31 May
2010
31 May
'10
8:49 p.m.
Hi everyone,
perhaps you know me as "paniq". For 10 years, I'm releasing good and
free music on the web.
My wife and I, we are currently organizing an album project called
"The most remarkable album on this entire planet". Most likely
remarkable because it will sound awesome, maybe also because the album
is entirely funded by fans, but most importantly, because the album
will be completely made with free software, in this particular case:
Ubuntu Linux and the Linux Audio infrastructure.
We hope the album will always be remembered for showing that selling
copies isn't the only way to produce great work, and that the power of
free software can indeed outsmart commercial software. Furthermore,
our aim is to contribute to the treasure of free works, because we
believe that financial interests interfere with quality, truth and
honesty in art, and we wish to set an example.
Since our launch last week, we have raised 50% of the basic production
cost from our closest friends and fans, but we are not quite there
yet. To make donating more attractive, we have thrown in some rewards
such as early downloads, a final CD, access to video logs and being
added to the album's booklet.
We hope you'll like our idea and will support us, financially or
through telling your friends.
Love,
Sylvia & Leonard
31 May
31 May
8:50 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
I'm sorry. I got so excited and nervous, I forgot to give you the link.
More details at:
http://the-album.cc
Love,
Sylvia & Leonard
http://www.paniq.cc
10:38 p.m.
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 08:49:05PM +0200, Leonard Ritter wrote:
We hope the album will always be remembered for
showing that selling
copies isn't the only way to produce great work,
It never is. The order is
1. Produce great work,
2. Sell copies.
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
10:50 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:33 PM, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
It never is. The order is
1. Produce great work,
2. Sell copies.
How is that going to work when we have always given out our work for free?
10:59 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Greetings to you!
Simple, to answer your question Leonard:
1. You produce good work
2. You give it away for free
I thik the point being made was simply this: Selling something is not in the
way of it being good. It is the question of inentionyou have. I know a lot of
very good bands and orchestras, who have produced very good works of music and
sold them. Some sales have gone fabulously well, others only relatively well.
Depends on the audience, which is reached by the kind of music you make.
And not to raise a flaming debate: I love the prospect of free music,
indulge in it myself - on a completely self-sufficient level - and hope, that
I can always keep that up. Because I enjoy giving it away and saying: Thanks
mates! Great work you did! And also: I didn't pay for the ideas. But not all
the world can do it. People earn a living by producing music. I admit: Some
are quite rich and earn astromic sums of money. Is this fair? That's beside
the point. :-)
Kindly yours
Julien
--------
Music was my first love and it will be my last (John Miles)
======== FIND MY WEB-PROJECT AT: ========
http://ltsb.sourceforge.net
the Linux TextBased Studio guide
======= AND MY PERSONAL PAGES AT: =======
http://www.juliencoder.de
11:11 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Julien Claassen <julien(a)c-lab.de> wrote:
I thik the point being made was simply this: Selling
something is not in
the way of it being good.
I understand you. But in this case, selling the music is simply not
possible. First of all, I can't sell the music well that I do on my
own. I would have to do it with the help of a label. But I want
everyone to be able to enjoy music. I don't think that it's right to
distinguish between customers and pirates. I don't want to think
about: how can we raise sales? I don't want to meet a fan and wonder
if he actually paid for my albums. I want to make good music. If I
spend my time doing business, then I'm wasting my time.
But still, in order for a great work to take shape, an investment must
be made. In the old days, a patron took action and put his trust into
this possibility. Now, in the age of the internet, we can reanimate
this old tradition, and see what great works can be evoked from the
realm of ideas, independent of commercial interests. Is that not an
exciting new possibility?
1 Jun
1 Jun
12:40 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Monday 31 May 2010 17:11:36 Leonard Ritter wrote:
Now, in the age of the internet, we can reanimate
this old tradition, and see what great works can be evoked from the
realm of ideas, independent of commercial interests. Is that not an
exciting new possibility?
Actually, this patronage does not *have* to be independent of commercial
interests. You might be able to think of ways to have commercial interests be
you patrons and *still* put out you music libre and even gratis.
all the best,
drew
7:12 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:40 AM, drew Roberts <zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
Actually, this patronage does not *have* to be
independent of commercial
interests. You might be able to think of ways to have commercial interests be
you patrons and *still* put out you music libre and even gratis.
Why would I want to do that?
7:52 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On 06/01/10 07:12, Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:40 AM, drew Roberts
<zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
Because it is nice.
Flo
--
Machines can do the work, so people have time to think.
public key DA43FEF4 x-hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net
Actually, this patronage does not *have* to be
independent of commercial
interests. You might be able to think of ways to have commercial interests be
you patrons and *still* put out you music libre and even gratis.
Why would I want
to do that?
7:55 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Florian Faber <faber(a)faberman.de> wrote:
On 06/01/10 07:12, Leonard Ritter wrote:
How?
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:40 AM, drew Roberts
<zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
Because it is nice. Actually, this patronage does not *have* to be
independent of commercial
interests. You might be able to think of ways to have commercial interests be
you patrons and *still* put out you music libre and even gratis.
Why would I want
to do that?
8:02 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On 06/01/10 07:55, Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Florian Faber
<faber(a)faberman.de> wrote:
Karma realignment.
Flo
--
Machines can do the work, so people have time to think.
public key DA43FEF4 x-hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net
On 06/01/10 07:12, Leonard Ritter wrote:
How? On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:40 AM, drew Roberts
<zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
Because it is nice. Actually, this patronage does not *have* to be
independent of commercial
interests. You might be able to think of ways to have commercial interests be
you patrons and *still* put out you music libre and even gratis.
Why would I want
to do that?
31 May
31 May
11:05 p.m.
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:50:36PM +0200, Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:33 PM,
<fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
You could try
It never is. The order is
1. Produce great work,
2. Sell copies.
How is that going to work when we have always given out our work for free? 1. Produce great work,
2. Give away copies.
:-)
You wrote:
... for showing that selling copies isn't the only
way to
produce great work, ...
And my point is: there is no point in showing this, because
selling copies has to happen after the work has been produced,
and therefore selling copies can never be a way to produce
a great work.
In the best case it can give you the means to produce the
*next* great work.
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
11:12 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:00 PM, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
And my point is: there is no point in showing this,
because
selling copies has to happen after the work has been produced,
and therefore selling copies can never be a way to produce
a great work.
In the best case it can give you the means to produce the
*next* great work.
That's what I meant.
1 Jun
1 Jun
12:31 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Monday 31 May 2010 17:00:27 fons(a)kokkinizita.net wrote:
And my point is: there is no point in showing this,
because
selling copies has to happen after the work has been produced,
and therefore selling copies can never be a way to produce
a great work.
Nah, you could pre-sell copies if you could find buyers.
In the best case it can give you the means to produce the
*next* great work.
I was just trying to order a peperback for my mother in law. It was not
available yet bout you could pre-order on most of the sites.
A Swarm of Angels : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Swarm_of_Angels
was trying to do it for a film. Although the claim is open source, iirc it was
an NC license and not what I would call open source as a result and so I did
not kick in.
Ciao,
all the best,
drew
31 May
31 May
10:58 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:33 PM, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 08:49:05PM +0200, Leonard
Ritter wrote:
Is that true, historically speaking?
The order
1. Produce some work
2. Inspire funding
3. (optionally) Produce great work
feels more familiar somehow.
Chris
We hope the album will always be remembered for
showing that selling
copies isn't the only way to produce great work,
It never is. The order is
1. Produce great work,
2. Sell copies. 
1 Jun
1 Jun
8:34 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Hi,
On Monday 31 May 2010 22:58:10 Chris Cannam wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:33 PM,
<fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
Historically it might be more like:
1) Get paid by _one_ individual to produce great work.
2) Produce work.
3) Get kicked out of the contract if the work isn't great enough or not to the
likes of the payer.
And before that time, it was:
1) Produce great work.
2) Give it away for free.
Doing music (or any) art for a living, that is with being paid, is a very hard
thing to do. Not only do you need people buying your stuff (after you made it,
who on earth pays an artist/designer/plumber before they at least started?),
you also need to deal with those 'real art has to be free'-blockes...
Have fun,
Arnold
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 08:49:05PM +0200, Leonard
Ritter wrote:
Is that true, historically speaking? We hope the album will always be remembered for
showing that selling
copies isn't the only way to produce great work,
It never is. The order is
1. Produce great work,
2. Sell copies. 
9:21 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Arnold Krille wrote:
Hi,
And before that time, it was:
1) Produce great work.
2) Give it away for free.
Doing music (or any) art for a living, that is with being paid, is a very hard
thing to do. Not only do you need people buying your stuff (after you made it,
who on earth pays an artist/designer/plumber before they at least started?),
you also need to deal with those 'real art has to be free'-blockes...
Musicians, indeed artists of all types, have been supported, allowing them to
produce their work, by society for very many centuries. This support has had
many forms, selling individual copies to paying customers is only one variation
on this. Working under a contract for someone else, who then sells the result to
customers for their profit is another variation, the rewards to the original
artist vary in this case.
With current internet and computer technologies there are more ways to sell
directly to a huge range of potential customers, and the production of recorded
music is a hugely cheaper prospect than even a few years ago, so the middlemen
who got very rich a few years ago may be feeling the pinch a bit.
But supporting artists in other, more direct, ways through public, semi-public
or private patronage, through institutions like grants from governments or
through universities now, or in the past through the powerful social
institutions of the time .. churches, kings, the aristocratic courts or
whatever, is and has always been part of any culture. In even older social
structures this was achieved by allowing some to produce art or music while
others produced food or provided other services, and the results were in various
fair, or unfair, ways shared.
Playing music has been both recreational for many, and a way of living for some,
for as long as we have had social structures, and way before any written history.
Simon
10:14 a.m.
On Tue, June 1, 2010 07:34, Arnold Krille wrote:
who on earth pays an artist/designer/plumber before
they at least
started?),
Someone who has bought and appreciated art from an artist and does not see
exactly what they want...
An artist who has a proven successful career, who does not depend so much
on other sources of income outside of their art. A commercial artist in
particular.
http://www.axisweb.org/atatcl.aspx?aid=612
James.
11:32 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On 06/01/2010 08:34 AM, Arnold Krille wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 31 May 2010 22:58:10 Chris Cannam wrote:
1) Produce great work
2) Give it away for free
3) Promote your great work
4) Perform your great work live (this is where the money is at the moment)
4) Sell merchandise at performances
5) Release your great work as a paid album with extra previously
unreleased tracks
Just my 2¢ ;)
Best,
Jeremy
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:33 PM,
<fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
Historically it might be more like:
1) Get paid by _one_ individual to produce great work.
2) Produce work.
3) Get kicked out of the contract if the work isn't great enough or not to the
likes of the payer.
And before that time, it was:
1) Produce great work.
2) Give it away for free.
Doing music (or any) art for a living, that is with being paid, is a very hard
thing to do. Not only do you need people buying your stuff (after you made it,
who on earth pays an artist/designer/plumber before they at least started?),
you also need to deal with those 'real art has to be free'-blockes...
Have fun,
Arnold
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 08:49:05PM +0200, Leonard
Ritter wrote:
Is that true, historically speaking? We hope the album will always be remembered for
showing that selling
copies isn't the only way to produce great work,
It never is. The order is
1. Produce great work,
2. Sell copies.
1:21 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jeremy <jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
4) Perform your great work live (this is where the
money is at the moment)
Completely impossible if you are a studio artist, and your music can't
really be performed. You could still set up a con show, but that will
reflect badly on you in the long run.
1:34 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On 06/01/2010 01:21 PM, Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jeremy
<jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
Hello Leonard,
My personal view is that studio artists appeared together with record
companies. And what goes for record companies these days goes for studio
artists too if you ask me. Nowadays you *have* to promote your work, you
*have* to let it out in the wild. Giving it away for free is not enough.
You need a way to get your work noticed.
Best,
Jeremy
(former indie label owner: http://www.zabel-muziek.nl/)
4) Perform your great work live (this is where
the money is at the moment)
Completely impossible if you are a studio artist, and your music can't
really be performed. You could still set up a con show, but that will
reflect badly on you in the long run. 
1:46 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Jeremy wrote:
On 06/01/2010 01:21 PM, Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jeremy
<jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
Hello Leonard,
My personal view is that studio artists appeared together with record
companies. And what goes for record companies these days goes for studio
artists too if you ask me. Nowadays you *have* to promote your work, you
*have* to let it out in the wild. Giving it away for free is not enough.
You need a way to get your work noticed.
Best,
Jeremy
(former indie label owner: http://www.zabel-muziek.nl/)
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
4) Perform your great work live (this is where
the money is at the moment)
Completely impossible if you are a studio artist, and your music can't
really be performed. You could still set up a con show, but that will
reflect badly on you in the long run.
2:13 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Jeremy <jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
My personal view is that studio artists appeared
together with record
companies. And what goes for record companies these days goes for studio
artists too if you ask me. Nowadays you *have* to promote your work, you
*have* to let it out in the wild. Giving it away for free is not enough.
You need a way to get your work noticed.
Like, e.g. (among other things) posting on the LAU group, because the
work is Linux audio related. I'm not going to make THAT mistake again
ha ha :D
It worked pretty good with Twitter though. We raised €2500 in the past
seven days.
2:20 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Leonard Ritter <paniq(a)paniq.org> wrote:
Like, e.g. (among other things) posting on the LAU
group, because the
work is Linux audio related. I'm not going to make THAT mistake again
ha ha :D
It worked pretty good with Twitter though. We raised €2500 in the past
seven days.
I don't think this group generally has cash, it isn't the right place
to find that kind of support.
But it certainly doesn't lack skills or experience, and is very
liberal with help and advice.
Music is posted often, and discussed. Collaborations are formed.
People with studios, gear and skills lurk. These can all be of great
help in your project, if you are open to it.
Simon
2:32 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
tisdag 01 juni 2010 14.20.15 skrev Simon Wise:
...
Music is posted often, and discussed. Collaborations
are formed.
People with studios, gear and skills lurk. These can all be of great
help in your project, if you are open to it.
Dance music is not the music I listen most to, but after hearing some of
Leonard's, music, looking at hes web site and trying out jacker, it seems to
me that Leonard is very skilled and know more about collaboration, studio and
have better ears than most of us - well, at least better that me anyways. :-)
Jostein
11:17 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 07:48:44 Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Jeremy
<jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
I don't consider it a mistake at all. Packet In was sort of born on these
lists:
http://packet-in.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
My personal view is that studio artists appeared
together with record
companies. And what goes for record companies these days goes for studio
artists too if you ask me. Nowadays you *have* to promote your work, you
*have* to let it out in the wild. Giving it away for free is not enough.
You need a way to get your work noticed.
Like, e.g. (among other things) posting on the LAU group, because the
work is Linux audio related. I'm not going to make THAT mistake again
ha ha :D
It worked pretty good with Twitter though. We raised €2500 in the past
seven days.
all the best,
drew
2:13 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Jeremy <jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
On 06/01/2010 01:21 PM, Leonard Ritter wrote:
if you want to sell your work you need to decide who could be the
buyer - if you can't play it live, then obviously that isn't a live
audience, but recorded music is played and payed for in lots of
places, some of the music download sites are now selling play lists to
the many places that want recorded music played publicly, and the
proceeds of those sales are split between the distribution and the
artist.
I have no idea how successful this has been, it would probably vary a
lot depending on the way royalties have been collected in the past in
each country, and how well the studios have locked in a monopoly on
this (as a very intentional side effect of the whole IP debate and
legislation). There is a large range of sites where people can buy
music to download, often at a price set by the artist with a split in
the returns between the artist and the site. The artist gets a much
bigger percentage than they ever got from the studios, but of course
there isn't any upfront support either.
But this isn't the only market for a studio artist, recorded music is
used, and paid for, in films, games, a huge range of places. If it is
out there and liked by an audience it is easier to sell to these
markets - either existing work or commissions. Allowing free downloads
with a Non Commercial license doesn't stop you selling for commercial
purposes, and may well help make the sale happen.
All this depends on the style of music, the artist, where you are ...
and lots more.
Finally, the cost of making a studio recording with current technology
is mostly the time spent by all concerned, if you want to retain full
ownership yourself then you need to pay for that time, but if the work
is good it is very possible to get a group together to make it and
share the ownership, and the returns if there are any. That can drop
the up-front costs a lot.
Simon
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jeremy
<jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
Hello Leonard,
My personal view is that studio artists appeared together with record
companies. And what goes for record companies these days goes for studio
artists too if you ask me. Nowadays you *have* to promote your work, you
*have* to let it out in the wild. Giving it away for free is not enough.
You need a way to get your work noticed. 4) Perform your great work live (this is where
the money is at the moment)
Completely impossible if you are a studio artist, and your music can't
really be performed. You could still set up a con show, but that will
reflect badly on you in the long run.
11:23 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 08:06:15 Simon Wise wrote:
But this isn't the only market for a studio
artist, recorded music is
used, and paid for, in films, games, a huge range of places. If it is
out there and liked by an audience it is easier to sell to these
markets - either existing work or commissions. Allowing free downloads
with a Non Commercial license doesn't stop you selling for commercial
purposes, and may well help make the sale happen.
I think I saw mention that this was to be a straight By project. This will
likely cut down the opportunities for film & TV licensing. BY-SA would retain
most of these opportunities while still making the album Free (libre)
Leonard, you may want to consider this for your next album. It would be odd to
make this change after having already raised support for this one.
all the best,
drew
2 Jun
2 Jun
1:31 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:23 PM, drew Roberts <zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
I think I saw mention that this was to be a straight
By project. This will
likely cut down the opportunities for film & TV licensing. BY-SA would retain
most of these opportunities while still making the album Free (libre)
All my previous albums have been BY-SA. This one is going to be BY on
purpose. Film, TV licensing, I want them all to be able to benefit
from it. After all, they are using my music, which almost makes them
good people by default, independent of what they do with it.
Sometimes, SA is simply impractical. I don't want anyone asking me for
permission to do this or that.
Unconditional love, my friend. It's rare, and there should be more of it.
1 Jun
1 Jun
1:43 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Completely impossible if you are a studio artist, and your
music can't
really be performed. You could still set up a con show, but
that will
reflect badly on you in the long run.
I've playing on stage a few times before but I do spend all my time in my studio
nowadays. I am not even sure the music I am composing will ever be played live (some of it
can though). But to me, the whole project described in the OP lies on a few assumptions:
- one can make a decent living out of music production
- it is desirable to make such a living
- ppl will support artistic efforts if only the artist can be convincing enough
- I may forget other things ...
While point one is true in some cases, I am not sure it is a good thing in the long run as
it fuels point 2, which will prevent a shift from the "capitalist" paradigm
(shift that is sorely needed, but that's just my opinion, no need to jump on this as
it is a vast and off-topic debate).
I would say that one can make a living doing whatever but considering the societal
fundamentals we currently bathe in, I find it extremely hard to make music composition fit
in. I personally gave up on the principle myself, too much stress and uncertainty
regarding paying bills, etc. You either have to have jumped on the train 30 years ago or
boost your ego to some insane extent in order to "make it" (cf. lady gaga for
example). This is simply too crazy and I see no reason to emulate such a
"success".
The music I compose does not have to compete with any other work or even spread to every
corner of the world. What for ? I do not want to judge the artistic value on how much
money I derive from my work. Some will say that the money is a consequence of the high
artistic value ... I am not sure, I tend to think that involving financial aspects in such
a project will bias it one way or another, or at least the way the artist will continue
his / her work. This is how I see it, and I end up creating my own stuff without asking
for money. At least, I am really on my own, using what I have, and thus not tied to anyone
else in any fashion. The drawback is that it takes more time ... but it may not be a
problem since my ideas have more time to mature, as long as I keep the artistic thread
alive in me.
OK, maybe that was not really well formulated or thought and I don't want to sound
negative about the OP's project :)
Cheers!
J.
1:57 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 1:43 PM, James Warden <warjamy(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I've playing on stage a few times before but I do
spend all my time in my studio nowadays. I am not even sure the music I am composing will
ever be played live (some of it can though). But to me, the whole project described in the
OP lies on a few assumptions:
- one can make a decent living out of music production
not at all.
- it is desirable to make such a living
no, what the hell? it is desirable to do independent art full-time,
that's what it is. I don't care how the living is made!
- ppl will support artistic efforts if only the artist
can be convincing enough
that's a law of nature. you can't get free support and trust from
scratch. you need references. it applies to any kind of work.
While point one is true in some cases, I am not sure
it is a good thing in the long run as it fuels point 2, which will prevent a shift from
the "capitalist" paradigm (shift that is sorely needed, but that's just my
opinion, no need to jump on this as it is a vast and off-topic debate).
first misunderstand, then criticize for the misunderstanding!
I would say that one can make a living doing whatever
but considering the societal fundamentals we currently bathe in, I find it extremely hard
to make music composition fit in. I personally gave up on the principle myself, too much
stress and uncertainty regarding paying bills, etc. You either have to have jumped on the
train 30 years ago or boost your ego to some insane extent in order to "make it"
(cf. lady gaga for example). This is simply too crazy and I see no reason to emulate such
a "success".
I just want to make an awesome album in the first place. What have we
gotten ourselves into here?
I added all the nice ideological bits because I thought saying "i love
to bang it" is not enough. I had no idea you guys would put on your
professor glasses and shred me to pieces for that!
2:04 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
I added all the nice ideological bits because I
thought
saying "i love
to bang it" is not enough. I had no idea you guys would put
on your
professor glasses and shred me to pieces for that!
sorry if you saw my comments like this. I probably had an incorrect understanding of your
project from the way the thread evolved. I think that just saying what you mentioned
here:
"I love to bang it"
sounds good enough for me. And I can assure you, I am in no way wearing "professor
glasses". The discussion thread just triggered some of my thoughts and questions
regarding the relationship art - money, nothing else. I am not pretending to know more
than you. But we can certainly disagree on some aspects of that relationship. I hope this
is clear enough :)
J.
2:14 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 2:04 PM, James Warden <warjamy(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
sounds good enough for me. And I can assure you, I am
in no way wearing "professor glasses". The discussion thread just triggered some
of my thoughts and questions regarding the relationship art - money, nothing else. I am
not pretending to know more than you. But we can certainly disagree on some aspects of
that relationship. I hope this is clear enough :)
Fair enough. :)
2:18 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 07:21:16 Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jeremy
<jeremy(a)autostatic.com> wrote:
I am not so sure about that. If you have a following, your fans may still want
to come to a show where all you do is play your music for them from a CD or
whatever and talk about it with them. Think about an independent filmmaker
screening their new film. They may very well value your time and interaction
with them enough to pay for a concert.
all the best,
drew
4) Perform your great work live (this is where
the money is at the
moment)
Completely impossible if you are a studio artist, and your music can't
really be performed. You could still set up a con show, but that will
reflect badly on you in the long run. 
2:25 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:18 AM, drew Roberts <zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
I am not so sure about that. If you have a following, your fans may still
want
to come to a show where all you do is play your music for them from a CD or
whatever and talk about it with them. Think about an independent filmmaker
screening their new film. They may very well value your time and
interaction
with them enough to pay for a concert.
case in point: steve roach, an ambient electronic musician (of prolific
output) is someone who i will generally no longer go and see live, because
his pieces are impossible to perform live. he ends up mostly just running a
mixing desk and adding a layer from time time. even in context of st. mary's
church in philadelphia, where you can lie on the floor and zone out, its
really just not worth my time - i get a better experience listening to mr
roach at home (in bed, or in the studio/office - ardour owes a lot to him).
however, on one occasion he did a show here in philadelphia at st. mary's
where there was a Q&A session, and i absolutely went to it. it was great. i
even put the "its not worth me seeing you live" perspective to him, and he
was very understanding :)
--p
3:18 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On 06/01/2010 02:25 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:18 AM, drew Roberts <zotz(a)100jamz.com
<mailto:zotz@100jamz.com>> wrote:
I am not so sure about that. If you have a following, your fans may
still want
to come to a show where all you do is play your music for them from
a CD or
whatever and talk about it with them. Think about an independent
filmmaker
screening their new film. They may very well value your time and
interaction
with them enough to pay for a concert.
case in point: steve roach, an ambient electronic musician (of prolific
output) is someone who i will generally no longer go and see live,
because his pieces are impossible to perform live. he ends up mostly
just running a mixing desk and adding a layer from time time. even in
context of st. mary's church in philadelphia, where you can lie on the
floor and zone out, its really just not worth my time - i get a better
experience listening to mr roach at home (in bed, or in the
studio/office - ardour owes a lot to him).
however, on one occasion he did a show here in philadelphia at st.
mary's where there was a Q&A session, and i absolutely went to it. it
was great. i even put the "its not worth me seeing you live" perspective
to him, and he was very understanding :)
--p
Another example would be Henry Rollins who is more successful nowadays
talking about his music instead of performing his music.
Jeremy
2:06 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Oops, forgot to send an actual reply...
Jeremy wrote:
4) Perform your great work live (this is where the
money is at the moment)
4) Sell merchandise at performances
In my experience as a performer (45+ years) I'd say that performance
isn't the money-maker for most struggling artists. The costs of
transportation, gear rental, show management (soundman, lights operator,
roadies) can quickly eat the entire paycheck for a club band. Sales of
everything from keychains to CD/DVDs is where they can make better money
(viz the Kiss story).
It's also worth noting that in my home area (NW Ohio) the pay scale for
club musicians hasn't changed significantly in more than thirty years.
Most venues don't like paying out more than $300 to $350 for a 4-hour
gig, so trios and duets have caught on in a big way around here. In Ye
Olden Daze we played clubs three to five nights per week, and the clubs
typically hired us for two to three weeks at a time. All that
disappeared here in the 1970s when the drinking age was lifted from 18
to 21. Clubs in Ohio wilted like daffodils in the desert, and it was no
longer possible to make a nice living playing the club scene.
Incidentally, if you're not geared up for the road, prepare for some
notable expenses. You may need your own PA system (a not inconsiderable
expense), stage-ready amplifiers, and everything else associated with a
stage show. Of course you'll need a capable vehicle too, or be able to
afford someone to move your stuff. Then there are managers and booking
agents to deal with, and they'll want their share too. Prepping a
band/show is a non-trivial exercise in small-to-medium-scale economics. :)
Best,
dp
11:27 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 08:06:20 Dave Phillips wrote:
It's also worth noting that in my home area (NW
Ohio) the pay scale for
club musicians hasn't changed significantly in more than thirty years.
Most venues don't like paying out more than $300 to $350 for a 4-hour
gig
Perhaps if we get to the point where enough Free music exists for a band to be
able to play a gig in a club consisting of only Free music (and perhaps laws
will have to change too, I admit ignorance here) there will be more money
available to go to the band rather than to the collection societies?
We shall see.
all the best,
drew
2 Jun
2 Jun
11:20 a.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
drew Roberts wrote:
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 08:06:20 Dave Phillips wrote:
Never thought about that actually. Over here in the Netherlands that is
still impossible because every venue has to pay a fixed amount to the
collection society (Buma). So until then I still have to send in
setlists and hope that I get anything back of our old songs that I
registred with the collecting society. All our new material is CC, I
don't want to be bound to the collecting society anymore.
Best,
Jeremy
It's also worth noting that in my home area
(NW Ohio) the pay scale for
club musicians hasn't changed significantly in more than thirty years.
Most venues don't like paying out more than $300 to $350 for a 4-hour
gig
Perhaps if we get to the point where enough Free music exists for a band to be
able to play a gig in a club consisting of only Free music (and perhaps laws
will have to change too, I admit ignorance here) there will be more money
available to go to the band rather than to the collection societies?
We shall see.
all the best,
drew
1 Jun
1 Jun
2:24 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Okay. This is not the discussion I wanted to start. Allow me to break
down my original message into simple commands:
1. Visit http://the-album.cc
2. Check out what we do.
3. Find that we are totally cool people and talented altruists.
4. Give us all your cash.
5. Receive incredibly well produced album on November 5th. Have aural
orgasms. Multiple.
6. Receive CD on December 1st*
7. Show this to all your Windows- and Mac-loving enemies and laugh in
their faces**
8. ???
9. Profit!
* ever noticed an asterisk in an offering where you couldn't find the
associated fine print, leaving you with a slight uneasy feeling? this
is such an asterisk.
** don't start an argument with me! of course you pity them for their
smug "i'm just thinking practical" attitude and their moral
inferiority. No? Well, I do. This will show them!
3:19 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Hi Leonard,
First of all let me say I respect and admire what you're trying to
accomplish and wish you all the best.
That said, I think much of the flame started because of
misunderstanding. From what I can see you are seeking for
sponsorship/donations to produce your CC open-source-based music. IMHO
there's nothing bad with that: I'm happy that people like Monteverdi,
Purcell, Vivaldi (to name a few) were sponsored in the past.
I think some people misunderstood that, as you write
we believe that financial interests interfere with
quality, truth and
honesty in art, and we wish to set an example.
which can be a point, but then you *do* need €1485/month for rent, food,
insurances... etc. again nothing wrong with that at all.
I guess many on this list would like to quit their every-day jobs and
only do music.. but there's that rent food etc. waiting :).. and I know
people for whom that can be an artistic and "honest" stimulus to make
art/music as much as wealthy pop-stars (remember also blues and
work-songs started partly with exploited people who had nothing but
their music...)
All the best and kind regards,
Lorenzo.
Leonard Ritter wrote:
Okay. This is not the discussion I wanted to start.
Allow me to break
down my original message into simple commands:
1. Visit http://the-album.cc
2. Check out what we do.
3. Find that we are totally cool people and talented altruists.
4. Give us all your cash.
5. Receive incredibly well produced album on November 5th. Have aural
orgasms. Multiple.
6. Receive CD on December 1st*
7. Show this to all your Windows- and Mac-loving enemies and laugh in
their faces**
8. ???
9. Profit!
* ever noticed an asterisk in an offering where you couldn't find the
associated fine print, leaving you with a slight uneasy feeling? this
is such an asterisk.
** don't start an argument with me! of course you pity them for their
smug "i'm just thinking practical" attitude and their moral
inferiority. No? Well, I do. This will show them!
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
4:20 p.m.
New subject: Campaign: "The most remarkable album on this entire planet"
Hey Leonard,
I just want to say, seconding Lorenzo: best of luck to you! I know your
software (aldrin), but not your music---will check it out. I gather you are
good at what you do, so I'm looking forward to it.
This music biz is amazingly difficult. I still primarily earn through
teaching (I'm a fine pianist) and a steady weekend gig at a Synagogue. I
have an project, a non-for-profit concert organization called UnTwelve (
www.untwelve.org), so I know how hard it is to fund interesting, even
extremely worthy projects. I admire anyone with the gusto to try, especially
if they back it up with excellence.
I for one have no problem with you asking for financial help in this forum.
I may or may not be able to help (I'm trying to keep all my $$$ resources on
my own project, and that's hard enough!) BUT--I will say that I can
certainly be an ally in getting your music project(s) attention by letting
my network of peeps know about it!
All best,
AKJ
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Lorenzo <lsutton(a)libero.it> wrote:
Hi Leonard,
First of all let me say I respect and admire what you're trying to
accomplish and wish you all the best.
That said, I think much of the flame started because of misunderstanding.
From what I can see you are seeking for sponsorship/donations to produce
your CC open-source-based music. IMHO there's nothing bad with that: I'm
happy that people like Monteverdi, Purcell, Vivaldi (to name a few) were
sponsored in the past.
I think some people misunderstood that, as you write
we believe that financial interests interfere with quality, truth and
--
Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.akjmusic.com
http://www.untwelve.org
honesty in art, and we wish to set an example.
which can be a point, but then you *do* need €1485/month for rent, food,
insurances... etc. again nothing wrong with that at all.
I guess many on this list would like to quit their every-day jobs and only
do music.. but there's that rent food etc. waiting :).. and I know people
for whom that can be an artistic and "honest" stimulus to make art/music as
much as wealthy pop-stars (remember also blues and work-songs started partly
with exploited people who had nothing but their music...)
All the best and kind regards,
Lorenzo.
Leonard Ritter wrote:
Okay. This is not the discussion I wanted to
start. Allow me to break
down my original message into simple commands:
1. Visit http://the-album.cc
2. Check out what we do.
3. Find that we are totally cool people and talented altruists.
4. Give us all your cash.
5. Receive incredibly well produced album on November 5th. Have aural
orgasms. Multiple.
6. Receive CD on December 1st*
7. Show this to all your Windows- and Mac-loving enemies and laugh in
their faces**
8. ???
9. Profit!
* ever noticed an asterisk in an offering where you couldn't find the
associated fine print, leaving you with a slight uneasy feeling? this
is such an asterisk.
** don't start an argument with me! of course you pity them for their
smug "i'm just thinking practical" attitude and their moral
inferiority. No? Well, I do. This will show them!
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
5291
days inactive
5293
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
43 comments
17 participants
participants (17)
-
Aaron Krister Johnson -
Arnold Krille -
Chris Cannam -
Dave Phillips -
drew Roberts -
Florian Faber -
fons＠kokkinizita.net -
James Morris -
James Warden -
Jeremy -
Jeremy Jongepier
-
Jostein Chr. Andersen -
Julien Claassen -
Leonard Ritter -
Lorenzo -
Paul Davis -
Simon Wise