Maluvia, you wouldn't believe me, but this time I
agree on everything. :-)
I knew we were of the same mind in spirit, Cesare.
Sometimes words just really get in the way. [hug]
About the definition, at least according to a google
search I've been
the first to use: 'web releasing musician'. I think it says it all.
Music released on the web instead of in shops.
This is a perfectly sensible, honest, descriptive term - I just tend to
agree with Carotinho that it is not very 'catchy'.
(Just trying to think of a term that gets that idea across in shorter, more
memorable fashion.)
But I also realize you're not interested in 'gimmicky' marketing ploys,
either - and I respect that.
Unfortunately, it just seems that many people need an extra nudge of that
sort to feel like opening their wallets - to feel like they are buying into
a concept or image, not just a product.
I wish it was not that way.
Hollywood has insinuated its mentality into nearly every facet of modern
society, and a big part of that mentality is that glamour is the commodity
- and *they* get to define what is 'glamorous' - up to now.
I started to see also website that proudly say 'not
available in shops',
Actually, that sounds like a good phrase to put on one's site - where it's
applicable.
"Available only online" evokes the idea that someone might be missing out
on something if they rely only on bricks-and-mortar establishments to
purchase goods, and plays into that - to me utterly bizarre - mentality
that something has more value because it is 'scarce'.
About your goal to earn a living with music, what I was
trying to
convince you all about is that it wasn't possible for non-commercial
artists to do this before. I've grown up listening mostly to music from
artists who had a day job. This could be possible now thanks to the Web.
I agree.
It is certainly not a technological barrier - we have all the tools to make
it happen.
It is a *psychological* barrier that we are challenged to overcome.
- Maluvia