To those of you who are fortunate enough to not have to follow the current trends in music business, crowdfunding is probably a foreign term. Sure it’s easy enough to figure out what it is…but what does it mean?
A few weeks ago, a man commented on a Facebook post that included the video for my current recoding project. He wondered how I could ask for charity…Hmmm… A day or two later, I started cooking up a blog to clarify the entire subject. It was lost on my To-Do list until several days ago when I came across a blog post by my Twiend (call me Sarah Palin but that’s my new word for Twitter Friend), Jason Parker. He has used crowdfunding for past projects but recently launched (and successfully funded) a campaign for a new album he will soon be recording.
It’s a well known fact that record labels (at least what we have all known as record labels) are sinking fast. The music
- Image via Wikipedia
industry has changed so much so fast that it is hard to keep up with it. They simply can’t keep up with the changing demands of the fans. While mainstream goes even more cookie-cutter than normal (because labels can’t afford to take risks) the “indie” scene gets hotter. More output, more diversity, and more participation from the music lovers keeps the scene fresh.
Musicians are taking note of all this and, instead of working on getting a “deal”, we are working on building relationships with our fans. We strive to have some sort of personal connection through giveaways, email, Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, etc. and the fans dig that. Plus, we get to meet a lot of really great people.
So, I guess you could ask, “how can you ask them for money; to give you charity?”
I implore you to take a look at some crowdfunding campaigns by bands/artists like Falling Up, Chris Potter, or Maria Schneider who have dealt with labels but have found a better way.
What does the fan get? Well, different levels of “patronage” unlock different levels of rewards. Lower contributions may get mentions on websites, digital downloads (before official release date), and/or exclusive footage from rehearsal/recording sessions. Perhaps even exclusive tracks, videos with back stories on songs or privileges at the band’s gigs. Higher contributions normally end up with physical items like shirts, autographed CDs, a private concert, invitations to sessions or mentions in the liner notes and Producer status on the project.
Believe it or not, as I have learned with my own project, it takes a lot of work to put together these packages and compose updates with footage. I spend a lot of time and effort making and editing videos, taking pictures, etc. but it’s all good because I am building a report with some really great people and getting to know others in totally new ways.
While it’s a extremely challenging time to be a musician, it’s also a wonderfully rewarding time. There is, however, nothing easy about the artist side of a crowdunding campaign.
This is a NEW approach (or perhaps a revisited approach) to funding
1.) musicians’ desires and 2.) music consumers’ desires. To NOT ask fans to contribute to their obviously identified, preferred musical tastes is the bastard sibling spawn of Creative Piracy.
Approaching crowdfunding cannot be dealt with in the same manner as mainstream music consumption. From the consumer’s POV, we jump online, click the song we want and, 99 cents later, we have our musical taste in hand. It can be easily compared to a music vending machine!
This grassroots approach, in order to get the consumer’s same end result, demands something more than a 99-cent click. It must be more like the agrarian tending his garden; it demands participation – involvement. It is that involvement – or lack thereof – that will allow a project to thrive or wither. What’s crazy is that the consumer plays the initial role of the farmer even moreso than the musician. The provide the one ingredient necessary to allow a project to be realized: “seed money.”
To maintain a vending machine approach in an embryonic “agrarian” age of grassroots projects will ultimately result in the undermining of the very musician we desire to hear. This demands a change in the way we perceive music. In order for he consumer to receive the best of organic, home-grown music he must cultivate alongside the musician.
Practically, that means that the consumer gives more money BEFORE and AFTER the music is recorded. The seed of consumer involvement is planted upfront, the musician cultivates it and, together, we reap the harvest of our desires.
Nicely put.
“This is a NEW approach (or perhaps a revisited approach) to funding…” – It is, indeed, revisited. Back when music was just beginning to leave the church and Tablature came around and allowed people to learn and pass on music, listeners invested in the artist. Much like the Church did (which is why we have so much great Classical music to enjoy). In many ways, this “electronic revolution” is taking music back to where it started (i.e. house concerts, commissioned works, etc.) and allowing the artist to connect with the people who connect with their art. Plus, there are no Armoni wearing businessmen trying to direct the art into a mainstream pigeon hole.