In NJ, summer 2011, I witnessed a violent conversation about what is the best mobile music app. It pretty much sums up the state of mobile music streaming in 2011:

Alternatives that come to mind are MOG and Grooveshark—both of which share the same main attraction as Rdio and Spotify: on-demand streaming. They are fundamentally different from discovery-centered apps like Pandora. Last.fm and exfm are in the cross. Who’s back do you have…what’s your vote? ▼

Kaiser Chiefs singer Ricky Wilson performs in 2005. – Photo: Andrew Kendall.

“If you haven’t got a scene you’ve gotta’ set your own scene” said Kaiser Chiefs singer Ricky Wilson at 31:40 and “keep your ears peeled” for song ideas said drummer Nick Hodgson at 51:00 during their interview below with Steve Lamacq on BBC Music:

Tom Silverman has made his entire career in the music industry. Circa the early 80s he founded Dance Music Report, the New Music Seminar (NMS) and Tommy Boy Records, now Tommy Boy Entertainment, whose roster includes hip hop staples De La Soul, Naughty by Nature, House of Pain, and more. WE+PR, the public relations team who works with NMS, set up a phone interview for me with Silverman, who had tons to say about the music industry. Stream the full interview—all 55min—by pressing the play button to the ←left—or on Bandcamp.

Our interview took place on January 20, 2011. Later that night he would fly to France to attend MIDEM and I would drive with my dad to Philadelphia—fearless of impending snow—to see my cousin Sharon headline at Johnny Brenda’s. On the phone that afternoon, Silverman told me about some of his early experiences with Tommy Boy Records, thoughts on the current state of the industry, and about the then upcoming New Music Seminar in Los Angeles—NMS LA 2011 took place last week (February 14–16).

If you remember I’d attended NMS NYC 2010 last summer and had heard Silverman speak to the summer crowd inside Webster Hall. I can tell you he is extremely passionate about what’s right and wrong in the music industry, which you’ll be able to hear yourself as our conversation heats up through the interview. Below I’ve transcribed a few select moments.

08:00 Silverman: We aren’t selling records—we’re selling perception. The perceived value of music is 100 percent arbitrary.

09:30 Silverman: He [Steve Jobs] has to work with a gigantic lead time and drop new products every 3–6 months like we drop albums. We haven’t thought about the obsolescence of music [in the way that Jobs thinks about Apple's product lifecycles].

15:45 Silverman: [On iTunes] every time somebody coverts from buying songs to buying an album [Soundscan] deducts it from buying singles. It acts almost as if those singles hadn’t been bought. So if I bought two singles from an artist last year and then I bought the album this year, then that artist gets minus two singles. So that’s also had an impact. In 18 percent of iTunes sales, album sales are ‘complete my album’ sales, and with some artists it’s a lot more than that. So every time somebody completes an album it’s a minimun of one song, but most usually it’s two songs that are minused out. That’s had a major impact in turning song sales backwards, not because less songs are selling, but because single songs are being coverted into albums and then being deducted from singles.

16:45 Silverman: What’s happening right now is catalog sales are dropping off in singles and they’re slowing down substantially in albums (digital albums) because people have already rebought their collections in MP3 form—in digital form.

25:05 RVE: If you’re going to advertise anywhere I don’t know why you would do it anywhere besides Facebook—because of the way you can target stuff. [...] Say you’re in a rock band in New York City. You could target an ad on Facebook to people that like the Smashing Pumpkins that live in New York City that are between the age of 20–25. [...] I wouldn’t advise anyone to buy ads on Google. I know Google makes all this money from ads but I never click on them—I have clicked on Facebook ads.

34:10 RVE: I was reading about [Pablo Picaso] on Wikipedia and there’s so many things that correlate to the music industry. [...] They said the total number of artworks he produced is estimated at 50,000 which is a lot of pieces of [art] but he didn’t sell most of them. He had most of them in his possession when he died. He only sold the ones that he needed to sell to make money. The rest of them he kept because…I guess he just wanted to keep them or was just to busy making art. He wasn’t really concerned with it. I wonder if today if he’d be like taking pictures of it and uploading pictures of it to Flickr…or you know? Also they said that his art has been stolen more than any other artist in the world. [...] He’s pretty much referred to as the most famous artist.

35:35 Silverman: There’s influential art and there’s popular art. Just because it’s popular it doesnn’t necessarily mean that it’s important but it does mean something. Margaret Mead, the famous cultural anthropologist, said “never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world—indeed it is the only thing that ever has.” The point is it’s always a small group of people that make all the change. [...] Kind of like Kool Herc, Afrika Bambaataa, and Grandmaster Flash all in the Bronx doing hip hop and nobody else in the world was doing hip hop—it changed the whole world really but it came from a 5-mile radius.

36:45 RVE: People would probably want me to ask about what you said in the Wired interview last year about most albums being just “noise” from “hobbyists” that clutters the marketplace. I mean I think that came across as kind of like a negative outlook to a lot of people, but I was thinking, aren’t really—I mean a hobbyist is really someone that just does something for pleasure. I think it has sort of a negative connotation [...] but aren’t the hobbyists the ones really driving musical innovation, or don’t you think they’re playing a big part in that?

37:30 Silverman: It doesn’t seem like they are. I always believed that they would be but it doesn’t seem like they are. Why isn’t any of that stuff breaking through? I mean if it’s that fantastic, it’s findable, everything findable, somebody’s got to discover it, and the word needs to spread. Why isn’t all this fantastic, creative, amazing art coming out musically through the web where everything is available accoding to the long-tail theory.

38:00 RVE: You want to think the cream will rise to the top.

38:03 Silverman: And it’s not happening. In fact not only is it not happening, it happened more before there was an internet than it’s happening now. I can tell you when Afrika Bambaataa came out with “Planet Rock” it rose to the top and I had only one or two employees working with me and we ended up selling 600,000 twelve inches. The cream rose to the top better then than it does now.

39:00 RVE: People like choices. Me, I don’t want to hear something that’s like everything else. I want to find [music] that’s different, the stuff that’s cutting-edge, and the stuff that’s changing. I mean there’s so many like generic…I mean there’s a lot stuff that just sounds generic. When you find something that’s really unique, really good, then it’s awesome. The more people you have making music the more likely that’s going to happen.

39:40 Silverman: Definitely there’s five times as many people making music now than there was 10 years ago. There should be five times as many great pieces of music coming through than ever. But the opposite is true. [...] In 2008 there were 1,500 releases that sold over 10,000 units. In 2009 that number dropped to 1,300. In 2008 there were about 200 artists who broke 10,000 for the first time. Less than eight of them were DIY artists that broke on their own or on very small indie labels. [... ] Eight artists breaking on brand-new or on their own labels is pathetic!

41:50 Silverman: Using samples, moving around samples, and working with Garage Band is kind of like the musical equivalent of color by numbers. [...] You don’t have to be able to play an instrument really. You don’t have to be an amazing engineer. You don’t have to go into a studio and know how mic’s work. Anyone can do it. It’s a two-edged sword. On one edge it gives power to the people and on the other edge it gives power to the people who have no abilities.

42:50 RVE: I’d rather have a world where anyone can make music. [...] I think stuff gets filtered by people’s friends. I think people say “hey did you listen to this?” I think that’s still going on but I think it’s going on Facebook and in text messages—I think it’s still going on in person too but it’s also happening on Facebook [...] because it’s easy to share stuff. I think the stuff that’s getting shared more is the stuff that has more readily available in a “content” format.

48:25 RVE: Every TED video that gets recorded goes on YouTube and is available for free…why not do that for NMS?

48:35 Silverman: You know what if I could charge $5,000 like TED charges for people that come and have a waiting list then I’d put everything up there [on YouTube].

48:55 RVE: The way I see it though it doesn’t cost you anything extra to put it on YouTube, right? Wouldn’t it be free promotion?

49:02 Silverman: If we put it on YouTube and people see that then they don’t have to come to the conference. Then it does cost me something because our numbers will go down even further and we won’t be able to afford to do the conference.

49:17 RVE: The New York one [last summer] sold out, right?

49:20 Silverman: It sold out but it sold out at such a low price. [...] It’s a marginal business. Let’s put it this way. Nobody makes money at the New Music Seminar.

52:50 RVE: I just feel like instead of listening to those baby-boomer generation executives I’d rather listen to their kids because I think that’s where you’re really going to learn stuff.

53:03 Silverman: I hear you but nobody’s going to pay to hear their kids talk [at NMS].

// NMS NYC 2010 and NMS LA 2011 both sold out. I think unleashing all the keynotes on YouTube would increase attendance—do you? Who’d you like to see speak at the next NMS?

“If you want to build a brand, you should own the .COM domain.”
–Chris Vinson/Bandzoogle.com

I consider my URL selection of virtualmusic.tv as a minor fail. Of course when I launched the site in July 2009 I thought it was brilliant, but truly, only hindsight is 20/20. Last summer a conversation with Bandzoogle founder Chris Vinson helped confirmed in my mind that the URL choice of virtualmusic.tv was not ideal for the core reason above—it’s no .COM.

There are of course plenty of .TV urls that work well: e.g. motherboard.tv, jawbone.tv, or justin.tv. Many people like .TV for video sites because it’s the abbreviation for television. Yet the .TV extension is actually the country extension for Tuvalu—a tiny group of islands in the Pacific that even smarter-than-5th-grader adults can’t locate on a map.

Aside from the extension, there are other issues. Due to MMORPGs, people increasingly associate the word “virtual” with virtual worlds, which is not what this site is about. This site is about online music culture and the technology that surrounds it. It’s about pushing the music industry forward.

Doesn’t the name ‘Music Flux’ align better with the content? Music culture and business will always be in a state of flux, right? (Other ideas?)

Like ‘digital music,’ the phrase ‘virtual music’ is somewhat of a generic word pair, making it hard to show up at the top of Google search results. One solid formula for a strong unique URL is:

(keyword) + (2nd word or keyword not typically phrased with 1st word) + .COM

e.g. ticket + fly + .COM

e.g. band + zoogle + .COM

e.g. sound + cloud + .COM

A name change can be a damaging blow if executed poorly or done for the wrong reasons. I’ve tried here to present a solid case for a URL change. I think musicflux.com is more descriptive, unique, memorable, and stronger as a brand identity. Do you? I’d really appreciate your input in the poll below and in the comments…because I don’t want to F it up. (Note: Functionality-wise the change for readers would be pretty seamless, as all existing links and feeds would redirect.)

Thank you! // More end of the year 2010 analysis is on deck.

Update 1/17/2010: We’re not changing it.

The median price point on RocketHub…and other crowdfunding platforms for that matter…is 20 bucks. … Make your $20 price point really jump off the shelf. –Brian Meece, RocketHub co-founder.

Crowdfunding website RocketHub was launched in January 2010 by three musicians/entrepreneurs—Brian Meece, Vladimir Vukicevic, and Jed Cohen. (tonic.com)  Meece was speaking above in his August 2010 interview with CDBaby podcaster Kevin Breuner. Meece continued with more details:

“The single most popular price point on RocketHub, by far, across the board, is $20. So what that means is make your $20 price point really jump off the shelf. Make it really exciting, make it really fun, because that’s what you’re going to move the most of likely. Another very popular price point is the $100 price point, which I also found very intriguing. The $100 price point typically are folks that have built up a lot of trust, or have been following you a little longer. They may be inner-circle folks, you know, your Uncle Bobby from Texas that loves everything that you do and buys 20 of your CD’s everytime they come out, but, you know just loves the fact that he’s got a nephew who’s making records. That’s where he’s probably gonna’ land. You’d be surprised who lands there, but it’s a very, very popular price point. … As a result the average contribution, it hovers day to day, but it’s in about the upper $50s. $57–$59 is the average across the board. So that’s very interesting because when we look at that average number, we could start to say if I wanna’ hit $500, then I need about 8–12 people to really hit that number—not a lot.” (CDBaby Podcast #098)

Guided by my own DIY business rule #6, I don’t need to waste time or money researching market price points for people who buy music. There’s already a company who’s perfected them—Apple:

2010 Apple iPod price comparison (source: apple.com)

Earlier this year Shamal Ranasinghe (@shamalman) presented marketing data from TopSpin Media at MIDEM 2010 in Cannes, France in series of slides. This one displays the advantage of selling at every price point—everything from frequent cheap buys to rare premium package deals:

“Consider Premium Offers”—slide 11. (source: Topspin Media)

On tour » another issue to consider is that location changes value/price.

Graphics: iPod, Topspin, and ‘price shuffle‘ graphics were remixed by RVE.

Considering what is already be done with modern audio devices, it’s far from a stretch. For the best quality, I think it would need to start from the source, the master recordings, which could be released in full dynamic form. Do you think it’s possible? I do. Do you think it’ll happen? Audiophiles would love it, but what about the general listener?

Imagine a stereo that had a slider on it for compression, where a listener could slide anywhere on the compression spectrum from full dynamic range to max loudness. What issues do you think come into play? Who should control dynamics? Rather, what industry standards need to be morphed, and which ones needs to be muted?

Photo: sbcbrassFlickr

I’ve noticed more and more pop tracks using these siren/alarm samples. Whoever’s behind this madness, please, for the love of the open road, STOP! I could argue that siren samples are a major safety hazard—distractions that cause traffic jams across the country, car accidents, lower fuel efficiency, and wasted time. But wait, would that make me a Communist? Shouldn’t I support freedom of expression blah blah blah, and trust the consumers to hone in on what’s best? Maybe. But the radio is no democracy. C’mon you know what I’m talking about, right? DJ’s don’t let DJ’s use sirens—except in a live set when they want to single out the illegals or the dealers. I’m not crazy. Drive safe.

Sorry, Chris Weingarten, but some drones can write. They want a voice. Their sting is called competition.
photo: aprilesole/flickr.

The line between drone-dom and leaping into the unknown is called perception.

In The Beach (2000), Richard was a jaded youth who had traveled far abroad to Thailand seeking something different—a unique experience—but when he got there, he realized he wasn’t the only one. In a curious series of events involving suicide and banana pancakes, he recruited a French couple and abandoned the tourist road. His case: “I just feel like everyone tries to do something different, but you always wind up doing the same damn thing.”

There is a fundamental difference between tourists and travelers. Mention Frommer’s to someone. If they cringe, then they’re a traveler. If not, then they’re a tourist. Travelers want to get lost. They want to leap into the unknown and experience the world as it is. Tourists want the greatest hits. Is The Hype Machine the Frommer’s of music blogging? Is Elbo.ws the Lonely Planet? Is MOG the Fodors? How would Richard ditch the map and escape the virtual beaten path through the music blogosphere?

If online music journalism was controlled by only an elite few, it would mind-numbing. Bland. Like gum from 1971. Like a rainbow in black and white. Taste is perception. It’s a point of view or a frame of mind. It’s relative. Music reviews? In ears we trust, or in Rolling Stone? The pre-blogosphere publishing era, where only a select few got published and got paid for it, now seems inherently degenerate. The era changed—a.k.a. progressed. Two thumbs up is now two million thumbs up.

Rock critic Chris Weingarten sees the negative flip side. He thinks The Hype Machine and Twitter have sent the masses into gravitational spin towards music mediacracy. Writing, reading, learning about music is “math”, he said last April at 140Conf, and “when you’re aggregating the shared tastes of thousands of people, that’s the very definition of the lowest common denominator.” He went on to point out that, “no one posts negative commentary anymore because no one Google’s for bands they don’t like.” Who wants to read about bands they don’t like? Criticism has been replaced by curation.

Weingarten has actually trashed-talked web culture enough that (even to his own surprise) there’s a panel lined up for SXSW next year, called Curatorial Culture: The Case Against Christopher Weingarten. The argument is this: “Cultural criticism is in fact far more diverse and productive when trusted to a representative democracy. This outbreak of curators is nothing short of a revolution and should be championed by those in the business of making music.”

Denying change is self-defeating. Denying creativity is world-defeating. Our world is a paradox without a crash course. The streets are filled with drivers who supposedly ‘can’t drive’ and writers who supposedly ‘can’t write.’ Perception is all you have. Run with it.

Graphic: VirtualMusictv/Flickr

When it comes to music, value is in the ear of the listener.

Value is always decided by the market. It’s a fundamental economics principle that Universal Music Group and the RIAA can’t seem to grasp—at least based on their latest propaganda initiative against music piracy in the US via Facebook, called Music Rights Now.

The lawsuits may have stopped, but that doesn’t mean the music industry and its trade group the RIAA has toned down its crusade against unsanctioned peer-to-peer file-sharing. Negotiations, label and lobbying sources say, have been underway with Internet service providers for more than a year, as the U.S. music industry is pushing ISPs to follow the leads of many European countries in adopting policies that limit or curtail Web access of those who are deemed as infringing users. Today, Universal Music Group Distribution took its fight online, launching a Facebook page in conjunction with the RIAA to promote the issue. (Universal goes social with ISP campaign | LA Times)

You can’t break nature. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. When it comes to music, value is in the ear of the listener—not any record company. Think about this: would you pay $400 for a Big Mac? Of course not. McDonalds knows this and they’ve based their prices to be competitive in the market.

Do we really want the music industry controlling our ISP’s? The group Music Rights Now would be more appropriately named Denying Reality Now. In time the laws will change because the market demands it. Instead of fighting piracy we should be finding ways to legalize/monetize its behavior.
[see An Infinite Freeway For Music Business?]