By Polar Levine, March 7, 2007

.
At the conference I observed panels of well-spoken and well-groomed professionals discussing in depth the myriad opportunities, roadblocks and conflicting interests involved in the monetization of music in the digital age. There was much discussion about “property” and much debate over the finer points of the pie-slicing of profits. But missing were the interests of the guys who make the stuff that somehow becomes the “property” of others to define and exploit for their own benefit. And the losers are those whose interests are the only reason for such an industry to exist: the musicians and their audience.

.
I believe that most people who compose music and lyrics, and a majority of the ones who perform them, start out as kids hiding out in their bedrooms whacking guitars, keyboards, etc. Truth be told, many of these activities are motivated by a need to mitigate against bad skin and pathetic social skills upon entering the teen marketplace of fucking and sucking. But along with that is a compulsion to create lurking in the subconscious. It’s the artist thang. It’s not about a game plan for success, but a force of nature like hurricanes, hunger and pond scum. At some later point, issues of economics and material ambitions enter the picture and, in some cases, dominate the drive to make music. But if you see an over-30 musician banging away while barely able to pay the rent -- you’re looking at a force of nature. One of those guys is me. And I’m as happy as a clam in clam-sauce. That’s a complex place to be.

.
One conference panelist who works for Sony/BMG referred to the stuff their contracted musicians make as “our music”; i.e.: Sony/BMG’s music. Another panelist suggested that if not for copyright protection, guys like me would stop creating the stuff. Both of these guys are so wrong that I go, “boo hoo hoo” and “ha ha ha” at the same time.

.
Many of us melody-makers, like our exploiters, are dumb, uncreative and untalented droolers. And some of us are truly gifted visionaries -- artists of the highest and second-highest calibers. But here’s the yinyang: many of us do what we do, and continue to do it beyond any rational motivation, because it provides big cosmic sex -- the kind of long-winded, rumbling, tumbling orgasms you get when you roll in the hay with what some people call god. On the other hand -- because what we do is rewarding in itself, we’re pathetically easy to exploit. Shit, yeah man, we’ll sign away the rights to our recordings and almost all hope of surviving with dignity and some measure of control over what we create. After all, we get to surf the etherial waves. God talks dirty to us and we transcribe these seductions into Property. The ride is worth it. Not to mention all that good earthly fucking on the road.

.
So sale of a song on iTunes will earn 9.1 cents for the publisher and 70 cents for the label. The composer will get a piece of the publishing and the recording artists will probably get nothing. We’re getting a bit pissy about this. But an online indie distribution system is evolving into a viable and humane alternative to the rapidly decaying industry we’ve grown up with. Artists whose names aren’t Britney or Justin will be leaving the plantation. We’ll be working with human beings who give us a fair slice of that pie we bake. Or we’ll find ways to do it ourselves just like our fans (“consumers” to the suits) who get it for free and give it away for free. We’d rather get ripped off by people who respect us. But my guess is that the fans will be more willing to pay when THEY start getting some respect.

.
DRM is the War On Drugs waged by the ghosts of musicBiz past. DRM is, and always will be, as successful as the War On Drugs. Please, keep investing in DRM and lobbyists. It will just make you crumble faster. Your present and future is in Big Entertainment not music. Leave us alone. You’ll feel better. Your stock will be fruitful and multiply.

.
But in the meantime musicians and fans who give a shit about quality of experience still have to put up with the tantrums of this blubbering dinosaur. During this transitional phase it would be useful for musicians to start thinking creatively about our role in the distribution food chain and learn to stop enabling the beast. The urge to be comfy or, put another way, our urge to not have to struggle with the torments of economic insecurity -- leads some to buy into the star machine and adopt the same value system and myopia as those who peddle the property. We want that limo, the good dope, The Stuff. We want to be like us but without the chaos that comes with it. Wouldn’t it be nice to have all these cosmic messages ooze through the ether will bulletpoints and graphs. The brain chemistry express would run on time and we could get some golf in on Sundays with guys from the legal department.

.
WHICH SIDE ARE YOU ON?
Now I’m not one of those socialist types who believe that music is for the people. My grapes aren’t sour. I believe that music is for the people but the people have to pay something for our trouble. And artists deserve compensation no less than industry execs; I’d argue that we deserve a lot more since, after all, there is no music industry without music but there is definitely music without the industry. Let’s all get along and make money. And let’s get very real: the bidniz of music is arriving at one of those historic which-side-are-you-on moments. We musicians are just as responsible as the suits for making this turn out well. Here are a few things we can consider:

.
If we can’t make an great album for under $100,000 (not including the producer’s fee in some cases) then I would say we suck. Most recording artists with talent and some recording skills can do brilliant work for half that or less.

.
If we need limos and a staff of image makers, stylists and comfort providers, then we’re not what I’d call musicians -- we’re entertainers and wannabe moguls. If that’s your career track, your reality window is narrow, but clear: get real pretty (or prettily ugly, depending on your market niche) and land that major label deal fast or consider peddling hedge funds. We have to be keenly aware of our motivations and do a reality check from time to time: whether we create music for riches and fame or for some other calling.

.
As the industry enters the advance stages of metamorphosis, the music creators have an opportunity to be active players in the new paradigm. Waiting around to get the bad news after the fix is in is unacceptable. For those of us not driven by the riches-and-fame factor, our goal should be the reasonable expectation that ongoing commitment to our work will be rewarded with long and lucrative careers, free of financial pressures and exploitation. Once we develop the hunger for huge advances and hangars full of cars -- we sign on with the bidniz guys for an ugly trip back to the mess we have now.

.
It’s in our interest as artists to collaborate with a community of smart, decent people who love music and want to be in the business of distributing it. We should want to make them reasonably wealthy and expect that they should want to reciprocate. In other words, we should work toward a music business paradigm that rewards the partnership of content providers and content marketers rather than mutually assured destruction.

.
Let the majors have their entertainment stars and I wish them well. There are people on both sides of the artist/business divide who are deeply committed to music free of mass market obsessions. Let them flourish in an industry committed to the relationship between musician and listener. It should be a no-brainer that quality and originality have added value. Let’s choose which side we’re on and get there fast.

.

Polar Levine
for Yankin' The Food Chain
polarity1.com

.