The difference between indie label and major label

JOEJOEJOE

If major labels do take advantage of artists, then why would so many bands want to sign with them?...the answer is: The Huge Advance!

Majors don't give 50-50 deals because they are taking a huge risk by doling out big advances.

An indie label can afford to give 50-50 deals because they are not taking too huge of a risk.

Its basic business....the bigger the risk to the investor, the bigger return on investment they will demand.

A friend of mine was on a major label for 1 album in the 90s.....the label invested $1 Million in the band, but the album sold only 75,000 copies.....the band members got to keep a tidy portion of the advance, and the label dropped the band.

In this case, the band got the best of the label, since the band signed to a new label and had a hit record, without having the $1 million recouped, which would have been the case had they stayed with their old label.

I am not a fan of the current major-label business model, but, none the less, the majors do serve a purpose.

Its great to have indie cred, but I see nothing wrong with looking out for the financial interests of the band members, as long as it doesn't overly compromise the music!

Cosmo

From what I understand... a basic difference is artistic license. Meaning Independent labels are more likely to allow the artists to decide the content of the albums and the bigger companies use target marketing data to direct the music the artists should be making in order to sell to the target audience. The larger labels have a great amont of money at stake in their up front investment... cash advances.
Smaller labels lack the massive resources of manufacturing, promotion and distribution resources that major labels wield... so the sales numbers are usually smaller. Major labels also have a greater influence on radio station and it is difficult to get smaller bands and artists on the air.

A Surprise Left

How many bands sign to a truly indie label and make it big? I mean seriously big? The answer is very few, the distribution channels of the majors simply cannot not be matched. Bands like Pearl Jam made it big with Sony and then can go and sign with J records and still sell similar numbers because they have built up a fanbase. They wouldn't have produced this amount of records (at least ones that sold millions of copies) if they signed to a small label like J at the start of their careers.

musicismylife78

A Surprise Left wrote:

How many bands sign to a truly indie label and make it big? I mean seriously big? The answer is very few, the distribution channels of the majors simply cannot not be matched. Bands like Pearl Jam made it big with Sony and then can go and sign with J records and still sell similar numbers because they have built up a fanbase. They wouldn't have produced this amount of records (at least ones that sold millions of copies) if they signed to a small label like J at the start of their careers.

the question then becomes, do bands sign with labels to make millions of dollars and to hit it big on TRL, or do they sign to get their music out, to be heard and to express themselves artistically.

musicismylife78

if the ultimate goal of all bands is to hit it big and the names of the band to be on the tongues of every 14 year old kid, then indeed what you said is correct. But many bands that keep being refered to Tool, Radiohead, Mars Volta, Pearl Jam and others seem more about pushing musical limits and having something important to say. I dont think Radiohead want to be the most talked about band on the planet, they want to be experimental and make the best art they possibly can. I dont think Tool want their songs to be on TRL, they want to make records that have something to say and are artistic.

1STmammal2wearPants

the shins are a great success story of an indie-label (sub pop) band that hit it big, and now has some mainstream exposure.

Tek Money

1STmammal2wearPants wrote:

the shins are a great success story of an indie-label (sub pop) band that hit it big, and now has some mainstream exposure.

I think Garden State helped them with that.

I love the Shins new album. I am listening to it right now.

South of Seattle

Cheguevara6 wrote:

if the ultimate goal of all bands is to hit it big and the names of the band to be on the tongues of every 14 year old kid, then indeed what you said is correct. But many bands that keep being refered to Tool, Radiohead, Mars Volta, Pearl Jam and others seem more about pushing musical limits and having something important to say. I dont think Radiohead want to be the most talked about band on the planet, they want to be experimental and make the best art they possibly can. I dont think Tool want their songs to be on TRL, they want to make records that have something to say and are artistic.

I agree with you 100%

Just like you stated, but this can be done on a Major Label. There's nothing wrong with making money and getting your music out at the same time. You can be on a Major Label and not be a sellout.

Fans can pick up on this shit. Look at all of us here.

soulsinging

Cheguevara6 wrote:

I dont think Tool want their songs to be on TRL, they want to make records that have something to say and are artistic.

they failed then cos they suck

BetterManningNYG

cheg,

first of all, i don't believe i was calling you names. i apologize if i was, but i really don't recall using any terms that hadn't already been used to describe me.

secondly, i really don't give a fuck what ian mackaye has to say. he's not the one arguing with me. you are. there are a lot of people in the world with a lot of different beliefs. so if this is going to continue, you might be better off providing your own thoughts. "i trust what he says" is not a valid argument unless you can present your reasoning for it. yeah, i like minor threat too, and i mean no disrespect to ian. but my own music is far different, and i'm not gonna blindly follow somebody's opinion unless i can justify it for myself.

which idea do you think i am fighting, exactly? i'm honestly not sure that you and i are involved in the same discussion right now. if you go back to my previous posts, you'll notice that i never once tried to imply that record executives weren't evil or that they wouldn't try to scam you. and yet you insist that this is the battle i'm fighting, which is kinda frustrating since i thought i made it clear several times that this wasn't my viewpoint at all. you want to know what i'm fighting here? i'm fighting pessimism. i'm fighting the idea that musicians need to give up their dreams just because of a few assholes in business suits. i'm fighting against the notion that it’s better to complain than it is to take action. and yes, you should be prepared for a battle if you want to deal with the major record labels. in my previous posts, i outlined what i felt was a legitimate strategy for dealing with these types of people: i said that you should bring lawyers to the discussion and be prepared to reject any proposal that isn't to your liking. but not once in your replies, cheguevara, have you remarked on this. maybe you should comment on the specifics of my argument rather than just recycling ian mackaye’s point of view over and over.

i truly believe that you can sell a million albums and still maintain your integrity as an artist. i could give you a laundry list of bands who have accomplished this. most (although not all) of the bands whose music remains culturally relevant after their time are the ones who sign major-label deals with clauses which allow them to maintain their artistic control. of course the labels will still be more likely to sign someone like britney spears. but that doesn't affect me. the only artist that affects me is me.

20,000 sales is great, but i could damn near accomplish that on my own without the help of a label. so why should i give somebody 50% of my earnings if they're not going to do anything for me? i'm not looking to hire a friend or a well-wisher or a shoulder to cry on. i just want people to hear my music. that's what's most important to me. i want to give people an option that is different from all the emo and teen pop and other bullshit that is floating around in the mainstream. i've also explained that i want to be able to play music for a living. and while it would be really cool to sell 20,000 albums, i would never be able to support a family that way. i'm sorry if wanting to support a family (at some point in the distant future) makes me sound selfish.

as far as the "work" aspect goes, of course musicians get exploited. but try explaining that to anyone who works long hours for minimum wage or less. they would kill to trade places. the truth of the matter is that musicians have it pretty good in the grand scheme of things.

by the way, i asked you very specifically to tell me what experience you have had within the music industry. you have not done so yet. this is really the only thing that's "tantamount to a sin" in my eyes: you keep trying to imply that i know nothing about the industry, but meanwhile i'm the only one who has cited specific life experience in this area. so PLEASE clarify this for me before you start telling me about music 101. i am an aspiring musician. it is my job to understand music 101 (in addition to my day job which i hate). the ones who don't understand are the ones who end up getting screwed. i have proven through my analysis that this isn't going to happen to me.

and no, i don't know what eddie vedder would say to me. i don't think he'd take the time to read through this entire ranting thread. but if he did, i think he'd respect the fact that i've shown a logical progression in my thought process and a willingness to explore the situation from all angles before making a decision. that's all i'm doing. i'm proposing that an artist should meet with everyone before deciding upon the best course of action. i also think ed would respect the fact that i have a strategy in mind to fight the labels. i'm not just going to resign myself to the idea that there's nothing i can do to improve the state of the music industry.

most importantly, i don't think ed would misinterpret my argument to suggest that i have any sort of respect for the major labels. i have made it very clear that i don't. so you can keep up your "major labels are the devil" argument, but i can assure you that it is unnecessary since i already agree with you 100% on this issue. the only difference in our two philosophies is how we intend to fight these battles. my philosophy is to confront the major labels with guns blazing (not literally, of course). yours is to avoid them altogether. our discussion is not going to progress until this is acknowledged. right now, all we're doing is wasting time (and bandwidth) repeating the same points over and over again.

BetterManningNYG

Cheguevara6 wrote:

the question then becomes, do bands sign with labels to make millions of dollars and to hit it big on TRL, or do they sign to get their music out, to be heard and to express themselves artistically.

ok, this is a very legitimate question that you ask. i think it goes both ways. i would personally be signing for the latter reason: to get my music out there. i really want to make it as clear as possible that this is my intention. i'm not some sort of money-obsessed TRL freak. i honestly believe that i am a pretty good songwriter and that i have the ability make a positive artistic contribution to music. that's all it is. no ulterior motives here.

the great thing about creating music is that it gives you the unique opportunity to change the way people view the world… but only if they have a chance to hear it…

tool is an interesting case in itself. 10,000 days is clearly an album that's meant to be listened to in its entirety. all of the songs are over seven minutes long and are composed in really obscure time signatures. even still, the album has produced two hit singles. go figure.

and while it is known that tool hates bandwagon fans, it has also been well-documented that they love making money. i was at a show last may in new york where maynard bragged about having the #1 album on the billboard charts. also, there's this:

http://toolshed.down.net/lyrics/aenimalyrics.php#07

"shut up and buy my new record!" lol... that gets me every time...

JSBE

i figured i'd toss in this old link from our pal steve albini

http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

musicismylife78

I have no experience in the music industry. I am a college student. I am basing my opinion of major labels on my entire life of music. Grunge turned me on to music. From the very start it was clear to me, all those bands in Seattle were very antimajor label even though they themselves were on major labels. I am very into underground rock and underground hip hop.

I respect and trust what ian mackaye and eddie vedder and Jello Biafra say about the music buisness because

1. They are people of integrity

2. They are in the music buisness

3. They arent liars.


I didnt respond to your suggestion to bring lawyers to the contract table, because you are suggesting its the artists responsibility not to be taken advantadge of. That if they are dumb enough not to be smart and bring lawyers that they deserve what they get. I think frankely thats a ridiculous argument.

You keep suggesting that I need to prove my credentials. Your credentials are that you are a musician. But, are you on a major label? Have you been involved in contract signings? Have you been contacted by an indie? If not I dont really care what you have to say on that specific issue. Indeed I like hereing your ideas on all this, but telling me I need to prove my credentials is absurd.

We do seem to be on the same side. But I dont see any reason to think Ian Mackaye and Eddie Vedder are liars. And the people who say major labels suck, the list is thousands of pages long. Thousands.

musicismylife78

also to suggest to some starry eyed 19 year old kid, that they are stupid for not bringing lawyers to the table, is ignoring some serious stuff. Is it Walmart employees fault for not looking at their contracts better, and not bringing lawyers to the table before getting that job? If they do take the job and Walmart exploits them, do they deserve that?

Not everyone knows about contracts and how major labels work. I think if you asked 100 people on the street if they would love to sign to a major label. 99 percent would say yes. Then ask those same people if they feel they would be raking in millions as a result of being on a major. Again, a large majority would say yes.

People dont know. They dont know how the music buisness works. And I dont pretend I know everything about it. But when someone like Neil Young gets sued by his own label for not making "commerically sounding albums, or neil young type records" you get the idea fast that major labels cant be changed. Indies are the only way to change things.

BetterManningNYG

fair enough. i understand your argument and i see where you're coming from.

the actual reason why i wanted credentials was based on your previous assertion that all bands have a choice. i read that and thought, "shit, my band never even had one option." i spoke with a few indies but none of them were gonna be able to do all that much for us. they were mostly start-ups.

so i just wanted to make it clear that, based on my difficult experiences, an artist's choices within the industry aren't as cut-and-dry as you made them seem. this issue is definitely a sore spot for me, so the assumption that i had a world of choices kinda touched a nerve. i'll admit, however, that demanding credentials and ranting about natural selection probably wasn't the best way to go.

but my point remains: businesses try to fuck you over. the only way to avoid it is by being smart enough to understand how it works. we both agree that music business sucks. no contesting that. but you know what? it's not just music business. it's all business. i got out of college less than three years ago myself. and let me tell you, the world is full of people who only want to scam you. just to humor me, go over to monster.com or careerbuilder.com real quick. type in "entry level marketing, public relations, advertising"... you see that list of job openings that just popped up? almost all of them are pyramid schemes. they are designed to brainwash young graduates by getting them caught up in the supposed glamour of having a job with unlimited room for advancement and growth. then they steal your money and make you work 70 hours a week with minimal pay. i had a friend who got caught up in one of these schemes. it was called ameriprise financial. they charged him over $1000 to pay for the training he would need. we kept telling him it was a scam but he wouldn't listen. after completing his training, he started working… 12 hours a day, six days a week. he made less than $100 a week for his time. and this isn't an isolated incident. there are "companies" all over the world that operate like this. and they are generally very successful.

so why am i telling you this unrelated story about my friend? because he was also my lead singer. nice guy, but easily the dumbest human being i have ever met in my life. and he was exactly the type of "starry-eyed" kid you were just taking about. at one point, some fucking scumbag actually scammed him into giving away the publishing rights to a whole bunch of songs that i had written. this is not a typo. this is not an exaggeration. this actually happened.

i am exceptionally paranoid when it comes to protecting my music. but in retrospect, my paranoia was the one thing that saved me. you see, i have a very strict policy concerning songs i've written. after i finish them, i send them to be registered with the copyright office at the library of congress. until i get confirmation that they have received my registration form, no version of the song will ever surface. i will not play it live, and no recordings or written versions will ever leave my home or rehearsal space. and this is the only reason i still own the rights to my music. when this scumbag approached my singer and said, "having your songs published will be a cool thing to do," the kid immediately agreed. this verbal contract could have held up in court. however, he didn't have the songs with him, so he had to call me and ask for them. needless to say, i freaked the hell out after he explained what was going on. fortunately, all of the songs he agreed to give away were registered in my name and my name only. you can't enter into a contract concerning material that you don't own. thus, my music still belongs to me.

not to get all technical on you, but music falls under the legal category of "intellectual property." if you write it, you own it… just like any other type of property. the trouble is that music is intangible, so it becomes much more difficult to prove ownership of a song than it would be for a house or car. this is a large part of why the record industry is so sketchy. they know that it's very easy to trick somebody out of the rights to their music, and so they will always try to do it. this doesn't just apply to major labels. there are plenty of scam artists who pose as indie, too.

the system is bullshit. we both agree on that. that's why you have to be very careful. i will never concede that it's ok to meet with a record company unless you have a lawyer present. anyone who has ever dealt with a record label (including several of my friends who work for such labels) will tell you this. you're gonna be sitting across the table from a bunch of MBAs and lawyers who honestly don't care about you as a person. therefore, it is absolutely essential that you have someone on your side who knows the industry. i'm not saying this just to contradict or mislead you. it's the honest truth.

and yes, a lot of people might not realize all this. but i'm not talking about any random person on the street. i'm talking about songwriters who dedicate large portions of their lives to creating music. as i said before, it is my job as a musician to know the industry. you can't live a life without knowing what that life entails. if you take the time to create music, you'd better take the time to learn how to protect it. yeah, it sucks. but not everyone out there is as friendly as your average pearl jam fan.

the common phrase "don't trust anyone in the music industry" is not intended as a joke. it is a serious warning. maybe i'm somewhat jaded; i'm still very angry at this ignorant fuck of a lead singer who almost ruined my life. but i just can't see how anyone who's serious about their music would ever try to negotiate with a giant corporation on their own.

and no, i would never call ian mackaye or eddie vedder a liar. that's not what they are. they are people with very strong opinions. you cannot be called a liar for expressing your opinion, only for intentionally misrepresenting the truth. neither of them have done that (and neither of us have done that either). but i can tell you for sure that i would trade jobs with ed in a second, as would most of his fans. and his life would likely be far different if it wasn't for that initial big-label deal. so i guess that's what makes this issue so complicated overall. there can be no liars in a discussion that has no right or wrong answers… unless you work for a label.