| Author
|
Reason for low sales?
|
Davolo
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
85
Posted : Dec 6, 2002 15:39
|
I am in agreeance with Voyager..
There has been a few artists whose CD's have popped up quietly (with a smile) in my local "2nd choice" store.. 6 weeks after the gig they played..
If their A&R had their shit together they could've made it possible to buy the album at local instead of import prices.. AND built an audience prior to the gig ..
The other side is making it available .. not that I want to go down the whole downloading bullshit but an audience builds by availability .. you can lead a horse to water BUT .. so what are you selling..
What is available and when .. labels A&R could be 2 months ahead of the artists no matter what.. if the trust was there.. |
|
|
Light
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
121
Posted : Dec 7, 2002 12:19
|
Quite right Davolo.
I think in the end it's the fault of the labels, for not investing in their products.
They just do the minimum possible, culculate for the 3000 sales and that's it. Also it seems the focus is rather on quantity versus quality releases.
Instead of taking 1 great album, investing in it, they just release and release and release.
|
|
|
|
voyager
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
76
Posted : Dec 7, 2002 12:28
|
They don't invest and then complaine about low sales.
|
|
|
|
lurk
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
32
Posts :
226
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 00:06
|
I agree with Mike A, there are just too many releases for the number of people that are interested in buying, and a large portion of these are average at best. The good tracks are still there, they're just spread out over many releases, rather than just a couple like in the "old" days. This feeds the mp3 culture, cos as we all know, music collection is an addiction and hardly any of us can afford to buy too many cds just for a couple of tracks. I spend about 150 euros a month on cds, and I still miss out on quite a lot... and I like most of what I buy.
On a seperate, but related note, I think it would help a great deal if all DJ's would actually "own" the music they play out. Nothing pisses me off more than seeing a cd case full of copied/downloaded cd's behind in the DJ booth It's so cheap for of these people to bask in the reflected glory of the artists and not pay them any dues at all.
 I said no to drugs... but they didn't listen |
|
|
|
arantes420
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
47
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 04:58
|
if is very easy to buy it´ll become commercial....
and if it is commercial nobody buys it...
it is very complicated..!
Sometimes you may think you can fly, but is better not try.. |
|
|
|
voyager
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
76
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 11:45
|
Shpongle is easy to buy, and lot's of people are buying it. So is that a problem for anybody ???
|
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 12:55
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-12-09 04:58, arantes420 wrote:
if is very easy to buy it´ll become commercial....
and if it is commercial nobody buys it...
it is very complicated..!
|
|
Have you read what you just wrote?
Commercial means that people buy it.
If it is commercial it's not that nobody buys it, it's just that instead of 5 so-called "quality listeners that know music" buying the cd, 500 "average listeners" buy it.
And artists who are making this great music don't want average listeners to listen to it.
|
|
|
|
Dave
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
30
Posts :
341
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 12:59
|
Quote:
|
it's just that instead of 5 so-called "quality listeners that know music" buying the cd, 500 "average listeners" buy it.
And artists who are making this great music don't want average listeners to listen to it.
|
|
Does that mean that artists dont want to make money?
Would they prefer to spend a year producing some incredible piece of music and having only 5 people buy it?
I think not. |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 13:03
|
They want to make money - the problem is that they don't want to be considered as commercial. And in order to do that, they have to be not commercial.
Look at GMS for example, or Infected. They are commercial, and no one talks about the music they make anymore. Everyone talks about GMS in the forum of money-machine, remixing-machine, track warehouse.
Artists don't want that.
|
|
|
|
Dave
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
30
Posts :
341
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 13:15
|
Sorry, i'm sure it's been asked earlier but how do you define commercial?
In my mind neither GMS or Infected are commercial. No psy act is. I would define commercial as being that a large majority of the normal public are aware of at least who they are. If i was to walk down the local street or ask at my university, 'Do you guys know who infected mushroom are, what about GMS, Astral, etc. etc.?' No-one would have a clue. If i asked do you know Paul Okenfield or Sasha or any of these other guys that i wouldn't have a clue about but I've heard of, the answer would be, yeah we know him. To me that is commercial. |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 13:25
|
|
You're confusing mainsteam and commercialism.
|
|
|
|
Dave
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
30
Posts :
341
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 13:26
|
|
Well then how do you define commercialism? |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 13:31
|
Commercialism: Making something just to sell it and make money (nothing wrong with that btw, if psytrance was commercial everything would look a lot better now).
Mainstream: Something that everyone knows about.
Commercialism can be targeted to a specific audience, not necessarily to everyone.
|
|
|
|
voyager
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
76
Posted : Dec 9, 2002 17:56
|
What's wrong about a lot of people liking your music !
Do you mean only 5 people know what good music sounds like ???
How come that Pink Floyd sold several millions, and almost everybody knows them, does that mean they were mainstream - I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
