DIY success is alive and thriving on the Internet says TuneCore’s Jeff Price in response to Tommy Boy Silverman’s claim reported in digital music news <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/012110tommy> that fewer than 8 DIY artists broke since 2008. Are album sales really the benchmark of success in the new music biz?? Agree or disagree?

(Reposted from TuneCorner. More at http://blog.tunecore.com/2010/01/how-people-use-neilsen-to-hurt-musicians.html)

How people use Neilsen to hurt musicians.

I read an article today at Digital Music News about comments by Tommy Silverman – founder of Tommy Boy and the New Music Seminar.

With all due respect, his information is wrong. But worse, the conclusions he reaches from this faulty information could be damaging to artists.

Some highlights include statements like:

“Silverman counted 105,575 new album releases that year, and found that just 225 of those were new artists surpassing the 10,000 unit threshold for the first time. Of that, just 14 were do-it-yourself artists, unaffiliated with a major, indie, or other entity.”

and

“What does this say about the Chris Anderson ‘Long Tail’ promise?” Silverman blogged in Musician Coaching. “Clearly the ease of making and distributing music does not benefit ‘breaking’ music. Breaking music requires mass exposure which requires luck or money or both. I can say with great authority that less new music is breaking now in America than any other time in history. Technology has not helped more great music rise to the top, it has inhibited it. I know this is a bold statement but it is true.”

I wrote a response to the editor of the blog where the article appeared, I do not know if he will post it, but I feel so strongly about making certain word gets out, I am re-posting my response to Tommy’s statements here

————

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing you in response to Tommy’s information and posting – the good news, he is dead wrong. The truth is more artists and bands are breaking now in America, and around the world, than at any other time in history. Technology has absolutly helped more great artists and bands rise to the top.

The Nielsen data cited is not only incomplete, but also provides a false analysis.

Let me provide you some hard stats to back this up:

According to Nielsen and Tommy there were:
“…106,000 new (music) releases in 2008″

In 2008, TuneCore released approximately 90,000 newly recorded releases

This means, according to Neilsen and Tommy, almost every single new music release in 2008 was distributed via TuneCore.

I know this simply not to be true – the base assumption that Tommy is making is as dead wrong as his other statistics.

Another example, Tommy states:

” just 225 of those (the new releases) were new artists surpassing the 10,000 unit threshold for the first time. ”

This is an empirically false statement for a few reasons.

First, in order for Neilsen to accuratly track sales, the UPCs for those albums must be pre-registered in their database. If the UPC is not registered in its database, Neilsen can not match the sales data to an album (or song). For example, if a digital store tells Neilsen it sold 100 copies of UPC # 123456789, and Neilsen has no idea what UPC # 123456789 is, it can not report the sales.

Next, the majority of the 90,000 releases via TuneCore in 2009 were not registered with Soundscan therefore making it impossible for them to track or report on the sales.

But these two points are actually kind of moot. Music is no longer bought by the album, it is bought by the song across an artist’s catalog. Tracking album sales as the sole indicator to determine if something is “breaking” is analogous to tracking only vinyl album sales to determine if something is “breaking”

Some examples:

When they were unsigned, the following TuneCore artists sold the following quantities of songs across their releases:

Kelly sold over 2,000,000 million tracks
William Fitzsimmons sold over 150,000 tracks
Soulja Boy sold over 200,000 tracks
Boyce Avenue sold over 1,200,000 tracks
Ron Pope sold over 250,000 tracks
Colt Ford sold over 300,000 tracks
Secondhand Serenade sold over 250,000 tracks
Tapes N Tapes sold over 200,000 tracks
Nevershoutnever sold over 1,000,000 tracks
Drake sold over 300,000 tracks
MGMT sold over 225,000 tracks
The Medic Droid sold over 150,00 tracks
Nickasaur sold over 150,000 tracks
Harry and the Potters sold over 200,000 tracks

This is just a very quick partial list that goes on and on and on

Under Tommy’s model, none of these artist sales count as they are not “album” sales.

With all due respect, Tommy might discount selling over 1,000,000 songs by an “unsigned” artist as not “breaking”, but I do.

On a macro level, in 2009 alone, the internet allowed the “long tail” unsigned artists that used TuneCore to generate over $32,000,000 in music sales by selling over 42,000,000 songs – this is more than one song a second selling by a TuneCore Artist on iTunes. This “long tail” catalog that TuneCore’s Aritsts represent is now one of the most valuable music catalogs in the world. And this all happened due to the net, social networking and access to the media outlets (like YouTube).

“Breaking” is not just about selling albums or even just the music – it is about generating revenue off of fame. This is done via merch, gig, publishing, music sales, ad revenue and more. Nevershoutnever sold over 35,000 t-shirts in a number of months via a regional sales program with Hot Topic. Surely Tommy does not mean to discount these sales and revenue simply because the artist is selling merch? How about if the band sold no music but consistently sold out 1,000 venue clubs and made $15,000 a night? Why does Tommy discredit bands for their success if they are not selling “albums”?

Another distributing and incorrect point suggested by Tommy is that music sales are down due to the fact that there is more music available to buy, share and discover.

As a matter of fact, its quite the opposite

In the late 90′s – also known as the “golden age” of market share and revenue for the music industry – more music was being released and bought than ever before (as an example, Warner was releasing one new release a day). Despite this increase of releases, sales (not just revenue) went up, not down.

Or from a pure logic perspective, if iTunes had 2,000,000 less songs, would an artist that is not selling now as no one likes their music magically start selling. Or to flip it around, I would suggest more music on the virtual shelf causes more music to sell as it allows the music buyer to discover music via the digital stores own recommendation association engines.

Tommy’s goes on to state:

“Breaking music requires mass exposure which requires luck or money or both.”

This statement is also dead wrong – and he knows it based on is own experiences at Tommy Boy.

Historically, in the music industry, 98% of what the record labels distributed, spent hundreds of millions of dollars on to market and promote and get played on commercial radio and MTV did not “break”. If “breaking” simply “required mass exposure”, there would have been a 98% success rate, not failure rate. But music is not a math equation, and therein lies the problem with Tommy’s statement. Yes, to break you need exposure, but that by no means guarantees success. The music has to cause reaction. For example, if “Smells Like Teen Spirit’ was not a song that people liked, it would not have mattered how much money was spent on getting you to hear it.

And that’s the excitement and beauty of the internet. The masses now have direct access to the media and “music discovery” social networking outlets. – i.e. YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, Pandora, Jango and more. These new social networking and media vehicles allow mass communication in an instanteous fashion at a click of button. Suddenly one person’s opinion does matter and can can impact a bottom line. Even the digital stores themselves provide a vehicle to market and promote yourself off off (i.e. iTunes iMixes or recommendations of other music to buy). Through these vehicles the internet has delivered the ability for anyone to “break”, and they actually are. The masses now have access to the media outlets to get heard. The problem is the old school view that “breaking” is simply defined by selling albums. This could not be farther from the truth.

Tommy also goes onto say:

“I can say with great authority that less new music is breaking now in America than any other time in history. Technology has not helped more great music rise to the top, it has inhibited it. I know this is a bold statement but it is true.”

It might be a bold statement by Tommy to help get headlines, but it’s also false (and kind of silly). The truth is more artists and bands are breaking now in America, and around the world, than at any other time in history. Technology has absolutly helped more great artists and bands rise to the top.

The distressing part for me about this is based on Tommy’s statements, if an artists’ release is not counted by Neilsen than it is not actually released. If music does not sell as an album then it has not sold. In effect, he is de-legitimizing artists.

With all due respect, I believe an artist’s release should “count” even if not recognized by Neilsen as this de-recognition closes off possible opportunities based on the perception that a release is not “real”

I also find it distressing that the media, and other outlets, turn to Neilsen as the definitive source to determine what is occurring in this industry thereby decreasing the opportunities for musicians and artists that are not part of this old school system.

The reality is the majority of music is now being created, released and sold outside of the traditional system. Ad agencies, music supervisors, video game manufacturers, radio programmers etc turn to Neilsen for information to discover music in an attempt to use/license it. They need to understand that the Neilsen information is an incomplete and an inaccurate portrayal of reality. This inaccurate perception is holding back opportunity and validation for others. Tommy needs to stop propagating this false perception as it hurts artists.

It’s important that an accurate picture of what is occurring be presented to fans and businesses to provide additional choice and opportunity for musicians. They work hard enough as it is, the last thing we need to do is propagate a false reality to hurt them. Tommy’s heart is in the right place, we are here to help musicians, but let’s start with a more accurate description as opposed to a “bold” but false statement that helps promote an agenda.

(Reposted from Digital Music News. More at http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/012010silvermandiy)

Define DIY success! Internet has hurt not helped new music succeed says Silverman of Tommy Boy Records. Agree?

Tommy Boy Records Tom Silverman says fewer than 10 new DIY artists really broke through since 2008.

The Incredibly Small Number of ‘Breaking’ DIY Artists…

Just how many DIY artists are really breaking into this market? Tough question, though Tommy Boy (and New Music Seminar) founder Tom Silverman recently investigated the issue using 2008 sales figures from Nielsen Soundscan. Silverman counted 105,575 new album releases that year, and found that just 225 of those were new artists surpassing the 10,000 unit threshold for the first time. Of that, just 14 were do-it-yourself artists, unaffiliated with a major, indie, or other entity.

Or were they? After digging deeper, Silverman realized that 14 was way too high. Right off the top, Silverman nixed two from the list after confusing the names with other, previously-successful artists. Silverman then eliminated another after discovering a partnership with indie Hip-Hop group Tech N9ne. Another Hip-Hopper was crossed-off after a massive marketing spend came to light.

The list kept shrinking. Another was boosted by American Idol, and another America’s Got Talent. A ‘few others’ were on ‘small labels with big budgets,’ according to Silverman.

And so on. “What does this say about the Chris Anderson ‘Long Tail’ promise?” Silverman blogged in Musician Coaching. “Clearly the ease of making and distributing music does not benefit ‘breaking’ music. Breaking music requires mass exposure which requires luck or money or both. I can say with great authority that less new music is breaking now in America than any other time in history. Technology has not helped more great music rise to the top, it has inhibited it. I know this is a bold statement but it is true.”

So what’s left? All of that sounds deflating, though Silverman pointed to opportunities at lower sales levels. Whether artists can truly monetize smaller audiences remains an open question, though certainly, life goes beyond the recording. “In the meantime, artists can still make a very good living without selling 10,000 albums by careful cultivation of their fan relationships,” Tommy Boy surmised.

Founder and Chairman of Tommy Boy Entertainment, Tom Silverman has been pioneering change in the biz for 25 years as an innovative force in hip-hop, dance, electronic and other styles of music. In addition to his role as record executive, Silverman has consistently been at the forefront of the industry as a founder of the original New Music Seminar; the creator of the DJ Bible and Dance Music Report; and through his involvement with the RIAA, NARM, NAIRD, the Dance Music Hall of Fame, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and now the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM ).

On the eve of launching a reimagined version of New Music Seminar that reflects rampant changes in the music business, AtlasPlugged met with Silverman to get his take on the state of the industry and the reasons he’s reconfiguring New Music Seminar for the 21st Century.

AtlasPlugged: Tommy Boy Records has been active and influential (especially hip-hop, dance & electronica) since the 80’s – what is the role that labels play in today’s industry?

Tommy Silverman: The role of labels is in transition. In the past, labels [played a number of roles] — venture capitalist, A&R advisor, marketing and promotion [coordinator] and distributor. From the consumer perspective, a label acts as a filter and a conduit to maximize the quality of music and its exposure.

AP: How do you anticipate the label’s role will change in the future?

TS: The label of the future will act as a venture capitalist, an advisor, a business strategist, and the manager of an artist’s fan relationships. Labels will be responsible for best monetizing the artist/fan relationship. From the consumer perspective, the label will still be the filter that finds the few worthy needles in the haystack of music that seems to get bigger every year.

AP: What is the biggest challenge artists and labels face today?

TS: Breaking through the obscurity barrier of 300 ticket sales and 10,000 albums. 105,000 albums were released last year and only 1515 sold over 10,000.

AP: What is Tommy Boy Records doing to address this challenges?

TS: Prayer, lucky amulets, and most recently, a pact with the devil.

AP: Is A&R Dead?

TS: Yes. Labels rarely sign an artist with their ears. Indie labels want an artist that is already moving 20 – 30 mile per hour. Major labels want artists that have an even bigger head of steam, say 40 – 50 mph. No one wants to invest in an artist that has no demand at all based solely on hearing music. The risk is to high and the reward too low.

AP: What are the 3 most important things artists & other independent industry pros need to know to be successful in this volatile business?

TS: 1. Do 2. It 3. Yourself

AP: What should artists do to get heard above the noise?

TS: 1. Be better than anyone else at what you do (See Malcolm Gladwell book “The Outliers”). 2. Radically differentiate yourself from anything else out there. And 3. Come to the New Music Seminar and take copious notes.

AP: The original NMS was one of the most exciting music industry events during the 80s & 90’s – why revive it now and what do you hope to accomplish?

TS: The business is in revolution. The New Music Seminar is vastly different in purpose and approach than the original. It is focused directly on the artist — as the future of the music business belongs to artists. But they must learn a whole new way of seeing their career and set their goals accordingly.

AP: How will this version of NMS differ from other music business conferences?

TS: No B2B Bullshit. Just information and ideas that will make a real difference in an artist’s career. No talk of DRM, DSPs, major labels, Miley Cyrus or the Jonas Brothers.

AP: What topics will you be covering and why do you regard them as important in today’s market?

TS: 1. Welcome to the New Music Business; Everything you know is wrong. 2. Fan Relationship Management – The Fan Relationship Pyramid and how to best monetize your fan relationship. 3. Creation: Radical differentiation in the creative quartet; And 4. The Song, The recording, The look/concept, and the Show.

AP: Will the panels and event be geared primarily for artists or managers or labels?

TS: Artists and their representatives be they managers or labels or neither.

AP: What advice would you give to someone interested in starting a record label?

TS: 1. Come to the New Music Seminar. 2. Start with as much money as possible. 3. Sign only the most outrageous artists you can find. 4. Don’t build a label around radio play.

Learn more about where the music industry is headed at
The New Music Seminar.