My previous post led to this discussion on the facey, which really caught my interest. I’ve quoted other people without their permission, so do let me know if you want it deleted, you peeps.
Hetty Kate (Tues 7 April 4pm)
That’s quite a rant, however a few nice pics, a nice video, a schtick, a costume and a cute name doesn’t mean you’re actually any good. Though it does make a bookers job easier.
Sam (Tues 7 April 4.16pm)
It’s a mega rant. Having those things does make a booker’s job easier (and a dance event organiser’s – which is a slightly different role), which I guess is my point. I guess with all these things you can fake it til you make it, right?
But I actually feel quite sad when I come across fantastic musicians (especially the older ones) who don’t have any online presence . Makes it really hard for me to discover them, or chase them down after a gig. Maybe I should start a side business – ‘Dodgy Sam’s Dodgy Websites for Jazzniks.’
Hetty Kate (Tues 7 april 4.17pm)
haha, well the older musicians came up in a different environment..
Sam (Tues 7 April 4.24pm)
Totes. But they gotta get on it, if they want to develop a new (or continuing) audience. It’s a shame, because the older doods have mad skills that many younger musicians could really benefit from working with. The dance scene is particularly respectful of elders, and we really dig seeing younger and older people working together.
Hetty Kate (Tues 7 April 4:24pm)
Bruce (Tues 7 April 4:46pm)
You can have the best product in the world, but if its not marketed properly no one will know about it!
Sam (Tues 7 April 5:09pm)
And I guess that’s the difference between the very olden jazz days and now. In those days bands travelled endlessly, and were gigging endlessly, so the word of mouth talk was strong. And there were magazines and general news stories (because this was mainstream music then) talking up bands and musicians all the time.
But today there are fewer opportunities for jazz bands and musicians, fewer gigs, and small audiences… though part of me thinks that olden days’ musicians had it a bit easier because they were pitching to the mainstream (ie a bigger market), and modern day musicians need to work a bit harder to convince people to try something new (old). But there is the internet, which makes reaching niche audiences easier.
Now I want to post a link to that fascinating post someone hooked me up with a while ago (I think it was Andrew?), where Steve Albini argues that the internet is good for niche/indy music (Steve Albini on the surprisingly sturdy state of the music industry – in full (Monday 17 November 2014)
I’m not 100% convinced by his largely personal anecdotes, but it’s an interesting provocation. The internet is an opportunity for niche music and musicians. How else could I get hooked on the Dry Throat Fellows?
…although playing and recording music professional has always been about networks. I’m reminded of a line I read in an article about Black Swan Records. Though they were explicitly designed to record and sell to black artists and audiences, they actually sold in the Asia Pacific region, because segregation happened in our part of the world too.
So getting your product to the right market – getting your music to the right ears – is still a matter of having a savvy promoter with the right contacts and a clever understanding of who might dig what you do. John Hammond, anyone?
I am (obviously) interested in the way specific communities of interest use digital media. That was my doctoral research. Now I’m thinking about jazz musicians and how they use (or don’t use) digital media. I guess I’m especially fascinated by the tension between ‘pre-digital’ media and cultural practices operating in a ‘digital’ world.