listen to it (not even avidly at that).  These days that old saying really seems to ring true that "everyone's a critic".  Simultaneously, "they" criticize with no respect.

The superfluous wave of criticism got me stirred up.  I've been avidly participating in this industry for the better half of a decade semi-professionally at the very least.  With 2 published albums  (1, 2) I know the game well enough to have some say.  I bet I've worked harder at honing my craft and building my business than most of those self-claimed critics do at their day jobs (no offense).  Not to say that anyone working right now isn't working their butts off, but let's face it, a multitude of the work out there is a whole lot easier (at least mentally) than trying to build a brand and identity in music.  It's time consuming, relentless, and extremely iffy at best.  Music has a notorious reputation for being the "bad choice" as a career.  That reason is the primary reason why most musicians never move past hobby-stage.

I'm sure at some point in life everyone's at least touched a musical instrument - or if not, at least seen a band or someone perform live.  Any serious musician can attest to the classic case of parental annoyance if they were lucky enough to start at a young age: "Stop playing that and do your homework," education is more important, is it not?  In today's economic climate this might sound something more like "put down that instrument and get a real job already".   The musically talented will surely tell you it's still taken them years to develop any sort of sound.

But we all know this already, don't we?  we know some distant relative or friend of a friend; or perhaps a coworker's dorm-room mate's boyfriend's uncle's cat who was owned by a complete stranger that by day works at a local retail chain or some conglomerate fast food resturaunt (because let's face it, fast food chains are the last American business model still standing proud) and then leads a 2nd life by night playing shows whenever they can scrounge any sort of time free to find a place willing to let them go up in front of any audience to play.

Truthfully, how often do we go to shows? I'm willing to bet a majority of us out there have only been to maybe 2 or 3 concerts in a lifetime, 2-6 small coffee-house shows with a small-time band playing small-time songs wanting to sound as big and amazing as possible, in front of maybe 10+ crowd who's really just there for the friends who invited friends to come check out "Hey, it's that one band" and then pointing "look, it's (insert random acquaintance)" as the crowd just kind of lackadaisically sits there half-interested in wanting to get up and dance and half-daydreaming of being somewhere else. My guess is that somewhere else is with their other "cool" friends who went off to the bay area to go club-hopping and chugging alcoholic beverages like it's a last-man-standing contest.

Anyone who's attempted to do so has faced the multitude of obstacles: mental, emotional, physical, and financial, that come with trying to create a successful music career.  Let's start with Billy (completely random name for my hypothetical situation) here.  Billy's 23, fresh out of college with a degree in guess what?... Business Communications!  Sounds great, but his passion is music.  He's been playing guitar self-taught since he was 12.  Awesome!  Motivated guy...  He learned a few chops from playing along to Van Halen and got sucked into the hardcore scene before Emo kids took it over and trashed the place before leaving like it was someone else's house party and the neighbors just called the cops.

Billy Found a few friends who decided to pick up drums, bass guitar, and started jamming together on regular occasion.  They spend a few months learning a couple cover songs and decide to be bold and write a few of their own.  Already 4 months in and they're all feeling confident, and Billy wants to take it to the next level.  Before they can go anywhere, the band needs a frontman (also commonly known as a singer).  Everyone else is too afraid to step up so Billy takes the limelight and grabs a mic.  The first sounds of this band with vocals are... less than pleasant.

Alright, Billy's hopes are a little rattled but he can shake it off; so singing isn't as easy as belting it out into the microphone.  He spends more time practicing vocals and guitar together and memorizing their new material whenever the band can't get together to practice. Which is usually 1-2 times a week for a few hours a day at most, since everyone has part time jobs and that awful jazz called bills.  After another month (that makes 5 in total) they are playing confidently in their garage for the neighbors to hear (with the occasional call to the cops about the noise of course).  Billy and the band's lucky day just happens to be now because there's a battle of the bands at the new local music shop that just opened up in town.  Things are looking great, opportunity's-a-knockin'!  Billy signs up the band and has one more month to get everything dialed in.

Their first time on stage at 6 months in, and everyone's got jitters and they rush through their material with anything but finesse.  It's alright though, people in the audience liked them enough to want to hear more.  Billy has the idea that the band should get serious, see's the audience reaction and wants to make the next step...  I bet you all right now Billy is only thinking one thing in his head... "How cool is this!?"

Folks, this might seem easy, but it's tough.  You know why? We haven't even started yet.  Billy doesn't have the first clue about building a business.  Business?!?!  What am I talking about?  This is music!  This is going on stage and performing killer tunes and getting noticed and signing to huge labels and making tons of money and making awesome records that sell like Ihop's pancakes on Sunday after church!  To everyone who just agreed with that sentence, close this page, go back to looking up porn (guys) or oogling at the latest pictures of Channing Tatum (girls) and get some rest, you've got a long day of work ahead of you at your day job tomorrow, which I highly suggest you keep.

So, having just offended everyone out there by now, you can guess that jaded view of the music industry is pretty old, but it's still true to a lot of people.  Because they don't know what exactly goes on behind those closed doors they assume it's magic.  So, just what goes into the business of music?  We all think we know the answer, and it should be simple enough right?  You're a band/artist and you perform in front of people, make money, produce cd's and gain lots of exposure... right?  That sentence is such a gross underestimation of just how complex the whole process can be.

First off, just how does a band go from local garage band to being a professional band?  That's easy to answer, not so easy to do.  Billy's band got lucky, and started gaining exposure the moment they played at a battle of the bands contest.  Most bands out there don't start that way.  In fact, most of them started in high school playing gigs at festivals, markets; wherever they could get a PA system and someone willing and desperate enough to put an act in front of any audience (usually for free for both).  After all, Billy and the band only make enough money at their jobs to save up for the occassional new set of strings, drum-heads, and a couple cables.  Billy took the extra effort to save up for a small practice PA system to get the vocals into the practice sessions.  Now that's taking initiative.  But let's add up just how much would be spent to create this band so far:
___
___
___ 
    • Frontman's heavy duty wireless mic setup, because we're hip nowadays: $640
    • Small practice PA system: $340
    • Long Speaker cables x2: $30 ($15 each)
    • Mic cable for the wireless setup to the PA system: $5
    • Mic stand, so the frontman can play his guitar and sing: $20
    • Frontman equipment total =  roughly $1,140 after tax
    So, while many of them have built up this collection of gear of a number of years playing and practicing.  Collectively,  they've invested around $5,600 into their gear.  Now, on top of that, there's things that need replacing and care regularly for these active "cool-cats" of rock.  The consumables the band needs to upkeep their gear are equally as important, so lets say they stay on top of everything really well, and actually have to go through these on a monthly basis:
    • Set of Bass strings: $8
    • Bassist might need new picks, he and the guitarist share:  $4
    • Good guitar strings for shredding: $12
    • New heads for snare and toms:  $45
    • New head for the kick: $36
    • New sticks as the old ones break and wear down: $8
    • Total cost per month = $125, collectively
    That's some serious cash right there already.  I bet none of you were expecting this huge of a list, were you.  Well, it's definitely a whole heck of a lot cheaper than what it used to be!  Compare this to the massive collection of guitars Eric Clapton just has to have, or the huge concerts being put on by the chart topping bands and you can imagine how that price quickly escalates;  drummers buy new gear to get different sounds, guitarists upgrade their "rig" and expand their sounds, Bassists get bigger and punchier stacks to get that "kick your chest in the balls" low-end.  It doesn't end there either!  What about capturing that sound?  After all we're talking about the music industry right? Then we must be talking about CD's and albums.
     
    Alright boys and girls, time to get out your wayback machine (yeah I said it, i'm lame).  Let's head back to Abbey Road Studios in London where that famous old band of the 60's recorded most of their albums: The Beatles.  Why the Beatles?  Because.  There, I figured that got your attention.  Let's take a look at how a typical breakdown of all the pieces in play here.

    First off, there's all the band members, 3 guitarists, a bassist, and a drummer.  Vocals would be carried out by various members, a couple more prominently than others.  There's the band's manager, and then there's the label, (referencing their most known album Abbey Road)Apple, and then the entity of the recording studio and it's engineers and producers etc...  Right away you can tell the number of people involved in this endeavor of recording their album is pretty numerous.  That's a lot of mouths to feed, all expecting to get paid for their work.  Next up, the facilities, location, and the equipment, the spaces aren't tiny or cheap on rent, and I'm sure you can't even imagine for that time the equipment is outrageously expensive to get and maintain / operate.  This takes a serious amount of money to make something as simple as an album that someone can pick up at a store and listen to.

    Just take a look at some of the preview page over at The Beatles' Book site.  The book is an invaluable resource for any producer, recording engineer, musician, agent, or any other job in the music business model as it has real-world documentary insight into every aspect of it.  Just look at the breakdown of the equipment categories they cover:
    • Mixers
    • Outboard gear
    • Microphones
    • Tape Machines
    • Speakers & Amplifiers\
    • Effects
    • Studio Instruments
    The multitude of technology (including the musical instruments) takes a lot of know-how to run, and a lot of money to acquire, and maintain.  Those recording engineers wore lab coats; geeky electronics geniuses with electrical engineering chops at the very most.  Couple that with the era and that technology in general was still very young and not commonplace.  Imagine how outrageously expensive that kind of equipment must have been.  This is the peak of the Major Label Studio era as I like to call it.

    This stuff is so enormous in cost and skill to use that it's reserved for only the highest caliber businesses and specialists (cough - recording studios - cough) because most laymen wouldn't have the first clue how to operate any of it.  This sort of specialization was key to the success of the music industry then, and possibly why music was so different compared to today's music.  Songwriters focused on writing songs, performers focused on practicing and performing them, and the recording studios with engineers and music producers focused on recording and producing records.

    Pretty simple right?  If only it had stopped there.  Technology kept advancing and getting more and more affordable.  Not just that, it kept getting better!  Fast forward to the mid 70's with the introduction of digital domain making it's debut in the audio industry via Tape storage.  Soon, in the mid 80's the revolution of the compact disc fueld by the new era of digital recording blows the doors to the music scene wide open.  Let's take U2 for example, Pretty big name and even bigger studios abroad with their Joshua Tree album.

    Digital technology is beginning to sweep across the industry making it more affordable, but the Analog domain technology is still the mainstay as it's been a proven and reliable way of recording; and bands like U2 are doing some pretty amazing things with the technology at more cost-effective prices than before.  Things continue to get cheaper, but again, still reserved for big budget studios.  For this album, they had the funding and actually set up a studio in a house outside Dublin, Ireland.  Had technology not improved it wouldn't have been possible for them to do this.  Simultaneously, a new home-based technology was sprouting alongside computers - Pro Tools.

    When Pro Tools hit the mass market and peaked as computers were gaining momentum in the consumer marketplace, It would slowly consume the music world from the bottom up.  This was the first DAW to come around and catered to home musicians wanting to record but couldn't afford access to big time studios.  As we progress through the 90's and now, technology picked up at such an amazing pace, that recording technology is more affordable, and ubiquitous than ever.  In fact, it's actually 10x cheaper to start a home "recording studio" than it is to buy a car!  This is the part where I get tricky with numbers.   Want to see just how it breaks down?

    Let's consider all the equipment that's really necessary for a single musician to start recording his or herself at home, absolute barebones basics:
    • First off, you'll need one of these: A typical desktop nowadays can easily handle audio recording tasks, so with a screen, keyboard, mouse and tower (full package) expect around $1,000 U.S.D.
    • 2nd off, you're going to need a DAW: The industry standard Pro Tools is usually a safe bet though there are plenty of others out there just as good to choose from, as well as the plethora of equipment it can take to get audio recorded.. but for now, this nice little package will be more than enough to get you started: Guitar Center's awesome package sets you back a cool $680 roughly, covers a recording interface, software, microphone, stand, cables, and studio reference speakers, pretty sweet eh?
    • So, this is where it starts to get unique according to the individual, so I'm going to say that in this hip, digital-heavy lifestyle we've all adopted in this day and age that computer saavy folk will probably have no issues with me referencing virtual instruments instead of physical ones.  My first guess is at this point you'll probably need some type of input device: a USB keyboard should do fine at roughly $170, we're already starting to push beyond barebones basics here.
    • Seeing as how the pop culture right now centers around hip-hop, pop-dance, electronic stuff I won't spend any money on actual music gear here because that's actually pretty expensive nowadays when you add up all the instruments one could collect.  For now, let's round up some virtual instruments instead that would more than cover what's needed to make "hit tunes". Reason does a fairly good job; there are literally a ton of specialist and high-quality professional Virtual Instruments from around the globe that can do better, but Reason has a very eclectic library of sounds to choose from that are all production quality-ready for any composer / artist to produce complete songs in.  That's going to be another $300.  Learning curves aside, the internet has infinite educational value nowadays: First google search result brought me Free Reason tutorial videos
    Assuming you've already got creative ideas and the experience in crafting music know-how to pull off what you want to achieve, all that's left is to start recording right?  So, at a minimal budget of somewhere around $2,500 U.S.D. we've got a home-based recording studio that actually is extremely powerful.  Did I come in under my mark? I believe I did.  In fact, It's actually cheaper than starting a real band.  Remember Billy's band?  That was a collective $5,600 just for the instruments and gear to perform the music.  To top that off, they'd have to spend weeks writing the songs and practicing them to near-perfection.

    So, here we are in this long-ass blog about the music industry and you're probably thinking "wow he's totally lost his argument".  It really couldn't be any easier now to make music than ever before, and this is totally 100% true.  Well, Let's bring Billy in.  Gone is his band, he just wants to write the music on his own without all the fuss of the politics that go on; the drummer can't keep it straight with the scheduling, and the bassist can't focus long enough in between the phone calls from all the hot chicks wanting to get with the sexy bass-player (because he plays bass, right?). Now, with all that noise out of the picture Billy can get in control of the creative license for a moment and actually make something.

    The virtual instruments give him a good sound for the bass and the drums, and with Pro Tools and his microphone he can record his live guitar sounds and his voice and viola, instant song!  Wow, that's easy!  Why aren't you all doing it too?!  Except recording is only 1 tiny phase, and usually it happens way later in the process.

    What Billy just did was a Demo.  Sorry Billy, but you're guitar skills are better than your audio engineering chops.  You've got a ton of "bleed" sound coming from your speakers into your microphone while you were recording guitar and vocals; Not just that, but the recording just doesn't sound right.  The virtual instruments sound fine aside from some things being somewhat louder than others should be.  What's the problem?  Why doesn't it sound like a cd?

    Here's the secret the recording studios don't want anyone to know.  This is super secret because once the word is out... it won't change a thing.  Those recording studios have tons of expensive gear, we know this; Billy knows this.  Well that recording software Pro Tools must not be good enough, right?  Except Pro Tools is actually in over 80% of all studios (big budget and project alike) as even studios are centered around the DAW and Computer now.  In fact, they tend to use the same effects you get with the software that Billy and we all get with our version we buy from the local music shop.

    It must be the mic, crappy low-end technology showing its true colors it seems!  Also not true,  read any of the plethora of recording trade magazines like EQ (go ahead, take a look at the $100 SM57 credited), Mix, Computer Music, and they'll quote famous engineers giving away their dirty studio secrets recording the latest chart topping-band and you'll find the microphone lockers have a surprising number of "cheap", or "lowend" mics.

    Then perhaps it's just your room, sorry Billy; that's it - it's the room man.  While the room really does make all the difference in a recording, Billy was recording pretty "dry" sounds where the sound of the room wasn't majorly affecting the sound.  So what is it then?  First off, I can tell you Billy doesn't know the first thing about what happens after recording.  It turns out there's actually some more steps involved.  While I show Billy here where the Compressors, limiters, EQ,'s and other effects plugins are in Pro Tools and Reason; he's only going to get more and more confused and the "allure" of making music easy is going up in smoke with his temper.  Calm down there bro, your recordings aren't half-bad.

    What sets apart those huge sounding professional cd's coming from big bands?  Go grab your favorite cd and take a look at the names on there.  I can guarantee you'll find way more than just the band members.  It takes engineers, assistant engineers, mixing engineers, assistant mixing engineers, mastering engineers, assistant mastering engineers, digital editors, producers, A&R personnel, A&R Coordinators, Marketing Directors, photographers, album design artists, guitar technicians, Drum Technicians, studio or session musicians for backing parts, lackies, and sometimes even outside influences (composers, lyricists, etc..) that have their spot in the project.  Those engineers spent their time learning about compressors and E.Q. and microphone polar patterns , the producers learned how to manage the project and coordinate and budget the stages of production for the artist and record label; everyone has their place and something they've specialized in.

    Did you know there's actually 3 stages of making an album?  Billy didn't.  Billy's still stuck in the recording phase, and already there's a lot to manage and consider at that point.  The final stage that comes next is actually even more tedious and time consuming, and that's the art and craft of mixing, and mastering.  In fact, these two processes are so in-depth that you can find studios that only specialize in one particular process.

    Even with the revolution of the digital era and virtual processing on the computer bringing down costs, Billy could easily take a few years just to learn how himself, or even just barely start using the equipment he already has for all these functions.  After all, the the stuff he bought is certainly capable of it.  The labor involved is so intensive, because there is so much to control and so much to be aware of that Billy here can just take his recording to one of those studios and spend a fraction of the tuition it would cost him to go to school and try to learn how to do it himself.  Or at the very least, save him countless hours toiling away trying to achieve that "cd" sound when a professional can do it promptly and with precision.

    I know Billy personally, he started music at the same time I did when I was a kid.  I went down the recording path and Billy took the performer path.  While we are at similar levels of skill we are worlds apart in our experiences in our craft.  Billy would have to spend years catching up to me as a recording artist and engineer.  Likewise, I would have to put in countless hours a day practicing an instrument or the like to catch up to Billy's finesse with his guitar solos.  That said, there is a hefty amount of respect to be had for any particular function in the industry as we witness the power of making music shift from the hands of the big budget studio to the hands of the individual.

    There's an endless sea of music being put out from just about everyone on the planet it seems nowadays.  Some of it is amazing, but it's rarer now to find great compositions or beautiful masterpieces as we've entered the era of digital consumerism.  The landscape of the music industry has changed from creative war reserved for those with the specialists of their craft, to that of the DIY music house.  We've witnessed the fall of rock and the live band being the main attraction to the perfect auto-tuned electronic pop and dance tunes played until they're played out at clubs; those same songs get recycled in an endless wave of remixes by the DJ-gone-producer.